Has modern history shown that invaders who have lost are less greedy for land after they’ve been given a partial parcel of the land they invaded but could not conquer?
Some Chicago Boyz know each other from student days at the University of Chicago. Others are Chicago boys in spirit. The blog name is also intended as a good-humored gesture of admiration for distinguished Chicago School economists and fellow travelers.
Has modern history shown that invaders who have lost are less greedy for land after they’ve been given a partial parcel of the land they invaded but could not conquer?
107 thoughts on “Just a Question”
Ginny, that is a rather silly question. You are better than this.
The history of Europe is that countries come & go, and borders are always in flux. Most obvious example is that the UK lost a huge part of its land area in the 20th Century when the Irish won independence from London. Did that make the English any less greedy?
Historically recent examples of countries trying to seize land would include Germany under Hitler and France under Napoleon each trying to seize Russian land. How did that work out for them? If we go back a bit further in time, the land currently claimed by the guys in Kiev was previously under the control of Lithuanians, Poles, Hungarians, Russians — borders continually moving.
About the only conclusion one can draw is that war & conflict have historically been the natural state of existence for Europeans. The wise course of action for Americans would be to step back, get out of NATO, and leave the Europeans to do to each other what they have always done to each other.
I honestly don’t undestand this question–Russia is going to keep the areas it’s conquered and can hold and not get the ones it hasn’t. Which is what always happens, no?
Unless this question is in reference to Palestinians…
I am having trouble bringing to mind a clear example of your question. There have been a lot of wars over the last few centuries and I’m no expert so might be missing something.
Very many of the disputes start out as disagreements over borders from the beginning. The aggressor’s aim is only some portion. These often ping pong back and forth for decades or even centuries. An example would be the Alsace-Loraine region presently in the possession of France. Most recently being involved in both the Franco-Prussian war and WWI.
Napoleon is the clearest example of a conqueror that I can think of. Nothing seemed to appease him short of total victory. The times where his reach exceeded his grasp, Russia and the Iberian Peninsula, resulted in long and ultimately losing campaigns.
Then there’s the United States. We tried to conquer or at least suborn rebellion in Canada twice and occupied Mexico’s capital once. In both cases, we came away with new territory. In Canada, our initial claim that the border with Western Canada should be at 54°40′ north would have included most of the presently inhabited areas of Western Canada. This was fairly long after the earlier attacks during the Revolution ans War of 1812 but did include threats of war. The war with Mexico was really never more than a border dispute, I’ve never heard of any “responsible” party that intended to take over Mexico entirely. In both cases, we seem to have been mostly appeased. At least I haven’t heard anyone seriously suggesting any further action.
So my answer would be no. Any country resolved on conquest of another will regard any initial pause in fighting as merely the first phase.
we got the more fertile and mineral rich regions of mexican territory, one might think if Santa Ana had engaged us in another conflict, we would have sonora and other territories, colonial expeditions are often not so shortlived, the French conquest of Algeria, started in 1830, after a run in with Berber raiders, it took them about 17 years, it was around the middle period that tocqueville visited and wrote his monograph on Islam, as part of the survey of the region, the wars in the Gulf Coast, taking down the Ashanti slave traders, was not a short run thing, of course little credit is given to Baden Powell, same with the regions of South africa
” The wise course of action for Americans would be to step back, get out of NATO, and leave the Europeans to do to each other what they have always done to each other.”
Why not, it’s worked so well before.
The Palestinians have yet to execute phase one of their conquest of Palestine. They show no evidence that they will be satisfied with the territory they have now nevertheless.
I don’t know why some people find the question hard to answer directly (“you’re better than this” indeed).
It’s a straight-up question: does appeasement appease? Oddly enough, sometimes it does; but the smart money bets that it doesn’t, because usually it doesn’t.
“Has modern history shown that invaders who have lost are less greedy for land after they’ve been given a partial parcel of the land they invaded but could not conquer?”
The question is silly because it is almost incomprehensible — it could be interpreted in so many different ways.
For example, is the questioner referring to the US/NATO occupation of Iraq? If Iraq (which the US/NATO could occupy but not conquer) had given a parcel of land to the US, would that have made the US/NATO less greedy to invade Afghanistan (which again the invaders could occupy temporarily but not conquer)?
If the question was intended to be a straight-up question about the efficacy of appeasement, then first define “appeasement”.
The War of 1812 ended with a treaty that was not particularly favorable to the US. Was that appeasement? Or was it a rational compromise? England’s long war against the Irish people ended with the partition of Ireland between those who wanted to be subservient to England and those who did not. Was that appeasement by the Irish? Or was it appeasement by the English? Or was it a rational solution to end a conflict which has some similarities to the situation between the different language groups in the Ukraine?
The original question is very poorly stated.
the brits invaded iraq in 1915 took two years to get to baghdad, gave it up after a half dozen years, but had to come back in 1941, to depose rashid ghailani, the vichy proxy, of course afghanistan was occupied by the brits, as an extension of their india policy from about 1819 to 1947, fought three wars, and dozens of expeditions,
I do think the Palestinians are the perfect example here, who else has been given land despite failing to win it themselves, and they certainly show appeasement of such a group can’t work.
Regarding the clear attempt to invoke Russia-Ukraine, I’m confused–who is proposing to “give” Russia land they don’t currently occupy? There are those who think Ukraine should sue for peace, but that’s not what you’re asking, so I don’t think asking you to clarify what you’re getting at is unreasonable.
(And to the NATO discussion above, I’m not Gavin, I don’t agree with much of his position, but as an Air Force brat of the Reagan era and a lifelong “conservative” of varying mainstream flavors, I still say sorry not sorry I think NATO needs to be disbanded, and the likes of the vile Milley and the overall DoD and IC blob are infinitely more of a threat to me personally than Putin is, again sorry not sorry. That’s not at all in conflict with saying the Russian invasion is unjustified and we should aid Ukraine to maintain its independence and sovereignty, something that to be honest it’s not at all clear to me this “war” is about at all, from the West’s perspective.)
It is not at all clear that the question was about “appeasement” as Anonymous bravely assumed. But let’s look at “appeasement”.
In the normal sense of the word, appeasement is a negotiation or concession prior to the outbreak of hostilities. Indeed, the aim of appeasement is to avoid hostilities altogether.
We all indulge in appeasement every day. You want to go to Raw Ribs for supper, she wants to go to Soy For All. Instead of fighting with her about it, you go to Soy For All.
Appeasement clearly has nothing to do with the current situation in the Ukraine, where the Kiev Krowd had been running a civil war and murdering thousands of men, women, and children on Russia’s border — and were planning (with US/NATO aid) to expand the fighting. Once the fighting has started, appeasement is no longer relevant. Instead, what we have is a situation which usually leads to a negotiated cessation of fighting. If that negotiation is extremely one-sided, eg Treaty of Versailles, then the fighting will resume after a decent interval.
The “Unconditional Evacuation” — sorry, Unconditional Surrender — which FDR imposed at the end of WWII was rather unusual; many who look at the history now conclude that was a mistake. Most wars end with some kind of negotiation.
Okay, I was thinking of Israel and Czechoslovakia – examples that come to my mind more quickly than others for personal reasons. It seemed to me a product of the insatiable desire for power, land, resources. But I also assumed that what comes to my mind quickly might not be so obvious that it is a form of feckless appeasement. Other examples were likely to come to other minds.
Certainly we haven’t lusted after Mexico despite the land that became America in the 19th century. As far as negotiated and somehow consensual peace at the end of a war, it would seem to be rare given the nature of war as the ultimate coercive tactic. Of course, we have often heard of the Treaty of Versailles as an example of a too-harsh settlement but others say that Germany should have been divided and occupied a sufficient length of time to stunt or redirect the rebuilding in more productive ways. Perhaps the latter opinion is an outlier, but a similar attitude has been taken about the first Iraq war and the fact that by not outing the then leader, that Iraq suffered under a truly odious dictator. Certainly leaving him in power to shred his opponents was not an attractive choice (even if it may have arguments in its favor).
