[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[Springal]

How does the SWIFT thing work with international businesses with presence there ? What’s the impact to pay staff etc - particularly if they are shell vehicles and don’t directly transact stuff locally ?

 

[Eric the meek]

The problem with your analysis (and that of Varoufakis) is that it treats the Ukraine as some sort of pawn to be bartered over by Russia and the West. Ukrainians are making it very clear that they value their independence and that means the freedom to align with whomsoever they choose.

Absolutely spot on. Succinct and to the point. Unlike the comment to which you were replying. Less is more.

 

[peterward]

I have to say Truss went up in my opinion this morning on the tv. Answered the question about "should people go into
Ukraine and help fight if they want". She was quite forward in her 100% approval. I think Russia will be fighting Europe
without realising it.

Something else happened last night, and I'm going to make a prediction here what it really means and what Putin will do next....

As I've mentioned before, after the first failed war efforts in the mid 90s in Chechnya, even though the odd terrorist attack from this area, there was no appetite for a new war with Chechnya, but Putin wanted to smash them and appear from obscurity as a strong leader. His old long time KGB friend Nicolai Patruchev was head of FSB and russian civilian targets (apartment blocks) started being bombed killing Russian civilians and generating outrage, it was blamed on Chechen terrorists and the Russian public wanted revenge.

However, in one town east of moscow, local police caught some men looking suspicious loading sacks into apartment block basement. The car had Moscow plates, the sack was tested and contained explosives and a detonator set for 5:30am. The 3 men caught were quickly identified as FSB operatives.

Putin praised local authorities, but straight after FSB head Patruchev said it was just a training exercise, to test local response, and the sacks were just sugar

The polonium 2:10 disident poisoned here, Alexander Litvinenko published proof in Russia this apartment bombing was an FSB false flag pretext to whip up fervour and justify a war on Chechnya,which Putin won by pummeling them and popularity rose.

Patruchev is now Putin's national security advisor and right hand man.

Why is this relevant?

Yesterday Russia reported 2 bomb threats against Moscow airports, could be just news, but I don't think so.

Right now Putin's "specific military operation" is going badly, he has a hostile Ukrainian national resistance, he has 1000's of dead russian troops while denying casualties, he is smashing civilian infrastructure whilst denying it, and yet again he has a public against war in Ukraine, as Ukrainians volunteer to fight.

So this is why i really suspect may happen next, the Chechnya playbook again.

Bombs in Moscow or Russia killing civilians, Blame on Ukrainians, which could allow him to declare actual war, try and turn public sentiment from no war to outrage against Ukraine, and give him the pretext to smash Ukraine (just like Chechnya). It would also be used to cover up the firing already done against civilian targets and the 4000 dead russians would be formally killed in action at some point after declaration of war date.

It's text book Soviet false flag fabrication. It's what these 2 men did before Chechnya with similar public sentiment, it could cover what he's done and currently denies, galvanise russian public into justification for his crimes as direct attack by Ukraine. And he too may then request outraged Russian volunteers with state TV able to ramp up full anti Ukraine hysteria

He's cornered right now. The bomb scares sent shivers down my spine. I bet this comes next

 

[1066familyman]

Swanny does sometimes have support from me, other times quite the opposite. Sometimes you do, other times quite the opposite. Sometimes Swanny does say the strangest tings, but other times, as in this thread, there will be occasions when he hits the nail on the head. It's all a matter of opinion. There are NSC members who irritate me much, but I am conscious that maybe I irritate them too. I have never been 'infracted' or banned. I suspect I never will be.

As regards posting false information, unwittingly we all do it, it is a question of what is deliberate in its miss-leading.

An example is this quote: '...the media (or rather the military–industrial–media comple) decides what people are or are not interested in'

Better folk than I have often remarked the same thing. And this feeds into his 'Goodies v Baddies' mantra. He is right to do this. As clear as it is that a sovereign country has been invaded, and you and I would both agree that Russia must stop, I am not viewing like some World Cup campaign as others are, fed by the barrage of jingoistic support for our new team from quarters of the press.

