Well, well.

Shit.

What a mess.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/4/ukraine-crisis-who-are-the-russia-backed-separatists

Russia can now say it upheld its commitment not to invade Ukraine when it invades and occupies the "independent" territories it just invented. Neat. And no, NATO won't do anything and no-one will even be talking about it in six months.

I pray you're right.

It's a probabilities game but all I see is a repeat of Crimea and Putin winning again while the west flails around trying not to look helpless.

No doubt that Putin is batshit crazy. Anything can happen.
Watching Ch4 news right now. Matt Frei doing what he's best at.
Showing what's going on and asking blunt questions.

President Putin has been giving a national televised address to the Russian people.

Putin insisted that Ukraine was a creation of Russia. Complaining that it had been ‘madness’ to allow any former Soviet republics to leave the Soviet Empire, he declared that Ukraine had never had a consistent tradition as an independent nation, and blamed the US for supporting ‘radicals’.

All this after a bizarre, carefully choreographed televised meeting of his security council today – where one by one Putin’s subordinates gave their support to recognising the independence of two breakaway regions. — Ch 4 News - Putin signs decree

''Have you packed your bag?''
https://www.channel4.com/news/it-was-like-watching-a-crazy-man-talk-ukrainian-mp-responds-to-putin-address

Former US Ambassador to NATO: ‘Russia are clearly showing they no longer respect Ukrainian sovereignty’:
https://www.channel4.com/news/former-us-ambassador-to-nato-russia-are-clearly-showing-they-no-longer-respect-ukrainian-sovereignty

Fascinating and terrifying. All waiting...

That would be nice.

If NATO won't do anything - which is not clear to me - then I think we can have some confidence that sanctions will be forthcoming. But if they are too severe, Europe is in trouble with its energy supply.

And then that, would be very worrying.

This is what @Apollodorus is utterly incapable to understand: the US didn't create it's sphere of influence by "divide and rule", but through integration, that the other countries saw beneficial also. — ssu

You know what Swedes and other Scandinavians say about Finns, don’t you? So, I’m not going to repeat it here.

As usual, you mustn’t have thought your argument through because there is neither rhyme nor reason to it.

First off, I never said that “the US didn't create its sphere of influence through integration”.

Second, of course spheres of influence only work "when the relationship is mutually beneficial and there is not hostility or aggression". They don’t work when one power decides to expand its sphere of influence at the expense of other powers. And this is exactly what Britain and America have been doing.

Another thing that is missing from your “logic” is that it may be “mutually beneficial” for a country like Finland, with a population of 5 million, to be integrated into America’s European Union and to be ruled by Brussels. But this may not be the case for larger countries like Germany, Britain, or France.

Obviously, the British didn’t think it was beneficial for them to be in the EU when they voted to leave in 2016, did they? France hasn’t left yet, but negative opinion of EU membership is among the highest in Europe.

And this is what you seem incapable to understand: that “beneficial” doesn’t mean that there are only benefits. There are also disadvantages to being an EU member. Both benefits and disadvantages are different from country to country. This is why there are countries like Malta, Romania, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Denmark, Ireland, with strong support for the EU, and countries like Greece, UK, Italy, France, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Slovenia, that are highly critical of the EU.

When the divide between favorable and unfavorable view of the EU is nearly 50-50, as in France, this means that there are some serious issues there, and the problem isn’t as simple as you are trying to paint it.

In addition to being told by Brussels what to do, there are other problems like corruption:

According to the European Commission, corruption costs the EU economy around €120 billion per year in terms of lost tax revenue and investments. The European Parliamentary Research Service's Cost of Non-Europe report, has found that corruption related to public procurement alone costs the EU over €5 billion annually.

Corruption in the European Union – European Parliament

Some of the corruption comes from America:

Research by historian Dov Levin, for example, found that between 1946 and 2000, the United States manipulated the democratic elections of other countries more than 80 times, including in European countries such as Italy and Greece … From a strategic point of view, there is criticism, among other things, that relations between Europe and the USA are unequal, as the US enforces its foreign policy with little consideration for European interests …

- Atlantiker – Wikipedia

So, we can see that integration into America’s sphere of influence (or empire) doesn’t always happen through legitimate means.

What do you think empires do? They integrate new territories into their existing territory or sphere of influence. And this integration is done by many different means, economic, financial, political, cultural, or military.

You have said it yourself:

If you are overtly hostile towards a country, which the US has been towards Cuba, in the end you only have the option to invade. When sanctions, coup attempts, using proxies, assassination attempts aren't options anymore ...

