It is nice to see that some people understand what really happened:
So true. Tragically, the corporate media in the neo-liberal (and neo-con) bubble all fall for the blob (military industry, deep state). That includes most all the sheeple consuming the media of the West, refusing to think by themselves and eating anything being fed.
I agree that this is a war, but I beg to disagree about this assignment of blame. In any case, I couldn't really hold it against the Russians if they were finally following the old English motto "Right or wrong, my country!" Ukraine and the West are at fault here. See "Minsk II".
It is nice to see that some people understand what really happened:
Anatoly Dremov, ruzzian war blogger tells it strsight out: âFor humanists and righteous people I repeat, this is war! And in war, all methods are good. If we do not bomb maternity hospitals, schools, and ordinary houses, we will not win this war. Only pressure from the Saloreich (Ukraine) population on Zelensky can force him to capitulate. The reputation of Russia and its army is at stake. We must win, no matter the cost! And remember, you cannot speak bad about your country during the war. Even if she's wrong!â
I agree that this is a war, but I beg to disagree about this assignment of blame. In any case, I couldn't really hold it against the Russians if they were finally following the old English motto "Right or wrong, my country!" Ukraine and the West are at fault here. See "Minsk II".
Perhaps the most striking thing about Moscow today is its calm. This is a city that has been barely touched by war. Indeed, until you turn on the television â where propaganda is omnipresent â you would hardly know that there is a war. Any economic damage from Western sanctions has been offset by the large number of wealthy Russians who have returned due to sanctions. The Russian government has deliberately limited conscription in Moscow and St. Petersburg, and this, together with a degree of repression, explains why there have been few protests by educated youth. No longer fearing conscription, many of the younger Muscovites who fled Russia at the start of the war have now returned.
As to the shops in central Moscow, I couldnât say if the Louis Vuitton handbags are the genuine articles or Chinese knock-offs, but there is no lack of them. And far more important, Russia since the war demonstrates something that Germany once understood and the rest of Europe would do well to understand: that in an uncertain world, it is very important indeed to be able to grow all your own food.
In the provinces, it is reportedly very different. There, conscription, and casualties, really have bitten deep. This however has been balanced by the fact that the industrial provinces have experienced a huge economic boom due to military spending, with labor shortages pushing up wages. Stories abound of technical workers well into their seventies being recalled to work, fostering their income and restoring the self-respect they lost with the collapse of the 1990s. As I heard from many Russians, âthe war has finally forced us to do many of the things that we should have done in the 1990s.â
In Moscow at least, there is, however, little positive enthusiasm for the war. Both opinion polls, and my own conversations with Russian elites, suggest that a majority of Russians do not want to fight for a complete victory (whatever that means) and would like to see a compromise peace now. Even large majorities however are against surrender, and oppose the return to Ukraine of any land in the five provinces âannexedâ by Russia. (...)
Anatoly Dremov, ruzzian war blogger tells it strsight out: “For humanists and righteous people I repeat, this is war! And in war, all methods are good. If we do not bomb maternity hospitals, schools, and ordinary houses, we will not win this war. Only pressure from the Saloreich (Ukraine) population on Zelensky can force him to capitulate. The reputation of Russia and its army is at stake. We must win, no matter the cost! And remember, you cannot speak bad about your country during the war. Even if she's wrong!“
KYIV, July 8 (Reuters) - Russia blasted the main children's hospital in Kyiv with a missile in broad daylight on Monday and rained missiles down on other cities across Ukraine, killing at least 41 civilians in the deadliest wave of air strikes for months.Parents holding babies walked in the street outside the hospital, dazed and sobbing after the rare daylight aerial attack. Windows had been smashed and panels ripped off, and hundreds of Kyiv residents were helping to clear debris.
"It was scary. I couldn't breathe, I was trying to cover (my baby). I was trying to cover him with this cloth so that he could breathe," Svitlana Kravchenko, 33, told Reuters.President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who stopped in Poland before heading off to Washington for a NATO summit, put the death toll at 37, including three children. More than 170 were injured.But tallies of casualties from the sites of attacks in different regions totalled at least 41.
Right-Sizing the Russian Threat to Europe Russia likely has neither the capability nor the intent to launch a war of aggression against NATO members â but the ongoing brinkmanship between Russia and the West still poses serious risks of military escalation that can only be defused by supplementing military deterrence with a diplomatic effort to address tensions.
