Cal88 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Russian invasion of Afghanistan provided the same benefits, right?

---

That lasted 10 years, and Ukraine is not Afghanistan, it is right on their border, had the strongest military in Europe before the war started, and is populated with a large Russian minority that is being attacked and whose basic rights are being stifled, and afghan jihadis did not send drones to Moscow or blow up St Petersburg restaurants .

Ukraine is a war that could have been entirely averted had Ukraine respected the Minsk Agreements or stayed neutral. Stoltenberg signs that paper as mentioned above, 430,000 Ukrainian soldiers would be alive today, 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers would have not lost their limbs, and Ukraine would still be the largest country in Europe.

There is no question that Ukraine would have been a billion times better off by just giving the Donbass region more autonomy and conceding Crimea, a region populated by Russians that is vital to Russian navy and shipping access. Instead Ukraine was pushed into an unwinnable war, their most radical nationalist nuts who hate Russia for ideological reasons were put into power, with Zelensky as the more palatable face of the Kiev regime.

Russia is stronger militarily today, no question about this. They are however also going to be stronger economically, as they have the BRICS behind them, and have developed a number of key industries (agro-industrial, passenger jets, consumer products, auto and trucks etc ) that they used to rely on imports and foreign countries to produce. As well the sanctions on Russian billionaires and millionaires have also forced this class to repatriate their capital and invest at home:

Truth V Narrative#Russians got richer last year even as the war in Ukraine raged on, while the #US and #Europe lost trillions of dollars, UBS reported.#Russia added $600 billion of total wealth, the Swiss bank found in its annual Global Wealth Report.https://t.co/zgL2trgO3N.

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 27, 2023

Russia sits on $75 TRILLION in natural resources, they are the richest country in the world by far, they have no unemployment, no debt (relative to their much larger gold and currency reserves), and have no need to import goods from the West, anything they cannot produce in the short term can be sourced from China.

Putin is now as popular as he was in the 00s, the Russians having rallied round their flag. He is however coming under increased criticism at home for being too passive and too soft. I think the Russians are going to make their move next year, either in winter or in summer after the Ukrainian military has further degraded in personnel and materiel.

The Russians have the upper hand now. They might settle for a solution with the current borders provided that the rest of Ukraine is neutral and demilitarized. However the Kiev government is still talking about reconquering Crimea and overthrowing Putin. So the carnage will go on for now..

---

[Russia is] the richest country in the world by far

By any metric other than the size of their economy, I suppose.

---

By natural resources.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090516/10-countries-most-natural-resources.asp

---

Unexploited natural resources are a silly metric to use to measure wealth. Maybe if we were in the 16th century. Does anyone think the value of the US lies in how much timber we have? We're not going to cut down all of our forests.

These days the real driver of wealth is innovation in the form of human capital and technology. The minute someone figures out cold fusion or figures out space-based solar no one is going to care about how much oil and natural gas a country has.

Once upon a time controlling the spice trade made countries immensely rich but these days not so much.

RE: human capital, they appear to have few homeless. Are their primary social ills still alcohol and the mafia? How about drug issues?

Russia's natural resources are key to western Europe for at least 2-3 decades, and China has an unquenchable appetite. Putin's pro-family PR moves were great, and I'd hope he went further. They need at least a TFR of 2.1. Build new housing and child care centers for prolific families.

Cold fusion? Probably still decades away, and then decades more for mass production here.

Space-based solar? We can't even make Earth-based solar work w/o massive subsidies. California buys oil-based energy from out of state, still faces blackouts, yet only extended green Diablo Canyon five years. We could put two more nuclear reactors at DC, a desalination plant, and solve many of our utility problems in one already-secure location.

There have to be numerous benefits to having an industrial base, and Russia could eventually take some eroding German industries with their cheap, reliable energy sources and land holdings. I'm not sure how much long-term value we have with social media apps and gadgets at Target manufactured in China.

