Sign In
0 Items (
Search
Comments (104)
Dear Igor,
Since we arrived in Australia, you and I, as refugees from the USSR some 40 years ago, you (and many like you) have disparaged the generous help this country has given you and your family. For some obscure reason, you seem convinced that this assistance is yours by right.
I beg to differ. This help has come out of the human decency, compassion and magnanimity of the givers – the Australian people. If you cannot understand this and feel no gratitude, as seems to be the case, this raises some troubling issues. To my mind, the question of gratitude has become a question of our national security.
__________________________________
Gratitude? That is something dogs have.” — Stalin.
People who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence. — Thomas Sowell
__________________________________
You and I came to Australia as refugees at almost the same time. This country gently embraced us and gave us every possible succour in the darkest hours of our lives. Stateless, belonging nowhere, with no knowledge of free societies, we were helped with language, housing, living expenses, schooling of our children, medical treatment, re-qualification for employment – the list goes on.
Most importantly she – for I perceive Australia as a kind woman, indulgent but pragmatic – has given us the freedom to believe or not, to agree or not, to speak or not, to travel or not – all without asking anyone’s permission.
She has magnanimously given former refugees safety from persecution, confidence in the future, self-respect, human dignity, unheard-of prosperity and the ability to look, without fear, straight into the eyes of a policeman, a bureaucrat or a government official.
We have been given the precious opportunity of being proud holders of one of the world’s most respected passports. We were asked nothing in return, except to live in peace, to pay taxes like everyone else, to obey the law and to be good neighbors.
Eligible elderly former refugees are getting a decent pension, subsidised housing, gas and electricity, free public transport, free medical care, as well as assistance with cleaning, shopping, cooking, medication-taking and showering. Your own elderly mother is provided with a free mobility scooter, subsidised housing in one of the most sought-after suburbs of Melbourne and has had several (expensive) surgical procedures. All at no cost to her, despite not having contributed a dollar because she has not worked a single day in this country. Frankly – your mother wouldn’t have lived that long if she had stayed in the old country. May she live until 120.
A considerable proportion of this nation’s budget was spent on strangers, instead of being spent on locals. Australian people have never complained or protested about this seeming profligacy, for this is a fundamental Australian tradition – live and let live.
Many children of former refugees are prosperous, well-educated and have good jobs. Many of them are part of local Aussie families, who could not care less where they came from – as long as they are good and decent people.
Ingratitude
Astonishingly, people like you, Igor, willingly absorb hostile anti-Western propaganda. You dismiss Australia’s magnanimous generosity, taking for granted the immensity of the gifts Australians have given you. You feel that everything you were given is owed to you. Your desire for more is like a cloud – pregnant with a heavy rain of resentment, envy and anger. This emotional cloud isolates you from common sense, leaving you endlessly criticising this country of our refuge, attacking her values, her system of government, her culture and her beliefs.
Instead, the eternally dissatisfied, like you, are praising the non-existent virtues of one of the most disgusting and dangerous dictatorships on the planet, the Russian government of Vladimir Putin. You believe that by doing so you defend your cultural, religious or ethnic identity. In case you did not notice, Igor, nobody here cares about your cultural identity, your religious belief or your skin color. You can keep or discard your culture as you wish. All you need to be is a person of good character.
Even more astonishingly, people like you would like this country of refuge to be more like the country you had left. Needless to say, it begs a simple question: why, then, did you leave your cherished ‘Motherland’? To sponge? To whinge? To undermine? To be unhappy? Why?
If my anger is getting through by now – so be it – for it took a chunk of my adult life to turn the dream of living in Australia into reality. Before being able to leave we – my wife, my daughter and I – had to go through two endless years of persecution, harassment and fear. In contrast to you, I have paid for the privilege of living here without any suffering or fear. And I know the difference between these two societies. When I hear your incessant complaints and disparaging remarks about your adopted country – all I can think of is – ‘what are you still doing here if things are so unbearable for you?’
My discontent with your incessant carping might’ve stayed at the level of an interpersonal difference of opinions. I would’ have lived with that, accepted it as our mutual contribution to freedom of speech and respect for differing opinions. However, this is not personal. Not anymore. Now you are dangerous!
Igor, please listen: you must understand – by professing your support for Putin and his mob of murderers, looters and rapists – you create an impression that the Russian-speaking people living in Australia are disloyal to this country and are ungrateful for all the help and care we have received. Most of all –you inevitably represent a security risk to my adopted country.
The Russophobia furphy
After the fall of the Soviet Union, I, like many others, was hoping that the new Russia was about to become a part of the peaceful family of nations, a world citizen in good standing. This hope did not last long. As soon as the crisis was over, the Russian Federation adopted the pattern of bad Soviet behavior. Aggressive foreign policies, use of trade as a weapon, breach of international commitments, assassinations overseas and inside Russia, bullying and military invasions of weak neighbors, kidnapping, jailing and killing the political opposition, electoral fraud, systemic corruption of a magnitude unheard of before and blatant disregard for the people’s needs have, once again, became the norm in Russia.
And now – the predator has struck Ukraine, piling atrocity on mass murder, aggression and disregard for the sanctity of human life. The régime is successfully brainwashing its people into believing that the whole world hates Russians. This propaganda is effective far beyond the borders of the Russian Federation, assuring that government’s ability to maintain an emotional and persuasive control of much of the worldwide Russian-speaking diaspora. The overall idea is that Russia, an eternal victim of the perfidious West, must defend itself against Russophobia. Therefore, every blatantly aggressive move by the Russian government is an unwilling, but just and noble, reaction forced by Western wickedness. All of this is utter nonsense, but it works.
Does Ukraine need to be liberated?
The Russian government has appropriated the right to “defend the oppressed Russian-speaking communities”. They threaten Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Israel or any other country which has a Russian-speaking community, including the US and Australia. The utterly fabricated pretext of the aggressive war against Ukraine is non-existent “violation” of the rights of the Russian-speaking communities.
Russian propaganda is trying to transform the Russian-speaking diaspora into a collective accomplice in the government’s criminal behaviour. They declare their right to use aggression wherever Russian-speakers live, splitting them from the mainstream of their host countries, manipulating them into supporting the Russian government’s policies.
Disturbingly, this is creating a body of supporters, helpers and ready-made collaborators – especially among those Russian-speakers unable or unwilling to integrate into the Australian way of life.
J’accuse!
Even now, at this time of the inhumane assault on the Ukrainian people, you, Igor, are supporting this outrage, praising Putin as a great leader. It is not rocket science to connect the dots and extend your platonic love affair with Putin and his cohorts to open collaboration. After reading this piece, you will not be surprised when I tell you that most Australians would find your views offensive and disloyal in this free society.
As I have mentioned before – your views go well beyond empty-minded ingratitude; they are a threat to this country and her people. They are a security threat to all of us. Think about it.
Sincerely,
Michael
Dr Michael Galak and his family came to Australia as refugees from the Soviet Union in 1978
Bravo!
Putting aside for a moment the rights or wrongs of Mr Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Dr Galak has described another instance of the unsavoury but common phenomenon of immigrants indulging nationalistic hatreds and prejudices that should have been discarded at quarantine, and cheering on the corrupt governments and brutal ideologies (and implicitly, any economic squalor) that they left behind. A phenomenon universally condemned, not least I would have thought by Quadrant readers. But apparently it’s OK if it’s Putin you’re cheering on.
And do help me, please, with the WEF. I’ve always thought of it as a gabfest of exceptionally rich people who fly into St Moritz in private jets – the airport is always clogged with them at WEF time – and generally lecture everyone about making do with less, and cutting emissions in particular. But apparently it’s a sinister cabal aiming at world domination! So please, point me in the right direction. All the crackpot websites, conspiracy theorists and jew-baiters you can think of. It’s been a busy week and I need a really good laugh.
Doubting Thomas, I meant the above as a stand-alone, not as a reply to your post. I meant only to say to you, bravo X2!
Bravo from me too. After reading most of the comments from ‘useful idiots’ below, I am staggered that such people can be so twisted in their thinking as to blame the West for Putin’s behaviour. It is good that their demented thinking can be displayed here so we realise the distorted thinking which sustains a few people in this country.
A worthy article but Dr Galak still ignores the historical facts and realities as to why Russia has gone to war to protect the ethnic Russians in Ukraine.
It is not good enough to demonise Russia for its failings when this war was created by the actions of the US, Nato and Ukraine and that has been documented for decades. Sure, we all wish that war was not seen as a problem-solving mechanism by the Russians but you can hardly blame them for taking this course with the precedent well set, with no justification as the Russians have, by the Americans in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria to name just a few of too many.
This statement is a blatant untruth:
The utterly fabricated pretext of the aggressive war against Ukraine is non-existent “violation” of the rights of the Russian-speaking communities.
The Ukrainian Government has been bombing Russian-speaking communities for nine years and working to remove their rights to speak Russian. If you are going to comment on this tragedy please do yourself and us a favour by doing the research first so you can present your opinions from a place of fact not prejudice.
Quote: Ukrainian government forces used cluster munitions in populated areas in Donetsk city in early October 2014, Human Rights Watch said today. The use of cluster munitions in populated areas violates the laws of war due to the indiscriminate nature of the weapon and may amount to war crimes.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/10/20/ukraine-widespread-use-cluster-munitions
Brilliant! Thank you rosross!
Those are my thoughts entirely.
So refreshing to hear the other side!
We are being lied to and I find it unforgivable.
I loathe the WEF, Klaus Schwab, UN, NATO, US and those behind this including Ukraine, along with their disgusting puppet Zelensky who was put there by them in the 2014 coup and who is being handsomely rewarded for his efforts.
They want the overthrow of Russia and Putin gone.
They have been poking the “bear” for a very long time! They have been doing appalling and unforgivable things.
Ukraine is one of the most corrupt places on earth and is laundering the so called “elites” ill gotten gains.
@ Edwina,
The informed and sensible take the view we do. With billions poured into Ukraine for quite some years, none of us are surprised that half of it has disappeared.
Edwina, what really worries me is how the Anglosphere’s political elite basically all sound like John Bolton these days. The neocons and neoliberals are on a war-without-end unity ticket. They aren’t interested in a negotiated settlement to the Ukraine war – unless it involves total Russian defeat and regime change in Moscow. Worried that pushing a nuclear-armed power into a corner risks Armageddon? You are a Putin stooge!
