Anyone who knows the former Soviet space well understands the crucial difference between “grazdanstvo” – citizenship – and “narodnosc” – nationality. It featured on all identity documents, including passports, in the Soviet Union and on post Soviet national passports, at least until countries joined the EU.
I don’t know if it is currently retained on Ukrainian passports, or if not when it was dropped – perhaps someone might advise.
Everybody in the post Soviet sphere knew the distinction. In Uzbekistan, an inhabitant of Samarkand would almost certainly enter their citizenship – grazdanstvo – as Uzbek and their nationality – narodnosc – as Tajik, for example.
There has been a strange failure to counter the myth that the inhabitants of the Donbass are mostly Russian. They are not, and have not been so for many centuries.
The last census in Ukraine was in 2001, conducted under the pro-Russian president Leonid Kuchma. These are the narodnosc results as percentages for the regions Putin has just annexed.
Donetsk Region
Ukrainians 56.9
Russians 38.2
Greeks 1.6
Belarussians 0.9
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.3
Jews 0.5
Azerbaijanians 0.2
Luhansk Region
Ukrainians 58.0
Russians 39.0
Belarussians 0.8
Tatars 0.3
Armenians 0.3
Kherson Region
Ukrainians 82.0
Russians 14.1
Belarussians 0.7
Tatars 0.5
Moldavians 0.4
Armenians 0.4
Crimean Tatars 0.2
Zaporizhzhia Region
Ukrainians 70.8
Russians 24.7
Bulgarians 1.4
Belarussians 0.7
Jews 0.2
Armenians 0.3
Tatars 0.3
Georgians 0.2
In none of the regions Putin has just annexed were Russians a majority in 2001, let alone a 99.7% majority. Apparently 6.4 million Ukrainians have simply vanished.
For completeness here were the 2001 results for Crimea:
Russians 58.3
Ukrainians 24.3
Crimean Tatars 12.0
Belarussians 1.4
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.4
Jews 0.2
Poles 0.2
Moldavians 0.2
Azerbaijanians 0.2
There is an extremely important validation of these results available. They only show small changes from the last Soviet census in 1989. In all of these regions (bar Crimea) a majority identified their nationality as Ukrainian in the Soviet census too. So it is not a factor of Ukrainian independence.
Here is the region with the highest concentration of Russians – Donetsk – in the Soviet census in 1989.
Donetsk 1989 Soviet Census
Ukrainians 50.7
Russians 43.6
Greeks 1.6
Belarussians 1.4
Tatars 0.5
Armenians 0.2
Jews 0.5
Azerbaijanians 0.1
As I said, there has never been a Russian majority in the Donbass.
There may have been a slight Russian speaking majority. 14.8% of those, Ukraine wide, who identified their nationality as Ukrainian, gave Russian as their first language. This was higher in the East and lower in the West. But those who self-identify as Ukrainian but speak Russian as their first language, are no different to English speaking Scots. Russian speaking was advantageous in the Soviet Union.
There has never been a Russian majority in the Donbass. Never. The Russian minority in Donbass is mostly derived from the great population movements of 1946, when the Polish city of Lvov became Ukrainian and German cities like Breslau and Posen became Polish.
The Russian minority in Donbass is heavily urban, concentrated in the cities. The Ukrainian majority in the Donbass is heavily rural. The Russians are thus much more concentrated, visible and easy to mobilise. That is why it is genuinely possible to mobilise a pro-Russian demonstration in the cities of Luhansk or Donetsk. It is why journalists visiting those cities get a false impression of the wider population of the region.
That urban/rural split is of course not absolute, and just one factor in patchiness of distribution. Some eastern portions of the Donbass probably did have a Russian majority population.
Farmers cling to their land, and a surprising number of rural Ukrainians remained even within the minority proportion of the lands of the Donbass that became a Russian military enclave post 2014. Most of the land of Donbass, outside the Russian controlled areas, became even more Ukrainian as some population exchange between the areas occurred.
The majority of the territory of Donbass has been conquered by Russia only within the last six months and the population there certainly remains majority Ukrainian. Only in the easternmost areas, the post 2014 enclaves, is there at this moment almost certainly a Russian majority. But even they still have some Ukrainian rural populations.
The notion that the entire Donbass voted 99% to join Russia is just so ludicrous that I don’t know what to say to people who believe it, except that they are so blinded by ideology and hatred of western governments that they have quite literally stopped thinking.
I probably dislike western governments in a deeper and more informed way than they do; it just does not lead me to the ridiculous illogicality of believing that because the west is bad and run by warmongers, rival warmonger Putin and his oligarchs must be better.
You see Vanessa, I do know better. I speak Russian and Polish, have lived in St Petersburg and Warsaw, and have almost certainly both spent more time in Ukraine than you, while I have very definitely forgotten more Ukrainian history than you will ever know.
The idea that in Zaporizhzhia – where 24% of the population self identify as Russian – or Kherson, where 14% are Russian, 97% of the population voted to join Russia is so ludicrous that I can’t believe I find myself explaining it. I have friends in Kherson.
Equally ludicrous is Vanessa Beeley’s idea of election observation. Knowing nothing of the country or its history – and I am quite certain she has no idea of the above census facts – you cannot fly in for a few days and judge a democratic process free and fair.
There are international rules for election observation, long established by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and more recently by the United Nations. These include that observers should not be funded by the host country or by any party involved or be dependent on either for logistics, transport, accommodation and communications. Observers should not be accompanied by any officials when observing.
I have asked Vanessa a few questions on the absolute basics of international referendum observation 101. Let me expand on those a bit here:
What electoral register was used? When was it taken?
What was the supervising body of the referendum? Where are its published rules? How independent was it?
Which people or organisations represented each side of the referendum question? How were they registered?
How long was the campaign period?
What broadcast debates were held?
How was equality of airtime on local broadcast media implemented? how did the observers monitor it?
What were the spending limits for each campaign? How much was spent? How was it audited?
Was each side able to campaign freely without fear and intimidation?
How were the observers dispersed geographically? How many in rural how many in urban areas? For how many weeks?
What campaigning was seen? Where is the observers’ photographic evidence of democratic campaigning by each side?
That is the basic work of any monitoring mission. Democracy is a process, not merely a vote. Only after that do we get to secrecy of the ballot, access to voting, intimidation at polling stations, security of the count etc.
The plain truth is that I resemble a Ducati motorbike more than what happened in Ukraine resembled a democratic process. Anybody who claims otherwise is simply an appalling liar. I was amused by a comment from Eva Bartlett, for whom I generally have much respect, who said she did not meet anybody opposed to the annexation.
If you think carefully, Eva, that is not the win you think it is.
These annexations are deeply unhelpful. They go way beyond anything to which Russia can have the slightest reasonable claim. I could see a negotiated settlement around Ukraine acknowledging Russian sovereignty over Crimea, and perhaps those parts of the Donbass within the control line as at February 2022.
But by declaring as Russian territory large regions of Ukraine to which Russia has no valid claim whatsoever, Putin has made a negotiated settlement almost impossible. He has also bitten off far more than he can chew. As I keep explaining, Russia is not the military superpower NATO wants us to believe in order to keep us fueling the military industrial complex.
Putin is playing into the hands of the United States’ strategy, to bleed Russia and degrade its military whilst expending only Ukrainian lives. Western military technology is vastly superior to Russian. Putin is sending 300,000 conscripts into a meat grinder. As more and more of that western weaponry reaches Ukraine and becomes operational, the Russian conscripts will neither see nor have a chance to fight the person killing them from way over the horizon.
The dangers of escalation towards the nuclear are becoming very real. I fully acknowledge and condemn the toxic nature of much Ukrainian nationalism, the glorification of Nazis, the banning of opposition parties and of Russian language teaching and media. I utterly oppose NATO expansion. Of course it was not Russia who blew up the Nordstream pipeline or shelled the nuclear power station they were themselves occupying.
I absolutely get all of that.
But unless Armageddon appeals to you, and if you have the slightest respect for truth over ideology, the cheering on of Putin has to stop.
————————————————-
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Craig,
I have admired your courage and knowledge for some time, although I don’t always agree. What should be done from here? What should Ukraine do, what should Russia do?
Mebbe tankies here should go to the nearest Russian Embassy and volunteer?
Putin needs you!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
Why not set an example by going to the nearest Ukranian embassy and volunteering yourself? I see that an Irishman was killed fighting for Ukraine. You could be his replacement.
?
That man died as one of many non-ukranians willing to fight and if necessary die to protect Ukraine and Europe against the quasi-fascist Putin regime.
How many free men and women have *volunteered* to join the Russki Foreign Legion?
John Kinsella. The answer to your question about how many have volunteered to join the Russian Army is tens of Thousands from all parts of the Federation. The recent mobilisation of 300,000 was not of conscripts but of reservists who had recently finished their service and contracted to serve again if asked. On top of that 70,000 ordinary Russian Federation citizens actually volunteered. Russia only deployed about 200,000 to the Ukrainian front. Most of the fighting was done initially by East Ukrainians from the Donbass. Nato had trained and armed Ukrainian forces for eight years into the strongest army of any European Nato force, exceeded the 200,000 of Russian forces. Tragically most are now dead or injured. The latest Ukrainian attacks have been at a horrendous cost. Once again not from Russian sources but western sources.
What is this Russian Foreign Legion of which you speak? As far as I can make out, Russia discourages random foreign hotheads from coming to fight for them.
The East Ukrainians and Russia don’t need more men. Their tactics are to use artillery barrages to destroy Ukrainian defensive positions at great loss of life. If the Ukrainians leave their positions to attack, the DPR and Russians retreat drawing them further away from logistical supplies and support and then proceed to destroy their armoured vehicles with artillery and air attacks. The Russians main goal is to deplete the Ukrainians and their weapons as much as possible, not to take land for political sake, as is Ukrainians goal to please its sponsors. All the armchair keyboard generals postulate while Ukrainians die in their tens of thousands. Russia never committed its full army to the Ukrainian front. It has many other fronts to keep an eye on where Nato can start fires. People in West and Russia were getting impatient and wanted Holywood style Shock and Awe. Russia sees Ukrainians as fellow cousins and not as sub humans. It launched a Special Operation not a War. A war would have been in the US mould : weeks of mobilisations, weeks of non stop bombing everything that moved both civilians and military, all power stations destroyed, all dams, all bridges, ask Iraq. Russia had hoped for a quick coup from within the Ukrainian military against the Government and got the intelligence wrong. It is Ukraine that needs more men, more arms, more money. Only to be depleted by Russia tragically. The leadership in Ukraine is only a puppet of extreme Nazis and their Nato handlers who want the war to go on and on. They have their own populations as hostage and as Hitler did, ruin his own nation and not come to terms with defeat.
Aye right.
Not a shortage of infantrymen but a surplus of arty.
?
One word that auld tankies hate.
HIMARS.
John Kinsella. You should add The New Atlas and Brian Berletic to your reading list of The Sun and The Guardian. Brian a US Marine vet, uses western sources to debunk western propoganda. He has an explanation of Himars, how many supplied, how many destroyed, how many promised. Who is in charge of their targeting and the targets chosen. What difference they make to the battle field. Brian publishes all his western sources, mainly the Pentagon !
Then why the “partial” mobilisation?
Hi Craig,
Have you looked into election results, 2002, or 2008 or 2012?
These four regions Odessa, included all voted for Russia.
These figures rather make a mockery of your assertions. Please feel free to educate me on the subject of fair and free elections or referendums when Russia made sure more than forty auditors approved of the credibility of the vote. Pity the same cannot be said for elections here!
The very best wishes to you and your family.
I will add few more comments on the general subject of Mr. Murray post – the imminent risk of a nuclear war.
The risk is very real. Some .. people .. say that there were agreements, mainly with Americans, somewhat less with Britain about the path, scale & limits this Russian incursion into Ukraine would take & have. That’s why there were these eyebrow-raising attempts of the “peace talks” early on & rather strange from a military point of view maneuvers of the “Russian” forces (see below) in the beginning. But as they always, always do, had and have done this time (and ever will) – the Americans reneged on their promises. Perhaps, counting on their past experience with the obviously gullible & genetically naive Russians. They, the Americans, have this national streak in them to blindly repeat the motions which were successful for them in the past. This time they miscalculated.
The “weak” Russian army. Not without their deficiencies, now being rapidly rectified, the actual “Russian” forces and equipment did not yet participate in the conflict. Almost all fighting was done by the “partisans” from unoccupied by Ukraine nazi Donbass, two small Chechen and Wagner groups of uhm .. contract soldiers and a bunch of essentially, police force. The main force is still reserved for NATO, which by this time has heavily invested in the conflict not only a large part of their very limited stock of equipment, but also their own manpower. There are (unconfirmed) reports from the field that up to 50-60% of the manpower participating on some directions in the current attempts of offensive on the Ukrainian side are “western” professional (read regular in disguise) army. Whether the still remaining industrial capacity of the “western” countries is capable of replenishing the (lost only in the Ukraine conflict) equipment remains open, but there are doubts, especially in the current circumstances.
NATO technical military advantage? I doubt it. Of course, all is possible with the Russians, and as Mr. Murray remarked, we had past evidence, but today they have a clear edge over NATO and Americans in the known modern armament in several critical for an *international conflict* areas and unknown stock and manufacturing capacity to make it. NATO has many times larger cannon fodder resource and this is where we all should become worried, as the means Russia has to counterbalance this appear to be all nuclear.
Otherwise, IMHO, the war, the WWIII, has already started. It is being fought full scale in the economy, and it started to trickle into the battlefield with the increasing and clearly crossing all imaginable safe limits direct participation of the “west” & especially, Americans in the conflict. There might be still a chance not to let it develop into a nuclear Armageddon, but the chance to avoid it is already slim. Of course, a large part of the noise in the media on this subject is related to the usual American circus they run regularly for they exceptional bright electorate before every election. But this time they IMHO overdone it.
Thus spake the Alex 🙂
– and Craig Murray, thank you for your post.
There is no directed participation by the US or other western allies. Let’s be clear both the UK and USA have strongly advised their citizens not to go to Ukraine to fight. There are estimated to be approximately 20,000 in the foreign legion of Ukraine out of a total of 1 million. That is 2%. (Even if you consider that the front-line force may only be 200,000 that is still about 10% – but really logistics is equally important). Now the vast majority of heavy weapons on both sides are Soviet – the Brits have no idea how to drive a Soviet tank or fire Soviet artillery – it’s almost exclusively Ukrainians doing this. As you have pointed out NATO doesn’t have a technical military advantage so the small number of NATO weapons should not be considered relevant in your analysis – but let’s suppose you do actually believe HIMARS to be the wonder weapon – the US is entitled to support Ukraine by selling or giving it weapons for its defense and that is not direct participation.
The part that I don’t really understand is why pro-Russian propogandists in the west still insist the special operation is going to plan.
The Russians are no longer saying this.
https://twitter.com/hugheselenaa
“Let’s be clear both the UK and USA have strongly advised their citizens not to go to Ukraine to fight.”
