Russia - General Discussion.

[2007yellow430]

Mm

The Neo-Cons down right lied about WMD. Most US media can sort of be forgiven for parroting government information which they essentially believed was correct although some more savvy reporters figured out their claims didn’t pass the smell test. It was an easy sell for the Neo-Cons, most Americans still had 9/11 on their minds and there were the untrue rumours Saddam helped bin Laden.

those of us able to figure this out were threatened, silenced, etc., but one thing was apparent: the type of uranium what Niger allegedly had (yellowcake), was partially refined. There are no refineries in Niger. They just mine the stuff:

How is uranium made into nuclear fuel - World Nuclear Association

Uranium is the main fuel for nuclear reactors, and it can be found in many places around the world. In order to make the fuel, uranium is mined and goes through refining and enrichment before being loaded into a nuclear reactor.

world-nuclear.org

Uranium Mining in Niger

large.stanford.edu

the falsify of this claim was readily apparent to us.

Art

 

[swerve]

The Neo-Cons down right lied about WMD. Most US media can sort of be forgiven for parroting government information which they essentially believed was correct although some more savvy reporters figured out their claims didn’t pass the smell test. It was an easy sell for the Neo-Cons, most Americans still had 9/11 on their minds and there were the untrue rumours Saddam helped bin Laden.

I remember being told by right-wing Americans after the 2003 invasion of Iraq that gas bombs had been found, & had tested positive for nerve gases, thus proving that Saddam Hussein still had WMDs.

They obviously didn't even read the reports they gave links to. The reports said that empty gas bombs had been found, & that traces of nerve agents had been found inside them. The bombs had been emptied & dumped, mostly buried in the desert. They were hazardous waste, not WMDs.

I was also told by some of the same people that French surface to air missiles had been found, proving that the French were still selling weapons to Saddam. But again, the reports they cited showed old missiles, Roland missiles made in the 1980s & which from photos looked to be in poor condition. IIRC they were Roland II, which went out of production in 1988. The sale of Roland to Iraq during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war was public.

 

[Ananda]

Neo-Cons down right lied about WMD. Most US media can sort of be forgiven for parroting government information which they essentially believed was correct although some more savvy reporters figured out their claims didn’t pass the smell test

Yes, this is one of many reasons why Non Western doesn't believe outright on everything that Western media told. It is prove that mainstream western media is not above political agenda miss direction and agenda bias.

Yes some reporters in West can shown independence but doesn't mean they can redirect their mainstream media. This days some of them can choose goes independent and goes online with their own pods. Heck even some Russian in their telegrams can goes more independent then the government media directions.

So the oversimplification is the talk that media even in West is above political bias and agenda. Yes it is more dependable then medias in autocratic nations, but it is also means especially in the situation like this war need to be taken with all the salt, until proven in the ground development.

Many in "the West" was convinced Russia was going to invade.

Say what you believe, the realities is the power in the West that matter including white house believe Putin red line is bluff, and last February he call that bluff. That's the reality.

 

[Ananda]

When you play poker and have a very good hand, you want your opponent to think you have a bad hand so that he puts more money into the pot. You try to look unsure and fearful, and if you’re in an early position you check or make a very small bet, so that your opponent will put a big bet believing you are going to fold

For quite some time Poker Game already included in many leading business schools as part of their decision making curriculum. This especially included after several years of their case studies, find many companies that relies on data analytics and traditional quantitatives decision making methods still not making adequate right decision in business.

Especially when those companies (many are Fortune 500 MNC) dealing with International business. Doesn't mean data analytics and other quantitative methods not working, but those business schools also believe it has to be enhanced with psychological and cultural assessments. Poker game theory is just one of those methods.

So I don't speculate whether Putin directly miss lead or he miss read Western cards. Whatever the reasons, I do believe it lead to West (especially US) and Russia miss read each other cards and bluff. This is not first time miss read cards lead to invasion. In sense Saddam miss calculation and over value himself, lead to his invasion to Kuwait. Saddam sees US value him as buffer against Iran, that they will turn blind eyes so the speak on his little adventure in Kuwait. Turn out US value little Kuwait more, as US values Rich Gulf Kingdoms more then some eratic Iraqi dictator.

There's also believe in West that perception in Russian public is not matter much, in contrary Russian public perception is the biggest matter. Autocratic regime on contrary value how their public perception more than democratic regime. This is why they control the information and try to shape their public perception on that.

Every politicians will try to manipulate their public perception, democratic or autocratic ones. Is just autocratic ones doing it more direct and blatant. Thus base on latest Putin communication, he is preparing his Russian public toward potential escalations. For that personally I don't see good moves to say he is 'just' bluffing.

 

[contricusc]

The USA - along with everyone else, except, perhaps, the Ukrainian army, expected a quick Russian vistory. You don't try to get your opponent to gamble everything on the turn of a card when you think you know he has a winning card.

