Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[PedroMorales]

Is that they become so enamored of their own superior knowledge and insight that they have blinders when it comes to anything that might cast doubt on their conclusions. I don't claim to be a geopolitical expert, but I do have a keen eye for when cherry-picking of agreeable facts, and failing to acknowledge (or look for) disagreeable facts, is going on.

What is going on is the world is changing. Pakistan has seen its biggest ever protests against the recent US coup where over 70% of the Cabinet are on bail on corruption charges. The future is a fatwa against Americans, all Americans, scalping and so on, low tech as well as Hi tech, al of which the Pentagon thinks they have planned for.

You mention China and India like they were tiny places. The Great Satan aka USA is now interested in human rights in India (not Saudi) because of Russia. The answer is an all out fatwa on America and Americans. Fat, lazy, stupid and they even defecate in bed, something a dog would not do.

[PedroMorales]

Pedro, you have to be a devout Marxist. You've obviously been sucking down Red Bull all your life.

I have never had a Red Bull in my life and I don't intend to ever have one. I see your Nazi pals in the steelworks are surrendering and the women are predictably giving damning testimony about their captives.

As this is a European thread, you and XPartan should really FK off as you have zilch to contribute, being Americans and therefore being stupid.

I am very busy these days. I have a choice of three local providers. I am amazed prices have not dropped, what with all these Ukrainian hookers fleeing West.

I posted in AW about the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard gig. Heard crapping in the bed, real American class. I find it hard to get around the psychologist, Dr Curry, American, good looking (gym rat?) and intelligent. I guess there's always one.

[Xpartan]

Pedro, you have to be a devout Marxist.

Devout Moron more like it.

[Xpartan]

LOL. Ukraine is being ruthlessly used by rogue elements in the USA who think a,weakened Russia somehow helps the USA. On the contrary, USA would benefit from a strong Russia led bloc as an ally against China. USA certainly wasn't threatened by Russia after 1990,-but some people didn't get the message. Or maybe they did get a different message: no Russian enemy means budget cuts. Too shortsighted to see that China would justify plenty of budget for defense, so no need fur Russia as enemy.

Sure, by all means. Rogue elements. Been missing your bullshit geopolitical word salad lately.

What gives? New instructions from the Internet Research Agency coming in?

Shit, you people are relentless.

Transparent too.

[Jmsuttr]

You are American and so do not belong in Europe about which you should not comment because you know nothing about it.

World War Two in Europe was a win for the USA who gave the least and took the most.

NATO is an American controlled mafia gang that is fueling the Ukrainian war, just as Sweden and Finland fueled Hitler. If Sweden and Finland carry through and join NATO and thereby allow Russia's Northern fleet to be blocked and Russia's early warning nuclear defences to be countered, nuclear war heads will rain down on New York and Washington.

Corruption has losers, in this case the ordinary Ukrainians. Zelensky, a guy who plays the piano in the nude, is the world's richest comedian..

If Finland and Sweden join NATO, it's as a direct result of Putin's narcissistic stupidity. He's going to rattle his nuclear saber, no matter what, but that's being seen as a sign of desperation and weakness.

Finland and Sweden are therefore giving LilliPutin the middle finger and calling his bluff. It seems to me they're betting that Vlad's trembling finger won't be able to find the red button, much less push it. And, even if he is a deranged and suicidal psychopath, it's unlikely that everyone in the launch chain of command will be willing to follow him off the nuclear cliff. It's just as likely that someone will give him a classic Stalin-style retirement.

Oh, and about corruption having losers, that's a perfect description of Putin, the uber-kleptocrat, and how he's raped his own country and population. He's losing in every conceivable way someone can lose. And, when he finally crashes and burns, it will be EPIC!

P.S. You know what else will be fun to watch? With all the new NATO bases and European deployments, there are going to be a lot of American soldiers shacking up with and shagging the local women. So that means, in about 9 months to a year, we should start seeing a bumper crop of Finnish-American, Swedish-American, and Baltic-American babies. Yep, thanks to Comrade Putin, NATO is enlarging and is stronger than ever.

[WyattEarp]

You are American and so do not belong in Europe about which you should not comment because you know nothing about it.

World War Two in Europe was a win for the USA who gave the least and took the most.