Has either government backed up this advice by any threatened sanctions on individuals who ignore it, like the removal of citizenship? Not that I have noticed. When they start doing that, only then will you know that it’s not just words.
“The part that I don’t really understand is why pro-Russian propogandists in the west still insist the special operation is going to plan.”
The part that I don’t really understand is why anti-Russian propagandists in the West still insist the Ukranian offensive is going to plan. There are fruit loops on both sides coming out with unbelievable rubbish; it means nothing.
Well, the Ukrainian offensive is generally moving …. forwards.
While the Russian defense against that offensive is generally moving …. backwards.
How do the tankies here suggest that we interpret those two facts?
i.e. stationary. Nothing’s been heard of since the initial advance some days ago, apart from undetailed boosterism in the style of Johnson.
> like the removal of citizenship?
It’s illegal in international law to deprive a citizen of citizenship, thus making them stateless. The UK did it to that girl that went to Syria; but unless they have dual citizenship, you can’t deprive people of citizenship.
If they break the law (by fighting for a foreign government), they should face normal criminal processes.
Um, why should a Ukrainian (?) in Canada be evidence of what Russians say or think?
Andrew H
You know the West even decides the target Ukraine for to hit?
“The US has a veto on what Russian targets Ukraine hits with its HIMARS artillery, general suggests”
https://www.businessinsider.com/himars-us-has-effective-veto-over-russian-targets-report-says-2022-8?r=US&IR=T
Nato weapons, intelligence, training, aid is of course why Ukraine is still fighting.
Russia is not fighting Ukraine, they are fighting Nato/US.
Dang those NAFO (sic) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAFO_(group) warmongers helping the NAZI Ukrainian Azovites fight the peaceful Russkyi Special Nice Operation, largely staffed by the Russkyi equivalent of the English Woodcraft Folk. https://woodcraft.org.uk/
I’d say so anyway.
Jack writes:
“You know the West even decides the target Ukraine for to hit?”
That’s not actually what the link says.
Furthermore your assertion is nonsense. Every time that the Ukrainians have some success, the seethe and cope is that it couldn’t have been the Ukrainians. This is nothing more than a manifestation of Russia’s superiority complex. The land maneuvers that we have seen in recent weeks are straight out of Gerasimov’s books (although it was the Germans that pioneered tank land warfare in WW2). One of the many ironies of this war is that Ukraine’s military leaders took the time to study Gerasimov’s books whereas the Russians leadership was too lazy to bother.
My gut feeling about why we don’t see much of Gerasimov is that he understands that his legacy is in his books and does not want to taint that with the outcome of this war, which he knows is already lost.
The reality is that the last time the US fought a large land war with tanks was back in 1945 – the US literally has no expertise in this matter. Vietnam / Gulf wars were all fought using air-power (just watch your favourite Vietnam movie – it is all about helicopters). You will know when the US gets directly involved because the entire character of the war will change – starting with a serious attempt by the US to gain air superiority and control of the skies.
NATO is not directly involved in this war, and attempts to say otherwise don’t stack up and are not supported by real evidence such as photos of US war planes bombing targets or photos of large numbers of NATO troops on the ground. Thousands of POWs have been captured by the Russians and only a small proportion were foreigners and no actual serving NATO.
Hang on; USA restricts HIMARS targets, because USA doesn’t want those weapons used to hit targets inside Russia. That we know. But you’re trying to say that means that USA tells Ukraine what targets to pick? That’s warped logic.
Of course, if you’re OK with that fallacy, then yes, Russia is fighting NATO/USA.
some (unfortunately, not all) relevant people believe that targeting of literally every shot from the American and not only artillery/MLRS by the “west”, the battleground recon, targeting plus tactical and strategic operation planning do constitute direct participation. On the top of it, it is one thing to say that the overall number of foreigners is relatively small, another – to say that almost all of them happen to be concentrated in few critical areas, doing more or less professional job, while Ukraine was ordered to provide the meat to cover them and create mass/targets to overload the defense. And the related question is of the extensive use of the western/american *civilian infrastructure* directly in the conflict – I am talking about Musk’s STARLINK satellites. I guess it was for a reason he obviously became concerned recently – and rightfully so. And no, I do not believe HIMARS, while being not a bad piece of equipment, can actually make any difference – other than briefly increase sales for its manufacturer.
Forgot one thing (Andrew H.) re. “The part that I don’t really understand is why pro-Russian propogandists in the west still insist the special operation is going to plan.” I have commented elsewhere on the occasion that in the circumstances where the “west” has banned all their useful export to Russia, the fact that this type of sugar is still exempt, especially considering the sort of “democracy” we have here, indeed should cause some questions 🙂 Otherwise, as my colleague once remarked, the main trouble in dealing with the Russians is that they never are what you thought they were.
Bayard asked
“What is this Russian Foreign Legion of which you speak? As far as I can make out, Russia discourages random foreign hotheads from coming to fight for them.”
My reply:
Indeed. There isn’t a foreign volunteer cadre in the RA it appears.
Which was my point.
Russia doesn’t appear to be attracting support from abroad. Though see below.
The Army of the Spanish Republic did form the The Fifth International Brigade (la Quinta Brigada) which fought honourably against Spanish and Italian Fascists and German Nazis.
I’m proud to say that some brave Irishmen fought and died in that cause. And ashamed of the dupes who were persuaded to fight for Franco by the Irish Fascist Blueshirts.
The RA were rumoured to be recruiting Syrian mercenaries back in March. Not sure how that worked out. ?
And DPRK “volunteers” to rebuild the occupied Donbas. Hah…
Did you feel proud when you saw the images Craig discovered when he searched Yandex for ‘Swastikas on Ukrainian tanks’?
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/09/diplomacy-is-always-an-option/
Funny that the “Z” symbol (adopted by the RA presumably for military id purposes) has been embraced by “Great” Russians as an icon of support for the war.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/15/the-pro-russian-war-symbol-z-is-the-new-swastika/
Oddly, when a second Z rotated through 90 degrees is superimposed on the first, a familiar political symbol appears.
Strange that, a coincidence I’m sure…. Not.
You completely ignored my question, John, which suggests to me you are just pretending to be disgusted by Nazism and fascism. Others may interpret you differently.
If some (a few?) Ukranian troops have daubed Nazi symbols on tanks or on their uniforms they should be disciplined by their officers.
In the middle of an unprovoked defensive war against a brutal opponent, their officers could be forgiven for seeing it as a matter of lesser importance than destroying Russkyi troop concentrations.
Don’t you agree?
John Kinsella. The majority of Ukrainians in the West wanted and voted for Zelensky the peace candidate. Nato and the Banderites had other ideas. The plans to use Ukraine to ” Extend ” Russia were laid years ago as was the plans to ” stop ” Nord Stream 2. Sourses The Rand Corporation. You are very passionate about the fact that Russia has invaded a Sovereign state and that one man, President Putin is to blame and the devil incarnate. This belief value system is the majority view in the populations of the Collective West I grant you that. You are in the majority, while I am in the minority. I care as much as you for the needless destruction of yet another country and the deaths involved. What do you expect Russia to have done ? Except that its Black Sea fleet base in Crimea to be taken over by US Navy ? Except the ethnic cleansing of the ‘ sub ‘ humans in the Donbass ? Except the construction of Nato bases in Ukraine with US missiles ? You are being at the least naive and at the worst a denier of the fact that Russians support their leadership and President Putin, his standing up to US Unipolar Hegemony and the economic independence of his country’s great wealth in resourses. By trying to isolate and overthrow the Russian leadership, US and its allies have only replicated the over 200 interventions they have made since WW2. The problem you have and the anger in your soul, is that Russia is not like any of the countries we have destroyed, invaded or regime changed. It has form in defending itself from Western European Invasions through Ukraine by people who believe in racial superiority and that Jews, Slavs, Brown and Black’s are sub human and it is justified to pillage their lands. Sorry mate, those days of Empire are over and playing out in the killing fields of Ukraine now.
@Wikikettle.
I take it that except-> accept?
I’m glad that we agree on the fact that the invasion is “needless destruction”.
Your whole position seems to be based on “realpolitik”== “might is right”.
Indeed the Melian dialogue may inform your thinking? https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Melian_dialogue
But all the above ignores the fact that the Ukranians are willing to fight for their freedom and have powerful allies.
The Melians on the other hand, though brave, had no powerful allies. (The Spartans didn’t assist I think.)
Interestingly, ” Although the Melians held out for a time, the Athenians eventually won after some form of unspecified treachery within the city. They then proceeded to execute all the men they took captive and to enslave the women and children, and further, they repopulated it as an Athenian colony.”
The Russians are not quite as barbaric though hundreds of thousands of Ukranians have been extracted from Ukraine by the RA – to what outcome we do not know. The repopulation of E Ukraine with Russians (as with the settlement of NE Ireland by lowland Scots long ago) is however comparable.
JK is a simple nafo wormtongue, by all appearance only hear to bark as the caravan moves along. And boy what a lot of barking on just this one page of comments.
John Kinsella. Ukraine is not Free and Independent. 40% of its land is owned by US. Privatised, no press freedom, journalists murdered, in debt, wages paid by US tax payer. Press Gangs going round, rounding up young men. Occupied by US and Nato since 2014. Ukraine is as free and independent as Japan and Germany. In US there were 50 news and media organisations, now only 6. In US there was a law that news outlets had to be impartial and give both sides, Clinton scrapped that law. Soon in UK the NHS will be privatised with medicals required to ascertain ” exclusions ” from your insurance policy. Read Dr Ranjeet Brarr. We have 2 parties to choose from ? The Corporation’s are buying up land and all smaller companies. Small farmers are pushed out. Every aspect of our lives are monitored and controlled. Your idea of Ukraine being free is perverse. The only freedom enjoyed in our neoliberal capitalism is the freedom of Corporation’s to gobble up everyone else, freedom to control and buy out media, corrupt think tanks playing the part of so called journalists brought on by BBC to spout the agreed talking points, international institutions such as the IAEA, OPCS, WHO, UN IMF all controlled by their financiers.
Wikikettle:
“The majority of Ukrainians in the West wanted and voted for Zelensky the peace candidate”
You make this up without even a cursory look at the facts – all of which are on Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Ukrainian_presidential_election
As you can see Zelensky won in every region EXCEPT the far West.
Wikikettle,
I’d find your posts easier to read if you’d have the courtesy to break your wall-of-text posts into paragraphs. I find your positions simplistic and crude, but if you were to format them a bit, I’d find your posts easier to skim. As it is, I don’t generally read past your first couple of sentences.
“Which was my point. Russia doesn’t appear to be attracting support from abroad.”
Is English your native language, because you seem to be struggling with it? I wrote that Russia discourages hotheaded foreigners joining their armed forces and you interpret this as a lack of support for Russia. So it was very much not your point, miffed though you may be that it was shown that your Russian Foreign Legion turned out only to exist in your head. What about the British Foreign Legion, that doesn’t exist either and I doubt you have one in Ireland, either. Oh dear, nobody likes the British or the Irish!
Surprise surprise, Nobel peace prize goes to…anti-putin activists
“Human rights advocates from ex-Soviet states awarded Nobel Peace Prize
The recipients include Memorial, an NGO that is banned in Russia, as well as a Belarusian activist and a Ukrainian civil group”
https://swentr.site/news/564215-nobel-ukraine-russia-belarus/
Last year the peace prize went to another anti-putin journalist.
But no propganda and/or political motivations, no no. Sigh.
Why not give the prize to Nato?
“I was given a full access to all archives, I learned everything there is about Stalin’s victims, and I prepared a complete report. However, I decided to save it for some future time. If I were to publish it, [I’d probably lose my job, there will be no more grants], my friends would drop me like a hot potato, I’d remain alone, and nobody will believe me anyway”.
This frank admission had been made in 2012 by the high authority on Communist era repressions, the founder and the chairman of the Memorial, a Russian anti-Communist NGO, Dr Arseny Roginsky. (He recently had died and had been lamented by his American supporters.) The Memorial is a designated foreign agent in receipt of generous aid from the State Department and George Soros Foundation, and the chairman Dr Roginsky was a life-long enemy of the Soviets, a person not likely to err in the Reds’ favour.
What was this terrible truth that Dr Roginsky decided to hide?
“According to my calculations, in the entire Soviet period from 1918 to 1987, according to the surviving documents, it turned out that 7 million 100 thousand people were arrested by the state security agencies (the Russian equivalent of the FBI) across the country. And that includes those arrested for banditry, smuggling, counterfeiting. And for many other criminal offences.”
Thus the Head of memorial, who sat on his discoveries, surprise, surprise!!
For those who think this number high, why not investigate how many millions today languish in US prisons, soon to be joined by Julian Assange.
Current US prison population is c.1.2 million the majority of whom will be eventually released. How many of Stalin’s detainees were executed (many without trial) or worked to death for political offences?
The majority of Stalin’s detainees were also released. No doubt some were worked to death for political reasons. I am not aware that any had their wives raped or their children tortured before their eyes, a common procedure for ‘security personnel’ tutored at the School of Americas by the US.It was along time ago, as with the US slave plantations. Note that a 1954 CIA investigation asserted that Soviet prisoners worked an 8 hour day and were paid. Maybe Stalin should have sent his security personnel for training in the US?
A 1957 CIA document titled “Forced Labor Camps in the USSR: Transfer of Prisoners between Camps” reveals the following information about the Soviet Gulag in pages two to six:
Until 1952, the prisoners were given a guaranteed amount food, plus extra food for over-fulfillment of quotas
From 1952 onward, the Gulag system operated upon “economic accountability” such that the more the prisoners worked, the more they were paid.
For over-fulfilling the norms by 105%, one day of sentence was counted as two, thus reducing the time spent in the Gulag by one day.
Furthermore, because of the socialist reconstruction post-war, the Soviet government had more funds and so they increased prisoners’ food supplies.
Until 1954, the prisoners worked 10 hours per day, whereas the free workers worked 8 hours per day. From 1954 onward, both prisoners and free workers worked 8 hours per day.
A CIA study of a sample camp showed that 95% of the prisoners were actual criminals.
In 1953, amnesty was given to 70% of the “ordinary criminals” of a sample camp studied by the CIA. Within the next 3 months, most of them were re-arrested for committing new crimes.
The first document: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000500615.pdf
The second document: https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80T00246A032000400001-1.pdf
Oh dear, more ‘whataboutery”.
The real crime is that the Gulags existed at all and that people were sent there without trial and for political reasons, often imaginary. There are known instances of female inmates being raped to death by their guards.
Stalin died in 1953, Beria, head of the secret police who sent hundreds of thousands to their death but cried like a baby when his own time came, was executed later the same year. Conditions had improved by 1954 as the system was run down before closure in 1960.
“The real crime is that the Gulags existed at all and that people were sent there without trial and for political reasons, often imaginary.”