This is a misunderstanding of the conflict in progress in Ukraine. Trying to appease Putin is not gonna work.
His goal is not to conquer, it is to create space between NATO and Russia. If you look at a map you will see the eastern border of Ukraine is under 300 miles from Moscow. If you look at history of the area you will see Russia has been invaded many times. If you look at and the geography, you will see a flat land with no natural defences.
So if you assume America controls Zelensky and the Nazis that support him, then you must see Putin faces an existential threat. If you don’t believe that, assume he does.
The stated point is to denatzify Ukraine, to destroy the Azov and Azov stiffened forces that have killed 16,000 people in the Donbass since 2014. This is the backbone of the threat he faces. Destroying that threat by killing the Nazis is most of the goal. As well space will be taken from Ukraine until Putin is happy with the new boarders.
You should not assume the various western media outlets have any idea at all about what is going on. Well their job is to deceive you so that may be not entirely accurate. ;)
The destruction and attrition of the forces facing the Donbass is a work in progress and will continue until its done. It is going fairly well, and some new command is getting pretty good results. The Russian soldiers seemed to have settled into their jobs well, and the methodical destruction of some of the best defences in Europe is under way. Part of why its slow is that they took too many causalities in the beginning and that is why command changes have been made. So slow and careful, no one in a hurry, will win the day.
After those forces are gone there is nothing that can seriously oppose the Russian military. Taking the entire country would be stupid. He wants to leave a monstrous mess for NATO and Europe to deal with. Enough space will very probably the only criteria, and of course the removing Ukraine’s access to the sea.
Then Ukraine will not be an existential threat to Russia.
Well, Jolly Good Show Penny!
Penny- one question- How many men under arms has each side got?
So far, Putin seems to have opened his hand with 180,000-200,000 soldiers and 120 BTG equipment sets, if memory serves. I don’t have any idea what Ukraine had at the start of this embroglio, but recent scuttlebut says 1,000,000 armed Ukrainian men available in June. That is a lot of trigger pullers. If that number is anywhere near realistic (and I am not claiming that it is), then Pooty-Poot is gonna have to do something, quick. The Z-man just found a check for $60 Billion from Uncle Suger and his Euro smoker buddies in his thong. My guess is that Putin will have to spend 5X that in response. Has he got the cash? As long as Putin would rather fight than fcuk, then he will always perceive existential threats. So, existential threat it is. Think Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Then think of the Balkans, Sweden/Finland and Poland. Given the immense natural resource wealth in Russia and Ukraine, and the deprivation of their peoples, that is the crime committed here.
Quite predictably, you are oblivious to their suffering.
“Then Ukraine will not be an existential threat to Russia.”
Absolutely no one with any military knowledge whatsoever in the West, in Russia, or in deepest, darkest Africa believes the Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia. It is an absurd statement.
“The stated point is to denatzify Ukraine…”
So you admit that Russia’s aim is genocide. That’s progress, though I know you’ve been supportive of genocide in the past, so it’s not surprising.
“to destroy the Azov and Azov stiffened forces that have killed 16,000 people in the Donbass since 2014.”
Ukraine’s killing of 16,000 invading forces is in no way a justification for launching a further invasion and killing of tens of thousands of civilians in the process (22,000 in Mariupol alone). Nor does it justify hauling off 150,000 civilians to Russian “filtration” camps for “re-education” (if possible) and “elimination” if not.
“Taking the entire country would be stupid.”
Taking the entire country is necessary to achieve his goals. Whatever part of the Ukraine he doesn’t take will effectively be a part of NATO. Within five years the Russians will be looking across the border at a modern military armed with M-1 tanks, Apache helicopters, and F-16 Fighting Falcons all protected by Patriot and Iron Dome missile defense systems. If Ukraine then decides to take back its lost territories then Russia is truly screwed.
Gack! That is Uncle Sugar. F me.
“Ukraine’s killing of 16,000 invading forces is in no way a justification for launching a further invasion and killing of tens of thousands of civilians in the process”
No its 16,000 civilians not involved in fighting, killed mostly by shelling, since 2014.
“So you admit that Russia’s aim is genocide.”
That was their stated intent. Its what they said.
“Absolutely no one with any military knowledge whatsoever in the West, in Russia, or in deepest, darkest Africa believes the Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia. It is an absurd statement.”
You really have no idea, do you?
Penny’s a boring troll, but if you read him you will at least have a grasp of the Russian POV. Luckily you only have to read every 10th post of his, because it’s always the same thing…
On a related note, it’s my vague impression that if you were in fact to watch Russia Today you would actually have more of a both-sides perspective than if you watch CNN or other Western regime media outlets. I’ve seen clips showing RT commentators criticizing the Ukraine war–does CNN ever allow dissenting views? Basically what I’m saying is that while it is undoubtedly true that Russia is not morally equivalent to America, and as far as I can tell the overall American media environment is much superior to Russia, major American media outlets such as CNN, NYT, WaPo, etc., are not actually morally superior to Russian media sources. They are the voice of the Deep State blob, and have no interest or concern with being comprehensively truthful, just in parroting regime propaganda.
Ginny: “It seemed to me a product of the insatiable desire for power, land, resources.”
Let’s not talk about the Biden Mal-administration — it just makes me so depressed!
Russia has Siberia, which has similarities to Minnesota in the 1800s. There is enough land & resources there to keep a nation busy for generations. Russia does not need the Ukraine.
Why does the US have 800 overseas military bases? Why has the US started wars of aggression on the other side of the world — in Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, Syria? The great mass of the American people don’t want foreign wars, yet the DC Swamp Creatures keep getting us involved in them. Tell me who it is who really has that insatiable desire for power, land, resources?
Where are you getting your civilian death numbers?
Date: 20 May 2022
From 4 a.m. on 24 February 2022, when the Russian Federation’s armed attack against Ukraine started, to 24:00 midnight on 19 May 2022 (local time), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) recorded 8,189 civilian casualties in the country: 3,838 killed and 4,351 injured.
(snip. More detail at the link.)
Ohcr= UN office of high commissioner human rights
Seems like a huge discrepancy between your numbers and the UN numbers.
Any thoughts on why?
I don’t trust the UN numbers and they even say they may not be completely up to date.
But the un’s civilian death count has not changed radically since I wrote about it somewhere else last month. I forget the number but it was definitely in the 3,000s.
Does anyone have a better source?
Speaking of casualties and deaths, the Russians for hundreds of years have shown little or no regard for human life, especially in war. Mass civilian casualties are routine, especially of the enemy. But also of Russians even in peacetime.
If the UN numbers are anything near correct, they seem to be operating with kid gloves relative to what we would normally expect. If they were really serious about this war, I would expect to see them rain down hell fire and truly massive civilian deaths.
Look at the steel mill in mariupol for example. It took a month to get 1500 troops to come out of the tunnels.
I thought it was because they did not want to damage the plant which seems pretty valuable. But it seems like they were always planning to tear it down anyway.
So why not just set up some really heavy guns and blast the crap out of it until the azovz surrender or are buried in the rubble.
Russia’s relative gentleness remains a mystery to me. Relative is the key word. They are NOT being gentle except as compared to historical norms.
Not sure if this if off topic but can I talk wheat?
For the past couple months we’ve been hearing about impending world famine due to disruptions in Ukrainian wheat supply. Ukraine has always been seen as a critical wheat supplier. Wars fought over it.
So I wondered just how important it is.