Russia has no right to start a war in Ukraine. Russia should leave immediately. But this does not mean that the original concerns should not have been addressed:

Yanis Varoufakis, for me one of the most balanced commentators in Europe who considers all side (read- Adults in the Room- his take on the EU during the Greek crisis when he was Finance Minister there) says:

[Tweet]1496952362048671745[/Tweet]

I could go on. But, yes, for certain Russia has done a really awful thing here. And I support the Ukranian effort to remove them. But on the whole NATO thing I do find myself questioning the motives of many in the West that can easily be wrapped up in a kind of righteousness that covers a multitude of underlying intent. And that is why, beyond the obvious support for the Ukrainians people's right to defend their own country, questions should be asked.

And I will not be swept along by the media, NSC, RT, the BBC (who I deeply respect unlike many), who may wish to push a narrative.

Brilliant post.

Well said.

 

[Seaview Seagull]

The problem with your analysis (and that of Varoufakis) is that it treats the Ukraine as some sort of pawn to be bartered over by Russia and the West. Ukrainians are making it very clear that they value their independence and that means the freedom to align with whomsoever they choose.

This. It would be just like the treatment of Czechoslovakia at Munich in 1938. I would not have been against the West encouraging Ukraine not to pursue NATO membership before the war but now is different and they need some sort of security guarantee short of membership.

 

[raymondo]

The best way to not let a thread be derailed if you don't want it derailed is to not reply to a derailing post. I continue to find this thread easy to read and useful.

Yes, I understand... although my personal preference would be for Swansman to start another thread purely focused for debate on the actions of Russia, Nato, US ....since ww2, rather than muddying this thread that is mainly about the here and now.

 

[Eeyore]

The problem with your analysis (and that of Varoufakis) is that it treats the Ukraine as some sort of pawn to be bartered over by Russia and the West. Ukrainians are making it very clear that they value their independence and that means the freedom to align with whomsoever they choose.

It has been for a long time, alas. And this where, prior to this Russian invasion in which only they are too blame for the current situation, we were at.

A good read from 2014, when the original coup happened, gives a good starting point for wanting to DYOR more..

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict

The problem, in the current climate, is the herd mentality that the media are forcing upon us. Only this weekend the FT was calling those of us who have serious miss-givings about what underlines NATO as 'Pro-Putin' in its headline. Pro-Putin is something I am not. But any reasonable discussion would never question that and there would be no need to defend myself. But that is what all this comes to alas, Goodies v Baddies. A point Swanny makes correctly. Then again, such a view would make me pro-Swanny... you see where I am going with this.

 

[Here'sWally]

Ukraine are saying that Russian military deaths are about 4,300 so far, whereas Ukrainian deaths are about 200. These numbers seem incredibly imbalanced - am I missing something here? Or should we not trust the Ukrainian figures quoted?

I think Ukraine is probably making a mistake by putting out stories and figures which are not believable, and or come to be proven untrue.

If Ukraine are to be believed, they need very little help, they are doing fine and Russia are bleeding out and nobody needs to be concerned.

Ukraine with their claims, and Russia with their silence about them, both seem to be following The Art of War.

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

Russia are probably quite happy with the propaganda coming out on the Ukrainian side, on balance it probably plays into Russia's hands.

I think the best thing to do would be to not believe anything you are reading or hearing on social media, sadly perhaps that should be extended to "respected" news media too, since they appear to be happy to amplify some of the more questionable stories too.

Remember, "The first casualty of war is truth".

 

[KZNSeagull]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter...eillance_by_country#Reporters_Without_Borders

I will go to bed eventually.

Good morning. I hope that you slept well. I certainly have. Thank you for this very useful link that you have sent me. Perversely, according to Reporters without Borders, the UK's press freedom is coloured green whereas Russia and Belarus is coloured red. If the UK's "censorship" of the Internet were so heinous, why is their press freedom green? No doubt you will tell me that people should be free to post whatever they like on the Internet, I disagree. Press Freedom, in my view, is far more important and your attempt to lump the UK in with the likes of Russia and Belarus is utter tosh.

If someone posts tosh in the first sentence of a post, I don't bother reading the rest.

 

[Eric the meek]

Ukraine are saying that Russian military deaths are about 4,300 so far, whereas Ukrainian deaths are about 200. These numbers seem incredibly imbalanced - am I missing something here? Or should we not trust the Ukrainian figures quoted?

