ronwagn

China's aggression is changing the nature of sovereignty.

Recommended Posts

(edited)

Is Putin set on conquering Europe at any cost?  By imagining Russia to be uniquely evil, Western commentators misread its every move

By Paul Robinson, a professor at the University of Ottawa. He writes about Russian and Soviet history, military history and military ethics, and is author of the Irrussianality blog. He tweets at @Irrussianality.

https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/

Quote

 

The new year has begun in much the same way as the old one ended: with predictions that Russia could invade Ukraine before the snow melts. Behind these as-yet-unfulfilled prophecies, however, are some fairly shaky assumptions.

There are two factors behind any potential threat: capability and intention. There is little doubt that Russia has at its disposal the military force required to invade Ukraine. The question is whether it intends to do so. Underpinning the widespread belief that it does is an assumption that Russia is a malign actor, intent on doing bad things for the sake of doing bad things.

Typical of this kind of thinking is an article by Anne Applebaum published this week in The Atlantic. Analyzing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intentions, Applebaum tells readers Putin aims to “reinforce his autocracy, undermine all democracies – and push Russian political influence as far as it will go. Break up NATO. Destroy the European Union. Remove American influence from Europe and everywhere else, forever.” Along the way, he seeks also “to realize his long-standing dream of removing Ukraine from the map.”

Those are some ambitious intentions! Not only are they plainly unrealistic – eradicating American influence “everywhere” and “forever”! – but Putin has never publicly stated any of them, not even once. Determining others’ desires is difficult because it involves getting in their heads. To do that,  it’s worth paying attention to what they say. But Putin has never said he wishes to “remove Ukraine from the map,” “undermine all democracies” (in fact, he has good relations with many democratic states, such as Israel, India and Armenia), “break up NATO,” “destroy the European Union,” and so on. Applebaum is simply making this up.

Peoples’ intentions can also be deduced from what they do. For the Applebaums of the world, Russia’s record is one of aggression – against Ukraine, Georgia and the US, in the form of purported electoral interference and the like. From this they deduce a pattern and predict that the aggression of the past will be repeated in the future.

The problem with this type of analysis is that it only works if you cherry-pick appropriate examples and then interpret those examples in ways that reinforce your prejudices. According to Applebaum, for instance, Russia “invaded” Georgia in 2008 and this proves its innate malevolence. The reality of the 2008 Georgian war, however, is rather different – it was the Georgian side that fired the first shots. The pattern isn’t quite what Applebaum imagines.

In fact, detailed analysis of Russian behaviour reveals considerable caution and restraint, even when using military power. There is absolutely no precedent in post-Soviet times for anything like a full-scale invasion of Ukraine being launched without any provocation whatsoever.

This is a point that is well made in an article by Russian journalist Leonid Radzikhovsky in The Insider, a publication not exactly noted for being pro-Putin – on the contrary, it is a regular thorn in the Russian authorities’ side and is designated as a 'foreign agent' by the Ministry of Justice over links to overseas funding. Radzikhovsky comments that those who think Russia will invade Ukraine assume that Putin is a maniac in the mould of Adolf Hitler. But there is absolutely no reason to believe that he is. 

In 2008, Radzikhovsky notes, the Russians had destroyed the Georgian Army. They could have entirely conquered Georgia if they had wanted. Instead, they turned around and went home. Would Hitler have done such a thing? Certainly not.

Likewise, in 2014, following the Battle of Ilovaisk, the way was open for pro-Russian separatists to advance as far westwards as they wanted, “to seize Odessa, Kharkov, and go on to Kiev.” They could easily have been followed by the Russian Army, and the Ukrainians would have been in no position to resist. Kiev alleges Moscow’s forces were embedded alongside the separatists – a position Russia has consistently denied. Whatever the case, they didn’t push on further into Ukraine.

None of this suggests that Putin or the Russian leadership as a whole are Hitlerite lunatics bent on invading and occupying a foreign country. Rather, it points to a system that is prepared to use force when necessary, but which imposes very strict limits on it when it does. This is, of course, somewhat different to the approach of the United States and its allies, which have shown themselves quite willing to engage in total war, as they did in their invasion of Iraq.

Another way of determining intent is by means of what intelligence analysts call “indications and warning tables”. Lists are drawn up of indicators that, if detected, suggest some future event is imminent. The more of these that are observed, the more likely and imminent the event in question.

In the case of war, one indicator is efforts by the state leadership to prepare its people. It’s rare for a state just to jump into war out of the blue. The political groundwork has to be laid first so the population accepts it. So, if you spot a ramping-up of state-driven war rhetoric, you have grounds for suspecting hostile intent.

But as former Canadian intelligence analyst Egor Evsikov points out in a piece last week for the online journal iAffairs, there is absolutely no sign of this happening in Russia. On the contrary, says Evsikov,

The [Russian] media is mostly focused on Covid-19, vaccine rollouts and the economy. Tensions with NATO and the situation in Ukraine are mentioned, but mostly to mock Western media coverage about the possibility that Russia might invade Ukraine, or to emphasize the need to de-escalate through diplomacy.” 

