Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 22, 2021

The White House Needs An Off-ramp From War In Ukraine

Ten days ago I wrote about the potential of war in the Ukraine:

There is fear in Russia that the U.S. is egging the Ukraine into a renewed active conflict with its renegade eastern Donbass region and thereby into a war with Russia.
...
The Biden administrations war mongering towards Russia may be seen to be free of cost. But it takes only one miscalculation in Kiev or some unforeseen incident in the Black Sea region and the situation could seriously escalate.

Moscow sees a salami slicing tactic at work that would only end with NATO directly confronting it on all its borders:

Moscow’s narrative is that the Western powers are deliberately fueling Ukraine’s revanchist instincts by arming it and encouraging President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is fighting for political survival, to believe that with Western support, a window of opportunity is opening to recapture the lost territories in Donbas and Crimea and thereby redeem his pledge to be his country’s savior.

And second, as Moscow sees it, the rising tensions with Russia have become a convenient alibi to involve NATO directly in Ukraine’s security and make it a template of the West’s containment strategy against Russia.

The level of alarm in Russia continues to be high. The current ticker on the right side of the TASS website includes these headlines:

The above are more then half of the links in the ticker column. It is thus extremely conflict heavy, far more than usual.

Russia has stated that it would intervene in the Ukraine should Kiev decided to invade Donbass. It would be the end of the Ukraine Moscow has said. (Russia would likely end up with taking the majority Russian east and south of the Ukraine. The rest would end up as a landlocked agricultural Nazi infested enclave.)

The Kremlin has also multiple times complained about the ever increasing amount of NATO activities near its border. A U.S. study confirms those activities:

There were some 2,900 incidents between NATO and Russian forces between 2013 and 2020. The three-year moving average increased by more than 60 percent over this eight-year timespan.

That increase was to a large part due to Pentagon policy during the Trump years that was not sanctioned by the White House. The Biden administration has recognized that and is trying to rein the Pentagon in:

The White House has asked the Pentagon to provide a rundown of exercises the U.S. military has taken in recent years in Europe to deter Russia, as well as the justification for each mission, as the Biden administration takes stock of military operations in the air, on land and at sea that are designed to check Kremlin power and reassure U.S. allies and partners in Europe.

The purpose of the request, according to a senior Biden administration official, is to give the White House full visibility into U.S. military exercises and other deterrence activities in Europe so new missions can be evaluated and scheduled in the context of past actions.
...
The senior official said the amount of information about such missions coming from the Pentagon to the White House when Biden took office was nowhere near what it was during the Obama administration, and the National Security Council was looking to restore the information flow.

The U.S. for its part has claimed that Russia is assembling more troops at its borders with the Ukraine. The claim is false. The Ukrainian defense intelligence chief recently provided a map with a table which shows that Russia has current only 40 Battalion Tactical Groups (ATG) at the ready while during the last 'Russia invades' scare in April it had 53 BTGs ready to go. How 25% less troops at the ready are supposed to a new danger is not clear to me.


bigger

Samual Charap from the Pentagon think tank RAND corporation warns that the U.S. must press the Ukraine to accept the Minsk agreement or it will almost certainly see Russia and the Ukraine at war. He mentions the alleged buildup of troops in Russia to then correctly note:

If Russia’s tactics feel like a repeat of the past, so, too, does the U.S. approach to the volatile situation in Ukraine. U.S. policy has generally been to offer sticks to Moscow and carrots to Kyiv. Successive administrations have tried to use coercive instruments — largely sanctions or the threat of them — to incentivize Russia to withdraw forces from rebel-held areas of the Donbas and deter further incursions. In parallel, Washington supports Kyiv economically, politically and militarily. The assumption is that the U.S. can coerce Russia into backing down by threatening consequences while strengthening Ukraine’s defenses and anchoring it to the West.

Threatening Russia does not work, he says, the U.S. must seek a comprise and that means pushing Kiev to finally implement the Minsk agreement and to negotiate with the Donbass rebels.

In response to critics of this 'appeasement' demand Charap states:

Samuel Charap @scharap - 21:27 UTC · Nov 21, 2021

This is *not* my idea of a good outcome. But, if my analysis of current Russian policy is right (and it seems like the USG is trying to convince allies of the same), the alternative (war) is far worse.

The warnings might have some effects on the White House. The Saker detects signs of secret negotiations between Washington and Moscow that may be at the core of the announced Putin-Biden summit:

Since a Presidential summit is only organized once both sides have already come to a general agreement, at least in principle, on at least some issues, if Putin and Biden do meet, that means that both sides have worked out at least the outlines of some kind important deal (not just empty statements, as was the case the first time around, at least officially).

In his recent speech Putin said “it is imperative to push for serious long-term guarantees that ensure Russia’s security in this area, because Russia cannot constantly be thinking about what could happen there tomorrow“.  If Biden is willing to not only give guarantees (the Russians, understandably, have *zero* trust in western promises, written or oral) but also to actually take actions, probably mutual, coordinated and verifiable actions by both sides, then a war in Europe could be avoided, rather easily in fact.

Will Biden undo the total mess created by Obama and Trump and their Neocon handlers?

