Russia has now invaded Ukraine (Representatives, Putin, interview, ethical)

[brrabbit]

Holodomor is an essential piece of Ukrainian history, yet it probably is not relevant to the topic. Ukrainians have been insisting that it was made explicitly to eradicate their nation. Non Ukrainians point out that Communists hated peasants of all origins equally. The process of Collectivization and Western Sanctions added to the problem considerably.
And I wouldn't say it was the biggest famine in human history. I bet there were worse famines in China or Africa in the past.


Or to go to a nationalistic route, why do Ukrainians blame Russia [as usual] for actions of a bunch of Jews and a Georgian?

[SlamDuncanitis]

Russian propaganda is pretty bad lol



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH3YtD_cckg



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2VnKqiUlAU

[Troubleshooter]

I imagine a cartoon of Putin as a baby with a machine gun screaming "My way! My way! My way! My way! My way"

[EveryLady]

Originally Posted by brrabbit

Holodomor is an essential piece of Ukrainian history, yet it probably is not relevant to the topic. Ukrainians have been insisting that it was made explicitly to eradicate their nation. Non Ukrainians point out that Communists hated peasants of all origins equally. The process of Collectivization and Western Sanctions added to the problem considerably.
And I wouldn't say it was the biggest famine in human history. I bet there were worse famines in China or Africa in the past.

I was only responding to someone else who asked: How was it Ukraine's right to make it a part of Ukraine? Responding because it was Ukraine, just proportionally fewer Ukrainians lived there because ...

Then erasure came along to give me a history lesson, except her lessons well ... enough said.

Originally Posted by brrabbit

Or to go to a nationalistic route, why do Ukrainians blame Russia [as usual] for actions of a bunch of Jews and a Georgian?

Ethnic-Ukrainians and ethnic-Russians seemed to get along pretty well for years. Until it benefitted someone to make them not get along. This is where it gets interesting. People can fight over this and that. Until some step changes the rules of a confrontation. Where lines are crossed to where a situation continues to escalate. For example, you like or rather read Strelkov. What say you about this?

Russia's Igor Strelkov: I Am Responsible for War in Eastern Ukraine

"I was the one who pulled the trigger of this war," Strelkov said in an interview published Thursday with Russia's Zavtra newspaper, which espouses imperialist views.

"If our unit hadn't crossed the border, everything would have fizzled out — like in [the Ukrainian city of] Kharkiv, like in Odessa," Strelkov, who uses that nom-de-guerre meaning "Shooter" to replace his last name Girkin, was quoted as saying.

"There would have been several dozen killed, burned, detained. And that would have been the end of it. But the flywheel of the war, which is continuing to this day, was spun by our unit. We mixed up all the cards on the table," he said.

Strelkov also told Zavtra that at the beginning of the conflict, Ukrainian separatists and government forces were reluctant to start fighting and that the main opposition to the rebels came from Ukraine's ultranationalist militants such as the Right Sector.

"At first, nobody wanted to fight," he was quoted as saying. "The first two weeks went on under the auspices of the sides trying to convince each other [to engage]."

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/...ukraine-a41598

Poor Stelkov. He shows up with Russian commandos. The Separatists are armed. Ukrainian army there. Even the Right Sector bully boys show up. And still he can't get a war going?

He goes on to say that because Russia did not outright invade the Ukrainian army moved to restore order. The history of the conflict is a tragedy of escalation.

So we've got Russian imperialism Strelkov-style vs Ukrainian nationalism but all Putin can complain about is Ukrainian nationalism?

Maybe keeping it to NATO would be simpler. But then Putin not only wanted no NATO in Ukraine he demanded post 1997 signatories remove NATO forces and armament from their countries. So Ukraine with no NATO gets invaded as countries with NATO also don't agree.

[brrabbit]

Originally Posted by SlamDuncanitis

Russian propaganda is pretty bad lol

You should not turn your back on the Ukrainian heroes.

The location where it happened is known, it's in Malorohansk Milk Processing Plant. The name of those who did it will be known too. Russians have better memory than Israelis.

[euro123]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

I imagine a cartoon of Putin as a baby with a machine gun screaming "My way! My way! My way! My way! My way"

Nothing against short people but I'm very much against evil gnomes from the fairytales:

[brrabbit]

Originally Posted by EveryLady

Poor Stelkov. He shows up with Russian commandos. The Separatists are armed. Ukrainian army there. Even the Right Sector bully boys show up. And still he can't get a war going?

He goes on to say that because Russia did not outright invade the Ukrainian army moved to restore order. The history of the conflict is a tragedy of escalation.

