Re: Ukrainian Refugees
Their arrogance and bad manners are beginning to exhaust the patience of even the most accepting social-Democrat type of German. There is also a certain undertone from these Ukrainians of milking the system which drives regular Germans absolutely bonkers.
Back during the ‘15-‘16 wave of ‘darkie’ refugees, Germans would remark that they-couldn’t-be-true-poverty-stricken-refugees since they all had smart-phones. these refugees worn threadbare clothes and old sneakers.
On the other hand; one can just imagine what hard working Germans think of Ukie refugees all decked out in the latest designer fashions, plenty of bling, 300€ sunglasses, idly lounging in restaurants and beer gardens. Zero evidence of even contemplating getting a job. Why work when the German taxpayer funds everything ?
Imagine it’s similar throughout Europe.

Posted by: Exile | Jun 20 2023 7:54 utc | 203

The most important news in June
1) counter-offensive has indeed been spectacular – flop-wise
2) the Nato is having the largest exercise you never heard of
3) Putin leaked the peace deal Ukies had initialled and told that BoJo torpedoed it
Bonus: nobody is leading the offensive, apart from the nobodies in Nato
what else?

Posted by: Jonathan W | Jun 20 2023 7:59 utc | 205

The real oligarchy that rules America has pulled the strings on their neocons attack dogs. The Russian asset lust is over (for now), and survival mode is the new game.
Posted by: Suresh | Jun 20 2023 7:17 utc | 193
Ah that could explain RFK for president.

Posted by: K | Jun 20 2023 8:08 utc | 207

unimperator @ 202

Stoltenburger said Nato arsenals of wunderwaffen are devastated (literally).

Here we go again, sorry to reiterate, why would someone running out of weapons and ammo in the middle of a heated battle announce they are running out of ammo???

Posted by: LightYearsFromHome | Jun 20 2023 8:25 utc | 209

The Chinese peace initiative, African peace initiative etc are to show the world, even those in the EU/NATO that Zelensky gang, Biden gang, the EU gang etc doesn’t want peace in the Ukraine or anywhere.
Other few turncoats, most of the Asian, African and Central and South Americans are against the US, Britain and NATO.

Posted by: ostro | Jun 20 2023 8:29 utc | 211

joeZay @ 208

Mercouris strikes me as gay.

He has a wife a kids not that that means anything. Most well educated English toffs come across as gay, 1000 years of inbreeding on a tiny island leads to strange outcomes, just look at dwarf elephants and homo floresiensis.

Posted by: LightYearsFromHome | Jun 20 2023 8:33 utc | 213

Night Tripper @ 204
I think Ukraine has more than suffered enough as US & Englands speacial freand, don’t you ?
Let the polluter pay. In every sense of the word pay.

Posted by: Mark2 | Jun 20 2023 8:34 utc | 215

Mercouris, of course, as others have mentioned here, is a peacenik who assumes everything Putin does is straight-forward and above-board. I am not so naive. He assumes that everything Putin says is just that and nothing more – there is nothing hidden or unstated. A lot of people here seem to believe that, too, which is why they’re always quoting Putin’s speeches about “de-militarization” and “de-Nazification” and protecting the residents of Donbass as if that is the only thing Putin was concerned about, when we know full well that his primary concern is NATO and the strategic installations in Poland and Romania.
Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jun 20 2023 8:28 utc | 210
—————
Only Putin didn’t mention about the demilitarisation of the NATO, or at least the nearest countries, 3 Baltics, Poland, Romania and even Finland, also Bulgaria. Other than a few nazified citizens of those countries, and some noisy politicos, the rest won’t go to fight Russia. They knew what happened before with the USSR, much weaker country than today’s Russia.
Yes, Putin’s primary concern is NATO…and to defeat it, militarily and economically. So, the SMO will continue, even after the Ukraine capitulation.
Like I said before, Kiev is built by the Russians, the Ukraine by the Soviets, usually know in the ‘west’ as Russians. So, the Russians will like preserve it for those who will live there later, but the capitols and the bases in the NATO countries are not emotionally connected. They can simply be destroyed, if push comes to shove.

