Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 08, 2022

Ukraine Open Thread 2022-62

Only news & views related to the Ukraine conflict ...

Posted by b on May 8, 2022 at 14:04 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page | next page »

I am waiting for the Empire of Lies to crumble

Posted by: Scorpion | May 8 2022 22:17 utc | 75

"Don't change before the Empire falls.
You'll laugh so hard you'll crack the walls."

Grace Slick, "Greasy Heart"

Posted by: Henry Moon Pie | May 8 2022 23:51 utc | 101

@ Posted by: watcher | May 8 2022 20:32 utc | 69

Way back in the era of the sextant and chronometer navigation era .

Two Soviet icebreakers/research vessels RV Lena and RV Ob. Involved in the IGY Antarctic years. Made a surprised unannounced visit to the Port of Adelaide.

This created major consternation with RG Menzies in Canberra and the Port of Adelaide Harbormaster. Hint the Petrov defection.......

Posted by: Bad Deal Motors On | May 8 2022 23:53 utc | 102

bevin @ 52, with respect, I think oldhippie's read is correct. This is the Streek analysis final take I posted on the other open thread:

"...Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe..."

I understand that to be his own assessment. Oldhippie and I have questioned it.

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:01 utc | 103

I can’t begin to read #87. Otherwise everyone is correct enough and it ain’t that important. The psyche that writes this stuff and the power they wield is more concerning. Just what these freaks do with their power will not be that closely predicted by this one article. An indicator.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 9 2022 0:09 utc | 104

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:01 utc | 100

We continue to see the awful news out of Mora. They've bulldozed around the house we built, but 65 MPH winds may prove too much as it heads up towards Guadalupita.

As for Streek, he definitely does have this thing about Russia being a more beneficial partner than Europe. Uh, what about resources? What about military abilities, including technological advancement?

Maybe Streek is trying to sell this "bargain" to our American billionaires. What I found surprising is that Streek could ever see those fellows ceding one square inch of the planet. They think it all belongs to them, and that they are best equipped to be its proprietors (not its conservators).

Posted by: Henry Moon Pie | May 9 2022 0:11 utc | 105

I will post again for this second page the conclusion to the Streek article that bothers me and oldhippie. It may indeed be what the US and Nato believe, and Streek himself offers it as his conclusion in his last paragraph:

"Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

That's his conclusion. Is a correct? I believe it separates many posting here; we need to be clear about that. We can disagree, but we ought to state the problem in those exact terms. Is Streek correct?

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:23 utc | 106

G7 Countries Pledge to Stop Importing Russian Oil
By AFP
Updated: 6 hours ago

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/08/g7-countries-pledge-to-stop-importing-russian-oil-a77616


Given this is the case - why wouldn't Russia IMMEDIATELY STOP all oil (& oil product) exports to Germany, France, Italy (The EU "3") and the rest of the G7. Today?

Why wait?

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 107

Sorry, "Is IT correct".

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 108

"Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

That's his conclusion. Is a correct? I believe it separates many posting here; we need to be clear about that. We can disagree, but we ought to state the problem in those exact terms. Is Streek correct?

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:23 utc | 103

It seems like wishful thinking to me. Probably based on the "gas station with an army" sort of thinking. That was the part I found a bit jarring in the Streek piece too.

Posted by: Bemildred | May 9 2022 0:33 utc | 109

juliania, what can the the US provide? Besides LNG at 3 times the price? Ron Suskind I think nailed it. The US elite creates its own reality. Just like the USSR leadership did. Until it all comes crashing down on all the citizens heads. If you live in the West I highly recommend you buy some bullion and store food. Prepping isn't crazy.

Posted by: Goldhoarder | May 9 2022 0:38 utc | 110

@Goldhoarder,

the USA can't even feed it's own babies - there's a serious shortage of baby formula in the USA at the moment. And they want to rule the world. Ridiculous people who think that "manifesting" their wishes leads to their heart's desire.

Posted by: Manage without me | May 9 2022 0:45 utc | 111

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:01 utc | 100
"...Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe..."
I understand that to be his own assessment. Oldhippie and I have questioned it."

Which I can understand, because he doesn't provide any figures for it. Neither has anyone else in opposition to it.

In any event, as I've said, it doesn't matter what the actual figures are. What matters is what the neocons figures are, whether right or wrong.

Again, you people need to get it through your heads: We are not dealing with rational cost-benefit analysis here. I don't know how many times this has been pointed out over the years when dealing with the US elites and neocons. Martyanov makes this point in virtually every post and video he does.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 0:46 utc | 112

Why wait?

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 104

Because it would be a propaganda win for the US/EU with claims that Russia is using energy as a weapon. With them voluntarily ending purchases and when their economies crash due to lack of energy they'll have no one else to blame, well at least that's what the proletariat will see as the culprit. I see torches and pitchforks as far as the eye can see very soon.

Posted by: One Too Many | May 9 2022 0:47 utc | 113

Long life and great respect to Caitlin Johnson:

Allowing the world to come this close to nuclear war already makes Biden the worst US president since Bush. At least. History may well show his to be the single most depraved presidency of all time.

Preventing nuclear war is a US president’s single most important job. It’s so important you shouldn’t even really have to talk about it, because it’s so self-evidently the number one priority. And this administration is just rolling the dice on nuclear conflict with increasing frequency every day.

Even if humanity survives this standoff (and the one with China that’s next in line), Biden will still have been an unforgivably depraved president for allowing it to get this close. There’s no excuse whatsoever for just casually rolling the dice on all terrestrial life like this.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 0:47 utc | 114

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 104
"Why wait?"

Because Russia is making money today. Why give up scores of billions of dollars before you have to - just to punish idiots who are punishing themselves?

Personally, I'd do it - but that's me and I'm a vindictive asshole. Putin isn't.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 0:49 utc | 115

Hey, I was just thinking what if Poland and Russia negotiated, and Russia said "sure, you can take all of Ukraine West of the Dnieper, as far as we're concerned, just no NATO and no missiles pointed at us."

Wouldn't it be nifty if Russia and Poland pulled off this kind of deal ?

Posted by: Featherless | May 9 2022 1:07 utc | 116

How you interpreted his conclusion as "The loss of Russia is negligible next to the gain in Europe. Win-win regardless of fate of Ukraine" is beyond me. One can quibble with some of his phrasing and a few minor points but your reading of Streeck's piece makes absolutely no sense.

Posted by: Antiwar Dinosaur | May 8 2022 23:16 utc | 87

Old Hippie is actually quoting Streek's words from from the article, read it again.

Posted by: K | May 9 2022 1:09 utc | 117

The numbers Russian MoD thought Ukraine had lost at the end of the fist month.

https://t.me/mod_russia/13574
At the time of the start of the special military operation, the armed forces of Ukraine, together with the National Guard, numbered 260 thousand 200 servicemen. During the month of military operations, their losses amounted to about 30 thousand people, including more than 14 thousand — irrevocable and about 16 thousand — sanitary.

◽️ Of the 2,416 tanks and other armored combat vehicles that were in service as of February 24 , 1,587 units were destroyed; of 1,509 field artillery and mortars — 636 units; of 535 MLRS — 163; of 152 aircraft — 112; of 149 helicopters — 75; of 36 Bayraktar TB2 UAVs."— 35 of 180 S-300 and Buk M1 air defense systems-148; of 300 radars for various purposes-117.

