Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
I am sorry but that would not quite explain the korean war and the plenty of other proxy wars linked to the standoffs between the great powers. It would not take much to reignite the indian subcontinent . There is apparently a school of thought ( in a manner of speaking) current in fundementalist USA thinking to promote Armageddon after which will come the Rapture and the second coming when all the saved will live in bliss.
In speech in parliament Honourable Member addresses ordinary members of parliament, Right Honourable Member addresses Privy Councillors.
The Privy Council is a body advising the Sovereign, mainly made up of current or past senior politicians.
The suffix to My (Right) Honourable is Friend for a member of one's own party, lady/gentleman/member for others.
.
Odd how Ukrianians are dying yet Russia covers up their soldiers deaths so it appears they aren't somewhere they shouldn't
and what threat to Russia is Sweden in the scheme of things?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_Ukraine_(2014–present)
As I said there was a short period following the Soviet collapse when everyone sighed with relief, stood down and partly disbanded their militaries (hence why I grew my hair long & never joined RAF as they reduced recruitment) . But Cold War Part II is due to Putin mounting a resurgent Nationalism and interfering (miltarily / cyber attacks etc. / stirring up preinstalled Russian speaking populations) with its former territories at the periphery of its former Empire that want no further part of being under Russian dominion and seek sanctuary with the West.
So yes the old game of Risk is back on as a consequence and deterrents are replayed - as despite all out nuclear deterrence part of the game is having naunced conventional deterrence to bridge the gap between doing sod all - to all out nuclear response. As historically this has lead to mainly (agreed) stalemate (as alterntaive played out in Europe is too bad to contemplate) some of this surplus military usually gets played with by the highest bidder outside of Europe in proxy wars (Middle East has for many years been a literal sandbox)
But anyway what;'s happening now is a reaction subsequent to Russia wanting to turn back the clock - not the West Bit like Brexit (keeping it on subject
which is leading even Trump (who is somewhat subservient IMHO for good or bad...} to his military advisers to begin wanting to ramp up nuclear capabilities afttr years of relative lack of investment.
I think we're on the same songsheet but arguing from different ends!
and what threat to Russia is Sweden in the scheme of things?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_Ukraine_(2014–present)
As I said there was a short period following the Soviet collapse when everyone sighed with relief, stood down and partly disbanded their militaries (hence why I grew my hair long & never joined RAF as they reduced recruitment) . But Cold War Part II is due to Putin mounting a resurgent Nationalism and interfering (miltarily / cyber attacks etc. / stirring up preinstalled Russian speaking populations) with its former territories at the periphery of its former Empire that want no further part of being under Russian dominion and seek sanctuary with the West.
So yes the old game of Risk is back on as a consequence and deterrents are replayed - as despite all out nuclear deterrence part of the game is having naunced conventional deterrence to bridge the gap between doing sod all - to all out nuclear response. As historically this has lead to mainly (agreed) stalemate (as alterntaive played out in Europe is too bad to contemplate) some of this surplus military usually gets played with by the highest bidder outside of Europe in proxy wars (Middle East has for many years been a literal sandbox)
But anyway what;'s happening now is a reaction subsequent to Russia wanting to turn back the clock - not the West Bit like Brexit (keeping it on subject
which is leading even Trump (who is somewhat subservient IMHO for good or bad...} to his military advisers to begin wanting to ramp up nuclear capabilities afttr years of relative lack of investment.I think we're on the same songsheet but arguing from different ends!
Last edited:
It does exactly that as you explain in saying proxy wars. Conflicts using fall guys like the Koreans and Vietnamese as the front for participation by the big boys. That left the big boys free to detach at any time, with one of them not being the loser they would be in a direct declaration of war between themselves.
Those giants were never the main sufferers, just look at the death rolls. It was the proxy nations who paid the price.
.
That is to fall into the trap that dishonesty is somehow acceptable at a particular level and/or within a certain group in society. Transparency is far more important than any 'right' to withhold truth based on short or long-term occupancy of a privileged position and I include all levels of the public services and the civil service in that remark.
