Assault on Kiev: Russian helicopters swoop above Ukraine's capital

[billyo]

This is a very interesting and sobering document from the US think tank the Rand Corporation - an august body funded by the US arms industry and the Pentagon so you can assume that such a piece of work carries a lot of weight in informing and helping to shape US foreign policy. It has been released with virtually no press interest so one could assume it is intended to leak slowly into the debate of how this war could end.

 

My take is that we will start to see a pivot in the narrative shortly as Biden calculates what is the off ramp and can he deliver a peace that brings the oil price down and a resurgent economy before the next election and that the war in uniting NATO , spurring rearmament and degrading and exposing Russian weakness has been a big win for US foreign policy. Just a shame that Zelenskiy and Ukraine has to suffer so terribly as a consequence.

 

In short they assert that US interests are not the same as Ukrainian interests and US policy must put the US economic and military first.

They say that maximalism in Ukraine demands to return all their territory from the Russians are unrealistic.

The primary focus should be on China not Russia and the Ukraine war is a distraction.

Peace should be brokered and maintained by potentially withholding further US military and economic aid if Ukraine doesn't agree.

A partial removal of sanctions from Russia should be considered as part of the peace deal.

 

That no side can win and that there is a high risk of escalation that risks the situation spiraling out of control.

 

That rebuilding Ukraine would take enormous investment from western partners and that will only be forthcoming if some sort of DMZ / international partnership brokers a lasting peace which benefits both Russia and Ukraine.

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

 

Commentary here ;

 

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/02/01/the-soft-chimes-of-a-song-ukraine-doesnt-want-to-hear/

 

Edited February 5, 2023 by billyo

[Bkk Brian]

21 minutes ago, billyo said:

This is a very interesting and sobering document from the US think tank the Rand Corporation - an august body funded by the US arms industry and the Pentagon so you can assume that such a piece of work carries a lot of weight in informing and helping to shape US foreign policy. It has been released with virtually no press interest so one could assume it is intended to leak slowly into the debate of how this war could end.

 

My take is that we will start to see a pivot in the narrative shortly as Biden calculates what is the off ramp and can he deliver a peace that brings the oil price down and a resurgent economy before the next election and that the war in uniting NATO , spurring rearmament and degrading and exposing Russian weakness has been a big win for US foreign policy. Just a shame that Zelenskiy and Ukraine has to suffer so terribly as a consequence.

 

In short they assert that US interests are not the same as Ukrainian interests and US policy must put the US economic and military first.

They say that maximalism in Ukraine demands to return all their territory from the Russians are unrealistic.

The primary focus should be on China not Russia and the Ukraine war is a distraction.

Peace should be brokered and maintained by potentially withholding further US military and economic aid if Ukraine doesn't agree.

A partial removal of sanctions from Russia should be considered as part of the peace deal.

 

That no side can win and that there is a high risk of escalation that risks the situation spiraling out of control.

 

That rebuilding Ukraine would take enormous investment from western partners and that will only be forthcoming if some sort of DMZ / international partnership brokers a lasting peace which benefits both Russia and Ukraine.

 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

 

Commentary here ;

 

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2023/02/01/the-soft-chimes-of-a-song-ukraine-doesnt-want-to-hear/

 

In short they assert that US interests are not the same as Ukrainian interests and US policy must put the US economic and military first.

 

Well that's a little obvious, the US interests are quite rightly for their own people and country primarily, just as any sovereign nation, however that full quote from Rand is:

 

"An important caveat: This Perspective focuses on U.S. interests, which often align with but are not synonymous with Ukrainian interests. We acknowledge that Ukrainians have been the ones fighting and dying to protect their country against an unprovoked, illegal, and morally repugnant Russian invasion. Their cities have been flattened; their economy has been decimated; they have been the victims of the Russian army’s war crimes. However, the U.S. government nevertheless has an obligation to its citizens to determine how different war trajectories would affect U.S. interests and explore options for influencing the course of the war to promote those interests."

