The reality is that Russia has proven itself reluctant to escalate after every one of Ukraine’s major US-backed provocations, of which there’s now a laundry list, perhaps because it truly fears that the US might provoke World War III over whatever provocation it may be that prompts Russia to escalate.
"...the way in which President Putin will continue approaching this dilemma."
He's right, of course, as he always has been — the adult in the room.
I'd like nothing more than to see the endless diatribe of awful adjectives used to describe them, which the UK/NATO/US Axis elicits and deserves, somehow vindicated, to see them suffer in some meaningful way, although there really isn't any way their suffering could ever equate to the suffering they've caused and continue to cause. It's childish, as old as humanity itself: 'An eye for an eye!'.
Unpopular though Christianity and many ideas from the Christian Bible have become (And I'm not a bible basher!) there would seem to be good reason why they underpinned several hundred years of gradual development to make us what we are today. There is sense in the idea, 'Turn the other cheek,'.
There was a Scot(t?) someone-or-other on Solovyov Live this morning (Вести ФМ). Solovyov played that awful game, when he demonstrates how fluent he is in English, so they get an interpreter to do a live translation from English to Russian, and I was still half-asleep (BST is two hours behind Moscow time.) so I missed a lot of what was said. I did catch one important point: this 'Scot' (Apparently, he was born in Scotland.) from Yankee Doodle (La-La) Land pointed out the main goal of the US in their use of the Ukraine was to provoke a war with Russia with the specific intention of using this to control the American people. Yes, he's right, of course; and that does make the danger of escalation to nuclear apocalypse very real. The Americans, after all, have nothing to lose.
It's really just a waiting game: if the Russians can turn the other cheek until the spoilt-brat American bully has ranted and raved and run out of steam, until some other distraction attracts the attention of their delusion, Russia may thus save the world. Difficult though I've found it to come to terms with (I do SO want to see them suffer!) Putin IS right.
Thanks for your reply. I find it sincerely gratifying to learn I am not alone in my sentiment.
Please forgive me for contradicting you, and please don't take this as patronising, but despite the admiration I have for the man and his work, I WOULDN'T like to meet him. However gratifying a life milestone meeting him might be for me, I'm afraid it might take some of the energy he uses to do other things away from the very much more important things he has to do. I wouldn't be happy with myself for having done that; I don't think we can afford it.
But I certainly appreciate and share your sentiment.
Putin is the problem. He has always thought that he had an understanding of German/French politics and that they would eventually agree something with Russia. In 2014, he agreed to the stupid Minsk agreement at a time when the Ukraine had only 4,000 battle-ready troops and had no Western weaponry and training at all. He stood in the way. In 2022, it was he who decided not to go in shock and awe style and take out all power stations, and other infrastructure, before invading. It was he who decided never to bomb any railway tracks to Poland carrying Western weapons (this remains the case till today). It was he who decided never to attack Zelensky (although he occasionally says "I may find my balls and attack decision-making centres one day") and to allow a constant parade of visits of Western leaders to Kiev without risk of attack. He decided in 2022 not to mobilise when it was clearly needed. Then at the end of the year, it was he who decided to attack power transmission architecture - which seemed like a big step , but was not in fact an attack on power generation facilities and could be repaired in days. He decided not to attack the bridges over the Dniepr. He decided to allow Global Hawk to direct attacks on Russia. He decided that his red lines on the Crimea were to be worthless. It was he who agreed a draft treaty in Turkey and agreed to pull his troops back before it was signed by Zelensky. It was he who offered to give back conquered territories in that draft treaty and to not demand sovereignty over the Crimea either. It was he who has decided not to respond to terrorist attacks within Russia itself. For me, the fact that Russia is a country you can attack at will with no repercussions is new information. I didn't realise that. Even now, he is angling to get the Ukraine to negotiate on the basis of the 4 oblasts - apparently Putin doesn't even want Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev and Odessa. But there are 8, not 4, Russian-speaking provinces. I mean, the guy is fixing to lose. Whatever happens will be a strategic defeat for Russia.
