Ukraine on the brink of civil war. Mod Warning in OP.

Vlad Dog Putin

Shurimgreat wrote: »

The fact the US have dozens of stealth bombers and fighters pretty much makes obsolete much of the Russian equipment which are dependent on radar. If it was a straight conventional fight, the Russians would get their asses kicked.

Innocent like child, Yugoslav war 1998 USA F117 stealth plane shot down. Look at wiki.
“Unknown to NATO, Yugoslav air defenses operators had found they could detect F-117s with their "obsolete" Soviet radars after some modifications”
S-125 missile shot it down, made in 1961, not best missile then, today it is stone age compare to new missiles in Russia.
“Photographs show that the aircraft struck the ground at low speed in an inverted position, and that the airframe remained relatively intact. Pieces of wreckage were reportedly sent to Russia, to be used in developing anti-stealth technology.”

BoJack Horseman

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

While I despise the politics of the far right

No one buys that for a second.

No one, spending so many hundreds of posts defending unwaveringly Europe's most far-right government, without some level of devotion.

Vlad Dog Putin

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

War is different now than it was it 1940, a war with Russia would be mostly fought in air and on sea with troops only being used to capture and hold strategic positions. Given the changes in technology and US naval and air domination I can't see Russia lasting long against a NATO attack did come..

USA navy admit aircraft carriers are like battle ships at ww2, the best is behind.
Launch many cruise missiles at them and one will hit, that the reason Russia and China don't built them.

Vlad Dog Putin

you forgot 2 big things in war, the fight to the death for country men and the fog of war.
Russia win both.
You think NATO French soldier fight to death to hold line to protect German flank?
You think Italian soldier dig in and fight like dog to give safe retreat for Polish soldier?
Russian soldier do these for his brother soldier, 100% loyal, can NATO say the same?

Fog of war, communication gets bad, units get mixed, how USA soldier communicate with Greek soldier?
English soldier ask spanish soldier to move tank?? No speak spanish , tank will not move.
Russia not have this problem.
Simple things win wars, here 2 that Russia win.

"Rule 1, on page 1 of the book of war, is: "Do not march on Moscow". Various people have tried it, Napoleon and Hitler, and it is no good. That is the first rule"
Bernard Montgomery.
He know more about war than you.

Scofflaw

Enough with the "my country could beat up your country" willy-waving. This is Politics, not /r/MilitaryPorn.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Elmer Blooker

Mr Gandalf, I would be grateful if you could provide me with further evidence of Putin's close links with these groups ... and please nothing from the likes of Washington Post, Maidan Press, Newsweek, Kyiv Post, Moscow Times NY Times, BBC, Reuters, etc ect - in other words, the usual suspects.

No one buys that for a second.

No one, spending so many hundreds of posts defending unwaveringly Europe's most far-right government, without some level of devotion.

A big improvement on last night's contribution from you at least.

gandalf

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Mr Gandalf, I would be grateful if you could provide me with further evidence of Putin's close links with these groups ... and please nothing from the likes of Washington Post, Maidan Press, Newsweek, Kyiv Post, Moscow Times NY Times, BBC, Reuters, etc ect - in other words, the usual suspects.

I'm curious Elmer did someone stealthy make you a mod so you can decide what source is valid and what one isn't?

I have provided sources, if you feel they are not telling the truth counter them with ones of your own. Are there any showing Putin is not supporting parties of the extreme right in Russia. Surely one of those wonder blogs you link to every now and then has something. They have had time to whip up a positive spin on this story has been doing the rounds for a while now

Scofflaw

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Mr Gandalf, I would be grateful if you could provide me with further evidence of Putin's close links with these groups ... and please nothing from the likes of Washington Post, Maidan Press, Newsweek, Kyiv Post, Moscow Times NY Times, BBC, Reuters, etc ect - in other words, the usual suspects.

Seriously, Elmer? That list sounds like it can be expanded to cover any source which might possibly comment on the subject bar Russia Today.