 

As for the commentary from responsiblestatecraft.org. 

 

"Co-founder Trita Parsi, an Iranian-born author and analyst, has described the Quincy Institute as "transpartisan", and, according to The Nation, has described the need for "an alliance of politicians on the left and right who agree on the need for restraint, even if they do so for different reasons".[7][12] Bacevich said: "Our purpose is to promote restraint as a central principle of U.S. foreign policy — fewer wars and more effective diplomatic engagement"

 

What do you expect from them? Restraint in all US foreign policy is their objective, even down to the Chinese balloon incident which they say is overblown.

 

 

[billyo]

18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

In short they assert that US interests are not the same as Ukrainian interests and US policy must put the US economic and military first.

 

Well that's a little obvious, the US interests are quite rightly for their own people and country primarily, just as any sovereign nation, however that full quote from Rand is:

 

"An important caveat: This Perspective focuses on U.S. interests, which often align with but are not synonymous with Ukrainian interests. We acknowledge that Ukrainians have been the ones fighting and dying to protect their country against an unprovoked, illegal, and morally repugnant Russian invasion. Their cities have been flattened; their economy has been decimated; they have been the victims of the Russian army’s war crimes. However, the U.S. government nevertheless has an obligation to its citizens to determine how different war trajectories would affect U.S. interests and explore options for influencing the course of the war to promote those interests."

 

As for the commentary from responsiblestatecraft.org. 

 

"Co-founder Trita Parsi, an Iranian-born author and analyst, has described the Quincy Institute as "transpartisan", and, according to The Nation, has described the need for "an alliance of politicians on the left and right who agree on the need for restraint, even if they do so for different reasons".[7][12] Bacevich said: "Our purpose is to promote restraint as a central principle of U.S. foreign policy — fewer wars and more effective diplomatic engagement"

 

What do you expect from them? Restraint in all US foreign policy is their objective, even down to the Chinese balloon incident which they say is overblown.

 

 

Yes it is well worth reading the document in full and they do indeed pay tribute to the valiant and heroic efforts of Ukraine to liberate their country from Russian aggression. But the concept that the Russians like the Nazis are inherently evil and a threat to European territorial interests and must be defeated at any price is absent from the report. They suggest , to my mind a tad menacingly, here is a peace deal sign or or else no more weapons and no chance of investment.

 

If a more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous Ukraine rises from the ashes of such a deal then the fight may have been worth it. If such a deal is to be had then it is better it begins now and in earnest rather than any more blood shed.It certainly strikes me as a ray of light and hope in this darkness. Both sides need to feel they have won and the other lost if such a deal is to be had, but the concept of war crime trials and retribution from the Russians won't happen.

 

If Biden pulls such a deal off, if a deal is to be had ,then  markets will soar and probably he.or his anointed one will win the next US election. This wasn't the war that the US wanted and that's why Biden offered to get Zelinskiy out when the invasion happened. He surprised everyone with his bravery and valour but probably as a consequence and by not calculating the utter ruthlessness and hold on power that Putin has (backed up by nuclear weapons of course) that his country would suffer most terribly as a result.

Edited February 5, 2023 by billyo

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, billyo said:

Yes it is well worth reading the document in full and they do indeed pay tribute to the valiant and heroic efforts of Ukraine to liberate their country from Russian aggression. But the concept that the Russians like the Nazis are inherently evil and a threat to European territorial interests and must be defeated at any price is absent from the report. They suggest , to my mind a tad menacingly, here is a peace deal sign or or else no more weapons and no chance of investment.

 

If a more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous Ukraine rises from the ashes of such a deal then the fight may have been worth it. If such a deal is to be had then it is better it begins now and in earnest rather than any more blood shed.It certainly strikes me as a ray of light and hope in this darkness. Both sides need to feel they have won and the other lost if such a deal is to be had, but the concept of war crime trials and retribution from the Russians won't happen.

