Translated by Alexander Fedotov / Edited by @Gbabeuf
Statement of I. B. Ivanov, Chairman of the Russian General Military Union, the former Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the of Donetsk People’s Republic
8 Sep 2014
The audience, for days on end, has been asking questions: where did the popular Donetsk People’s Republic TV program “Journal of the Militia”—publicly declared in Kiev a dangerous “informational weapon of terrorists”—vanish to; and why does its presenter no longer appear on TV? I have no doubts that esteemed viewers have noticed much more serious changes in the internal life of the DPR, and, perhaps, have already been able to connect these events…
It is unlikely to have been a secret to anybody that, as early as mid-August, events which could be qualified as a coup occurred in Novorossiya, which dramatically changed the political face of the Militia and of the Republic itself. The TV program “Journal of the Militia” was shut down shortly thereafter on the insistence of the new Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the DPR and newly appointed Commander-in-Chief, Aleksandr Zakharchenko. On his personal order the author of these lines was forbidden from appearing on TV or speaking publicly on the subject of what is happening at the front and in the internal life of Novorossiya.
However, closing down “Journal of the Militia” was only one link in the chain of eliminations of ideological work, which latter had been established in the Militia when the Commander-in-Chief had been Igor Ivanovich Strelkov. It is no coincidence that, from the very first days of the “new power”, rather emotional appeals by the new Commander-in-Chief resounded from the high tribunes of the Supreme Council and Council of Senior Army Officers—appeals to eliminate the Political Department of the Militia (created under my supervision), and to replace it with another structure of a fundamentally different ideological content (in place of the previous Orthodox-patriotic and strictly non-parti pris orientation).
In light of all these events, a few days ago I and several other officers of Strelkov’s team came to a decision to submit our resignation letters, which decision we implemented there and then.
I, and likewise many of my comrades in the Militia—both members and non-members of the Russian General Military Union (RGMU)—are not indifferent to the way in which we fight. It is one thing to be led by a Russian officer, whom the Militia and people trust absolutely, in the name of the specific and clear aim of the liberation of Novorossiya. However, it is another thing entirely to continue military service under the command of dubious personages appointed by a third party, who are either known in the DPR as rear spinners, or who became infamous through their squalid intrigues against the former Commander, and who unfortunately can only lead the people of Novorossiya to a thoroughly disastrous political outcome.
As for me, personally, I leave with a sense of duty fulfilled, because, together with other members of the RCMU, I joined the Militia in its most difficult moment—breaking into an already encircled Slavyansk—and resigned only when our army had crushed the enemy and gone on the offensive. We came to protect Novorossiya in that difficult period when the Militia could confront the armadas of APCs, aviation and artillery with nothing more than small-arms, old anti-tank rocket launchers and fortitude of spirit—whereas now the Army of the DPR is armed with tanks, IFVs and various artillery systems, including Grad multiple rocket launchers…
Therefore, I left my position as Combatant Service officer of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the DPR with a clear conscience. Any other competent officer familiar with the staff work could replace me in this post.
