5 Filters

Order Out Of Chaos: How The Ukraine Conflict Is Designed To Benefit Globalists [Russia, China and America all equally bad]

Politics
#21

Yep! Anarchists too, just like the wider ‘Left’, indulge in their own ‘wrong-analysis!’ splinter wars. :roll_eyes:

FWIW, I reckon there IS a right and wrong side in this war: The gangsters running the US - and it’s attack chihuahua the ukstate - have wilfully pushed Russia to the point where it has nothing left but a choice of evils; the least-bad if them being this operation to protect the Donbas Russians from an imminent genocidal attack by the Ukrainian forces - including the nazi battalions - massed right on the LDNR borders; and - in for a penny, in for a pound - to then denazify and demilitarise the Ukraine, in accordance with Russia’s minimal national security needs. Vile business; but then the alternatives - the actually, really possible ones - are all worse.

In the real world of modern mass societies - which anarchists never seem to be able to deal with emotionally - these are the sordid qualities of actually art-of-the-possible realpolitik. Putin and his faction seem to be doing a pretty good job of steering their homeland through this global piss-mire, as well as is practicably possible. The key word here being ‘practicable’, rather than comfortable-theoreticians’ dream-worlds.

Hands dirty because of it? Sure, how not? But what else are actually-practical people supposed to do, being out in the nasty real world of human politics, instead of armchair theorising from the comfily-feathered nests of the still-sheltered Pampered Twenty Percent?

BTW: notice how sexually-tasty those ‘young women soldiers’ are in the pics. PR photies, do you reckon…? The Swampies’ latest no-hoper scam is to attract thousands of jihadis to Western Ukraine, to try - futilely, I reckon - to bog down Russia in a quagmire situation. Got to give America’s proxy armies of footloose merc loonies their images of ready virgins to fantasise about, on their way to getting themselves killed.

#22

Rhyd Wildermuth is posting some deep stuff at the moment, this was certainly one of the highlights. Thanks @GKH

1 Like
#23

Hi, my name is Saddam Hussein, speaking to you from Hell, or Heaven, or Purgatory or from Nowhere’sVille, you choose. This photo is evidence that me and the USA masters of war were always working together. Yep, I was one of the planners and participants of the big globalist plan whose goal is one world government by banking and WEF elites and some heads of state where you will own nothing but your Universal Basic Income account while we laugh and click drinks together and light each other’s cigars. Do you doubt my story? Hey, look at the photograph! Proof! As part of the plan I intentionally played the role of the bad guy of the month and even while the USA/NATO was destroying my country I was secretly helping them! That’s right, look at the photo, that’s solid evidence! And even after they shock and awed Baghdad (I gave them all the targeting info they need) and captured me, it was all part of a bigger plan and I was playing a role we had hashed out together in Davos! And then there I was on the scaffold, thinking 'oh those fools who think I was an enemy! Those fools who think I was the leader of their country! My theatrical performance was flawless! Me and the Globalists won again! Don’t believe me? Look at that photo of me and Rumsfeld! There’s the proof! We were always working together, me and the CIA, and the USA, through the 60’s and then the 80’s and now also! Yes, they’re going to hang me and occupy my country and take our oil and and gold and control our currency, but it’s all part of OUR PLAN! I’m so happy to be part of OUR PLAN! In fact I planned, with my globalist partners, my own demise! It’s true, I wanted to die for OUR PLAN! Do you doubt me? Look at all those meetings I attended with the globalists! Look at my history of working with the globalists! And look at that photo of me and Rumsfeld! That’s proof that we were always, always, until now as they pull the handle and I plummet with a rope…around…my nnnnneeecckkk ugh glug GO GLOBALISM!

image

1 Like
#24

Hmmm…this from “the leaky hulk” may be of some amusement: https://members5.boardhost.com/xxxxx/thread/1647274487.html

1 Like
#25

Killed as some hundreds of foreign mercenaries have been already, over in the west of the Ukraine, in the training camp near the Polish border, which Russia has just attacked with long-range missiles.

