quote:

Keep in mind, Putin is a moderate in his own party. While he's been keeping the hawks at bay, these folks are very willing and eager to see some warfare with the West.

WHAT? Putin is a criminal head of a "Mafia" organization that took over the goverment little by little over the years. The Russian media was taken over by murdering opposing journalists, even those that fled to other countries. The Russian courts were corrupted by bribes & threats to support takeover of many commercial activities. Russians are being told that the US is supporting a Ukrainian invasion of the Rostov region. Busloads of Ukrainians are now being housed as refugees in Rostov-Na-Donu.

^^^^^^^^^
Yeah it is obvious that you are informed. Nice to see.

February 20, 2022


What Rough Beast Slouches Toward Munich?
By Clarice Feldman



From the 18th of this month through the 25th, national leaders are meeting in Munich in an apparent effort to deescalate the situation in Ukraine. The administration has pulled together its putative allies to forestall what it claims is an imminent threat by Russia to invade Ukraine. In fact, it discouraged (apparently unsuccessfully) Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky from attending on the ground that war could start any minute and his absence from Ukraine would be taken as flight.

Heading the U.S. delegation is Vice-President Kamala Harris, which hardly comforts me. She threatens severe economic sanctions against Russia if they invade. (But this is from the very same administration which has done so much to strengthen Putin’s hand -- for example, by scotching the Israeli gas pipeline to Europe, giving a thumbs up to the Russian gas pipeline to Europe and reducing in every possible way U.S. energy production, all of which enriches Russia.

President Trump used economic warfare and would have allowed completion of the domestic and Israeli pipelines and prevented the construction of the Russian pipeline to limit Russian power over Europe, as opposed to the saber rattling from the present White House.) The one thing you can count on with the Biden-Harris administration is inconsistency and incoherence.



Critics claim the entire business is a wag-the-dog scenario -- a distraction from the Democrats' (and the President’s) tumbling approval and disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. They assert the contretemps on the eastern Ukraine border is a legitimate effort by the mostly Russian settlers there to rejoin Russia and not a false-flag operation. Moreover, they agree with Putin that we agreed not to expand NATO to Ukraine. This week the critics of the administration got a bombshell that supports Putin’s position. It was discovered by a professor at Boston University, unveiled by the German media, and is a clear indication that Germany will not be onboard whatever nitwittery Biden-Harris propose.

David Goldman (Spengler) has done some significant coverage. Like me, he thinks NATO has gone far beyond its intended purpose and actual power.



He tweets:

The damage from Ukrainistan will be much worse than Afghanistan: Biden frog-marched our NATO allies into this one. They’re looking for excuses to bolt and when they do, NATO will be a grease patch on a side road near Fulda. With a defensible perimeter we could keep NATO.



The Bombshell

Contemporaneous records found in the UK national archives by Boston University political science professor Joshua Shifrinson and given to the German magazine Der Spiegel showed that on March 6, 1991 U.S., UK, French, and German foreign ministries indeed promised the then-Soviet Union “that we do not intend to benefit from the withdrawal of soviet troops from eastern Europe” and that “NATO should not expand to the east, either officially or unofficially.” This account with the copy of the document appears in the Soviet news service

The story was first carried in Der Spiegel and Die Welt. As Die Welt notes, the document supports the Russian claim.

That the document account surfaced on German media during the security conference is a sure bet to my mind that the Germans will have a political fight on their hands if they join in slouching with Biden-Harris to war over the right of NATO to expand by adding Ukraine to its ever-larger grab bag of weak states we defend.

The 1991 protocol just released this week is in direct conflict with NATO’s 2008 commitment to Ukraine and Georgia that one day they, too, could become alliance members. That’s Russia’s position.



Missiles stationed there would be able to hit Russian targets within minutes and the protocol, if accurately reflecting the agreements made -- and there’s no reason to believe it does not -- conflicts directly with NATO and U.S. contentions about our agreement with Russia.

