shriekingviolet posted:has the war started
the Grayzone had Pepe Escobar on, and he suggests it's probably going to happen in the spring if Zelensky does something stupid like destroy Donbas.
tears posted:ukranine man begging england for pre-pre-emptive sanctions on russia on yesterdays british broadcasting corporation broadcast
i heard that too i felt bad for the guy
if the news anchors have it their way apparently we're all going to die in about 5 minutes, so it's been fun comrades.
shriekingviolet posted:if the news anchors have it their way apparently we're all going to die in about 5 minutes, so it's been fun comrades.
the rhetorical ramp up has been pretty quick this time. and they're not even really trying on it.
one of the more level-headed things i'd read on it so far was that piece in Foreign Affairs i linked a couple weeks ago:
What Putin Really Wants in Ukraine
Russia Seeks to Stop NATO’s Expansion, Not to Annex More Territory
...
Moscow’s demands are probably an opening bid, not an ultimatum. For all its insistence on a formal treaty with the United States, the Russian government no doubt understands that thanks to polarization and gridlock, ratification of any treaty in the U.S. Senate will be all but impossible. An executive agreement—essentially an accord between two governments which does not have to be ratified and thus does not have the status of a law—may therefore be a more realistic alternative. It is also likely that under such an agreement, Russia would assume reciprocal commitments addressing some U.S. concerns so as to create what it calls a “balance of interest.”
Specifically, the Kremlin could be satisfied if the U.S. government agreed to a formal long-term moratorium on expanding NATO and a commitment not to station intermediate-range missiles in Europe. It might also be assuaged by a separate accord between Russia and NATO that would restrict military forces and activity where their territories meet, from the Baltic to the Black Sea.
Of course, it is an open question whether the Biden administration is willing to engage seriously with Russia. Opposition to any deal will be high in the United States because of domestic political polarization and the fact that striking a deal with Putin opens the Biden administration to criticism that it is caving to an autocrat. Opposition will also be high in Europe, where leaders will feel that a negotiated settlement between Washington and Moscow leaves them on the sidelines.
These are all serious issues. But it’s crucial to note that Putin has presided over four waves of NATO enlargement and has had to accept Washington’s withdrawal from treaties governing anti-ballistic missiles, intermediate-range nuclear forces, and unarmed observation aircraft. For him, Ukraine is the last stand. The Russian commander-in-chief is supported by his security and military establishments and, despite the Russian public’s fear of a war, faces no domestic opposition to his foreign policy. Most importantly, he cannot afford to be seen bluffing. Biden was right not to reject Russia’s demands out of hand and to favor engagement instead.
...
Putin’s actions suggest that his true goal is not to conquer Ukraine and absorb it into Russia but to change the post-Cold War setup in Europe’s east. That setup left Russia as a rule-taker without much say in European security, which was centered on NATO. If he manages to keep NATO out of Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, and U.S. intermediate-range missiles out of Europe, he thinks he could repair part of the damage Russia’s security sustained after the Cold War ended. Not coincidentally, that could serve as a useful record to run on in 2024, when Putin would be up for re-election.
seems sensible enough. especially since the donbass region has spent the last 8 years sending russia love letters and petitions to be incorporated into the federation that have gone formally unrecognized
meanwhile, let's see what a new york times explainer newsletter says about why we're all confused and furious and talking about ending the world
Today’s newsletter offers a Q. and A. on the risks of war in Eastern Europe.
...
1. Why is Putin threatening war with Ukraine?
The honest answer is that most diplomats and experts aren’t entirely sure. “It’s not clear what Russia’s central demand is,” Blinken told reporters yesterday in Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital.
Even Putin’s top advisers may not know what he is trying to accomplish and how seriously he is considering an invasion, as Anton has written. “The expert opinion that I can authoritatively declare is: Who the heck knows?” said Fyodor Lukyanov, a Russian foreign-policy analyst who advises the Kremlin.
This murkiness allows Putin to declare the confrontation a success in multiple scenarios.
so, those are the competing narratives: it's either "russia wants to keep NATO out of striking distance and also has domestic political considerations that might propel the drawing of a red line" vs the dominant story of "I DUNNO MAN THEY'RE JUST CRAZY, ARM THE NUKES"
(NB: the entire second half of the piece the NYT linked focuses on the same counter-NATO narrative, but they buried that lede in both the article and the newsletter for some reason lol)
interestingly, the usa has come close to sanctioning germany over this
The debate in Europe on Russia and Ukraine is playing out on three levels: the continued political viability of the Nord Stream pipeline from Russia to Germany given Europe’s gas shortages; whether Germany should relax its ban on sending weapons to Ukraine; and finally, the extent of the economic sanctions that should be placed on Russia if it did invade Ukraine.
Baerbock is aware that Joe Biden last week fought off a Republican attempt in the Senate to slap sanctions back on Nord Stream 2, which bypasses Ukraine, largely because he wanted to stay in harness with Germany. If there is no reciprocation from Germany, the Biden team will have to review its strategy.
INSKEEP: I want to make sure that we're clear on this. You're saying that some U.S. senators are pressuring the Biden administration to pressure Germany to pressure Russia.
[RACHEL] RIZZO [of the Atlantic Council]: Yes, that's exactly what's happening. Some Republican senators basically said, we're not going to call for votes on your ambassadorial nominees until you agree to put enough sanctions on both Russian and German companies that this pipeline gets stopped. The Biden administration hasn't done that yet, hasn't sanctioned German companies. I don't think it will. And so this has just been a consistent source of tension and annoyance for the Biden administration.
INSKEEP: Why doesn't President Biden want to sanction Germany?