Posters are entitled to ask for sources, but to try to limit the sources in this way is an abuse of that entitlement.

Also, yellow card for the incivility. Yellow card for gandalf for the "did someone make you a mod" line.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Brussels Sprout

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

... and please nothing from the likes of Washington Post, Maidan Press, Newsweek, Kyiv Post, Moscow Times NY Times, BBC, Reuters, etc ect

can't believe the Guardian and the Economist didn't make the list!

WakeUp

Gatling wrote: »

Might want to ask why russian heavy bombers have been flying off our west coast , and conducting practice bombing runs in and around others country's

seen this interesting and unusual video today. unusual in that its filmed from the nuclear bombers perspective as opposed to the interceptors havent seen that before. really odd turboprop engines on the tu-95 moving so fast they break the speed of sound and look like they arent moving much an optical illusion of sorts. typhoon and mirage in the video a couple of times you see them tilting showing their belly and weapons to the Russian pilots. not really sure when it was filmed or where some of the comments on youtube seem to think late Jan early Feb this year. know this sort of thing has increased a lot and is sort of "routine" so to speak though still a little too close for comfort really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnZMy1WWjZs

Ren2k7

Vlad Dog Putin wrote: »

USA navy admit aircraft carriers are like battle ships at ww2, the best is behind.
Launch many cruise missiles at them and one will hit, that the reason Russia and China don't built them.

Both Russia and China are building new aircraft carriers.

Ren2k7

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Mr Gandalf, I would be grateful if you could provide me with further evidence of Putin's close links with these groups ... and please nothing from the likes of Washington Post, Maidan Press, Newsweek, Kyiv Post, Moscow Times NY Times, BBC, Reuters, etc ect - in other words, the usual suspects.


A big improvement on last night's contribution from you at least.

So, basically you want sources from Russia Today and Sputnik. :rolleyes:

WakeUp

gandalf wrote: »

Extreme times tend to bring out the extremists. I agree there are far right elements at play on both sides of this conflict

some interesting thoughts from this Russian general...

Russia's Gen. Ivashov: "I Assume that the Foreign Ministry Understands We Are at War":

Feb. 11 (LPAC)—In an interview published Feb. 10 by km.ru, Gen. Leonid Ivashov, the former foreign relations head of the Russian Ministry of Defense and current president of the Academy of Geopolitical Studies, issued a sharp warning about the nature of the strategic crisis unfolding in Ukraine:

"Apparently they [officials of the European Union and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry] have dedicated themselves, and continue to do so, to deeply and thoroughly studying the doctrine of Dr. Goebbels. . . They present everything backwards from reality. It is one of the formulas which Nazi propaganda employed most successfully: ... They accuse the party that is defending itself, of aggression. What we are seeing in Ukraine and in Syria is a western project, a new kind of war: in both places you see a clear anti-Russian approach, and as is well known, wars today begin with psychological and information warfare operations. . .

"I assume that the Foreign Ministry understands that we are at war, and that wars have their laws. . . After the information war, they are preparing a land and sea in Ukraine. Kerry and Obama are encouraging in Kiev what they harshly repress in their country. European leaders break up unauthorized demonstrations with hoses, throwing demonstrators in jail, while in the Ukrainian case they do the exact opposite, and on top of that they threaten Russia. Logically, this is part of information warfare.

"Keep in mind that, under the cover of information commotion, U.S. ships are entering the Black Sea, that is, near Ukraine. They are sending marines, and they have also begun to deploy more tanks in Europe. . . After the information war, they are preparing for an operation by land and sea. Possibly also by air.

"The scenario could be the following: drive Ukraine to the breaking point, blame Yanukovich and Russia for everything, to then say that NATO can't simply sit by as a mere spectator, and then send its troops into to return order. Then a transitional government would be formed, as happened in Iraq and Kosovo, and NATO would take control of everything. Historical experience shows we have lived through similar situations. But before that they will need to justify the aggression with information warfare. . .

