Europe Backdrop to the war in Ukraine

[Gethelred]

This is the thread for the geopolitics, history and framework around the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If you want to discuss the events of the war, head over to this thread:

Europe - War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

This is the thread for discussing the War in Ukraine. Should you want to discuss the geopolitics, the history, or an interesting tangent, head over here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/backdrop-to-the-war-in-ukraine.1302028/ If a post isn't directly concerning the events of the war or...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[IlovethePies]

I am not Russia's side but everything Putin says and does is true and justified .........

On SM-A136B using BigFooty.com mobile app

You said that, not me.

 

[IlovethePies]

Exposing the myth of Western betrayal of Russia over NATO’s eastern enlargement

Thirty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia is still peddling the old myth of Western betrayal of Russia by expanding NATO eastward after the end of the Cold War. Both Vladimir Puti…

blogs.lse.ac.uk

my source was the nsa archive

It was based on original documents.

Yours was from the LSE, a pro British imperialism think tank, operating as a "specialised university" in politics and economics, simply quoting the opinions of one of its academics.

It is necessary not just to find sources, but to be able to determine which ones are more likely going to provide a basis for establishing historical truth.

That is what you are totally incapable of, because you are completely uncritical in your attitude to the official narrative.

 

[IlovethePies]

You’ve got your own strange storyline going here.
“NATO/US are intent on overthrowing the Putin government using Ukrainians as their cannon fodder.” There was no war until russia invaded. If NATO/US wanted to overthrow Putin’s government why do they place restrictions on the weapons they give Ukraine, why do they give Ukraine their cast off weapons.

And your solution is to get rid of capitalism. Now that is "insane logic".

Actually, abolishing capitalism is the only realistic solution.

The alternative, allowing capitalism to continue, is the truly insane one.

 

[IlovethePies]

Putin In Stalin’s Mirror

The end of the Soviet Union promised a new day. But Russia’s pattern of autocratic leadership re-emerged.

www.hoover.org

If Putin wins this war there will be a Holodomor II. It may not be another death famine but it will be another attempt at destroying the idea of being Ukrainian.

These past fourteen months of war in Ukraine have caused me to think more and more about Vladimir Putin in the mirror of Josef Stalin, and Stalin in the mirror of Putin. I resisted for a very long time the notion that Putin was a Stalin-like figure. However, the similarity between the two of them, the historical dialogue, has seemed to be growing too powerful to be pushed aside.

Both Putin and Stalin use the non-Russian peoples of Russia/Soviet Union as cannon fodder. Both pay little if any attention to the actual loss of life and casualties at the front.

Yet to both Stalin and Putin, Ukraine is the little brother, “Little Russia,” as it was known under the czars. Russians should see themselves as superior to Ukrainians: bigger, stronger, more powerful, more central to the imperial project than the Ukrainians.

But Ukrainians are not Russians and do not want to be Russians. That is precisely why they are dangerous for Moscow.

But even in a previous era, the period of the Holodomor, the death famine of 1932–33, Stalin constantly asserted that the Poles would use the Ukrainians to destroy the Soviet Union. Putin now claims that Ukraine is being controlled by the West, that the leaders are nothing but marionettes of the United States.

and now you are propagating the lie of "Holomodor", ie the lie that is promoted by Ukrainian nationalists and Western propaganda.

Yes, the Stalinist bureaucracy is responsible for a famine in the Soviet union in the early 30's which killed 6 to 8 million, of whom 4 to 5 million were Ukrainians.

But there is no evidence whatsoever that the policies of the Stalinist bureaucracy intended such an outcome, nor that they were targeted against Ukrainians as an ethnic group.

As the figures indicate, there were also millions of non-Ukrainian Soviet citizens who died.

All historians who have an ounce of intellectual integrity have proven that the famine in the Soviet Union at that time was not an ethnically motivated genocide, but was the result of the criminally incompetent and irrational economic policies of the Stalinist bureaucracy, in a desperate attempt to forcibly industrialise the economy after years of incorrect policy directions. Kazakhstan for example suffered on a scale similar to that of Ukraine.

