Speaking to the No2Nato meeting on Saturday, I had the challenge of telling a packed and highly motivated audience some things that they very much instinctively disagreed with, from a very different viewpoint to much of what they had heard from some excellent speakers all day.
I had to follow a really effective rabble rousing performance from Chris Williamson which had raised the rafters.
On top of which, I was outlining facts and arguments which have had no discernible place in the public discourse on Ukraine on any “side” and were new to most people there.
I appealed at the start for the audience to listen with an open mind, and I think largely they did.
So here is me, with no notes and no visuals, just talking, giving people my own perspective.
————————————————
It is your kind subscriptions and donations which keep both my activism and this blog going. Hotel costs alone for this visit to London – in a very basic hotel near Kings Cross – were £150 a night and the total three day trip, which included meeting the Assange family, meeting lawyers and working on the McDonald emails, cost over £800 including travel. (But not including the Lagavulin).
I give this detail because I am often asked where the subscriptions go! Lawyers, mostly.
This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
What is the point ?
Since when did the State listen to the publics wishes ?
Remember the anti Iraq war protests in London, what good did that do ?
20+ years and it is still going on !
The only thing that has changed since the mediaeval period is the technology, it is the same old cutthroat maniacs at the helm. We still have to pay protection money in the guise of “taxes”, little of which goes back to the public or national interest infrastructure. Now we call it sanctions instead of a siege. We have the same criminal social caste system where only the upper class can commit crimes legally. We still have slave labour in the lower classes. Peasants still pay for their masters in their castles (as well as the heating bill for their horse stables) etc.
We never learn. Murder, they say, is illegal (even in self defence) unless it is the State ordering the mass murder or “execution”
All too eager the dumb public herd fall for it every time the State trumpets toot.
It is a miracle humans have made it this far given the mass WMD’s that are now available.
Why is war not an international crime yet ?
(Not that certain nations or individuals would get prosecuted even if it were)
Humans had a lot of potential as a species but, they threw it all away by letting organised gangsters take control of corrupt politics and greedy corporate business that destroy everything they touch.
David I agree with what you say.. At what point are people going to wake up.. and remove the millionaires and Billionaires that force our babies, children, and grand parents and everyone to Freeze , go hungry, suffer and die.. I cannot understand Scots who support the Union..We pay more than any country for energy..yet we produce so much in Renewables..
A few years ago I went on an Anti Trident march to Faslane Nuclear base, on My river..I can see it from my house.. We were a mostly Mature, Older group .. we were about 800 of us..And a Police man every two yards all along the march – All that policing cost for Nothing but show..all that £200+ Billion for weapons that cannot be used.
I feel what you say..Sometimes I want to climb a Mountain And Scream.
It takes all the mystery out if the post world war question; “how could the Germans let that happen?”
It is not hard to control the herd of public zombies. It works the same in every nation.
Loads of money to bail out criminal Banksters, to bail out tax avoiding corporation during the Scamdemic, to give to Nazis in Ukraine to launder into private bank accounts.
Nothing for the tax payer mugs other than ever higher taxes (protection money with menaces). Lose what few freedoms we had, charged for energy before we even use it, ever increasing rents (easy money for crooks), State control over what goods we can purchase, used as lab rats with bogus vaccines and “lockdown” experiments on social control. Our mouths uttering criticism removed from the public domain. CCTV everywhere but it only sees what is convenient for the State, are we all criminals that are guilty unless innocence can be proven ?
Our own military being used against us via the 77th brigade etc.
Maybe we deserve what we have coming. The real enemy is within our own State and their systems of self interest.
The Germans didn’t, they always voted against the Nazi partei; it was the respectable fascists who assassinated the Weimar republic in 1930.
Squeeth: that’s an oversimplification. In the July 1932 Reichstag election, which was as free and fair as most modern elections, with seats awarded according to the nationwide strength of the party vote, the NSDAP (Hitler’s NAZI party) was the largest party with 230 out of 605 seats, that is 38%. That’s a considerably higher percentage than any party achieved in the 2021 Bundestag election.
In January 1933 Reichspräsident (head of state) Hindenburg agreed to Hitler becoming Reichskanzler (head of government). As Squeeth points out, that decision meant the death of the Weimar republic.
From then on free elections were no longer possible in Germany. However one contemporary observer, journalist Sebastian Haffner, who remained in Germany until 1938, considered that Hitler’s popularity had increased during the previous 5 years and that it was likely he would have won a clear majority had a further election been held.
2 Coldish: Do not forget that Weimar Republic wasn’t like modern Germany or Bismark’s Prussia, where the Chancellor was the top dog. In Weimar, the President had all the powers, so Hindenburg’s decision to appoint Hitler as Chancellor really did not mean much, unless the President died. But at the time this was mostly a symbolic gesture. Pretty much like the appointment of Kamala Harris as Biden’s VP is nothing but a symbolic nod to women and the people of color at the moment. However, if something happens to Sleepy Joe, God help us all.
You are correct that 230 seats is enough to disprove the statement that “the Germans voted against the Nazis”; however, since this was not an absolute majority (i e more than 50%) one can’t also state that “the Germans voted for the Nazis”.
Sorry one point I missed about Scotland’s resources (mostly owned by foreign controllers) :
In Alaska, USA, the natives are paid an annual oil dividend from the oil companies. Every Alaskan gets a few thousand dollars every year. What do Scots get…. nothing but a higher cost of living and the resources taken away for peanuts thanks to the SNP and Westminster gangsters.
They literally get the gold (thanks to traitors Blair & Brown), and Scots get the empty cold shaft. Then they wonder why real scots want out of the undemocratic union.
Don’t worry, they will get independence once America and Westminster have bled the country dry of all resources and infrastructure. It won’t be long now, just a few more oil & gas wells to thieve.
Now that turncoat Sturgeon is out, expect the replacement to be just as bad. I always knew she was a fraudulent shill, same with Salmond.
The other thing that has changed is the efficiency of the state propaganda system, that now extends to all media outlets, whether it be “news”, “entertainment” or “social” networks. They all reinforce the idea that “we” (the West) are the good guys, licensed to kill, and “they” (the ROW who won’t play along, otherwise disguised as zombies or orcs or whatever) are the bad guys and need to be killed for our own survival. Compare the protests against the Vietnam War and the Iraq War with the mindless, immediate adoption of Nazi Ukraine as one of “us” complete with endorsement of the proxy war against “evil” Russia. It is terrifying how, even as we are pounded with homages to WW2 battles against the Nazis, we accept without question the call to stand with the Nazis of Ukraine just because they are fighting the successfully demonised Russia. Three decades of relentless propaganda has paid off. (Another example of complete cognitive dysfunction is provided by the demonisation of Jeremy Corbyn – hated in the red wall who chose Johnson instead on patriotic grounds – ostensibly for saying about Israel what today his leading persecutors are having printed in the duplicitous Guardian.)
What cost Corbyn the Red Wall was the 2nd referendum policy. He had won all those seats with increased majorities just two years earlier. That frightened the British Establishment so we got the whole People’s Vote psyop to hang a laughably antidemocratic policy around his neck.
Possibly but I suspect the British establishment and the Americans couldn’t allow Corbyn to win because of his stance on NATO – so they lied and cheated to make sure he didn’t, inventing pretexts. Whether Johnson’s landslide was even genuine I am not convinced – and the lack of public outcry to Johnson being deposed last year also suggests not.
Reply to fonso: Thank you.. Few British voters cared about Corbyn’s views on Israel.. It was Brexit, Brexit, Brexit that won the red wall seats for Johnson in 2019.
Conversation at the bar of a Working Men’s Club in North-East England with a mid-40’s, (up till then) life-long Labour voter (including in 2017), who voted Remain in EU Referendum and is not Jewish. (I used to live in the same house as him). Mid-afternoon. Late 2019.
Me: “Will you be voting Labour in the election then?”
Him: “For Corbyn? Ah don’t ****ing think so. Ah can’t stand that horrible ****.”
Me: “What do you not like about him?”
Him: “Er, er…he’s ****ing anti-Semitic.”
Me: “Anything else?”
Him: “Er, er…erm, er…he’s ****ing against Brexit.”
Me: “Anything else?”
Him: “Er, er… er, er…he’s just a ****ing ****, mate.
[Pinter-esque pause]
Me: “Same again, yeah?” [Looks around at the yellowing ‘Bad language will not be tolerated in this establishment’ notice, and then out of the window into the gloaming, thinking: looks like Boris has got this one in the bag.]
Corbyn capitulated every time he was challenged and lost the northern working class when he reneged on the result of the exit vote. Served him right the gutless poltroon but now we reap the whirlwind he sowed. I fear that the fools who vote will put the block of wood in, which will mean a formally antisemitic partei will be in power. Well done Jeremy.
The election was blatantly tampered with for several reasons. They clearly did not want Corbyn (let’s not forget that America withdrew food aid to Britain post WWII because the Labour Party was elected).
The Zionists did not like him for his pro Palestine stance. Ironically, his wooden replacement has expelled many Jews from the party (George Galloway was my source of information) yet nobody is calling Wooden bookend Starmer an “antisemite”. He only expelled Jews that were pro Palestine, the evil Labour Zionists made sure of it. The irony is that nobody ever mentions that Palestinians are also Semites, as are most Arabs in general. Who has been murdering Palestinian semites since 1947 ?
I doubt Corbyn would have been any good as a PM but then again, the PM only follows orders regardless of which party it is.
Labour was destroyed in the right wing parliamentary coup in the 1970’s that nobody talks about. Blair is a Thatcherite among other crimes. The last true Labour Party member was Tony Benn.
No to NATO is saying no to America, America now owns the UK post WWII so, we must do as they demand. We get nothing in return other than been used and abused.
The Tories are traitors, as are backseat driver Blairs Labour Party. The Lib Dems are only there to scare people into only voting for the two headed monster Tory Labour pushmepullyou party. Now we have the dubious Greens sniffing around. You would have to be very green (naiveto) trust them.
Why does anybody even vote for a Labour party that won’t expell T.Bliar ?
I think war is an international crime, but the US removed itself from the jurisdiction of one international criminal court in the 80’s and won’t sign the treaty to be under the jurisdiction of its successor, the way I understand it. I mean the international court has jurisdiction over war crimes, and the biggest crime of all is an unprovoked aggressive war. Which makes the U.S. the biggest criminal of all, but it will never be prosecuted. The so-called rules-based international order is a goddamn joke.
A simple solution would be sanctions against America until they sign AND HONOUR (they never do) the same legal treaties they insist everybody else sign.
The UN and The Hague are also a corrupt joke, but I’m not laughing. They do whatever America dictates to them.
Look up what the WWII criminal nazi Klaus Barbie got up to post 1945 in America. America has been destabilising the world by any means available since at least WWII. Now they own or control much of the U.K. (an old enemy grudge they held for over a century). Even our very language is under attack as everybody is falling over themselves to be American. Now we also have the “dumb down effect” in Britain too. All those American stores post 2008 taking over the high street. Destabilising and controlling Europe post 1945 to present day, making the EU nations the targets in the coldwar in case of nukes being used. The terrorist attack on sea pipelines then calling out their victims as the aggressors! The list goes on, nobody cares, even if it means the end of the world. Insane.
this rather unsettling piece from 2 days ago, no idea how to judge that.
I am friend of skepticism which Stephen Bryan in this text seems not to be a proponent of.
“A coming wider war with Crimea in US sights – US-NATO response to fall of Bakhmut is likely an assault on Crimea, which in turn will spark Russian attacks on Eastern Europe”
by Stephen Bryan
https://asiatimes.com/2023/03/a-coming-wider-war-with-crimea-in-us-sights/
In the end it says:
“(…)The Nuland threat to Crimea appears more and more to be a foregone conclusion: a US policy with existential implications for Europe and perhaps also for America.
The issue was decided by the new arms shipments (two separate announcements as late as March 3 US time). While no published decision has been made and Biden has been silent, the equipment being sent could only be intended for Nuland’s offensive on Crimea.
If there were a public announcement of a decision supporting Nuland, Blinken would likely have a heart attack – but the US is sending long-range bombs and artillery as well as bridging equipment essential to attack Crimea. If such an attack is not envisioned, the Ukrainians don’t need this kit.
Meanwhile, there seems to be very little coherent US opposition to the unfolding scenario of what could quickly become a general war in Europe.(…)”
There’s a lot of whatIfery about. Crimea, Transnistria, etc. But, IMO, even the absolute nutters in the USA understand that Russia will not and cannot lose. The plan continues to be to wear Russia down and potentially undermine Putin. It’s a game of chess for the Russians, counter every move and continue the relentless grind to achieving their objectives. For the West It’s a game of noughts and crosses, try this, that didn’t work, try this instead, every move is a random trial and error tactic there is no overall plan.
It will get worse, for the West, before it gets better.
NATO has a major problem, unlike Iraq, both Russia and China have weapons of mass destruction far deadlier than anything used against Japan. They fly so fast they cannot be intercepted.
The Neo cons [who are in control of the west at this time] want to pivot to Asia to take on China, thus NATO will have at minimum a two front war, throw in Iran and other coalitions of the willing then you have a recipe for the destruction of not only NATO but Europe as well. When Liz Truss suggested this pivot to Asia many people agreed with her. Then George Galloway said at the Oxford Union debate recently “Would you enter a World war fighting for Liz Truss” the idea is preposterous, just as Liz Truss and all neo cons who think like her are preposterous?
The blind cannot see that it is America that is destroying Europe (the industrial competition to America) since WWII.
