Jacques Baud is a former colonel of the General Staff, ex-member of the Swiss strategic intelligence, specialist on Eastern countries. He was trained in the American and British intelligence services. He has served as Policy Chief for United Nations Peace Operations. As a UN expert on rule of law and security institutions, he designed and led the first multidimensional UN intelligence unit in the Sudan. He has worked for the African Union and was for 5 years responsible for the fight, at NATO, against the proliferation of small arms. He was involved in discussions with the highest Russian military and intelligence officials just after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and later participated in programs to assist the Ukraine. He is the author of several books on intelligence, war and terrorism, in particular Le Détournement published by SIGEST, Gouverner par les fake news, L’affaire Navalny. His latest book is Poutine, maître du jeu? published by Max Milo.
This article appears through the gracious courtesy of Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement, Paris. Translated from the French by N. Dass.
Glosses over essentially that little "invasion" of Crimea.
Glosses over the little green men in Donbas since 2014? Ish. "Only 50 foreign fighters" sure.gif
Putin is demilitarizing the Ukraine! Ok, so your invading a sovereign country to defeat its military. Pretty classic communist rebranding there.
Maybe I didn't get to the good part but he took a long time getting there and at some point I've had my fill of rehashed Kremlin talking points.
@RatherBeBrewing will probably be more willing and motivated to post a tequila style takedown.
Not even worth my usual explanation. Mssr Baud is just a simple expert for hire, and his client is Russia. In fact, any of you can hire him to lend his resume to whatever you would like him to justify or distort - it’s not very difficult to find how.
There’s no nice way to say this, but if anyone believes this assclown they are either very dim or are just looking for a source that confirms what they want to believe. I’m dumb for having read it, and even dumber for bothering to write the shit below.
Look at Baud’s articles and interviews. Special military operation this, special military operation that. That’s to avoid Russia’s new laws, where you can’t call their invasion a war. That should be a dead giveaway every time.
Denazification, Russian speaker genocide, THE Ukraine, speaking about the tiny parcels of two oblasts as if they are legitimate republics. Trying to explain the ass kicking in Kyiv as the original plan, and all those dead Russian soldiers are by design to spare civilians, instead of air strikes like the Western strategy. Although Russia has used more cruise missiles in two months than the United States has used in TOTAL in all conflicts in the last 30 years, but few people will check. Jesus, the use of MLRS like the Smerch (successor to the still in heavy use Uragan and Grad) with cluster munitions by both Russia and Ukraine is worse than air strikes for civilians by far.
I've been sitting on this for a while because I wanted to collect my thoughts, and I'm busy af. Your point about referencing a "special military operation" is fair.
The challenge I have - especially when trying to get to the bottom of what's going on - is the rote line we hear "Putin is invading a sovereign country!!" Why? "Because he's worse than Hitler!" What if I want to know more? "Putin apologist!!"
After the Hunter Biden laptop story broke, we heard all about the 50 intelligence officers saying "it has the hallmarks of Russian disinformation!!" Well, frankly, the US Govt's explanation has all the hallmarks of every tim they've gas lit the American public the last 6 years - from Russiagate to Covid and many many parts in between.
So how is this different? Given recent history, "Putin is evil" by itself is not a good enough explanation.
When one searches for more substantive understanding, it's almost always castigated as Russian Misinformation. That might be true to some degree, but when we are not allowed to parse out fact from fiction, we are eternally where we started with the narrative makers stonewalling the conversation. It's happened here on this bored many times.
I think of the information we are hearing as a 3-sided venn diagram - Western narrative, Russo narrative and objective truth. How are we supposed to discern the intersection of the 3-sides when we aren't allowed to even entertain a differing explanation.
Nearly all of the independent media has some nuance around the idea that the US could/should have done more to stop the war before it started. And a lot are so perplexed that they take it a step further, that the US wanted a war to break out. Given the ever escalating rhetoric from the Administration, it's not hard to believe this is the case.
