Ukraine
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
Would recommend everybody reads this.
I’ve not fact checked any of it, but it’s a pretty interesting read
Good god, that's some delusional shit right there.
Has anyone told the Japanese or ze Germans that they're still being occupied by the US? Hope they don't read this, it could be WW3!!!
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
I think Putin is a history buff. I expect he knows what happened when the last Tsar entered into an ill advised and catastrophic war.....
If you look at Putin's objectives and philosophy - Greater Russia, keeping NATO away from his doorstep, global influence, splitting the West - he's already lost big, big time.
Add into the mix he's destroyed his energy leverage on Europe, lost half his navy, make his much-vaunted military look like idiots and managed to re-arm Europe's biggest economy (Germany) against him and it's a cluster-fuck of epic proportions. Just pisses me off tens of thousands will die before it ends.
As he scoops up hundreds of thousands of unwilling conscripts I am sure this will piss some ordinary Russians off.
-
They appear to be struggling to organise and equip the latest conscripts let alone ramping things up to those kind of numbers. That would be literally feeding humans into a meat grinder, or freezer if you consider how gnarly winter conditions will be.
But his speech is terrifying. But will I care (as a Russian fulla) that much when I've been conscripted and am learning more and more about how the war is going?
-
@Paekakboyz said in Ukraine:
They appear to be struggling to organise and equip the latest conscripts let alone ramping things up to those kind of numbers. That would be literally feeding humans into a meat grinder, or freezer if you consider how gnarly winter conditions will be.
But his speech is terrifying. But will I care (as a Russian fulla) that much when I've been conscripted and am learning more and more about how the war is going?
I know it's not 1918. But how much unrest will there need to be until Putin's cronies start thinking about axing him to save themselves?
-
Seeing Putin still petrified of germs is so weird. The compliant crowd at his annexation speech were miles back from his rostrum.
A tough guy so scared of a virus 80% of the globe have already caught, is such a weird visual contrast.
I literally thought that was a WW2 reference to the Germans when I read that
-
@canefan surely there are many attempts ongoing to get a bead on Putin. The way he holds power makes it hard to get a handle on what the people around him actually believe. Also hard to tell if foreign powers are lining someone/s up for a takeover versus just zapping Putin and seeing what happens.
-
@Paekakboyz said in Ukraine:
@canefan surely there are many attempts ongoing to get a bead on Putin. The way he holds power makes it hard to get a handle on what the people around him actually believe. Also hard to tell if foreign powers are lining someone/s up for a takeover versus just zapping Putin and seeing what happens.
The scary thing is it appears his inner circle have all drunk the Kool-Aid (I guess they dissapear if they don't drink it), is there even a western friendly leader among the elite that would right the ship so to speak. Is there even an opposition party in Russia?
-
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
-
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
More that he'll never be trusted on energy supply again
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
More that he'll never be trusted on energy supply again
He doesn't want to be trusted. He doesn't want to supply the gas. He wants Europe to burn, to go down and establish a new world order.
You really think the damage to the pipeline was done by anybody other than Russia?
The narrative is pretty clear. He's putting pride in the Russian state, looking for allies for the new world order & threatening (basically the US) that any attempts to try and stop this global realignment will be dealt with harshly.
The only way back from here is an internal overthrow of his power & frankly, it isn't going to happen as he is clearly not just a one man band. WW3 won't start in my view, but the new world order has and will grow.
Thats just the sad reality in my opinion.
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
More that he'll never be trusted on energy supply again
He doesn't want to be trusted. He doesn't want to supply the gas. He wants Europe to burn, to go down and establish a new world order.
You really think the damage to the pipeline was done by anybody other than Russia?
The narrative is pretty clear. He's putting pride in the Russian state, looking for allies for the new world order & threatening (basically the US) that any attempts to try and stop this global realignment will be dealt with harshly.
The only way back from here is an internal overthrow of his power & frankly, it isn't going to happen as he is clearly not just a one man band. WW3 won't start in my view, but the new world order has and will grow.
Thats just the sad reality in my opinion.
I think the pipeline thing was almost certainly Russian. Whether it's burning bridges, making a statement on energy pre-Winter or a warning shot on critical undersea infrastructure, I don't know.
