On the gas price, oil price, diesel price, heating oil price, propane, etc...
Yeah, I'm very certain in circles I talk in that people are supportive on this, cutting Russia out...doing our part...if you will.
But I also expect this to get political, as perhaps it maybe should. Maybe we need to look at the run up of oil and refined products post, oh December 2021 to now and prices from whatever...2020 to December 2021. Because I think there is a difference and some might try to sweep that difference under the rug while others are going to hammer on it as if it is all the same.
We have, not run-away, but historically high inflation in a recent sense, inflation across all asset classes and the reasons for that are separate of what is happening with commodity markets related to Russia-Ukraine. There deserves to be a differentiation between the two and the reasons for the run-up prior to Russia assembling their troops and invaded and then post invasion - I mean we end up at the same point, but there are some policy reasons perhaps why we experienced the first part of the inflationary energy pricing, just like we saw inflation across so many asset classes - and then there is the surge in price post invasion. It's two things happening or that did happen and they shouldn't be grouped together one way or the other, but politicians and their supporters will do it.
@nebish seems to be a under current that a lot of GOP has money ties with the Oligarchs...seems they not only hitched their wagon to *tRump but maybe Puti too...
Maybe. I've heard some discussion about how friendly the UK also got with these Oligarchs through the years. And I guess maybe that was fine in different times as things normally go in normal times so long as we aren't talking about illegalities and such. Different times now. No use for rich Russians. Go overthrow your piece of shit leader Russian oligarchs or you are no good here or anywhere.
Time did a similar story on the volunteer fighters with a more European nation slant.
https://time.com/6155670/foreign-fighters-ukraine-europe/
While it is hard to believe the Ukraine foreign minister cited figure of 20,000 who have volunteered to fight, there are perhaps more believable counts of 300 Norwegians or 200 Lithuanians according to local embassies. Expand that out assuming all countries in the area are having some volunteers, hopefully it makes a difference.
John Bolton recently said that he thinks Putin was waiting for Trump to withdraw the US from NATO to attack Ukraine.
Trump or his still supporters like to pretend this invasion would never have happened if he were President. Nobody can know that and to say it is only guessing. If Putin wanted Ukraine, he would've acted to take it no matter who was in the White House.
Oil, gas, refined oil products, wheat, nickel, palladium, steel & aluminum and neon gas (Ukraine exports 50% of the global supply - 90% of US neon imports for semiconductor manufacturing comes from Ukraine!). Have you seen the prices for nickel! There is already a bottleneck in semiconductor production and nickel is used extensively in stainless steel and batteries (like those in EVs that we are all supposed to be buying to not use oil).
Maybe the world can get off Russian oil someday, but what about their 28% of global supply of nickel?
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/08/nickel-price-surge-could-threaten-automakers-ev-plans.html
And Putin says he is going to restrict exports of raw materials, although no details were given. If we don't want Russian oil...then we don't want Russian nickel either, right?
No question that Americans (especially some GOPs in the Senate) have ties to the oligarchs, but the UK has finally acted to freeze/seize the assets of 7 oligarchs. Roman Abramovich is the most recognizable & had been desperately trying to sell Chelsea, the soccer team he owns without success. The UK seized Abramovich's 90-GBP house & isn't allowing Abramovich to travel to the UK or conduct any business. BUT Chelsea is going to continue to operate under bizarre conditions - no new ticket sales, no new players/trades, & existing ticket holders can attend games, buy food & drinks from 3rd party sellers, & buy in-stock team merchandise through 5/31.
I don't know a thing about the value of a soccer team, but I doubt that plus a house isn't going to cripple Abramovich. I thought sanctions against the oligarchs was to annoy/inconvenience them enough that they might try to influence Putin to stop his aggression against Ukraine AND cause ordinary Russians who've been enjoying things like a Russian-owned sports team on TV to suddenly be deprived of this entertainment (along w/Western concerts featuring Putin-friendly Russian artists) & wonder if Putin might be lying. If the team is allowed to play & nothing is mentioned about ownership, how is the average soccer fan in Russia going to know Abramovich has been sanctioned for being a 30-year buddy of Putin's?
Frankly, I don't think anyone should complain about rising gas prices - consider it our contribution to support Ukraine & its refugees.
Surely you can understand why hard-working Americans, struggling to make ends meet, might complain about getting hit hard in the wallet because of some other countries' battles.