A treason against the people of a country is committed when open government resorts to falsehoods and deliberate obfuscation to deny the population the truth of a difficult situation.
Government of the people, by the people and for the people is usually credited to Abe Lincoln who used the expression in his Gettysburg Address and it is generally regarded as the basis for all modern democracies. Lying to the people can never be reconciled with that commendable mission statement in any humanitarian democracy.
OG is absolutely correct when he suggests that:
We owe it to ourselves.
Tom
Unfortunately flecc in the Donbass region they are, day and daily. I watch it on TV every day, today three more Ukrainian soldiers.
Since 2014 over 10,000 have been killed
https://www.worldcrunch.com/world-affairs/donbass-blues-the-forgotten-conflict-in-eastern-ukraine
This is the fundamental Western lie, there are no separatist Ukrainian regions, they are Russian. When Krushchov reorganised regional management in the USSR, the Ukraine within the USSR had the responsibility to manage those adjacent regions. When the USSR collapsed and the Ukraine sought independence those eastern edge regions were Russian since managing doesn't mean owning. Once Russia sorted itself out they were content to leave things as they were since the Ukraine was a friendly country with a very big Russian population. Until see below:
This is the propaganda reverse of the truth. Putin is responding to the continued encirclement of Russia by NATO countries. Inspired by US covert action assisted by the EU, the method is to tempt with EU membership and cash, and then followed by NATO enrollment. Country by country that was done on the Western flank and then the Americans and EU tried a pincer movement from the other side, Georgia. The Ukraine was the next on the US list to recruit to the EU and NATO to complete the encirclement. Russia finally woke up, went into Georgia and taught them a swift harsh lesson, showing them who it was best to be friends with.
That was the first Russian action in this sequence, proving conclusively that it was the West and mainly the USA who initiated all the current troubles. Before that Russia was entirely happy for a friendly Ukraine to run the Crimea where the Russian southern fleet was based, and the eastern regions. Once the US financed Orange Party took over the Ukraine and adopted a pro West stance wanting EU membership with the threat of joining NATO, it eventually provoked Russia to use the dominant Russian population of the Crimea to vote to rejoin Russia, thus protecting its southern fleet.
Putin is exactly what Russia needed, cometh the hour, cometh the man.
.
Last edited:
See this reply above Tommie. The Ukrainians are responsible for their own deaths, it was completely unnecessary.
.
There's nothing like the opinions of an Independent think tank, and this wasn't!
I'm not entirely sure about that 'Wicky'! I do apologise if I failed to grasp your point or misunderstood what you were saying but I always have a difficulty when people applaud or criticise other peoples and use political or strategic situations to justify their opinion on those matters.
I have found in my travels through life that people in other lands are not really all that different from our own people and I just wonder how the average Russian ebiker sees the British or the EU, a place with many different languages. What must it be like to have endured the might of the German forces in WW2, only to begin rebuilding your country from rubble and watch as the USA builds military bases at many strategic points which may only be considered as a threat against the soviet nations comprised in the USSR?
Even worse, when Glasnost and Perestroika were introduced to form the basis of a new, restructured society under a communist form of democracy, the USA and the recently enlarged EU continued to criticise Russia and sought to intervene in Russia's internal politics, possibly with a view to fragmenting and destabilising the Moscow government.
I am no supporter of the communist approach to democracy but I cannot condemn the Russian mechanic, the carpenter, the electrician, shop or factory worker for being concerned about the motives of those nations with a long history of making war and raping foreign countries while building empires, not that the Russians have had no experience in that field. If I were Russian though, having a drink down the pub and a natter about the news on the wall-mounted TV in the bar area, I think I might be more than a little concerned at some of the outpourings from Trump, Johnson, Farage and the prospect of an EU army on top of the NATO and UN forces which are regarded as pro-American and anti-communist.
I have no axe to grind with the Russian people and I'm grateful to them for the huge part they played in the 1940s when along with the UK, the USA, ANZAC and Canadian, Polish and Free French along with all the other resistance fighters who together managed to finally overwhelm the greatest war machine ever seen in the modern world.
