Ukraine invasion

[IlIlIlIlI]

Revealing Ukraine

Documentary film by Igor Lopatonok, produced by Oliver Stone. Continuation of "Ukraine On Fire"

rumble.com

Ukraine crisis: bugged call reveals conspiracy theory about Kiev snipers

Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet tells EU's Cathy Ashton about claim that provocateurs were behind Maidan killings

www.theguardian.com

Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call

A transcript of the alleged conversation between Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and the US ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt discussing the crisis in Ukraine.

www.bbc.com

 

[Atilla]

Must listen watch.

By qualified experienced and patriotic person.

I hope you have the stomach for American atrocities and vile foreign policy implementation.

I'm really looking forward to some response from the war mongers here on how they will receive and process what col. Richard Black says???

 

[IlIlIlIlI]

 

[timsk]

The two videos above, posted by Atilla and Histo' respectively, should be required viewing for everyone - especially those who cling to the total fantasy that Ukraine can win this war. If people really knew and understood what is going on and that no amount of money and hardware will help Ukraine - merely make a bad situation much worse - then everyone would come to their senses now instead of in a month's time, or two, or three, or six or whatever. End the destruction, end the killing and stop the war. Now!
Tim.

 

[timsk]

Must listen watch.
By qualified experienced and patriotic person.

Mike Robinson of UK Column News did an interview with Col. Richard Black earlier in the month in which he made similar points:
Insight Vox: Col. Richard Black on Ukraine

 

[Atilla]

Mike Robinson of UK Column News did an interview with Col. Richard Black earlier in the month in which he made similar points:
Insight Vox: Col. Richard Black on Ukraine

It is damning evidence of the relationship between CIA, Al-Qaida and Isis and absolutely horrific account US activities in Syria.

Hard to watch but this is coming from a man who knows having served and how it all works.

Confirms US have no interest in lives or Ukraine. Just as we have said all along, it is the Lords of War pushing their agenda to make more money.

His view and questions around the Bucha killings around 56mins is really good too? Makes a mockery of the US providing satellite info of dead bodies without date and time? Evidence, the US is complicit in the false narrative.

 

[Rufus_Leakey]

Must listen watch.

By qualified experienced and patriotic person.

I hope you have the stomach for American atrocities and vile foreign policy implementation.

I'm really looking forward to some response from the war mongers here on how they will receive and process what col. Richard Black says???

I'm not a war monger, since I think the war in Ukraine is stupid and bad for the world. But since you asked ...

The transcript of the video, https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/...chard-black-u-s-leading-world-to-nuclear-war/ and 5:44 in the video have

We are supporters of Al Qaeda today, where they’re bottled up in Idlib province. The CIA supplied them under secret Operation Timber Sycamore. We gave them all of their anti-tank weapons, all of their anti air- missiles. And Al Qaeda has always been our proxy force on the ground. They, together with ISIS, have carried out the mission of the United States

Now it all makes sense. The U.S. is allied with Al Qaeada and ISIS, two terrorist groups that have and still want to kill Americans and anyone who doesn't follow their interpretation of Islam. And Colonel Black gets all this intelligence information from being a pilot in the Vietnam War, then a lawyer for the U.S. Army until 1994, and eventually becoming a U.S. State Senator (part of a state's local government).

On the other hand, he's appeared on Russia Today (now called RT), so maybe he does have access to some propaganda"inside information."

 

[timsk]

Now it all makes sense. The U.S. is allied with Al Qaeada and ISIS, two terrorist groups that have and still want to kill Americans and anyone who doesn't follow their interpretation of Islam.

R_L,
He's condemning the policy, not condoning it and goes on to explain the thinking behind it here:
". . . One of the things that we did as we as we allied ourselves with Al Qaeda, and on and off with ISIS; I mean, we fought ISIS in a very serious way, but at the same time, we often employed them to use against the Syrian government. So it’s kind of a love-hate. But we have always worked with the terrorists. They were the core. . ."