Frankly, I don't think anyone should complain about rising gas prices - consider it our contribution to support Ukraine & its refugees.
Surely you can understand why hard-working Americans, struggling to make ends meet, might complain about getting hit hard in the wallet because of some other countries' battles.
I am as big of a proponent of decoupling to the fullest extent possible, however until then or even if that can be achieved, products and resources that come from abroad will be impacted by events of some other countries.
I think there needs to be a definitive line drawn here be it energy, or food prices, or most anything because there was surging inflation throughout 2021 which has now been boosted to new levels. But the reasons for them are not the same.
Let's look at food prices. Everyone knows by know the wheat supply and fertilizer supply that Russia and Ukraine contribute to the world. Plus things like sunflower oil (Russia and Ukraine account for 80% of the sunflower oil exports, who knew!?) Those prices, not counting energy input costs, has risen through the roof.
It is noteworthy that the February food index level reached an all time high, it only increased 3.9% from January of this year. Year-over-year it is 20.7% higher from last February.
So as with food, all of the increase in the price of energy is not "Putin's fault" as the circulating narrative is pushed.
Brent crude oil closed at $37.46 October 25, 2020. A year later on Oct 24, 2021 it closed $84.38. This shows significant increase year-over-year - still though those were fairly normal prices we have seen and been accustomed to. It is currently 109.24 as I type. Brent crude rose $46.92 from October 2020 to October 2021 or 125% increase. From October 2021 to March 11 2022 it has increased $24.86 or 29%.
So I think people need to be very careful when calling inflation and price spikes Putin's fault (not people here, more of a Biden administration and media thing). No doubt the last few months have contributed to it, but we were living in a highly inflationary atmosphere absent of Russia/Ukraine.
Getting to your specific point @theotherbrothers I find there is wide support even among Republicans for cutting off Russian oil imports to the US, and actually since the announcement the increase has been marginal, setting new highs, but it had already reached near ceiling levels before the announcement.
I don't like our economy being impacted by events around the world many of which we have little to no control over. But until we can decouple, or if that is pure fantasy, it will always be the case.
Russia's first step in expanding conflict:
Ukraine says Russia fired at Belarus from Ukrainian airspace to drag it into war
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-belarus-attacks-idAFKCN2L81M3
Pentagon is not confirming the reports of Belarus villages being targeted by Russians.
No question that Belarus was/is used for staging, but fake involvement hasn't been determined yet. Did read that Pink Floyd has had all its post-1987 music recording removed from Belarus/Russia streamers.
If pundits, experts, & ex-pats are to be believed that an isolated, slightly mad Putin's plan is to reunite Mother Russia w/him as Peter the Great, Belarus is definitely on the list to be absorbed.
The confusion and collapse of the MIG transfer...what do you think really happened there? Could it have been a go, then for some reason Poland announced what was happening to the world and the US had to put the brakes on it. Some things really should be kept secret. Not always easy with the press searching for stories to follow and break, but countries should be careful to not show their hands to the Russians on what they intend to do and how they intend to do it.
Civilian and military casualties will continue to be impossible to verify with estimates and statements varying widely.
2.8 million people have fled Ukraine.
Tens of thousand of Russians have fled to Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Uzbekistan among other nations.
13,000 people have been arrested for anti-war protests in Russia. 5,300 were detained country-wide on Sunday.
Russian strikes in Western Ukraine pick up targeting military training bases and supply and staging locations of western military aid. Russia suggests weapons staged outside the boarder from Ukraine would be legitimate targets.
No clue what happened re the transfer. I've read that it was supposed to have been done a year ago, that Ukrainian pilots had planned to fly them to Ukraine, & all of sudden Poland announces they're going to a US base in Germany?!
The general analysis from the little I read is that Putin miscalculated or didn't believe that his troops were unprepared, that Ukraine would resist, or that the West would act unilaterally. It's hard to have a defense strategy if the offense is improvising.
The best ending would be for the tier of insiders just under Putin & above the oligarchs who have the military at their command would oust Putin as happened to Gorbachev. I had no idea Gorbachev is still alive until yesterday.
Had a discussion on another board about what NATO does if Poland or another NATO country is attacked. I said NATO will defend boarders but will not invade or push into Russian territory. Something errant on the part of the Russians (some sort of a miss-fire incident) could happen but my feeling the NATO commanders will take that into consideration and respond appropriately.
sAs nebish previously posted and I'm sure most of the free world and many inside Russia agree that the only way the war ends is for Putin to be removed from power. Then again, that doesn't guarantee anything. His replacement could be worse. I'm willing to take that chance.
