Drones against the Kremlin

[jaF0]

^^ Not for mature, rational people, no.

 

[ll74]

You don’t suppose NATO’s 800 mile expansion since ‘91 up to Russia’s borders might have been an issue?

Nope. NATO is all over the place. Ukraine already agreed not to join. Russia acknowledged this in the Minsk agreements.

Russia invaded without true provocation

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Nope. NATO is all over the place. Ukraine already agreed not to join. Russia acknowledged this in the Minsk agreements.

Russia invaded without true provocation

II74:

We can’t be taken seriously, II74, if we ignore all the antecedent history and make ‘who crossed a border first’ the hill upon which we stand and die.

https://www.wsws.org/en/special/pages/background-ukraine-russia-war.html

‘Beginning with ‘who crossed the line/who fired the first shot’ is a completely ahistorical approach. We’ll never develop solid analysis of material circumstances. We will be confused and disoriented and politically illiterate. We’ll be condemned to political reaction and we’ll be ‘had’ by every campaign or slogan that targets us.

Since Thucydides’ day [4 c BC], we have understood that revolutions and wars are always complex and momentous events for which long term, medium term, short term and immediate causes always apply.

Example: if Canada oriented toward China, and began receiving vast measures of ordinance and matériels, would this be seen benignly by the WH/Pentagon?

Or say that Mexico followed suit. Say that China began routine Gulf of Mexico patrols claiming“Freedom of Navigation” as Beijing refused to recognize the US’ exclusive influence in the region.

Or say China stationed powerful surveillance systems on the border of Canada and/or Mexico, capable of penetrating deep into US territory.

Are we to believe that if it acted to end these policies, the US would be entirely responsible for said actions?

I wouldn’t.

‘NATO is everywhere,’ you say?

Precisely.

That’s Russia’s predicament.

Nor was it an accident today Germany and the US sponsored a coup in Ukraine to overthrow a pro-Russian regime, to establish a Western oriented/acceptable to Washington fascistic leaning one.

Nothing that has happened in the region over decades is the result of accident. As I said, this is the result of decades of NATO expansion to her very borders.

Whether Ukraine is a de jure NATO member is irrelevant, other than it would immediately place the alliance in a war with Russia.

NATO membership requires a lengthy process of reforms and political alignment, and it ultimately requires the approval of all current NATO members.

In a 2016 speech to Canada’s Parliament, Petro Poroshenko, Ukrainian President, referred to Ukraine as a "de facto member of the NATO alliance" due to its participation in NATO operations and exercises.

Even earlier, former German Chancellor Merkel admitted that “the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time.” “It also used this time to become stronger, as you can see today.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/22/ffci-d22.pdf

In 2015, the wsws.org reported that:

‘The truce in Ukraine agreed by the German chancellor and the presidents of Russia, France and Ukraine after 16 hours of negotiations in Minsk is merely a hiatus in an escalating war.’

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/13/pers-f13.pdf

 

[Comshaw]

Essentially this drone strike was analogous to a flash bang grenade, with little damage but a lot of smoke and noise. So who would benefit from such a thing? Not Ukraine. They have demonstrated that when they do something it's with a purpose. Doing something like this might turn the Russian people who oppose the war to support the war. Ukraine wouldn't want to chance that just to make a statement of "See? We can reach the Kremlin!"

Was it the Russian people who oppose Putin and the war? Why? Why would they want to make a statement with a lot of smoke and noise? All it would do is bring the ire of Putin and cohorts down on them even more. An assassination attempt I could see but not a dumbass useless statement like this.

Was it the US? Again, why? We would gain nothing from it and if it were proven, add to the legitimacy of Putin's complaint against us, nope not the U.S.

That leaves Putin and friends. What would it gain him? He's tried to blame it on the U.S. If he was successful doing so, it would go a long way in convincing the Russian people to support the war. And right now the country is a pot ready to boil and blow it's top because of the war. This man is an ex-KGB agent, trained and steeped in espionage, covert and disinformation operations. A man who wouldn't hesitate to use (or produce) something like this to his advantage.

If I had to put my money on one, it would be Putin and friends. But we'll see. Or we won't. It'll be fun to find out though.

Comshaw

 

[Holy_Seduction]

who would benefit from such a thing?

