Russia v Ukraine

[TheHowieLama]

A Key Russian general who Russian President Vladimir Putin promoted this week views the invasion of Ukraine as a mere "stepping stone" to further conflict with Europe.

This week, Putin promoted Lieutenant General Andrey Mordvichev to the rank of Colonel-General. The military leader had already been serving in the role of commanding the Central Military District and Russian Central Grouping of Forces in Ukraine.

 

In a recent interview with Moscow's state-run Russia-1, a clip of which circulated widely on social media Saturday, Mordvichev said he believes Putin's war will last quite a long time and expand in the future.

"I think there's still plenty of time to spend. It is pointless to talk about a specified period. If we are talking about Eastern Europe, which we will have to, of course then it will be longer," the general said.

"Ukraine is only a stepping stone?" the interviewer then asked.

"Yes, absolutely. It is only the beginning," Mordvichev responded, who went on to say that the war "will not stop here."

 

 

[Gnasher]

20 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

A Key Russian general who Russian President Vladimir Putin promoted this week views the invasion of Ukraine as a mere "stepping stone" to further conflict with Europe.

This week, Putin promoted Lieutenant General Andrey Mordvichev to the rank of Colonel-General. The military leader had already been serving in the role of commanding the Central Military District and Russian Central Grouping of Forces in Ukraine.

 

In a recent interview with Moscow's state-run Russia-1, a clip of which circulated widely on social media Saturday, Mordvichev said he believes Putin's war will last quite a long time and expand in the future.

"I think there's still plenty of time to spend. It is pointless to talk about a specified period. If we are talking about Eastern Europe, which we will have to, of course then it will be longer," the general said.

"Ukraine is only a stepping stone?" the interviewer then asked.

"Yes, absolutely. It is only the beginning," Mordvichev responded, who went on to say that the war "will not stop here."

 

 

 

Cunts been on the Vodka. They wouldn't get past Poland.

[Section_31]

Bet the paras are shitting themselves.

[Gnasher]

On 10/09/2023 at 20:12, Captain Howdy said:

I can’t lie I like Gnash, always have, I mean I don’t agree with him on much but he speaks from the heart. Tell you what though there’s a strange absence of certain other posters on this thread who would normally be all over this kind of illegal invasion shit. Very strange 

 

Well I can't speak for other posters but if you equate this thread to the outside world, the 'pro war' lobby are massively over represented. 

 

The 'realists' meanwhile are underrepresented, its pretty much just me. I call us 'realists' because that's what this journalist called it the article I posted which resulted in certain posters losing their shit.

 

Here you go. It's (imo) an excellently written piece of work. Although I don't agree with all of it. 

 

 

 

Is Gavin Jacobson the editor of the New Statement also a Russian bot? 

 

It's had to be objective when one country illegally invades another country, subjectivity makes objectivity seem heartless. But its undeniable a lot of what these so called realists has come true. 

 

Sanctions (the economic ones) have indeed hurt our own people. More civilians here have died through cold in Britain (in part to rising fuel costs) than civilians in Ukraine. How many lives they've saved is open to discussion.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/sep/06/excess-winter-deaths-caused-by-cold-homes-in-great-britain-up-by-about-a-third

 

 

Corruption in Ukraine IS a massive problem, as people warned. Zelensky has just sacked his defence minister and all recruitment agents because of corruption. Seems the rich are able to buy themselves out of the draft. It's perfectly legitimate and reasonable for corruption to be raised when foreign aid has been invested. She's right, the sacking of the Ukrainian defence minister just rubber stamps it 

 

 

The counter offensive has resulted in massive Ukrainian casualties and has been a limited success. Despite the amounts of western aid and ammunition. 

 

The media hype about fears Russia would be storming through Europe has proved massively wide of the mark. Most of Ukraine is relatively safe with few civilian casualties. People here were wearing the Ghost of Kyve t-shirts. Orchestras were forbidden to play Russian composer's. Britain was not at war. Raising eyebrows over such behaviour sure you looked upon as some sort of traitor. It was ridiculous. 

 

Anyway if people get upset or irritated over others opinions I'd suggest they can use the ignore button.

[Gnasher]

On 10/09/2023 at 20:12, Captain Howdy said:

I can’t lie I like Gnash, always have, I mean I don’t agree with him on much but he speaks from the heart. Tell you what though there’s a strange absence of certain other posters on this thread who would normally be all over this kind of illegal invasion shit. Very strange 

 

Anyway the bottom line is I'm not stopping anyone speaking, but they can't go crying when their abuse gets swatted. The only grief is with those who result to the 'shill" 'bot' 'traitor' nonsense but they probably use that as an excuse to cloud the points being made in the article posted. 