Maybe.

For one thing, such a major political success would certainly help Biden with this (currently atrocious) approval ratings in the USA. 

I don't think that a deal would actually help Biden in the polls. The hawks would scream about it. They want a war in the Ukraine and the U.S. involved in it. However the U.S. public is still unlikely to support a war against Russia which would likely soon escalate.

But a Ukrainian Russian war that the Ukraine is sure to lose and in which the White House does not intervene will lead to huge loss of face.

That prospect then may indeed motivate Biden to give Russia the guarantees it wants.

Posted by b on November 22, 2021 at 18:25 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

@ 31 Toivos
I agree with this take.
Imo, Putin was willing to do ONLY what it took to secure Crimea.
That was the key piece for Russian interest..
Any more and he would risk NATO official military reprisal.
The propaganda was hard. I remember being in university poli sci class when the
Ukraine EU/RUS decision was happening.
The message was “Ukraine wants an expanded opportunity that only the EU offers”
Almost all my classmates were pro EU. I decided I didn’t know enough to have an opinion.
I KNEW, however, that I couldn’t trust Nuland and the Western media.

And now, 7 yrs later, here we are.
A standoff at the Donbass lines.

Posted by: Cadence calls | Nov 23 2021 6:44 utc | 101

I have to ask myself, have Biden and the Secr of State and the NSC been asleep or what... is the entire executive branch of the US gov't so captive by the M-I-C that it hasn't been aware or seen where all this war mongering in Europe and especially with the scoundrels in NATO, where that is all taking us?
Posted by: michaelj72 | Nov 22 2021 23:56 utc | 73

Of course they do. There has been only one course of action in their minds since the mid 1950's.

And, after the analysis of their lunar samples from the Chang'e 5 mission, Xi Ping also knows where it's all headed and why. The only person who apparently refuses to believe where this is headed and why is Putin.

Like it or not, the USA will launch at Russia and China, that is guaranteed and probably not that far off, because they foolishly believe that they will be able to survive and that is their only option.

--------

@4 Hoyeru-Nov 22 2021 18:44 utc

No, it's Putin and Putin's alone.

Yes it is, but not Ukraine. Putin refused to authorize a response in Syria when Israel shot down the Il-20, that's why they keep pushing, Putin will not act when needed. Some see Putin as a hero, but that's only because he will not act and keeps them safe from WW3. If we get that far and he is elected again in 2024 he certainly won't last his entire term and another will do what's needed and will then be required to tell the citizens of Russia the truth.

I will never vote for United Russia again.

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 8:15 utc | 102

If a POTUS finds himself in the position of asking the Military "What have you been doing?" without also asking "Who told you to do that?" then he didn't want to know and something has gone very, very wrong.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 23 2021 3:41 utc | 95

Well this is the point, the US government is not in fact obedient to it's nominal leaders, it functions as a bunch of fiefdoms in competition for public cash. That is, as a government, it is fake, if does not govern. Government by grift is no government at all.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 23 2021 8:17 utc | 103

@ Roger | Nov 23 2021 1:59 utc | 82
Indeed it is traditional in the western wars that the same people own infrastructure on both sides and make sure their Generals don’t target it. I mean with WW2 DuPont, Ford, ICI, IG Farben etc plants all seemed to survive miraculously in the endless months of the blitz and massed bombing raids ...somehow missing the easy targets and hitting plenty of civilian ‘slum’ areas ...

“Elites, have been busy manufacturing consent for new military action. Disconcerting to say the least, but Does this surprise anyone here?”
Posted by: michaelj72 | Nov 23 2021 6:43 utc | 100

That is just so here in the U.K. too - many of our publishers have had visits from top officers working out of the MoD over the last few years to instill anti Russian sentiment in what they write - even technical journals! They’ve really thought through their Initiative with dis Integrity!

Let’s not forget the original nato nazi plan was to butcher Ukraine up into parcels that would be shared out with Poland,Hungary and as many oligarchs as wanted it. Fuck the EU and fuck the actual Ukes no doubt. Is that plan over?
They wants their cake!

Poking The Bear - is a thing. What can possibly go wrong?
Let one of these links from Tass above explain so NO ONE SAYS THEY DIDNT KNOW that any charge of the gung-ho US and nato Light Brigades would be about as successful as the original in the Crimea.

“10 AUG, 14:50
Russian Army operates around 170 battalion tactical groups — defense chief
These are the forces that are ready for deployment in an hour after an alert signal, Sergey Shoigu pointed output “
https://tass.com/defense/1324461

I think CentCom understands. As they understand the message of the 2014 Mediterranean showdown. I expect the Russian Generals also know how to use feignt to keep the enemy jittery and confused - ‘go on Vlad tell him gem you are Mad as Hell and ain’t gonna take it anymore - tell them you are willing to blow your own brains out live on the whole worlds tv m, if they don’t get away from your red line’s, bare your chest and make a war dance and you’ll take every single mofo’s with you’ give them the crazy snake eye stare like we practiced . If that don’t get them than our modern day valley of doom is ready to receive their suicidal charge’

Back to that Tass article to finish -
“ A battalion tactical group is a temporary operationally flexible formation set up on the basis of a battalion and attached artillery, air defense, engineering and logistics support units for combat operations as part of motor rifle and tank brigades. Aviation groups, special operations forces and other units can also be attached to a battalion tactical group to accomplish assigned missions.”

Can nazi nato match that on the ground? Unlikely based on the countless blue on blue incidents in a relatively one sided battlefield situations of Iraq and Afghanistan never mind against fully trained and motivated soldiers defending THEIR borders and neighbours.

So what is the most likely scenario? March your troops back down the hill or charge into the valley of doom?

Posted by: D.G. | Nov 23 2021 8:19 utc | 104

I view Putin as a leader who does not let his enemies bait him into doing stupid things. The situation as it is works very well for Russia in international geopolitical terms, the longer it goes on, the better for Russia. The West continues to decline, it's enemies continue to develop. Why would he want to stop that by jumping into some stupid little war?

When will the west have leaders who do not want to get it into more stupid little wars?

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 23 2021 8:25 utc | 105

nobody #102

Thank you for the heads up on the Chang'e-5 lunar samples analysis. Are you referencing this paper at National Science Review or can you link to your source.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 23 2021 8:44 utc | 106


When will the west have leaders who do not want to get it into more stupid little wars?

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 23 2021 8:25 utc | 105

The west does not have leaders, the west has puppets under the control of their masters.

I view Putin as a leader who does not let his enemies bait him into doing stupid things.
Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 23 2021 8:25 utc | 105

It won't save us. On the 4-11-2021 the earth turned red, You can do a little research at NASA and NOAA and see that for yourself, the next time that happens you can expect the geopolitical situation to also turn red not long after. :D

Enjoy your day/evening

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 8:45 utc | 107

It won't save us. On the 4-11-2021 the earth turned red, You can do a little research at NASA and NOAA and see that for yourself, the next time that happens you can expect the geopolitical situation to also turn red not long after. :D

Enjoy your day/evening

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 8:45 utc | 107

No no, don't try to cheer me up.

Posted by: Bemildred | Nov 23 2021 9:12 utc | 108

nobody | Nov 23 2021 8:45 utc | 107

"On the 4-11-2021 the earth turned red, You can do a little research at NASA and NOAA and see that for yourself"

Two things. Is the date 4th November or 11th April (USA format) And can you give us a pointer? All I get from searches is lunar eclipse info.


Posted by: JustAnotherAussie | Nov 23 2021 9:16 utc | 109

What is the right move for China to help at this time and show solidarity with Russia? Can Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea also help? Can Belarus help by directing several thousand refugees to the Lithuania border (instead of Poland which has the resources to stop the refugees)?

Posted by: doingmore | Nov 23 2021 9:27 utc | 110

Posted by: doingmore | Nov 23 2021 9:27 utc | 110

China doesn't even have to. The real battle is the aftermath and NA-EU preplanned economic terrorism against Russia.

Posted by: Lucci | Nov 23 2021 10:20 utc | 111

@JustAnotherAussie | Nov 23 2021 9:16 utc | 109

Australian date format 4th November 2021. The planet received a C2 solar impact, it turned earth red. If you're interested google " The South Atlantic Anomaly " NASA, NOAA, The Russian Academy of Sciences and the Chinese equivalent all agree that Earth has lost +/- 25% of our magnetosphere, that should tell you why the future is bleak geopolitical speaking. In Novosibirsk on that day the Aurora Borealis was briefly visible for the first time in living memory. Re: China, The dating's for the samples from the Chinese mission to the farside show them to be much, much younger that the USA samples from many years ago, As I said, I believe that Xi Ping now fully understands the Science, Putin not so much, he seems to be afflicted with/by Normalcy Bias ;-). It's late in Oz goodnight.

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 10:38 utc | 112

@Roger 80
Not butthurt, just tired to read the myths the Nazi generals spouted after the war again and again. Plan Barbarossa stated to overthrow the USSR ("Russia") in a fast campaign of 6 to 8 weeks. There was no reason to worry about a four weeks delay due to the aggression and conquest of Yugoslavia.

Even less holding water is blaming Hitler because he insisted on taking Kiew and Ukraine. Not only this would have meant to leave 1.2 million Red Army troops unharmed, and able to push into Romania and the Nazi oil supplies. Without that move the Wehrmacht would also have left an open flank to the southwest of about 700 km, open for attacks through the Pripyat swamp area on the main supply line. Moreover, it would have meant one train line less for the Wehrmacht advance.

And logistics were a disaster already due to the poor planning (another question would be whether better planning would have led to anything but aborting the whole campaign). Even if the Wehrmacht had pushed towards Moscow 4 weeks earlier, they would always have run into the mud season between mid September and November. And yes, territory and weather play a role in military planning, demonstrating what arrogant bunch of idiots the Nazi generals were. A shame that they weren't all hanged after the war.

As to fuel freezing, gimme a break. Aeroplanes at that times operated up to 6000m, where the temperatures are lower the whole year than in a Russian winter.

Posted by: aquadraht | Nov 23 2021 11:06 utc | 113

@99 psychohistorian

"So the bio, economic and financial fighting going on don't count? (...)"