Rybar telegram channel puts current losses - killed, wounded, prisoner at around 53,000
https://t.me/rybar/32356

If Russian MoD's figures for the first month are somewhere in the ballpark, multiplying it by 2.5 = 75,000? Rybar's numbers perhaps in the ballpark, perhaps conservative?.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | May 9 2022 1:21 utc | 118

I suspect that the real Boris Johnson is trapped in the underground at Azovstahl. There is an imposter clown going about seeking to discredit Johnson by absurd behavior.

Posted by: jared | May 9 2022 1:25 utc | 119

juliania #103

"Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

That's his conclusion. Is a correct? I believe it separates many posting here; we need to be clear about that. We can disagree, but we ought to state the problem in those exact terms. Is Streek correct?

I see two threads in Streeck's report. One is his surmise as to the ineptitude of German leadership and how it arrived at Scholz - the peak of stupidity along with the EU team of hate hysterics.

Streeck's question is flawed as it asks for an answer to a now, non existent europe.

Europe has zilch in hand to deliver to the USA. As of the Russian liberation action in Ukraine, europe is now infested with more nazi loving refugees than before and they are very skilled nazi loving refugees and from this point on europe is doomed to years of extreme political chaos and street violence.

USA already has many of these types and we witness how they have colonised the strategic policy making and political agenda of the USA. Now it is europe's turn to endure this parasite. It will destroy them. So europe might have represented some prize in the past but it is now a poisoned chalice of its own making. Europe's energy policy decisions in the past weeks have ruined its interconnected economy.

After this europe will be a prize for none.

The calamity of this current war business is arrears thinking. Today Europeans and englanders hate Russia for some past circumstance (or none at all -just racism) that is centuries old and lost in the mist. Europeans cannot see in the now. They are staggering about in their centuries old mist screaming hatred against Russians. Then madly turning off their energy supplies out of spite.

Europeans and englanders and their idiot cousins in power in the USA are mesmerised by the past thinking that will give them glory. Sounds like Banderite nonsense, looks like Hitler parading glory with torchlight, smells like fascist death squads, results in smashed cultures and enslaved people. Perhaps that is what the world will reap from their idiocy.

Meanwhile Rusiia and China and the countries that have an affinity for a peaceful world will huddle closer for a shared future rather than a demented past.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 1:26 utc | 120

juliania | May 9 2022 0:01 utc | 100

Agreed. That is the author’s conclusion and it’s wishful thinking at best and probably delusional. What does the US gain from Europe that suffers energy shortages? It was already an aging population in the parts that the IS would want. It has immigration issues. Banking and finance maybe, but how upset will that be by current events?

I don’t think this is going to plan at all for the west. I can see how they hoped that they could push to capture Donbas, cut off Russian gas via sanctions and supply Europe through fracking in Ukraine (only takes about a week to crack a deposit). With the Donbas in western hands this all works pretty well. Without it, it’s a shitshow. Claiming Europe to be the big prize doesn’t make any sense if Europe’s a mess. Clearly nobody in the Atlantic bloc actually planned for replacing Russian gas/oil (again, if the Ukrainian fields are available there is a replacement). That’s why they’re projecting out months and years on a plan that won’t work.

The piece gets a fair number of things right but the conclusion misses the mark by a mile.

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 1:30 utc | 121

uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 1:26 utc | 117 "They are staggering about in their centuries old mist screaming hatred against Russians."

That is something that has surprised me a bit. Not so much the ignorant masses that simply follow the pied piper but it is very strong in the so called elite of the western world, no less than what we see in eastern Europe.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | May 9 2022 1:38 utc | 122

So, in the past week we have Pelosi and crew, Biden's wife, Boris, others I am sure to be missing showing up in Ukraine.

Why is there all this personal show of support when actual military support, as reported here, is worthless and too little/too late?

Feeble minds are curious. Does Z really buy the "show of support" as valuable?

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 1:41 utc | 123

psychohistorian | May 9 2022 1:41 utc | 120

Z is not buying. He is selling. Currently netted I think 850 million according to a Dutch investigation. Not bad for a small time mafia comedian.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | May 9 2022 1:48 utc | 124

Re the Streeck article...

Ukrainian politics apart, an American proxy war for Ukraine may force Russia into a close relationship of dependence on Beijing, securing China a captive Eurasian ally and giving it assured access to Russian resources, at bargain prices as the West would no longer compete for them. Russia, in turn, could benefit from Chinese technology, to the extent that it would be made available. At first glance, an alliance like this might appear to be contrary to the geostrategic interests of the United States. It would, however, come with an equally close, and equally asymmetrical, American-dominated alliance between the United States and Western Europe, one that would keep Germany under control and suppress French aspirations for ‘European sovereignty’. Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe. A proxy war in Ukraine could thus be attractive to a United States seeking to build a global alliance for its imminent battle with China over the next New World Order, monopolar or bipolar in old or new ways, to be fought out in coming years, after the end of the end of history.

Nothing in that paragraph talks about economic

One could interpret the line "Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China" as referring to an economic gain that is referred to in the line "securing China a captive Eurasian ally and giving it assured access to Russian resources, at bargain prices as the West would no longer compete for them", but that is refuted from the rest of the line "by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

It is further supported by the following line: "A proxy war in Ukraine could thus be attractive to a United States seeking to build a global alliance for its imminent battle with China over the next New World Order..." which reinforces the point is that the US goal is dominate the EU as an ally against China.

In other words, everyone here has completely misread the last paragraph. At the very least, the last paragraph might be considered ambiguous as to what the author actually was referring to, whether it was geopolitical gains or economic gains. The presumption that it is the latter is unjustified.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 1:55 utc | 125

Botched the bolding... My bad.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 1:56 utc | 126

Maybe this is just silly, but considering that Russia is involved in a proxy war with the US, it's interesting that Russian intelligence hasn't leaked anything pertaining to 9/11 that might legitimately discredit the US government/deep state-- maybe there really is nothing there to all the conspiracy theorizing about 9/11 after all.

Posted by: MallardB | May 9 2022 2:01 utc | 127

the USA can't even feed it's own babies - there's a serious shortage of baby formula in the USA at the moment. And they want to rule the world. Ridiculous people who think that "manifesting" their wishes leads to their heart's desire.

Posted by: Manage without me | May 9 2022 0:45 utc | 108


It's not that the USA can't feed its own babies; it's that the USA isn't interested in doing so.

Posted by: malenkov | May 9 2022 2:07 utc | 128

Anyone who else ever go check in on the Ukrainian telegram channels? Azov’s is pretty hilarious. Right now. Not only the claim of 25K+ Russian KIAs but that they’re expectation is to be extracted by the UN. Apparently surrender wasn’t part of NATO training. I’ve never served in the military, but I understand that at a certain point a soldier’s choice is to either fight to the death or surrender.

The other super Ukrainian channels are no better in their contact with reality. Like ambassador melnyk who claimed today that Ukraine liberated Europe from fascism in 1945.