If - idiot naked apes that we are - we’re going to indulge our chronic addiction to war, then it’s as well to be aware of who’s in the right of it, and who’s in the wrong, relative as it may be. In this case, the bulk of the argument lies with Russia. And they - clearly - are attempting to do the least destructive and murderous war that is - again, that word - practicable; in the real-world of actual military operations, that is, rather than on the comfortable sidelines of all we armchair onlookers…

#26

All too plausible, alas @Everyman

#27

I gather that the Comedian President, flushed with success at his standing ovation via Zoom from the assembled reptiles of Westminster, is due for a repeat genuflection in the Capitol tomorrow (Wed 16/3/22). If only the little bastard had stuck to waiting tables during his periods of rest, world history - what’s left of it - might have turned out a little different.

Sadly I must have missed the “bring and bake sale all proceeds to Ukraine” at work today. Actual work to do, and all that.

#28

I was never a habitué G, and nothing I saw in that thread persuades me that that was a poor choice.

I notice that their threading algorithms allow people to choose a cheery little header for their lobbed grenades. As the phrase goes: that escalated quickly, and this little finesse probably heightens the antagonism.

#29

My responses (also I can edit here -such a relief-), quote;

“Let’s look at Putin’s position, his getting away with annexing Crimea is a whole can of worms…it seems to me that it suited someone in the State Dept. that he should…energies were clearly focussed on installing western puppets in positions of power in Kiev and the wider Ukraine…one would have expected far more activity within the U.N structure if Crimea wasn’t a “pawn sacrifice”…It seems Putin knew this very well and has (to an extent), played along…The Donbas is more complicated, after all the separatists themselves seem far more Bolshevik than Putin ever was even in his KGB days…again the suggestion is he is using the separatists…Do the separatists have genuine concerns? Do the actions of the Ukrainian state violate international law with regard to suppressing the separatists? Yes and yes, however, Putin could have easily justified militarising the Donbas and then evacuating those in most peril (surely what a humanitarian would do), even responding by defending the Donbas from within its own borders (if he thought necessary, the non-violent approach would have been to evacuate the populace to Russian territory -not Crimea-, as he now has, and deal with the problem diplomatically through the U.N), however, and here’s the point, Putin is not a man of peace (Corbyn for all the internal squabbling -in which I do not have a running-dog by the way-, would have chosen to de-escalate surely?), and is using the conflict to support his (very over-stretched), power base as totalitarians (like ours), do.
What is your problem with that analysis s? Must we march on Maldon?”…

“Psychologically speaking oppressed peoples have a marked tendency to further oppress minorities within their own society whereby homophobia, misogyny and racism increase as displacement activity, it is well to remember though that, primarily, this is the fault of the original oppressor who often uses pre-existing prejudices to lubricate the wheels of its “client” state.”

Myself and one of the regulars have quite a “ding-dong” re: Jamaica, non-violence and the effects of emancipation (same thread as posted above):

G

#30

I agree absolutely with your points RG - that this is a “just war” under that old furphy of the Right to Protect - which is applicable in this case just as it has been in Syria for the last seven years. In Syria as in Ukraine Russia’s intent is genuine and honest, and not supported by a barrage of silly sob stories and the fear-brainwashing of the population of the country under siege - that is the rest of Ukraine. The presentation of stories about hundreds of civilians being held hostage by Russian soldiers is the epitome of this fraud by the Imperium and its sycophants. I’ve been too bogged down in fighting this war at home to look at 5 filters and this fascinating thread. Yesterday the whole media and political enterprise had a hate fest on Putin and a save Ukraine blitz, including bland statements that “Putin was flattening residential areas of cities to force citizens into submission”. more later, when we see just how far the idiot Empire malingers are going to push this.
A brilliant analysis btw on the Gray Zone, interviewing a US Colonel with a realistic appraisal of Russia’s military tactics and … success.