Gorbachev is alive! Well that is a little intriguing, wonder what he has to say on the matter.
It's just really worrisome - beyond the tragic loss of life and personal and physical devastation the Russians are inflicting; I just don't see a good ending in this for Russia, so then if Putin also doesn't see or get a good ending in it for him what is he left to do? I suppose he will want to expand conflict, double down. While I am quite confident his military is not up to the task of fighting western allied military, it still means there will be unnecessary suffering, destruction, death and economic fallout from all of it - and the obvious uncertainty of use of some kind of nuclear weapon.
I think we are all in agreement, the only 'good' end at this point would seem to be Putin's removal or death to put a stop to what he has started and prevent what else he might do. Being that those to things don't seem especially likely - I'm confident in thinking he is extremely isolated and only surrounded by his most trusted advisors, I guess we'll all just keep holding our breath this doesn't go any further. But then again I wonder, if he does expand and draw NATO and the US into some kind of conflict, maybe that will be the only way to stop him? it's just that nobody surrenders these days, nobody accepts losing, everyone keeps fighting and Putin surrendering is about the least likely thing I can think of unless he encountered some enormously devastating losses. I know NATO and the US could push back and suppress Russian military, it's just those damn nuclear weapons that he could use out of desperation or spite.
Listened to Zelenskyy address Congress. I can’t help to think that time is running out…Ukraine’s stand 3 weeks into this war is amazing, but I’m not sure what will be left to defend in 3 more weeks.
Opinion: The war in Ukraine is proving that Russia is no longer a superpower
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/03/15/ukraine-war-proves-russia-no-longer-a-superpower/
Opinion: The war in Ukraine is proving that Russia is no longer a superpower
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/03/15/ukraine-war-proves-russia-no-longer-a-superpower/
Since the WP won't let anyone w/o a subscription read for free, I don't know the content but the headline isn't news. We've pretty much known since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 that all the USSR scary stuff that we'd be led to be afraid wasn't so much or so scary. Everyone in the world knows that except Putin. So, it begs several questions (nukes aside) from someone w/zero military tactical knowledge:
By what authority exactly would the US declare Ukrainian airspace a no-fly zone? Zelensky sees that a non-starter so he goes on to ask for more weapons. The west seems more than willing.
Why are Finland, Norway, & Sweden all of sudden concerned that Putin has his eye on them w/Finland's president saying he didn't want to be left to fend for himself as in WW2? Putin's goal presumably is the reunification of the USSR or Tsarland. Belarus, Georgia, et al would be his targets if he had military power to back it up.
No one - all the military minds in the western world - can figure out how to get defense weapons to Ukraine?
The Washington Post will allow a limited number of free articles, and if somebody has a phone, a laptop, tablet or desktop - multiple devices will allow several free articles. I recently subscribed to NY Times for $4 a month. Washington Post and WSJ all offer similar rates, then I cancel before the regular rate starts...not the best way to support journalism, but I'm not a frequent user either.
My opinion on the other historically neutral countries now wanting to join NATO, I think because there is a clear aggressor, clear good vs bad and the collective unity that comes with standing with NATO against that. It's ironic that after years of hoping NATO would grow weaker that Putin himself has actually been the impetus that is making it stronger. I really can't see Putin trying to go into Europe as some have warned, he's just not capable really. He thought Ukraine was an easy target and look.
While a no-fly zone would help Ukraine, we also know that would bring NATO and the US directly in conflict with Russian planes. So that would be a monumental decision, and I wonder at some point, or at what point, how much more devastation or death will the west tolerate before engaging directly? Perhaps it could be something like chemical weapons or some other small battlefield nuclear weapon? I do think the no-fly zone would help, but Russians are firing long range missiles, not all of the damage is coming from aircraft.
The longer this goes, I think the US and NATO will engage directly. There is a chance that Putin provokes or some event or some totality of events will build enough resolve by western governments to try and put a stop to it. Where would the authority be absent of an attack on a NATO country. I presume in the US it would have to come out of Congress. Congress has long long deferred their power to the President, but I don't think any of the previous war powers used by prior administrations in the global war on terrorism would make military engagement in Ukraine valid.