The reactionary historical falsification of the Ukrainian nationalists is that the famine was a conscious effort by the stalinist regime to eliminate the Ukrainain population. This is false to the core.

There is a fundamental similarity between Putin and Stalin, but it is not the one you think. Stalin, just like Putin, was anti-socialist. Putin says everything he can to condemn and falsify the history of the Bolshevik Revolution. Putin is a bitter anti-socialist. Likewise, Stalin was motivated by his hatred and fear of genuine socialism. The genocide that Stalin carried out in the late 1930's (the Great Terror) was not an ethnic genocide, it was a political genocide. Stalin murdered anyone he could find who had the slightest connection with, or sympathy for, the Russian Revolution. Putin agrees totally with Stalin on that score.

 

[Zidane98]

my source was the nsa archive

It was based on original documents.

Yours was from the LSE, a pro British imperialism think tank, operating as a "specialised university" in politics and economics, simply quoting the opinions of one of its academics.

It is necessary not just to find sources, but to be able to determine which ones are more likely going to provide a basis for establishing historical truth.

That is what you are totally incapable of, because you are completely uncritical in your attitude to the official narrative.

Looks like Mobbs delivers - again!

 

[IlovethePies]

Looks like Mobbs delivers - again!

Clearly your standards are extremely low.

 

[Carringbush2010]

If Russia withdrew its forces from Ukraine, the US and NATO would proceed to arm Ukraine, build military installations on the Ukraine/Russia border and use Ukraine as a platform for mounting further provocations, military and otherwise, against the Putin regime.

But US and NATO imperialism have no intention of making a ''fair deal'
No way that US imperialism can accept anything other than the removal of any barriers to its total domination and plunder of the Russian Federation land mass.

These are purely theory of your mind mate, if the US wanted to take Russia, they would've taken it already.

There is no conspiracy against Russia, like I said, if that was the want it would've happened already.

 

[Mobbs]

my source was the nsa archive

It was based on original documents.

Yours was from the LSE, a pro British imperialism think tank, operating as a "specialised university" in politics and economics, simply quoting the opinions of one of its academics.

It is necessary not just to find sources, but to be able to determine which ones are more likely going to provide a basis for establishing historical truth.

That is what you are totally incapable of, because you are completely uncritical in your attitude to the official narrative.

Oh sorry was yours not the opinion of an academic? Hmm?

Sveta Savranskaya is also a very human person with opinions, actually a good listen when she's out doing podcast interviews etc (I ran across her talks 2 or 3 times in 2022). Tends to be well-meaning, though I've been exposed to more of her predictive power (which sucks) than her analytical power (which I haven't examined).

The reality of the events remains unchanged. These claimed assurances were "read into" the agreements, and not at the time, but revisionally by a Meltsin.

Any increase, perceived or not, of a threat towards Russia from NATO is the result of Russia's behaviour, invading place after place since (and before) the dissolution of the USSR. Russia's expansion westward through the supranational community agreement with Byelorussia predates Poland joining NATO. Now they want to expand further westward via Ukraine, with Dugin still in Putin's ear whispering "we need all of Europe".

 

[wannabejack]

and now you are propagating the lie of "Holomodor", ie the lie that is promoted by Ukrainian nationalists and Western propaganda.

Yes, the Stalinist bureaucracy is responsible for a famine in the Soviet union in the early 30's which killed 6 to 8 million, of whom 4 to 5 million were Ukrainians.

But there is no evidence whatsoever that the policies of the Stalinist bureaucracy intended such an outcome, nor that they were targeted against Ukrainians as an ethnic group.

As the figures indicate, there were also millions of non-Ukrainian Soviet citizens who died.

All historians who have an ounce of intellectual integrity have proven that the famine in the Soviet Union at that time was not an ethnically motivated genocide, but was the result of the criminally incompetent and irrational economic policies of the Stalinist bureaucracy, in a desperate attempt to forcibly industrialise the economy after years of incorrect policy directions. Kazakhstan for example suffered on a scale similar to that of Ukraine.

