SCOTT RITTER did his homework.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu There is no diplomatic solutionIsrael should declare three nos;
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
no to nuclear Iran, no to two-state solution, no to bi-national state
@peloni
Amazing quote from Luongo!
It’s like we are back in 1933 but the country is different.
Here is how Colin Kahl justifies sending cluster bombs to Ukraine
@Reader
As Tom Luongo recently observed:
@peloni
Another proof that the real purpose is genociding BOTH the Russians and the Ukrainians with the other locals killed as a bonus.
Even if nuclear weapons are used there, why would it bother the US?
Both Ukraine and a good part of Russia and Belarus would turn into multiple Chernobyls, the war would be over, zillions of the “subhumans” would be dead (especially if the always eager Russia-hating Poles decide to rush in).
The cluster bombs used in Vietnam are still killing people (including children) 60 years later.
After reading the news of cluster bombs being sent by the USA to Ukraine, research revealed that 120 countries had banned these, but the USA had not signed on to that agreement. Well then, it must be OK to use cluster bombs. Second thought! This is going to become a CF.(old military term). I believe Reader put forth a good argument in the past few days (in another article comment section) on the probability and or possibility of a nuclear exchange.
I was in agreement with his; what I thought was an objective analysis. But after reading of the cluster Bombs, I beginning to think we might see a small tactical nuclear warhead deployed in Ukraine just to beat back the zombies. And in the last few days we see Prigozhin moving about. There is more at foot then we are being told.
@Ted
Yes, about two-thirds of NATO members are signatories to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, as are about three-quarter of the EU members, so the opposition against these weapons is quite strong, while not complete. The US had intended to institute a ban on the use of these munitions with a fail-rate of more than 1%, which was most of them, at the end of 2018, but this decision was revised one month prior to this taking effect amid objections of the same congressional Democrats who are today remaining quite silent. In fact the Dems introduced legislation in 2018 to re-institute the ban of the less reliable Cluster Munitions due to the dangerous nature which the unexploded munitions pose to civilians. Curiously enough, Gen. Milley recently announced that the weapons which will be provided to Ukraine will actually have a fail rate upto 2.35%, not 1%. In other words, the very munitions which would have been banned by the US in 2018 with support of the US Dems are the very munitions which the current Dem regime in Washington is sending to Ukraine to support their failing proxy war against Russia. The cynism in all of this is quite palpable.
I think that the greater point to raise, however, is that, while the use of this weapon might not necessarily be considered to be a war crime, the use of this weapon directed at population centers is, and Ukraine has been shown to have done exactly this back in 2014 in the aftermath of having faced a complete collapse of its military assault on Dombas. The parallel between the circumstances of the 2014 military upset to today, where the Ukrainian ‘counter-offensive’ has failed to produce any meaningful gains, should not be overlooked.
There should be zero expectations that these weapons will not be used by Ukraine against the population center’s which fall within the range of these weapons. By providing Ukraine with these Cluster Bombs, the US has itself become completely and knowingly complicit in each war crime Ukraine will shortly commit using these devastating weapons.
@Peloni
According to Google:
The US is sending CLUSTER BOMBs to Ukraine. The US-installed Ukrainian regime used this same weapon to slaughter the civilians of Donetz in October of 2014. This was two months after the defeat of the Ukrainian army at the battle of Iliovask, and one month after the faux agreement to implement the Minsk accords had been made. Is anyone honestly decieving themselves to believe that this latest tool provided to Ukraine by the corrupt US regime will not be used once again upon the civilians of Donetz?
@peloni
Because everyone knows (although pretends not to) that Russia is not going to use the nukes any time soon or at all but moving soldiers to a place has a very clear almost immediate purpose, especially in this case.
Imagine the consequences if Russia were to officially announce a major deployment of troops to Belarus?
The initial numbers don’t matter, the rest of the “Wagnerians” were told that they can go to Belarus if they want to – and why wouldn’t they – they get paid for it and it’s close to home.
