Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (6 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

superchuck500

U.S. Blues
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
4,661
Reaction score
11,740
Location
Charleston, SC
Online
Russia continues to mass assets within range of Ukraine - though the official explanations are that they are for various exercises. United States intelligence has noted that Russian operatives in Ukraine could launch 'false flag' operations as a predicate to invasion. The West has pressed for negotiations and on Friday in Geneva, the US Sec. State Blinken will meet with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

Certainly the Russian movements evidence some plan - but what is it? Some analysts believe that Putin's grand scheme involves securing Western commitments that NATO would never expand beyond its current composition. Whether that means action in Ukraine or merely the movement of pieces on the chess board remains to be seen.


VIENNA — No one expected much progress from this past week’s diplomatic marathon to defuse the security crisis Russia has ignited in Eastern Europe by surrounding Ukraine on three sides with 100,000 troops and then, by the White House’s accounting, sending in saboteurs to create a pretext for invasion.

But as the Biden administration and NATO conduct tabletop simulations about how the next few months could unfold, they are increasingly wary of another set of options for President Vladimir V. Putin, steps that are more far-reaching than simply rolling his troops and armor over Ukraine’s border.

Mr. Putin wants to extend Russia’s sphere of influence to Eastern Europe and secure written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge. If he is frustrated in reaching that goal, some of his aides suggested on the sidelines of the negotiations last week, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.






 
I'm having no trouble with this "delima." I don't care.

089513000_1602130823-pomegranate-3259161_1280.jpg

Enjoy sucking off the red fruit juice from the seeds. Don't chew.
 
It’s really unfortunate that he casually presents a conspiracy theory as fact and it gets accepted. Where is the proof that a democracy promoting organization is a front for the cia? The us openly promotes democracy. I must lack need to know access to top secret info.
1997 New York Times:
Screenshot_20230109_125754_Chrome.jpg

 
1997 New York Times:
Screenshot_20230109_125754_Chrome.jpg

So, you’re advocating that the US should unilaterally stop trying to counter the authoritarians of the world? You cannot be blind to the fact that you had to go back over 20 years to find this, can you?

The US certainly hasn’t always done good, but they have mostly tried to reinforce democracy. Would you think it’s a good idea to let the rest of the world burn? That’s completely short-sighted and frankly pretty stupid. Do you think people are better off in a democratic form of government or a dictatorship or oligarchy?
 
So, you’re advocating that the US should unilaterally stop trying to counter the authoritarians of the world? You cannot be blind to the fact that you had to go back over 20 years to find this, can you?

The US certainly hasn’t always done good, but they have mostly tried to reinforce democracy. Would you think it’s a good idea to let the rest of the world burn? That’s completely short-sighted and frankly pretty stupid. Do you think people are better off in a democratic form of government or a dictatorship or oligarchy?
I'm surprised the CIA didn't get that removed from the internet. Are you surprised that no corporate journalists have recently said that the National Endowment for Democracy is a CIA front?

You are falling for US propaganda if you think all the wars and military engagements have been for Democracy. We should only get involved militarily if there is a direct threat to the US.

You should read the Jakarta Method and see if you still feel that the US is normally just trying to support democracy.

The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World is a 2020 political history book by American journalist and author Vincent Bevins. It concerns U.S. government support for and complicity in anti-communist mass killings around the world and their aggregate consequences from the Cold War until the present era. The title is a reference to Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66, during which an estimated one million people were killed in an effort to destroy the political left and movements for government reform in the country.

The book goes on to describe subsequent replications of the strategy of mass murder, against government reform and economic reform movements in Latin America, Asia and elsewhere.[1][2] The killings in Indonesia by the American-backed Indonesian forces were so successful in culling the left and economic reform movements that the term "Jakarta" was later used to refer to the genocidal aspects of similar later plans implemented by other authoritarian capitalist regimes with the assistance of the United States.[3][4]
 
I'm surprised the CIA didn't get that removed from the internet. Are you surprised that no corporate journalists have recently said that the National Endowment for Democracy is a CIA front?

You are falling for US propaganda if you think all the wars and military engagements have been for Democracy. We should only get involved militarily if there is a direct threat to the US.

You should read the Jakarta Method and see if you still feel that the US is normally just trying to support democracy.

The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World is a 2020 political history book by American journalist and author Vincent Bevins. It concerns U.S. government support for and complicity in anti-communist mass killings around the world and their aggregate consequences from the Cold War until the present era. The title is a reference to Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66, during which an estimated one million people were killed in an effort to destroy the political left and movements for government reform in the country.