1 Like
#31

It would have been (by anyone’s definition), a “just war” if Gandhi had enabled the insurrection against the British…he saw things differently and so does history…if this war is considered “just” then we’re left with either/or democracy…the dalliance of the totalitarian…no third way…no middle ground…no East European Union free of NATO’s influence (to my mind the only workable solution to the impasse). I trust the West’s propaganda less far than I can spit, nevertheless, if Putin had stayed behind the borders of the separatist regions we would not be in this position…this is two globalised elites blood letting for their own purposes…none of it is “just”… Martin Luther King jnr., Gandhi the true heroes of the twentieth century would be searching for a workable and peaceful solution…, however, both here and on TLN the debate has descended into the mire of tit-for-tat “eye for an eye” Old Testament politics…isn’t the lesson of the 20C that such is never a solution and merely perpetuates the cycle of violence?

Consider dear “Bomber Harris”, vilified by the right thinking Left (pun intended), but surely justified if one is to believe those proselytising for Putin’s version of justice…

Bomber

…and frankly guys the “no flies on us” notion re: Russian aggression just doesn’t stand up to even the most basic scrutiny….there are nuclear reactors all over the Ukraine…even those living in countries opposed to conflict would be affected if just one was badly damaged…for goodness sake… (also another reason NATO should not get involved)!

#32

Can’t agree at all GK! Staying within the separatists regions was never even an option, as the neo-Nazi scum were dug in all along the control line, which confined the two republics to a fraction of the two provinces and excluded them entirely from Mariupol. The DNR/LNR were the rump of the Russian speaking and culture leaning populations of the East, which included Kharkiv, and would all have gone together were it not for Kiev’s constant war and pressure and Kiev’s failure to follow any of the agreed Minsk protocols.
When it comes to war also, my model is Syria, where the Gandhi option would simply mean the collapse of the government and subiugation of the people to an alien power. Syria’s war was always defensive, and still is not won - as an offensive war would long have been. Were Syria the US it would have taken the whole SE of Turkey and Lebanon and built new military bases along the whole NE Med coast.

In Ukraine also, Kiev’s intent was to launch an attack/invasion of Donetsk and then of Crimea, on behalf of their Imperial overlords. Zelensky continues to say that all of Ukraine must be united, including getting back Crimea, and presumably forbidding the speaking and use of Russian.
Last on the nuclear plants - the object of Russia from the start has been to secure the nuclear plants so that the nazi crazies couldn’t get their hands on them and cause a terrorist incident or hold people to ransom with threats. If you watched “Red Election” you will see GCHQ’s playbook for how the media has played this, even before it happened. IMO the film “Chernobyl” was a preparation for this multi-faceted psy-op.

1 Like
#33

You’re not hearing me… he evacuated once he decided to attack…to give ground to protect ground is an ancient principle he should have employed, the same is true re: Syria…peace is no “quick -fix” it takes work and patience…is it really worth the risk of (for instance), a nuclear accident? He took the “pawn sacrifice” of Crimea and could have defiended it with at least some justification…the international community are hardly behind NATO…Minsk should have been shaken down in the U.N…both sides have allowed the real issues of self-determination to be obscured for their own purposes…Putin was willing to sacrifice his Bolsheviks!

#34

But we need to remember it’s not just 'Putin" here. It’s Lavrov, and Nebenzia, and Shoigu, and Zakharova bless her heart - who are all capable of expounding at length on the exact nature of the conflict in Donbass and who was and is responsible for it. We can’t say what would have happened had Russia not intervened - after three months of warnings and diplomatic ultimatums that the US quite failed to respond to or register. This all came against a backdrop of months of lies and destabilisation - remember Tikhanovskaya, Kazakhstan, IS fighters trained in Al Tanf, It was an impossible choice, but one that had to be made.

2 Likes
#35

But acting like “Bomber Harris” is not at all what the Russians are doing. Of course, one can expect the Russians to claim they’re trying to avoid civilian casualties, but Col. McGregor’s comments indicate this is true from his reading of the military campaign. Apart from that there’s clearly a self-interest (on the Russian side) not to create enemies in Ukraine on your doorstep, whether or not believe you believe Putin et al are doing so for moral reasons.

What’s also interesting is that McGregor’s comments show that the Russians are essentially speaking the truth about the conflict. There may be propaganda on both sides, but it’s heavily skewed in one direction.