Posted by: ostro | Jun 20 2023 8:42 utc | 217

They need to beat AFU in the open fields
unimperator | Jun 20 2023 7:50 utc | 202
They can win against the army. It may take a few years since they use a highly outnumbered army. Then, if everything else is left as it is today, the next attack is guaranteed in only a few months, at most a year later and terrorism all day long. No need for 100k soldiers to shoot a few missiles or to explode another dam or pipe. The last smo day should have been the day negotiations were rejected by nato puppets, when the deal was broken and replaced with Bucha fakes and plans for dirty bombs. It seems the great generals from Russia were not prepared for any outcome other than surrender, so they continue the weak smo even today, still inside what is Russia now. At least Putin is talking about a buffer zone. it remains to be seen if they do it or when.

Posted by: rk | Jun 20 2023 8:58 utc | 219

Ghost of Zanon @ 121

I doubt any purge of the Pentagon or, more importantly, the State Dept. is coming. These folks have all mastered the art of “failing upward.” Nuland in particular will still be there with her shit-eating grin even if Russian tanks roll through Lisbon.

There are always fists in pockets and knives behind curtains waiting for a sign of weakness.
Whether it’ll be a putsch for the better or something even worse that’s the question.

Posted by: LightYearsFromHome | Jun 20 2023 9:06 utc | 221

@ Richard Steven Hack | Jun 20 2023 0:08 utc | 140
My gut tells me Ru does a lot for sake of credibility with RoW — never because they’re stupid or were fooled — and would consider it an unlikely but welcome bonus if the opposing belligerents start doing the right thing for once.
The more those belligerents do the wrong thing, the more they prove to everyone else that Ru must take all of the borderland. For instance, the more the tards fuck around from Odessa and screw up grain exports to RoW, the more it proves to the hungry Row that Ru must take Odessa.
Also, thanks for posting a lot of good stuff lately (excerpts from lavrov, putin q&a, plus your own thoughts).

Posted by: natokraine | Jun 20 2023 9:15 utc | 223

So Mercouris is now the enemy?

Posted by: Jonathan W | Jun 20 2023 9:19 utc | 225

makes a point I’ve been making for a long time: Russia did not spend the 2014-22 period preparing for war. This also means that the MENSA candidates who keep making excuses for Putin not crushing the nazis in 2014 are talking through their hats. As usual.
Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Jun 20 2023 3:05 utc | 169
In a way, Russia did. They did not have hypersonic rockets back in 2014. Those weapons were still in development. The first successful tests were done in 2017 – or was that 2019? They were most certainly not in mass production.
They did not have their own payment system in place, either. They started developing that after US threats to cut Russian banks off from SWIFT back in 2014.
In addition, Russia started hardening its economy. Remember how Russia decided to reply to EU sanctions back then? Russia counter sanctioned cheese from EU. Most of the West laughed. The Baltic states howled. They lost the market for their cheese products. Those sanctions strengthened internal Russian milk and cheese production.
On one hand, Russia might have had less trouble defeating Ukraine back then. On the other hand, EU and US sanctions might have had much worse effects inside Russia than they have today.
But then, what do I know. I am just a MENSA candidate. And a failed one, at that.
You occasionally make good points. It’s a shame you then have to go, and insult people who don’t agree with you.

Posted by: Martina | Jun 20 2023 9:30 utc | 227

So Mercouris is now the enemy?
Posted by: Jonathan W | Jun 20 2023 9:19 utc | 225
Anyone who doesnt agree with RSH is either “a fool” or the enemy, haven’t you noticed. Fascinating study in self obsession that RSH telgraphs here the disputes he’s having with other pundits on other sites, and then copies them back here to seek further argument, support and self-validation. I’m sure this will go on until he is proven “right”.

Posted by: The Dolphin | Jun 20 2023 9:38 utc | 229

Jonathan W @ 225

So Mercouris is now the enemy?

No hate from me, learned a ton from the guy, I just saw an opportunity to shit on the English upper class and took it. But Mercouris, unlike Christoforou does suffer from the brevity is the soul of wit problem, it’s a youtube monetizing thing I figure.
Only very odd cloudiness in Mercouris’s otherwise clear headedness is his reverence for Trump who is a born hustler, a rich fool, a daddy’s boy, and proven spineless. From day one of his administration, even before when he “selected” Pence, he let them walked all over him, from every direction, six ways to Sunday, he never had a chance but he put up no fight whatsoever. He’ll always take the easy way out, that’s not what we need on the right or left.

