Ukraine war mega thread

[pickel]

Here's what looks like a Russian bridge building convoy destroyed. Bridges are supply lines socal.

[Backspin]

[panama hat]

Link?

^ Its all fog of war. Could it be photoshopped ?

Aren't you simply embarrassed by now?

[pickel]

And now they have a Jew for a President, and the Russians have a Nazi in charge. How times change.

[panama hat]

SWIFT is no longer a monopoly.

You're not good at reading/comprehension, are you.


Oh, here's some news for you which has undoubtedly escaped you - Backspit is socal. Yup . . . amazing how someone can so easily be 'unveiled' . . .

[Buckaroo Banzai]

And now they have a Jew for a President, and the Russians have a Nazi in charge. How times change.

I dont agree or disagree about the Nazi claim, I simply do not know enough to have an opinion
But The "they got a Jew for a president" to counter the Nazism claim is a red herring argument , If you don't think Jews can be Nazis, look at Israel.

[sabang]

With the war in Ukraine, US resolve is crucial — and yet we can see the sunset on the American century


In 1991, the United States stood unchallenged. The Cold War was over. The Berlin Wall had come down two years before and now the red flag of the Soviet Union had been lowered for the last time in Moscow.
Francis Fukuyama, the American political scientist, hubristically pronounced this moment "the end of history".
This would be a triumph of liberal democracy and usher in a new era of democracy worldwide.
Russia was humbled. China was expected to go the same way. The Chinese Communist Party, it was said, would reform and accept the inevitability of democracy or collapse.
So as Russia invades Ukraine, as China eyes off Taiwan, we now know for sure: history did not end.


The US talks a tough game; it rallies allies, hits back with sanctions, moves its troops around the world — but it won't fight.
President Joe Biden said as much. He will not put American lives on the line to defend the sovereignty of democratic Ukraine.
That's an invitation to Vladimir Putin. Xi Jinping would be wondering if the US will spill blood for Taiwan. The last they saw of the US military it was retreating from Afghanistan, and after 20 years the Taliban was claiming victory.
The question now is, what happened to America? How did the world go from the unipolar moment to the end of the American order?

What happened to America?Where to begin?

1991?

The US had an opportunity then to bring a humbled Russia in closer. It was an opportunity lost.
1998?

Bill Clinton impeached for his tawdry abuse of power. His lies about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky demeaned the office of the President and turned the White House into a reality TV program.
2001?

Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda launched a terrorist attack on US soil. America responded with war on Afghanistan. We know now how that ended.


2003?

George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq on the pretence of Saddam Hussein hoarding weapons of mass destruction. The US attacked without UN sanction. It was accused of breaching international law, upending the rules-based global order America had written.
The Iraq invasion damaged American credibility and prestige. It triggered a power vacuum that spilled over in the region, tipping neighbouring countries like Syria into civil war. Terror groups became emboldened, leading to Islamic State eventually declaring a caliphate.
2007?

The US's corrupt banking system collapsed, triggering a global financial crisis that cost Americans their jobs and their houses while the bankers were saved. "Too big to fail", we were told.


This sowed the seeds for the angry backlash of those who felt abandoned by their own country. The line from bailing out Wall Street bankers to Donald Trump's presidency was clear.
2008?

The election of Barack Obama supposedly promised hope and "yes, we can". The first black President. The so-called "post-racial America" and race anger only intensified.
Obama left the world and America weaker. On his watch, North Korea stockpiled its nuclear arsenal. China claimed and militarised the disputed islands of the South China Sea. Putin annexed Crimea. IS carved out its caliphate. Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons on his own people. Iran made a fortune out of its nuclear deal — halting but not abandoning its pursuit of nuclear weapons — and used the windfall to fund terrorism in the Middle East.
2016?

The Trump presidency. A man who exploited the worst of America, trashed alliances, cosied up to despots yet was a symptom of a system already poisonous.
2021?