Even Elon Musk, who has materially supported the Ukrainians, was recently attacked as “pro-Russian” for daring to offer a peace plan: https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/the-ideological-tyranny-of-liberal-interventionism/
Edwina says; “Zelensky who was put there by them in the 2014 coup”
.
britannica.com says; “On April 21 Zelensky was elected president of Ukraine with an impressive 73 percent of the vote”. That was in the 2019 election.
.
Edwina, could you please provide the evidence you have that validates your claim that he is a puppet put there by “WEF, Klaus Schwab, UN, NATO, US” in the 2014 coup?
Do you really believe the election was free and fair? Ukraine is one of the most corrupt places on earth.
How did Joe Biden win in 2020 again?
Sorry! I am aware there was another President after the 2014 coup and before Zelensky came to power.
There was also widespread rumours the election was not “free and fair”.
I repeat; “Edwina, could you please provide the evidence you have that validates your claim that he is a puppet put there by “WEF, Klaus Schwab, UN, NATO, US” in the 2014 coup?”
And I would like to know why the WEF is behind it all, and how it is bent on world domination! As noted above, it has always struck me as a gabfest of very rich people who fly into St Moritz in private jets, and tend to lecture the rest of us about making do with less and cutting emissions. But perhaps I’m not seeing the big picture.
Don’t be gaslighted by the Trump bandwagon.
He was completely out organised.
The highest court in the land, with a black law majority does not agree.
Its time to move on.
You must be joking, rosross, with your “why Russia has gone to war to protect the ethnic Russians in Ukraine”. Such gullibility betrays abject ignorance of reality. Russia started originally with Kievan Rus, which moved to Moscow a few centuries later to escape Mongol depredations. Ukrainians and Russians have effectively been the same people since year dot, mixing freely, even in Soviet days; in fact, Ukraine’s lingua franca happens to be Russian, spoken by the vast majority in their daily lives. It’s only now that a sharp distinction is being enforced, accelerated by Putin’s mindless, opportunistic aggression, so that most of your “ethnic Russians” have now become anti-Russian, Putin haters.
For centuries, Russia’s leaders have perfected nationalistic paranoia into an art form; Putin promulgates hatred and distrust of the West, yet where does he keep all his stolen wealth? Where do his oligarchs keep their palaces and yachts, and send their kids for education? Where do they go for their shopping sprees? Doesn’t that reveal something to you about their shameless hypocrisy?
The legacy of this war will be extremely long-lasting, leaving Ukraine no option but to join NATO and the EU. The best thing the Russians can do is to get rid of Putin ASAP, and his henchmen, including the FSB, truly democratise their political system, and then apply for entry to NATO and the EU! The inevitable war reparations to Ukraine might prove an obstacle, but could be eased if Putin’s wealth were traced and liquidated.
I admit to being conflicted over this. I equate the situation here as being somewhat similar to the situation in Germany between the wars. The conservatives are losing out to the communists/socialists. In order to defeat the communists they decide to go into a coalition with a crazy fascist minority group called the Nazi Party (but in the here and now its called the World Economic Forum) Those that lived through the 1940s in Germany know where that’s going to end. So here is my dilemma. Does the German owe his unconditional allegiance to the Nazi Party – just because he is German – no matter what? Or should he be opposing his own country? I have no great love of Putin or the Russians, but if the World Economic Forum wins its objective of regime change in Russia – then all of us in the West, and the majority of the rest of the world, are in really deep trouble. If the Great Reset isn’t about turning the world into a sort of global North Korean nightmare for the benefit of a few oligarchs I’d be really surprised! And if Australian Government choses to side with the WEF, should I unconditionally support that too!!! And I don’t want to be any part of that under any circumstances. In my world view a long drawn out stalemate in the Ukraine that exhausts both the WEF and Russia is about the best option we can hope for, and if that exhausts Australia too – at the moment that seems like a reasonable trade off to me. I remain to be convinced that our support of Ukraine does any more good than simply advance the WEF’s globalist takeover agenda. Not in my name!
Well said Alistair. This war in Ukraine is not about Russian aggression but about Russian security concerns in the face of Ukrainian/Nato aggression led by the US. The goal is clearly for regime change in Russia and the Americans have said as much. Quite why they think it is fine for them go waddle around toppling leaders they do not like when some of their own leaders are in need of toppling is the question.
There is an agenda behind this war and it is not about the Russians or the even more corrupt Ukrainians but the sorts of things you cite. The main game is to maintain American hegemony where the power monkeys are playing the WEF agenda. Dangerous times indeed and if anyone thinks it cannot happen here, think again.
We actually need Russia to remain strong in order to reinstate a bipolar world if we are all to be protected.
Yes, rosross. Historically speaking it seems to me that Russia has more to fear from Europe than Europe has to fear from Russia. Let’s face it, both the French and the Germans marched through to Ukraine to the outskirts of Moscow, and now with an American led coup (see Cori Bernardi this morning https://www.corybernardi.com.au/posts/american-origins-of-ukraine-crisis/) and Biden announcing a plan for “regime change” I think Russia was entitled to feel nervous – even to the point perhaps of contemplating a pre-emptive first strike to preserve its “buffer zone”? The idea that Russia, with an economy about the size of Italy’s represents a threat to Europe/NATO seems a bit far-fetched.
The way Australia falls in behind all the WEF’s globalist agenda tells me we are no longer a sovereign democratic country but just another arm of the WEF – and I never signed up for that.
Any reading of the history and from noted American diplomats and political analysts makes it clear that US/Nato/Ukrainian aggression toward Russia has been underway for decades.
I have no doubt the Americans would have done the same if the Mexicans or Canadians had sought to enter into a military alliance with China and if the Chinese had staged a coup in either country to toss out pro-American Governments, as happened in Ukraine with the help of the CIA.
If the Americans can get hysterical about Russian missiles in Cuba, they can hardly blame the Russians for being concerned about US/Nato missile bases along their border with plans to extend them through Ukraine. Not to mention 46 biolabs in Ukraine set up by the US. The Americans would be apoplectic if that happened in Canada or Mexico.
One can only conclude the Americans worked to create this war which is why Russia deserves to win it.
Koutsafti:
Michael mate, I visited Russia in 2007 and in my opinion, you are dead wrong on almost everything you have written. You were wrong in your 2015 piece on the Greeks because in spite of their never ending political, economic and security chaos, Greece is and hopefully will remain, an oasis of civilized sanity. You should be very worried about the self inflicted wounds of our adopted Australia. You arrived here as a refugee, I was a ‘New Australian’ after the war to a proud, prosperous and victorious nation. Australia’s culture was young and vibrant then, it is being cancelled now by the same woke madness that has infected the West and is determined to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.
Supposed bias comes into it but many of my Russian family have been seduced by the western propaganda and are terrified although they have kids who might be called up. I lived and worked there from just after perestroika and went through all the tough times but Russia eventually powered ahead when The Ukraine hasn’t. Interference from the USA, think Clinton and the Biden family, internal corruption, Poroshenko using munitions banned from use on civilians in the Donbas area, forbidding the Russian language to be spoken in the Crimea. Remember what the USA did when Khrushchev started to build a missile base in Cuba so what would the USA do if Russia placed military bases close to the USA border in Canada, Mexico, and Cuba once more as they have done with NATO to hem Russia in. The western propaganda has been magnificent and unusually imaginative especially when earlier on they showed a supposedly lightly clad Ukrainian girl lambasting a Russian soldier, but the background was desert and in fact the TV clip was shot on the West Bank thousands of kilometres away ten years earlier. The negotiating table will resolve this and one hopes the likes of Boris Johnson won’t interfere with a negotiated treaty between both places as he did when they were about to sign one before.
Well said. However there can be no negotiated treaty unless the Americans come to their senses and decide to end this war they created. Nato is gutless, the Ukrainians only care about creaming off more money – only the US can bring peace and from the look of it, that is the last thing they want.
Agree with rosross “A worthy article but Dr Galak still ignores the historical facts and realities as to why Russia has gone to war to protect the ethnic Russians in Ukraine.”
The root causes of this skirmish are being concealed by the post-modern, horrible method of staying quiet when an answer is expected. Abrogation of accountability.
Michael Galak, you captured the Australian way very well.. Thank you from a 5th gen Aussie. Geoff S
I don’t think Putin cares too much about ethnic Russians in Ukraine when you consider how little cares about the welfare of Russians in Russia.
@Stephen,
Since Putin has worked hard to improve life for Russians, and crack down on corruption,one can suppose the high level of support he has from the Russian people indicates he has had success. You are wrong since the Russians are the best source of information in regard to how Putin is seen. Some 75% of Russians approve of Putin.
Perhaps take the time to do a little research. It is wonderful at diluting and dismissing prejudice and ignorance. And you will find that Putin has been fighting for the rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine for many years. That is what the Minsk Agreement which the Americans told the Ukrainians to ditch was about.
I’d venture to guess that Kim Jong-un’s approval ratings would be even higher than Putin’s; that does not mean anything in a dictatorship. Putin is not just a thug to neighbouring countries; he has not exactly been kind to those who have dared to oppose him–including protesters against the current war.
Brilliantly articulated, Dr. Galak — as a child of refugee parents myself, I couldn’t have stated it better, although we did arrive here 30 years before you (my parents just happen to have grown up in the areas of current heaviest fighting, but I still have relatives living there).
However, I am stunned by the vehement negative responses, above, especially by those of rosross, to your perfectly reasonable statements. Their underlying ignorance and prejudice, as revealed by the usual conspiracy theories, is a real worry. They go on and on about Putin having to respond to NATO’s “aggression”, yet never provide a single example. Then rosross writes ” Nato is gutless, the Ukrainians only care about creaming off more money”. Can’t she see her own self-contradiction here? NATO has always been a pussycat, albeit a convenient scapegoat for the Russian bear. And isn’t it obvious what’s driving Putin, the world’s richest man? It’s most definitely not love of his fellow Russians (who, in my view, and experience, are the same as Ukrainians, even though they’re now being forced to split into two separate ethnicities). He’s a narcissistic psychopath (now transformed to sociopath) running the world’s largest auto-kleptocracy. All of his actions are driven by his need to protect himself from his own people, whose resources he has methodically stolen, and who inevitably will rise up in rebellion, so his demise is not going to be pretty, for anyone. As all demagogues know, the best way to unite a population is to conjure up a convenient external enemy, Ukraine being Putin’s latest choice — now obviously his worst, and no doubt final (unless he goes nuclear) mistake. Even his own elaborate propaganda machine is having increasing difficulty in supporting his bizarre charade.