The Poles caught on right away and promised to reinforce the Polish border in response to the move, although no one in Russia cares about attacking Poland.
Also, read this
https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-should-watch-exiled-wagner-group-boss-yevgeny-prigozhin-very-carefully-warns-former-uk-army-chief-12909220
You have to keep in mind a whole number of things. The deep crisis within capitalism. The deadly rise of Ukraine Fascism. The marriage with those Fascists between the west and this new form of Fascism.This marriage is across the board. Is all consuming. Media in total control. Fascism is there taking many forms including the LABLEAK lies. Strong denial of science and hatred of scientists. We have to go back, into history of 1917 to 1923 or so initially.
PS this not a coup attempt, no way, was a protest aimed at change.
Ritter is politically bankrupt at this point. His brutal language aimed at blocking real discussion.
Thank you, Ted. When I cut/paste something, I can only see a small window and don’t know how big it is. I will try to do intermediate pastes with Notepad, to check the length.
@Michael
You comment was far too long and thus was “jammed”. I have released it.
Ted, my comments are getting jammed.
Problem cleared 11pm PST
There is much being posted lately on this matter, with a trend towards the idea that the FSB is in a struggle with the Ministry of Defense. Putin has not officially taken one side or the other.Prigozhin was in St. Petersburg yesterday, and apparently in some communication with Putin.
@Reader
Only a small portion of Wagner is going to Belarus. There were some 5-8K troops with Prigrozhin at Rostov, and only those who want to leave Russia and continue with the unit will be going to Belarus. Even if all of them went, it is a paltry number of soldiers. Also, I am not sure why Wagner could not simply be moved to Belarus – they sent nukes to Belarus, so sending Wagner could hardly be judged to be more extreme than arming a non-nuclear state with nuclear weapons. Of course, just my own thoughts on you theory, such as they are.
The “mutiny” was a show designed to move the “Wagnerians” to Belarus.
Take a look at the map
https://static.vecteezy.com/system/resources/previews/000/093/220/large_2x/eastern-europe-map-vector.jpg
https://worldmapwithcountries.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/east-europe.jpg
Hello, gang.
I still haven’t bothered to tune in to Ritter — a distraction, as far as I can see. Perhaps later. Nor have I checked in on Macgregor, mainly because I can’t stand Napolitano’s sanpaku eyes and hoarse voice.
Concerning Putin, I hold with what his former KGB comrade and his former speech writer have said — it’s WAY too early to speculate on what’s going on in Russia, because we have few facts. Significantly, we literally still don’t know where half the people are.
A new theory has come out, which seems plausible, namely, that
1. Prigozhin’s aim was to surprize and capture Shoigu and Gerasimov in Rostov; that he relied on Surovikin for intelligence of their whereabouts
2. Shoigu and Gerasimov became aware of the plot, and slipped out of Rostov.
3. Surovikin realized the plot had failed, and warned Prigoshin with his “drunken” message, and
4. Prigozhin began working on Plan B: The parade towards Moscow, the deal with Lukashenko, etc.
I gathered this, based mainly on
https://youtu.be/7UF5zZtMB70
I have some further speculation, and that is precisely what it is, that this conflict was mostly between the generals in Ukraine:
1. Surovikin (head of the Russian Air Force, and former top commander in Ukraine) and Prigozhin, and
2. Shoigu and Gerasimov.
3. Putin looks like the “odd man out”, having been kept in the dark for over a year by false reports from the field, mainly by Shoigu. His actions during and after the couparade have been those of one trying to keep some sort of balance between the ambitious military oligarchs who obviously hate one another.
4. It also seems that there is some sort of play to overthrow Putin, probably by Shoigu. Time will tell.
PS Felix, Zechariah 14 should put to rest questions about nuclear war.
Ted, Peloni
You must remember the situation is fluid. The Russian masses give large support to Putin in elections and still would because he fought the international capitalism corporations who were under the pliant Yeltsin devouring Russia like hyenas. Yet MacGregor also says that there’s present unease with the war. This needs to belooked at.