Not very, as it turns out. Here’s the top 10 countries for wheat production in tons & %
1 China 134,340,630 18%
2 India 98,510,000 13%
3 Russia 85,863,132 11%
4 USA 47,370,880 6%
5 France 36,924,938 5%
6 Australia 31,818,744 4%
7 Canada 29,984,200 4%
8 Pakistan 26,674,000 4%
9 Ukraine 26,208,980 3%
10 Germany 24,481,600 3%
World Total 750,000,000
So a bit ahead of Germany but behind Pakistan (!?) Ukraine’s 26mm tons is not nothing but at 3% of world total is close.
I also looked at global production for the past 10 years and several of yty variations were more than Ukraine’s entire 26mm.
I fear there may be a famine with 10s or hundreds of millions of deaths. But Ukraine will not be the cause.
I’ll bet $5 it will be blamed on “climate change” I’ll bet $20 it won’t be caused by climate change
India has blocked exports of wheat.
So far, Putin seems to have opened his hand with 180,000-200,000 soldiers and 120 BTG equipment sets, if memory serves.
I seem to recall a pro-Russian site claiming that the invasion started with 80-100 BTGs, but I couldn’t find the article. Regardless, it’s quite an accomplishment for the Russians to be succeeding while outnumbered.
The Z-man just found a check for $60 Billion from Uncle Suger and his Euro smoker buddies in his thong. My guess is that Putin will have to spend 5X that in response.
I think it’s a very American trait to assume the amount of wealth expended equals the amount of success that will result. I suspect this is very wrong. I note Russia has managed to develop and deploy hypersonic weapons, while the US has not, despite spending untold billions on the task. I put it that way because the first stories revealed by a google search all had different and contradictory numbers, so I’m not even going to attempt to guess how much been wasted over the years attempting to match Russia.
So, existential threat it is. Think Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Yet oddly Russia has only reacted when moves are made against their interests, such the abortive attempt by Georgia to join NATO or conduct another color revolution to replace the government of Kazakhstan. And of course, the present invasion of Ukraine.
I detect a pattern here. I also detect a pattern in the Western moves- that is, they are quite plausibly part of a scheme to destroy Russia, to borrow from Janet Yellen again.
Quite predictably, you are oblivious to their suffering.
If the Deep State gets its way, then they’ll do to Russia pretty much what they did to Libya- replace a functioning nation-state with churning bloody chaos.
I suggest we to take note of this looming disaster and stop encouraging escalation, to be cognizant of future suffering implied in the endless schemes of the Deep State- and stop it from happening.
John H: “Russia’s relative gentleness remains a mystery to me.”
There is no mystery — if one takes what the Russians have said seriously. They have not declared war on the Ukraine; instead, they are doing a “Special Military Operation” to protect Russian-speakers in the Donbas from the ongoing attack by the Kiev Krew. Hence the Russians want to minimize civilian casualties in that area, and presumably want to minimize damage to infrastructure too.
Of course, CNN will tell us that Russia’s statements are disinformation and should be disregarded. Time will tell.
England’s long war against the Irish people ended with the partition of Ireland between those who wanted to be subservient to England and those who did not. Was that appeasement by the Irish? Or was it appeasement by the English? Or was it a rational solution to end a conflict which has some similarities to the situation between the different language groups in the Ukraine?
Religious wars are the worst. The Irish “troubles” began with William of Orange encouraging Scot Presbyterians to emigrate to Ireland. Catholics were deemed untrustworthy because of the history of the Stuarts. An accident of geography prolonged the problem because Ireland lies west of England, in a position to block England’s commerce with the rest of the world. Had Ireland been east of England, there would have been little incentive to occupy it for so long, Both France and Germany attempted to occupy Ireland to deny England its route to America. Ireland has also been unsuccessful in both agriculture and industry. Absentee land ownership has contributed and is still a problem.
You make a good point, but look at this chart of imports. Look especially at all the very long bars for places like Indonesia that haven’t even been mentioned. Notice that Egypt and China are also close to the top.
Another surprise for me was that the U.S. while still down the list, actually imports about 3 million tons of wheat.
To coin a phrase, man does not live by bread alone. The U.S. would also rank high on exporters of everything from soybeans to peanuts. In the U.S. wheat competes with a lot of other crops for field space depending on geographic location. Every year, farmers play the game of betting on which of the crops they can plant will be profitable a year or more in the future. People that think gambling only happens in casinos have never farmed.
Wheat is fungible, It will go to whoever is willing and able to pay most. If you look at the list of big importers, many are what we used to call poor countries. These are countries that often support their poorer citizens by subsidizing things like wheat and bread. They’ll be caught in a squeeze between the rising cost of wheat and rising prices for everything else, especially oil. Historically, rising food costs in poor countries have usually been associated with civic unrest and lately providing traction for Islamic extremism or radicalism of other sorts.
In China, imported foods are the foods of the elites. They are the ones that know just what a risk you take by consuming domestic foods and have the means to avoid them. These are widely known to contaminated with everything from pesticides considered too hazardous to use any place else in the world to industrial chemicals used as “additives”. Detergent in fluffy buns is probably one of the less objectionable things.
Absolutely no one with any military knowledge whatsoever in the West, in Russia, or in deepest, darkest Africa believes the Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia.
True. The threat to Russia is NATO, and by extension, the United States. Everyone understands this.
Ukraine’s killing of 16,000 invading forces is in no way a justification for launching a further invasion…
How many Russians is Ukraine allowed to kill before Russia is justified in stopping them? There has to be a number- please let us know what yours is. Mine is well below 16,000, by the way.
Within five years the Russians will be looking across the border at a modern military armed with M-1 tanks, Apache helicopters, and F-16 Fighting Falcons all protected by Patriot and Iron Dome missile defense systems.
I’d just like to point out that all of those systems were developed decades ago, except for the Iron Dome, which I’ve read that Israel will not share with foreigners.
So perhaps Russia isn’t as screwed as you might think.
Gavin, you are right, raining hell fire on civilians is not a good way to win a limited war. I was being a bit ironic in my mystery comment.
Lots of talk about Russian use of nukes (perhaps so we can use them preemptively?). But Russia has a lot of non-nuke options they can ramp up with before needing nukes.
I find it hilarious that these armchair generals and pundits conclude that the biggest threat to America and the West lies within. And the biggest threat to Russia is the US and NATO.
It’s not always about us, you know, and although we have our problems, we are not the only source of the world’s troubles. Granted, we are the biggest threat to ourselves, and have lots of work to do to correct that situation.
Guess who is the biggest threat to Russia? It’s Russia! The largest land area in the world, natural and human resources, and a thoroughly poisonous national culture. They are crazily insecure, espouse completely contradictory national myths, and pursue imperialism with crazy vigor despite the disasters their imperialism has visited on them throughout history.
They think they must subjugate their non-Slavic neighbors and wonder why these minorities don’t want to become Russian. They insult their Slavic neighbors because they should instead be Russians rather than their own Polish, Slovak, Bulgarian, or Ukrainian cultures. As a result their history is of expanding empire followed by calamity and receding empire, always brutal warfare, and they never learn.
It was a mistake to end the Soviet empire as we did, without a reckoning such as Germany and Japan had to undergo in the last half of the twentieth century. They must lose this war and have an internal reckoning, or Russia is doomed.
Mike K: “Ireland has also been unsuccessful in both agriculture and industry.”
The world is changing. Here is an interesting comparison of the way things have changed since Ireland shook off the dead hand of England:
Per Capita GDP in Ireland overtook that in England in the early 2000s. Now, Per Capita GDP in Ireland is almost twice that in England. As of 2021:
Maybe the people of Western Ukraine would become much better off if the Kiev Krew would agree to partitioning off Eastern Ukraine? Of course, a wealthy Eastern Ukraine would increase the temptation on Poland to assert its historical claim on that part of the planet, and back it up with an invasion. They are all Europeans, after all — they will never be at peace!