Posted by: LightYearsFromHome | Jun 20 2023 9:50 utc | 231

[210]
Mercouris, of course, as others have mentioned here, is a peacenik who assumes everything Putin does is straight-forward and above-board. I am not so naive.
No but you are incredibly bumptious !
Mercouris is neither “peacenik” nor “warmonger” – he is from a renowned Greek political family resident in London where he suffered a nervous breakdown as a barrister. He is overly cautious in what he says careful not to incur the wrath of the London regime……….he is often overly wordy – but I have no doubt he has a preference for non-war……..many people do………..some we know on this thread get frissons of excitement at the thought of other men being dismembered while they sit agitating their keyboard – we call them “Vickie” Nuland……..

Posted by: Paul Greenwood | Jun 20 2023 9:52 utc | 233

Perhaps another important factor was getting the Rest of the World on board. Perhaps this was something for which Putin felt it necessary to show extraordinary restraint and generosity (perhaps expecting it to be refused). Certainly whatever he did seems to have worked.
Posted by: Tim | Jun 20 2023 9:27 utc | 226
I concur. A major motive in Putin, his party, the Duma, his ministers, is to present Russia as a fair and decent actor on the world stage. Lavrov and Zakharova and Pescov do that frequently. They highlight and mock the insanities of the West. Thus, whilst the US is making enemies and earning distrust, Russia is making friends and earning the trust of the RotW. Gradually, and eventually, Russia will come to appear as a most level-headed world power. This, imo, is precisely why he has not *and will not* make radical, tumultuous, rash decisions and actions. He’s building long term credibility … even to those “unfriendly” countries like Germany. He’s not being vindictive or fully burning bridges because, I think, he believes in national redemption and the potential of long future partnerships. It wouldn’t surprise me if he doesn’t envisage Nordstream one day being resurected with/for the Germans.

Posted by: The Dolphin | Jun 20 2023 9:59 utc | 235

Posted by: Engineer-John | Jun 20 2023 8:36 utc | 216
A contingent of Ukrainian SS came to Britain post-war – perhaps the people in your town in the 60s had some connection to them?
https://youtu.be/UB_Gs-0dhOo

Posted by: Night Tripper | Jun 20 2023 10:12 utc | 237

I’m only criticizing Mercouris for very few things: 1) wordiness; 2) an over-emphasis on negotiations which blinds him to other possible outcomes; 3) an inability to comprehend why Ukraine is doing what it’s doing – he’s constantly wondering why when it’s fairly obvious; and 4) he sometimes extends his military speculations past his expertise, despite claiming he has none.
Other than that, he’s invariably correct in his analyses on both economics and foreign policy, which is why I watched him regularly since 2021 – until he got too wordy in the last few months. And I still watch him on The Duran, which, as I said earlier, takes half the time. 🙂
My current issue with him is he ascribes far too much importance to the March-April, 2022, negotiations. He believes this was a pivotal chance to end the war.
I don’t – for reasons I’ve stated to which he appears to have a completely different interpretation. It’s that simple. Either one of us could be wrong, but I think while he relies pretty much purely on Putin’s statements and his speculations about the events and the reasons for them, I rely on the Big Picture of Russia’s security concerns and on Putin’s statements which I believe have greater import than the ones he cites. So I think on balance I am correct both in the early days of the war and especially now.
I also rely on what I believe would be Gerasimov’s response to Putin when Putin inevitably asked what Russia could do about those Aegis Ashore installations and NATO in general. There are only two options to that: 1) a unilateral strike – which Putin wouldn’t do, and 2) find a way to get Russian defenses next to those installations – which means take Ukraine off the board and put Russian defenses on the Polish border – which also has the advantage of solving the general problem of Ukraine, NATO in Ukraine, Ukraine’s Nazis, and the Donbass question all in one fell swoop.
And I find it hard to believe Putin, Shoigu, Gerasimov and Lavrov didn’t see that well in advance of February, 2022. Sure, they tried the diplomatic approach as well all through 2021 – which I’m sure Putin and Lavrov insisted upon. But I’m also sure Putin didn’t rely on that approach. And contrary to Mercouris, I don’t think Putin believed negotiations in the first month of the war was going to solve anything in that regard.
At this point, it’s irrelevant. That was then and now is now. We’ll see what the outcome is – either a Military District in western Ukraine or WWIII. I don’t see a valid third option.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jun 20 2023 10:36 utc | 239