That`s not what I said. B in his article did explicitly write about such things like Ukraine launching an offensive in Donbas, Russia invading Ukraine and Ukraine being divided into two.

Such large scale fighting will just not happen, at least not in the near future. The enmity in other areas will of course persist. In fact the EU´s respons to the Belarusian aggression against Poland is still pending.

Does anybode know when the next meeting of the EU Council is scheduled? I wonder if the German proposal to keep the sanctions on a symbolic level has a chance to get a majority and if France maintains it`s position that Russia "is not part of the problem but part of the solution".

Posted by: m | Nov 23 2021 11:11 utc | 114

nobody | Nov 23 2021 10:38 utc | 112

Have you ever wondered at the classical Chinese paintings of dragons flying in the sky? And took note that these dragons are typicaly colored green and red. The same green and red of the aurora borealis (or australis for you.)

Posted by: Lurk | Nov 23 2021 11:28 utc | 115

Posted by: aquadraht | Nov 23 2021 11:06 utc | 113

A couple of days ago in our Spanish El País, that is to say our NYTimes, there was an article using the image of "general winter" for the incidents in the Belarus Poland border. When anybody credits the winter as the winner in the Great Patriotic War it is very easy to know where they're comming from, nazi apologists. So the bitter cold only afects the invaders? yeah right, Russians and their equipment do not mind -35º C temperatures.

Posted by: Paco | Nov 23 2021 11:54 utc | 116

Well, agreed, but Roger certainly is no Nazi apologist

Posted by: aquadraht | Nov 23 2021 11:58 utc | 117

You fail to take into account the fact that the warmongering gang, led by such vermin as Jihadi Julian Röpcke of Bild, have gone from hailing Bidet as the messiah to condemning him as a worse "appeaser" of Russia than the "Putin stooge" Trump. Scum such as Röpcke are obvious CIA mouthpieces, and the what passes for the media in Europe is wholly CIA owned. The CIA, in fact, is determined to start a war in Ukranazistan, which it is also well aware NATO would lose. In fact NATO has no more intention of fighting that war than it did in Saakashvilistan in 2008. A war where Russia smashes the Ukranazi coup regime to pieces would be a terrific propaganda boost to Amerikastan, which - along with its Canadastani puppet - would hoot and howl like a rabid baboon that "European democracy" is being "destroyed" by Putin. The sacrifice of Ukranazistan is a small price to pay for that; Amerikastan has looted it to the bone anyway.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Nov 23 2021 12:31 utc | 118

@ Oldhippie #32 von Clausewitz said 'war is politics by other means'. What he left out is that politics is economics by other means. The only growth industry left in the US is military. Military misadventures are the national pastime, whether by direct intervention, proxy armies, economic warfare, staged terrorism, false flag operations, etc. Corporate media is their megaphone. Gulf of Tonkin! WMDs in Iraq! Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11! Syria is using chem weapons! Russia hacked the election!

US Special Forces are deployed in foreign uniforms around the globe, including Ukraine. Youtube recently scrubbed a video of a Ukie reporter trying to interview a Ukie solider who turned out to be American. Whoops. Meanwhile the US refuses to have a peace treaty with DPRK - 69 years after that war (started by another false flag operation).

Posted by: Black Cloud | Nov 23 2021 13:08 utc | 119

Posted by: m | Nov 23 2021 11:11 utc | 114

>>In fact the EU´s respons to the Belarusian aggression against Poland is still pending.

As if someone cares. Who gives a sh about a declining EU entity which turns into peninsula of Asia anwway.

Posted by: Passer by | Nov 23 2021 13:33 utc | 120

@Roger #82
Are you aware of the stirring of renuclearization?

Harris Kupperman is the one who brought this up:

On Maxing Out Positions (Uranium)

the new Japanese Prime Minister come out in favor of restarting their mothballed reactors, France postponing deactivations and planning for new reactors, the UK realizing that nuclear is the future, the various Green Parties of Europe determining that nuclear is now “green,” and even Illinois deciding to postpone two retirements. The biggest incremental data-point was last week when China decided to build 150 additional reactors

This is pretty counter-narrative, so I checked this out:

Kishida defends pro-nuclear position in parliamenary debut

Macron says new nuclear plants

Telegraph on new nuclear plant as part of UK Net Zero Initiative

Finland Green Party no longer opposed to nuclear (2018)

EU on nuclear as possible green solution

EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen gave a strong hint on the direction of travel when speaking to reporters after a leaders’ summit in Brussels on October 22.

“The energy mix of the future needs more renewable and clean energy. Alongside this, we also need a stable source, nuclear energy, and during the transition, also natural gas.

“That is why – as called for by many leaders – the Commission is going to come forward with a taxonomy proposal in the near future,” said Ms von der Leyen.

10 European countries calling for nuclear power to be classified green

In view of the ongoing energy crisis in Europe, ten EU countries wrote to Brussels in favor of nuclear energy as an “important affordable, stable and independent energy source” that could protect EU consumers from “being exposed to price fluctuations”. The document, initiated by France, was sent to the EU Commission with the signature of nine other EU countries, most of which already include nuclear energy in their national energy mix: Bulgaria, Finland, Croatia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Hungary.