Apologies for my mistaken geographic reference. It is of course the Western Ukraine which was formerly part of Poland.
“Where are you getting your civilian death numbers?”
From the mayor or Mariupol, who has stated that 22,000 residents of that city have been killed in the fighting and another 33,000 have been taken by the Russians to filtration camps. The UN isn’t operating in Mariupol yet — or any area anywhere near the fighting — so they wouldn’t know.
“They have not declared war on the Ukraine; instead, they are doing a “Special Military Operation” to protect Russian-speakers in the Donbas from the ongoing attack by the Kiev Krew. Hence the Russians want to minimize civilian casualties in that area, and presumably want to minimize damage to infrastructure too.”
Are you serious? They’re “protecting” the Russian speakers by killing them by the tens of thousands? Hint: The Russians have killed 22,000 civilians in Mariupol alone, 90% of whom are Russian speakers.
The Russians have bombed schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, supermarkets, sewage treatment plants, and water treatment plants. They have filled mass graves with hundreds of bodies. They destroyed 2,800 residential buildings in Chernihiv alone. They have used drones to drop anti-personnel mines in the apartment complexes of Kharkiv. They have pulled tanks up to apartment buildings and fired into the buildings at point-blank range until they collapse. Then they pulled survivors out of the wreckage and carted them off to filtration camps.
This is what you call minimizing civilian casualties? I call it evil. It is dismaying how many people excuse it.
“The threat to Russia is NATO, and by extension, the United States.”
Nobody believes this, not even the Russians. NATO without the United States has no offensive capability. They couldn’t get ten miles inside Russia without Russian permission. And the United States won’t even send an F-22 to the skies of an ally with whom it signed an agreement to protect their territorial borders, let alone commit ground forces. That the United States would launch an invasion of Russia is preposterous, and everyone knows it.
“How many Russians is Ukraine allowed to kill before Russia is justified in stopping them?”
Considering the Russians in question were in the Ukraine conducting a war of conquest on said sovereign country, the answer is infinite. Ukraine is allowed to kill as many invaders as is necessary to remove them from their country.
“I’d just like to point out that all of those systems were developed decades ago…So perhaps Russia isn’t as screwed as you might think.”
Considering that the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a near stalemate with even older Soviet weapons while having hardly any air force or navy to speak of, yeah, they’d be screwed. The Americans armed with such weapons plowed through a 600,000-man strong Iraqi army armed with Russian weapons, force structure, and tactics in 100 hours. Maybe the Ukrainians wouldn’t be quite that fast, but the Russians have shown themselves to be a paper tiger.
“From the mayor or Mariupol, who has stated that 22,000 residents of that city have been killed in the fighting”
Where are all these bodies then? One doesn’t have to be Penny to note that that number doesn’t seem remotely plausible.
Gavin, that graph is very interesting. What happened in 2010? Why did Ireland continue to grow and UK flattened out?
the latter embraced the green agenda more heavily, i’m guessing, with the liberal democrat government,
In a serious country Milley would be locked up in Leavenworth, but then so would every senior figure in the FBI and CIA of the past several decades. The fact that he’s suffered zero consequences shows that the Pentagon being completely rotten isn’t the usual joke by the ranks, it’s an ironclad fact that is going to cause untold pain and suffering at some point in the not too distant future, not least because none of our adversaries can possibly take a country seriously that allows fat traitors like him to prosper.
Not my area of expertise, but isn’t Ireland’s growth a mirage that is totally divorced from the condition of the average person, and due entirely to their banking system, so presumably it’s a function of the goosing of the global financial system in the years since the “Global Financial Crisis” of 2008, and is certain to end in tears?
“Considering that the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a near stalemate with even older Soviet weapons while having hardly any air force or navy to speak of, yeah, they’d be screwed.”
Again the Azov and Azov stiffened forces are fanatically motivated, very well trained by NATO, well armed by NATO and fighting from positions that have been prepared since 2015.
You can follow along here: https://geoworld.space/ukraine/
Right in one. The super geniuses that wrote the Maastricht Treaty neglected tax arbitrage along with all the other things that have nearly torn the Euro apart. Ireland was willing to take a small bite out of players like Amazon to allow them to escape making a meal for the more rapacious members.
Milley is just a sign that it’s been a long time since we have fought a real war. Every army breeds his sort of parade ground martinet when there’s nothing real to give them a test. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, the government was willing to tolerate years of failure rather than question the “experts” and have the whole enterprise called into question.
Mike K: “What happened in 2010? Why did Ireland continue to grow and UK flattened out?”
Good question! The suggestions above about the UK’s enthusiastic adoption of windmills while Ireland enthusiastically adopted low business taxes might have something to do with it. Part of Ireland’s “GDP” may be multi-national companies reporting European income through their Irish offices. But the improvement does not just show up in economic statistics — Ireland under English mis-rule was poor for generations, with major exports being emigrants and jokes about poor dumb Irish; now that has turned round, and Europeans are moving to Ireland for jobs.
The Ukraine is a very large, seriously mis-managed, highly corrupt country with a dis-united population. The Irish example suggests that partition might be beneficial to the population. The Kiev Krew signed up years ago for a gentle form of near-partition within the country’s existing borders in the Minsk Agreements — but then refused to implement them. Lost opportunity! Why we should pay $40,000,000,000 for their stupidity is another question.
“Ireland was willing to take a small bite out of players like Amazon to allow them to escape making a meal for the more rapacious members.”
This is very funny.
Nobody believes this, not even the Russians. NATO without the United States has no offensive capability.
If you don’t understand why Russia is threatened by the US presence in Europe and on its borders, I suggest you look up the Cuban missile crisis.
Considering the Russians in question were in the Ukraine conducting a war of conquest on said sovereign country, the answer is infinite.
Well no, the Russians in question were the ones getting shelled by Ukraine before the war started. I’ll ask again- how many Russians should Russia allow to killed before reacting to stop it? I remind you that the three thousand Americans killed on 9/11 was sufficient to launch the 20 year adventure in Afghanistan, and likely made certain the invasion of Iraq.
Considering that the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a near stalemate with even older Soviet weapons while having hardly any air force or navy to speak of, yeah, they’d be screwed.
No, they’ve been using billions of dollars worth of western weaponry, to the extent that western governments have been concerned about depleting their own stockpiles. Plus, before the war, Ukraine received quite a lot of western training supplies.
“I suggest you look up the Cuban missile crisis”
I also found the rhetoric from Australia and New Zealand about the ChiCom arrangement with the Solomon Islands a couple months back to illuminating. Lots of saber rattling about spheres of influence, etc.
From the mayor or Mariupol, who has stated that 22,000 residents of that city have been killed in the fighting and another 33,000 have been taken by the Russians to filtration camps.
The mayor of Mariupol fled the city before the Russians arrived, so how the h3ll does he know what’s happening there? My guess is he doesn’t.
The Russians have bombed schools, hospitals…
Mm-hmm. Excuse me if I find these claims dubious. The Russians have no incentive to murder random Ukrainians or destroy the country for the sake of destruction- and quite the incentive no to do so. On the other hand, the Ukrainians very much have an incentive to magnify everything event to encourage the west to continue to support them.
I call it evil. It is dismaying how many people excuse it.
Now tell us about the destruction of Libya. And the Iraq War. And the bombing of Serbia. Or Obama’s personal hobby of killing people in random foreign countries with drone strikes.
Or was that different because the Deep State was doing the killing?
I think not. To quote General Sherman, war is hell and you cannot refine it.
I also found the rhetoric from Australia and New Zealand about the ChiCom arrangement with the Solomon Islands a couple months back to illuminating.
Yeah, that’s another good example.