“The use of these missiles outside the zone of the special military operation will mean the full involvement of the United States and Great Britain in the conflict and will entail immediate strikes on decision-making centers on the territory of Ukraine,” the minister stressed.”
Posted by: Republicofscotland | Jun 20 2023 9:52 utc | 232
nato will want to do it even more. Shoigu gave them, in the most public way, guarantees they won’t be punished for anything. In his next speech, after the attack, he’ll say “if you nuke us, we’ll nuke Ukr!”
@Republicofscotland | Jun 20 2023 9:42 utc | 230
The idea that bombers can fly from UK, or anywhere else, and drop nukes on Russia is as hilarious as listening to a general on CNN. Those bombers may drop a few on Finlandesians or Polandesians just to say evil Putin did it, but across the border is just comedy.

Posted by: rk | Jun 20 2023 10:43 utc | 241

Posted by: Republicofscotland | Jun 20 2023 9:52 utc | 232
They’ve been striking “decision centers” in Ukraine for weeks now. If he means attacking the “centers” where NATO personnel are, then that would be an upgrade, assuming they haven’t already done so on occasion as some have suggested. But Russia still shows absolutely zero signs of being willing to conduct any operations against NATO outside the borders of Ukraine, and I expect that to remain.
As I argued earlier in the thread, even the flying of F-16s from Poland is unlikely to result in a strike there, as long as the Russians have no reason to suspect the planes carry nukes – and frankly I consider that extremely unlikely – and I suspect so do the Russians – even with the neocons involved. The Pentagon would seriously push back on that because any such action would immediately trigger a Russian retaliation that, whether or not it involved nukes, would indeed result in strikes on NATO territory and WWIII.
There’s next to no chance the US will use nukes in Ukraine any time soon. I wouldn’t be so cavalier as to suggest the US would never do so, but the situation isn’t nearly dire enough for the Pentagon to go along with that. While most of the generals are morons, some of the lower officers do remember that Russia is a fully-armed nuclear nation with hypersonic and ICBM missiles with nuclear warheads which the US can not intercept on its best day.
As someone once said, death does tend to concentrate the mind.
What is far more likely is some idiotic attempt to “finesse” a conventional NATO incursion into Ukraine. Only once that is annihilated is it conceivable that the US would consider using tactical nukes in an attempt to “stem the bleeding”. Russia will be aware and will forestall that with the appropriate warnings and possibly a demonstration. That’s when things could get really dangerous.
Anything is possible but we’re not close to that yet. Check back at end of summer or fall when Ukraine is on its last legs and the Russian offensive is moving to the Dnieper or beyond.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jun 20 2023 10:52 utc | 243

Gilbert Doctorow didn’t say the Russians would use nukes against the NATO airbase that F-16s would launch from. Doctorow just reported that the Russians said they would use nukes.
True, the Russians don’t necessarily need to use nukes to destroy a hardened target like a NATO airbase. They could use all of their hypersonic missiles, of which their current production capacity is about two per month. If they hold off on using kinzhals for a few months then they can stock up a half a dozen of them, each of which could take out a command bunker or hardened hangar, and then use regular missiles to rough up the runways and destroy regular maintenance sheds and such. There would still be some hardened hangars and bunkers untouched in such an attack on a base like Ramstein, but oh well, you can’t have everything.
But why should the Russians waste expensive and sparse ordinance instead of a single cheap nuke to destroy Ramstein other than to avoid offending a bunch of delusional faggots in the West? Furthermore, every single one of you who asserts “The Russians would never use nukes!” is part and parcel of the reason why the Russians absolutely must use nukes. That infantile delusion must be destroyed before the Empire of Delusions salami-slice escalates its way to a full, civilization-ending exchange. I mean, here we are at the whiskey bar filled with more sober geopolitical realists than all of the imperial think tanks and national capitals of the West combined, and even here the childish delusion that nukes are unthinkable rules. Does anyone here really imagine the “diverse”, incompetent asshats running the Empire are more hardcore realists than you? Nonsense!
The Russians would be foolish sentimentalists to not use nuclear devices against any NATO targets outside the Ukraine that were involved in the first unambiguous military actions in the war. Failure to do so just invites the salami-slicing to continue.
Sure, de-dollarization will destroy the Empire, but will that proceed far enough to paralyze the Empire in the next year or two? Unlikely, and until then we remain in the Thucydides Trap, and it is one where Russia isn’t even the prime target of the Empire. Russia is just an impediment to taking down China. So long as we remain in that trap, nuclear war is a 100% certainty.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 20 2023 11:33 utc | 245

