Young Master Smeet
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
On that theme:
This Twitter Thread from Iraq Body Count
Reminds us of how many civilians died during operation Shock and Awe during the Invasion of Iraq:“The rate at which civilians were killed by invading US-led forces in the 21 days from 20 March–9 April (invasion to “fall of Baghdad”) was 315 per day – so high compared to the following 2-year period it could not fit on the same intensity graph:”
(I honestly can’t recall talk about civilian casualties at the time, there might have been mention, but it just goes to show the power of the doctrine of worthy and unworthy victims and the way the press can pull focus).
I doubt it’s that far from the carnage Russia is inflicting on Ukraine.
No-one would disagree that in the drunkard scenario, if you believe your life to be in jeopardy, you may use the necessary force – up to and including slaying the aggressor – to defend it.
Likewise, whilst we believe we have a route to peaceful socialism, should a recalcitrant minority try to prevent us, we shall use the minimum necessary force to defend ourselves, just as existing social structures would do for enforcing their rules over parking fines.
As wars between states are antithetical to the interests of the working class – destroying lives and livelihoods, we argue that workers should act in such a way as to end the inter state conflict. We take the same approach to wars between mafia gangs.
“YMS, as our war games expert, does this make sense as a strategy? It does seem to be that that is their strategy, cynical and a mug’s game for those called upon to die for the Ukrainian state as it is.”
It’s pretty much the strategy in Palestine, and in any asymmetric war (and it is kind of the foundational principle of guerrilla war, keep the enemy engaged until a real army arrives).
As a minimal, and rational strategy, making the cost of Russian victory as high as possible makes sense. The problem is, I think the Kremlin is prepared to pay a high price: I didn’t think they’d start the war, since Ukraine has a sizeable modern army, losses would be inevitably heavy.
The Pentagon is quoting about 10% losses for Russia, which is about par for a modern full-on war (Iraq was preceded by ten years of siege to avoid that sort of level of casualties). Even if that sort of death rate continues, even if Ukrainians are killing more Russians than they lose, Ukraine will eventually fall to attrition: possibly Russia might back off due to the sanctions, but I suspect not, and full mobilisation might occur.
Alan,
indeed, however, the wargamers seem to have called it.Alan,
according to this guy, it looks like the Russians are probably on schedule:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzMThey’ve got to slow down due to logistics, also, the Ukrainians have flooded the land round Kyiv, which means mud stops the Russians going off road.
Socialist Alternative (In Russia)
Translate gives:“Well, morning everyone. There is so little good in it. Propaganda media – TASS, Interfax and RIA Novosti – at the same time issued news that work was allegedly being carried out in Ukraine to create nuclear weapons. And that is why Putin is bombing Ukrainian cities. More and more new tales come up with state propaganda, otherwise why didn’t Yanukovych, with whom Putin is friends, stop all this and didn’t tell earlier?
“Meanwhile, anti-war actions have begun in the Far East, which are dispersed by the police. More than 60 people were detained in Vladivostok and Irkutsk, and at least 70 in Novosibirsk.”
If True, the Kremlin is scraping the propaganda barrel.
The same outfit also published this discussion on the operation of the new laws on speech restrictions, short version, it’s impermissible to call for troops out or sanctions and to *knowingly* spread false rumours – I expect, though, even if the process remains remotely fair on that one, the process will become the punishment, and people will be detained while cases are heard.
I’m getting these things via:
Edmund Griffiths who’s spoken with us a few times.“The WSM blog
https://www.worldsocialism.org/wsm/2022/02/26/no-war-between-peoples-no-peace-between-classes/”
Surely Zelenskyy not Zelenko?
Statement of the Confederation of Revolutionary Anarcho-Syndicalists
“The first shot was fired by the stronger, predatory and arrogant of the bandits – the Kremlin. But, as always happens in imperialist conflicts, behind the immediate cause lies a whole tangle of disgustingly stinking reasons: this is the international struggle for gas markets, and the desire of the authorities of all countries to divert the attention of the population from the tyranny of “sanitary” dictatorships, and the struggle of the ruling classes of the countries of the former Soviet Union for the division and redistribution of the “post-Soviet space”, and larger-scale and global contradictions, and the struggle for world domination between NATO, led by the USA and China, challenging the old hegemon and fastening its “little brother” in the Kremlin to its chariot. Today these contradictions give rise to local wars. Tomorrow they threaten to turn into a Third World Imperialist War.”
Statement of the Revolutionary Workers Party
in Russian: can’t vouch for the bona fides of the group, but still interesting to get a purportedly dissident voice from within the Russia milieu, as it were.
Google translate is at least intelligible, but I, obviously, can’t vouch for accuracy.
“No considerations of “containment of NATO”, no criticism of the Ukrainian political regime and other geopolitical nonsense can justify this massacre! Putin talks about the “anti-people junta” and about the fact that the Russian army is allegedly trying to liberate Ukraine from the “Nazis”. But the Russian regime is no better than the regime in Ukraine. And the only one who has the right to liberate Ukraine from the ultra-liberal nationalist dictatorship is the Ukrainian proletariat, and not Russian imperialism! There is nothing fair in this war. There are only imperialist interests of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation and dirty haggling with the US and EU bourgeoisie. And in the name of realizing these interests, which are purely alien to the working class, the blood of the workers of Ukraine and Donbass, the soldiers of Russia, the sons of the working class, is now shed.”
Convinced that Nato will never reject Ukraine’s membership, Putin has now taken his own steps to block it. By invading Donetsk and Luhansk, he has created a “frozen conflict”, knowing the alliance cannot admit countries that don’t control all their borders. Frozen conflicts already cripple Georgia and Moldova, which are also split by pro-Russian statelets. Now Ukraine joins the list. There is speculation about what will happen next but from his standpoint, it is not actually necessary to send troops further into the country. He has already taken what he needs.
130,000 Russian troops, versus about 215,000 active personnel in teh Ukrainian army, 6,500 tanks, about 7,000 combat armored vehicles, 1,500 combat aircraft, and more than 350 ships.(Wikipedia) – I can’t see that being enough, even a lightning strike on Kyiv would leave the army intact, so long as it can supply itself, they’d have to watch for the counter-punch. The US at its greatest extent had 100K troops in Afghanistan, but the Afghans didn’t have armour or planes.
A useful wee article from Declassifed
“Dearlove said that in the run-up to the 2000 Russian election, he had been approached by a senior KGB officer in London asking for MI6’s help in getting Putin elected. The officer asked if Blair would be willing to attend the opera alongside Putin.
“We had a long discussion in London whether Tony Blair should accept the invitation or not, and we decided on balance that this was an unusual and unique opening and we accepted the invitation,” Dearlove said.”
“The Foreign Office documents ask Blair to lobby for BP regarding the bankruptcy of the Russian oil company, Sidanco, in which BP had bought a 10% stake in 1997 for $571-million.
This “highlighted the problems faced by foreign investors”, the document notes, before the rest of the line is censored. The document then notes: “A deal was cut in December enabling BP… to hold their stake in Sidanco and begin implementation of the recovery plan to release Sidanco from bankruptcy.””
In this BBC article shows that really the propagandists can summon up very little by way of UK interest in the situation, other than credibility of a force based order (the nearest they get is the ‘principle of national self determination’, but that kind of breaks down when the Russian main casus belli is the areas of Russian population arbitrarily included in Ukrainian territory.
This is fascinating essay by (allegedly) Putin:
Here
“What can be said to this? Things change: countries and communities are no exception. Of course, some part of a people in the process of its development, influenced by a number of reasons and historical circumstances, can become aware of itself as a separate nation at a certain moment. How should we treat that? There is only one answer: with respect!”“I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia. Our spiritual, human and civilizational ties formed for centuries and have their origins in the same sources, they have been hardened by common trials, achievements and victories. Our kinship has been transmitted from generation to generation. It is in the hearts and the memory of people living in modern Russia and Ukraine, in the blood ties that unite millions of our families. Together we have always been and will be many times stronger and more successful. For we are one people.”
He considers the ‘anti-Russian’ agenda to be the work of 3rd Parties on Ukraine.
The whole thing reads very much like what we can expect from British patriots should Scotland ever gain independence…
Re: Nordstream: the War nerd discussion touches on this, noting that Putin has more leverage over Ukraine once it’s done, so they add it as another reason why invasion is unlikely now.
Re: way out. Paul Mason has been pushing the line that NATO can keep the principle that Ukraine could join, but in practice refuse to admit a state to a defensive alliance that is in a current state of war with a disputed border.