Getting back to Baud: In my view the compelling part of the story he has to tell is that it corroborates in much greater detail what fmr weapons inspector Scott Ritter and ret. Col Douglas Macgregor under Gen Wesley Clark at NATO, and academic John Mearsheimer have been saying the entire tim. Two of those three are US soldiers/officers who are very much still loyal to the US (despite smears).
Anyway, that's a long winded way of saying there seems to be a lot more there then the US want's discussed, for whatever reasons.
Further, this pervading idea that the US govt a would NEVER lie and we must fall in line behind their assertions just seems crazy in light of what's happened the last 6 years - and orders of magnitude more so the last 2.5.
Admittedly I don't know enough about this conflict. But the one thing I do know, is I can not trust the us govt/msm apparatchik. So yeah, I'm going to turn to more independent sources to help understand what's going.
*I may add on more in the morning when less tired
The US government can be lying just the same as the Kremlin. Considering both sides doesn't necessarily get one any closer to the truth.
The venn diagram can just be three separate circles after all.
Occam's razor says this war is about 3 things.
Ukraine's potential to become a gas competitor to Russia in Europe. (See previous Georgia invasion iirc)
Russia vs. NATO proxy security dominoes.
Russia's gross miscalculation that this would be a 3 day war where they would be greeted as liberators and able to setup a client state easily. (Typical of authoritarian regimes that live in an echo chamber)
Obama had no trouble installing a puppet government in '14. Did we send them free Dominion voting machines?
Jacques Baud is a former colonel of the General Staff, ex-member of the Swiss strategic intelligence, specialist on Eastern countries. He was trained in the American and British intelligence services. He has served as Policy Chief for United Nations Peace Operations. As a UN expert on rule of law and security institutions, he designed and led the first multidimensional UN intelligence unit in the Sudan. He has worked for the African Union and was for 5 years responsible for the fight, at NATO, against the proliferation of small arms. He was involved in discussions with the highest Russian military and intelligence officials just after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and later participated in programs to assist the Ukraine. He is the author of several books on intelligence, war and terrorism, in particular Le Détournement published by SIGEST, Gouverner par les fake news, L’affaire Navalny. His latest book is Poutine, maître du jeu? published by Max Milo.
This article appears through the gracious courtesy of Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement, Paris. Translated from the French by N. Dass.
Glosses over essentially that little "invasion" of Crimea.
Glosses over the little green men in Donbas since 2014? Ish. "Only 50 foreign fighters" sure.gif
Putin is demilitarizing the Ukraine! Ok, so your invading a sovereign country to defeat its military. Pretty classic communist rebranding there.
Maybe I didn't get to the good part but he took a long time getting there and at some point I've had my fill of rehashed Kremlin talking points.
@RatherBeBrewing will probably be more willing and motivated to post a tequila style takedown.
Not even worth my usual explanation. Mssr Baud is just a simple expert for hire, and his client is Russia. In fact, any of you can hire him to lend his resume to whatever you would like him to justify or distort - it’s not very difficult to find how.
There’s no nice way to say this, but if anyone believes this assclown they are either very dim or are just looking for a source that confirms what they want to believe. I’m dumb for having read it, and even dumber for bothering to write the shit below.
Look at Baud’s articles and interviews. Special military operation this, special military operation that. That’s to avoid Russia’s new laws, where you can’t call their invasion a war. That should be a dead giveaway every time.
Denazification, Russian speaker genocide, THE Ukraine, speaking about the tiny parcels of two oblasts as if they are legitimate republics. Trying to explain the ass kicking in Kyiv as the original plan, and all those dead Russian soldiers are by design to spare civilians, instead of air strikes like the Western strategy. Although Russia has used more cruise missiles in two months than the United States has used in TOTAL in all conflicts in the last 30 years, but few people will check. Jesus, the use of MLRS like the Smerch (successor to the still in heavy use Uragan and Grad) with cluster munitions by both Russia and Ukraine is worse than air strikes for civilians by far.