This is hardly indicative of war. “A more plausible explanation of the Russian build-up [of forces near Ukraine] is that Putin wants to signal his intention to intervene should Ukraine attempt to re-capture territory seized by pro-Russian separatists,” argues Evsikov. This seems a sound conclusion.

It also contradicts what Radzikhovsky calls the “Western politicians and, after them, a crowd of political scientists, journalists and other prostitutes [who] scream about the invasion of Ukraine.” Surely they know better? Indeed, they do. But it suits them to say otherwise. For whatever reason, they have determined that tension with Russia is in their interests, and if the truth gets in the way of that, then the truth be damned.

As Radzikhovsky concludes, “All the presidents, senators, political science professors, famous publicists and journalists cannot lie so brazenly! Of course they can. Lying is their craft, and if they don’t lie, what will they say?” What indeed?

 

 

Edited by Tomasz
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2021 at 12:10 AM, frankfurter said:

Returning to the title... what is the threat from China exactly?  Has China a military base, armed with 100,000 soldiers and nuclear weapons, anywhere near the USA?  Has China bombed and invaded any country in the past 50 years?  Has China formed any military alliance with any country anywhere?  Do the Chinese consume more, pollute more per capita than the Americans?  Do the Chinese force all countries in the world to buy crude and gas in CNY and no other currency? Has China funded any separatist, any terrorist groups in America?

Check Tibet, Mongolia, Viet Nam and India.  Ask them how nice the Chinese are as neighbors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2022 at 8:20 PM, Andrei Moutchkine said:

We have Chinese all-you-can eat places serving your roo roadkill!

By the way Andrei, them roo's you love to eat ain't roadkill, only the best roo meat is allowed to be exported after stringent quality testing :) The rest we feed to our dogs and cats :) 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most important takeaway from all this is China is an open book known for stealing technology and making financial loans to Countries that can't pay it back. Still, I always think back to the history of DARPA and the technology and production of weapon systems that you only learn about a decade later.

I refer to President Trump commenting about missiles and their incredible speed; I further look back at the subtle change of Boeing's Company logo that resembles a hypersonic missile and the logo circles around. I believe we are way further advanced in weapons than we will ever disclose.

In the ’'80s and yes I'm up there in age I had a lifelong friend that joined the Air Force and was part of the nuclear weapons program, after a thorough and complete background check, he and the others in his class was received the highest level clearance, and he told him they we taken to an auditorium and dialed in on the United States most advanced weapon systems. Though he obviously could not elaborate, he started; he was stunned by the capabilities that the United States had in its arsenal. Several years later, he directed me to a discontinued weapon that could be used if a nato Country had a ground intrusion from the Russians. 

This weapon could be deployed by air, artillery, and mortars, and it would kill humans but leave the cities intact. If you are interested, do some research in modifying neutron weapons; and the program was ended because it was deemed inhumane. 

He retired but still must maintain the secrecy of the nature of what he was trained with. By the age of mid-’20s, he was getting grey-haired, much like what happens to former Presidents while in office or out of office.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out history of Ion Weapons are advanced directed energy weapons utilised by the Fire Caste of the Tau Empire. Ion Weapons typically are capable of engaging enemies at long range with high-energy streams of ionised subatomic particles, vaporising flesh and metal with equal ease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

The most important takeaway from all this is China is an open book known for stealing technology and making financial loans to Countries that can't pay it back. Still, I always think back to the history of DARPA and the technology and production of weapon systems that you only learn about a decade later.

I refer to President Trump commenting about missiles and their incredible speed; I further look back at the subtle change of Boeing's Company logo that resembles a hypersonic missile and the logo circles around. I believe we are way further advanced in weapons than we will ever disclose.

In the ’'80s and yes I'm up there in age I had a lifelong friend that joined the Air Force and was part of the nuclear weapons program, after a thorough and complete background check, he and the others in his class was received the highest level clearance, and he told him they we taken to an auditorium and dialed in on the United States most advanced weapon systems. Though he obviously could not elaborate, he started; he was stunned by the capabilities that the United States had in its arsenal. Several years later, he directed me to a discontinued weapon that could be used if a nato Country had a ground intrusion from the Russians. 

This weapon could be deployed by air, artillery, and mortars, and it would kill humans but leave the cities intact. If you are interested, do some research in modifying neutron weapons; and the program was ended because it was deemed inhumane. 

He retired but still must maintain the secrecy of the nature of what he was trained with. By the age of mid-’20s, he was getting grey-haired, much like what happens to former Presidents while in office or out of office.