Russia's natural resources won't matter once we are colonizing Arrakis and, once again, farming spice. He who controls the spice will control the universe.

sycasey said:

---

Afghanistan was on the USSR's border, right? Not that different from Ukraine in that respect.

---

Yeah, there is quite a bit of holdover from the USSR days, but do we really need to point out that the USSR was dissolved 30 years ago? Maybe if our policies had evolved along with Russia, Ukraine wouldn't find itself in its current predicament. The irony is, back then the American Left was constantly downplaying the threat of the actually expansionist, oppressive police state that was the USSR. In light of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and insurgent USSR-backed revolutions all over the world, Putin is a rank amateur.

What changed? Perhaps it was the Left hitching its wagon to the neocon MIC. The didn't like Russians selling their cheap gas to Europe, a liberating boost for both sides. Can't have either the Russians or Europeans getting uppity.

Not Wakanda?

Zippergate said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Afghanistan was on the USSR's border, right? Not that different from Ukraine in that respect.

---

Yeah, there is quite a bit of holdover from the USSR days, but do we really need to point out that the USSR was dissolved 30 years ago? Maybe if our policies had evolved along with Russia, Ukraine wouldn't find itself in its current predicament. The irony is, back then the American Left was constantly downplaying the threat of the actually expansionist, oppressive police state that was the USSR. In light of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and insurgent USSR-backed revolutions all over the world, Putin is a rank amateur.

What changed? Perhaps it was the Left hitching its wagon to the neocon MIC. The didn't like Russians selling their cheap gas to Europe, a liberating boost for both sides. Can't have either the Russians or Europeans getting uppity.

---

And it goes against their green religion.

In my lifetime Putin invaded more countries than the USSR

dimitrig said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

The Russian invasion of Afghanistan provided the same benefits, right?

---

That lasted 10 years, and Ukraine is not Afghanistan, it is right on their border, had the strongest military in Europe before the war started, and is populated with a large Russian minority that is being attacked and whose basic rights are being stifled, and afghan jihadis did not send drones to Moscow or blow up St Petersburg restaurants .

Ukraine is a war that could have been entirely averted had Ukraine respected the Minsk Agreements or stayed neutral. Stoltenberg signs that paper as mentioned above, 430,000 Ukrainian soldiers would be alive today, 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers would have not lost their limbs, and Ukraine would still be the largest country in Europe.

There is no question that Ukraine would have been a billion times better off by just giving the Donbass region more autonomy and conceding Crimea, a region populated by Russians that is vital to Russian navy and shipping access. Instead Ukraine was pushed into an unwinnable war, their most radical nationalist nuts who hate Russia for ideological reasons were put into power, with Zelensky as the more palatable face of the Kiev regime.

Russia is stronger militarily today, no question about this. They are however also going to be stronger economically, as they have the BRICS behind them, and have developed a number of key industries (agro-industrial, passenger jets, consumer products, auto and trucks etc ) that they used to rely on imports and foreign countries to produce. As well the sanctions on Russian billionaires and millionaires have also forced this class to repatriate their capital and invest at home:

Truth V Narrative#Russians got richer last year even as the war in Ukraine raged on, while the #US and #Europe lost trillions of dollars, UBS reported.#Russia added $600 billion of total wealth, the Swiss bank found in its annual Global Wealth Report.https://t.co/zgL2trgO3N.

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 27, 2023

Russia sits on $75 TRILLION in natural resources, they are the richest country in the world by far, they have no unemployment, no debt (relative to their much larger gold and currency reserves), and have no need to import goods from the West, anything they cannot produce in the short term can be sourced from China.

Putin is now as popular as he was in the 00s, the Russians having rallied round their flag. He is however coming under increased criticism at home for being too passive and too soft. I think the Russians are going to make their move next year, either in winter or in summer after the Ukrainian military has further degraded in personnel and materiel.

The Russians have the upper hand now. They might settle for a solution with the current borders provided that the rest of Ukraine is neutral and demilitarized. However the Kiev government is still talking about reconquering Crimea and overthrowing Putin. So the carnage will go on for now..

---

[Russia is] the richest country in the world by far

By any metric other than the size of their economy, I suppose.

---

By natural resources.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090516/10-countries-most-natural-resources.asp

---

Unexploited natural resources are a silly metric to use to measure wealth. Maybe if we were in the 16th century. Does anyone think the value of the US lies in how much timber we have? We're not going to cut down all of our forests.

These days the real driver of wealth is innovation in the form of human capital and technology. The minute someone figures out cold fusion or figures out space-based solar no one is going to care about how much oil and natural gas a country has.

Once upon a time controlling the spice trade made countries immensely rich but these days not so much.

---

Capital and technology without cheap energy won't be enough for countries like Germany, S. Korea and Japan with a large industrial base.

Russia is already the world leader today in fossil fuel production. As a portfolio of natural resources, Russia is nearly twice as rich as the second place US and Saudi Arabia. As well Russia has a large industry tied with these resources, it's not like they don't exploit their resources.

For example, while they only produce 5% of the world's uranium they dominate its transformation, with nearly half of the world's uranium processing and enrichment.

Quote:

---

KEY POINTS

• Russia is a dominant player in global supply chains of nuclear reactor technology, as is detailed by a new paper published Monday from Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy.
• There were 439 nuclear reactors in operation around the globe in 2021, and 38 of them were in Russia, an additional 42 were made with Russian nuclear reactor technology, and 15 more under construction at the end of 2021 were being built with Russian technology.
• Russia owned 40% of the total uranium conversion infrastructure in the world in 2020, and 46% of the total uranium enrichment capacity in the world in 2018, according to the report.

---

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/23/russia-dominates-global-nuclear-reactor-and-fuel-supply-chains.html

That is important in the context of the economic sanctions. You can't sanction the world's leading producer of fossil fuels and nuclear fuels without that blowing back on the world economy. They are also the world's largest exporter of fertilizers and wheat.

Russia has leveraged its position as the world resource leader through BRICS, which is locking in world oil and gas production.

Zippergate said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Afghanistan was on the USSR's border, right? Not that different from Ukraine in that respect.

---

Yeah, there is quite a bit of holdover from the USSR days, but do we really need to point out that the USSR was dissolved 30 years ago?

---

Of course, everyone knows that. Cal88 argued, however, that Ukraine was different because it's "right on their border." By the standards of the time, so was Afghanistan.

Maybe the country's leadership has just always had a heavily imperialist attitude towards its neighbors.

sycasey said:

---

Zippergate said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Afghanistan was on the USSR's border, right? Not that different from Ukraine in that respect.

---

Yeah, there is quite a bit of holdover from the USSR days, but do we really need to point out that the USSR was dissolved 30 years ago?

---

Of course, everyone knows that. Cal88 argued, however, that Ukraine was different because it's "right on their border." By the standards of the time, so was Afghanistan.

Maybe the country's leadership has just always had a heavily imperialist attitude towards its neighbors.

---

⚡️🇺🇸 Woody Harrelson condemns the invasion of… Ukraine pic.twitter.com/nUTfuGHt5o

— What the media hides. (@narrative_hole) September 10, 2023

movielover said:

---

So we're you OK with Russia putting military weapons in Cuba?

---

I wasn't alive, but no I'm not in favor of that.

I'm even less in favor of the US trying to invade Cuba in response.

bearister said:

---

"430,000 Ukrainian soldiers would be alive today, "

Source for that stat?

What does source report for Russian soldiers KIA?

---

Various sources including Col. MacGregor, Swiss colonel Baud, both have access to insider NATO sources. OSINT and some revealed from Ukrainian sources as well.

For Russian losses, about 50,000 KIAs, this is a good source:

https://en.zona.media/article/2023/07/10/stats#:~:text=By%20the%20end%20of%202022,the%2024%2C000%E2%80%9325%2C000%20excess%20deaths.