"They haven't even taught [opposition leaders] Klitchko, Yatsenyuk and Tyahnybok to run a government efficiently. The main thing is for them to take power, and destroy the Ukrainian state."

Gen. Ivashov has been an active participant in Russia's increasingly influential Izborsk Club group of intellectuals, having co-authored its military-strategic white paper in early 2013.

http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/29788

this general doesnt think its a cold war or it might escalate into war he believes and states Russia is already and actively at war.

The Izborsk Club, brings together leading patriotic, anti-liberal Russian analysts with figures close to the Kremlin. Its new report was co-authored by Gen. Leonid Ivashov (ret.) (former head of the International Relations Department of the Ministry of Defense), Academician Sergei Glazyev, editors Alexander Prokhanov and Alexander Nagorny from the weekly Zavtra, and historian Andrei Fursov, among others.

In late January, the Izborsk Club, Russia's new policy-shaping group, released a report entitled "Defense Reform as an Integral Part of a Security Conception for the Russian Federation: a Systemic and Dynamic Evaluation." The sections of the 85-page report dealing with a potential thermonuclear global showdown demonstrate that leading Russian circles are well aware of the developments discussed in the latest Leiber-Press article, regarding U.S. attempts to develop a "counterforce" capability—to be able to take out Russia's means to retaliate against a nuclear attack, thus making thermonuclear war more likely.

the Izborsk authors soberly assess the danger of thermonuclear war, and its finality, as stemming from utopian policies reigning in the West. They write:

"Washington is escalating its efforts to achieve overwhelming military-technological superiority over Russia, such that the R[ussian] F[ederation] would dismantle its strategic nuclear arsenal, thus losing its retaliatory nuclear-strike capability and, consequently, losing strategic parity with the U.S.A. Washington is pursuing this goal both by developing advanced strategic rearmament programs, and through diplomatic efforts to impose upon Russia strategic and conventional arms reduction agreements that are advantageous to the U.S.A....

"Washington's likely line in its Russia policy in the near future will be to involve Russia in a NEW RESET scheme, using the NATO bloc in order to (a) prevent Russia's rapprochement with China, and (b) weaken Russia's military potential as much as possible. This weakening will be accomplished through a series of disarmament agreements, reducing Russia's strategic nuclear missile potential, as well as tactical nuclear weapons, to a minimum; the latter are especially important in the event of regional and local conflicts, including in Central Asia and the Caucasus region....

"For the decades ahead, however, any real threat of a massive nuclear-missile strike against Russia would originate only from the U.S.A and its allies. For the time being, the likelihood of such a war can be regarded as very small, as long as as Russia maintains its strategic nuclear forces and its deterrent capability of launching an assured retaliatory nuclear-missile strike. This turns nuclear weapons into the military-political ultima ratio, and makes them the subject of continuous military-technological competition between the superpowers, in attempts to neutralize this power factor. At the same time, in wars on a local or regional scale, tactical weapons are gaining more and more importance. Over the last decade, the USA and the NATO countries have been intensely developing the conception of a disarming non-nuclear strike against Russia's control systems and its strategic nuclear forces. Such a counterforce strike would rule out the possibility of Russian nuclear retaliation that would cause unacceptable damage to the U.S.A."

Concerning a "major war scenario," the report continues:

"The nature of such a war will be:

high-intensity and high-technology, since any of the countries named above would seek to deliver a preemptive, disarming strike with HPW [high-precision weapons] against our strategic nuclear forces, reconnaissance, control, and communications systems in outer space, in the air, and on the ground;

"based on a massive employment of HPW and conventional forces and means of battle in the first attack echelon (in all-or-nothing mode), in order to destroy our forces and achieve the basic war objectives before a retaliatory nuclear strike can be launched and before the initiation of political negotiations.

"In strategic terms, such a conflict may be preceded by a period of escalating conflict potential, which could allow the timely detection of war preparations by intelligence/ reconnaissance forces and assets, and the ability to carry out the needed countermobilization."