 

 

 

The claim is: China is inferior and weak, it resorts to stealing technology. The USA is superior and strong; it resorts to stealing technology, resources, gold and cash reserves. 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tomasz said:

Is Putin set on conquering Europe at any cost?  By imagining Russia to be uniquely evil, Western commentators misread its every move

By Paul Robinson, a professor at the University of Ottawa. He writes about Russian and Soviet history, military history and military ethics, and is author of the Irrussianality blog. He tweets at @Irrussianality.

https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/

 

A very deceitful take on the situation IMO. This is just a Ukraine like excuse to save a dictatorial puppet regime by Russia. They did the same in Byelorussia recently. They people had huge demonstrations then Russia sent in support for their dictator. Then they encouraged him to fly in immigrants and encourage them to break into Poland. Poland is still resisting the attempts to forcefully invade its land. The neighboring Muslim countries will join together and assist each other in the long run. They are stuck between China and Russia but there are many Muslim countries that have been watching what China is doing to its Uighur Muslim people. Mongolia has just been told to stop using its native language in school also. 

Russia and China are biting off  more than they can chew in the long run. Meanwhile they are showing their imperialist goals very clearly. The world is far larger and greater than the sum of Russia and China which are dubious allies anyway. Both will eventually fall either from without or within. The people of both countries see the stupidity of taking on the whole world for the glory of the leaders for life, when peace would be much more beneficial to the people of China and Russia. 

https://news.yahoo.com/un-slams-kazakhstan-soldiers-seen-224129945.html

VOICES

 
JAN. 10, 2022 / 8:02 AM

In Kazakhstan, Russia follows a playbook it developed in Ukraine

By Lena Surzhko Harned, Penn State
   
In Kazakhstan, Russia follows a playbook it developed in Ukraine
Riot police officers block a street during a protest rally over a hike in energy prices in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on Wednesday. Protesters stormed the mayor's office in Almaty, as Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev declared a state of emergency in the capital. Photo by EPA-EFE

 

Jan. 10 (UPI) -- Add Kazakhstan to the list of former Soviet republics whose independence is being threatened by Russia. Russian leader Vladimir Putin is using a similar playbook in Kazakhstan to one that he has used over almost a decade to threaten the sovereignty of Ukraine.

What began as protests over rising fuel prices on Jan. 2, quickly escalated into violent clashes on the streets of Kazakhstan. On Wednesday, Kazakhstan President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, a firm ally of Putin's, requested support from the Collective Security Treaty Organization, of which Putin's Russian Federation is the leading member. Russia has responded decisively by sending paratroopers, special operations troops and equipment as part of a nearly 3,000-strong force to Kazakhstan.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

Tokayev explained his request by claiming that protesters are really "a band of terrorists" trained abroad. On Friday, Tokayev escalated the conflict: "I have given the order to law enforcement and the army to shoot to kill without warning," Tokayev said.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

As a scholar of post-Soviet Ukraine, Russia's involvement in Kazakhstan looks very familiar to me. It's similar to what happened in Ukraine beginning in 2014, when peaceful protesters were met with violence by the government and a protest grew into a revolution that ultimately overthrew the Russian-backed leadership of the country.

 

Dangerous neighborhood

Seizing on that moment of domestic unrest in 2014, Putin gave direct orders to annex Crimea, a Ukrainian territory home to a key Russian naval base. Shortly afterward, he supported a war mounted by so-called Russian-speaking separatists in Ukraine's eastern regions.

For more than eight years now, the Russian Federation has continued to support that conflict in Ukraine and has recently threatened Ukraine with a full invasion. This most recent version of Putin's aggression toward Ukraine came in November, when he staged 175,000 troops along the Ukraine border. His goal: to use a potential invasion as leverage to stop Ukraine from joining the alliance of Western countries known as NATO.

 

In Kazakhstan, as in Ukraine in 2014, the Russian government explains its military presence as appropriate and requested by a legitimate government. As in Ukraine, the Russian government emphasizes that external forces are responsible for unrest in the former Soviet republic. As in Ukraine, the Russian Federation has pointed out the need to protect a Russian-speaking population.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

These tendencies of the Russian government to assert dominion over former territories that it lost during the breakup of the Soviet empire demonstrate that Russia is willing to act quickly and do anything to keep control of its neighborhood. I see this as an important message about what the Western leaders can expect from a meeting with Russian officials in Geneva on Monday to discuss the conflict building again along Ukraine's border and Russia's demands that NATO not expand to Ukraine.

Soviet and Russian legacies

 

Russia has long seen Kazakhstan as within its sphere of influence. In a press conference on Dec. 23, Putin called Kazakhstan a "Russian-speaking country in every sense of the word."

Earlier Putin claimed that before the collapse of the Soviet Union, "Kazakhs never had a state of their own." In December 2020, two members of Russia's parliament claimed that territories of northern Kazakhstan were "a big gift" from Russia to Kazakhstan.

Such claims are reminiscent of the language that Putin has applied to Ukraine. He has often claimed that Ukraine was not a real country, including in an article published by the Kremlin in July, in which he claimed that "modern Ukraine is entirely the product of the Soviet era."

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

The use of the same terminology does not bode well for Kazakhstan.

Putin's references to a Russian-speaking population in Kazakhstan are reminiscent of the experience of Ukraine's Crimea region. In April 2014, Russian soldiers appeared on the streets of Crimea, forced Ukrainian soldiers to leave their posts, and oversaw a so-called referendum that allowed for Crimea to be integrated into the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation said then, and continues to claim, that its interest in Ukraine is a continued concern for the welfare of the Russian speakers in Ukraine, which in Russia's view is being oppressed.