Nuclear power plants generate over 26 percent of the electricity produced in the European Union.

The Green party volte-face doesn't seem correct - as you most likely know, the raise d'etre of the European Green party is anti-nuclear, but reclassification of nuclear as "green" by the EU is pretty significant IMO.

Posted by: c1ue | Nov 23 2021 14:12 utc | 121

@m 98 114
As to alleged Russian "war scare": https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-officials-warn-possible-russian-military-incursion-into-ukraine/

Posted by: aquadraht | Nov 23 2021 15:10 utc | 122

This incompetent Administration's latest move of releasing a pointless trickle of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve does have one result -- a clear implication that they do not believe a conflict with a rival is imminent.

Posted by: figleaf23 | Nov 23 2021 16:31 utc | 123

@norb (50) I live in the United States, and I can assure you that the economy is not in ruins. How did you come to that conclusion?

How? I live in the US as well. Maybe it was hyperbole, but our economy is not in great shape. Too many work low pay service sector jobs with no future. Inflation is going through the roof while they keep interest rates at the zero bound for years at a time. There is still manufacturing, but much of it is simply assembly of products from globally sourced components. My niece worked as an engineer for a commercial truck company. She showed me a design for a hoist she had done...then it was sent to China to be made. The real problem with our economy is that no one cares about anything but "growth", whether it makes a bit of difference in the real world or not. Wall Street first, Main Street never.

Posted by: norb | Nov 23 2021 17:01 utc | 124

Someone needs to explain that off ramp theory to Blinking and company.
Ramp up seems to be the US order of things.
And the EU can freeze.


https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/european-gas-prices-jump-us-announces-nord-stream-2-sanctions

Posted by: JPC | Nov 23 2021 17:15 utc | 125

Thanks to Stonebird for pinch-hitting.

At yesterday's presser, Lavrov was of course asked about Ukraine. From the four detailed paragraphs given as his answers to the multiple-point question asked, IMO this is the key segment related to this thread:

"During President Vladimir Putin and President Joe Biden’s summit in Geneva, the US President reaffirmed his adherence to the Minsk agreements. He acknowledged that it is important to fulfill, among other things, the part of the agreements that talks about Donbass’ special status. This matter was discussed during US Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland’s visit to Russia. She reaffirmed this position stated by President Biden during the meetings at the Foreign Ministry and the Presidential Executive Office. We believe that the United States has a better understanding of the current situation. No one doubts they have a stronger influence on Kiev than anyone else. Let's see whether the United States will be able to translate its words into actions and help fulfill the Minsk agreements." [My Emphasis]

The fundamental point at issue as the above excerpt details is Kiev's refusal to implement any portion of the UNSC Mandated Minsk2 Treaty. The Outlaw US Empire instigated the 2014 coup that installed the current regime and this pulls its strings as Lavrov noted. Kiev's ongoing Refusal and repeated violations causing death and destruction within Donbass are what prompted Putin's decree I wrote about here, that is the effective equivalent of an R2P operation. As The Saker has reviewed many times, Russia's military can control the entire region from within its own borders should it choose to do so; and IMO that choice was made in yet another effort to get Kiev to act, and if not Kiev than its puppet master. Ever since the failure of the coup's main goal in 2014--the capturing of Crimea--the Ukraine debacle has gone from bad to worse for NATO as it's shown to be toothless along with Ukraine's Nazis, both of which represent ongoing failure of the Outlaw US Empire's policy. What remains of that policy is the political goal of trying to portray Russia and an aggressive warmonger via an actual invasion of Ukraine. But as Lavrov remarked yesterday, it's quite clear that the Ukrainians are the #1 warmongers. I refer to the following two paragraphs from Lavrov:

"But in recent weeks and months we have been hearing a very heated and dangerous stream of consciousness coming out of the Ukrainian leadership, especially its military. Whenever bellicose rhetoric of that kind is being stoked, it betrays plans to carry out a provocation and bring the conflict into a hot phase. In their remarks, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Commander of the Joint Forces Operation in Donbass are constantly outlining their aggressive plans. There is an old-fashioned word 'warmongers'. But I can’t think of any better description: it’s the aggressive plans of the Ukrainian warmongers. They threaten to use Javelins, and they have already used Bayraktar. Not that they had done so by accident, but they reported it with pride, despite being banned by the Minsk agreements. Truth be told, they provided inconsistent testimony. First, they said it did take place; then they said it didn’t happen, and finally they confessed. They did more than confess, they said they would continue to use attack drones in Donbass, thereby once again trampling upon their obligations under the Minsk agreements.

