The Russian occupation of Ukraine

[spot]

Ukraine is reacting “seriously” to UK Foreign Office allegations that Moscow has plans to invade the country and install a puppet government, a senior government adviser has said

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ys-adviser

There has been a lot of recent USUKA soundbites about an imminent occupation of Ukraine. I'm not sure about the Australian part of that but the other two, definitely.

It's the apparent outrage at "install a puppet government" that I'm focused on. Installing a puppet government is exactly what USUKA did when they occupied Iraq and Afghanistan. Why it should be a wickedness if done by the Russians but okay for the West I'm not sure.

The thing about Ukraine is that it has a major border with Russia, and it's trying to get membership of NATO.

The entire point of the Yalta agreement was that Russia would be given buffer states to allow protection in depth. The Yalta agreement is why the West has successfully avoided war with Russia ever since. Putting NATO directly on the Russian border is suicidal but it appears to be a NATO ambition.

A simple agreement to bar Ukraine from NATO membership is all that's needed to stop the occupation. Why is it being refused? NATO membership for Ukraine is equivalent to Mexico successfully negotiating a mutual protection treaty with Russia. I'm quite sure America would prevent that at all costs, right down to installing a puppet government, which is all Russia is considering over the threat to its own border security.

[LarsMac]

All the drumbeating seems to have taken on a life of its own.

It's hard to have sensible talks when you can't hear what anyone is saying over the clatter.
And, a lot of the racket seems to be coming from London.

[spot]

The reason London is banging on is to capture the local newspaper headlines here. We're in the drawn-out process of pushing our Prime Minister onto the back benches as an ordinary MP and replacing him with an as yet unknown colleague. Boris can only remain in office if the media stops focusing on his scandals for a few months.

World War Two was the making of Boris's hero Winston Churchill. Boris may well hope for a similar chance of glory, given the alternatives.

[LarsMac]

The reason London is banging on is to capture the local newspaper headlines here. We're in the drawn-out process of pushing our Prime Minister onto the back benches as an ordinary MP and replacing him with an as yet unknown colleague. Boris can only remain in office if the media stops focusing on his scandals for a few months.

World War Two was the making of Boris's hero Winston Churchill. Boris may well hope for a similar chance of glory, given the alternatives.

Old Winston was a character in his own right. Figures Boris would hold him in so high regard.
Near as I can tell, he gave one somewhat rousing speech, that made him the hero.
His other claim to fame seems to be getting the US into the "Great War"

Meanwhile, our Mr Biden has his nuts in a vice. No matter what he does about the Ukraine, he'll get shit from the folks at home.

[magentaflame]

I loved it when a Russian diplomat said that Ukrainians were nervous because of all the hype coming from America.
After I heard him say this, I thought....Hmmm nope! Ukrainians are nervous because there are a shyteload of tanks and troops lined up on their border.

would make me nervous too.

And now we are seeing protests in the street of a town because their president told Ukrainians where the tanks are most likely to enter first. DOH!
How not to prepare for war. lol

[spot]

If I remember correctly, the Ukranian President is a professional TV comedian - perhaps that has something to do with it.

[spot]

I loved it when a Russian diplomat said that Ukrainians were nervous because of all the hype coming from America.
After I heard him say this, I thought....Hmmm nope! Ukrainians are nervous because there are a shyteload of tanks and troops lined up on their border.

Actually, the Russians have around a hundred thousand troops on the Ukrainian border. The Ukrainians have a half a million. Some perspective would be welcome.

What NATO does, as it's done already in Poland for instance, is to host American nuclear missiles along the Russian border once a country has been admitted as a member. The Russians are reluctant to see this happen along the border with Ukraine. I'm interested to know whether you find that reluctance unreasonable.

Russia has already said that a simple promise by NATO not to accept Ukrainian membership would bring the entire stand-off to a screeching halt.

[magentaflame]

I loved it when a Russian diplomat said that Ukrainians were nervous because of all the hype coming from America.
After I heard him say this, I thought....Hmmm nope! Ukrainians are nervous because there are a shyteload of tanks and troops lined up on their border.