 

If Biden pulls such a deal off, if a deal is to be had ,then  markets will soar and probably he.or his anointed one will win the next US election.

32 pages of a Rand doc with the very important caveat that you snipped. A similar analysis could be said for any country supplying military aid to Ukraine. At the end of the day its what Ukraine and all its allies decide. Simple as that.

 

If a more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous Ukraine rises from the ashes of such a deal then the fight may have been worth it.

 

Its also worth it to avoid a far worse corrupt and far less democratic Russia occupy Ukraine.

[billyo]

They end the report with this conclusion but they obviously want that debate to begin.

 

 

A dramatic, overnight shift in U.S. policy is politically impossible—both domestically and with allies—and would be unwise in any case. But developing these instruments
now and socializing them with Ukraine and with U.S. allies might help catalyze the eventual start of a process that could bring this war to a negotiated end in a time
frame that would serve U.S. interests. The alternative is a long war that poses major challenges for the United States, Ukraine, and the rest of the world.

 

[Saanim]

17 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

“where actually is the "propaganda"? “

 

Just switch on RT. Or whenever Putin or one of his cronies says something.

 

There have been plenty of polls in Russia which show that somewhere between 50 to 80% of the people believe the lies and BS they are told on a daily basis by Russian state media and their pundits. I would call that successful propaganda, wouldn’t you?

 

My own experience with something similar is that, a long time ago, I had a Czech girlfriend, who had fled then Czechoslovakia with her family at the end of the 1970’s, when she was 10 years old. Later her parents told her that, back when they were still in Czechoslovakia, they had been very careful not to discuss any ‘sensitive’ topics in front of their children, for fear that one of them would inadvertently say something about that in school or to a friend. Which would lead to a visit by the secret police and possibly detention or being locked up in a mental institution.

I imagine things were not much better in the USSR. I also imagine this is the kind of state that Putin and his henchmen are very much longing to return to. 

 

 

 

As per your own experience from your GF in Cz the people were careful to discuss anything,  they did not believe what the regime told to them. And you "imagine things were not much better in the USSR". That means also the people in USSR did not believe the official propaganda.

 

So, how did you conclude that now in USSR "between 50 to 80% of the people believe the lies and BS they are told on a daily basis by Russian state media and their pundits"?

 

But perhaps you are right with the present 50 to 80%. They know very well how their country and their life has been changed, so they appreciate it, expressing it in a poll with figures unprecedented in other countries, highly developed with a high democracy.  (Or is so, they are forced to those figures by "Putin and his henchmen"?)

 

Then, the question is; How do you know that now only "the lies and BS they are told"? Do you know what "they are told"? Are you listening, reading what they are told? Then perhaps you can give us some examples of the lies and BS?

 

Or is it so that you know it from what you "are told on a daily basis". Then, disclose us please: "where actually is the propaganda"?

 

         

 

 

[heybruce]

Many of the supporters and/or defenders of Russia's illegitimate invasion of Ukraine rely on the "sphere of influence" justification.  Evidence shows that both Russia's and China's concepts of sphere of influence allows them to dominate nearby nations and crush those that do not acquiesce to their domination.

 

The United States could try to rely on such a concept, but I don't think Canada or Mexico would go along.  In fact I think both Canada and Mexico would find a realpolitik way to tell the United States to F***-Off, and rightly so.  Sphere of influence should imply an opportunity and willingness of nations to work with their neighbors, not dominate them.

 

I think EU nations are more or less in agreement with my concept of sphere of influence.  Those nations that have legitimate fears of Russian aggression seem especially keen on supporting Ukraine in its fight to exist as an independent nation.  Supporting such a right to exist as an independent nation can come at a high cost; financially for the west and in blood for Ukraine.  However so long as Ukraine is willing to pay the price for its existence I think the west should support it.