There's def. a new word order and that's been growing for some time. Putin's master-stroke has been to make the world and the previously-complacent West very much aware of it and start to counter it.
His army is fucked, they are losing ground to Ukraine, the West is still pouring arms in and his own people are fleeing Russia rather than be conscripted. I think Putin and his elite are in a corner and are looking for a way out - hence the call for peace talks.
The big worry will be what he does if Ukraine reclaims more of his territory and come next Spring the West, and particularly Europe, are still united.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
More that he'll never be trusted on energy supply again
He doesn't want to be trusted. He doesn't want to supply the gas. He wants Europe to burn, to go down and establish a new world order.
You really think the damage to the pipeline was done by anybody other than Russia?
The narrative is pretty clear. He's putting pride in the Russian state, looking for allies for the new world order & threatening (basically the US) that any attempts to try and stop this global realignment will be dealt with harshly.
The only way back from here is an internal overthrow of his power & frankly, it isn't going to happen as he is clearly not just a one man band. WW3 won't start in my view, but the new world order has and will grow.
Thats just the sad reality in my opinion.
I think the pipeline thing was almost certainly Russian. Whether it's burning bridges, making a statement on energy pre-Winter or a warning shot on critical undersea infrastructure, I don't know.
There's def. a new word order and that's been growing for some time. Putin's master-stroke has been to make the world and the previously-complacent West very much aware of it and start to counter it.
His army is fucked, they are losing ground to Ukraine, the West is still pouring arms in and his own people are fleeing Russia rather than be conscripted. I think Putin and his elite are in a corner and are looking for a way out - hence the call for peace talks.
The big worry will be what he does if Ukraine reclaims more of his territory and come next Spring the West, and particularly Europe, are still united.
I still think people are reading, and believing, far too much Western narrative.
Theres close to 150mill people in Russia. Around 200k have fled. Thats 0.125%. Certainly an exodus, but not exactly castrophic.
We have very little feel for the support of the war there. Yes, there have been people protesting, but again, what percentage? Is it that high?
The unknown thing for me is what sort of tie ups has he got with China & India, the worlds most populous country. You agree to supply gas to them, who gives a shit about Europe and it's piddly 750 mill people, of which a lot live in warmer climates.
-
@Victor-Meldrew a conversation off the earlier twitter post was about saving face. That losing to Ukraine is unthinkable, but taking on NATO aka the USA tilts the scales in terms of domestic opinion. Getting fucked over by their 'peers' and traditional enemies makes for an easier spin compared to upstart Ukraine. @MajorRage that may be the angle of that JR vid, haven't checked it out just yet.
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew are you talking about Nordstream? Highly doubt he would destroy a primary source of revenue.
More that he'll never be trusted on energy supply again
He doesn't want to be trusted. He doesn't want to supply the gas. He wants Europe to burn, to go down and establish a new world order.
You really think the damage to the pipeline was done by anybody other than Russia?
The narrative is pretty clear. He's putting pride in the Russian state, looking for allies for the new world order & threatening (basically the US) that any attempts to try and stop this global realignment will be dealt with harshly.
The only way back from here is an internal overthrow of his power & frankly, it isn't going to happen as he is clearly not just a one man band. WW3 won't start in my view, but the new world order has and will grow.
Thats just the sad reality in my opinion.
I think the pipeline thing was almost certainly Russian. Whether it's burning bridges, making a statement on energy pre-Winter or a warning shot on critical undersea infrastructure, I don't know.
There's def. a new word order and that's been growing for some time. Putin's master-stroke has been to make the world and the previously-complacent West very much aware of it and start to counter it.
His army is fucked, they are losing ground to Ukraine, the West is still pouring arms in and his own people are fleeing Russia rather than be conscripted. I think Putin and his elite are in a corner and are looking for a way out - hence the call for peace talks.
The big worry will be what he does if Ukraine reclaims more of his territory and come next Spring the West, and particularly Europe, are still united.
I still think people are reading, and believing, far too much Western narrative.
I think the Western narrative is quite clear and believable. I don't see any serious discussion about Putin being overthrown anytime soon. The West wants the war to continue to drain Russia's economy, manpower, armed forces and isolate the country. It's a long-haul strategy.
