World War Three

[Catsquotl]

I'm not sure what 'greed' would have to do with anything unless that applies to Putin. The west is playing the usual game of 'stop the madman' and saving civilian lives.

OK.
In that case, I'm unsure about how you think this world is run.
"Greed" is what is making the west make money by complying with Putin to open an account on their central banking system and speculating with the rising rouble.
It's the securing of regions in the ukraine by Russia to ensure future trade agreements concerning the recourses there.

It's the will to leave a legacy once you die. Etc etc etc.

Greed.

And despite the symbol politics everyone is flashing about. There's people getting very rich from this war, or the pandemic.
Etc etc etc....

[Dreamtimer]

Greed and power. I'm not sure how separate they are in this case. The atrocities now being revealed after Russians have left towns and cities just add to the list of things Putin has done wrong. In terms of this power play, I have no desire for Russia to win. I have no desire to see Putin move on NATO countries as he has wanted to do for a long time. It's about power and his legacy.

The amount of money now both going into and coming from energy renewables is some very good news these days. The dominance of oil is waning. But the power plays will continue because people want to squeeze blood out of that rock as long as possible.

And Putin has failed in his legacy plan so he's now solidifying what he can in the east. But he screwed the pooch. He won't be the Great one that he wanted to be.

[Emil El Zapato]

you peoples are silly, this is Earth I, at least where I live ... Earth I, Houston, TX 77062. We all know reality is tough in some places for some and in other places for others. This place for me is an easy one.
No more Mr. Nice Guy. Confusion, I call it Chaos is what runs this world, wherever, whenever, or whatever rules it in the cosmos.

[PurpleLama]

Greed and power. I'm not sure how separate they are in this case. The atrocities now being revealed after Russians have left towns and cities just add to the list of things Putin has done wrong. In terms of this power play, I have no desire for Russia to win. I have no desire to see Putin move on NATO countries as he has wanted to do for a long time. It's about power and his legacy.

The amount of money now both going into and coming from energy renewables is some very good news these days. The dominance of oil is waning. But the power plays will continue because people want to squeeze blood out of that rock as long as possible.

And Putin has failed in his legacy plan so he's now solidifying what he can in the east. But he screwed the pooch. He won't be the Great one that he wanted to be.

Impressive that you should know what motivates Putin as well as you do.

In many, many photos I have seen of these atrocities, one thing sticks out, to me. Over and over again, one may see in the photos of these victims, that one or more corpse will be wearing a white arm band. Have you any idea what this could mean?

[Lord Sidious]

you peoples are silly, this is Earth I, at least where I live ... Earth I, Houston, TX 77062. We all know reality is tough in some places for some and in other places for others. This place for me is an easy one.
No more Mr. Nice Guy. Confusion, I call it Chaos is what runs this world, wherever, whenever, or whatever rules it in the cosmos.

And you're that full of shit that the sewers around your house have their own insurance policies..............

[Emil El Zapato]

And you're that full of shit that the sewers around your house have their own insurance policies..............

Actually, I haven't put up for that, it's all on me.

[Dreamtimer]

I don't personally believe that Putin has motivations any different than other men/people with massive power and wealth who have become detached from the regular world and most of its people. It's about power, gaining and keeping it for Russia, and leaving a lasting legacy on the area and the world. Dugan and Ilyan are his inspiration.

If there were enemies in Ukraine before, there are even more now. And he would know this would be the result. His quick taking of the country didn't work. So he punishes it. If the executions had happened after he took the country we'd likely never know or see.

I don't claim to know what's in a person's heart. I just try to look at the most likely dynamics which are usually about power, often through the use of fear. Fear of the evil enemy. Fear of nukes. I sure hope Putin doesn't really try to use them. If they're in the same shape as the army they might blow up before leaving their own territory.

The Atlantic Council has a pretty extensive analysis of when Russia left Bucha and the claims being made regarding armbands. I personally wouldn't take the Kremlin's word on that one. Russia has demonstrated many times its willingness to commit such acts as what occurred in Bucha and elsewhere.