I've been sitting on this for a while because I wanted to collect my thoughts, and I'm busy af. Your point about referencing a "special military operation" is fair.
The challenge I have - especially when trying to get to the bottom of what's going on - is the rote line we hear "Putin is invading a sovereign country!!" Why? "Because he's worse than Hitler!" What if I want to know more? "Putin apologist!!"
After the Hunter Biden laptop story broke, we heard all about the 50 intelligence officers saying "it has the hallmarks of Russian disinformation!!" Well, frankly, the US Govt's explanation has all the hallmarks of every tim they've gas lit the American public the last 6 years - from Russiagate to Covid and many many parts in between.
So how is this different? Given recent history, "Putin is evil" by itself is not a good enough explanation.
When one searches for more substantive understanding, it's almost always castigated as Russian Misinformation. That might be true to some degree, but when we are not allowed to parse out fact from fiction, we are eternally where we started with the narrative makers stonewalling the conversation. It's happened here on this bored many times.
I think of the information we are hearing as a 3-sided venn diagram - Western narrative, Russo narrative and objective truth. How are we supposed to discern the intersection of the 3-sides when we aren't allowed to even entertain a differing explanation.
Nearly all of the independent media has some nuance around the idea that the US could/should have done more to stop the war before it started. And a lot are so perplexed that they take it a step further, that the US wanted a war to break out. Given the ever escalating rhetoric from the Administration, it's not hard to believe this is the case.
Getting back to Baud: In my view the compelling part of the story he has to tell is that it corroborates in much greater detail what fmr weapons inspector Scott Ritter and ret. Col Douglas Macgregor under Gen Wesley Clark at NATO, and academic John Mearsheimer have been saying the entire tim. Two of those three are US soldiers/officers who are very much still loyal to the US (despite smears).
Anyway, that's a long winded way of saying there seems to be a lot more there then the US want's discussed, for whatever reasons.
Further, this pervading idea that the US govt a would NEVER lie and we must fall in line behind their assertions just seems crazy in light of what's happened the last 6 years - and orders of magnitude more so the last 2.5.
Admittedly I don't know enough about this conflict. But the one thing I do know, is I can not trust the us govt/msm apparatchik. So yeah, I'm going to turn to more independent sources to help understand what's going.
*I may add on more in the morning when less tired
The US government can be lying just the same as the Kremlin. Considering both sides doesn't necessarily get one any closer to the truth.
The venn diagram can just be three separate circles after all.
Occam's razor says this war is about 3 things.
Ukraine's potential to become a gas competitor to Russia in Europe. (See previous Georgia invasion iirc)
Russia vs. NATO proxy security dominoes.
Russia's gross miscalculation that this would be a 3 day war where they would be greeted as liberators and able to setup a client state easily. (Typical of authoritarian regimes that live in an echo chamber)
Obama had no trouble installing a puppet government in '14. Did we send them free Dominion voting machines?
I am never sure if I agree or disagree with @RatherBeBrewing , or, if I just like his brand of storytelling, but I look forward to his posts about as much as Subaru wants lesbians in them. Most interesting and creative poster in forever, and it isn't close. Probably on Zelensky's payroll and here as a disinformation actor to convince a few retards on a backwater Pac-12 program board that Putin is maybe gay.
I thank you, or maybe not, but I think the former - noble native inhabitant of this land. My regards to Method Man. The Russian side has chosen their Indians, and have honored their agreement with traditional social realist homoerotic art where Russians are portrayed by Swedes.
But we know who the superior Indians are, and it’s a synergistic relationship; you domesticated the tobacco which allows for many hours of squatting with comrades while holding a 1L plastic bottle of beer. Or a .5L bottle of our gift to you, which we call horilka a drink that comes from the word “to burn” and shows our solidarity. You also call it something similar, while the barbarians call it vodka. You are welcome for that and the domestication of the horse, which I understand let your people collect many scalps and look cool doing it. Much more difficult to kidnap 19th century pioneer women without horse, wink wink.
We thank your King Phillip for the generous donation, but are mixed on withdrawal from the Russian market. Unless a more carcinogenic Chinese alternative has replaced it. Not a call for genocide, it’s just very difficult for oncologists in a nation where the average life expectancy is so short.
DIMS and GOP chickenhawks have already decided what the military solution is. American soldiers dying on the battlefield. GOP leaders better let it be known loud and clear that isn't gonna happen. Pelosi and crew visiting Ukraine was the camel's nose under the tent.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
Very "religious" people from the West did a hell of a lot of conquering and killing and enslaving. I'm assuming a lot of Christians and Jews were involved in dropping a couple of nukes on Japan. I agree that the atheistic left/commies don't believe in individuals or God. Their religion is state control to achieve a mythical group utopia and a pile of dead people is just breaking some eggs to make an omelet. I also agree that without some moral bearing people do fail as they contemplate a purposeless life.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
Very "religious" people from the West did a hell of a lot of conquering and killing and enslaving. I'm assuming a lot of Christians and Jews were involved in dropping a couple of nukes on Japan. I agree that the atheistic left/commies don't believe in individuals or God. Their religion is state control to achieve a mythical group utopia and a pile of dead people is just breaking some eggs to make an omelet. I also agree that without some moral bearing people do fail as they contemplate a purposeless life.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
I'm not certain whether this was a reality check by RBB or an endorsement of East Euro/former Soviet "toughness."
Either way, I can't imagine such a thought process grinding in the minds of anyone with the least bit of optimism in their souls.
To see others as cannon-fodder is one thing. To see or accept oneself in such a manner is grim AF.
What's more, where or what is this fanciful "greater good" such thoughts would serve? I guess I'm just too "westernized" to reconcile it with anything useful.
Very "religious" people from the West did a hell of a lot of conquering and killing and enslaving. I'm assuming a lot of Christians and Jews were involved in dropping a couple of nukes on Japan. I agree that the atheistic left/commies don't believe in individuals or God. Their religion is state control to achieve a mythical group utopia and a pile of dead people is just breaking some eggs to make an omelet. I also agree that without some moral bearing people do fail as they contemplate a purposeless life.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
I'm not certain whether this was a reality check by RBB or an endorsement of East Euro/former Soviet "toughness."
Either way, I can't imagine such a thought process grinding in the minds of anyone with the least bit of optimism in their souls.
To see others as cannon-fodder is one thing. To see or accept oneself in such a manner is grim AF.
What's more, where or what is this fanciful "greater good" such thoughts would serve? I guess I'm just too "westernized" to reconcile it with anything useful.
Marx was a westerner. So was Ludwig Von Mises. The dichotomy of the state being supreme or the individual. The founders of our Republic chose the individual. The modern American left has chosen the state along with the RINOs.
Not hostile to your opinion at all RBB. I asked the direct, devil's advocate questions because I really wanted to read your opinions which would flush the details out like you have been providing. I haven't been able to read your thouhhts yet but really look forward to them. I'm not sure exactly where I stand on this issue yet because while I know I shouldn't side with Russia almost ever, something doesn't pass the smell test with Ukraine and our? left's corruption there and it's fanatical desire to destroy Russia at all cost. They have been lying about Russia's influence in our country to the detriment of ours for years and I don't trust their motivation for war there is all. None of that matters as to the historical and regional knowledge you're sharing with us and why supporting Ukraine and going to war may be a good thing.
As an FYI I don’t mean to sound overly aggressive or hostile, I’m just a dick. Default factory setting.
I understand. Being skeptical for one, anything in that region should be regarded with suspicion. I don’t like giving the Pentagon the benefit of the doubt. If this was Madagascar or Indonesia I’d be keeping my mouth shut because I don’t know much about them, let alone have the necessary depth of knowledge.
I’ve mentioned I’ve been to conflict zones before, and even after seeing it with my own eyes I couldn’t fathom what was really going on. The whole cultural immersion thing is necessary in order to parse the difference between truth and what is actually fact. They are oftentimes different.
This is the first time in my life I have the firsthand knowledge and experience to see beyond the gray zone in some kind of conflict. It’s a complex situation, but about as stark of evil versus not evil as it can get. I know we in the US like to tie everything back to us, and we’ve become Ukraine’s war sugar daddy, but regardless of our level of involvement this would be happening.
Shit, if the US didn’t make it known there would be retaliation Putin would have probably done this sooner. If we didn’t provide military intelligence/equipment/training this thing would be much bloodier with another corrupt quisling in Ukraine while Putin’s henchmen would be liquidating civic leaders, robbing, and deciding which bordering nation is next. Maybe China would be emboldened or some shit, but I don’t know nearly enough about that situation beyond just wild speculation - but I’m guessing it wouldn’t be good for us.
Anyway, maybe these maps can help in understanding part of this war. The point is that Russia’s version of history is the one that gets attention, with language, ethnicity, etc all to their favor. They’ve successfully convinced people in the Kuban, Krasnodar Krai, and other parts that they’re Russian. Despite their native language having the name of “little language” in Ukrainian and all their folk songs being in Ukrainian. I don’t know if any other country that is so damn sensitive about appearing greater than it is, they even have a full time staff that edits Wikipedia articles to be more positive to Russia.
Ukrainian ethnographic map, Germany 1945
Post WWI conference on national borders, Paris 1919
From Prague, 1919-20
Early USSR linguistic map. Pre Holodomor genocide and Russification. See map below. Pre deportation of Crimean Tatars - the former majority of Crimea, a Turkic (‘white looking’ for lack of better description) Muslim people that practice the Sufi branch of Islam. Let’s just say they’ve basically been on island for 700 years and had their own little Khanate with affiliation to the Ottomans and the Armchairs. Probably worthy of a longer explanation. They’re not exactly friendly to the Russians and play a big part in Ukraine’s history.
The companion map to the language one. The Holodomor, murder by hunger, that Russia claims didn’t target Ukrainians to resettle the land with Russians (as @WestlinnDuck I believe mentioned about social engineering and resettlement). Look at the percentages of population loss. Academically accepted figure is 6 million, but 3-10 mil is the range. The “breadbasket of Europe” couldn’t feed itself, yet the non-Ukrainian regions fared much better.
Soviet grain exports by year. 1913 was the last pre-WWI harvest after that the was and communist harvests. The Holodomor began 1930-31. In a shorter time period Stalin managed to kill as many Ukrainians as Hitler did Jews, without moving them, while forcing them to grow grain for export, and eliminating resistance to communism and Stalinism. The Germans are envious of such efficiency.
Very "religious" people from the West did a hell of a lot of conquering and killing and enslaving. I'm assuming a lot of Christians and Jews were involved in dropping a couple of nukes on Japan. I agree that the atheistic left/commies don't believe in individuals or God. Their religion is state control to achieve a mythical group utopia and a pile of dead people is just breaking some eggs to make an omelet. I also agree that without some moral bearing people do fail as they contemplate a purposeless life.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
I'm not certain whether this was a reality check by RBB or an endorsement of East Euro/former Soviet "toughness."
Either way, I can't imagine such a thought process grinding in the minds of anyone with the least bit of optimism in their souls.
To see others as cannon-fodder is one thing. To see or accept oneself in such a manner is grim AF.
What's more, where or what is this fanciful "greater good" such thoughts would serve? I guess I'm just too "westernized" to reconcile it with anything useful.
Marx was a westerner. So was Ludwig Von Mises. The dichotomy of the state being supreme or the individual. The founders of our Republic chose the individual. The modern American left has chosen the state along with the RINOs.