I think Russia does not want Ukraine. In any way. Because it would mean having to control millions of incipient terrorists.
I mean Russia. Not Putin, not this guy, that guy, Russia. Russia does not need or want Ukraine.
Russia did not want and does not need the Donbas even.
I can see sense in Putin's reluctance to take them onboard. It is your problem, he said, way back, you solve it, you are part of Ukraine. I think that's fair enough. Good politics even. For the people had the option always open to move to Russia.
Not easy to do, I know, I'm not pretending otherwise.
But if the place is so unpleasant that they're actually targeting you for what we might call 'low grade' ethnic cleansing then if it were me I'd give very serious thought to migrating family and all to Russia
And Russia needs the population.
Let them stay there and handle it and perhaps they could have arrived at a better government and a different situation. All the signs were there. Zelensky was elected on a peace platform.
Where's the real need for a war? Lose god knows how many of your own, Donbas people, over 10 years of fighting. Got to be 50,000 I'd say at a wild guess. And Russia has lost maybe 100,000 now for sure though they're not giving the figures. But everyone talks about 5:1. Well Kiev must have lost a good 600,000 DEAD by now.
I think it sane and sensible to avoid taking Ukraine.
If the war can be won by negotiation then good. There's something like 600,000 men lying in their graves: and all their families and friends, who'd be better off today if there'd been a negotiated settlement.
But I think as a normal man with a normal man's fears for life and safety of self and family. Not as some histrionic ideologue. I would rather be alive and free to move than dead.
And when it comes to 'strategic defeat' I think it is clear that Russia and the BRICS have won the greatest strategic victory for the forces of the people and free trade and multipolarity that anyone - more than anyone - could have imagined would have been possible a few years ago.
I can’t imagine the pressure Putin is under to retaliate. I think there is something else going on—what, I don’t know. Retaliation hardly means that the next step is WWIII. It would seem to an outsider that serious retaliation would expose the enemy’s next step, and that is an important piece of information for a commander.
I think they should wind up to shooting down the drones. Make much publicity about it. Spell it out widely and very very clearly and simply - even over simplify, put it as: 'these drones are the trigger and the targeting for these attacks' - and mention the period of time this has been going on, mention that Russia has always been able to bring them down - be slow, slow, slow - weeks, maybe even a couple of months... and then bring one down.
There has to be a stop to the pussy footing somewhere sometime and this looks good to me. It's only a drone after all. Over the water. To the average guy what the hell is it doing there anyway? The USA is thousands of miles away. F*** off to your own backyard.
Putin spelled out clearly already the essence of it all: the targeting, the munition and even the trigger pulling is all American.
His people particularly the 'alt media' or whatever who're active in Telegram, YT war vids etc, are vociferous increasingly with demands that he do something.
They want him to hit live targets, even with collateral damage. Some want especially collateral damage.
You would think at the least he would put up a drone offshore the USA. But in fact if he did that they would shoot it down and then of course he'd have to shoot theirs. That would be the beginning of a shooting war.
This way would be safer. I think. I think a yankee drone over the Black Sea means much much less to the Americans than a Russian drone offshore.
Does anyone think the phone call between Austin and the new Russian Minister of Defense might have included discussion of a change in that "policy"...? ☮
"Even asymmetrical responses aren’t seriously considered except for bombing a few military targets afterwards and sometimes hitting a couple of power plants, but those responses have had absolutely no deterrent effect as is indisputably known."
I think it does have an impact on the Ukrainian population. 10 minus hours and falling power a day has to wear on thier moral and that's not good for the Z.
Plus, recent articles by Ben Rhodes and a recent Rand book indicate a split in the Party of Venice/City of London elites running DC. Putin would want to let that fester.
Your frequent and consistent jab to the so-called Alt-Media influencers sounds more and more a personal vendetta. Rather than causing diversion among the ranks, why not realising we our struggle to the evil empire is a shared and united struggle!