Actually, the Russians have around a hundred thousand troops on the Ukrainian border. The Ukrainians have a half a million. Some perspective would be welcome.

What NATO does, as it's done already in Poland for instance, is to host American nuclear missiles along the Russian border once a country has been admitted as a member. The Russians are reluctant to see this happen along the border with Ukraine. I'm interested to know whether you find that reluctance unreasonable.

Russia has already said that a simple promise by NATO not to accept Ukrainian membership would bring the entire stand-off to a screeching halt.

Perspective? Really?
Ukraine has indeed a large military base. Third after France AND RUSSIA! whether the troops are on the border or not is neither here nor there there's many more where they came from... Intent to harrass another country by taking away their independent right to choose.

Russia is telling others beyond it's borders what to do I believe the Russians call it "peace enforcement" remember Georgia? that too happened during a Beijing Olympics games.

So you agree that Russia should take back by force all the independent countries it lost in 1991?

[spot]

Ukraine has indeed a large military base. Third after France AND RUSSIA! whether the troops are on the border or not is neither here nor there there's many more where they came from... Intent to harrass another country by taking away their independent right to choose.

If it makes no difference where the Russian troops are located - on the border or not - then the crisis is permanent and has always existed and can only be solved by unilateral Russian disarmament. I don't see that as a likely outcome.

And if it comes to "Intent to harrass another country by taking away their independent right to choose" - what on earth was Australia doing in Iraq?

So you agree that Russia should take back by force all the independent countries it lost in 1991?

Of course not. I think Russia should refuse at all costs to have American nuclear missiles sited in Ukraine, and I think the American government should not be such tossers as to push for that to happen. The first time they did this was in the early 60s when they sited them in Turkey and were forced to remove them the same year, the issue is no different now.

[LarsMac]

It is time that NATO was dismantled. I believe It has long outlived its charter.

[spot]

It is time that NATO was dismantled. I believe It has long outlived its charter.

Your previous President made the same suggestion, if I remember.

[LarsMac]

It is time that NATO was dismantled. I believe It has long outlived its charter.

Your previous President made the same suggestion, if I remember.

Something about a broken clock comes to mind.

[magentaflame]

Happy now you peices of shit?

[spot]

Happy now you peices of shit?

What puzzles me is that you seem to think it's fine for the White Western powers to do things like this to lesser countries, but that you're entitled to complain when a country you disapprove of (Russia in this case) protects its own interests with rather more cause.

Perhaps you could explain why the Russians should be criticized, so that I can substitute (for example) Iraq and America directly into your post and see whether my revised copy makes as much coherent sense as the original. I suspect it has to. The White West set the example.

[FourPart]

Happy now you peices of shit?

What puzzles me is that you seem to think it's fine for the White Western powers to do things like this to lesser countries, but that you're entitled to complain when a country you disapprove of (Russia in this case) protects its own interests with rather more cause.

Perhaps you could explain why the Russians should be criticized, so that I can substitute (for example) Iraq and America directly into your post and see whether my revised copy makes as much coherent sense as the original. I suspect it has to. The White West set the example.

For a start off, the legitimate Government of Ukraine is begging for assistance and we are refusing it, whilst Putin continues with his agenda to restore the Former Soviet Union. It started with Crimea. Now Ukraine. What next? Poland? Romania? Eastern Germany? He has already been using Vaccuum Bombs that are Internationally Banned, and therefore classed as a War Crime.

The MAGA-Heads are now singing Putin's Praises. I wonder where they stand on his allying himself with 'Jina'?

[spot]

It started with Crimea. Now Ukraine. What next? Poland? Romania? Eastern Germany?

It can't be Poland or Romania or Eastern Germany because they're all NATO members where an attack on one is an attack on all, baked into their treaty articles. Both Ukraine and NATO refused to prohibit future Ukrainian membership, hence the current regime change to a government that will put the prohibition into Ukrainian law. Once it's done the Russians will go home, job done, though I doubt there will be an unrigged election in Kiev for the foreseeable future.