NATO is an American controlled mafia gang that is fueling the Ukrainian war, just as Sweden and Finland fueled Hitler. If Sweden and Finland carry through and join NATO and thereby allow Russia's Northern fleet to be blocked and Russia's early warning nuclear defences to be countered, nuclear war heads will rain down on New York and Washington.

Corruption has losers, in this case the ordinary Ukrainians. Zelensky, a guy who plays the piano in the nude, is the world's richest comedian.

Ukraine should surrender. Eastern Ukraine is being liberated and the last twelve years of Kiev war crimes are being ended. Western Ukraine will be another Kosovo, another US controlled Kosovo. Victoria NuLand said Fuck the EU. Fuck America as well. And fuck off as well.

Pedro, you have to be a devout Marxist. You've obviously been sucking down Red Bull all your life.

[Jmsuttr]

LOL. Ukraine is being ruthlessly used by rogue elements in the USA who think a,weakened Russia somehow helps the USA. On the contrary, USA would benefit from a strong Russia led bloc as an ally against China. USA certainly wasn't threatened by Russia after 1990,-but some people didn't get the message. Or maybe they did get a different message: no Russian enemy means budget cuts. Too shortsighted to see that China would justify plenty of budget for defense, so no need fur Russia as enemy.

Ukrainians are even stupider than USA to have allowed themselves to be used by these USA rogue elements. I say rogue, because according to reports in NYTimes and elsewhere, CIA has been warning for years that Ukraine is a red line for Russia and was advising against arming Ukraine. Even former President Bush the first (previously head of CIA) warned Ukrainians about nationalism in 1990. His son, of course, was the idiot (along with arch warmongers Rumsfeld and Cheney) who insisted on opening NATO for Ukraine,-which is how this mess started. Rogue elements are State and Defense Department. Defense because they never met a war they didn't like, as long as no real risk to USA. State because populated by nsive idealists. In other words, contrary to the natural assumption of a devious CIA plot, CIA are the responsible grownups in this case, and State Department is who has been running amok.

Is that they become so enamored of their own superior knowledge and insight that they have blinders when it comes to anything that might cast doubt on their conclusions. I don't claim to be a geopolitical expert, but I do have a keen eye for when cherry-picking of agreeable facts, and failing to acknowledge (or look for) disagreeable facts, is going on.

With respect to pre-Feb 24th realities, all of that was mooted by Russia's invasion. With that single act Putin took a situation that was many shades of gray and turned it into one that's starkly black and white. In Europe, the West, and arguably much of the world, Ukraine is perceived as the victim and Russia, personified in Putin, as the villain and aggressor.

I use the word "personified" because it's particularly apt, as Putin's leadership is as much a cult of personality as anything else. But that becomes problematic when the leader weakens or fails. Putin's health is clearly failing, as several videos released by Russian media have shown. And his military is desperately trying to avoid failure and gin up something that can be proclaimed as a victory, esp by the symbolic date of May 9th.

If Putin dies, or becomes unable to function, it's your assumption that another hard-liner will seamlessly take over and continue as before. I would argue that, in a "Royal Court" environment in which Putin has ruthlessly eliminated and suppressed any potential rival, it's equally likely that a bloodbath could break out as possible successors fight among each other. And there's also the question of how well, in a population conditioned to revere and idolize (only) Putin, any successor would be accepted. Any successive leader will be viewed, and evaluated, through Putin-colored glasses.

BTW, it's also worth noting that some strange shit is going on in Russia:

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2022...ussia-n1593602

Events like mysterious fires and bridge collapses indicate either an extraordinary level of bad luck (or incompetence?) or perhaps an ongoing campaign of sabotage by either internal or external actors. Whatever the explanation, Mother Russia is experiencing a significant case of indigestion. I'm not making any specific predictions, simply observing that any analysis that ignores internal Russian difficulties is flawed.

Equally flawed is the assumption that Putin's army is capable of a conventional military victory, or would be able to effectively hold any territory they might conquer. All the evidence from the battlefield indicates that any gains made by Russia have come at a huge cost in men and equipment. That doesn't mean Ukraine isn't paying a high price, but they're being backstopped and replenished by the West, while Russia remains isolated. So, if a conventional victory proves to be out of reach, nukes are arguably one of the few (only?) cards Putin has left. One possible scenario would be a low-yield strike at a strategic target. But is such a move possible in the context of a "special operation" or would Putin first need to declare war and move toward full mobilization? And would such a move cost Russia the last shred of support or neutrality by countries like China and India?