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2013/4011nuke_first_strike.html

at if the Russians werent spooked enough about what they believe may well be US intentions this certainly wont help with that.

Russia has lost its ability to detect incoming nuclear missiles from space


Russia just lost its early-warning system for detecting ballistic missiles because of delays in the launch of its new "Tundra" advanced early-warning system.

According to Russia's Kommersant newspaper, the system was due to replace ageing satellites launched as part of the Oko programme that had already exceeded their expected life span of five to seven years. The system had been beset by technical problems, and in January this year the last two satellites, which were operational for only a few hours each day, finally went offline.

The Tundra satellites, designed to be capable of tracking tactical as well as ballistic missiles, were first scheduled for launch in 2013. But technical problems delayed the programme, with its revised launch date in 2014 already having been missed. It is now scheduled to be launched "no earlier than June 2015," according to Kommersant.

The loss of geostationary satellites risks weakening Russia's early-warning system for missile launches. Sources at the Russian Ministry of Defence say the loss is being compensated for by radar systems on the ground located in the Kaliningrad, Leningrad, Irkutsk, and Krasnodar regions of the country.

However, it is impossible to verify those claims.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-ballistic-missile-defence-system-tundra-delayed-2015-2?r=US

where are all the adults at.

AbusesToilets

WakeUp wrote: »

this general doesnt think its a cold war or it might escalate into war he believes and states Russia is already and actively at war..

Of course he believes Russia is actively at war, they started it.

gandalf

Wakeup just doing a quick search about this Gen Leonid Ivashov shows him to be a hawk who yearns for the good old days of the USSR.

Straight question Wakeup, should the aggression we have seen in Eastern Ukraine which has been initiated and actioned by Russia be allowed to pass just because they seem vulnerable?

I certainly don't. I find it highly amusing that this General says the EU and US are using Nazi propaganda techniques when Russia are using that playbook and the Sudetenland 1938 playbook to the letter.

(makes you wonder were the killings on the Maiden 2013's "Operation Himmler")

Just to give you another idea on the calibre of person you are quoting Wakeup take a look at this, it's a tweet that is citing an article where the good General blames the Paris attacks on mercenaries working on behalf of USA & Israel. The article in Russian is linked below that and I have pulled the relevant quote (using Google translate) from that article.

https://twitter.com/20committee/status/554749266816557059

http://www.dynacon.ru/content/articles/4586/

this is translated by Google translate.

most likely the operation was planned in the United States to destroy the Islamic culture, Islamic tradition, to oppose Islam Europeans. Thus, customers receive two-way benefit.

But what has happened is most likely to be involved more and Israeli intelligence services.

Lockstep

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I don't really need to, though.

Of course you do if you want to be taken seriously. This is the Politics forum. You're expected to backup your claims.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Please have some manners.

Asking someone to prove their point is bad manners?

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm referring to the magazine's warning a few years back that the Central European member states of the EU were about to be bailed out because they had failed to live up to the standards expected of liberal western Europe. Cue liberal Western European economies drowning in red ink, accepting cheques from a lot of handsome slavs.

Which "liberal Western European economies" are accepting cheques from handsome Slavs?
Eastern and Central European countries are net recipients of EU money

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

On Ukraine specifically, commentators like this have been pointing out shortcomings in its reporting, and as you can see it isn't a once-off.

On Ukraine specifically? It's criticising coverage of Russia's economy. The only time it mentions Ukraine is in saying that Ukraine has a higher proportion of people emigrating than Russia. It doesn't support your previous claim that the Economist's coverage of Ukraine has been consistently discredited.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I don't really want to bore you, or waste my time, in fact-checking the magazine's articles line-by-line. Plenty of bloggers, some of them pretty lucid, spend their time doing exactly that.

You wouldn't be boring me. I specifically asked you to cite your claims. That's how this forum works.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

In any event, the magazine that once protested at Irish famine aid has never denied that it has an ideological axe to grind, and nobody need be surprised at its approach to Ukraine.

I'm not sure why the Economist's slant 150 years ago is relevant now. The Economist was a lot more ideological back then.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

In your opinion.

Not exactly.
The Economist is one of the most trusted news sources in the US

Ren2k7

WakeUp wrote: »

some interesting thoughts from this Russian general...


http://archive.larouchepac.com/node/29788

this general doesnt think its a cold war or it might escalate into war he believes and states Russia is already and actively at war.


http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2013/4011nuke_first_strike.html

at if the Russians werent spooked enough about what they believe may well be US intentions this certainly wont help with that.


http://uk.businessinsider.com/russia-ballistic-missile-defence-system-tundra-delayed-2015-2?r=US

where are all the adults at.

Mental. And not surprising La Rouche's looney lot gleefully republish it to bolster their claim global thermonuclear war is imminent (La Rouche has claimed WWIII has been imminent for the last 50 years BTW).

Shurimgreat

The Minsk agreement is essentially dead before it even got started.

Russians moving more armour and troops into Eastern Ukraine.

Beginning to believe Merkel is just a puppet of Putin.

Icepick

Shurimgreat wrote: »

The Minsk agreement is essentially dead before it even got started.

Russians moving more armour and troops into Eastern Ukraine.

Beginning to believe Merkel is just a puppet of Putin.

You have to look at it in this context:


So the real failure is on UK's side. Germany and France have a real pragmatic reason not to escalate the conflict (especially during the winter).

The Kremlin is using salami tactics.
It's time the West did the same. It's time we started to provide technology and training to the Ukrainian army. And this is where even small countries like Ireland can help. Further sanctions need to be implemented.
If that's not enough, we start arming them.

Vlad Dog Putin

Icepick wrote: »

. It's time we started to provide technology and training to the Ukrainian army. And this is where even small countries like Ireland can help. Further sanctions need to be implemented.

what can Ireland give?

Ren2k7

Shurimgreat wrote: »

The Minsk agreement is essentially dead before it even got started.

Russians moving more armour and troops into Eastern Ukraine.

Beginning to believe Merkel is just a puppet of Putin.

She once was a member of the East German communist youth movement and speaks fluent Russian. Such indoctrination she was sure to have received would not have been forgotten. Then again successive German government in general have always been quite pally with the Kremlin. Merkel's predecessor Gerhard Schröder is now a "consultant" on the Russian gas pipeline project "Nordstream" from Russia to Germany.

Ren2k7

Vlad Dog Putin wrote: »

what can Ireland give?

We could provide training to ill prepared conscripts and their officers at the Curragh. We already do this for a number of countries, including the UK.

Ren2k7

Icepick wrote: »

You have to look at it in this context:

That's the malign legacy of Comecon displayed perfectly. Comecon was the economic equivilent of the Warsaw Pact, a union that locked the communist bloc countries together under overall Russian control. It provided the Kremlin with a mechanism in which to control and dominate the economies of those countries of the eastern bloc, ensuring they would always be reliant on Russia. All economic integration revolved around Russia and what was best for them.

Even today, two decades after the collapse of communism in Europe Russia's influence still exists.

Shurimgreat

Neville Chamberlain himself would be proud of Merkel and Hollande. Taking Putin at his word was always going to lead to one thing. The whole Mink agreement like the Munich agreement was basically a thumbs up to continue as before. Merkel is Putin's poodle.

History tells us you can't negotiate with thugs like Putin, they do not understand the concept of negotiation. While they pretend to be interested in negotiation they are ordering armoured divisions to mobilise in the background.

Scofflaw

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Neville Chamberlain himself would be proud of Merkel and Hollande. Taking Putin at his word was always going to lead to one thing. The whole Mink agreement like the Munich agreement was basically a thumbs up to continue as before. Merkel is Putin's poodle.

History tells us you can't negotiate with thugs like Putin, they do not understand the concept of negotiation. While they pretend to be interested in negotiation they are ordering armoured divisions to mobilise in the background.