I don’t think the US expected a quick Russian victory. I think this is what they wanted the public to believe, in order to encourage Putin to make the move and fall into the trap.

Like Putin, Biden & European leaders have their own, many of them internal, reasons for what they're doing. They're not sitting around a table playing poker, with nothing else going on. They have to get support within their own parties, & sometimes from other parties, & convince the public they should go along. Scholz, for example, has to struggle with a long-standing policy of friendliness to Russia & trying to tie Russia to the west economically, so that it's against Russia's interests to go to war. I'm sure that he was shocked & surprised by the invasion.

Yes, everyone has different reasons. Scholz didn’t want this war, and he wanted good relations with Russia. Macron had made many efforts to convince Putin not to invade, incouding those humiliating long hours phone calls when Putin gave him history lessons about Peter The Great. Germany and France wanted to continue with the status quo and have good relations with Russia, but the Americans didn’t like that.

For the US, the benefits of this conflict are so great, that it is absurd to dismiss their interests to encourage it. And Biden is an establishment politician. He is old and he doesn’t care much about the voters or another term. He can do the dirty work of the establishment. During his term, many of the previous unfinished problems have been solved quickly (the Afghanistan withdrawal was done quicker than anyone imagined possible, the Fed raised the interest rate faster than anyone expected). The status quo of the last 15 years (American troops in Afghanistan and zero interest rate policy) has been turned upside down in only two years.

What I’m trying to point here is that the Americans had all the reasons to want Putin’s invasion to happen. Also, many of the more nationalist elements in Ukraine wanted this war to happen, as they prepared for it since 2014. Do you think it is a simple coincidence that Ukrainians were shooting at targets in Donetsk in the days before the invasion? They were poking the bear, and they probably had promises of help from the US.

The truth is that the US outmaneuvered Putin and Scholz big time. The German-Russian relations have been destroyed and the US is now exporting LNG to Europe, while European industry is suffering from high energy costs. Finland has joined NATO and Russia has lost a lot of its military capabilities. And all this happened without the US firing a single bullet and losing a single soldier. The economic costs for the US have been insignificant and the benefits enormous. I don’t think the US just got lucky. I think they did their best to mislead their rivals into making foolish mistakes.

 

[contricusc]

Every politicians will try to manipulate their public perception, democratic or autocratic ones. Is just autocratic ones doing it more direct and blatant. Thus base on latest Putin communication, he is preparing his Russian public toward potential escalations. For that personally I don't see good moves to say he is 'just' bluffing.

I think he is preparing the Russian public for further mobilizations. If he wanted to go nuclear, he would have done that by now. His threats are meaningless now because he has shown he is afraid of nuclear escalation. Now he must find a way to sell a withdrawal from Ukraine to his public in a way that doesn’t look humiliating. Stating that he is fighting the entire West is a good way to prepare the public for a glorious “stalemate” when Russia goes back to its 2014 borders.

 

[Delta204]

Say what you believe, the realities is the power in the West that matter including white house believe Putin red line is bluff, and last February he call that bluff. That's the reality.

This is nonsense... the US began warning Ukraine and the rest of the world very publicly before the invasion that it was imminent - to the point that Zelensky asked the US to stop making these public statements because it was causing panic in Ukraine and negatively impacting the economy.
Ukraine: Russian attack would bring 'significant' casualties, Milley says (usatoday.com)

Look back at the Russian demands to NATO before the invasion began, it's hardly a serious attempt at diplomacy. Or read Putin's pre invasion rambling speech. This invasion was not a response to a "red line" that the west crossed....

 

[Ananda]

How Did Everybody Get The Ukraine Invasion Predictions So Wrong?

www-rferl-org.cdn.ampproject.org

No it is not nonsense, even one of the most supporter on West support on Ukraine, believe that West will not believe Russia will invade. Even for those in US that give warns that possibilities, still believe Russia basically will not do, thus Bluffing.

This invasion was not a response to a "red line" that the west crossed....

That's your believe. For me that's nonsense. Putin already give his red line for sometimes.

 

[contricusc]

That's your believe. For me that's nonsense. Putin already give his red line for sometimes.

And what was his red line that was crossed and made him invade?

 

[Ananda]

his red line that was crossed and made him invade?

If you still ask, and means you don't believe his red line exists. So no point on discussing this. It will be moot discussions as it is different perspective. This why I say in my point, it is dangerous to think how Putin and Russian regime think only base on common Western perspectives and perceptions.

 

[swerve]

If you still ask, and means you don't believe his red line exists. So no point on discussing this. It will be moot discussions as it is different perspective. This why I say in my point, it is dangerous to think how Putin and Russian regime think only base on common Western perspectives and perceptions.

No, I think it means that he wants it spelled out by you, to show what you think the red line was. He wants to know what your argument is.

 

[swerve]

No it is not nonsense, even one of the most supporter on West support on Ukraine, believe that West will not believe Russia will invade. Even for those in US that give warns that possibilities, still believe Russia basically will not do, thus Bluffing.