"Death is acceptable and the European concept of minimal casualties is stupid. It’s a war, people will die, more people can be made, wars can’t be un-lost, we are tougher and willing to die."
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
I can’t comment with certainty on whether it’s a philosophical/cultural difference. The collectivism vs individualism thing isn’t something starkly different. It’s surmised that in Russia and the rest of Asia it skews towards collectivist while in Europe more so towards an individualistic mindset or a hybrid of the two.
The Russian mindset is often “we are suffering thus our cause is noble” instead of “our cause is noble thus we are willing to suffer” - I don’t understand it either.
It manifests itself in things like Putin being the latest beloved tyrant in Russia’s history. In contrast to Ukraine, which has had six presidents post-USSR, and only one has been re-elected thus far.
I just mentioned this because the OP article author Baud uses this as an excuses for Russia’s staggering troop losses. It’s an attempt to impress upon a Western audience that this is perfectly fine - Russia is willing to let those soldiers die because they’re not obsessed with the stats, they want to save civilians at their own expense.
He’s full of shit on who killed more Afghanis, not worth even refuting, it’s just a pattern. It’s also a complete distortion of Soviet, and now Russian, military tactics. Which are destroy everything with artillery and then send in the good troops followed by the conscript slop poppers.
The western half of Ukraine spent the last 8+ years attacking the eastern half and trying to mandate them to not to speak Russian...hell even Zelensky ran on a peace platform of stopping the attacks against people in Donbass and won a shite-ton of the vote. Then he went out East and tried to tell the Azov crowd they need to find a new line of work and they laughed in his face on National TV and said they weren't stopping and if he pulled any troops they would find 10x more. And he gave in, lost most of his internal support, and is now being forced by the West into a protracted war that is leaving his own people bearing the brunt of the pain and suffering all so the idiots in DC and the Raytheon crowd can think they are weakening Russia while they are really bankrupting Europe. I'm sure his banking accounts that were dug up in the Panama Papers are doing well though.
BTW...surprised nobody commented on the dust-up in Germany a few days ago when they showed video of a few Azov fighters and they just happened to have some Nazi symbols...amazing how the media covers up some of this stuff...
So I really never focussed on who the mercenaries in the Donbas region were taking out civilians although your analysis of them not being Blackwater or any subsidiary of them was outstanding! I simply want to know why the Ukraine was fighting in this region killing Russian separatists. Perhaps those reports were also Russian propoganda? The whole Nazi narrative going back to unsettled, WWI and II scores is historically intriguing to me. It does seem these regional bias' against the Jews is something of interest. Thanks again for sharing your knowledge and intelligence with us!
Sorry I didn’t get back to this earlier, in the interest of organization I’ll do bullet points as there appear to be three things mentioned:
* Russian separatists are AKA Russians. Most countries tend to fight back against those who are attacking them. * Nazis to Russia are people who don’t support Russia. I, like all Soviet children, was conditioned to associate the word Nazi with an enemy to be destroyed without knowing what it means. * No country particularly loves us Jews. Eastern European - Jew relations are difficult and complex to describe. The reason 75% of the world’s Jews lived in Poland and Ukraine isn’t as complex. Many Americans are unaware of something called the Pale of Settlement. Jews, with a few exceptions, were not allowed to live in many places, including Russia proper. Here’s a map:
Russia’s foreign ministry has been debating Israel on whether Hitler was really a Jew and whether we Holocaust-ed ourselves. Putin had to make a rare apology. The other country has a Jewish president, recently had a Jewish prime minister, and along with Poland is the cradle of modern European (not Sephardic) Jewish culture. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.
FWIW most Russians and Ukrainians aren’t extra anti-Semitic. If anything I’d say much less so than most of the rest of Europe. Putin is many bad things but he’s not biased against Jews, and some of his most closest corrupt cronies are Boris and Arkady Rotenberg. Russian propaganda has been ratcheting up over the last ten years, on a more macro scale where Jews are behind all of the world’s ills. The Elders of Zion protocol thingy is a Tsarist creation, which surprised me when I learned about it because I assumed it was of Western European origin.