Essential reading for anyone interested in this (as all responsible citizens should be) are Bill Browder’s two exceptional, spine-chilling books: “Red Notice” and “Freezing Order”. I’d strongly advise well-intentioned but naive ideologues to keep quiet on this issue until they’ve read both these books.
@pmprociv,
Browder is a fiction writer and propagandist. Perhaps if you stick with those who are really informed you might have a better grasp of the issue.
You said: However, I am stunned by the vehement negative responses, above, especially by those of rosross, to your perfectly reasonable statements.
You may well call FACTS negative but they remain facts. In regard to Russia the author is clearly prejudiced and has not made perfectly reasonable statements.
US/Nato aggression toward Russia has been long documented. Historical facts.
Quote:
The dean of America’s Russia experts, George F. Kennan, had called the expansion of NATO into Central Europe “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” Kennan, the architect of America’s post-World War II strategy of containment of the Soviet Union, believed, as did most other Russia experts in the United States, that expanding NATO would damage beyond repair U.S. efforts to transform Russia from enemy to partner.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-u-s-decision-to-enlarge-nato-how-when-why-and-what-next/
John Joseph Mearsheimer is an American political scientist and international relations scholar, who belongs to the realist school of thought. He is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago. He has been described as the most influential realist of his generation.
The Russians have been protesting for two decades and in 2015 the noted American political analyst, John Mearsheimer gave a lecture about the dangers of the American policy of aggression toward Russia, using Nato, and warned that the outcome would be Ukraine destroyed. He and many others were ignored.
In 2014 the CIA launched a coup in Ukraine which threw out the pro-Russian, democratically elected President and replaced him with a pro-US stooge. The Ukrainians then tossed out the Minsk agreement and increased their attacks on ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine. The Russians warned them this would not be tolerated. THE UKRAINIANS AND THEIR AMERICAN MINDERS IGNORED THE RUSSIANS.
You can be certain, by the time of the CIA coup the Russians were well aware that American aggression was going to increase and they began planning to defend their borders. Why would they not? The Americans threatened nuclear war when the Russians tried to set up a missile base in Cuba, far from their borders, so why would they be surprised at the Russian response? UNLESS THIS WAR WAS WHAT THE AMERICANS WANTED.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
The dean of America’s Russia experts, George F. Kennan, had called the expansion of NATO into Central Europe “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” Kennan, the architect of America’s post-World War II strategy of containment of the Soviet Union, believed, as did most other Russia experts in the United States, that expanding NATO would damage beyond repair U.S. efforts to transform Russia from enemy to partner.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-u-s-decision-to-enlarge-nato-how-when-why-and-what-next/
Thanks Michael for your obviously heartfelt piece.
Arguments by assertion, particularly when they imply motives in the mind of someone not know personally, and even more particularly when we are continually bombarded with what the media wants to tell us, and show us in the form of obviously staged pictures, many in other parts of the world, plus anecdotal, prejudicial information bordering on gossip, I think can be placed in the category of opinion.
Good comments, and I tend to lean in the direction of those of jjprineas….. and similar…..in my own opinion of course.
CONTEXT.
But by pretending that history started with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the story is made simple, a clear case of right and wrong. And while it is true that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine and so is responsible for the present war, such a Manichean telling of the story does little to further informed policy discussion. Indeed, that is precisely the point: to ignore the decades of declared Russian security interests in the orientation of states directly at its border, as well as to obscure a history of US meddling in Ukraine.
So unless you think context is irrelevant, that recent history is unimportant to understanding current crises, here are four things you aren’t supposed to say about Ukraine but that are absolutely true and that all Americans should be aware of before forming a hasty opinion regarding a deadly serious matter that until a few weeks ago most knew nothing about.
The “Revolution of Dignity” Was a US-Backed Coup.
There Is a Significant Neo-Nazi Problem in Ukraine
The Russians Always Objected to NATO Expansion into Ukraine
Biden Could Have Prevented the War
https://mises.org/wire/facing-unpleasant-facts-what-you-arent-supposed-say-about-war-ukraine-0
Putin murders and imprisons political competition.
Putin is wealthy.
Putin has a Palace.
Putin considers himself a Christian.
The worlds people aren’t falling over themselves to move to socialist/ communist countries.
People living in communist socialist places want to move out of them.
***
As usual Micheal another brilliant article from you, who knows BS when he sees it.
ITS A BRAVO FROM ME TOO..
WE CAN ALL DO WITHOUT THE LIKES OF THE ATTITUDE OF THE IGOR’S OF THIS WORLD.
You said: Putin murders and imprisons political competition.
Those are claims unproven. And since the US leaders murder and imprison (Julian Assange etc.) political opponents internationally, you can hardly point the finger at Putin even if you could prove your claims.
You said: Putin is wealthy.
Is he? And if he is, how is that different to Biden being wealthy, Trump being wealthy and many other leaders being wealthy?
You said: Putin has a Palace.
Because he is President of an ancient country with many palaces. Biden has the White House, the UK leader has Downing Street, the French leader has some pretty impressive accommodation, the Oz PM has Kirribilli on the Harbour and the Lodge. And your point would be.
You said: Putin considers himself a Christian.
Putin is a committed Russian Orthodox christian. Yes.
You said: The worlds people aren’t falling over themselves to move to socialist/ communist countries.
People living in communist socialist places want to move out of them.
This is off-tangent since Russia is neither socialist nor communist. Your point fails to register. Did you not hear the Soviet Union fell in 1991 and that was the end of Communist Russia.
Having spent a lot of time in Russia I can assure you the people would love their country to be socialist again but it is not. Capitalism reigns in Russia as it does in China.
Insult someone else’s intelligence.
Thanks for responding, rosross. It’s clear to me just how one’s ideological filters and lenses can skew interpretations of history, and those authors you mention are just as susceptible (Mearsheimer is a strident “useful idiot”, or Putin apologist; much of his stuff that I read is way off beam). I used to be a rabid communist and Russia apologist, no doubt a result my exposure to parents with strong sympathies to their homelands — to which they decided never to return, despite eventually having the means to do so. Having travelled extensively through Russia in 2005, confronting widespread corruption, talking to locals (yes, my dormant memories of my first language did resurrect) and visiting relatives (some of whom then came out here as my guests), my eyes were finally opened to the very sad truths on the ground. Stumbling across old Soviet military bases and still-functioning Gulag outposts were revelations. I could write a book, but that would make no difference to naive believers in Putin’s goodwill and the West’s perpetual malevolence.
BTW, you still haven’t provided a single example of NATO’s aggression towards Russia.
And have you actually read Browder, or listened to his talks? A recent one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkZMH7mx2nE
A parallel situation is to be found among apologists for that sleazy Putin-lover, Trump, also a kleptocratic, narcissistic psychopath (restrained only by the barely still-functioning institutions of a struggling democracy). It strains my credulity to encounter educated and apparently intelligent folk who still fervently believe that his election was “stolen”, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary (many of whom inhabit these pages, most surprisingly and disappointingly; they give Quadrant an undeserved bad name). It’s no different from religious belief — which is essentially what conspiracy theories are. People cling to them for underlying, mysterious, personal reasons, impossible for others (or even themselves) to figure out. That’s why the world will always be a mess.
@prociv,
yes, I know the Russia/Putin haters describe Mearsheimer as you do but I would advise you and others to listen to what he says in terms of the facts. Facts are above apologists.
You said: you still haven’t provided a single example of NATO’s aggression towards Russia.
But I have. You chose to ignore the realities. If the Americans had kept their promise that Nato would not move one inch closer to Russia after the Soviet Union fell in 1991 then one could not claim Nato aggression.
However, Nato has done nothing but creep closer to Russia, ringing it with US/Nato military installations which to anyone sane person constitutes aggression. If the Americans could get hysterical about Russian military bases in Cuba because they deemed it aggression, then Nato swallowing up countries along Russia’s border was certainly aggression.
Russia went along with it but said Nyet to Ukraine. They were ignored. US/Nato have had military bases in Ukraine for many years, they set up 46 biolabs, they staged a coup to throw out the pro-Russian President.
ALL OF THAT IS NATO AGGRESSION ALONG WITH US AGGRESSION. All of that makes Bay of Pigs look benign.
Your digression into Trump is about as ill-informed, irrelevant and nonsensical as your opinions on Russia.
But prejudice does that and it is a pity that some are unable to let go of past wrongs, real and imagined, and keep an objective mind to process facts.
I started watching but it is a book promotion. He is hardly qualified in the field. No doubt the book is fascinating but I suspect has about as much substance as the charges and claims made by disaffected expat Russians. That was clearly demonstrated in the Iraq fiasco where the US relied on statements from disaffected Iraqi expats.
The problem with people having an agenda is that they have an agenda. This is the problem with Dr Michael Galak – he writes from a place of prejudice and is subjective not objective. Browder is the same.
It all makes for entertainment and excellent book sales but it does not amount to facts or credible information. Browder is in essence a fiction writer like Bruce Pascoe, drawing upon some facts and much imagination. I do not consider Pascoe to be a reliable source of information on Australian history and therefore do not consider Browder to be reliable on Russia or Putin. Browder has too many axes to grind to even be considered reliable as a source of information.
May I just say the only ideological filters I have are the defence of principles of fact and truth. I find prejudice and bias to be destructive forces and believe that the childish idea that war can be reduced to good and evil or goodies and baddies, creates more war not less.
Any knowledge of the history of Russia and their suffering explains their tendency to fear and paranoia about being threatened. Any knowledge of the past few decades since the Soviet Union fell makes it very clear the Americans have worked to keep Russia as an enemy.
Any knowledge of US history makes it clear they are serial and serious warmongers and will stop at nothing to gain and retain hegemonic power in the world.
Any knowledge of military history makes it very clear that wars happen for all sorts of reasons and each side commits evil and acts for a good in which it believes.
It is called perspective. Russia is doing exactly what the Americans would do if the Canadians or Mexicans were stupid enough to do with China what the Ukrainians were doing with US/Nato. Let us not add hypocrisy and double standards to prejudice and ignorance.
Looks like our worldviews are so wide apart that we’ll never agree, rosross.