Controversial Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovski claimed on Jan. 6, 2021, that Russian speakers in Kazakhstan are similarly oppressed by Kazakh language requirements. Zhirinovski is a radical figure in Russian politics, but it is usually assumed that he voices the more extreme claims of the Russian government.

Protecting from foreign invaders

Tokayev claimed that the protests in his country were fueled by the "free press" and foreign forces who were sponsoring terrorist activity in his country. The Russian government willingly accepted this terminology. Tokayev did not specify which external forces he meant.

Putin has long claimed that the Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine in 2014, which ousted his ally, President Viktor Yanukovich, was really a coup sponsored and coordinated by the United States.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

Similar arguments about outside influences were made by the embattled Belarusian dictator, Alexander Lukashenko, about the anti-government protesters in Russia-aligned Belarus in 2020.

The spokeswoman for the Russia Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, said on Thursday that there is a need to stop extremism in Kazakhstan. Her words came in response to European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell's concerns over the Russian troop deployment.

This consistent message supports Putin's narrative about the need to protect Russia and the countries in its neighborhood against what he regards as destabilizing influences like the United States and NATO, which, according to Putin, support and promote anti-government extremists and revolutions in the region.

Show of strength

Putin continues to cultivate an image as a decisive leader who responded to a call from a neighboring country to "help Kazakhstan overcome this terrorist threat."

His actions in Kazakhstan, I believe, are aimed at both internal and foreign audiences.

Domestically, Russian media see Russian troops as a part of a multilateral peacekeeping response, which includes troops from Belarus and Armenia. Deployment of so-called peacekeeping forces in Kazakhstan in the middle of instability and violence will be portrayed in Russia as a huge achievement for Putin.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

This is also a message to Ukraine and the West. Putin will not hesitate to show strength to achieve Russia's goals. Russia now has nearly 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border. And while there was a reported withdrawal of 10,000 soldiers in late December in a de-escalation effort, most of the troops and military equipment remain.

Geneva outlook

Negotiations in diplomacy require compromise. However, Russia is entering the talks in Geneva with an ultimatum toward NATO and the United States.

Russia's demands, according to Reuters, include a "halt to NATO enlargement, no deployment of its weapons systems in Ukraine and an end to provocative military exercises" in the region.

Russian action in Kazakhstan should serve as a sobering reminder to Western countries that Russia is willing to act decisively to protect its interests and retain its influence in the neighboring countries. The Conversation

Lena Surzhko Harned is an assistant teaching professor of political science at Penn State.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ADVERTISEMENT
 

 

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SUZNV said:

Propaganda was based on chopping up a long stream of history/event/truth bit by bit, which leaves room to inject lies or cherry picking facts. 

While politicians around the world was busying stirring up nationalism or blaming other countries and covering their lies. It is too bad most US people was busy with life and stocks and worrying for retirements or sometimes entitlement and vote based on what they think will benefit them the most in short term without really being informed the geopolitical pictures and history. Any problem in the world will blame the US first hand while ignore all the good part US did, for example: no WW3 and putting out the Marshal Plan for Western Europe competing welfare with Eastern bloc socialism and Russia, which now in turn, becoming the Welfare Standard that the Liberal in US was seeking for. 

Regardless of Trump, MAGA is just a political slogan yet the response from US newspapers is fascism, populism, US has never been great etc. This allow other countries' politicians to blame the US and the absence of defense from US media make them believe they were right, and that's how the true picture are ignored by all sides, regardless of the whole long chain of historical events make very little room for lies. 

Capitalism in modern time have no country, the same with Socialism. Both represent a bunch of aristocracy elites with capital or political power or natural resources flowing around globally. If US people are proud of their stock index, think again.  Any other countries institution/person who has large amount of USD can own these as well. When USD became the world currency, Wall Street (including US banks list on it)  is the  international assets. This means foreign élite/politicians have mutual interests in US politics to ensure their assets or their powers and US government bailed these international corporations out by US people's tax, and defend their benefit with US military.  Any GOV debt will need to pay someday, eventually in the future. Most of the geopolitical sanctions nowadays are about local elites vs global elites.

The key ideology that separated US to the rest of the world is the believe in Individualism and Decentralization of powers. The people votes for the government, the government ensure the execution of corporations, corporations employed the people. Government sliced in 3 branches:  legislative, executive and judicial. These 3 branches sliced to state and federal level. Another extra layer is Fed is sliced half private bank, half public officers.

USD as world currency broke this system gradually because it allows corporations to be owned globally, bankers globally, and therefor US government became global police where other country call US just the same US citizen called 911. While the people in the US bares all the cost and hated from any of the other 2 branches' misbehaviors.

If the US people understand this and strive to independent from government, they can balance the use of the system and control the global corporations for their own futures. Otherwise Global corporations control the US people votes and then the US government to ensure their establishment. And that's why there are so much lies, cherry piking facts and  reparation movements among US mainstream, politicians and education is just one of the channel. US Individualism is the arch enemy of Global Capitalism/Socialism/Liberalism. 

