Shaking my head: What did Scholz think he would accomplish? Scholz is a lame duck, unlike Putin. Scholz repeats old half-truths and platitudes without new diplomatic initiatives. My respect for President Putin, willing to waste time taking a meaningless call from a washed-out vassal that has neither authority nor clear purpose. Slightly surprised that the old fool Borrell almost called out "Israel" for the rabid dog that it is. Guess patience for genocide is wearing thin, even in colonial Europe. Good.
The new Aegis Ashore installation in Poland - “That blast came from the Death Star! That thing's operational! (Obligatory Star Wars reference) - just reinforces why Russia has to take all of Ukraine off the board and put a new Military District on the border with Poland and Romania.
Of course, Putin continues to say all Russia wants is neutrality, de-nazification, demilitarization and relief of all Russia sanctions (that last one is a howler - 'cuz "That Ain't Gonna Happen") - which are merely the preconditions for Russia's real objective. But everyone continues to insist that's all Russia wants.
Even Macgregor now thinks Russia will stop at the Dnieper. I can see them stopping there temporarily while the West blows off another (useless) Putin attempt at negotiations, but then the steamroller will get back in operation.
I never recovered any sense in the "stop at the Dniepr" argument. Firstly, RF is obliged to take the parts of Kherson and Zaporozhe oblasts on the right bank of the river. Secondly, the River Dniepr isn't a border river, never was AFAIK, but more of a life line of the region (which is reflected by the oblast borders). The big cities are mostly situated on both sides. So, how can the Ukrainian side defend Kiev along the Dniepr, when one third of it is on the other side? Non of the warring sides considers this option, only "expert" observers from overseas.
Yes, even I forgot that Kherson is on the other side. Back when the Russians retreated from Kherson, I complained that they made a mistake by not reinforcing their forward positions on the other side months before which they already had established early in the war. All that worry about them being flooded was so much garbage, an excuse for the retreat so they could use those forces elsewhere. If that was an issue, either control the dam or push the forward positions further so it was no longer a problem.
The "experts" fixated on "Russia won't take all of Ukraine" for a variety of reasons, most of them not thought through. They claim Russia would need a million men to "hold Ukraine", which is nonsense. Russia doesn't need to "hold" anything except Kiev - and once the Ukraine army is finished, taking Kiev will be a cakewalk.
The other stupid reason was "Russia doesn't want an insurgency". I pointed out that Russia already did that from 1947 to 1956, plus did Afghanistan, Chechnya (twice) and Syria since then. Plus it's impossible to field an insurgency in these days of lethal thermal-equipped drones unless you did deep like Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and North Korea - which the Ukrainians haven't and can't.
"Lavrov’s humor in his closing remark probably dumbfounded the media person."
Karl, I've always wondered if Lavrov has an incredible sense of humour. He just looks like someone who would. Do you know if this is actually the case? I know this isn't very geopolitical, but I've always been curious.
"Question: The EU and NATO countries are increasingly calling for dialogue with Moscow at various levels, or at least contacts with Moscow, although until recently they said that there would never be another dialogue. How can you explain the trend behind this change of rhetoric?
Sergey Lavrov: This means that they are probably not completely lost as politicians."
Very funny, but alas inaccurate, as least as far as Scholz ia concerned - he is definitely completely lost.
Another reply to Borrell by Alfred de Zayas. A little bit of his bio
From 2012 to 2018 he was the UN’s Independent Expert on International Order and produced 14 reports for the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council, formulating “ 25 Principles of International Order”. From 1980 to 2003 he was a senior lawyer with the UN Human Rights Office in Geneva, served as Secretary of the UN Human Rights Committee and Chief of the Petitions Department. He is the author of ten books including “Building a Just World Order” (Clarity Press, 2021),
Here he is on twitter today
Alfred de Zayas @Alfreddezayas 10:38 AM · Nov 16, 2024
I seldom agree with Josep #Borrell on anything, but on #Israel's murderous campaign against the #Palestinians, it is certainly "ethnic cleansing" -- but so much worse -- it is #genocide.
Borrell wants the #EU to take decisive action against Israel - that would be easy - 1. immediately stop all commercial relations with Israel, 2. criminalize the sale of weapons to Israel after the filing of the ICJ case by South Africa, 3. break diplomatic relations with Israel.
It is an understatement to say that Israel is committing human rights violations. The Israeli government has practised #Apartheid for decades, which is a crime against humanity.
Borrell's concern that Israel is risking the destruction of the “rules-based order” established by the West is too silly for words. Our so-called "rules based order" is an aberration, nothing but imperialism and neo-colonialism. Anachronistic.
Borrell also fears a “ripple effect of crises” for Europe.... euphemisms, platitudes, empty rhetoric! The #UK and the European Union are morally bankrupt. Let's hope that the #BRICS nations have better luck with a moral revival.
The United States is not only morally bankrupt. We are on our way to economic bankruptcy too -- with 36 trillion dollars of debt. Who will buy #US Treasury Bonds? Not me.
Shaking my head: What did Scholz think he would accomplish? Scholz is a lame duck, unlike Putin. Scholz repeats old half-truths and platitudes without new diplomatic initiatives. My respect for President Putin, willing to waste time taking a meaningless call from a washed-out vassal that has neither authority nor clear purpose. Slightly surprised that the old fool Borrell almost called out "Israel" for the rabid dog that it is. Guess patience for genocide is wearing thin, even in colonial Europe. Good.
