The Kiss Your Arse Goodbye Thread

[Ming]

Perhaps some of his Russian friends will offer him some tea.

Toxic tea: The Russian opponents of Vladimir Putin struck by poison

Opponents of the Kremlin just keep getting poisoned....

www.chicagotribune.com

I think the word of 2022 should be defenestrate judging by the number of Vlad’s mates diving out of windows. It’s become a bit of a joke it’s so blatant.

 

[RD2003]

I think the word of 2022 should be defenestrate judging by the number of Vlad’s mates diving out of windows. It’s become a bit of a joke it’s so blatant.

Blatant, but perfectly in line with how the Russian political class has, more often than not, behaved historically. Politics is a dangerous business in Russia, as in most of the world. 'The West' (as if it didn't have its own crimes to hide), in helping to propel a supposed 'westerniser' to power, in Boris Yeltsin, made no difference, and will continue to make no difference whatever the outcome of the present war. Under Yeltsin, the warfare among the elites was merely transformed into undisguised gangsterism.

If the world survives in something resembling its present form, people will still be discussing 'Russian barbarism' in 50-100 years' time. Although other areas of incurable barbarism might have eclipsed Russia by then. Barbarism might even have moved closer to home for us.

 

[Ming]

Blatant, but perfectly in line with how the Russian political class has, more often than not, behaved historically. Politics is a dangerous business in Russia, as in most of the world. 'The West' (as if it didn't have its own crimes to hide), in helping to propel a supposed 'westerniser' to power, in Boris Yeltsin, made no difference, and will continue to make no difference whatever the outcome of the present war. Under Yeltsin, the warfare among the elites was merely transformed into undisguised gangsterism.

If the world survives in something resembling its present form, people will still be discussing 'Russian barbarism' in 50-100 years' time. Although other areas of incurable barbarism might have eclipsed Russia by then. Barbarism might even have moved closer to home for us.

True.

I’ve started to look at the current shower of right wing popularists internationally as barbarians. They don’t believe in anything other than power. No civilized high ideals there.

I always felt sorry for Gorbachev. He tried to reform and save communism in the USSR and Yeltsin royally stabbed him in the back.

 

[RD2003]

True.

I’ve started to look at the current shower of right wing popularists internationally as barbarians. They don’t believe in anything other than power. No civilized high ideals there.

I always felt sorry for Gorbachev. He tried to reform and save communism in the USSR and Yeltsin royally stabbed him in the back.

I've long thought that Gorbachev's mistake was in trying to reform Communist rule by injecting a dose of liberalism, which has no real echo in Russian society and history (and this leaves aside the complications of the societies that made up the rest of the USSR.) There were, and are, genuine liberals in Russia, but they never win, for reasons about which books have been written. Some of those higher-ups in late Soviet Russia who renounced their party membership probably imagined, in good faith, that they'd suddenly become liberals. When reality hit them in the face, they embraced the society they had helped create, and realised that there was money to be made, and the rest of society (who they 'knew' didn't really understand anyway) to be fucked.

If Putin falls to a more 'westernising' regime, wait for the pattern to be repeated.

 

[RD2003]

DP-Edit fail.

 

[Ming]

I've long thought that Gorbachev's mistake was in trying to reform Communist rule by injecting a dose of liberalism, which has no real echo in Russian society and history (and this leaves aside the complications of the societies that made up the rest of the USSR.) There were, and are, genuine liberals in Russia, but they never win, for reasons about which books have been written. Some of those higher-ups in late Soviet Russia who renounced their party membership probably imagined, in good faith, that they'd suddenly become liberals. When reality hit them in the face, they embraced the society they had helped create, and realised that there was money to be made, and the rest of society (who they 'knew' didn't really understand anyway) to be fucked.

If Putin falls to a more 'westernising' regime, wait for the pattern to be repeated.

Bad isn’t it? Fuck knows who we’ll get next.

 

[MrCurry]

This is simultaneously worrying, and also vague enough to mean anything. Maybe Sky News (from where the screenshot was taken) want to leave things open to interpretation so they can later claim to have been prescient, whatever happens?

 

[elbows]

This is simultaneously worrying, and also vague enough to mean anything. Maybe Sky News (from where the screenshot was taken) want to leave things open to interpretation so they can later claim to have been prescient, whatever happens?

