He’s not a hawk in the least and actually used to be one of his country’s most well-known Western-friendly experts before the special operation led to him gradually re-evaluating his worldview.
Trenin's articles are vastly better than those of the sad clowns from Valdai. The West, rather than yielding to its usual hubris, should really pay attention to this particularly worrying point in the public attitude of high-ranking Russian officials. In the West, warlike acts are always preceded by grandstanding statements, terrible chin-jutting, and bellicose fanfares—probable remnants of the era when Celtic, Germanic, or Scandinavian armies used to hurl insulting challenges at each other before engaging in battle (something neither the Persians, nor the Greeks, nor the Romans practiced). Looking at Russian history, this is clearly not their custom. It is when their leaders begin to wear grave, resigned, almost sad expressions that one should be wary. The Russian does not have a cheerful, swaggering way of mounting the saddle. But when he is in the saddle...
Living in Germany and following closely the attitudes of not only our power elite but of the whole lot of them (not the masses, mind you), I assure you that these people are completely unable to »pay attention«, i.e. take seriously what the Russian leadership says.
I have to say that I'm amazed by german "elite" since Scholz and Merz.
For a french guy who watch carefully to the German politics since Schmidt, and used to the terrible serious and effectiveness of Kohl, Schroeder, Merckel, seing so amazingly stupid and restless ministers like Bearbock and incredibly stupid decisions as shut down the nuclear plant let me without voice.
And in seing your dumb current führer caricature...
But it is the shepherd that leads the sheep. If the elites are suicidal then surely they will drag the masses behind them, even if they put up some resistance. I personally am more familiar with goats who are harder to herd than sheep but they too eventually fall in line with a little training. The metaphor speaks for itself.
My side business - taking internet orders to dump piss on neocon graves so the grass never grows over evil - is booming! With John McCain in the ground, Mitch McConnell brain dead and soon to the dirt, and now Sweet Lips Lindsey? I'm going to be listed on NYSE before too long...
You formulate: »The Kremlin [i.e. the Commander in Chief], so far, has been exceedingly restrained in using its more powerful conventional capabilities, or engaging some high-value, high-visibility targets. There are many explanations for such restraint«. At the end you speak of President Putin’s »Christ-like self-restraint«. Yes, it seems clear meanwhile that there is something like this and that such an attitude is not universal among the Russian power elite, but more or less an attitude of the Commander in Chief alone. I would appreciate if you would undertake to explain the realistic reasons that cause »such restraint«. I could think of China as a reason, to split EU-Nato from U.S. Nato may be, to accommodate the West-loving (and even more longing for to be loved by the West) Russian billionaire class. What do you think, Andrew?
Putin still sincerely believes that Ukrainians are fraternal people to Russians even after all that happened, and he therefore still prioritizes the lives of its civilians over a speedy resolution of the conflict that could be very bloody and entail massive collateral damage.
You're right though, a lot of people -- elite and average Russians alike -- want Putin to do what's needed to bring about a quick victory instead of dragging this on till who knows when amidst the new "war of attrition" against Russia.
The average Russians are mistaken. A quick victory over Ukraine will solve nothing. Absolutely nothing. There will remain a hotbed of disorder, insurrection, and terrorism. And the West will trigger other wars, other special operations, in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Belarus, or elsewhere. It is the West that must be definitively—or at least durably—deterred.
The noose that has been created by Nato virtually all around Russia, which Andrew keeps analyzing, will be there anyway, it is a fact today, though not completed yet. I agree. I also agree that from the point of view of Russia’s national interest the West must be deterred. (It is very strange to say that for me, living in this West, Germany. As the Norwegian professor recently remarked: It is good for us that Russia holds back..) Before that, however, common sense alone dictates that Ukraine must be finished off. Completely. There will be left a lot of terrorism etc. As you mention, but the situation will be fundamentally different for Russia as that territory cannot be used anymore to attack it with long-range weapons. A relief. Of course, Nato then could fire these missiles from its own territory. That would then be the moment of deterrence. Open war, no more proxy.
It's not wrong. But I'm sure that NATO sending missiles and drone deeply in Russia with its Ukraine proxy , will not last too long.