Riddle this: How many casualties are there, truly, on both sides of Ukraine war? - Responsible Statecraft


https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/07/12/riddle-this-how-many-casualties-are-there-truly-on-both-sides-of-ukraine-war/

estimating troop losses on both sides in the Russia-Ukraine war


https://theloop.ecpr.eu/estimating-troop-losses-on-both-sides-in-the-russia-ukraine-war/

*One issue that confuses me: If Russia is kicking arse and taking names, why is it turning to North Korea for arms replenishment?

bearister said:

---

Riddle this: How many casualties are there, truly, on both sides of Ukraine war? - Responsible Statecraft

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/07/12/riddle-this-how-many-casualties-are-there-truly-on-both-sides-of-ukraine-war/

estimating troop losses on both sides in the Russia-Ukraine war


https://theloop.ecpr.eu/estimating-troop-losses-on-both-sides-in-the-russia-ukraine-war/

*One issue that confuses me: If Russia is kicking arse and taking names, why is it turning to North Korea for arms replenishment?

---

Don't forget the internal document release which showed a lopsided KIA / WIA figures. It had the same 7-to-1 / 8-to-1 ratios. The source for this imbalance is the massive difference in artillery usage.

And look at the Kiev Independent article I posted this AM - a Ukrainian soldier said "Russian drones are everywhere" - aiding their artillery / targeting.

Russian politician and former general acknowledges that Ukraine has successfully adapted during the counter offensive and is making progress. At the end he calls out Russian lies as being harmful to their war effort. So I guess it's good for Ukraine to have shills here spreading Russian low grade propaganda.

But my favorite part is where he says it's clear that NATO is giving Ukraine all of the technology it has. Lol we have spent 1.5 years slow playing aid to Ukraine (without even getting into what Obama did and Trump after him).

Interesting from the Russian general and MP Gurulev who took it to Telegram to say that Ukrainians have changed tactics, that they effectively combat minefields, that their drones are endless, and that the Russian counter-battery fire is still ineffective.

We've actually heard… pic.twitter.com/IUbznLS91x

— Dmitri (@wartranslated) September 15, 2023

And Russia has announced that soldiers (who already were short on leave) won't be getting any more until the war is "over". Good luck with that Vlad.

Mobilized Russians will not return home until the end of the war

This was announced by the Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Defense Andrei Kartapolov.

Back on September 9, he promised something completely different: the rotation of the mobilized was to take place at the… pic.twitter.com/oCs4n5yW0u

— NEXTA (@nexta_tv) September 15, 2023

Another appeal to the czar - this time complaining of medics and logistics personnel being sent to the front line to fight. This is what strong militaries who are driving their opponents to their knees do. #winning

2/ The relatives say in a pair of videos that their men are from Barnaul and Slavgorod in the Altai Krai region, serving in the 1307th and 1442nd Motorised Rifle Regiments and the 89nd Tank Regiment. They appeal to Vladimir Putin to help their men and punish their commanders. pic.twitter.com/zcnhUae56k

— ChrisO_wiki (@ChrisO_wiki) September 17, 2023

More towns liberated.

#Ukraine is celebrating the liberation of two small towns south of #Bakhmut, but #Kyiv's entire effort first to defend and now to conduct counter-offensive operations around Bakhmut has been the subject of much unwarranted criticism.🧵1/7

Special Edition: https://t.co/QsHC7MkX0F pic.twitter.com/8ncNBytkgd

— ISW (@TheStudyofWar) September 17, 2023

Cal88 said:

---

---

I thought the list curious so I picked 1 that especially caught my eye: Virgin Islands.

A quick Google search reveals the US sent Military Police to St. Croix following a hurricane to help provide security, in the face of severe looting and lawlessness. The troops were sent in response to a request for security from the Island's Governor. Per news reports it appears those troops remained on the Island for approximately 3 months.

But sure, this "invasion" is exactly like Russia with Ukraine.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

---

I thought the list curious so I picked 1 that caught my eye because it seemed intuitively curious: Virgin Islands.