The Alt-Media Community refers to the diverse collection of non-Mainstream Media platforms and people, many of whom tend to have very similar if not identical interpretations of events, a lot of which tend to be based on false dogmas and end up being regularly debunked.
I'm a part of this community and I've seen it operate from within, both from my prior vantage point in publicly financed Russian international media and through participation in several independent projects, not to mention my close observations of others in this field.
I've come to the conclusion that while some top influencers are well-intentioned but naive, many are malicious and deliberately mislead their audience with wishful thinking and copium to generate clout, push an ideology, and solicit donations.
Suffice to remind everyone of the countless lies over the years about Russia plotting to shoot down attacking Israeli jets over Syria or plotting a supposedly imminent campaign against Odessa. None of that ever happened, and those top influencers who pushed these claims never publicly accounted for why they were wrong, nor will many of them ever do so.
I disavow those who manipulate their audience and betray their trust for self-interested reasons. These people are also very cliquish and prone to "inquisitions" where they "cancel" folks who share different views, let alone politely debunk their false dogma. It's literally cultish at this point and I want nothing to do with those who partake in such activities.
There's no "shared and united struggle" with people who weaponize lies for their own gain, even if they thinly disguise their intent as pursuing "the greater good". They've discredited the community, dumbed it down, and turned it into a replica of the Mainstream Media, albeit with different rhetoric and in support of a different side, but it's largely run the exact same way.
To be clear, there's still some quality work and honest influencers in the Alt-Media Community, but they're increasingly far and few between. Most of what's out there is just people shouting slogans, ranting against the other side, and spinning everything that their own side does as part of a "5D chess master plan" or whatever. I'm frankly disgusted by it.
"...the way in which President Putin will continue approaching this dilemma."
He's right, of course, as he always has been — the adult in the room.
I'd like nothing more than to see the endless diatribe of awful adjectives used to describe them, which the UK/NATO/US Axis elicits and deserves, somehow vindicated, to see them suffer in some meaningful way, although there really isn't any way their suffering could ever equate to the suffering they've caused and continue to cause. It's childish, as old as humanity itself: 'An eye for an eye!'.
Unpopular though Christianity and many ideas from the Christian Bible have become (And I'm not a bible basher!) there would seem to be good reason why they underpinned several hundred years of gradual development to make us what we are today. There is sense in the idea, 'Turn the other cheek,'.
There was a Scot(t?) someone-or-other on Solovyov Live this morning (Вести ФМ). Solovyov played that awful game, when he demonstrates how fluent he is in English, so they get an interpreter to do a live translation from English to Russian, and I was still half-asleep (BST is two hours behind Moscow time.) so I missed a lot of what was said. I did catch one important point: this 'Scot' (Apparently, he was born in Scotland.) from Yankee Doodle (La-La) Land pointed out the main goal of the US in their use of the Ukraine was to provoke a war with Russia with the specific intention of using this to control the American people. Yes, he's right, of course; and that does make the danger of escalation to nuclear apocalypse very real. The Americans, after all, have nothing to lose.
It's really just a waiting game: if the Russians can turn the other cheek until the spoilt-brat American bully has ranted and raved and run out of steam, until some other distraction attracts the attention of their delusion, Russia may thus save the world. Difficult though I've found it to come to terms with (I do SO want to see them suffer!) Putin IS right.
He is a remarkable leader and constantly shows it. I’d like to meet him.
Thanks for your reply. I find it sincerely gratifying to learn I am not alone in my sentiment.
Please forgive me for contradicting you, and please don't take this as patronising, but despite the admiration I have for the man and his work, I WOULDN'T like to meet him. However gratifying a life milestone meeting him might be for me, I'm afraid it might take some of the energy he uses to do other things away from the very much more important things he has to do. I wouldn't be happy with myself for having done that; I don't think we can afford it.