In 1914 Britain declared war on Germany, followed by America in 1917. Did Britain and America expand their sphere of influence? Yes, they did. And I’ve explained to you already how they created the European Union after two world wars.

In any case, Crimea doesn’t belong to Ukraine, it isn’t for Finland to decide, and there is nothing you can do about it …. :wink:

As predicted four days ago:

On Tuesday (15th Feb), the Duma, Russia’s parliament, passed a resolution authorizing Putin to recognize the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republic—the two provinces of Ukraine’s southeastern Donbas region, which are occupied by armed pro-Russia separatists—as independent states. He could next move thousands of troops, tanks, and other weapons into the territories, at the “request” of their leaders, to defend their people from Ukrainian assault. — Slate, Feb 16th

Today's headline:

Putin Claims Ukraine as Part of Russia

MOSCOW — President Vladimir V. Putin said he would recognize the independence of two Russian-backed territories in eastern Ukraine and warned the government of Ukraine that further bloodshed “will be fully and wholly” on its conscience, delivering an emotional and aggrieved address that set the stage for the possibility of Russian military action against Ukraine. — NYTimes

'We're taking over, and any resistance will be regarded as an act of aggression.'

'We're taking over, and any resistance will be regarded as an act of aggression.' — Wayfarer

All of this has been predictable.
Why and how other world leaders let this happen for so long...?
Because they're all batshit fucking crazy monsters. Power greedy, needy men for the most part, no?

So, the warmongers celebrate with crocodile tears dripping down their double faces.
Yay. 'Emotional and aggrieved', huh?

Why and how other world leaders let this happen for so long...? — Amity

How have 'other world leaders' been 'allowing this to happen'? The US and European nations have long opposed Russian territorial aggression on Ukraine. The US has been screaming blue murder for the last six weeks, which a lot of people say is simply scare-mongering, although it's obviously not.

Nobody wants any of this to happen. If Russia goes full tilt, it's quite possibly going to have devastating economic consequences all over the world, let alone the possibility of much bloodshed on the ground. Russia allegedly has a hit list of Ukraining dissidents, politicians and activists which it activate as soon as it takes over. A lot of European countries rely 100% on gas exports from Russia and many more have partial dependency, if this is disrupted it will have huge downsides. Meanwhile the proposed sanctions include closing Russia's access to the SWIFT system meaning that Russia will be financially isolated from the rest of the world (although latest reports say these aren't in the initial proposals). It could feasibly be the beginning of WWIII, but even if it's not, it really is war, and it looks like it really is coming.

The US and European nations have long opposed Russian territorial aggression on Ukraine. The US has been screaming blue murder for the last six weeks, which a lot of people say is simply scare-mongering, although it's obviously not. — Wayfarer

Yes. Words come easy. Some are genuine.
Putin has been a dangerous, now totally paranoid, dictator for how long?
How many leaders have shaken his hand and been showered upon...

Nothing has been learned. And the innocent suffer yet again.
For the evermore power hungry plans of a single man...or men.

How did we let it come to this. On all sides.
Buttons pushed. So easily.
The worst button. Nuclear.

Right from the Stalinist playbook.

After recognizing the Independence of Luhansk and Donetsk, next phase I assume is that they volunteer to join the Great Motherland of the Russian Federation. And hence the Minsk agreements are dead.

The EU leaders Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel said: “The recognition of the two separatist territories in Ukraine is a blatant violation of international law, the territorial integrity of Ukraine and the Minsk agreements.

Nobody wants any of this to happen. — Wayfarer

Except Putin. He surely wants this to happen. Do note the choreographed theater how Putin plays this.

This isn't anymore some rough-handed way to get NATO to "back down", to get them seriously to talk, but an obvious march to war.

Those still persisting that it's the US behind the war scare that doesn't exist should just read what Russian news media is writing. How Ukraine is constantly harassing and making provocations towards Russia. (They do have sites in English also, you know.)

Perhaps one should look at this another way. Putin started a concentrated effort to reorganize and modernize the Russian armed forces after a quite chaotic war with Georgia, which was successful, but could have ended in a disaster. Then he gained strategic surprise with the occupation and annexation of Crimea and the war in the Donbass. Then he has had the ability to train his commanders and air force in Syria. And now perhaps, he feels confident in his forces. And he does seem firmly believe what he says:

Putin calls eastern Ukraine ancient Russian lands. He says situation in eastern Ukraine is critical again.

“Ukraine authorities have been contaminated by virus of nationalism and corruption," he said during a televised address. The President accuses Ukraine of stealing Russian gas in the past, of using energy to blackmail Russia.