Theres close to 150mill people in Russia. Around 200k have fled. Thats 0.125%. Certainly an exodus, but not exactly castrophic.
It's who's leaving though. These are the smart people the russian economy needs
We have very little feel for the support of the war there. Yes, there have been people protesting, but again, what percentage? Is it that high?
I'm watching mentions of public protests by soldier mothers. Growing, but slowly.
The unknown thing for me is what sort of tie ups has he got with China & India, the worlds most populous country. You agree to supply gas to them, who gives a shit about Europe and it's piddly 750 mill people, of which a lot live in warmer climates.
China and India are wary and India is wary of China so that's one to watch.
That said, Putin now has 750 million people on his border who are much, much richer than he is, building up their armed forces, determined not to rely on his country for energy, pretty pissed off with him for invading Ukraine and eager to welcome that country into the EU.
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
This is really worth a listen as well.
I really think people should understand why Putin is doing what he's doing, and not just accept the he's a madman narrative.
I love the way you send a twitter thread and a video and you now know all Putins motives and want to educate us as to why he's not mad.
Jeez man, if that twitter thread actually nailed Putins thinking, then it very much makes him a madman.
I think Putin has massively fucked up. He's completely pinned his hopes to China, and a little bit of India. China could absolutely fuck Russia right now for a very long time. You call Europe piddly, but it hardly seems smart to me to put a trade sanction on them for the foreseeable future.
Putin has exposed his weak army for all to see. They're poorly trained and poorly managed. Unfortunately for all of us, they still have nukes.
The only way I see out of this is if Putin is assassinated, ideally from within. Otherwise I think he just goes down swinging, and that's really bad for everyone.
-
@Paekakboyz said in Ukraine:
@Victor-Meldrew a conversation off the earlier twitter post was about saving face. That losing to Ukraine is unthinkable, but taking on NATO aka the USA tilts the scales in terms of domestic opinion. Getting fucked over by their 'peers' and traditional enemies makes for an easier spin compared to upstart Ukraine.
At the end of the day there needs to be a solution which saves face. I just don't think the West is prepared to countenance that yet or as long as Putin is in power.
The last thing the West & the EU will want is for Putin to be rewarded in any way for invading Ukraine. And the cynic in me realises that sending arms to Ukraine to do the fighting is a pretty pain-free way to do that
-
This is a week or so old, but I found it really interesting as a Russian perspective
Russia’s elites are split over Vladimir Putin’s uncertain future
For 21 years, Putin was a highly convenient political leader for Russia’s ruling elites, preserving the status quo. But suddenly, he’s turned into a destroyer.
Tatiana Stanovaya
Sep 21, 2022 – 5.00amUkraine’s successful counterattack means that for the first time in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 22 years in power, he has to deal with elites who disagree with him – on strategic decisions over Russia’s war in Ukraine and how the war may end.
Having launched the war not just without any internal discussions, but without even informing key players, Putin has taken huge risks politically. If the war were going well, that gamble would have paid off, but today, as Ukraine is counterattacking and Russia is retreating, questions about Putin’s decisions are mounting.
Support for Putin is wavering within the Russian elite amid questions over his handling of the war in Ukraine. AP
There are fears that Russia may lose outright. If the president fails to convince the elites that he remains a strong leader with a clear understanding of where he is taking the country, uncertainty may become a significant political risk to Putin’s regime.
It’s true that a portion of the Russian elites – the most powerful, ambitious, and dominating players – consider the war a disaster. But virtually everyone in the elite not only empathises with Putin’s political motives but also shares his understanding of the situation and motives in launching the war.
The political mainstream remains significantly anti-Western and anti-liberal, does not consider Ukraine a full-fledged state, and dreams of shaking up the world order as revenge for 30 years of Western arrogance.
Many believe that Russia was left with no other option but to do something disastrous that would destroy the current order and provide an opportunity to rebuild it in more historically just circumstances. To put this viewpoint simply: The war may be a disaster, but it is a justifiable and understandable one.