The book goes on to describe subsequent replications of the strategy of mass murder, against government reform and economic reform movements in Latin America, Asia and elsewhere.[1][2] The killings in Indonesia by the American-backed Indonesian forces were so successful in culling the left and economic reform movements that the term "Jakarta" was later used to refer to the genocidal aspects of similar later plans implemented by other authoritarian capitalist regimes with the assistance of the United States.[3][4]
This is all history, and yes, the US has backed authoritarian regimes in the past. Do you acknowledge that in this case the US is opposing an authoritarian regime which is attempting to destroy a fledgling democracy?

I do see a difference between what happened back then and what is happening now. Do you see a difference?

Do you think that the US should just sit back and watch democracies get destroyed by invasion? You cannot see a scenario where allowing Putin to reconstruct the USSR might cause us problems?

Isolationism is a terrible practice. You could maybe justify it when we didn’t do business with the whole world, but today it’s a recipe for disaster.
 
This is all history, and yes, the US has backed authoritarian regimes in the past. Do you acknowledge that in this case the US is opposing an authoritarian regime which is attempting to destroy a fledgling democracy?

I do see a difference between what happened back then and what is happening now. Do you see a difference?

Do you think that the US should just sit back and watch democracies get destroyed by invasion? You cannot see a scenario where allowing Putin to reconstruct the USSR might cause us problems?

Isolationism is a terrible practice. You could maybe justify it when we didn’t do business with the whole world, but today it’s a recipe for disaster.
What makes you think Ukraine is an actual democracy? Do democracies usually shut down opposition media & ban political parties?


Do democracies usually imprison opposition leaders?

 
Last edited:
What makes you think Ukraine is an actual democracy? Do democracies usually shut down opposition media & ban political parties?


Do democracies usually imprison opposition leaders?



In your article:

Tymoshenko has been Yanukovych's chief political rival for nearly a decade, co-leading the Orange Revolution that kept him from coming to power in 2004 as Ukraine bucked Russian influence in favour of forging closer ties with the west.

Do you know who Viktor Yanukovych is? Do you know what happened in 2014 that precedes Russia invading? Do you know were Yanukovych lives now?

It's true Ukraine has a problematic democracy due to Russian influence. That was the trigger point for the war.

You should look up what happened to Ukraine's PM who won after that Orange Revolution mentioned in the article you posted. That guy was famously poisoned by Russia.

I'm gobsmacked you posted that article as proof.
 
1997 New York Times:
Screenshot_20230109_125754_Chrome.jpg

Wow. Btw China calls that foundation the second CIA. But nevermind what the chinese government tells you what to believe. Or russia for that matter. It is no secret that the US policy promotes democracy post wwii with or without cia involvement. Now Ive stated this before and its tiresome to have to do it again. Most historians, political scientists and ergo us policy makers...believe that liberal democracy do not attack each other. As a means for peace and order post wwii, the us promotes this. Now during the cold war, containment had precedence and therefore the us had inconsistencies towards promoting democracy. So its laughable that you cling on to this silly idea. That would mean a whole lot of intellectuals including applebaum in hundreds of universities are working for the CIA. That's just easier to believe right? Those working for your russia...and against american interests all want you to believe [that all those people] are all agents of the CIA? Because the peace and prosperity of the world from that world order established post wwii and shipping lanes benefit the US. And guess who tells you the contrary and you eat it up? The very countries that want to destroy those institutions. So yeah, I dont buy your anti american propaganda. That quote says nothing about cia involvement. A heavy handed word association and your confirmation bias ate it up. Says a lot about you russiaphilia.
 
Last edited:
Wow. Btw China calls that foundation the second CIA. But nevermind what the chinese government tells you what to believe. Or russia for that matter. It is no secret that the US policy promotes democracy post wwii with or without cia involvement. Now Ive stated this before and its tiresome to have to do it again. Most historians, political scientists and ergo us policy makers...believe that liberal democracy do not attack each other. As a means for peace and order post wwii, the us promotes this. Now during the cold war, containment had precedence and therefore the us had inconsistencies towards promoting democracy. So its laughable that you cling on to this silly idea. That would mean a whole lot of intellectuals including applebaum in hundreds of universities are working for the CIA. That's just easier to believe right? Those working for your russia...and against american interests all want you to believe [that all those people] are all agents of the CIA? Because the peace and prosperity of the world from that world order established post wwii and shipping lanes benefit the US. And guess who tells you the contrary and you eat it up? The very countries that want to destroy those institutions. So yeah, I dont buy your anti american propaganda. That quote says nothing about cia involvement. A heavy handed word association and your confirmation bias ate it up. Says a lot about you russiaphilia.
I posted an article from the New York Times and you immediately deflect to China...and Russia 😆

Current playbook: accuse anyone questioning or pointing out something negative about US foreign policy, wars, military engagements or even CIA activity of being a Putin/Russia supporter/agent and China is now added to the list.