A quick Google search reveals the US sent Military Police to the St. Croix following a hurricane to help provide security, in the face of severe looting and lawlessness. The troops were sent in response to a request for security from the Island's Governor. Per news reports it appears those troops remained on the Island for approximately 3 months.

But sure, this "invasion" is exactly like Russia with Ukraine.

---

Note that this list mashes up "invasions" with "interventions" as if they are all the same thing. It's bulls***.

The Virgin Islands are US territory, by the way, so that one is doubly wrong.

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

---

I thought the list curious so I picked 1 that caught my eye because it seemed intuitively curious: Virgin Islands.

A quick Google search reveals the US sent Military Police to the St. Croix following a hurricane to help provide security, in the face of severe looting and lawlessness. The troops were sent in response to a request for security from the Island's Governor. Per news reports it appears those troops remained on the Island for approximately 3 months.

But sure, this "invasion" is exactly like Russia with Ukraine.

---

Note that this list mashes up "invasions" with "interventions" as if they are all the same thing. It's bulls***.

The Virgin Islands are US territory, by the way, so that one is doubly wrong.

---

Maybe British Virgin Islands?

We have been at war with those limey *******s since the 1700s.

Pity, poor Kuwait. Invaded by the U.S. in 1991.

dajo9 said:

---

Pity, poor Kuwait. Invaded by the U.S. in 1991.

---

How False Testimony and a Massive U.S. Propaganda Machine Bolstered George H.W. Bush's War on Iraq


A Debate on One of the Most Frequently Cited Justifications for the 1991 Persian Gulf War: Did PR Firm Hill & Knowlton Invent the Story of Iraqi Soldiers Pulling Kuwaiti Babies From Incubators?
https://www.democracynow.org/2003/12/2/a_debate_on_one_of_the

And the aftermath.

Cal88 said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

---

I thought the list curious so I picked 1 that especially caught my eye: Virgin Islands.

A quick Google search reveals the US sent Military Police to the St. Croix following a hurricane to help provide security, in the face of severe looting and lawlessness. The troops were sent in response to a request for security from the Island's Governor. Per news reports it appears those troops remained on the Island for approximately 3 months.

But sure, this "invasion" is exactly like Russia with Ukraine.

---

This list has a body count of the order of 5 to 10 million civilians dead from US interventions/invasion. Ukraine has around 25,000 civilian deaths to date.

So yes, not exactly like Russia with Ukraine.

---

You are pretty amazing.

Didn't the Biden admin manage one more drone strike that killed innocent civilians and children on our way out of Afghanistan?

sycasey said:

---

movielover said:

---

So we're you OK with Russia putting military weapons in Cuba?

---

I wasn't alive, but no I'm not in favor of that.

I'm even less in favor of the US trying to invade Cuba in response.

---

It's usually better to invade early when the enemy is in the process of setting up in your backyard instead of waiting until they're fully established with bases equipped with tactical nukes, bombers, runways, and personnel.

WAR: NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg revealed that Russia offered not to invade Ukraine if the alliance would agree to deny Zelenskyy membership. Our refusal triggered the war - we are complicit. pic.twitter.com/Rj9jbOoLVA

— @amuse (@amuse) September 18, 2023

Cal88 said:

---

Can you name a better metric to judge the degree of wretchedness of a foreign invasion than the number of civilians killed in the process?

---

Does it matter? Does the fact that the Zodiac Killer existed first make it impossible to say The Unabomber was a bad dude who did evil things?

My gosh. Stop with the moral relativism. America doesn't have to be perfect to say the obvious: Russia is in the wrong for invading Ukraine.

(And also, not for nothing, but do you not see the irony of the guy who constantly posts about the sources his opponents uses posting from a source that considers providing requested military police for post hurricane security to be an "invasion"? My gosh, maybe take a step back from being SOOOOO entrenched in a position to exhibit some intellectual honesty).

