The Kremlin is burning?

[sunday]

NATO should have dissolved after the fall of Communism. There was no Russian aggressiveness back then. Military threats were the European South Flank, and another Greco-Turkish war.

That was not enough, so the organization kept looking for a mission, and under the neocon guide it laid waste to Irak, Lybia and Syria. Ultimately, it was decided that Russia needs to be destroyed, as it was Carthage after it had ceased to be a threat to Rome.

I think that Mearsheimer's realism could have helped to formulate this position.

 

[ink]

1 hour ago, Sardaukar said:

Well, she was in Playboy..so there is that

Damn! I did not know that!

[urbanoid]

1 hour ago, sunday said:

NATO should have dissolved after the fall of Communism. There was no Russian aggressiveness back then. Military threats were the European South Flank, and another Greco-Turkish war.

That was not enough, so the organization kept looking for a mission, and under the neocon guide it laid waste to Irak, Lybia and Syria. Ultimately, it was decided that Russia needs to be destroyed, as it was Carthage after it had ceased to be a threat to Rome.

I think that Mearsheimer's realism could have helped to formulate this position.

 

Nah, the Russian assumption was that 'spheres of influence will be divided among us great powers' with everything between Germany and Russia having fuck all to say about that. Inquiries about joining NATO came from some of those countries almost immediately as we were well aware of that.  

Pretty much everyone correctly assumed that Russian attitude is the same as it ever was, only they lacked the strength to do much at the time, so we better use our window of opportunity, as it may slip. Well, it did slip for Ukraine at least, also for Belarus for other reasons, but everyone else managed to get in in time.  

The real engine of the integration with the West worked here, we were asking to let us join and had to work on Western leaders to overcome their reluctance, not the other way around. 

In 2003, the whole 'new Europe vs old Europe' thing wasn't really American doing, it was our own, what Rumsfeld did was acknowledging it. There's a reason while on Iraq debacle everyone 'between Germany and Russia' took US side, as we were scared shitless of Schroeder and Chirac plotting with Russia and about what that would mean for us. We're talking about countries that either already joined NATO in 1999, were set to join NATO and EU in 2004 or were aspiring to join at the later date. Even those not directly exposed to Russia didn't want to remain in the 'gray zone of security'. Sure as hell nobody here cared one bit for Saddam and whether he has or hasn't any WMDs. As one of my professors said, us joining the Iraq War wasn't about Iraq, it was about who we were invading WITH, adding that for as we were concerned it could have been  Brazilian province of Pernambuco instead of Iraq just as well, as long as we have positioned ourselves on the US side and against Franco-German-Russian one.

[R011]

12 hours ago, MiGG0 said:

Again RUS wont attack NATO just. UKR didnt have NATO umbrella.

At least we really hope they won't.  I prefer not to quite literally bet my life on it.  Probably be best if we were ready in the event they did and support Ukraine so they can't.

[Josh]

I largely have skimming/skipping this thread. But I actually just saw a play that is kinda relevant called Patriots, and it was very well done with a feel of almost a Shakespeare tragedy married to largely factual events of Putin’s rise as best I know (the dialogues between characters is likely fabricated). It actually is an interesting crash course in recent Russian history for anyone who wasn’t previously interested. I’m hoping they make a movie out of it; it actually is only running for several months in nyc so it must not have been profitable. But it’s the best play I’ve seen in a decade.

intellectually I know that Putin was a washed up KGB agent turned deputy mayor turned cab driver, but it is so amazing to see it portrayed to remind you. And he’s not even the main character.

Edited June 1, 2024 by Josh

[sunday]

16 hours ago, urbanoid said:

Nah, the Russian assumption was that 'spheres of influence will be divided among us great powers' with everything between Germany and Russia having fuck all to say about that. Inquiries about joining NATO came from some of those countries almost immediately as we were well aware of that.  

Pretty much everyone correctly assumed that Russian attitude is the same as it ever was, only they lacked the strength to do much at the time, so we better use our window of opportunity, as it may slip. Well, it did slip for Ukraine at least, also for Belarus for other reasons, but everyone else managed to get in in time.  

The real engine of the integration with the West worked here, we were asking to let us join and had to work on Western leaders to overcome their reluctance, not the other way around. 