America is our most “special fwend” in the whole world…. O’ no they’re re not, wake up, that’s a Machiavellian dagger Sam has at your back.
One of the things that baffles me is that when discussing Russia/Ukraine, commenters always cite the US/Iraq as a parallel. FUKUS/Libya is a far better parallel.
What was the rationale for the FUKUS intervention in Libya? “We’re going in to protect civilians who are under threat of attack by their own government…”
On this basis, FUKUS obtained UN approval, which was not opposed by Russia or China in the Security Council, for a no-fly zone – which FUKUS then abused to bomb the country to rubble and destroy the “regime”. But based on the original Libya rationale, Russia had not only a right to intervene but a “duty to protect” in Ukraine, where civilians were not merely under threat, but had actually been attacked and killed, by “their own government”.
David. I would go further, Lord Ismay said the purpose of NATO was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” In 1949, prior to serving as Secretary General of NATO . Cutting off Germany and the rest of Europe from cheap Russian gas, then shipping in US gas at 5 times the price, plus getting Europe to buy overpriced US weapons systems, Germany has recently increased its defence budget by $100 Billion dollars including a fleet of US F35’s From the United States. As you say, a win win for the US with the bonus of destroying European competition.
Questions that few to nobody ever asks:
Who funded and supplied the Nazis in WWII ?
Who was behind the 2014 Ukrainian coup ?
Where are the receipts for the alleged weaponry sent to Ukraine and who is in charge of the security of the dangerous weaponry ?
Why did the Ukrainian nazis shoot down MH17 and why is Ukraine not held accountable ?
After Ukraine fires a missile into Poland, killing polish civilians, where is the mightier Article 5 and NATO’s attack on Ukraine ?
Given that we went to war against nazi Germany, many allies died doing so, why is the dumb public now supporting nazis ?
Given that we are now suddenly pro nazi, does that mean we can now use our war memorials as public urinals ?
Who are the bad guys again ?
Pretending they were appalled by neo-nazis, the far right and antisemitism was the entire performative self-identity of US and UK liberals in the years 2016-21.
Who are the bad guys again ?
“Are we the Baddies?” – Mitchell and Webb Funny Nazi Sketch
Yes, I remember seeing that “we have skulls on our hats !? Are we the bad guys ?” sketch ha ha
” Given that we went to war against nazi Germany, many allies died doing so, why is the dumb public now supporting nazis ? ”
What did those Nazis do that started the war? Oh yes, illegally annexed one nation and illegally invaded another, murdering, raping and torturing as they went and forcibly deporting tens of thousands. Remind you of anybody? They too tried to dress it up as an act of self-defence.
In 1939 the UK had a treaty with Poland even though Poland’s government wasn’t much, if any, better than Nazi Germany’s. A right wing dictatorship which falsified elections, locked up opponents and passed anti-Jewish laws that were every bit as bad as those in Germany. Regardless they had a treaty with France and the UK which was supposed to guarantee their sovereignty.
That might sound familiar too.
Pears Morgaine
Nope the annexation came after the western backed coup, which was led forward in Ukraine by neo-nazis like Azov and neo-fascists in the “Right Sektor” and other various groups tied to neo-nazis in “Svoboda”.
Are you supportive of these neo-nazis and fascists in the UK? I bet no, so why are you supportive of the same anti-democratic violent forces in Ukraine? Do you not quesiton this double-think of yours?
Poland had an alliance with Britain and France, two undemocratic states and the biggest slave empires in the world; they didn’t have skulls on their hats though.
Correct Squeeth, they did not have little skulls on their hats. They had little skulls inside their very big hats.
Did any British or French “pirate/privateer” have skulls on their clandestine unofficial State hats, or is that just a Disney thing ?
Napoleonic France did use the imperial eagle boss, as did the Nazis and modern day America. Maybe their cult got tired of the old cliché skull motifs after using it for so many centuries?
Indeed. The Minsk Agreement reference, set up to fail, just as Germany was set up to fail after WWI by the righteous League of Nations.
I knew a Pole who was a child in WWII Poland so I have known the dirty truth about Poland for many decades now.
Some happily sided with the Nazis and used the SS to kill off anybody they had long standing grudges with. The other half of Poland was either neutral or pro Russia. Then we have the notorious death camps that many Poles were happy to exploit. To be fair though, we have nazi types in every nation. It is a mental illness that gets swept under the dirty carpet rather than recognised and dealt with. Our own government is rancid with Zionists. Also, why are MP’s not subject to drug testing or fired for drinking on the job ?
If rumours are true about parliament and cocaine abuse, where are the police sniffer dogs ?
I’m yet to find evidence of whether Germany “invading” Poland was a false flag event or not. I do suspect the west set Hitler up from day one, not too unlike what they did to Saddam (he used to be our best buddy when he did as he was told).
What we do know is that Prescott Bush (George Bush snr’s father) was investigated and found guilty of “trading with the enemy in a time of war” in 1942. Nothing happened to him regardless of his crimes.
Thanks to major general Smedley Buttler, we know that there was an attempted nazi coup in 1930’s America.
He also wrote an interesting book titled “war is a racket” (meaning a criminal scam).
We also know that the war criminal Klaus Barbie was recruited by America, they pretty much used him to train the CIA. Now we know the original inspiration for their heinous international crimes post WWII.
We also know that many other nazis were recruited by America, Russia and the U.K.
WWII nazi criminals were given top CEO jobs in big pharma corporations (Bayer AG and other subsidiary branches of AG Faber, BASF etc.), the kind of monsters that did fatal inhumane experiments on prisoners. Western medics still use the evil nazi anatomy book from those recorded experiments in the death camps, so much for “do no harm” bs. The infamous Dr Magele was given free passage to South America where he continued twin experiments on children.
The last of von Braun’s hand picked nazi team to help found NASA died just a few years ago in America.
Clearly our self appointed masters, hiding behind the State institutions, don’t have any issue with what the nazis did or how many suffered etc. (much like the “pandemic”)
WWII was completely staged and in the planning of the League if Nations (now called the UN) from at least 1918.
Who was Hitler and Co. really working for ?
Who funded Hitler & Co. ?
At least they are semi honest about funding Ukraine this time round. We have been getting fleeced since the economic crash that hit right before the “pandemic”. Funny how nobody is talking about that. Bust economy to, ransacking the tax coffer box for tax avoiding corporate cronies during a Scamdemic (the truth is coming out now) to, laundering tax coffers via a proxy war in Ukraine.
Meanwhile our cost of living increases ever higher, as public incomes get ever lower, paying through the nose for energy in advance of even using any, bogus food shortages, a very abusive and corrupt NHS draining taxes etc., people sat in the cold with the threat of a nuke war now we are done with killer virus terrorisation etc.
But, when we want a tax coffer hand out they instantly claim that the treasury is empty and can’t afford it, unless you’re a Banster or other crony.
Still, easier to attack and bully the weak unemployed for “spending ‘MY’ taxes” than stopping the real villains right ?
People just make it too easy for these criminals to get into positions of power.
It is clear that the real villains of WWII lost nothing and gained everything.
As the United Kingdom’s inability to replenish its weapon stockpiles poses a threat to the country’s ability to ensure its own security then this would be an excellent time for Argentina to reclaim the Malvinas ?
https://sputniknews.com/20230307/uk-may-be-unable-to-ensure-own-security-due-to-depleting-arms-stockpile-parliament-says-1108139362.html
There is more to this than meets the eye.
Firstly, regarding ammo count data.
Why do they obsess about announcing, to the entire world, top level State secret data about national weapon stockpiles ?
Meanwhile provoking Russia in a proxy war that could easily expand into the last ever global war with suicidal extinction level consequences?
Either, it is bait for Russia to take or, it is setting up a horrendously expensive weapons contract with America (that won’t work) or, just to keep the surplus fear from the pandemic alive in the nations military level psychological warfare on its own citizens or, all of the above ?
Even though people think we have nukes, no we don’t really. They belong to America and we need their permission to get the launch codes to use them. That takes us to point #2 :
Second point, Falklands :
Thatcher threatened to use Nukes if France did not hand over the data for Argentine missiles. Laughable given that Reagan would never have allowed Thatcher to do that, he had the launch codes not Thatcher.
I have been wondering why Argentina has not thought about this before, given that the uk military has been tied up in the Middle East this past 20+ years ?
It is reported, for all that’s worth, that Argentina has recently ripped up the Falklands treaty. Why now ?
Is it because of the West (America) trying to dominate world markets via coups, wars and sanctions etc. A response to the competitive Block trading between non American controlled nations ?
During the Falklands conflict, America was making shady “diplomatic” deals with Argentina, that was their excuse for not helping Britain.
The evil criminal and mass murderer general Pinochet was happy to help the UK regarding the Falklands, that is one reason why Thatcher suddenly went all pro “human rights” and pro “political asylum” for her buddy Pinochet. She also did the same for a Taliban terrorist named Abu Hamza for his services rendered in Afghanistan.
I often wonder if she was, like Reagan and the Clinton’s fake “war on drugs” (look up pilot Barry Seal or, Iran Contra Oliver North) shipping in cocaine from South America via the Falklands?
She would have had use of military sized logistic vehicles to ship it straight past customs without any questions asked. Europe was flooded with cocaine during that period.
When it comes to a solution for the Falklands, that is simple… total independence from everybody. It is ridiculous that any nation lay claim to owning it. You can’t even see it from the Argentinian coastline, as it lay hundreds of miles out in the South Atlantic. England’s claim is just as dubious given their distance factor. Even the history of the island has had several European settlements on it, England was not the first.
Why do either nation want control of it anyway, there is nothing there of value ?
David,
re. “Why do either nation want control of it anyway, there is nothing there of value ?”
I believe, that the Falklands gives the UK access rights to Antarctica and of course there is the issue of access to huge oil and gas reserves in the area. So potentially there is huge value with holding on to the pile of rocks and supporting the penguin worriers.
The fact is that the UK could not now defend the Falklands because our ‘defence’ forces have been decimated by 12 years of Tory rule.
The British Antarctic Territory is administered separately from the Falklands, Stevie. All mining and oil & gas extraction in Antarctica and south of minus 60 degrees latitude is prohibited by treaty anyway.
I wouldn’t say that the Falklands’ oil reserves are huge by international standards, and their natural gas resources are probably still essentially worthless even after all that’s happened this year. Still, seeing as the oil has been known about for over a decade, if Britain truly was incapable of defending them, I’d imagine that Argentina would have had another go at taking them by now, and come to some sort of deal with the Islanders.
“Sy Hersh and The Way We Live Now” – comment 1035494
“Sy Hersh and The Way We Live Now” – comment 1035496
Speaking of ‘Truth and Ukraine’ – unless all that is said in the interview ( below) is fabricated – I strongly feel that there is a war agenda now advanced in Ukraine and another one shaping up for Taiwan. Listen…
‘NATO Violated All The Commitments’: Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov In India On Ukraine War (India Today, 3 Mar 2023) – YouTube, 3h 47m 30s
When I get into wherever, my first private members bill will be to put into law that any politician who vote for war or invasion, must be on the first wave in, together with his wife and children.
That’ll sort them out.
Indeed!
This article below on point
“Just as its easy to spend other people’s money, it’s easy to send other people off to war. Let’s see some skin in the game from the pro-war crowd. From Jacob G. Hornberger at fff.org:”
https://straightlinelogic.com/2022/02/25/how-many-chicken-hawks-are-in-ukraine-by-jacob-g-hornberger/
A bit off topic – mod could delete if they want –
Seems like US trying a color revolution in Georgia right now.
Meanwhile, their pro-US/EU/Nato president just happens to be in the US and just recently delivered a video of support to the protesters!
Georgian president supports protests against foreign agents bill
“I’m with you, because you represent free Georgia now,” Zourabichvili said
https://tass.com/world/1586035
Yeah…. that is what truly bother people in Georgia, that US/EU/Nato can keep funding and subverting their state.
Not suspicious at all, another Maidan in the mix?
Interesting turn of events.
What is interesting is that, like Ukraine, the USA (military) has been operating several biological labs in Georgia which have raised concerns with regard to research into warfare agents: Black death, dengue fever, swine flu, covid, etc. A number of incidents have been reported about leaks: accidental and possibly intentional.
See Lugar Research Centre:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugar_Research_Center
Thank you Craig. Your passionate call for peace is inspiring, and I am sure you are right.
But – what could Russia have done differently? The threat of slaughter in East Ukraine and the threat of the destruction of Russia was and is real.
“Sy Hersh and The Way We Live Now” – comment 1035519
This is telling, the BBC gives over the front of its “news” webpage to a story about protests in the former Soviet republic of Georgia.
A barely disguised reprint of an MI6 press release. The violent protests are against the passing of laws by the democratically elected parliament to require any organisation that receives more than 20% of its income from foreign sources to register as a foreign agent. The laws don’t shut the organisations down, they just require transparency as to their funding.
Why the outraged indignation from multiple state entities in the West?
Expect NuSNP apparatchik Stephen Gethins to be wheeled out on the rolling “news” shows. Gethins was previously employed by State Department / CIA front, NGO LINKS to interfere in Georgian politics. NGO LINKS was primarily funded by the US Government’s, National Science Foundation. Now why would a body tasked with furthering the development of science within the territorial boundaries of the USA be funding a political influencing operation in the former Soviet republic of Georgia? Is the National Endowment for Democracy losing its usefulness as a CIA front?
Nothing to see here, move along now.
About time Georgia had a responsible government imposed on it that will respect international law and the rules based international order.