We claim, as Reuters summarizes, that Russia is demanding an effective veto on NATO membership; NATO Secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg parroted our claim: “It is a fundamental principle that every nation has the right to choose its own path… including what kind of security arrangements it wants to be part of.” Maybe. But if the countries that make up NATO already told a neighboring country they would not admit Ukraine to its rolls, it should drop the idea of breaking the agreement.

Goldman was there and vouches for the narrative in the protocol, though until this week he had not seen the documentation. He calls Secretary of State Anthony Blinken a “a liar.”



What is the Contrary Evidence?

There’s Blinken and there’s Steven Pifer. He was our ambassador to Ukraine 1998 to 2000. Writing in 2014, he denies any promises were made to the Soviets about not enlarging eastward. Pifer wasn’t there in 1990 and claims as his basis for contention an article in the Washington Quarterly by Mark Kramer (who did not see the formerly marked “secret” document in the UK archives) to argue we had only promised that "no additional troops would be deployed; no weapons of mass destruction would be placed" in the former German Democratic Republic. This pledge was, in fact, incorporated into Article 5 (signed September 12, 1990).

Pifer also quotes a publication (Russia Behind the Headlines) of a purported interview with former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was reportedly asked why he had not insisted that U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s promise that NATO would not expand into the East be legally encoded and responded, according to that report, NATO expansion was “not discussed at all.” He did, however, call NATO eastward expansion “a violation of the spirit of the assurances given Moscow in 1990.”

Eight years after the agreement detailed in the newly-found protocol, NATO did move eastward, admitting Poland, Hungary, and Czechia. Fifteen years later in 2204, it added Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Russia grumbled, but perhaps felt it was in too weak a position to do much then to halt NATO’s eastward expansion.

Russia now draws the line on NATO expansion into Ukraine and Georgia.

It might be useful for a reporter who might care to ask James Baker about the protocol and any assurances made to the Soviets by him and other NATO members.

If this were a legal case in the U.S., I believe the protocol could be entered into evidence under the Ancient Documents Rule even if the purported agreement had not been formalized in writing, although Russia’s acquiescence over the years to NATO’s eastward expansion would also be considered to weaken its case.

But all this business about credibility of the various parties and legalisms seems somewhat extraneous to me at this point. I think the German media has forced Germany’s hand and it will bolt and not stand with us. If it doesn’t go along, others will follow and the wag-the-dog effort will fail.



https://www.americanthinker.co...s_toward_munich.html



.

You know I know Russia won’t invade? Because Joe Biden says it will. He’s been wrong on international issues for 47 years.

yep. still waiting for this 'sure thing' to kick off

-----------------------------

Every day the Russians don't invade, this smells more and more like a bluff. I wonder if the west just told Putin to fuck off, and not do what he wants, if he would actually do it.

quote:

Originally posted by Nuclear:
You know I know Russia won’t invade? Because Joe Biden says it will. He’s been wrong on international issues for 47 years.

If they don't invade within the next 12 days it will be months, if ever, because of the season of mud that usually befalls the Ukraine

I still don't believe any war is going to happen here.

Biden's handlers are absolutely FRANTIC to wag the dog here to try and get something started so he can look like some sort of wartime leader to prop up his collapsing administration. Only problem is other than the UK being prodded to go along, NO ONE ELSE wants to start anything with the Russians especially the Germans.

Like that article mentions, I'm starting to think this may be the beginning of the end of NATO. The Germans and French are teaming up in a new military cooperation alliance that excludes the US already and none of these members are forgetting the absolute Biden fuckup in Afghanistan.

Putin will continue to screw with Biden for some time I predict and end up making him look like even more the hapless fool he already is, the man has NEVER been right about any foreign policy his entire life.

Seems to be the trend in the news…

Russia declares eastern Ukraine independent. The Donbas region.

Apparently V. Putin is on Russian television talking about the history of the Ukraine and how the biggest mistake of the Soviet Union was to be so generous and giving all this away.