Thank you!
Thank you
The new Aegis Ashore installation in Poland - “That blast came from the Death Star! That thing's operational! (Obligatory Star Wars reference) - just reinforces why Russia has to take all of Ukraine off the board and put a new Military District on the border with Poland and Romania.
Of course, Putin continues to say all Russia wants is neutrality, de-nazification, demilitarization and relief of all Russia sanctions (that last one is a howler - 'cuz "That Ain't Gonna Happen") - which are merely the preconditions for Russia's real objective. But everyone continues to insist that's all Russia wants.
Even Macgregor now thinks Russia will stop at the Dnieper. I can see them stopping there temporarily while the West blows off another (useless) Putin attempt at negotiations, but then the steamroller will get back in operation.
I never recovered any sense in the "stop at the Dniepr" argument. Firstly, RF is obliged to take the parts of Kherson and Zaporozhe oblasts on the right bank of the river. Secondly, the River Dniepr isn't a border river, never was AFAIK, but more of a life line of the region (which is reflected by the oblast borders). The big cities are mostly situated on both sides. So, how can the Ukrainian side defend Kiev along the Dniepr, when one third of it is on the other side? Non of the warring sides considers this option, only "expert" observers from overseas.
Yes, even I forgot that Kherson is on the other side. Back when the Russians retreated from Kherson, I complained that they made a mistake by not reinforcing their forward positions on the other side months before which they already had established early in the war. All that worry about them being flooded was so much garbage, an excuse for the retreat so they could use those forces elsewhere. If that was an issue, either control the dam or push the forward positions further so it was no longer a problem.
The "experts" fixated on "Russia won't take all of Ukraine" for a variety of reasons, most of them not thought through. They claim Russia would need a million men to "hold Ukraine", which is nonsense. Russia doesn't need to "hold" anything except Kiev - and once the Ukraine army is finished, taking Kiev will be a cakewalk.
The other stupid reason was "Russia doesn't want an insurgency". I pointed out that Russia already did that from 1947 to 1956, plus did Afghanistan, Chechnya (twice) and Syria since then. Plus it's impossible to field an insurgency in these days of lethal thermal-equipped drones unless you did deep like Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and North Korea - which the Ukrainians haven't and can't.
No one ever asks the next question.
"Lavrov’s humor in his closing remark probably dumbfounded the media person."
Karl, I've always wondered if Lavrov has an incredible sense of humour. He just looks like someone who would. Do you know if this is actually the case? I know this isn't very geopolitical, but I've always been curious.
He has a dry, wry, witty, sarcastic sense of humor that gets revealed every so often, usually in response to media.
"Question: The EU and NATO countries are increasingly calling for dialogue with Moscow at various levels, or at least contacts with Moscow, although until recently they said that there would never be another dialogue. How can you explain the trend behind this change of rhetoric?
Sergey Lavrov: This means that they are probably not completely lost as politicians."
Very funny, but alas inaccurate, as least as far as Scholz ia concerned - he is definitely completely lost.
This is why the qualifier “probably”
I thought he might. Thanks for confirming that.
Another reply to Borrell by Alfred de Zayas. A little bit of his bio
From 2012 to 2018 he was the UN’s Independent Expert on International Order and produced 14 reports for the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council, formulating “ 25 Principles of International Order”. From 1980 to 2003 he was a senior lawyer with the UN Human Rights Office in Geneva, served as Secretary of the UN Human Rights Committee and Chief of the Petitions Department. He is the author of ten books including “Building a Just World Order” (Clarity Press, 2021),
Here he is on twitter today
Alfred de Zayas @Alfreddezayas 10:38 AM · Nov 16, 2024
I seldom agree with Josep #Borrell on anything, but on #Israel's murderous campaign against the #Palestinians, it is certainly "ethnic cleansing" -- but so much worse -- it is #genocide.
Borrell wants the #EU to take decisive action against Israel - that would be easy - 1. immediately stop all commercial relations with Israel, 2. criminalize the sale of weapons to Israel after the filing of the ICJ case by South Africa, 3. break diplomatic relations with Israel.
It is an understatement to say that Israel is committing human rights violations. The Israeli government has practised #Apartheid for decades, which is a crime against humanity.
Borrell's concern that Israel is risking the destruction of the “rules-based order” established by the West is too silly for words. Our so-called "rules based order" is an aberration, nothing but imperialism and neo-colonialism. Anachronistic.
Borrell also fears a “ripple effect of crises” for Europe.... euphemisms, platitudes, empty rhetoric! The #UK and the European Union are morally bankrupt. Let's hope that the #BRICS nations have better luck with a moral revival.
The United States is not only morally bankrupt. We are on our way to economic bankruptcy too -- with 36 trillion dollars of debt. Who will buy #US Treasury Bonds? Not me.
Great! Thanks for that. IMO, a solution will occur next year, although it may be prolonged and thus transient.
I doubt Scholz did anything to reassure V. V. Putin that Russia could expect any better now than from the perfidious Minsk scams.
"As long as it takes", indeed! I am sure that threat is in Russian calculations, for what it is worth.
Olaugh schultz asked Putin for a set of testicles
🤣