True enough, but hardly anything in the way of human depravity. One might call the British Empire one huge Gulag ( A. Forth, ‘Barbed-Wire Imperialism: Britain’s Empire of Camps 1876-1903” 2017). For depravity cf C. Elkins, ”Britain’s Gulag” (2005), where young women were raped with bottles and had snakes inserted in their vaginas, and your men were castrated. No doubt for you this is just ‘whataboutery’ ! others might evince some moral shame about the acts of their own government. Sturgeon for example has called Putin a war criminal. Well, we have in Tony Blair one much closer to home. I”ll believe in the moral outrage in the UK against Putin when Tony Blair replaces Julian Assange in Belmarsh Prison!
Your references to Beria demonstrate you have no idea what you are talking about. The purges reached a peak under Yezov, who was executed as result and replaced by Beria, under whom things greatly improved. There is no firm evidence for Beria’s execution. We do not know even the date!
You’re right; it is just whataboutery and has no relevance to the Gulags.
Beria took over the Gulag system and greatly expanded it. He was responsible for the purge of the Red Army and the Katyn Forest massacres. My point was that he was in charge up until his death after which conditions improved. He was executed with a single pistol shot to the head by General Pavel Batitsky on 23rd December 1953.
“Barnes described the Gulag as an institution of forced labor, where workers had real prospects of being released. According to the author 18 million people passed through the work camps. While approximately 1.6 million died, a large number were released and reintegrated into Soviet society”.
“I was given a full access to all archives, I learned everything there is about Stalin’s victims, and I prepared a complete report.”
Thus Roginsky, whose paid job it was to come up with as many victims of communism as possible. His calculations are 7.1 million. Barnes, who also claims to have examined the archives, suggests a figure much higher. So one of them is sadly amiss, and it is difficult to comprehend how Roginsky, who had every reason to produce a grossly exaggerated figure, but whose intellectual honesty seems to have caused him such embarrassment as to have suppressed his figures, is likely to have under-estimated the total.
The problem is political bias. We have for example no reliable figure for the number of young girls forced into sex slavery by the Japanese Army. I have seen figures ranging from 50,000 to 250,000. However that may be, the late unlamented Prime Minister of Japan, Abe, issued strict instructions to the Japanese media to refer to such poor wretches as ‘prostitutes.’ This is real depravity. Abe of course was a strong critic of Putin!
PS Don’t bother to come up with the rape of German women by Soviet troops. Perfectly true. Better you emphasise the rape of German women by Allied troops. The German scholar, Miriam Gebhardt (“Also Die Soldaten Kamen” There is also a video), produces these calculations: Soviet rapes = 439,000; Allied rapes = 285,000. There is this difference though, isn’t there: the Germans went on a rape spree in the Soviet Union; they did not do so in the UK or USA! Guess Miriam will not get the Nobel Prize for literature!
Gebhardt’s methodology, calculating the number of rapes from childbirth statistics, requires some sweeping assumptions and is thus prone to considerable error. The more widely accepted figure is 2 million in the Soviet zone and don’t lose sight of the fact that it was much smaller than the area controlled by the other Allies; 18 million people compared to 50 million.
Would that be the same Nobel peace prize that was awarded to: Drone Bomber and Afghan-wedding-party-pooper Barack Obama, Irgun Terrorist Menachem Begin and last but not least, please give him the clap he so richly deserves, Henry Kissinger, one of the greatest mass-murderers of the 20th century?
All worthy recipients I’m sure.
The last two had been on the world stage for some time, thus they might (I strongly doubt it though) had done something that the Nobel group might have misinterpreted as peace. All Obomber had done was win an election for USA president. And that’s worthy of a ‘peace’ prize?
No US president’s actions could be misinterpreted as peace.
Nothing compared to the groomed (im)propaganda “fan club” parrots also scratching at straws here, such as you good self ASC and few others — repeatedly exposing how poorly informed they are. First turn off the radio and TV put down all the mainstream papers, and the I’d like to invite you all who would point fingers of ridicule screaming ‘Putin bot” every time their cognitive dissonance causes them to sweat, to instead read some of these articles and see what you understand then:
https://www.voltairenet.org/rubrique30002.html?lang=en
@DunGroanin:
“JK is a simple nafo wormtongue, by all appearance only hear to bark as the caravan moves along. And boy what a lot of barking on just this one page of comments.”
Hi DG.
That is ad hominem.
“by all appearance”-> “based on his posts”?
“Wormtongue” (as you a JRRT fan?)
“Only hear”-> “only here”?
“barking”->”commenting”?
Seriously how would you describe your posts in opposition to mine?
Wise?
Well-informed?
Empathic?
We need to be told…
—
[ Mod: Actually, we don’t need to be told. Unfortunately, Dungroanin has resorted to posting ad hominem insults (some of which have been suspended) despite moderator advice to refrain. If his rejoinders are in the same vein, they won’t appear. ]
DunGroanin is correct though.
Let’s get some facts on the ground down here as it seems nafo have been spraying all over.
Via Geroman just now.
https://nitter.net/GeromanAT
1. From October 7, Russian music has been banned in Ukraine on television, radio and in public places. In addition, Russian performers are prohibited from touring in this country.
2. Ukrainian language will not be forbidden and even further taught in schools in the 4 integrated areas…
That is the difference between the regime in Kiev and Russia.
3. People were being full body tied to lampposts around Ukraine with their private parts on display and being encouraged to be punished by even children for speaking Russian as they didn’t know any Ukrainian- mostly Romany types.
4. Little Zelensky’s audition for the job of president of Ukraine running for several years on TV before he was deposited onto the world stage was wholly in Russian throughout. He appears to growl in Ukrainian when mugging to his phone camera.
5. From Comrade Misty is Putin’s Buddy ? @SarcasmStardust
‘NATO is using Ukraine and the Ukrainian people in an un-winnable proxy war against Russia. That they’ve have said they are willing to fight until the “last Ukrainian”. If you support that, stop pretending that you care about the people of Ukraine. It’s gross.’
————————
The Sun and The Guardian are now in lockstep – goose stepping against Russia and its elected leaders as they wail and gnash that Putin has not played along with the New World Order as was being complained by their ‘unelected’ grandees of the WEF since at least 2015 and long before.
The overt racism against all things Russian continues in the demented Collective Waste.
NOT IN MY NAME. Not again after 2003 and the fake WMD.
DunGroanin. The Information War is won. The sheeple are following the shepherd obediently to kingdom come and the rapture.
do you fondly imagine that the Ukrainians are fighting so hard because “NATO” – not a country, do you mean the US or others – are using them as a proxy?
Would you risk your life fighting what we were told was the modernised Russian Army with lots more equipment and proven willingness to destroy whole residential areas, and which could call on greater numbers because your govt. told you to? They must be the most gullible people on earth.
They seen the missile attacks, the refugees murdered by the road side and increasingly hear of the tortured, murdered, raped and disappeared. The country has been saturated with journalists of all types, including some who have been open critics of aspects of western policy before. The Russian controlled areas have only allowed a few supportive journalists.
Ian,
There are plenty of journalists there from across the world. Inc many western independent ones. Many of these have been ‘sanctioned’ by their government.
There are many videos made by Ukrops complaint about their sides orders and lack of support.
Whole units!
They also complain about foreign troops.
There has been years of nato training, including command and support in the field.
Do you also think that is imaginary?
Yes there are training detachments. They are there by invitation though I daresay they were eagerly volunteered by some quarters.
The only combat troops who were in the East before the war are the reinforced battalions in the Baltics.
Is it possible to supply a link these independent journalists?
> There are plenty of journalists there from across the world.
But they get thrown in prison if they call the war “a war”. The sentence is ten years, I believe. Journalists that speak freely do not operate in Russian-occupied regions.
Ian Stevenson
Ukraine are fighting “so hard” because of western/Nato help, Zelensky is brainwashing his people that they are doing something good by fighting a nuclear armed Russia. If there was not for Nato and western pouring arms on them, Ukraine would have made peace long time ago – in fact they did but then again west pushed Ukraine out of the peace talks. So of course this is a proxy-war but the journalists will not frame it like that.
What have Ukraine won by 8 months? Thousands of lives and whole regions lost.
Zelensky could say ‘Ok we wont join Nato’ and they could say ‘OK we have new referendums through UN and see where people want to go’. Then, this conflict would by over tommorow. But again the west wont accept a peaceful settlement.
Jack
Making peace and surrender are not quite the same.
The Russians intended a program of de-militarisation and de-Nazification. That would have meant Moscow would have a veto over any Ukrainian actions if not actually direct them. In the ‘DPR & LPR’ , there were lists of people. There is good evidence of what happened to them – mainly from those who escaped and recorded by the UNHCR and OSCE. Yes there were abuses on the Ukrainian side too.
Just being supplied with weapons, often a bit late, doesn’t make men willing to fight. A recent example being in Iraq where well armed troops fled ISIS. We saw similar in Vietnam. Defending their homeland and hearing the accounts of people who had fled these areas, plus the extensive destruction of civilian areas will fortify the will to resist.
If Ukraine is only doing so well because of arms supply in the last year, how was the country a threat to Russian security? The former Warsaw Pact members only hosted military from the pre-1991 NATO countries for training. The Baltic states have a few reinforced battalions from other NATO countries and they are there at the request of the Baltic states. There is the argument that the Russian authorities are paranoid about the intentions of neighbouring countries due to a history of invasion, but the number of troops, tanks and mobile artillery to launch an invasion is not adequate. Germany has less than 200 tanks in current use. The real threat of Ukraine – and the people of Belarus who didn’t vote for Lukashenko – is their desire, especially among the young, to be closer to Europe.
The Novesti page published at the time and soon taken down, I think, gives an indication that it is all down to the Kyiv govt being stubborn:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220226051154/https://ria.ru/20220226/rossiya-1775162336.html
“do you fondly imagine that the Ukrainians are fighting so hard because “NATO” – not a country, do you mean the US or others – are using them as a proxy?”
You seem to forget that the majority of the opponents of the Ukranian Army are themselves Ukranians, but I suppose you would say that they are only fighting hard (and winning) because Russia is using them as a proxy.
“the majority of the opponents of the Ukranian Army are themselves Ukranians”
You got the slightest bit of proof for that? It seems to be something cooked up recently to explain away Russian failure and to make it look as though this is some sort of civil war, not an invasion.
I think Bayard means dpr lpr soldiers / donbass habitants that have chosen to not be controlled by Kiev since 2014
PM, no, if you know where to look, it has been obvious for months that the Russians are letting the DPR and LPR armies do the bulk of the fighting in their home territories and yes it is a civil war and has been since 2014. Sure the Russian have sent in troops and armour, but they are not the majority. Sadly for them, all those bloodthirsty types who signed up to kill Russians have mostly ended up killing Ukranians, Chechens and other mercenaries.
D, I do indeed, although I dare say that the BBC hasn’t mentioned it yet, so, officially it’s not true.
It is not Ukrainians from the ‘DPR and LPR’ who are firing on Kharkiv, Odessa, and elsewhere or flying planes over Ukraine. The dead soldiers in the recovered areas are Russian. Even the Russians say so.
However much you might think the Ukrainian troops are misguided or brainwashed, they have chosen to fight . No doubt some have opted out or are there because they don’t feel able to refuse. However, if there was no will to defend their country, the war would have been over by now.
There are lots of reports from local people in the Donbas region of men being conscripted by Russia and who are trying to avoid it. One might say ‘western media will only report that’ but western media has always had those who criticised – in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Those who criticised in Russia during the Chechen wars were few and far between.
“It is not Ukrainians from the ‘DPR and LPR’ who are firing on Kharkiv, Odessa, and elsewhere or flying planes over Ukraine. The dead soldiers in the recovered areas are Russian. Even the Russians say so.”
The troops in Karkhov oblast are not the majority of troops fighting the Ukranian Army. I didn’t say there were no Russian troops fighting.
“No doubt some have opted out or are there because they don’t feel able to refuse.”
No, they are not able to refuse because they are being conscripted. Why do you think the Ukranian refugees are overwhelmingly women and children?
“There are lots of reports from local people in the Donbas region of men being conscripted by Russia and who are trying to avoid it.”
Plenty of reports also of men throughout Ukraine being conscripted and trying to avoid it. In any case, why would Russia be conscripting civilians in the Donbas when it has a huge reserve of trained soldiers to draw upon?
“One might say ‘western media will only report that’ but western media has always had those who criticised”
Precious few these days and those that do are immediately labelled as “Russian sympathisers”.
> You seem to forget that the majority of the opponents of the Ukranian Army are themselves Ukranians
The majority? Really? I think a lot of the fighting has been Chechen units, and Wagner. As far as I can tell, the DNR/LNR forces have done a lot of the fighting so far, and are pretty much broken. The units fighting in Ukraine have names like “152nd Independent Armoured Infantry Brigade” (I invented that). These are not Donbas units.
A prominent Russian milblogger and TV presenter (who supports the war) asks the taboo question “If Russia has a 2 million man army, why the need for a (partial) mobilisation?”.
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1578323188655980544?t=5yaP8uZ8CezQ9iZVBeWFcQ&s=19
As the well known political advisor Wormtongue said in Tolkien’s book, “a very fair question”…
Simple thousands of miles of borders.
Russia uses 100’s of thousands of troops in static defence of its borders?
Maybe so.
Odd then that Vladimir Solovyov would affect ignorance of that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Solovyov_(TV_presenter)
There is an inherent assumption in your article that anyone who voted ‘yes’ to joining the Russian Federation must identify as ‘Russian’ in some way (ethnically, culturally, linguistically)… I don’t think that necessarily follows. There could be other reasons for wanting to be part of Russia… some people of the USSR generation might simply prefer to be part of a post USSR Russia i.e. nostalgic reasons. They would also be entitled to an automatic Russian state pension if they are of that age – so the choice could be economic. It could simply be driven by a dislike for the Kiev government and the idea of being part of the EU and NATO… i.e. a politically driven choice. To assume that everyone who voted, has done so on pure ethnic/identity lines, is probably incorrect and gives too much weight to identity/ethnicity in a nation state that is simply too young for those sorts of ties to matter too much. But we are not likely to know the facts anyway…
No, I don’t think at all that “anyone” who voted yes to being in Russian must identify as Russian. I have no doubt at all that there exist some who identify as Ukrainians who would prefer to be in Russia.
But to believe Putin’s 99% result, you have to believe that effectively all of the majority who self-identify as Ukrainian wish to live in Russia. That is hardly likely.
Maybe the people of the region took the ” lets blow up a nuclear power plant to show those pesky Russians” approach from Zelensky and co badly, no?
I know it would push me in the direction of voting for the option where I still exist next month.
It was 97% and anyway, if you are going to rig a vote, you don’t return a result like 97% unless you are very stupid.
Exactly….
It is always a mistake to underestimate your opponent. It’s what lost the Athenians the Peloponnesian War and other commanders countless battles since then. If you start from the viewpoint that the enemy is really stupid, you’ve lost the battle before you even start fighting.