[PurpleLama]

I personally would not take the Atlantic Council's word on anything, either.

[Lord Sidious]

I personally would not take the Atlantic Council's word on anything, either.

Reading up on em, I agree..............

[Fred Steeves]

I personally would not take the Atlantic Council's word on anything, either.

I take them about as seriously as I do any of our mainstream news channels, the biggies on cable included. These are the places guaranteed to paint the US and her allies as well meaning knights in shining armor, and the countries or regimes that they don't like as evil, aggressive, and dangerous. We're also highly unlikely to get any true sense of unbiased history from these outlets.

The mission statement of Atlantic Council, from the very get go, speaks volumes to me:

Since 1961

For sixty years, the Atlantic Council has pursued the mission that we have now boiled down to a few words: “Shaping the global future together.” In short, we see our role as advancing and advocating constructive US leadership in the world alongside friends and allies.

And further down:

Throughout the 1960s, the Council produced a series of reports on the state of public opinion towards Alliance member countries and sought to actively educate the public about the need for engagement in international affairs through television commercials (starring Bob Hope), an academic journal, and its newsletter. In 1967, the Council produced its first edited volume, Building the American – European Market: Planning for the 1970s. By 1975, the Council was producing numerous policy papers, books, monographs, and other works with the help of international practitioners and had expanded the scope of its work to include environmental management and the relationship between Japan and the West.

In 1979, Atlantic Council Vice-Chairman Theodore Achilles, recognizing the need to formally reach out to young leaders, established the Committee on Education and the Successor Generations. He wanted future policymakers to understand the solidarity required among people of good conscience if they were to build a better world. In 1980, the Council began to host mid-career professionals for a one-year fellowship, in order to provide opportunities for government officials, research scholars, business, media and other private sector leaders worldwide to pursue a year of independent study. In 1985, the NATO Information Office opened in conjunction with the U.S. Department of State, in order to focus public attention on issues of importance to the collective security of the United States and its Allies.

The Council convened a major international conference on rebuilding East-West relations in 1988, featuring speeches by President Ronald Reagan, then-presidential candidate Michael Dukakis, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Colin Powell, and Brent Scowcroft.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/about/history/

It's hard for me to see anything but a mission to heavily influence public opinion toward certain ends, and nurturing present and future leaders to be allies in the influencing campaign.



Speaking of Zbigniew Brzezinski, I thought this part of a piece by them was quite demonstrative of the self serving and white washed lens they view history through:

However, even this reasonable lesson could prove complicated in practice. The United States helped topple the Taliban after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and for good reason. Several relatively calm years followed, a golden period that perhaps lent itself to creating better outcomes for Afghanistan, but the United States turned toward Iraq. Could greater concentration on Afghanistan have achieved a better result?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...ship-just-yet/

The Taliban was the enemy? Really?

Nothing about their man Zbigniew Brzezinski being the point man on giving the Russians their Vietnam War by helping lure them into invading in the first place, and being the Genesis of the whole radical Islamic movement by training and arming the Mujahideen, to be later known as Al Ciada.

And apparently the only problem in turning to Iraq was that it diverted too many resources away from Afghanistan.

So if this is how the Atlantic Council views the world according to them in hindsight, that should be a very good indicator as to how they view the world according to them presently. By no means are they around to give us an objective world view, on anything.

As a side interest, I find the credentials of the writer of the above piece interesting as well:

Daniel Fried is the Weiser Family distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council. He was the coordinator for sanctions policy during the Obama administration, assistant secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia during the Bush administration, and senior director at the National Security Council for the Clinton and Bush administrations. He also served as ambassador to Poland during the Clinton administration.

Republican administrations, democrat administrations, so far as foreign policy goes it really doesn't matter because Atlantic Council advises them all.