Yes, you are missing something.

You are missing the word 'civilian' in front of the 200.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was a genuine mistake on your part.

'Ukrainian government ombudsman Lyudmyla Denysova says more than 210 Ukrainian civilians have been killed and more than 1,100 wounded in Russia's invasion.'

Edit: [MENTION=42592]Here'sWally[/MENTION] may wish to take note.

 

[amexer]

Appreciate covered on another thread but unbelievable uefa and Fifa have not yet kicked Russia out of World cup and out of Europa cup. Even Eurovision song contest has kicked them out.

 

[Eric the meek]

Appreciate covered on another thread but unbelievable uefa and Fifa have not yet kicked Russia out of World cup and out of Europa cup. Even Eurovision song contest has kicked them out.

Even the International Judo Federation have suspended Putin as Honorary President !

https://www.france24.com/en/live-ne...deration-suspends-putin-as-honorary-president

 

[Here'sWally]

Russia and the West are playing by different rulebooks. Russia view this as a national security issue and they view Ukraine as being of strategic security importance.

The West do not view Ukraine as being of strategic security importance. It would be nice to have Ukraine in NATO, but the West does not believe that the security of Europe depends on it.

As a consequence, we will use football, music, economics (to a point), and other non military means to further our goals.

But Russia will use military means to secure theirs, and will care very little, on balance, about football and music and limited economic hardship. Because their percieved security interests are always going to come first.

This is what I don't understand about how this thing even got started. Russia always possessed a will and a resolve in this that the West never will. Both sides knew this the whole time. Everyone knew that the West would never send troops into Ukraine to fight and die and start a global war with Russia. Everyone also knew that Russia probably would be willing to.

It's like playing a hand of poker, where both sides cards are face up on the table. We can see that we have the weaker hand. At every turn we raise the stakes and insist on continuing. It really never made any sense, and has been deeply unfair to Ukraine. We should have sat down with all parties and negotiated a peace which took account of everyones concerns, and resulted in a non-aligned status for Ukraine. Hopefully that is what will result from all this, but it should never have come to this in the first place.

 

[Here'sWally]

Yes, you are missing something.

You are missing the word 'civilian' in front of the 200.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was a genuine mistake on your part.

'Ukrainian government ombudsman Lyudmyla Denysova says more than 210 Ukrainian civilians have been killed and more than 1,100 wounded in Russia's invasion.'

Edit: [MENTION=42592]Here'sWally[/MENTION] may wish to take note.

There is absolutely no chance that Ukraine have killed 4,300 Russian soldiers and shot down 27 Russian planes in two days.

That would mean that Ukraine have killed as many Russian soldiers in two days as the total number of U.S. soldiers killed over the course of the entire 7 year war in Iraq, and almost double the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan over the course of 20 years.

 

[Poojah]

I think Ukraine is probably making a mistake by putting out stories and figures which are not believable, and or come to be proven untrue.

If Ukraine are to be believed, they need very little help, they are doing fine and Russia are bleeding out and nobody needs to be concerned.

Ukraine with their claims, and Russia with their silence about them, both seem to be following The Art of War.

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

Russia are probably quite happy with the propaganda coming out on the Ukrainian side, on balance it probably plays into Russia's hands.

I think the best thing to do would be to not believe anything you are reading or hearing on social media, sadly perhaps that should be extended to "respected" news media too, since they appear to be happy to amplify some of the more questionable stories too.

Remember, "The first casualty of war is truth".

If you want an idea of the Russian perspective on events, you can visit the Russian state owned website https://ria.ru/ and automatically translate into English in Chrome.

As it happens, there is relatively little coverage of matters in Ukraine; the current top story being about a supposed thwarted ISIS attack on the Russian city of Kaluga. What coverage there is is far more slanted towards western imposed sanctions rather than Russia’s military operations.

 

[origigull]

Ukraine are saying that Russian military deaths are about 4,300 so far, whereas Ukrainian deaths are about 200. These numbers seem incredibly imbalanced - am I missing something here? Or should we not trust the Ukrainian figures quoted?