Basically everyone is afraid of Putin. And that is not a knock on President Biden because I think so far he has not been far off and I support this administration and our countries actions and I wish citizens and politicians in this country would stop saying what should've or could've or they would've done. it's over. We are in the now.
Basically trying to strangle Russia and make it financially unfeasible for them to conduct this war is the best first step. If that doesn't fully have the desired effect, the next step is engagement. The fight will be over Ukraine and perhaps even on the ground in Ukraine. Will it stay there? Russia is weak. Russia is in no position to expand the conflict realistically. I'm not smarter than the generals...but there could be angles that say US and NATO direct conflict will not bring about the dire consequences Putin has threatened. As you ask, could he even deliver on such a threat? It's best to not provoke and find out, but there comes a time, I think the west will call his bluff. Russia would then be defeated in Ukraine and withdraw their forces to their own border. What would come next is anyone's guess.
On one hand I feel Russia is so vulnerable right now, militarily, economically and even socially to a point. Do we just let that simmer and work? If the west engages, while I don't think Russia would fair well, could that rally support within Russia because now they are not the aggressor killing innocent civilians, but they would be fighting against the United States and maybe it somehow would work to embolden and strengthen the effort within their ranks?
I think it has been best we have stayed out of it. But I'm also thinking the time that we get in it might be approaching.
I do NOT think the west needs to be in this. I'd rather the siloviki, who know full well that the government/military is not prepared to win never mind maintain the subjugation of Ukraine or anywhere else, will get rid of him or possibly more likely, Russian soldiers on the ground see that the so-called justification for the invasion, is a lie & surrender. Some reports are already saying Russian POWs do NOT want to go back.
I think Biden is handling this more aggressively behind the scenes than anyone expected due in part to his 8 years as VP dealing w/NATO, EU, and one-on-ones w/senior European officials as well as his 35+ years in the Senate where he served on, among other things, the Senate Foreign Relations committee spanning the war in Bosnia, 1st Gulf War (he voted against), N. Ireland & the UK, and Kosovo working across the aisle. He voted for war v Afghanistan & wanted to de-escalate soon after. I can't think of anyone in government would could possibly be more qualified to handle this situation. He knows the players, the territory, and actually reads/listens to military/intelligence briefings.
I don't think countries are afraid of Putin per se. They're afraid of getting bogged down in a WW2-type land war. That's certainly my concern - this is far more relevant to me (& why I try to stay informed but not over-informed) than any of our so-called peacekeeping military actions. Putin's strategy is to pound the enemy into the ground. He simply doesn't have the capacity to do that & I don't think the Russian Army has the stomach for it. China has no interest in some Euro/Russian war; it's seen the fantastic economic benefits to concentrating on peace bring.
Someone - I would hope - knows the condition of his nuke capacity. Even that, directly affects Europe more than the US given the range of most of his missiles. I think someone will take out Putin before it goes that far. The siloviki aren't foolish enough to let Putin's fantasies have a western retaliation come down on them.
There has been a very purposeful narrative from the administration to contrast defensive vs offensive weapons. And I understand why, what is going on the record and over the airwaves matters right now.
I am failing though to see all the weapons being classified as "defensive" as purely being so. Is a "kamikaze drone" really all that defensive? Weaponry that can be fired upon Russians and kill them, the US can label those weapons however they want, but Russia is going to label those however they want as well. Just because we think calling what we give to Ukraine as being defensive and not offensive so then it looks like we are not escalating, I do not believe that is the case really.
This comes back to the White House continually calling fighter jets "offensive" and seems more unwilling now than ever to facilitate a transfer. I am not saying that fighter jets are not offensive, but they can also be defensive and all these weapons we have authorized or given to Ukraine fall into some blended category of both offensive and defensive.
I think they are being a little too careful here with semantics. I like careful to a point. I also don't like saying things that aren't necessarily true, just because they say it doesn't make it true in every sense.
As Russian Troop Deaths Climb, Morale Becomes an Issue, Officials Say
More than 7,000 Russian troops have been killed in less than three weeks of fighting, according to conservative U.S. estimates.
WASHINGTON — In 36 days of fighting on Iwo Jima during World War II, nearly 7,000 Marines were killed. Now, 20 days after President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia invaded Ukraine, his military has already lost more soldiers, according to American intelligence estimates.