But I certainly appreciate and share your sentiment.
Thanks for writing!
Putin is the problem. He has always thought that he had an understanding of German/French politics and that they would eventually agree something with Russia. In 2014, he agreed to the stupid Minsk agreement at a time when the Ukraine had only 4,000 battle-ready troops and had no Western weaponry and training at all. He stood in the way. In 2022, it was he who decided not to go in shock and awe style and take out all power stations, and other infrastructure, before invading. It was he who decided never to bomb any railway tracks to Poland carrying Western weapons (this remains the case till today). It was he who decided never to attack Zelensky (although he occasionally says "I may find my balls and attack decision-making centres one day") and to allow a constant parade of visits of Western leaders to Kiev without risk of attack. He decided in 2022 not to mobilise when it was clearly needed. Then at the end of the year, it was he who decided to attack power transmission architecture - which seemed like a big step , but was not in fact an attack on power generation facilities and could be repaired in days. He decided not to attack the bridges over the Dniepr. He decided to allow Global Hawk to direct attacks on Russia. He decided that his red lines on the Crimea were to be worthless. It was he who agreed a draft treaty in Turkey and agreed to pull his troops back before it was signed by Zelensky. It was he who offered to give back conquered territories in that draft treaty and to not demand sovereignty over the Crimea either. It was he who has decided not to respond to terrorist attacks within Russia itself. For me, the fact that Russia is a country you can attack at will with no repercussions is new information. I didn't realise that. Even now, he is angling to get the Ukraine to negotiate on the basis of the 4 oblasts - apparently Putin doesn't even want Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev and Odessa. But there are 8, not 4, Russian-speaking provinces. I mean, the guy is fixing to lose. Whatever happens will be a strategic defeat for Russia.
I think Russia does not want Ukraine. In any way. Because it would mean having to control millions of incipient terrorists.
I mean Russia. Not Putin, not this guy, that guy, Russia. Russia does not need or want Ukraine.
Russia did not want and does not need the Donbas even.
I can see sense in Putin's reluctance to take them onboard. It is your problem, he said, way back, you solve it, you are part of Ukraine. I think that's fair enough. Good politics even. For the people had the option always open to move to Russia.
Not easy to do, I know, I'm not pretending otherwise.
But if the place is so unpleasant that they're actually targeting you for what we might call 'low grade' ethnic cleansing then if it were me I'd give very serious thought to migrating family and all to Russia
And Russia needs the population.
Let them stay there and handle it and perhaps they could have arrived at a better government and a different situation. All the signs were there. Zelensky was elected on a peace platform.
Where's the real need for a war? Lose god knows how many of your own, Donbas people, over 10 years of fighting. Got to be 50,000 I'd say at a wild guess. And Russia has lost maybe 100,000 now for sure though they're not giving the figures. But everyone talks about 5:1. Well Kiev must have lost a good 600,000 DEAD by now.
I think it sane and sensible to avoid taking Ukraine.
If the war can be won by negotiation then good. There's something like 600,000 men lying in their graves: and all their families and friends, who'd be better off today if there'd been a negotiated settlement.
But I think as a normal man with a normal man's fears for life and safety of self and family. Not as some histrionic ideologue. I would rather be alive and free to move than dead.
And when it comes to 'strategic defeat' I think it is clear that Russia and the BRICS have won the greatest strategic victory for the forces of the people and free trade and multipolarity that anyone - more than anyone - could have imagined would have been possible a few years ago.
I can’t imagine the pressure Putin is under to retaliate. I think there is something else going on—what, I don’t know. Retaliation hardly means that the next step is WWIII. It would seem to an outsider that serious retaliation would expose the enemy’s next step, and that is an important piece of information for a commander.
I think they should wind up to shooting down the drones. Make much publicity about it. Spell it out widely and very very clearly and simply - even over simplify, put it as: 'these drones are the trigger and the targeting for these attacks' - and mention the period of time this has been going on, mention that Russia has always been able to bring them down - be slow, slow, slow - weeks, maybe even a couple of months... and then bring one down.