BearHunter said:

---

sycasey said:

---

movielover said:

---

So we're you OK with Russia putting military weapons in Cuba?

---

I wasn't alive, but no I'm not in favor of that.

I'm even less in favor of the US trying to invade Cuba in response.

---

It's usually better to invade early when the enemy is in the process of setting up in your backyard instead of waiting until they're fully established with bases equipped with tactical nukes, bombers, runways, and personnel.

---

I think it's better to not invade at all unless you were directly attacked. But I'll put you down as pro-invasion. Good to know!

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Can you name a better metric to judge the degree of wretchedness of a foreign invasion than the number of civilians killed in the process?

---

Does it matter? Does the fact that the Zodiac Killer existed first make it impossible to say The Unabomber was a bad dude who did evil things?

My gosh. Stop with the moral relativism. America doesn't have to be perfect to say the obvious: Russia is in the wrong for invading Ukraine.

(And also, not for nothing, but do you not see the irony of the guy who constantly posts about the sources his opponents uses posting from a source that considers providing requested military police for post hurricane security to be an "invasion"? My gosh, maybe take a step back from being SOOOOO entrenched in a position to exhibit some intellectual honesty).

---

Cal88 gave up on intellectual honesty a long time ago. Remember the fake Time Magazine covers.

His only purpose here is to make Russia and its allies look as good as possible and Russia's enemies as bad as possible. Consider his every argument from this standpoint and they all make a lot more sense.

sycasey said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Can you name a better metric to judge the degree of wretchedness of a foreign invasion than the number of civilians killed in the process?

---

Does it matter? Does the fact that the Zodiac Killer existed first make it impossible to say The Unabomber was a bad dude who did evil things?

My gosh. Stop with the moral relativism. America doesn't have to be perfect to say the obvious: Russia is in the wrong for invading Ukraine.

(And also, not for nothing, but do you not see the irony of the guy who constantly posts about the sources his opponents uses posting from a source that considers providing requested military police for post hurricane security to be an "invasion"? My gosh, maybe take a step back from being SOOOOO entrenched in a position to exhibit some intellectual honesty).

---

Cal88 gave up on intellectual honesty a long time ago. Remember the fake Time Magazine covers.

His only purpose here is to make Russia and its allies look as good as possible and Russia's enemies as bad as possible. Consider his every argument from this standpoint and they all make a lot more sense.

---

Yeah right, and we only intervened in Iraq to save the locals from a nasty drought, and went into Vietnam because of bad floods...

Using one obscure entry out of a mountain of indisputable evidence is both a cheap shot and an incredibly dense move.

And this is indeed exactly the same cheap smear that the circle jerk of detractors have used ad nauseum in the debate about the 1970s global cooling where they pretend that the large body of evidence I have presented did not exist.

The longer this thread goes, the harder it will be for the delusional purists to hold on to the script they were sold last year.

Counterpoint to the Ukraine-is-winning propaganda

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/p/macgregor-ukraines-war-over-zhous

Someone will be proven wrong. I just hope the neocons don't drag us into WWIII.

"So that's the end of Ukraine's war. It's petering out in the mass carnage of a disastrous "offensive", reportedly planned by the US and NATO and forced on a reluctant General Zaluzhny. Zelensky, in recent interviews, sees the handwriting on the wallthe collective West's support is waning, at least when it comes to creating and equipping yet another iteration of the Ukrainian army. The West simply doesn't have the wherewithal to do that.

Thus, a new phase beginsand the recent missile attacks directed toward Crimea, using Western missiles (Ukraine has claimed they're their own missiles) and managed by US Global Hawk assets. The new phase will be a more or less long range strike war, managed by the US even more directly than past phases. "

Cal88 said:

---

Using one obscure entry out of a mountain of indisputable evidence is both a cheap shot and an incredibly dense move.

---

Oh no, it was all very disputable. Your hilarious doubling down on Time articles that didn't exist was just the most obvious sophistry, so I love to remind everyone of it.