That order, according to the US and NATO:
We can subvert democracy in any country we choose.
Do not object.
We can invade sovereign countries and wage wars of aggression.
You can’t.
We can commit war crimes with impunity.
You can’t.
We can surround any country we choose with military bases and shitloads of weapons.
You can’t.
Unfortunately there are still some recalcitrant slow learners out there that need to be eliminated.
As a copy of the Russian law it would also make the NGO liable for extra audits and taxes as well as having to publish a disclaimer. The word ‘agent’ is associated with Cold War era spies.
If you think the Foreign Agents Law isn’t about suppressing freedom of expression by making life harder for any NGOs in opposition to the government you need to think again.
Pears
Great, then Russia should fund NGOs in the UK right? Or is it then suddenly not about freedom of expression?
Can’t see why it should. If it did it could do so without hindrance.
Some information about how the law is used against opposition groups amongst others in Russia:-
https://ehrac.org.uk/en_gb/key-ehrac-cases/russia-foreign-agents-case/
Pears
According to the “experts” Russia meddled in Trump, Brexit and every other european elections past 2 decades. You support that? Really?
Not sure what your link was suppose to claim, read it twice. What was your argument?
Academic now because despite its benign intent they’ve scrapped the idea.
Pears
So equally you would support mass of people, violently demonstrating for a law that would accelerate russian funding NGOs in the UK?
You forgot that this Russian law is a copy-paste from the American law of 1938. However, this Russian law is not as harsh as its American original. First, the Russian law only applies when the foreign financing of a NGO is more than 20% of its total finance while the American law is applied when ANY moneys come from any foreign source; second, violations of the Russian law can only bring you administrative punishments like fines while in the US one can also get jail time. Just ask Maria Butina.
“If you think the Foreign Agents Law isn’t about suppressing freedom of expression by making life harder for any NGOs in opposition to the government you need to think again.”
American government funded ‘charities’ have organised riots in Geogia to prevent the passing of a law which is a direct copy of the US US Foreign Agents Registration Act.
https://tass.com/world/1587007
I wonder if the Women’s Day is celebrated in your countries today? Or, is it against gender policy? 🙂
The second day in our news is – Swiss media ‘Le Temps’ published a stenogram of the Putin / Macron dialogue. It took place on February 20, 2022, 4 days before the war. Back then, the event was discussed here in Russia in the aspect that Macron violated the diplomatic rule of confidentiality, and during the dialogue there was a journalist with recording equipment.
Now the stenogram is brought to the public attention again.
“Emmanuel Macron:
Since our last conversation, tensions have continued to grow and you know my commitment and my determination to continue the dialogue. I would like you to give me your reading of the situation first and perhaps quite directly as we both tell me what your intentions are. And then afterwards, I wanted to try to see if there were still useful actions to be taken and to make some suggestions to you.
Vladimir Poutine:
What could I say? You see yourself what is happening. You and Chancellor Scholz told me that Zelensky was ready to make a move, that he had prepared a bill to implement the Minsk Accords. […] In fact, our dear colleague, Mr. Zelensky, does nothing. He is lying to you. […] I don’t know if you heard his statement yesterday where he said that Ukraine must have access to nuclear weapons.
(Diplomatic adviser Emmanuel Bonne: “But no, nonsense.”)
I also heard your comments during the press conference in Kiev on February 8th. You said that the Minsk Accords must be revised, I quote, “so that they are applicable”.
(Macron’s advisers: “No, he didn’t say that”, “I’ll tell him not to get into a detailed discussion with him.”)”
the source in French is here, you may like to read the whole dialogue
https://www.letemps.ch/monde/europe/emmanuel-macron-vladimir-poutine-quatre-jours-guerre-ne-sais-juriste-appris-droit
that conversation was covered just briefly on the Kremlin website
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67818
—
I hope you folks remember great women who fought for women’s rights :-). Thanks to them, we now can vote, and we can count on equal salary as men have.
honestly my Mum said on the phone recently – “What the fuck is going on the other 364 days? We gonna be suppressed?”
thx for the Mac(a)ron.
re: the issue of nuclear arms: as far as my limited French goes, “n´importe quois” doesn´t necessarily mean “it´s nonsense”. Rather “of no real value” or “doesn´t matter”. Which would fit more the example.
My translation program would say “nonsense” too. So I took the time to check the original text myself.
I remember Noam Chomsky sort of criticizing Putin for wanting to play ice-hockey.
(I believe Nicolai Petro mentioned that the Kiev government did not accept the separatists as a legitimate dialogue partner and only were willing to talk with them via Moscow, even though Minsk was about the fate of those very same separatists.)
Tatyana, all I remember about the “woman’s movement” is that :
They were nasty antisocial misanderists that bullied pacifists and young boys on the street to fight in WWI, handing them white feathers for “cowardice” ! (even though they were too young to enlist, some of those under aged boys were even executed in the military because they had shell-shock on the horrific front lines, many under the age of 16 !).
I don’t remember any of those bias rights misanderist women joining the military to fight and die in the trenches at the Somme etc. ?
They also attacked men that were walking home after leaving the pub. Women against men & alcohol is quite hypocritical given the history of “old mothers ruin” (aka gin and the upper class women’s that abused it).
Or that selfish woman that threw herself in front of the racehorses, no compassion or concern for the horses safety. They shoot injured horses because they can’t use them to race after bad leg injuries, just disposable garbage at that point. They could be healed but a bullet and insurance claims pay better.
I’m all for equality across the board but, never for antisocial division or biased rights. I don’t care what gender, colour or nationality the person.
Well, we have this celebration morphed here into a day of respect for the female sex. The most common way to celebrate is to give fresh flowers to women, according to the season these are tulips, daffodils, hyacinths and mimosa. Sweets and champagne for loved ones 🙂
But, the memory of the struggle for equal rights lives on. Hardly any of the men today dare to publicly say “the woman belongs in the kitchen” as they might have done on another day, reckoning that it might be taken as humor. So, I guess we are not supressed, we still feel the stereotypes that are dangerous because of their vitality, they can be resurrected from the slightest spark. (Masters of Horror, 2-nd season, “The Screwfly Solution”)
https://youtu.be/8U0LydpeVfI
Tatyana, happy woman’s day.
I’m glad that Russia, at least, recognises what an actual woman is. Here in the western regimes it often appears that real woman are hated and persecuted unless they have a penis or a beard.
Stevie Boy
From what I learn from the Western media, I get a certain impression. I’ll make a disclaimer so as not to appear intolerant or ignorant – I respect the right of any human being to their views, I believe that no one should be discriminated against and that the only way to peaceful coexistence within the community is through dialogue and education.
With that said, I think that XX and XY dominate in the human population. I’d say dominate as the norm, and are evolutionarily proven to be the best strategy for the existence and reproduction of the species at the moment.
The theories put forward that other sets of chromosomes survive and give offspring in the human population don’t withstand scientific criticism, because such cases are currently rare survivors among massively unviable embryos.
As for genders aka the social roles assumed by members of society (in order to obtain the most favorable conditions for the current moment, IMO) – I leave this to their discretion.
In traditional terms, the sexual behavior of normal mature individuals implies not only sexual intercourse, but also a more global attitude in evolutionary terms – the desire to spend one’s own resources on the survival of the offspring.
This is one of the aspects that we characterize ‘love’ and what we celebrate during the ‘wedding’. This is completely different from the ‘desire’ we may feel for any other object, regardless of their gender and prospects for having the offspring (sometimes even regardless their biological species, or, even regardless of their belonging to the world of live creatures)
I don’t really like to describe it in such insensitive terms, so I’m back to sweets and champagne 😉
What happened to “Mother’s Day” ?
“Women belong in the kitchen” is taken out of context for modern’ish nefarious agendas. Where and why did it originate :
Back in the day, men went off to do often dangerous jobs (women were not exposed to such jobs for several sane reasons), as a result men often died at a younger age than their wives. Nobody in their right mind would go down the pits or join the military, male or female. Desperation or necessity was usually the main motivation.
So, in days gone by, men went to work to get the money to support a thing we used to call “a family”, they lived in the same house.
Money was needed for the usual essential necessities, rent, food, clothes, children, maybe a horse or other vehicle, general supplies, doctors bills maybe.
Naturally that took up all the mans time, 12hr shifts, up to 7 days a week makes it hard to do the shop, or make food or do the laundry etc. But, it’s hard to live without the slave chains of money. I have worked 14+hrs 7 day weeks and it’s not fun. Dangerous, and crap pay.
So, the woman’s roll was to keep house, make family meals, also a huge time consuming chore when all food was made from scratch (no “ready ping meals” or “pot noodle” or “dishwasher machine” back then). It takes a few hours just to make a loaf of bread (a daily chore, tough winter job, yeast likes it warm). Then there were the children to look after, a very important roll given child mortality rates pre 1960. The children are the family name and future. Mending clothes, food shop etc. The payment was a strong safe family unit in a nice house with resources.
Hence the saying “a woman belongs at home.” Or “in the kitchen” a room where much of the housework was carried out. Because that was her family support roll, just as the father went to get the means to fund it, if he survived to see payday.
Very important rolls for a family to function and succeed. Women were kept safe at home to do what the man had zero time left to do (work, sleep, work, sleep, work). Many species and human tribes recognise this same basic social strength value of keeping women safe from harm (it used to be called common sense and chivalry aka respect). Useful for a species to thrive.
So, women had a very serious job to do just as much as the men did. Men slaved for money, women worked hard to support the family at home so that the man could earn money for the family to have nice things. Many men died doing so.
People may not like that concept but families were stronger units pre 1970.
Strong families make strong citizens, strong citizens keep society safe and crooks out of positions of power.
Now look at the modern day quagmire we are in. Mass unemployment due to surplus labour (now flooded with both genders), broken families, broken homes (also causing the short housing crisis), messed up kids that will only result in dysfunctional adults later in their lives (if suicide, drug addiction or murder does not get them first), general antisocial divisions to keep us fighting among ourselves rather than fighting the master in the castle who makes our lives a miserable existence until we die.
Some of the old values had their place, and it made for a more structured functional family unit and society.
I don’t have a special day for those in my fold becaus every day is special, no excuses needed for a party… just have one anytime of the year. Presents are not just for xmas.
This all sounds pretty sweet to married people somewhere in the absence of modern technological civilization.
I still prefer to have rights regardless of my marital status.
Thanks to those women who fought for equal rights, I had a decently paid job. When the child was born, I could support myself – my state provides paid maternity leave for 18 months, the amount of payments was about 80-70% of the salary. From the age of 18 months, a child can attend the state nursery kindergarten for a very small fee. I was lucky to get one. This made it possible to complete a car driving course and find a part-time job with even higher pay.
I can’t tell you how much confidence in future it adds, as opposed to relying solely on the husband. This differs strikingly from the time of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, with total poverty and the absence of state guarantees.
Mother’s Day in its place is at the end of November and Father’s Day in mid-October.
The truth according to Craig Murray is that Russia was scared that NATO was going to invade, and, hence, was provoked into a mass slaughter of innocents. For decades, Chomsky and chums have told the world that countries have realized that if you acquire nuclear weapons, the U.S. will leave you alone. A lesson that Saddam Hussein had to learn the hard way, we were also informed.
Russia has the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world – something Murray forgot to mention. Russia’s frightened, he tells us. Is that why Putin threatened the world with nuclear annihilation?
So why then JFK was so pissed off with Soviet nukes in Cuba? The answer is, when time for the missiles to reach their targets gets so short, the temptation to launch them can be irresistible.
@Sleeping Dog
in case you drop in here, I talked about the archives, but I couldn’t get an answer to your question, they just don’t know.
But, I once again received confirmation why the Holodomor is a fake. The position of the Kyiv regime is that it was a deliberately done action for the genocide of the Ukrainian people. It’s a lie. The pseudo-historian Snyder who wrote this “historic” book for them is a liar.
For several years now, state archives have been digitized, so the employees work a lot with papers. When visiting the archive, this is very clear. Like, in a small town, a yearly death registration book may take up one or two volumes. For 1933, this is a dozen volumes and deaths were recorded by entire families. Anyone truly interested could come and see it with their own eyes. Paper can be examined for the authenticity or, whatever is real scientific research.
That was a famine throughout the USSR. Snyder sucked this fake story out of his, probably, finger or worse.
For some perspective on that claim, the EU and 22 other countries recognise the Holodomor as a genocide and a crime against humanity. According to the official document, the EU:
“1. Recognises the Holodomor, the artificial famine of 1932-1933 in Ukraine caused by a deliberate policy of the Soviet regime, as a genocide against the Ukrainian people, as it was committed with the intent to destroy a group of people by deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction;”
and records how it was orchestrated by Stalin’s regime:
“evidence shows that the Soviet regime deliberately confiscated grain harvests and sealed the borders to prevent Ukrainians from escaping from starvation; whereas in 1932 and 1933 the Soviet Union exported grain from the territory of Ukraine while people there were starving; whereas the killing of predominantly rural Ukrainians was often accompanied by agitprop scapegoating peasants and depicting them as culprits for the famine;”
The EU also takes a firm position on Holodomor denial:
“8. Condemns the current Russian regime’s manipulation of historical memory for the purpose of regime survival; [ … ] calls on the EU and its Member States, public and private institutions and all civil society to actively denounce and refute all attempts at distorting historical facts or manipulating public opinion in Europe through false historical narratives that are fabricated and disseminated to support the ideology and survival of criminal regimes;”
So the EU (and other countries) would classify what you just posted as false and malicious Russian propaganda. Just so you know.