So we've got Russian imperialism Strelkov-style vs Ukrainian nationalism but all Putin can complain about is Ukrainian nationalism?

Maybe keeping it to NATO would be simpler. But then Putin not only wanted no NATO in Ukraine he demanded post 1997 signatories remove NATO forces and armament from their countries. So Ukraine with no NATO gets invaded because countries with NATO don't agree.

I believe that was factually true, with big uncertainty in what capacity he came. It seems like he was actually _provoking_ Kremlin to make a move (and there has been a faction in there supporting him, but Putin decided against it at the end).

And when Strelkov arrived with a group of 54 people, he met organized and armed militia of 2000 men there in Slavyansk. They assumed he's representing Russia and he assumed the command over majority of the militia (Hodakovsky's (colonel of Ukrainian Special Ops) regiment Vostok stayed independent and did not accept his comand - those guys are still fighting the war in Donbass and were in Volnovakha and now are in Mariupol).

So, he did not build the gun, nor loaded it, not even prepped it to shoot, but he did puil the trigger.

Also, having said that, Strelkov maintained civil order and explicitly prohibited any "inappropriate" behavior. For instance, he publicly criticized Givi for improper (albeit fairly mild) treatment of captive ukrainian officers.

And any Civil war starts with people hesitating to start it. Ukrainian Army at the time was apolitical, heavily underpaid, poorly equipped, and fairly neutral in the conflict. That's why Crimea was taken without a single shot. Ukraine recognized that mistake and took care of it since then.

[SlamDuncanitis]

Originally Posted by brrabbit

You should not turn your back on the Ukrainian heroes.

The location where it happened is known, it's in Malorohansk Milk Processing Plant. The name of those who did it will be known too. Russians have better memory than Israelis.

They need to hire some better people for the makeup department.

[EveryLady]

Originally Posted by brrabbit

I believe that was factually true, with big uncertainty in what capacity he came. It seems like he was actually _provoking_ Kremlin to make a move (and there has been a faction in there supporting him, but Putin decided against it at the end).

And when Strelkov arrived with a group of 54 people, he met organized and armed militia of 2000 men there in Slavyansk. They assumed he's representing Russia and he assumed the command over majority of the militia (Hodakovsky's (colonel of Ukrainian Special Ops) regiment Vostok stayed independent and did not accept his comand - those guys are still fighting the war in Donbass and were in Volnovakha and now are in Mariupol).

So, he did not build the gun, nor loaded it, not even prepped it to shoot, but he did puil the trigger.

Also, having said that, Strelkov maintained civil order and explicitly prohibited any "inappropriate" behavior. For instance, he publicly criticized Givi for improper (albeit fairly mild) treatment of captive ukrainian officers.

And any Civil war starts with people hesitating to start it. Ukrainian Army at the time was apolitical, heavily underpaid, poorly equipped, and fairly neutral in the conflict. That's why Crimea was taken without a single shot. Ukraine recognized that mistake and took care of it since then.

Per the bold, it's intriguing how much is not known about various happenings, which is why it's irritating when we get pronouncements of the why. With this many dying, best to attempt the figuring. For example, there's more than one version to the Yanukovych and Putin story.

I'd promised but forgotten to post the Strelkov war analysis: https://rentry.co/2gqat
Came to my attention via @christogrozev but not aware of a reason to think it not genuine.

[brrabbit]

Originally Posted by EveryLady

Per the bold, it's intriguing how much is not known about various happenings, which is why it's irritating when we get pronouncements of the why. With this many dying, best to attempt the figuring. For example, there's more than one version to the Yanukovych and Putin story.

I'd promised but forgotten to post the Strelkov war analysis: https://rentry.co/2gqat
Came to my attention via @christogrozev but not aware of a reason to think it not genuine.

Here are some good documentaries with English captures. If you want to see some


Maidan: The road to War, documentary...
https://odysee.com/@%D0%95%D0%BA%D0%...-Documentary:2

Donbass (2016)...
https://odysee.com/@ThePlandemic:d/Donbass-(2016)-:2

Donbass (2022): Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow - the history of the conflict.
https://odysee.com/@QuantumRhino:9/D...E2%80%94-RTD:4

As far as Strelkov's analysis, it's one of his older ones. I am subscribed to his telegram and watch everyone as soon as it goes out (go to translate.google.com and put it into the "From" box and read side by side, it seems to be close enough to get the idea :

================================================== =============
Стрелков Игорь Иванович, [3/27/22 1:13 AM]
По моему мнению, для того, чтобы рассчитывать на победу в текущей войне, необходимо как можно скорее предпринять следующие политические и военно-политические действия:

1. Окончательно и безповоротно отказаться от признания легитимности действующих киевских властей и способствовать скорейшему созданию на освобожденной территории властей новых. Предпочтительно - властей Новороссии (на территории Херсонской области) и Малороссии ("украины") - где-либо на Слобожанщине или в одном из освобожденных городов Киевской области. Начать с ними дипломатическое общение и заключить серию договоров о дружбе, взаимопомощи и (главное) их вхождении в состав будущего Союзного государства России, ДНР, ЛНР, Новороссии и Малороссии ("украины", если уж от этого термина в Кремле никак не могут отказаться). Возможен вариант создания не единых Новороссии и "украины", а народных республик в рамках ранее существовавших областей. Здесь важна не форма, а декларация принципа полного переформатирования бывшей "украины" и создание законной альтернативы киевским нацистам.

2. Начать формирование добровольческих вооруженных сил и полицейских формирований из местных сторонников России и противников действующего режима. Естественно - с подчинением их российскому военному командованию, но с предоставлением некоторой степени автономности (что позволит гораздо шире задействовать людские ресурсы, сняв многие ограничения, неизбежные в рекрутировании в российскую регулярную армию).

3. Перестать церемониться с представителями киевской власти (хотя-бы наиболее одиозными и непримиримыми), сделав их законными объектами для воздействия всеми видами оружия.

4. Понять, наконец, что эту войну можно только ПОЛНОСТЬЮ ВЫИГРАТЬ или ПОЛНОСТЬЮ ПРОИГРАТЬ. И срочно готовить войска (резервы) в достаточных количествах для ее выигрыша. Что не сделать без серии частичных мобилизаций в самой Российской Федерации. А также переведения экономики на военные рельсы (в рамках разумного).

20 лет "благополучного прожирания ресурсной ренты" - закончились навсегда. Впереди нас ждет нелегкий период внешней блокады и серии войн. Чтобы не провалиться в ад смуты - надо действовать быстро и решительно, не теша себя иллюзиями, что "скоро снова заживем как при дедушке с тем-же дедушкой". "Дедушка" от нас и так никуда не денется - это понятно и неизбежно (что вовсе нельзя сказать о значительной части его окружения), а вот "жить как раньше" - мы не будем точно. Главная задача - просто "остаться жить". А сохранить жизнь (как государству, так и огромному количеству его граждан) можно только побеждая.

Стрелков Игорь Иванович, [3/27/22 1:15 AM]
В дополнение к предыдущему тексту.

Когда-то (уже довольно давно - лет 6-7 назад) я не раз писал о том, что президент "сидит на двух стульях, постепенно разъезжающихся в стороны под его задницей". Под "стульями" понимались:
- "государственно-патриотическая идеология" (представленная военным и гражданским чиновничеством всех разновидностей);
- "либерально-олигархическая" экономическая модель.
Также Ваш покорный слуга предупреждал, что таковое "сидение" - относительно комфортное до "крымских событий" - оставаться стабильным более не может. И президенту придется выбирать: "на какой стул окончательно пересесть". Или провалиться "между".

И, вот, - выбор наконец (с ОГРОМНЫМ опозданием, но все-таки) сделан. Отборные и казалось-бы "абсолютно вечные" кадры олигархов побежали за границу вместе с частью своей наиболее одиозной обслуги. Немыслимая вещь! - "Эхо Москвы" закрыто! Того гляди - и на "Ельцин-центр" втихую повесят амбарный замок...

Не смотря на все "ёрзания" (Путин не был-бы самим-собой, если-бы шел куда-то по прямой, а не с постоянными "вихляниями" и попытками "свернуть в сторону или вообще обратно") - "стул выбран".

А вот теперь - начинается самое интересное: наблюдать за тем, насколько прочно это изначально хилое и очень сильно поточенное червями сооружение, собранное из престарелых "партийно-комсомольских" кадров и безсовестных вороватых (и еще более бездарных) карьеристов позднейших формаций. Не говоря у же о том, что немалая часть деталей "перетекла" из соседнего (ныне отвергнутого едва-ли не полностью) "стула". И всё это - под знаменами "возрождения России" и "государственного патриотизма".

Способно-ли оно - без радикальной замены большинства деталей - выдержать испытание войной? Вопрос чисто риторический...
Или "детали" (начиная от самых "пафосно-важных" и заканчивая "мелкими винтиками") будут постепенно (но быстро - времени нет) заменяться, или...
================================================== ================