The reactionary historical falsification of the Ukrainian nationalists is that the famine was a conscious effort by the stalinist regime to eliminate the Ukrainain population. This is false to the core.

There is a fundamental similarity between Putin and Stalin, but it is not the one you think. Stalin, just like Putin, was anti-socialist. Putin says everything he can to condemn and falsify the history of the Bolshevik Revolution. Putin is a bitter anti-socialist. Likewise, Stalin was motivated by his hatred and fear of genuine socialism. The genocide that Stalin carried out in the late 1930's (the Great Terror) was not an ethnic genocide, it was a political genocide. Stalin murdered anyone he could find who had the slightest connection with, or sympathy for, the Russian Revolution. Putin agrees totally with Stalin on that score.

So you say.
“the Soviet union in the early 30's which killed 6 to 8 million, of whom 4 to 5 million were Ukrainians”.
“nor that they were targeted against Ukrainians as an ethnic group.”
That’s over 60% from a single ethnic group. That’s one group (state) out of 15 Soviet Socialist Republics.


Andrei Markevich, Natalya Naumenko, Nancy Qian

They also point out that during non-famine years, mortality rate in Ukraine was lower than in the rest of the Soviet Union (18 per 1,000 compared to 22 per 1,000), however in 1933, when mortality in Belarus and Russia increased to 30 per 1,000, in Ukraine it jumped to 60 per 1,000, while famine mortality rate was four to six times higher in Ukraine than in Russia. Regions with higher Ukrainian population shares were struck harder with centrally planned policies corresponding to famine such as increased procurement rate and Ukrainian populated areas were given lower amounts of tractors which the paper argues demonstrates that ethnic discrimination across the board was centrally planned.

The analysis notes that according to 1926 and 1939 census, the overall number of ethnic Russians increased by 28%, while Belarussian population increased by almost 13%; meanwhile, number of ethnic Ukrainians decreased by 10%, and its share in the overall Soviet population dropped from 21.3% to 16.5%. When comparing population in the areas designated by the government as "grain-producing" areas, overall number of ethnic Russians increased by 20% and Tatar population grew by 31%, while Ukrainian population decreased by almost 12%; the Russian share also increased from 41.9% to 48.1%, while Ukrainian dropped from 43.8% to 37.1%, meaning Russians overtook Ukrainians as the largest ethnic group in those areas. The analysis also comes to conclusion that mortality across Soviet regions was significantly higher depending on the percentage of ethnic Ukrainians, regardless of the republic. Nancy Qian notes in a lecture about the paper that the statistics are entirely consistent "with a model of ethnic bias and mass killing" for the famine presented by other authors.

 

[IlovethePies]

These are purely theory of your mind mate, if the US wanted to take Russia, they would've taken it already.

There is no conspiracy against Russia, like I said, if that was the want it would've happened already.

...ummm...you're missing the point, mate. Russia has nuclear weapons.

 

[Carringbush2010]

...ummm...you're missing the point, mate. Russia has nuclear weapons.

Ummm.... it's no secret that vlad has nuclear weapons, what you're missing is the obvious.

Let me spell it out for you.

If Vlad was ever gonna use his nukes, he would've done it by now, and if he would've, Russia would've been obliterated in the next 5 minutes afterwards.

 

[Present Not Past]

Ummm.... it's no secret that vlad has nuclear weapons, what you're missing is the obvious.

Let me spell it out for you.

If Vlad was ever gonna use his nukes, he would've done it by now, and if he would've, Russia would've been obliterated in the next 5 minutes afterwards.

As soon as Putin threatened the West with nuclear weapons, Biden flew nuclear armed B 52s over to Polish airbases.
We've all saw the footage.
They've been in the air over Poland ever since.
These aircraft can deliver nuclear payloads all over Russia within minutes.
As a result, Putin has backed off from his nuclear rhetoric ever since.