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:15 utc | 129

Recent developments indicate the Donbas front is cracking open. See here:

https://t.me/Slavyangrad/303

Posted by: ChasingGlowies | May 9 2022 2:16 utc | 130

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 104

"Why wait?"

To profit until the very last minute, and perhaps beyond because the ban may never materialise in reality - why jump the plank if you were never going to get pushed anyway?

Posted by: Arch Bungle | May 9 2022 2:20 utc | 131

Featherless #113

Hey, I was just thinking what if Poland and Russia negotiated, and Russia said "sure, you can take all of Ukraine West of the Dnieper, as far as we're concerned, just no NATO and no missiles pointed at us."

Wouldn't it be nifty if Russia and Poland pulled off this kind of deal ?


Spoiler.... there is not just a trust deficit, there is an absolute black hole in the west that sucks all trust in and emits blinding rays of hate. But it would be nice to see Poland establish a lasting trustworthy relationship with Russia and denazify itself.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 2:23 utc | 132

In other words, everyone here has completely misread the last paragraph. At the very least, the last paragraph might be considered ambiguous as to what the author actually was referring to, whether it was geopolitical gains or economic gains. The presumption that it is the latter is unjustified.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 1:55 utc | 122

No we haven’t. There is no geopolitics without economics. What geopolitical gains does Europe give the US against China? Europe was integrating with China for economic reasons. A europe without cheap and abundant energy is no threat to China because the only thing europe had was economic power as a market for and investor in China. If anything, the european majors like VW will become more dependent on the Chinese market rather than less.

The US can’t fight Russia and China while supporting europe. It probably can’t do any of the three individually. Are european armies going to be formed to march on Moscow and then across Siberia to attack China?

The author doesn’t explain why europe is such a prize. Probably because it isn’t. Again, demographic issues; a financial sector built on German industry reliant on cheap energy; the rotting corpse of the British empire; internal issues with immigration; and significant economic disparity within the EU. What is it that europe offers the Atlantic bloc except its history of imperial colonialism and a place Americans like to visit to pretend they’re cultured? (I like europe, btw, I’ve lived in it.)

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:26 utc | 133

ChasingGlowies #127

Good news and thank you. May the glowies light your path ;)

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 2:34 utc | 134

This is an impressive interview with an even more impressive panel about Ukraine, Europe/Empire and its outlook. Alistair Crooke, Scott Ritter, Max Blumenthal and Mohammad Marandi. The only regret is that it lasted only 1:30 hours.

https://youtu.be/vrMJoRDfRFI

Posted by: Alpi | May 9 2022 2:37 utc | 135

The piece gets a fair number of things right but the conclusion misses the mark by a mile.

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 1:30 utc | 118

Yes,Lex, thanks - that's it in a nutshell.

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 2:52 utc | 136

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:26 utc | 130
"What geopolitical gains does Europe give the US against China? Europe was integrating with China for economic reasons. A europe without cheap and abundant energy is no threat to China because the only thing europe had was economic power as a market for and investor in China."

Again, geopolitical gains are not economic gains. They determine economic gains. With the EU forced to deal only with the US, the US receives every dime spent by the EU - even if those "dimes" are a lot fewer than they were before. China does not receive them. Russia does not receive them. That's the whole point of the sanctions - to tie Europe's economy to the US, while attempting (unsuccessfully) to weaken Russia.

"The US can’t fight Russia and China while supporting europe."

Who said the US is going to "support Europe"? It's Europe that is going to support the US economy, slowing the US' own slide into bankruptcy. That's the whole point, as Martyanove repeatedly says. Any rebuilding from a NATO-Russia war is only going to benefit the US economy. Any European economic activity divorced from Russia and China is only going to benefit the US economy.

"Are european armies going to be formed to march on Moscow and then across Siberia to attack China?"

No one has suggested that. Straw man much? Europe will still maintain a military, however weak compared to Russia and China (even weaker if my concept that the US intends to sacrifice NATO in a war with Russia.) That's not the point. The US needs Europe to geopolitically support its war against China and to keep Russia out of Europe, even if that support does not amount to much against China. But the primary geopolitical point is to tie Europe's economy to the US and to do that it needs Europe to support the US geopolitical concept, i.e., against Russia and China. As I said, the geopolitical determines the economics.

"The author doesn’t explain why europe is such a prize."

He's not talking about Europe being "such a prize". He's saying that the US needs control of Europe to stop its geopolitical drift away from the US in order to tie the EU economy to the US.

"What is it that europe offers the Atlantic bloc"

Already explained. Whatever is left of the EU's economy is going to be locked in to the US - or at least that's what the neocons thinks. Whether that will prove to be true may be problematic but in any event the US considers it worth the effort.

So the point I made remains. What Streeck is saying is that the US intends to dominate Europe economically by cutting it off from Russia and China. The US believes this will benefit the US economically and geopolitically (i.e. the cutting it off from Russia and China.)

Everyone here appears to be assuming that there will no economy at all in Europe due to the sanctions fallout. This is quite obviously false. Even a "collapsed" economy has an economy. Even if Europe ends up with the same level of German hyperinflation as in the 1920's, there will still be an economy and it will be forced to deal with the US. As Streeck said, the US doesn't mind losing Russia to China if it gains whatever is left of Europe. Streeck did not make clear whether the "net gain" was economic or geopolitical, but it could be either or both depending on what actually happens to the EU economy.

Dismissing the author as being wildly wrong is incorrect (even assuming that he meant economical value, which as I said is not entirely clear from that paragraph everyone is fuming over.) It seems to me that some people are upset that the US might possibly gain from the economic problems of Europe, which is fine, you can be upset about that (especially if you're European, you should be) but that doesn't mean it's not going to happen. In other words, some people have a degree of cognitive dissonance over this situation.

As Martyanov says, "It is what it is."

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 2:54 utc | 137

@uncle tungsten @129

Poland will never, ever, get over its hatred of Russia. The Poles can barely tolerate the Czechs or Slovaks, and these are just neighbours who haven't really been at odds with the Poles for decades. Can you imagine how they feel about the Russians?

Posted by: Manage without me | May 9 2022 2:58 utc | 138

If Poland moves into Poland would that not be the kind of "invasion" the west decrys RF for doing?
RF had an invitation to provide assistance to the Donbass quoting Article 5, why does 404 not extend the same invitation to Poland?
Are they
a. afraid the Poles won't leave and
b. dont want to legitimise the RF's SMO?

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 3:05 utc | 139

Reuters is reporting that Z is saying that Russia bombed a school and killed 60 people...any confirmation of this?

Smells like desperation propaganda once again to me.....look at the timing....sigh

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 3:20 utc | 140

Manage without me #135

Can you imagine how they feel about the Russians?

Oh yes, I can imagine all of it. Perhaps a bit like Thatchers warmth toward Lenin.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 3:32 utc | 141

Posted by: jared | May 9 2022 1:25 utc | 116

but how do you distinguish the imposter clown discrediting Boris Johnson with absurd behavior from the clown himself, discrediting himself with absurd behavior?

Posted by: pretzelattack | May 9 2022 3:35 utc | 142

psychohistorian #120

So, in the past week we have Pelosi and crew, Biden's wife, Boris, others I am sure to be missing showing up in Ukraine.