Consequently, in the first few weeks of the war in February and March, the elites consolidated around Putin. Even those who could be considered in-system liberals or technocrats – those who viewed Putin’s actions with dread and despair – displayed submission. Many put the blame for this geopolitical nightmare not on Putin but on the West.
Russia can’t lose. Or can it?
In the first stages, until April, many hoped that the war would end quickly – in, of course, a Russian victory, whether a peace deal with Ukraine or Ukraine’s outright defeat. Russia’s inevitable victory was questioned only in terms of its cost and duration. By the end of the northern hemisphere spring, the understanding that the conflict could drag on for years had become conventional wisdom: Russia can’t lose, simply because Ukraine can’t win.Or can it? A lot changed in September.
Ukraine’s unexpectedly successful counterattack, its first since the beginning of the war, has sparked serious concerns and fears among Russian elites. Namely, what if Russia can, in fact, lose? Importantly, these doubts are focused not so much on the capability of the Russian army or its military might (although that is also cause for concern), but, more importantly, on Putin and his ability to control the situation.
Concerns started to accumulate, with a growing number of questions going unanswered. Is Russia going to annex the occupied territory? Will it hold referendums on these areas becoming part of Russia, and if so, when? Which Ukrainian regions will it take? Is it capable of retaining them? Where will Moscow find personnel to serve in the public administrations? Will the Kremlin announce an official military mobilisation?
To this day, the questions keep coming, yet Putin has been silent. All he has said is that everything is going according to plan and “all the goals of the special operation will be achieved”; those were the only answers the elite apparently deserved to hear.
The Russian informational space, from opposition media to in–system outlets, has been awash with rumours, leaks, and assumptions apparently coming from the Kremlin. But nothing sounds convincing, and nothing has come true.
Putin, right, at the Shanghai Cooperation summit in Uzbekistan last week with from left: Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev. AP
Putin’s unwillingness to explain himself, to reveal practical plans and intentions, or to address concerns and fears is one of the main reasons that his leadership is being eroded. It’s one thing to put your fate in the hands of a political leader who is a proven strongman with the capacity to stand firm in the face of geopolitical challenges. It’s another thing entirely to find yourself completely dependent on a political leader who seems to be losing yet remains stubbornly reluctant to explain anything.
Putin failed to hold his annual address to the Federal Assembly, a joint meeting of both chambers of parliament, in the spring; postponed indefinitely his Direct Line (a Q&A show with ordinary Russians planned to be held over the summer); and dodges most subjects concerning the situation on the front. He started this war alone, and he is waging it alone, leaving the elites with no choice but to blindly follow and trust his shadow deliberations with a handful of nonpublic figures as isolated as the president himself.
Over the course of September, the long–running question of “How are we going to win this war?” became “How are we going to avoid losing this war?” The problem is that Putin’s initial concept – winning the war by militarily exhausting Ukraine, slowly biting off chunks of its territory, bombarding the rest of its territory, and just waiting until it gave up – stopped being remotely convincing when Ukraine launched its counterattack.
Putin has made just two public comments on the subject of a counterattack so far. In July, commenting on a possible Ukrainian counterattack, Putin said: “Let them try ... Everyone should know that, by and large, we have not started anything in earnest yet.”
And last week, he said that Russia’s “restrained response” to Ukrainian “terrorist attacks” would not last forever, adding: “Recently, Russian Armed Forces delivered a couple of sensitive blows to that area. Let’s call them warning shots. If the situation continues like that, our response will be more impactful.”
The nuclear option
These interventions shed no light on how Russia intends to avoid losing the war. Many now speculate that Russia may have only two options: a nuclear threat (to the West, or tactical use in Ukraine) or a general military mobilisation. The latter remains highly unlikely, while the former would spell world disaster.It would be wrong to assume that the ostensible Russian leadership knows about Putin’s plans and intentions. Anyone citing insiders or Kremlin leaks overlooks that these perspectives do not reflect Putin’s real views, only the suggestions of those who may be working around him. These insiders may only guess, divine, interpret, or rely on obsolete instructions.
