Forum Replies Created
Well, it seems that that was the helicopter of the interior minister.
from the Beeb:
There is no indication the crash was anything other than an accident, although witnesses said Russia’s war was to blame for the disaster.
“It was very foggy and there was no electricity, and when there’s no electricity there are no lights on the buildings,” local resident Volodymyr told the BBC. which is probably true…
Just to add some points:
Each organisation would have definite ends: i.e. a shoe factory might have the mission statement of ‘Providing enough shoes for the whole community’. Within that, they might have performance targets that “there should be shoes of varying purposes and designs that are long wearing and comfortable and able to resist water.” This provides a rational basis for decision making when assessing inputs. The chief thing is that socialist production is with a definite end in mind, which is to provide for the democratically agreed needs of the community. they would be aware of the global plan to ‘provide all human beings with sufficient footwear for their needs’ and would take part in discussions of how that could be achieved, and what resources (including human) would be needed.
Even today, project management software allows for project planning to achieve defined goals, and this would still be available in socialism.
I’ll add an important point that there can be no compulsion to labour, so we’re only providing each other with what we’re willing to work to provide each other.
As Alan says, other methods might be applied. For example stable matching algorithms might be useful (say for housing allocation) or adjusted winner auctions could be useful at a ‘wholesale’ level. There are some interesting tools at http://www.spliddit.org/ These all provide rational and computable approaches that could help get goods where they need to be to achieve our goals.
individual Anarchist actions in Russia The most interesting reports here are the rail sabotage and the possibility of fraternisation on the “zugzwang” of the front.
Interesting on the state of both armies’ morale. This war probably will be settled by a mutiny.
The TUC will hold a national ‘protect the right to strike’ day on Wednesday 1 February.
The announcement comes following a meeting of trade union leaders today.
Events will take place in different parts of the country against the Conservative’s new anti-strike legislation.
And members of the public will be invited to show their support for workers taking action to defend their pay and conditions.
More information will be provided in the coming weeks about planned activities.
Well, ok, nought like determined action…
Nice and clear from Chomsky:
It was not hard to predict, as we did over the months, that sooner or later Russia would resort to U.S.-U.K.-Israeli tactics: Quickly destroy everything that sustains a viable society. So they are now doing, arousing justified horror among decent people — joined by those who implement or justify these tactics with the “right agency”: us. The strategic incentive is clear enough, especially after Russia’s battlefield setbacks: Destroy the economy and the will to resist. All familiar to us.
Quite definitely war crimes, whether in Iraq, or Gaza, or Ukraine.
And some will still accuse him of being Pro-Putin. Also, interesting on the role of Democrat Presidents.
TS, no, let’s try this again:
Try this link, and then search within the page for “20,000”
Or is the Kremlin transcription service an imperialist stooge?
Neither of your links work. The Russian Minister of Defence would not have made such an error. Your source either has a typo, a mistranslation or is outright lying. It’s impossible to know which.
You might be Geoblocked, try searching for ‘Russian Ministry of defence’ and then click on their news link (or directly copy the URL into your browser).
Also, there is a version on Moon of Alabama:
But, to reiterate, my source is the official website of the Russian Ministry of defence.
Don’t know where that number comes from. Out of a hat? The actual number of recent volunteers for the Russian military exceeds 70,000.
My quote was from the Russian Minister of Defence, or is he a Guardianista bro?
I forgot: In the meantime, every precaution is being taken to prevent the deaths of civilians. : thousands will die of hypothermia and lack of sanitation, this is a flat out lie.
This appears to be the text of Shoigu’s speech.An increase in the fighting and troop strength of the Russian Armed Forces was necessary to stabilise the situation, defend the new regions, and launch additional offensives.
For this, a partial mobilisation was conducted. It served as a gauge of Russian society’s maturity and served as a rigorous test for both the nation and the armed forces.
Plans for mobilisation hadn’t been implemented since the Great Patriotic War. The actual mobilisation system was not completely adjusted to the changing economic relations.
Therefore, with the start of partial mobilisation, Russia encountered difficulties in notifying and recruiting citizens who are in the reserve.
Every flaw had to be immediately fixed. Military administration, formations, and units’ organisational and staff structures underwent changes as soon as possible.
There were immediate steps taken to enhance all forms of support.
Partial mobilisation measures were fully and on-time carried out. About 300,000 reserve citizens received military service calls.
The coordinated efforts of the state’s federal and regional authorities have been crucial in this situation.
Social activism is to be particularly emphasized. More than 20,000 people joined as volunteers before being called.
More than 830,000 people have been excused from conscription to help the nation’s economy, including those who work in the defence industry and a variety of other socially significant fields. Note that ratio, only 20,000 volunteers.
Control of the North Crimean Canal has restored water supply to the Crimean peninsula, which had been absent for eight years due to the water and energy blockade. This confirms this was a key objective. Not much discussed in the media.
So, Russia is expanding the size of its military:
Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu proposed calling up Russian citizens aged 21-30 for active duty, building up the personnel strength by another 30% and deploying 20 new divisions…The lower limit of the conscription age needs to be raised gradually from the current 18 years to 21 years and the upper limit from 27 years to 30 years, Shoigu said.
Having said they weren’t going to expand conscription after the resistance last time, this is a slightly worrying sign of how things are really going, that they need to draft more victims. Although this is being spun as a need for a greater military because of Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Putin claims “We will not engage in militarization of the country and militarization of the economy,” but if they draw more labour capacity out of the economy and into military idleness, wages will start to erupt and they will have to start intervening in industry to control prices.
This is also hard to square with: Putin stressed that the Russian Armed Forces were receiving all the required means: “We have no financing constraints and the country and the government give all that the Army requests. I hope that the response will be formulated accordingly and the corresponding results will be achieved.”
I will also note their estimate that NATO has squandered $97 billion into the war, just to emphasise why war is a crime against the whole of humanity, since that represents vast economic resources that are not being sent to satisfy human need.
The people of the regions exercised their right to self determination. Would you deny them that right?
Bwahaahahahahahahaha! As a matter of fact, I don’t believe there is a right of self determination for peoples, only people. But, even on a formal statist level, referendums in warzones aren’t very convincing at the best of times.
Shall I say it more slowly so you can understand child? D-e-N-a-z-i-f-c-a-t-i-o-n.
denazification ≠ regime change.
OK, we’ve a problem here. Ukraine was no longer a sovereign country. Its legitimate government had been overthrown in a US funded coup. Victoria Nuland publicly admitted to spending $5 billion on the overthrow of the government. She personally chose the new cabinet. This government launched the war in the Donbass which caused a massive refugee exodus and disenfranchised similar numbers of voters with sympathies toward Russia. This disenfranchisement ensured that all future governments, including the current one, are not legitimate. Kiev is Washington’s pawn. Washington scuttled peace talks with Russia and entirely funds its government and military apparatus. Ukraine, therefore, is not sovereign. So, an appeal to sovereignty is moot.
What’s that skippy? He’s moving the goalposts again? That played no part in Moscow’s causus belli there has been no mention from Moscow that their intention is to remove the illegitimate government. That would also be incompatible with annexation, since the point of the war would, Shirley, be to remove the installed government and allow a genuinely Ukrainian government to be formed, within it’s existing territory.
It did all these things. Russia strenuously argued for the implementation of the Minsk 2 Agreement which former Ukrainian and German presidents both recently agreed was a ruse to re-arm Ukraine. Russia also proposed a security agreement halting NATO’s eastern expansion which was summarily ignored by NATO. No ultimatums were issued, no attempt to go through the UN for a peace keeping force, etc. That Putin only decided at the last minute only compounds the crime not exonerating him.
Anyway, I don’t know if the Amnesty report on Russian action in occupied zones has landed here before, apologies if it has: but it’s worth a read, especially to see the faces of the victims of this war: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur50/5561/2022/en/
Let’s look at things from a slightly different angle: the commonly accepted doctrine of Just War.
Just cause: The reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot, therefore, be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. A contemporary view of just cause was expressed in 1993 when the US Catholic Conference said: “Force may be used only to correct a grave, public evil, i.e., aggression or massive violation of the basic human rights of whole populations.”
Russia has an arguable case here, claiming that they acted to protect the populations of Donetsk and Lugansk from shelling and further depredations by Kyiv (also, the later claim that Kyiv was organising for a massive onslaught to pacify those reasons). Now, the doctrine of national sovereignty would apply here, as Kyiv was putting down an internal revolt, so Moscow would need to rely on a case of grave violations of human rights (of which, see more below). This justification fails if it could be shown that Moscow had instigated the uprisings in those reasons to engineer a justification for war.
Competent authority: Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war. “A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice. Dictatorships (e.g. Hitler’s Regime) or deceptive military actions (e.g. the 1968 US bombing of Cambodia) are typically considered as violations of this criterion. The importance of this condition is key. Plainly, we cannot have a genuine process of judging a just war within a system that represses the process of genuine justice. A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice”.
This is interesting: Russia’s denial that it was going to invade, right up until the moment it did vitiates this criterion, that Moscow made no international appeals, or bilateral moves or publicly stated it had to act. Likewise, the shifting goalposts, from defending the Russian minority in Ukraine to the annexation of territory, means that Russia does seem to be delinquent in this regard.
Probability of success: Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success
Herein is Moscow’s gravest sin, plainly, the probability of success was low, their initial gamble didn’t pay off, and confrontation with a large military force that was going to require destruction and bloodshed far greater than the ill they were professing to address.
Now, whether their conduct in the war is within the realms of just war theory is a matter for another time, my point here is that their justification for war in the first place is sufficiently weak that it is plausible that even without atrocity their actions constitute war crimes.