Joe Biden abandoned Afghanistan. The images of troops leaving and helicopters in the air resembled the fall of Saigon.


The last 30 years have been a persistent erosion of American power and prestige. The US is a nation in search of its soul and moral purpose.
It has been led by a succession of timid, or reckless or vapid or exploitative, and opportunist presidents.
International politics expert Jonathan Holslag calls them "polite cowards". Those leaders who talk up democracy while ignoring the people in their own countries whom democracy is failing.
Each leader has presided over the drift from the American Dream. Inequality has grown like a cancer.

Decades of decline

Research by economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton reveals the wealth of someone in the top 1 per cent of society is 950 times greater than a member of the bottom 50 per cent.
Case and Deaton tell of an America of broken families, drug dependency, increasing suicide, declining wages or no work at all. To these people, they say, Washington politics "looks more like a racket".
But the unravelling began decades earlier. The heady days of Cold War victory obscured deeper cracks in the US.


As political scientist Joseph Nye said, the United States stopped paying attention to the world and turned its sights inward. American leaders "became arrogant about our power, arguing that we did not need to heed other nations. We seemed both invincible and invulnerable".

1989 was a watershed but, in hindsight, not for the reasons we first thought.

In his book, World Politics Since 1989, Holslag writes: "The high tide of globalisation appeared to hold opportunities for all."
What did we get? Nationalism and authoritarianism, he said, "are on the offence". Resentment is rising and there are disputes everywhere over territory.

With the war in Ukraine, US resolve is crucial — and yet we can see the sunset on the American century - ABC News


From Stan Grant of the ABC (aussie version).

[Backspin]

And now they have a Jew for a President, and the Russians have a Nazi in charge. How times change.

yeah yeah

Neo-Nazi groups recruit Britons to fight in Ukraine | Ukraine | The Guardian

Azov fighters are Ukraine's greatest weapon and may be its greatest threat | Ukraine | The Guardian

Ukraine’s Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violence (And No, RT Didn’t Write This Headline) - Atlantic Council

Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem | Reuters

[sabang]

The "they got a Jew for a president" to counter the Nazism claim is a red herring argument

For that matter, some of the Azov Brigade (or what's left of it) is Jewish.

[Backspin]

Now that the war has broken out, its easy to forget just weeks ago, the US guaranteed this war, by refusing to even negotiate on security in the region.

The US said, we are gonna keep flying 1500 tons of weapons in, we are going to keep building our naval base in Odessa, we are going to keep flying nuclear B 52 bombers along Ukraine's border. And we won't negotiate ANY rules of the road with you.

This is after Russia gave up its empire in 1991 for peace.

NATO rejects Russian demands for security guarantees in latest round of talks - ABC News

[panama hat]

This is after Russia gave up its empire in 1991 for peace.

You fucking idiot

[Troy]

Skiddy is completely out of control. Can someone put him back in his pram.

[pickel]

yeah yeah

Neo-Nazi groups recruit Britons to fight in Ukraine | Ukraine | The Guardian

Azov fighters are Ukraine's greatest weapon and may be its greatest threat | Ukraine | The Guardian

Ukraine’s Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violence (And No, RT Didn’t Write This Headline) - Atlantic Council

Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem | Reuters

All those articles are at least 4 years old.

Almost every country has its share of Nazis. The ones in America are cheering Putin on.

[sabang]

Bit highbrow for here, but can't lob it in the News thread really. This is an excerpt from a longer article by Jack Matlock-



So far as Ukraine is concerned, U.S. intrusion into its domestic politics was deep—to the point of seeming to select a prime minister. It also, in effect, supported an illegal coup d’etat that changed the Ukrainian government in 2014, a procedure not normally considered consistent with the rule of law or democratic governance. The violence that still simmers in Ukraine started in the “pro-Western” west, not in the Donbass where it was a reaction to what was viewed as the threat of violence against Ukrainians who are ethnic Russian.