It’s crazy talk to think Russia should be concerned with NATO bases in Poland (say) fifty miles from the border- but a Chinese base 1000 miles away from Australia is a grave threat to national security blah blah.
“Penny’s a boring troll”
So your government told the bouncy castle people to stay out of DC. Wonder why. ;)
Anyone up for war vids. The LPR has a few good ones, music. humour and death. ;)
India has only temporarily blocked exports of wheat. They had a big marketing push last year and sold too much. They are only blocking it until suypply and demand level out.
there is also something about China hoarding Indian wheat.
The claim I’ve seen for the past few months is that Ukraine/Russia are the dominant source of wheat for much of the Middle East, including places like Egypt that have very little reserves of either food or cash and so are extremely sensitive to short-term disruptions, and could be subject to political unrest like what we’re seeing in Sri Lanka (where’s the updates on that?) not that it will likely cause global famine.
but of course,
Oh well I’ll inflict one on you.
The Storming of the urban-type settlement Novotoshkovskoye. April 2022. By the 4th separate motorized rifle brigade of the LPR army. They have been fighting since 2014. There were significant casualties. It is very instructive to watch to the tactical operations of an expert group. Drones have changed everything:
Another piece of evidence in the ongoing saga of Russia’s “isolation”:
“Saudi Arabia has signaled its support for Russia as a continued member of the OPEC+ oil cartel, which comes amid ongoing Western pressure to sanction and isolate Moscow over the Ukraine invasion.”
But I heard on the radio yesterday that Starbucks is permanently closing all its Russian stores, so clearly Putin’s on his last legs now.
Of course, I also heard on the radio that despite all the claims that the economy is doing terrible and inflation is crushing people, that consumer spending is actually up, which obviously shows things are great!
Also I am a moron.
What will Russia do without Starbucks?
Also, Dimitri Orlov has some thoughts about American policy:
Ordered up a couple of Z t-shirts from Donetsk. Small support for them, and an opportunity for me to get beat up. ;)
I guess we’ll see if they make it though the churn.
Or sniped. Lots of Ukrainian immigrants in Western Canada. Do Canadian Moose hunters wear ghillie suits?
Not a lot of moose where I live. Quite a few Elk though. The hunters are a bit of a joke these days, I am usually well above them, on the hill when I see them, they seem to be uniformly obese and don’t go far from their trucks. As they can’t get their big ass F150s very far up the hill, the locals just move one ridge over. ;)
I know some very good hunters and they just go up into the next valley and get their deer, as that’s where they will be. ;)
As for me I’m very old but I do toy with idea of moving to Russia. I’m pretty strong, I lift weights and could maybe help with the medical side of the conflict. I will not kill anything above a fish. ;)
How many T-shirts to sponsor an air strike? Do you get to pick the target? Is the Russian Air Force no-show because of a merchandising problem or shipping delays from China? You know the shirts are either from China or Pakistan, don’t you.
I have been following this conflict since 2014. I have established some connections, and admire the staunchness the people of Donetsk and Lugansk who had to defend their communities against the ethnic cleansing attempted after the coup in 2014. They fought, under Russian Special Forces leadership, the nascent Azov and Azov stiffened forces to a standstill, pocketed a great deal of it and destroyed it. They were in a position that they could have broken out and taken a fair bit of Ukraine. Then Minsk was imposed, really to prevent this very breakout.
So its my admiration that makes me want a Z t-shirt, and my very small support through this, is all I can do really.
If you actually look at the present conflict, you will see no one does close air support, as aircraft and helicopters, are easy such meat for modern portable anti air. The video I posted above could show you how they fight there, if you have any interest at all.
I stopped reading the “news” on the Ukraine invasion weeks ago, since the osint sources were obviously propaganda, and the MSM wasn’t even really attempting to cover it, but from scrolling through this Guardian page things sound fairly bleak for Ukraine:
Nato ‘doing literally nothing’ to stop Russia, says Ukraine
Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, accused Nato of “doing literally nothing” in the face of Russia’s invasion of his country.
Russian forces are advancing in the Luhansk part of the Donbas and it’s grim for many places in that province.
Russian forces have launched fresh assaults on towns in eastern Ukraine, with the city of Sievierodonetsk increasingly in danger of being totally encircled.
Germany’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, said victory for Ukraine “does not seem to be an option” and that Berlin is “waiting for Putin to say his war goals are reached”.
Brian — the Kiev Krew are not the Ukraine, any more than Joe & the Ho are the United States.
It is very difficult to get any good information. Most the Lame Stream Media is Rah! Rah! Ukraine. If one digs, one can find websites which are Rah! Rah! Russia. It is tough to separate the real news from the propaganda.
It looks as if things are not going well for the Kiev Krew — they are retreating, Russia is advancing. But Russia is advancing rather slowly, which leaves people scratching their heads. Some suggest the slow progress is because Russia is trying to put much of the burden of fighting on the Donbas forces — it is their country; they should liberate it from the Kiev Krew themselves. Others suggest that the slow movement should be compared to World War I — the Kiev forces deeply entrenched themselves over their previous 8 years attacking the Donbas, and are difficult to dislodge.
The important issue is — What comes after Russia achieves its current aims (destroying the Kiev armies, liberating the Donbas, presumably also reclaiming Catherine the Great’s city of Odessa)? How do the parties (including the Europeans and the US) move from war to peace? No-one in positions of authority is talking about that.
From a rah rah rah Russia telegram channel:
Huge forces of the Russian Aerospace Forces passed over Lugansk towards the front, powerful explosions thundered.
The correspondent of “Russian Spring” from the capital of the LPR reports that he sees this for the first time, a lot of combat aircraft and helicopters swept over the city. They went in several waves. Soon, deafening explosions thundered in the distance, windows and even the walls of houses trembled.
At this time, air raid sirens are roaring in Ukraine.
Makes the Guardian seem upbeat.
Also interesting to look up what’s going on in Pakistan. “We” helped organize a coup against their pro-Russian leader right after the invasion to put “our” filthy corrupt friends back in charge, but apparently he decided not to just go away quietly…
In related news, what’s going on in Sri Lanka? It’s just incredible how horrible the modern news media is. Total navel gazing morons…
“the Kiev forces deeply entrenched themselves over their previous 8 years attacking the Donbas, and are difficult to dislodge.”
I have trench warfare vids now. People fight over, and die in trenches. Drones just are everywhere, and used constantly.
I find it interesting, given this place’s normal attitude, that you have no interest in the actual practicalities of this war. Just various theory’s. ;)
No one’s interested in anything you have to say, Penny, because you’ve decided to play the fool for years now. You have no credibility, because you’re a clown. If you want to have serious discussions you need to go find people who you haven’t flushed your name down the toilet with.
As for this war, yes it’s an awful situation but the fact is for anyone not more directly involved, it’s a movie, a cartoon even, and most of us have bigger worries to deal with, like how to pay for food and heat for the next year.
Yeah, its not a cartoon for me. A very large number of people are dying because of it, some of them people I quite admire. It is actually criminal what your country is doing, fighting to the last Ukrainian is an apt description. Some numbers: About 100,000 Ukrainian casualties and 30,000 Russian ones.
Any way the war is going quite well, the Azov and Azov stiffened forces are being defeated, both in detail and generally across the eastern front. All the territory Russia takes, becomes Russia, as well as the Lugansk and Donetsk territory. Russia will take Odessa and whatever else it wants. One of the stupidest things in this war so far, is the US threatening Russia in the Black Sea, ensuring the loss of Odessa.
The incoming crash is just fun for me. A pile of gold and silver and an indexed pension keeps me from much harm. As well the results of QE on the housing market has left many people vulnerable, as interest rates rise to more normal levels. My daughter needs a house. ;)
So the question of the day is why the WaPo, a Deep State cutout, is writing that well akshually Russia isn’t about to collape, in fact Ukraine is in deep trouble on the military front–an attempt to justify the $40B and argue for the next round to be even bigger?