I don't pretend to know the answers to all the above questions, or the scores of additional variables (known and unknown) that undoubtedly exist. All I know is that most pundits and prognosticators, like those who predicted a quick capitulation by Ukraine, have been proven embarrassingly wrong. Reality tends to play by her own rules.

[Nyezhov]

LOL. Ukraine is being ruthlessly used by rogue elements in the USA who think a,weakened Russia somehow helps the USA. On the contrary, USA would benefit from a strong Russia led bloc as an ally against China. USA certainly wasn't threatened by Russia after 1990,-but some people didn't get the message. Or maybe they did get a different message: no Russian enemy means budget cuts. Too shortsighted to see that China would justify plenty of budget for defense, so no need fur Russia as enemy.

Ukrainians are even stupider than USA to have allowed themselves to be used by these USA rogue elements. I say rogue, because according to reports in NYTimes and elsewhere, CIA has been warning for years that Ukraine is a red line for Russia and was advising against arming Ukraine. Even former President Bush the first (previously head of CIA) warned Ukrainians about nationalism in 1990. His son, of course, was the idiot (along with arch warmongers Rumsfeld and Cheney) who insisted on opening NATO for Ukraine,-which is how this mess started. Rogue elements are State and Defense Department. Defense because they never met a war they didn't like, as long as no real risk to USA. State because populated by nsive idealists. In other words, contrary to the natural assumption of a devious CIA plot, CIA are the responsible grownups in this case, and State Department is who has been running amok..

You need to include the power hungry Dems that used the Ukraine to gin up fake scandals in your history of this sad event.

As a child of the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, I know how complex the history of that area is.

[DramaFree11]

LOL. Ukraine is being ruthlessly used by rogue elements in the USA who think a,weakened Russia somehow helps the USA. On the contrary, USA would benefit from a strong Russia led bloc as an ally against China. USA certainly wasn't threatened by Russia after 1990,-but some people didn't get the message. Or maybe they did get a different message: no Russian enemy means budget cuts. Too shortsighted to see that China would justify plenty of budget for defense, so no need fur Russia as enemy.

Ukrainians are even stupider than USA to have allowed themselves to be used by these USA rogue elements. I say rogue, because according to reports in NYTimes and elsewhere, CIA has been warning for years that Ukraine is a red line for Russia and was advising against arming Ukraine. Even former President Bush the first (previously head of CIA) warned Ukrainians about nationalism in 1990. His son, of course, was the idiot (along with arch warmongers Rumsfeld and Cheney) who insisted on opening NATO for Ukraine,-which is how this mess started. Rogue elements are State and Defense Department. Defense because they never met a war they didn't like, as long as no real risk to USA. State because populated by nsive idealists. In other words, contrary to the natural assumption of a devious CIA plot, CIA are the responsible grownups in this case, and State Department is who has been running amok.

Ukraine is not going to win as long as Putin is alive, because Russia can just escalate to nukes. Furthermore, even without Putin, there is a deep bench of military types behind Putin who are just as hawkish about Ukraine being a red line, so nukes still possible without Putin. Though I don't expect nukes, with or without Putin. Rather, I expect total devastation of southern and eastern Ukraine..

By far your best post ever. We disagree about a lot of thing, about Ukraine, but I completely agree with you on your assessment. Ukraine loses either way. A tie is not a win, if there is nothing left.

[Kozerog]

On May 8 1945, many countries in Europe laid destroyed, and yet, it was a win. What does corruption or NATO have to do with the fact that Ukraine became a victim of an unprovoked aggression? Did Ukraine wake up one morning and decided: what a great day for getting destroyed? Or did Russia do it to them?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say? Should Ukraine capitulate in your opinion now that they're winning?

LOL. Ukraine is being ruthlessly used by rogue elements in the USA who think a,weakened Russia somehow helps the USA. On the contrary, USA would benefit from a strong Russia led bloc as an ally against China. USA certainly wasn't threatened by Russia after 1990,-but some people didn't get the message. Or maybe they did get a different message: no Russian enemy means budget cuts. Too shortsighted to see that China would justify plenty of budget for defense, so no need fur Russia as enemy.