Maybe it’s not to live in Russia, maybe it’s not to be a part of Kiev, maybe because of the last 8 years (that’s not a comment on the numbers just the mentality).
Great to hear your words.
So it’s fine for Kosovo or Taiwan to declare independance from their states but not culturally Russian peoples from an oppressive NAZI regime who practice human rights abuses daily with open invitation from the west?
I thnk you should lose your anti-Russian establishment indoctrination Mr Craig.
Curious, a couple of years ago Mr Craig Murray urged us to reject anti-Russian propaganda by taking
“a look at the report by the Intelligence and Security Committee on Russia. It is so flawed it is tempting simply to mock it. But in fact, it is extremely dangerous […] It specifically accepts the Integrity Initiative’s Christopher Donnelly and Ben Nimmo as examples of good identifiers of the material which should be banned – even though Nimmo is the man who stated that use of the phrase “Cui bono” is indicative of a Russian troll, and who accused scores of ordinary Scottish Independence supporters of being Russian trolls […] To assess the threat of a report which specifically calls on the social media companies to ban those individuals the British government identifies as Russian trolls, and which calls on the security services to act against those people [e.g.] Ian [who] was identified by the British government as a Russian troll, on the word of Nimmo and Donnelly – exactly the “experts” on which this report relies. This report proposes Ian, and people like him, be banned from social media and subject to security service surveillance. In short the report is a real threat to democracy. Its evidence base is appalling […]”
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/08/the-russian-interference-report-without-laughing/
“Citizenship”, “Nationality”, and “Ethnicity” are very slippery things. British people are usually referred to as “British Nationals”, although there are several classes of “nationals”. British people are rarely referred to as “British Citizens” (a class of “Nationals”), possibly because citizenship is a bit of a foreign idea and the rights of British citizenship are not codified. Not so long ago, British people (and others) were “British Subjects”. Then there is the bonkers UK use of the term “ethnicity”.
My Mother, if she was still alive, would, I’m sure, have ticked the “White British” box indicating her ethnicity. Privately, she might have said she was “English” but she would never admit to being “White”, because whiteness implied negative things in her community (not simply skin pigmentation). She would have, however, freely and fairly ticked the “White British” box, because to do otherwise might have caused her trouble in the future. I imagine a lot of people in the now-annexed Ukrainian regions “freely and fairly” voted for annexation to avoid possible repercussions.
Central and Eastern Europe are very complicated, the results of the clash of empires, genocides, and forced relocations. For example, in the last 110 years, the “elite language” of the city of Lviv has switched from German to Polish to Russian to German to Russian to Ukrainian. What do “citizenship”, “nationality”, and “ethnicity” mean in this context?
I can innumerate many provocations that might have led to Russia invading Ukraine. Nonetheless, if Russia had not invaded Ukraine, people would not be dying in this war. It might, perhaps, have been advantageous for Russia to be forthright in explaining their issues prior to contemplating invasion.
The Russian regime lied in advance of the invasion and denied having any intention of invading.
SOP of course.
Amusing to read back over bloggers who affected not to believe that an invasion was in prospect.
Remember the cartoons of people waiting for the Russians to arrive?
https://starecat.com/mr-bean-in-ukraine-waiting-for-russian-invasion/
How we laughed.
Then we stopped laughing.
[ Mod: Pigeon English, your thoughts about what other commenters should be allowed to post should not appear under Craig’s articles. You can create a new topic in the Blog Support Forum, where replies can be posted without distracting from the topic of this thread. ]
When is a country’s military tactic a lie and when is it an operational secret?! (That’s not a comment on the wrongs or rights of the war.)
Well, the military build-up prior to Feb 24 was very obviously preparations for an invasion. The Kremlin’s denials weren’t persuasive, and I don’t think they were meant to be persuasive. I heard those denials as “Yeah? So whatcha gonna do about it?” bravado. Basically, you can’t maintain “operational secrecy” if you’re moving 150,000 troops with heavy armour onto your neighbour’s borders.
Jim
They moved their own military to their own borders not across them. They are allowed to do that are they not? Just like they did in 2021.
Because the natzo funded trained and commanded Nazis were ready to retake the breakaway regions threatening to de Russify all these peoples living there and move in ‘pure blooded Ukrainians’. A self admitted genocide was planned. It exists as Ukrainian TV broadcasts. Turning a Nelsonian blind eye to it won’t make it go away.
Neither will any amount of bluster from the elites of our fascist state or its propaganda daily bullshitted into the brains of these who are only ever going to get their knowledge of life from the soma poison tube plugged physically into all their spaces. The likes of Jeremy Bowen lying down on some grass pretending to be at the front lines, while a bemused bystander lady with her shopping bag watches!
Anyone still believe any of the daily media be narrative?
Currently the British Viewer is attached to a ‘true crime’ entertainment about a serial killer cannibal! It’s the best tv they have seen for ages they tell me!
Ukraine, Putin, Kerch Bridge, Gas pipeline, natzo mercenaries… nothing matters except some escapist nonsense , roll on a Yankee Halloween a half forgotten Bonfires Day history and the biggest soma of all – the World Cup.
A bit of make believe horror over rides all genuine horror committed in our name throughout the world as usual.
A vain attempt to sell us of our status as the creators of football. Dreaming of ancient glory. Never to return. Not when the rest of humanity is rising and allowed a fair competition with us.
Ah yes, the military tactic of telling your enemy exactly what you are going to do, as used by successful commanders throughout history. Pah! who needs surprise? Make your intentions obvious, like the Allies at Gallipoli, and success will be yours!
@John
The Russians did hand in an ultimatum that spelt it out, we ignored it.
And let’s not forget that the UN Security Council appointed Russia as guarantor of the Minsk peace agreement broken by Zelinski.
Henry writes:
“Central and Eastern Europe are very complicated”
Hmmm… I’m not sure this is true at all. Part of the reason that most East European countries are very nationalistic and anti-immigration is that their population is very pure/white (esp. Poland/Hungary but even Czech/Slovak). It is of course not true – but you won’t convince Orban of that. The UK has a legacy of colonialism and has been forced to face the fact that many citizens are not white. The same is true in France. Germany is also fairly pluralistic (in certain regions). Even in Italy in the Sudtirol there is a chunk of the population that identifies as German speaking. Looking at the UK in greater detail we have Welsh/Scottish/English each with their own linguistic and cultural roots. Everywhere it is complicated – the European Union has done a huge amount to reduce the divisions between people – by far the best way to protect the Russian population and other minorities in Ukraine is EU membership.
Henry:
“British people are rarely referred to as “British Citizens” (a class of “Nationals”), possibly because citizenship is a bit of a foreign idea and the rights of British citizenship are not codified”
What???? Total bs if you ask me. (We are more correctly UK citizens)
“the reason that most East European countries are very nationalistic and anti-immigration is that their population is very pure/white”
So a ‘pure race’? Racist rubbish. There is no scientific evidence for such nonsense.
As I said “It is of course not true”. I understand and agree it is racist – I am just pointing out that is East European mentality. (Look which countries were not happy about Syrian refugees – look which countries are building walls to keep refugees out without regard to EU law. That is not to say racism isn’t alive and well in the UK/France).
“Central and Eastern Europe are very complicated”
Hmmm… I’m not sure this is true at all. Part of the reason that most East European countries are very nationalistic and anti-immigration is that their population is very pure/white (esp. Poland/Hungary but even Czech/Slovak).”
Possibly true but definitely irrelevant to the point in hand. Whilst eastern Europe is racially homogenous, being, as you say, mostly Caucasian, the complication lies in its political history and the history of its intra-racial groupings with which its inhabitants identify. This is what Henry Smith is referring to when he writes – ” the results of the clash of empires, genocides, and forced relocations.” immediately after “Central and Eastern Europe are very complicated”, which piece you appear to have ignored, thus taking the original remark out of context. In any case, a cursory glance at eastern Europe shows that racial homogeneity is no guarantor of simplicity of either culture or grouping of peoples.
“What???? Total bs if you ask me. (We are more correctly UK citizens)”
From the .gov.uk website (and they should know) on “Getting a British passport”:
“Types of British nationality
You can apply for a British passport if you’re a:
– British citizen
– British overseas territories citizen
– British overseas citizen
– British subject
– British national (overseas)
– British protected person”
> We are more correctly UK citizens
I wish. In fact I am a British subject (a subject of the monarch). I yearn for citizenship.
“if Russia had not invaded Ukraine, people would not be dying in this war.”
What?
This war has been in progress since the illegal coup of 2014 (what, no referenda to effect a change in government? – such outrage by the host of this blog).
The Donbass has been shelled continuously by the Kievan/Lviv regime since said coup; with thousands of civilian deaths.
So: the dead of the past 8 years is un-noteworthy and irrelevant?
Donbassian deaths don’t matter?
What about the build-up of troops for a major push by the Kievan/Lviv regime in order to try and ethically cleanse the Donbass of Russian speakers ? No civilian deaths if that was to have taken place (unlike Bucha)?
Once again this is straight up Russian propaganda unsupported by the facts. Even Igor Girgin has stated that there would be no war in Donbass if he had and other Russian had not destabilized the region with military intervention. If you accept that Igor Girkin was in Donbass and that Russia was supplying weapons in this so called civil war then it is clear Russia started this. Moreover a civil war in Ukraine does not justify Russia sending its military and especially into regions such as Kherson/Kharkiv/Kiev that were not at war. The amount of killing of those in the Donbass since 2022 vastly exceeds that of the previous 8 years.
Moreover a civil war in China does not justify USA sending its MIC products.
Moreover a civil war in Serbia does not justify USA / HATO (sic*) sending its military.
Moreover a civil war in Syria does not justify USA sending its military.
Moreover no specific war in Africa justifies USA sending its Wisconsin National Guard over there.
See how I fixed it ?
Do thank me for my service.
* do note the Cyrillic spelling; the Rooskies, actually Putler himself, demanded it.
When people don’t have good answers they revert to whataboutisms. Let’s stick to the main question. Why did Russia invade Zaporizhzhia and Kherson? Were the people of Kherson bombing the Donbass or what is your argument?
I was waiting for the “whataboutism” card to be shown.
That’s the inept and artificial defence of hypocrites, that won’t acknowledge their hypocrisy.
Ray
standards are good so double standards must be double as good. Whatabouterry bad but hypocrisy good.
Once again you don’t address the question. In fact, you seem to be acknowledging that Russia’s actions are wrong – but are trying to justify them by saying the USA has done wrong things too. Is that correct? One wrong doesn’t justify another but at least you appear to acknowledge that Russia’s actions are illegal and wrong – which I think is the gist of Craig’s post.
Andrew H – Which specific is ‘straight up Russian propaganda’?
Not just the build up of troops – the increase in shelling as per the OSCE recordings; that information is available on their website.
They report an increase in explosions but few clues as to who was causing them. The Russian build up for the invasion started months earlier so it wasn’t in reaction to an increase in shelling, more likely to be Russian guns ‘softening up’ the defences before the tanks went in.
The osce I assume know where the explosions hit as they are recording and publishing numbers.If the dpr / lpr was the instigators of an increase in shelling I believe,but it’s unprovable the msm would tell us loudly.in regards to your 2nd point:did Ukraine position it’s army in a way that provoked the Russian response.I’m open minded as opposed to assuming 1 is good 1 is bad
> what, no referenda to effect a change in government? – such outrage by the host of this blog
Referendums are not the usual way of changing government, at least in this country. The “coup” to which you refer was the result of Yanukovic fleeing to Russia in the face of massive public demonstrations, after he reneged on his election promises.
A coup is when an armed force ousts the government, and replaces it. Euromaidan was a revolt, Yanukovic fled and his government fell, and new elections were held. That’s not a coup.
– brilliant post about “Citizenship”, “Nationality”, and “Ethnicity” are very slippery things.”
I am looking forward to CM addressing such a complicated Issue IMHO in the future.
You forgot to mention British Nationalist called by Scottish nationalist?.
So what is English or Scottish? Nation or ethnic group ? What is British I guess Nationality or maybe Citizenship ?
All the evidence I have seen over the months clearly shows that there was a plan to launch an offensive to take back not just the two rebel regions but also an attempt at retaking Crimea.
Much of it from Western experts.
Evidence also shows that plan was also planned for 2021 – but was thwarted by the mobilisation of Russian Forces to these borders in 2021.
Further reports from Ukraine over the last years also show that the plan was to never implement the Minsk agreements, even if supposedly guaranteed by European States.
It’s a bit like saying the First World War wouldn’t have happened if the Arch Duke had not been assassinated. Or the WW2 wouldn’t have if Hitler had two balls.
> Zaporizhzhia Region: Ukrainians 70.8
That is as may be, but you have to be very careful interpreting this data. I suspect that it was based on people’s perception of their national identity. It would otherwise be hard to explain the 70% of ethnic Ukranians in a 100%-Russian speaking region.
Excellent piece in the London Guardian re Donbas.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/07/vladimir-putin-eastern-ukraine-referendums-russian-moscow?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
While the Guardian is compromised, so are all British and European media.
As of course are Russian media, though to be fair Putin has murdered most independent Russian journalists so no worries there.
“though to be fair Putin has murdered most independent Russian journalists so no worries there.”
I would suggest that, if you wish to retain any shred of credibility on this blog, you refrain from making statements like that. Unless you can produce some evidence to back them up, of course.
D’ye say so.
The last time that a Russian TV journalist opposed the war she was dragged away and is now avoiding arrest by Putin’s goons.
Perhaps you could mention a few Russian media outlets that are free to print or broadcast?
Thanks.
Do you speak Russian, John, read their MSM, watch the TV channels, live in Russia, ever visited? Where does your information about Russia come from, please tell.
“The last time that a Russian TV journalist opposed the war she was dragged away and is now avoiding arrest by Putin’s goons.”
So one journalist opposed the war and wasn’t even arrested. That’s hardly proof that “Putin has murdered most independent Russian journalists”, is it? Julian Assange opposed the UK authorities and had to avoid arrest by the government’s goons for years, then was thrown into jail without even the benefit of a trial.
Do we have a tv journalist or media outlets that opposes the msm view,there was rt,there was Sputnik online so we are equally 1 sided
>> “though to be fair Putin has murdered most independent Russian journalists so no worries there.”
> I would suggest that, if you wish to retain any shred of credibility on this blog, you refrain from making statements like that. Unless you can produce some evidence to back them up, of course.
Now you come to mention it, Bayard, I posted this on an earlier thread:
You could start with the extensive list on Wikipedia: List of Journalists killed in Russia under Putin – each with a name, occupation, media company, as well as the date and place of death/disappearance.
You can view the online spreadsheet of Journalists murdered in Russia since 2000
The Committee to Protect Journalists has an online database with various filters you can use to refine your search. (The benefit of this one is that you can click on the names to read the story of their demise.)
It’s also worth consulting the Politifact page entitled Does Vladimir Putin kill journalists? (4 Jan 2016), which has an analysis as well as a list.
There are many similar resources, easily found via a simple web search.
