Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry Bale, can't comment on your post entirely right away, but I am listening to today's "60 minutes," and it's out of this world.
I wish I could translate it ALL, because it's so important in terms of clues it gives what's going on in the Russian government now, and what are the perspectives of the future developments, but let me stop just at this fragment of Putin's speech ( regarding the Western portion of Ukraine.)
I've never seen such "bad light" in his eyes ( or the smirk, or whatever you want to call it.)
Before him there were two different speakers, and one of them was from the KPRF; ( Communist Party,) he was pretty consistent all these years that Donbass ( South East in general) had to be protected, since "all these agreements, all this our running with "peace negotiations" via diplomatic channels such as PACE, UN and what not, didn't do any good.
Because we saw that within Ukraine, whoever was trying to resolve anything in democratic peaceful manner, were simply beaten up or killed by the Nationalist gangs. We observed it over and over again - all these older people trying to protect their statues of Lenin that belonged to the city, the statues of heroes of the WWII - whatever they believed in - they were simply beaten up with sticks. " ( All true, I saw it too many times.)
I haven't seen the facilitators being so quiet throughout his full speech. It's seldom when they wouldn't interrupt like that.)
Then there was a speech of some functionary ( al lot of them were arguing before how it was "not our people and not our problem - all these "Ukrainian affairs."
Now a lot of them are changing their tune.
But back to Putin and his speech.
"Ukraine came to life as the result of the Bolsheviks policies. We can call it today with the full responsibility (by its real name) "Ukraine named after Vladimir Ilich Lenin." He is her author and architect. This is entirely confirmed by the archive papers, including his stern orders regarding Donbass, which was literally forced into Ukraine.
And now the "grateful descendants" quote unquote ( meaning Ukrainian Nationalists) got busy destroying all the Lenin's monuments." ( I think it was Poroshenko that signed the law of "decommunisation of Ukraine," while unleashing the Nazi propaganda across the country.) Putin: "So this destruction of monuments is what they call "decommunisation" over there. *Sigh.* So you want the "decommunisation?"
Oh well, we don't mind.
But let's not stop half-way here.
We are ready to show you what REAL DECOMMUNISATION means for Ukraine."
Silence.
And now I have to fill in what the facilitator ( Olga Skabeejeva) was saying before she switched the screen to Putin's speech; ( she was weighing down, whether a lot of actions that Russia took in Caucasus or Crimea really "unleashed the war" or "brought the peace," since there were a lot of arguments pro and contra.
But whatever it was, the same case was argued for Donbass now.
The functionary (at 27:42); "I think we didn't start the war, but we actually started the process of unification with Ukraine."
Olga Skabejeva; "A stern warning came from the president Putin to Ukrainians ( the Nationalists first of all of course)
You were dreaming about the "decommunisation?"
We'll show you the "decommunization." If Ukraine won't calm down, it will shrink down to five regions, the rest will be "decommunised," as you were asking for it."
Erasure, Putin admitted defeat with his speech. The Minsk agreement is dead, he couldn't even influence a neighboring country. He was moping about how Soviet leaders sacrificed the power of historic Russia (the Russian empire).
Russia is on the retreat world wide, the western hysteria about his power plays is just that, hysteria.
Erasure, Putin admitted defeat with his speech. The Minsk agreement is dead
It was dead already for quite some time in the shape and form that it was written.
The last nail on the head came when Western media started trumpeting that it's "not a path to peace, unless it's changed."
Blinken confirmed it, when he said in his last UN speech that "Russia must sit down and negotiate with Zelensky in good faith."
This was a no-no for Minsk agreement, since the whole idea behind it was negotiations between Zelensky and LDNR representatives, and not "with Russia."
It seems you missed my detailed explanations in "Ukraine" thread, so look them up.
Quote:
he couldn't even influence a neighboring country.
There was nothing about "influencing the neighboring country" - the directives to change Minsk agreement, the way it would be convenient for Ukrainian nationalists and not for Moscow, came from Washington.
So Moscow was right to stop playing the games any longer and to just recognize the LDNR.