"Ukraine leaders wanted all good things from Russia without obligations." He accused the western intelligence services of helping Ukraine commit crimes.

And no, NATO won't do anything and no-one will even be talking about it in six months. — Baden

They haven't stopped talking about Crimea, so this won't be forgotten.

The last conflict that could have been forgotten was the Russo-Georgian war, as the US tried to "reset" the relations. But Georgia is on the other side of the Caucasus Mountains, so technically not in Europe.

In any case, Crimea doesn’t belong to Ukraine, — Apollodorus

FINALLY!

The Truth from you (likely as a slip, but still). Sovereignty of nations and the multitude of international agreements in that Russia accepted the territorial integrity of Ukraine don't matter. After all, Ukraine is the historical birthplace of Russia, so it's totally natural for Ukraine to be a part of Russia...as Putin has hinted many times (the same way the artificiality of an independent Ukraine has been mentioned by the Kremlin).

You know what Swedes and other Scandinavians say about Finns, don’t you? — Apollodorus

Oh so empty with nothing else to say that go for ad hominems or national stereotypes? Lol.

FINALLY!

The Truth from you (likely as a slip, but still). — ssu

:lol:

Nobody wants any of this to happen.
— Wayfarer
Except Putin. He surely wants this to happen. Do note the choreographed theater how Putin plays this.

This isn't anymore some rough-handed way to get NATO to "back down", to get them seriously to talk, but an obvious march to war. — ssu

Indeed.

Excerpt from the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/21/putin-angry-spectacle-amounts-to-declaration-war-ukraine

'Sitting alone at a desk in a grand, columned Kremlin room, Vladimir Putin looked across an expanse of parquet floor at his security council and asked if anyone wished to express an alternative opinion.

He was met with silence.

A few hours later, the Russian president appeared on state television to give an angry, rambling lecture about Ukraine, a country that in Putin’s telling had become “a colony with a puppet regime”, and had no historical right to exist.

Putin’s double bill, which was immediately followed by the signing of an agreement on Russian recognition of the two proxy states in east Ukraine as independent entities, is likely to go down in history as one of the major turning points in his 22-years-and-counting rule over Russia.

This was not a politician convening his team for discussions, this was a supreme leader marshalling his minions and ensuring collective responsibility for a decision that, at minimum, will change the security architecture in Europe, and may well lead to a horrific war that consumes Ukraine.'

It's pretty self-explanatory just to read what Vladimir the Great said in his television address:

Ukraine never had a tradition of genuine statehood. - From the very first steps they began to build their statehood on the denial of everything that unites us. They tried to distort the consciousness, the historical memory of millions of people, entire generations living in Ukraine.

In NATO documents, our country is officially and directly declared the main threat to North Atlantic security. And Ukraine will serve as a forward springboard for the strike. If our ancestors had heard about it, they probably would simply not have believed it. And today we don't want to believe it, but it's true.

They are trying to blackmail us again. They are threatening us again with sanctions, which, by the way, I think they will introduce anyway as Russia's sovereignty strengthens and the power of our armed forces grows. And a pretext for another sanctions attack will always be found or fabricated. Regardless of the situation in Ukraine. There is only one goal - to restrain the development of Russia. And they will do it, as they did before. Even without any formal pretext at all. Just because we exist, and we will never compromise our sovereignty, national interests and our values. I want to say clearly and directly that in the current situation, when our proposals for an equal dialogue on fundamental issues have actually remained unanswered by the United States and NATO, when the level of threats to our country is increasing significantly, Russia has every right to take retaliatory measures to ensure its own security. That is exactly what we will do.

That is a speech from a man going to war.

Or in stalinist speech, a man that has just started "a peacekeeping operation in the countries he has recognized as being sovereign."

(Btw, remember that before Crimea joined Russia, it also "declared independence" in March 11th, 2014)

That is a speech from a man going to war. — ssu

No question. Most chilling.

as Russia's sovereignty strengthens and the power of our armed forces grows

I mean ...

The Truth from you (likely as a slip, — ssu

More like YOUR slip of memory! :rofl:

The reality is I've always said that Crimea is not Ukrainian and everyone knows that, even Ukraine:

As for Crimea, don’t you see that the very fact that Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine in 1954, demonstrates that it cannot be Ukrainian??? Crimea had been invaded by Mongols (Tatars) and Turks in the Middle Ages and was under joint Tatar and Ottoman control until Russia took it back in 1783. It had never been “Ukrainian” before 1954! — Apollodorus

And "international agreements"??? You forget China annexing Tibet and Turkey occupying Cyprus, no? Another slip of memory from you. Or maybe a slip of judgment? :grin:

Like many others ...

