Russia - General Discussion.

^ To be fair, the resolution doesn’t exactly say what the two UA articles suggest. Here is what the resolution says in this regard:

[…]Recognizing also that the unprecedented challenges now facing Europe following the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, and against Georgia prior to that, and the cessation of the membership of the Russian Federation in the Council of Europe, call for strengthened cooperation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe, notably in order to promptly restore and maintain peace and security based on respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of any State, ensure the observance of human rights and international humanitarian law during the hostilities, provide redress to victims and bring to justice all those responsible for the violations of international law[…]

I don’t believe there is much to spin.

Here is the resolution itself:

ODS HOME PAGE

Multilingual interface of the UN Official Documents System
documents-dds-ny.un.org
 
True but it's still a quite a breakthrough that so many countries, including China and India, voted for a resolution that included the phrase "the unprecedented challenges now facing Europe following the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, and against Georgia prior to that..."
 
In new just a little east of this thread ,Japan is in talks to have a N.A.T.O liaison office in its country the first in ASIA , China has opposed this
Why NATO’s Planned Liaison Office in Japan Is a Bad Idea – The Diplomat
Why is China opposed to NATO expansion when it's not even in Europe? - CGTN
These articles though state that Russia was planning to attack Japan before attacking the Ukraine ,even going as far as referring to the Japanese as Nazis, though what China would think of Russia pushing Japan into agreements with N.A.T.O or how they would of viewed Russia engaging in hostilities with Japan and a possible escalation with the U.S would be interesting
Russia Planned To Attack Japan in 2021: Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
Vladimir Putin Wanted To 'Attack' Japan, Before He Chose To Invade Ukraine - Claims Alleged FSB Whistleblower (eurasiantimes.com)
Putin Branded a Narcissist in Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
 
seaspear said:
In new just a little east of this thread ,Japan is in talks to have a N.A.T.O liaison office in its country the first in ASIA , China has opposed this
Why NATO’s Planned Liaison Office in Japan Is a Bad Idea – The Diplomat
Why is China opposed to NATO expansion when it's not even in Europe? - CGTN
These articles though state that Russia was planning to attack Japan before attacking the Ukraine ,even going as far as referring to the Japanese as Nazis, though what China would think of Russia pushing Japan into agreements with N.A.T.O or how they would of viewed Russia engaging in hostilities with Japan and a possible escalation with the U.S would be interesting
Russia Planned To Attack Japan in 2021: Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
Vladimir Putin Wanted To 'Attack' Japan, Before He Chose To Invade Ukraine - Claims Alleged FSB Whistleblower (eurasiantimes.com)
Putin Branded a Narcissist in Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
Click to expand...
A real stretch IMHO but at least Vlad would have two allies close by, one competent and the other likely more competent than Russia but with a leader even more unstable than Vlad.
 
seaspear said:
In new just a little east of this thread ,Japan is in talks to have a N.A.T.O liaison office in its country the first in ASIA , China has opposed this
Why NATO’s Planned Liaison Office in Japan Is a Bad Idea – The Diplomat
Click to expand...
I don't see why a NATO liaison office in Japan would be a bad idea -- it's merely to ease communication between NATO and a close partner (Japan). It will also facilitate easier communication with other Asian partners (SK, AUS, NZ). I understand China is not happy about it, but in my opinion this is much ado about nothing. Having a liaison office in Japan does not mean that NATO is planning a military confrontation with China. I also struggle to understand why lack of European military capabilities suitable for Asia should be destabilizing?
Why is China opposed to NATO expansion when it's not even in Europe? - CGTN
Click to expand...
NATO is no threat to Russia, only a threat to Russia's imperial ambitions. NATO is also no threat to China, but may be causing significant "problems" for China in the future if China has global ambitions (which I strongly suspect they have).