I don’t consider building up one’s defences, against possible future attack (a reasonable precaution, given what’s just happened), to be aggression. If that’s the worst NATO has done, you don’t have a case. Hasn’t Russia been building up its forces for yonks? Is that aggression, in your view? And you’d suggest that attacking Ukraine wasn’t aggression, but self-defence? Against NATO?! Orwell would be laughing.
As for Browder, you’ve obviously written the bloke off without having any idea of where he’s coming from, based on a brief look at that video. There’s a strong reason he’s needed to promote his books, and my guess is you’re afraid to confront it. Sad. Why are you so enamoured of Putin?
Do you ever wonder about how much anti-Western propaganda emanates from well-paid Western pundits, freely and even for profit, or whether comparable anti-establishment commentary would be possible within Russia? Or what sort of world we’d now have if the USA hadn’t entered either world war, or wasn’t the leading hegemon now? Do you think we’d be happier with Russia and/or China in charge?
@pmprociv,
you said: I don’t consider building up one’s defences, against possible future attack (a reasonable precaution, given what’s just happened), to be aggression.
So by that principle you support the Russians.
You said: If that’s the worst NATO has done, you don’t have a case.
So you believe the Americans were wrong to threaten nuclear war over Russian bases in Cuba? Far, far, far from US borders, unlike the US/Nato aggression on Russia’s borders.
You said: Hasn’t Russia been building up its forces for yonks? Is that aggression, in your view?
Hasn’t the US been building up its forces for yonks. Is that aggression in your view?
The US has been ringing Russia with its military bases for decades. Is that aggression in your view?
If Russia or China were ringing the US with military bases would that be aggression in your view?
You said: As for Browder, you’ve obviously written the bloke off without having any idea of where he’s coming from, based on a brief look at that video.
I read a lot and have an open mind in regard to sources. But, after many years in the media, I can pick book sales spin from a distance. He also has no professional credibility and I have met a lot of people like him after living for decades in India and Africa. Good fiction and entertaining but not reliable in terms of facts. I read quite a bit about him and know enough to know listening to him is a waste of time.
I will stick with credible sources who have a long history of professional experience.
You said:. Why are you so enamoured of Putin?
I am not. I simply defend principles of reason, justice and common sense. The Russians like Putin and he is their business just as many Americans liked Trump and he was their business. Having read quite a few of Putin’s speeches, and then compared them to the Western translations, I can see he makes a lot of sense and is probably more intelligent than many American Presidents. That is not to say he is perfect or cannot get things wrong, but, neither is he a fanatic.
I know enough of the history to know this war was made in the USA over decades and to have perspective on Russia’s response. I also know enough Russian history to understand their paranoia about being attacked by the West.
You said: Do you ever wonder about how much anti-Western propaganda emanates from well-paid Western pundits, freely and even for profit, or whether comparable anti-establishment commentary would be possible within Russia?
I find the hatred of the West and its culture, which is sourced in the West, to be concerning. For all of its faults the modern or Western world is the best we have as yet. And Russia with a rich history of interaction with the West has more in common with the West than anything else. Which is why the American warmongering is such a tragedy. After 1991 Russia should have been taken into the West. The Americans prevented that.
You said: Or what sort of world we’d now have if the USA hadn’t entered either world war, or wasn’t the leading hegemon now?
Hypothetical. Who knows? given the carnage the Americans have wrought with their wars we might have had a more peaceful world. One could argue if Napoleon had won and unified Europe would there have been less war? Who knows?
You said: Do you think we’d be happier with Russia and/or China in charge?
I fail to see why anyone has to be in charge. The Americans want to be in charge but they are not. They are just the latest bullies on the block.
What I do know is that we need a bi-polar world so there is a force at work to keep the Americans in check and to make them think twice before rampaging around destroying another country.
After all the heat, noise, dust and smoke triggered by this “open letter” have dissipated, does anyone have any idea of who its recipient, Dear Igor, might be? Is he a real person, or a hypothetical “straw man”? I’m just curious — although people like him really do exist, and not only among immigrants from Russia, but from just about everywhere else. Nostalgia is a universal human characteristic (a flaw, some might say), with varying degrees of expectations, entitlements and disappointments.
@pmrociv,
My question also. On this we agree.
rosross says: “it is true that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine and so is responsible for the present war”. Finally she acknowledges this most fundamental truth. No amount of polemic will change that.
.
pmprociv says; “one’s ideological filters and lenses can skew interpretations of history”. Exactly, for example, the fact of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was interpreted as a good thing by them and a bad thing by the U.S.
@Brian Boru,
Misquoting is a very bad look.
I DID NOT SAY:
“it is true that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine and so is responsible for the present war”.
I quoted someone who said it but I DID NOT SAY IT.
Let me qualify. I interpret that statement to mean in literal terms Putin made a decision to go to war to protect Russia’s security and ethnic Russians in Ukraine, and to counter US/Nato aggression.
So, yes, Russia/Putin could have opted not to go to war but they have done so, in the face of much provocation. Just as the British triggered World War Two by opting to go to war with Germany. Whose fault was that war? See how complex it all is?
So, yes, Putin opted for war to counter US/Nato aggression but since US/Nato aggression came first, while Putin shoulders responsibility for resorting to war, the Americans and Europeans are equally if not more to blame for pushing Russia into that position.
I see you are a literalist which explains why you get so much wrong missing the nuances.
Under the heading of CONTEXT it certainly seemed to me that’s what you said and meant. Maybe I misunderstood your statement, it certainly surprised me. You could clarify it for me, if you were to mention exactly who you were quoting.
I provided the link at the bottom. I should have prefaced it all with the word QUOTE. Mea Culpa.
You can read the complete article here:
https://mises.org/wire/facing-unpleasant-facts-what-you-arent-supposed-say-about-war-ukraine-0
So you quoted Joseph Solis-Mullen but you would not agree with the statement he made and you quoted to justify your position?
.
Your mea culpa is accepted but as a skilled journalist please try to be more careful and use quotation marks so that you don’t in future mislead a simple person who might miss the nuances.
Yes, agree I was remiss in not including quotations.
However, let it be known that when I post information it is to help inform others who appear to be struggling from a base of ignorance. It does not mean I agree with everything said in any article or source which is presented.
As to Zelensky being a stooge, there is plenty of information.
It is clear the Americans were behind the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Ergo, those who came to power after that coup would have been put in place by the Americans who did literally handpick the first replacements when the democratically elected President was ousted.
Quote: Even from a blinkered American perspective, the whole Western plan was a dangerous game of bluff, enacted for reasons that are hard to fathom. Ukraine is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a vital security interest of the United States. In fact, Ukraine hardly matters at all…. In contrast, for Russia—with its 1,200-mile shared border and its history of three major land-route invasions from the West, the most recent of which, during World War II, caused the death of roughly 13 percent of the entire Russian population—Ukraine is the most vital of national interests. (pp. 60–61, emphasis removed)
The underlying cause of the war lies not in an unbridled expansionism of Mr. Putin, or in paranoid delusions of military planners in the Kremlin, but in a 30-year history of Western provocations, directed at Russia, that began during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and continued to the start of the war. These provocations placed Russia in an untenable situation, for which war seemed, to Mr. Putin and his military staff, the only workable solution. (p. 7)
Abelow documents his thesis to the hilt, placing great emphasis on the promise of the United States to refrain from expansion of NATO to Russia’s borders. Supporters of current US policy have countered by pointing out that the United States made no written commitment to this effect, but this is a mere technicality, and the weight of the evidence supports the Russian view of the question.
In describing this episode, I am not suggesting that Western assurances were legally binding, or that the violation of these assurances fully explains Russia’s invasion of Ukraine … I simply want to note that the West acted in a way calculated to deceive Moscow, and this episode laid the foundation for the evolving Russian sense that NATO, and the United States in particular, could not be trusted. (p. 12)
In the years since this broken promise, the US has continued a policy of provocation and hostility.
In late 2013 and early 2014, anti-government protests occurred in Independence Square in Kiev. These protests, which were supported by the United States, were subverted by violent provocateurs. The violence culminated in a coup in which armed, far-right Ukrainian ultra-nationalists took over government buildings and forced the democratically-elected pro-Russian president to flee the country. (p. 15)
It soon afterward came to light that Virginia Nuland, a neoconservative warmonger of long standing, and some of her colleagues had a hand in these developments.
As if this were not enough, the United States has again and again stated an intention to admit the Ukraine to NATO, in the face of Putin’s repeated declarations that this would be an intolerable state of affairs for Russia.
It would be a serious mistake to discount Abelow as unduly pro-Russian in his sympathies. The efforts he supports to secure a peaceful settlement by making concessions to Russia are in the best interests of the Ukrainians themselves, even those hostile to Russia. True friends of Ukraine should not send vast amounts of military aid to the intransigent Zelensky regime: that is the way to what Kant in another context aptly calls the peace of the graveyard.
Mises Institute. How The West Brought War to Ukraine.
“It does not mean I agree with everything said in any article or source which is presented.”. Very slippery, it also means that we cannot know which parts of anything you quote to support your position is intended to support your position.
.
Which ultimately means that we cannot take anything you quote as justifying your position.
.
“it is true that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine and so is responsible for the present war”. This is a most fundamental truth. No amount of polemic will change that and it was said by Joseph Solis-Mullen of the Mises Institute in an article which you have relied on.
@Brian Boru,
I have absolutely no problem with my posts being seen as information rather than seeking to prove a position. You can take that approach with my blessing.
As to your dependence on the quote regarding Putin, I repeat, as a literalist you seem unable to process nuance.
Yes, this war exists because Putin took military action to defend Russia and ethnic Russians in Ukraine. We can accept the literal conflict began at that point.
However, since the situation was set up by the US and Nato, logic decrees that they bear the greatest responsibility for this war even if we accept that Putin resorting to war because of their aggression, places responsibility on his shoulders also.
And:
Anatomy of a Coup: How CIA front laid foundations for Ukraine war https://mronline.org/2022/07/06/anatomy-of-a-coup/
Quote: Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs “Toria” Nuland was the “mastermind” behind the Feb. 22, 2014 “regime change” in Ukraine, plotting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych while convincing the ever-gullible US mainstream media that the coup wasn’t really a coup but a victory for “democracy.”
Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who pushed for the Ukraine coup and helped pick the post-coup leaders.
https://truthout.org/articles/the-ukraine-mess-that-nuland-made/
Since the Americans were behind the regime-change in Ukraine, then logic decrees they were behind Zelensky’s elevation in some way. Zelensky works for one of the most powerful and corrupt oligarchs in Ukraine who no doubt is working for someone else. That is how it goes.
rosross I love your writing.