The beauty of the western world is that different opinions may be expressed. There are always people who disagree. And that's how it should be. I can disagree with people but respect their right to disagree with me, even when I find their opinions repellent.

In Russia it's illegal to call the war with Ukraine a war. Criticism of the war is punished. There are cases of the state taking peoples children away, because the children have let slip that their parents criticised the war privately, at home. That is evil. I am glad that I don't live in a country with such a government. And when I hear praise of such governments, it disgusts me.

 

[Vivendi]

Say what you believe, the realities is the power in the West that matter including white house believe Putin red line is bluff, and last February he call that bluff. That's the reality.

This is factually wrong. The White House warned about the risk of invasion several times. The article you link to in your other post even says it! Some did not believe it of course, and many of those that believed an invasion would happen, did not predict the scope. From the article yourself linked to:

On February 22, 2022, Josep Borrell, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, took a phone call from the United States’ top diplomat.

According to Borrell, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told him that Russia, after months of building up a massive military force on Ukraine’s border, was, in fact, going to invade.

 

[Ananda]

He wants to know what your argument is.

Which is going to be useless discussion as it is already in different perspective. I don't want to engage in that kind of discussion as useless. There's enough talk on Putin red line in media on both sides, even assessment from several think tanks. Many of them can't seems to get similar agreement, this then open to each impretation.

However some line that Putin Regime make, is being believe by them being crosses by other side. Nobody going to do military action and invade if none of their perceive line being cross.

And when I hear praise of such governments, it disgusts me.

Well do I praise Russian Regime in any of my posts? There's different between supporting and praise, with the need to see both ways.

In all my posts I already stated Western media (which based on Western values) are more dependable then Media from Autocratic Regimes like Russia and China. However not make Western sides is the truth. Not making those who want to see both sides and sitting in fences as Pro Russian.

This is factually wrong.

No it's not, I put that article just to shown even very pro West media acknowledge that there is 'believe' Russia will not invade, but they (Russian actually) eventually call it.

The unwillingness of many Western officials to believe the warnings was psychological, Muzyka said.

So believe all you want. The reality most of Power in West not believe it, even with all warnings.

 

[Vivendi]

No it's not, I put that article just to shown even very pro West media acknowledge that there is 'believe' Russia will not invade, but they (Russian actually) eventually call it.

In the text I quoted you wrote specifically about "the white house" -- by that I assume you mean the current US government. I then quoted a text from the article you linked to, which specifically said that Blinken (from "the white house") called Borrel and warned him about the invasion, before the invasion happened. Are you claiming the article is wrong? Or that Blinken lied to Borrell?

 

[Ananda]

I said in my posts that most of West believe and including white house. Blinken can what he want to say at this moment, reality before the War despite all the warnings do they really act on that? Again there is enough talks on West including from several Western think tank on that assessment of West believe that Russia will not invade.

Well seems you still on your style putting words of others. I never say the article wrong but seems you choose only that suite you. The essence of that article assessment, West not believe Russia will invade even with all warnings. Seems you are that not believe on that article, not me.

 

[Vivendi]

I said in my posts that most of West believe and including white house. Blinken can what he want to say at this moment, reality before the War despite all the warnings do they really act on that? Again there is enough talks on West including from several Western think tank on that assessment of West believe that Russia will not invade.

What do you mean by "this moment". The article said he called Borrell before the invasion. And yes the US did several things before the invasion. In retrospect they should have done more of course.

Well seems you still on your style putting words of others. I never say the article wrong but seems you choose only that suite you.

No I am not. I am just trying to understand how you can reconcile what you claimed about "the white house" not believing an invasion would happen , and the article you linked to that said Blinken called Borrell and warned about the Russian invasion before it happened.

 

[seaspear]

Russia has proclaimed laws for even calling its actions in Ukraine a war
Russian law bans journalists from calling Ukraine conflict a 'war' or an 'invasion' : NPR
Certainly earlier laws passed by Putin prevents disclosure of casualties from this military event
Report With Tally Of 'Russian War Casualties' Causes Stir (rferl.org)
Some of the fervor from the time with Putins reasoning critiqued
What's really behind Putin's invasion of Ukraine? | Euronews

 

[Ananda]

am just trying to understand how you can reconcile what you claimed about "the white house" not believing an invasion would happen

The essence of that article assessment, West not believe Russia will invade even with all warnings

I already answered that. White House can say what now or more precise after invasion anything on their warnings. However not doing enough raise questions whether they're believe or not on those warnings, thus Russian intentions to Invade.

I choose to believe on assessment (like in that article) that most western politicians not believe Russia will do it (despite all warnings from their own intelligence). You can choose to believe what you want.

 

[swerve]

Well do I praise Russian Regime in any of my posts? There's different between supporting and praise, with the need to see both ways.

I didn't say you praise the Russian government. But some do.