"Their statement to the effect that the Ukrainian military are not restricted in using weapons in Donbass is another example of their bellicose rhetoric. They can fire at will. This goes to show Ukraine's outright refusal to comply with the agreements it signed in July 2020 on how to respond to fire and how to coordinate return fire. Our colleagues from Germany and France wanted to devote the Normandy format meeting to this particular issue, among others. Donetsk and Lugansk are complying with their respective obligations. Ukraine has publicly withdrawn from them. Instead of rapping Ukraine’s knuckles and make its 'clients' in Kiev do as agreed upon with Britain and France’s assistance and support, they are inviting us to hold another Normandy format meeting. This path leads nowhere. I’m very worried about how resistant Berlin and Paris are to supporting the Minsk agreements and how they bend over backwards to cover up and justify the Kiev regime’s unacceptable actions." [My Emphasis]

And what's even worse is the fact that the supposed guarantors of Minsk2 and Normandy Format members UK and France are supplying Ukraine with weapons while supposedly being engaged in promoting a peaceful settlement. Here's the latest evidence of French weaponry in Ukronazi hands. So, the upshot is Russia is doing what it must to apply pressure to those at the root of the problem, for it refuses to fall into the political trap to bail out the Empire's policy. The Ukronazis behave like starved rabid dogs eying Russia as fresh meat and will do anything to goad Russia into acting against its own interests. Given they're essentially CIA, I don't expect any change in that behavior except via military eradication. And until the Nazis break their leash, the conflict will remain frozen, while Donbass becomes an ever more de facto & de jure member of the Russian Federation.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 23 2021 18:32 utc | 126

Today's news reveals Ukraine seeks a new Normandy Format meeting, which as Lavrov has noted almost daily for the past two weeks are utterly useless given Kiev's refusal to implement what was already decided and decreed via the UNSC.

UK, France and the Outlaw US Empire are UNSC permanent members charged with upholding the UN, UNSC, their resolutions and thus World Peace. Currently, all three are supplying Ukraine with arms and doing nothing to force Ukraine to abide by the UNSC Minsk2 Treaty nor condemn Kiev for its daily ceasefire violations. Thus we may reasonably ask WHY those three nations are UNSC members at all for they do nothing to promote global peace and instead provoke global chaos. I know many within Russia and China ask that question as those nations do what they can to counteract the negative efforts of the other three.

Ultimately, much boils down to propaganda. Much can be learned by listening to Rittenhouse in his post-trial interview where he takes on the media and Biden's slanderous false associations--the same ones made by BigLie Media:

"'It’s actually quite hysterical how nobody can go back and look at the facts of the case: ‘He crossed state lines’ – false. ‘He’s a white supremacist’ – false,' Rittenhouse said, naming common tropes that repeatedly appeared in press coverage. 'None of that is true, and the lies that they can just get away with spreading is just sickening and it's a disgrace to this country.'" [My Emphasis]

IMO, we need to see lots more of what this describes:

"Rittenhouse would not be the first youth in recent years to take news agencies to court for botched and defamatory coverage. Following a controversy in 2019 involving Catholic high school students and a Native American activist in Washington, DC, teenager Nicholas Sandmann took CNN and other outlets to court over their repeated portrayal of him as a ‘racist’. While a $250 million suit against the Washington Post and another $275 million lawsuit targeting CNN were both settled out of court with no dollar amounts disclosed, Sandmann is thought to have been given a significant amount."

The problem with that outcome is those publications remained in the business of Lie Promotion, CNN in particular. The lawsuits ought to be in the Trillions, the obvious aim to bankrupt them so they are no longer capable of distorting reality for those controlling the Duopoly, for that's who ultimately controls them.

And we aptly approach a national holiday based on yet another BigLie.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 23 2021 19:21 utc | 127

@nobody | Nov 23 2021 10:38 utc | 112

Look up "Carrington Event" 1859. What you mention is not very significant.

Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 23 2021 19:22 utc | 128

Look up "Carrington Event" 1859. What you mention is not very significant.

Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 23 2021 19:22 utc | 128

I don't need to look it up, I'm quite familiar with the 1859 event.

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 19:35 utc | 129

@nobody | Nov 23 2021 19:35 utc | 129

Then you know that recent events are insignificant.

Posted by: Norwegian | Nov 23 2021 20:02 utc | 130

Don Bacon | Nov 23 2021 2:34 utc | 85

Surprisingly, in Yahoo, taken from Oilprice.com or bloomberg (I can't remember which & it has been removed now) there was a remarkably rational article by an American academic commentator saying that the US should stop provoking the Russians in Ukraine, because if the Russians reacted militarily, and the two sides avoided falling into a nuclear war, the Americans were going to get extremely badly hurt, whether they supported Ukraine militarily or not.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Nov 23 2021 23:02 utc | 131

I don't need to look it up, I'm quite familiar with the 1859 event.

Posted by: nobody | Nov 23 2021 19:35 utc | 129

Hm. Nobody knows about 1859 event. I surely don't.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 24 2021 3:02 utc | 132

US should stop provoking the Russians in Ukraine, because if the Russians reacted militarily, and the two sides avoided falling into a nuclear war, the Americans were going to get extremely badly hurt, whether they supported Ukraine militarily or not.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Nov 23 2021 23:02 utc | 131

There is no danger of nuclear war, or any NATO involvement. The line of control between "under-control" Donbas and "temporarily not under-control" has a lot of deep trenches and minefields, so with 2 to 1 ration between the troops Ukraine and those of the Republics there is a balance. I heard on YouTube that the republics have 3rd corps, with heavy weapons, in reserve. One can guess that the newest anti-aircraft/anti-drone weapons are there. In the spring, Ukraine implicitly threatened war by nearly doubling the number of troops in the regions, so Russia supplied lots of video of their troops moving the various sectors of the border for exercises.