Other things worry me more. The drastic personnel changes that have taken place in the Republic can only be described as a political fiasco and they threaten the most tragic consequences for the future of Novorossiya. We are not talking about “the replacement of yesterday’s idealists by today’s pragmatists” as some people currently think and say. This, unfortunately, is the replacement of a quite professional team—who distinguished themselves in an emergency situation—and what were, undoubtedly, decent politicians and military by, in fact, local representatives of crime and corruption…
Of the current key leaders in the DPR, it is perhaps only the new Minister of Defence, Lieutenant Colonel V. Kononov, of whom I can speak respectfully and vouch for his compliance with the requirements of his office. But, unfortunately, he does not play the decisive role in the leadership of the Republic which his predecessor did: the role of the current Minister of Defence was from the first day reduced to the function of a military expert under the Commander-in-Chief, the Prime Minister, “Oplotnik” Zakharchenko and First Deputy Prime Minister, retired KGB general, Antyufeev…
The professional, intellectual and moral level of the majority of the Republic’s newly appointed officials is unacceptable. And, of course, they are all far from being leaders who are trusted by the Donbass, or who, like I. I. Strelkov, both the Army and civilian population would follow with confidence…
Joining the ranks of the Militia volunteers, in addition to a military victory over the enemy, we foresaw in front of us another, no less important, task. We have always believed that after all their suffering the people of Novorossiya must receive guaranteed rights of freedom of expression and social justice corresponding to their faith, aspirations, and national and historical traditions. The struggle that has commenced should not only rid Novorossiya of genocide, ethnocide, forced Ukrainization and the terror of the self-proclaimed, puppet Kiev leadership, but should also bring relief from the economic oppression of the oligarchy and the USSR-inherited system of hyper-corruption, so typical of the Russian Federation and to an even greater degree of Ukraine. In Slavyansk and then in Donetsk, the people’s Militia was steadily and firmly moving in this direction, in particular, leading a tough, relentless fight against corruption and crime…
Alas, if the first task—our military victory—is, obviously, resolved on the battlefield, the second task, even in terms of the elimination of corruption and organized crime, let alone the creation of a positive political, economic and social model for Novorossiya, unfortunately seems already very difficult to achieve now, after the political, ideological and staff changes in the Republic.
None of the above implies the slightest doubt of the need for a sacred fight for Faith, Honour and Freedom, in which the people of Novorossiya are currently engaged. One must be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. The question today for Russian patriots is not whether to support the struggle of Novorossiya or whether this fight is needed now under a changed domestic political environment, but how under the current adverse complications to carry the struggle to the maximum acceptable result.
Each Militiaman at the front knows that we are not fighting against the Ukrainian people. The current war was from the very beginning provoked by the West and is conducted against their own population by those zombified by Ukie propaganda. Fed by the West, and at one time actively encouraged by the CPSU, the sectarian heresy of Ukrainian separatism brought a bloody harvest to Slavic lands. This evil must be stopped and destroyed.
Puppeteers beyond the ocean are ready to continue the self-destruction of the Ukraine to the last Ukrainian soldier. But for all of the triune people this fratricide is the greatest calamity. We have repeatedly talked about the need for a speedy termination of the civil war. However, this issue should be resolved not by violating those rights won by the people of Novorossiya with their blood.
Let historians and armchair “strategists” discuss now what the RCMU might or might not have been able to do in this war. We fulfilled what we believed was a matter of an officer’s honour and a duty to the Russian people. It does not end, the struggle continues!
I. B. Ivanov
Tragic disappointment for the fighters and the civilians who support them. However, Moscow ultimately must have control over the ultimate outcome which is not yet known or evident in any of the infighting and machinations of oligarchs, fifth columnists and the Putin policy enforcers of the FSB, GRU and general staff.
The present events are like the mid-point of a fierce fire fight. Impossible to know the ending.
But Putin is not going to barter away or lose Ukraine, Novorossiya or any more significant lives of Russians. It cannot look like victory because it has entered a miasmic stage from which will come the end of the junta, the total destruction of Western de-stabilization efforts and a secure region once known as Ukraine.
Two years or so from now, we will see a result and why and how it was achieved. Should the junta persist, the West persist, then a decisive and total devastation of the Ukie capacity for force and fascist actions will no doubt be unleashed by Russian military.
Meanwhile, the valiant are heart-broken, rightly so. But the theatre of war is far greater than Donbass. The stakes are far greater than those caught in the hellfire could have imagined. Moscow has the correct view of the entire situation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent summary. I think you’re right. I hope so. And only time will tell.
A great military strategist indeed with a unique view of events. We are to believe that the AFU was “crushed” by Strelkov’s mini-units engaged in a couple of months of reconnaissance and sabotage. This enabled a new team to take over and go on the offensive, appearing to win a victory that had already been won by Strelkov et al. playing defense, conserving their loyalists for the political aftermath, and retreating, retreating, retreating.
The new team had better equipment because they damn well went out and seized it. Few trophies result from “reconnaissance and sabotage.”
I might add, the defeatist talk from the Strelkov camp, the reasons why it was impossible to go on the offensive, continued right up to the time that the offensive began.
I can imagine Strelkov ending his days directing a small band of insurgents in an obscure corner of an obscure Balkan nation, dressed as Catherine the Great.
I am a Canadian and watch the Novorussian infighting with no biases. I want a good outcome for the Donbass because I am anti-American, a bias which does not predispose me to support any one of the forces in the Donbass. I am pulling for survival, freedom and success and judge only by that.
Cass, altho you describe yourself as anti-American it appears that some of the arrogant lack of respect for others so typical of the USA has rubbed off on you. Pity you didn’t choose to express yourself with courtesy towards one who risked his life while you and I only ‘wished Donbass well.’, I think you’re probably a better person than this, but were just seduced by the opportunity for clever phraseology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
i dont have enough info, how did a coup took place without resistance?? it did look pacific
in a video, strelkov did talk on the fifth column, that made russia lost twice in the past, that’s wat he mention upon this donbas new team.
even more dangerous, was his views on this truce on minsk, a treason !!
ivanov’s comments point out on the same direction.
Thrasyvulos towords Oligarchs (Athens 403 BC) | vgiannelakis
Again is very sad to read about how the Novorossiya struggle for justice and freedom can be twisted or betrayed.
He mentioned who is the puppet (Zakharchenko) but not who is the puppeteer, any problem? Is he to much powerful to give a name?
Doesn’t he understand that the empire only negotiate to achieve better conditions for aggression?
It is easy to see that Putin and Russian oligarchs are more afraid of Novorossiya revolution than Kiev fascist junta.
If Putin and Russian oligarchs believe that they can achieve a good (economic) deal in exchange for Novorossiya and Ukraine people, he is out of touch with reality and they will be the next chip to fall, and if his betray is true nobody will regret his fall.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OBI-JUAN, I hope and believe that it was not so much betrayal as a difference in strategy and in patience to wait for the long-range outcome. That said, I have no evidence for my view.
On another article you asked what skeletons in the closet I was referring to that keep France and Germany obedient to the US. The answer is given by an article “Will France and Germany Challegne NATO?” Briefly, France is keeping in poverty 15 African countries by ruling them economically. This includes keeping 65% of their foreign currency reserves and gold reserves in Paris– at zero interest! US/UK support her in this, but a press campaign about it would be very troublesome.
Germany is still under UN’s Enemy State provisions, from WWII. Additionally, se is under a letter of submission to the US. Additionally, see http://nsnbc.me/2014/07/11/germany-expels-u-s-spy-chief-opens-geopolitical-can-of-worms/
I, like you, am very concerned for Novorossiya.
You are very kind and thank you for the article, but this doesn’t change my overview of the crisis.
We are looking in front our own eyes a WW3 scenario. The over debt load in NATO countries, creates a necessity for capital destruction and the best way to conduct this capital destruction is by the destruction of other countries following the Libyan (total destruction of the state) or Iraq (division and partial destruction of the state) examples, by plundering the resources and stealing their assets and reserves (Libya and Ukraine gold reserves are gone, besides Libyan huge dollar reserves in western banks are also gone).
Right now Novorossiya people is fighting for freedom and justice against the model created by NATO meanwhile Russian oligarchs are thinking in profits. They are not in the same page.
NATO is pushing in all fronts, I recommend this article about the lowering oil price:
Bottom line, NATO oligarchs rule the system, they own the IMF, World Bank, SWIFT, VISA…., Internet, Sea lines, Food industry…..Russia oligarchs and Russia state is just collateral to the system. They don’t have any weight in the real centers of power IMF, World Bank. Russia by any advance capitalist standards (USA, Germany, Japan and even China) is a backward country with backward infrastructure, technology and production system. The space program and military hardware is just a drop in the ocean.
