Ukraine, Russia and the Philosophy of Genocide

[Count Lucanor]

This is purely Putin's war in an effort to regain territory that once belonged to the Soviets. He noticed how relatively easy Crimea was so why not go for the whole enchilada. If Nato had not been expanding, would it seriously have made any difference for what he always wanted to do, planned to do? Consider the reasons given for the invasion namely denazification which is such a stupid absurdity impossible for anyone else to accept!

Putin's motives are clear having little to do with Nato's expansion which was never a military threat to Russia. Putin is nothing more than the 21st century's paperback version of Hitler, against which the West - in spite of all the sanctions - remains as wimpy as ever.

Sure, forget about history, politics and international relations of power, it all boils down to the demonic desires of a mad men vs the nice guys. That's just the caricature sketched out by the masters of propaganda, the same that will make a military operation with a civilian death toll of half a million look like an everyday walk in the park.

Oh, I haven't forgotten about history; history is being made right now with ramifications for just about everyone. In case you haven't noticed, it was Russia that invaded Ukraine in order to denazify it. What a stupid absurdity!

Maybe it's you who should wake up!

In case you haven't noticed, I never stated any belief that the cause behind the war is the "denazification" of Ukraine. I said what are the causes, read!! Putin will give justifications in the same way that Bush junior gave justifications for invading Iraq, which had very little to do with the real causes, that are to be found in geopolitics. Ultimately, this is a proxy war.

Enlighten me! Did NATO ever start a war?

You must be kidding. NATO is a military alliance, not a diplomatic conference. Get serious or less naive.

[Tegularius]

This is purely Putin's war in an effort to regain territory that once belonged to the Soviets. He noticed how relatively easy Crimea was so why not go for the whole enchilada. If Nato had not been expanding, would it seriously have made any difference for what he always wanted to do, planned to do? Consider the reasons given for the invasion namely denazification which is such a stupid absurdity impossible for anyone else to accept!

Putin's motives are clear having little to do with Nato's expansion which was never a military threat to Russia. Putin is nothing more than the 21st century's paperback version of Hitler, against which the West - in spite of all the sanctions - remains as wimpy as ever.

Sure, forget about history, politics and international relations of power, it all boils down to the demonic desires of a mad men vs the nice guys. That's just the caricature sketched out by the masters of propaganda, the same that will make a military operation with a civilian death toll of half a million look like an everyday walk in the park.

Oh, I haven't forgotten about history; history is being made right now with ramifications for just about everyone. In case you haven't noticed, it was Russia that invaded Ukraine in order to denazify it. What a stupid absurdity!

Maybe it's you who should wake up!

In case you haven't noticed, I never stated any belief that the cause behind the war is the "denazification" of Ukraine. I said what are the causes, read!! Putin will give justifications in the same way that Bush junior gave justifications for invading Iraq, which had very little to do with the real causes, that are to be found in geopolitics. Ultimately, this is a proxy war.

Enlighten me! Did NATO ever start a war?

You must be kidding. NATO is a military alliance, not a diplomatic conference. Get serious or less naive.

I asked did NATO ever start a war not whether or if it's a military alliance! Proxy war or not, you're almost certainly going to encounter steep resistance in being that brutal against civilians which acts as incentive for the defenders to keep fighting. But the Russians have always been like that! It's far less about geopolitics than Putin's ambition to reclaim at least part of the former Soviet empire. If it's simply all about geopolitics as compared to naked aggression why did Finland and Sweden, who were so far neutral, now decide to join. What were the geopolitical implications for them to apply NOW which normally they wouldn't have done?

[Pattern-chaser]

At the end, Kennan and Mearsheimer will be proven right: not only they predicted what is currently happening, but the path chosen by the US to dominate Eurasia will backfire spectacularly: Russia will fall into the hands of China, and with India not being particularly friendly to the Western alliance, it will have lost Eurasia altogether. But it's an ongoing chess game, we have to see the next moves.