Its a fairly typical attempt to analyse the words of Putin etc, and Sky are just a conduit, see the full analysis from the ISW for the detail:

Institute for the Study of War

The Kremlin intensified its information operation accusing NATO expansion of presenting a military threat to Russia. Shoigu stated that NATO’s military expansion near Russian borders, including Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership aspirations, neces

www.understandingwar.org

Sky correctly quoted the bits of that ISW analysis that focus on that aspect. The ISW analysis does not expand further on that angle, and if that is what will actually happen its a story that will be told over many years. Of more immediate relevance are other things focussed on in the analysis, such as Putins words being seen as an attempt to shore up support with the pro-war nationalists. They also analyse the reference to nuclear stuff and conclude, as usual, that this does not mean that Russia is actually showing greater intention to actually use such weapons.

This sort of study of propaganda usually leads to the obvious, that most of what is said is propaganda, and as such does not actually give us much more certainty as to whether we will have to kiss our arses goodbye. All sides may at times make use of such fears in various different ways, and we should remain somewhat detached from the concept of kissing our arses goodbye unless indicators that arent just propaganda start flashing with greater intensity.

 

[MrCurry]

Its a fairly typical attempt to analyse the words of Putin etc, and Sky are just a conduit, see the full analysis from the ISW for the detail:

Institute for the Study of War

The Kremlin intensified its information operation accusing NATO expansion of presenting a military threat to Russia. Shoigu stated that NATO’s military expansion near Russian borders, including Finland’s and Sweden’s NATO membership aspirations, neces

www.understandingwar.org

Sky correctly quoted the bits of that ISW analysis that focus on that aspect. The ISW analysis does not expand further on that angle, and if that is what will actually happen its a story that will be told over many years. Of more immediate relevance are other things focussed on in the analysis, such as Putins words being seen as an attempt to shore up support with the pro-war nationalists. They also analyse the reference to nuclear stuff and conclude, as usual, that this does not mean that Russia is actually showing greater intention to actually use such weapons.

This sort of study of propaganda usually leads to the obvious, that most of what is said is propaganda, and as such does not actually give us much more certainty as to whether we will have to kiss our arses goodbye. All sides may at times make use of such fears in various different ways, and we should remain somewhat detached from the concept of kissing our arses goodbye unless indicators that arent just propaganda start flashing with greater intensity.

Thanks. Looks like a very interesting analysis document. I’ll have to return to it when I have more time.

 

[NoXion]

Putin and his goons are so practised at the "firehose of bullshit" mode of communication, that attempting to divine any meaning from what they say is akin to reading tea leaves. They will say damn near anything if they think it serves them in the moment. Even if it means contradicting what they said mere moments before.

Analysis of their actions would seem to be more fruitful than trying to make sense of their words.

 

[RD2003]

Myabe they're thinking about it...

Defensive missile systems erected on Moscow rooftops

Kremlin appears to prepare for strikes on Russian capital by installing interception systems

www.theguardian.com

 

[Humberto]

huh?

 

[RD2003]

Putin ally: Western weapons supply to Ukraine will lead to 'global catastrophe'​

A close ally of Vladimir Putin has warned that the world faces a “global catastrophe” if Washington and NATO countries supply weapons that threaten Russian territories.

Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the Duma - Russia’s lower house of parliament, said such action would also make arguments against using weapons of mass destruction “untenable”.

In a post on the messaging app Telegram, Volodin said that the United States and NATO’s support of Ukraine is leading the world to a “terrible war”.

He wrote:

If Washington and NATO countries supply weapons that will be used to strike civilian cities and attempt to seize our territories, as they threaten, this will lead to retaliatory measures using more powerful weapons.
Arguments that the nuclear powers have not previously used weapons of mass destruction in local conflicts are untenable.

He added that this was because the US and NATO “did not face a situation where there was a threat to the security of their citizens and the territorial integrity of the country”.

On Friday, 50 countries agreed to provide Kyiv with billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware, including armoured vehicles and munitions needed to push back Russian forces.

But Germany is facing a backlash from allies over its reluctance to supply Leopard 2 tanks to bolster Ukraine’s fighting capacity.