‘…a criminally reckless provocation, serving no other purpose than to provoke retaliation by Russia that would then be used to justify a massive escalation of NATO’s involvement in the war.’
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/05/04/dlkp-m04.pdf

 

[Comshaw]

‘…a criminally reckless provocation, serving no other purpose than to provoke retaliation by Russia that would then be used to justify a massive escalation of NATO’s involvement in the war.’
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/05/04/dlkp-m04.pdf

And you believe that such an action, in essence, a flash-bang, is a "reckless provocation"? I can think of a hundred other more provocative actions IF NATO really wanted to get into this war. A flash-bang is way, way down that list of things. Besides, they wouldn't do it that way. To get the populations of the NATO countries behind a war it would have to be done so that it looked like Putin and friends initiated it and no country has tried (or will) to do such a thing. Why should they when all they have to do is wait and the Russian people will get the war stopped on their own? When they grow tired of sending their sons off to die for nothing, it will stop. They will stop it.

Comshaw

 

[ll74]

II74:

We can’t be taken seriously, II74, if we ignore all the antecedent history and make ‘who crossed a border first’ the hill upon which we stand and die.

https://www.wsws.org/en/special/pages/background-ukraine-russia-war.html

‘Beginning with ‘who crossed the line/who fired the first shot’ is a completely ahistorical approach. We’ll never develop solid analysis of material circumstances. We will be confused and disoriented and politically illiterate. We’ll be condemned to political reaction and we’ll be ‘had’ by every campaign or slogan that targets us.

Since Thucydides’ day [4 c BC], we have understood that revolutions and wars are always complex and momentous events for which long term, medium term, short term and immediate causes always apply.

Example: if Canada oriented toward China, and began receiving vast measures of ordinance and matériels, would this be seen benignly by the WH/Pentagon?

Or say that Mexico followed suit. Say that China began routine Gulf of Mexico patrols claiming“Freedom of Navigation” as Beijing refused to recognize the US’ exclusive influence in the region.

Or say China stationed powerful surveillance systems on the border of Canada and/or Mexico, capable of penetrating deep into US territory.

Are we to believe that if it acted to end these policies, the US would be entirely responsible for said actions?

I wouldn’t.

‘NATO is everywhere,’ you say?

Precisely.

That’s Russia’s predicament.

Nor was it an accident today Germany and the US sponsored a coup in Ukraine to overthrow a pro-Russian regime, to establish a Western oriented/acceptable to Washington fascistic leaning one.

Nothing that has happened in the region over decades is the result of accident. As I said, this is the result of decades of NATO expansion to her very borders.

Whether Ukraine is a de jure NATO member is irrelevant, other than it would immediately place the alliance in a war with Russia.

NATO membership requires a lengthy process of reforms and political alignment, and it ultimately requires the approval of all current NATO members.

In a 2016 speech to Canada’s Parliament, Petro Poroshenko, Ukrainian President, referred to Ukraine as a "de facto member of the NATO alliance" due to its participation in NATO operations and exercises.

Even earlier, former German Chancellor Merkel admitted that “the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time.” “It also used this time to become stronger, as you can see today.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/12/22/ffci-d22.pdf

In 2015, the wsws.org reported that:

‘The truce in Ukraine agreed by the German chancellor and the presidents of Russia, France and Ukraine after 16 hours of negotiations in Minsk is merely a hiatus in an escalating war.’

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/13/pers-f13.pdf

So you ignore the Minsk agreements. Got it
Russia does as well. Glad that you admit your support for Putin

 

[Dribble]

The leader of the Wagner Group military force publically said God damn it we will pull back if we don't have bullets. We need bullets. Magically...a flash bomb goes off. Putin did this to divert attention from the fact their military can't even get bullets to the Wagner force

 

[Holy_Seduction]

IF NATO really wanted to get into this war

NATO has had every intention of pursuing war on Russia.

The allied powers did bring war to the Newly formed Soviet Republic. And after WWII, there were those in the US military who wanted to continue driving into Moscow.

In the first case, the Red Army defeated the invaders. After the second war, this was not attempted as a general rebellion in the military would have followed.

The Capitalist class — and especially in the US has NEVER forgiven the Russian oligarchy for being the First Nation to ‘succumb’ to a workers revolution.

Additionally, the Russian and Chinese revolutions — despite Stalinist betrayals — deprived the US and other imperial powers access to the vast resources of Asia.