[M_B]

I called you a shill because you called Ukraine a terrorist state for trying to destory the Kerch bridge while never once condemning Russia's missile attacks, and your posts are overwhelmingly pro-Russian. You use this thread to constantly push pro-Putin propaganda, and you repeatedly post the same stuff in an attempt to derail the thread - classic hallmarks of a shill.

 

Walks like a duck, talks like a duck etc.

[M_B]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/12/kim-jong-un-arrives-russia-vladivostok-vladimir-putin-meeting

 

Putin now asking North Korea for military supplies because Russia cannot replace its losses.

[Gnasher]

37 minutes ago, M_B said:

I called you a shill because you called Ukraine a terrorist state for trying to destory the Kerch bridge while never once condemning Russia's missile attacks, and your posts are overwhelmingly pro-Russian. You use this thread to constantly push pro-Putin propaganda, and you repeatedly post the same stuff in an attempt to derail the thread - classic hallmarks of a shill.

 

Walks like a duck, talks like a duck etc.

 

My posts are not 'pro' Russian and neither are the articles posted. That journalist from the New Statement is not 'pro Russian' either. She's also not a bot or a shill. She just holds a different opinion to you. This is what happens when you're sucked so far down the rabbit hole, you become so subjective you want to ban people from reading Russian books or listening to Tchaikovsky.

 

An example, not a leftish journo like the one from the New Statesman but one from the right. Retired British Army general. I don't agree with much in this article (bar from the counter offensive not going as well as hoped). It's a load of fucking bunk. But I'm pretty confident he's not a pro Russian, he's also not a Russian spy, he's not a Russian bot and he's not a Russian shill. He's just someone with a differing take on the war to you (and me for that matter).

 

 

Anyway, if to shill or not to shill, if that is your question you believe your own answers but you'll be met with mirth.

 

 

[SasaS]

But what do "realists" propose? Negotiations instead of war. Negotiations over what? Ukrainian territory seized in Russia's invasion (third in less than 10 years) and already annexed by Russia. The result of this negotiations? Cessation of hostilities (and a massively unstable Ukraine with all sorts of negative implications) through appeasement of invaders.

 

Global implications? A new international order is instated, in which every country, unless it is protected by security guarantees such as NATO membership (which will be increasingly tested) can be invaded by a stronger neighbour in a land grabbing move, accompanied by realists nodding whatchagonnado. Resulting in massive expansion of military budgets and security pacts such as NATO and explosion of global instability. 

 

And they call it being realistic.

[Gnasher]

9 minutes ago, SasaS said:

But what do "realists" propose? Negotiations instead of war. Negotiations over what? Ukrainian territory seized in Russia's invasion (third in less than 10 years) and already annexed by Russia. The result of this negotiations? Cessation of hostilities (and a massively unstable Ukraine with all sorts of negative implications) through appeasement of invaders.

 

Global implications? A new international order is instated, in which every country, unless it is protected by security guarantees such as NATO membership (which will be increasingly tested) can be invaded by a stronger neighbour in a land grabbing move, accompanied by realists nodding whatchagonnado. Resulting in massive expansion of military budgets and security pacts such as NATO and explosion of global instability. 

 

And they call it being realistic.

 

An awful lot of assumptions in that post. 

 

The alternative to talks is an awful lot of Ukrainians being sent east to possible death.

 

It's also worth noting most of what the 'realists' predicted has proved true. 

[M_B]

36 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

My posts are not 'pro' Russian and neither are the articles posted. 

 

hahaha, riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

36 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

It's a load of fucking bunk. But I'm pretty confident he's not a pro Russian, he's also not a Russian spy, he's not a Russian bot and he's not a Russian shill. 

 

Agreed - it's just you who is the shill here, on this thread.

 

[SasaS]

3 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

An awful lot of assumptions in that post. 

 

The alternative to talks is an awful lot of Ukrainians being sent east to possible death.

 

We are going on in circles. An awful lot of assumptions are on the "realists" side - that there is anybody out there willing to talk, that talks would end the war and most importantly, that end of support for Ukraine would create the sound basis for talks. Essentially, "realism" means an effort to persuade Ukraine to stop resisting or the West to pull out and leave Ukraine to their destiny. That is certainly one way of reacting to the situation. But lets not call it "realism". 

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, SasaS said:

 

We are going on in circles. An awful lot of assumptions are on the "realists" side - that there is anybody out there willing to talk, that talks would end the war and most importantly, that end of support for Ukraine would create the sound basis for talks. Essentially, "realism" means an effort to persuade Ukraine to stop resisting or the West to pull out and leave Ukraine to their destiny. That is certainly one way of reacting to the situation. But lets not call it "realism". 

 

Well 'realism' was the journos word.

 

 

As you said in a previous post its an ever changing situation so who knows what talks will entail or what theyll bring and how they'll work out if some sort of agreement was reached.

 

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss them though.

[M_B]

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-guard-putin-flees-ecuador/32586511.html

 

Quote

Guard At One Of Putin's Palaces Flees To Ecuador, Criticizes War And Kremlin Leader

 

A guard at one of Russian President Vladimir Putin's residences in occupied Crimea has fled to Ecuador, calling the Kremlin leader a war criminal.

 

Vitaly Brizhaty, who worked on the Ukrainian peninsula for the Federal Protection Service (FSO), the Kremlin's bodyguard agency, told Dozhd TV in an interview that he opposed the war in Ukraine.

 

Brizhaty is the second member of the FSO to flee and publicly criticize the president over the invasion of Ukraine. Brizhaty worked at Olivye, one of Putin's two palaces in Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. RFE/RL's Crimea. Realities revealed the massive palace in Olivye in a 2021 report.

 

In the interview, Brizhaty said that Putin didn't trust his own guards. He said the Kremlin would announce Putin's arrival at two different airports in Crimea but that he could very well end up arriving by sea.

 

"That's how much this man fears for his life," he said.

 

Brizhaty claimed that FSO personnel were banned from communicating with Ukrainian relatives, citizens of the United States and European Union, or any people who oppose the war, under threat of criminal prosecution.

 

He said he feared punishment because one of his friends, a former classmate with whom he has remained in contact, now resides in the United States and has come out against the war. Brizhaty claimed that if his friend liked a pro-Ukrainian post on Instagram, he could come under investigation.

 

"It's just insane," he said.

 

A few months after the start of the war, Brizhaty said he tried to quit the FSO but was told he would be sent to fight in Ukraine if he left the service.

 

In the meantime, his wife, a native of Crimea, applied for a residence permit in Ecuador as a qualified worker and received it. The permit extended to him as well.

 

As FSO and other Russian security-service personnel are not allowed to hold a foreign passport or residency permit, Brizhaty was dismissed and he immediately left with his wife for Ecuador.

[Gnasher]

12 minutes ago, M_B said:

 

hahaha, riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

 

Agreed - it's just you who is the shill here, on this thread.

 

 

Errr OK.

 

 

Mirrthh.

[M_B]

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-muratov-independent-journalism-is-over/32588093.html

 

Quote

Russia's 'History Of Independent Journalism Is Over,' Says Nobel Laureate

 

Russian journalist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dmitry Muratov believes there is neither freedom of the press nor freedom of expression in his home country. "The history of independent journalism is over, [it's] finished," the 61-year-old said on September 11 at the start of the first Hamburg Press Freedom Week. The editor in chief of the Novaya gazeta newspaper, which is banned in Russia, told Germany's NDR public broadcaster that, since he still lives in Moscow and will return there, he can only say in Hamburg what he can also say there, and "in Moscow, I can't talk about anything anymore."

[M_B]

Another good article on Russian corruption.

 

https://www.ecpmf.eu/putins-russia-how-propaganda-bolsters-corruption/

 

Quote

Would you say that propaganda is supporting political corruption in Russia?

Without propaganda and pressure on independent media Putin would never be able to hold on to his legitimacy, his corrupted system would crack. Particularly after the sanctions in 2014, questions and doubts arose. However, the propaganda machine blamed the USA and Europe for the worsening living conditions. Not Putin who had led the country to that point. It’s very artificial. It’s very made up.

 

Just to show you the extent of propaganda nowadays: In 2000 when the Kursk submarine disaster happened, Putin visited the mothers and relatives of the dead sailors. The people were crying and screaming and blaming him for the death of their husbands and sons. The mothers of soldiers who died during the Chechen War also went to the streets and protested. 

 

But now it is different. Now we are in a situation where the mothers of men, who were mobilised for war, are buying ammunition and life vests for their sons. And if their men die in the war, they are claiming: “Yes, my son died, but he died as a hero.”

 

There you can see the level of infiltration – nothing but horror. This is the fact of propaganda – it’s a massive anaesthetic for the whole population. They don’t feel pain, they aren’t able to think, they are sedated. 

 

I remember a different Russia. And I look at it and see what is happening now, it is the fact of propaganda. The absence of free speech strengthens political corruption and its powerful elite.  

 

And a good conclusion

 

Quote

Any concluding words?

Yes. The Russian people are not any different from Europeans. We Russians, the citizens, just managed to get ourselves into a very difficult situation. We were lied to and we remained too passive until the point we did not have it in our hands anymore. I am asking you not to judge all Russians. We are not all the same. Not everyone of us supports the corrupt system, supports Putin, or supports war. Without the ability to stand up, many of us suffer. For what are we fighting in this war?

 

[Gnasher]

9 minutes ago, M_B said:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-muratov-independent-journalism-is-over/32588093.html

 

 

Russian journalist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dmitry Muratov believes there is neither freedom of the press nor freedom of expression in his home country. "The history of independent journalism is over, [it's] finished," the 61-year-old said on September 11 at the start of the first Hamburg Press Freedom Week. The editor in chief of the Novaya gazeta newspaper, which is banned in Russia, told Germany's NDR public broadcaster that, since he still lives in Moscow and will return there, he can only say in Hamburg what he can also say there, and "in Moscow, I can't talk about anything anymore."

 

 

Russia being corrupt, shock.

 

If you're upset at press freedom being eroded there you're going to hate what's been happening to press freedom here.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-media-law-press-freedom/

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/citing-martial-law-ukraine-president-signs-decree-combine-national-tv-channels-2022-03-20/

 

 

 

https://theintercept.com/2023/06/22/ukraine-war-journalists-press-credentials/

 

 

https://europeanjournalists.org/blog/2021/08/26/ukraine-president-bans-opposition-media-strana-ua-and-sanctions-editor-in-chief/

 

 

[M_B]

https://www.ecpmf.eu/putins-russia-how-propaganda-bolsters-corruption/

 

Quote

This Russian high-level corruption is based on networks of nepotism and clientelism. When Putin came into power, he gave the country’s most important branches to his like-minded elite. They are now the richest people in Russia – there are more than one hundred billionaires in the country. 90% of this money was not gathered by the skills, abilities, or the cognition of the people, but was grabbed through the connection to Putin. 

 

[M_B]

This bit is chilling

 

https://www.ecpmf.eu/putins-russia-how-propaganda-bolsters-corruption/

 

Quote

Political subjectivity has been taken away from Russian society, people don’t have this political establishment. Officially more than 90% voted for Putin. But the electoral system is corrupted and broken to such an extent that society cannot make a real choice and change, they don’t have the necessary tools. They don’t go to the streets, because the degree of state security intervention and number of policemen are so high – everybody is under total surveillance.

 

There is no point in waiting for the Russian people to go on the street and fight the Putin regime. In my opinion, a great chaos is awaiting Russia. Since the country is sinking in this economic recession, life in Russia will get worse and it will cause aggression. Everybody is waiting for a civil war. But it won’t be a war for power, but a war for survival. And life will become more and more difficult and there are groups who have weapons and their willingness to fight for resources is rising. It will be crucial to resist.

 

[SasaS]

10 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

Well 'realism' was the journos word.

 

 

As you said in a previous post its an ever changing situation so who knows what talks will entail or what theyll bring and how they'll work out if some sort of agreement was reached.

 

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss them though.

 

As I probably wrote before, they are talking all the time, there are always channels. They will talk for real and openly only when both sides are so exhausted they cannot go on, which is not happening soon, or when one side is facing a defeat, or when domestic political pressure forces either side to quit because there is no support for the war anymore.

 

Unless you think Russian invasion was justified, the only direction pressure for talks should be applied is Moscow, because the talks must create a relatively sustainable situation, otherwise,  what is the point if there is going to be a new war in a couple of years, when Russia decides to finish the job, or unfavourable deal brings the Ukrainian radicals to power with a promise of liberation of occupied land.

 

The best and most "realistic" way of pressuring Russia is continuation (and expansion) of military and economic support for Ukraine so it can further strengthen its army through deliveries of ever more sophisticated weapons, constant training of its personnel and development of its own military industrial capabilities. Along with helping them develop and continue as a sustainable country in the territories less affected by war, and applying further political pressure which  comes with the EU accession process - human and minority rights, fighting corruption, independent judiciary etc.