Comments
But we know who the superior Indians are, and it’s a synergistic relationship; you domesticated the tobacco which allows for many hours of squatting with comrades while holding a 1L plastic bottle of beer. Or a .5L bottle of our gift to you, which we call horilka a drink that comes from the word “to burn” and shows our solidarity. You also call it something similar, while the barbarians call it vodka. You are welcome for that and the domestication of the horse, which I understand let your people collect many scalps and look cool doing it. Much more difficult to kidnap 19th century pioneer women without horse, wink wink.
We thank your King Phillip for the generous donation, but are mixed on withdrawal from the Russian market. Unless a more carcinogenic Chinese alternative has replaced it. Not a call for genocide, it’s just very difficult for oncologists in a nation where the average life expectancy is so short.
Is this the result of statist, non-religious indoctrination? Or another form of mass-psychosis? People in the west value life, although some lives more than others, for certain.
But this theory is pointless and regards lives as inevitable, but meaningless and drab, it seems to me. Kind of explains the hopelessness and failure of the civilization from which it came.
Either way, I can't imagine such a thought process grinding in the minds of anyone with the least bit of optimism in their souls.
To see others as cannon-fodder is one thing. To see or accept oneself in such a manner is grim AF.
What's more, where or what is this fanciful "greater good" such thoughts would serve? I guess I'm just too "westernized" to reconcile it with anything useful.
I understand. Being skeptical for one, anything in that region should be regarded with suspicion. I don’t like giving the Pentagon the benefit of the doubt. If this was Madagascar or Indonesia I’d be keeping my mouth shut because I don’t know much about them, let alone have the necessary depth of knowledge.
I’ve mentioned I’ve been to conflict zones before, and even after seeing it with my own eyes I couldn’t fathom what was really going on. The whole cultural immersion thing is necessary in order to parse the difference between truth and what is actually fact. They are oftentimes different.
This is the first time in my life I have the firsthand knowledge and experience to see beyond the gray zone in some kind of conflict. It’s a complex situation, but about as stark of evil versus not evil as it can get. I know we in the US like to tie everything back to us, and we’ve become Ukraine’s war sugar daddy, but regardless of our level of involvement this would be happening.
Shit, if the US didn’t make it known there would be retaliation Putin would have probably done this sooner. If we didn’t provide military intelligence/equipment/training this thing would be much bloodier with another corrupt quisling in Ukraine while Putin’s henchmen would be liquidating civic leaders, robbing, and deciding which bordering nation is next. Maybe China would be emboldened or some shit, but I don’t know nearly enough about that situation beyond just wild speculation - but I’m guessing it wouldn’t be good for us.
Anyway, maybe these maps can help in understanding part of this war. The point is that Russia’s version of history is the one that gets attention, with language, ethnicity, etc all to their favor. They’ve successfully convinced people in the Kuban, Krasnodar Krai, and other parts that they’re Russian. Despite their native language having the name of “little language” in Ukrainian and all their folk songs being in Ukrainian. I don’t know if any other country that is so damn sensitive about appearing greater than it is, they even have a full time staff that edits Wikipedia articles to be more positive to Russia.
Ukrainian ethnographic map, Germany 1945
Post WWI conference on national borders, Paris 1919
From Prague, 1919-20
Early USSR linguistic map. Pre Holodomor genocide and Russification. See map below. Pre deportation of Crimean Tatars - the former majority of Crimea, a Turkic (‘white looking’ for lack of better description) Muslim people that practice the Sufi branch of Islam. Let’s just say they’ve basically been on island for 700 years and had their own little Khanate with affiliation to the Ottomans and the Armchairs. Probably worthy of a longer explanation. They’re not exactly friendly to the Russians and play a big part in Ukraine’s history.