Why should I trust the EU more than my own eyes? Why should I trust their interpretation of the events? Their man Borrell said the EU is a garden and everything else is jungle, so he instructed the young EU diplomats to lie, literary lie by omitting, he said ‘don’t tell the whole truth’.
> Why should I trust the EU more than my own eyes?
With respect, Tatyana, I won’t ask your age, but I’m quite sure you weren’t an eye-witness to the Holodomor. However, since you mention it, you can find dozens of eye-witness accounts (in video with transcripts) here, describing not just the famine, but the Five Year Plan system of enforced quotas, the seizure of grain from starving families (despite much of it being left to rot at train stations), the arrests and murders of starving protestors by the communist authorities, censorship of any criticism of Soviet policy, and so on. You can watch survivors speak in English and Ukrainian and judge for yourself whether they are lying. (Surely you don’t think Borrell had any influence on them?)
If you don’t trust the historical investigations of Timothy Snyder (b. 1969), then you can consult direct reports from that era: e.g. “The Soviet and the peasantry: hunger in Ukraine – From a correspondent in Russia” (The Guardian, 27 March 1933).
There’s plenty more information on the Holodomor from credible sources, awaiting your discovery.
Tymothy Snyder is a preudo-historian, so bringing him up as a reference is not comme il faut, as the French say. EU is also extremely biased, so please do not bring up their judgements. They, for example, stated in their Resolution of Sept 17, 2019 that WW2 was caused by the conclusion of the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939, a conclusion that real historians, such as AJP Taylor or Richard Overy, would find laughable. They (and you) ignore the fact that about 20% of the excessive death in 1932-3 occurred outside of Ukraine, in the southern Russia’s areas of Kuban’, Rostov and Stavropol, and that the Ukrainians were not even the demographic majority in the areas in the south of Ukraine, such as in the hard-hit Kherson area. The hunger was caused by the inability to correct grain acquisition plans with regards of the drought and took place where the drought happened.
> Tymothy Snyder is a preudo-historian, so bringing him up as a reference is not comme il faut, as the French say.
Yuri, you failed to notice which person brought up Snyder in the first place.
Tatyana – March 9, 2023 at 09:17: “The pseudo-historian Snyder who wrote this “historic” book for them is a liar. […] That was a famine throughout the USSR. Snyder sucked this fake story out of his, probably, finger or worse.”
I don’t care what you, Tatyana, or anybody else thinks of Timothy Snyder – my point is that Tatyana is wrong to blame him for conjuring up the story. The deliberate starvation in Ukraine was reported long before Snyder was born and it is featured in encyclopedias and history books which were available well before his book Bloodlands (2010) was published. The idea that he made up the story (or pulled it out of his … wherever) is absolutely risible!
> EU is also extremely biased, so please do not bring up their judgements.
You ask me not to mention the EU with regard to Ukraine … a country that is trying to join the EU. Don’t you think the EU’s perspective might be relevant here?!
I’m certainly not ignoring the excess deaths outside of Ukraine. They give a good comparative benchmark: the death rate from famine in Russia was less than 3 per cent; inside Ukraine it was 8-12%. 2 million tonnes of grain was exported but the people were sealed in.
2 Dawg: Of course Snyder did not made up the story, but he made up its interpretation. The “EU perspective” as you’ve called it, might be relevant in the internal discussions between EU and Ukraine; however, since their resolutions are made public, we, as outside observers, can judge their validity and make our conclusions.
Let me play some whataboutism here: what about the Bengal famine of 1943-4? Looks like you do not need Stalin to starve millions of people to death…
Yuri, the same point applies to the interpretation as to the story: both preceded Snyder’s publication and thus cannot have been dependent on it. (In any case, the idea that one historian could have such a dictatorial influence over major publishing corporations and academic institutions, with their own teams of researchers, is frankly ludicrous.)
As pointed out above, it’s not just the EU who recognises the Holodomor as a genocide: you can add Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania and the USA to that list. (And the Vatican, for what it’s worth). As well as a number of other international organisations.
Even Russia has recognised that the disproportionate excess deaths in Ukraine in 1933 were a result of Stalin’s policies; they just quibble that there was no ethnic discrimination. Unfortunately, scrutiny of the evidence suggests there actually was.
Your blatant attempt at whataboutism is highly jarring in a thread entitled “Truth and Ukraine”, and it doesn’t reflect at all on the reality of the Holodomor.
2 Dawg: “Unfortunately, scrutiny of the evidence suggests there actually was [ethnic discrimination]” I do not believe such evidence is credible and you could not counter my arguments above, proving that peasants died simply where the drought took place, not just where Ukrainians lived.
The fact that some countries recognized this or that in our days is only the matter of current politics. I’ve noticed that UK is missing from your list; nor is UK among the 34 countries that formally recognized the Armenian genocide. I wonder, why? Maybe, because of the “plank in your own eye” effect?
Thanks for your reply, Yuri K.
> I’ve noticed that UK is missing from your list; nor is UK among the 34 countries that formally recognized the Armenian genocide. I wonder, why?
Simple. It’s because there is no UK parliamentary procedure for formally recognising historical events as genocides. This official position was reiterated numerous times in parliament – e.g. David Rutley MP: “As I have said, our consistent view across successive Governments—not just this one—is that the recognition of genocide is a matter for judicial bodies, not Governments.”
Nonetheless, the British government explicitly acknowledges that “The famine was man-made, and a result of a Soviet programme of forced agricultural collectivisation launched by Soviet leader Josef Stalin in 1932. Under the plan, individually owned and operated farms were replaced by large state-run collectives. Ukrainian farmers largely resisted the policy and in response Soviet officials forced some farmers from their lands, seized property, and confiscated produce in punishment for not meeting State production quotas. Soviet authorities also sealed the borders so no one could leave the country and blocked food supplies into Ukraine.”
> you could not counter my arguments above, proving that peasants died simply where the drought took place, not just where Ukrainians lived.
“Could not” is quite a rash inference on your part; I haven’t finished yet. Weather, including drought, was a factor, but not the dominant one. There were of course multiple factors in play, and in order to determine their relative influence you need to compile and disaggregate the data statistically, which is a huge undertaking. Thankfully, the data collection and number crunching has been done in meticulous detail – see The Political-Economic Causes of the Soviet Great Famine, 1932-33 (Qian et al., 2021). One of the relevant findings is summarised thus:
“The baseline specification controls for lagged grain production (predicted by weather and geography), urban population share, each of their interactions with the famine year indicator, and province and year fixed effects. Thus, our finding of higher famine mortality in ethnic Ukrainian areas cannot be due to differences in agricultural production, weather or urbanization rates.” (p.3)
“The fact that we are controlling for weather-determined food production means that higher famine mortality in ethnic Ukrainian areas was not due to different weather conditions or food production across regions. Note that we can alternatively control for individual weather conditions instead of predicted grain. The interaction estimate of interest is very robust.” (p.14)
The fact that grain was compulsorily exported from agricultural areas when there was enough to feed the local population at subsistence level, but no surplus for the urban areas, was a political decision. If that hadn’t happened, then the mortality for the agricultural population would have been much lower than for the urban population. Starving people who retained food were classed as enemies of the state and punished accordingly – even sent to the gulags or executed on the spot.
> 2 Dawg: “Unfortunately, scrutiny of the evidence suggests there actually was [ethnic discrimination]” I do not believe such evidence is credible
Thanks for telling me what you don’t believe, but let’s look at the empirical investigation. There was a great deal more data available than mortality rates alone, allowing for fine-grained distinctions at the district level as well as comparisons with Soviet regions outside Ukraine. They even incorporated variables from declassified secret police reports, such as the proportions and ethnicities of Communist Party members in each province and the rates of arrests for violent acts and public demonstrations. It’s a very thorough study.
Having surveyed a wealth of data from multiple sources, the authors conclude: “The triple interaction estimates of 1928 grain production and the political proxy variables support the claim that the Soviet regime used the famine to systematically repress Ukrainians.” (p.24)
You can find a relevant summary in the introduction (p.5):
“The findings … show that centrally planned policies known to have contributed to famine mortality were more intensively enforced in regions with larger Ukrainian population shares. Moreover, the mortality-Ukrainian gradient and the policy intensity-Ukrainian gradient both increase in the importance of a region for agricultural production. Together, these findings support the interpretation that ethnic Ukrainians were systematically repressed during the famine. The nuanced patterns of repression are consistent with the view that the regime’s desire to control grain production together with its fear of Ukrainian nationalist resistance resulted in the famine being especially harsh in ethnic Ukrainian areas (e.g., Graziosi, 2015).
“It is beyond the scope of our empirical analysis to be conclusive about the motivation for repression. The empirical and historical evidence together suggest that it was likely the combination of Ukrainians’ importance to agricultural production together with their opposition to the Bolsheviks that made them a target.” (p.5)
The paper contains myriad statistical tables and graphs which await your perusal. If you’d like to dismiss their findings as not credible, I’d be interested in your detailed critique of the dataset or statistical methodology in the study. But if you’re just going to comment on your feelings about it (which could show group loyalty and political bias effects) or your personal decision not to believe in it (which would suggest the deployment of ego defences), you needn’t bother.
Dawg: The “mortality-Ukrainian gradient” may just be a geographical coincidence. I’ve already mentioned that Kherson oblast’ was among those with the highest excessive deaths; however, Ukrainians comprised less than half of its population. Another disaster area was Luhansk Oblast’, where 2/3 of the population are native Russian speakers. Other areas of Soviet Union were also hit by poor harvests and hunger that season. For example, some estimates give the numbers of about 1.25 million excessive deaths for Kazakhstan and 67,600 for Belorussia.
Thank you for reading my latest comment, Yuri K. From what you say, it’s quite evident you didn’t read the study paper.
It’s totally obvious that different population mixes would have a significant effect. If the idea occurred to you so quickly after learning about the study, it’s surely no surprise that the researchers thought about it as well. Not only did they take it into consideration: it was a fundamental strength of their study design.
The relative demographics in the individual districts were mapped using data from the 1926 census.
“The 1926 Population Census is commonly viewed as one of the highest quality Soviet censuses (Andreev, Darskij, and Kharkova, 1998). It is the latest census prior to agricultural collectivization.
In 1926, the population shares of ethnic Russians and Ukrainians were 53.1% and 21.3% in the Soviet Union, 57.2% and 23.1% in our sample, and 41.9 and 43.8% in “grain-producing” provinces. Grain-producing provinces are a subset of our sample. This is an official designation used by Soviet central planners and procurement agencies, it indicated the importance of a province for agricultural production.” (p.11)
Think of the kind of coloured “heat maps” that are used to represent geographical distributions. If you have one map divided into districts with varying shades representing the proportions of ethnic Ukrainians in each one, and another map using shades of a different colour to show the varying mortality levels in each district, you would easily spot a correlation between the two. The same patterns can be discovered and quantified using precise statistical methods. This means the findings are much more robust than if the study had simply assumed everyone in Ukraine must be an ethnic Ukrainian, or if a single percentage was used for entire countries.
“Appendix Figure A.1b maps the share of ethnic Ukrainians in the rural population for each province as reported in the 1926 Census. It shows that the greatest concentration of Ukrainians is in Ukraine, but that there is also substantial variation outside of Ukraine. Agriculturally productive regions are shaded in crosses. Ukrainians are concentrated, but not exclusively residing in productive regions.”
“Figure 4a shows that there is a jump downwards in mortality rates as one crosses the border from Ukraine to Russia. However, this jump disappears once we control for urbanization and the rural population share of ethnic Ukrainians. This can be seen in Figure 4b, which plots the mortality residuals against distance to the border. These results imply that the Soviet policies which led to the famine targeted ethnic Ukrainians rather than Ukraine.
Second, the disaggregated data allow us to examine whether similar patterns exist across districts within provinces and across provinces.” (p.12)
Note that they also considered the ethnic population share in regions outside Ukraine: “In interpreting these results, it is important to recall the high degree of residential segregation across ethnic groups in rural areas of the Soviet Union. A higher share of rural ethnic Ukrainians in a province means a higher number of ethnic Ukrainian villages.” (p.12)
The calculations found strong statistically significant correlations between the relative population shares in the various provinces and death by starvation. Higher concentrations of ethnic Ukrainians correlated reliably with higher concentrations of famine mortality.
The researchers even identified the areas with the most political resistance and correlated that with the relative proportions of Ukrainian ethnicity: “The positive association between rural Ukrainian population share and per capita resistance is consistent with the findings by historians discussed in the background section and the conventional wisdom that strong group identity and local organization facilitate organizing resistance.” (p.12)
As I said, it was a very thorough study.
Before suggesting that the researchers might have overlooked something important, it would be wise to read the paper to check whether it was actually included in their analysis.
Dawg: Correlation does not necessary equal causation. Like I said, a simple geographical coincidence was “highly likely”, to quote from Theresa May. Since Ukrainians lived predominantly in the SW of Soviet Union and those were the areas hit by the drought, they were more likely to die from hunger. The hunger of 1921-2 resulted in more than 6 million dead but since the drought hit mostly middle and lower Volga river area and the dead were ethnic Russians by a large margin, nobody complained of “genocide”. The same was true for the famine and hunger of 1891-2 that killed probably half a million.
Yuri K, recall that I finished the last comment with: “Before suggesting that the researchers might have overlooked something important, it would be wise to read the paper to check whether it’s actually represented in their analysis.”