If the Chinese is worried about a small NATO office in Japan, perhaps they should consider how NATO countries perceive the illegal Chinese cyber-attacks launched against a number of NATO countries. China also has illegal Chinese police stations in a number of NATO countries. Furthermore China is now presenting itself as a "near arctic" country and clearly has huge ambitions in the artic region, which mainly consists of NATO countries. Add to this the "no limits" partnership with Russia, and it seems like a great idea to me to open a NATO office in Japan. I hope we get NATO offices also in SK and Australia. And perhaps Singapore?
[/QUOTE]
These articles though state that Russia was planning to attack Japan before attacking the Ukraine ,even going as far as referring to the Japanese as Nazis, though what China would think of Russia pushing Japan into agreements with N.A.T.O or how they would of viewed Russia engaging in hostilities with Japan and a possible escalation with the U.S would be interesting
Russia Planned To Attack Japan in 2021: Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
Vladimir Putin Wanted To 'Attack' Japan, Before He Chose To Invade Ukraine - Claims Alleged FSB Whistleblower (eurasiantimes.com)
Putin Branded a Narcissist in Leaked FSB Letters (newsweek.com)
[/QUOTE]
Interesting, and also explains why Japan wanted a NATO liaison office. Russia is NATOs main concern, and it seems from these leaks a significant source of concern also for Japan.
 
An interesting question might be did President Putin run these ideas of attacking Japan with China and receiving a rebuff ,perhaps even hoping the P.L.A.N would run interference to the U.S.N ?
 
Vivendi said:
NATO is no threat to Russia, only a threat to Russia's imperial ambitions. NATO is also no threat to China, but may be causing significant "problems" for China in the future if China has global ambitions (which I strongly suspect they have).
Click to expand...

NATO is absolutely a threat to Russia. Look what they did to Yugoslavia. Imagine Russia had internal tensions, with a portion of the country looking to secede, a government crackdown against the separatists goes poorly, with civilians killed, and western media starts whipping up hysteria, talking about genocide, etc. Some economic interests get involved that think it would be great to take Russia's oil or titanium manufacturing, and you have the perfect recipe. A weak and divided Russia with an internal conflict would be ripe for NATO intervention. And considering history, there is likely a period of weakness and internal strife at some point in Russia's future. How do you guarantee that no foreign country ever intervenes no matter what is going in Russia internally? Only by being able to deal enough damage to make it not worth while for anyone.

Interesting, and also explains why Japan wanted a NATO liaison office. Russia is NATOs main concern, and it seems from these leaks a significant source of concern also for Japan.
Click to expand...

This seems like lunacy. Japan is an island. Russia has nowhere near the amphibious assault capabilities to attack Japan. And trying to win the war in the air and sea would be disastrous. Russia would end up having to cede half of Sakhalin to Japan all over again.
 
seaspear said:
An interesting question might be did President Putin run these ideas of attacking Japan with China and receiving a rebuff ,perhaps even hoping the P.L.A.N would run interference to the U.S.N ?
Click to expand...
A more interesting question, I think, is why publish rubbish? I don’t frequent Newsweek, but lately see it as a trash outlet (maybe is and always was? No idea and can’t comment one way or the other).

In this instance, they talk about some “correspondence” from an alleged FSB agent that insists Russia was going to attack Japan because they declassified some previously secret documents and ran some information campaign to paint the Japanese as Nazis in August 2021. That’s simply absurd. Everyone involved completely ignores the fact that there is somewhat of a tradition in Russia to publish newly declassified documents in regards to WW2 in May and June (when the, so called, Patriotic War began with Germany invading the Soviet Union), as well as on occasion in August, though not on the regular basis, when Soviet Union sent troops to Japan in accordance to the deal they made with the US and the Brits. To imply that Russia was planning to invade or attack Japan based on that tidbit is… I am not sure what to call it, really. It is beyond stupid, in my opinion.

I have been reading Russian news media long enough to know this, but I can see how Newsweek wouldn't be aware (I wouldn’t give them a pass on this though, no reputable outlet would just go ahead and post the rubbish without even little due diligence), but that tells you quite a bit about the Wind of Change Research Group, Gulagu.net, Osechkin, Sushko, and their “FSB sources” and “contacts”.