Why is there all this personal show of support when actual military support, as reported here, is worthless and too little/too late?

Feeble minds are curious. Does Z really buy the "show of support" as valuable?


I suspect they are collecting their payments in bullion and trust no one bar themselves and their fat escort to take it out of Ukraine.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 3:36 utc | 143

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 2:54 utc | 134

I haven't done any of those things, Charles. I simply questioned the basis for his final assumption that a continuance of hegemony was 'very likely' the successful outcome, one pairing weighed against the other. Which by the way is not how Russia and China perceive their relationship, but rather a hegemonic viewpoint it seems to me. I'm surprised you seem to favor that assumption, but maybe you misunderstand our problem with the article, or - more likely - I haven't explained it properly. Sorry.

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 3:40 utc | 144

Hope someone will post Putin's speech on the 9th. Damn sure won't be on our MSM here in the U$A.

Posted by: vetinLA | May 9 2022 3:41 utc | 145

137

Reuters?

Learned not to trust one word of Reuters, the fake news factory par excellence.

Posted by: CarlD | May 9 2022 3:44 utc | 146

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 8 2022 22:37 utc | 79

Seen pictures of her. She's kinda hot. Also, it's "Olena" not "Elena". She used to be a screenwriter - obviously useful in Ukraine today. :-)

Her given name is Elena.
Olena is the ukrainisation of the Russian name Elena (by post-Maidan law in Ukraine). Just like Kiev and Kyiv :-/

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 3:57 utc | 147

@ CarlD | May 9 2022 3:44 utc | 143 who wrote
"
Reuters?

Learned not to trust one word of Reuters, the fake news factory par excellence.
"

Yeah, that is a given.


That said, the school bombing will be the story making the rounds through Western zombie heads and not Putin's speech tomorrow.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 4:05 utc | 148

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 3:40 utc | 141
"I simply questioned the basis for his final assumption that a continuance of hegemony was 'very likely' the successful outcome, one pairing weighed against the other."

Well, as I may have mentioned in an earlier post, is the EU going to switch to China? Well, of course, they should. But there is no evidence they will. They're busy cutting themselves off from Russia. Now eventually, if the predictions of unrest in the EU prove true, as they well might, then perhaps the EU bureacracy will be replaced by politicians more amenable to cutting themselves off from the US. But until we see evidence of that, it's all speculation. And it has nothing to do with what Streeck said, because he didn't put a time frame on his prediction.

"Which by the way is not how Russia and China perceive their relationship"

I would agree with that. However, others have also suggested that both China and Russia are viewing the relationship as essential to their core concerns, in other words, realistically, despite all the public "buddy-buddy" stuff. I submit it's likely a mixture of both, and even more likely no one really knows. Actions count more than words and so far all the action between the two countries says they're partners and will remain so for the foreseeable future. So Streeck takes a more "realist" tone based on countries looking after their own interests first and foremost. In any event, it's irrelevant to the overall point.

"maybe you misunderstand our problem with the article, or - more likely - I haven't explained it properly. Sorry."

Well, I'm mostly going off Lex's explanation, which as I pointed out, has major problems. Correct me if I'm wrong but the basic complaint appears to be that his prediction that the US will benefit from cutting the EU off from Russia and China and that it will be more of a benefit to the US than maintaining relations with Russia. It appears the major complaint is this line: "what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

That line, as I said to Lex, is not clear about whether he is talking about economic or geopolitical gains. In the case of Russia and China, as expressed in the previous lines in that paragraph, he emphasizes economic gains from Russia to China and technology gains from China to Russia. But then he switches to "what Europe can deliver to the United States" as exceeding what Russia can deliver to China. One can interpret as the notion that Europe can deliver economic gains to the US vs the economic gains that Russia can deliver to China. But that's not that clear for two reasons. First, he's not clear about exactly what economic gains Russia gives to China other than access to resources at cheap prices, and 2nd he then switches to talking about geopolitical gains which aren't related to Russia and China at all.

There's just nothing in that paragraph that justifies getting excited. First it's not clear, mixing two different areas in one sentence, and second, he's not necessarily wrong in either economic or geopolitical terms. As Martyanov says, the US is sacrificing the EU's economy to force the EU to tie itself more closely to the US economy. Whether that "exceeds what Russia can give China" is problematic, but not necessarily wrong, absent any actual figures, which neither Streeck nor his critics have provided. As I said to Lex, if the EU is cut off from Russia and China, then every dime the EU spends goes to the US, not Russia and China. Is that more or less, even assuming a "collapsed" EU economy? Does it even matter? Russia and China's economies will deal with each other at some level. What matters between the EU and US is that the EU will be dependent on the US and thus forced to pay the higher prices, as opposed to what Streeck believes will be lower prices from Russia to China because the West is not longer competing with China for those goods. Is he wrong about that? Who knows? It hasn't happened yet.

Then in geopolitical terms, the US wants a united front against China. It won't get it from the Global South or Asia or Africa. So the EU is the only source of geopolitical support for a US confrontation with China. It doesn't matter whether the EU will have the military clout to provide any actual military support in a war with China. But the EU will still have a military - assuming a war with Russia doesn't devastate it. And more importantly, the EU will be forced to pay the US for upkeep and expansion of that military if the EU bureaucracy continues to support the US' geopolitical goals. Which ties the US' geopolitical goals even tighter to the US' economic goals of bleeding Europe dry.

Why everyone decided to criticize that paragraph when it's both unclear and not necessarily wrong on either front eludes me, other than, as I told Lex, it's another case of cognitive dissonance, in that people don't want to believe that such a result can happen. But it is by no means certain that it can't.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 4:12 utc | 149

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 3:57 utc | 144

Well, Wikipedia says Olena. And since she's Ukrainian, the Ukrainian pronunciation takes precedence over the Russian. Her maiden name was Olena Kiyashko.

Not that it matters to her hotness. :-)

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 4:16 utc | 150

Gonzalo Lira discusses Ukrainian oligarch Kolomoisky and predicts Kolomoisky's made too many enemies to survive much longer...

2022.05.08 Ihor Kolomoisky Is In Trouble
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iWkvJKiFEQ

Another video from Lira discusses what it's like to live in a war zone.

2022.05.08 What Living In A War Is Like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj3d1GfVjOQ

RSH

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 4:23 utc | 151

psychohistorian | May 9 2022 3:20 utc | 137

Russia hit it. Those school children doing night classes were full grown and wearing uniforms.
A military barracks.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | May 9 2022 4:23 utc | 152

That said, the school bombing will be the story making the rounds through Western zombie heads and not Putin's speech tomorrow.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 4:05 utc | 145

oh yeah, there is no doubt of that. it's still an article of faith that the Russians killed those people in Bucha. at least the ghost of Kiev was finally laid to rest, presumably with some garlic and holy water and a crucifix and stake.

Posted by: pretzelattack | May 9 2022 4:26 utc | 153

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 3:40 utc | 141

"Then in geopolitical terms, the US wants a united front against China. It won't get it from the Global South or Asia or Africa. So the EU is the only source of geopolitical support for a US confrontation with China."