Of course I give my UNCONDITIONAL defence of Putin against the real Fascist movement Zelensky leads.
But in general terms I must ask where they are going given that there’s the issue of nuclear arms involved.
You both ignore that.
@Ted
Yes, Putin has proven himself to be a very capable leader, and clearly holds the support of his govt, his armed forces, and his public as evidenced by the lack of any support from any corner of Russian society for the recent mutiny by Prigogyn. It is quite unfortunate that the US lacks a leader as capable and successful as Putin has been for Russia, going back over twenty years now.
@Peloi @Felix.
I am surprised he said that.
Macgregor is a big supporter of Putin’s leadership. He thinks of him as a great leader. I believe many Russians would agree.
Peloni
We are heading straight towards Nuclear War situation.
Do you wish that I repeat that for you.
World Nuclear War the end of all life on earth.
Right or wrong?
Do address that?
What are the factors involved if you agree THERE IS THIS DANGER?
@Felix
Speaking for myself, Ritter did not in any way cut out any discussion coming from me. In fact I have made my position on this event quite clear in a lengthy post in another thread as well as a followup statement as well. I have nothing more to add, but found Ritter’s comments quite supportable, albeit he prefers a different style of speaking from myself, but this is quite a routine aspect of his commentaries. So, no, Ritter did not in any way silence me. Rather, I had my say before Ritter had his, though I agree with much if not all of what he states which is why I added the statement below to echo this fact.
I disagree entirely with this statement. Putin is not Trotsky and we are all the better for this fact being actually true. Imagine the harm and devastation from a radical armed with nuclear weapons. Better to have someone capable of leading without abusing their followers, either by their own actions or the reactions they generate in others. Indeed, I think Putin has handled the crisis with Ukraine in a fashion which is both rational, reasonable and responsible and his continued ability to thrive amongst the economic and military onslaught brought against him is a testament to this fact. Of course, I know you prefer a radical solution to that preferred by Putin, but he has established a network of economy and trade with half the world while also providing for the the needs of his people with a growing economy even amid the coordinated effects of the greatest economic banditry and economic assaults made against any nation in history – none of this would have been possible should he have pursued your advise and gone full-Trotsky on the West. His leadership and diplomatic skills have in fact provided the very escape from the economic trap which was intended to ensnare him in a decaying economic spiral amid civil unrest resulting in the regime change so badly desired by the West and quite capably countered by Putin. Trotsky, for all your love of his revolutionary style, would have been quite incapable of managing these victories which Putin has arranged, and he would, I would argue, most certainly fallen pray to the same regime change which Putin has so far quite successfully evaded.
But do share your own thoughts more thoroughly if you would.
Hi, Felix. As you said,
Ritter has been talking for some time about what a juggernaut Putin is; but the facts have said otherwise. I don’t just take him with a grain of salt; I ignore him altogether.
I got the impression from Ritter that he was retreating into bombast (I found his method and language extreme) and the end result was to end discussion. And this cutting out discussion look at the response to Ritter from Ted Belman and Peloni 1986.
Overall Putin has been a miserable leader.
If anything he has tested on his popularity gained in his time of saving the country from the Oligarchs created by Yeltsin.
Trotskys fight as a leader in the Civil War is an amazing contrast. In every single way.
Michael
What do you agree with me on? Surely you can at least acknowledge the specific points I made and make it all quite clear. I am very very critical of your response which is 11 words.
Felix,
This is one of the few times I agree with you!
Take all of this from Ritter with a grain of salt. He contradicts what he said before. He trims his spiel as situations change.
But absent is any analysis of how in general one defeats Fascism.
Ritter is a US marine and no more than that.
Redacted is a nasty lab leak and anti science outfit with no answer either on how to defeat Fascism in this epoch of decaying capitalism…So their comfortable relationship with Ritter.
A rather well discussed analysis by Ritter.