Russia is surprised by such a lack of wisdom but it will say "stop!" once, twice perhaps three times but when Poutine will think that's it's time to strike, Russia will do it, strongly.
No need of end in Ukraine's war.
Perhaps we'll soon see a russian warning about the sinking of any NATO war ship which would dare seizing a Russian tanker or cargo.
Maybe we'll see a sinking without warning of a warship( probably english or french) which will dare it.
Or we'll see a ultimatum( warnings have already been made) about the open aerial space for Ukrainian drones.
Russia has already done absolutely every warnings possibles.
1/ Mr Putin and team do not wish Russia to become the moral equal of Israel in the eyes of the world. Western propaganda is superior, but people paying attention, like me, still see action before words.
2/ Mr Putin is trying to balance economic and social effects of the Russian reaction with the perceived risks to Russia, while letting the west expend its arms, resources, and reputations while diplomacy (such as it was) played out. Importantly, the most vicious fighting force has been severely chewed up and degraded. The strategy remains effective in spite of the disappointment that its Chinese ally profits from supplying weapons that are beginning to have greater impact.
3/ Time was needed to understand the true intentions of Trump, a man who has disgraced himself and his country by lying to supporters and to Russia to a degree many have never observed. He and his aids and the institutions backing him are nothing but rank thugs of the first order. Additionally, it has taken time to clarify the intentions of Europe. Whereas America initially funded this disaster, it is now the Europeans who are expending hard earned money to keep it going, while America sits in the background selling arms and benefitting from higher energy prices.
4/ Russia is a country of 160 mil people. Europe is roughly 700 mil. Before engaging an adversary that is roughly 5x bigger, it is wise to prepare extensively and to carefully measure when to start.
5/ Mr Putin, on behalf of the world, on behalf of all of us, does not appear to want a childish and foolish game of chicken with nuclear weapons. This is ~our world, collectively, and it is not a world owned by the idiots who conceived this nonsense. I personally credit Mr Putin with recognizing that.
Imo, Russia is blessed to have Mr Putin and Mr Lavrov as their leaders. It's difficult to make decisions in a fog, far easier to criticize them after the fact.
The 700 million people figure for Europe includes Russia. Assuming the Turks fight Russia is extremely speculative, so another eighty million likely drop from the number. The 45 million people credited to Ukraine are already in the fight, and the ten million your number includes in Belarus would fight on Russia's side.
Germany: ~83.6 million
United Kingdom: ~69.9 million
France: ~66.7 million
Italy: ~59.1 million
Spain: ~47.9 million
Poland: ~38.1 million
Romania: ~18.9 million
Netherlands: ~18.3 million
Belgium: ~11.7 million
Sweden: ~10.5 million
Total number is more like 450 million. Ninety million of those are Black African, Middle Eastern, Pakistani, and Indian immigrants. I'm not so sure they're going to take up arms to fight Russia for their new homes - even under force. Another third of those left are elderly - they're not fighting. Meanwhile, Russia has some four million experienced North Korean reservists who would likely join the fight quickly on their side.
Most of the NK ground force has to stay in NK in case SK leaders get any ideas. However, I like your analysis in that looking at raw numbers is not enough. For the current Gulf war, the tonnage of iron bombs and short-range rockets does not matter; only standoff weapons and BMs matter. The number of artillery barrels and tanks does not matter. For a potential Russia-NATO war, we also have to consider resources, energy, and MIC capacity on both sides, especially for long-range munitions at the beginning.
The following isn't coming from any particular expertise. just observation.
Russia clearly considers tanks to still matter. It seems to me that the last two years of the SMO has been a steady up and down of how much UAV drones matter to each side, as the technology shifts. Right now the news is all about long-range drones striking deep inside both country's territories, and not so much about the up-close FPV drone battle taking place.
If artillery can be protected - and in certain theaters of the SMO right now, like Konstantynivka and the shelling of Druzhkivka adjacent to it, they can be - there is almost no other weapon outside of ariel gravity bombs and the Russian glider kits on those bombs that pack the punch of 152/155mm artillery shells.