In my humble opinion your interpretation of the Ukraine/Russia situation is absolutely spot on..
A “left” mind ALWAYS sees things differently. 100% all of the time. Yet it is conservatives who end up, and very predictably, being correct!
It is one of the mysteries I can’t fathom. I have a few theories.
In comments above you said that Zelensky was put there by “them” as a puppet in 2014. So far you have admitted that you were wrong with the date of his election. However you have not provided any evidence to back up your statement about him being “put there” despite being twice requested by me to do so.
.
Please provide your evidence.
@Edwina,
thanks, but I would not describe myself as Left. Indeed, in my time I have been called a right-wing redneck and a tree-hugging Leftie nutter so I feel I have bases well covered.
@rosross.
Oh dear! I am so sorry! I have caused you some confusion.
I wasn’t referring to you as having a “LEFT” brain. God forbid that! The total opposite in fact.
I was referring ONLY to those who are not seeing the Russia/Ukraine situation as clearly and as correctly as you do and can’t be convinced otherwise with facts!
I hope it is clear now.
@Edwina,
The medium promotes confusion. All good. Clear now.
Sorry, rosross, but are you saying that Britain was responsible for WW11 by declaring war on Germany? If so, wow! That is truly revealing of your views on world history. And, of course, Hitler was forced into attacking the USSR — not his fault at all. Same for killing all those Jews, and other enemies and provocateurs — they had it coming.
@pmprociv,
you said: but are you saying that Britain was responsible for WW11 by declaring war on Germany?
No, I am saying that by declaring war on Germany Britain expanded the war. Many played a part in creating WWII and indeed, the punitive measures imposed on Germany after WWI were a major factor in the path to war.
I am saying there are not simply goodies and baddies. War is more complex than that as any reading of military history demonstrates.
My views on world history are always sourced in historical facts, context and perspective. You should try it.
You said: And, of course, Hitler was forced into attacking the USSR — not his fault at all.
NEVER SAID THAT.
You said: Same for killing all those Jews, and other enemies and provocateurs — they had it coming.
NEVER SAID THAT.
It is unwise to seek to put things into the mouths of others.
And please, let us have some context because while the Nazis were responsible for many atrocities, so too have been many nations in the name of war. Read carefully of the horrors the Americans inflicted on the Vietnamese in the name of US hegemony. Then follow it up with what they did to the Iraqis, Afghans, Libyans, all in the name of US military dominance.
To prevent war we have to understand it and to know that evil exists in all people and the Stalin’s, Hitlers, Pol Pots of the world were not the worst, not the first and tragically not the last.
@Brian Boru,
Worth exploring the historical data on the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour. American actions contributed to that attack, as indeed is the case in Ukraine. Some things do not change. And if the Americans were not smart enough to work out their destructive sanctions which were designed to destroy Japan would not bring a response like the attack on Pearl Harbour, then they were truly stupid. Some things do not change.
I quoted the Pearl Harbor attack only as an example of more than one interpretation being able to be drawn from a fact according to prejudices. But since you have again used it to vent your prejudice, I would opine that the US sanctions were a direct response to Japan’s belligerent expansion across Asia. The Japanese did not stop at the Nanjing massacre and who knows how far they may have come in pursuit of their Co-Prosperity Sphere without the US. opposing them. Appeasement has been a proven failure at stopping aggressors.
I have no illusions about the horrors perpetrated by the Japanese. However, in understanding war, we need to understand all actions. And let us not ignore the horrors the Americans perpetrated in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. The Japanese are hardly alone in their capacity for atrocities.
Indeed the greatest war crime, possibly plural, ever committed was the Americans dropping the atomic bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. One might argue one bomb but the second was certainly a war crime of horrific proportions.
The history reveals that the Americans knew the war was over, Japan was finished as an opponent, but they dropped the bombs to test them and to send a message to Russia.
So, let us not point fingers at others when atrocities are writ large in the history of all nations and none more so than the US.
Jeez, rosross, you need to do a bit more reading. After the horrors of Okinawa, where US soldiers faced civilians, including women and children armed with pitchforks, they were terrified of the prospect of an invasion of the Japanese mainland. The best guesses indicated a war of at least 6-12 months, with millions of casualties. After the Hiroshima bomb, Truman sent an ultimatum to Japan: surrender, or there’ll be more. With no reply, he ordered the next one, on Nagasaki. Again, there was still no reply, for about a week! Trouble is, the US didn’t have another one up its sleeve (it was still being assembled), so there was great relief when the Japanese finally capitulated.
And for those who cry racism, the atom bomb had been intended for use on Germany, which collapsed a lot faster than anticipated. The big fear had been that Hitler would get one before the Allies did.
Regardless, neither of those bombs did as much damage as the carpet-bombing raids on Tokyo, when one raid killed far higher numbers of people. And without those bombs, the world would have been ignorant of their devastating effects, so no doubt they’d have been used far more liberally in subsequent wars; as it happens, nobody has been game to use one since, so we should be grateful. That’s why your mate Vlad can threaten us so readily, causing so much angst in the West. Nobody is threatening him with N-weapons.
You need to read deeper and wider.
you said: The best guesses indicated a war of at least 6-12 months, with millions of casualties.
That was and is American propaganda. The dropping of the bombs on two cities was to kill civilians. It was NOT an attack on Japanese military and the war was over by the time they were used. The atomic bombs were a terrorist attack to terrorise the Japanese people, and to send a message to Russia and to test the bombs.
Quote: In the article originally published to mark the 70th anniversary of the events that led to the end of World War II, the author, Gar Alperovitz, reminds us that almost every US military leader at the time counseled against dropping the bomb. It cites the testimony of Admiral William Leahy, President Harry Truman’s chief of staff; Henry “Hap” Arnold, the commanding general of the US Army Air Forces; Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz, commander-in-chief of the Pacific Fleet; and Admiral William “Bull” Halsey Jr., commander of the US Third Fleet.
All these senior officers agreed that “the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment.” Even Major General Curtis LeMay, who nearly 30 years later tried to push John F. Kennedy into a nuclear war with the Soviet Union during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, agreed that “the atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.”
General Dwight Eisenhower, the future president, also believed “that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.” But Eisenhower added this consideration of profound geopolitical importance, which directly contradicts the official pretext given by the government and repeated in the official narrative, that thousands of American soldiers would die in the final assault on Japan. “I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives,” he said.
Source: Fair Observer – The Mother of All War Crimes
Historians know what official history has chosen to forget: The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the mother of all war crimes.
You said: Nobody is threatening him with N-weapons.
Hmmm, so why the need to ring Russia with US/Nato military bases if it was not a threat? And by your criteria, neither were the Russians threatening the US with N-weapons in Cuba but the Americans got hysterical and threatened nuclear war to make the Russians back down?
You seem very selective in your approach. Every Nato nation on Russia’s border threatens the Russians with nuclear attack. Join the real world.
The trouble with this, Rosross, is that you are presenting as unarguable fact what is in fact a jumble of one person’s assertions (Alperovitz) and opinions. It’s far from clear, as you suggest, that there was any opposition to the use of the bomb at the time, and repeating your glib assertion that the war was over doesn’t make it so. There is no question that the invasion of Japan would likely have cost a seven figure number of allied deaths and injuries. Your statement that “almost every US military leader at the time counselled against dropping the bomb” is simply untrue, and Alperovitz doesn’t even say it. The distinguished emeritus professor of history at Stanford, Barton Bernstein, has written about the absence of any “solid evidence that any high-ranking American military leader, other than General George C. Marshall on one occasion, expressed moral objections before Hiroshima to the use of the atomic bomb on Japanese cities. Nor, before Hiroshima, did any other top military leader — Admiral William Leahy, Admiral Ernest King, or General Henry Arnold – ever raise a political or military objection to the use of the A-bomb on Japanese cities or argue explicitly that it would be unnecessary. Only after the war would Leahy utter moral and political objections.” (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01402398708437307)
Your frequent admonition to others to “join the real word” is something that you should also ponder on.
@sindri,
We all know that history is a diverse feast presenting plates of varying interpretations.
So, let us accept for the moment your view of it that Japan was not finished. My question then is, given the horrors of the Atomic bomb and the impact dropping it would have, why not just drop one?
Why the second bomb which was certainly the worst war crime in recorded history?
And, why drop an atomic bomb on civilians if the belief was the Japanese had a military capacity?
In answering my questions your position is destroyed which is why you will not answer them.
Japan didn’t even respond to the US ultimatum after the first bomb and indeed gave every indication that it would fight on. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when used it to champion one’s own ideological views. Millions of US service personnel had either been killed or injured by this point in the war. A land invasion of Japan threatened, with truly massive deaths and injuries in prospect. Truman took the decision he did against all of that background. Yes, I know what you say about the war being over, I’ve read it, so no need to post it again. Our view of these matters is far apart and we will not persuade each other. The only reason I have replied here is your rather strange assertion that I had no answer.
Rosross, seeing we’ve strayed well beyond the boundaries of the original topic, and the real world calls, I’ll have to make this my last comment here. My views on the A-bombs are based on first-hand accounts by frontline soldiers, military leaders, politicians and journalists at the time, not the vague, politically-driven reminiscences of various old farts decades later. No doubt the countless impacts (unintended pun) of those bombs had been debated endlessly by key players before their deployment, but there’s no question that their prime, in fact only, purpose, was to end that war, as fast as possible. Stalin probably knew more about the internal workings of the Manhattan Project than either Truman or Churchill, when they got together at Potsdam, and even had his own teams already working on their own copies of the bomb.
Had the USA been so hateful and/or frightened of the USSR at the time, why didn’t it simply nuke the place, then and there, while it had the upper hand, as you claim Curtis LeMay (and perhaps MacArthur) advocated? Looking back, that might have been a far better option, not only for the rest of the world, but for the Soviet denizens as well. They could then have had their own version of a Marshall Plan, ending up like West Germany, rather than the East Germany of the Warsaw Pact. Would have averted the Cold War, too . . . one can dream on.