During President Obama’s second term, his rhetoric became more personal, joining a rising chorus in the American and British media vilifying the Russian president. Obama spoke of economic sanctions against Russians as “costing” Putin for his “misbehavior” in Ukraine, conveniently forgetting that Putin’s action had been popular in Russia and that Obama’s own predecessor could be credibly accused of being a war criminal.Obama then began to hurl insults at the Russian nation as a whole, with allegations like “Russia makes nothing anybody wants,” conveniently ignoring the fact that the only way we could get American astronauts to the international space station at that time was with Russian rockets and that his government was trying its best to prevent Iran and Turkey from buying Russian anti-aircraft missiles.

I am sure some will say, “What’s the big deal? Reagan called the Soviet Union an evil empire, but then negotiated an end of the Cold War.” Right! Reagan condemned the Soviet empire of old—and subsequently gave Gorbachev credit for changing it—but he never publicly castigated the Soviet leaders personally. He treated them with personal respect, and as equals, even treating Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko to formal dinners usually reserved for chiefs of state or government. His first words in private meetings was usually something like, “We hold the peace of the world in our hands. We must act responsibly so the world can live in peace.”

Things got worse during the four years of Donald Trump’s tenure. Accused, without evidence, of being a Russian dupe, Trump made sure he embraced every anti-Russian measure that came along, while at the same time flattered Putin as a great leader.

Reciprocal expulsions of diplomats, started by the United States in the final days of Obama’s tenure continued in a grim vicious circle that has resulted in a diplomatic presence so emaciated that for months the United States did not have enough staff in Moscow to issue visas for Russians to visit the United States.As so many of the other recent developments, the mutual strangulation of diplomatic missions reverses one of the proudest achievements of American diplomacy in latter Cold War years when we worked diligently and successfully to open up the closed society of the Soviet Union, to bring down the iron curtain that separated “East” and “West.” We succeeded, with the cooperation of a Soviet leader who understood that his country desperately needed to join the world.

All right, I rest my case that today’s crisis was “willfully precipitated.” But if that is so, how can I say that it can be easily resolved by the application of common sense?

The short answer is because it can be. What President Putin is demanding, an end to NATO expansion and creation of a security structure in Europe that insures Russia’s security along with that of others is eminently reasonable. He is not demanding the exit of any NATO member and he is threatening none.

By any pragmatic, common sense standard it is in the interest of the United States to promote peace, not conflict. To try to detach Ukraine from Russian influence—the avowed aim of those who agitated for the “color revolutions”—was a fool’s errand, and a dangerous one. Have we so soon forgotten the lesson of the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Now, to say that approving Putin’s demands is in the objective interest of the United States does not mean that it will be easy to do. The leaders of both the Democratic and Republican parties have developed such a Russophobic stance (a story requiring a separate study) that it will take great political skill to navigate the treacherous political waters and achieve a rational outcome.

President Biden has made it clear that the United States will not intervene with its own troops if Russia invades Ukraine. So why move them into Eastern Europe? Just to show hawks in Congress that he is standing firm? For what? Nobody is threatening Poland or Bulgaria except waves of refugees fleeing Syria, Afghanistan and the desiccated areas of the African savannah. So what is the 82nd Airborne supposed to do?

Well, as I have suggested earlier, maybe this is just an expensive charade. Maybe the subsequent negotiations between the Biden and Putin governments will find a way to meet the Russian concerns. If so, maybe the charade will have served its purpose. And maybe then members of congress will start dealing with the growing problems Americans have at home instead of making them worse.One can dream, can’t one?

Jack F. Matlock served as U.S. ambassador to the U.S.S.R. (1987-1991). A member of the board of directors of the American Committee for U.S.-Russia Accord (ACURA), he writes from Singer Island, Florida.
Full Article- Ukraine Crisis Should Have Been Avoided – Consortium News

[pickel]

The small group

Nuff said.

[Switch]

This is after Russia gave up its empire in 1991 for peace.