As a final point, I don’t really see this `tit for tat’ attitude, either here or on TLN.

1 Like
#36

Stepping away from armchair moral theorising at a safe distance, and sticking strictly with the real world of how realpolitik is actually done by our villainy-addicted, violent species, the real description of the situation is pretty clear:

The Putin-led ruling group in Russia tried constantly to persuade the Anglozionist-empire crew that this could all be resolved with good-faith, and give-and-take genuine diplomatic negotiation. And so it could have been. They promoted this, and pled for it repeatedly.

And we all know perfectly well that they got the runaround from a bunch of utter crooks in Washington and London, and the other Az-empire underling creatures in Brussels.

The real world conclusion is simple: Russians, up against a wall which threatened the very continuing existence of their country and their people, were faced with a set of dire bad choices, with no good choice at all available.

Ahimsic choice to bow the head and accept the destruction wouldn’t have actually happened. Putin and colleagues would have been thrown out, and other war-willing people would have taken their place. The bulk of the Russian people understand these realities, and are resolute about them.

Faced with war as the least bad of an all-bad set of choices, Putin, Shoigu, Lavrov and the rest are by far the best people to at least conduct it as briefly and with least death and destruction as they can. It’s a shit awful situation; but ALL the other (real-world) options were worse; as much for certain death and destruction on a much larger scale than is happening now, as for any other bad outcomes.

Sometimes fate lays a situation on you where there is literally no lily-white, absolutely harmless way out. This is one such. The best that those dedicated to peace and ahimsa above all can hope for now is that the Russians manage to bring off their - quite evident - plan to complete the war, disarm the Ukrainian military, clear out the massed violent, murderous criminal formations, and ensure the Ukraine’s long-term neutrality, with the absolute minimum of death and destruction created in the process.

What part of this least vile of a wholly vile set of choices is so hard to understand? When, that is, one is prepared to face up to the awfulness that the real world throws on us regularly, without any hope of dodging?

1 Like
#37

“We can’t say what would have happened had Russia not intervened - after three months of warnings and diplomatic ultimatums that the US quite failed to respond to or register. This all came against a backdrop of months of lies and destabilisation -” We can say some things…for instance there wouldn’t be conflict above, in and around the environs of nuclear reactors…

Harry Patch

Re: “Bomber Harris” both countries/regimes were under attack from NAZIs …

#38

My heart is with the ahimsa approach, and Gandhi was a great man, but not the naive innocent he is painted as. From the same template as Mandela. Compassion and the edge of the sword are not indivisible.

Strictly speaking Manjushri (below) uses his sword to cut through ignorance.

Manjushri
Manjushri1000×1339 339 KB

Two quick points:

Britain was able to decommission the Empire model of doing things because we had captured all the institutions and created a reliable strata of professionals keen to feather their nests by continuing to administer things the way they’d been taught. All that distasteful brutality could be curbed (and a fair percentage of the subalterns were sick to death of it, or actually slaughtered in WWII).

Sometimes it might be better to save evil people from karmic catastrophe by ending their earthly existence before the debt becomes overwhelming. The example here is the assassination of Langdarma by Lhalung Pelgyi Dorje.

1 Like
#39

Because Rhis those who reach for a violent solution always, always do so before the last option for peace has been exhausted…Who has articulated the “Eastern European compromise” or the formation of an EEU? Topical now mon’ brav…

#40

So was Martin Luther King jnr. Gandhi also said; “(tyrants) may seem invincible but they all fall eventually!” The trick is not letting the situation develop into one where one’s back is against the wall and there is no room for compromise. Harry Patch said; “war is legalised murder” but he also said; “if I had had my machine gun on me when the German bomber was flying above the street I was on machine gunning civilians I would have used it” …but he didn’t…horses for courses…the right of self-defence is fundamental… however, Putin (and the others), knew they were sticking their necks out and then they stuck them out further…don’t tell me the non-violent approach was discussed in the Kremlin the notion just isn’t credible…“weapon of last resort” means just that the very “last resort”…