Furthermore there is a big misunderstanding to separate Russia and Soviet achievements, Russia still living from Soviet Industry and technological base, period.
I will make a very easy historical analogy, 23 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia oligarchs driving economy created almost 0 (zero) new factories, power plants or infrastructure. Twenty three (23) years after the October revolution, Civil and World Wars, in 1940 the Soviet Union created more than 9000 brand new factories and power plants (Alexander Werth, Russia at war), improved the infrastructure, and created a system for mass education and healthcare.
With this economic base, they successfully confronted Nazi Germany, can you see the differences?
Regarding Cass’s comments, the Southern Offensive was obviously planned by Strelkov and his staff because Strelkov
was relieved only a few days before the offensive began. Planning and execution were superb before Zakharchenko managed to shut it down. By the way, I notice that the great warrior, Zakharchenko, is sporting not one but two St. George’s Crosses.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Evidence of a possible CIA dis-information campaign falsely posing as ‘pro-Novorossiya’ … someone sneering at Slavyangrad …
Is ‘Vineyard of the Saker’ an asset of the CIA … Saker also someone writing under the name of ‘Tom Sullivan’? (Maybe still not the real name of the ‘Saker’, as ‘Saker’ writes like a female and may indeed be female.)
For a long time there has been some significant weirdness about the ‘Vineyard of the Saker’ blog, more ‘pumped’ by big media than sites with more significant news and views in English, such as Slavyangrad or Colonel Cassad.
Now the evidence is much stronger than ever … this ‘Saker’ person shrilly denounces that she / he will delete any comments referring to Gleb Bazov (!) or Vladimir Suchan …
Some background –
(1) Saker writes from Florida USA near the headquarters of the CIA-Mossad Wikipedia, and solicit funds to a mailbox there (CIA-Wikipedia has been charged in Europe with fundraising fraud) … Saker promotes CIA-Wikipedia at top of her older blog site
(CIA Wikipedia-Google fraud EU police report is here: http://homment.com/FB3PjBQ2DF)
(2) Saker is strangely lazy about posting important news from Novorossiya, but very eager for promoting her/him self … a lot of her blog is devoted to self-promotion, getting her work in other languages … Serbian is the latest …
(3) Saker has a general approach of ‘making excuses for Putin’ as Putin does weak things close to what the USA wishes
(4) Saker makes very close use of CIA-Google, and has been heavily promoted by Asia Times Online, a site now heavily tied to the CIA’s Radio Free Europe / Asia and promoting Zionist extremist neo-con David Goldman aka ‘Spengler’ .
(5) Saker claims to be a male but writes very much with female emotionality, the false gender being a very ‘American agent’ type of faux-clever move
(6) Saker is heavily promoted by Western media as if she is the Anglo ‘voice of East Ukraine’, has huge comment following thinking (s)he is hero … but Saker shows many signs of being ‘limited hang-out’, i.e., partial truth mixed with effort to deflect and detour readers down a channel …
Vladimir Suchan has an article criticising the Saker as a US dis-info agent, and also identifying Saker with the ‘Tom Sullivan’ blogger who does indeed seem to write like the Saker. Suchan wrote about Saker:
«it does take a certain skill to present a US strategy as the most faithful and best course for Putin and Moscow to follow. »
Here is ‘Tom Sullivan’ sounding exactly like Saker, including use of favourite special Saker terms like ‘AngloZionist’ – Saker has given alter-ego ‘Tom Sullivan’ the #1 link spot on one of her blog entries –
Here is Saker today, increasingly arrogant about her role, being truth-suppressing ‘bitch mistress’ of her comments section, and absurdly declaring war on anyone who wants to post on her blog regarding Gleb Bazov …
« Some of you have asked me to react to something published by Gleb Bazov (Slavyangrad) or Vladimir Suchan. I have nothing to say to them and no comments to make about anything they post; any comment referring to them will be deleted. »
Her banning any discussion of Gleb Bazov, seems conclusive proof convicting Saker of being a ‘tool’.