Don’t be put off by our discussions — while they only occasionally change my views, they always serve to sharpen up my thinking. And, given your exhaustive reading, you’ll have no trouble digesting Browder; he’ll only take a day of your time, and definitely is not a con man! Putin hates him vehemently, for very good reason: Browder is unravelling the mysteries of Putin’s dispersed wealth. You’ll put be off Putin for life, guaranteed; sure took the scales from my eyes (like Peter O’Brien did, re. “Dark Emu’). Regardless, Putin won’t be around for much longer (I think the Russian people will lynch him), so it’s merely an academic issue at this point.
@pmprociv,
You appear to be an intelligent individual which is why I find it so odd that you would believe anything someone like Browder has to say.
He has an axe to grind against Putin, who did work hard to stop corruption, and he is looking to sell his book. Two counts against his credibility.
I can’t keep up with real reading let alone dabbling in a Browder.
Me again, rosross; couldn’t avoid returning to see if you’d responded, nor resisting this reply. You strike me as a highly intelligent, widely read person, too. And all your comments serve to further convince me just how overloaded we’ve become with “data”, a veritable deluge of facts, opinions, misinformation and disinformation, much of it apparently sophisticated (specious), often taken out of context, and all so readily accessed via the internet. Seeing it’s impossible for one person to sort through even a tiny fraction of this morass, most people trawl along narrow paths, and interpret, what interests them, i.e. best fits/supports their worldview. This means cherry-picking stuff from what your fine-tooth comb has scraped up,
Starting as an idealist, then transforming into a sceptic and then cynic, over many years of direct experience in with various administrative organisations, I’m highly suspicious of all conspiracy theories (nobody ever could be so well organised, especially on an international scale, when most would have trouble running even a pub chook-raffle) — which is what all the anti-West/anti-USA hysteria (including much among these responses) boils down to. My background has finely tuned me to “leftist”, Marxist, pro-Russian and pro-Soviet thinking (hell, I still get nostalgic twinges that way even now, but fight hard to resist them).
And many commentators often forget that democratic, Western administrations chop and change frequently, so that supposed themes and motives also come and go, unlike autocratic dictatorships, run by obsessive kleptocrats. And yet, on the global scale, the flow of refugees is forever Westward, even out of Putin’s “reformed” Russia . . .
Being highly tuned into quirks of human nature, personal perceptions and motivations, I try hard to get into the minds of those who think differently from me. Your peremptory dismissal of Browder, without any knowledge of the man, where he comes from, or what he has to say, plus your frankly incredibly apologistic support for Putin, says it all — you’re comfortable with your settled worldview, and nobody’s going to change that. It’s no different from religious faith, which I understand. — and have learned not to argue about.
BTW, Browder happens to be one of my all-time heroes, an exceptionally courageous individual, whose painstaking and dangerous work deserves a Nobel Peace Prize; were he a mere conman, why on earth would Putin be wasting so much time and effort in trying to eliminate him? Perhaps you’d agree with Putin that Browder is Satan incarnate, which cannot be disproven.
@PROCIV,
You said; And all your comments serve to further convince me just how overloaded we’ve become with “data”, a veritable deluge of facts, opinions, misinformation and disinformation, much of it apparently sophisticated (specious), often taken out of context, and all so readily accessed via the internet.
Yes, I agree which is why it is important to ensure that sources of information have some level of credibility in a professional sense and why reading books is a critical balance for online sources. Also, there are reliable online sources and not so reliable. Discrimination is critical.
You said: Seeing it’s impossible for one person to sort through even a tiny fraction of this morass, most people trawl along narrow paths, and interpret, what interests them, i.e. best fits/supports their worldview. This means cherry-picking stuff from what your fine-tooth comb has scraped up,
Many do, certainly which is why it is very important to put together a foundation of facts before forming an opinion.
You said: Starting as an idealist, then transforming into a sceptic and then cynic, over many years of direct experience in with various administrative organisations, I’m highly suspicious of all conspiracy theories
My position also. And having lived in four African countries, India, Europe, UK, North America and spent a lot of time in Russia I do not for one moment believe that anyone can control the world as some claim. Influence certainly but control, never.
However, one critical lesson of the era of Covid has taught us that what is called a conspiracy theory is often an inconvenient fact.
You said:— which is what all the anti-West/anti-USA hysteria (including much among these responses) boils down to.
I am concerned at the hatefest toward the Western world in terms of its culture and traditions, much of it coming from within the West, but I have no problem recognising and factoring in the negatives of the Western world in general and of the US in particular. I have also spent a lot of time in the US, have family there and have read a lot of its history. Many of its mistakes come from too much, too soon, too easily and its adolescent nature of breaking away from ‘Mother” at too young and age and being gifted with wealth and power at a pubescent stage of national development.
I find the Americans problematic in their religious/naieve and mystical belief in their own exceptionalism and God-driven nature and cause. It is a deeply troubled culture and a highly aggressive if not paranoid one. We can be thankful that it does not lead the world as it claims to do and I for one believe a bi-polar world is far safer and healthier than a unipolar world where the Americans rampage around playing God, King, Emperor etc.
You said: My background has finely tuned me to “leftist”, Marxist, pro-Russian and pro-Soviet thinking (hell, I still get nostalgic twinges that way even now, but fight hard to resist them).
I have never had a Marxist or Soviet bent. I have long read Russian history and literature and find the country fascinating. Then again, the same applies to many other countries including the US so not particular to Russia.
You said: . And yet, on the global scale, the flow of refugees is forever Westward, even out of Putin’s “reformed” Russia . . .
Hardly surprising. Russia is poor and Western countries are rich by comparison. You might be surprised at how many Americans, the ones who can afford it, flee elsewhere.
You said:. Your peremptory dismissal of Browder, without any knowledge of the man, where he comes from, or what he has to say,
Your assume I have done no research into Browder. I did and so I have dismissed him with some knowledge of the man and his situation and wiith a keen ability to read human nature.
You said: plus your frankly incredibly apologistic support for Putin, says it all —
What have I said about Putin? I believe he is intelligent, much smarter than Biden, not hard, passionate about his country, his people and his religion, and a strong leader, which the Russians like.
I believe like all humans he has flaws but are they worse than many others? Given the propaganda levels about him who can say. The Russians like him and trust him and in my view that is all which matters. Our opinions are irrelevant.
I have a tendency to defend the underdog and I find the hysterical demonisation of Putin to be childish and concerning.
You said: you’re comfortable with your settled worldview, and nobody’s going to change that.
What settled worldview? You assume much. I come from a position of defending principles of justice, reason, rule of law, common sense, human decency and pragmatism in regard to the foibles of mere humans.
I have read the history and it is clear that the US created this war, either through stupidity or design, and the Russians have long had good cause to fear for the security of their borders. I also know the Americans have in the past reacted similarly with far less good cause.
You said: It’s no different from religious faith, which I understand. — and have learned not to argue about.
Forming opinions sourced in verifiable historical facts is not like a religious faith. I believe the Putin/Russia hatefest is far more like fanatical religious faith than anything I have said.
You said: BTW, Browder happens to be one of my all-time heroes, an exceptionally courageous individual, whose painstaking and dangerous work deserves a Nobel Peace Prize;
I gathered that. You are highly subjective in regard to Browder.
You said: were he a mere conman, why on earth would Putin be wasting so much time and effort in trying to eliminate him?
Putin, like most Russians, hates those who abuse and exploit Russia and he has worked to reduce corruption. If Browder is corrupt, as many who operate in Russia were and are, that would be enough reason for Putin to target him.
You said: Perhaps you’d agree with Putin that Browder is Satan incarnate, which cannot be disproven.
Putin is a conservative Christian. I am not. I don’t believe in Satan so your question is irrelevant.
You need to read deeper and wider.
You said: The best guesses indicated a war of at least 6-12 months, with millions of casualties.
That was and is American propaganda. The dropping of the bombs on two cities was to kill civilians. It was NOT an attack on Japanese military and the war was over by the time they were used. The atomic bombs were a terrorist attack to terrorise the Japanese people, and to send a message to Russia and to test the bombs. Source: Fair Observer – The Mother of All War Crimes Historians know what official history has chosen to forget: The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the mother of all war crimes.
You said: Nobody is threatening him with N-weapons. Hmmm, so why the need to ring Russia with US/Nato military bases if it was not a threat? And by your criteria, neither were the Russians threatening the US with N-weapons in Cuba but the Americans got hysterical and threatened nuclear war to make the Russians back down? You seem very selective in your approach. Every Nato nation on Russia’s border threatens the Russians with nuclear attack. Join the real world.
Can’t let this one pass, either. The A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed far fewer people than the carpet-bombing of Tokyo and those big German cities. And they did it far quicker, with no loss of service personnel (unlike possibly a million or more US soldiers predicted from a direct invasion of Japan). Sure, the images are frighteningly awe-inspiring, but only for movie viewers; it would look different from the ground (I’ve read eye-witness accounts, from both Japan and Germany). Given a choice, I’d much rather be evaporated instantly that cremated slowly. Anyone claiming that those A-bombs represent a war crime is an armchair virtue-signaller, displaying abject ignorance of reality, judging the past by today’s standards.
As for that “ring of N-weapons” circling Russia, how effective was it in preventing Putin’s attack on Ukraine? Or was Putin actually hoping for a nuclear response? (It should have happened, according to his propaganda.) And, seeing the Ukraine war is such a convenient provocation, why is NATO resisting the opportunity to obliterate Russia? Has it ever tried to before? We in the West can clearly see the agonising and debating going on daily among our political leaders about merely helping Ukraine with low-key conventional weapons, while Putin blusters to his own people about starting WWIII. Paranoia is a convenient national characteristic that has been fomented and actively exploited by Russian autocrats for centuries; it’s probably now genetically hardwired. Once Putin’s gone, it’s still going to be one huge, uphill struggle to bring some order to Russian society, for no-one will trust anyone else, and the opportunists will be out in force. Not something to be looked forwards to . . .
@prociv,
you miss the point, as you must no doubt, but the atomic bombs while a faster death than the fire-bombing of Dresden, another war crime, were still attacks on civilians, NOT MILITARY.
And while one might argue the first bomb, there is no defence for the second which represents the worst war crime in recorded history.
Forgive me if I am not swayed by your argument that the atomic bombs were more ‘humane.’ They were designed in the dropping to slaughter civilians in an act of terror – that is a war crime.
They were also dropped to test them – an even worse war crime. And dropped to send a message to the Russians – a clear war crime.
You said: As for that “ring of N-weapons” circling Russia, how effective was it in preventing Putin’s attack on Ukraine?
At least you admit their existence. After accepting the growing ring and categorically stating Ukraine was a step too far, the Russians knew it was time to act to weaken the ring.