WaPo is trying to get ahead of events. They have been pumping out the ‘Russia is losing big time‘ meme since the beginning; now they have a file record saying that they advised their readers that maybe there was another side to the story — a side that would become irrefutable when/if the Kiev forces suddenly collapse. All WaPo is trying to do is protect their own reputation, such as it is.
The bigger question is — What happens if the Kiev forces do indeed collapse? Do our Betters take the Kissinger path of telling the Kiev Krew to negotiate a partition of the Ukraine? Or do they take the Soros path of increasing belligerency, and with China as well as Russia?
The fun part will be if our Betters choose to double down on war, requiring the reintroduction of conscription. Will the Squad and such like Feminists demand that young women be conscripted and sent to die along with young men? Or will they suddenly change to 19th Century ladies? In these awful times, we have to take the smiles wherever we can find them.
I’m late here, and haven’t read all the comments.
But to address Gavin’s question at 1028: there’s no chance whatever that conscription will be re-imposed here. The American population won’t tolerate it, the professional soldiers don’t want it, and few young Americans are fit and smart enough to be of use in a modern war anyway. They are soft degenerates in a period of late-imperial overstretch. And we’ll see The Anti-War Movement ™ out too, bigtime.
A few more general remarks. The Russians and the Ukes are fighting like they are because those are the conditions and circumstances there. As has been remarked, trench warfare with drones, over territory that will be wrecked regardless of the outcome, and very likely insurgency and guerilla fighting even if there’s a ‘settlement.’
I don’t hide my preference that Putin and Russia lose, and lose big–but only to the extent that such a loss might lead to some good old-fashioned revolution there. If Putin wins the provinces, digesting the ruins will take a long time, too, and that in itself presents dangers to the system.
As for global food shortages and famine, my view is that the most vulnerable are also the most expendable. The Backwardistans and Democratic Peoples’ Kleptocracies had their chances.
James Howard Kunstler at Clusterfuck Nation. Read it now.
Cousin Eddie: “there’s no chance whatever that conscription will be re-imposed here. The American population won’t tolerate it”
Take a look around you, Eddie. The American population has already tolerated a lot — a stolen presidential election; an open southern border; a Chinese-fed fentanyl disaster; a hollowed-out economy; riots in Democrat-run cities; unrepayable government borrowing; increasing inflation.
Maybe you are right that conscription would be a step too-far … but don’t count on it! Slava Ukraini, you peons!
The American population has already tolerated a lot — a stolen presidential election; an open southern border; a Chinese-fed fentanyl disaster; a hollowed-out economy; riots in Democrat-run cities; unrepayable government borrowing; increasing inflation.
I can’t believe you forgot covid and the despicable mandates for an experimental medical treatment that has caused thousands of deaths so far and myriad other complications.
Anyway, I think the US is roughly like the Soviet Union circa 1985- the problems mount, but all the “experts” assume it will be around forever. Built into that assumption is the idea the public will tolerate the idiocy of the regime forever. I suspect not, but I also can’t predict which particular disaster will bring the regime to an end.
I sort-of recall a line from The Fourth Turning, about hunger stalking the land. We aren’t quite there yet, but the minions of the regime are hard at it. We apparently have now arrived at the point where a random bureaucrat can cripple the production of baby formula for months, for no real reason, causing serious supply problems- and the only thing the idiots in charge can think of to do is import formula from foreigners.
Shrug. I just don’t think idiocy so thorough can last for much longer, one way or another.
I thought that everyone knew from Columbine that the number one rule in these situations is get in and “neutralize” the shooter ASAP, and there is no number two rule. Here we are a quarter century later and apparently our institutions are completely helpless. “They” aren’t going to like it when the vast majority of people decide that America is one big 24/7/365 Flight 93 situation. It’s been leaning that way for a while, but when the dam breaks, all bets are going to be off…
My vision is fine, Gavin. Everything you list is a reason why conscription is a non-starter, not a reason that it will be revived. That train has left the station and short of Russian or Chinese naval infantry inside US waters nothing will bring it back.
I note that you don’t dispute my characterization of American Yoot, class of 2022.
Our own problems are just part of a larger crisis of modernity and its breakdown. Incompetence at the top is not only widespread, it is, after a while, inevitable. Several corrupt and degenerate imperial systems declining at once is something new in this century, and dangerous for everyone.
Talking about conscription is just silly for two reasons. First, If those already in uniform can’t defeat this rump of a Russian army in about a week, a mob of half trained, if that, kids isn’t going to help. Second, conscripting this mob and half training them will take more than a year at best. By then, the question in Ukraine will be decided one way or another.
The bottomless incompetence of the Russian Army has probably created an unrealistic optimism that Ukraine might manage better than a sullen stalemate. Before March, even a stalemate would have seemed wildly improbable. Now, We’ll have to see how much pain the Russians are willing to endure and how effective the Ukrainians will be at inflicting it. In any case, the illusion of Russian military power has been exposed once and for all.
I wouldn’t wish liberation by a Russian Army on my worst enemy. All those liberated from the Nazi oppression can look forward to living among the ruins for the foreseeable future. There certainly won’t be money from the decrepit Russian economy to rebuild, not when there is money to be looted and super yachts to be bought.
“Before March, even a stalemate would have seemed wildly improbable”
Actually, some of us were saying that Vlad would never invade because the Russian army is incapable of defeating anyone above the level of Chechnya/Georgia. You can look it up.
“the decrepit Russian economy”
The ruble’s far stronger than it was pre-war, Russian trade balance has shown huge gains (yes, I know apparently it’s because imports have collapsed far faster than exports, which haven’t dropped much at all since Europe can’t survive without their oil), etc. I don’t know why this “we destroyed the Russian economy” myth persists…
MCS: “Second, conscripting this mob and half training them will take more than a year at best. By then, the question in Ukraine will be decided one way or another.”
The flaw in the logic there is that what has started in the Ukraine will necessarily stay in the Ukraine. That is demonstrably untrue.
“Our Guys” just seized a Russian tanker supposedly carrying Iranian oil off Greece, and Iran has now seized two Greek tankers. “Our Guys” are apparently planning to send the Kiev Krew missiles which can strike Russia; you know that Russia would respond beyond the boundaries of the Ukraine to any major such incident. Things could spin out of control of “Our Guys” very easily. E.g., a Danish-supplied Harpoon missile sinks a Russian ship in the Black Sea — Russia drops a non-nuclear hypersonic missile on the Danish Parliament. What happens after that?
“There certainly won’t be money from the decrepit Russian economy to rebuild …”
There won’t need to be. Assuming “Our Guys” don’t trigger an all-out thermonuclear war, the eventual settlement of the Ukrainian situation will require a “peace-keeping force”. Since the US/EU/UN have all taken sides, they are disqualified. That leaves China to provide a military force on the territory of the Ukrainian side of the partition to keep the Russians and NATO out. China will provide the funding to rebuild the remaining Ukraine to its own liking as part of the Belt & Road scheme. They will also throw out any of those suspicious US biolabs which the Russians have not already destroyed.
It is really sad — and a tribute to the vast incompetence of our Rulers — that the best outcome now from the 8+ year long war in the Ukraine would be a permanent Chinese military presence in Europe.
There certainly won’t be money from the decrepit Russian economy to rebuild, not when there is money to be looted and super yachts to be bought.
According the various pro-Russian sources I read, Russia is already rebuilding in areas it controls, e.g. Mariupol.
It seems to me that you have internalized the attitude that the American regime has against its own people- that is, it hates us and seeks to harm us in every way possible- and are projecting that a foreign government will act similarly.