In the light of events, that seems a massive overstatement! Currently, Europe and the US can't even get the grain exports, which the Russians stole, moving out of Ukrainian ports to fend off starvation especially in 3rd world countries. Why? Is the US too afraid, too chickenshit, these would-be controllers of Eurasia, to perform what clearly isn't optional but supremely essential?

Why would Russia be concerned about Nato in the first place, since it's a defense organization certainly not willing to attack Russia. This is purely Putin's war in an effort to regain territory that once belonged to the Soviets. He noticed how relatively easy Crimea was so why not go for the whole enchilada. If Nato had not been expanding, would it seriously have made any difference for what he always wanted to do, planned to do? Consider the reasons given for the invasion namely denazification which is such a stupid absurdity impossible for anyone else to accept!

Putin's motives are clear having little to do with Nato's expansion which was never a military threat to Russia. Putin is nothing more than the 21st century's paperback version of Hitler, against which the West - in spite of all the sanctions - remains as wimpy as ever.

WELL SAID

On a talk show recently the guest, a political analyst, commented that Biden's biggest mistake was telling Russia that American troops
would not get involved, no boots on the ground - Another words he said we will slap Russia on the wrist with economic sanctions and
some military hardware to Ukraine but we will not stop Russia

I wasn't around when Hitler told the World what he was going to do - But history records the rest of the World {particularly the US,
Britain, and France} did little to stop what happened next, WWII.

This same pussyfooting with a wounded bear, Russia, led by an ex Communist Party functionary, Putin, who 'may' be suffering from early onset dementia, is more than dangerous - It is very dangerous

Sometimes I wonder if those so-called geniuses who work for military and civilian 'think tanks' are so hung up in their own illusions
and delusions that they can no longer think straight and see the World for what is really happening




“Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

It alarms me a little that the discussion of these matters calls for firm and resolute action against Putin, without considering the possible consequences. Yes, I agree that Putin's threats and actions should be countered. But I am also aware that, from where I sit, I can see that Putin might, if backed into a corner, use the nuclear, biological or chemical weapons he has at his disposal. Action against Putin that pushes him to such extreme action(s) is unsuccessful and undesirable action. Action that moves us away from WW3, and pushes Russia out of the Ukraine, is what we want, I think.

Then, when that is achieved, maybe we could look at the genocidal antics of Israel as it brutally digests the land, resources, and possessions of the Palestinian people?

[Tegularius]

At the end, Kennan and Mearsheimer will be proven right: not only they predicted what is currently happening, but the path chosen by the US to dominate Eurasia will backfire spectacularly: Russia will fall into the hands of China, and with India not being particularly friendly to the Western alliance, it will have lost Eurasia altogether. But it's an ongoing chess game, we have to see the next moves.

In the light of events, that seems a massive overstatement! Currently, Europe and the US can't even get the grain exports, which the Russians stole, moving out of Ukrainian ports to fend off starvation especially in 3rd world countries. Why? Is the US too afraid, too chickenshit, these would-be controllers of Eurasia, to perform what clearly isn't optional but supremely essential?

Why would Russia be concerned about Nato in the first place, since it's a defense organization certainly not willing to attack Russia. This is purely Putin's war in an effort to regain territory that once belonged to the Soviets. He noticed how relatively easy Crimea was so why not go for the whole enchilada. If Nato had not been expanding, would it seriously have made any difference for what he always wanted to do, planned to do? Consider the reasons given for the invasion namely denazification which is such a stupid absurdity impossible for anyone else to accept!

Putin's motives are clear having little to do with Nato's expansion which was never a military threat to Russia. Putin is nothing more than the 21st century's paperback version of Hitler, against which the West - in spite of all the sanctions - remains as wimpy as ever.