My inclination leads me to fear Trump and his acolytes far more than Putin and his politburo. Perhaps Russia is a place with which we should do more business?
Tom
“Oh would some power the gift give us, to see ourselves as others see us.”
To the Americans we are an Aircraft Carrier moored off the coast of Europe and an extension of American Power, much reduced as we now have no influence on European Affairs
To the Russians we are an old and toothless Mouse that roars. they know that in the Event of the proverbial hitting the fan we can be neutered with a handful of missiles. (They will probably wait for a favourable offshore wind before they do.)
To the Europeans we are one thorn in the flesh reduced to a vassal status. and when they have their own Army we will be no threat. Quite handy having their own versions of Cuba on the doorstep.
To the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and everyone else we are a convenient Take away.
And regardless of the Fact we have no Manufacturing we can describe as ultra modern, nothing special to sell others can't make better of cheaper, no merchant Navy to ship the Goods, no Navy numerous enough to protect our shipping if we had it, and no trade deals to sell these hypothetical goods through.
We have been promised by the Powers that be here that are expecting us to become a "Global Power House".
Despite the historical fact that only Foreigners seem willing to invest here and already own 50% of our companies we have a patriotic slogan about taking back control...Laughable!
You couldn't get finance to run a corner shop with so utterly hopeless a business plan as the UK. PLC has, and yet there is popular support for Brexit.
Why? it beggars belief.
To the Americans we are an Aircraft Carrier moored off the coast of Europe and an extension of American Power, much reduced as we now have no influence on European Affairs
To the Russians we are an old and toothless Mouse that roars. they know that in the Event of the proverbial hitting the fan we can be neutered with a handful of missiles. (They will probably wait for a favourable offshore wind before they do.)
To the Europeans we are one thorn in the flesh reduced to a vassal status. and when they have their own Army we will be no threat. Quite handy having their own versions of Cuba on the doorstep.
To the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and everyone else we are a convenient Take away.
And regardless of the Fact we have no Manufacturing we can describe as ultra modern, nothing special to sell others can't make better of cheaper, no merchant Navy to ship the Goods, no Navy numerous enough to protect our shipping if we had it, and no trade deals to sell these hypothetical goods through.
We have been promised by the Powers that be here that are expecting us to become a "Global Power House".
Despite the historical fact that only Foreigners seem willing to invest here and already own 50% of our companies we have a patriotic slogan about taking back control...Laughable!
You couldn't get finance to run a corner shop with so utterly hopeless a business plan as the UK. PLC has, and yet there is popular support for Brexit.
Why? it beggars belief.
I might not haveexpressed it in so bleak terms i do think the uk as a whole has an image and perception problem
That body is what in my benighted republic we call a council of state. ..it has no legal standing but its advice will be sought by the president when there is legislation to be signed off on which the president fears may be foul of the written consitution.
Brilliantly perceptive piece OG!
Once upon a time I drank in a pub named 'The Case Is Altered' and always wondered about the name's origins.
The story behind the name is not at all clear but the 'Brexit' situation today compared to June 2016 fits the bill aptly for such an epithet.
The whole charade needs to be ended now or allowed to run its full course with all the disappointment and heartache that will ensue.
Tom
I and Ukrainians would disgree
"Ukraine’s Independence Day commemorates the anniversary of the country’s independence. Prior to 1991, Ukraine was a constituent republic of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.). On August 24, 1991, after a failed coup in Moscow, Ukraine declared its independence. About 90 percent of Ukrainians voted for their country’s independence following this declaration, on December 1, 1991."
https://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/ukraine/independence-day
Stalin cannily shifted native Russian speakers all over their peak domain and encouraged Rusiian Cutural imposition on native populatiion i.e schools teaching exclusively Russian language etc. hence the motivation of my Grandma bailing out her young. Stalin's long term policy has served Putin in Ukraine and Estonia and other Eastern European former terriitories to meddle under the pretence of defending Russian speakers.
Ever wonder why in the Cold War there were was greater outfux of folk voting with their feet fto get away from Soviet control (Berlin Wall as an exemplifier) than the other way, and why the trend continues with former territories to this day?