It’s clear, once again, that you didn’t consult the research paper. Not only is your objection about a “simple geographical coincidence” ruled out by the quotes I’ve already cited regarding patterns in the data across different geographical regions, but the specific mediator you propose was used as a control variable and matched against ethnicity. Moreover, statistical analysis with multiple variables is a lot more sophisticated that the simple linear regressions you may be familiar with; there are methods for detecting misleading correlations.
“We provide a large body of evidence against alternative explanations for our findings that do not require Ukrainian bias (e.g., weather, rigidity in centrally planned procurement) in the paper.” (p.4, my italics)
“The triple interaction estimates are zero in all years except during the famine, when it increases dramatically. The timing is sharp and shows that the effect manifests during the famine and is unlikely to be driven by spurious correlations.” (p.24)
The researchers also took the earlier 1892 famine into account:
“We find that mortality is positively associated with Ukrainian population share only during the famine. In non-famine years, the association is negative. In addition, using a similar specification, we find that Ukrainian population share is uncorrelated with famine mortality during the 1892 famine, the last large famine under the Tsars. These results suggest that higher Ukrainian mortality is specific to the Soviet famine and unlikely to be driven by time-invariant correlates of Ukrainian population share.” (p.3)
“… we study the 1892 famine, the last large famine in the Russian empire, using province-level mortality data from 1885 to 1913. Table 4 column (6) estimates our baseline specification for this earlier famine and shows that 1892 famine mortality is not associated with Ukrainian population share. This shows that our main results are unlikely to be explained by slow-moving features of Ukrainian culture.” (p.19)
So you can’t conclude “The same was true for the famine and hunger of 1891-2 that killed probably half a million.” It clearly wasn’t the same.
If you continue to propose lazy objections without checking whether they’re actually valid, this will be a very tedious discussion. I’m not going to keep reading you excerpts from the article like a bedtime story.
Dawg: Of course the 1892 famine did not correlate with Ukrainians because this famine hit Volga river area, where Russians are majority. Isn’t this obvious? Nevertheless, the authors of the paper you referred to make a wise face to state this banality. Yes, Dawg, famines in Ukraine killed Ukrainians; famines in Russia killed Russians; famines in Ireland killed Irish; and famine in Bengalia killed Bengalis. No matter how the authors of your paper try, they do not show the evidence that Ukrainians were picked up to die, like Jews or Gypsies in the Holocaust, or Armenians in Turkey, based on their language or looks or genetics etc. And w/o specific ethnic targeting there is no genocide, end of story.
OK, Yuri K, now I’m getting concerned about the level of stupidity you’re projecting here.
> Of course the 1892 famine did not correlate with Ukrainians because this famine hit Volga river area, where Russians are majority. Isn’t this obvious?
Yes, it is obvious – so obvious it’s covered in the introduction to the article. It was the inspiration for their research project in the first place! That’s why they disaggregated the regional data.
Your latest objection is even more ignorant than your previous ones, because now you’re assuming that the study compared the total number of deaths per ethnicity across the board for entire famines with no regard to how location and ethnicity might interact. You couldn’t possibly read the introduction and think the issue wasn’t addressed head on. (Is it reading or thinking that is proving the biggest challenge for you?) From the introduction:
“The causes of the famine and the high Ukrainian mortality have been a subject of much controversy. One side claims that the famine was a “terror” intentionally waged by the Soviet government on the Ukrainian peasantry (e.g., Conquest, 1986). Ukrainians were the largest ethnic group in grain-producing regions, they had a strong group identity, a history of confrontation with the Bolsheviks during the Civil War and resisted Soviet efforts to control agriculture, which constituted nearly half of GDP. Thus, the regime targeted Ukrainians in its efforts to control rural production (e.g., Graziosi, 2015). Some have gone further to argue that the famine was intended to annihilate the ethnic Ukrainian population. The other side claims the opposite: that there was no systematic bias against Ukrainians. Historians note that areas outside of Ukraine also experienced famine (e.g., Kondrashin, 2008). Some acknowledge that Ukrainians experienced higher famine mortality, but do not believe that it was due to state repression. Instead, they argue that bad weather and pre-famine policies led to larger harvest declines and higher mortality in areas populated by Ukrainians (Davies and Wheatcroft, 2004; Kotkin, 2017). This heated debate is at an impasse because of the lack of disaggregated data to evaluate competing hypotheses.
The primary contribution of our study is to address the data limitation by constructing the largest and most comprehensive dataset for interwar Soviet Union, 1922–40. Drawing mainly from archival sources, we construct panel data at the province and district levels, which contain information about economic, political, historical, geographical and climatic factors. The data include the three largest and most populous Soviet republics: Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The large sample size, long time horizon, disaggregated units of observation and rich set of variables allow us to distinguish between competing hypotheses and provide rigorous empirical evidence on the extent of Ukrainian bias in the famine.[2]
Our analysis aims to answer two questions: i) did ethnic Ukrainians experience higher famine mortality; and ii) was this due to systematic bias in Soviet economic policy or factors outside the control of the government in 1932? In addition, we provide a large body of descriptive evidence to shed light on the potential drivers of Ukrainian bias.” (Qian et al. 2021, p.2)
So let’s go over this one more time. The study examined demographic proportions at district (raion) level within provinces (okruhas). It compared the death rates for the different ethnic groups within those districts. They found that Ukrainians were dying at a much higher rate than other ethnicities in the same districts under the same conditions, and that this higher rate of deaths for Ukrainian people was consistent across different provinces. They concluded that “bias against Ukrainians explains up to 77% of famine deaths in the three republics of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus and up to 92% in Ukraine.” (ibid, p.1)
The same ethnicity effect was not observed in previous famines: Ukrainians did not die at a higher rate (i.e. percentage relative to population) than other ethnicities in the 1892 famine; nor did Russians, for that matter, inside or outside the Volga region. Do you get the point now?
That should be plain enough even for an idiot to grasp. (I’m tempted to say “Now what part of that don’t you understand?”, but I fear in your case the correct answer would probably be “All of it”.) If you don’t even understand research methods well enough to appreciate your elementary failure in comprehension, you need to be in a remedial class.
I think it’s time you stepped away from the keyboard, Yuri K. You’re obviously not clever enough to use the internet properly. Go back to your fingerpainting.
> end of story.
Yes, end of (bedtime) story. I hope you’ll be able to sleep now.
Tatyana, you say the account of the Holodomor as the deliberate starvation of Ukrainian people is “selective”. OK, to iron out any personal accusations of perfidy, how about consulting some histories from educational sources via a quick web search, then?
Encyclopedia Brittanica – Holodomor: “man-made famine that convulsed the Soviet republic of Ukraine from 1932 to 1933, peaking in the late spring of 1933. It was part of a broader Soviet famine (1931–34) that also caused mass starvation in the grain-growing regions of Soviet Russia and Kazakhstan. The Ukrainian famine, however, was made deadlier by a series of political decrees and decisions that were aimed mostly or only at Ukraine. In acknowledgement of its scale, the famine of 1932–33 is often called the Holodomor, a term derived from the Ukrainian words for hunger (holod) and extermination (mor).”
Wikipedia – Holodomor:
“The Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомо́р, romanized: Holodomor, IPA: [ɦolodoˈmɔr]; derived from морити голодом, moryty holodom, ‘to kill by starvation’), also known as the Terror-Famine or the Great Famine, was a man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. The Holodomor was part of the wider Soviet famine of 1932–1933 which affected the major grain-producing areas of the Soviet Union.”
World Atlas – What was the Holodomor?
“The Holodomor refers to the man-made famine in the Ukraine Soviet republic from 1932-1933 which resulted in mass starvation and millions of deaths. The Holodomor is now known as an act of genocide against the Ukrainian peasantry.”
History Collection – The Holodomor: Stalin’s Genocidal Famine that Starved Millions in the 1930s:
“Known as the Holodomor, or “the murder by starvation,” the famine would claim millions of lives over the space of a few years. But unlike most famines, the Holodomor may have actually been planned. At the time, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union, an uneasy union of countries across Eastern Europe and Central Asia, all held together in Josef Stalin‘s iron fist. As in many countries in the Union, there was a strong independence movement in Ukraine that threatened Stalin’s control. According to many historians, Stalin settled on a simple tool to fight this Ukrainian nationalism: hunger. After all, as Soviet diplomat, Maxim Litvinov once said, ‘Food is a weapon.’ And the people of Ukraine were about to learn how devastating a weapon food can be.”
Study Smarter – Holodomor:
“The Holodomor famine was one of the most shocking events in modern history, claiming the lives of nearly 4 million Ukrainians. It was so brutal that the Kremlin denied its existence for over half a century. The most shocking aspect of Holodomor was that the famine was man-made. Joseph Stalin issued a directive to replace independent Ukrainian farms with state-run collectives whilst stamping out any notions of Ukrainian independence.”
allthatsinteresting.com – 26 Horrifying Photos Of Holodomor — The Ukrainian Famine That Killed Millions:
“In 1932 and 1933, millions died in the Ukraine. The country was hit by the Holodomor, a famine so terrible that, for the people caught in the middle of it, seeing an emaciated body collapsed on the side of the road had become an everyday sight. […] When the Ukraine famine started, Stalin actively made things worse. He exported almost two million tons of food out of the Ukraine, pulling away the little food the people had to survive. Then he barred the people there from moving to any other part of the country. They had no food; they had no way to escape – nothing to do but wait and die.”
I’m clearly not writing those histories, Tatyana. You can check them for yourself and evaluate whether the authors and editors have a reasonable claim to expertise in their specialist topics. You can search around for other recognised history sources.
As for checking the validity of your anecdotal reports, which would be much more difficult, don’t worry: I already trust your honesty and sincerity. That’s not the issue here.
listen, you could trust Solzhenitsyn. In 1933 he was 15 years old and lived in Rostov-on-Don, a region affected by famine. He gave an interview in 2008, and said:
“The Ukrainian authorities misinterpret the terrible famine of the 1930s, calling it the genocide of the Ukrainian people.
The provocative outcry about “genocide” began to emerge decades later — at first secretly, in musty chauvinistic minds, viciously disposed against the “Muscovites”, but now it has also entered the state circles of present-day Ukraine.”
Or is he a liar? then admit that he lied about the Gulag and take the Nobel Prize from him.
The State Duma of Russia in 2008 also made a statement
“As a result of the famine caused by forced collectivization, many regions of the RSFSR (the Volga region, the Central region, the North Caucasus, the Urals, Crimea, part of Western Siberia), Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and Belarus suffered. From hunger and diseases associated with malnutrition, in 1932-1933, about 7 million people died there.”
How can you make it a tragedy of Ukraine? You, Dawg, say it was 8-12% excessive death rate there, when in Volga region it was 3/4 of the population? in Kazakhstan, such masses of the population died, were not born and irrevocably migrated to escape from hunger, that they lost from 42% in the southern and up to 80% in the northern regions of Kazakhstan.
I don’t know what are the motives of the European Union and other countries with this resolution of theirs, but it’s just monstrous.
“how about consulting some histories from educational sources via a quick web search, then?”
With enough effort and resources a propaganda meme can be put into circulation so that ‘authorative’sources copy it from each other. An appeal to mere ‘authority’ then is not an argument.
> listen, you could trust Solzhenitsyn.
Are you serious? Solzhenitsyn was a right-wing extremist who despised the Soviet regime (inc. the Gulag) because he yearned for the glory days of the Russian Empire under the tsars. Read the Guardian article (4 Aug 2008): “The other Solzhenitsyn: Praise his critique of the Soviet system certainly, but remember that it was informed by a deeply reactionary pan-Slavism“. In “Rebuilding Russia” (1990) he called for the creation of a new Slavic state bringing together Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and parts of Kazakhstan that he considered to be Russified. He would heartily approve of Putin’s imperial ambitions and wouldn’t want to stop at the annexation of 4 Ukrainian regions either.
> How can you make it a tragedy of Ukraine?
It’s widely recognised throughout the world as a tragedy of Ukraine inflicted by policies imposed by the Soviet leadership. Look back at the quotes from encyclopedias, the personal testimonies and the government declarations, which I noted above.
Regarding the demographic impact, the discrimination against Ukrainians could be pitched at the level of nationality (i.e. geographical boundaries), ethnicity (ancestry), or culture (e.g. language, artefacts, farming practices).
The key question is whether the excess deaths can be attributed to something outside the boundaries of Ukraine. Weather could be regarded as internal. An external factor would be interference by the Soviet government. You can find detailed facts and figures in the study I cited in my answers to Yuri K: The Political-Economic Causes of the Soviet Great Famine, 1932-33 (Qian et al., 2021)
“Many historians argued that the strong resistance to collectivization among ethnic Ukrainians was the key reason of their systematic persecution. Indeed, a common language and national identity, and experience in resisting the Bolsheviks during the Civil War facilitated the collective action of the Ukrainians. On the eve of the famine, when regional party officials began reporting food shortages to Stalin and asking for procurement reductions, the central leadership believed that the shortages resulted from intentional peasant resistance. The Stalin-led government believed that the peasants, including Ukrainian peasants, should be penalized for their subversion.
“In late summer of 1932, when it was obvious that enforcing procurement quotas would cause a severe famine, Stalin received multiple reports indicating the reluctance of Party leaders at all levels in Ukraine to facilitate the starvation of so many peasants. Stalin responded by sending special commissions headed by his closest deputies, Vyacheslav Molotov and Lazar Kaganovich, neither of whom were ethnic Ukrainians, to implement the full force of Soviet policies in Ukraine and North Caucasus, the two key grain-producing regions where most ethnic Ukrainians lived (Kotkin, 2017).