You make very good points to be aware of the Saker website intentions, thank you very much.
I don’t know if the Saker is a CIA asset, but for sure hi is a chauvinist, who make the opposite things that he said. He said he hates AngloZionist and love Russia, but he lives in Florida, USA. He said that AngloZionist is very close to economic collapse but he ask for contributions in dollars not in rubles.
You said “Saker is strangely lazy about posting important news from Novorossiya.” the true is that he usually don’t post news, he post other websites news and write long articles based in wishful thinking like you said “Saker has a general approach of ‘making excuses for Putin’ as Putin does weak things close to what the USA wishes” or the campaign for a purge that never happened.
My goodness, gentlemen– what a catfight! I guess all of us should always keep an exceedingly close watch on what we permit into our heads as accurate knowledge. And certainly at this time it is mandatory to watch out for the ‘limited hangout’. That said, I must say I’m hearing too many disagreements described as ‘betrayal’. Once you’ve described the other side’s position as a betrayal y’all seem to think it unnecessary to expose the error. Just call it a betrayal and then you don’t have to analyze it.
Just a single example cuz I don’t think I can reach you anyway:
You said, “(3) Saker has a general approach of ‘making excuses for Putin’ as Putin does weak things close to what the USA wishes.”
This is equivalent to saying ‘Saker’s general approach is a betrayal since it excuses Putin’s actions when they approximate US wishes.’ You find it so satisfying to have alleged betrayal that you STOP analyzing the approach: to allege betrayal is sufficient to you.
But this is the merest ad hominem attack. Don’t you understand that you still have to analyze the approach or position. When you say, “that position is a betrayal” you are only calling names. Be a man and say, “I disagree with the position and I will now logically demolish it.” Anything less is just childish.
I think the overall approach pursued by Putin and Lavrov and praised by Saker is the following:
1. What the US wants is to safeguard its hegemony over Europe by driving a wedge between Europe and Russia. The growing economic integration must be interrupted to protect US political control and to protect the very existence of NATO. (The attempted regime change in Syria is about a similar reason: The criminals running the US can’t bear the prospect of the Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline toward Europe because Iranian oil for Europe would lessen US control over Europe)
Russia has lessened the ability of the US to accomplish this goal. She has not been able to prevent all aspects of it.
2. Russia desires to save Novorossiyan lives. She has not been able to save all.
3. Russia has consistently proclaimed that she wants a united and prosperous Ukraine without NATO military facilities. She did not sucker the militia in with promises of something else. Other countries manage reconciliation. If a decent govt can be managed in Kiev that would go a long way towards reconciliation.
Now, if you have logical arguments I would be honored to see them. Not feminine emotion, please. Masculine logic. (Yes, that was a cheapshot . Sorry)
I have to agree with quite a few things you’ve written about this Saker character, in particular, he/she or “it” writes like a woman and often shows the clear psychological profile of an unstable woman; a tendency to go hysterical, have hissy fits like like a spoiled girl and sudden shifts in emotion. Perhaps this character is bipolar and/or female. Definitely lacking in maturity and emotional control. Very different from the psychological profile of an unstable male (even an ‘unstable’ or bipolar-disorder suffering man would tend to display quiet aggression, anger, terse, concise logical expression, would ignore childish slights, would focus more on the need to retaliate/destroy the enemy rather that emphasize the victimization and over-emphasize exaggerated ‘fear’ of consequences of eliminating the Kiev Junta.)
The leadership worship and trying to twist logic on it head to fit his/her narrative is bordering on obsessive. Saker’s blog is increasingly becoming stranger and stranger.
At the very least, a very unusual personality type (too unusual).
You all are concentrating on the military aspects of this. As a military you never had the equipment and manpower needed to win a decisive victory. Yes you fought hard and won a lot of land, but could never deliver the knockout blow. The only reason you recovered from near defeat was when Russia sent in troops who could chew up and spit out the Ukrainian army. Strelkov is a loose cannon and if he were any good as a military office believe me he would be in the Russian army, not running re-enactments. There was never going to be an updated version of Stalingrad – no winter warfare.
