Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,149 replies, 37 voices, and was last updated 3 days, 4 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
TW appears (not for the first time) to be confused. On the one side he has frequently said he supports the Chinese regime, a regime that has said that Sovereignty should be upheld, yet on the other hand he supports the frontier change that Putin is trying to impose by force.
Let’s not forget that the reasons that Putin start of this was the “mistreatment” of ethnic Russians in The Ukraine and the possible expansion of the EU and or NATO.
The speech below was made BEFORE the Crimean/Donbas occupation, it shows that the aim was border change from the very beginning, not a resolution that solved these “problems” in any other way.
“I am determined to solve (1) the Ukrainian question and (2) to see to it that a change is made in the relationship between Russia and The Ukraine that shall ensure a peaceful co-existence. In this I am resolved to continue to fight until either the present Ukrainian government is willing to continue to bring about this frontier change or until another Ukrainian Government is ready to do so. I am resolved to remove from Russian frontiers the element of uncertainty, the everlasting atmosphere of conditions resembling civil war. I will see to it that in the West there is, on the frontier, a peace precisely similar to that on our other frontiers.”
So what is it, TW do you support the aim of frontier change as it was outlined above? In the light of the recent China, is the pre war statement still a reasonable one that you are happy about? It’s a straightforward question, are you happy with the ideas that were put forward in the speech, or do you not?
l Macron, has said China’s engagement in peace in Ukraine is a “good thing”.
Macron told reporters that he would visit China in early April, in part to seek Beijing’s help with ending the war.
He said: “China must help us put pressure on Russia so that it never uses chemical or nuclear weapons, (an effort) which China has already made, and that it stops its aggression as a precondition for talks.”
“TW appears (not for the first time) to be confused. On the one side he has frequently said he supports the Chinese regime, a regime that has said that Sovereignty should be upheld, yet on the other hand he supports the frontier change that Putin is trying to impose by force.”
Sovereignty should be upheld unless it is Nazi sovereignty. Russia is putting an end to the threat of NATOstani/Nazi violence. The more long range weapons the Nazis have the further they’re pushed back from
Russia’s borders. It’s a very simple equation. Nothing confusing about it at all.“Let’s not forget that the reasons that Putin start of this was the “mistreatment” of ethnic Russians in The Ukraine and the possible expansion of the EU and or NATO.”
That is true.
“The speech below was made BEFORE the Crimean/Donbas occupation, it shows that the aim was border change from the very beginning”
No, that is merely your mistaken interpretation of the speech.
“not a resolution that solved these “problems” in any other way.”
I beg to differ. The destruction of the NATOstani/Nazi puppet government in Kiev will solve at least one problem. The Nazi problem.
“I am determined to solve (1) the Ukrainian question and (2) to see to it that a change is made in the relationship between Russia and The Ukraine that shall ensure a peaceful co-existence. In this I am resolved to continue to fight until either the present Ukrainian government is willing to continue to bring about this frontier change or until another Ukrainian Government is ready to do so.”
“Frontier change” obviously means a change from threats on Russia’s border to non-threats on
Russia’s border.“I am resolved to remove from Russian frontiers the element of uncertainty, the everlasting atmosphere of conditions resembling civil war. I will see to it that in the West there is, on the frontier, a peace precisely similar to that on our other frontiers.””
And there you have it. Plain as day.
“So what is it, TW do you support the aim of frontier change”
A peaceful border?
“as it was outlined above?”
What is your problem with peace?
“In the light of the recent China, is the pre war statement still a reasonable one that you are happy about?”
Peace is reasonable, yes.
“It’s a straightforward question, are you happy with the ideas that were put forward in the speech, or do you not?”
I am. I am for good things and against bad things.
TS argues that there can be a just war. In the case of Ukraine, Putin conducted a humanitarian invasion and a war of national defence.
It was a pre-emptive war built upon Putin’s speculation of the imagined grounds that Ukraine was an existential threat to LPR and DPR and to Russia itself from NATO eastward expansion. Perceived threats by Putin as no actual invasion of the separatist republics had taken place and no NATO bases had been created on Ukrainian territory.
Why was not the Baltic states’ earlier actual membership seen as even a bigger threat as it created a corridor to Russia’s second city St Petersburg? Grounds also now exist for the invasion of Finland once it formally enters NATO. Will it happen?