Looks to me Kyiv might be on the table shortly.

Joe Biden‘s EO


“Laughable sanctions” in response, from the White House RE: Russia and the Donbas region.

If I was Russia, I would be more concerned with securing the farmland

Does today's announcement by Putin of "peace keeping" in the Ukraine sound somewhat reminiscent of Hitler's justification of the annexation of the Rhineland, Austria and Sudetenland? Seems quite similar by my notion.

...

quote:

Does today's announcement by Putin of "peace keeping" in the Ukraine sound somewhat reminiscent of Hitler's justification of the annexation of the Rhineland, Austria and Sudetenland? Seems quite similar by my notion.

^^^^^^^
Lebensraum was the term Germany used. Somewhat similar.

Moscow Says US Embassy "Out Of Touch With Reality" After Dire "Terror Alert"

https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...er-dire-terror-alert

The US Embassy in Moscow issued an unusual "terrorism alert" to American nationals residing in the country on Sunday. It warned all US citizens of possible "attacks in shopping malls, metro, and railway stations" - and on that basis urged Americans to begin prepping plans to leave Russia.

However it didn't invoke intelligence or official assessments, instead: "According to media sources, there have been threats of attacks against shopping centers, railway, and metro stations, and other public gathering places in major urban areas, including Moscow and St. Petersburg as well as in areas of heightened tension along the Russian border with Ukraine," according to the alert.

The FSB (Federal Security Service) responded to the notification on Monday by underscoring that Washington had not shared any information of threats, which would be the norm in such a scenario, given the FSB has open lines of communication when it comes to counter-terrorism with the FBI and CIA.

The US embassy message had gone so far as to tell US nationals to "have evacuation plans that do not rely on U.S. government assistance." Weeks ago the US Embassy in Kiev told Americans to depart the neighboring country to Russia amid fears of a 'Russian invasion' - which has yet to materialize.

Subsequent Kremlin statements slammed the US embassy move as being "out of touch with reality" - according to Russian state sources:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also stated on Monday that Russian authorities had not found any confirmation of the alleged “threats” alluded to in the statement issued by the US mission.

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Monday that the US diplomatic mission was "out of touch with reality," seeking to sow fear among the Russian people.

"Today, it looks like a real informational terrorist attack [in media against Russia]. Yesterday, you probably saw the US embassy in Moscow acting completely out of touch with reality, terrifying the Russians," Zakharova told Channel One Russia.

She described that it is part of the Washington playbook of fear-mongering and creating fake crises to intimidate the population.

Without doubt a full-on 'info war' is now in full swing between both sides, also as shelling intensifies in Donbas, and as the Putin is poised to make a decision on issuing formal independence recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:

quote:

Originally posted by dynorat:
The chances of Russia invading go down as the price of oil goes up.

As long as it is above what it costs them to pull it out of the ground, they don't need the expense of an occupation.

I’d argue the exact opposite.

As the price of oil increases Russia becomes more immune from global sanctions.

They have the ability to ship everything to China now.

Killing energy independence here through restricting federal leases and pipeline closures is the predicate for most of this; then there was Afghanistan.

Agree 100%.....we are funding Russia/Putin expansion by paying high fuel prices. When gas was at 2 dollars a gallon Putin couldn't afford to invade the Ukraine but with gas prices at historically high levels Putin has the financial cushion he needs to invade and occupy.

And guess what which way energy prices will move all week?

Today alone was terrifying. Brent closing in on $100 and NatGas up 7.5%

Now Germany has supposedly stopped Russian gas on the Nord Stream II, quick headline.

It’s kinda like having the two armies across the No-go zone, unintended consequences or misinterpretations are always a possibility.

I’m thinking the price of firewood just went up in Germany.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:
And guess what which way energy prices will move all week?

Today alone was terrifying. Brent closing in on $100 and NatGas up 7.5%

Gasoline is up 30 cents here in about five days.