WELL SAID

On a talk show recently the guest, a political analyst, commented that Biden's biggest mistake was telling Russia that American troops
would not get involved, no boots on the ground - Another words he said we will slap Russia on the wrist with economic sanctions and
some military hardware to Ukraine but we will not stop Russia

I wasn't around when Hitler told the World what he was going to do - But history records the rest of the World {particularly the US,
Britain, and France} did little to stop what happened next, WWII.

This same pussyfooting with a wounded bear, Russia, led by an ex Communist Party functionary, Putin, who 'may' be suffering from early onset dementia, is more than dangerous - It is very dangerous

Sometimes I wonder if those so-called geniuses who work for military and civilian 'think tanks' are so hung up in their own illusions
and delusions that they can no longer think straight and see the World for what is really happening




“Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

It alarms me a little that the discussion of these matters calls for firm and resolute action against Putin, without considering the possible consequences. Yes, I agree that Putin's threats and actions should be countered. But I am also aware that, from where I sit, I can see that Putin might, if backed into a corner, use the nuclear, biological or chemical weapons he has at his disposal. Action against Putin that pushes him to such extreme action(s) is unsuccessful and undesirable action. Action that moves us away from WW3, and pushes Russia out of the Ukraine, is what we want, I think.

It should be clear to Putin...or made very clear to him that whatever he threatens to do can also be done to the whole of Russia. It's a two-way street and that's the default reality of it. Giving in to a bully isn't going to solve problems, only create more.

Putin had it made! He got Crimea with very few consequences initiated by the West which Putin already expected knowing that its leaders had a backbone made of jello; no one attacked Russia and clearly no one was going to or even considering it. He could have kept feeding his ultra parasitical oligarchs to purchase estates and mansions all over the West which amounted to wealth that belonged to the people of the country it came from. So what was the point of all this BS except his ambition to draw himself large in the history books as having reclaimed, at least partially, the Soviet empire!

The West still elicits all the symptoms of spinelessness in not going forth with a large fleet of warships ready and primed to fire if necessary to release the grains which never belonged to Russia but with which Putin attempts to blackmail the West. Based on the consequences for the world in withholding these grain exports it should have been noticed by the stupid, wimpy West that a very serious red line has been crossed.

If nothing else works, as true of Putin, the only way to really challenge an asshole is to become one.

[Count Lucanor]

I asked did NATO ever start a war not whether or if it's a military alliance!

The US is a leading member of NATO and it has started many wars for itself or with the explicit support of NATO. NATO invaded Afghanistan in 2001. It also intervened in Libya in 2011. If as you claim, NATO was a peaceful defense force that only reacts to attacks, why then the need to expand it? To defend from whom? If your answer is Russia, then you will be proving my point.

Proxy war or not, you're almost certainly going to encounter steep resistance in being that brutal against civilians which acts as incentive for the defenders to keep fighting.

No doubt Palestinians and nations invaded by the US and its allies will put up a good fight before being submitted.

If it's simply all about geopolitics as compared to naked aggression why did Finland and Sweden, who were so far neutral, now decide to join. What were the geopolitical implications for them to apply NOW which normally they wouldn't have done?

For the same reason: it is in line with the objectives of NATO's expansion. Both Finland and Sweden are NATO partners since they joined the EU in 1995. They are not neutral since then.

[heracleitos]

If your answer is Russia, then you will be proving my point.

Now that Romania is a member of NATO, you get things like this:

U.S. reinforcement troops to arrive in Romania, more expected

The ministry said a part of the squadron, which will be named Task Force (TF) Cougar, will enter Romania at around 2000 GMT and drive across the country to the Mihail Kogalniceanu military base in the eastern county of Constanta.

U.S. forces have used the Mihail Kogalniceanu air base on the Black Sea since 1999. Romania, a NATO member since 2004, also hosts a ballistic missile defense system.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us ... 2022-02-09

Ukraine joining NATO would mean NATO building military bases in Ukraine, right across the border with Russia.