I wouldn't count tanks and artillery out as being difference makers in any larger war. Grossly heavy Leopards, Challengers, and Abrams (which are all designed for use in the firmer central European plains, rather than the marshy east) might not be of much use until the Russian Army again knocks on Berlin's door.
I remember the ~4 million reservist number from some time ago when Russia and North Korea were signing their mutual defense pacts. Those agreements are similar to Article 5 of the NATO agreements - North Korea is obligated to come to Russia's aid if the SMO expands into a broader European war.
The DPRK has ~1.2 million active soldiers, and ~6.8 million reservists. They can use tactical nuclear weapons on South Korea, if need be. And they have another even mightier weapon that people don't usually consider - opening the Imnam Dam, which would completely flood and submerge Seoul in a torrent of water. That region is highly mountainous, and Seoul and it's sits in the lowlands. 10 million residents of South Korea's capital city - 20% of the country - would be homeless or dead within days, and the command and control of the country cut off at the head.
For Russians' work in Ukraine, no argument. My statements are more for the potential war of Russia vs NATO, if it ever comes that far, or NATO troops inside Ukraine (Russia would prefer to destroy them by missiles rather than by tanks and grenades). Tanks' role is morphing into self-propelled artillery, much like SU-76 in the old days. Tanks MAY recover their glory if some effective and cheap anti-drone weapons are found.
Dear friend, as Jörg points out, your calculation is wrong. Moreover, it is completely irrelevant. First, it does not specify who is attacking whom, where, and why. Russia has neither the intention nor the means to invade Europe. If it were to attack, it would be with conventional long-range or nuclear weapons. Whether NATO has 600 million people (including Turkey) in Europe changes nothing. The EU has neither the human nor the material means to invade Russia. It might possibly have the material means in 10 years, but it will have even fewer human means. As Jörg notes, a country like France already has between 25% and 30% of its citizens from African immigration. I can guarantee you they will not go and get killed to attack Russia. Good luck to those who would try to force conscription on them in their neighborhoods. :) The young native generations are emasculated by rampant wokism and have grown up in contempt and hatred of the very notion of homeland. They will not even go and fight to defend Estonia or Poland, let alone go and attack the Russians. They will flee the country en masse. So, more than ever, counting 'beans' is of no use in this matter.
Not disputing that argument. It’s one rough measure. The adversary is certainly and has significant arms stockpiles. Otoh, it is likely less motivated, not protecting homeland, etc etc.
This point does not refute my opinion. It’s a minor pushback on one element, which is valid pushback.
Your lines do resonate exceptionally well with my confirmation bias. For a while. Then this crops up in my mind: wishful thinking? How does he know that? What is his evidence?
I said it is my opinion, based on trying to rationalize Mr Putin's restraint in the face of both internal resistance and a level of provocation that would never be tolerated i the west.
That the war being fought is a war of attrition and that Mr Putin and team have shown extreme restraint is not a narrative, it is a fact. There are numerous other facts not worth my time to articulate for you.
If you prefer other reasons, such as that Mr Putin is weak, timid, or unintelligent, you are entitled to those beliefs.
I do not believe that he is weak, timid or unintelligent, on the contrary. I agree with the Norwegian professor Glen Diesen that this line of action by the Russian president is good for us in Western Europe (I am German, cursed with a war-mongering state leadership, even the whole elite hates Russia). My wishful thinking was, as I wrote, very grateful to your lines of arguments. It just does not convince me thinking again.
Should be here: I think #3 needs clarified. I am not running cover for Trump, but I think he is a hostage for a lot of reason to many to visit here. In other words, he ain't driving the bus.
What I find incredible in this whole story is that it's Germany, of all people, that's acting like one of the maddest NATO pitbulls. Germany, country without nuclear weapons, that can be hit by the RF -- or, for that matter, by any nuclear-armed country -- without any grave consequences for the attacker.
Are they crazy? Are they in control of their actions? And if they aren't, who is? I don't get this.
Well, to a degree, usually. Not to the point of committing suicide.
Is it possible that there are, perhaps, some communications between Germany and the RF behind the scene, and what we see is, to some extent, just a show?
But that's just me, a crazy conspiracy theorist...
...but totally amazing, if that's what it is. But hey, we'd seen the USSR and Yugoslavia in the 1990s, so yes anything is possible, states do commit suicide...