You said: Or was Putin actually hoping for a nuclear response? (It should have happened, according to his propaganda.)
Why would he wish destruction on his people? I wonder how many speeches by Putin you have watched and how many translations of them you have read. But please, cite your sources for the claim Putin expected a nuclear attack in the present time, as opposed to the potential for such an attack in the future.
You said: And, seeing the Ukraine war is such a convenient provocation, why is NATO resisting the opportunity to obliterate Russia?
Because that would be mutual destruction. If the US/Nato sought to obliterate Russia the northern hemisphere would experience a nuclear holocaust since the Russians have a nuclear capacity also. Which American President wants to be responsible for nuclear missiles hitting US cities? Which European leader wants to be responsible for the destruction of Europe?
Ros, three cheers for the second A-bomb and, for that matter, Dresden too. The rules of the game were established by the Huns and Japs — Guernica, Rotterdam, Warsaw, Nanking, Unit 731. The Allies simply responded in kind but with more muscle.
More to the point, the A-bombs were a mercy. The ongoing US conventional (firebombing mostly) bombing had killed and would have killed more than the combined Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which brought the war to an end.
And there’s a second element to consider: the moral culpability of citizens who enthusiastically endorse the evils their governments/regimes perpetrate (sort of like, in moral miniature, the ‘I Stand With Dan’ crowd down here in poor, blighted, debt-ridden and stuffed Victoria) Such was the case in both Germany, where it was all gung-ho for Adolf until early 1945, and Japan, where the military wasn’t keen on surrender even AFTER the Nagasaki blast.
Max Hastings’ ‘Retribution: The battle for Japan, 1944-45’ is worth reading.
@Roger,
The ‘rules’ may well have been established by the Germans and the Japanese but I would question the wisdom of allowing those who are prepared to sink to the lowest depths to be the arbiter of rules.
No doubt you are right, and there lies the problem. When the West, the Americans in particular, who pride themselves on being better, more noble etc., and having systems which support civilized principles, resort to the most base tactics, simply because others have, we are all in dire straits.
And this also reflects on a major problem since the Americans over the past century have established the precedent and the rules for resorting to war as a ‘problem solving’ mechanism, they and we cannot blame others for doing the same. If the US can invade and destroy Iraq on a ‘story’ which turned out to be a lie, they can hardly condemn the Russians for doing the same with Ukraine, after warning they would for decades, in order to defend their security and the integrity of their borders.
This is why, in my humble opinion, the ‘rules of the game’ need to be sourced in sound principles and those who claim to abide by such principles, such as the West, should ensure they defend them. Dresden was a war crime and the slaughter unnecessary, regardless of what others might have done.
By the way, I have read in the history books but Churchill made a decision to bomb German civilians because he believed the Germans would respond in kind, which they did, and this might bring the Americans into the war. Prior to this there had been an agreement that civilians would not be targets in such a way. I think we can safely say that evil and the capacity for evil exists in all, even the ‘great’ Churchill who, while an admirable wartime leader was also ruthless. Shades of Putin.
In a civilized world we should not allow ourselves to be drawn down to the worst we can be, but strive to remain the best. On that count, the second bomb dropped on Japan can never be justified. The war had ended and there is plenty of evidence that the bombs were dropped to test them and to warn the Russians.
Now, we can argue that the dropping of the bombs was so horrific that it did serve as a nuclear deterrent. However, that is a conclusion reached in hindsight and does not justify their use.
As to moral culpability of the populace, it is tricky because some people are just not as strong as others, some are easily frightened, many do not bother to question and enquire into things, and that applies to Covid and to war, and some are just too busy, exhausted, troubled to take a stand.
So, I think we have to be careful on that count. It is easy to blame, even easier to demonise and none of it is fair. Or wise. Hitler was not all bad and the German people responded to the best and the ‘best’ the National Socialists offered, without knowing, as happens and as we saw with Covid, how far it might all go. Japan is a very different culture and again, their situation did not happen in a vacuum. There are always various factors at work.
Walk a mile in their shoes applies I think and if I have learned anything, it is that we have no idea what we might do, or who we might be, until we actually experience something.
Max Hastings’ ‘Retribution: The battle for Japan, 1944-45’
It looks impressive. Problem is I have 30 books in my TO Read list at present.
Wish we heard from you more often Roger.
@ Brian Boru,
QUOTE:
WHAT MAINSTREAM MEDIA DOES NOT TELL YOU. IF WWIII DOES HAPPEN THIS IS WHY. Thank the Americans for yet more warmongering if the northern hemisphere goes up in smoke.
Thanks to U.S. media, a very small percentage of Americans know that:
Fourteen years ago, then U.S. Ambassador to Russia (current C.I.A. Director) William Burns was warned by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov that Russia might have to intervene in Ukraine, if it were made a member of NATO. The subject line of Burns’ Feb. 1, 2008, Embassy Moscow cable (#182) to Washington makes it clear that Burns did not mince Lavrov’s words. It stated: “Nyet means nyet: Russia’s NATO enlargement redlines.”
Thus, Washington policymakers were given forewarning, in very specific terms, of Russia’s redline regarding membership for Ukraine in NATO. Nevertheless, on April 3, 2008, a NATO summit in Bucharest asserted: “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.”
Eight years ago, on Feb. 22, 2014, the U.S. orchestrated a coup in Kiev — rightly labeled “the most blatant coup in history,” insofar as it had already been blown on YouTube 18 days prior. Kiev’s spanking new leaders, handpicked and identified by name by U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland in the YouTube-publicized conversation with the U.S. ambassador in Kiev, immediately called for Ukraine to join NATO.
Six years ago, in June 2016, Russian President Vladimir Putin told Western reporters of his concern that so-called antiballistic missiles sites in Romania and Poland could be converted overnight to accommodate offensive strike missiles posing a threat to Russia’s own nuclear forces. (See this unique video, with English subtitles, from minute 37 to 49.) There is a direct analogy with the 1962 Cuban missile crisis when Moscow put offensive strike missiles in Cuba and President John Kennedy reacted strongly to the existential threat that posed to the U.S.
On Dec. 21, 2021, Putin told his most senior military leaders: “It is extremely alarming that elements of the U.S. global defense system are being deployed near Russia. The Mk 41 launchers, which are located in Romania and are to be deployed in Poland, are adapted for launching the Tomahawk strike missiles. If this infrastructure continues to move forward, and if U.S. and NATO missile systems are deployed in Ukraine, their flight time to Moscow will be only seven to 10 minutes, or even five minutes for hypersonic systems.
This is a huge challenge for us, for our security.” [Emphasis added.]
On Dec. 30, 2021, Biden and Putin talked by phone at Putin’s urgent request. The Kremlin readout stated: “Joseph Biden emphasized that Russia and the U.S. shared a special responsibility for ensuring stability in Europe and the whole world and that Washington had no intention of deploying offensive strike weapons in Ukraine.” Yuri Ushakov, a top foreign policy adviser to Putin, pointed out that this was also one of the goals Moscow hoped to achieve with its proposals for security guarantees to the U.S. and NATO. [Emphasis added.]
On Feb. 12, Ushakov briefed the media on the telephone conversation between Putin and Biden earlier that day. “The call was as a follow-up of sorts to the … December 30 telephone conversation. … The Russian President made clear that President Biden’s proposals did not really address the central, key elements of Russia’s initiatives either with regards to non-expansion of NATO, or non-deployment of strike weapons systems on Ukrainian territory … To these items, we have received no meaningful response.” [Emphasis added.]
On Feb. 24, Russia invaded Ukraine.
Unprovoked?
The U.S. insists that Russia’s invasion was “unprovoked.” Establishment media dutifully regurgitate that line, while keeping Americans in the dark about such facts (not opinion) as are outlined (and sourced) above. Most Americans are just as taken in by the media as they were 20 years ago, when they were told there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They simply took it on faith. Nor did the guilty media express remorse — or a modicum of embarrassment.
Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a C.I.A. analyst includes serving as chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
Thank you for the initial column and thank you for the replies. They have all been very informative. I note that many American conservatives are opposed to the US supplying arms to Ukraine and are firmly of the view that the war is another US folly presided over by Biden’s Democrat puppet masters. Once again we have to ask who are the beneficiaries? It is certainly not the Ukrainian people.
Personally, I do not follow wars except as an onlooker horrified by Mans’ inhumanity to Man.
However, I have wined and dined with several diverse people who were exceedingly wealthy from their sales and/or manufacture of arms. Wealthy people are known to try to influence decision-makers. It is logical that such people have motives and means to act to keep the business brisk. Guessing here, was that part of the reason for Hunter Biden’s visits to Ukraine?
Of the many words that rosross has written here, I endorse these because of experience: “May I just say the only ideological filters I have are the defence of principles of fact and truth. I find prejudice and bias to be destructive forces and believe that the childish idea that war can be reduced to good and evil or goodies and baddies, creates more war not less.” Geoff S
Russian forces invaded Ukraine early 2022, after invading Ukraine in 2014 and taking Crimea. Remember Putin’s history, his KGB background, his treatment of those who disagree with him, his actions in Syria. Consider the likely desire of the EU/NATO to invade Russian territory: nil.
Comments above suggesting his war in Ukraine are triggered by concerns for Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens are a flight of fancy.
Self interest is V Putin’s driver.
mfberkhout
You conveniently overlook the fact that the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia. Crimea is predominantly ethnic Russians and should not have been handed to Ukraine when the Soviet Union fell.
That referendum made it very clear the Crimeans wanted to be a part of Russia not Ukraine and that choice should be respected. Putin did not invade Ukraine and take Crimea – the Crimean people asked to return to Russia.
As to your views on Putin’s driving force, I humbly suggest you take the time to read the well documented history of Putin in regard to increasing US/Nato aggression so you can pretend you know what you are talking about.
p.s. self interest is everyone’s driver. Why have the Americans created this war? To further their own self-interest. Why have the Europeans gone along with it? To further their self interest. Why have the Ukrainians sacrificed their country and lives to be used as a pawn by US/Nato? To further the self interests of those in power.
“You conveniently overlook the fact that the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia”
Come off it, Rosross. In Putin’s absurd rigged plebiscite.
Crimea is majority ethnic Russian and belonged to Russia up until Khrushchev transferred it by decree to the Ukrainian SSR in the 1950s. Why is it so hard to believe that the Russian majority in Crimea identifies more with Moscow than Kiev?