Russia does not want that.
Ukraine did not care.
So, Russia told Ukraine that if they do not care, they would make them care.
Ukraine still did not care.
...
The rest is history.

[Count Lucanor]

If your answer is Russia, then you will be proving my point.

Now that Romania is a member of NATO, you get things like this:

U.S. reinforcement troops to arrive in Romania, more expected

The ministry said a part of the squadron, which will be named Task Force (TF) Cougar, will enter Romania at around 2000 GMT and drive across the country to the Mihail Kogalniceanu military base in the eastern county of Constanta.

U.S. forces have used the Mihail Kogalniceanu air base on the Black Sea since 1999. Romania, a NATO member since 2004, also hosts a ballistic missile defense system.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us ... 2022-02-09

Ukraine joining NATO would mean NATO building military bases in Ukraine, right across the border with Russia.

Russia does not want that.
Ukraine did not care.
So, Russia told Ukraine that if they do not care, they would make them care.
Ukraine still did not care.
...
The rest is history.

Note also that the Monroe Doctrine is in effect. The US has not tolerated, nor will tolerate in the Americas, anything remotely close to a military alliance with foreign powers. But it demands from Russia that it accepts military bases one step from the Red Square. Put up resistance to that and you are a mad man with demonic desires.

[UniversalAlien]

If your answer is Russia, then you will be proving my point.

Now that Romania is a member of NATO, you get things like this:

U.S. reinforcement troops to arrive in Romania, more expected

The ministry said a part of the squadron, which will be named Task Force (TF) Cougar, will enter Romania at around 2000 GMT and drive across the country to the Mihail Kogalniceanu military base in the eastern county of Constanta.

U.S. forces have used the Mihail Kogalniceanu air base on the Black Sea since 1999. Romania, a NATO member since 2004, also hosts a ballistic missile defense system.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us ... 2022-02-09

Ukraine joining NATO would mean NATO building military bases in Ukraine, right across the border with Russia.

Russia does not want that.
Ukraine did not care.
So, Russia told Ukraine that if they do not care, they would make them care.
Ukraine still did not care.
...
The rest is history.

Note also that the Monroe Doctrine is in effect. The US has not tolerated, nor will tolerate in the Americas, anything remotely close to a military alliance with foreign powers. But it demands from Russia that it accepts military bases one step from the Red Square. Put up resistance to that and you are a mad man with demonic desires.

WHAT - Ever heard of this small island just south of Florida {USA} called CUBA
{That's the island that caused President Kennedy to challenge Russia {the old Soviet Union, just like Putin wants} to get the missiles
out of or WWIII

Not to mention Venezuela in South America.

I can't stop you from trolling this post, but at least get your facts right



“Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.
[Inaugural Address, January 20 1961]”
― John Fitzgerald Kennedy

“Mankind must put an end to war - or war will put an end to mankind.
[Address before the United Nations, September 25 1961]”
― John F. Kennedy

[Count Lucanor]

Note also that the Monroe Doctrine is in effect. The US has not tolerated, nor will tolerate in the Americas, anything remotely close to a military alliance with foreign powers. But it demands from Russia that it accepts military bases one step from the Red Square. Put up resistance to that and you are a mad man with demonic desires.

WHAT - Ever heard of this small island just south of Florida {USA} called CUBA
{That's the island that caused President Kennedy to challenge Russia {the old Soviet Union, just like Putin wants} to get the missiles
out of or WWIII

Not to mention Venezuela in South America.

I can't stop you from trolling this post, but at least get your facts right

So you're implying that the US was actually very happy or indifferent to the presence of a Soviet-friendly Cuba UNTIL missiles were installed there by Khrushchev. That has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have heard in quite a while. Never heard of Bay of Pigs? Never heard of the counter-revolutionary operations against Cuba? Never heard of an embargo?