joeZay @208: “Mercouris strikes me as gay.”
Nah, he’s just British. They all sound more or less like that.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 20 2023 11:42 utc | 247

Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 20 2023 11:33 utc | 244
Apparently you’ve forgotten the US Trident missile subs…
Putin is not going to use nukes first. Period. End of story. If a single or small number of nukes are used against Russian forces tactically, Russia will respond tactically – with hypersonics on the command-and-control, whether nuclear or conventional, and then on “decision centers” if the US doesn’t stand down.
Then we have WWIII. Your notion that the US will simply back down is not worth the risk. This is the kind of nonsense which Putin explicitly derided recently when he said that discussion of this sort enables the slippery slope toward using nukes. Every time you argue that Russia should use nukes first entice the US to use nukes first. Putin is quite correct on that score.
In any event, as I said, he’s not listening to you, so your opinion is irrelevant.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Jun 20 2023 12:45 utc | 249

Richard Steven Hack @249
It is already US policy to use nukes as the response if key military assets (major airbases, aircraft carriers, etc) are destroyed, regardless of how they were destroyed. This is the only defense US aircraft carriers have against modern near-peer adversaries, for example. America has this policy because its population and its leaders believe themselves to be exceptional and above their own “rules-based order”. This is because we all know America will use their nukes humanely and righteously, and nobody else would “dare” use nukes because that would just be unthinkable.
When the US does use nukes to retaliate for a major base being destroyed they will hit hard with disproportionate force, regardless of what means were used to destroy their base. Not a full-scale nuclear attack, but they would definitely nuke the Kremlin, preferably with Putin present in it. The only way to prevent this is to remove the delusion that “They wouldn’t dare! Not against exceptional America!”.
The only way to avoid this is to break the delusional mindset that it is “unthinkable” for anyone else other than the US to use nukes. That takes a practical example. Words cannot work with the Empire.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 20 2023 13:55 utc | 251

dh @252: “That must be why they get cast as Hollywood villains.”
Villains or comic relief. Americans liked BoJo because he was both.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jun 20 2023 14:10 utc | 253

Finally, it is pretty obvious USA never really wanted Ukraine to win. Slow war is exactly what USA wanted. They just didn’t expect it would be USA/NATO that suffered from endless war while Russia used war an an excuse m/motivation to make long-needed reforms and become stronger. So all Russia needs to do is give USA an off-ramp. Best off-ramp is simply postpone victory until after Nov 2024.
Posted by: Revelo | Jun 20 2023 15:07 utc | 254
The drone idea has real possibilities, surprised nobody thought of it before. I suppose it is the bias in favor of expensive weapons. Drone wars coming soon.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jun 20 2023 15:14 utc | 255