Those resources are increasingly critical to US production, including military production. That addresses why the NATO powers will not be satisfied to see Putin abandon Ukraine. The objective is and has been for many years — war on Russia, to defeat Russia, and to break it up into independent, semi-colonial statelets that are incapable of preventing the exploitation by NATO aligned powers.

And once that is accomplished, the US and Allie’s will bring war to China.

This is a conflict for global conquest, as Leon Trotsky himself described.

And again …

https://www.wsws.org/en/special/pages/background-ukraine-russia-war.html

 

[FGB]

If we had attacked that silly bastard, neither he nor the Kremlin would be there.

Nice fireworks show ...

 

[ll74]

NATO has had every intention of pursuing war on Russia.

The allied powers did bring war to the Newly formed Soviet Republic. And after WWII, there were those in the US military who wanted to continue driving into Moscow.

In the first case, the Red Army defeated the invaders. After the second war, this was not attempted as a general rebellion in the military would have followed.

The Capitalist class — and especially in the US has NEVER forgiven the Russian oligarchy for being the First Nation to ‘succumb’ to a workers revolution.

Additionally, the Russian and Chinese revolutions — despite Stalinist betrayals — deprived the US and other imperial powers access to the vast resources of Asia.

Those resources are increasingly critical to US production, including military production. That addresses why the NATO powers will not be satisfied to see Putin abandon Ukraine. The objective is and has been for many years — war on Russia, to defeat Russia, and to break it up into independent, semi-colonial statelets that are incapable of preventing the exploitation by NATO aligned powers.

And once that is accomplished, the US and Allie’s will bring war to China.

This is a conflict for global conquest, as Leon Trotsky himself described.

And again …

https://www.wsws.org/en/special/pages/background-ukraine-russia-war.html

You're a Russian stooge.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

So you ignore the Minsk agreements.

A careful reading would shot that Zi addressed Minsk. I provided the Merkel quote, which has been repeated by others including high profile Ukrainians.

As for the remark about supporting Putin —that is incorrect. It also illustrates my point about political confusion and disorientation which results inevitably from ahistorical accounting of events.

My opposition to the undeclared war against Russia does not constitute support for Putin. Both Putin and Biden along with many around them stand to be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, and for crimes of war against peace. Both are war criminals. I hope that is cleared up.

 

[ll74]

A careful reading would shot that Zi addressed Minsk. I provided the Merkel quote, which has been repeated by others including high profile Ukrainians.

As for the remark about supporting Putin —that is incorrect. It also illustrates my point about political confusion and disorientation which results inevitably from ahistorical accounting of events.

My opposition to the undeclared war against Russia does not constitute support for Putin. Both Putin and Biden along with many around them stand to be prosecuted for crimes against humanity, and for crimes of war against peace. Both are war criminals. I hope that is cleared up.

So you ignore the Minsk agreements and can't admit that you do.

Thanks for clarifying.

Also, Russia invaded Ukraine, in case you need to update your notes.

 

[Pad_Foot]

Biden… war criminal ?
Trump, Obama, the Bushes, Reagan sure!!


But? Putin is running out of missiles and bombs he is using on civilians. He is an Imperialist

You ? Are an enabler and resemble a brown seal

Bye!

 

[Holy_Seduction]

If we had attacked … that .., neither he nor the Kremlin would be there.

How many times must we fall for ‘cakewalk’ theory. As I said, without the perspective of historical and material analysis, we are condemned to political illiteracy, reaction, and to be suckers for every campaign and slogan on the horizon. Why must we refuse to learn?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Biden… war criminal ?
Trump, Obama, the Bushes, Reagan sure!!

This is entirely correct.

And yes, the Russian oligarchy/Capitalist class does constitute an imperial power. Their hands are as oily as our own, or anybody else’s.

 

[Comshaw]

NATO has had every intention of pursuing war on Russia.

The allied powers did bring war to the Newly formed Soviet Republic. And after WWII, there were those in the US military who wanted to continue driving into Moscow.

In the first case, the Red Army defeated the invaders. After the second war, this was not attempted as a general rebellion in the military would have followed.

The Capitalist class — and especially in the US has NEVER forgiven the Russian oligarchy for being the First Nation to ‘succumb’ to a workers revolution.

Additionally, the Russian and Chinese revolutions — despite Stalinist betrayals — deprived the US and other imperial powers access to the vast resources of Asia.

