Denazifying and handing over all of these lands to Russia is the only way to achieve lasting peace - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15221009
Igor Antunov wrote:Last I checked 180,000 Russian troops are in Ukraine, still 150+ airstrikes daily.

You're the serial coper. I'm just accepting the sorry fate of all those who oppose Russia.


Is that why you are on a roll starting these copium threads? ;)

Getting bogged down in Ukraine is hardly something to be happy about. The prestige of the Russian military already took a big hit, even if they manage to take the whole Donbass (the bare minimum one expects from the bear).
#15221016
Here's from 14 years ago:



Russian interests and involvement

Transcaucasia lies between the Russian region of the North Caucasus and the Middle East, constituting a "buffer zone" between Russia and the Middle East. It borders Turkey and Iran. The strategic importance of the region has made it a security concern for Russia. Significant economic reasons, including access to major petroleum reserves, further affects interest in Transcaucasia. Rule over Transcaucasia, according to Swedish academic Svante Cornell, would allow Russia to manage Western involvement in Central Asia, an area of geopolitical importance.[75] Russia saw the Black Sea coast and being adjacent to Turkey as invaluable strategic attributes of Georgia.[76] Russia had more vested interests in Abkhazia than in South Ossetia, since the Russian military deployment on the Black Sea coast was seen as vital to Russian influence in the Black Sea.[49] Before the early 2000s, South Ossetia was originally intended as a tool to retain a grip on Georgia.[63]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Geo ... nvolvement
#15221017
Igor Antunov wrote:Image

There's no counter-argument to this logic. Please refrain from masticating gibberish objections to my grand logic and accept the inevitable. Finland is definitely next.


Yeah, after Ukraine I don't think that Russian army is in any shape at all to do anything about Lichtenstein, not to mention the highlighted region. Even if they had 100% of what they did have before the war started then it still wouldn't be even 10% needed to fight NATO.

Your favourite dictators are impotent.
Last edited by JohnRawls on 04 Apr 2022 17:53, edited 1 time in total.
#15221018
@Igor Antunov Last I checked 180,000 Russian troops are in Ukraine, still 150+ airstrikes daily.


Then why did you post that Russia only sent 30,000 troops in another thread. Confused? :roll:

People who are not good liars should choose to tell the truth or not say anything at all. But then you have been doing it for years.
#15221025
Drlee wrote:Then why did you post that Russia only sent 30,000 troops in another thread. Confused? :roll:

People who are not good liars should choose to tell the truth or not say anything at all. But then you have been doing it for years.

Which begs the question. How can someone with so much practice be so focking bad at lying :lol: I guess it is a combination of lying and incompetence.
#15221027
JohnRawls wrote:
Yeah, after Ukraine I don't think that Russian army is in any shape at all to do anything about Lichtenstein, not to mention the highlighted region. Even if they had 100% of what they did have before the war started then it still wouldn't be even 10% needed to fight NATO.

Your favourite dictators are impotent.



Jeez, but it *is* for the sake of de-Nazification -- maybe it's time for NATO to pick-a-side.
#15221033

At this point, it is not easy to foresee how the war will develop militarily. However, it can be foreseen that this war marks a critical turning point in the crisis of the world capitalist system. The global dimensions of the struggle will become increasingly apparent. For the imperialist powers, and above all the United States, the purpose of this war is a new division of the world. The main targets of this redivision are Russia and China. The United States is determined to 1) end Russia’s existence as an obstacle to its global interests, and 2) obtain direct control over Russia’s immense strategic resources. The realization of these goals requires the breakup of Russia in its existing form. As this struggle unfolds, the United States is pursuing similar objectives in relation to China.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2022/0 ... t-a02.html
#15221034
You know what is hilarious that in a war started by Russia, openly, the communist author of the above propaganda piece uses the words "the purpose of America".

Even if America has these purposes they would not be granted without Russia invading, so for the author himself Putin can be either a covert American ally or America's useful idiot.

Which do you prefer?

Igor thanks for showcasing the Russian threat.
#15221039
noemon wrote:
You know what is hilarious that in a war started by Russia, openly, the communist author of the above propaganda piece uses the words "the purpose of America".