For the blog owner’s insight into that matter, you should consult his detailed 2007 investigative report for the Mail: Russian Journalist Murders, and Gazprom. An excerpt:
“Ivan Safronov thus became about the one hundred and sixtieth – nobody can be certain of precise numbers – journalist to meet a violent end in post-communist Russia. In the West, the cases of Anna Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko hit the headlines. But in Russia, there was nothing exceptional about those killings. It has long been understood that if you publish material which embarrasses or annoys those in power, you are likely to come to a very sticky end.”
Ivan Safronov is dead?
“It has long been understood that if you publish material which embarrasses or annoys those in power, you are likely to come to a very sticky end.”
Absolutely, so I trust all those who share my indignation at the suppression of journalists have been joining Craig in supporting Julian Assange! It is always best first to condemn the crimes of one’s own government, otherwise one incurs being deemed a hypocrite.
> Ivan Safronov is dead?
I know, right? It’s kinda confusing. There were news reports only a month ago that Ivan Safronov had been given a 22-year jail sentence – following a non-jury trial behind closed doors on the say-so of an FSB informant. It seems like an unnecessarily harsh punishment for a corpse! (In other news: yesterday the highly anticipated boxing match between Chris Eubank and Conor Benn was called off; notably, Chris Eubank retired from boxing in 1998. Later today, former US president George Bush will receive a humanitarian (?!) award from the Hoover Foundation; incidentally, there are confirmed reports that former US president George Bush passed away 4 years ago.)
It can be confusing when sons get lumbered the same name as their dad (why do people do that?!). Of course the Ivan Safronov (Jr) in prison is the son of the Ivan Safronov (Sr) who unexpectedly fell from a window above his flat on returning with his groceries (maybe the shop was out of vodka?). Craig Murray went to Russia to investigate and the people he interviewed insisted that Safronov Sr had been murdered for embarrassing the state by exposing illegal Russian arms sales to Iran.
Obviously the growing list of independent journalists meeting sudden deaths was becoming increasingly embarrassing for the Kremlin, so they changed tactics. Amnesty International notes:
“The absurdly harsh sentence meted out to Ivan Safronov [Jr] symbolizes the perilous reality faced by journalists in Russia today. It also exposes the failings of the Russian justice system and the impunity enjoyed by state agencies, who routinely fabricate cases with little or no evidence to support them.”
A letter signed by 338 fellow journalists declared that Safronov Jr was being stitched up, and an online petition against the conviction acquired nearly 100,000 signatures. The full background to the story can be found on Open Democracy – Jailing of journalist shows how far the rot in Russia goes, which states:
“Russia’s journalism community, among others, has been subjected to incredible persecution. Most independent media have received the status of “undesirable organisations” or “foreign agents”, crippling their journalism and financial operations. Since the Kremlin ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February this year, more than 500 journalists have been forced to leave Russia.
The sentencing of Safronov to 22 years in prison today on unproven charges of selling state secrets is another nail in the coffin of press freedom and the right to a fair trial in Russia.”
Most of the remaining Russian media expressed consternation at the outcome. However, our Tatyana assured us a couple of days ago that Safronov Jr actually deserves his 22-year sentence, just like the Russian government says, for the crime of leaking state secrets (albeit seemingly from Wikipedia). So that’s alright then: we can ignore the fact that in 2019 he provoked international condemnation of Russia after reporting on their illegal secret sales of SU-35 fighter jets to Egypt – which had nothing to do with this trial apparently.
J.Lowrie: regarding your interjection, let’s redirect attention onto that for a moment, then.
> It is always best first to condemn the crimes of one’s own government, otherwise one incurs being deemed a hypocrite.
Yes – though it doesn’t have to come first: simultaneous would be fine too, surely?
I can’t speak for all others: there may well be hypocrites around. I may have encountered some at the demonstrations for Julian outside the Ecuadorian embassy, and I’m sure a fair few have read some of the articles I edited and translated in his defence, but I’m pretty sure there weren’t any among the campaign support team. I won’t ask what you’ve done, which I assume must be impressive, because that would only redirect attention from what we were discussing – i.e. the Russian persecution and murder of journalists who contradict the state (see above) and its effect on suppressing inconvenient news from Ukraine. I hope that wasn’t your aim; whataboutery is such a crude device.
It would appear the NATO countries have quite some way to go to catch up with Russia’s murderous bodycount. We can’t let them make any moves in that direction – which is why the Assange campaign is so hugely important, especially today.
“It would appear the NATO countries have quite some way to go to catch up with Russia’s murderous bodycount.”
It doesn’t look like they will have to. We seem to have a similar dearth of independent journalists without anyone having to be bumped off.
“Now you come to mention it, Bayard, I posted this on an earlier thread:”
Strangely, from JK’s reply, he doesn’t seem to have been aware of that evidence, although he is now.
JK may not have cited the evidence, but he was right about the reality … whereas you were ignorant of both the evidence and the reality. There’s no way you come out on top in that verbal skirmish, so dae yersel a favour an’ haud yer wheesht.
Those censuses are from a world before the orange revolution, the maidan coup and the long subsequent assault by the Ukrainian state on the eastern oblasts. That military assault and attendant discriminatory legislation changed everything. There was no way the people of those regions were voting to remain punchbags of a ferociously hostile state.
The genuinely outrageous event of last week was the massive US terrorist attack in Europe – its sabotage of Nord Stream 1 and 2. As Jonathan Cook points out in his latest article, “it shows that the US is ready to turn the whole of Europe into a battlefield – and bully, betray and potentially sacrifice the continent’s population as cruelly as it has the Global South”. The difference being, at least the people of the developing world know what the US is doing to them.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/evidence-united-states-role-nord-stream-pipeline-blasts/282149/
Damn. You are so well informed.
An example to us all.
But just in case some doubters remain…
Maybe give us your proof that the US blew the gas pipelines.
Thanks.
Too high risk for US/West since too many undersea assets. (The fact that Putin has already threatened revenge says it all). NS2 was already permanently shut down by the US placing sanctions on the Swiss firm that owned the pipe (nothing Gazprom/Germany can do to force those sanctions to be lifted – so the pipeline was already dead). In my view, logically, only real possibilities are Russia/Ukraine/random anarchist/other non-state actor – someone willing to take a major risk. Obviously the conspiracy theorists have their own ideas.
Interesting video: Nord Stream sabotage and hybrid war on Europe, by Anders Puck Nielsen (4 Oct 2022) – YouTube, 13m 41s
Let the investigators do their job.
Here’s the real question:
What is NATO for?
Is it a defensive Military Organisation or is it an offensive Military Organisation?
If it is defensive then does its expansion right up to the borders of Russia mean that NATO
is defending its members against a Russian offensive?
My view is that NATO have played What Time is it Mr Wolf? over the years with Russia.
The idea being to get closer to Russia with your Nuke Missiles so as to gain a first strike advantage.
A missile from a country right next door is going to land quicker than one coming from the USA.
So all this aren’t-we-nice bullshit from the US (who run NATO) is all about NATO’s capabilities and not Russia’s.
The US is the only nation on the planet who have actually (not theoretically) bombed a country – you know this & I know this and of course the media know this too.
In the media build-up to the Russian invasion, the US were running around all the media outlets telling the western media that the invasion was “certain”.
Not surprising, when the whole thing was planned by the US, that what happened – happened.
Roger Waters is correct – he doesn’t agree with the invasion but was not surprised when and why it happened.
Now I’m no fan of Putin but I genuinely am much less of a fan of NATO, and particularly the US government, over many years.
They don’t do occupation but they do do Wars by Proxy.
This is a Proxy War and I honestly believe that the ordinary Ukrainians are being used here and are dying needlessly.
Zelensky is certainly in the US’s pocket and unfortunately the Europeans have been asked to jump very high and continue to do so.
The West has issued ‘sanctions’: this purely for effect for the folks back home; and, having no sense of irony (an American trait), when Russia sanctions back they are accused of using energy as a weapon.
Lack of irony has caught on.
Funnily enough the UK and others were asking Ukraine to join the EU ( see lack of irony here) and to be allowed into NATO.
Step forward Mr Michael Gove – who absolutely correctly said if The Ukraine joined NATO then ” an attack on one – would be
an attack on all” which would certainly bring on a Nuke War.
The winter is now approaching and despite all the Western Media second guessing what Mad Putin may/will do the it looks like a dig in by the Russians.
What the Ukranians will do is attempt to take back the captured areas and as they say – this will take some time.
So in my opinion this War will go on – more people will die on the NATO altar and the media will cheer it all on and the
expense of the War Effort will be paid for by Germans – French – the British etc for an American gain.
Of course going off the democratic west arguemnet that MAD has prevented nuclear War then if every country had nuke sthen the world would be a safer place – wouldn’t it?
There’s an irony.
You have to hand it to Andrew. There is no depth of absurdity to which he is unwilling to plunge in his defence of US/UK imperialism. Let us leave aside his demented conjuring up of James Bond type villainous anarchists. He has pretended to offer Ukraine as a culprit so as to appear ‘objective’ in the hope that we will be persuaded that the real culprit was Russia. Ukraine has no direct access to the Baltic, but it may be that the ruling Kiev junta has as strong a grasp of geography as Madame Truss and in its ignorance dispatched some puny naval team to swim all the way from the Black Sea . That leaves Russia. We are to suppose that the Russians blew up pipeline 2, instead of turning off the spigot, which would of course allow them to turn it back on in the future in order to generate further future revenue. Cui bono? The Yanks have made clear their opposition to NS2 from the very beginning. Their navy has been active off Bornholm island: motive, ability, opportunity.
”Let the investigators do their job.” Nato will investigate itself? The Russians have asked to be included in the investigating team. Any hope?
“his demented conjuring up of James Bond type villainous anarchists”
He’s certainly persuaded me, then clinched it by branding me a “conspiracy theorist”. ??
J. Lowrie asks
“The Russians have asked to be included in the investigating team. Any hope?”
This needs to be an investigation not a circus. (similar to airplane crashes or Lockerbie bombing). Personally I would have no problem with a Russian representative on the team with the following proviso.
The person Russia nominates has substantial engineering/scientific expertise – someone who might bring something to the investigation, someone who has a verifiable career, significant published papers, or major internationally recognized engineering accomplishments, someone who has international accreditation that could be stripped if they leak or report back to Russia progress of the investigation prior to release of the final report.
Investigations of this type may not bring answers quickly and it is important that those involved in the investigation are not prematurely leaking information. (For example following the recent China air crash, Boeing is helping with the black boxes – but it is up to China to decide when the final report will be released since they are the lead investigators – Boeing cannot be leaking what is on the black boxes in the interim)
So we might expect they are scouring the seabed for fragments. Will there be explosive residue and can that be chemically analyzed to determine the source? Is there a possibility of finding the remains of a circuit board with possibly damaged chips? If there are damaged chips, something like trying to get the serial numbers off them is something that probably only very few companies can do – this is not something Russia is likely to be involved in. That said having someone from the Russia end to understand the scientific aspects of the evidence would not be a bad thing.
btw. Can Ukraine be included in the team investigating the Crimea bridge incident? There are reports that this may be infighting amongst Russian groups – Ukraine would bring an element of neutrality to the investigation.
CIA warnte Bundesregierung vor Anschlag auf Ostseepipelines
Es verdichten sich die Anzeichen für eine geplante Attacke gegen die beiden Nord-Stream-Gasleitungen. Nach SPIEGEL-Informationen gab es bereits im Vorfeld Hinweise darauf aus den USA.
Von Matthias Gebauer, Roman Höfner und Fidelius Schmid
28.09.2022,
The CIA in June warned the German Government of an attack on the North Sea pipelines, according to The Spiegel Magazine, which is privy to German intelligence sources. So how did the Yanks know of such an attack prior to its occurrence? Unless Biden was taking séances with a fortune teller or sessions of divination with a necromancer which I could well believe, those of us with normally functioning brains can come to the only rational conclusion: BECAUSE THEY WERE PLANNING TO DO IT!
The yanks have pretty deep intelligent assets in Russia. It is notable that the USA did not expel Russian diplomats following the invasion of Ukraine (I don’t think the UK did either?). Many other European countries did. It is clear that a few countries did not want tit-for-tat expulsions of their agents – ask yourself why.
“It is notable that the USA did not expel Russian diplomats following the invasion of Ukraine (I don’t think the UK did either?).”
If that is true, it’s pretty bonkers, considering how many they kicked out after the farcical Skripal Affair?
“Maybe give us your proof that the US blew the gas pipelines.”
Well if they didn’t, who did? In the absence of definite proof, they are the most likely candidate. They had motive, means and opportunity.
The assertion that Russia did it suffers from a similar absence of proof and Russia had neither the motive (they could simply close the valves), the means nor the opportunity. In any case unless you think the Russians are irretrievably stupid, why blow up three of the four pipelines than say that you are still prepared to send gas down the remaining one?
I think Norway or Sweden are more likely culprits. The USA aren’t very good at being surreptitious; they’d have sailed a carrier group into the Baltic for an operation like that.
Craig, you seem to forget that most of the PRO-Ukrainian inhabitants of the occupied territories have simply left. And the those remaining are more likely to welcome Russian rule.
This in part may explain why Ukrainian forces don’t shy away from shelling those areas. They consider those people “not theirs”. Just trying to recapture the territory.
Additionally the people who were against Russia likely did not even attend these “Referendums” and completely ignored them.
Any comments on the tragic accident (apparently due to yet another piece of carelessness with a lit cigarette) to the wonderful Kerch Bridge? And on Gospodin Putin’s 70th birthday too! Most unfortunate… ?
Elf and Safety in Russia has a long way to go!
Well, John can chortle, but can he not see that this will force Putin to escalate by using US style Shock and Awe? Many Russians are angry at his procrastinating weaknesses hitherto. Where is it going to end? As I keep reminding Western imperial cheerleaders Russia is not Korea or Vietnam or Iraq, nor even Grenada. Putin has made it clear that that this is an existential war for Russia, and they would find ‘technical’ ways to respond. London Bridge might become a target. The Ukrainians have already been selling on the black market these shoulder-held rockets Britain has supplied. Into which terrorist group’s hands might they land? John feels comfortable because the Ukrainians are doing the proxy fighting for Nato, but even a wimp like Putin will finally be forced to act decisively. We are well on the way to WW3. Russia cannot afford to lose. It is not only a matter of realpolitik but, as Russians see it, of their national survival. It does not matter whether one agrees with such an outlook or not. What we have to anticipate is Russian response. I now fear a mighty escalation. Let us hope London Bridge will not be falling down any time soon, but I have always been an optimist – till now!
J.Lowrie. You don’t think that the UA has the right under the laws of war to destroy Russkiy infrastructure? Given what Putin’s thugs have done to Ukraine?
Or you would prefer that Ukraine surrender?
Like N Vietnam did when defending against the USA?
There is a big difference between doing what you have the right to do and acting wisely, the two are not always the same, as illustrated by Tatyana’s story of the unfaithful wife.