My comment was in regards vassals to America in regards destroying the German economy by allowing Nordstream destruction and buying US LNG at multiples of the price of Russian gas instead. Plus the drive to war.
As for Putin he wants G8 back and to be back in the fold again I believe hence no bold decisive win is possible just an unfair agreement for Russia's population but favourable to the oligarchs and their families living in the West now and business back to normal.
What country tries to balance the budget during an existential war as Nabiullina is doing with complete support from VVP. Absurd to the point of treasonous!
Russians regad themselves as one people with Ukraine. This will never change. Best to listen to Trenin if we want peace in the region. Let western officials come to their senses There are some who hate Russia but that will get get them what they want. Russia rules in the region. America is 10,000 miles away Best if America get rid of the cabal of Jews who hate Russia.
Putin will be out by the end of the year. The shit is getting real now and Kremlin officials are rolling their eyes when Putin speaks. They know, and he soon will, that the shelf life of the SMO has expired. Stop for a moment and realize that preventing a Ukraine that is a NATO missile launching platform for strikes deep into the heart of Russia is why this war started in the first place.
I think #3 needs clarified. I am not running cover for Trump, but I think he is a hostage for a lot of reason to many to visit here. In other words, he ain't driving the bus.
I'd agree, and it's obvious. But I'd say it's been that way for a long time. How else to account for Obama's 180 from campaigning on peace to being the biggest warmonger the country had seen in a long time? Bush Jr. obviously wasn't in the driver's seat.
Trenin's articles are vastly better than those of the sad clowns from Valdai. The West, rather than yielding to its usual hubris, should really pay attention to this particularly worrying point in the public attitude of high-ranking Russian officials. In the West, warlike acts are always preceded by grandstanding statements, terrible chin-jutting, and bellicose fanfares—probable remnants of the era when Celtic, Germanic, or Scandinavian armies used to hurl insulting challenges at each other before engaging in battle (something neither the Persians, nor the Greeks, nor the Romans practiced). Looking at Russian history, this is clearly not their custom. It is when their leaders begin to wear grave, resigned, almost sad expressions that one should be wary. The Russian does not have a cheerful, swaggering way of mounting the saddle. But when he is in the saddle...
Living in Germany and following closely the attitudes of not only our power elite but of the whole lot of them (not the masses, mind you), I assure you that these people are completely unable to »pay attention«, i.e. take seriously what the Russian leadership says.
Same for France. Alas.
I have to say that I'm amazed by german "elite" since Scholz and Merz.
For a french guy who watch carefully to the German politics since Schmidt, and used to the terrible serious and effectiveness of Kohl, Schroeder, Merckel, seing so amazingly stupid and restless ministers like Bearbock and incredibly stupid decisions as shut down the nuclear plant let me without voice.
And in seing your dumb current führer caricature...
Where are my wise and serious Germans?
But it is the shepherd that leads the sheep. If the elites are suicidal then surely they will drag the masses behind them, even if they put up some resistance. I personally am more familiar with goats who are harder to herd than sheep but they too eventually fall in line with a little training. The metaphor speaks for itself.
Off-topic announcement:
There is indeed a Good Lord.
And He is full of mercy. Proof? He has just kindly rid us of that old b.... (peace be upon her soul) Lindsay Graham."
May he pass peacefully, along with McConnell, right straight into hell.
My side business - taking internet orders to dump piss on neocon graves so the grass never grows over evil - is booming! With John McCain in the ground, Mitch McConnell brain dead and soon to the dirt, and now Sweet Lips Lindsey? I'm going to be listed on NYSE before too long...
Sure, McCain wait for them with a sign where it's written: " welcome in Hell, country liberated by USA"
A.M.F. Lindsey Graham
SOB too
You formulate: »The Kremlin [i.e. the Commander in Chief], so far, has been exceedingly restrained in using its more powerful conventional capabilities, or engaging some high-value, high-visibility targets. There are many explanations for such restraint«. At the end you speak of President Putin’s »Christ-like self-restraint«. Yes, it seems clear meanwhile that there is something like this and that such an attitude is not universal among the Russian power elite, but more or less an attitude of the Commander in Chief alone. I would appreciate if you would undertake to explain the realistic reasons that cause »such restraint«. I could think of China as a reason, to split EU-Nato from U.S. Nato may be, to accommodate the West-loving (and even more longing for to be loved by the West) Russian billionaire class. What do you think, Andrew?