INSKEEP: Why doesn't President Biden want to sanction Germany?
INSKEEP: Why doesn't President Biden want to sanction Germany?
INSKEEP: Why doesn't President Biden want to sanction Germany?
INSKEEP: Why doesn't President Biden want to sanction Germany?
if it's not over the pipeline, we may also end up doing so over the arms ban thing; it goes without saying that washington will never countenance a US ally refusing to arm nazis
Edited by Constantignoble ()
One question: Why would CIA leak this "we lied about Havana Syndrome sorry not sorry" story to their towelboy Ken Dilanian? Sometimes they do this to ruin an impending scoop from a less friendly reporter, one who's getting leaks from a rival DC agency.https://t.co/d6B9p9BqR6 pic.twitter.com/lkqfgXFPoh
— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) January 20, 2022
cars was probated until (Jan. 23, 2022 04:18:40) for this post!
The story worked better than CIA hoped, like, claims of "Havana syndrome" probably jumped >1000%.
And that doesn't have to be contradictory with them 100% believing in it for a while either.
also there are people demanding sanctions against Germany for refusing to arm neonazis, that part is funny.
this post presented by Lockheed Martin
zhaoyao posted:today they were describing how ominous it is that russia hasn't invaded yet.
we are rapidly approaching "refusing give us a casus belli" being treated as a valid casus belli, at which point you may notice colours inverting as we finish our transition to the Negative Zone
zhaoyao posted:while posing as subject-matter experts, described themselves as having no clue about russia or its motivations
the ummm “expert” I heard them have was posing as putin’s therapist and was quite happy to report that all russian decisions were just playing out as his unconscious desires. They made a show of letting the segment go long so that this expert could explain that war wasn’t going to happen since putin is just doing this all cause he likes the attention (apparently putin is a big npr listener lol)
shriekingviolet posted:it's no longer possible to differentiate genuine impending war from attention seeking histrionics about potential war
attention seeking histrionics, astroturfing war mongering, analysis that is just a thin veil covering racism and an excuse for xenophobic nationalism. No escape on any medium or from any corner.
karphead posted:someone sum up what the hell is going on because i barely give a shit
The USA just lost a war with Iran in 5 days and got rinsed out of Afghanistan by a few dozen dudes with AKs cruising in the back of a 1992 Toyota pickup. America's valiant defenders managed nothing except to machinegun a crowd of civilians and drone strike a bunch of kids. The exact same generals, who have not been fired or executed or disciplined for failure and incompetence, are gonna pick a fight with Russia, IN RUSSIA, without half of the military? In February.
shriekingviolet posted:I think it's entirely possible that after it had done its job as a piece of propaganda they just wanted to get out ahead of it being obviously bullshit to maintain credibility. Smugly debunking your own hoax is a great power move.
And that doesn't have to be contradictory with them 100% believing in it for a while either.
in any case my plan to be the first Havana syndrome lifetime income recipient from the Buttigieg 2024 campaign fund will need some revising
cars posted:maybe i should just charge for the tijuana donkey show as that Mark Ames tweet has to be at least the second time i’ve accidentally probated myself in this thread as thread monitor
i thought you were righteously probating yourself for posting twitter outside of the twitter thread
Russia poses an almost negligible threat to them. They have to know this. is this just biden's deteriorating mind harkening back to his glory days as Vice Russophobe under obama, in the wake of his epicly plummeting approval ratings? desperately flailing attempts at recovering some funding or support from within the Democratic party for the midterms?
the US state apparatus is pursuing its various interests in the service of capital as it always does, and due to its own short term political needs the US presidency is choosing to emphasize areas of that activity where they think they can repair their embarrassing reputation.
as far as classical empire matters go, there's oil infrastructure sphere of influence factors at play, and on a military strategic level an obsession with encirclement and containment of anyone who won't play ball. plus I think some genuine chauvinist confusion as to why anyone would resist them stomping around like the above is their god-given right, and a lingering insecurity that NATO may be becoming obsolete (hence attempting to bully Germany for insufficient bloodthirst.) I think they really do see it as an easy win, just like every other drawn out atrocity the US has charged face first into.
Gssh posted:not sure if it's more due to the nearly two years of disciplining the population or because the breathless bellicosity is so devoid of any credibility now, but i see no significant anti-war mobilization happening anywhere i'm familiar with in europe. an actual hot conflict between nato and russia would be so utterly devastating one would expect to see some gesture toward self-preservation.
i think it's because all the armies involved are fascists
MarxUltor posted:The whole thing sincerely appears to be just Biden and Johnson wagging the dog desperately for any distraction
AFP posted:#BREAKING Ukraine president Zelensky urges West not to stir 'panic' over Russian troop buildup
maybe even wagging too hard for ukraine
sorta giving the game away, revealing their ability to sense the presence of russian blood
And a simpler version of that question is, "What exactly does NATO do anyway?"
Your average person in the West might know NATO was created to "fight Communism". They don't know it's been active since. And when they hear the full list of NATO's activities to date, it sounds like a short list of the worst ideas of the last two decades. It becomes a lot clearer why NATO expansion is seen as aggression.
cars posted:the treaty represented by the "T" in NATO
upheld by famously North Atlantic states slovakia, hungary, bulgaria, the czech republic, and turkey
l m a o h o l y s h i t
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh yeah. blink twice if you need an ambulance at 1 CNN Center.
beyond the creepy self-rationalizing parts, the story almost makes me think some top-flight drone from one of the agencies has convinced the Biden administration that they can make Russia invade just by repeating over and over in the press that Russia will invade. this doesn't seem so much like a psyops strategy as it does magical thinking sold by means of PowerPoint.