Imagine what a Russian invasion of Japan would look like, lol. Especially due to the US commitment to defend Japan.

Honestly, this is probably the dumbest thing I have read in a while.
 
KipPotapych said:
A more interesting question, I think, is why publish rubbish? I don’t frequent Newsweek, but lately see it as a trash outlet (maybe is and always was? No idea and can’t comment one way or the other).

In this instance, they talk about some “correspondence” from an alleged FSB agent that insists Russia was going to attack Japan because they declassified some previously secret documents and ran some information campaign to paint the Japanese as Nazis in August 2021. That’s simply absurd. Everyone involved completely ignores the fact that there is somewhat of a tradition in Russia to publish newly declassified documents in regards to WW2 in May and June (when the, so called, Patriotic War began with Germany invading the Soviet Union), as well as on occasion in August, though not on the regular basis, when Soviet Union sent troops to Japan in accordance to the deal they made with the US and the Brits. To imply that Russia was planning to invade or attack Japan based on that tidbit is… I am not sure what to call it, really. It is beyond stupid, in my opinion.

I have been reading Russian news media long enough to know this, but I can see how Newsweek wouldn't be aware (I wouldn’t give them a pass on this though, no reputable outlet would just go ahead and post the rubbish without even little due diligence), but that tells you quite a bit about the Wind of Change Research Group, Gulagu.net, Osechkin, Sushko, and their “FSB sources” and “contacts”.

Imagine what a Russian invasion of Japan would look like, lol. Especially due to the US commitment to defend Japan.

Honestly, this is probably the dumbest thing I have read in a while.
Click to expand...
I believe this report was investigated by Christo Grozev the lead investigator of Brincat whose sources verified this
Prior to the war in Ukraine, Putin was planning to attack Japan per leaked documents (msn.com)
Christo Grozev: Journalist who exposed Navalny plot excluded from BAFTAs | CNN
 
^ I guess, you can add Grozev to the list in my post above, as well as his sources?

Not sure what to say here, really. From the link above:

Ultimately, however, the whistleblower wrote that the Russian leadership “sort of swapped out Japan for Ukraine.”

"But on the whole,” the FSB whistleblower continued, “war was inevitable for Russia due to the maniacal desire for war by the leadership…And now the bulk of the combat-ready units from that direction has been redeployed to Ukraine."

This is just crazy, in my opinion, and completely baseless. Not even sure why this is a serious discussion, that is how crazy this is.

I’ll repeat, how does one imagine Russian invasion of Japan would look like? Also, Soviets and now Russians have had a complete control of the islands in question for many decades, without any meaningful threat of losing that control. The peace treaty talks with Japan had taken place many times with various degree of success. Then, on a warm August night in 2021 (well, I guess prior to that because they got those troops combat-ready before swapping for Ukraine instead), the maniacal Russian leadership thirsty for war decides to invade Japan (how?) in order… Hmm… In order… I guess this is the place where the story falls apart? Well, it falls apart back in the beginning because, like I said, it is completely crazy. At least the two countries are officially in a state of war from back in the day because the peace treaty was never signed, so the Russians wouldn’t have to call it a special military operation to denazify Japan in order to protect ??? (perhaps, “Kurilians”?) from those Japanese nazis that conducted some horrors in World War 2 80 years ago.
 
I haven't read anything of an invasion of Japan in these claims, a possible planned military action considered perhaps ,to say Russia or Putin would not do this because it would be lunacy ,well more recent events show that would not stop Russia and that what we may consider lunacy Russia does not
 
^ Yes, seaspear, you are right. And I apologize for the hyperbole. You can replace the “invasion” with “military action” in my post, however, and I believe I would still be right and on point. The author of the “letters” also mentions “even war”, which again makes zero sense, as does military action, because such a “war” would necessarily involve Untied States. And again, they do not have an urgent (or otherwise, really) problem with Kuril Islands as the articles suggest. I would go as far as to propose that the invasion of Ukraine seems almost perfectly reasonable in comparison to the military action, war, call it what you will against Japan.
 