Posted by: badjoke | Jun 19 2023 21:37 utc | 97
«Sorry US planners crammed on the Cliff notes of On War the night before the exam on Adderall and then binge drank that evening to go to sleep. They don’t even remember taking the test let alone what the Cliff notes said./i>»
There is a lot of laughable kremlinista handwaving in comments here, but it is rather well documented that the USA DOD, CIA and their think-tanks have been organizing the Ukraine coups, attack on the Donbas, etc. for many years, rather intelligently and carefully. Of course no strategy or plan is perfect and they have had some mistakes, but it remains that they did their homework with care and competence, and today it is russian cities that are being bombed regularly, not USA (or even just EU) cities. These programs have been going on for many years, and have been quite successful:
https://news.yahoo.com/cia-trained-ukrainian-paramilitaries-may-take-central-role-if-russia-invades-185258008.html
«The CIA is overseeing a secret intensive training program in the U.S. for elite Ukrainian special operations forces and other intelligence personnel, according to five former intelligence and national security officials familiar with the initiative. The program, which started in 2015, is based at an undisclosed facility in the Southern U.S., according to some of those officials […] “The United States is training an insurgency,” said a former CIA official, adding that the program has taught the Ukrainians how “to kill Russians.”»
http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-saker-interviews-dmitry-orlov/
“After some amount of effort by NATO instructors to train the Ukrainians, the instructors gave up. The Ukrainians simply laughed in their faces because it was clear to them that the instructors did not know how to fight at all. It was then decided that the “road map” for Ukraine’s inclusion in NATO should be set aside because the Ukrainians are just too crazy for sedate and sedentary NATO.
The trainers were then replaced with CIA types who simply collected intelligence on how to fight a high-intensity ground war without air support — something that no NATO force would ever consider doing. Under such conditions NATO forces would automatically retreat or, failing that, surrender.”

Posted by: Blissex | Jun 20 2023 20:55 utc | 257

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Jun 19 2023 21:38 utc | 98
«Another strategy that the West announced, and which Russia is familiar with, is the post-Russian victory ‘stay behind,’ terrorist insurgency. […] potential for this insurgency is not just being destroyed but its survivors are very likely to have hard questions for the forces responsible for sending them into meat grinders. Further,»
That to me seems wishful thinking: the people being fed into the meat grinder are apparently not the fanatical fascist militias (which however were ground down in Mariupol), but largely the non-ruthenian/galician minorities of the russian-spoeaking majority.
Anyhow the hard core of fascist militants (“freedom fighters”) will remain in sufficient numbers to cause trouble at least in western Ukraine, it does not take a lot of them to do that.
The goal of phase 3 insurgency (phase 1: invasion of the Donbas, phase 2: grinding down the counter attack by the Donbas and the RF) is not to defeat the RF military, but to be one of the elements to trigger or at least enable (not even cause) regime-change in Moscow through demoralization, maybe over the next 10-20 years.
«for the post-defeat insurgency to work, the European powers will have to have both the will and the resources to remain in a state of war.»
That seems to be a baseless claim: the “Washington consensus” countries have been able to sustain sanctions and support insurgencies for *decades* in the past (see Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, …).
The proxy war in Ukraine is currently costing those countries perhaps 1% of GDP per year in direct costs (5-10% of GDP in sanctions costs for many countries other than the USA), something that they can sustain indefinitely, and 1% of the GDP of the “golden billion” is n absolute terms quite a big sum. A “state of war” would see 40-60% of GDP devoted to war production…
That’s why Putin has repeatedly said that the RF strategy is to build up military capabilities gradually and economically, obviously to sustain the operations in the long term.

Posted by: Blissex | Jun 20 2023 21:10 utc | 259

Posted by: Revelo | Jun 20 2023 15:07 utc | 254
«Finally, it is pretty obvious USA never really wanted Ukraine to win. Slow war is exactly what USA wanted.»
And as bloody as possible: on the russian side to demoralize russian voters and turn them against Putin, on the galician side to create resentment and revenge against “the russians” for generations,
«They just didn’t expect it would be USA/NATO that suffered from endless war»
The USA has greatly benefited from this war: share prices of military contractors and energy rentiers have been booming, for example. The EU countries have been hit had, but they don’t matter, and teaches them a lesson.
«So all Russia needs to do is give USA an off-ramp. Best off-ramp is simply postpone victory until after Nov 2024.»
There will not be an off-ramp until the USA empire goes bankrupt: the USA elites will keep trying to trigger regime-change in Moscow for decades, to gain a chain of DOD/CIA biolabs and bases on the chinese borders, as the PRC is their real target, and the RF (and relatedly Kazahstan) are the biggest buffer states the PRC has.

Posted by: Blissex | Jun 20 2023 21:20 utc | 261