 

A world in which three great powers dominate their neighbors and engage in a perpetual fight for total global hegemony is the back story of "1984".  It is not a happy story.

 

 

[billyo]

8 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Many of the supporters and/or defenders of Russia's illegitimate invasion of Ukraine rely on the "sphere of influence" justification.  Evidence shows that both Russia's and China's concepts of sphere of influence allows them to dominate nearby nations and crush those that do not acquiesce to their domination.

 

The United States could try to rely on such a concept, but I don't think Canada or Mexico would go along.  In fact I think both Canada and Mexico would find a realpolitik way to tell the United States to F***-Off, and rightly so.  Sphere of influence should imply an opportunity and willingness of nations to work with their neighbors, not dominate them.

 

I think EU nations are more or less in agreement with my concept of sphere of influence.  Those nations that have legitimate fears of Russian aggression seem especially keen on supporting Ukraine in its fight to exist as an independent nation.  Supporting such a right to exist as an independent nation can come at a high cost; financially for the west and in blood for Ukraine.  However so long as Ukraine is willing to pay the price for its existence I think the west should support it.

 

A world in which three great powers dominate their neighbors and engage in a perpetual fight for total global hegemony is the back story of "1984".  It is not a happy story.

 

 

The US would probably say we saved your guys asses twice in the last century, show us some respect ! UK foreign policy is absolutely to back the US in nearly all instances since WW2 right or wrong. That said Harold Wilson wisely kept us out of the Vietnam War and rightly so. If the US was to pull support from Ukraine it would probably be game over for them as a lot of wavering European allies would fold as well. Global geopolitics is a very dirty game and the US can be a very dirty player if it suits them  When the missile hit Poland Biden pushed back very intemperately to Zelinsky. If he wasn't to accede and then subsequently lost stuff would no doubt come out that he would rather not be aired in public and the Great Game would move elsewhere.

[Bkk Brian]

22 minutes ago, billyo said:

The US would probably say we saved your guys asses twice in the last century, show us some respect ! UK foreign policy is absolutely to back the US in nearly all instances since WW2 right or wrong. That said Harold Wilson wisely kept us out of the Vietnam War and rightly so. If the US was to pull support from Ukraine it would probably be game over for them as a lot of wavering European allies would fold as well. Global geopolitics is a very dirty game and the US can be a very dirty player if it suits them  When the missile hit Poland Biden pushed back very intemperately to Zelinsky. If he wasn't to accede and then subsequently lost stuff would no doubt come out that he would rather not be aired in public and the Great Game would move elsewhere.

NATO is not wavering. 

 

Your instance on taking events out of context is evident. As for the accidental air defense missile that landed in Poland:

 

"The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations blamed Russia for the death of two citizens inside Poland’s territory.

“While we still don’t know all of the facts, we do know one thing: This tragedy would never have happened but for Russia’s needless invasion of Ukraine and its recent missile assaults against Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure,”

 

Russia is "ultimately responsible for this tragic incident," with its now nearly nine-month invasion of Ukraine, the White House council said.

[rudi49jr]

3 hours ago, Saanim said:

As per your own experience from your GF in Cz the people were careful to discuss anything,  they did not believe what the regime told to them. And you "imagine things were not much better in the USSR". That means also the people in USSR did not believe the official propaganda.

 

So, how did you conclude that now in USSR "between 50 to 80% of the people believe the lies and BS they are told on a daily basis by Russian state media and their pundits"?

 

But perhaps you are right with the present 50 to 80%. They know very well how their country and their life has been changed, so they appreciate it, expressing it in a poll with figures unprecedented in other countries, highly developed with a high democracy.  (Or is so, they are forced to those figures by "Putin and his henchmen"?)

 

Then, the question is; How do you know that now only "the lies and BS they are told"? Do you know what "they are told"? Are you listening, reading what they are told? Then perhaps you can give us some examples of the lies and BS?