Those resources are increasingly critical to US production, including military production. That addresses why the NATO powers will not be satisfied to see Putin abandon Ukraine. The objective is and has been for many years — war on Russia, to defeat Russia, and to break it up into independent, semi-colonial statelets that are incapable of preventing the exploitation by NATO aligned powers.

And once that is accomplished, the US and Allie’s will bring war to China.

This is a conflict for global conquest, as Leon Trotsky himself described.

And again …

https://www.wsws.org/en/special/pages/background-ukraine-russia-war.html

Almost everything you said above is speculation on your part without a shred of real evidence to back it up. I say almost because there were some generals after WWII who did want to attack Russin. Thank goodness we had cooler heads that slapped them down.

And you are really touting the World Socialist Website as a source? Damn! That's as asinine as someone quoting the KKK when arguing for diversity.

you can as we all can post your opinions here. But I doubt very much if you will get few if any who will agree with your erroneous, fact free and very bias thoughts.

Comshaw

 

[Pad_Foot]

But
No one has made war in the west like Putin is!
He’s brought back WW1

Does Russians fear war ? Sure! He is using that fear! America citizens have no clue what war is like

 

[Holy_Seduction]

you are really touting the World Socialist Website as a source? Damn! That's as asinine as someone quoting the KKK when arguing for diversity.

And there the discussion ends…

 

[Dribble]

Patton was right. That's OK. We won't make the same mistake twice

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Patton was right. That's OK. We won't make the same mistake twice

General George S. Patton expressed the desire to continue the war against the Soviet Union and to reestablish a Capitalist regime oriented to the US.

He expressed this in several meetings including one with British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery in May 1945. There was also a letter he wrote to his wife on June 22, 1945.

Patton wrote: "I hope I am wrong, but I have a feeling that our good friends the Russians will turn on us one day. They are a beast, and we will have to keep our eye on them more than on the Germans." He also wrote: "In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these."

I think the ‘we won’t make that mistake again’ expresses NATO’s ongoing intention which is now unfolding in a war on Russia.

 

[ll74]

General George S. Patton expressed the desire to continue the war against the Soviet Union and to reestablish a Capitalist regime oriented to the US.

He expressed this in several meetings including one with British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery in May 1945. There was also a letter he wrote to his wife on June 22, 1945.

Patton wrote: "I hope I am wrong, but I have a feeling that our good friends the Russians will turn on us one day. They are a beast, and we will have to keep our eye on them more than on the Germans." He also wrote: "In my opinion, the American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these."

I think the ‘we won’t make that mistake again’ expresses NATO’s ongoing intention which is now unfolding in a war on Russia.

Not sure you got the memo....Patton died a while ago.

Hope this helps!

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Patton died a while ago.

The point is that the intention to dismantle and dispossess Russia of its very substantial mineral wealth continues. I’ll assume you realize that this was the point.

 

[ll74]

The point is that the intention to dismantle and dispossess Russia of its very substantial mineral wealth continues. I’ll assume you realize that this was the point.

The point is that you want to base current events on a guy who died half a century ago.

I'll assume you realize that times have changed.

Also, your continued deference towards Russia is disturbing.

 

[Comshaw]

The point is that the intention to dismantle and dispossess Russia of its very substantial mineral wealth continues. I’ll assume you realize that this was the point.

One word...bullshit. And that wasn't the point of why Patton wanted to go to war with Russia. He saw them as a world threat. And it seems over the years Stalin proved they were. Actually, he was more of a threat to his own people (how many did he kill or stave to death?) Your pie in the sky accusation that the U.S. and NATO have designs on going to war with Russia and China, then occupying them so as to strip their natural resources has no basis in fact or anything that could remotely substantiate such an opinion.

And I just can't buy the whine that Russia is afraid of NATO because NATO wants to conquer them. That has nothing to do with why Putin and company want Ukraine. They want it for the rich farmlands it has. they want it because Putin wants an empire like the old Soviet Union. He wants to be Stalin incarnate. They want it to prove how powerful they are. Hopefully the Russian people will rise up before he has a chance to feed many more into the lethal war grinder. He has the same mentality that Satlin did in WWII, "we'll just keep throwing bodies at it until we win, no matter how many of our own people we have to kill." Stupidity. Sheer, utter stupidity.

Comshaw