It is ironic, to the point of becoming cynical, that you mention the Cuban missile crisis to defend your views against mine, when it is actually a very clear illustration of the point I'm making. Kennedy was effectively enacting the Monroe Doctrine there. As a good US politician, he was hostile to the Cuban regime even before being president.

I want to talk with you tonight about the most glaring failure of American foreign policy today - about a disaster that threatens the security of the whole Western Hemisphere - about a Communist menace that has been permitted to arise under our very noses...

[...]This is a critical situation - to find so dangerous an enemy on our very doorstep. The American people want to know how this was permitted to happen - how the iron curtain could have advanced almost to our front yard.

(REMARKS OF SENATOR JOHN F. KENNEDY AT DEMOCRATIC DINNER, CINCINNATI, OHIO, OCTOBER 6, 1960).

You could take those words, update names and locations, and put them in Putin's mouth. Not much difference.

So yes, just as the US will not tolerate (even willing to start WWIII) any military menace near its borders, Russia will not tolerate such threats, either. That makes sense, but the cognitive dissonance created by your heartfelt desire to demonize the political rivals of the US and NATO will not allow you to see it.

[heracleitos]

So yes, just as the US will not tolerate (even willing to start WWIII) any military menace near its borders, Russia will not tolerate such threats, either.

The Russian Federation would always have had to some day push back.

They could also have waited for NATO to plant the American flag on top of the Kremlin, but they seem to have decided to act a bit earlier.

The EU's feeble attempt at economically and financially boycotting the Russian Federation will only further cement the new geopolitical reality.

The EU want to "pay" for oil, gas, and other supplies, with Euros into frozen bank accounts from which the Russian Federation cannot spend. How ridiculous! Who the hell would want that kind of Euros for their oil and gas?

The solution, for the Russian Federation, is to cut off and fully arrest all direct trade with the EU, and to find new customers elsewhere.

Why even give the EU time to adjust?

If I were the Russian Federation, I would cut off absolutely all gas supplies in September, just before the onset of the winter months.

Ukraine is disrespectful and arrogant, because the EU is, and ultimately, because somewhere in the background the USA are instigating all of them to be disrespectful and arrogant towards the Russian Federation.

I expect China to start pushing back too, because that is also long overdue. Now the time has come to duly rein in the arrogance.

[Tegularius]

I asked did NATO ever start a war not whether or if it's a military alliance!

The US is a leading member of NATO and it has started many wars for itself or with the explicit support of NATO. NATO invaded Afghanistan in 2001. It also intervened in Libya in 2011. If as you claim, NATO was a peaceful defense force that only reacts to attacks, why then the need to expand it?

You can’t come along with better examples? Russia is only reacting against NATO's expansion!?

It's expansion comes from those who want to join as is happening with Sweden and Finland who now want inclusion considering Russia's hooliganism. Whatever Russia expected worked in reverse causing the expansion!

The U.S. was attacked in 2001 and the NATO mandate triggered accordingly. If it hadn’t been activated, the NATO protocols would have been useless. Had this not happened, Afghanistan would not have been attacked which strictly speaking it wasn’t. It was the terrorist groups in Afghanistan that were focused on, not the civilian population as is happening in Ukraine. Look at Afghanistan now under Taliban rule! Who do you think most people would prefer back in control...especially the women!

Obviously such an attack as happened against the US initiated the expected response by its NATO allies conforming to their mandate.

Admittedly NATO’S operation in Libya is more dubious and there is still much debate about it but to claim it as some kind of qualifying precursor to Russia’s transgression against Ukraine is obscene considering what’s happening there now and not least, what they did in Syria.

If it's simply all about geopolitics as compared to naked aggression why did Finland and Sweden, who were so far neutral, now decide to join. What were the geopolitical implications for them to apply NOW which normally they wouldn't have done?

For the same reason: it is in line with the objectives of NATO's expansion. Both Finland and Sweden are NATO partners since they joined the EU in 1995. They are not neutral since then.