Because whenever there has been a vote free vote in the Russian-speaking areas of east and south-east Ukraine, including Crimea, pro-Russian separatist parties have never got a majority of the vote, ever, anywhere. That’s why.
@sindri,
The West claimed it was rigged but they would say that wouldn’t they. Funny how after that referendum the Crimeans appeared more than happy to rejoin Russia, their natural home and did not take to the streets in protest. Well a few CIA stooges might have done.
May I ask if you factor in American aggression in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Libya to name just four of many in the same way you cite Russian actions. Please, let us not add hypocrisy and double-standards to the list of factors fuelling misinformation.
It should be noted that the West/NATO set a dangerous precedent in Europe when it bombed the Serbs and amputated Kosovo.
As Ted Galen Carpenter asks, how are Russia’s actions different from what the United States and its NATO allies did to Serbia in 1999?
“Washington and other NATO capitals cannot insist on rigorous respect for the territorial integrity of countries and the sanctity of borders when it suits Western policy but embrace the opposite standard whenever that position suits Western policy. In their handling of the Kosovo question, the NATO powers did exactly that, and the brazen hypocrisy keeps coming back to haunt them.”
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/kosovo-precedent-still-haunting-nato-200771
The wars of the 20th century and into the 21st have been in the main creations of the United States and its lackey allies, including the Balkans war.
The Russia/Putin haters come out to ‘play’ with facts while ignoring the far worse atrocities committed by the Americans.
Well, late to the party on this one , and it’s all been said but brand me a “Useful Idiot” as I agree with rosross , Edwina and G, Sherrington. Putin is a known known – the scorpion to Europe’s frog- while Zelensky to me is a complete fraud , opportunist and has his own dictatorial tendencies . A crass “Comedian” who liked to dress in drag, play the piano with his penis , dresses now in battle fatigues as if on the front line and has the chutzpah to do a Vogue photo shoot with his wife , amid destroyed buildings ! And we in the west , who appear more keen on nuclear engagement than Putin , blame the energy crisis on him (When it is the west’s years long capitulation to green madness, and Biden’s energy halts in the US , and the covert 19 self-destruct movement by our leaders). And while we’re at it , why should Australia , and the US be getting involved ? It’s Europe’s mess but Biden wants a “Wartime President” on his wafer thin CV , and a distraction from his own mess in the States . Seems we must have designated victims in all things , but frankly , I don’t give a damn about an Eastern culture, Ukraine or Russia , steeped in brooding violence , saturated in Vodka , and the AK47 aside , don’t make things that work very well.
@johnmac,
Well said. As we saw with Covid there will always be some, too many, who are easily brainwashed and led on an issue. Sadly they seem to lead the way until they are proven to be utterly wrong but by then it is too late for reason, sanity and common sense.
Cheers rosross. what a comment-fest this article turned out to be ! It appears we are in the minority on this issue , I don’t care and will never cave into group think but maybe a rule of thumb .. whatever Biden and his ilk promote , assume the opposite .And on that note , the West is imploding and my interest in the Ukraine is down the list as we have our own Dictators to worry about Trudope (I have many a Canadian relative who voted for that creep). Our psychotic neighbour across the ditch , Ardwork , Teacher’s pet Mini Micron , and whoever wins the musical chairs in the UK plus aforementioned Brandon. Not to mention being sandwiched by McGowan and Andrews !
@johnmac,
Bigotry and ignorance should always be countered, particularly bigotry. And I agree with your other comments. The Russia/Ukraine/US/Nato war is a distraction in the main and there are other more dangerous forces at work.
The Americans want Russia crippled, but, by the look of it that will not happen. The Americans will fight, sadly, to the last Ukrainian and the destruction of Ukraine but the Europeans freezing this Winter is a more critical issue. The global economy has made us all vulnerable.
Foreign affairs.com
The Sources of Russian Misconduct
A Diplomat Defects From the Kremlin
By Boris Bondarev
November/December 2022
I wasn’t particularly taken by this article but it surely flushed out the Igors and Igorinas.
.
Here is a small part of the text of the Budapest 1994 agreement when Ukraine agreed to give up it’s nuclear weapons to Russia. The Russian Federation agreed to
“to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.” Ukraine was concerned at that time not to be subjected to the same kind of Russian interference as had other former Soviet bloc countries. It is obscene now that Russia is threatening to use it’s nuclear weapons whilst it kills innocent Ukrainians. The Igors and Igorinas have not once mentioned this undertaking by Russia.
.
The anti-U.S. prejudiced here have played the old discredited “two wrongs make a right”. They don’t and Russia still is to be condemned.
.
“it is true that Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine and so is responsible for the present war”. This is a most fundamental truth. No amount of polemic will change that and it was said by Joseph Solis-Mullen at the Mises Institute in an article which was quoted by the most wordy Igorina. But when it was pointed out that she had made the quote, she disavowed that part of it. She wants to rely on expert opinion but only those parts that support her view.
.
The anti-U.S. brigade ignore the history of the area. The Holodomor, the Katyn Massacre, the Russian violent suppression of democracy uprisings in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. All these, notwithstanding that Russia is no longer Communist can be expected to be in the Ukrainian consciousness.
.
The anti-U.S. brigade also ignore the violence of the Berkut. They ignore the overwhelming vote for Ukrainian independence and the expectations for closer European relations that were dashed by a President who changed his orientation and misused his power
.
Finally, with the exception of one Igor, I don’t think I have noted even one statement of sympathy for the innocent Ukrainians being killed, displaced and having their lives ruined.
@ Brian Boru,
you quote an agreement which says-
“to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”
And yet ignore the total lack of respect by Ukraine and its US/Nato minders for the Russian borders, sovereignty and independence. We have certainly flushed out your double standards.
You said: The Holodomor, the Katyn Massacre, the Russian violent suppression of democracy uprisings in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
Shall we trawl through the history of American atrocities? Oh dear, perhaps not because that would mean applying the same principles equally to all. Ask the Filipinos, Hawaiians, Mexicans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laotians, Koreans, Iraqis, Libyans, Afghans, Yemenis, Syrians, Palestinians, American Indians what they thing of the centuries of American aggression. Shall we take all of that into account? Playing fair is just so inconvenient.
If a nation takes a stance as an enemy, as Ukraine did toward Russia, then such agreements become null and void.
Two wrongs do not make a right. We agree. But context, perspective and precedent play a part.
If the US/Nato/West can wage war without just cause then there are no grounds to criticise Russia for waging war with just cause. If the Americans set a precedent of invasion and destruction to ‘solve’ their ”problems,’ i.e. Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc., then they and you cannot complain if others follow their precedent.
You said: Finally, with the exception of one Igor, I don’t think I have noted even one statement of sympathy for the innocent Ukrainians being killed, displaced and having their lives ruined.
Selective reading and prejudiced processing will ensure you miss things. I have certainly expressed compassion for the Ukrainians who have been betrayed by their leaders, the US and Nato.
However, I have also expressed compassion for the Russians who have been pushed into war against a brother country by US/Nato aggression and Ukrainian corruption and stupidity.
John Mearsheimer, noted American political analyst, said in 2014 if the US/Nato continued on their path of aggression it would result in the destruction of Ukraine and the Americans would certainly fight to the last Ukrainian.
Mearsheimer saw nearly a decade ago what the Russians also saw. This war was made in the USA and all deaths and suffering rest on the shoulders of the Americans and their lackey allies in Europe and elsewhere. Including Australia.
The Neocons and the Woke Left Are Joining Hands and Leading Us to Woke War III – https://www.newsweek.com/neocons-woke-left-are-joining-hands-leading-us-woke-war-iii-opinion-1748947
The most wordy Igorina hits the keyboard again with the same old discredited arguments. Shouting the loudest or the most words does not help find truth.
.
Goodbye, to the Igors and Igorinas, undoubtedly you will have the last word but that will never justify Putin’s war or the killing of Ukrainians.
@Brian Boru,
When people resort to ad hominem or personal attacks without making a substantive case for what is said they are admitting they cannot mount a coherent rebuttal. At least we have that clear.
You have refuted NONE of the facts presented and calling those with whom you disagree names, is childish.
As part of your failure to process, you assume I seek to justify killing by the Russians. I do not. I merely make the point that this killing is happening because of the Americans and Europeans as well as the Ukrainians and I deplore all killing, whether done by Russians or the decade of slaughter carried out by the Ukrainian Government against ethnic Russians.
It seems you apply double standards in supporting the killing by the Ukrainians, Americans and Europeans (Nato) while condemning it by Russia. Such lack of consistency with principles reflects on you.
By the way, did you deplore the slaughter of Iraqis by the US? Around a million were killed, 10 million maimed or injured and many millions more made refugees because of the US who waged war, not to defend its borders, but in the name of regime change having grown tired of their stooge Saddam Hussein.
Your hypocrisy is breathtaking. Please correct me if indeed you were vocal in your opposition to the Iraq war.
I apologize for any and all parts of my comments which could be seen as ad hominem. It is now apparent to me that my attempted humour strayed too far when I endeavoured to mimic the theme of the article which as I have already said I was not particularly taken with.
.
All else stands.
@Brian Boru,
Fair enough. This medium does not work for humour. You need to be clear about what you think is humour. We can agree to disagree. Good to talk it through all the same.
Thanks Ros.
Sorry to have to intrude here again, rosross, but you seem to view WWII’s ending as you’d prefer it to have been, rather than as it truly was. After the second bomb, on Nagasaki, which killed even more people than that on Hiroshima, the Japanese War Cabinet still ignored the repeated US ultimatum, most arguing to continue fighting, regardless of the horrendous civilian deaths that would ensue. Surrender was simply not an option — and the populace was sufficiently fired up to go along with that, terrified that the US soldiers would eat their babies. It was only a week later, when Emperor Hirohito finally got off his horse, and addressed the people over their radios (the first time any of them had ever heard him speak; they were stunned to discover that he actually had a voice), to announce that the fighting must stop, that it suddenly ended — God had given his permission, in fact his order, to surrender. The benevolent, non-racist intentions of the USA were reflected in MacArthur’s subsequent administration of Japan: not demanding execution of the emperor, setting up a constitution for a viable democracy, giving women full and equal rights etc. — all of which enabled Japan to rapidly become a leading industrial power, now one of the world’s largest economies. There is no significant hatred of the USA in today’s Japan, which is saying something.