The conservative side of the estimate, at more than 7,000 Russian troop deaths, is greater than the number of American troops killed over 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
It is a staggering number amassed in just three weeks of fighting, American officials say, with implications for the combat effectiveness of Russian units, including soldiers in tank formations. Pentagon officials say a 10 percent casualty rate, including dead and wounded, for a single unit renders it unable to carry out combat-related tasks.
With more than 150,000 Russian troops now involved in the war in Ukraine, Russian casualties, when including the estimated 14,000 to 21,000 injured, are near that level. And the Russian military has also lost at least three generals in the fight, according to Ukrainian, NATO and Russian officials.
Pentagon officials say that a high, and rising, number of war dead can destroy the will to continue fighting. The result, they say, has shown up in intelligence reports that senior officials in the Biden administration read every day: One recent report focused on low morale among Russian troops and described soldiers just parking their vehicles and walking off into the woods.
The American officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters, caution that their numbers of Russian troop deaths are inexact, compiled through analysis of the news media, Ukrainian figures (which tend to be high, with the latest at 13,500), Russian figures (which tend to be low, with the latest at 498), satellite imagery and careful perusal of video images of Russian tanks and troops that come under fire.
American military and intelligence officials know, for instance, how many troops are usually in a tank, and can extrapolate from that the number of casualties when an armored vehicle is hit by, say, a Javelin anti-tank missile.
The high rate of casualties goes far to explain why Russia’s much-vaunted force has remained largely stalled outside of Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital.
“Losses like this affect morale and unit cohesion, especially since these soldiers don’t understand why they’re fighting,” said Evelyn Farkas, the top Pentagon official for Russia and Ukraine during the Obama administration. “Your overall situational awareness decreases. Someone’s got to drive, someone’s got to shoot.”
But, she added, “that’s just the land forces.” With Russian ground forces in disarray, Mr. Putin has increasingly looked to the skies to attack Ukrainian cities, residential buildings, hospitals and even schools. That aerial bombardment, officials say, has helped camouflage the Russian military’s poor performance on the ground. President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said this week that an estimated 1,300 Ukrainian soldiers had been killed in the war.Signs of Russia’s challenges abound. Late last week, Russian news sources reported that Mr. Putin had put two of his top intelligence officials under house arrest. The officials, who run the Fifth Service of Russia’s main intelligence service, the FSB, were interrogated for providing poor intelligence ahead of the invasion, according to Andrei Soldatov, a Russian security services expert.
“They were in charge of providing political intelligence and cultivating networks of support in Ukraine,” Mr. Soldatov said in an interview. “They told Putin what he wanted to hear” about how the invasion would progress.
Russians themselves may be hearing only what Mr. Putin wants them to hear about his “operation” in Ukraine, which he refuses to call a war or an invasion. Since it began, he has exerted iron control over the news outlets in Russia; state media is not publicizing most casualties, and has minimized the destruction.
“I don’t believe he can wall off, indefinitely, Russians from the truth,” William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, told the Senate last Thursday. “Especially as realities began to puncture that bubble, the realities of killed and wounded coming home, and the increasing number, the realities of the economic consequences for ordinary Russians, the realities of the horrific scenes of hospitals and schools being bombed next door in Ukraine, and of civilian casualties there as well.”
Western officials say that around 20 Russian generals were in Ukraine as part of the war effort, and that they may have pushed closer to the front to boost morale.
“Three generals already — that’s a shocking number,” Michael McFaul, the former United States ambassador to Russia, said in an interview.
On Wednesday, Ukrainian officials reported that a fourth general, Maj. Gen. Oleg Mityaev, the commander of the 150th motorized rifle division, had been killed in fighting.
Two American military officials said that many Russian generals are talking on unsecured phones and radios. In at least one instance, they said, the Ukrainians intercepted a general’s call, geolocated it, and attacked his location, killing him and his staff.
If Russian military deaths continue to rise, the kinds of civic organizations that called attention to troop deaths and injuries during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan could once more come to prominence.
But the Russian toll, some military specialists and lawmakers say, is unlikely to change Mr. Putin’s strategy.
“It is stunning, and the Russians haven’t even gotten to the worst of it, when they hit urban combat in the cities,” Representative Jason Crow, Democrat of Colorado and a member of the House Armed Services and Intelligence committees, said in an interview.
“I don’t think it’ll have an impact on Putin’s calculus,” Mr. Crow said. “He is not willing to lose. He’s been backed into a corner and will continue to throw troops at the problem.”