Russian disinformation.
"Spoiler Alert: Official Ukrainian sources confirm that Putin did stop in March 2022, after Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky agreed to forswear membership in NATO."
This parrots a recent comment made by Putin to explain the debacle of their initial push to seize Kiev. Putin did not stop. He was stopped.
Subtle difference.
If you want more solid analysis of why negotiations have frequently failed, try this.
The tensions escalated dramatically in 2021. Russia massed forces on the Ukrainian border and stepped up its aggressive and imperialist rhetoric. In December 2021, emboldened by the chaotic Western withÂdrawal from Afghanistan, Moscow switched levels and addressed its demands directly to the United States and NATO. Russia preÂsented the Western allies with an ultimatum, in the guise of twodraft treaties conÂcerning âsecurity guaranteesâ: NATO should agree to admit no new members and to refrain from any form of military activity in Ukraine and other states neighbouring Russia. The alliance was also to restrict its military activities to the states that were already members in May 1997. The United States was to withdraw its nuclear weapons from Europe. Russia was demanding nothÂing less than the division of Europe into Russian and American spheres of influence, and a âresolution of the Ukraine questionâ over the heads of the Ukrainians. Hence, the Russian diplomatic offensive was logiÂcally directed above all towards Washington and in second place to the European NATO allies. As well as the aforementioned maximal demands, the documents also conÂtained proposals for consultation mechanisms, confidence-building and arms conÂtrol. Despite intense diplomacy between the Western capitals and Moscow in January and February 2022 Putin was not prepared to negotiate on individual aspects. The United States responded positively to some of the Russian proposals, but Moscow inÂsisted on the whole package and stayed its course to rupture.
I recommend you read the first part of the article before moving on to this one, as it provides some much-needed context. But if youâre too lazy to do that, hereâs a brief summary of Karaganovâs points:
The crisis of capitalism: The modern capitalist model prioritises profit and fosters unnecessary consumption, leading to significant environmental degradation. This systemâs encouragement of relentless consumerism has contributed to resource depletion and a detachment from sustainable living practices.
Global resource crisis: Major global issues such as pollution, climate change, and the scarcity of essential resources like fresh water remain unresolved. These challenges are exacerbated by growing consumerism and unequal resource distribution, leading to intensified competition and internal societal tensions.
Rising social inequality: Social inequality has been escalating since the collapse of the USSR, diminishing the middle class in the West and increasing visible wealth gaps. This trend contributes to societal instability and discontent.
Societal and intellectual decline: The West, in particular, is experiencing societal degradation, driven by urbanisation and excessive digital consumption, which leads to a decline in critical thinking and increased susceptibility to manipulation. This, combined with oligarchic control, undermines traditional values and promotes divisive ideologies.
Virtualisation of life: Modern man is increasingly living in a virtualised state, where fears and challenges are digitalised, detaching people from real-world issues and historical drivers of human progress, like hunger and the threat of violence.
Western elitesâ intellectual decline: Western elites, especially in the US, have lost strategic thinking capabilities, leading to poor governance and international policy blunders. This decline contributes to a weakened global leadership role.
Global power redistribution: Karaganov highlights the significant shift in global power from the West to rising nations, particularly Russia and China, as one of the major sources of international tension. This shift is causing geopolitical instability and redefining international relations, as the West grapples with losing its long-standing hegemony.
Deteriorating global governance: The post-war international governance structures are collapsing and are unable to maintain global stability. The arms race and the breakdown of security agreements further complicate this landscape.
Increasing risk of conflict: The Westâs reaction to its declining dominance includes heightened propaganda, economic sanctions and proxy wars, fostering an environment ripe for conflict, especially with Russia and China. This tension is aggravated by dehumanisation tactics and the re-arming of strategic capabilities.
Technological and arms race: Karaganov warns of the growing technological and arms race, including developments in bioweapons and AI, which threaten to destabilise global security. The proliferation of advanced weapons, like drones and hypersonic missiles, adds to the precariousness of international relations.
Potential for catastrophe: There is a profound concern in Russia about the increasing likelihood of large-scale disasters or even a global catastrophe, driven by the above challenges.
I will now look at Karaganovâs policy recommendations for Russia in light of the aforementioned geopolitical context â which make for an even more interesting, though arguably more disquieting, read.(...)
Yeah, too lazy to plow through most of your links.
But these are all criticisms of current Russian society and policy.