You are absolutely right with this statement. The global south will take advantage of the current situation as the US is essentially backed into a corner as they cannot afford to 'punish' any other countries in the current climate. You can already see this with Mexico looking to set up a cartel with all the major Lithium exporting countries to maximize their leverage of this valuable resource. The US lacks true vision if they did not understand how vulnerable they have left themselves under the current situation with having to try and source the commodities that they need to sustain themselves. How long will the American people put up with Europe competing for the same resources with the resultant rampant inflation? Especially when it is for the resources being produced in America, i.e. LNG

Posted by: Undercutter | May 9 2022 4:29 utc | 154

Maybe Putin's May 9th speech is not going to live up to my expectations....

Below is a quote from a TASS report about Putin's speech


Congratulations to leaders of Donbass republics, citizens of Ukraine
"In his congratulation telegrams for the leaders of Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, the Russian leader noted that our servicemen, just like their ancestors, are fighting together to liberate their soil from the Nazi filth, and expressed his certainty that victory will be our, just like in 1945," the Kremlin said.

The Russian president underscored in his address to the veterans of the Great Patriotic War and the people of Ukraine that "a revanche of ideological successors of those defeated during the Great Patriotic War is unacceptable."

According to the address, also published at the Kremlin website Sunday, Putin pointed out that, 77 years ago, thanks to the bravery and heroism of front fighters and partisans, resilience and dedication of home front workers, Nazism was crushed, "which sought to enslave Europe, and which brought pain and suffering to tens of millions of people."

"The countless casualties, sustained in the name of our common Victory, have become essential for our life and freedom. This memory must not be left in oblivion," the Russian leader underscored, adding that, unfortunately, Nazism today "again raises its head and seeks to impose its barbaric, inhuman order."

In general, the Russian leader sincerely congratulated Ukrainian veterans and citizens of Ukraine with the Victory Day, calling it "a common great celebration". The Russian President wished the veterans spiritual fortitude, good health and longevity, and peace and fair future for all people of Ukraine.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 4:46 utc | 155

Concerning the article „Fog of War“ of Wolfgang Streeck the question here was what the gain of Europe might be for the US. It is apparently not an economical gain.
Simply it is the fact that Europe does not find an arrangement with Russia and China and therefore erect this Eurasian "block" whose plain existence finishes all unipolar wet dreams.
A bankrupted Europe has no value in itself. But if it belongs to the enemy and could recover to a certain amount this creates a world that is at least bipolar.

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 5:01 utc | 156

Re: Posted by: One Too Many | May 9 2022 0:47 utc | 110

"A propaganda win"?

You can't be serious. Western propaganda is irrelevant to Russia's conduct of the war in Ukraine.

Completely irrelevant.

When do you suppose Russia will be "WINNING" this propaganda war you speak of?

I can tell you - Russia will win the "Propaganda War in the West" on the 10th of NEVER.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:05 utc | 157

Re: Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 0:49 utc | 112

Why provide energy to your enemies - why not make those BILLIONS OF DOLLARS from your friends?

If the G7 announces (as they have) they will be cutting off Russian oil (& oil products) later this year - provide them with the early present of cutting them off now.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:07 utc | 158

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 3:05 utc | 136
Ukraine

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 5:19 utc | 159

As Ukraine war takes Russian - and probably partially Mongolian and Kazakh - commodities out of world markets, an intense resources hunger is inevitable. In this new world, resource-deficient and financially bankrupt West is bound on procuring needed materials by way of coercion and military conquest. Two countries, Cuba and Venezuela appear particularly vulnerable. First one because of its immense nickel reserves, second due to its oil riches. Both may want to apply to CSTO as quickly as possible, or at least place token Russian garrisons on their soil. Otherwise, they are as good as dead. They’ll be invaded, and relatively soon.

Posted by: Venom | May 9 2022 5:31 utc | 160

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 5:01 utc | 153

You bring up a point. Most people think Europe is going to bankrupt itself forever. Short of nuclear war, that's not going to happen. Europe will recover from the cutoff of Russian oil and gas. It might take a decade or two, but they will dig themselves out of this situation - at least if the bureaucracy doesn't do anything more over that time to wreck the economy. In the short term, the EU is screwd, no doubt about that. But once the economy recovers, and assuming, as the neocons probably do, that the geopolitical situation remains as now - the EU cut off from Russia and China due to geopolitical concerns - then the US will benefit from the increased EU economy.

Actually I don't even think the neocons care what happens to the EU economy or even how much that will benefit the US. They just want to dominate the EU economically and geopolitically. As I said above, as long as every dime the EU has goes to the US instead of Russia and China, they consider that a win, even if those dimes are only ten percent of the dimes being sent to the US now.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:07 utc | 155

Perhaps China isn't quite ready to buy all the oil and gas Russia produces. Also perhaps Russia needs to enhance its transit mechanisms before it can do so.

In other words: let's stop trying to assume we know more than Russia about what Russia needs to do about its oil and gas. I assume the same discussion goes on in Russian government circles - and so far the decision is to do what they're doing.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:19 utc | 161

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:05 utc | 154

It's not about Russia winning the propaganda war. It's about the EU losing face by having to explain to their populations their savings and livelihoods will now be destroyed. Russia shifts the anger away from them and onto their own governments. Brilliant move if you ask me.

Posted by: One Too Many | May 9 2022 6:37 utc | 162

Moldova Separatists Report Drone Strikes Near Ukraine Border
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-05-07/moldova-separatists-report-drone-strikes-near-ukraine-border

CHISINAU (Reuters) -Pro-Russian separatists in Moldova said on Saturday their region had been hit four times by suspected drones overnight near the Ukrainian border.

Nearly two weeks of similar reported incidents in the Transdniestria breakaway region have raised international alarm that Russia's war in Ukraine could spread over the frontier.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:46 utc | 163

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 3:57 utc | 144

Well, Wikipedia says Olena. And since she's Ukrainian, the Ukrainian pronunciation takes precedence over the Russian. Her maiden name was Olena Kiyashko.

Not that it matters to her hotness. :-)

Guess that means it is Kyiv and not Kiev for you ;-)

Yet Elena is not wrong either :-)

Many Ukrainian women are attractive - as are Russian - but Belarusian women take the cake ;-)

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 6:53 utc | 164

CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:19 utc | 158

I am not convinced about how Europe could recover after having made the wrong geopolitical decision. Europe as it is now cannot afford to work with artificially increased energy expenses unless it would protect its interior market against the rest of the world. How could it export then to those markets?
No, the only intelligent solution for Europe now is to leave NATO immediately. To continue with it means suicide. After realizing that Putin cannot be demonized as a new Hitler, they try it, though, the phantasy is served that Putin continues the old Russian expansionism.
But it is dumbfuck easy to compare the situation of 1992 with today - so who is „expanding“?
As an European citizen I do not need to apply any anti-American sentiment. I could even say: fine, let us continue our relationships as until now, but we get out of this NATO, it does not serve our interests. We simply do not need a petro-dollar defined currency.

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 7:04 utc | 165

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 6:53 utc | 161
"Guess that means it is Kyiv and not Kiev for you ;-)"

Nope. Spelling it Kiev is how I've always seen it spelled until the war started. Note I also keep switching from Lviv to Lvov - because I can't make up my mind. :-)

But a person's name should be spelled as they spell it. What does she spell it as?