Hi Jorg, I explained it here in the analysis that I hyperlinked to:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/is-russia-the-new-christ-of-nations
Putin still sincerely believes that Ukrainians are fraternal people to Russians even after all that happened, and he therefore still prioritizes the lives of its civilians over a speedy resolution of the conflict that could be very bloody and entail massive collateral damage.
You're right though, a lot of people -- elite and average Russians alike -- want Putin to do what's needed to bring about a quick victory instead of dragging this on till who knows when amidst the new "war of attrition" against Russia.
The average Russians are mistaken. A quick victory over Ukraine will solve nothing. Absolutely nothing. There will remain a hotbed of disorder, insurrection, and terrorism. And the West will trigger other wars, other special operations, in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Belarus, or elsewhere. It is the West that must be definitively—or at least durably—deterred.
The noose that has been created by Nato virtually all around Russia, which Andrew keeps analyzing, will be there anyway, it is a fact today, though not completed yet. I agree. I also agree that from the point of view of Russia’s national interest the West must be deterred. (It is very strange to say that for me, living in this West, Germany. As the Norwegian professor recently remarked: It is good for us that Russia holds back..) Before that, however, common sense alone dictates that Ukraine must be finished off. Completely. There will be left a lot of terrorism etc. As you mention, but the situation will be fundamentally different for Russia as that territory cannot be used anymore to attack it with long-range weapons. A relief. Of course, Nato then could fire these missiles from its own territory. That would then be the moment of deterrence. Open war, no more proxy.
It's not wrong. But I'm sure that NATO sending missiles and drone deeply in Russia with its Ukraine proxy , will not last too long.
Russia is surprised by such a lack of wisdom but it will say "stop!" once, twice perhaps three times but when Poutine will think that's it's time to strike, Russia will do it, strongly.
No need of end in Ukraine's war.
Perhaps we'll soon see a russian warning about the sinking of any NATO war ship which would dare seizing a Russian tanker or cargo.
Maybe we'll see a sinking without warning of a warship( probably english or french) which will dare it.
Or we'll see a ultimatum( warnings have already been made) about the open aerial space for Ukrainian drones.
Russia has already done absolutely every warnings possibles.
My opinion on this question, fwiw:
1/ Mr Putin and team do not wish Russia to become the moral equal of Israel in the eyes of the world. Western propaganda is superior, but people paying attention, like me, still see action before words.
2/ Mr Putin is trying to balance economic and social effects of the Russian reaction with the perceived risks to Russia, while letting the west expend its arms, resources, and reputations while diplomacy (such as it was) played out. Importantly, the most vicious fighting force has been severely chewed up and degraded. The strategy remains effective in spite of the disappointment that its Chinese ally profits from supplying weapons that are beginning to have greater impact.
3/ Time was needed to understand the true intentions of Trump, a man who has disgraced himself and his country by lying to supporters and to Russia to a degree many have never observed. He and his aids and the institutions backing him are nothing but rank thugs of the first order. Additionally, it has taken time to clarify the intentions of Europe. Whereas America initially funded this disaster, it is now the Europeans who are expending hard earned money to keep it going, while America sits in the background selling arms and benefitting from higher energy prices.
4/ Russia is a country of 160 mil people. Europe is roughly 700 mil. Before engaging an adversary that is roughly 5x bigger, it is wise to prepare extensively and to carefully measure when to start.
5/ Mr Putin, on behalf of the world, on behalf of all of us, does not appear to want a childish and foolish game of chicken with nuclear weapons. This is ~our world, collectively, and it is not a world owned by the idiots who conceived this nonsense. I personally credit Mr Putin with recognizing that.
Imo, Russia is blessed to have Mr Putin and Mr Lavrov as their leaders. It's difficult to make decisions in a fog, far easier to criticize them after the fact.