There is no way any reporter in the corporate media would be allowed to write an article like the one I linked to from 1987.

This part sounds familiar:

Since the end of World War II, the United States, usually acting covertly through the C.I.A., has installed or toppled leaders on every continent, secretly supported political parties of close allies like Japan, fomented coups, spread false rumors, bribed political figures and spent countless billions of dollars to sway public opinion.

''If the Chinese indeed tried to influence the election here last year, the United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine,'' said Peter Kornbluh, a researcher at the National Security Archive, an organization affiliated with George Washington University that monitors intelligence and foreign policy.

''China has done little more than emulate a long pattern of U.S. manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world,'' Mr. Kornbluh said.


Just supporting democracies right?


...When the C.I.A. was established 50 years ago, Allen Dulles, one of its founders, said that the United States and other democratic nations must ''fight fire with fire'' to respond to the threat of expansionist communism.

But over the years, other nations have learned from the United States that national self-interest can often be used to justify ignoble means.

The C.I.A.'s earliest political activities -- considered by many agency veterans to be its greatest successes anywhere -- were in France and Italy in 1947 and 1948, when aggressive and well-financed Communist Parties and communist labor unions came close to winning power.

The United States poured millions of dollars into both countries to support center-right parties and conservative unionists, forestalling the Communist advance. The Italian effort was supervised by James Jesus Angleton, who gained notoriety later as the C.I.A.'s chief of counterintelligence for his paranoia about Soviet penetration of the agency.

The C.I.A. grew more ambitious in the 1950's, helping to overthrow leaders in Iran and Guatemala that the United States considered too leftist and replacing them with friendly dictators.

More subtly, it secretly manipulated elections in the Philippines, Lebanon and Nepal with large amounts of covert cash.

Edward G. Lansdale, the legendary C.I.A. operative, essentially ran the successful presidential campaign of Defense Minister Ramon Magsaysay in the Philippines in 1953.

At one point in the campaign, Mr. Dulles, then the Director of Central Intelligence, offered Mr. Lansdale $5 million to use in the operation. The C.I.A. officer cabled back that he could sway the election for $1 million.


Being antiwar isn't anti american.
 
I posted an article from the New York Times and you immediately deflect to China...and Russia 😆

Current playbook: accuse anyone questioning or pointing out something negative about US foreign policy, wars, military engagements or even CIA activity of being a Putin/Russia supporter/agent and China is now added to the list.

There is no way any reporter in the corporate media would be allowed to write an article like the one I linked to from 1987.

This part sounds familiar:

Since the end of World War II, the United States, usually acting covertly through the C.I.A., has installed or toppled leaders on every continent, secretly supported political parties of close allies like Japan, fomented coups, spread false rumors, bribed political figures and spent countless billions of dollars to sway public opinion.

''If the Chinese indeed tried to influence the election here last year, the United States is only getting a taste of its own medicine,'' said Peter Kornbluh, a researcher at the National Security Archive, an organization affiliated with George Washington University that monitors intelligence and foreign policy.

''China has done little more than emulate a long pattern of U.S. manipulation, bribery and covert operations to influence the political trajectory of countless countries around the world,'' Mr. Kornbluh said.


Just supporting democracies right?


...When the C.I.A. was established 50 years ago, Allen Dulles, one of its founders, said that the United States and other democratic nations must ''fight fire with fire'' to respond to the threat of expansionist communism.

But over the years, other nations have learned from the United States that national self-interest can often be used to justify ignoble means.

The C.I.A.'s earliest political activities -- considered by many agency veterans to be its greatest successes anywhere -- were in France and Italy in 1947 and 1948, when aggressive and well-financed Communist Parties and communist labor unions came close to winning power.

The United States poured millions of dollars into both countries to support center-right parties and conservative unionists, forestalling the Communist advance. The Italian effort was supervised by James Jesus Angleton, who gained notoriety later as the C.I.A.'s chief of counterintelligence for his paranoia about Soviet penetration of the agency.