It seems that when the Russians venture deep into the cities of Ukraine, traps and ambushes are the only sensible thing the Ukrainians can do, then they melt away into the shadows ie typical guerrilla warfare.

 

[pb21]

If you want, you can make direct BTC/ETH/USDT donations to Ukraine.

[tweet]1497594592438497282[/tweet]

 

[Seagull27]

Yes, you are missing something.

You are missing the word 'civilian' in front of the 200.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was a genuine mistake on your part.

'Ukrainian government ombudsman Lyudmyla Denysova says more than 210 Ukrainian civilians have been killed and more than 1,100 wounded in Russia's invasion.'

Edit: [MENTION=42592]Here'sWally[/MENTION] may wish to take note.

Ah, thanks. I can't see anywhere that quotes Ukrainian military deaths though, and it would be interesting to know how they are classifying civilian deaths when many of their civilians are taking up arms.

I have no agenda here, just interested in the comparison.

 

[Eric the meek]

There is absolutely no chance that Ukraine have killed 4,300 Russian soldiers and shot down 27 Russian planes in two days.

That would mean that Ukraine have killed as many Russian soldiers in two days as the total number of U.S. soldiers killed over the course of the entire 7 year war in Iraq, and almost half the number of U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan over the course of 20 years.

You should stick to the point. Otherwise you run the danger of being accused of deflection and distraction. None of your comment above is relevant.

I simply pointed out that [MENTION=18487]Seagull27[/MENTION]'s post was wrong in comparing Russian military deaths with a figure of 200 Ukrainian deaths, as the 200 referred to civilian deaths only. You had already pounced on it in some Eureka moment. Now you are talking about other data, and veering off on a hopeless tangent about casualties in other wars. You need to be more objective.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Swanny does sometimes have support from me, other times quite the opposite. Sometimes you do, other times quite the opposite. Sometimes Swanny does say the strangest tings, but other times, as in this thread, there will be occasions when he hits the nail on the head. It's all a matter of opinion. There are NSC members who irritate me much, but I am conscious that maybe I irritate them too. I have never been 'infracted' or banned. I suspect I never will be.

As regards posting false information, unwittingly we all do it, it is a question of what is deliberate in its miss-leading.

An example is this quote: '...the media (or rather the military–industrial–media comple) decides what people are or are not interested in'

Better folk than I have often remarked the same thing. And this feeds into his 'Goodies v Baddies' mantra. He is right to do this. As clear as it is that a sovereign country has been invaded, and you and I would both agree that Russia must stop, I am not viewing like some World Cup campaign as others are, fed by the barrage of jingoistic support for our new team from quarters of the press.

Russia has no right to start a war in Ukraine. Russia should leave immediately. But this does not mean that the original concerns should not have been addressed:

Yanis Varoufakis, for me one of the most balanced commentators in Europe who considers all side (read- Adults in the Room- his take on the EU during the Greek crisis when he was Finance Minister there) says:

[Tweet]1496952362048671745[/Tweet]

I could go on. But, yes, for certain Russia has done a really awful thing here. And I support the Ukranian effort to remove them. But on the whole NATO thing I do find myself questioning the motives of many in the West that can easily be wrapped up in a kind of righteousness that covers a multitude of underlying intent. And that is why, beyond the obvious support for the Ukrainians people's right to defend their own country, questions should be asked.

And I will not be swept along by the media, NSC, RT, the BBC (who I deeply respect unlike many), who may wish to push a narrative.

The mistake he and you are making, is to assume that everyone else is swayed by the media. Many of us posting are savvy enough to do our own research, and I usually take the trouble to post a link to a person or article which shows what I have said. I am very careful to check links and verify them before posting. I am also happy to be corrected.
I speak from experience about NATO.
When NATO goes into a conflict as NATO, all troops wear sky blue berets. Do not confuse actions by individual NATO countries as being NATO conflicts. NATO wasn't involved with the Falklands conflict, for instance. That was only Britain/

Neither side are perfect but don't assume those who post their opinions are not as clever as you or those who are against this. It's so easy to point the finger and say you're wrong without reason to back it up. Swanny has even used wikipedia which is notoriously inaccurate. and edited by all and sundry.