Yes.

Well, if Putin does that, he'll do it with his armed forces.

And it doesn't really look good.

Putin is accusing Ukraine of genocide. We already had the "kindergarten bombing incident" noted by . That the rebel enclaves say they are evacuating 700 000 people to Russia isn't either a good sign.

What Russia is saying about Ukraine should is alarming:

(TASS) It is highly probable that Kiev will embark on a combat operation in Donbass, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday.

"The attention of our interlocutors is drawn in every possible way to this dangerous concentration [of the Ukrainian troops at the engagement line in Donbass] and the attention of our interlocutors is drawn to the fact that a military operation and an attempt to resolve problems with the use of force in the southeast [of Ukraine] are quite real. This probability is high and real and, unfortunately, all of us and the entire world were witnesses when Kiev unleashed a military operation in Donbass, that is, it started a civil war in the country," the Russian presidential spokesman said.

The Ukrainians are saying their side:

(Jerusalem Post) The military intelligence of Ukraine announced Friday that it has information that Russian special forces have planted explosives at a number of social infrastructure facilities in separatist-controlled Donetsk.

Donetsk is located in eastern Ukraine, where Ukrainian forces have been fighting pro-Russia rebels since 2014 in a conflict that has killed some 14,000 people.

“These measures are aimed at destabilizing the situation in the temporarily occupied territories of our state and creating grounds for accusing Ukraine of terrorist acts,” the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine said in a tweet.

Comes to my mind Finland attacking Soviet Union in 1939 and the famous the artillery shelling of Mainila. Right from the Stalinist playbook.

This time Biden and his secretary of state Blinken would be just fine and happy if they would be wrong. They were wrong about Wednesday, you know.

Hopefully a war doesn't start...

They're such brazen liars.

They are KGB. All that matters is that the Russian people accept it and go publicly with the lie, even if they would have doubts about it in private.

You show strength by believing in your own lies, I guess.

I don’t know who to believe.

The Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said she would like to “request to the mass disinformation outlets of the USA and Britain – Bloomberg, the New York Times, the Sun etc – announce the schedule of our ‘invasions’ for the coming year. I’d like to plan my vacation”. And these predictions have so far been worthy of such mockery. No doubt some incident will occur before anything happens, but it is unclear who will do it first.

As expected, more straw men from you, isn't it? Every one of them more transparent and easier to debunk than the others! :smile:

It isn’t just Erdogan, it’s the whole AKP party, plus allied far-right and ultra-nationalist (or neo-fascist) parties allied to it like MHP, the military, terror and criminal organizations, the Islamist religious mafia, and basically, the whole Turkish system.

Turkey is converting Christian churches and monasteries into mosques (Agia Sofia Cathedral, Monastery of Chora, etc.), it suppresses religious and ethnic minorities, it routinely jails journalists, academics and political opponents (many more than Russia!), etc. In other words, a neo-fascist state with an Islamist twist, i.e. a Frankenstein monster created by Kissinger and his anti-Russian policies.

Critics have accused the AKP of having a 'hidden agenda' despite their public endorsement of secularism and the party maintains informal relations and support for the Muslim Brotherhood. Both the party's domestic and foreign policy has been perceived to be Pan-Islamist or Neo-Ottoman, advocating a revival of Ottoman culture often at the expense of secular republican principles, while increasing regional presence in former Ottoman territories

Justice and Development Party (Turkey) – Wikipedia

Of course, because of Russia, Erdogan isn’t openly saying that he will occupy Crimea - for now. But if there is a war between NATO and Russia, there is no doubt that Erdogan will show his true colors. And his expansionist plans are well-known:

Erdogan confidant and adviser Metin Kulunk declares on Turkish TV that Turkey will occupy Greece in five hours:

Turkish Politician: We can take Greece in 5 Hours – You Tube

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu'nun explains on Turkish TV his “Extraordinary Strategy” plan for Turkey to take the Greek islands from the Greeks:

Türkiye'den Adalar çıkışı: Yunanistan bundan vazgeçmezse... – YouTube

Since 2015, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has exuded historical revanchism in justifying Turkish interference in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Central Asia—his discourse peppered with flowery mentions of “geography in our heart” and “our spiritual borders.”
Turkey today seeks to become a great power able to negotiate on equal terms with the rest of the great powers and, wherever possible, impose its will by resorting to faits accomplis.
All in all, Erdogan’s agenda encompasses much more than mere defense and survival. His ultimate goal is to alter the geopolitical status quo in ways he believes benefit Turkey. In this sense, Turkey is now a revisionist state: It embarks upon military interventions and seeks to control foreign territory, as in Syria and Iraq …

What Erdogan Really Wants in the Eastern Mediterranean – Foreign Policy

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!

Obviously, when Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine, this was not a major problem as it was still part of the Soviet Union. However, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the creation of Ukraine as an independent state, followed by EU and NATO relentless expansion, the situation obviously changed completely. It isn’t Russia that changed, but EU and NATO expansion.

I don’t know if NATO “didn't have any military plans to defend the Baltic States”, as you claim, since NATO isn’t sharing its plans with the public. But I do know for a fact that the EU aimed to incorporate Ukraine, Georgia, and Russia itself, into its system. And after the experience of the 90’s explained above (RussiaGate Scandal, p. 12), Russia obviously had no appetite whatsoever for becoming part of the West. It’s as simple as that.

Richard Poe, Remembering RussiaGate: Never Have So Few Stolen So Much From So Many

In any case, Russia cannot logically be expected to accept the Black Sea being turned into a NATO lake (controlled by NATO states Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, and possibly Georgia). In your opinion, how is Russia going to access the Mediterranean through NATO-controlled waters??? Doesn’t this amount to encircling and containing Russia??? Is Russia encircling and containing America, or the other way round???

:up:

So having started by shelling a kindergarten, let's follow up by evacuating an orphanage. 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.

I mean, if they (US and UK intelligence) continue saying such non-sense, it would not be surprising if they'd actually do some false flag operation and blame it on the Russians.

Things aren't as easy for them since the Iraq intel fiasco.

You actually believe the Russian propaganda. I don't understand that. Can't you see that it doesn't even make sense?

The Ukrainians are begging for help. Why do you think they're doing that?

They are KGB. All that matters is that the Russian people accept it and go publicly with the lie, even if they would have doubts about it in private.

You show strength by believing in your own lies, I guess. — ssu

Some commentators say it's a kind of abuse: to undermine any kind of rational discussion. Obviously it works.

We have a resident specialist here.

Who?

@swstephe

I don’t know who to believe. — NOS4A2

But this is easy.

1) If Russia doesn't attack Ukraine, then it can be said that the outing of the Russian army on the Ukrainian border got the West to sit down with Russia and talk about Russia's security issues. An attack that doesn't happen isn't an attack.

2) If Russia is "forced to respond to the grave threat" and performs a military operation, then Biden told the truth.

Of course you could look at previous history at what the sides have said. Starting from that Russia (and Putin) has denied any involvement of Russian army in the Ukraine. And those Russian soldiers that have been captured their were just volunteers, who went to fight alongside the separatists on their spare time.

And if you think that Ukraine would launch a military strike to Donbass when Russia has deployed the largest army on it's border since the Cold War, then, how does the saying goes... "I'd sell you some real estate in Florida".

Frank, it's propaganda on both sides, we happen to choose which one we think is most plausible. I'm not pretending to be viewing this thing from a "view from nowhere", which we know doesn't exist.

I'm basing my comment on the fact that there have been many reports of an imminent Russian attack, which has not materialized each time it was stated. It got to the point that the Ukrainian president told the West to tone it down, or it would increase tensions.

It's not as if there's no lack of history of this with the Gulf of Tonkin, or Iraq's WMD.

Having said that, it would be really stupid to actually engage in such an act. But it's no less smart to keep saying that things are really immanent, and they haven't happened.

Radio evangelist Harold Camping famously predicted that the Apocalypse would occur on September 6, 1994, then again on September 29 of the same year, and then again on October 2. In 2005 he revised his claim and said the real Rapture was coming on May 21, 2011, and then when that failed to pan out he said it was happening on October 21 of that year. Whenever he got a prediction wrong he'd just do some more magic Bible math and move the date into the future.