[PurpleLama]

Here is a twitter thread that goes to debunk a lot of the western narritive around the Bucha incidents.

https://mobile.twitter.com/antiwar_s...86358110027791

[Aragorn]

Here is a twitter thread that goes to debunk a lot of the western narritive around the Bucha incidents.

https://mobile.twitter.com/antiwar_s...86358110027791

You do of course know that Twitter is riddled with Russian propagandists, right? And that didn't start yesterday either. They've already been there for several years.

The satellite footage confirms the summary executions of civilians — men, women and children — in Bucha. Eyewitness testimonies also confirm that certain Russian battalions — note: not all Russian battalions, but certain Russian battalions, presumably trained for the more coldblooded stuff — have been and still are using rape as a weapon of terror, even raping women in front of their children.

The mayor of Motizjin (sp) — a town west of Kiev — as well as her husband, their son, and one of the mayor's aides were executed and thrown in a pit. Their bodies were found yesterday. Also, living people and dead bodies alike have been purposely tortured — including dismemberment — and people trying to escape by way of a vehicle are being crushed by tanks.

What is true is that both the Ukrainian military and the Russian military have been summarily executing prisoners of war. And the Azov brigades are neo-Nazis, yes. But the atrocities committed by the Russians are real, and the Russian military has already been notorious in that regard since at least World War II, when they were conducting the same kinds of atrocities against German civilians.

[PurpleLama]

Strider, I would suggest that all social media is suffused with all types of propagandists, not to mention that mainstream channels tend each to favor their own flavor of propagandist as well. While one side of obvious propaganda is displayed, alternatives should also, and something resembling reality might be found somewhere in between.

All that said, Russia does have the least to gain and the most to lose from excessive brutality, especially where civilians are concerned, given their stated goals in this war. This doesn't mean that some of what is said about them isn't true, but a whole lot of non Russian analysts have been punching holes left and right in the Bucha narrative that the west has spun.

I am not at all in favor of this Russian adventure, but neither was I in favor of the ongoing civil war for the last 8 years. The excessive brutality has been going on, all along.

We can't really know the truth without being there.

[Emil El Zapato]

Strider, I would suggest that all social media is suffused with all types of propagandists, not to mention that mainstream channels tend each to favor their own flavor of propagandist as well. While one side of obvious propaganda is displayed, alternatives should also, and something resembling reality might be found somewhere in between.

All that said, Russia does have the least to gain and the most to lose from excessive brutality, especially where civilians are concerned, given their stated goals in this war. This doesn't mean that some of what is said about them isn't true, but a whole lot of non Russian analysts have been punching holes left and right in the Bucha narrative that the west has spun.

I am not at all in favor of this Russian adventure, but neither was I in favor of the ongoing civil war for the last 8 years. The excessive brutality has been going on, all along.

We can't really know the truth without being there.

You know I actually would be inclined to believe that both sides are going medieval. As Aragorn pointed out Putinia does this by default under the current regime. Many 'normal' Ukrainians would act in kind regarding their treatment of Putinian soldiers. Presumably short of war crimes. It is hard to commit a crime against a soldier. An interesting sidenote about historical parallels are that during the Vietnam war people were in the streets in droves protesting the war and those same people were outraged when one Lt. Calley went under court-martial for crimes he committed (if I remember correctly it was for 'accidentally' executing Vietnamese civilians. The takeaway was that avoid war at all costs, but if one of our own by 'accident' slaughters innocents then he is a scapegoat if forced to face justice.
His commander, I believe one Captain Medina (funny I thought it was Monzon) was a complete idiot and that helped me understand why Vietnam was such a clusterf*ck. The dude could barely speak English. I just read that it was My Lai.

Typical 'confusion' about right and wrong. Long story short, Right is right and Wrong is wrong.

[Lord Sidious]

I would suggest that NOTHING that you can't confirm as legit is real.
When you go look at deepfake videos, you can see that almost anything is possible.
As they say, the first casualty of war is truth...............

It is hard to commit a crime against a soldier.

Erm, no it isn't.
You must have missed the trials after 1945...............