 

[IlovethePies]

So you say.
“the Soviet union in the early 30's which killed 6 to 8 million, of whom 4 to 5 million were Ukrainians”.
“nor that they were targeted against Ukrainians as an ethnic group.”
That’s over 60% from a single ethnic group. That’s one group (state) out of 15 Soviet Socialist Republics.


Andrei Markevich, Natalya Naumenko, Nancy Qian

They also point out that during non-famine years, mortality rate in Ukraine was lower than in the rest of the Soviet Union (18 per 1,000 compared to 22 per 1,000), however in 1933, when mortality in Belarus and Russia increased to 30 per 1,000, in Ukraine it jumped to 60 per 1,000, while famine mortality rate was four to six times higher in Ukraine than in Russia. Regions with higher Ukrainian population shares were struck harder with centrally planned policies corresponding to famine such as increased procurement rate and Ukrainian populated areas were given lower amounts of tractors which the paper argues demonstrates that ethnic discrimination across the board was centrally planned.

The analysis notes that according to 1926 and 1939 census, the overall number of ethnic Russians increased by 28%, while Belarussian population increased by almost 13%; meanwhile, number of ethnic Ukrainians decreased by 10%, and its share in the overall Soviet population dropped from 21.3% to 16.5%. When comparing population in the areas designated by the government as "grain-producing" areas, overall number of ethnic Russians increased by 20% and Tatar population grew by 31%, while Ukrainian population decreased by almost 12%; the Russian share also increased from 41.9% to 48.1%, while Ukrainian dropped from 43.8% to 37.1%, meaning Russians overtook Ukrainians as the largest ethnic group in those areas. The analysis also comes to conclusion that mortality across Soviet regions was significantly higher depending on the percentage of ethnic Ukrainians, regardless of the republic. Nancy Qian notes in a lecture about the paper that the statistics are entirely consistent "with a model of ethnic bias and mass killing" for the famine presented by other authors.

There was an important qualification in my comment. I said that historians of intellectual integrity have concluded that the famine in the early 30's was not ethnically motivated.

I will quote two experts in the field, Steven Wheatcroft and Robert W. Davies

"The Lower and Central Volga regions, including the German ASSR, together with the Bashkir ASSSR to the east of these regions, were also strongly affected by the famine. The population of these regions was about 14 million, and they covered an area equal to the territory of Ukraine. The rural death rate rose to nine times the normal level in the Lower Volga region, and to three times the normal level in the Central Volga. In the Central Black-Earth region, not generally listed as a famine area, the rural death rate reached over four times the normal level by July 1933. Serious food difficulties were also reported from the Ural region and the Far East. And the famine continued, and even intensified, in Kazakhstan.

Even excluding the Urals, Siberia and the Far East, the famine areas included over 70 million of the 160 million people in the USSR. (Stephen Wheatcroft, Robert W. Davies, Years of Hunger: Soviet Agriculture, 1931-1933, Palgrave Macmillan 2004, pp. 410-411.)"

In other words, the famine extended throughout the Soviet Union, affecting numerous ethnic groups. While Ukraine no doubt suffered the greatest numerical loss of life, the famine was proportionately even more devastating in Kazakhstan, where between 1 and 1.5 million died.

Finally, since the opening of the formerly secret Soviet archives when the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991, historians have had access to thousands of pages of documents on the famine.

Yet not a single document has been uncovered which could prove the intent to kill by starvation - with respect to the Ukrainian or any other ethnic group within the Soviet Union. Intent is the fundamental requirement for characterising any event of mass death as genocide.

I just googled Naumenko's research. She and her colleagues have looked at documents from the Soviet archives, and found plenty of empirical data showing the horrific levels of starvation in the Ukraine. But there is nothing there to prove intent, which is the key.

Just did some research on Markevich, and found that he was a fellow with the Hoover Institution.

What is the nature of the Hoover Institution?

The Hoover Institution formally became part of Stanford in 1959.