In a joint statement the foreign ministers of the three Baltic states of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania said they “call on Germany to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine now”. The tanks are held by a number of NATO nations, but in order to transport them to Ukraine, the countries need Berlin’s approval.

 

[NoXion]

One of Putin's lapdogs does some yapping.

 

[RD2003]

Doomsday Clock set to lowest ever time after Ukraine invasion​

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has set its Doomsday Clock, intended to illustrate existential risks to the world, at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest to midnight the clock has ever been since it was first introduced in 1947.​

Rachel Bronson, the president and CEO of the Bulletin, said the decision to move the clock forward from last year’s position of 100 seconds to midnight, was due “largely, though not exclusively, because of the mounting dangers in the war in Ukraine.”

The lowest point it had been was its previous setting of “100 seconds” in January 2020 to reflect worsening relations between superpowers. It was held at that point in 2021 and 2022.

During the cold war, which provided the backdrop for the metaphorical clock’s establishment, it reached two-minutes to midnight during hydrogen bomb tests by the US and Soviet Union in 1953.


(From the Guardian.)

 

[likesfish]

Russia’s defence budget is $84 billion ish
Uk budget is $64 billion
Even if you feed your conscripts cabbage and don’t pay them. Your not in the middle of a war building a military that can threaten NATO.
Russia hasn’t got the high tech weapons or the infrastructure it’s built a few super tanks and the odd stealth fighter.
But it’s buying drones off the military superpower that is Iran.

 

[RD2003]

Russia’s defence budget is $84 billion ish
Uk budget is $64 billion
Even if you feed your conscripts cabbage and don’t pay them. Your not in the middle of a war building a military that can threaten NATO.
Russia hasn’t got the high tech weapons or the infrastructure it’s built a few super tanks and the odd stealth fighter.
But it’s buying drones off the military superpower that is Iran.

Can still hit us with nuclear weapons.

 

[Duncan2]

Can still hit us with nuclear weapons.

Was just typing that same sentence.Noone can say where this will go now.

 

[RD2003]

Was just typing that same sentence.Noone can say where this will go now.

Also, anybody who thinks Russia has launched this war because it thinks it's still a superpower is well wide of the mark. It's precisely because they understand their overall decline that they've done it.

And you're right. The war has just entered its most dangerous and unpredictable phase.

 

[RD2003]

I think the danger lies in areas where even this article doesn't go. While it points to the fact that there is little possibility of a qualitative change in Russia's ruling elites even if defeated, it doesn't really consider the possibility they might, facing defeat and feeling under personal threat, do whatever they can to make Ukraine unviable (or uninhabitable) for generations to come. The ultimate gamble, but these people got where they are because they're gamblers.

When will Putin give up Ukraine? Only when his inner circle forces him to stop | Olga Chyzh

Unlike western leaders, the Russian president does not answer to voters or the media. Which means he plays a much, much longer game, says political science academic Olga Chyzh

www.theguardian.com

'Even if Ukraine chases every last Russian soldier from its land, Russia’s aggression will not end. Russia will continue to make claims to Ukraine’s territory, and will back them up with threats, intermittent missile launches and border skirmishes. There is no such thing as a decisive victory for the defender. A decisive victory implies the destruction of the attacker, lest it come back after a brief reprieve. Destroying Russia’s will or long-term capacity to take its land is something that, for Ukraine, is not an option. With an aggressor impervious to international or domestic pressure, tenuous peace, backed by a state-of-the-art anti-missile defence system and a world-class military on standby, may just be the best outcome Ukraine can hope to achieve.'

 

[likesfish]

Can still hit us with nuclear weapons.

possibly the US was whining about keeping its nuclear arsenal relevant Nuclear Weapons and Forces Sustainment and Modernization thats with more money than God and a relatively uncorrupt system.
add a much tinyier defence budget and a system that makes the average squaddie look not like a kleptomaniac.
The Idea that vastly expensive systems that need really really expensive regular maintence and were never expected to be used havent decayed been robbed of funds or had anything of value flogged off is laughable.
unforuntatly they had nearly 6000 warheads so if 90% are rubbish that leaves 600 and thats more than enough to wreck everything

 

[nogojones]

I've long thought that Gorbachev's mistake was in trying to reform Communist rule by injecting a dose of liberalism, which has no real echo in Russian society and history (and this leaves aside the complications of the societies that made up the rest of the USSR.) There were, and are, genuine liberals in Russia, but they never win, for reasons about which books have been written. Some of those higher-ups in late Soviet Russia who renounced their party membership probably imagined, in good faith, that they'd suddenly become liberals. When reality hit them in the face, they embraced the society they had helped create, and realised that there was money to be made, and the rest of society (who they 'knew' didn't really understand anyway) to be fucked.