At some point the military contest ends – you reached a point where neither side could win. The NAF lacked the advanced equipment to win and nothing shows it more than the waste of time and ammunition at the airport. You needed heavier artillery (rockers, missiles) or air bombardment to take out the underground bunkers. You got a decent agreement at Minsk.
You obviously don’t like Zakharchenko and he may not be very good as a military tactician but he does have the sense to know that you have to set up a working government with civic institutions for the people. And he is trying to do that. You make not like the borders, but you need fixed borders as part of any nation-state, whether they remain or you can enlarge them come spring only time will tell. But above all Novorossiya is behold to Putin and Russia and whoever runs the state has better meet Russia’s approval. The military should give some thought to try and acquire some training with the Russian Army and get upgraded equipment and arms from Russia.
Thank you, Judy, for good sense.
The dramatic collapse on the southern front in late August was foreseeable to anyone aware of how the UAF were getting mauled from July onward. The encirclements and the losses just kept getting bigger and bigger. All the squealing from Kiev about a “Russian invasion”was just an excuse for the sorry performance of the UAF and a ploy to get NATO involved.
The Minak “agreement” only has as much authority as action on the ground shows it to have. When the enemy keeps on shelling and moves forces with a threat to attack, it has very little authority. With continued shelling and concentration of attack forces north of Donetsk, removal of those threats takes precedence, agreement or not. Gaining control of the airport was hardly a waste, as it diverts the efforts of the attack forces in Avdeevka. All UAF can do with the tunnels and bunkers is engage NAF in a game of whack-a-mole. There are a lot of similarities between the situation at the airport and the situation at Ilovaisk – a key piece of ground for an assault on Donetsk draws in reserves that could otherwise be used to strengthen the front elsewhere. NAF has shown time and time again that it knows how to manage battles to put attrition in its favor and the airport is no exception.
tHIRDEYE, Thanks for the reminder. I’m sure you’re correct.
NAF needs to use the winter months to its benefit. Stop playing whack-a-mole at the airport – it’s a waste of time and ammunition. What I see lacking is an over-all vision for what sort of Military you want and need. You may have excellent commanders, but they are not very useful if they go off and do their own thing. Do you think for a minute the Russian military allows commanders to run off and do their own thing. No – why do you think they train so intensively – so they can act under command as a UNIT. Do you think for a minute that the allies did not have unified command structure at D-DAY – every single unit commander took orders from Eisenhower. If they hadn’t D-DAY could have failed. When D-DAY was planned ALL the commanders sat around a table and talked out many ideas how to do D-DAY right down to the weather. It is the ability to have coherent plan for ALL units that is lacking. The government needs to sit down and sort this whole thing out while they have the time that winter gives them.
In the US The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs does not manage every single unit — he manages the whole war and give advice to the President. You need someone Like Chairman of the Join Chiefs who sits downs with the commander and plans out a campaign. And never forget the enemy gets vote on your plans when you engage in battle. You need to plan collectively not individually. You need to set goals along with reasonable plans on how to accomplish them including training and improving equipment. Do try and upgrade your equipment by buying or getting some better stuff from Russia. And see if you can get some training with them too.
Finally I have never understood the fawning over Strelkov. I am sorry I don’t think he was a very good military commander. What he know about the military was more from playing in re-enactments than actually doing. Yes he seemed flashy, and brave, but he never really had the practical experience to command. I doubt if Shoigu or Gerasimov play in re-enactments. Strelkov was always something of a fraud with a big mouth into which he too often put his foot. Sorry to be so unkind about him, but that is what I think of him.
” Strelkov is a loose cannon and if he were any good as a military office[r] believe me he would be in the Russian army, not running re-enactment.”
What a laughably ignorant comment: you write “believe me he would be in the Russian military”:
1) Firstly, why should we believe you? Who the hell are you? What is your expertise? What are your qualifications? Armchair quarterback? Armchair general?