I suspect not. A tactic way foreign regimes use retain public support is to make the circumstances of their people better- I know, that’s crazy, right?- and thus the Russian regime has ample incentive to govern well, including in areas newly regained.
Meanwhile, Americans are busy trying to prevent their babies from dying due to a lack of formula and are being arrested because they want police to stop their children from being murdered.
I don’t know why this “we destroyed the Russian economy” myth persists…
That’s easy. It persists because relentless propaganda from the regime tells everyone this sort of thing, endlessly and always. Also, the Russian military has been almost completely destroyed and will run out of ammunition by this time tomorrow.
I presume plenty of people believe all that, not least because just about any source of doubt is quickly scrubbed from the internet in Western countries.
Things could spin out of control of “Our Guys” very easily. E.g., a Danish-supplied Harpoon missile sinks a Russian ship in the Black Sea — Russia drops a non-nuclear hypersonic missile on the Danish Parliament. What happens after that?
Well, on the bright side, the harpoons being sent probably were made in the early 80s, so the batteries won’t work.
Also, the pro-Russian sources sometimes claim most of the Russian military and the best units aren’t even involved in the war, being held back for use against NATO.
It’s fascinating to see the vast yawning gulf between what I read on many US sites and what I read at those places.
Both versions of reality cannot be true.
My guess- Russia is destroying the Ukrainian army and Ukraine is about to start begging for peace. Failing that, it will collapse.
I find the Chinese peacekeepers in the Ukraine notion as fantastic as the reinstitution of conscription here.
We’re talking famine and quite possibly social breakdowns on a massive scale, definitely including China. If the dire predictions that are made daily here–by people of all persuasions and POVs–come true, there will be no peace to keep and no borders to police.
Not for a long, long, time.
Imagine the sort of race war that could easily be brought about by the introduction of large numbers of armed Chinese onto European soil. A field day for Euro-nationalists and racists.
I can do that easily.
Imagine the Chinese deciding that putting a lot of their young men at the end of a tether at the mercy of people who hate and despise them will appeal to the leadership or the people.
I can’t do that at all.
YMMV and we will see (if we’re lucky enough not to die as it unfolds).
Eddie: “Imagine the Chinese deciding that putting a lot of their young men at the end of a tether at the mercy of people who hate and despise them will appeal to the leadership or the people.”
History tells us that US personnel in Japan immediately after WWII had very little problem with hatred from the Japanese people, despite the US having killed a large number of their soldiers and burned many of their citizens out of their homes. Situation in Germany was somewhat similar. It took time before the following generation of Euros started to hate the US.
So China shows up in the Ukraine after the shooting stops with lots of money and as much rough justice as the situation requires to eliminate Kievan Korruption — jobs for the people and protection from the kleptocratic oligarchs. And China brings peace & security, for which the great majority of Ukrainians will be very grateful. Of course, it does not have to happen that way, but this is historically more likely than assuming Chinese protection of the independence of the Ukraine from both EU and Russia will degenerate into something like the US occupations of Iraq & Afghanistan.
China has already put lots of its young men into various countries in Africa and South America. That is not discussed in polite circles in the West, but it seems to be going well enough for the Chinese to make them continue doing it. Putting Chinese citizens in the Ukraine would not be a new experience for China.
As you say, we will see (provided the nuclear war scenario is somehow avoided). The world being what it is, we will probably both be surprised.
“China has already put lots of its young men into various countries in Africa and South America.”
Yes, China has re-introduced colonialism to the 3rd world, and Gavin thinks it is wonderful. I have read that China plans to re-locate 350,000,000 ot its people to Africa.
Gavin also equates the need for Ukrainian independence from Russian ‘actions’ with a need for Ukrainian independence from EU/Nato/US/UN ‘actions’. As if invading Ukraine is the equivalent to arming Ukraine. That is some pretzel logic.
Raymondshaw: “As if invading Ukraine is the equivalent to arming Ukraine.”
US/NATO spent the last 8 years arming the KIev Krew to murder their fellow Ukrainian citizens who happened to be Russian-speakers. So, yes, there is a strong parallel between arming the Ukrainian junta and invading the Ukraine to prevent what (under other circumstances) the Usual Suspects would call “genocide” by Kievan forces.
The world is a more complicated place than the “Russia Bad, Zelensky Good” mantra that CNN keeps telling you.
You believe the Russian storyline, I don’t. Your repetition of it doesn’t get more persuasive with time. My scant knowledge of history tells me that for 300 years Russia has made it a regular practice to invade and conquer their neighbors. Why would anyone believe that this time is different?
CNN doesn’t tell me anything. I ditched my cable connection in 1991. I don’t watch TV or listen to the radio, ever.
China will be hard pressed to be passing cash around to anyone.
Your historical examples are so far from matching today’s reality on the ground that further discussion will be fruitless. Enjoy your Sinophilic fantasy, Gavin.
Cousin Eddie: “Your historical examples are so far from matching today’s reality on the ground that further discussion will be fruitless.”
Come on, Eddie! Don’t duck the issue. What are the big differences from historical examples?
The Allies’ occupation of Germany post-WWII did not experience a significant amount of guerilla activity. Nor did the US post-WWII occupation of Japan meet a resisting population. Whereas the US/NATO occupation of Iraq faced tremendous problems — even the road from the airport to Baghdad was never completely secure. What was the difference?
The US/NATO occupation of Afghanistan was more like the situation in Iraq than Germany or Japan. Again, the question is — why? To be fair, the earlier English and Russian occupations of Afghanistan faced the same problems of a resisting population. We have to go back to Alexander the Great to see what might possibly have been a successful occupation of Afghanistan, and even that is debatable.
The American Civil War was not followed by a bleeding sore of guerilla activity, even though the defeated South had easy access to weapons and good reasons to hate the highly destructive Northern invaders.
What is the basis for your assertion that the situation in the Ukraine will end in “very likely insurgency and guerilla fighting even if there’s a ‘settlement.’”
No Gavin, you’re going in the wrong direction.
The more detail you give about postwar settlements–after particular wars, by particular regimes, at particular times, under particular conditions–the less you impress. All wars are political, and all politics is local, ergo–
How about you give an indication that some future Chinese occupation and peacekeeping duty in the Ukraine is on anyone’s menu.
Can you cite anything in the news that would support the Longmuir Plan as a thing? A thing worth discussing now, when any outcome and settlement are months, years, or decades away?
(After the ACWABAWS, the South was rife with quasi-insurrection and terrorism in the form of the KKK. White Southerners knew that the USG would eventually tire of occupation and they could wait it out since they retained the social and economic power. The restoration of
White Supremacy (a.k.a. Jim Crow) was legal warfare against African-Americans, and just the extreme expression of W/white attitudes nationally. So how is that example relevant anyway?)
Eddie: “How about you give an indication that some future Chinese occupation and peacekeeping duty in the Ukraine is on anyone’s menu.”
Do we have to wait until the NYT says something before we can engage brain?
Russia issued quite clear public proposals to the US and NATO while the Kiev Krew were building up their forces to attack the Donbas — Russia wants no threats on its borders. The rational end to the Ukrainian situation/civil war will be a partition, similar to what happened in Ireland. That protects the Donbas, but would still leave a potential NATO threat in the rump Ukraine. Hence Russia will likely insist on foreign peacekeepers in rump Ukraine.
Who would be acceptable to both sides as a peacekeeper — there to make sure that both NATO and Russia stay out? NATO/US and Russia are obviously disqualified. The UN is an empty vessel. The choices for a credible military force (protective, not occupying) come down to India or China. China was already involved in the Ukraine through the Belt & Road Initiative, which makes it the likely candidate. Note that China has been highly circumspect in its approach to the Ukrainian situation — not explicitly supporting either side, and calling for peace.
But if you want to wait until it gets discussed in the NYT, feel free to do so.