 

SUSNV, how did you get so smart and wise?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

https://news.yahoo.com/un-slams-kazakhstan-soldiers-seen-224129945.html

UN slams Kazakhstan after soldiers seen wearing UN helmets amid unrest

2c41c9f10cfd23b5fe8fa35f3c46b297
 
Kazakh soldiers are seen patrolling the streets in Almaty on January 10, 2022 (AFP/Alexandr BOGDANOV)
  •  
     
     
     
  •  
 
Mon, January 10, 2022, 4:41 PM·1 min read
 
 
In this article:
  •  
     
     
     
  • Stéphane Dujarric
    UN official
 
 
 

The United Nations on Monday criticized Kazakhstan after government soldiers there were seen wearing the UN peacekeepers' blue helmets during last week's violent unrest.

"We have conveyed our concern to the Permanent Mission of Kazakhstan directly on this issue, and we've received assurances from them that this issue had been addressed," UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters.

He added: "Any UN troop and police-contributing countries are to use UN insignia only when they are performing their mandated tasks as UN peacekeepers in the context of their deployment within a UN peacekeeping operation, as mandated by the UN Security Council."

 

Photos posted on social media showed several soldiers in Kazakhstan's main city of Almaty dressed in military fatigues and wearing blue helmets with UN insignia.

Kazakhstan issued an awkward statement in response, saying the helmets were the only part of UN gear worn by its soldiers.

"During the violent riots in Almaty, the Peacekeeping Unit of the Ministry of Defense of Kazakhstan (Kazbat) was put on high alert to assist and protect strategic infrastructure facilities of the city from the terrorists and extremists," Kazakhstan's mission to the UN said in a statement on Twitter.

"Except for the helmets that were worn as part of the official gear of local peacekeepers during the high threat, no 'UN' marked equipment was used."

Dozens of people were killed in clashes between protesters and government forces during historic violence in the Central Asian state last week in what authorities described as an attempted coup d'etat inspired by foreign forces.

Thousands were detained for questioning.

prh/md/crs/jh

 
Information on all of these countries and recent news. RCW

                  Central Asia, The Stans

Vzrwsnm2jo2-R-4buHaLt6NwZArpe69d8B9n5chQzpk89Mw4KpWrOPZ4Vz3e9bFtOx-7-UqGd8GXRpOhRl8EKM-gYcb-Z-Gxez3g4cacyc8w9FlPzajuQPARk9aVSnWew5RD0eU

 

Edited by ronwagn
reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wombat One said:

By the way Andrei, them roo's you love to eat ain't roadkill, only the best roo meat is allowed to be exported after stringent quality testing :) The rest we feed to our dogs and cats :) 

Good to know. The rumor is, nobody in Australia eats or grows roo, so it must be roadkill. Personally, I do like the taste.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2021 at 4:07 AM, Tomasz said:

 

Two, it would seem, that the US should not be at war with Russia and China at the same time.

 

Especially after saving their ass during WWII. Why are these countries so ungrateful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, RichieRich216 said:

The most important takeaway from all this is China is an open book known for stealing technology and making financial loans to Countries that can't pay it back. Still, I always think back to the history of DARPA and the technology and production of weapon systems that you only learn about a decade later.

I refer to President Trump commenting about missiles and their incredible speed; I further look back at the subtle change of Boeing's Company logo that resembles a hypersonic missile and the logo circles around. I believe we are way further advanced in weapons than we will ever disclose.

In the ’'80s and yes I'm up there in age I had a lifelong friend that joined the Air Force and was part of the nuclear weapons program, after a thorough and complete background check, he and the others in his class was received the highest level clearance, and he told him they we taken to an auditorium and dialed in on the United States most advanced weapon systems. Though he obviously could not elaborate, he started; he was stunned by the capabilities that the United States had in its arsenal. Several years later, he directed me to a discontinued weapon that could be used if a nato Country had a ground intrusion from the Russians. 

This weapon could be deployed by air, artillery, and mortars, and it would kill humans but leave the cities intact. If you are interested, do some research in modifying neutron weapons; and the program was ended because it was deemed inhumane. 

He retired but still must maintain the secrecy of the nature of what he was trained with. By the age of mid-’20s, he was getting grey-haired, much like what happens to former Presidents while in office or out of office.

 

 

 

I’ve been making the point about hypersonic missiles making much of the military obsolete for years. Yet a Trumper would buy more nukes. Lol Idiots. What will bases and conventional weapons do but die a quick death. Putins military on the border. They would last a few hours tops if total death was the goal. Same with any conventional military gathering. No place to hide boys. Just reality. Tech has killed conventional  military systems like Musk killed ICE cars. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boat said:

Especially after saving their ass during WWII. Why are these countries so ungrateful. 

Except it was the other way around - USSR saved the rest of the world.