The 700 million people figure for Europe includes Russia. Assuming the Turks fight Russia is extremely speculative, so another eighty million likely drop from the number. The 45 million people credited to Ukraine are already in the fight, and the ten million your number includes in Belarus would fight on Russia's side.
Germany: ~83.6 million
United Kingdom: ~69.9 million
France: ~66.7 million
Italy: ~59.1 million
Spain: ~47.9 million
Poland: ~38.1 million
Romania: ~18.9 million
Netherlands: ~18.3 million
Belgium: ~11.7 million
Sweden: ~10.5 million
Total number is more like 450 million. Ninety million of those are Black African, Middle Eastern, Pakistani, and Indian immigrants. I'm not so sure they're going to take up arms to fight Russia for their new homes - even under force. Another third of those left are elderly - they're not fighting. Meanwhile, Russia has some four million experienced North Korean reservists who would likely join the fight quickly on their side.
Not as one-sided as it seems.
Most of the NK ground force has to stay in NK in case SK leaders get any ideas. However, I like your analysis in that looking at raw numbers is not enough. For the current Gulf war, the tonnage of iron bombs and short-range rockets does not matter; only standoff weapons and BMs matter. The number of artillery barrels and tanks does not matter. For a potential Russia-NATO war, we also have to consider resources, energy, and MIC capacity on both sides, especially for long-range munitions at the beginning.
The following isn't coming from any particular expertise. just observation.
Russia clearly considers tanks to still matter. It seems to me that the last two years of the SMO has been a steady up and down of how much UAV drones matter to each side, as the technology shifts. Right now the news is all about long-range drones striking deep inside both country's territories, and not so much about the up-close FPV drone battle taking place.
If artillery can be protected - and in certain theaters of the SMO right now, like Konstantynivka and the shelling of Druzhkivka adjacent to it, they can be - there is almost no other weapon outside of ariel gravity bombs and the Russian glider kits on those bombs that pack the punch of 152/155mm artillery shells.
I wouldn't count tanks and artillery out as being difference makers in any larger war. Grossly heavy Leopards, Challengers, and Abrams (which are all designed for use in the firmer central European plains, rather than the marshy east) might not be of much use until the Russian Army again knocks on Berlin's door.
I remember the ~4 million reservist number from some time ago when Russia and North Korea were signing their mutual defense pacts. Those agreements are similar to Article 5 of the NATO agreements - North Korea is obligated to come to Russia's aid if the SMO expands into a broader European war.
The DPRK has ~1.2 million active soldiers, and ~6.8 million reservists. They can use tactical nuclear weapons on South Korea, if need be. And they have another even mightier weapon that people don't usually consider - opening the Imnam Dam, which would completely flood and submerge Seoul in a torrent of water. That region is highly mountainous, and Seoul and it's sits in the lowlands. 10 million residents of South Korea's capital city - 20% of the country - would be homeless or dead within days, and the command and control of the country cut off at the head.
For Russians' work in Ukraine, no argument. My statements are more for the potential war of Russia vs NATO, if it ever comes that far, or NATO troops inside Ukraine (Russia would prefer to destroy them by missiles rather than by tanks and grenades). Tanks' role is morphing into self-propelled artillery, much like SU-76 in the old days. Tanks MAY recover their glory if some effective and cheap anti-drone weapons are found.
Good comments. If you start a Substack I will be your first follower
Dear friend, as Jörg points out, your calculation is wrong. Moreover, it is completely irrelevant. First, it does not specify who is attacking whom, where, and why. Russia has neither the intention nor the means to invade Europe. If it were to attack, it would be with conventional long-range or nuclear weapons. Whether NATO has 600 million people (including Turkey) in Europe changes nothing. The EU has neither the human nor the material means to invade Russia. It might possibly have the material means in 10 years, but it will have even fewer human means. As Jörg notes, a country like France already has between 25% and 30% of its citizens from African immigration. I can guarantee you they will not go and get killed to attack Russia. Good luck to those who would try to force conscription on them in their neighborhoods. :) The young native generations are emasculated by rampant wokism and have grown up in contempt and hatred of the very notion of homeland. They will not even go and fight to defend Estonia or Poland, let alone go and attack the Russians. They will flee the country en masse. So, more than ever, counting 'beans' is of no use in this matter.