Then there were some tense phone calls and the number of troops on all sides got reduced to normal.

Small provocations are getting quite measured answers, they make no news, least of all, international news. Would Ukraine tried to repeat what they did in the Spring, it would take weeks to transport troops and weapons. So Russia would get enough time to bring theirs. Were Ukrainians out of their minds and attack, they would have more than 50% of their fight-capable force on the front with trenches and mine fields, and in.the aftermath of the massive attacks, Russia would send troops to positions 100-300 km west of the valiant attackers. I assume, a blitz with air support, with a laud messages about averted "humanitarian crisis". Things would be pear-shaped, as the British say. Would Ukrainian military retreat to the other side of Dnyepr in an orderly fashion, or disorderly? Would Ukrainian politician rescue themselves by flying abroad? Hard to tell, but if there were some pathetic circus, the political price in the West (and in Ukraine) could be very heavy.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 24 2021 3:21 utc | 133

nobody, do you have a link in response to my #106? Regarding Chang'e-5 moon samples, your cagey avoidance is revealing.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 24 2021 4:02 utc | 134

Hoyeru #4

That was truly pathetic.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 24 2021 4:04 utc | 135

Don't make any plans for the autumn when the American midterms are hot and heavy. Just saw this posted by Mark Ames. Zelensky will start a war all on his own.

A majority of Americans support going to war with Russia over Ukraine, and to war with China over Taiwan. Church attendance may be down sharply, but millenarian dreams are stronger than ever here. And who can blame us? Shit jobs, shit lives—who wants to go on living like this
He is at: https://twitter.com/MarkAmesExiled

Propaganda does indeed work.

Posted by: Erelis | Nov 22 2021 20:49 utc | 51

Very well, but gringos have enough guns to kill themselves via murder-suicide without any need to involve the rest of us...

Posted by: Misotheist | Nov 24 2021 9:31 utc | 136

nobody, do you have a link in response to my #106? Regarding Chang'e-5 moon samples, your cagey avoidance is revealing.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 24 2021 4:02 utc | 134

Sorry, I have a life and family. This has what you need (including references)

China's fresh moon rocks age

I think they are being less than honest, but that will have to wait for further analysis.

Posted by: nobody | Nov 24 2021 11:18 utc | 137

To Michael Weddington:

Marxism, en effet, is not a science: is an ideology. But the dialectical materialism is a philosophy. In fact, Karl Marx is one of the main (if no the main) proponent of scientism (in the sense of an objective and exact analysis of reality) and so, one the fathers of the modern science. In Marxist terms, philosophy is a rigorous discipline base on dialectical logic. Marx was a master of this logic (and Engels too). He linked tightly the economy and politics in one science and stated that a discipline can only reach maturity when is able to use mathematics. The language of Marx was scientific from head to toe, and laid the basis of everything that we know currently as science.

Posted by: Vulturius | Nov 24 2021 17:36 utc | 138

RE: Posted by: Vulturius | Nov 24 2021 17:36 utc | 138

“Marxism, en effet, is not a science: is an ideology. “

Mr. Marshall's “Principles of economics” was published in 1890 in order to redefine an area of endeavour previously known as political economy, the register of “Principles of economics” using “mathematics” in efforts to suggest that economics were independent of the agency of others, in an attempt to deflect “blame” following times of trouble in political economy.

From 1924 onwards in “The Soviet Union” dialectical historical materialism was increasingly rendered as “Marxism/Leninism/Stalinism” in efforts to suggest that areas of endeavour including political economy and science were dependent on the thoughts of a limited sum of “personalities” being implemented by the agency of others, as illustrated by Mr. Federenko and Mr. Leontiev's “Optimum functioning system for a Socialist economy” published in 1974 since Mr. Marx did not write detailed significant works on “Socialist” economic models.

From 1969 onwards in “The Soviet Union”, predicated on the understanding of some that “The Soviet Union” was not sustainable for various reasons, some implemented preparations including but not limited to facilitating Progress Publisher's efforts in producing from 1971 onwards a virtually complete version of the collected works of Marx and Engels to facilitate the transcendence of “Marxism/Leninism/Stalinism” by dialectical historical materialism to facilitate the transcendence of “The Soviet Union” with the minimum of blowback, whilst in “The United States of America” in 1971 Mr. Kuhn published through the University of Chicago imprint “The structure of scientific revolutions”.

Understandably given that omniscience was not/is not an option, the register of Mr. Kuhn's “The structure of scientific revolutions” included notions of “paradigms” which he acknowledged were/are transcended - however in his rendition transcended/replaced by other “paradigms” - a “paradigm” apparently being a closed linear system thereby limiting/undermining the application of his hypotheses , a lacuna perceived by some “scientific practitioners” catalysing their further efforts predicated on observations that perhaps this was a function of Mr. Kuhn's conflation of slow velocities of lateral change with notions of stasis, thereby obfuscating that lateral change is a constant whose variables include but are not limited to trajectory and velocity.