In 2003, the whole 'new Europe vs old Europe' thing wasn't really American doing, it was our own, what Rumsfeld did was acknowledging it. There's a reason while on Iraq debacle everyone 'between Germany and Russia' took US side, as we were scared shitless of Schroeder and Chirac plotting with Russia and about what that would mean for us. We're talking about countries that either already joined NATO in 1999, were set to join NATO and EU in 2004 or were aspiring to join at the later date. Even those not directly exposed to Russia didn't want to remain in the 'gray zone of security'. Sure as hell nobody here cared one bit for Saddam and whether he has or hasn't any WMDs. As one of my professors said, us joining the Iraq War wasn't about Iraq, it was about who we were invading WITH, adding that for as we were concerned it could have been  Brazilian province of Pernambuco instead of Iraq just as well, as long as we have positioned ourselves on the US side and against Franco-German-Russian one.

Note this is posterior to the, for Russia, black 1990s. Even after 9/11 there was no need to extend NATO behind the former members of the Warsaw Pact, perhaps with the exception of the Baltics.

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, sunday said:

Note this is posterior to the, for Russia, black 1990s. Even after 9/11 there was no need to extend NATO behind the former members of the Warsaw Pact, perhaps with the exception of the Baltics.

Why was there a NATO after 1992? The pure existence of NATO is a threat to Russia.

[Josh]

1 hour ago, sunday said:

Note this is posterior to the, for Russia, black 1990s. Even after 9/11 there was no need to extend NATO behind the former members of the Warsaw Pact, perhaps with the exception of the Baltics.

The Baltics are the most controversial part - former Soviet republics that would be incredibly hard to defend.

Fundamentally NATO is a defensive organization that can barely agree on calibers. There is no threat of it attacking Russia, one of the two great nuclear powers, and at one point there was an opportunity for it to join.

[glenn239]

At the 8:25 mark of this video it shows an announcement posted by the Chinese army that it stands with Russia for global peace and security, and that the PLA will deepen military cooperation with the Russians globally,

 

 

 

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

At the 8:25 mark of this video it shows an announcement posted by the Chinese army that it stands with Russia for global peace and security, and that the PLA will deepen military cooperation with the Russians globally,

 

 

 

Obviously, as China would be next, if Russia looses.

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

At the 8:25 mark of this video it shows an announcement posted by the Chinese army that it stands with Russia for global peace and security, and that the PLA will deepen military cooperation with the Russians globally,

I wonder who believe it - as in reality Russian elite is currently begging West to allow them to capitulate, only asking for fasesaving that will allow them to stay in control of Russia by demonstrating capitulation as victory for population. No doubt China leadership is aware of Abramovich traveling around with this mission, and i do not think comunist China will move a finger to help Russian capitalists to save their London palaces from Western capitalists. What PLA will "deepen military cooperation with the Russians globally"  - in doing nothing?

  Fresh illustration: this night Belgorod was attacked by 12 HIMARS missiles. They were all shot down this time, but no doubt sooner or later some will get through. It was direct crossing of another "red line" - and what is official reaction? Nothing, complete silence, even no official reporting (while pro-Rus TG channels are full of picrures of HIMARS missiles parts - for example https://t.me/vysokygovorit/16043 ) As usual, all loud rhethorics turned out to be just hot air for internal consumption, as pro-Western elite of Russia woud prefer loosing half of Russia if it allows them to have their luxury lifesryle back.

    Popular joke (or not joke) among pro-Russians is that one Houti motorboat would be more effective then entire Black Sea Fleet  -as Houtis are not affraid to shoot at US drones and warships.

P.S. Fresh viudeo of AD intercepting another wave of incoming missiles over Belgorod few hours ago https://t.me/sashakots/47061

Edited June 1, 2024 by Roman Alymov

[glenn239]

23 hours ago, seahawk said:

Obviously, as China would be next, if Russia loses.

There's that, but another factor I think is at play.  The Chinese do not want Russian nuclear weapons to bark under any circumstances, and if the situation moves in this direction, the Chinese may decide to increase their support of Russia as an alternative to it.

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

There's that, but another factor I think is at play.  The Chinese do not want Russian nuclear weapons to bark under any circumstances, and if the situation moves in this direction, the Chinese may decide to increase their support of Russia as an alternative to it.

Yes, because they could lead to Taiwan getting nukes. But imho this should only be the reason to strike now. China needs to re-unite and the time is right. The West is weak.