[FourPart]

It started with Crimea. Now Ukraine. What next? Poland? Romania? Eastern Germany?

It can't be Poland or Romania or Eastern Germany because they're all NATO members where an attack on one is an attack on all, baked into their treaty articles. Both Ukraine and NATO refused to prohibit future Ukrainian membership, hence the current regime change to a government that will put the prohibition into Ukrainian law. Once it's done the Russians will go home, job done, though I doubt there will be an unrigged election in Kiev for the foreseeable future.

The Ukranians are putting up a sterling performance of resistance under an admirable Leadership rarely seen.
Putin was expecting to take Kiev within 10 hours of the Invasion. That was a week ago.
Putin underestimated the Ukranian Patriotism & ended up getting a bloody nose.
Patriots DEFEND their Capital - not attack it.

[spot]

An admirable Leadership would have had more sense than to have pissed off the Russians to such an extent recently. And I find your ten hours a bit hard to swallow.

[spot]

The Russians appear to have single-handedly returned to the Cold War. It will take the fall of President Putin to reverse that.

What President Putin has done is to order the invasion of a sovereign country so as to impose a collaborating government against the wishes of the majority of its electorate, to their long-term disadvantage.

It's regrettable that he has so many recent Western precedents to cite in support of his action. This is precisely what Western governments have done over the past twenty years to – go on, make your own list, I’ll just sound repetitive if I roll them out again. Governments were destabilized, those governments lost control of the nation, alternative pro-Western collaborationist governments were shoe-horned in place, the well-being of the citizens suffered greatly, the West walked away and did it again elsewhere, more turmoil ensued following the evaporation of the collaborators. The tale is a scandal. Russia has merely piggy-backed onto the exact same process. I don’t believe Russia could have done so had there not been this shameful succession of relevant precedents.

The Russian occupation comes with a list of people to detain or kill on sight. Perhaps someone can think of a Western-planned destabilization this century which didn’t do that too. The West does not have the moral authority to criticize. It should have but it hasn’t. If you would like someone to blame for all this, start with Tony Blair. When Volodymyr Zelenskyy is executed, ask yourself what happened to Saddam Hussein.

Russia is now under some sort of martial law, if I understand matters right. So, effectively, was the Soviet Union back in the day. I’m sure the Russian government is quite happy with that outcome as well.

[spot]

Russia claims it invaded Ukraine in part to prevent the country from becoming a member of NATO.

It explained that several other countries bordering on Russia became members of NATO and subsequently all hosted forward deployments of NATO members’ heavy weapons and missiles along the Russian border. That’s quite true. Whether the Ukraine would ever have succeeded in becoming a member of NATO is unknowable now, but the present Ukraine government said it wanted to, saying it spoke for both the Ukrainian-speaking majority and the majority-Russian-speaking East Ukraine and Crimea. [The majority-Russian-speaking East Ukraine and Crimea were illegally annexed by Russia 8 years ago after false claims that the majority-Russian-speakers faced ethnic discrimination and potential genocide.]

Russia would have had less excuse to mount its current invasion of Ukraine had NATO and the Ukrainian government made a commitment not to pursue Ukrainian or Belarusian membership. I don’t think it would have been an unreasonable price to pay in exchange for relieving Russian concerns that NATO membership might happen. The world would perhaps now be a safer place if disclaiming membership had been offered as a reasonable compromise to Russia instead of dismissed out of hand by all three parties. It would also have made eventual membership of the EU a separate, as opposed to a linked, possibility.

Sweden and Finland both co-exist with Russia despite refusing to apply for NATO membership. It should have been seen as a tested applicable model for Ukraine. And had the Russian invasion happened despite the prospect of Ukrainian membership being formally abandoned, Russia would have lacked much of the excuse it now offers.