The claim of genocide can either be 6400 DPR-LPR dead, the majority killed several years previously and the majority being armed militia rather than civilians. OCHR’s estimate is 3,106 civilian deaths (7,000–9,000 wounded) on BOTH sides of the ceasefire lines.
Or was it the cultural UN definition of genocide, the extinction of Russian (and Hungarian) languages?
TS has avoided connecting the war with Ukraine’s imminent membership of the EU, although it was the trigger for the Maidan protests back in 2014.
“TS argues that there can be a just war.”
I do. Fighting Nazism is just.
“In the case of Ukraine, Putin conducted a humanitarian invasion and a war of national defence.”
Yes.
“It was a pre-emptive war built upon Putin’s speculation of the imagined grounds that Ukraine was an existential threat to LPR and DPR and to Russia itself from NATO eastward expansion.”
You are editorialising Alli-in with the CIA. All-in thinks that because the Guardian didn’t write about Ukraine’s troop build up and imminent invasion of the Donbass that no such thing was about to happen. Following this smooth brained ligic D-day never happened either because the Times of London never reported on the invasion plans.
“Perceived threats by Putin as no actual invasion of the separatist republics had taken place and no NATO bases had been created on Ukrainian territory.”
Ukraine invaded the republics in 2014.
“Why was not the Baltic states’ earlier actual membership seen as even a bigger threat as it created a corridor to Russia’s second city St Petersburg?”
It is a threat and it may well be dealt with. But Nazis aren’t slaughtering Russian speaking civilians on a daily basis in those countries.
“Grounds also now exist for the invasion of Finland once it formally enters NATO. Will it happen?”
Possibly if NATO bases are built there, certainly if missile silos are.
“The claim of genocide can either be 6400 DPR-LPR dead, the majority killed several years previously and the majority being armed militia rather than civilians. OCHR’s estimate is 3,106 civilian deaths (7,000–9,000 wounded) on BOTH sides of the ceasefire lines.
Or was it the cultural UN definition of genocide, the extinction of Russian (and Hungarian) languages?”
Had the Ukrainian Nazi invasion not been disrupted by Russia’s entry in to the conflict: both.
“TS has avoided connecting the war with Ukraine’s imminent membership of the EU, although it was the trigger for the Maidan protests back in 2014.”
Didn’t talk about the price of tea in China either. Not relevant.
Back in 2014, no doubt that Western propaganda tried to promote pro-EU policies but equally Russia also tried to influence opinions.
Taking advantage of what amounted to insurrections, Russian troops entered Crimea and also the Donbas.
The International Court of Justice has held “the right of every state to conduct its affairs without outside interference, and that an alleged right of intervention could not find a place in international law.”
One of our goals in the SPGB is the abolition of the nation-state. We don’t recognise that countries are natural entities but artificial creations. That is why we accept the re-drawing of any border to avoid war.
I very much doubt you ever read what we wrote 2014 but it has remained consistent and here is a reminder.
“Ukraine is now in the throes of full-scale civil war.
On one side – the ‘Maidan’ movement, the new government it brought to power in Kiev, the European and American backers of that government and (behind the scenes) the Western-oriented business magnates or ‘oligarchs’.
On the other side – the resistance movement known as the ‘Anti-Maidan’, a collection of armed groups in the country’s eastern regions (which are also fighting one another), the Russian government with its secret services and the Russia-oriented oligarchs.
Both the Maidan and the Anti-Maidan are basically nationalist movements (Ukrainian nationalist in one case, Russian nationalist in the other). Both feed on ethnic hatred. Both are willing to massacre unarmed civilians identified with the other side. They fight for the interests of different sections of Ukraine’s capitalist class. They have nothing to offer working people except further suffering, bloodshed and privation, perhaps even famine…”“Yanukovych, faced with the alarming prospect of the severance of East Ukraine’s economic ties with Russia, announced that he would not sign the agreement with the EU after all. Thereby he set off the Orange protests and the current crisis.
This time, it seems, Ukraine has to make a definite choice. It cannot move toward membership in both the EU and the EAEC. That is unacceptable to both organizations. Ukraine would become the gap through which Russian or Kazakh goods (say) could enter the EU or German or Polish goods enter the EAEC, effectively turning Europe and the post-Soviet region into a single customs union.”“Those… who seek to justify Russian action to a greater or lesser extent resort to the largely ad-hominem argument of guilt by association. If you don’t lend support, even qualified support, to Russia then you are, by default, somehow supporting NATO. This remains so even if you condemn both sides.