What laws of war? What rights? Russia is claiming the right to defend Russia and Russians, which is surrounded by NATO. You might not see it that way. So what? We are now at war! What next?
John Kinsella
I would like to comment.
I just don’t know how I can do this, given the wishes of our kind blog owner to allow my comments as long as they are made with humor and grace. And also given his position that I’m not a person, but a certain team. And some more warnings hinting that I am spreading Russian propaganda. Oh yeah, and not to forget a special warning about the use of sarcasm.
Perhaps in these circumstances I should have just left this site, but there is another “nice” caveat to this, that I’m free to leave this site forever if I’m going to lie.
The dilemma is I’m not going to lie and, I’ve no desire to comment under such a pressure.
Well, given all of the above, I will try to express my thoughts in this way:
– haha, isn’t it a wonderful morning, waking up to see the Crimean Bridge blown up? Three have died so far. Not a big deal, the Ukrainian ambassador to Kazakhstan, Vrublevsky, prepared us for such collateral damage, didn’t he, very wittily remark that the more Russians are killed now, the fewer Russians will have to be killed later!
it was humor for you, the best I could produce
Now, well, let’s try grace (I’m not sure about the meaning of the word ‘grace’, because my perception of this word is heavily influenced by the movie Dogville*)
– Donbas geeks didn’t die from the bombings and didn’t flee to Russia to escape ethnic discrimination. The Crimean bastards didn’t die of thirst when the freshwater canal was blocked for them. The Lord probably blessed all the soldiers defending the right of Kyiv to rule the Russians, allowing now to blow up the Crimean bridge. What a joy that the Russians don’t feel safe!
Still not sure if I understand the word ‘grace’ correctly.
—
Well, now I say without theatrical gestures, for people who perceive me as I am.
– I’m very sorry that this happened, and even more I regret the effect of this news. The bridge can be repaired. But now the Ukrainian language will never have for me a romantic halo of the language of my ancestors, a wonderful image of the language of a colorful culture. From now on, the slogan Glory to Ukraine sounds to me like Allah Akbar from radical Islamist suicide bombers.
If the explosions of the leaders of Donbass could be explained by the struggle,
if the explosion of Darya Dugina’s car could be explained by the work of an extremist group,
the joy from the explosion of the Crimean bridge is coming from the state of Ukraine itself, which claims to represent the entire people, history and culture.
—
* We watched the film Dogville with my husband several times, but the very first one left an indelible impression. When Grace took the gun, my husband said “come on, girl, show them”, and he did not understand what I meant by “what are you going to do, Grace? You can’t!”
For him, that would be a sign of weakness. In very impolite words, using a term ‘pigs’ he explained that ‘pigs’ are unable to feel for other people and any sign of mercy they take as a sign of weakness.
Dear Tatyana.
You addressed your comments to me so perhaps I may respond?
You seem to regard the attack on the bridge as terrorism?
If Russia is at war (no “Special Military Operation” nonsense please) with Ukraine then Ukraine is entitled under the UN Charter and the laws of war to act in her self defense.
And self defense includes destroying the aggressor’s logistics infrastructure – the Kerch Bridge was used to supply the aggressor’s military in Russian occupied Ukraine.
If you can rebut any of the above points I would be very interested.
John
Dear John,
I consider sending a suicide truck loaded with explosives as terrorism.
I understand that you live in a world where there is good legal terrorism vs bad illegal referendum, vs bad disadvantageous Minsk agreements, vs bad ridiculous Russia-NATO treaty.
Well, in my opinion, Russia has enough flexibility of thinking to understand and even accept the opponent’s worldview.
I think that you, too, have this invaluable quality.
Thus, you must agree that the logistics infrastructure of the Ukrainian side of the conflict is a legal target. I think that since Poland has become the main hub, it makes sense to use good legal terrorism on its territory. Not to forget about good legal terrorism in the countries of Europe that supply weapons. And it also seems to me that the main seller of weapons is the United States, and the main advocate for this war is Mr. Lloyd Austin, a millionaire from Rytheon and part-time head of the Pentagon.
I think the United States would understand and appreciate the legality of the second 911.
Do you agree?
We can say its an act of self-defense under the UN charter, if you care about formalities.
Hi Tatyana.
We don’t yet *know* who blew up the train which (it appears) seriously damaged the Kerch Bridge.
Obviously I welcome the damage as it impedes Russian logistics.
I’m intrigued by “I consider sending a suicide truck loaded with explosives as terrorism”.
I very much doubt if the UA used suicide bombers.
But a brave man or woman starting a timer to detonate a bomb on an enemy bridge and hopefully escaping is an act of war, not terrorism.
It’s called sabotage.
You do know that Ukraine and Russia are at war?
ah, I see, your media do not show you that track… videos all over the internet, make an effort.
I know English-speaking media spread a fake about another Auschwitz, demonstrating a lot of dentures. Namely: The Times, The Sun, The Independent and the Daily Mail. And they suppressed the investigation by Paul Ronzheimer published by Bild, his interview with a local dentists who was robbed of said dentures.
I’m happy to blame it on your ignorance, honestly. Because I was doubting the level of your readiness to apologize terrorism. You know, they apologized ukrainians who burnt people alive in Odessa trade union building. They apologized Nazi supporters and glorified them as heroes. They apologized bombings of Donbass. And now they apologize terrorism. All apologisings based on ‘law’. Like ‘I don’t care if they are monsters, until they kill inside of their fence, and until they kill Russians, and until we can drag in a legal grounds for the killings’. Very sad decline of humanism.
Especially sad to get a warning that I have no right to say ‘shame on you’, when talking how I feel about it, on the website of an Ambassador and Human Rights Activist.
Crocodile tears. Three people may have died but it will likely save the lives of hundreds of others. Every day Russia sends random bombs into civilian areas of Ukraine killing innocent people for no other reason than to create terror in the belief that enough terror will eventually turn opinion against the war. The Russian military has been carrying out attacks on Ukraine’s infrastructure and now calls foul when a bridge that is used for military transport is damaged.
As to the bridge itself – it is structurally unsound and will eventually collapse sooner or later of its own accord (probably next major earthquake). It is also causing the channel to silt up which has significant long term environmental implications. This is part of the reason Russia has being trying to annex a land corridor through Ukraine.
“it will likely save the lives of hundreds of others.”
I’m interested to know how this miracle is going to be performed.
“Every day Russia sends random bombs into civilian areas of Ukraine killing innocent people for no other reason than to create terror in the belief that enough terror will eventually turn opinion against the war.”
Do you have any evidence for this compared with the evidence that every day Ukraine sends random bombs into civilian areas of (what it still thinks of as Ukraine killing innocent people for no other reason than to create terror without even the belief that enough terror will eventually turn opinion against the war?
Last night’s revenge for the bridge:
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1579047613235875840
Hang on, didn’t you just say that ““Every day Russia sends random bombs into civilian areas of Ukraine”? Why is this bomb no longer random, but “revenge for the bridge”? How can you tell? Were you close enough to the incoming missile to read “this one is for the bridge” on the casing?
I note that “President Volodymyr Zelensky called the Russian attack on civilians an “absolute evil,” adding that Russians are “savages and terrorists.”” I wonder what he thinks of his own forces’ attacks on Donetsk. That is, of course, if any of these attacks on civilians are happening at all.
Oh, and you still haven’t said how the attack on the bridge is going to save hundreds of lives. So far your only response is to say that it has claimed twelve more.
Bayard your friend is Michael Tracy:
https://twitter.com/mr_gh0stly/status/1579140154857771009
Sorry, can’t see anything with “this one is for the bridge” written on it there, or was that just a general comment, or even perhaps an attempted introduction? Is Mr Tracy a friend of yours?
If the Kerch bridge was blown up by the careless smoker then so were both NS pipelines. Many people in Russia are now demanding that the Ukrainians start carelessly smoking near their infrastructure (bridges, power station etc.). Will they?
I’ve been wondering for months why the Ukrainians haven’t targeted the Kerch Bridge sooner. I imagined it was a rather feeble structure, thrown up in a hurry. In fact it seems to be rather robustly-built, and damaging it apparently requires demolition expertise.
There was a rocket strike on the Kerch Bridge early in the war; I think it was said to be one of those Ukrainian guided anti-ship missiles.
“We will not be silenced! Speaking truth in times of War”
— conference by the Schiller Institute 6/10/22, all US petitioners here appear to be on Ukranian kill list
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV7THiwgrX8&t=2863s
Tony Pringle. I have found The Schiller Institute to be a sane voice advocating dialogue and peaceful coexistence. However the power structures in our Collective West are set on a course with the helm lashed down, heading straight for the rocks. There is no individual block within that pyramid that can even give the alarm to change course. No one wants to lose their job, from the stenographer journalist to the little members of Parliament. The Judiciary has behaved as badly with the way it handled our host and Julian. The military showed its political leanings with the threats it voiced over the possibility of Jeremy winning. I agree with J.Lowrie that President Putin is going to have to respond despite his attempts to have a European Wide Treaty and Arms Control rejected by US Nato. The mood in Russia is that of a nation under economic and military siege on its own borders. Our cultivated hatred of everything Russian is blatant racism. Our invasions and domination projected onto them just rank Hypocrisy. Russia has no intention of using nuclear weapons at all. Yet we and US think a limited tactical use of nukes in Ukraine, or shelling of the biggest nuclear power plant in Europe there, is the answer to us being conventionally being beaten in Ukraine. Hence the hype and misrepresentation to President Putin’s speech and warning. We always give the game away by projecting onto Russia what we are about and willing to do !
The only army being “conventionally beaten in Ukraine” is the Russki Rabble (TM).
What are you like?
John Kinsella. Its ok, don’t worry John, as I said before, your views are already the majority in the populations of the Collective West. Consent has been manufactured very successfully as have the manufacturer of weapons if not that of ploughs. It is a known fact that most people form their political views early and rarely change them despite critical discourse and available information. There is no need to call other commentators or other nationalities names. Time will tell what transpires, till then I hope you like me are investigating what we can do in our own lives to prepare for the future as much as possible.
@WK You say that
“There is no need to call other commentators or other nationalities names”.
Are you suggesting that I have done so?
If so, examples please.
I seem to recall another poster being notified by the mods for ad hominem remarks?
I look forward to seeing some examples of how I fell short….
“”The only army being “conventionally beaten in Ukraine” is the Russki Rabble (TM).”
What are you like?”
Yes, what are you like? Have you actually looked at a map of Ukraine, recently, or at all? Have you seen how small an area that the Ukranian army has recaptured, yes, that’s taken back what they have already lost, compared to the area that the Russians and the DPR and LPR armies have beaten the Ukranian Army out of? That’s like a punter at the races who claims he’s winning because his last horse won him a tenner, despite the fact that all the previous ones have lost him hundreds.
I cannot share your evident delight in the (questionable) triumph of the Putin regime’s invaders.
Disappointment on your part about being once again shown to be holding a view contrary to what is actually happening in the world does not translate to delight on my part about the facts about which you were mistaken.
According to my approximate calculation 20 % of 600,000 km2 of Ukraine is under Russia control which is about
120 000 km2 . The size of England is 130 000 km2 and recaptured area to my understanding is 2 500 km2 (size of Devon )
“What are you like?” !!!
No ad hominem intended
This is a left wing view of the conflict from a Ukrainian. I do not call myself a socialist, more social democrat – a term with wide range of interpretations but probably the closest. I found it interesting
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/online_articles/self-determination-and-the-war-in-ukraine
“a term with wide range of interpretations”.
Indeed the “social democrat” designation is preferred by Labour’s hardest right neoliberal/ Atlanticist superhawk MPs.
Here is the antiwar take of the (Marxist-Leninist) Workers Front of Ukraine. It is a little more alive to the role of the west in provoking and perpetuating the war.
https://www.nowarleft.com/wfu
A recent wideranging interview with them on Revolutionary Left Radio:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6BXKNb3Zq5PQDpooqiU3JP?si=ZIlhOXTsRfi82-YV8lkuFA&utm_source=copy-link
The latest blog by Brian Berletic of The New Atlas discusses the ramifications of the bombing of the bridge. His habit is to use Western sources to debunk western media propoganda and publish/name those sources. He discusses the legal/illegally arguments of civilian infrastructure and Sovereignty, the history of Crimea, its special autonomous status prior to the Coup and Referendum there. In my opinion an honest and more journalistic reporting and very informative. I think we are coming to the highatus of the Ukrainian attacks and advances. The third offensive by Ukraine about to be launched. The previous two gaining land but killing minimum Russian forces and equipment, (Western Sourses quoted by Brian). However Ukrainians killed in action and equipment lost have been horrendous. (Again western sources quoted by Brian ). The tragedy for Ukrainian injured soldiers is that, being in long exposed column advances, exposed to long range attacks by artillery and aircraft, the normal ratio of 1 to 3/4 killed in action to injured is now approx 1 to 2/3. As injured soldiers can’t be retrieved and transported back in the open exposed land they advanced over which is now a death trap. The Russians are just retreating in the face of a frontal attack, experiencing minimum losses while inflicting terrible losses. Its estimated that over the long long front, Russian forces only amount to between 30 to 60 men per kilometre. With intelligence it is relatively easy to mass an attack and break through. However over time its not how much land you can take, but how long you can hold it and what cost to men and material you can sustain. The prediction is that Ukrain can’t sustain these losses and is desperate to get Nato to intervene as a buffer by escalation to shelling the nuclear power plant and trying to provoke Russia by destroying the bridge for example. Russian military planners seem to have a strategy which is slowly working, but any loss of land is getting a strong political/public fallout at home and pressure to take the gloves off. The answer to if this is a war or an operation is to see life in Ukrainian cities like the capital. A war would have destroyed the capital, its power supply, its transportation, its water and politicians would not be flying in and out. Ask Iraq what Nato did !
Oh dear.
The UA are suffering: “Ukrainians killed in action and equipment lost have been horrendous.”
But ” Russian military planners seem to have a strategy which is slowly working, but any loss of land is getting a strong political/public fallout at home and pressure to take the gloves off.”
So Ukraine’s losses of men and materials are “horrendous and tragic”.
While “any loss of land (by Russia):is getting a strong political/public fallout at home and pressure to take the gloves off.”
Did I hear something about a “partial” mobilization?
Cry me a river….
I cannot share your evident delight in the ever increasing probability of World War III. Unless, of course, you have completely failed to understand the possible consequences of “strong political/public fallout at home and pressure to take the gloves off.”
And which “cry me a river” are you “oh dearing” about? Note that what was “Eastern Ukraine” is now “West Russia”. The boot is on the foot of Ukraine to reclaim it if it can as it has been trying to do in 8 years of civil war after the US backed Nazi hi-jacking of the rest of Ukraine.
Putin “Knock knock”
Obama “Who’s there?”
Putin “Crimea”
Obama “Crimea who?”
Putin “Crimea river”
But I thought all ‘Western sources’ were controlled by the PTB and cannot be relied upon.