 

Or is it so that you know it from what you "are told on a daily basis". Then, disclose us please: "where actually is the propaganda"?

 

         

 

 

Well, apparently the propaganda got to you as well. Like I said, just watch RT, or any other state controlled media, and it’s nothing but lies and BS. I don’t care if you believe that or not, but please stop pushing your distorted view of the world, and your belief that everything is hunky dory in Russia.
If, like you said, you really believe that the vast majority of the people in Russia appreciate the way things are right now in their country, then there really is nothing I can do for you, other then to recommend to do some research and get your facts straight.

[rudi49jr]

2 hours ago, Saanim said:

Please enlighten us how the Ukraine is "more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous". 

 

What is generally known about the corruption and prosperity in the last 20 years is well documented, beside the fact how the population had shrank, working for a lowest salaries anywhere in Europe, not only in the West but also in the East Europe countries. And many who still had had a family back home to support, without their money they would not survive 

 

And about the "more democratic"? Not sure whether I can mention here the 2014 Maidan coup where the democratically elected parliament was brutally stormed?  How in other countries such insurgency is classified?    Just curious...  

Maybe you should work on your reading skills. This is what was said:

 

“If a more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous Ukraine rises from the ashes of such a deal then the fight may have been worth it”

 

They were talking about the future, hypothetically.
 

But since you brought it up: Zelensky was elected president in a fair and democratic election. When’s the last time there were fair and democratic elections in Russia? There have also been quite a few stories (easy to find on the internet, just google it) of Russian soldiers in Ukraine who were astounded that houses had indoor plumbing, and gas and electricity, which they themselves didn’t have back home. Moreover, they were led to believe (here’s that pesky propaganda again) that Ukrainians were dirt poor and lived like cavemen. And that all Ukrainians were nazi’s. 

[jvs]

6 minutes ago, Saanim said:

Nothing of his promises was fulfilled.  The bombing has not ended - it never has been intended to end - as disclosed by Merkel, Hollande and Poroshenko.  And a new language law has been immediately issued outlawing the Russian language.

Just quoted one part that is an absolute lie,it is not illegal to speak Russian in the Ukraine.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jun/08/sergey-lavrov/russian-has-not-been-banned-ukraine-despite-repeat/

[Rimmer]

Off topic history lessons from the usual suspect have been removed also some replies.

 

 

 

 

 

[bannork]

Ain't karma a britch 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

Ukraine prepares for renewed Russian offensive

Ukrainian forces are bracing for an imminent large-scale attack by Russian troops as the Kremlin seeks to regain the initiative in the war and seize the rest of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine.

 

Ukrainian officials have multiplied warnings in recent days about a coming Russian offensive, albeit with differing timelines.

 

Oleksiy Reznikov, Ukraine’s defence minister, said on Sunday that his country expected Russia’s invading forces to launch a new offensive in the Donbas and southern areas where it currently occupies close to 20 per cent of Ukrainian territory later this month.

 

https://www.ft.com/content/268bd522-4794-4f3d-895f-f58a55536af9

[Social Media]

You're going to hear the term "spring offensive" a lot in the coming weeks of the war in Ukraine.

In a traditional military sense, it's when armies look to generate momentum after using the poor winter conditions to replenish.

It is true that the fighting has become more static during typically cold conditions.

However, all signs seem to be pointing towards an upcoming Russian push.

Moscow has mobilised hundreds of thousands more men, as well as increased its production of weapons and ammunition.

Kyiv is expecting to see major attacks from the east and south as soon as 24 February, which would mark a year since the full-scale invasion.

 

So, if Russia does launch another offensive, what will it try to take?

[thaibeachlovers]

On 2/3/2023 at 8:41 PM, rudi49jr said:

I think it’s quite clear that Putin and his clique live on another planet, in a totally different ‘reality’, so there’s no telling what they will do. IMO, any negotiated peace with Russia won’t be worth the paper it’s written on, since Russia has proven that it simply can not be trusted. If not by attacking Poland or the Baltics, they will want to find another way to screw things up for the West. It’s what they have been doing for years already, and they won’t stop. 