Source for the claim that Russia is moving armoured divisions into Ukraine?

I have only "US officials" via the WSJ:

In Washington, however, U.S. officials said that Russian weaponry and troops continue to move into Ukraine as the separatists consolidate their control of Debaltseve. U.S. officials said the Russians have moved artillery and rocket launchers into Ukraine; equipment that the U.S. believes is operated by Russian soldiers.

“We have continued to see large quantities of Russian equipment flow from Russia into Ukraine,” said Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman. “All of this Russian equipment that moves into Ukraine contributes to destabilization.”

The Kremlin has repeatedly denied sending weapons or troops into Ukraine.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/more-russian-troops-enter-ukraine-1424342640

cordially,
Scofflaw

Shurimgreat

Scofflaw wrote: »

Source for the claim that Russia is moving armoured divisions into Ukraine?

I have only "US officials" via the WSJ:



http://www.wsj.com/articles/more-russian-troops-enter-ukraine-1424342640

cordially,
Scofflaw

Apologies for delay in responding, was busy with something else.

I caught it as a headline on one of the news channels. Here is a source I have.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/20/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSKBN0LO13420150220

Accusations from the Ukrainians. They have usually been spot on in the past about armour crossing from Russia.

Icepick

Vlad Dog Putin wrote: »

what can Ireland give?

military training

Benefits both sides.

Lockstep

Lockstep wrote: »

This is the Politics forum. You're expected to backup your claims

We all make our own assessments of certain media. Asking a poster to go and retrieve any dossier to prove an opinion he has developed over time is quite a taxing ask. But if you are going to ask me for it, then ask me: don't demand.

What are you looking for here? My opinion on the The Economist's dodgy coverage is shared by Mark Adomanis, a well-regarded analyst (and critic) of Russian policy.

I honestly don't know what will please you short of an qualitative study of The Economist's Ukranian coverage 2013-2015, because clearly if I only select random articles, it proves nothing.

Do you think you are making a realistic request here?

Which "liberal Western European economies" are accepting cheques from handsome Slavs?

Did you read the article you asked for? I'm talking about the financial crisis, which you should have known if you read the link you asked for.

Ireland is one such economy. The former Eastern bloc members of Euroland were not bailed out by the Eurozone as The Economist prophesised, in fact they contributed to bailing out the Western European economies, such as Ireland, Greece, Portugal and Spain who came a cropper.

gandalf

gandalf wrote: »

(makes you wonder were the killings on the Maiden 2013's "Operation Himmler")

Looks like the Ukrainians are hinting that the killings were directed from Russia alright.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has accused Russia of direct involvement in the sniper fire which killed dozens of protesters in central Kiev a year ago.

He was speaking as the capital marked the first anniversary of the clashes between protesters and police which toppled ex-President Viktor Yanukovych.

A top Kremlin aide, Vladislav Surkov, had organised snipers, he alleged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31548896

And it looks like the ousted Ukrainians have been well rewarded by Moscow for their role in the set up.

In Moscow, Yanukovych moved to Barvikha, one of the most expensive neighborhoods in Moscow's suburbs, the RBC news website reported. Novo-Ogaryovo, one of Putin's official residences, is nearby.

.......

Without letting the grass grow under his feet, in May, Alexander Yanukovych — who under his father's presidency had become one of the most influential businessmen in Ukraine — opened two enterprises: Arsenal-Invest and Arsenal-Estate in St. Petersburg. According to Arsenal-Invest's registration documents, obtained from an open-source database, the company's primary function is "managing industrial groups and holdings."

...........

Former Interior Minister Alexander Zakharchenko, who is suspected by the current Ukrainian authorities of organizing the mass killing of protesters on Maidan, has received Russian citizenship and became a senior consultant at Russia's Rostec state corporation, established to develop hi-tech industrial production in the country, the TASS news agency reported last month.

................