If Putin falls to a more 'westernising' regime, wait for the pattern to be repeated.

What do you think Gorbachev should have done given the structural problems the USSR had at the time?

If it helps, I don't have a clue. I think it was beyond the capability of the state and existing institutions to deal with from above by that point. Right or wrong Gorbachev did have a go, but I have that lingering feeling that it was fucked whatever way it played out.

Maybe the only hope within a capitalist framework would have been better support and less "let the market sort it out bollocks" being punted by western institutions, but ya know, wheres the money in that?

 

[RD2003]

What do you think Gorbachev should have done given the structural problems the USSR had at the time?

If it helps, I don't have a clue. I think it was beyond the capability of the state and existing institutions to deal with from above by that point. Right or wrong Gorbachev did have a go, but I have that lingering feeling that it was fucked whatever way it played out.

Maybe the only hope within a capitalist framework would have been better support and less "let the market sort it out bollocks" being punted by western institutions, but ya know, wheres the money in that?

As I've said elsewhere in these threads, I was in Moscow, on a long-term visa, when the 1991 coup took place. Knowing how Russians don't generally like foreigners sticking their noses in despite most of those I was friendly or acquainted with being fairly westerner-friendly, I stayed at a safe enough distance from the tanks, troops and street protests, which were on a lesser scale than we were led to believe in the west. I was, however, on the side of those who opposed it, no question. Now, though, I'd rather it had succeeded and headed off the burgeoning gangster capitalism. I don't know if that would have been possible, but Yeltsin's victory, backed and advised by the West, led inexorably to the Russia we see today.

One thing for sure is that the coup wasn't about 'saving' the Soviet system as it had existed pre-Gorbachev, which anybody-even a mere visitor, albeit quite a frequent one, like me-could see was finished, so I think the most likely outcome would have been an attempt at some sort of controlled market economy which maintained more of the social safety net, an attempt at slowing or halting the ongoing break-up of the SU, and a more robust attitude towards the West. Maybe that's what Gorbachev, despite all the rhetoric about 'renewing socialism,' was aiming for before things spiralled out of control.

 

[likesfish]

The West had careers built on kremline watching and nobody picked up on it. I was still learning soviet tank tactics as we watched the whole thing collapse by the time people got their heads round the idea the cold war was over the Soviet Union was gone it wasnt a ruse, It was far too late to do anything meaningful. you'd have needed something like the marshall plan and a proper Giant in the White House to see it through.

 

[RD2003]

This, largely pro-Ukraine, article states that 'As it is, a full-frontal nuclear conflagration is allegedly being held at bay by a backroom deal between Washington and Beijing, as reported by Owen Matthews in his book Overreach. Putin’s Chinese friends assure the west that he will not “go nuclear” as long as Nato does not stray on to Russian soil. Certainly that is a line Biden and Nato have conspicuously and carefully observed. But the temptation to breach it grows ever stronger from the pro-escalation lobby lurking behind every western defence budget.'

Message to Olaf Scholz: send tanks to Ukraine now – and lay the path for a negotiated peace | Simon Jenkins

The German chancellor should be bold, but even then there will never be ‘total victory’: the best hope is a ceasefire and a deal, says Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins

www.theguardian.com

This is by the writer he's referring to, although as it was written in November fuck knows what's being said behind the scenes given developments over the past week.

The red line: Biden and Xi’s secret Ukraine talks revealed

 

[NoXion]

Can still hit us with nuclear weapons.

The moment they do that, they lose. Hard. Now here's the way I see it, are the Russian elites generally a somewhat rational bunch who can at least realise that turning their own source of power and unearned wealth into radioactive cinders is a stupid and self-defeating thing to do? Or are they a bunch of idiot lunatics who genuinely think that starting a nuclear conflagration will ever put them in advantageous position?