Armenian genocide - Wikipedia

Slavery in the Ottoman Empire – Wikipedia

Erdogan is not shy to publicly chase his Ottoman dream and to reinvent himself as a Caliph. If Erdogan is out to overshadow the legacy of Ataturk, then undoing the Lausanne Treaty is what will help him accomplish this goal – even if it means declaring war. Once the 1923 treaty expires, Erdogan will immediately seek to reclaim the territories the Ottomans lost.

Erdogan’s mission to revive the Ottoman Empire – Muslim Vibe

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s chief aide said the Treaty of Lausanne, which ended the conflict between the Ottoman Empire and the Allies and established the modern border between Turkey and Greece, had “expired,” freeing Turkey up to seize rich resources including those in northern Iraq.

Erdoğan’s secret keeper says Lausanne Treaty ‘expired,’ Turkey free to grab resources - Nordic Monitor

It could feasibly be the beginning of WWIII, but even if it's not, it really is war, and it looks like it really is coming. — Wayfarer

No shit. There has never been a war before, you know. And, didn't you hear? Moscow has just announced it will invade OZ, like tonight. So, you better get ready, matey! :smile:

Plus, the economic impact on Europe was predictable from the start. If America cared about Europe it wouldn't impose sanctions on Russia that hurt Europe! And it wouldn't insist on EU and NATO unlimited expansion. But, of course, Biden has told Europe not to worry because he will supply it with American oil and gas. So, the reality is that the only ones who have anything to gain from this are US oil and defense corporations ....

nothing but whataboutism and dissimulation.

Yep. From you.
Maybe you should leave those Pali suttas for a minute and try reading some history ....

Decent article from the Financial Times on the topic:

https://www.ft.com/content/a87bdc20-94a9-4be8-b92c-f2dba7ab1b76

"Why Putin has Ukraine’s separatist regions of Donetsk and Luhansk in his sights"?

You are not some "apologist for Putin", by any chance, are you? Or "Russian silovik"? :wink:

Ha.

I mean, I'd need to wait a bit so I can find some reliable info. At this moment, most info is going to be very politically charged.

I'm not sure doing this was in Russia's interest, because it plays directly to the hawks in Washington, who will be thrilled. Maybe they know something we don't. I'm assuming he knew that the negotiations with Ukraine on NATO were dead. But I need verification on this, from a reliable source.

Still, it's very risky and dangerous.

But as you know, the US and NATO are hardly trustworthy either, they've lied over and over again. Ideally Minsk II could have been accepted, but, that's likely dead now.

Look, I know you're joking with the comment, the way I see it is that Russia does need safety from NATO. Ukraine should have self defense, as any modern nation state should. And if force is used en masse in Ukraine, they have a right to fight back, no matter the history, what matters is now.

So it's complex.

What bothers me personally, is all these people using the very same sources who've NEVER seen a war they did not like, suddenly use these sources as reliable. It's Orwell in real life.

What I am almost certain of, is if the tables were turned, NATO would be destroying any country threatening its borders.

This doesn't justify anything, but it's what would happen.

We'll see how it goes.

In another article, the FT writes:

Former US national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski observed that without Ukraine, there can be no Russian empire. Putin fears a Ukraine that is economically and politically orientated towards the west with an ever closer security relationship with the US and other members of Nato — even if it is not a member of the alliance. He regards that as a critical security risk and, just as bad, an alternative economic and political model likely to be increasingly attractive to Russians — a dagger pointed at the heart of Russia.

Note how the article insists that Ukraine is "not a member of NATO". But the whole bone of contention, of course, is not that Ukraine is not a member, but that it wants to become one!

Moreover, the FT fails to say how America would react if Mexico were to join Russia and park Russian nuclear missiles on America's southern flank.

Very "objective" and "impartial" analysis from the FT mouthpiece for Anglo-American democracy and justice ....

Sure. That's why I linked to this article, not another one.

The FT is interesting. It has to present more or less tolerable view of the world to the people who own it, they can't be like CNN, almost never having dissident voices on.

If the people who run the world don't know anything about it, it's hard to make investments or know what to do when it comes to important business deals.

But if you look around, you'll find an article or two that is pretty decent. But as new info comes in, there will be better sources.

Very soon it will be clear to the whole world that Russia will have to send in peacekeepers to maintain civil order, while the West falsely accuses it of war-mongering. — Wayfarer

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered troops into separatist-held parts of eastern Ukraine in what the Kremlin called a "peacekeeping" mission, just hours after he signed decrees recognizing the independence of the Moscow-backed regions.