It's real simple; if for some idiotic reason the Russian regime attacked Japan, the US would be fully involved because of the Treaty Mutual Cooperation and Security Between Japan and the United States of America.

Article Five.​
Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations in accordance with the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
Source: MOFA: Japan-U.S. Security Treaty​
​
So any talk of Russia attacking Japan is spurious and misleading. Deal in facts not innuendo and rumour.
 
contricusc said:
keep repeating the idea that Russia is the one who decides when it feels threatened and pushed into a corner, as if there is nothing objective about the situation and everything is just perception.
Click to expand...

Before last year invasion, Putin already talk about his red line on Ukraine. Most everyone in the West agree he will not going to invade, and call it his red line as a bluff. Well February last year, he call that bluff.

Personally for the sake of the world, I do hope he's bluffing on nuclear threat. However he also keep raising that tone on Russia existential threat. So let's see if he's bluffing this time. However last year invasion shown Putin and Russian Elites don't follow Western logic. Russian telegrams already believe that NATO soldiers already in the ground in the pretenses of volunteers. I'm not going to debate on that, just shown what West public believe and what Russian public believes is already not same.

Rob c said:
however the scale of disinformation from Russia is of several magnitudes higher than what would come from most western governments and their statements are in the main are based on facts, but they do at times make significant omissions as opposed to direct falsehoods.
Click to expand...

Well US invade Iraq on the base on falsehoods. That falsehood is being trumpets by Western media throughout the world as a fact. Just shown false information is not monopolise by autocratic regime like Russia or China.

I already say in my previous post, yes agree that West in somewhat more dependable on information then Russia and China. However in this days even officials media of Russian and China or other autocratic regimes can not dictate their public informations flows. Russians telegrams despite all the bias, shown how they are more or less work independently. Perhaps not on western standards, but for their standard their information flow surprisingly quite independent.

Thus as non western that already see how Western media work, and even from time to time falls toward western agenda throughout history, well forgive us if (and I do believe even some in West) also keep our reserves on both information as much grain of salt until being collaborate by event in the ground.

Well hope you don't mind if this is the last comment I make on both sides bias on this war, in this thread. We can talk more in Russia-West thread if you want.
 
contricusc said:
It’s all about the perceived consequences. Before the invasion, the Biden administration made big efforts to suggest there will be no consequences if Russia makes a small military operation in Ukraine. It was obviously a trap for Putin, which he fell into. He even named his invasion as a “special military operation” in the hope that the Americans will look the other way. But it was a trap and he is now caught in this quagmire with no good exit options. . . .
Click to expand...
Trap? Doh!

Biden didn't set a trap like that for Putin. He & his cabinet & advisers didn't believe Putin would launch a full-scale invasion. Big efforts? What big efforts?

There are solid internal Russian reasons for not calling the invasion a war. It has legal implications. You've fallen into the classic self-set trap of imagining vast conspiracies everywhere, & explaining how the world works. In reality, cock-ups are far more common, such as those which led to the Falklands war.
 
swerve said:
Biden didn't set a trap like that for Putin. He & his cabinet & advisers didn't believe Putin would launch a full-scale invasion. Big efforts? What big efforts?
Click to expand...

I think it started with the intentionally blundered pull-out of Afghanistan, that was meant to create the impression of a weak US administration. This was the first step to make the US look weak and embolden Putin.

Then, you can add statements like "I think what you're going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It's one thing if it's a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do." which tend to give the impression that the US would tolerate a “minor incursion”.

Yes, it was Putin’s blunder that he invaded, but let’s not pretend that the US administration is not happy with the result. If the US truly wanted Putin to stay out of Ukraine, they would have made serious threats before the war, but they didn’t. They obviously tried to downplay their future help for Ukraine, in order to embolden and encourage Putin to act. That’s how a trap looks like.