Julian E. Barnes is a national security reporter based in Washington, covering the intelligence agencies. Before joining The Times in 2018, he wrote about security matters for The Wall Street Journal. @julianbarnes • Facebook
Eric Schmitt is a senior writer who has traveled the world covering terrorism and national security. He was also the Pentagon correspondent. A member of the Times staff since 1983, he has shared three Pulitzer Prizes. @EricSchmittNYT
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/russia-troop-deaths.html?
A couple of interesting things are beginning to take shape internationally that I believe could, if they actually come to fruition, prove dire for Putin in the long run as a result of his war against Ukraine.
1) There seems to be an acknowledgement that the financial system that allows strongman autocrats like Putin and others around the world to amass such wealth and thus power via money laundering must become more transparent and regulated.
For instance the British Parliament has recently revisited a long dead and dusty piece of legislation designed to reform its regulation of corporations. How their incorporated, who can own them, and how they’re taxed.....Such reform could pick up steam worldwide (doubtful I know, but possible) as other nations recognize that oligarchs and wanna be strongman gain power and control via their wealth. Mostly illegal wealth.
2) European nations and NATO members recognize that they can no longer depend solely on the American military to defend them from outside threats.
Germany in particular is now acknowledging that it’s own military is not at all up to the task of self defense. It just days ago announced a deal to purchase 30 F-35 stealth fighter planes from Lockheed. And has now set a goal to become the third largest military in the world behind the United States and China (a country they also recognize as a serious threat to Europe). This, literally a month ago would have been unheard of in Germany.
Certainly these two movements are a long, long way from fruition, especially financial reform of the international banking system, real estate LLC’s, corporate taxes and governance, etc. But surely Putin and his supporters must recognize the can of worms they’ve potentially opened.
As a lawyer, I'm a stickler for correct language. However, I don't have a clue as to the global meanings of various military weapons & I'm certain terms are being used incorrectly, interchangeably, and casually. I don't think it matters to anyone except Putin when one day he decides "X" means something that is a trigger.
As to the WSJ, this isn't news; it's details w/so many caveats as to be meaningless. Is it 3 or 4 generals who've been killed? Was it 1 or 8 generals who warned Putin he didn't have sufficient ground forces pre-invasion & were fired?
Last night, I spoke to a retired Navy seal acquaintance whose wife is from Belarus & his MIL, SIL & BIL all still live there. His take was that average Russians know Russian TV is propaganda & their source of information is global thru SM - what they're seeing from family/friends outside Belarus on IG & TikTok. His in-laws (MIL is 70, others are 40s) haven't been affected except for a shortage of salt. His take that whatever is going on in Ukraine is business as usual to them & there's no sense of urgency to leave. Also, there's nowhere to go since their Russian passports aren't accepted w/o a visa even in Cypress where they have a 2nd home. His personal take was to laugh when I mentioned bombing of the maternity hospital in Ukraine saying I was naive if I didn't think that's what the US/Afghans did in Afghanistan (hospitals if not children's hospitals) & just kept that info out of reports/knowledge of average Americans. He wasn't defending Putin, but making the point that "war is hell" & to think otherwise is naive. He declined to discuss nukes. So, that's my anecdotal info.
@cyclone88 that is some good info - and it leads me to this...the US and much of western allied media is overdosing everyone with the news on Ukraine - and because, it's a really big deal and all. But it can have an effect of painting story lines and info and events in the moment that don't necessarily end up being the way it was. I think many sources try to verify, but there is speculation and propaganda and misleading accounts. I think we know the big picture bottom line of what is and has taken place, but we might not be getting all the individual pieces correct. I will still read and watch and make of things what I will as I think everyone will, be that info 100% accurate or not.
The way this war is being reported on, the access on the ground not with reporters, but the civilians is way different than anything we have seen before. And it is more relatable, a European nation being invaded and ruthlessly bombed with many similarities in their lifestyles to western life.
It also raises the points of how we have viewed our conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan, or conflicts involving Israelis and Palestinians - all of it. It's different, I don't think it is different because these people are "white" as I have heard some say. It's just something to think about. I think we just see a society that resembles western society and an independent nation who is willing to lay down their lives to fight, people who have never held or shot a weapon before, now doing so. It's just compelling to follow and cheer and hope for these people to succeed against the obvious rogue nation. I know other countries see the US as the rogue nation in conflicts...it's just I think alot and it can get all twisted if you step out and look at it objectively.