The companion map to the language one. The Holodomor, murder by hunger, that Russia claims didn’t target Ukrainians to resettle the land with Russians (as @WestlinnDuck I believe mentioned about social engineering and resettlement). Look at the percentages of population loss. Academically accepted figure is 6 million, but 3-10 mil is the range. The “breadbasket of Europe” couldn’t feed itself, yet the non-Ukrainian regions fared much better.
Soviet grain exports by year. 1913 was the last pre-WWI harvest after that the was and communist harvests. The Holodomor began 1930-31. In a shorter time period Stalin managed to kill as many Ukrainians as Hitler did Jews, without moving them, while forcing them to grow grain for export, and eliminating resistance to communism and Stalinism. The Germans are envious of such efficiency.
The Russian mindset is often “we are suffering thus our cause is noble” instead of “our cause is noble thus we are willing to suffer” - I don’t understand it either.
It manifests itself in things like Putin being the latest beloved tyrant in Russia’s history. In contrast to Ukraine, which has had six presidents post-USSR, and only one has been re-elected thus far.
I just mentioned this because the OP article author Baud uses this as an excuses for Russia’s staggering troop losses. It’s an attempt to impress upon a Western audience that this is perfectly fine - Russia is willing to let those soldiers die because they’re not obsessed with the stats, they want to save civilians at their own expense.
He’s full of shit on who killed more Afghanis, not worth even refuting, it’s just a pattern. It’s also a complete distortion of Soviet, and now Russian, military tactics. Which are destroy everything with artillery and then send in the good troops followed by the conscript slop poppers.
@GrundleStiltzkin
The western half of Ukraine spent the last 8+ years attacking the eastern half and trying to mandate them to not to speak Russian...hell even Zelensky ran on a peace platform of stopping the attacks against people in Donbass and won a shite-ton of the vote. Then he went out East and tried to tell the Azov crowd they need to find a new line of work and they laughed in his face on National TV and said they weren't stopping and if he pulled any troops they would find 10x more. And he gave in, lost most of his internal support, and is now being forced by the West into a protracted war that is leaving his own people bearing the brunt of the pain and suffering all so the idiots in DC and the Raytheon crowd can think they are weakening Russia while they are really bankrupting Europe. I'm sure his banking accounts that were dug up in the Panama Papers are doing well though.
BTW...surprised nobody commented on the dust-up in Germany a few days ago when they showed video of a few Azov fighters and they just happened to have some Nazi symbols...amazing how the media covers up some of this stuff...
* Russian separatists are AKA Russians. Most countries tend to fight back against those who are attacking them.
* Nazis to Russia are people who don’t support Russia. I, like all Soviet children, was conditioned to associate the word Nazi with an enemy to be destroyed without knowing what it means.
* No country particularly loves us Jews. Eastern European - Jew relations are difficult and complex to describe. The reason 75% of the world’s Jews lived in Poland and Ukraine isn’t as complex. Many Americans are unaware of something called the Pale of Settlement. Jews, with a few exceptions, were not allowed to live in many places, including Russia proper. Here’s a map:
Russia’s foreign ministry has been debating Israel on whether Hitler was really a Jew and whether we Holocaust-ed ourselves. Putin had to make a rare apology. The other country has a Jewish president, recently had a Jewish prime minister, and along with Poland is the cradle of modern European (not Sephardic) Jewish culture. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.
FWIW most Russians and Ukrainians aren’t extra anti-Semitic. If anything I’d say much less so than most of the rest of Europe. Putin is many bad things but he’s not biased against Jews, and some of his most closest corrupt cronies are Boris and Arkady Rotenberg. Russian propaganda has been ratcheting up over the last ten years, on a more macro scale where Jews are behind all of the world’s ills. The Elders of Zion protocol thingy is a Tsarist creation, which surprised me when I learned about it because I assumed it was of Western European origin.