[Stefan Kotsch]

33 minutes ago, seahawk said:

Yes, because they could lead to Taiwan getting nukes

Oh what! Much worse. The USA will supply 344-mm Lepage Glue Guns. Then the Taiwanese can glue entire Chinese squadrons together in the air.

Edited June 2, 2024 by Stefan Kotsch

[Pavel Novak]

On 5/30/2024 at 11:16 PM, mkenny said:

who blindly pursued peace in your example?

 

Some polish diplomat mentioned negotiations between Russia and Ukraine before 2022 invasion. There were lot of issues but one was striking: Russia was adamant regarding Ukraine neutrality but at the same time it was absolutely against any form of guarantee for rest-Ukraine. For Ukrainians this was no-deal breaker, they want some clear guarantee that if such deal is accepted there will be functional guarantee.

[Roman Alymov]

Pro-Rus TG channels are cheering the rumours of political decision do address the problem of NATO strategic reconasance drones over Black Sea. https://t.me/milinfolive/123395 At the same time, in real world, RusMoD officially claimed recent MLRS salvo of 6 missiles on Belgorod (shot down by AD less then hour ago) was Ukr-made "Olkha" missiles, as they are affraid to acknowlege it was HIMARS missiles. https://t.me/dva_majors/44302

[Stefan Kotsch]

Russia is currently importing a lot from China. And the transport takes place via rail. Now China is drastically increasing freight prices.

Russia:'China has never failed to seek its advantages even in the era of 'brothers forever',
especially in relationships with those who cannot do anything about it themselves.
This is evidenced by numerous unprecedented facts of economic exploitation of Russia...

https://topwar.ru/243253-esli-nechem-zamenit-kitaj-ili-kogda-situacija-diktuet.html

Economic exploitation of Russia? @Roman Alymov will spit poison and bile. First the West, now the Chinese. 🤧

[Josh]

Would not most of travel between Russia and China be inside Russia using Russian trains? I assume there is a gauge change?

[Stefan Kotsch]

But it has to be transported to the border first. That already costs...

[Ssnake]

You have no idea how much this costs!

[glenn239]

8 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Russia is currently importing a lot from China. And the transport takes place via rail. Now China is drastically increasing freight prices.

Sorry to disappoint, but this is not a strictly Sino-Russian phenomenon.  Just today I had one of my factories in China ask for assistance in securing a freight quote to Canada, because their inquiries were all returning prices that were too high.

[glenn239]

7 hours ago, Josh said:

Would not most of travel between Russia and China be inside Russia using Russian trains? I assume there is a gauge change?

Most trade probably goes by container ship, even with the Trans-Siberian.

[Josh]

On 6/5/2024 at 6:50 PM, glenn239 said:

Most trade probably goes by container ship, even with the Trans-Siberian.

It’s kinda funny how you say that now but when we discuss how open to shipping interdiction China is, suddenly everything is by train.

Edited June 7, 2024 by Josh

[Stefan Kotsch]

7 hours ago, glenn239 said:

15 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

Russia is currently importing a lot from China. And the transport takes place via rail. Now China is drastically increasing freight prices.

Sorry to disappoint, but this is not a strictly Sino-Russian phenomenon. 

Right, that's it. But that wasn't my point. My point is that @Roman Alymov (as example) keeps telling us that an unsuspecting and guileless Russia has been exploited by the devious West. And now people are accusing their best friend China of this. That I don't have to laugh.

The boys are still committed to their socialist ideas. You want a successful economy like the USA, but you want it to function like the Soviet Union.
Unfortunately, the laws of free-market economics also work on the railways, even if the Russians simply close their eyes and shout  YEP - I CAN'T SEE ANYTHING AND I CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING.

 

 

 

[Stefan Kotsch]

Here are the railway lines between China and Russia:

And especially in the Ekaterienburg region and Southern Urals region, Russian Railways is having serious problems managing transport. They often break down, which is why entire trains are left stranded until the locomotive is ready for use again. A third of all failures are at the expense of the locomotives. Approximately 60% of these locomotives do not comply with the technical readiness coefficients guaranteed by the manufacturer. One of the railway's most recent burning problems is the lack of pulling power of the locomotives. etc etc.

https://www.rzd-partner.ru/zhd-transport/comments/pochti-tret-otstavleniy-poezdov-dopushcheno-po-vine-lokomotivnogo-kompleksa/

Edited June 6, 2024 by Stefan Kotsch