NATO is the imperialist tool of the world hegemon, the USA, so those who resist it are by definition anti-imperialist and require understanding at least, not condemnation, or so goes the argument. Those who position themselves on the left, but condemn Russia, are supposedly social-imperialists.
Taking an active pro-Ukraine stance against Russian aggression is to become a perhaps unwary ally of a virulent nationalism…”“The US and EU capitalist blocs are using the military threat of a revived NATO against Russia as part of the western capitalist attempt at influencing the external orientation of Ukraine towards Europe… Ukraine has decided to pursue membership of NATO, and clearly the western capitalist powers regard the Russian ‘near abroad’ as their own sphere of influence…Russia went to war with Georgia in August 2008 when Georgia sought to join NATO. Russia could not allow this and Russia halted NATO expansion into the Caucasus…”
=============================In fact, this forum featured a thread on the Euromaidan protests. A taste of the posts here
“…the Western Powers are using movements to which they claim to be ideologically opposed to further their ends. That it’s not about “democracy” but realpolitik as to which sphere of influence the Ukraine is to fall into: the West’s (Germany’s in particular) or Russia’s…”
“I’m still inclined to believe that those throwing Molotov cocktails at the police in Kiev will be ultra-nationalist quasi-fascists from that part of the Ukraine which was annexed by Russia from Poland in 1940 and which had previously been part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and which supplied Nazi Germany with concentration camp guards and non-German members of the Waffen SS. So, no sympathy for them. The last thing they wanted is political democracy. Mind you, the government side is just as bad. Some choice, fascism or stalinism.”
“There are already indications that part of the country won’t accept the new regime. The map at the end of this article from RT (Russian government world TV) shows what these areas might be.It is also ominous that in other reports RT is referring to the people living there as “Russians” rather than Russian-speaking Ukrainians as well as referring to the western part of the country as “Galicia””
“One mafia opposed the mafia that was in charge, and co-ordinated the discontent in the government, and found muscle through the fash (and maybe lost control of the muscle). The mafias had relations with groups in Europe and in Russia, who sponsored them. One mafia had friends in the unions (in the East).Our position (and Stop the War’s) should be clear: we are against the mafia. We don’t support anyone dying for either side, and we don’t support “our” state sending anyone to the theatre to kill or be killed. We have no interest in where the borders are drawn, but we do care that effective and meaningful democracy be restored.”
Kiev’s parliament is voting on Thursday to establish a National Guard of 20,000 people – recruited from activists involved in the recent pro-Western protests as well as from military academies – to strengthen Ukraine’s defences. Ukraine’s national security chief Andriy Parubiy said the Guard would be deployed to “protect state borders, general security and prevent “terrorist activities”. Reading the above report i foresee that the neo-nazi nationalists will now be legitimised and given weapons to reinforce their influence against any liberal elements. Official Brownshirts. We now await the SS to be established.”
================We have always been critical of both sides other war
AH – “I am resolved to remove from Russian frontiers the element of uncertainty, the everlasting atmosphere of conditions resembling civil war. I will see to it that in the West there is, on the frontier, a peace precisely similar to that on our other frontiers.””
And there you have it. Plain as day.
Perhaps not as plain as you think.
The speech you applaud so vigorously wasn’t a speech by Putin about the Ukraine. I changed Germany to Russia and Czechoslovakia to Ukraine.
The speech you support was made by a certain Adolf Hitler about the Sudeten Germans in 1938.
So considering that you think that all Nazi supporters should be shot, perhaps you should consider shooting your self!!
https://youtu.be/96gjjkOZpfg?t=1310
The interesting point is that he seems to be claiming the immediate objective is to ‘lock down’ Donetsk and Luhansk, and maybe over three years(!) push all the way to the Dnipro for a new border.
On a material level, the resources in the Donbas would be enough to repay the cost of the war to Russia…
Further to the financing of Wagner, it is entering into commercial contracts with its various African clients.
https://socialistbanner.blogspot.com/2023/02/wagner-in-africa.html
“Taking advantage of what amounted to insurrections, Russian troops entered Crimea and also the Donbas.”
