Russia

[woolley]

On 1/1/2023 at 2:05 PM, Apple said:

Following on from @code99 post above the report in todays Sunday (Murdock) Times (yes, sad I know) shows the details of the £150 billion invested by China in UK companies. Ranging from healthcare, property, stock market etc and even a £1.4 billion stake in BP. Thames water and Heathrow airport even feature for having Chinese stakes.

As for UK companies in Russia the top four (or is it 5) accountancy firms fled Russia earlier this year and the likelihood of them returning is slim. It will not portray any returning business in a good light if Putin remains in office even after whatever resolution is reached. he faces new elections this year I think. Doing business with a regime that has been declared guilty of war crimes might just be a step too far.

Meanwhile the death of people and the calculated destruction of a nation continue on a daily basis. 

Yes, with some reservations. And there's nothing wrong with the Sunday Times, incidentally. Good, honest reporters have died in the pursuit of posting quality accurate copy to its august pages.

Folk tend to believe without question what they are fed in the West about the righteousness of our established moral view. I've often thought that many of the cornerstones upon which we base our moral code are illusory. Take, for instance, "rules of war" and "war crimes". Apart from the reality that these ostensibly laudable principles tend to dispense conqueror's justice, or very selective justice (nobody ever put Bush and Blair on trial for killing innocent Iraqis, etc. etc.), the notion of war being conducted by civilised rules when push comes to shove is ludicrous. It's a contradiction in terms because the very state of war is an abandonment of the rules of civilised behaviour.

The Russians thought they would roll their tanks into Kyiv, engineer a virtually bloodless coup and have their army back in its barracks within a month as happened with their similar excursions in Europe in the Soviet days. As things have become more difficult and bogged down, they are acting more and more as murderous thugs terrorising civilians and destroying civil infrastructure. In extremis, when faced with defeat or humiliation, war leaders will reach for all means at their disposal and use them against the most vulnerable targets to gain an advantage. All the conventions and show trials in the world will never change this.

There is no inevitability that the war will end in defeat for Russia no matter how much we wish it or believe it "has" to be so. When the war started we were told that the rouble had collapsed. It had - briefly - but now it is trading above where it was previously, and our media are very quiet about this. We were also told that sanctions would soon bring the Russian economy to its knees. It hasn't happened because necessity is the mother of invention. I believe Putin applauds the likes of McDonalds and all the prominent brand names pulling out because they were tainting his country with their undesirable decadent ways which he saw as an economic hegemony by the West or more particularly the USA. He's a Russian nationalist so money being made by Russians running formerly foreign owned businesses is good news. We were assured that he would soon run out of weapons, but that appears to be wishful thinking as ever more missiles rain down on Ukrainian cities. It remains to be seen whether the starvation of Western technology will be more effective over time, but no doubt the Chinese could help. It isn't a foregone conclusion.

So it's a mess with no obvious solution. NATO needs to ask what is its endgame? Is it to encourage the Ukrainians to believe they can ultimately drive the invaders out, and at what cost in Ukrainian young human life and Western hardware? Or is it to keep the Russians bogged down for years in a stalemate that will slowly degrade their capability at similar cost? Should we continue in this endeavour with the stock justification that right must prevail? Is it an honest endeavour, or is it driven by opportunism and cynicism? Are there backchannels even now between the US and Russia that could produce a compromise, albeit unsatisfactory to the belligerents, particularly the Ukrainians?

The only thing that seems certain is we cannot rely on a simplistic scenario of "good" triumphing over "evil" because the random world doesn't necessarily work that way, and because vested interests are intertwined globally in opaque and mysterious ways.

[Albert Tatlock]

All major economies are in the shit this year...top of that is Japan. Lot of contagion out there in 2023.

We're not out yet.

[woolley]

45 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

All major economies are in the shit this year...top of that is Japan. Lot of contagion out there in 2023.

We're not out yet.

And it does make you wonder what new variants with changed characteristics will emerge from the precipitate abandonment of lockdowns and the "zero Covid" policy in China. An awful lot of potential there for the virus to make new mischief among a massive and ineffectively protected population.

[Apple]

1 hour ago, Albert Tatlock said:

We're not out yet.

Just down, according to Dr Allinson ....

[P.K.]

6 hours ago, Albert Tatlock said:

All major economies are in the shit this year...top of that is Japan. Lot of contagion out there in 2023.

We're not out yet.

Ain't that the truth:

Third of world economy to hit recession in 2023, IMF head warns

China’s lagging growth a key threat this year, IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva said, while the US is ‘most resilient.’

For much of the global economy, 2023 is going to be a tough year as the main engines of global growth – the US, Europe and China – all experience weakening activity, the head of the International Monetary Fund has warned.

“We expect one-third of the world economy to be in recession. Even countries that are not in recession, it would feel like recession for hundreds of millions of people,” she added.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/02/third-of-world-economy-to-hit-recession-in-2023-imf-head-warns

Whereaways the UK...?

[P.K.]

7 hours ago, woolley said:

So it's a mess with no obvious solution. NATO needs to ask what is its endgame? Is it to encourage the Ukrainians to believe they can ultimately drive the invaders out, and at what cost in Ukrainian young human life and Western hardware? Or is it to keep the Russians bogged down for years in a stalemate that will slowly degrade their capability at similar cost? Should we continue in this endeavour with the stock justification that right must prevail? Is it an honest endeavour, or is it driven by opportunism and cynicism? Are there backchannels even now between the US and Russia that could produce a compromise, albeit unsatisfactory to the belligerents, particularly the Ukrainians?

The war crimes started pretty much immediately. But you are right in that the attempt to take Kyiv was a disaster for the Russians.

But it may not be a slogging match. Which would certainly suit the Russians with their pretty much endless supply of manpower. The winter makes operations difficult, even wars get tired, but come the spring all bets are off.

As their country has been invaded, again, with the intention of taking complete control of it the Ukrainians are highly motivated to push the Russians back. With excellent targeting info on the ground and NATO weaponry making a crucial difference they will try to outflank the Russians and then roll their positions up. If they can do this the Russian forces may even collapse. Risking a possible nuclear counter-strike.

But time is not on the side of Ukraine. They are shooting down cheap as chips drones with very expensive A-to-A and G-to-A missiles which can't go on. The Israeli "Iron Dome" system would be a good option but Israel won't supply it due to fears of Russian retaliation in proxy from Syria. It's also designed to protect cities rather than a broad front as in Ukraine. So what's needed is something new as a drone swarm attack is difficult to stop without expending a lot of very expensive missiles.

Difficult times ahead. But NATO has to stand firm with Ukraine or Russian expansionism (is that a word?) will just carry on.

ETA : Patriot isn't the solution either as the missiles for it are about $4m each! I would save them for a possible tactical nuclear strike...

Edited January 4, 2023 by P.K.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

On 12/27/2022 at 6:12 AM, GD4ELI said:

Putin's internal support will collapse, it's already happening. The destruction of Russia's military equipment and the exposure of the incompetence of the officer core gives NATO countries a breather. As for China - they would drop Russia in a heartbeat.

Assuming that his internal support is becoming to collapse, what then?  Say it collapses completely, do you think that will result in the Donbas and the Crimea being handed back?  If you take Putin out of the picture, Russia isn't going to want to lose face and the longer the conflict continues the less likely it will be for negotiations.

I don't know what you mean about destruction of Russia's military in practice.  If you mean exhausting Russia's ability to hold the Donbas and Crimea then that isn't going to be a short war.  It assumes the Ukraine can do this with massive military support from the NATO.  That's all fine if the death toll to civilians and military personnel isn't important and if an economic and humanitarian crisis in Ukraine is acceptable.

Russia's incompetence has already been demonstrated by not achieving it's war aims at the beginning of the conflict.  Before this, NATO countries didn't need any breather over Russia.  Now Russia's incompetence has been demonstrated, do you think those countries now feel genuinely threatened?  

With China I am talking about trade, not military alliances.  Russia isn't going to be dropped by China for trade.  No country would be if they are trading something that is valuable.  

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by La_Dolce_Vita

[La_Dolce_Vita]

On 12/27/2022 at 12:10 PM, code99 said:

Putin’s Russia must be treated the same way as the USSR and the allies treated Hitler’s Nazi Germany in 1945. Only complete defeat of Putin’s regime including the removal of every Russian soldier from Ukraine including Crimea has to be the T&C for the negotiations. That does not mean of course that Russian kleptocrats should ever be warmly accepted back to the Western bosom the way they were previously welcomed. Europe (Germany in particular) deluded itself about the true nature of Russian politics and the threats these presented – because it wanted Russian gas. The West naively left their own doors open for Putin’s oligarchs to wash the riches they stole from ordinary Russians. This situation must never be allowed to occur again.

There will never be peace and reconciliation in Europe unless the day of reckoning for Putin and his murderous cronies is decisive and thorough.    

I don't disagree with you about the conflict being a war crime and people like Putin should be brought to justice but there isn't anything unique about the war crime.  We don't have to talk about Hitler.  Maybe you should be talking about the US and it's Presidents and the justice they rightly deserved, as Iraq is a more recent example.  And with Iraq and Kosovo the US and UK got work sooner with destroying infrastructure.  

And what you're asking for, with complete defeat of Russia, might not be achievable.  If it is possible, the Ukraine might not be worth living in and worth returning to (for evacuees), many thousands or more would have died, Europe will be weakened and brought further under US influence, and a resource-rich nation would turn further to the East to trade with.  And for what?  Will the Ukraine just offer referenda and hand back the Donbas or continue to hold it and deal with civil war  indefinitely.

 

 

 

[code99]

22 minutes ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

We don't have to talk about Hitler.  Maybe you should be talking about the US and it's Presidents and the justice they rightly deserved, as Iraq is a more recent example.  And with Iraq and Kosovo the US and UK got work sooner with destroying infrastructure - Offensive and Absurd; 

...the Ukraine might not be worth living in and worth returning to (for evacuees), many thousands or more would have died, Europe will be weakened and brought further under US influence, and a resource-rich nation would turn further to the East to trade with.  And for what?  Will the Ukraine just offer referenda and hand back the Donbas or continue to hold it and deal with civil war  indefinitely - Offensive and Absurd;

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts". I've come to expect Russian propaganda from you. I pity you.

[woolley]

47 minutes ago, code99 said:

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts". I've come to expect Russian propaganda from you. I pity you.

It's not Russian propaganda. It's a tenable assessment of the situation on the ground which is not going to be resolved by wishful thinking that the Russians "must be defeated". There is nothing to suggest that this can happen. The current path is one of death and destruction, and there isn't a viable end anywhere in sight.

[manxman1980]

@La_Dolce_Vita @woolley

If the UK was invaded by a foreign power how much of the country would you be willing to sacrifice to that invading nation?

If you did sacrifice part of the country what is then to stop that invading force laying claim to further UK territory? 

Ukraine already surrendered Crimea without much of a fight and now we are witnessing Russia trying to take more territory because they though Ukraine would just surrender more land to them. 

[GD4ELI]

4 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

@La_Dolce_Vita @woolley

If the UK was invaded by a foreign power how much of the country would you be willing to sacrifice to that invading nation?

If you did sacrifice part of the country what is then to stop that invading force laying claim to further UK territory? 

Ukraine already surrendered Crimea without much of a fight and now we are witnessing Russia trying to take more territory because they though Ukraine would just surrender more land to them. 

Ukraine didn't have American arms when the Crimea was invaded. Now for a relatively small outlay in US defence budget terms the Ukraine is able to inflict great damage on Russia. I've lost a couple of Russian friends who were serving, I'm sure others have as well.

[code99]

2 hours ago, GD4ELI said:

 I've lost a couple of Russian friends who were serving, I'm sure others have as well.

Sorry to hear that you have lost a couple of friends in this senseless war.

According to the UN, at least 17,000 innocent Ukrainian civilians have been killed so far, as well thousands of Ukrainian soldiers. Millions of Ukrainian refugees have fled all around the world to escape Russian military brutality.

None of this would have happened if Putin did not start this barbaric war in the first place.

[code99]

8 hours ago, woolley said:

It's not Russian propaganda. 

Steve Sackur's interview with the Russian opposition activist Evgenia Kara-Murza.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001gtj9/hardtalk-evgenia-karamurza-russian-activist-and-wife-of-jailed-dissident

 

[P.K.]

8 hours ago, woolley said:

It's not Russian propaganda. It's a tenable assessment of the situation on the ground which is not going to be resolved by wishful thinking that the Russians "must be defeated". There is nothing to suggest that this can happen. The current path is one of death and destruction, and there isn't a viable end anywhere in sight.

The master of the obvious.

When Colonel Jones was killed in the Falklands the 2 I/C Chris Keeble took command of 2 PARA and did a fine job at a critical moment in the battle. He remarked afterwards "War is a nasty, dirty, miserable business. We should never allow ourselves to go to war..." Amen to that. But when an aggressor invades going to war is the ONLY available choice. Otherwise next would have been Moldova and so on.

Last night "Ukraine: The Peoples Fight" was aired by Aunty Beeb. It showed how Ukrainians from all walks of life just dropped everything and put on a uniform, picked up a gun and went to fight for their country. And I have to say the lack of training really showed when they were trying to bracket a Russian tank with mortar fire!

The point being that these folks are motivated to such an extent that it is probably difficult to understand unless you were standing in their combat high-tops.

It's often said that wars can only be ended by a political solution. However as surrender is not an option for these people it would appear that this war can only be ended with a victory and defeat...

If "Ukraine: The Peoples Fight" is on iPlayer I suggest you watch it.