Oso planning to go pro
After Putin is gone, no matter how that happens, then what? Who will his successor be, or probably more important, how will his successor rule?Putin's rationale for the invasion is straight out of Hitler's prewar playbook. He had to rescue, liberate the Germans living in Czechoslovakia from oppression, so the Nazis occupied the country. After the war, it was proven that he ordered German soldiers dressed in Polish army uniforms to stage an "attack" on Germany near their border with camera crews positioned to film it all. Of course, the narrative was that Germany had to protect the motherland and crush Poland, beginning WW11. All media was strictly controlled, just like Russia's is now. Until a solid majority of the Russian people turn against not only Putin but all that he stands for, the threats to Europe and much of the rest of the world will remain. The Russian people need to become like the post war Germans. Meanwhile, there is only one country poised to win big time from this war-China. If Russia has to turn to China to bail it out from the sanctions, Russia may effectively become a subsidiary of China Inc. Maybe we will see Russia listed on the stock exchanges of the world.
Not disagreeing with you, but wasn't that our playbook in Iraq also. We needed to liberate the people from the oppression of Saddam, and then manufactured evidence of WMDs. Even the first Iraq war, we first told Saddam we would do nothing regarding Kuwait, then fabricated evidence of atrocities in Kuwait.Pretty much every nation is guilty of false narratives in every war of aggression.Wars are terrible. What is happening in Ukraine is an atrocity. But it is far from unusual in terms of historical context.
Much different situation from a geopolitical standpoint. Scoop Snoop's analysis is spot-on.
I guess, if you think that Europe matters, and the Middle East and it's people are just pawns...then sure. His analysis is right though regarding China. China is winning. Everyone else is losing.
No. And if it were up to me we wouldn't allow genocides but as you know we did nothing in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Darfur, etc. It's about the overall implications of Russian genocide and expansion.
As suspected, the U.S. has been sharing targeting information with Ukraine, both incoming and outgoing. Meanwhile, the Putin wing continues to mouth Russia's talking points for them.U.S. intel helped Ukraine protect air defenses, shoot down Russian plane carrying hundreds of troopshttps://news.yahoo.com/u-intel-helped-ukraine-protect-160006854.htmlRand Paul echoes Putin's talking points on Ukraine while arguing with Blinken over Russia's motives for invadinghttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/rand-paul-echoes-putin-s-talking-points-on-ukraine-while-arguing-with-blinken-over-russia-s-motives-for-invading/ar-AAWCUVj?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=dae7c60483a7489b9d9fa5503234e22e
Which was the immediately decried by Kinzinger and others. Not like it was some agreed party chorus. It sounds more like Rand Paul being a moron while trying to be partisan and pedantic
Rand Paul's stunt is gold to Putin, but Biden's statements that Putin needs to go combined with calling him a war criminal, butcher, (all very true) and whatever else he has said serve only to solidify the support of the Russian people behind Putin. Anti-war protests in Russia have been smashed, but if there was any chance they would become so widespread like they were in 1991 when an estimated 500,000 protestors brought down the government, I think Biden, like Paul, has handed Putin a gift by running his mouth. Add to that Blinken's and Austin's stating that our goal is to weaken Russia (again, true, but why say it publicly?) and Russians will rally behind Putin even more. Biden not only at least approved of their statements in advance but, I believe, more than likely instructed them to make them.
You say those things to rally EU countries and other allies, and to show strength. I doubt any of those statements will have any real affect on the Russian people; they get all their news filtered through Putin, anyway.It's far worse that we have vocal Putin sympathizers in "leadership" positions within our country.
1) EU countries, especially the ones that suffered through 45 years of Russian occupation, do not need an American president to rally them. They get it. They are far, far ahead of us on this. Let's not insult their intelligence. Notice that Macron, in his desperate attempt(s) to influence blood thirsty Putin, has refrained from name calling or defining the goal as weakening Russia (although it most certainly is).
2) The news filtered through Putin includes Biden's remarks and our Secretaries of State and Defense defining our goal as the weakening of Russia. How can that NOT draw them rally behind their leader? There are good reasons why his handlers try to keep Biden to stick to statements prepared by them.
Such comments aren't intended to "rally" those countries. They're intended to show them they we get it, we understand the existential threat they face from Putin and that we have their backs. And that, frankly, is something very unlike what they heard from the previous administration that consistently sucked up to Putin and repeatedly threatened to abandon its NATO allies.You want he U.S. government to take its foreign policy cues from Macron and the French? That's a new one.Influencing the Russian population - which, in many ways, is beyond influence - is a far, far less important goal than influencing our allies in Europe.
The Russian population was influenced enough in 1991 to put 500,000 people on the streets and force the military government out. I would like to see a repeat performance. Likely? No. Possible? Yes. We have already influenced our allies in Europe. I would like to see a squeeze play on Putin.
While a general uprising from within would be optimal, I think the chances are virtually zero after more than two decades of Putin tightening his grip. As we saw early, protests were put down quickly and effectively. I don't believe Putin would allow mass protests of the magnitude necessary to force him out, nor am I sure there is enough dissent to make it possible.A palace coup seems more likely, and even that is wishing upon a star IMO unless things get bad economically, really bad.
The Russian media in 1991 cannot be compared to the 2022 Russian media under Putin. I'd wager that was the reason 500,000 were able to protest then.
Russia in 1991 was in a very different place than it is today, and the conditions/motivations that led to those protests don't really exist in contemporary Russia.Remember, those protests came about in response to a coup by hardliners, against a popular regime that had given the population its first taste of freedom - particularly economic and travel freedom. The people who rose up then didn't want to lose those freedoms. Flash forward to today, and those freedoms remain largely intact. Putin isn't trying to take it away from them. Political freedom is another matter, of course, but the Russians have never truly had that.