[LarsMac]

Well since Ukraine had yet to actually start the process of applying for membership in NATO, prior to the invasion, I must suggest that Putin may have been a tad hasty in his reaction.
And, had Putin not ben entertaining for years a notion that Ukraine was actually still a part of Russia and had no business drifting away from Mother Russia back in the 90s, perhaps his Notion of them pondering a NATO membership would not have seemed so disturbing to him.
What he now has succeeded in accomplishing is to demonstrate exactly why Ukraine SHOULD have been seeking a membership in NATO.

And, perhaps I was mistaken. Maybe NATO can still prove itself useful.

[spot]

I'd not dispute any of that. I'm merely wondering when President Putin ought to have made his opinion known about NATO membership if not before an application was made and positions frozen. And then, once he'd said his piece, how one might expect him to react if he were simply laughed at rather than taken seriously.

And, as an aside, if I were Russian and anyone suggested Ukraine wasn't part of Russia I'd have thought they were mistaken. How far back in history do you have to go to find Ukraine being anything other than a Russian province. 350 years last time I looked, except six months around 1917 and a couple of years between 1942 and 1944. That's what history is for, to check assertions. What alternative facts are there in this case.

The French, with British assistance, attempted to take Crimea away from Russia in 1854. Not from Ukraine, from Russia. Check a textbook. We lost. Russia 1, France and UK 0, Tennyson notwithstanding.

I would much rather NATO had said Ukraine would be a steppe too far, and avoided the subsequent hubbub.

[spot]

[Boris] Johnson is meeting with leaders from Canada and a variety of European countries in London in a series of talks beginning on Monday and he reiterated a point made in the House of Commons last month that Russia must “be seen to fail” in its mission of aggression towards Ukraine.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... -zelenskiy

There you are - just what I always said about USUKA in Afghanistan, that they must be seen to fail in their mission of aggression. And so they were. And now it's Moscow's turn. No difference whatever, the principle is identical.

[spot]

The Chinese academic Wang Shuo saw it as “a US-created crisis”. “The strategic selfishness of the US has brought more disasters to the world,” Wang grumbled on Wednesday in the state-run Global Times, blaming Washington’s “selfish and short-sighted action” for plunging Ukraine into war.

And for the editorial board at Mexico’s La Jornada newspaper, it was time to abandon the unhelpful fantasy that Putin’s “ambition and wickedness” was the sole culprit and face “the difficult truth” of how Nato’s eastward push had paved the way for disaster.

“The west’s horror at Putin’s actions should be placed in the context of the shameful history of western powers’ involvement in illegal wars,” said an article in the prominent South African newspaper the Daily Maverick, pondering South Africa’s perceived neutral position on the war.

For the record, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... e-the-west is central to balancing the account of what has happened in Ukraine. The observation that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is an "unjustifiable and illegal onslaught on a sovereign state" is undeniable. I haven't suggested or thought otherwise. But so is the rest of the article, and what I've posted in this thread falls entirely within the bounds of the article's reportage. Nato’s desire to push eastward did indeed pave the way to this disaster. Repeated White Western disregard for sovereign independence gave the precedent for what is happening this year. Either it's illegal or it isn't, but the same rules have to apply impartially at all times to both sides.

[LarsMac]

And, from another corner of the American right wing:

Pat Robertson says Putin was ‘compelled by God’ to invade Ukraine to fulfill Armageddon prophecy
So pucker up kiddies, the ride is just getting started.

Televangelist Pat Robertson said Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin was “compelled by God” in his decision to invade Ukraine, suggesting that Russia’s attacks are a precursor to an end-times battle in Israel.

The Christian media mogul returned to “The 700 Club” a few months after he retired from the show he hosted for 55 years on the Christian Broadcasting Network. In his return, Robertson claimed that Putin was simply following God’s wishes when Russia invaded Ukraine — to fulfill a biblical prophecy.

“I think you can say, well, Putin’s out of his mind. Yes, maybe so,” said Robertson, 91. “But at the same time, he’s being compelled by God. He went into the Ukraine, but that wasn’t his goal. His goal was to move against Israel, ultimately.”

