Putin is a loser

[Trainee neophyte]

Ukraine a sovereign nation, so it's invasion by Russia just wrong, and completely unjustified by any rational measure.
Again if you feel that is unreasonable then why?

Well, hang on - the West, or NATO, or whatever shorthand you want to use for the hegemon or empire or whatever, is constantly invading sovereign nations. When not militarily intervening they intervene by overthrowing the current, often democratically elected governments. Two wrongs don't make a right, but if the world's policeman ignores international law, why would anyone else pay even lipservice to it? The Russians have a word for the West, which translates as "agreement incapable". In other words, Russia doesn't believe anything that the West says, because they invariably lie, obfuscate and renege on any deal. "Not one inch eastward" springs to mind as just one example, or how about Merkel confirming Minsk 2 was purely to allow the Ukraine a chance to rearm and get back to ethnically cleansing the Donbas region of its ethnic Russian subhumans. Oh, how about Boris Johnson rushing to Kiev to put a stop to any agreement between Russia and the Ukraine which was all ready to go so the fighting could stop?

And yes, the West did overthrow the duly elected, constitutional and democratic government in 2013/2014, which is why the Donbas region refused to acknowledge the Kiev coup, hence a civil war. Russia can claim a right to protect because it is precisely what NATO did in Kosovo, amongst other places.

 

[Fergie 307]

Thoughtless uncaring sociopath might fit Stalin rather well.
He was happy enough to sacrifice a few million before the war to starvation. Not to mention the thousands murdered on his direct orders.
And some choice comments. "There are no Soviet POW, only traitors". Why he had thousands shot when they were returned.
Another favourite, " a single human death is a tragedy, a million is merely a statistic".
Lovely guy.
The poor Russians have been blighted by some truly awful leaders over the years, Putin just being the latest.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Where did I say the Nazis killed them all? Stalin was as ruthless with his own as he was with the Germans.

I took your implication to suggest that the Russians killed all their own people and there was no input from Germany whatsoever. Is that what you are saying?

 

[Fergie 307]

Well, hang on - the West, or NATO, or whatever shorthand you want to use for the hegemon or empire or whatever, is constantly invading sovereign nations. When not militarily intervening they intervene by overthrowing the current, often democratically elected governments. Two wrongs don't make a right, but if the world's policeman ignores international law, why would anyone else pay even lipservice to it? The Russians have a word for the West, which translates as "agreement incapable". In other words, Russia doesn't believe anything that the West says, because they invariably lie, obfuscate and renege on any deal. "Not one inch eastward" springs to mind as just one example, or how about Merkel confirming Minsk 2 was purely to allow the Ukraine a chance to rearm and get back to ethnically cleansing the Donbas region of its ethnic Russian subhumans. Oh, how about Boris Johnson rushing to Kiev to put a stop to any agreement between Russia and the Ukraine which was all ready to go so the fighting could stop?

And yes, the West did overthrow the duly elected, constitutional and democratic government in 2013/2014, which is why the Donbas region refused to acknowledge the Kiev coup, hence a civil war. Russia can claim a right to protect because it is precisely what NATO did in Kosovo, amongst other places.

Oh dear.
No one is suggesting the West have a blameless record, but you could write a book on the deceit of the Soviet leadership ever since the revolution. They lied to us repeatedly throughout the war, and after.
How did they establish their empire after the war for example.
Do you think all the states concerned were willing participants?
Are you not aware how they treated Hungary for example?
Or the way they carved up Poland with their then Nazi mates?
If you actually knew your history then you would know that the west have been given ample reason to distrust the Soviet and now Russian leadership.
As for the old nonsense about the CIA or the Klingons or whoever overthrowing the Ukrainian government, that has been so comprehensively debunked we may as well argue whether the moon is made of cheese.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

And if you think characterising Putin as evil is unfair then please explain why.

How would you characterise him?

I wouldn't- I've never met the man. Lots of people here seem to know exactly how he thinks and what he wants and what his motivations are, and that he is an evil, ruthless dictator. My understanding is that the Russian people, I.e the ones actually voting for him on a regular basis, see him as a fairly bland, not very autocratic, and in fact moderate politician. A safe pair of hands. He has an approval rating between 70 and 80% , and has had for years. How is your man Starmer getting on? The Russian people quite like him, trust him and back him in this war. Russians have been attacked by europe repeatedly since 1600ish - they know what happens, and what it costs to survive. Every 80 to 100 years, like clockwork, Europeans forget history and try to steal Russian land and resources. Every 80 to 100 years the Russians beat them off and then follow said Europeans back to their capitals. Did you know that the word "Bistro" is from the brief Russian occupation of Paris after Napolion came a cropper?

It will be interesting to see what happens once Putin retires. A much more agressive, less cautious leader could have some pretty alarming repercussions for the rest of us.

 

[Jacob]

Since the revolution the Russians, and left wing regimes of all shapes and sizes, have had everything to fear from the west (USA and allies) and nothing has changed in modern times. Democratic left-wing regimes subverted, attacked , destroyed. https://www.socialistparty.org.uk/a...-the-wests-war-to-end-the-russian-revolution/
You can hear it from the right in the expressions of visceral hatred of communism, socialism, which even percolates down to these pages! Last week one of Trumps lunatic advisors was advising UK to keep clear of the socialism of Europe and build closer ties with the imaginary "free market" economics of USA!
Glasnost was a lost opportunity in that they were fobbed off with the failed neo-liberal ideology of Thatcher/Reagan, which somehow turned Russia into a mafia state. I suppose you could think of that as the apotheosis of free-market capitalist economics. We've been lucky in keeping it at arm's length (so far) - the Americans have Trump, we only have the ridiculous Fartrage buffoon.
How much this bears on Putin's world view I've no idea.

 

[Blackswanwood]

I wouldn't- I've never met the man. Lots of people here seem to know exactly how he thinks and what he wants and what his motivations are, and that he is an evil, ruthless dictator. My understanding is that the Russian people, I.e the ones actually voting for him on a regular basis, see him as a fairly bland, not very autocratic, and in fact moderate politician. A safe pair of hands. He has an approval rating between 70 and 80% , and has had for years. How is your man Starmer getting on? The Russian people quite like him, trust him and back him in this war. Russians have been attacked by europe repeatedly since 1600ish - they know what happens, and what it costs to survive. Every 80 to 100 years, like clockwork, Europeans forget history and try to steal Russian land and resources. Every 80 to 100 years the Russians beat them off and then follow said Europeans back to their capitals. Did you know that the word "Bistro" is from the brief Russian occupation of Paris after Napolion came a cropper?

It will be interesting to see what happens once Putin retires. A much more agressive, less cautious leader could have some pretty alarming repercussions for the rest of us.

My understanding is that it’s pretty easy to win an election and have a high approval rating when your opponents are prevented from standing by being put in prison.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Oh dear.
No one is suggesting the West have a blameless record, but you could write a book on the deceit of the Soviet leadership ever since the revolution. They lied to us repeatedly throughout the war, and after.
How did they establish their empire after the war for example.
Do you think all the states concerned were willing participants?
Are you not aware how they treated Hungary for example?
Or the way they carved up Poland with their then Nazi mates?
If you actually knew your history then you would know that the west have been given ample reason to distrust the Soviet and now Russian leadership.
As for the old nonsense about the CIA or the Klingons or whoever overthrowing the Ukrainian government, that has been so comprehensively debunked we may as well argue whether the moon is made of cheese.

Firstly, you do know that the USSR is no longer with us? Stalin died generations ago. Russia is not the same country and Russians are not the same people as the Soviet Socialist Republic denizens.


Secondly, a list of US interventions in other peoples' governments:

• China 1949 to early 1960s
• Albania 1949-53
• East Germany 1950s
• Iran 1953 *
• Guatemala 1954 *
• Costa Rica mid-1950s
• Syria 1956-7
• Egypt 1957
• Indonesia 1957-8
• British Guiana 1953-64 *
• Iraq 1963 *
• North Vietnam 1945-73
• Cambodia 1955-70 *
• Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
• Ecuador 1960-63 *
• Congo 1960 *
• France 1965
• Brazil 1962-64 *
• Dominican Republic 1963 *
• Cuba 1959 to present
• Bolivia 1964 *
• Indonesia 1965 *
• Ghana 1966 *
• Chile 1964-73 *
• Greece 1967 *
• Costa Rica 1970-71
• Bolivia 1971 *
• Australia 1973-75 *
• Angola 1975, 1980s
• Zaire 1975
• Portugal 1974-76 *
• Jamaica 1976-80 *
• Seychelles 1979-81
• Chad 1981-82 *
• Grenada 1983 *
• South Yemen 1982-84
• Suriname 1982-84
• Fiji 1987 *
• Libya 1980s
• Nicaragua 1981-90 *
• Panama 1989 *
• Bulgaria 1990 *
• Albania 1991 *
• Iraq 1991
• Afghanistan 1980s *
• Somalia 1993
• Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
• Ecuador 2000 *
• Afghanistan 2001 *
• Venezuela 2002 *
• Iraq 2003 *
• Haiti 2004 *
• Somalia 2007 to present
• Honduras 2009 *
• Libya 2011 *
• Syria 2012
• Ukraine 2014 *

Q: Why will there never be a coup d’état in Washington?

A: Because there’s no American embassy there.
[/i]We should delete the Ukraine from the list, then - some nice person from the state department said "I dindo nuffin'", so there was never any US involvement. Victoria Newland was just handing out cookies at the Maidan because she is a nice person. Got it.

 

[Fergie 307]

Since the revolution the Russians, and left wing regimes of all shapes and sizes, have had everything to fear from the west (USA and allies) and nothing has changed in modern times. Democratic left-wing regimes subverted, attacked , destroyed. https://www.socialistparty.org.uk/a...-the-wests-war-to-end-the-russian-revolution/
You can hear it from the right in the expressions of visceral hatred of communism, socialism, which even percolates down to these pages! Last week one of Trumps lunatic advisors was advising UK to keep clear of the socialism of Europe and build closer ties with the imaginary "free market" economics of USA!
Glasnost was a lost opportunity in that they were fobbed off with the failed neo-liberal ideology of Thatcher/Reagan, which somehow turned Russia into a mafia state. I suppose you could think of that as the apotheosis of free-market capitalist economics. We've been lucky in keeping it at arm's length (so far) - the Americans have Trump, we only have the ridiculous Fartrage buffoon.
How much this bears on Putin's world view I've no idea.

Best quote in the article is the "river of blood" that separated Lenin and Stalin. Both sides in the revolution got up to some pretty awful stuff, the whites supported by the West who got their hands very dirty too.
However bad the Bolshevik's may have been as the eventual winners they were rank amateurs compared to Stalin, who naturally had all their leaders butchered in short order to protect his own position.
The wholesale butchery of the revolution has I'm sure coloured the view of their leaders ever since, as well as making them paranoid about the possibility that they might themselves be overthrown, Putin just being the latest example.

 

[TRITON]

As for the old nonsense about the CIA or the Klingons or whoever overthrowing the Ukrainian government, that has been so comprehensively debunked

Debunked by who ?
Debunked by one side that is bias, or the other side that is bias, or by someone who is neutral ?
Debunked by someone who cannot admit, or when they do they downplay western atrocities and invasions as " Well im not denying ... but..." which is pretty much doing just that.

"Hey, we invaded these countries, killed millions,destroyed economies, infrastructure, but that ok because hey, let me tell you about this evil Russian regime ..."

"Russia is only interested in expansionism", says the country with 750+ military bases around the world.

Do you know how many military bases China has around the world ? 1.
What about Russia ? Russia has 21, so a few more than China. But certainly not 750+

Russia and china being the aggressors in this world, at least according to the country with 750 military bases and whom has been involved in invading sovereign states and overthrowing elected governments to install their own choice of dictator.

But today its China, yesterday it was Iraq,Syria,Afghanistan, prior to that it was Russia.
Who next ? An African state somewhere. Will we be demonizing next in the right wing press ? Angola, Nigeria. Or maybe it will be back to South America, Brazil is getting a bit uppity.

I'd prefer it if we stopped all this war stuff. But it seems some want the world to burn, and the spectators on the sidelines must have their war p0rn.

So thats it from me on this thread, too many of those spectators on this thread to be able to look at all this realistically.

 

[Fergie 307]

My understanding is that it’s pretty easy to win an election and have a high approval rating when your opponents are prevented from standing by being put in prison.

Dare say the most "popular" leaders on the planet are those of Russia, China and N Korea.
Stands to reason, no one votes for anyone else do they?

And it's undoubtedly Wensleydale

 

[Fergie 307]

I wouldn't- I've never met the man. Lots of people here seem to know exactly how he thinks and what he wants and what his motivations are, and that he is an evil, ruthless dictator. My understanding is that the Russian people, I.e the ones actually voting for him on a regular basis, see him as a fairly bland, not very autocratic, and in fact moderate politician. A safe pair of hands. He has an approval rating between 70 and 80% , and has had for years. How is your man Starmer getting on? The Russian people quite like him, trust him and back him in this war. Russians have been attacked by europe repeatedly since 1600ish - they know what happens, and what it costs to survive. Every 80 to 100 years, like clockwork, Europeans forget history and try to steal Russian land and resources. Every 80 to 100 years the Russians beat them off and then follow said Europeans back to their capitals. Did you know that the word "Bistro" is from the brief Russian occupation of Paris after Napolion came a cropper?

It will be interesting to see what happens once Putin retires. A much more agressive, less cautious leader could have some pretty alarming repercussions for the rest of us.

I wouldn't- I've never met the man. Lots of people here seem to know exactly how he thinks and what he wants and what his motivations are, and that he is an evil, ruthless dictator. My understanding is that the Russian people, I.e the ones actually voting for him on a regular basis, see him as a fairly bland, not very autocratic, and in fact moderate politician. A safe pair of hands. He has an approval rating between 70 and 80% , and has had for years. How is your man Starmer getting on? The Russian people quite like him, trust him and back him in this war. Russians have been attacked by europe repeatedly since 1600ish - they know what happens, and what it costs to survive. Every 80 to 100 years, like clockwork, Europeans forget history and try to steal Russian land and resources. Every 80 to 100 years the Russians beat them off and then follow said Europeans back to their capitals. Did you know that the word "Bistro" is from the brief Russian occupation of Paris after Napolion came a cropper?

It will be interesting to see what happens once Putin retires. A much more agressive, less cautious leader could have some pretty alarming repercussions for the rest of us.

You do realise that in 1814 the Russians were fighting alongside Austria and Prussia?
Did you not know that, or perhaps it suited your narrative to just ignore that bit?
In 1945 the Soviets took Berlin, due in no small part to the support given them by ourselves and the Americans.
Support repaid by the blatant lies told by Stalin to delay the advance of the other allies, so he could grab as much as possible.
And then engaged in widespread "immoral activity" as it was euphemistically referred to by the party, that's **** to you and I, including prisoners of the Germans, some of them fellow Soviet citizens.
Or did you not know that either.

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

You may be right - I may be wrong.

But my best bet would be on bringing Ukraine (provisionally until normal criteria met) into the NATO and EU fold which may act as a deterrent to further military action by Russia. It would also be a clear condition of any territorial agreement that NATO and EU were part of the deal.

It may be another 10 years before Russia tried offensive action again - Putin may be then be dead, demented, ousted etc. We know little about who may replace him.

We're just spit-balling here and none of us really have all of the best info to go on.... Nor are we proper analysts or diplomats or negotiators. I don't think that anyone is either right or wrong for having an opinion, but I do feel enriched from reading everyone's take and then being challenged by considering their views.

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

I wouldn't- I've never met the man. Lots of people here seem to know exactly how he thinks and what he wants and what his motivations are, and that he is an evil, ruthless dictator. My understanding is that the Russian people, I.e the ones actually voting for him on a regular basis, see him as a fairly bland, not very autocratic, and in fact moderate politician. A safe pair of hands. He has an approval rating between 70 and 80% , and has had for years. How is your man Starmer getting on? The Russian people quite like him, trust him and back him in this war. Russians have been attacked by europe repeatedly since 1600ish - they know what happens, and what it costs to survive. Every 80 to 100 years, like clockwork, Europeans forget history and try to steal Russian land and resources. Every 80 to 100 years the Russians beat them off and then follow said Europeans back to their capitals. Did you know that the word "Bistro" is from the brief Russian occupation of Paris after Napolion came a cropper?

It will be interesting to see what happens once Putin retires. A much more agressive, less cautious leader could have some pretty alarming repercussions for the rest of us.

You're not being serous are you?

I'm a bit lost for words if you are.

Talk about "alternative facts"... it's staggering.

 

[TRITON]

it's not easy to imagine a peaceful ending occurring until the main proponents are dead and gone

I look forward to that sharpening thread.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Talk about "alternative facts"... it's staggering.

And there you have it, in a nutshell. What you are led to believe is not the same as what people outside of the western world are led to believe. You, I presume, assume that everything you have been told MUST be true, so anything that goes against that narrative must, by definition, be false.

What if it isn't?

Is this a war between Russia and the Ukraine, or is this actually a civil war between parts of what used to be the Ukraine, with Russia and the West fighting proxy war on Ukrainian ground? Or, is it an existential war between the Golden Billion who hold all the wealth, and the other 7 plus billion who are kept in poverty for the exclusive benefit of the "wealthy" nations? All are possibilities, and perhaps all are true.

Things are not as they seem. The smug certainty that Russia is finished financially seems not to be based in reality. The smug certainty that all russian military are incompetent and all russian equipment is useless is also not based in reality. The ukrainian army in 2022 was the finest, best trained army that NATO could field, and it was destroyed by the Russians. The ukrainians then fielded a sedond army, which was also destroyed by the russians. They are now on their third army, which appears to have been explosively disassembled in Kursk, of all places (do you know your history?) Each time this happens, NATO has less equipment to send. All the old soviet kit is long gone from the ex soviet countries. All the old western kit is now gone. The shiny new kit purportedly for the defence of NATO countries is seriously depleted, and NATO countries are now whining about not being able to supply more.

NATOs best, shiniest new wonder-weapons cannot be launched by Ukrainian technicians, and use NATO real-time targeting information inputted by NATO technicians. At what point will you be forced to admit that this is a NATO war against Russia? If it's perfectly right and proper for NATO operatives to kill Russians, should it not also be perfectly right and proper for Russians to kill NATO servicemen, (and civilians too, it's their war as well, don't forget)? If not, why not?

Does anyone have a good explanation as to why Russia wants to expand its empire? They have the largest country in the world, with the most resources. They have so much excess land that they give it away, free of charge, to anyone who wants to become a farmer. What possible reason do they have to want to invade and occupy all of western Europe, or even some of it? They don't have the manpower for it - it would be an impossible task, and western Europe doesn't have sufficient wealth or natural resources to make it a viable proposition. Europe is utterly indebted and broke. Russia wants to sell oil and gas to Europe, not conquer and pay for it. So why has Russia invaded the Ukraine? What could the reason be, if it isn't for a land grab? Defence of ethnic russians and Mother Russia, perhaps?

Defence against whom?

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Support repaid by the blatant lies told by Stalin to delay the advance of the other allies, so he could grab as much as possible.

And the western side wasn't lying and trying to grab as much as possible?

And then engaged in widespread "immoral activity" as it was euphemistically referred to by the party, that's **** to you and I, including prisoners of the Germans, some of them fellow Soviet citizens.

I presume you are talking about the alleged **** of Berlin? Of course, the western armies didn't **** their way across France, because we are the good guys. Do you know about the missing million German soldiers who, at the end of the war were taken prisoner, but never returned home? I have no idea if it is true or just a weird Internet thing, but I am pretty confident that the Allies were not warm, fluffy liberators bring peace and happiness to the feckless denizens. There appears to have been a policy of reducing the German population through starvation, which was only overturned when the cold war required rearing Germany. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_in_occupied_Germany

Oh, and Dresden. Amongst other things.

 

[Cantungman]

My dumb strawman alert has gone off.

The idea that UKR can kick Russia out is not laughable, their invasion is failing with huge losses and their economy is collapsing fast now.

What is the basis of the statement that Russia’s economy is collapsing? The IMF and BBC both report that it is growing at a rate faster than the US and UK.

 

[Scruples]

Military and civilian deaths there in WWII are conservatively estimated at 27 million. In Russia life is cheap - and certainly no great concern to Putin.

While losses on the scale of WW2 were high, they were in a different time. In those days with poor communications and with only the 'official' broadcasts available, the rulers kept the 'peasants' in the dark. That doesn't happen so much these days. The kids in Russia all have radios and tune into worldwide stations. The few I talked to, tuned into the Scandinavian countries as they were afraid of being caught listening to the West. Or, officially, they preferred them...

 

[Fergie 307]

And the western side wasn't lying and trying to grab as much as possible?

I presume you are talking about the alleged **** of Berlin? Of course, the western armies didn't **** their way across France, because we are the good guys. Do you know about the missing million German soldiers who, at the end of the war were taken prisoner, but never returned home? I have no idea if it is true or just a weird Internet thing, but I am pretty confident that the Allies were not warm, fluffy liberators bring peace and happiness to the feckless denizens. There appears to have been a policy of reducing the German population through starvation, which was only overturned when the cold war required rearing Germany. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_in_occupied_Germany

Oh, and Dresden. Amongst other things.

Your knowledge of history really is straight from a Soviet era history book.
The mass r**e of women in Berlin particularly is well documented, nothing alleged about it. Presumably all the women who reported being gang *****, and the doctors who treated them etc etc were all lying? Well documented by the Soviets themselves who recognised at the time that what they euphemistically called "immoral activity" was a widespread problem, not least because of the numbers of troops suffering from STD.
Can you point us in the direction of any actual evidence of similar behaviour by American or British troops? Sadly I am sure there will have been some cases, but not on the industrial scale practiced by the red army.