You say that like it is a bad thing.
But without the resolve to stay during the early days of the conflict, Zelensky would almost certainly not have been able to muster the same level of support that has carried them through to today. Same goes for their military and civilian populations in their resolve to maintain their independence from Russia.
Not difficult at all to gather allies when you’re being invaded for the purpose of a land grab, particularly in Europe.
Didn’t Catherine the Great say something like that before? Or was it some other more recent Tsar?
What made is sound like a bad thing?
You’re speaking militarily, right?
Satire, more or less.
“it is our solemn duty, as outlined in the Constitution, to fully fund the Ukrainian government at all times," said Senator Chuck Schumer. “We humbly accept this sacred responsibility to send billions to Ukraine, who will send it to Raytheon, who will send it to super PACs, who will help us get elected. It’s the right thing to do.”
That clown meme is a pretty braindead take on the whole situation.
Who benefits from the damaged pipeline?
what is far more interesting than the technicalities of the referenda is what the decision to annex these regions says about Russian intentions. Once these regions become formally annexed, they will be viewed by the Russian state as sovereign Russian territory, subject to protection with the full range of Russian capabilities, including (in the most dire and unlikely scenario) nuclear weapons…Those fixating on the “legality” of the referenda (as if such a thing exists) and Medvedev’s supposed nuclear blackmail are missing this point. Russia is telling us where it currently draws the line for its absolute minimum peace conditions
So far in this war, Ukraine has achieved two big successes retaking territory: first in the spring, around Kiev, and now the late summer recapture of Kharkov Oblast. In both cases, the Russians had preemptively hollowed out the sector. We have yet to see a successful Ukrainian offensive against the Russian Army in a defensive posture.
Let’s be frank about this. Russia did not blow up its own pipelines, and it is ludicrous to suggest that they did. The importance of the pipeline to Russia lay in the fact that it could be switched on and off, providing a mechanism for leverage and negotiation vis a vis Germany. In the classic carrot and stick formulation, one cannot move the donkey if the carrot is blown up.
Cui bono? Who benefits? Well, considering Poland celebrated the opening of a new pipeline to Norway only a few days ago, and a certain former Polish MP cryptically thanked the United States on Twitter, it is fair to make a few guesses.
Let us briefly meditate on the actual implications of Nordstream’s demise.
Russia clearly perceives this as a bridge burning move of sabotage by NATO, designed to back them into a corner. The Russian government has decried it as an act of “international terrorism” and argued that the explosions occurred in areas “controlled by NATO” - the concatenation of these statements is that they blame NATO for an act of terrorism, without explicitly saying that. This precipitated another meeting of the Russian National Security Council.
A cursory Google search shows that Mr. Sachs is highly controversial and inclined to pro-China, and other anti-West views.
I know your predilections, and if that’s all your comment is, I understand. However, if you could explain which panels are braindead, or why all of the panels are braindead, I would appreciate it.
While I am all for shedding light on theories, crackpot (Bush in a B2, Trump urinating on a bed) or otherwise, I need a starting point to see where your angle originates.
ETA: And if your comment includes
You say that like it is a bad thing.
Please explain how it sounds like it is a bad thing.
We have yet to see a successful Ukrainian offensive against the Russian Army in a defensive posture.
Is this a joke?
Let’s be frank about this. Russia did not blow up its own pipelines, and it is ludicrous to suggest that they did.
This is not a ludicrous as you might think.
They did, in fact, blow up their own pipeline to Georgia. And Russia (Putin in particular) is well-known for false flag attacks to sow confusion, even at fairly significant loss of life to their own citizens in some cases.
I think it will be some time before we ever get a clear answer on responsibility, since those that know would be revealing sources-and-methods to give a thorough explanation of events.
But to completely discount possible Russian action is moronic.
EDIT; and to the quote Russia had about “areas controlled by NATO” – the explosion happened in areas that Russia ships and subs were operating recently enough to be plausibly responsible. It happened in international waters.
You say that like it is a bad thing.
Please explain how it sounds like it is a bad thing.
The way it read, at the time, in the context of the thread and in the context of your previous posts on the topic – just came off as snarky.
Maybe you didn’t intend it to be.
May I humbly suggest that was the way you read it at the time. If you look at what I wrote, it was, if anything, blatantly complimentary to Ukraine’s government.
The US admits it was a Ukraine assassination of that daughter in Russia.
WASHINGTON — United States intelligence agencies believe parts of the Ukrainian government authorized the car bomb attack near Moscow in August that killed Daria Dugina, the daughter of a prominent Russian nationalist, an element of a covert campaign that U.S. officials fear could widen the conflict.
The United States took no part in the attack, either by providing intelligence or other assistance, officials said. American officials also said they were not aware of the operation ahead of time and would have opposed the killing had they been consulted. Afterward, American officials admonished Ukrainian officials over the assassination, they said.
I doubt it really matters, short-term, in terms of whether Russia feels it can, or should, target Ukrainian officials or their families. (which seems to be the only practical objection that is raised in the article)
I suspect that Russia is actively trying to target anyone they can in Ukrainian government and at this point have a sufficiently dysfunctional communication flow that they aren’t currently able to pull it off.
Though post-war, when Ukrainian officials get back to normal pattern-of-life, I would have no doubt that Russia could go on a murder-spree with Novochok and pulonium, as some act of general retribution that lashes out at whoever they can reach.
This is a silly allegation. In the spring the supply lines got bogged down and then slowly destroyed, the Russians had no choice but to retreat. The recent recaptures paint a similar picture – their defensive positions and supplies are being destroyed, most likely with the help of HIMARS.
I suppose anything is possible, I just didn’t think he could capture a country with ~41 million people and 300K troops using < 200K soldiers at the border. The eastern regions could be captured due to proximity and a significant ethnic Russian population, some of whom may be supportive.