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10.01.2022 at 00:21, nsdp said:

Не выгнать Россию из Международного банка расчетов. В этот момент вы не можете обменять рубль на какую-либо иностранную валюту. вы используете прямой бартер. В этот момент все зарубежные российские активы заморожены. Спросите у японцев, как сработало замораживание активов и исключение из IBS в 1941 году. Кроме того, российская нефть не может фрахтовать суда под иностранным флагом и не может заходить в российские гавани.    Грузы и суда, направляющиеся в Россию, не могут быть застрахованы. Как вы собираетесь экспортировать свое зерно без порта захода? Спросите у иранцев и Венесуэлы о бартерной торговле и проблемах с Международной морской организацией. Ваши корабли не могут покупать топливо в иностранных портах. Как ваши корабли возвращаются домой?

SPFS + CIPS (or SPFS + CUP) = BRICS Pay

You will not disable SWIFT, because incur huge losses and reduce confidence in the "main reserve currency of the world" to 0. You are tormented by driving planes with cash to Russia to pay for contracts on hydrocarbons, metals, wheat ...
In addition, Russia has had an analogue of SWIFT since 2014.
The SPFS (Financial Message Transfer System) of the Bank of Russia appeared in 2014. It was originally conceived as an alternative channel of interbank interaction in case the country is disconnected from SWIFT. Now SPFS accounts for about 20% of the total number of financial transactions within the Russian Federation.
And NSPK Mir is an analogue of Visa and Mastercard payment systems.
China since 2002 has its own national payment system in China UnionPay (CUP) and China International Payments System (CIPS) plus digital yuan ....

And before the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing, we will probably))) sign an agreement on the unification of the national payment systems SPFS-CIPS (or SPFS-CUP) into one. Subsequently, we will connect India and create BRICS Pay "

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Boat said:

Особенно после спасения их задницы во время ВОВ. Почему эти страны такие неблагодарные. 

1. If the US decides to attack Russia, they will be destroyed in preparation for war * during the "threatened period" the US will receive a "preemptive nuclear missile strike" which is guaranteed (98%) to destroy the US / NATO.
(At the same time, systems will be disabled: missile attack warnings, communications, location, navigation, reconnaissance ... and power supply)))
Since 2012, the United States is guaranteed to lose the "Nuclear War with Russia", and from 2025, the percentage of the guarantee of the victory of the Russian Federation will strive for 100, and the degree of damage inflicted on Russia will tend to zero idiots. And the management knows about it !!!
In this version, you will present victory over yourself to Russia and China.
2. If the United States decides to start a war with the PRC, it can only win by inflicting RNW - having spent the entire stock of strategic nuclear weapons (you have almost no tactical nuclear weapons, you cannot produce nuclear weapons, modern ICBMs, BBs, or strategic submarines with bombers - you Russia is ridiculously funny, even the "Papuans" are not afraid of you, clowns who have not won a single war, except for their civil war! You have long lost your competence, technology, resource - as soon as the "von Brauns" run out).
In this version, you will present the world domination of the Russian Empire, since you will be left with nothing.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Except it was the other way around - USSR saved the rest of the world.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/05/08/dont-forget-how-the-soviet-union-saved-the-world-from-hitler/

Andrei in the West and history taught at schools in the West, the part the USSR had to play in the defeat of Hitler and the Nazi's is very rarely told. This I believe comes from nationalistic pride on the part of each respective country and the role each played in WW2 but it is not the reality or the truth and only tells a fraction of the story.

As this article (from the Washington Post) highlights is the incredible heroism and stoicism of the people from the USSR to be so determined to play a major part in winning a truly horrific war. 80 USSR soldiers to every Allied 1 tells its owwn story but the truly gruesome fact that 60% of nuclear families lost 1 member and the level of civilian casualties is the real tradegy.

Why the West and USSR became so divided so quickly to me is very sad. Respect to your nation for the losses they suffered!

 

  • Great Response! 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

9 minutes ago, Andrew Neopalimy said:

1. If the US decides to attack Russia, they will be destroyed in preparation for war * during the "threatened period" the US will receive a "preemptive nuclear missile strike" which is guaranteed (98%) to destroy the US / NATO.
(At the same time, systems will be disabled: missile attack warnings, communications, location, navigation, reconnaissance ... and power supply)))
Since 2012, the United States is guaranteed to lose the "Nuclear War with Russia", and from 2025, the percentage of the guarantee of the victory of the Russian Federation will strive for 100, and the degree of damage inflicted on Russia will tend to zero idiots. And the management knows about it !!!
In this version, you will present victory over yourself to Russia and China.
2. If the United States decides to start a war with the PRC, it can only win by inflicting RNW - having spent the entire stock of strategic nuclear weapons (you have almost no tactical nuclear weapons, you cannot produce nuclear weapons, modern ICBMs, BBs, or strategic submarines with bombers - you Russia is ridiculously funny, even the "Papuans" are not afraid of you, clowns who have not won a single war, except for their civil war! You have long lost your competence, technology, resource - as soon as the "von Brauns" run out).
In this version, you will present the world domination of the Russian Empire, since you will be left with nothing.

Andrew the above is all irrelevant and hearsay

NOBODY "Wins" a nuclear war!