Camping was one of many exploitative Christian cult leaders who've falsely predicted the Second Coming over the years amassing thousands of followers with an early form of tabloid clickbait. The difference between the Harold Campings of history and the Ukraine invasion prognosticators of today is that Harold Camping died disgraced and disdained instead of being elevated to lucrative positions in the most influential news media outlets on the planet.

https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/russian-invasion-prognosticators?utm_source=url

Things aren't as easy for them since the Iraq intel fiasco. — Manuel

Correct. Isn't it strange that the pro-NATO camp keeps conveniently forgetting the West's own psyops and false-flag operations? :smile:

US national security adviser Jake Sullivan has said that “In the situation in Iraq, intelligence was used and deployed from this very podium to start a war. We are trying to stop a war, to prevent a war, to avert a war". Whether starting or "preventing" war, it amounts to an admission that "intelligence is being used" to shape the narrative and manipulate public opinion!

Of course the Russians themselves are doing this, but why shouldn't they given that the US-UK are at it as well?

Plus, the UK has deployed troops to Ukraine, ostensibly to "train" Ukrainian forces. But the truth of the matter is that all such deployments are a cover for special operation forces and other elements who have a specific task on the ground, including reconnaissance, intelligence, sabotage, etc.

And there is no doubt that they are playing on people's emotions by suggesting that the Russians are indiscriminately murdering old women and children.

Remember they did the same in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 when they claimed that the Serbs had committed "genocide" on Albanians in Kosovo when in reality they had simply fled over the border to Albania because there was a war going on!

In the end, they got caught out when the UN ruled that there had been no genocide!

Kosovo assault 'was not genocide' - BBC

A United Nations court has ruled that Serbian troops did not carry out genocide against ethnic Albanians during Slobodan Milosevic's campaign of aggression in Kosovo from 1998 to 1999.

So, Iraq, Kosovo, and all the way to WW1 and "German atrocities in Belgium" when in reality it was all about Britain wanting to keep Africa and Europe for itself!

Yes. I remember the Kosovo situation, Western Intellectuals really went crazy in that one. As if anyone really believes they actually care about Muslims. Not if you look at the Middle East and other parts of the world.

They are playing a dangerous game, likely to win some political points (Russia too, but they have security concerns, as does Ukraine), but this is not the place to do such things.

The Western Intelligence community is extremely ideological, though they pretend to be "neutral".



Yeah. It's really dangerous and stupid.

The Western Intelligence community is extremely ideological, though they pretend to be "neutral". — Manuel

Yep, "neutral" my left foot! Shamelessly (and clumsily) fabricating "evidence" of Iraqi WMD's is sooo incredibly "neutral" that only idiots can swallow it without getting sick. :smile:

And why do they do it? To manipulate public opinion, obviously! But, oh no, the West couldn't possibly ever tell lies, could it now? It's only evil "subhuman species" like Russians, Germans, and Japs that tell lies, so they need to be taught a lesson that they will never forget!

It's the common theme for super powers. Britain, Spain, etc, is the same thing, but now there's more tech involved.

In other words, no matter what Russia does, it's always the West that is at fault.

Not at all.

Russia has committed war crimes in Chechnya and also in Afghanistan and most recently in Syria. There are no innocent states.

But the crimes committed by states is proportional to the power they have.

Oh good. That was just an impression from reading some of the comments. Glad that I'm wrong about that.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-has-plans-for-post-invasion-arrest-and-assassination-campaign-us-officials-say?ref=home?ref=home

Biden is now saying he thinks Putin is committed to invasion. Who is he targeting with that? What is he trying to accomplish with that statement?

To rob Putin of justification?

I'm basing my comment on the fact that there have been many reports of an imminent Russian attack, which has not materialized each time it was stated. It got to the point that the Ukrainian president told the West to tone it down, or it would increase tensions. — Manuel

You're right. We both look at the available facts and draw the conclusions that are most reasonable to us respectively. We're just coming to very different conclusions on this.