I think they're all batshit crazy and I believe that Common Sense will win over on the Global Theater, but then, there's a lot of them out there.
So, it probably wouldn't hurt to make sure your affairs are in order. just in case some those loonies actually have their finger on the button.

[spot]

I suspect Mr Robertson is a confidence trickster, I don't for a moment think he can believe in such a bogus set of notions.

[LarsMac]

I suspect Mr Robertson is a confidence trickster, I don't for a moment think he can believe in such a bogus set of notions.

Oh, I think many of his ilk fully believe the crap they throw out there.

[LarsMac]

It appears that this thread might have been prematurely named.
Russia has yet to Occupy Ukraine in the strictest sense.
While they may be taking up space in Ukraine, and they may be occupying much of the attention of the People of Ukraine, they have yet to achieve the ultimate goal of actually controlling the nation of Ukraine.
My hope is that Mr Putin soon finds himself working a mine in Eastern Siberia. Or perhaps, wandering the wilds of Mongolia begging for a meal.

[spot]

I concede I titled the thread with a view to subsequent events and I'll happily go along with your best wishes for an immediate end to what's happening and the prompt departure of the invaders. But I have considerable doubts. I'm not sure how far back you'd need to go to find a Russian leader who was removed from office by anything other than the grim reaper. Nikita Khrushchev, presumably, if you discount Mikhail Gorbachev stepping down in the face of overwhelming events - I'm sure Gorbachev left of his own volition rather than a push.

You'll know when Ukraine is occupied - a pro-occupation president will be appointed. Rather like what happened with Hamid Karzai or the singularly inadequate Paul Bremer.

[spot]

A nakedly corrupt and evidently narcissistic leader, surrounded by a phalanx of accommodating acolytes, enriched his supporters with liquidised public assets and spurious government schemes, flagrantly broke international treaties, trashed domestic political standards, systematically flooded social media with fake news, used his power over the press to spread disinformation over many decades, sought to destabilise the EU, had fruitful meetings with far right figures in Europe and America, weaponised nostalgic nationalism, and allowed refugees to be used as cannon fodder in an ongoing border dispute. But now is not the time for Keir Starmer to call for Boris Johnson’s resignation. (Did you see what I did there? I’m here all week!! Try the fish!!!)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... n-trousers

Goal!

Well done Stewart Lee.

The entire article is recommended, chaps. Stewart Lee is clinically incandescent.

[LarsMac]

Russia is going about it all wrong, I think.
They could have become a member of NATO. making that organization a powerful, nearly global organization with a firm handle on the Northern Hemisphere of the planet.

I reckon he really didn't think it through.

[spot]

That would be about the only route to full nuclear disarmament too - the expanded NATO would have all but a thousand of the world's warheads between them. Lots of bargaining power if you have such a preponderance.

[LarsMac]

Found this little gem today

[spot]

Found this little gem today

Have a guess what it immediately reminded me of...

The House Committee on Un-American Activities (HCUA), popularly dubbed the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) was an investigative committee of the United States House of Representatives, created in 1938 to investigate alleged disloyalty and subversive activities on the part of private citizens, public employees, and those organizations suspected of having either fascist or communist ties. It became a standing (permanent) committee in 1945, and from 1969 onwards it was known as the House Committee on Internal Security. When the House abolished the committee in 1975, its functions were transferred to the House Judiciary Committee.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un- ... _Committee

President Putin may be late to the party, but it's the same party. I doubt whether Mr Elgort would see it that way though.

I would like to state at this time that I am not now and have never been an advocate for President Putin, but he never struck me as being in the same ball-park as any recent American President when it comes to blatant nationalist propaganda.

[LarsMac]

Maybe he was infected by The Donald?

[magentaflame]

Belarus president just let it slip that Moldova is next. Seems to me he wants all of them back.

[spot]

If you have a news link, that would be interesting to read or watch. There were reports of a chart on a TV screen three weeks ago at a press conference given by Alexander Lukashenko but I've seen nothing since - is that what you're referring to? Your "just" has me puzzled.