A striking example is the Kremlin’s apparent preparations to hold referendums in occupied Ukraine. Summarising media leaks and talks with my own sources, it appears that at the end of August, the presidential administration was working on the basis of June assumptions that by September, Russia would have secured its control over major parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions – those that the Kremlin had recognised as independent entities on the eve of its invasion – and would therefore hold votes there.
In the first few days of September, it became painfully obvious that the political agenda was at odds with the military situation on the ground, and that the military agenda was significantly behind. All plans were paused at the last moment, several days before the envisaged referendum date (September 11).
The power vertical fails to act consistently: While domestic policy overseers, who are responsible for referendums, are ready to launch preparations for the votes, military divisions struggle to secure physical control over the territories, and the front line is moving. The FSB agency objected to the referendums over security concerns. Every official body has its own agenda and political priorities, which often contradict the goals of others or the overall goals of the military operation. Putin appears to be failing to bring it all together.
The military setbacks and ensuing uncertainty and fears that Russia may lose the war have also aggravated internal splits. The current challenging situation on the front has deepened the schism between two large groups: The first can be summarised as “let Putin do what he considers necessary,” and the second one as “it’s time to do something, since the Kremlin is failing to react appropriately”.
The first group consists of technocrats and senior officials in the presidential administration, the cabinet, and the central bank: They are all trying to focus on their supposedly peaceful agendas and can only watch the development of the military situation without being able to impact it.
Some seek political dividends (such as First Deputy Chief of Staff Sergey Kiriyenko), some (including Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and central bank head Elvira Nabiullina) focus on their direct duties, ignoring the war atrocities. They are passive and diligent.
The second group, which may be frustrated into action, is much more visible and vociferous. It is made up of very different players, including those who are directly involved in military affairs (such as the armed forces, security services, national guard, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov’s forces, and billionaire Yevgeny Prigozhin’s mercenaries), and the United Russia ruling party, the in-system opposition (Communists, Liberal Democrats, and A Just Russia-For Truth), and various public figures from the dominant conservative camp.
Uncertain future
All of them are either begging Putin to inflict a crushing defeat on the Ukrainian army as soon as possible or are preparing to act on their own initiative, such as the Chechen leader Kadyrov, who has called for self–mobilisation, or billionaire Prigozhin, who is recruiting prisoners to go and fight. This part of the elite is eager to propose their own political agendas to fill the vacuum that Putin is leaving on how Russia can win the war.Meanwhile, the setbacks caused an outcry among pro-war activists and bloggers. When Russia lost control over an important part of the Kharkiv region, social networks exploded with anguished cries that “Russia is losing,” “it’s a disaster,” and “where is Putin?” – as well as calls to investigate Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and the General Staff for treason, and for an urgent full mobilisation.
This camp is strategically loyal and ideologically close to the authorities, and it does not have a significant political impact on the opinions of the populace. It has no structure or political organisation and appears to be harmless for the Kremlin. But in the current situation, this group has become extremely dangerous, as it may shape the mood among the elites, spread awareness about the reality of the situation, and fuel fears that Russia may lose. Panic can be highly contagious.
For 21 years, Putin was a highly convenient political leader for Russia’s ruling elites: His popularity guaranteed political stability and predictability, while his reluctance to carry out any reforms ensured the conservation of the status quo.
While his high approval rating still safeguards against political destabilisation from ordinary Russians, he has suddenly been transformed into a destroyer: a leader of a country with a very uncertain future.
But make no mistake. It’s not anti–Putin sentiment that has been rising. The current political demand is for a decisive, bold, well–informed, and competent strongman – and for Putin these latter two attributes are currently in doubt.
They want a leader who can guide, confront challenges, mobilise when needed, and give hope of a better future. The elites want the old Putin to return to his duties as a full-fledged political leader, connected to reality and his surroundings, but they don’t know if he still even exists.
There is no risk of an anti-Putin takeover, since there is still no alternative to him, and the elites remain hampered by their fear of the secret services and Putin’s omnipotence.
But growing uncertainty, nervousness, and fears that Russia could lose the war will push the elites to act more independently and more boldly against their enemies. Putin’s politically fading star is the biggest threat to the regime – much more dangerous than any possible opposition or mass protests.
Tatiana Stanovaya is a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the founder and CEO of political analysis firm R.Politik
— Foreign Policy