In high school I got in an argument with a teacher over the pronunciation of "Rio Grande". Since I was taking Spanish, I knew that it should be pronounced "R-e-o Gr-ah-n-day". She argued it should be pronounced "R-e-o Grand". Well, that's just ridiculous in my view. If you're talking to a national, how can they understand you if you don't pronounce it as the locals pronounce it? Why "Americanize" it other than racism or nationalism? I can see Americanizing a word that is extremely hard to pronounce in the native language. It's like some Asian immigrants change their names to an Americanized one because they know it will be a problem for Americans to pronounce - and more likely butcher - their name.

The bottom line is that Olena is her Ukrainian name and Elena is a Russianized or Americanized version.

By the way, that page you referenced had this:
name in native language
Олена Володимирівна Зеленська (Ukrainian)

Wikipedia also has this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olena

Olena
Olena, Olenna (Ukrainian: Олена) is a Ukrainian variant of the feminine name Helen. It is of Greek origin and means "sun ray" or "shining light". Variants of the name Olena include: Alena, Elena, Jelena, Lena, Lenya, Lenochka, Olinia, Olinija, Olenya, Olinda, Olina, Lina, Olinia, Olenka, Olenochka and Olinija.

So pick one you like! Note that most variants begin with an O, not an E.

And I think we've beaten this off-topic to death. :-)

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 7:07 utc | 166

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 7:04 utc | 162
"I am not convinced about how Europe could recover after having made the wrong geopolitical decision. Europe as it is now cannot afford to work with artificially increased energy expenses unless it would protect its interior market against the rest of the world. How could it export then to those markets?"

I did say it might take a couple decades to recover. First, they obviously have to set up the infrastructure to handle LNG from the US and elsewhere (at high prices compared to Russian oil.) Beyond that, they probably should restart their nuclear energy program if they can get the uranium and can ignore the Greens. Where they'll get the money to do so is unclear, however. I wouldn't expect them to even begin this project until the Russia-NATO impasse is resolved (if it is.)

The point is they can get energy from somewhere eventually. There's nothing stopping them. In fact, they have no choice but to do so. At this juncture they might not, but eventually they will be forced to.

As Martyanov says, the issue is always the real economy, which is based on geography. Europe is on the fringes of the geography that produces a "real economy". Russia, China, the Stans, they are the "real economy", the EuroAsian heartland. The EU is going to have to come to terms with that, either by reestablishing relations with Russia and China and/or changing the focus of their entire economy to something other than heavy industry dependent on resources they've cut themselves off from.

But I don't see them staying an agrarian wasteland forever.

"No, the only intelligent solution for Europe now is to leave NATO immediately."

Obviously. But that's not going to happen without a complete change not just of current political leaders but the entire political framework of the existing parties. Not going to happen soon.

The rest of what you say is fine.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 7:19 utc | 167

Live stream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YjjT67x-Uo

Posted by: MarzoD | May 9 2022 7:26 utc | 168

There is an english language live feed of the May 9 parade at here only problem is it is a Telegraph feed with an englander army nato feed who sledges all the gear.

Posted by: Debsisdead | May 9 2022 7:57 utc | 169

Posted by: MallardB | May 9 2022 2:01 utc | 124

...not until they would need it for maximum political "fire for effect." Remember Putin visiting Bush 43 in Texas? IMO, Putin seemed to be navigating as a statesman who "keeps his adversaries closer" and holding an ace card of RF intel about the actual players of 9/11 may require a necessity of silence until such a time when Putin starts talking about Building 7 and naming names. Now, THAT would be something...

Posted by: ERing46Z | May 9 2022 8:03 utc | 170

I keep looking for more information on the alleged capture of Canadian and NATO Lieutenant General Trevor Cadieu but can't find anything. It's been over a week. This is what I've got on the episode.

https://johnplatinumgoss.com/2022/05/09/lieutenant-general-trevor-cadieu-and-azovstal/

Posted by: John Goss | May 9 2022 8:08 utc | 171

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 0:23 utc | 103

""Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe."

That's his conclusion. Is a correct? I believe it separates many posting here; we need to be clear about that. We can disagree, but we ought to state the problem in those exact terms. Is Streek correct?"

Not correct.
Russia is an 11 timezone spanning superpower, commodity powerhouse - a bread basket.
Europe is an empty basket case rattling around in the back seat of the Empire of Lies overpriced Hummer.

Posted by: Scorpion | May 9 2022 8:08 utc | 172

There is one May 9 Victory parade that stands head & shoulders above all others May 9 1945 Watch out for Marshall Georgi Zhukov galloping on his white charger - magnificent.

Posted by: Debsisdead | May 9 2022 8:15 utc | 173

JC. (80).

Could be the reason the Canadian PM sneaked into Ukraine yesterday, as did Biden's wife, maybe after all the foreign officers are captured more heads of state will sneak into Ukraine to try and plea bargain for their officers.


"Canadian Prime Minister Justine Trudeau has visited the city of Irpen in the Kiev region, the city’s mayor, Alexander Markushin, wrote on his Telegram channel on Sunday.

"I have just had the honor to speak with Canadian Prime Minister Justine Trudeau. He has arrived in Irpen," he wrote and thanked the Canadian prime minister "for the support Canada is offering to Ukraine."

He also expressed the hope that Trudeau will help "organize the efforts of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada to restore infrastructure facilities in Irpen." In his words, the city authorities will soon issue corresponding official letters."


Posted by: Republicofscotland | May 9 2022 8:28 utc | 174

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 1:26 utc | 117

Brilliant, thank you.

Posted by: anon2020 | May 9 2022 8:36 utc | 175

I think we might all be missing something here.

What if the Empire has already acknowledged that it is yesterday's hegemon?

Am beginning to suspect that this kinetic kerfuffle in Ukraine is an attempt by the current globalist element of the US-dominating 1% to have skin in the emerging new Eurasian-World Order game. A Mafia-style security shakedown:'if you want security, you better pay us to go away in Ukraine otherwise we'll never let know a moment of peace.'

A deal may be going down, and the current conflict is simply a bargaining gambit. When everything settles, Ukraine is going to be an entirely different place most likely run by by that globalist 1% faction who will be moving their base out of US/City/Zurich/TelAviv and into Eurasia proper, with Ukraine as their main portal to the East.

A new digital currency system is now in the works, most likely an international one, featuring universal digital ID and social credit monitoring. So maybe the current fight is over who gets to control it similar to how the past couple of centuries the power has been in who gets to control national credit issuance via the central banking systems which are about to be replaced, seemingly.

On some level there may well be multipolarity versus 'there can be only one' US Dollar system hegemony; but on another level there will be some form of digital techno-fascist centralization mechanisms in the mix so that all these things can function seamlessly in cyberspace which is a universal, transnational and thus highly centralizing medium. So perhaps all this is about who gets to run the new globally seamless digital money system.

Maybe they are saying to Russia-China: 'look, let us run this new system, at least in the West if not world wide; otherwise we will keep fomenting war on your western flank and ensure that our side won't join your side so you can kiss goodbye all your plans for a peaceful Eurasian rise since we have the power - as you can plainly see - to keep the threat of escalation in play for as long as we like and hijack the minds of all your and our peoples accordingly. And look: we also have the power to deliver the West to you on a platter: in another year or so they will be on the verge of collapse; we control them. So give us Ukraine as our new base and we can all be one big happy family.'