Being part of the EU it’s unlikely they can be completely neutral. It would be a contradiction if that were so! However, their military and politics has so far been independent of NATO, which, based on Russia’s thoroughly unjustified attack on Ukraine, they now wish to understandably rescind since Putin’s Russia has clearly gone rogue.

Russia has a massive inferiority complex. It's Putin's agenda to set right by making Russia Great Again by attempting to regain its former boundaries. Being subject to such disorder on a national level, as exemplified in their news and media channels, they will project their own deficiencies as caused by others. To boot, they have an overriding Nazi neurosis ready to thrust that term on anyone they wish to dehumanize and treat accordingly which explains the atrocities in Ukraine and again demonstrated in their media sick with hatred. The Russian army has always consisted of murderers of civilians, torturers, and most egregiously rapists. Wherever they are the story is always the same.

This is not news to the countries who now want to join NATO even though it may come as a surprise to you.

[Count Lucanor]

I asked did NATO ever start a war not whether or if it's a military alliance!

The US is a leading member of NATO and it has started many wars for itself or with the explicit support of NATO. NATO invaded Afghanistan in 2001. It also intervened in Libya in 2011. If as you claim, NATO was a peaceful defense force that only reacts to attacks, why then the need to expand it?

You can’t come along with better examples? Russia is only reacting against NATO's expansion!?

You have not been reading:

In their promotion of NATO's expansion, Kissinger and Brzezinski have said that without Europe, USA would just be an island between other powers. Following the ideas of Halford Mackinder, they have said that the Eurasian continent is key for strategic world domination. Russians are no fools, of course, and they have come up with their own version of Eurasianism, which includes a Russian version of the Monroe Doctrine (the US will not allow military bases from other country anywhere in the Americas and will go to war to enforce that doctrine, as the Cuban missile crisis showed). What is at stake here is then pure geopolitics, which only knows of national interests, not morals. All actors will do what they find practical for their pursued interests, so does NATO and so does Russia. Against the advice of strategic consultants (Kennan, Mearsheimer), however, the US and its allies have chosen the path of expanding NATO, effectively challenging and provoking Russia, which at some time after the fall of the USSR did want to be integrated to Western Europe (one point you hear Putin talk often is how Russia was ignored and mistreated by Western powers during this approach).

It's expansion comes from those who want to join as is happening with Sweden and Finland who now want inclusion considering Russia's hooliganism. Whatever Russia expected worked in reverse causing the expansion!

NATO can consider Russia's stance as hooliganism as much as Russia can consider NATO's stance as hooliganism. These are world powers with conflicting interests. One pushes forward, the other one pushes back. Is that too difficult to understand? NATO is not a diplomatic organization, it is a belligerent military alliance.

Had this not happened, Afghanistan would not have been attacked which strictly speaking it wasn’t. It was the terrorist groups in Afghanistan that were focused on, not the civilian population as is happening in Ukraine.

You seem to be an easy target for propaganda. The fact is that all wars kill civilians, and to say that "collateral damage" happens "inadvertently" is purely a PR manouver.

More than a decade ago, the U.S. military recognized that when NATO and U.S. air strikes inadvertently killed civilians in Afghanistan, those strikes diminished U.S. standing with ordinary Afghans, making it harder to win the war. The U.S. military then focused on reducing harm to civilians. Thus, in June 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, who was alarmed by thenumber of civilians being killed by U.S.airstrikes in Afghanistan,ordered that the rules of engagement for using air power be tight, so that the risk to civilians would be minimized. When on 17 July 2009, two weeks after the publication of McChrystal's directive, 13 civilians were wounded and at least five were killed in a U.S. close air support strike in Kandahar, Afghanistan, General McChrystal was livid. He said, "What is it we don't understand? We're going to lose this f***ing war if we don't stop killing civilians."