As neither side has released reliable casualty figures how does Mr Berletic know any of this; or is it pure conjecture, wishful thinking, on his part? He’s fallen into the same Vietnam pit as other commentators in trying to project the idea that as long as the Russians are killing more Ukrainians than the Ukrainians are killing Russians then they’re winning despite the amount of ground they’re losing.
One thing that has become apparent is the amount of Russian equipment that is falling into Ukrainian hands. Half the UA’s tanks were captured from the RA having been abandoned, apparently undamaged, by their previous owners. Clear evidence of a panicked retreat and not a planned withdrawal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KO7uhPXQRaw
Fact: Ukrainians show one captured howitzer. Claim: “Half the UA’s tanks were captured from the RA having been abandoned”. My take: cheap propaganda.
“As neither side has released reliable casualty figures how does Mr Berletic know any of this; or is it pure conjecture, wishful thinking, on his part?”
Are you suggesting that the sources Mr Berletic used were underestimating the Russian casualties or exaggerating the Ukranian ones? If the sources that are most likely to be underestimating the Ukranian casualties say that they are “horrendous”, then there is a very good chance that they are. I would have thought that this was obvious.
“trying to project the idea that as long as the Russians are killing more Ukrainians than the Ukrainians are killing Russians then they’re winning despite the amount of ground they’re losing.”
What is also obvious is that if the Russians are killing more Ukranians than vice versa, then Ukraine is going to lose because it is going to run out of troops first, quite apart from the fact that gaining an area the size of England and losing one the size of Devon is not losing ground. Yes, the Ukranians have recaptured some ground, but then, so did the Germans in the “Battle of the Bulge”. I am sure there were people in Germany at that time saying that the tide had turned and Germany was now winning and would soon be pushing the Allies back across the Atlantic.
https://www.businessinsider.com/over-half-ukraine-tank-force-captured-retreating-russian-armor-intelligence-2022-10?r=US&IR=T
At the Battle of the Bulge the German advance was halted and driven back in about 5 weeks. No sign of this happening in Ukraine yet.
Body counts:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeKQvfnrFGw
@PM, this claim came from Britain’s defense ministry. No proof was ever provided. Given Britain’s role in this conflict (mostly propaganda), it’s really hard to believe them.
Hi Wiki, that is pretty much what other military analysts are stating – eg Jacques Baud, and an American military person, Douglas Macgregor, plus reporters in the area. The Ukraine forces are losing masses of equipment, the equipment which reaches them and doesn’t get “lost off the back of a lorry, horrible death and injury toll, the Nato countries are running out of patience, supplies, their populations are turning against the “war”, and winter is coming. The European economy is in ruins. Russia is doing fine. There are food shortages in European countries, and the Germans are cutting down trees for god sake – the German love their trees. Russia has masses of food and fuel – which they are willing to share with the world. The theory of these experts is that Russia is waiting for the ground to freeze before sorting out Ukraine – sound familiar. And no, Russia is very aware of civilian life and doesn’t want to inflict more casualties in that direction than it can help. Whereas, the Ukraine forces are constantly shelling civilian targets with 155 mm shells which inflict horrific injuries and death, firing in things called butterfly mines which are hard to see until you step on one and get your foot blown off – these are the actions of terrorists no matter how you try to justify it. As for the blowing up the infrastructure of your enemy, the Nordstream gas pipelines were blown up by the Americans with possibly the assistance of the British – pipelines which belong also to Germany and which bring in gas to the European people and industry. Russia is very willing to continue to supply gas to Europe. So who are the “enemies”? The enemies are a geriatric clique of psychopaths in Washington and probably London, and a pack of Nazis in Ukraine. So what the hell are we doing putting up with it!!!
As for the bridge, i would have thought there would be a high degree of security with regard to the traffic crossing it, especially that of a lorry carrying fertilizer. Guess that will change.
I Stevenson, War mongering – pouring MORE weapons into a war – is NOT socialist. The opening paragraph of the link you gave, simply exposes the current crop of so-called “socialist” or “left-wing” politicians, sorry psychopaths, as in fact bough and sold clueless right wing shits (that’s me being charitable about them): “Scandinavian left-wing parties as well as Eastern European ones have listened to Ukrainians and supported arms supplies to Ukraine. Some progress is taking place among U.S. socialists. But unfortunately, even a joint statement by Ukrainian and Russian socialists hasn’t convinced enough people to support military aid.
@Bayard.
Which is it?
A triumphant Russia pushing W, sweeping aside the scattered Azovite Nazi rabble. All good then?
Or..
A demoralised Russian army retreating/routing E. Putin gotta use his nukes?
Is it fair to ask you why Putin would use tac nukes if the war is going well for his regime?
Thanks.
The only people talking about the use of nukes are Zelensky (demanding preventive strike), Biden, you and western media.
Pay Pal threatened to ” Fine ” its users $2,500 for Misinformation ? So it can decide what you posted on this blog or anyother was MI ? Great Democracy isn’t it. How long before your bank account is no longer totally in your control ? Wait for it, didn’t Canada already do that ?
> The only people talking about the use of nukes are […]
Putin and Lavrov, to name two. Of course they don’t specifically refer to nukes; they use phrases like “all available means”. They know that we know exactly what they mean.
I can’t see how any strategic or tactical use of nukes is going to benefit the Russians; such an act would result in a huge conventional response from the West, and Russia would be destroyed as a military power. They can’t win a conventional war against Ukraine, and I think they would lose a nuclear war too. I don’t think their forces are capable of winning a fight on a nuclear battlefield, if they can’t win a war on a conventional battlefield.
So I think popping a tactical nuke in Ukraine would be a signal from Putin that he knows he’s lost.
“Putin and Lavrov, to name two.”
Link, please to a video or transcript of them calling for the use of nuclear weapons outside retaliation for a first strike by others.
It’s not either, nor has Putin used any nukes, or even threatened to do so, unless Russia is attacked with nukes first.
Outside your fantasy world, the Ukrainian army has been steadily pushed back, losing men and armaments all the while, since the start of the war. In places they have made successful counter attacks, however that have only recaptured a small proportion of what they had already lost. This counter-attack now appears to have stalled. There is no evidence that the Russian retreat was a rout, it seems it was much more like the Retreat from Mons in WWI than Dunkirk in WWII.
The reason why Putin is talking about using nuclear weapons is that he thinks that the only country ever to have used them might be about to use them again on him.
“The reason why Putin is talking about using nuclear weapons is that he thinks that the only country ever to have used them might be about to use them again on him”
Well it is good that you acknowledge that Putin is “talking about using nuclear weapons”.
But it is strange that you claim to know what he thinks.
And revealing that you identify Putin with Russia (“on him”) as if he were the New Tsar…..
“Well it is good that you acknowledge that Putin is “talking about using nuclear weapons”.
Why should I not? What’s wrong in threatening retaliation against a first strike. After all, the UK and the US have been equally vocal about nuclear retaliation if not more so. Who wouldn’t be?
“But it is strange that you claim to know what he thinks.”
Listening to what he says gives most people a fair idea.
“And revealing that you identify Putin with Russia (“on him”) as if he were the New Tsar….”
Do you think that if a nuclear armed country used those weapons against Russia, they would take particular care not to hit the president? I would have thought that would be their number one priority.
He actually did not talk about nuclear weapons. He said this: “We will defend our land with all the powers and means at our disposal.” This was said in the context of declaring annexation of Ukrainian regions. The logic is obvious: since these regions are now recognized by Russia as their own they get full protection guaranteed by the Russian constitution. Questions about nukes were then raised by the westerners. And the answer (including one by Lavrov) was that, yes, “all means” included nukes. What exactly were they expected to hear? That the Russians were going to treat their new regions differently from all other regions? So, in short, Putin did not talk about nukes. But Zelensky and Biden did.
A number of Russian hot heads have been calling for nuclear strikes including this lunatic:-
https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1578974285586055168
@PM, a lot of people say a lot of stupid things but that’s not what JK claimed. He specifically mentioned Putin.
Plenty of hotheads everywhere calling for nuclear strikes, including, it seems, President Zelensky. Let’s hope Biden and Putin ignore them, eh?
“There is no evidence that the Russian retreat was a rout”
Apart from the huge amount of serviceable equipment left behind.
The British retreat from Mons was a military disaster, most of the original force of 90,000 became casualties and it took four years of hard fighting to recover the lost ground. For a properly organised tactical retreat read up on the German withdrawal to the ‘Hindenburg Line’ in February-March 1917. Few casualties and they left nothing behind except mines and booby traps.
“Apart from the huge amount of serviceable equipment left behind.”
Which consisted of what? I’ve seen plenty of pictures of the “huge amount of serviceable equipment left behind” by the Ukranian Army as they retreated west. That doesn’t mean that they actually did leave it behind. Considering that both armies are using the same ex-Soviet kit, it’s not exactly difficult to produce the necessary “evidence”.
“The British retreat from Mons was a military disaster, most of the original force of 90,000 became casualties and it took four years of hard fighting to recover the lost ground.”
I’m not sure where you are getting your information from, certainly not Wikipedia, which states that, there were 40,000 French and British troops involved of which about 10,000 were casualties. At no point were the British troops routed “As the British retreat continued south towards Paris, there were small, vigorous holding actions by various units of the British rearguard.[11]” Nor did it take four years of hard fighting to recover the lost ground. Until the whole Western Front became seized up by trench warfare (which was why it took four years, not the disorder of the retreat from Mons), “From 5 to 12 September, the First Battle of the Marne ended the Allied retreat and forced the German armies to retire towards the Aisne River and to fight the First Battle of the Aisne (13–28 September)”. The German retreat to the Hindenburg line was a tactical withdrawal to a better defensive position, not a retreat from superior forces during a battle. They had plenty of time to plan it down to the last detail, rather than a commander having to make decisions in minutes in a rapidly changing battlefield.
Yawn, John Kinsella exposes the tiny world he lives in with yet another false dichotomy.
”Disgraced former Ukrainian ‘human rights commissioner’ says she’s “being asked” by Ukrainian “intel” to pass off fabricated accounts of Russian misdeeds and expresses frustration with her replacement in a conversation with a Russian prankster posing as Michael
@McFaul
What is her name?
Thanks.
Her name is Lyudmila Denisova. She was relieved of her duties over her handling of reports detailing sexual assault allegations made against Russians in Ukraine. She fabricated reports about Russian soldiers raping women and children. Fabrications were so obvious that Ukrainian authorities had to sack her. More information here:
https://correctiv.org/en/fact-checking-en/2022/08/11/reports-of-sexual-violence-in-the-war-why-the-ukrainian-parliament-dismissed-human-rights-chief-denisova/
Her Wiki entry has it rather differently:
“On 31 May 2022, the Verkhovna Rada voted to dismiss her, using the provisions of Ukraine’s Martial law, for failing to facilitate humanitarian corridors in warzones, prevent Ukrainians under Russian occupation from being deported to Russia, and facilitate the protection and exchange of prisoners of war.[26][27][28] The deputy chairman of the Rada regulatory committee said that Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk had had to take on most of the wartime human rights issues.[27] An open letter from 140 activists, media professionals and lawyers criticized the rhetoric of her reports about sexual crimes by Russian forces just before her dismissal.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmyla_Denisova
Nothing there about “She was relieved of her duties over her handling of reports detailing sexual assault allegations made against Russians in Ukraine. She fabricated reports about Russian soldiers raping women and children.”
Strange.
This speaks volume about Wikipedia and not the Lyudmila Denisova affair. One can find the details of the story in Ukrainian press: https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/articles/2022/06/27/7354838/
Google Translate: “In order to find out where Denisova gets her stories from, prosecutors summoned her for questioning as a witness. But in the office of the law enforcement officers, the official was of few words. She was never able to name the source of her data.
Later, during the second interrogation, just before her release, Denisova did admit that she learned about everything from her daughter. And did she talk to other psychologists of the hotline – she could not remember.
Oleksandra Kvitko was also summoned several times for questioning. According to UP, the psychologist assured that her hotline received about 1,040 calls in a month and a half. Of them, 450 related to the rape of children.
However, when the prosecutors took the official transcript, it turned out that only 92 calls had been made to the phone during the entire time.
Kvitko could not provide any details: who called her, to which doctors she referred the victims. Nothing to indicate that these victims actually existed.”
Why does not Wikipedia mention this? It’s simple. It’s just another western media propaganda outlet.
I was never led to believe that the Donbas was full of Russians. Lots of Russian speakers, yes. There are some similarities with South Africa under apartheid. Whites voted overwhelmingly for the “right wing” Afrikaner National Party….but that in no way meant that they were all Afrikaners. Or even right wing. This Afrikaner political party was supported by liberal jews, English speakers, white post WW2 immigrants…. for many reasons, mostly because they felt the blacks would destroy the country…and they knew which side their bread was buttered on. Ditto Ukraine….if you look at the 2010 election results map you will see that Eastern Ukraine voted overwhelmingly for the Russian-leaning Yanukovych. The subsequent coup and Kiev’s treatment of the Donbas would have pushed many more people into the Russian camp…..and the bad feeling, including the war, will undoubtedly have caused many Kiev supporters to leave the area. So I believe that of those voters who remain in Eastern Ukraine….and who wanted and were prepared to vote…the published figures are likely genuine. And even if they were exaggerated, I believe the majority would definitely have wanted to hook up with Russia.
Who Blew Up the Nordstream 2 Pipeline? (w/ Aaron Mate)
https://youtu.be/jCQmVFqU4Gs
Good news for Putin. Dammit…
That beacon of African democracy Zimbabwe has declared its support for Russia.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1579027637107933184?s=20&t=Rdql4lbeuK-YFyzB7IDldQ
I expect that the Zimbabwe “security forces” will wish to volunteer for the Donbas front line ASAP?
Be afraid Zelenskyy!
Is that so JK? I suppose it’s their choice so what’s the problem?
I equally heard Ugandan Presidents son last week said something similar recently. As have many other African States.
Your point is what? Is it just Zimbabweans you are worried about? Why?
Are you maybe suggesting just these Africans are going to be deployed in the NovoRussia against ‘elensky?
Perhaps arriving in their hordes to take over the Ukrainian Master Race and storm across Europe in a wave after wave of invasion and all the accesses of Vikings landing in their long boats across ancient Europe or something? Give me a clue fella, I’d like to help.
I suspect that Zimbabwe “security forces” will wish to volunteer for the Donbas front line right after American and British forces do the same (i.e. never). What’s your point?
The regimes that support Putin are uniformly thuggish and undemocratic.
Zimbabwe, DPRK, Syria, (?) China, …..
And I see that Trump is muttering about peace between Ukraine and Russia. Not about a Russian withdrawal from Ukraine of course…
Russia is notable for the moral quality of its “friends”…
Speaking of moral quality… Let’s just remember that it was Britain – real beacon of democracy – that was colonizing Zimbabwe not so long ago. Let’s also remember that the most notorious cases of use of weapons of mass destruction (including nuclear) were done by the “beacons of democracy”. There is no democracy in the international affairs.