( It's not like they were not ready for this kind of scenario.)
Quote:
He was moping about how Soviet leaders sacrificed the power of historic Russia (the Russian empire).
Where? When?
I am not even sure what you are talking about, since the excerpt I brought actually sounded rather ominous for Ukraine, and not some "mopping around."
But in his OTHER speech I heard, he acknowledged his mistake of not taking Donbass already long time ago. ( And that's what I've been saying all along.)
Quote:
Russia is on the retreat world wide, the western hysteria about his power plays is just that, hysteria.
If it were in retreat for real, I see no point for "Western hysteria."
So do you think the Russians will go with troops and local allies beyond the rumps of two oblasts, now declared independent, and take control of those two oblasts in their entirety? Do you think they will go into other oblasts in eastern Ukraine, possibly the two in the southeast as far as Kherson or maybe as far as Odessa and the border of Moldova/Romania? And/or to the Dnieper as far as the northern border with Belarus?
My gut feeling is that even taking control of the two oblasts currently in question in their entirety would already be very bold, and going any further beyond that would depend on the level of local support town by town, city by city, oblast by oblast, of which I have no idea.
What do you think?
Also, with regard to my previous comments, any thought or analysis from the Polish perspective, including their currently frayed relationship with the EU?
Sometimes I have the impression that these so-called sanctions are laughable and that the US/UK are almost begging the Russians to move into at least some other portion of eastern Ukraine, albeit at the highest price possible to all parties involved, except themselves of course and they already have the least to lose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
Sorry Bale, can't comment on your post entirely right away, but I am listening to today's "60 minutes," and it's out of this world.
I wish I could translate it ALL, because it's so important in terms of clues it gives what's going on in the Russian government now, and what are the perspectives of the future developments, but let me stop just at this fragment of Putin's speech ( regarding the Western portion of Ukraine.)
I've never seen such "bad light" in his eyes ( or the smirk, or whatever you want to call it.)
Before him there were two different speakers, and one of them was from the KPRF; ( Communist Party,) he was pretty consistent all these years that Donbass ( South East in general) had to be protected, since "all these agreements, all this our running with "peace negotiations" via diplomatic channels such as PACE, UN and what not, didn't do any good.
Because we saw that within Ukraine, whoever was trying to resolve anything in democratic peaceful manner, were simply beaten up or killed by the Nationalist gangs. We observed it over and over again - all these older people trying to protect their statues of Lenin that belonged to the city, the statues of heroes of the WWII - whatever they believed in - they were simply beaten up with sticks. " ( All true, I saw it too many times.)
I haven't seen the facilitators being so quiet throughout his full speech. It's seldom when they wouldn't interrupt like that.)
Then there was a speech of some functionary ( al lot of them were arguing before how it was "not our people and not our problem - all these "Ukrainian affairs."
Now a lot of them are changing their tune.
But back to Putin and his speech.
"Ukraine came to life as the result of the Bolsheviks policies. We can call it today with the full responsibility (by its real name) "Ukraine named after Vladimir Ilich Lenin." He is her author and architect. This is entirely confirmed by the archive papers, including his stern orders regarding Donbass, which was literally forced into Ukraine.
And now the "grateful descendants" quote unquote ( meaning Ukrainian Nationalists) got busy destroying all the Lenin's monuments." ( I think it was Poroshenko that signed the law of "decommunisation of Ukraine," while unleashing the Nazi propaganda across the country.) Putin: "So this destruction of monuments is what they call "decommunisation" over there. *Sigh.* So you want the "decommunisation?"
Oh well, we don't mind.
But let's not stop half-way here.
We are ready to show you what REAL DECOMMUNISATION means for Ukraine."
Silence.
And now I have to fill in what the facilitator ( Olga Skabeejeva) was saying before she switched the screen to Putin's speech; ( she was weighing down, whether a lot of actions that Russia took in Caucasus or Crimea really "unleashed the war" or "brought the peace," since there were a lot of arguments pro and contra.
But whatever it was, the same case was argued for Donbass now.
The functionary (at 27:42); "I think we didn't start the war, but we actually started the process of unification with Ukraine."