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. Then you call and see the turn. You slowly build the pot each turn by looking weak and afraid, because you want your opponent to go big and lose a lot at the showdown. You don’t want him to fold too early. That’s why the US gives weapons in small increments, because it wants Putin to still believe he can win. The US strategy is to fool Putin that he has a chance to win, so that he spends all his resources on this war. Making Putin to fold too early is not in the best interest of the US. Anyone who ever played poker understands this.
 
Last edited:
contricusc said:
I think it started with the intentionally blundered pull-out of Afghanistan, that was meant to create the impression of a weak US administration. This was the first step to make the US look weak and embolden Putin.

Then, you can add statements like "I think what you're going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It's one thing if it's a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do." which tend to give the impression that the US would tolerate a “minor incursion”.

Yes, it was Putin’s blunder that he invaded, but let’s not pretend that the US administration is not happy with the result. If the US truly wanted Putin to stay out of Ukraine, they would have made serious threats before the war, but they didn’t. They obviously tried to downplay their future help for Ukraine, in order to embolden and encourage Putin to act. That’s how a trap looks like.

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. Then you call and see the turn. You slowly build the pot each turn by looking weak and afraid, because you want your opponent to go big and lose a lot at the showdown. You don’t want him to fold too early. That’s why the US gives weapons in small increments, because it wants Putin to still believe he can win. The US strategy is to fool Putin that he has a chance to win, so that he spends all his resources on this war. Making Putin to fold too early is not in the best interest of the US. Anyone who ever played poker understands this.
Click to expand...
KipPotapych is right. ^ That’s not what happened, or is happening. 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'm afraid you've confirmed my opinion that your analysis is flawed. It's like a game, or a film, not real life.

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. Biden inherited the decision to pull out of Afghanistan from Trump, who's buddied up to Putin & spoken against US help to Ukraine, & had already pulled out most US troops. You seem to think that was all a cunning plan hatched betweem Trump & Biden. The unreality of that idea staggers me.
 
Ananda said:
Before last year invasion, Putin already talk about his red line on Ukraine. Most everyone in the West agree he will not going to invade, and call it his red line as a bluff. Well February last year, he call that bluff.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Many in "the West" was convinced Russia was going to invade. Somewhat fewer predicted the scale of the invasion. And a few did not see the invasion coming, for instance the French intelligence failed to predict the invasion and the French intelligence chief lost his position because of that. French intelligence chief Vidaud fired over Russian war failings - BBC News
The US, the UK, Poland, the Baltics, Norway and several other countries predicted the invasion.

Personally for the sake of the world, I do hope he's bluffing on nuclear threat. However he also keep raising that tone on Russia existential threat. So let's see if he's bluffing this time. However last year invasion shown Putin and Russian Elites don't follow Western logic. Russian telegrams already believe that NATO soldiers already in the ground in the pretenses of volunteers. I'm not going to debate on that, just shown what West public believe and what Russian public believes is already not same.
Click to expand...
What "Russian public" believes is not very important in this context. Putin and his cronies have full control, at least for the time being. What they believe, and how they perceive things, is what matters.

Well US invade Iraq on the base on falsehoods. That falsehood is being trumpets by Western media throughout the world as a fact. Just shown false information is not monopolise by autocratic regime like Russia or China.
Click to expand...
You over-simplify. Many western media warned against the Iraq invasion. Furthermore, several Western countries warned against it, and did not participate in the invasion (e.g., France, Germany, Norway -- all close allies of the US).
 
Vivendi said:
Incorrect. Many in "the West" was convinced Russia was going to invade. Somewhat fewer predicted the scale of the invasion. And a few did not see the invasion coming, for instance the French intelligence failed to predict the invasion and the French intelligence chief lost his position because of that. French intelligence chief Vidaud fired over Russian war failings - BBC News
The US, the UK, Poland, the Baltics, Norway and several other countries predicted the invasion.


What "Russian public" believes is not very important in this context. Putin and his cronies have full control, at least for the time being. What they believe, and how they perceive things, is what matters.


You over-simplify. Many western media warned against the Iraq invasion. Furthermore, several Western countries warned against it, and did not participate in the invasion (e.g., France, Germany, Norway -- all close allies of the US).
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top