Not disputing that argument. It’s one rough measure. The adversary is certainly and has significant arms stockpiles. Otoh, it is likely less motivated, not protecting homeland, etc etc.
This point does not refute my opinion. It’s a minor pushback on one element, which is valid pushback.
Your lines do resonate exceptionally well with my confirmation bias. For a while. Then this crops up in my mind: wishful thinking? How does he know that? What is his evidence?
I said it is my opinion, based on trying to rationalize Mr Putin's restraint in the face of both internal resistance and a level of provocation that would never be tolerated i the west.
That the war being fought is a war of attrition and that Mr Putin and team have shown extreme restraint is not a narrative, it is a fact. There are numerous other facts not worth my time to articulate for you.
If you prefer other reasons, such as that Mr Putin is weak, timid, or unintelligent, you are entitled to those beliefs.
I do not believe that he is weak, timid or unintelligent, on the contrary. I agree with the Norwegian professor Glen Diesen that this line of action by the Russian president is good for us in Western Europe (I am German, cursed with a war-mongering state leadership, even the whole elite hates Russia). My wishful thinking was, as I wrote, very grateful to your lines of arguments. It just does not convince me thinking again.
Thank you for that kind remark and your solid German common sense.
Should be here: I think #3 needs clarified. I am not running cover for Trump, but I think he is a hostage for a lot of reason to many to visit here. In other words, he ain't driving the bus.
I dont disagree with that pov. But he wrote a lot of checks to get elected.
What I find incredible in this whole story is that it's Germany, of all people, that's acting like one of the maddest NATO pitbulls. Germany, country without nuclear weapons, that can be hit by the RF -- or, for that matter, by any nuclear-armed country -- without any grave consequences for the attacker.
Are they crazy? Are they in control of their actions? And if they aren't, who is? I don't get this.
Vassal states led by satraps,Adam is the obvious answer. Trained, schooled and selected. Same across the western countries.
Well, to a degree, usually. Not to the point of committing suicide.
Is it possible that there are, perhaps, some communications between Germany and the RF behind the scene, and what we see is, to some extent, just a show?
But that's just me, a crazy conspiracy theorist...
Adam.
Suicide?
Have you not notice that Germany has already sacrified it's economical model for obeying to USA?
Folks who decide those sacrifices and suicides think that themselves will not pay the price, only the people. They don't care.
Fair enough, I guess.
...but totally amazing, if that's what it is. But hey, we'd seen the USSR and Yugoslavia in the 1990s, so yes anything is possible, states do commit suicide...
Germany is used to it.
My comment was in regards vassals to America in regards destroying the German economy by allowing Nordstream destruction and buying US LNG at multiples of the price of Russian gas instead. Plus the drive to war.
As for Putin he wants G8 back and to be back in the fold again I believe hence no bold decisive win is possible just an unfair agreement for Russia's population but favourable to the oligarchs and their families living in the West now and business back to normal.
What country tries to balance the budget during an existential war as Nabiullina is doing with complete support from VVP. Absurd to the point of treasonous!
Europeans like being slaves.
Because Russian dithering and indecision have convinced them that Russia can be finished off once and for all.
Russians regad themselves as one people with Ukraine. This will never change. Best to listen to Trenin if we want peace in the region. Let western officials come to their senses There are some who hate Russia but that will get get them what they want. Russia rules in the region. America is 10,000 miles away Best if America get rid of the cabal of Jews who hate Russia.
Putin will be out by the end of the year. The shit is getting real now and Kremlin officials are rolling their eyes when Putin speaks. They know, and he soon will, that the shelf life of the SMO has expired. Stop for a moment and realize that preventing a Ukraine that is a NATO missile launching platform for strikes deep into the heart of Russia is why this war started in the first place.
I think #3 needs clarified. I am not running cover for Trump, but I think he is a hostage for a lot of reason to many to visit here. In other words, he ain't driving the bus.
I'd agree, and it's obvious. But I'd say it's been that way for a long time. How else to account for Obama's 180 from campaigning on peace to being the biggest warmonger the country had seen in a long time? Bush Jr. obviously wasn't in the driver's seat.