Ukrainians are even stupider than USA to have allowed themselves to be used by these USA rogue elements. I say rogue, because according to reports in NYTimes and elsewhere, CIA has been warning for years that Ukraine is a red line for Russia and was advising against arming Ukraine. Even former President Bush the first (previously head of CIA) warned Ukrainians about nationalism in 1990. His son, of course, was the idiot (along with arch warmongers Rumsfeld and Cheney) who insisted on opening NATO for Ukraine,-which is how this mess started. Rogue elements are State and Defense Department. Defense because they never met a war they didn't like, as long as no real risk to USA. State because populated by nsive idealists. In other words, contrary to the natural assumption of a devious CIA plot, CIA are the responsible grownups in this case, and State Department is who has been running amok.

Ukraine is not going to win as long as Putin is alive, because Russia can just escalate to nukes. Furthermore, even without Putin, there is a deep bench of military types behind Putin who are just as hawkish about Ukraine being a red line, so nukes still possible without Putin. Though I don't expect nukes, with or without Putin. Rather, I expect total devastation of southern and eastern Ukraine.

So yes, capitulation is and always has been the best option. If they want, split off west Ukraine and call it Galicia and send all the nationalists there.

[PedroMorales]

You are American and so do not belong in Europe about which you should not comment because you know nothing about it.

World War Two in Europe was a win for the USA who gave the least and took the most.

NATO is an American controlled mafia gang that is fueling the Ukrainian war, just as Sweden and Finland fueled Hitler. If Sweden and Finland carry through and join NATO and thereby allow Russia's Northern fleet to be blocked and Russia's early warning nuclear defences to be countered, nuclear war heads will rain down on New York and Washington.

Corruption has losers, in this case the ordinary Ukrainians. Zelensky, a guy who plays the piano in the nude, is the world's richest comedian.

Ukraine should surrender. Eastern Ukraine is being liberated and the last twelve years of Kiev war crimes are being ended. Western Ukraine will be another Kosovo, another US controlled Kosovo. Victoria NuLand said Fuck the EU. Fuck America as well. And fuck off as well.

On May 8 1945, many countries in Europe laid destroyed, and yet, it was a win. What does corruption or NATO have to do with the fact that Ukraine became a victim of an unprovoked aggression? Did Ukraine wake up one morning and decided: what a great day for getting destroyed? Or did Russia do it to them?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say? Should Ukraine capitulate in your opinion now that they're winning?

[Xpartan]

When your country is destroyed, sorry that is not a win. They will never get into NATO because of the corruption. Yes, both Russia and Ukraine are screwed. Especially they every day people.

On May 8 1945, many countries in Europe laid destroyed, and yet, it was a win. What does corruption or NATO have to do with the fact that Ukraine became a victim of an unprovoked aggression? Did Ukraine wake up one morning and decided: what a great day for getting destroyed? Or did Russia do it to them?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say? Should Ukraine capitulate in your opinion now that they're winning?

[GDreams]

Russia gets million from selling oil and gas, they can use another third country (like Iran or so) to buy Chinese equipment and skip sanctions, will see what happens.

What broke the USSR was military spending trying to match the US. With more sanctions, reduced international access to markets and through the roof military spending the people in Russia are not going to be be happy if the only outcome of this war is to get independence for a couple of breakaway republics that had already broken away.

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...KGB-chief.html

As I noted in the post title, this is as yet unconfirmed. But it's certainly something to watch for over the next few days or weeks.

[Jmsuttr]

Jmsuttr, I was reading how a country like India buys a lot of military hardware from both Russia and the West. If countries see Russian military hardware underperforming in battle they might adjust their purchases. This war can't be good for future Russia's military exports.

India has always played a decent game of neutrality. However, Indian elites are definitely Western-oriented. Too many affluent Indian ex-pats in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, etc. The Indians are also watching this dance between China and Russia. Needless to say, China is India's rival economically and militarily in the region.

One foundational fact is that India hates China, with a capital H. One reason they've cultivated a relationship with Russia is because that was seen as way to blunt China's regional influence.

Right now I think many countries, India included, are reevaluating their relationship with Russia. I'm sure India is happy, in the short term, to buy oil at a substantial discount. But I'm sure they're taking a look at long term scenarios.

And I absolutely agree that Indian generals and admirals must be positively horrified at the underperformance of Russian military eqp.