Not at all.

Russia has committed war crimes in Chechnya and also in Afghanistan and most recently in Syria. There are no innocent states.

But the crimes committed by states is proportional to the power they have. — Manuel

Well, this is about a war that is going on Ukraine and the possible enlargement of that war. For the Russian involvement, just to give one example of a battle in 2015:

in February 2015, separatist militia attacked Mariupol from the east with only limited success. A Russian tank battalion was committed to the fight to capture the town before the Minsk II ceasefire was signed, but a company(-) of Ukrainian Army tanks were able to defeat them. The infantry attack continued for three more months, with support from Russian artillery and multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS), but the separatists were unable to penetrate the city’s eastern outskirts. Ukrainian volunteer infantry, backed by army tanks and long-range artillery, prevented a Russian success because there were insufficient local separatists, and Russia was unwilling to commit enough regular infantry.

Do notice that actually there hasn't been accusations of war crimes, mass killings, against Russia and there hasn't been ethnic cleansing as in the Yugoslav wars. Far more soldiers have been killed on both sides than civilians have died. But note the use of entire tank battalions, and heavy artillery. Even if there has been an obvious restraint (starting from that Russia hasn't used at all air power), the Russian role and participation in fighting is obvious.

The case of the Kosovo war is important to this as that was basically the braking point of Russian and NATO relations. But then NATO was interested in these "new missions" as it tried to reinvent itself, and the Russian response came as a surprise. Note back then it was Yeltsin, not Putin in power.

Biden is now saying he thinks Putin is committed to invasion. Who is he targeting with that? What is he trying to accomplish with that statement?

To rob Putin of justification? — frank

Something like that.

I think (and many commentators have noted this too) it is the tactic that the US hopes to deter Putin from attacking. Likely Biden is telling what his intelligence services are reporting. They are saying that a lot of those forces have now moved from depots to field deployments. And obviously if those armored vehicles now photographed in depots spread out to the countryside into their battalion combat teams, then that is something that you have to do in order to use those forces in war.

I guess Biden makes these statements because if Putin doesn't attack, then he can say these statements deterred Putin from attack. Obviously if there's no attack, then those who think that Putin had no intention of attacking can stick to their argument. No attack is no attack.

Putin can put his forces all ready...and then call it off later. If he wants.

For Ukrainians this obviously is annoying as the markets starting from their currency get a hit from a possibility of a war braking out (even more). That explains why the Ukrainian president has said for the US to calm down. It really isn't a role for a president of a country to spread fear around.

In other words, no matter what Russia does, it's always the West that is at fault. — Wayfarer

I don't know by what logic you arrive at that conclusion. People do tend to become emotional when loss of life or property, alleged or factual, is involved. But being in the grip of emotions is exactly what makes us easy to manipulate and why a cool head is needed. After all, philosophy is about thinking, not emoting - or so I was brought up to believe.

The fact is that things don't happen out of the blue. There is usually a historical background to any political and military situation. Like people, countries have a history, and without knowledge of that, you can't understand their present actions.

Britain was the largest world empire in the history of mankind, and it didn't become that through philanthropic activities, but by force of arms and by defeating, conquering, and enslaving other nations. Don't forget how they treated the Boers and how they put them in concentration camps just because they dared to defend their own territory against British greed.

The Boers' farms and fields were burned to the ground, their livestock killed, the men deported overseas, women and children put in concentration camps where many thousands died from lack of shelter and hygiene, malnutrition and disease. In short, a deliberate policy of physical extermination.

And War Secretary St John Brodrick had the impudence to claim in parliament that the concentration camps were "purely voluntary" and that the inmates were "contented and comfortable"!

Second Boer War concentration camps - Wikipedia

That's a nice example of British lies and propaganda for you, right there. And there are many more, enough to fill volumes. Don't forget the British government's political and psychological warfare department during the world wars, and the special operations. Britain may have lost its empire, but the propaganda goes on. And the same goes for America.