“On December 14, 1932, the Politburo of the Communist Party and the Soviet government issued a classified decree in which the government insisted on complete fulfillment of grain procurement in Ukraine, North Caucasus and the Western region and required the arrests of communists (e.g., party secretaries) and local officials who failed in this task. In the same decree, the communist leaders accused Ukrainian nationalists within the Communist Party and local bureaucracy of sabotaging grain procurement. The decree required regional authorities in Ukraine (as well as the North Caucasus and the Western region) to “crush” any resistance of “counter-revolutionaries” and nationalists and to fulfill procurement quotas (Danilov, Manning, and Viola, 1999–2006, Volume 3, Document 226).”
It’s very obvious why Russia has a keen interest in drawing a veil over this embarrassing episode in its history – especially in the light of Putin’s ambition to reabsorb Ukraine and its resources.
Amazing, just amazing! You call Solzhenitsyn a critic of the Soviet regime, and it looks like you are acknowledging that he is right about the Gulag, but not that he disagrees with the term “genocide” regarding the famine.
I think the base of your position is well shown just below – you really don’t like the idea of uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, don’t you?
I tell you that historically these are close people, coming from one root, with a common history, culture, languages, religion, economy, territory. You can’t deny it, these are facts. Your superficial view omits all this and interprets the impulse for unification as imperial ambitions. Obviously, you think that our peoples should be separated as far as possible from each other, and the more reasons for hatred, the better.
Dawg, this is exactly what I call the patronizing lecturer’s mentoring approach. For some reason, you think that I should trust the opinion of Timothy Snyder or the European Union more than my own ancestors, archives, or the same Solzhenitsyn. It’s just amazing! I think you even have an opinion why accepting your point of view will benefit me, right?
Tatyana, your arguments are becoming increasingly unhinged. I did not cite Solzhenitsyn as a trustworthy authority and his personal views are irrelevant. You brought his name into the discussion, for no good reason. Let me reiterate the title of the Guardian article – The other Solzhenitsyn: Praise his critique of the Soviet system certainly, but remember that it was informed by a deeply reactionary pan-Slavism. Those are two separate and distinct issues. Until you start making more sense, there’s no need to waste any more time discussing Solzhenitsyn.
Similarly your (second) attempt to insinuate that a belief in the Ukrainian right to self-determination somehow depends on trusting Timothy Snyder, is wrong-headed and pathetic. I didn’t bring Solzhenitsyn or Snyder into the discussion – you did. The recognition and condemnation of Soviet atrocities in Ukraine is an independent mattter. Stop trying to deflect the argument onto the personality of commentators.
> you really don’t like the idea of uniting Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, don’t you?
I don’t like the idea of uniting countries by force.
If the “impulse for unification” is mutual, why did Putin launch a military invasion to conquer Ukrainian territory by killing and maiming Ukrainians, in addition to destroying the buildings, landscape and civil infrastructure? That’s not a constructive way to express communal kinship.
Let me present an alternative view of this “impulse for unification”. Ukraine had its own language, history and culture until the Russian Bolsheviks seized control of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, imposed their radical communist ideology of collectivism, wiping out the tradition of peasant farming, deported or killed people who protested, decimated the remaining population via forced starvation, then repopulated (the eastern districts, especially) with their own people who spoke the Russian language and had family connections in Russia. (The same policy was used a decade later to displace the Tatars from Crimea.) That’s why some Russians have the delusion “that historically these are close people, coming from one root”. They feel an affinity not with the native Ukrainian people, but with the colonial occupiers.
I know that it was me who brought Snyder and Solzhenitsyn into the discussion, no need to remind me of this, my memory is fine, thank you.
Your “alternative view” I don’t understand, what was that, Dawg? An attempt at gaslighting, or what? Thank you very much, anyway. I could not have come up with a better joke to turn heated political discussions into entertainment, at parties with my compatriots. I’m already looking forward to next Friday to tell them that someone on the internet at the Scottish political forum thinks we’re delusional about unity with the Ukrainian people!
I really enjoy people from the outside teaching me who I am and what I should think. This is such a combination of cute naivety and impenetrable aplomb!
You see, in the 18th century, after a series of wars between the Russian and Ottoman empires, peace was made. The treaty assigned to Russia the entire Northern Black Sea region, including the Crimea (by the way, some 10 years before that, Russia also defeated the Crimean Khan, a vassal of the Ottomans. May I remind you that the enmity between the Russians and the Turks arose because of the Turkish habits to drive the non-Muslim population into slavery for sale in the slave markets?)
Also, Russia got the lands between the Southern Bug and the Dniester, founded Tiraspol and Odessa. I’m afraid that for your “alternative view” Tiraspol, that is modern Moldova, is maybe too much 🙂 Or the fact that the city of Odessa was founded by Russians, may become a great inconvenience. But, what can I do, I’m just bringing some non-alternative history here 🙂
Well, in my region, a border was established along the Kuban River.
a small excursion into Geography – if you are in a boat on a river, then you are carried by the current to the sea. the land to your right is called the right bank, and the land to your left, respectively, is the left bank. rather simple, eh?
So, after the victory over the Ottomans, the Russian Empress gave the entire right bank of the Kuban to the Black Sea Cossack army, that consisted of the Cossacks of Zaporozhye. Lands were given for perpetual use, the treaty was super-progressive for those times. because the Cossacks were not burdened with any dependence, financial or natural, except for the obligation to live on these lands and, accordingly, to protect these lands as their home.
Now, Dawg, the fact is that I live in this region and am one of the descendants of those same Zaporozhye Cossacks. My grandfather was a Cossack, you know, a real one, who rode horse and all that cossackian stuff. The Kuban is the kind of river that flows through my city of Krasnodar, and which I used to cross to get to Ikea, or to the Nissan service. I also loved taking my son fishing on the banks of this river in the early mornings of the summer school holidays.
I think my compatriots and I will need a lot of whiskey to accept your “alternative view”, to forget our ancestors, forget why we live on this land and consider it ours, and most importantly, figure out who are the colonial occupiers here – Ukrainians or Russians. But I’m afraid I can’t drink that much 🙂
What can I say, Dawg, I find your points ‘Curiouser and curiouser!’ (c) Alice 😉
Dawg
I returned to thank you again for the impetus you gave, awakening in me the desire to further understand the issues of the commonality of the Ukrainian and Russian peoples.
It is a well-known understanding here in Russia that the source of militant extreme Ukrainian nationalism comes from Western Ukraine. Especially its three regions Ternopil, Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk. These regions have historically changed their “citizenship”, and Mr. Murray talks about this in his video, and he separately emphasizes that the city of Lvov is of great importance for Poland.
I’d like to comment in more detail that the city of Lvov was founded by Prince Danil, from the Russian royal family of Ruriks, the founders and rulers of the Russian state.
It was in the Middle Ages, Western Europe was trying to build itself on the model of the Western Roman Empire. The general belief was that the royal power was once given to the first kings by God himself and passed on to the heirs by blood. So the political customs were such that the legitimacy of the ruler was confirmed by the Pope. So that Pope crowned that Danil to rule the Galicia-Volyn principality, the title given was Rex Russiae.
This prince later became the Grand Duke of Kiev, like his father Roman, and like his grandfather Mstislav, and like his great-grandfather Izyaslav, and like his great-great-grandfather Mstislav (known as Harald, after his grandfather King Harold Godƿinson who died in battle under Hastings), and as his great-great-great-grandfather Vladimir Monomakh, who turned all of Russia into Orthodox Christianity.
It’s interesting that monarchs of that time married each other, like, to keep their ‘divine royal blood’, let’s go in the opposite direction on the timeline: Monomakh was married to Gytha of Wessex. His son Mstislav ‘Harald’ married the Swedish princess Christina Ingesdotter. His son Izyaslav married Agnes fon Hohenstaufen, daughter of the King of Germany. And his son Mstislav married Agnieszka, daughter of the Polish prince Bolesław III Krzywousty.
All these genealogies are about the younger branch of the Ruriks, who ruled the Russian tribes. A more or less complete list of Russian principalities is here
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%85_%D0%BA%D0%BD%D1%8F%D0%B6%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2
With the course of history, the tribes are normally assimilated, change citizenship, fall under the influence of another church/ The same with Galicia – it fell under the influence of the Poles, the Catholic Church, then moved to Austria-Hungary, where they learned bad things 🙂 Denial of connection with the Russian people came from people of this region. Ukrainian support for Nazism in WW2 spread from this region. Monuments to Bandera and Shukhevich are installed in this region. Contemporary militant Ukrainian nationalism comes from this region. It cannot find support in other regions of modern Ukraine and is forced on people by Kiev illegal regime. That is why Kiev resorts to totalitarian means, bans opposition, repress Russian language and Russian culture and Russian Orthodoxy. It uses military to eradicate any pro-Russian movement, with the support of the same West, as many centuries ago – Poles as a cultural model in the first place, catholic church in the second.
People like you, spreading their “alternative views” help this division, promote hatred and intolerance, and simply say things that are not true.
Well, thank you for that delightful little story about rivers, Cossacks and a Russian Empress, Tatyana, as well as the additional history lesson. It’s a nice distraction, but it’s missing the point.
May I remind you: we were discussing the systematic starvation and displacement of ethnic Ukrainians in 1933 due to Soviet policies, as documented in the numerous references I provided elsewhere in this thread. (If you haven’t consulted them, the links are still there.) That was 90 years ago, not centuries ago.
It’s difficult to work out what your underlying message is. Do you think most of Ukraine is really Russian land and you want it back? Or that there is no separate Ukrainian identity, despite their distinct language and culture? Or that the people who believe there is a separate identity are actually foreign Nazis? Or that Ukrainians have no right to self determination? (Should Britain re-invade Ireland, for that matter?)
You began this discussion by claiming “the Holodomor is a fake”. Evidence to the contrary was provided in the form of newspaper reports from that period, the testimony of survivors, accounts of historians, encyclopaedia entries and declarations by diverse nations, not to mention a detailed statistical study of the archives.
It’s you who’s doing the gaslighting, Tatyana – trying to sow confusion to make people question the widely accepted reality. For most of your counter-evidence, you cite … your own opinions, emotions and family stories. Not convincing.
I’m not denying that whatever you say is the reality for you. The history you believe is the history you learned. Considering which country you grew up in, that may explain the discrepancy.
Bravo, Dawg!
No one has ever said that I’m lying because I’m Russian, as elegantly as you did!
I hesitated whether to enter into a discussion with you or devote my time to more pleasant things, but now I see that it is not in vain. It’s definitely a small one but still progress. After all, it could have been worse. I could get the “female with tits emoting” or “Russian propaganda”.
O – Optimism. Find the good in everything 🙂
The second good thing is, at least you acknowledge that there is more than one version of reality.
Definitely a beautiful day today.
Dearest Tatyana,
I’ve already said I don’t think you’re lying. (My default position is that I have faith in your integrity.)
But you can only assimilate the information to which you’re exposed.
I understand the Russian government has a history of controlling the historical narrative.
“Soviet and Russian history
See also: Historiography in the Soviet Union, Soviet war crimes, and Holodomor denial
During the existence of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (1917–1991) and the Soviet Union (1922–1991), the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) attempted to ideologically and politically control the writing of both academic and popular history. These attempts were most successful in the 1934–1952 period. According to Klaus Mehnert, writing in 1952, the Soviet government attempted to control academic historiography (the writing of history by academic historians) to promote ideological and ethno-racial imperialism by Russians. During the 1928–1956 period, modern and contemporary history was generally composed according to the wishes of the CPSU, not the requirements of accepted historiographic method.”
— ‘Historical negationism‘ (Wikipedia)
The Stalinist purge of information potentially critical of the leadership was all-encompassing. It extended to news media, publishing houses, libraries, official meetings and even casual conversations. (As you may be aware, it was the inspiration for George Orwell’s seminal authoritarian satire 1984.) The natural result of such information control is that the Soviet myths became embedded in Russian folk memory.
The regimes following Stalin slowly began to relax the restrictions, but Putin has reversed some of those freedoms. See Vladimir Putin’s Rewriting of History Draws on a Long Tradition of Soviet Myth-Making, by Richard Cohen, author Making History: The Storytellers Who Shaped the Past.
Even the satirical film The Death of Stalin (2018), starring Steve Buscemi and Michael Palin, was banned in Russia (and the one cinema that defied the ban quickly dropped it under pressure from police). That doesn’t sound much like a regime that’s relaxed about its own history.
And now we are invited to disbelieve the ample evidence of ethnic cleansing via targeted famine in 1930s Ukraine – by the country that was responsible for it, on the basis that … grrrr … ‘How can you say such monstrous things?! You didn’t grow up here! You have no right …’ etc, etc. Talk about gaslighting!
For obvious reasons, there’s no point in waiting for a Russian (kubanoid or otherwise) to accept this explanation. They might even regard it as a “joke” or “entertainment”. As Mark Twain remarked: “It´s easier to fool the people than convince them they´ve been fooled” (h/t svea).
Unfortunately, your method didn’t pass the test.
My husband asked me what we have for dinner, and I replied that in my version of reality he had already had his dinner, and my friends can confirm that the amount of solar energy and prana he received today is absolutely enough for life support! By the way, reality widely accepted 🙂
Any ideas why my husband told me that my answer reeked of schizophrenia?
I’m curious what would happen if my husband found me in bed with another man, and I said that in my version of reality, I’m a virgin? The funniest thing would be to convince our son of that! 🙂
In that case, it’s not a good result for you … because the ‘subjective reality’ defence was your last refuge. As I demonstrated, your Holodomor denial story doesn’t pass the objectivity test.