If the former, we shouldn't be too worried about their nuclear threats, because they are empty. If the latter, then it's already too late.

Personally, I'm not convinced that the Russian elites are interested in self-destruction, despite their many and obvious shortcomings.

 

[keybored]

The moment they do that, they lose. Hard. Now here's the way I see it, are the Russian elites generally a somewhat rational bunch who can at least realise that turning their own source of power and unearned wealth into radioactive cinders is a stupid and self-defeating thing to do? Or are they a bunch of idiot lunatics who genuinely think that starting a nuclear conflagration will ever put them in advantageous position?

If the former, we shouldn't be too worried about their nuclear threats, because they are empty. If the latter, then it's already too late.

Personally, I'm not convinced that the Russian elites are interested in self-destruction, despite their many and obvious shortcomings.

Hopefully it's not just this one rational guy with the launch codes...


View attachment tennowthennowthennowthennow.mp4

 

[RD2003]

The moment they do that, they lose. Hard. Now here's the way I see it, are the Russian elites generally a somewhat rational bunch who can at least realise that turning their own source of power and unearned wealth into radioactive cinders is a stupid and self-defeating thing to do? Or are they a bunch of idiot lunatics who genuinely think that starting a nuclear conflagration will ever put them in advantageous position?

If the former, we shouldn't be too worried about their nuclear threats, because they are empty. If the latter, then it's already too late.

Personally, I'm not convinced that the Russian elites are interested in self-destruction, despite their many and obvious shortcomings.

If they hit us with nuclear weapons, it isn't just they who lose; we all lose. And it will be as if all of us and our forebears, on both 'sides,' as well as the world's majority with no skin in the game (as they say) might as well have never been here in the first place.

As for what you say about them being a rational bunch, I can't help agreeing. But there have been many moments in history when rationality goes out of the window, and all in a matter of days. When under severe threat, you always get those who are prepared to taske everybody else down with them. They may be relatively rare, but they do exist. And it only takes decisions by a few. Or a major gamble, and as I said in another post in this thread, most of the current Russian elite got where they are by being gamblers-just look at the accounts of the kind of place Russia was in the Yeltsin years, especially early on when they were all maneouvring for position. It was a situation absolutely guaranteed to bring out the worst in people-and all the worst people. But they are there and will not be going away (and this leaves aside that we have many people with basically the same mentality ruling over us, but exist in societies where they are restrained by certain established norms, and which weren't in social and economic meltdown only a short time ago.)

I've long thought that the widely-accepted unthinkable is actually very thinkable. When I still had the tenacity and inclination to read the great novels that attempted to explain the human condition blah blah, it often crossed my mind that whatever horrors those 19th/early 20th century writers were attempting to explain, and whatever they thought about the human predicament at the time, they couldn't possibly have imagined the utter horror that lay ahead of them. Hasn't history constantly revealed that what was previously unthinkable becomes...what? Just part of history, I suppose. But when the nukes come into it, the ultimate horror comes into play and human history is over. Personally, I can't help thinking that when these weapons came on the scene it was only a matter of time before they came into use. And with all the naive hopes of the immediate post-1989 period lying in tatters, not least because of misplaced western triumphalism and all that followed, there has never been such a danger, as the Doomsday Clock watchers (see in thread above) seem to agree.

 

[RD2003]

I would have given this, from kebabking a like if I was allowed to post in the main thread. as an example of what I'm trying to get at with regard to Putin and co.

'I would think that the relationships are much more two way than that. I think it's a much more like a series of circular power relationships - that he needs them, and they need him.

I also think it would be unwise to ascribe a particular pattern or thread of rationality to him/his circle - they are simply motivated by stuff we don't really grasp, and in proportions (hopes/fears/greed etc..) that we don't understand - nor do we understand how the events of the last year, as they understand them, have influenced those thought patterns among the different individuals.'

 

[Dogsauce]

They’re not all rational at all. Prominent media talking heads speak of ‘holy war’, framing this as a last stand of Christianity against satanic nazi hordes, bringing forth the second coming. Some proper lunatic stuff.

This could be viewed as stuff for a domestic audience, but the same were calling for strikes on Ukrainian power infrastructure to freeze people to death a while before it became actual military policy, they are close to the opinions and thoughts of those holding power (else they wouldn’t be in their position)