Olga Skabejeva; "A stern warning came from the president Putin to Ukrainians ( the Nationalists first of all of course)
You were dreaming about the "decommunisation?"
We'll show you the "decommunization." If Ukraine won't calm down, it will shrink down to five regions, the rest will be "decommunised," as you were asking for it."
It was dead already for quite some time in the shape and form that it was written.
The last nail on the head came when Western media started trumpeting that it's "not a path to peace, unless it's changed."
Blinken confirmed it, when he said in his last UN speech that "Russia must sit down and negotiate with Zelensky in good faith."
This was a no-no for Minsk agreement, since the whole idea behind it was negotiations between Zelensky and LDNR representatives, and not "with Russia."
It seems you missed my detailed explanations in "Ukraine" thread, so look them up.
There was nothing about "influencing the neighboring country" - the directives to change Minsk agreement, the way it would be convenient for Ukrainian nationalists and not for Moscow, came from Washington.
So Moscow was right to stop playing the games any longer and to just recognize the LDNR.
( It's not like they were not ready for this kind of scenario.)
Where? When?
I am not even sure what you are talking about, since the excerpt I brought actually sounded rather ominous for Ukraine, and not some "mopping around."
But in his OTHER speech I heard, he acknowledged his mistake of not taking Donbass already long time ago. ( And that's what I've been saying all along.)
If it were in retreat for real, I see no point for "Western hysteria."
Russia's goal was to get the US/NATO to pressure Ukraine to accept the Minsk agreement. That planned failed.
So do you think the Russians will go with troops and local allies beyond the rumps of two oblasts, now declared independent, and take control of those two oblasts in their entirety?
Sounds like this is a plan ( judging by what I hear on this program.)
Quote:
Do you think they will go into other oblasts in eastern Ukraine, possibly the two in the southeast as far as Kherson or maybe as far as Odessa and the border of Moldova/Romania? And/or to the Dnieper as far as the northern border with Belarus?
This is up for discussion. ( I hear them talking about the peace keepers, but how/what/how far) not sure at this point.
Quote:
My gut feeling is that even taking control of the two oblasts currently in question in their entirety would already be very bold, and going any further beyond that would depend on the level of local support town by town, city by city, oblast by oblast, of which I have no idea.
What do you think?
Now this becomes a very complicated question.
On one hand - there are plenty of Eastern Ukrainians that don't want to be part of Putin's Russia for a number of reasons (sort of like me.) They were happy with where they were BEFORE that coup d'etat of 2014.
On another hand, these very people become the hostages of the Nationalists, and they understand it too.
Interestingly enough, the Ukrainian blogger turned politician who lives in EU now, and who has his own party in Ukraine now ( the youngest and the most educated segment in South-Eastern part of Ukraine, but Kiev too,) - he used to be shy of associating himself and his policies with Moscow, since he always thought that it were "internal Ukrainian affairs."
But after his life ( and the lives of his child and wife) were threatened by the Nationalists, the people in his party were beaten up by them while disseminating his party election materials, and harassed during local council meetings across the region - he said to his constituents "enough is enough, I am going to Moscow, and I will start talking about the Russian culture and our historic ties to it - let them ( the Nationalists) choke on it."
Because with time he realized that in spite of all his multiple appeals to the EU, no one was going to do anything about the Nationalists.
Moscow is the only force that can, and it's waking up to that.
So Donbass ( as a blue color region) - that's pretty straightforward. ( The Ukrainian soldiers acknowledge themselves that the locals don't want them there, and that they help the LDNR forces covertly.)
But more "white collar" areas - such as Kharkov for example - that I don't know.
I hear them talking on-line, that they are still the Russian-speaking city, in spite of the forcible Ukrainization, but what they think beyond that is hard to say, since no such polls are available in the Nationalist-dominating scene.
This is the latest example of it ( in the tabloid, so I had to set the record straight.)
Also, with regard to my previous comments, any thought or analysis from the Polish perspective, including their currently frayed relationship with the EU?
You mean regarding the situation in Ukraine?