[spot]

Here's what is in effect an open letter to Chinese President, offering an assessment of his options. It's interesting.

A brief extract:

China cannot be tied to Putin and needs to be cut off as soon as possible. In the sense that an escalation of conflict between Russia and the West helps divert U.S. attention from China, China should rejoice with and even support Putin, but only if Russia does not fall. Being in the same boat with Putin will impact China should he lose power. Unless Putin can secure victory with China’s backing, a prospect which looks bleak at the moment, China does not have the clout to back Russia. The law of international politics says that there are “no eternal allies nor perpetual enemies,” but “our interests are eternal and perpetual.” Under current international circumstances, China can only proceed by safeguarding its own best interests, choosing the lesser of two evils, and unloading the burden of Russia as soon as possible. At present, it is estimated that there is still a window period of one or two weeks before China loses its wiggle room. China must act decisively.

https://uscnpm.org/2022/03/12/hu-wei-ru ... na-choice/

[LarsMac]

Belarus president just let it slip that Moldova is next. Seems to me he wants all of them back.

From his speech the other day, that seems to be his intent.

[LarsMac]

China will likely sit back and let Putin flounder, then when it gets quiet, they will make a move to take some of the Siberian "resources" away from what's left of Russia.

[Bryn Mawr]

Belarus president just let it slip that Moldova is next. Seems to me he wants all of them back.

They’ve already put fifteen hundred Russian troops into eastern Moldova as agitators to justify the invasion as “saving” our mistreated people.

[magentaflame]

I'll find the interview with a Chinese general. It'll put shivers up your spine.

Gas cut off to Poland and Bulgaria.

I believe WW111 has already begun. I'm beginning to prepare.

[magentaflame]

[magentaflame]

pH and Russia stopped talks with Japan over the islands Russia believes it owns . The Islands connect mainland Japan to each other.

[spot]

pH and Russia stopped talks with Japan over the islands Russia believes it owns . The Islands connect mainland Japan to each other.

Go on, have a look at where the Kuril islands actually are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril_Isl ... labels.png

They start beyond Japan's northernmost island and head further north, they don't connect Japan to anywhere.

The Japanese owned the nearest 4 of the islands before World War Two. At the end of World War Two, after a negotiated UK, US and Russian agreement at the Yalta conference, the Russians added those 4 to their existing 52 Russian Kuril islands as reparation... you remember Japan lost that war? You lose a war, you lose territory, it's meant to make you think twice before starting the next one. Burned fingers, slap across the wrist. Ask a few Australian POWs whether it was a reasonable conclusion to events.

The whole Kuril island set of 56 islands form a defensive barrier for the Russian Pacific coastline, why on earth would you expect the Russians to hand 4 of them back. And to the Japanese, of all people.

[spot]

I'll find the interview with a Chinese general. It'll put shivers up your spine.

Perhaps you need to ask whether the Solomon Islands is a sovereign nation with the right to form its own foreign policy. Because if it is, and it can see a national benefit to a deal with China relating to port facilities in the Pacific, then that's a choice they get to make. The deal may well annoy the Australian government but it's done on a level international playing field.

Perhaps Australia can offer the Solomon Islands a better deal.

What I can't quite see is why either the Solomon Islands or China should do anything to make the Australian government happier. Australia chose to adopt a security agreement with the US, it allows US military access to Australian ports, there's entire US Intelligence bases on Australian soil - why do you insist the Solomon Islands should be less capable of making such an arrangement wherever it feels the most benefit?

[LarsMac]

pH and Russia stopped talks with Japan over the islands Russia believes it owns . The Islands connect mainland Japan to each other.

"Mainland Japan" ?
If they connect anything, it would be the Russian Kamchatka Peninsula to the Japanese Island of Hokkaido.

I'm not sure there's a point in "Getting ready" for WWIII.
We will very likely be toast if real hostilities ever kick off. Somebody will eventually push the button, and Earth will be an interesting phenomenon for astrophysicist in the Alfa Centauri system to observe for a few days.