Unlike academic university departments, whose job is to advance humanity’s knowledge of truth, former President Herbert Hoover explained its role as follows: “The purpose of this institution must be, by its research and publications to demonstrate the evils of the doctrines of Karl Marx—whether communism, socialism, economic materialism or atheism—thus to protect the American way of life from such ideologies, their conspiracies, and to reaffirm the validity of the American system.” In other words, an institution devoted to the propagation of US propaganda.

Unlike Stanford professors, Hoover fellows do not go through the tenure process required of professors. Instead, they are given appointments by an institution answerable only to the president of the university. These fellows are then able to legitimize their views through their Stanford affiliation. Past and present Hoover fellows include Iraq War architects Donald Rumsfeld, Rice and Reagan-era Secretary of State George Shultz.

 

[IlovethePies]

Ummm.... it's no secret that vlad has nuclear weapons, what you're missing is the obvious.

Let me spell it out for you.

If Vlad was ever gonna use his nukes, he would've done it by now, and if he would've, Russia would've been obliterated in the next 5 minutes afterwards.

How the f**! do you know that?

Are you able to read Vlad's mind (making the puerile assumption that it is only Vlad who has any input into such a decision)

 

[Carringbush2010]

How the f**! do you know that?

Are you able to read Vlad's mind (making the puerile assumption that it is only Vlad who has any input into such a decision)

Oh my!

You really don't get it do you. That's not a question by the way, it's a statement.

It's pretty simple, Vlad wants to annex Ukraine, wanted to do it in 2 or 3 days, finds out he can't do by usual military.

So what he has got now? Only one thing, so why won't he use it?

Pretty obvious innit, he won't coz it'll mean annihilation of his beloved Russia.

How you don't get this is testament to your mind set.

 

[IlovethePies]

Oh my!

You really don't get it do you. That's not a question by the way, it's a statement.

It's pretty simple, Vlad wants to annex Ukraine, wanted to do it in 2 or 3 days, finds out he can't do by usual military.

So what he has got now? Only one thing, so why won't he use it?

Pretty obvious innit, he won't coz it'll mean annihilation of his beloved Russia.

How you don't get this is testament to your mind set.

I'm scared by your simplistic views.

Hopefully, the young generation does not share them...otherwise humanity is doomed.

 

[Present Not Past]

I'm scared by your simplistic views.

Hopefully, the young generation does not share them...otherwise humanity is doomed.

It is pretty simple though.
Putin's plan to take Kyiv through a strike from neighbouring Belarus.

 

[IlovethePies]

It is pretty simple though.
Putin's plan to take Kyiv through a strike from neighbouring Belarus.

I will leave you and Carringbush to Simpletonia, the island of simpletons.

I am sure you will be able to relax there for a while, enjoying a blissful break from reality in a tropical paradise...until the tsunami of reality comes crashing down...

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'm scared by your simplistic views.

Hopefully, the young generation does not share them...otherwise humanity is doomed.

Simplistic? Maybe............

None the less, Vlad, not Russia and its citizens wants to annex Ukraine, I know you know this by your posting.

You are correct in your reasoning of Vlad's want, still you don't seem to understand the end game here.

Yes, it is pretty simple, if Vlad wants what he wants and you and I and everyone else knows what he wants. His motives for what he wants are irrelevant.

What IS relevant is what the outcome is, that being that Ukraine does not want what Vlad wants, 100's of 1000's of lives being lost as we speak, on both sides.

The only way Vlad can win this war is by force is by nuclear weaponry, he knows he can't use that because he knows Russia will be obliterated immediately if he does so.

It's not rocket science.

Yeah you can point to capitalism / liberalism as the enabler, whether or not you're correct or not doesn't matter, it's irrelevant.

The 'west' or if you will, liberal democracy (or capitalism in your view) will ensure that Russia will not annex Ukraine, sure they're pussy footing around on it, none the less if push comes to shove you can bet you bet your bottom dollar Vlad loses out, which he will eventually anyway.