This really ought not to surprise you if you've followed any of these conflicts. After all, if Al Quada and ISIS terrorists are actively engaged in the war in Syria, then they pose no threat to U.S. / western citizens and interests elsewhere. Besides which, what's the worst that can happen? They get killed. So, your enemy in normal times gets killed fighting a proxy war on your behalf. That's a fantastic win : win situation for the U.S. - so it makes absolute sense to use them. Morally and ethically reprehensible yes - but morality and ethics have always been conspicuous by their absence from U.S. foreign policy.
Tim.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

I'm not a war monger

Neither I am.
I just don't want Putin to win land from Ukraine.
This doesn't mean Ukraine is a paradise or that I agree with 30 years of US foreign policy.
TBH I dont' think Putin is a threat for Poland or other EU countries.
What I think is that if you leave him 20% of Ukraine today , he will come back for another 10% tomorrow and so on.
He took Crimea and he came back for Donbas, than he needs Kherson and Mariupol to "protect" Crimea that now he considers motherland.
Every non NATO former soviet country with ethnic russians will become a potential target.

 

[tomorton]

The two videos above, posted by Atilla and Histo' respectively, should be required viewing for everyone - especially those who cling to the total fantasy that Ukraine can win this war. If people really knew and understood what is going on and that no amount of money and hardware will help Ukraine - merely make a bad situation much worse - then everyone would come to their senses now instead of in a month's time, or two, or three, or six or whatever. End the destruction, end the killing and stop the war. Now!
Tim.

Agreed.

I was shocked when Russia failed to strike into Kiev within a week. After that time, NATO countries had the chance to re-arm Ukraine and the chance to take the capital, dismantle the government and gain most of the country's territory was gone.

I've been saying for weeks that NATO would eventually tell Ukraine to forget the Donbas, its Putin's now. If Ukraine doesn't toe the line, the arms supply stops coming.

For NATO this would eliminate the risk of the war spreading or escalating, prevent further serious economic disruption across the west, stem disruptive disagreements within NATO members, and avoid de-stabilising Putin.

If the war continues indefinitely, Putin will eventually win. If he is thrown out of the Donbas, he will either retaliate or escalate. If Putin is weakened so he is de-throned, we risk going back to square 1, possibly with an equally aggressive new czar eager to strengthen his position.

 

[timsk]

. . .I just don't want Putin to win land from Ukraine. . .

Too late CV, he already has.
And there's no way he's going to give it up now and Ukrainian forces have no chance of retaking it and booting Russian forces out. Zero, none, zilch, nunca! The longer this goes on, there's one thing and one thing only that will happen with regard to territory lost and won. Ukraine will lose more and Russia will win more. Period. If you don't want that to happen, you need to smell the coffee and jump ships to our side of the argument - it's the only one that makes any sense and the only one based on the reality of what's actually going on. We'll prepare a reception committee with Prosecco and canapes to welcome you!

 

[timsk]

. . . For NATO this would eliminate the risk of the war spreading or escalating, prevent further serious economic disruption across the west, stem disruptive disagreements within NATO members, and avoid de-stabilising Putin. . .

Tom,
I agree with everything in your post with the exception of the two points highlighted in bold.

The economic disruption is, I suspect, part of the plan - or at least a welcome byproduct of it. The economic system is beyond repair and it's only a matter of time before it collapses and fiat currencies become worthless. It's the means by which (well, one of them at least), governments can usher in the miracle new cure - the financial equivalent of the Covid 19 vaccines to save us all: central bank digital currencies.

De-stabilising Putin is the objective! More than that, various senior politicians in the west are on record as saying that ousting him from office is the end goal. Quite why they want to do that is a mystery to me because, as you rightly point out, Putin could be replaced by someone even worse. Perhaps CV can answer that question, as he's also of the view that Putin must go at any cost, by fair means (e.g. Russian uprising) or foul (e.g. CIA assassination).
Tim.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

And there's no way he's going to give it up now and Ukrainian forces have no chance of retaking it and booting Russian forces out. Zero, none, zilch, nunca!