Err no. This is just Putin refusing to accept reality, and trying to rebuild a lost empire and a lost cause. Idiot.

Who do you think you are. Saint Jude the Apostle?

[kingwilly]

The fog of war propaganda is insane right now

Says a known serial liar, who uses twatter as his source of information...

[bsnub]

How many times are you going to repost that shit opinion piece, sabang? Running out of propaganda to post?

[kingwilly]

Also, Ukrzaliznytsia will continue to develop transportation with Asian countries, in particular China,

I see their mistake...

[Backspin]

Here's a long documentary about the only history of Ukraine as a state. And yes it's by RT. It's mind blowing how honest it is. There's tons of parts of this film that they could twist certain ways. But they don't. Typical Russia. They think the truth will win out but it usually doesnt.

[kingwilly]

There's tons of parts of this film that they could twist certain ways. But they don't. Typical Russia. They think the truth will win out

You're funny troll.

[sabang]

How many times are you going to repost that shit opinion piece, sabang?

Didn't post that one before- but I have posted other stuff by Jack Matlock.

Running out of propaganda to post?

Hell no. Following some 'propaganda' from the ABC.


Putin's strike on Ukraine is testing the US and NATO – and a shocking reminder that tough talk doesn't always work



It took less than 24 hours from the time Russian President Vladamir Putin announced the invasion of Ukraine to the emergence of predictions that the country's fall, and its rapid fall, was a fait accompli.

But after weeks of theorising about Putin's strategic objective; whether it was just about stopping Ukraine joining NATO, or something more; about his military capability, and assessments of whether Ukraine's capabilities had improved in the last decade, it was not just the speed of Russia's attack but its widespread nature that came as a shock.

This was no assault confined to a couple of eastern regions but a comprehensive attack from all directions designed to wipe out any military resistance quickly and, presumably, overthrow the government.

LIVE UPDATES: Read our blog for the latest on Russia's invasion of

Ukraine.There was talk in that first 24 hours of resistance. And there was still talk after that of resistance in western Ukraine that might make Putin's occupation more costly or contested, particularly if it was being supported by "the West".

But Ukraine has been left to fall by the United States and NATO.

The nature of Putin's strike has made very clear his strategic intentions: Ukraine's expected rapid collapse, and the fact the US and NATO were not able or willing to do anything about it, is what makes this such a profound turning point in Europe.

If Putin's aim was to demonstrate declining United States power and influence, it is hard to imagine a more effective way of doing it. And it happens at a point in time when other powers in Europe are divided and weak.



........ There is not a lot of optimism that the sanctions the US, Europe, Australia and many others have imposed will actually work.

A particular reason why they might not work is China's position. China has described the sanctions as "illegal" and opposes them.

It's decision to buy wheat from Russia — and likely more oil and gas — will obviously undermine the potency of western sanctions on the Russian economy.

The US won't always step up

Defence Minister Peter Dutton told breakfast television on Friday that "there's one leader in the world, frankly, who can exert pressure on President Putin and that is President Xi".

At a time when there has been so much debate on whether a Chinese takeover of Taiwan would become the testing point of US power, Putin's move on Ukraine appears to have given a highly uncomfortable answer, without Beijing having to do a thing.

Putin'''s strike on Ukraine is testing the US and NATO – and a shocking reminder that tough talk doesn'''t always work - ABC News


At least 'one term Joe' can look forward to his retirement.

[panama hat]

Putin's strike on Ukraine is testing the US and NATO – and a shocking reminder that tough talk doesn't always work

It's not just talk, though . . . are you that devoid of intellect?

[sabang]

Are you that devoid of intellect that you don't realise it is pasted from the ABC web site (Link provided), and the author is Laura Tingle- a very well known Australian journo? But this is most certainly a reminder to the whole world that American political blowhard bombastics does not always work. It's all over the News!

[sabang]

sorry mk- wrong thread