You may be right, but short of war, or Putin being replaced by another Gorbachev, what can be done about them in the real ( MAD ) world?

The world stood back while Stalin and Mao killed millions of their own citizens, and neither had a nuclear deterrent.

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, billyo said:

Yes it is well worth reading the document in full and they do indeed pay tribute to the valiant and heroic efforts of Ukraine to liberate their country from Russian aggression. But the concept that the Russians like the Nazis are inherently evil and a threat to European territorial interests and must be defeated at any price is absent from the report. They suggest , to my mind a tad menacingly, here is a peace deal sign or or else no more weapons and no chance of investment.

 

If a more democratic, less corrupt and more prosperous Ukraine rises from the ashes of such a deal then the fight may have been worth it. If such a deal is to be had then it is better it begins now and in earnest rather than any more blood shed.It certainly strikes me as a ray of light and hope in this darkness. Both sides need to feel they have won and the other lost if such a deal is to be had, but the concept of war crime trials and retribution from the Russians won't happen.

 

If Biden pulls such a deal off, if a deal is to be had ,then  markets will soar and probably he.or his anointed one will win the next US election. This wasn't the war that the US wanted and that's why Biden offered to get Zelinskiy out when the invasion happened. He surprised everyone with his bravery and valour but probably as a consequence and by not calculating the utter ruthlessness and hold on power that Putin has (backed up by nuclear weapons of course) that his country would suffer most terribly as a result.

I wonder what the Europeans will do when told that their "investment" in the war has achieved no win for Ukraine? I doubt they will go it alone.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

If, like you said, you really believe that the vast majority of the people in Russia appreciate the way things are right now in their country, then there really is nothing I can do for you, other then to recommend to do some research and get your facts straight.

To not like the way it is now, they would need a better past to compare with. Sooooo, the million $ question is "has there been a better time in living memory for the average Russian"?

[thaibeachlovers]

34 minutes ago, Black Ops said:

You're going to hear the term "spring offensive" a lot in the coming weeks of the war in Ukraine.

In a traditional military sense, it's when armies look to generate momentum after using the poor winter conditions to replenish.

It is true that the fighting has become more static during typically cold conditions.

However, all signs seem to be pointing towards an upcoming Russian push.

Moscow has mobilised hundreds of thousands more men, as well as increased its production of weapons and ammunition.

Kyiv is expecting to see major attacks from the east and south as soon as 24 February, which would mark a year since the full-scale invasion.

 

So, if Russia does launch another offensive, what will it try to take?

So, if Russia does launch another offensive, what will it try to take?

IMO they will try to break the Ukrainian front line to prevent them launching their own offensive, and build a defensive line on strategically important features. Think Hindenberg Line as an example.

I very much doubt they will try and take more of Ukraine than the east permanently.

[rudi49jr]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

To not like the way it is now, they would need a better past to compare with. Sooooo, the million $ question is "has there been a better time in living memory for the average Russian"?

Agreed. Russians have been oppressed for centuries, first by the Czars, then by communist dictators and now by Putin and his cronies. So most of them don’t know any better.
But many of them do know things are (much) better in the West, what with TV and internet and social media. And I suspect they also know that things could be a lot better in Russia, if only they could find a way to get rid of the oligarch kleptocracy and have some semblance of democracy. But how do you do that when there has never been a large and strong middle class that can bring to bear enough opposition? The only thing they know and have ever known  is brutal oppression. How to break through that vicious circle? 
I have no idea, to be honest. It’s probably going to take some kind of revolution and involve a lot of bloodshed, because Putin and the oligarchs are not going to give up their position of absolute power without a hell of a fight. 

[jvs]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You may be right, but short of war, or Putin being replaced by another Gorbachev, what can be done about them in the real ( MAD ) world?