This globalist part of the 1% love running key systems (like the current central bank credit cartel) and thereby controlling populations. It's what they do.

Posted by: Scorpion | May 9 2022 8:52 utc | 176

somewhere in all the gossip of daily battles over one trench or another people have forgotten putins words that nato will rereat to the 1997 borders . keep the long game in mind when reading western msm articles about russia running out of missiles or fuel.

Posted by: hankster | May 9 2022 9:08 utc | 177

Scorpion | May 9 2022 8:52 utc | 173

At least this „concept“ would fit to the facts as we can know them by now. - A glocal debt reset done so that the present international elite, whoever belongs to it, would recover the control grip they have now over this world. As these bad people never ever work with publicly announced meetings, viewable decision and propoer public documentations of their decision we are bound to spend the rest of our lives in researching each day: which news are reported facts and which are created narratives for international consumption.

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 9:16 utc | 178

Latest from Jaob Dreisin... He's seems fairly convinced the Polish incursion is going to happen...

Military Developments Over the Weekend
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/05/08/military-developments-over-the-weekend/

As I have written, the probability of tactical nuclear weapons being used inside the Ukraine, goes from precisely zero point zero zero, to “something”, if a NATO country army or armies become involved openly, directly inside the Ukraine.

Of course, use of tactical nuclear weapons may lead to the use of strategic nuclear weapons.

I trust that all readers are prepared to die for the Ukraine.

RSH

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 9:27 utc | 179

"...Very likely, what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe..."

This statement is the wrong way around.

The US gains nothing from holding Europe captive but loses EVERYTHING from losing Europe. Largest EU trading partner is China. Trains run from Shanghai and Wuhan into Germany every week carrying laptops and other goods across Russia. It is far faster than by ship.

That is now halted.

That is the whole purpose of the Ukraine War. Now China intends to use Mariupol as a port at the end of the train line and avoid Malucca Straits and Suez Canal.

Merkel signed an Investment Treaty with China during German presidency of European Council and US was incandescent under Trump. Conte as PM in Italy signed wide-ranging treaties with China including Yellow Brick Road Treaty -

US watched its colonies slipping away.

Posted by: Paul Greenwood | May 9 2022 9:34 utc | 180

Let us look at the bigger picture and not be bogged down by particulars. In the above discussions about the Streeck article there is a lot of discussion. But absent are the long term goals.US has no interest in using the EU for its economic or other purposes, merely as an extension and as a buffer. The Question is that of ideologies. The EU and the US belong to the same ideology of pirate rentier capitalism. The old Marxian exploitative capitalism whereby the capitalist owns the means of production in order to make goods is no longer needed, it is about the control of money and of making lots of it by controlling money flow. In this way Russia ideologically belongs more to this school of thinking than to communist China. The current grouping of US and EU vs China and Russia is therefore on the Russia China side not ideological but that of convenience and potentially unstable in the long term. The real battle is that over Russia itself. The golden days of the empire was the Yeltsin years when Russia was brought to its knees , converted to the worst form of capitalism and compliant with the west. The two stage regime change in the Ukraine has been more successful in transforming Ukraine to a complete dependency on the west and even with a considerable undeclared NATO presence and capabilities.
Russia is a vast country with rich resources but is relatively underpopulated and with a population of 150 million is comes as 9th in world order. It is unlikely that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.
In precipitating the current crisis, it is clear that the empire has its sights on no less than regime change in Russia and nothing less will be acceptable.
I am sorry if I did not express my thoughts clearly but I feel that these questions lie at the heart of the current dilemma that many who profess to be on the left do not really address with clarity.

Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 181

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 7:07 utc | 163

Sadly you missed the point in my original reply, by law in Ukraine no-one can officially use Elena - it has to be Olena. I know because my former Ukrainian girlfriend is called Elena, yet when she changed her national passport for an international biometric passport (they operate with national and international passports in Ukraine, the latter gradually replacing the former) her official name was changed to Olena. She had no choice and her complaint was dismissed.

As to Wikipedia, they have removed most Russian references in Ukrainian articles.

For me it will be Kiev, Lvov, Kirovograd (not Kropyvnytskyi and still in Kirovograd Oblast) and Elena (which despite your initial comment on the matter, is not wrong).

Enough said, just a reflection of "democratic" Ukraine :-/

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 9:56 utc | 182

General mobilization in Russia.

Not clear to me what this means. Don't think It means everyone puts on a uniform and gets sent to the front. Does anyone here know? Sounds ominous.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 9 2022 10:01 utc | 183

Interesting reporting on the May 9 celebrations according to Sky News and Yahoo! (referring back to Sky).

Sky News is quite neutral and balanced until about half-way through its report here.

Yahoo! reposts the Sky News article but leaves out the negative second half here.

I was quite cheered up by the Yahoo! version until I went and found the original. Maybe, just maybe, it signals a minor shift in western reporting.

Please don't patronise me by saying that what the UK media reports is not important. Of course it isn't in the grand scheme of things. But we "insane, Putin-loving war-mongerers" have to take what small crumbs of comfort we can find.

Posted by: echelon | May 9 2022 10:13 utc | 184

#--Posted by: aquadraht | May 8 2022 16:21 utc | 27

I wouldn't be sure either, if my survival strategy was using civilian hostages.

Posted by: Anne B | May 9 2022 10:17 utc | 185

Sky News. = Comcast

Do you understand that Sky TV is owned by Comcast which also owns NBC ?

Posted by: Paul Greenwood | May 9 2022 10:20 utc | 186

Link from TheSacker: https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1p/k1pvngjn8e (original site: https://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-yeah-we-have-some-big-deals/)

There was a very interesting revealing of how Reuters is manipulating with facts.

Natalia Usmanova was interviewed almost 2 minutes by a journalist where Reuters only showed 1min including a framing that Russia caused damage and agony and that she is so terrified.

When you listen to everything she said, she calls out the Asov as the bad guys.

A very good example on how western media is manipulating the facts supporting a certain narrative.

Posted by: Rasta | May 9 2022 10:22 utc | 187

Re: Posted by: One Too Many | May 9 2022 6:37 utc | 159

Why yes - the G7/EU are the ones announcing they will ban the import of Russian oil/oil products and eventually gas - the blame is ALREADY ON THEM.

If Russia turns around and cuts them off a few months early - it is obviously directly related to the actions of the EU in cutting them off in the first place.

A few months gains Russia nothing except a few shekels. It won't gain them any "plaudits" in the West.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 10:26 utc | 188

Re: Posted by: ERing46Z | May 9 2022 8:03 utc | 167

Naming names?

Like George Bush Sr? DEAD.
Like Donald Rumsfeld? DEAD.

Like several others - probably DEAD as well.

If they were going to expose 9/11 - they would have done so by now - there is not much utility to exposing something in which many major participants are now DEAD.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 10:30 utc | 189

Posted by: Rasta | May 9 2022 10:22 utc | 184
Der Spiegel removed it, there is only one version of events allowed in MSM :-/

The 2 minute video...