Even if America has these purposes they would not be granted without Russia invading, so for the author himself Putin can be either a covert American ally or America's useful idiot.

Which do you prefer?

Igor thanks for showcasing the Russian threat.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard
#15221040
ckaihatsu wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard


I'm aware of them, are you?

Even if America has these purposes they would not be granted without Russia invading, so for the author himself Putin can be either a covert American ally or America's useful idiot.

Which do you prefer?
#15221041
noemon wrote:
I'm aware of them, are you?

Even if America has these purposes they would not be granted without Russia invading, so for the author himself Putin can be either a covert American ally or America's useful idiot.

Which do you prefer?



It's a murky situation altogether, as war is while it's happening -- I *like* the 'denazification' idea, but it sounds like Putin's regime *is* more monarchical-minded than anything else (as the article notes).

You're saying that Russia / Putin is playing into the NATO trap, but then why the ongoing encirclement and provocations, centered in Ukraine. It would make *anyone* nervous, understandably.
#15221050
ckaihatsu wrote:It's a murky situation altogether, as war is while it's happening -- I *like* the 'denazification' idea, but it sounds like Putin's regime *is* more monarchical-minded than anything else (as the article notes).


Putin's Russia is the primary funder/partner of all neonazi organisations in Europe and the US and possibly globally.

https://www.justsecurity.org/68420/conf ... -extremism

You're saying that Russia / Putin is playing into the NATO trap, but then why the ongoing encirclement and provocations, centered in Ukraine. It would make *anyone* nervous, understandably.


Why is Putin provoking and encircling Europe by bombing every country that expresses a desire to join the EU?

Should NATO bomb every country that expresses a desire to join the CSTO?

Evidently NATO should do that as legitimately as Putin in your dictionary because that would be falling into the Russian trap and playing into Putin's hands so with no fault of its own.
#15221055
noemon wrote:
Putin's Russia is the primary funder/partner of all neonazi organisations in Europe and the US and possibly globally.

https://www.justsecurity.org/68420/conf ... -extremism



Okay, noted, thanks.


noemon wrote:
Why is Putin provoking and encircling Europe by bombing every country that expresses a desire to join the EU?

Should NATO bomb every country that expresses a desire to join the CSTO?

Evidently NATO should do that as legitimately as Putin in your dictionary because that would be falling into the Russian trap and playing into Putin's hands so with no fault of its own.



Ehhhh, I'm not going to get *that* wrapped-up in the intricacies of such geopolitics -- it's not my concern.

What I *will* say is that this is a geopolitical *rebuffing* of Western predation, which is fair in-and-of-itself.

Also the Ukraine EU / NATO / whatever membership is just a *formality*, as others have noted -- things are chummy-enough as they were, anyway.

Your second question is really a *strawman*, though, because this *isn't* a retro-Cold-War superpower showdown -- there's no *equivalency* in the scales involved, so then it's necessarily primarily *diplomatic* / geopolitical.

You're *evading* the *original* question / issue, which is why can't NATO just back the fuck off -- if everything is so purportedly even-handed and whatever.
#15221057
Nobody is "encircling Russia". Look at the history.

Russia is surrounded by nations it essentially conquered and bullied into the USSR/Warsaw pact. Little more than cannon fodder in the days of the USSR.

Then the USSR dies. East Germany, naturally reunites with West Germany. What are the others to do? Join a collapsed country with a faltering economy and uncertain political future or align with the prosperous, free and welcoming West/Europe? Are you maintaining that Poland should have thrown its lot into an alliance with a country to this say with an economy smaller than Italy?

Russia had and still has the opportunity to plead its case to these nations. It even, given a regime change, could embrace the West and enjoy the massive economic benefits that would offer.

Nobody is encircling Russia. Russia is cultivating enemies on its borders all by itself. They need no help from the big bad USA when it comes to making enemies. Care to guess what these nations think about the brazen and unprovoked attack on their sovereign neighbor?

No sympathy for Russia AT ALL.
January 6 Hearings LIVE

So now that the warhawk CIA Democrats are back, d[…]

:hmm:

The USA is not getting gun control. Nor is it go[…]

Krugman on Putin

We are way ahead. Dodge Rams and the genocide of[…]