““Marxism, en effet, is not a science: is an ideology. “

Consequently “Marxism” is a cult with the hope to preclude lateral change whilst being subject to lateral change, thereby requiring an ideology to facilitate belief when expectations and outcomes diverge, whilst “science” is a practice where doubt is a catalyst to encourage trajectories and velocities of transcendence; Mr. Marx's understanable areas to transcend including but not being limited to “and stated that a discipline can only reach maturity when is able to use mathematics. “ since “mathematics” are also subject to lateral change.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Nov 26 2021 18:48 utc | 139

Posted by: MagdaTam | Nov 26 2021 18:48 utc | 139

Barely decipherable idealist ramblings.

Here we have another totally independent FrEe ThInKeR that somehow got bit by a marxist in their childhood, otherwise the unyielding obsession with lining potshots against marxism simply cannot be explained.

Of course, there is the marxist explanation: the class interest of this person runs afoul of the class interests of organized, conscious working classes.

Not to say that the writing style is pompously elitist and needlessly obscure, a hallmark trait of bourgeois "intellectual" who cannot help but attempt to cover their own banal meaninglessness in a shroud of rehearsed obscurity.

Marxism is, among other things, a revolutionary political doctrine. Whether you like it or not, the USSR and the PRC are the paramount examples of successful revolutions, and they build upon, and are built upon marxist doctrine.

Other "left-leaning" political ideologies haven't had the teeth to put themselves to put themselves to practice, are simply window-dressing for bourgeois plunder and subjugation; or collapse in short order with nothing to account for, their function fulfilled in the dispersal of proletarian forces and the reinforcing of capitalism as the only viable alternative in practice.

Honey, "lateral" and "transcendence" only have a fucking meaning if you fucking bother to define them, or if you have a shared philosophical background with your audience.

What you're doing amounts to nothing but plastering buzzwords all over the place and see what sticks, self-help shelf guru grade bullshit.

Maybe you should send an application to some economics department?

Posted by: Misotheist | Nov 28 2021 16:33 utc | 140

Neilo | Nov 23 2021 2:37 utc | 86

I see a lot of comments about the potential of Russia taking control of East Ukraine from their border to the Dneiper and down to Odessa. But of course that’s simply not feasible given the social, political and crippling economic effects(sanctions) that would inevitably follow.

Otoh consider that the USA is buying a lot of oil from Russia and Europe is buying a lot of gas from Russia and if they imposed sanctions on Russia do you suppose that the Russians would continue to supply them? The mid-term elections are coming up and sky-high gas prices would not improve the Dems's election prospects nor would the US and EU's industry appreciate sky high oil and gas prices.

Posted by: foolisholdman | Nov 28 2021 20:26 utc | 141

nobody | Nov 23 2021 8:15 utc | 102


Like it or not, the USA will launch at Russia and China, that is guaranteed and probably not that far off, because they foolishly believe that they will be able to survive and that is their only option.

I read that the Pentagon keeps playing war games of a war with Russia and war with China and the US-NATO team comes off 2nd best each time. Granted there are many US politicians who would love a war, are there really US generals who would willingly go into a war they are expecting to lose?

Posted by: foolisholdman | Nov 28 2021 20:38 utc | 142

And on the 30th of November, the Russian President clarififed, in response to a question on 'red lines' and what it might mean for foreign businesses investing in Russia:

"You have asked about Ukraine and where the red lines run. They are, above all, the threats to us that can come from that territory. If the enlargement, the infrastructure continues to be enlarged...the issue concerns the possible deployment in the territory of Ukraine of strike systems with the flight time of 7–10 minutes to Moscow, or 5 minutes in the case of hypersonic systems. Just imagine that. Incidentally, you live in Moscow, as far as I know. East Capital is in Moscow, isn’t it? The flight time to Moscow is 5 minutes [for these systems].

Jacob Grapengiesser: Yes, I have been living in Moscow for the past 15 years.

Vladimir Putin: So, what should we do? We would need to create similar systems to be used against those who are threatening us. Can you imagine that?

But we can do this already now, because we have held successful tests, and early next year we will put a new sea-launched hypersonic missile with a maximum speed of Mach 9 on combat duty. The flight time to those who issue orders will also be 5 minutes."

Once again, Russia's military doctrine is that in the event of an attack on Russia the response will include "those who issue orders".

In this case the attack would be from NATO infrastructure directly on Russia's border (in Ukraine, maybe even from re-taken Donbass).

It might be mini-nuke artillary shells, it might be missiles.

With a 5 to 10 minute flight time to cripple Russia's nuclear response command and control, there would be no time to find out what the projectiles are 'supposedly' armed with.

So response would be instant.

Including on those who ordered the attack.

So, who are they who give the orders?

NATO command? Nothing happens without USA direction of NATO.

Where are they who give the orders?

There are already subs with hypersonic missiles, some probably nuclear armed, 4 minutes hypersonic missile flight from mainland USA.

And Russia does not have 'mini-nukes'.

The last word goes to the Russian President:

"I hope it will not come to this. I hope that common sense and responsibility for one’s country and the international community will prevail after all."


Posted by: powerandpeople | Dec 2 2021 2:23 utc | 143

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.