I think there is 0% of kicking russians out of Crimea.
50% of kicking russians out of Donbas
80% of kicking russians out of southern Ukraine
If western countries keep doing their job without listening to appeasers.
I don't mean next month but by the end of the year.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

Perhaps CV can answer that question, as he's also of the view that Putin must go at any cost, by fair means (e.g. Russian uprising) or foul (e.g. CIA assassination).

My most likely scenario is declaring the operation successful.
Stepping down for health reasons and appointing Medvedev as president.
New elections, if there will be more democracy it will depend on Medvedev and russians.

 

[Atilla]

De-stabilising Putin is the objective! More than that, various senior politicians in the west are on record as saying that ousting him from office is the end goal. Quite why they want to do that is a mystery to me because, as you rightly point out, Putin could be replaced by someone even worse. Perhaps CV can answer that question, as he's also of the view that Putin must go at any cost, by fair means (e.g. Russian uprising) or foul (e.g. CIA assassination).
Tim.

Richard Black specifically states the intention of the West as throwing Putin and replacing Russia's leadership with the corrupt bent and corporate (I mean big money) driven so call "democratically elected" process.

BLACK: But it just shows the utter cruelty. When we fight these wars, we have no limits on the cruelty and the inhumanity that we’re prepared to impose on the people, making them suffer, so that somehow that will translate into overthrowing the government, and perhaps taking their oil, taking their resources.

BILLINGTON: Clearly, the policy against Russia today, by the current administration.

BLACK: Yes. Yes. You know, Russia is, perhaps more blessed with natural resources than any other nation on Earth. They are a major producer of grain, of oil, of aluminum, of fertilizers, of an immense number of things that tie into the whole global economy. And no doubt there are people who look at this and say, “if we could somehow break up Russia itself, there will be fortunes made, to where trillionaires will be made by the dozens.” And there’s some attraction to that. Certainly you’ve seen some of this taking place already, with foreign interests taking over Ukraine, and taking their vast resources.


This was the case with Yeltsin who was drinking too much and not quite with it all. The corrupt corporate driven agendas in the West works for the interest of profits increasingly going to the pockets of the 1%. It really is a disguise.

We could discuss the distribution of income and inequities in our societies but not here. Teachers have been saying for some time that our young people are under fed and come from families increasingly struggling with meeting simple dietary requirements. I've met teachers who take food into the class to feed children.

We have young people who come from broken families struggling with bringing up children. There is so many things wrong with our systems especially here in the UK and US the way these two highly powered up nations conduct them selves on the international stage is criminal, corrupt and so very disingenuous in many respects.

As said before the West doesn't like strong governments they can't manipulate and like snake oil salesman - sell democracy and freedom as a guise to bribing, corrupting and exploiting countries for their "national interest". The new "Gun-Ship Diplomacy of the 21st Century". IMHO.

 

[Atilla]

I was shocked when Russia failed to strike into Kiev within a week. After that time, NATO countries had the chance to re-arm Ukraine and the chance to take the capital, dismantle the government and gain most of the country's territory was gone.

I think Russians may have underestimated the resistance yes. It would have been nice but such is the outcome.

However, the decision not to shock and awe and destroy Kiev or Kharkiv were calculated and one that leads to a better outcome for the people of Ukraine.

Russians have essentially been targeting soldiers and armed resistance.

Black: Now, often you hear it said, well, the Russians have destroyed this or destroyed that. Well, I’ve got to tell you, you go back to the wars that we fought when we invaded Iraq, the “Shock and Awe,” we destroyed virtually everything in Iraq, everything of significance. We bombed military and civilian targets without much discrimination. The coalition flew 100,000 sorties in 42 days. You compare that to the Russians, who have only flown 8,000 sorties in about the same period of time. 100,000 American sorties versus 8,000, in about the same time. I think the Russians have tended to be more selective. Whereas we went out — the philosophy of Shock and Awe is that you destroy everything that is needed to sustain human life and for a city to function. You knock out the water supply, the electrical supply, the heat, the oil, the gasoline; so that you knock out all of the major bridges. And then you just continue to destroy everything.