I offered you a way to escape the charge of deliberate lying, but now you’ve spurned it. If your version of events in Ukraine in 1933 doesn’t even seem like reality to you, then you’re not commenting here with integrity.
I conclude that you’re posting untenable pro-Putin propaganda, and your latest evasive and insubstantial reply is crafted to avoid admitting that fact. That’s an observation that people, including Craig, should be aware of.
Famine in the USSR, 1933, map. I hope you know some Geography
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:Famine_en_URSS_1933.jpg
Tatyana – it´s NOT you I´m referring to; I always appreciate your contributions. On the other hand Twain´s´ observation obviously applies to a certain group of people …..
“It´s easier to fool the people than convince them they´ve been fooled” Mark Twain
Svea, English is not my native language, so I’m sometimes unable to correctly understand the full range of meanings in the message. Sorry.
The story about the holodomor that Dawg defends feels like a monstrous accusation, built on selective facts arbitrarily pulled out of our common history with Ukraine.
He says I wasn’t a witness, but hey! I didn’t fall from the sky! I have parents and grandparents and I live in a region that was also affected by that famine. In addition to living witnesses, there are documentary evidence in the archives of my city. And there is also a living folk memory that emotionally describes those events.
My region is fertile steppes, traditionally agricultural and with a large proportion of the population of Ukrainian origin. There was some contagion a year before, up to 70% of the crop died, so 1933 was expected to be low-yielding. Authorities attempted to distribute what little they managed to grow to other starving regions of the country. No doubt it was mismanaged, no doubt it was violent, and no doubt it felt like heartless decision. It was met with strong resistance from the peasants. Frightened by hunger, people refused to understand that we were in the same boat.
This gave rise to a lasting reputation. Until now the inhabitants of my region Kuban are called humiliatingly “kubanoids”, which means greedy people who don’t want to share, who are ready to pass by the starving and won’t give them a bread crumb.
Another part of this stereotype is ‘taking without a sense of gratitude, taking for granted’. This is how the Ukrainians in the USSR were seen for the fact that the country helped them become an independent state, all the country shed blood in WW1, in the revolution, in the civil war, in the WW2, in order to give them land and protect their territories. No gratitude paid back, but reproaches and accusations.
The USSR collapsed, there is no communism, Ukraine became the largest territorially and financially the richest ex-USSR republic. Still we hear ‘you owe me’.
Ask anyone over 45, they will confirm that the standard of living in the national republics was higher. People know and remember as they went there to buy decent clothes, food and household appliances.
Here in Russia a new stereotype has grown up – small and weak states are always looking for a patron who will shed blood for them while they are accumulating wealth. Trading their loyalty.
Here comes an outsider, with their charged infantile judgments, trying to take political advantage of the people’s tragedy. Patronizing self-appointed judges who know what’s best for us. Inflating the stereotypes, fuelling enmity, feeding hatred and thereby facilitates the war. Tell me why the EU waited 90 years after the famine, but decided to take this step in December 2022 at the height of the war?
I have no words other than obscene to express my attitude.
I can’t calm down. I don’t understand what’s going on in the heads of the people, who distorts history like that?
What’s this? Is this naive stupidity? Is it an intellectual disability? Or is it emotional deafness?
These new Ukrainians who glorify Hitler’s collaborators and neo-nazis as national heroes, who are they? They claim that they have the right to do, yet pretend to be surprised that we Russians do not share this idea. Hello! We lost tens of millions of lives in that war!
I can compare it to the feelings of a raped woman who is asked: “Please understand that that particular gangster did not rape you, he only helped the rapist get into your house. Could you shove your opinion up your ass and please let his children honor the memory of their father? After all, they now live in this very house. By the way, thank you for giving them the part of the household.”
And also this story with the Crimean Tatars and Mr. Murray’s position, it sounds to me like a continuation of the same crazy movie: “You know, we, the neighbors, believe that you then hit this guy too hard in the past. After all, he did not rape you, but only pulled off your skirt and held your hands for a bit. Now that so much time has passed, you probably have calmed down and forgot about what happened, so perhaps you could consider compensating for his bruises?”
Do you play some strange version of tolerance there in Europe, which is completely out of touch with reality? Or is it good old propaganda for the sake of war and profit?
—-
Sorry Mr. Murray and readers for too much emotion. I hate to write this as much, as it might hurt you to read it. But someone had to say it out loud, after all.
Tatyana, English is not my mother tongue either. I Am vey sorry to abviously have upset you and I apologize. Actually I had intended to support you in your endeavour to set a number of things straight. The Mark Twain quote was / is addressed to those people who obviously don´t realize that they are biased. Example: a) Denial of the existence of WTC 7 before 9/11; its collapse in free fall. b) it´s not true that the People´s Republic of China has managed tolift about 80 million out of poverty whereas in the USA about half of the population lives from pay cheque to pay cheque. No comments on Russia, Ukraine, Bandera on purpose here. – Most MSM in Western Europe have for decades been doing a “good job” by using soft power to influence the populations´s mindset. (Hollywood films, James Bond e.g.) In the western part of Germany “re-education” programs were implemented right after 1945 /46. (one more “annalena” (war) tanks in the 19th century) Book: Journalists for Hire, by U. Ulfkotte (Gekaufte Jour-nalisten) – Do have a happy weekend!
Hello Tatiana.
My respects.
I look forward to your enlightened and remarkably tolerant comments.
This article might clarify certain things about the EU.
Cynthia Chung is a Canadian historian.The article is on her substack.
Best regards
Ukraine Hawk Who Heads European Commission Has a Nazi Pedigree She Does Not Want You to Know About
A Tatar Return?
Although I agree with most of what you have said, I cannot see how a return of the Tatar population to Crimea could not lead to another “ethnic cleansing”. The Tatar population was deported much earlier than you state. Probably immediately after the second world war, but there was a massive exodus that preceded even that.
Attempts to rectify the injustice inflicted on the Tatar people cannot become the creation of another perceived injustice to the current population, many of whom have also lived in Crimea for generations.
I do not doubt that jews have enormous difficulty getting their property back after the holocaust or the Palestinian people obtaining theirs too. It would be better to examine some mechanism of collective restitution rather than launch another round of conflicts over who should own a patch of land or site of a former business.
I am, of course, in complete agreement with you this should not become a source of further conflict and violence.
Murdo Ritchie
The current story circulating about the pipe blowing yacht and crew is so patently ludicrous and absurd as to make one think that it was a deliberate propaganda attempt to garner attention to the absurdity on the basis that people enjoy discussing absurdity more than they do reality and lose the connections between them. Huge dead cat being thrown.
I think John Mearsheimer puts it beautifully, it’s principally the west’s fault, Nato expansion, Bucharest summit and the US Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership all threatened Russia. It doesn’t absolve Russia from its actions or how the war is being waged but it does mean that all parties need to get to the negotiating table quickly.
https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/03/11/john-mearsheimer-on-why-the-west-is-principally-responsible-for-the-ukrainian-crisis
a new recommended blog entry by Bernard from “Moon of Alabama” on the issue of casualties, since it is a recurring topic:
“Ukraine Is Lying About Casualty Ratios To Justify Holding Of Bakhmut”
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/03/ukraine-is-lying-about-casualty-ratios-to-justify-holding-of-bakhmut.html#more
of course others here with military background (unlike me) but like Bernard can start to argue over this.
one comment from the Moon of Alabama comment section here (it can´t be linked directly),
I don´t know what to think of Larry Johnson, but I guess it depends on the topic:
“(…) Latest from Larry Johnson – about the pollicisation of western intelligence
https://sonar21.com/how-could-western-intelligence-have-got-it-wrong-again-they-didnt-they-had-other-purposes/
Key Quotes
“Larry Johnson, an ex-CIA analyst, writes “I no longer hold clearances and have not had access to the classified intelligence assessments. However, I have heard that the finished intelligence being supplied to U.S. policymakers continues to declare that Russia is on the ropes – and their economy is crumbling. Also, analysts insist that the Ukrainians are beating the Russians”.
Johnson responds that – lacking valid human sources – “western agencies are almost wholly dependent today on ‘liaison reporting’” (i.e., from ‘friendly’ foreign intelligence services), without doing ‘due diligence’ by cross-checking discrepancies with other reporting.
In practice, this largely means western reporting simply replicates Kiev’s PR line. But there does occur a huge problem when marrying Kiev’s output (as Johnson says) to UK reports – for ‘corroboration’.
The reality is UK reporting itself is also based on what Ukraine is saying. This is known as false collateral – i.e., when that which is used for corroboration and validation actually derives from the same single source. It becomes – deliberately – a propaganda multiplier.”
“Bluntly, so-called western ‘Intelligence’ is no longer the sincere attempt to understand a complex reality, but rather, it has become the tool to falsify a nuanced reality in order to attempt to manipulate the Russian psyche towards a collective defeatism”
“So, it’s ‘goodbye’ to traditional Intelligence! And ‘welcome’ to western Intelligence 101: Geo-Politics no longer revolves around a grasp on Reality. It is about the installation of ideological pseudo-realism – which is the universal installation of a singular groupthink, such that everyone lives passively by it, until it is far too late to change course” (…)”
Pigeon English
We discussed Putin’s words about the Western approach to the sexual education of children and why this is unacceptable for Russia. Article for your attention:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/03/ron_desantis_destroyed_critics_of_his_socalled_book_banning_with_a_master_class_in_jujitsu_on_hostile_media.html
In a nutshell, one DeSantis, the governor of Florida, a Republican politician, was criticized by his Democrat opponents for “banning books.” The governor gave a press conference and demonstrated which books he banned. It turned out that the content of these books was so sensitive that it qualified as pornography, so that the media covering that press conference could not even legally air it.
The books in the classrooms and libraries of Florida schoolchildren.
so, Pigeon English, you considered Putin’s words as if he called people in the West degradants. Of course, you are free to have any opinions, I’ve already said that to me it seems too emotional interpretation.
I’m more rational. I see that Putin’s opinion on the provision of information for minors is shared by some governors of some states of America, and I think this is correct.
I also see the strange hypocrisy – the content cannot be shown on the air of news channels, but is still appropriate for a school textbook. I feel something wrong with this. IMO, materials for children should not contain such things that adults are unable to openly demonstrate to the public.
“It turned out that the content of these books was so sensitive that it qualified as pornography, so that the media covering that press conference could not even legally air it.”
The press covering that conferance were given very short notice that DeSantis’ presentation would contain sexually explicit material. They had no idea what that material was nor had any time to review it (without foreknowledge) to assess whether it was or wasn’t suitable to air. Therefore, in an exercise in caution, they didn’t air that portion of his presentation. For sure, DeSantis scored a PR coup with this stunt but there is actually more nuance to it.
I have tried unsucessfully to find what this “pornographic” content is so I could make up my own mind.
ET
I do agree there’s more nuance to it, and I like the definition ‘PR coup’. After all, the whole sense of the article is admiration for how cleverly the governor pulled off this trick.
However, aside from the governors, their presentation methods, and the effect they had – if you look at the bare core of what happened – the very fact that a journalist must be careful when reporting on the content of books from classrooms and libraries.
Were that a standard anatomical manual on the human reproductive system, or, material on sexual education, as part of other school discipline, I think it could not cause such a cautious reaction from the press, because 1. those are absolutely normal for an educational institution, 2. books for libraries and classrooms of educational institutions are purchased through authorized commissions, and do not come from street stalls, 3. would be no problem to name the material like “anatomical atlas” or “sex education book” and no problem to show children everything they are interested in without resorting to pornography. After all, for centuries and millennia, art has been able to depict this aspect of our lives without trivializing it, right?
What I saw in this whole event, this is what the author of the article said – the press is not sure that they can livestream the contents of children’s books. I see a problem in this.
“the press is not sure that they can livestream the contents of children’s books”
I think they were unsure what was in DeSantis’ presentation (because he didn’t let them know). Tatyana, you realise that USA is fundamnetalist christian nutjob country where almost half to population still believe in a creationist 8000 year old earth and insist it is taught as a viable scientific theory in schools? Florida is one of the more fundamentalist states and DeSantis is playing to the crowd. I would want to see what is so pornographic in those books and to what age group they were adressed before I’d comment. My default position would be that this is more than likely fundamentalist christian nutjob territory.
If you knew how much it tickles my curiosity, to see with my eyes what they found there so much too pornographic that has not yet been published anywhere!
Ok, found some
https://i0.wp.com/i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/03/08/19/68477465-11835973-image-a-17_1678302627676.jpg
https://i0.wp.com/i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/03/08/18/68477487-11835973-image-a-3_1678299173343.jpg
The URL hints it was published in the Daily Mail, perhaps you can get the whole article?
They are from this twitter account:
https://nitter.kavin.rocks/tarynfenske
@tarynfenske
I have got to say BLOODY HELL to be honest. It’s a far cry from the kind of sex education I got as a kid.
I avoid where possible visiting the Daily Mail website Tatyana. But I’ll try find their story.
Tatyana
since we spoke about Roger Waters:
Our beloved city of Frankfurt just called off his concert which was part of his tour.