In addition to ignoring US-UK-EU actions that may have contributed to the situation, some on here seem to be unable (or unwilling) to honestly answer a simple question: What would they do if they were in Russia's shoes, and why?

It's the common theme for super powers. Britain, Spain, etc, is the same thing, but now there's more tech involved. — Manuel

Correct. The lies and the propaganda may be more subtle and easier to conceal under the cover of "democracy and human rights" than in the past, but it is very much there all the same.

The "colonial mission" to "civilize the barbarians" has remained unchanged. The only difference is that Africans and Indians have been replaced as the target of "Western philanthropy" by Germans and Russians .... :smile:

Russia behaves as would any other country given its size and military.

The "colonial mission" to "civilize the barbarians" has remained unchanged. — Apollodorus

Fisk's The Great War for Civilization is a masterclass on this, though it focuses in the Middle East, it's an amazing book.

I don't agree with everything Fisk says, but he is a keen observer and focusing on the Middle East isn't necessarily a problem as the region is one of the keys to understanding the current situation.

People like to imagine that empires no longer exist, but they very much do, only in different forms. And so do colonized and subjugated nations.

If you look at the Germans as a nation, they are totally paranoid, schizophrenic and in self-denial. They can’t even breathe without worrying what America and Britain might say. And this is the result of systematic British and American indoctrination, conditioning, and brainwashing - a broken and zombified nation with no mind or life of its own and no future.

For all its flaws, Russia is the last European nation that is still free and has not fallen into the New-World-Order spiderweb woven by the Anglo-Saxon “master race”. And this is why I think Russia has a point.

And, exactly as I predicted, Western pressure is forcing Russia to align itself with China, which is a win-win for China (and potentially for Turkey) and a lose-lose for Russia and the West. In other words, the West is shooting itself in the foot by antagonizing Russia ….

Incidentally, Britain in WW1 had been hoping that if it dragged America into the war, it would be allowed to rule the world as before, with America as an equal partner. Unfortunately, it got the shock of its life after the war, when it discovered that it had become indebted to America up to its neck, that New York had become the world’s financial center instead of London, and that America now ruled the world instead of Britain!

Now, Britain’s Turkish Prime Minister Boris Johnson, whose great-grandfather was none other than Ali Kemal who was in the government of Grand Vizier Damat Ferid Pasha, was hoping that being a good poodle to America was going to earn him America’s goodwill.

But, like Churchill and many other predecessors, Boris has been forced to discover that America doesn’t give a fig about anyone except itself. He had been dreaming of a trade agreement with America which he had promised to the British voters. Instead, Biden told him that Britain must make separate agreements with each American state!

The EU’s situation isn’t much better, either. America and the EU are each other’s largest trade and investment partners. This means that US-EU relations are dominated by economic considerations. And as the US is the dominant partner in this relationship, this means that it is dominated by US interests. The World Bank whose main members are US, UK, France, Germany, and Japan, is dominated by America. The IMF is a US-UK creation. The global stock-market is dominated by America. European investment banking is dominated by US banks, etc.

Many of Europe’s current problems were directly created by America and its anti-Russian policies. In order to contain Russia, America in 1952 made Turkey a NATO member, after which it sought to bind Turkey and Europe closer together. In the 60’s America forced Germany to accept migrant workers from Turkey who are now four or five million. In the 70’s, in order to keep Russia out of North Africa and the Mid East, America sought to bind the region closer to Europe by launching the Euro-Arab Dialogue followed by the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (1995) and the Union for the Mediterranean (2008), and together with Turkey instigated the civil war in Syria as well as meddling in the Arab revolutions across North Africa, eventually creating a tide of millions of refugees all heading for Europe.

Turkey is now hosting refugee and migrant camps on its soil amounting to millions of people that are funded by Europe and that Turkey threatens to send to Europe unless Europe complies with its demands.

It follows that the situation is as complicated as it is volatile and dangerous, and any weakening of Russian power can only serve to embolden Turkey and its North African and Mid Eastern allies to interfere more and more in European affairs, destabilize the whole continent, and bring about its downfall, while America is watching and counting its petrodollars - until al-Qaeda and Islamic State rise again from the ashes ….