There has to be a stop to the pussy footing somewhere sometime and this looks good to me. It's only a drone after all. Over the water. To the average guy what the hell is it doing there anyway? The USA is thousands of miles away. F*** off to your own backyard.
Putin spelled out clearly already the essence of it all: the targeting, the munition and even the trigger pulling is all American.
His people particularly the 'alt media' or whatever who're active in Telegram, YT war vids etc, are vociferous increasingly with demands that he do something.
They want him to hit live targets, even with collateral damage. Some want especially collateral damage.
You would think at the least he would put up a drone offshore the USA. But in fact if he did that they would shoot it down and then of course he'd have to shoot theirs. That would be the beginning of a shooting war.
This way would be safer. I think. I think a yankee drone over the Black Sea means much much less to the Americans than a Russian drone offshore.
Agree Andrew, BUT, I am also sensing some frustration among some Russian's with Putin's warnings not followed up by actions.
I've sensed this frustration from the get-go but it never amounted to any drastic shift in policy.
Don't get me wrong, I personally hope that the policy changes, and it should have already.
But I'm also not getting my hopes up either and getting disappointed once again.
I’ve said elsewhere, “If Putin keeps the world out of WWIII then he should get the Nobel Prize.”
Does anyone think the phone call between Austin and the new Russian Minister of Defense might have included discussion of a change in that "policy"...? ☮
"Even asymmetrical responses aren’t seriously considered except for bombing a few military targets afterwards and sometimes hitting a couple of power plants, but those responses have had absolutely no deterrent effect as is indisputably known."
I think it does have an impact on the Ukrainian population. 10 minus hours and falling power a day has to wear on thier moral and that's not good for the Z.
Plus, recent articles by Ben Rhodes and a recent Rand book indicate a split in the Party of Venice/City of London elites running DC. Putin would want to let that fester.
Wait for it.
Your frequent and consistent jab to the so-called Alt-Media influencers sounds more and more a personal vendetta. Rather than causing diversion among the ranks, why not realising we our struggle to the evil empire is a shared and united struggle!
The Alt-Media Community refers to the diverse collection of non-Mainstream Media platforms and people, many of whom tend to have very similar if not identical interpretations of events, a lot of which tend to be based on false dogmas and end up being regularly debunked.
I'm a part of this community and I've seen it operate from within, both from my prior vantage point in publicly financed Russian international media and through participation in several independent projects, not to mention my close observations of others in this field.
I've come to the conclusion that while some top influencers are well-intentioned but naive, many are malicious and deliberately mislead their audience with wishful thinking and copium to generate clout, push an ideology, and solicit donations.
Suffice to remind everyone of the countless lies over the years about Russia plotting to shoot down attacking Israeli jets over Syria or plotting a supposedly imminent campaign against Odessa. None of that ever happened, and those top influencers who pushed these claims never publicly accounted for why they were wrong, nor will many of them ever do so.
I disavow those who manipulate their audience and betray their trust for self-interested reasons. These people are also very cliquish and prone to "inquisitions" where they "cancel" folks who share different views, let alone politely debunk their false dogma. It's literally cultish at this point and I want nothing to do with those who partake in such activities.
There's no "shared and united struggle" with people who weaponize lies for their own gain, even if they thinly disguise their intent as pursuing "the greater good". They've discredited the community, dumbed it down, and turned it into a replica of the Mainstream Media, albeit with different rhetoric and in support of a different side, but it's largely run the exact same way.
To be clear, there's still some quality work and honest influencers in the Alt-Media Community, but they're increasingly far and few between. Most of what's out there is just people shouting slogans, ranting against the other side, and spinning everything that their own side does as part of a "5D chess master plan" or whatever. I'm frankly disgusted by it.
Atleast they can be followed by drones with jamming equipment. Russia would have deploy more airforce guys for which it has to do mobilisation