So it’s really ironic. And keep in mind, Iraq is a relatively small country. Ukraine is a huge country. 100,000 sorties in 42 days, 8,000 sorties in about the same time. A tremendous difference in violence between what we did in Iraq, and what they have done in Ukraine. So there’s simply no credibility when you actually get down to the facts and you look at the way that the war has been conducted.

 

[Atilla]

I'm not a war monger, since I think the war in Ukraine is stupid and bad for the world. But since you asked ...

The transcript of the video, https://schillerinstitute.com/blog/...chard-black-u-s-leading-world-to-nuclear-war/ and 5:44 in the video have

Now it all makes sense. The U.S. is allied with Al Qaeada and ISIS, two terrorist groups that have and still want to kill Americans and anyone who doesn't follow their interpretation of Islam. And Colonel Black gets all this intelligence information from being a pilot in the Vietnam War, then a lawyer for the U.S. Army until 1994, and eventually becoming a U.S. State Senator (part of a state's local government).

On the other hand, he's appeared on Russia Today (now called RT), so maybe he does have access to some propaganda"inside information."

Do you not see any flaws in your argument at all to question the motives of a man who has spent a life time serving his country and his experience fighting wars?

So with our corrupt MSM how else is he to announce his opinions?

He was speaking to The Schiller Institute is a German based political and economic think tank founded by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, with stated members in 50 countries.

Also, Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche Jr. was an American political activist who founded the LaRouche movement and its main organization the National Caucus of Labor Committees.

Presented via youtube.

He volunteered for Vietnam and saw very bloody battles losing his friends and was wounded. Number of combat missions he took is over 300. He says he is very patriotic and pro-USA.

He says
So I’m very pro-American. I actually was a part of NATO and was prepared to die in Germany, to defend against an attack by the Soviet Union.

But Russia is not the Soviet Union at all. People don’t understand that because the media have not made it clear. But Russia is not a communist state; the Soviet Union was a communist state.


You say...
On the other hand, he's appeared on Russia Today (now called RT), so maybe he does have access to some propaganda"inside information."


No one can pull the wool over your eyes can day. You keep your eyes wide open the bright spark that you are?

 

[timsk]

I think there is 0% of kicking russians out of Crimea.
50% of kicking russians out of Donbas
80% of kicking russians out of southern Ukraine
If western countries keep doing their job without listening to appeasers.
I don't mean next month but by the end of the year.

CV,
Fancy a wager?
I say there's 0% chance of kicking Russia out of any of the three areas you mention. The one caveat is that there's no direct intervention by Nato forces - all bests are off if that happens. So, I propose that on 31st December 2022 President Zelensky (or his successor) and Ukrainian forces will not be in control of any of the three areas you list. If they are, even just one of them, you win the bet. Your prize is one of these:
Britannia 2022 1 oz Silver Bullion Coin
It's a very cool coin and it's real money, unlike the GBP or the EUR! Oh, and I'll pay P&P - so you pay nothing at all.
If you lose the bet, then I want anything you choose that's 1 oz 999 fine silver. I suggest you start by looking here:
Italian Mint . . . or any reputable bullion dealer.
What do you say - do we have a deal?
Tim.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

What do you say - do we have a deal?

I will think about it.

 

[IlIlIlIlI]

I think Russians may have underestimated the resistance yes. It would have been nice but such is the outcome.

I think it was not planned to take Kiev as the troops had only supply and food for 2 days. A follw up supply chain was not built - maybe that was a bad strategy. I assume they thought that Kiev would go to negotioations much earlier and negotiations could be successful.

I think meanwhile they regret it.