Rather a poor deflection there… Is that the best argument that you have for the moral quality of the Putin regime?
domb
Just ignore this comedian. He was justifying nuking Japanese civilians on the previous page.
Your original post was a deflection. And, yes, if you want to talk about Putin’s moral qualities, you can’t do it without comparing his actions against those of other countries. Otherwise you end up aligning with American position: do as I say, not as I do.
FONSO
That was funny!
Domb and JK
If Zimbabwe was still Rhodesia thing would be more Democratic for JK !
Even though Russia is not Socialist or USSR anymore many African countries (colonies)
know who was on their side during decolonization! While our beloved Democracies were
supporting Apartheid, Soviets colloquially Russians were on their side.
Selection bias John Kinsella 3 years ago : – Belarus, Syria, China, Algeria, Libya,Sudan, Serbia, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, North Korea, Malaysia, Armenia, Greece, Spain, Somalia, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Chile, Cuba, Mexico, Thailand, Ukrainian Separatists, Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iraq, Kurdistan, India, Palestine, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Bolivia, and Army Of The Guardians Of The Islamic Revolution.
Today the list is longer.
https://www.quora.com/What-countries-are-currently-allied-to-Russia
«I was never led to believe that the Donbas was full of Russians. Lots of Russian speakers, yes.»
Indeed there are differences between citizenship, nationality, ethnicity and political orientation. For propaganda purposes Putin makes a big deal of nationality and ethnicity and history, but it is not quite as simple as that.
Probably many ukrainians, given how much more vicious and fascist and corrupt have been the ukrainian governments look at Crimea and wish they were part of a better organized and richer state, look with envy at the Russia Federation and even Belarus, and that’s not just those who remember the advantages of “pax sovietica” and inside the COMECON.
Many of these are those you mention vote accordingly:
«the 2010 election results map you will see that Eastern Ukraine voted overwhelmingly for the Russian-leaning Yanukovych.»
Except that Yanukovych was not pro-russian, but a corrupt amoral oligarch, he had just found Ukraine could get a better deal from the Russian Federation and took it.
«The subsequent coup and Kiev’s treatment of the Donbas would have pushed many more people into the Russian camp…..and the bad feeling, including the war, will undoubtedly have caused many Kiev supporters to leave the area. So I believe that of those voters who remain in Eastern Ukraine….and who wanted and were prepared to vote…the published figures are likely genuine.»
And that’s the real reason why our blogger’s claims based on 97% are rather silly: since the ukrainian government make a felony to vote in the referendum, like for the Donbas previously, one would expect only supporters of independence and membership of the Russian Federation would vote “yes”.
Indeed that the referendums were honestly organized and the vote was correctly reported is proven by the somewhat damningly low turnout figures for turnout w.r.t the population before the war of aggression started by the ukrainian government against the Donbas and some southern regions in 2014.
Obviously a lot of ukrainian nationalists in the 4 regions did not want to vote, or could not vote.
But regardless Putin is rather legalistically acting, also as to referendum rules, according to the rules of the “rules based order” defined by precedents created by the USA and NATO in similar previous occasions, most notably the yugoslavian wars, and according to those precedents the independence of those regions and their subsequent request for membership in the Russian Federation are fine.
The argument ultimately is simple: that the precedents and rules that are valid for the USA and NATO are not valid for the Russian Federation or the People’s Republic of China, because the latter are antidemocratic and colonial powers, while the USA and NATO being champions of democracy and anti-colonialism can be trusted.
@fonso
“Just ignore this comedian. He was justifying nuking Japanese civilians on the previous page.”
Better a comedian than a cold-blooded killer.
Better Zelenskyy than Putin.
Worship your hero Zelensky saying “They are what they are” about Nazis
https://life.ru/p/1484034
indeed a comedian
And his Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of Ukraine with a swastika on his bracelet
https://twitter.com/cinc_afu/status/1578083916296192000
indeed a cold-blooded killer
@Tatyana.
Perhaps you were not replying to me but
We don’t yet *know* who blew up the train which (it appears) seriously damaged the Kerch Bridge.
Obviously I welcome the damage as it impedes Russian logistics.
I’m intrigued by “I consider sending a suicide truck loaded with explosives as terrorism”.
I very much doubt if the UA used suicide bombers.
But a brave man or woman starting a timer to detonate a bomb on an enemy bridge and hopefully escaping is committing an act of war, not terrorism.
It’s called sabotage.
You do know that Ukraine and Russia are at war?
John, you’ve already asked this question from me, above, and I’ve answered.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/10/striding-towards-armageddon-why-putins-annexations-are-wrong/comment-page-5/#comment-1027351
No need to copy and paste it again.
I wish you commented on your support for the N.a.z.i. supporting regime, your heroes.
Hello Tatyana.
I saw your reply but it was vague and not to the point. No offense meant.
One simple question:
Are you saying that the attack on the Kerch Bridge was terrorism rather than an act of war?
If so, why?
Thanks,
John
John, I’ve seen this tactics already – not answering questions but putting your new questions instead. I recall it was another commenter from here, too uncertain to answer directly, referring to their venerable age. I understand it’s the tactics with the purpose to avoid answers. Sorry, but I can’t think of another excuse for a citizen of a state proclaiming freedom of speech as one of its greatest values.
So, let me be straight in my questions, as much as this website allows
(I recall you’ve used Russkie Rabble) https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/10/striding-towards-armageddon-why-putins-annexations-are-wrong/comment-page-5/#comment-1027279
*wink if you’re under pressure
One simple question:
Are you saying that the attack on the Kerch Bridge was terrorism rather than an act of war?
If so, why?
No need for a big long answer.
Thanks,
John
Yes, I believe it’s terrorism. It’s a destruction and murder commited in a dangerous manner.
I’ve no idea why you do cheer this behaviour.
Now it’s your turn to answer please at least one of my questions 🙂
Will you?
Good job “team Tatyana”, finally you provided the answers we were waiting for!
?. Can I answer the questions pretending to be xyz?
Tatyana asks: “do you support Nazi ideology?”
There are plenty of russian nazis.
Putin’s war is straight out of Hitler’s playbook.
In answer to your question, I do not support Nazi ideology – that is why I am opposed to Putler.
Tatyana,
You seem to have become rather evasive and slippery in your recent comments. I think you ought to answer the simple question that you were asked.
Is it a legitimate act of war to attack Russia’s bridge across the Kerch Strait, which was being used to supply Russian troops in Ukraine; or was it an act of terrorism?
(I dislike the word terrorism; as a second question, would you like to say what you mean by “terrorism”?])
Tatyana writes:
“Yes, I believe it’s terrorism. It’s a destruction and murder commited in a dangerous manner.”
Are you aware that Russia has attacked many bridges in Ukraine in a dangerous manner or do you simply not pay attention? How is it you have time to follow this blog but no time to follow the news? So according to your naïve understanding of terrorism, Russia is a terrorist state.
However, a bridge that is used or could be used to transport military cargo is a legitimate military target. Ground lines of communication are ALWAYS legitimate targets. (Ukraine has been severing the bridges to Kherson for months – it makes sense from a military perspective. The Crimean bridges are equally valid targets – it is used to move tanks, ammunition and gas into Ukraine). Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.
Now that Ukraine seems to have figured out how to mail-order truck bombs, perhaps they could also send them to military bases, training grounds, munitions factories and oil-refineries throughout Russia? These would also be valid targets. I truly don’t understand how Russians could have thought it was fine for them to start a war and expect no consequences.
& PS. If you believe the current explanation for this – that this was all done by ‘mail order’ and it was a Russian occupier (and not a suicide bomber) that drove the bomb onto the bridge then you really have to hand it to the Ukrainians with regard to their ingenuity. [I don’t even consider the driver of the truck to be a civilian victim because he had no business driving into occupied territory].
Then, of course, 9/11 was not an act of terrorism, right? It’s all a matter of propaganda. BTW, according to NY Times: U.S. Believes Ukrainians Were Behind an Assassination in Russia.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/us/politics/ukraine-russia-dugina-assassination.html
So, Ukraine (Zelensky) assassinated Dugina (Russian journalist). Try to spin that.
domb writes:
“Then, of course, 9/11 was not an act of terrorism, right?”
We have another Michael Tracey fan boy that cannot understand the essential difference between terrorism and a legitimate military target. See https://twitter.com/mr_gh0stly/status/1579140154857771009
The twin trade towers had no military significance but were full of civilians as were the planes that flew into them. Clearly terrorism. Beslan was terrorism too, since a school full of children was not a military target. Terrorism can happen in Russia as well as in USA. On the other hand a bridge that is being used to supply the military is a legitimate target in war so not terrorism.
Tatyana,
“Yes, I believe it’s terrorism. It’s a destruction and murder commited in a dangerous manner.”
Finally, a condemnation from you of Putin’s disgusting war. Took your time, but got there eventually.
Jimmeh – I actually think it is the same Tatyana – there are some good explanations by psychologists on the internet – it’s some kind of Stockholm syndrome – it’s very hard for a person to accept that what they are doing is immoral or wrong – so rather than coming to that conclusion a deep kind of denial sets in because it is easier to throw logic and rational argument out of the window than to accept the impossible. This is being amplified by state tv, friends and family who are all collectively falling into the same state of mind. From outside it is crazy – but it is real.
do you realise people may also have read your own comments, saying you get misty eyed over nazis and that the nordstream pipes were likely blown up by ‘anarchists’? just checking.
@JK (We don’t yet *know* who blew up the train which (it appears) seriously damaged the Kerch Bridge.)
But we kind of do. Obviously, western mass media aren’t very eager to report it but NY Times published this: “But a senior Ukrainian official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of a government ban on discussing the blast, confirmed that Ukraine’s intelligence services were behind the bombing and said that explosives had been loaded onto a truck that was driven onto the bridge and detonated.”
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/09/world/europe/putin-ukraine-crimea-bridge-terrorism.html
@Domb Kind of a peripheral point, I simply said that we don’t *know* that the UA SF’s blew the bridge. I agree that it is likely, very likely even on the basis of cui bono alone.
I also welcome the successful attack which, though it doesn’t appear to have destroyed the bridge, will reduce its utility to the Putin regime.
And of course to claim that the bridge is not a legitimate military target is simply absurd.
The Putin regime has been blowing bridges (and schools, hospitals and apartment buildings) all over Ukraine for over 6 months.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Or perhaps more apposite, what goes around comes around.
“Report: CIA Lost Office In WTC”.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-cia-lost-office-in-wtc/
again with you jimmeh, you do not exactly lack stridency in defending nato and the MOD’-guardian newspaper.
seems to be a particularly severe dose of wooden-mirror syndrome doing the rounds.
I have not become more pro-Putin, I have not become more pro-war, but I have become more pro-Russian. Because my nationality is thrown in my face as an accusation. They tell me that I’m lying because I’m Russian.
Every hole now oozes Russophobia. The promoters of this hatred invite everyone to join, assuring that this does not resemble anti-Semitism, that this is high moral behavior and does not make you a racist. And such an invitation implies support for Ukraine, which has long been going this way of hatred, justifying any dirt, if only it would help to destroy the Russians.
I didn’t become more pro-Putin, I became more defensive because I get attacked more often. I get surprise attacks from people whom I genuinely believed in what they were saying. Now, I think if they appear to be so f*cking wrong about me, then perhaps they were wrong on other things too?
Now, you have the opportunity to discuss other changes in me. Like, it’s getting colder and I’m thinking about changing T-shirts and flip-flops for a sweater and shoes. Or, I have new hair cut. Or, one more thing, nails, they grow back, you may know, so I have to trim my nails from time to time.
Aren’t them intriguing topics to discuss? Any will do, as long as one wishes to avoid direct answers to direct questions, right?
Dear Tatyana,
Looks to me that you are dealing with a lot of trolls on this comments thread.
They’ll never give you straight answers to questions you ask, they split hairs and they seem to make up the bulk of comments on this thread.
Perhaps you (and all of us) would be better off not talking to them at all as they’ll just go off on tangents quibbling over the status of the Crimea Bridge and trying to justify the bombing on it regardless of whether or not it was being used for military supplies.
If it was still being used by civilians at the time of the explosions – and the driver of the truck that exploded, and the people in the car that happened to pass by the truck at the time it exploded appear to have been civilians – then there may be a good case that the bombing was a terrorist attack. But you would know better than I do whether the bridge has been used by both civilians and the military since February 2022 up to the time of the bombing.
If there is a silver lining in this cloud, it may well be that if the bombing had been carried out by the Ukrainians, it represents an act of desperation on their part that they would resort to such actions against civilians. This surely is not the act of a nation that is supposedly winning a “war”.
Thank you for explaining your changing stance. I hadn’t noticed people here denouncing you for lying; perhaps it’s happening somewhere else, or maybe I’m just unobservant. FWIW, I have found your posts interesting.
“We don’t yet *know* who blew up the train which (it appears) seriously damaged the Kerch Bridge”
It wasn’t the train, so the answer to that question is “nobody”.
“I very much doubt if the UA used suicide bombers.”
Then it wasn’t the UA, then. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t someone acting under orders from Kiev.
“But a brave man or woman starting a timer to detonate a bomb on an enemy bridge and hopefully escaping is committing an act of war, not terrorism.”
If you are to look at the CCTV footage you will see that it is very unlikely that anyone escaped, so if it was a “man or woman starting a timer to detonate a bomb on an enemy bridge “, they set it blow up a lorry that some unsuspecting victim was driving. That’s terrorism.
How can you say the referenda were not fair, when all you give are the unlikelihood of the high result, and a list of questions you think one particular person may not know the answers to? If you know the answers to those questions, give them, and your sources. Then you may be able to say the referenda were shams. Until then it’s in the air.
On the important part of Craig Murray’s post
“Why I think there’s a one-in-six chance of an imminent global nuclear war”
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Dod9AWz8Rp4Svdpof/why-i-think-there-s-a-one-in-six-chance-of-an-imminent
The “analysis” skips the important hidden currents – such as British (open & subversive) activities to retain influence in Europe and East Asia (China), (open & subversive) attempts to reduce Germany’s economic dominance by several lesser actors, American quite open efforts to grab everything which is left unsupervised, Russia’ and China’s subtle counter efforts to keep European market alive etc. (Ukraine by itself, with all their fascism & nazism is, of course, just a minor theater in a bigger game). But IMHO, it is a worthy addition to the topic.
Moderators – I am not going to comment on this. This is just an info – Craig’s post made me worried, that current situation might be different from the “normal” per-election American circus, moreover that we don’t see the usual in such cases activity of the retired “Fathers” in the media with their usual words of peace.
Wise words in a world gone mad from Jeffrey Sachs:
Jeffrey Sachs: end Ukraine proxy war or face “armageddon” (The Grayzone, 9 Oct 2022) – YouTube, 26m 25s
The professor is a hugely honourable and brave man. He knows that by stating the truth in the belly of the Hegemon he will be demonized by both US war parties and their war machine media. A vanishingly rare figure unwilling to sacrifice his integrity.