As usual All-in with whatever the fuck propaganda narrative NATOstani MSM throws at you you are entirely wrong. Russia already had troops in Crimea at the Sevastopol naval base. Zero Russian troops entered Donbass. A great deal of the Ukrainian army changed sides though and fought for the Donbass republics with the weapons, both heavy and light, they’d taken with them.
“The International Court of Justice has held “the right of every state to conduct its affairs without outside interference”
Indeed, and yet that didn’t stop NATOstan from interfering.
“and that an alleged right of intervention could not find a place in international law.””
Well, that’s simply not true as their is a right to pre-emptive self defence. If you’re coming over to my house with a loaded gun waving in the air saying how you’re going to shoot me I’m well within my rights to plug you before you walk up my driveway.
“One of our goals in the SPGB is the abolition of the nation-state. We don’t recognise that countries are natural entities but artificial creations. That is why we accept the re-drawing of any border to avoid war.”
That is what all Marxists aspire to but you are not Marxists. You are Utopian idealists. You inhabit a fantasy world located in your belly buttons. It’s why are so ineffectual and will forever remain so.
“I very much doubt you ever read what we wrote 2014 but it has remained consistent and here is a reminder.”
No thanks. You are informed by the NATOstani psyops and grandiose delusions of spontaneous revolutions. You’re analysis is crap.
““Yanukovych, faced with the alarming prospect of the severance of East Ukraine’s economic ties with Russia, announced that he would not sign the agreement with the EU after all. Thereby he set off the Orange protests and the current crisis.”
And what of the 5 billion dollars the US funneled in to the country to foment color revolution? That played no role? You see, your analysis is crap. Give you a join the dots picture of an elephant and you’d end up with an apple. You have no understanding of geopolitics whatsoever.
“This time, it seems, Ukraine has to make a definite choice. It cannot move toward membership in both the EU and the EAEC. That is unacceptable to both organizations. Ukraine would become the gap through which Russian or Kazakh goods (say) could enter the EU or German or Polish goods enter the EAEC, effectively turning Europe and the post-Soviet region into a single customs union.””
Russia didn’t give a crap about the EU, it was concerned with NATOstani encroachment and the slaughter of ethnic Russians on its border.
““Those… who seek to justify Russian action to a greater or lesser extent resort to the largely ad-hominem argument of guilt by association. If you don’t lend support, even qualified support, to Russia then you are, by default, somehow supporting NATO. This remains so even if you condemn both sides.
NATO is the imperialist tool of the world hegemon, the USA, so those who resist it are by definition anti-imperialist and require understanding at least, not condemnation, or so goes the argument. Those who position themselves on the left, but condemn Russia, are supposedly social-imperialists.
Taking an active pro-Ukraine stance against Russian aggression is to become a perhaps unwary ally of a virulent nationalism…””I think this is all about daddy issues for you lot. You got spanked too much as a child and now rebel against all authority. You’re are living examples of zlenin’s infantile disorder. You understand nothing in a profound way.
Here Scott Ritter talks Ukrainian casualties starting 11:12. He estimates 350,000 KIA.
Ritter starts off by quoting Prigozhin as an authority for 135,000 *verifiable* dead. By whom?
And says Prigozhin isn’t prone to exaggerate when you earlier in response to the news that there is dissent between Wagner and the Russian regular army said Prigozhin does embellish the facts.
Ritter provides no source for Ukraine’s 350,000 KIA, 350,000 wounded and 100,000 MIA.
His figure for Russian casualties is also given without source, 95,000 casualties, an almost 1/1 ration of dead to wounded which returns to your earlier exchange with BD on statistics.
Hitchens’s general rule for rejecting certain knowledge claims states what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
Ritter claims Russian victory by Autumn at the latest.
Things will have to happen from what we have not yet witnessed any evidence for if that is the case.
I will mention Putin’s offer back in 2014 of $15 billion in loans and cheaper gas to counter the EU promises.
If Putin couldn’t buy Ukraine, he tried to steal it.
NATO is the imperialist tool of the world hegemon, the USA, so those who resist it are by definition anti-imperialist and require understanding at least, not condemnation, or so goes the argument. Those who position themselves on the left, but condemn Russia, are supposedly social-imperialists.
Q? Is that you? Q Anon one world government conspiracies. Yet you have added SPGB to your list of supporters! Novel to say the least.
Hope all runs okay for ya Q… me, I am flummoxed with intrigue 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.