Russia or anyone else counting on China to pull them out of their difficulties are out of luck. China gives all the appearances of being headed into one of their periodic fits of insanity with mass death and displacement triggered by covid.
Think Cultural Revolution if they’re lucky, Taiping Rebellion with less luck.
That is an interesting video about the lockdowns in Beijing. What one can’t help noticing is that — despite the massive numbers of people living in that city — the clean litter-free streets, the absence of graffiti, the well-kept green spaces, the reasonable behavior of even the exasperated residents. So different from Seattle, Cleveland, New York. Yes, China has its problems; so do many other places.
Some observers have hypothesized that the “Covid” lockdowns in China are actually cover for economic warfare against the West. Instead of embargoing certain exports to the US and Europe, Chinese rulers are shutting down the production process under the pretense of containing a viral outbreak. Time will tell!
and suppression of dissent, tomato tomatoe
Most speculation about Chinese behavior right now has to do with internal party politics before some big meeting later this year where Winnie the Pooh wants to consolidate his power even more, and needs to attack Shanghai based rivals before then. Of course there’s basically no Western media in the country anymore and those who are are either corrupt or idiots.
The Beijing thugs are way more worried about each other than Brandon and crew, who they view with open contempt.
(And of course there’s not going to be Asian “peacekeepers” in Ukraine, I have to assume Gavin’s just trolling…)
it’s instructive to note that hubei, which wuhan was a seat of, was a rival to beijing for several generations if not centuries,
No, Gavin, I’m a historian by education and don’t depend on the NYT for anything but the opinion of the NYT. That’s you laying smoke, and others see it too.
There are foreign policy publications from universities and thinktanks of all political persuasions, on all sorts of issues.
Find one–just one–that discusses a postwar settlement that resembles anything you outline. Or is your experience and acumen so great that you see what everyone with skin in the game has missed?
Can you find anything online, in any language, that even hints that the Longmuir Plan is based on more than your fantasy of setting the world right?
for the war to end, or at least pause, you would need some middle faction, before the impact on the global economy to turn ruinous, but that seems to be the point of the exercise, where will the 40 billion, more than our first iraq appropriation go?
if one would have written this up as a treatment, it would have been implausible
Haven’t checked in on this thread in a while. Let’s see what’s up….
Oh my goodness! It’s sunk into delusion.
“The fun part will be if our Betters choose to double down on war, requiring the reintroduction of conscription.”
“…the best outcome now from the 8+ year long war in the Ukraine would be a permanent Chinese military presence in Europe.”
“…the Russian military has been almost completely destroyed and will run out of ammunition by this time tomorrow.”
Absolutely delusional — all of it. There will be no American conscription, nor will there by a Chinese military presence in Europe, and Russia has plenty of military resources left despite the massive losses it has been taking.
Let this be a lesson to anyone else still paying attention to this thread. When you dismiss all alternative sources of information, when every news story is “fake news”, when every photograph is a “photoshop”, when every video is a “green screen”, there’s no brake on your imagination. When that happens, you veer off into delusion.
I suppose I should answer the only semi-plausible scenario Gavin has brought up in a long while.
“…a Danish-supplied Harpoon missile sinks a Russian ship in the Black Sea — Russia drops a non-nuclear hypersonic missile on the Danish Parliament. What happens after that?”
Denmark invokes article V of the NATO treaty, and Russia’s military is reduced to rubble. The only question is whether Russia will use its nuclear arsenal to take the rest of civilization down with it. Given its leadership, it just might.
for the west this is mostly the ‘phony war’ except for the amount of weapons we seem to be expending (not that we need them for any other occasion) there are suggestions some special operators french canadian even a former american spec ops chief have been involved, but that is the fog of war, now it serves as a pretext for the privations of fuel and food, that our insect overlords,
for Russians and Ukrainians it’s very much real, there was a degree of arrogance to try to seize the jewel of the kievan rus, but that plan went pearshaped rather quickly, with the failure of the airbridge at gospedal, sic, then the main land force, floundered in the marshes,
the bulk of the main force was focused at mariupol, in the manner we’ve seen in grozny before and that has had some success, in the sense of the zachista, but the reasons are unclear, (yes biological research facilities are why one should tread carefully, not shell indiscriminately)
the liquidation of the zaporizhian sich, was due to the alliance with the swedes, that war ended so poorly the swedes put in an tyrannical monarch, and crushed the two party faction involved in the operation,
the bombing of the turkish fleet at sinope, was what prompted the allied expedition, against the crimea, considered a major escalation, this was in the era of grapeshot not kindzal missiles,
Eddie: “There are foreign policy publications from universities and thinktanks of all political persuasions, on all sorts of issues. Find one–just one–that discusses a postwar settlement that resembles anything you outline.”
So your argument, Eddie, is that only people in “universities and thinktanks” are allowed to engage brain? Everyone else is supposed to wait with brain in neutral until their Betters tell them what they are permitted to think?
this is more like early 20th century trench warfare then the set piece engagements we are used to,
currently there are russian advance at severdonetsk and krasni lyman, in a week who knows,
but one looks at the bigger picture, 20 years ago, cofer black was a midlevel chief of cia’s counter terror division, he pressed for more direct engagement against bin laden, but his record in blocking operatives like al midhar and al hamzi, is less clear, he then moved on to at large ambassador and vp at blackwater, then a few years later, he ends up on the board of burisma, likely due to his previous contacts at state with the oligarch who owns it and privat bank, the latter was ‘decapitalized’ to the tune of 6 billion dollars, not long after the loan that was extorted by biden, at the price of the firing of the procurator general shokin,
No, Gavin (this gets old).
What I’m saying is that there are people all over the world whose job it is (jobs they are?) to monitor and report on developments of import to governments and businesses. Some are paid to justify a policy already decided or to persuade decision-makers a certain way.
They are specialists in understanding and analyzing the complexities of events like wars in remote (to Americans) places, involving strange and obscure (to Americans) actors. Does that mean they always understand what’s going on and always have pure motives? Of course not, it only means that they track things on a level that very few people do, and proudly report what they think is happening–and disagree in the open.
My understanding of your background and experience is that you are an engineer and international businessman and consultant. (Please correct me if I’m wrong.) Is the postwar development of the Ukraine a topic of interest in your circles and among your peers?
Do you know of anyone, high or low, in the Ukraine, Russia, or China who is engaging their brains on the Longmuir Plan?
I’m trying to take it seriously. Is anyone else? Anyone that counts?
Eddie — What I am trying to get at is the question of How does this war end? We all know that very little attention is being paid to that question by the Powers That Be. We also know, from history, that all wars come to an end, one way or another.
It is unfortunately easy to see how the situation in the Ukraine could escalate to a nuclear war that destroys the US, Europe, and Russia. It is not easy to see how the noble Ukrainians could push the Russians back to their borders and return to murdering Russian-speaking residents of the Ukraine. Kissinger’s suggestion of a return to the status quo ante is a non-starter. Perhaps Russia will be able to achieve its stated aims of rescuing the Donbas and destroying the (current) Ukrainian military — but that will not end the war. Spengler (David Goldman) sees the Ukraine being reduced to a depopulated blasted heath — but that still would not be the end of the war.
Because of the risk of global nuclear war, the conflict currently confined to the boundaries of the Ukraine is potentially an existential issue for all of us. It bears thinking about how this war can be brought to an end without destroying Western civilization.
Here’s an interesting thread on the balance of risk between Russian regulars and the “patriots” supporting the “independent” Republics. Spoiler, the dead patriots don’t count as Russian casualties.
Notice that while the high command seems perfectly oblivious to the grossest incompetence, they might be powerless in the face of barracks lawyers. Isn’t it ironic that the lawyers that have done so much to destroy American military effectiveness have counterparts doing the same in Russia.
Comments are closed.