Why not read what I posted? I haven't disputed the Ukraine's independence, it's a fact. What I pointed out, but you and those disagreeing appeared to have ignored, was that the Eastern territories that they were managing for the USSR while in the USSR are Russian lands. In the chaos of the breakup of the USSR they took those lands with them as if they owned them. They did not and never have owned them.
That is where the fighting is, on stolen Russian territory on the Eastern flank of the country, the dominant Russian population not wanting to be a part of a newly anti-Russian Ukraine and supported by Russia in that.
.
There is a little bit of revisionism going on here. As I would see it there were are a collection of different countries with different names, different ethnic groups , different languages, somewhere different histories. Some were part of the older Russian empire of the czars, and others were part of the heartland of the Rus others product of conquest,and with somewhat fluid borders. When the red Soviets took over, they constructed sometimes by force, sometimes by agreement, a union of" independent "republics, of which both Georgia ,the Crimea and the Ukraine were parts. If they were not independent, . They would not have been a union.of republics. The union had a single army and a single currency, a single governing party and a centralised economy controlled from Moscow.
With the collapse of the Soviet structure, the three Baltic republics, which had prior history of Hanseatic league, looked west. The loss of them was unpleasant to prestige of the newly formed Russian confederation, but not critical The unrest in Georgia was undoubtedly formented by western interests, and was put down, to popular acclaim, within Georgia, by the Russian military.
That the Ukraine was given independence, is a fact, but in Russian minds, it was always the heartland, and the notion of it forming an oppositional stance was never contemplated. That the Crimea might be lost was unthinkable. The Crimea holds a close affection both as a seaside location, a military port ,a retirement home etc. I am searching for an equivalent UK counterpart, and perhaps Windsor, or Lindesfarne ,or Portsmouth, or Devon or the island of Iona or the Oval all rolled into one might come close. There was never a possibility that the Russian elite would let it go. So they did the least necessary,. They stuffed it with green men, .. serving and non serving miilitary and forced a non binding referendum. The residents of that area, being both culturally, emotionally , financially and in many cases family, naturally sided with mainland Russia. Illegal yes, understandable yes.
The problem now is that the Russian federation has become emboldened by these excursions and is flexing it's muscle.
Last edited:
Odd then that there are documents that Russia happily gifted Crimea to Ukraine in 1954.
And that on 2 Dec 1991 Boris Yelsin and the government of the day recognised Ukrainian Independence.
Leading to a 1997 treaty between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, Russia recognized Ukraine’s borders, and accepted Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea.
"In accord with provisions of the UN Charter and the obligations of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the High Contracting Parties shall respect each other′s territorial integrity and reaffirm the inviolability of the borders existing between them."
The point being that Putin did an about face and militarily (green men, 'vactationing' Russian soldiers & equipment etc) stole parts of the independent Ukraine back, and is paying part of the price for that action by the resulting sanctions.
Hence why other former territories and others inc Sweden are untrusting towards Putin and not keen to see Russians stomping back and see a repeat of enforced Russification of their populations
.
Almost all of this I don't and haven't disputed, I'm at least as familiar as you with the 100 year history of the Ukraine. The one part I disagree with is that Moscow centralisation. From the start of the cold war a policy of scattered production of anything military related was followed, though administration was centralised in Moscow. But in the 1950s under Khrushchev, the administration of the regions was decentralised presumable for efficiency and/or defence reasons.
It was then that the Russian industrial region on the eastern flank of the Ukraine was placed under Ukraine management. The current western claim that it was given to the Ukraine back then is a lie, Russia was absolutely not in the business of giving away home territory during the peak of the cold war.
That eastern region did not include the Crimea which was definitely Ukrainan territory, albeit having previously long been Russian and with a majority Russian population. Russia illegally claimed the Crimea on the basis of a popular vote by the population, this to prevent any possibility of their southern fleet being based at a NATO country in future.
My argument is simply on the status of the Russian industrial region that the Ukraine illegally took with them on the breakup of the USSR.
.
Last edited: