Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 10 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: Then why was the war even started? Because it became clear to Russian elite (who are, with all their corruption and greed, far more intelligent people then Western counterparts, for simple reason of surviving brutal selection of 1990th when the price of failure was not end of political career, but life) that they are unable to negotiate with West and that they are next dish on the table, with Ukraine to be used as tool to remove them by wiping out Donbass republics and causing mass public movement inside Russia by this (as Russian public will not tolerate such an open manefestation of elites treason). "Collective Putin" rule is, first and foremost, populist - and can't survive collapse of popularity. This popularity was gained by correcting most obvious flaws of local corruption and Western looting in early 2000th, but can be lost very quickly. 46 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: And why isn't it over yet? Because with every next day of war and every next soldier dead it is becoming harder for "collective Putin" to negotiate surrender they would be able to sell to Russians as victory.
Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 13 minutes ago, Josh said: That’s an interesting fantasy. I doubt Xi remotely cares about your internal politics or which oblasts Russia controls when the war is over. What would it possibly matter to China? Russia is just a gas station and a nuclear chess piece for China. Take away those two things and it becomes almost completely irrelevant. Your problem is you do not understand that Russian elite is quite likely to buy their return to their London palaces by turning Russia against China (actually, it is effectively the only thing they could propose to West that West might be interested in - since all other things from Russia West allready had).
ink Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said: There you go. Tell me, have you seen 'Remains of the Day'? It may have been fiction, but it was describing an actual truth. The book's better, of course. But, like you said, it's fiction. 1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Mosley was an aristocrat as well remember. This wasnt the postwar years when a peoples vote meant something. At this point in history, everything was in flux, and that included the possiblity of appointing a PM, a Lord, that wasnt chosen at the ballot box. It wasnt THAT long ago we had a foreign secretary whom didnt have to pass that test either. Look, I'm not saying it wasn't a scary time. And there were definitely a couple of aristocrats who saw the situation as an opportunity. I'm just trying to be fair to Chamberlain, who I reckon gets a lot of flak - only a portion of which is deserved.
ink Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 58 minutes ago, urbanoid said: Offensive against Germany from the West likely would have been disastrous and a total failure. Not my text, just taken from a good Polish facebook profile about WW2 and autotranslated: https://www.facebook.com/WojnawKolorze2.0/posts/pfbid0Q8eEyb7KEqp798rNJNa4ASbDeX5HeahbKsK2AXnTvL6oA6keJYdBcJ7upHmQigqml PS. 'Adenoid Hynkel' is obviously another 'AH', but since fb algorithms are crazy sometimes... 39 minutes ago, urbanoid said: @ink And another one, about French doctrine, the state of the French military and its comparison to the Wehrmacht. And yes, we were fully aware of that when we were accepting French guarantees, we were fully aware that the whole country may end up occupied (Serbian WW1 variant with gov in exile was considered long before 1939), what we were not fully aware of was the genocidal nature of the Reich (as opposed to USSR, which we already knew as such) - which is understandable, as it wasn't particularly genocidal PRIOR to the war. https://www.facebook.com/WojnawKolorze2.0/posts/pfbid0U2P2fjna273caeAAMZr1oZbTG61cAU8piiPsrennvPNcYHgfdNNvADjB9LdHPEbal You'll get no disagreement from me. I don't think France was ready for war either. I was just saying that a different France, had better and more justifiable opportunities to intervene against Germany than the early 30s. One of your texts mentions that a war between France and Germany would have been a gift to Stalin - and that's the part I agree with most. France could (theoretically - I get that) have marched to Berlin in 1939 while the Wermacht was in Poland. But that would have meant giving up on the great dream of the Western powers - that Hitler and Stalin would go to war first, that this would weaken both of them, and that French and British commercial and imperial interests would survive or even be fortified by a war in Eastern Europe. But, ultimately, you're right, or the texts you posted are, nobody expected Poland to fall so quickly (or the double whammy of the Molotov-Ribebntrop+the Soviet invasion from the East). But much more importantly for European history (sorry, I love Poland but) the fall of France was simply unforeseeable in anyone's calculation.
Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 8 minutes ago, ink said: One of your texts mentions that a war between France and Germany would have been a gift to Stalin - and that's the part I agree with most. France could (theoretically - I get that) have marched to Berlin in 1939 while the Wermacht was in Poland. But that would have meant giving up on the great dream of the Western powers - that Hitler and Stalin would go to war first, that this would weaken both of them, and that French and British commercial and imperial interests would survive or even be fortified by a war in Eastern Europe. But, ultimately, you're right, or the texts you posted are, nobody expected Poland to fall so quickly (or the double whammy of the Molotov-Ribebntrop+the Soviet invasion from the East). But much more importantly for European history (sorry, I love Poland but) the fall of France was simply unforeseeable in anyone's calculation. I'm affraid you are overestimating the importance of "Stalin" (USSR) for European politicians of 1930th. USSR was just pariah state created on the ruins of what was left after brutal civil war, sort of inflated version of Houthi or Taliban regime in A-stan now. Only 10+ years ago Red Army was defeated by Poles (who were also "geographic news", uncomparable to first-rate military powers of Old Europe). European cities were full of Russian migrants waiting for "Soviets" to collapse if not today then tomorrow. And so on. Only during and, especially, after WWII USSR was acknowleged to be military superpower.
Stefan Kotsch Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said: Because it became clear to Russian elite .. far more intelligent people then Western counterparts, Oh right. Yes, now I finally understand that. 👍 ___ The russian elite: THE END OF DARWINISM The Darwinian theory of human evolution from apes was extremely ideologically and scientifically outdated by the mid-20th century and should be eliminated from biology textbooks. ... We can judge what such education can lead to by looking at the rabid West, which has deviated from God. ... https://t.me/s/kvmalofeev/2988 -> Konstantin Valeryevich Malofeyev is a Russian oligarch. He is the founder and managing director of the international investment fund Marshall Capital Partners. Edited September 28, 2024 by Stefan Kotsch
Josh Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, Roman Alymov said: Your problem is you do not understand that Russian elite is quite likely to buy their return to their London palaces by turning Russia against China (actually, it is effectively the only thing they could propose to West that West might be interested in - since all other things from Russia West allready had). I do not see how Russia could hurt China even if the Appeasement Of The West Party wanted to. Moreover I suspect simply ending the war in Ukraine would be all the west needed to end most sanctions. Edited September 28, 2024 by Josh
Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 Map of Pokrovsk roads (red=cut, yellow=in reach of drones, blue=safe)
Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 6 minutes ago, Josh said: I do not see how Russia could hurt China even if the Appeasement Of The West Party wanted to. Even the simple fact of West having access to massive Russia-China border (4200 km, for comparison sake US/Mexico border is just 3145 km) will create a lot of headache for China, not to mention having prospects of hostilities on that border.
mkenny Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 2 hours ago, urbanoid said: And yes, we Poland has refused any dealings with the Soviets in 1938, because it didn't want to end up as a Soviet republic. History has shown that was a mistake. The Soviets were the only realistic way Germany could be deterred.
Josh Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 3 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: Even the simple fact of West having access to massive Russia-China border (4200 km, for comparison sake US/Mexico border is just 3145 km) will create a lot of headache for China, not to mention having prospects of hostilities on that border. are you implying The West wants to get into a land conflict with China or that Russia would ever host foreign forces?!?
mkenny Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 1 minute ago, Josh said: are you implying The West wants to get into a land conflict with China or that Russia would ever host foreign forces?!? Yes that's absurd. Next you will be saying the west was using Ukraine to get right up to Russia's borders..................
Josh Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 (edited) 4 minutes ago, mkenny said: Yes that's absurd. Next you will be saying the west was using Ukraine to get right up to Russia's borders.................. The west didn’t start the war. There were a lot of military options available to Russia if protecting the breakaway republics was the goal and there was zero prospects of Ukraine actually joining the EU, let alone NATO, pre war. There still is no realistic prospect of either, but now integration with NATO logistics and communications structures is massively accelerated. It was not even a pre war consideration. Edited September 28, 2024 by Josh
ink Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 54 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: I'm affraid you are overestimating the importance of "Stalin" (USSR) for European politicians of 1930th. USSR was just pariah state created on the ruins of what was left after brutal civil war, sort of inflated version of Houthi or Taliban regime in A-stan now. Only 10+ years ago Red Army was defeated by Poles (who were also "geographic news", uncomparable to first-rate military powers of Old Europe). European cities were full of Russian migrants waiting for "Soviets" to collapse if not today then tomorrow. And so on. Only during and, especially, after WWII USSR was acknowleged to be military superpower. Maybe that was true of the Soviet Union (I don't really think so, but eveb if it was...), the real fear that preoccupied all of the West was communism. Literally nothing scared Western elites that much until the advent of ICBMs in the early 1960s. And even after that, the fear was there in the background. Fascism and Nazism were, by some at least, seen as safe alternatives... Hence the Business Plot in the US and people like Mosely and (less so) Halifax in the UK.
ink Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Josh said: The west didn’t start the war. There were a lot of military options available to Russia if protecting the breakaway republics was the goal and there was zero prospects of Ukraine actually joining the EU, let alone NATO, pre war. There still is no realistic prospect of either, but now integration with NATO logistics and communications structures is massively accelerated. It was not even a pre war consideration. Harsh to say "zero" given the palaver in Bucharest in 2008 and the proclamations that followed Maidan by the likes of Rasmussen and Poroshenko. And it should be "NATO, let alone the EU". Edited September 28, 2024 by ink
Roman Alymov Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 5 minutes ago, ink said: Maybe that was true of the Soviet Union (I don't really think so, but eveb if it was...), the real fear that preoccupied all of the West was communism. Literally nothing scared Western elites that much until the advent of ICBMs in the early 1960s. Communism was internal threat coming from their own working class districts, not from USSR far away (the same way as another equality ideology - islamism - is now rising in the same poor working class/migrant districts, not threatenenig by military invasion from abroad).
mkenny Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 8 minutes ago, Josh said: and there was zero prospects of Ukraine actually joining the EU, let alone NATO, pre war. We believe you ..................
Josh Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 4 minutes ago, ink said: Harsh to say "zero" given the palaver in Bucharest in 2008 and the proclamations that followed Maidan by the likes of Rasmussen and Poroshenko. And it should be "NATO, let alone the EU". There were lots of people who might have wanted Ukrainian membership in NATO but the fact any one country can veto membership meant it was always a pipe dream. Post 2014 most of Western Europe would not want to entangle itself in that conflict (one of the primary goals of said conflict) and I struggle to contemplate a situation where Orban or “Just The Tayyip” would both approve. So yes, EU let alone NATO, and the EU has sufficient hoops to jump through (and Ukraine sufficient corruption) that I think the process would have taken decades, if ever. There was no pressing security need on Russia’s part; it probably could have preserved the D/LPK with just a no fly zone. Annexation or troop deployments were other low risk options.
Josh Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 4 minutes ago, mkenny said: We believe you .................. Your belief isn’t required. Your lack of counter arguments says it all.
urbanoid Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 Just now, mkenny said: History has shown that was a mistake. The Soviets were the only realistic way Germany could be deterred. No, history showed something exactly opposite. And if you think there was no practical difference between becoming a satellite state in postwar environment and a (part of) a Soviet republic before/during the war, you're gravely mistaken. Up until June 1941 the Soviet occupation of the Eastern part of the country was at least as bad as German one in the West, which was pretty much a pattern - it was quite genocidal in the Baltic States too in 1940-41 timeframe.
ink Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 7 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: Communism was internal threat coming from their own working class districts, not from USSR far away The two were integrally linked from the get go, but especially so after the Soviet Union showed it was willing to support foreign causes, as in Spain.
urbanoid Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 Communist parties all across the West have been supported AND directed from Moscow, they were literally Soviet agents.
mkenny Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 30 minutes ago, urbanoid said: And if you think there was no practical difference between becoming a satellite state in postwar environment and a (part of) a Soviet republic before/during the war, you're gravely mistaken. When I visited the Sikorski Museum in London a while back I was given an elderly Polish lady as a guide. She told me of her time in Poland in WW2. She hated both Germans and Russians with a passion but explained that whilst capture by the Germans meant certain death when she was in Soviet custody she was treated badly but received a small weekly wage and was eventually released. Sometimes it is better to be eaten by a Tiger rather than a Lion.
Stuart Galbraith Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 My Grandfather chose to stay with the Germans rather than be liberated by the Soviets. So did most of the other British Pows. 1 hour ago, urbanoid said: Communist parties all across the West have been supported AND directed from Moscow, they were literally Soviet agents. It's a bit more complicated than that. The Italian communist party was sharply critical of the USSR by the 1980s, particularly over Afghanistan. I'm reading th3 diaries of one of the guys in the Kremlins international department, and the gnashing of teeth by the Soviet leadership is delightful to behold.
urbanoid Posted September 28, 2024 Posted September 28, 2024 7 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said: My Grandfather chose to stay with the Germans rather than be liberated by the Soviets. So did most of the other British Pows. It's a bit more complicated than that. The Italian communist party was sharply critical of the USSR by the 1980s, particularly over Afghanistan. I'm reading th3 diaries of one of the guys in the Kremlins international department, and the gnashing of teeth by the Soviet leadership is delightful to behold. I meant in the interwar period. Postwar quite a lot of communists have become disillusioned with USSR, largely becoming 'social democrats' and the like, even if the old party names remained.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now