Edited by Rob Plant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Андрей все вышесказанное не относится к делу и слухи

НИКТО не "выигрывает" ядерную войну!

By this, you betrayed yourself as an amateur in this topic))) these are fairy tales for the profane, as well as the fact that after the JA the whole world will plunge into darkness, etc.
Ask your MO - they know perfectly well since 2012 that only Russia is guaranteed to win, while incurring insignificant damage. And the rest are definitely not.

For specialized questions, contact the specialists, professionals (of which you have less and less every day)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 minutes ago, Andrew Neopalimy said:

By this, you betrayed yourself as an amateur in this topic))) these are fairy tales for the profane, as well as the fact that after the JA the whole world will plunge into darkness, etc.
Ask your MO - they know perfectly well since 2012 that only Russia is guaranteed to win, while incurring insignificant damage. And the rest are definitely not.

For specialized questions, contact the specialists, professionals (of which you have less and less every day)

 

Personally I think destroying at least half the planet (you yourself said it would destroy US /NATO countries) means NOBODY "wins"

To think otherwise I believe is crazy! Do you want to live in that world??

All this BS posturing (my nuc is better than your nuc) gets neither side anywhere.

To say we will "win" 98% guaranteed is also a very uninformed thing to say. Are you part of the latest NATO strategy? Are you advised of the latest military tech from both Russia and NATO and can make informed decisions on who will "win"?? I doubt it!

Im pretty sure the latest tech on both sides isnt available to download and view!

Edited by Rob Plant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

Personally I think destroying at least half the planet (you yourself said it would destroy US /NATO countries) means NOBODY "wins"

To think otherwise I believe is crazy! Do you want to live in that world??

All this BS posturing (my nuc is better than your nuc) gets neither side anywhere.

To say we will "win" 98% guaranteed is also a very uninformed thing to say. Are you part of the latest NATO strategy? Are you advised of the latest military tech from both Russia and NATO and can make informed decisions on who will "win"?? I doubt it!

Im pretty sure the latest tech on both sides isnt available to download and view!

Hypothetical scenario. What if there was a way to take out all US/NATO carriers and nuclear subs with a single surgical strike. No need to attack the actual countries. Wouldn't that be a clear win, in theory?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Andrei Moutchkine said:

Hypothetical scenario. What if there was a way to take out all US/NATO carriers and nuclear subs with a single surgical strike. No need to attack the actual countries. Wouldn't that be a clear win, in theory?

Yes potentially it would if it were possible. What would Russia do then if they could? Start a land invasion? what would that achieve?

What has Russia to gain from a nuclear war or a demonstration that they could take out all of NATO's nuclear armamament? All it will do is escalate new tech / military strategy to avoid that scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

51 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Yes potentially it would if it were possible. What would Russia do then if they could? Start a land invasion? what would that achieve?

What has Russia to gain from a nuclear war or a demonstration that they could take out all of NATO's nuclear armamament? All it will do is escalate new tech / military strategy to avoid that scenario.

Yes, it is possible. I know because I started out by designing such a "perfect win" strategy as a hypothetical scenario only to find out that it obviously already exists for real. I think Mr. Andrew has done the same, judging by him using the 2012 date. (which is the latest date the deal was sealed for good)

Russia could than casually drive to occupy Newport Beach, to make sure nobody ever tries to "rule the seas" again? Which obviously requires massive fleets you cannot simply  rebuild overnight. Russia has neither desire nor means to do so itself and no concept of "power projection" Without the ability to project power, is US hegemony done and over with. Just note that US, like the British Empire before it, is predominantly a sea power depending on their navies as cornerstone of their military doctrine. They have no real means to properly engage Russia on land using conventional forces, at least as far as core Eurasia is concerned. As far as actually starting an invasion themselves? Why? Neither Russia, nor USSR actually ever had any invasion plans for anybody West. Extrapolating unfortunate ethnic conflicts left in the wake of Soviet Union's disintegration to general Russian aggressiveness is generally dishonest and serves the needs of military industrial complex / NATO apparatchiks only. The real Russia is actually a deeply pacifistic culture. Orders to execute a conventional nuclear first strike targeting civilians would invariably be refused outright.

So, the plan is a categorical disarmament of the West, followed by doing mostly nothing? You gonna look very stupid spending many consecutive decades trying to re-arm against a hypothetical Russian aggression which already was. It is not a conventional nuclear war the way you understand it, but only targets those who harbor nuclear weapons themselves. Think Cinderella scenario, where all the nukes turn into pumpkins come midnight.

Edited by Andrei Moutchkine
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ronwagn said:

https://news.yahoo.com/un-slams-kazakhstan-soldiers-seen-224129945.html

UN slams Kazakhstan after soldiers seen wearing UN helmets amid unrest

2c41c9f10cfd23b5fe8fa35f3c46b297
 
Kazakh soldiers are seen patrolling the streets in Almaty on January 10, 2022 (AFP/Alexandr BOGDANOV)
  •  
     
     
     
  •  
 
Mon, January 10, 2022, 4:41 PM·1 min read
 
 
In this article:
  •  
     
     
     
  • Stéphane Dujarric
    UN official
 
 
 

The United Nations on Monday criticized Kazakhstan after government soldiers there were seen wearing the UN peacekeepers' blue helmets during last week's violent unrest.