Her statement about Ukraine as a state being dead to her, is strong.

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 10:36 utc | 190

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 9:56 utc | 179

In other words, you're saying that without Ukrainian law, Olena would become Elena? I think not. She is Ukrainian, not Russian. She would use the Ukrainian spelling, regardless of the law. most likely. As for trying to say Wikipedia just removed the reference, I think not, since they didn't. They listed Elena as an option for Olena.

Fail.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:39 utc | 191

Posted by: Paul Greenwood | May 9 2022 9:34 utc | 177
"The US gains nothing from holding Europe captive but loses EVERYTHING from losing Europe....US watched its colonies slipping away.:

Yes, the latter is a good point. The former follows from the latter. The US gains from not losing its colonies and by being able to bleed them dry - which is the whole point of colonies.

RSH

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:42 utc | 192

Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 178

Yes, the US wants Russian resources. By cutting the EU off from Russia, and starting a war between NATO and Russia, the US hoped to weaken Russia, cause regime change and put everything back to the 1990's. Of course, that isn't going to happen. The secondary goal with regards to the EU is to weaken the EU, prevent it from drifting into Russia and China's orbit, and then bleeding it dry like every other colony.

In other words, the US wants Russia as a colony, and it wants the EU as a colony. In general, it wants every nation as a colony. Fortunately that ultimate goal is not going to happen, and neither will Russia become a colony. The EU is much more likely to be a "success" in that regard depending on how one determines what is a "success".

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:48 utc | 193

#--Posted by: Mark Mosby | May 8 2022 17:16 utc | 38

Can anyone provide a more reasonable, and reasoned, answer? This month? This summer? By the end of this year?

Why do you need a time-line? And how do you think it will help you?

Posted by: Anne B | May 9 2022 10:52 utc | 194

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 10:26 utc | 185

A "few shekels? $66 billion in two months is not "a few shekels". Listen to yourself.

Russia Nearly Doubled Its Income From Energy Sales To The EU During Wartime, Study Shows
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-energy-sales-europe-doubled-study/31825742.html

New research by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) released on April 28 shows that Russia has nearly doubled its revenues from sales of fossil fuels to the EU during the two months of war in Ukraine.

Soaring prices have more than compensated Russia for the loss in sales volume due to sanctions, the research shows.

Researchers at CREA also say new sanctions promise to drive up prices even more, nullifying efforts to prevent Russian President Vladimir Putin from using energy to pressure the EU and to finance the war against Ukraine.

Since the start of the war, Russia has sold 46 billion euros worth of energy resources to the European Union, and the figure continues to rise. This is about twice as much as the amount of sales in the same period in 2021,according to CREA.

Even though there was a decline in the volume of sales, the increase in the price of oil brought Moscow about 63 billion euros ($66 billion) on the energy exported on ships and through pipelines since the invasion was launched on February 24.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:57 utc | 195

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:39 utc | 188

Oh wow, not what I said - Elena is today a name not allowed for official use in Ukraine. Mrs. Zelenskaya may well have been given Olena, though unlikely - considering she was born in the Soviet Union when Russian was dominant, as was Elena over Olena. Her husband was primarily a Russian speaker, struggling with Ukrainian until he became President - just as an example to the preference for Russian until recently. I coped very nicely in Ukraine with my Russian, just the rare individual correcting it to Ukrainian.

My reason for replying to you was your adamant correction to the poster who used Elena and Elena is still not wrong. Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source in the current geopolitical atmosphere.

I will let you get the final comment on this, - no doubt being important to you - as I have nothing further to say on the matter ;-)

Good luck CharlesLutherThanos :-)

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 11:00 utc | 196

#--Posted by: bevin | May 8 2022 19:03 utc | 52

This should wash the taste of Bono out:


It did - thank you.

Posted by: Anne B | May 9 2022 11:08 utc | 197

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 11:00 utc | 193
"considering she was born in the Soviet Union when Russian was dominant, as was Elena over Olena."

Olena Kiyashko was born in Kryvyi Rih, which is in Ukraine, in 1978. Yes, she was under Soviet rule at the time and Elena might have been forced on her then, even by her father.

But she is Ukrainian and clearly adopted Olena subsequently. I see no evidence this was forced by law. Without evidence of a reference to her as "Elena" prior to the dissolution of the USSR, we apparently have no information to suggest otherwise.

What her husband spoke or anyone else for that matter is irrelevant to the issue of this single individual's name. Which is not Elena now, regardless of what it may have been under other conditions.

"Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source in the current geopolitical atmosphere."

Ah, yes, the old saw: "You can't trust Wikipedia" - when Wikipedia proves someone wrong. Not to mention I already said Wikipedia allows for Elena, and it's Eastern Slavic Naming Conventions article also does.

"I have nothing further to say on the matter ;-)"

Neither do I, as I said before, this off-topic issue has been done to death. Whatever the woman's name was before, it is now Olena, not Elena - unless one wants to be confusing.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 11:19 utc | 198

It is unlikely that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.
I feel that these questions lie at the heart of the current dilemma that many who profess to be on the left do not really address with clarity.

Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 178

I don't know how you can say its "unlikely" that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.

I just watched a great video that I think someone here posted of Putin in an RT interview from many years ago, explaining that the difference in ideology between Russia and the US, is that the US is based on the primacy of the individual, where as Russian culture and society is based on the welfare of the collective. You could feel his genuine appreciation and respect for Russian culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JVR0zAiyw0&t=9s

So the ties between Russia and China run deeper than westerners can appreciate with our dog eat dog phosophy. They are both very old collectivist societies, Russia has been communist before and is witnessing the absolute decadence and depravity of the liberal capitalist system breaking down before their eyes.
Meanwhile China is rising, dignity and culture intact and not by raping and pillaging other countries. China is not demanding that Russia change its ideology, that's a point that westerners do not understand and can't accept, China doesn't historically, politically or culturally want or need to dominate the world. Neither does Russia, so they are actually a very good match.
I would suggest that Russia has its eyes wide open to all of this and not being naive or stupid will honor their commitment and friendship with China.
Of course this incorporates trade and defence issues, but i think its a serious mistake to presume that either China or Russia made their alliance based solely or even primarily on $$$

Also your statement "The old Marxian exploitative capitalism whereby the capitalist owns the means of production in order to make goods is no longer needed" doesn't make sense since Marx wrote about the workers owning the means of production not the capitalists, so I'm not sure what you meant by this.

As to leftists addressing this issue with clarity there are many eloquent socialist/marxist leftists on this blog who regularly post excellent commentary. From my perspective even though Russia is not currently communist, they also aren't imperialist or colonial so less like the US and UK, I have no expertise to make predictions but my hunch is that Russia will become more of a conservative socialist democracy perhaps in a unique way that has not been done before.

I hope that gives you a perspective that might be worth considering..

Posted by: K | May 9 2022 11:36 utc | 199

Julian @186

There is not much utility to exposing something in which many major participants are now DEAD.

Nonsense. There is always benefit in identifying the truth, if only to discourage similar events in the future. Just imagine if legal due process had been allowed in the Kennedy assassination. We might have avoided many destructive events in the following years.

Posted by: echelon | May 9 2022 11:37 utc | 200

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.