This time its not Ukraine, but Israel (I guess since Ukraine didn´t work out as a justification they now abuse German alleged intellectual prowess´ blind spot re: Palestine)
There is an open letter by Prashad/ Halper here:
“Headline: Frankfurt City Council Undermines Human Rights by Canceling a Concert by Roger Waters
By Vijay Prashad and Katie Halper”
https://independentmediainstitute.org/publisher-portal/?article_id=11597
and here 3min. Video by Chomsky on the Israel/South Africa comparison
(this is not new. I assume he has been saying this for 50 years now. But to quote “Touch of Evil” – “It´s so old, it´s new”):
https://znetwork.org/zvideo/noam-chomsky-ive-never-called-it-apartheid-because-its-worse-than-apartheid/
We did not talk about children’s education, but the West normalizing pedophilia and the Generalization of the people in the west as degenerates. There is nothing rational in generalization and even less rational in believing in the wisdom of Holy Books.
Belief and reason don’t go together.
Sorry, must be some misunderstanding. I thought it was about kids, because that is how the dialogue developed:
AG mentioned Putin’s speech
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/02/sy-hersh-and-the-way-we-live-now/comment-page-5/#comment-1034440
You answered “pretty good speech addressing many issues and as usually explaining the background. I did not like when he started talking about “family values” (gay marriage etc. and even claiming/implying that the West normalized pedophilia)”
bringing a YouTube video link as a source of your opinion
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/02/sy-hersh-and-the-way-we-live-now/comment-page-5/#comment-1034451
Since your video source has already been removed from YouTube, I found that speech by Putin on the official website. I quoted an excerpt about family values specifically making a reservation about the theme and rheme, highlighting significant meanings in bold and omitting the religious part as insignificant.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/02/sy-hersh-and-the-way-we-live-now/comment-page-5/#comment-1034621
You found that part about religion that I omitted and got angry, focusing on the holy scriptures and the degradation of the West. But for me, it still remained the problem of kids and their upbringing.
again sorry for being so nerdy, just want to clarify.
Pedofilia has nothing to do with “kids and upbringing” or homosexuality.
Religious bigots calling me degenerate does make me angry.
In Russia ‘degenerate’ might mean something else but in my culture it’s very very offensive.
Likewise IMO degenerate and degradation are different.
I would not even comment on the pics, if you did not address me.
I explained enough time why I disagree with his Opinion on a Holy Books and normalizing pedofilia. Your link is not related to either. Quote that a marriage is between man and a women is religious stuff.
Might be that even pedofilia has a different meaning in Russia.
An auction is now going on of how much we should be spending on ‘defence’ with doubling of our nuclear submarines. Labour is egging Tories to spend more and more with money better spent on health and energy infrastructure.
There’s votes in them thar subs – in places like Barrow. One of Labour’s many Achilles’ heels – the Unions that represent the defence industry. More powerful, it seems, than those representing the NHS.
The ukrainians seems more and more bizarre as it gets worse on the battlefield:
Today they whine that Zelensky was barred from making a statement at the Oscars’ while at the same time Navalny documentary got a prize for the best documentary
https://swentr.site/pop-culture/572924-zelensky-podoliak-navalny-oscars/
A week ago Ukraine came up with a conspiracy theory that Louis&Vitton (the luxury brand that left Russia early on because of the war), allegedly made an ad in support for Russia because which color they picked in the ad
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/03/06/ukraine-accuses-louis-vuitton-endorsing-russian-invasion-advert/
And some days ago news broke that they seriously contemplate about changing the name of Russia.
https://www.euronews.com/2023/03/11/president-zelenskyy-considers-petition-calling-for-russia-to-be-renamed-moscovia
Ukraine seems to be all about optics and PR.
I’m not surprised they were upset – they probably thought Zelensky should have been awarded an Oscar himself!
Apparently 1 Oscar win is not enough for Mr Zelensky
Ukraine President Zelensky given Oscar by actor Sean Penn – (Daily Mail, 9 Nov 2022) – YouTube, 2m 21s
To be fair, If Zelensky urged for diplomacy and peace I would have no problem with him adressing at the Oscars’ but his point, as always, would just be: “send more weapons, send more money” and thus more death, destruction and nearer a nuclear escalation.
The standard playbook comes out, every time anyone comes up with a peace plan, or hopes for peace. Either they are an naive ‘appeaser’, with references to Chamberlain (with all the baggage of Hitler hopefully dragged into it), or else they’re a stooge and supporter of Saddam Hussain, Putin or whoever.
Jack, this thing about renaming Russia into Moscovia
it has become the object of very sarcastic remarks here. The fact is that the name ‘Ukraine’ historically and linguistically means ‘outskirts, suburbs’, it derives from Russian word ‘krai’ – edge, ending, far end.
So if Russia becomes Moscovia, then Ukraine will inevitably turn into Sub-Moscovia 🙂
I’d say, these people should better focus on ending the hostilities, rather than on entertaining their masters with new and new stupid comedy.
Indeed, I saw that Medvedev joked about renamning Ukraine to ‘Stephan Bandera Reich’, surprisingly (or is it?) there was no loud protests coming from Ukraine.
What I sometimes read about Medvedev’s statements, retold by other people, makes my hair move. If this is true, then I’m ashamed of him. I can understand tense or heated rhetoric in wartime, but I don’t see how insults or mockery would help resolve the situation.
I agree, I do not recognize him anymore, too emotional these days.
…you should read what German papers write about German peace protesters.
It´s unbelievable.
To call Nazis, Nazis, in contrast is much less upsetting to me.
(Of course I agree none of this stupid rhetoric is helpful. But that rule would apply to all sides. And eventually it matters less what I say than what I do.)
AG, I agree about words and actions. Some strange madness has swept the world, everyone pretends that reality is not important, but only words and opinions matter. There’s some kind of battle of narratives going on. Absurd. For myself, I visualized it as a “battle of hypnotists”, like a competition for who will do the best job of convincing the public in their version of events.
Today they are discussing the situation with the fallen Reaper. CNN described the situation like “Reaper and two Russian aircraft were flying over the sea …” I thought I were reading a novell 🙂 Like, “a drone flew serenely over the Black Sea, perhaps enjoying beautiful clouds, or maybe entertaining itself with counting dolphins in the waves” 🙂 As you know, people on a vacation on a beach under palm trees turn off their smartphones, apparently that was the motive of that drone for turning off its transponder 🙂
The Russian MoD joined the game and commented like “a couple of Russian fighters just flew near it and the drone accidentally fell for some unknown reason.” Indeed, there is such a wave of witty jokes in Russian social networks, I laugh all day reading this.
The events are presented so frivolous, so unrelated to reality, irresponsible, it seems to me that we will go into the Third World War laughing all the way.
According to John Helmer the Navalny documentary is disinformation https://johnhelmer.net/navalny-the-oscar-nominee-for-best-documentary-film-is-disinformation-2/
The question that people should ask is – everyone knows Navalny, but who can name one single name of Ukrainian opposition?
There’s Biden and there’s Trump. There’s Putin and there’s Navalny. There’s Zelensky and there’s no one.
Is it not telling that during the whole war, Zelensky have never once really reached out to the people of Luhansk, Donetsk etc thus not seeing those as ukrainians but just russian/enemy occupiers of ukrainian land.
Remember week before the war, Zelensky rejected the Minsk agreement:
“France and Germany ‘pushing Ukraine to use unpopular peace deal’ to avert war
Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz said to have urged Kyiv to invoke Minsk accords that ended Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2015”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/02/16/france-germany-pushing-ukraine-use-unpopular-peace-deal-avert/
Remember also how in 2021 he called upon his own population to leave.
“Zelensky urges Donbass residents who consider themselves Russian to leave for Russia ”
https://tass.com/world/1322979
With such a leader, strife, war is inevitable
And this chump is hailed today 247, amazing.
Many countries are supporting Ukraine against Russia.
But one country that is supporting Ukraine against Russia that many might not realise.
That country is Russia itself. Yes Russia is supporting Ukraine against Russia.
It might seem mad but it is true. Russia is supplying Ukraine with Gas and Oil and Diesel That Ukraine needs to help it fight Russia.
Why one may ask would Russia want to support Ukraine against Russia. It must be to prolong the conflict.
So why prolong the conflict. It must be so more can be spent on the war. Be it on weapons and shells but also on reconstruction.
First you knock it down then you rebuild. Repeat as often as possible
The result is huge debt . Just another way to take wealth of the people and transfer it to those who will be far away from the conflict.
This is a complex issue and you could also argue that Ukraine is breaking the western sanctions by continuing to allow the gas flow which goes to Europe. In any case do you have any recent information post NS2 sabotage? I can only find references to this from March 22
part 1 of a conversation between Dan Ellsberg and Noam Chomsky. 30 minutes.
Mainly about China-Taiwan-US
With a nice cliffhanger
https://znetwork.org/zvideo/chomsky-and-ellsberg-on-the-present-danger/
With a few interesting Details by Ellsberg (Chomsky is doing the asking here) on how US Marines are currently changing training tactics in terms of amphibious landing etc. for a possible War in the Pacific.
They even mention “island hopping” McArthurs then wording. Its WWII all over again.
* * *
totally different subject:
re: thinking about the demise of Corbyn and the destruction of Labour – basically part of a cool plan for the Brits to take over the lead in a revitalized NATO that would check Russia while the US take care of China.
Anglo-Saxon world games.
and this item from THE GUARDIAN I found interesting:
“Ex-Nato head says Putin wanted to join alliance early on in his rule – George Robertson recalls Russian president did not want to wait in line with ‘countries that don’t matter’”
Nov. 4th 2021
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule
Since people love to quote Putin. Some stuff for quotations in here too.
Just a few days ago I read that Russia had attempted to join NATO not twive (as I thought) but four times.
I lost that text. So I am trying to find it again.
(no person discussing these issues seriously can ignore NATO´s role in this matter with all its details.)
The Russian invasion still makes no sense, for example the ongoing Battle of Bahkmut.
So, Bahkmut is about 90km from Russia proper border, still Russia has trouble gaining foot even there!
I do not understand why Russia keeps the railways open and doesn’t bomb them because Ukrainian soldiers and arms from western Ukraine are are shipped to the front systematically.
How many lives lost now? For what?
Bahkmut is already destroyed so what to save? ‘No man’s land’.
On top of that, the major work is done not by Russian army (do they lack the competence, will?) but the Wagner group and their…eccentric and emotional commander with no real military training, experience, from what I know. On top of that, the same person has some infighting with the Russian state.
I have no idea how Russia is going to get out of this war/mess with any dignity.
Jack
I get your point but what if those railways become useful in the future for SMO?
Bakhmut is a paradox. One day It’s not important and the day after crucial and UA will hold as long it can. I believe that massive amount of soldiers and equipment was stationed there and that is why is a big ‘ target’. Many months ago estimates were about 30 000 – 60 000 troops.
To my understanding UK active forces are about 80,000 – to put things in perspective.
Futhermore on 100 km frontline (Dover to Brighton )Whole( maybe more) all of Active UK forces engaged
Yes that is true (possible usefulness for themselves in the future)
but imo the most urgent objective, for Russia, should be to stop the arriving ukrainian troops/arms before they get to Bahkmut (railways but also vital roads), I mean Russia have been fighting for Bahkmut for over 6 months now and part of the reason of that the continued fighting is that Russia is keeping the door open so to speak for Ukraine to replenish continuously. I cannot see how that is a successfull strategy.
And if not targeting railways/roads more, why not target the soldiers, caravans, arms, trucks etc before they got on the train/roads to Bahkmut?
if I understand history correctly one lesson from Vietnam learned, you do not fight with conscripts in such wars but mercenaries.
Otherwise you will lose the war at the media front at home.
As to Wagner, I assume, the “cook” (the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover), is more of the PR guy. Enough knowledgable people in the background.
Bakhmut appears to be the place to “trap” Ukrainian soldiers.
Analysts claim if Bakhmut is under Russian control most of Donbas would be.
Thus a key point.
And railroads?
I dunno. They WANT heavy arms to be transported in small numbers to the front now so they can destroy them.
Instead of opposing a tank divison well prepared and equipped with everything waiting at Kiev.
Some argued even that the Chinese need the railroad system for their R&B Initiatve. So they sort of asked the Russians to keep it intact.
p.s.: Bakhmut – as far as Scott Ritter is concerned, he says Ukrainian KIA there 1000, Russians 100, per day.
If true it concurs with the assumption that Russians transformed much of this war into an “old style” sitting war, a.k.a. war of attrition. So the distance to Russian border is not the essential significance of the location. It’s more about the casualties the battle inflicts.
As it has become clear that there will be no negotiations from US side, because it’s not US soldiers dying.
Instead they are abusing Ukrainians to degrade Russian conventional capabalities. In how far this has worked out, who knows.
By now I don´t know what to believe.
The only thing I do know is that a former board member of Raytheon is SoD of the USA.
Very little Scott Ritter says is true. As nether side is releasing accurate casualty figures how would he know? Where is he getting his information from?
He’s also heavily biased towards Russia.
Pears
the problem of source reliability is known especially in this war.
On the other hand when I hear similiar numbers form various people it might enhance credibility.
What we do know is that Ukrainians are dying in high numbers.
Apart from that were it an issue if Ritter was heavily biased towards the US?
And what does that actually mean?
He is lying?
He is making up things?
(I am not a Scott RItter fan boy. From time to time I look into his texts and statements. But so I do with dozens of other “experts”.)
And I do think it is safe to assume that Russian High Command would not conduct this kind of warfare were it not in their interest.
Russia have about 1 million active military soldiers and at least the double in the reserve > this is the very people that should do the bulk of the operations in this war, you wont get anywhere imo with this thousands or so troops from Wagner.
In my view, mercenaries could do smaller targeted military operations, not big events like taking and holding a big territory like Bahkmut.