The world stood back while Stalin and Mao killed millions of their own citizens, and neither had a nuclear deterrent.

It does not look like you have noticed it but the world has changed just

a little bit since those days.

Anyway what happened back then was terrible but it was an internal affair.

This time a little man called Putin has set his sight on invading another sovereign country,he needs to be stopped.

Are all Russians guilty by proxy?

I believe in a way they are.

[JerseytoBKK]

For those who aren't aware of Perun's weekly presentations on the war, yesterday he released an analysis of how much and what type of aid Ukraine needs to succeed. Already over 4,000 comments and 99% of the comments marvel at the in-depth research he does and his superlative presentation skills. His videos are usually around an hour long and no one complains about the length and most would keep tuning into his presentations even if they were twice as long. He's that good. The previous week, his analysis talked about not underestimating Russia and their ability to prolong the war despite sanctions.

 

[tgw]

10 hours ago, jvs said:

Are all Russians guilty by proxy?

I believe in a way they are.

Absolutes rarely are an accurate way to deal with reality.

Of course all Russians aren't guilty.

Take Navalny for example, but also one of my neighbors who is Russian, she despises Putin and his policies.

Edited February 6, 2023 by tgw

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

Agreed. Russians have been oppressed for centuries, first by the Czars, then by communist dictators and now by Putin and his cronies. So most of them don’t know any better.
But many of them do know things are (much) better in the West, what with TV and internet and social media. And I suspect they also know that things could be a lot better in Russia, if only they could find a way to get rid of the oligarch kleptocracy and have some semblance of democracy. But how do you do that when there has never been a large and strong middle class that can bring to bear enough opposition? The only thing they know and have ever known  is brutal oppression. How to break through that vicious circle? 
I have no idea, to be honest. It’s probably going to take some kind of revolution and involve a lot of bloodshed, because Putin and the oligarchs are not going to give up their position of absolute power without a hell of a fight. 

A revolution against the revolution!

Unfortunately, as with all countries now, the elites have the militarised police to protect them. The days of the village bobby that was friends with everyone are long gone- think Thatcher's police force with guns, and prepared to use them.

 

Even the French revolution didn't bring a better society for the peasants, just different masters and years of war.

[thaibeachlovers]

11 hours ago, JerseytoBKK said:

The previous week, his analysis talked about not underestimating Russia and their ability to prolong the war despite sanctions.

Anyone that underestimates the Russians has not read their history, and is destined for a shock.

[ExpatOilWorker]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyone that underestimates the Russians has not read their history, and is destined for a shock.

The Russians also have a long history of self-destruction and infighting, so Russians might also be in for a shock.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

The Russians also have a long history of self-destruction and infighting, so Russians might also be in for a shock.

Do tell.

My understanding is that they have been ruled by despots for centuries, but still managed to survive as an empire till Gorbachev ended it.

All countries have infighting and I see self destruction of the west going on all the time now. IMO just a matter of time before Rome ( the West ) collapses due to the rot at the core. All civilizations end, and usually not well.

IMO a new Dark Age approaches.

[VocalNeal]

^ Interesting, ???? Are we suggesting this is the fall of the Russian empire.

Edited February 7, 2023 by VocalNeal

[placeholder]

On 2/5/2023 at 10:42 AM, billyo said:

They end the report with this conclusion but they obviously want that debate to begin.

 

 

A dramatic, overnight shift in U.S. policy is politically impossible—both domestically and with allies—and would be unwise in any case. But developing these instruments
now and socializing them with Ukraine and with U.S. allies might help catalyze the eventual start of a process that could bring this war to a negotiated end in a time
frame that would serve U.S. interests. The alternative is a long war that poses major challenges for the United States, Ukraine, and the rest of the world.

 

I noticed that it lumped in Russia with the "rest of the world". They seem to want to minimize that it poses huge challenges for russia, too.