Former Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Arbuzov also lives in Moscow, according to RBC, but works in St. Petersburg, where he presides over the Center for Research into Economic, Social and Cultural Development of the Countries of the CIS, Central and Eastern Europe. According to the center's website, the center is located in the Russian Academy of Sciences' building in St. Petersburg.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/ousted-ukraine-officials-enjoy-life-of-luxury-in-moscow/516264.html

WakeUp

gandalf wrote: »

Wakeup just doing a quick search about this Gen Leonid Ivashov shows him to be a hawk who yearns for the good old days of the USSR.

Straight question Wakeup, should the aggression we have seen in Eastern Ukraine which has been initiated and actioned by Russia be allowed to pass just because they seem vulnerable?

I certainly don't. I find it highly amusing that this General says the EU and US are using Nazi propaganda techniques when Russia are using that playbook and the Sudetenland 1938 playbook to the letter.

(makes you wonder were the killings on the Maiden 2013's "Operation Himmler")

Just to give you another idea on the calibre of person you are quoting Wakeup take a look at this, it's a tweet that is citing an article where the good General blames the Paris attacks on mercenaries working on behalf of USA & Israel. The article in Russian is linked below that and I have pulled the relevant quote (using Google translate) from that article.

https://twitter.com/20committee/status/554749266816557059

http://www.dynacon.ru/content/articles/4586/

Leaving his comments about the Paris attacks to one side as thats just nonsense in my opinion the worrying thing about this general is that he has influence within the military thinking and establishment of the Kremlin. Both Moscow and Washington have their hawks whether I agree or disagree with his comments about potential US nuclear primacy vis a vis Russian nuclear deterrence is irrelevant. Whats relevant is that people like him and people he surrounds himself with appear to be thinking that way. thats how they are viewing the unfolding events. Putin believes that the west is trying to push him out of power and destroy Russia. His generals believe well some of them anyways that they are already at war. the nazi angle is interesting alright. wasnt it Sun Tzu who said all warfare is based on deception.

To believe one side of the many sides of this conflict are the only ones engaged in story telling/ propaganda would be naive in the extreme. all of them are at from Kiev to Washington to Moscow to Warsaw hell pick a capital and there is noopolitik overload emanating from one and all. Whatever side of the discussion one happens to be on theres one thing everyone will have in common. we have all been are being mind phucked to some extent. In this day and age the fog of war is just so much more pronounced than it ever was with the amount of information being put out and disseminated. Its just really hard to spot the truth these days from the bullsh1t from all sides. Theres a method to that madness.

With regard to Russian aggression sanction them fine. I dont believe it will work but this is where we are. the question isnt should Russia be allowed away with whatever the question is are you prepared for war with Russia because of Ukraine. a non-Nato and non- EU member state. and Nato intervention in Yugoslavia is an irrelevant analogy to be used as a precedent for Nato action here. I see it mentioned in another comment. if you want the continent to burn thats a sure way to acheive it. In that situation it wasnt nuclear powered Russia directly like it would be now that Nato would be confronting. on their own border no less.

Icepick wrote: »

You have to look at it in this context:


So the real failure is on UK's side. Germany and France have a real pragmatic reason not to escalate the conflict (especially during the winter).

Ren2k7 wrote: »

That's the malign legacy of Comecon displayed perfectly. Comecon was the economic equivilent of the Warsaw Pact, a union that locked the communist bloc countries together under overall Russian control. It provided the Kremlin with a mechanism in which to control and dominate the economies of those countries of the eastern bloc, ensuring they would always be reliant on Russia. All economic integration revolved around Russia and what was best for them.

Even today, two decades after the collapse of communism in Europe Russia's influence still exists.

Why is it up to the UK (Nato member) to escalate the conflict .Comecon has nothing to do with some of Europe and the EU not being able to diversify its energy away from Russian energy supplies that is both practical and makes economic sense. and which is now a factor or potential factor in what is and may or may not play out. they have had time to come up with a plan. only problem is our options are limited. you cant blame the Russians for that.