Or what exactly?
Quote:
Sometimes I have the impression that these so-called sanctions are laughable and that the US/UK are almost begging the Russians to move into at least some other portion of eastern Ukraine, albeit at the highest price possible to all parties involved, except themselves of course and they already have the least to lose.
Sometimes I think that Biden simply downright wants the war between Russia and Ukraine, with as many body bags as possible.
Particularly on the Russian side.
Ukrainians - he doesn't even care.
Russia's goal was to get the US/NATO to pressure Ukraine to accept the Minsk agreement. That planned failed.
Russia was not even LETTING US PARTICIPATE in these Minsk negotiations for long time, saying it's none of their business, it's only between Russia France and Germany, since they were the guarantors of it.
Those were the parties that Russia was hoping to press Ukraine to fulfill Minsk agreement, which would keep Donbass in Ukraine.
And Russian government had its own reasons ( the faulty ones) to keep the LDNR inside Ukraine, and that's why they were not in a hurry to set it free or to join Russia, as much as Zakharchenko ( then DNR's Prime minister) was asking for it.
The US was only the recent addition to the company, and pretty much when Russian government already made up its mind regarding Donbass.
So this part of of "negotiations" was already in the name only.
Russia was not even LETTING US PARTICIPATE in these Minsk negotiations for long time, saying it's none of their business, it's only between Russia France and Germany, since they were the guarantors of it.
Those were the parties that Russia was hoping to press Ukraine to fulfill Minsk agreement, which would keep Donbass in Ukraine.
And Russian government had its own reasons ( the faulty ones) to keep the LDNR inside Ukraine, and that's why they were not in a hurry to set it free or to join Russia, as much as Zakharchenko ( then DNR's Prime minister) was asking for it.
The US was only the recent addition to the company, and pretty much when Russian government already made up its mind regarding Donbass.
So this part of of "negotiations" was already in the name only.
What "mopping" - I am not going to sit through 1,5 hour of his speech like seriously)))
You want me to dissuade you from believing that "Russia is done" or whatever, or what's the story?
If Russia is winning or losing, it all make very little difference.
But based on this speech, he seems brow beaten. He wanted to influence Kiev and couldn't get it done.
If I am right there will be no more military operations.
If I am wrong, Mariupol will be seized. We will find out in the coming days.
If Russia is winning or losing, it all make very little difference.
But based on this speech, he seems brow beaten. He wanted to influence Kiev and couldn't get it done.
If I am right there will be no more military operations.
If I am wrong, Mariupol will be seized. We will find out in the coming days.
I suspect you are not reading between the lines.
At this point Putin is *thinking* about * peacefully negotiating with Kiev* so it would cease the hostile military actions in Donbass, against the newly-recognized republics.
Sometimes I think that Biden simply downright wants the war between Russia and Ukraine, with as many body bags as possible.
Particularly on the Russian side.
Ukrainians - he doesn't even care.
I agree about the body bags and Ukrainians: US policy makers don’t care - up to a certain point - how much Ukrainian territory stays in or goes back to the Russian fold, as long as it comes at the highest possible price, for both Russians and Ukrainians.
As for Poland, they are currently involved in a dispute with EU concerning Poland’s judicial laws, even to the point where EU is withholding funds.
Poland could stand to gain most among formally EU countries from a derelict western Ukraine, as opposed to Germany and EU as a unit, with an emphasis on EU as a political entity which is under a lot of strain, internally and externally, economically, politically, militarily.
From a broader geopolitical perspective, US policy makers are succeeding in “balkanizing” the entire European continent, with some half-willing, half-reluctant formally EU junior partners, and one of their best junior partners in EU is Poland, even also Lithuania and the like.
To put it another way, the promise of the EU, while not a total failure, has disappointed, while NATO appears stronger and more relevant.
To put it another way, the western economies have stalled in terms of internal organic growth, they need external expansion, and, led by US/NATO, they view Ukraine, other smaller entities in Caucuses region, and eventually Russia itself as easy pickings, almost as easy as illegal immigration internally and semi-slave labor in Asia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
