Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

I

I think you'll find I've posted about quite a range of things on this thread and my posts eg the one you quote about how we ended up here in response to rather than pre-empting posts about root causes etc. So rather than telling me to 'save the historical analysis' you should think about that yourself. I don't think much of hitchens bit about I was there but I think he's on the money with his conclusions and it's to me telling you don't attempt to engage with his points
I don't think he's worth bothering with because he's brought precisely fuck all to the table that hasn't been discussed before on this very thread.

His points have already been dealt with a lot better by people on this thread and Chomsky has been saying similar for at least a decade. I find Fiona Hill's analysis and the article from a Ukrainian leftist, titled something like The idiocy of Western anti imperialists, posted earlier on this thread far more useful though because they acknowledge the NATO aspect but discuss issues way beyond anything Hitchens or Chomsky do.
 
I don't think he's worth bothering with because he's brought precisely fuck all to the table that hasn't been discussed before on this very thread.

His points have already been dealt with a lot better by people on this thread and Chomsky has been saying similar for at least a decade. I find Fiona Hill's analysis and the article from a Ukrainian leftist, titled something like The idiocy of Western anti imperialists, posted earlier on this thread far more useful though because they acknowledge the NATO aspect but discuss issues way beyond anything Hitchens or Chomsky do.
this is the only post to mention idiocy on this thread. maybe you have the link if not the name of the article?

e2a: you mean the anti-imperialism of idiots perhaps or perhaps A letter to the Western Left from Kyiv but this is something lots of people have been criticising for years, the notion that my enemies' enemy is my friend. i've not been whitewashing russia or saying they were right to invade ukraine or georgia or making any excuses for putin, and tbh nor have most other people right left or centre.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
A Canadian veteran gives his view on the performance of Russian forces so far:


If half of what he says is correct, Ukraine may have a better chance than we'd think.
 
China already had extensive and productive relations with Ukraine though. China's general strategy in recent years has been soft power projection... And yes, infrastructure development is a major part of that, but I don't think rebuilding a shattered country with scant investment and a hostile populace fits into their current model. Especially not one where their normal tactics seem to have been working pretty well. May still be Russia's intent of course, intent and reality do not always match.
China's whole Belt-and-Road initiative requires peace in Eurasia - and they have already bet the farm on the BRI, so you can bet Vladimir won't be on their Xmas card list this year.
 
A Canadian veteran gives his view on the performance of Russian forces so far:


If half of what he says is correct, Ukraine may have a better chance than we'd think.
bridges.
 
This. I think banging on about mistakes made in the 90s and NATO expansion are of little use at this point. Putin didn't seem too concerned about NATO when he was getting state visits here and when he and Bush lovingly looked into each others souls. It was only when all that power and money started going to his head he could start using NATO as a way to convince the Russian people it was an imminent invasion threat.

I felt nauseous the way certain aspects of the left parrotted his propaganda during the Syrian war. Now I'm about ready to vomit the way some are carrying on in this conflict about it all being NATO and making out Putin is the victim. Fuck that, he's blitzkrieging his neighbour. Even if NATO expansion was at the forefront of his reasoning it doesn't, in a month of Sundays, justify this level of aggression against Ukraine, a country not even in NATO.
This, especially the bolded bit.
 
A question whirling about my head - if NATO were to intervene in Ukraine, it would be World War 3: but has WW3 actually started already?

Is this, historical analogies not being perfect, the Sudentenland, the Anschluss, or whatever other example you might wish to use, none of which wouldn't be described as being part of WW2..?

Fiona Hill is of this view.

 
They wouldn’t be aiming for ukraine :eek:
Where else would they be aimed at? Any missiles aimed at a NATO country would trigger NATO's 'an-attack-on-one-of-us-is an attack-on-all' clause, with the 'logical' response being a tit-for-tat attack on Russia. Putin may be behaving irrationally but I can't see him initiating nuclear warfare because of the likelihood of reciprocal counter-attacks aimed at his ass the Russian people.

I still think his nuke threat is just brinkmanship and a bully's threat.

He's perhaps frustrated and angry that the invasion hasn't (yet) gone according to plan; that brave Russian people are protesting this war in various cities and in sizeable numbers too; and because sanctions are having an effect already (plummeting rouble). Since there was a feeble response after his 2014 Crimean land-grab, he may have underestimated the relative severity of sanctions (not that they could be a lot more severe, e.g. if the Johnson clown govt didn't care about offending their donors...)

If anywhere at all, I would've thought only Ukraine itself could be a potential nuke target - a means to bring the war to a halt by forcing a Ukrainian surrender (as happened with Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki). But, as has been said upthread, if he covets Ukraine and sees it as part of Russia, why drop the bomb there, rendering large areas a radioactive wasteland?

Also, wouldn't a nuclear attack on Ukraine play very badly among Russian people? Whether some Russians see Ukraine as an independent and sovereign state, or whether (like Putin), some believe it should be merged with Russia as they are "basically the same people" - either way it's not a good look, surely, to evaporate millions of your fellow Slav & Orthodox neighbours?
 
NATO is not the root cause. The root cause is Russian imperialism and a distorted view of the world. Poland and the Baltic states joined because of a history of being invaded and occupied. They have absolutely no intention of invading Russia. Neither does Ukraine.
Of course its about Russian imperialism and a "distorted" view of the world. Russia is the aggressor.
NATO is also about imperialism and has it own "distorted" view of the world.
Of course Poland isnt about to invade Russia! I dont see what difference that makes.
Yes there's a defensive aspect to NATO, if thats what you are getting at - all military might has that aspect. But lets not forget the empire building and strategising that currently see Iran surrounded by US bases! Or recognise how much strategic importance has been placed on Ukraine.
Its all a very dangerous game, and NATO is a player in it too.
What is the ROOT cause? Imperialist mentalities.

We've been through the NATO has a role to play stuff already and I dont want to repeat that.
But maybe worth saying this: NATO continues to have a massive role in this situation right now and could yet make an aggressive mis-step that gets many more people killed.
 
Russian amphibious assault on Odessa seems to have failed this morning as marines refused at the final hurdle and mutinied as they approached the beaches - couldn't face attacking such a Russian city, supposedly.

There's a nice irony there.

Pinch of salt etc but it is very widely reported:

 
Back
Top Bottom