The C.I.A. grew more ambitious in the 1950's, helping to overthrow leaders in Iran and Guatemala that the United States considered too leftist and replacing them with friendly dictators.

More subtly, it secretly manipulated elections in the Philippines, Lebanon and Nepal with large amounts of covert cash.

Edward G. Lansdale, the legendary C.I.A. operative, essentially ran the successful presidential campaign of Defense Minister Ramon Magsaysay in the Philippines in 1953.

At one point in the campaign, Mr. Dulles, then the Director of Central Intelligence, offered Mr. Lansdale $5 million to use in the operation. The C.I.A. officer cabled back that he could sway the election for $1 million.


Being antiwar isn't anti american.
No one denied that the US used covert operations in the past. For the most part, the us had been consistent in establishing democratic institutions in countries that they had footholds: japan, germany, s. korea, etc. But because of containment and their fears that communism will spread, they intervened in italy, for example, when it appeared that the communists would win that election. Probably the worse covert act is in iran, where, as it turns out, the motivation may have not been containment.

In any case, you contend that because the us had past covert behaviors, then it is reasonable to say that the national endowment for democracy is a front for the CIA...which has a history of spreading democracy? Put it this way...and nevermind the part where YOU emphasized the cia's illiberal acts against democracy. "Since the US had past history of covert operations, the peace corp is a cia front". The peace Corp after all is a us funded entity, yeah. Just like how nuland in Ukraine promoted democracy
..so it must be a cia operation, right? And because the endowment is funded by the us government it too is a cia front!!!!!!

Or rather, is it just the US using its soft power to promote democracy? And from say a Chinese or Russian perspective, such institutions are incompatible with their autocratic rule. As such, the chinese calls that endowment THE 2nd CIA. So I ask you where you get this idea that an independent organization is a cia front?

Being antiwar isn't anti american
Laughable. Are you really antiwar? Have you placed the blame on the one and only aggressor? The ones that committed...you know...genocide? And yet here we are attacking another country that is giving out weapons for Ukraine to defend itself from total annihilation. And I may add the US didn't persuade the ukrainians, "hey go fight and I'll give you money and forget your prison terms". No they came asking for help.

Ps..you griping about the "minimal" effects of the russian influence on 2016 doesnt gel with this endowment is a cia front. You see this one way criticism right that's consistent with your posts right? Us does something...oh the horrors. Russia does it, it had no effect!!! Or no they didnt do it...for example the 2014 ukrainian maidan. Russia actively persuaded Yanukovych to move from the EU but when the us brokered a peace deal...oh the us is interfering. Cry me a river.
 
In your article:



Do you know who Viktor Yanukovych is? Do you know what happened in 2014 that precedes Russia invading? Do you know were Yanukovych lives now?


the icing is ...guess who ran point for Yanukovych PR leading to election?

MAN
A
FORT.

LOL. No wonder he is peddling crap from that side.
 
SFL - everything that GG tells you about Russia, assume the opposite is true. That will save people from having to explain reality to you. Over and over again, lol.
 
SFL - everything that GG tells you about Russia, assume the opposite is true. That will save people from having to explain reality to you. Over and over again, lol.
This can't get any funnier from you when you post things from David Frum, yeah the guy who sold the Sadamm has WMD, Bill Krystol known neocon and war monger, the clown Jennifer Rubin, etc. Stop lecturing me on what to post. You know glass houses and all.

Also, if you can't tell me what specifically Greenwald was wrong about I'll assume you are just using your favorite way to try to discredit someone. Vague statements that aren't specific so you don't have to defend them. Yes I know in the past you have been specific a few times, but that's rare.
 
This can't get any funnier from you when you post things from David Frum, yeah the guy who sold the Sadamm has WMD, Bill Krystol known neocon and war monger, the clown Jennifer Rubin, etc. Stop lecturing me on what to post. You know glass houses and all.

Also, if you can't tell me what specifically Greenwald was wrong about I'll assume you are just using your favorite way to try to discredit someone. Vague statements that aren't specific so you don't have to defend them. Yes I know in the past you have been specific a few times, but that's rare.
It’s actually not rare. I had your most recent quoting of GG in mind from his disparaging the Russian influence on the 2016 election due to the false claim that “it was only $100k ads” on Facebook.

It‘s extremely dishonest of him to do that.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Back
Top Bottom