 

Theories that Russia will and can just go on for years fighting an army that gets progressively stronger in order to destroy a country which gets progressively superior to them in every aspect or that Ukrainians don't have the will or enough people to continue are not based in reality, but in desire to redirect (Western) resources elsewhere (lets not get into other reasons, there are many in the ideological spectrum) in a myopic belief that the issue would somehow then go away, or not have long lasting serious global implications. I know that people get used to and tired of everything after a while because adaptability is in human nature, but this war remains a very serious issue, beyond the region, most likely a watershed moment in at least our lifetime.

[Gnasher]

22 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

As I probably wrote before, they are talking all the time, there are always channels. They will talk for real and openly only when both sides are so exhausted they cannot go on, which is not happening soon, or when one side is facing a defeat, or when domestic political pressure forces either side to quit because there is no support for the war anymore.

 

Unless you think Russian invasion was justified, the only direction pressure for talks should be applied is Moscow, because the talks must create a relatively sustainable situation, otherwise,  what is the point if there is going to be a new war in a couple of years, when Russia decides to finish the job, or unfavourable deal brings the Ukrainian radicals to power with a promise of liberation of occupied land.

 

The best and most "realistic" way of pressuring Russia is continuation (and expansion) of military and economic support for Ukraine so it can further strengthen its army through deliveries of ever more sophisticated weapons, constant training of its personnel and development of its own military industrial capabilities. Along with helping them develop and continue as a sustainable country in the territories less affected by war, and applying further political pressure which  comes with the EU accession process - human and minority rights, fighting corruption, independent judiciary etc.

 

Theories that Russia will and can just go on for years fighting an army that gets progressively stronger in order to destroy a country which gets progressively superior to them in every aspect or that Ukrainians don't have the will or enough people to continue are not based in reality, but in desire to redirect (Western) resources elsewhere (lets not get into other reasons, there are many in the ideological spectrum) in a myopic belief that the issue would somehow then go away, or not have long lasting serious global implications. I know that people get used to and tired of everything after a while because adaptability is in human nature, but this war remains a very serious issue, beyond the region, most likely a watershed moment in at least our lifetime.

 

The problem with your last point (on Russia not being able to continue for a considerable amount of time) is Russia possess nuclear weapons. I know its unlikely but who knows Putins mindset (if he's still in charge) if he believes he/Russia is about to suffer heavy defeat.

 

 

As for another Russian invasion in a few years if their was some sort of peace agreement I'm not going to read Putins mind (or whoever is in charge) but considering how badly this war has gone surely Russia wouldn't be so reckless in the coming decade or so? 

[SasaS]

6 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

The problem with your last point (on Russia not being able to continue for a considerable amount of time) is Russia possess nuclear weapons. I know its unlikely but who knows Putins mindset (if he's still in charge) if he believes he/Russia is about to suffer heavy defeat.

 

 

As for another Russian invasion in a few years if their was some sort of peace agreement I'm not going to read Putins mind (or whoever is in charge) but considering how badly this war has gone surely Russia wouldn't be so reckless in the coming decade or so? 

 

You cannot acquiesce to the demands of a nuclear power just because they have nukes and may use them. Soviet Union didn't use them in Afghanistan, nor did Americans in Vietnam, for good reason, they eventually packed up and went home.

 

On second point, they were reckless enough to invade in the first place. Also, everyone is constantly excluding what Ukrainians might do from their predictions and plans like they don't exist which is the whole new bag of wrong.

[Gnasher]

2 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

You cannot acquiesce to the demands of a nuclear power just because they have nukes and may use them. Soviet Union didn't use them in Afghanistan, nor did Americans in Vietnam, for good reason, they eventually packed up and went home.

 

It's not a case of bowing to their 'demands' its showing due diligence for the what the enemy might do. Especially if cornered.

 

2 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

On second point, they were reckless enough to invade in the first place. Also, everyone is constantly excluding what Ukrainians might do from their predictions and plans like they don't exist which is the whole new bag of wrong.

 

 

They were but I think Putin believed his own hype and overestimated his army's capabilities and the task. He'd (or whoever is in charge) surely not be as foolish again. At least not anytime soon. Even if he was mad enough to invade again logistically would he be able to muster the manpower? Doubtful.

[SasaS]

8 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

It's not a case of bowing to their 'demands' its showing due diligence for the what the enemy might do. Especially if cornered.

 

 

 

They were but I think Putin believed his own hype and overestimated his army's capabilities and the task. He'd (or whoever is in charge) surely not be as foolish again. At least not anytime soon. Even if he was mad enough to invade again logistically would he be able to muster the manpower? Doubtful.

 

Because Ukrainian army would be too strong now? Due to successful resistance, its own development  and Western military assistance over the past 18 and a half months?