War is hell and on one hand war crimes is kind of an oxymoron- war itself could be considered a crime. I do think the way the US conducts strikes, the way the US plans and attacks while innocent civilians can and do die, non-military or government targets can and do get destroyed - it's not on purpose. Whatever the Afghans backed by the US did in the 80s, it's not the same. How the US goes about it, with precision, to minimize collateral damage - what we are seeing with the Russians is like they are fighting in the 1960s or 70s. Not like there is "right" way to fight war, but there is a "wrong" way and the Russians are doing it all wrong - like the Washington Post talked about in that link yesterday about Russia no longer being a super power, how they are waging war it's like their a second or third rate nation compared to how warfare has evolved in the 21st century.
But all we know is what the media delivers to us, without any real deep digs for some alternate sourcing. Is everything that Ukraine says happened true? Probably not. Is everything that Russia has said false? I mean, everything? Probably not.
Generally, or even more than generally, I take things like 3 generals being killed as fact. The 4th? I guess we have to believe something. But yes, definitely, everyone needs to leave room for doubt in what we are being told.
I want to touch back on the White House continually insisting that fighter jets are offensive weapons and everything else they are or have been supplying or coordinating are defensive. Like you said and we both knows, it only really matters how Putin takes it and what his response is. I could definitely make a case that the US is involved in a war right now with Russia. Different levels or war, but war none-the-less. Fighter jets could very strongly be considered a defensive tool, Ukraine is defending their sky, their air space, their infrastructure and buildings and people below. I really don't see the different the White House keeps trying to make. They are all means in which the Ukrainians are trying to kill Russians - be it offensive or defensive - if the Russians are in their country inflicting death and destruction, really for the Ukrainians, it is all defensive!
If anyone has 45 minutes and wishes to listen to a very interesting discussion about the topic of this thread, I suggest listening to today’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross. Today she interviewed Mary Elise Sarotte, historian and author of the book “Not One Inch.”
I found it a fascinating interview and discussion about the history of NATO, Putin, Boris Yelton, The end of the Cold War, The Bush I and Bill Clinton presidencies, Putin’s rise to power, etc.....This is well worth your time if you desire more insight into the current situation in Central Europe. Here’s a link:
If anyone has 45 minutes and wishes to listen to a very interesting discussion about the topic of this thread, I suggest listening to today’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross. Today she interviewed Mary Elise Sarotte, historian and author of the book “Not One Inch.”
I found it a fascinating interview and discussion about the history of NATO, Putin, Boris Yelton, The end of the Cold War, The Bush I and Bill Clinton presidencies, Putin’s rise to power, etc.....This is well worth your time if you desire more insight into the current situation in Central Europe. Here’s a link:
Thanks for the heads up. Big NPR listener. I use to listen a lot to Fresh Air in the evenings but they moved her time slot, so I am kinda hit or miss with it.
Everyone has a plan, till you get punched in the face,
@chain, thank you. I just listened.
I had heard the "not one inch" phrase mischaracterized - as Putin himself mischaracterizes it.
I could listen to that kind of stuff all day right now. Thanks.
Thanks for this. If nothing else, it conveys how Putin rose to power by being a well-known protector of corruption & to his current position to protect Yeltsin. I didn't know that the break-up of the USSR made Ukraine the 3rd largest nuclear country had it known how to control the nukes & hadn't ceded control to Moscow. The author was quite non-partisan noting the factual roles & alternatives that both US & Russian presidents could have taken from 1989. "Refreshing" to hear a clear recitation of facts w/o placing blame.
@cyclone88 that is some good info - and it leads me to this...the US and much of western allied media is overdosing everyone with the news on Ukraine - and because, it's a really big deal and all. But it can have an effect of painting story lines and info and events in the moment that don't necessarily end up being the way it was. I think many sources try to verify, but there is speculation and propaganda and misleading accounts. I think we know the big picture bottom line of what is and has taken place, but we might not be getting all the individual pieces correct. I will still read and watch and make of things what I will as I think everyone will, be that info 100% accurate or not.
Yes. Media is a business & right now, war is selling. I, too, have heard criticisms that the same topics that were important 4 weeks ago are still important but are not getting sufficient attention. This is the scourge of 24/7 media - people become numb. We have BLM, Covid, Jan 6 "fatigue" because we can only process so much.