"From 2017 through 2019, with the war in a long stalemate, the U.S. relaxed its rules of engagement for airstrikes. As a consequence, civilian casualties due to airstrikes increased from 2017 through 2019. n 2019, more Afghan civilians were killed in airstrikes than at any time since early 2002."

https://media.carnegie.org/filer_public ... 7_2020.pdf

Admittedly NATO’S operation in Libya is more dubious and there is still much debate about it but to claim it as some kind of qualifying precursor to Russia’s transgression against Ukraine is obscene considering what’s happening there now and not least, what they did in Syria.

You're still trying to find moral justifications in acts of war, I don't. Some are worst than others, and the US and its allies are certainly not exempt of committing atrocities in their trangressions. They have also made sure they cannot be held accountable for their crimes by any international court.
https://archive.globalpolicy.org/intern ... e-icc.html

Russia has a massive inferiority complex. It's Putin's agenda to set right by making Russia Great Again by attempting to regain its former boundaries. Being subject to such disorder on a national level, as exemplified in their news and media channels, they will project their own deficiencies as caused by others. To boot, they have an overriding Nazi neurosis ready to thrust that term on anyone they wish to dehumanize and treat accordingly which explains the atrocities in Ukraine and again demonstrated in their media sick with hatred. The Russian army has always consisted of murderers of civilians, torturers, and most egregiously rapists. Wherever they are the story is always the same.

Your statements do not come from objective analysis, but pure prejudice. Russians are demons and the US and NATO are angelical envoys descended from heaven. Whenever Russians do something, it is because of some essential evil, whenever the US does the same or worst, there are always reasonable explanations, because...well, they can only be the good guys. You can see it at the movies, right?

[Consul]

The current geographical situation: 125,000 km² (~20%) of Ukraine occupied by Russia!



For comparison: If 125,000 km² of Germany or Italy were occupied by Russia:





SOURCE: https://katapult-magazin.de/de/artikel/ ... er-zu-viel

[UniversalAlien]

In Russia we only had two TV channels. Channel One was propaganda. Channel Two consisted of a KGB officer telling you: Turn back at once to Channel One.
-Yakov Smirnoff

The problem with Russia is not corruption per se, or even Putin per se. Russian government is not corrupt because Vladimir Putin has absolute power. Russian government has been corrupt and will always be as long as anyone has absolute power.
- Robert Zubrin

When men are arrested without any legal basis and for political reasons, it's merely a routine, everyday occurrence in Russia, and hardly anyone has any sympathy.
-Alexei Navalny

There were no strategic mistakes that could affect Russia's history and it further development. No, there were no such mistakes. Tactical errors were made in some less significant options, problems and so on. But, on the whole, Russia embarked on a correct path and it changed.
-Boris Yeltsin

[UniversalAlien]

"Russian chess grandmaster Kasparov criticizes Russia, calls support for Ukraine
'Bankrupt Putin's war machine. Freeze & seize Russia's finances & those of him and his gang,' former chess champion says"

ANKARA

Russian chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov on Thursday criticized Russian military intervention and called support for Ukraine.

"Support Ukraine militarily, immediately, everything but boots on the ground. All weapons, intel, cyber," the former world chess champion wrote on his Twitter account.

"Bankrupt Putin's war machine. Freeze & seize Russia's finances & those of him and his gang," he added.

Kasparov said Russia should be kicked out of every international and financial institution in the world, including Interpol.

"Ban all elements of Putin's global propaganda machine. Turn them off, shut them down, send them home. Stop helping the dictator spread lies & hate," he wrote.

He also said all countries' ambassadors should be recalled from Russia, adding, "There is no point in talking. The new unified message is 'stop or be isolated completely'."

Kasparov, who became the youngest undisputed world chess champion in 1985, at the age of 22, argued that Russian oil and natural gas should be replaced.

He advocated that the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) should be pressured to increase their crude oil production.

"Acknowledge there will be costs, sacrifices. We waited too long, the price is high, but it will only get higher. It's time to fight," he added.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/russian ... ne/2513893