"We have conveyed our concern to the Permanent Mission of Kazakhstan directly on this issue, and we've received assurances from them that this issue had been addressed," UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters.

He added: "Any UN troop and police-contributing countries are to use UN insignia only when they are performing their mandated tasks as UN peacekeepers in the context of their deployment within a UN peacekeeping operation, as mandated by the UN Security Council."

 

Photos posted on social media showed several soldiers in Kazakhstan's main city of Almaty dressed in military fatigues and wearing blue helmets with UN insignia.

Kazakhstan issued an awkward statement in response, saying the helmets were the only part of UN gear worn by its soldiers.

"During the violent riots in Almaty, the Peacekeeping Unit of the Ministry of Defense of Kazakhstan (Kazbat) was put on high alert to assist and protect strategic infrastructure facilities of the city from the terrorists and extremists," Kazakhstan's mission to the UN said in a statement on Twitter.

"Except for the helmets that were worn as part of the official gear of local peacekeepers during the high threat, no 'UN' marked equipment was used."

Dozens of people were killed in clashes between protesters and government forces during historic violence in the Central Asian state last week in what authorities described as an attempted coup d'etat inspired by foreign forces.

Thousands were detained for questioning.

prh/md/crs/jh

 
Information on all of these countries and recent news. RCW

                  Central Asia, The Stans

Vzrwsnm2jo2-R-4buHaLt6NwZArpe69d8B9n5chQzpk89Mw4KpWrOPZ4Vz3e9bFtOx-7-UqGd8GXRpOhRl8EKM-gYcb-Z-Gxez3g4cacyc8w9FlPzajuQPARk9aVSnWew5RD0eU

 

It takes years to set up a proper UN-backed peacekeeping mission.

Not every blue helmet qualifies as UN insignia. Don't think they enjoy any actually protected status anchored in any treaty, though confusions are naturally to be avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Andrew Neopalimy said:

SPFS + CIPS (or SPFS + CUP) = BRICS Pay

You will not disable SWIFT, because incur huge losses and reduce confidence in the "main reserve currency of the world" to 0. You are tormented by driving planes with cash to Russia to pay for contracts on hydrocarbons, metals, wheat ...
In addition, Russia has had an analogue of SWIFT since 2014.
The SPFS (Financial Message Transfer System) of the Bank of Russia appeared in 2014. It was originally conceived as an alternative channel of interbank interaction in case the country is disconnected from SWIFT. Now SPFS accounts for about 20% of the total number of financial transactions within the Russian Federation.
And NSPK Mir is an analogue of Visa and Mastercard payment systems.
China since 2002 has its own national payment system in China UnionPay (CUP) and China International Payments System (CIPS) plus digital yuan ....

And before the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing, we will probably))) sign an agreement on the unification of the national payment systems SPFS-CIPS (or SPFS-CUP) into one. Subsequently, we will connect India and create BRICS Pay "

Russia's liquid FX reserves are in the form of IMF Special Drawing Rights. Those can conceivably only be blocked at the cost of destroying the dollar-based "Bretton Woods" monetary system as we know it. The less liquid reserves are in the form of physical gold, so the immediate side effect of the action would be a margin call on all kind of "paper gold" which is very much not in the interest of US/UK, who are significantly oversubscribed, to say the least. Think the infamous GAMESTOP stock. You need to understand why is that thing still around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2022 at 11:28 AM, Wombat One said:

Don't confuse "communist India" with "democratic India"? I am no expert in Indian politics, but the little I have learned recently points in the direction I have indicated.

There is no difference, for as long as it is "sovereign India" There is both a history of zero conflict in the past and near zero opportunity for conflict in the future with Russia. What would be the potential area of conflict between the two? The Indian establishment level of distrust in the British borders on paranoia. For example, do they think that "Amnesty International" was created for sole purpose of Indian Reconquista. (Don't know if that is true, but it shows how far the British are gonna get using their traditional instruments of "soft power")

Indians are not stupid enough to be pulled into additional hostilities with China on behalf of the West. They are simply playing hard to get to score freebies off Uncle Sam. Bought their S-400s with impunity, for example, and buying some more. The usual Western method of buying out the top of indigineous leadership won't work in India, too complicated. It is nothing short of up-and-coming 4th superpower.

Incidentally, Russia has a reputation of a great neutral arbiter throughout the larger Eurasia. (forgetting the American shills in the West) This is how you find India, Pakistan and China simultaneously participating in SCO, a potential military alliance. One outcome of Kazakhstan is CSTO being very real now and effectively containing the Taliban, whatever other Islam-themed BS in Central Asia and/or Erdogan's pan-Turkic delusions of grandeur. Also note how potential Armenian-Azeri war was quashed in the bud, in the time it took the West to bleat out its gravest concerns about the matter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.