2)How would you know that Strelkov was or wasn’t a competent commander? Were you there? Do you have 1st hand knowledge? Even your alter-ego Saker has repeatedly gone on record affirming Strelkov as being an excellent military leader (having pulled of miracles in tying down such large Ukie forces with so little men and materials and having slipped out to Donetsk without losing any men from Slavyansk).
3) You may be right that Strelkov appears to act like a lose cannon but you have no idea whether this is contrived on real. Western Intelligence has indicated that this guy has lead successful and ruthlessly efficient operations from Bosnia, thru Transnistria to the 2nd Chechen war. He’s an Intelligence Agent, a cut above a regular military commander. I may not agree with his current persona nor many of his actions, but I won’t be stupid enough to dismiss him as merely a war-buff and reenactment junkie.
Yep, @Saker-not-what-he-she-seems, I have to agree with you.
The whole Slavjansk- and Southern Cauldron-Operations planned and conducted by Strelkov were a masterpiece of attritional partisan warfare. Entering Slavjansk with 60 men and leaving it with some 2000 armed men (and women) must be the work of a highly skilled Special Operations Officer in every aspect of the term: military, logistically and ideologically.
I believe, that Strelkov (and others, some of them very close to him, like Borodai), who was on the Crimean Peninsula before operating in Donbas and an official Russian Army member until April/May 2014, was sent with a special mission and clear-cut operational goals in an unfolding conflict between East and West.
My concern is (for some time now), that the majority of Donbas population has never asked Strelkov or any other ‘specialist’ to come to Donbas and organize a Civil War. Which means alot of suffering for the population of Donbas so far. Those decisions about armed and professional warfare were made elsewhere – outside of Donbas. Strelkov’s affiliation with the Russian Right Wing ideology of Dugin, his preference of pre-1917 society models and his (likely) involvement in very bloody and brutal wars like Bosnia and Chechenia make me wonder, if Strelkov is responsible for the torture and murder of civilians and POW at Slavjansk and Donetsk – as indicated by sources on this blog.
They “were not asked”? Do you think they would have been welcome if their presence was not appreciated by a substantial portion of the Donbas population? Have you not seen the huge crowds that applaud and thank these Militia leaders and the battalions. They shower them with appreciation and gifts. “Has caused suffering”? It is the Kiev Junta and the Western backers that has caused the suffering! Resistance is not causation. I dunno 😛
The problem is what he failed to do in Slavyansk. He could not hold the city. He ran to Donetsk. It is almost as if he made no preparations for defense.
What I know of Strelkov is the egotistical stuff he put on the web. And from that you would hardly classify him in the same category as Julius Caesar, Eisenhower, Patton or Montgomery or Petraeus. He certainly does not show the capacity to organize. He seems to be someone who requires supervision. He strikes me more as a General Custer type of command and we all know what happened to him at the Little Big Horn.
He’s a mercenary and was merely a volunteer in Bosnia. As mercenary he is available for hire wherever their is a war. J don’t see him as command material or a candidate for admittance to war collage. I suspect Russia doesn’t think must of him either. He simply one of a crowd of mercenaries that run around the globe wherever there is war.
He really should go an volunteer his services to the Kurds in Kobani.
“What I know of Stelkov is his egotistical stuff on the web”
There have been several fake Strelkov accounts of FB, Twitter, and V.K.
“[The Donbas Militia] appreciated by a substantial portion of the Donbas population” [Aquila Rossa]
I really doubt that, @Aquila. The substantial portion of the Donbas population (and the rest of the Ukraine, not to forget) is just asking, what the heck is going on with our country, why is it going to hell? And they will just hear propagandist answers from every party of this conflict – on any side. And, yes, @Aquila, Civil War on such a large scale and with such weaponry on both sides causes suffering – and you always need at least 2 warfaring parties for a Civil War – and the civilians are just in between – with no chance or will to defend and fight in most cases, like the majority of the Slavjansk population. Or to put my concern in 1 sentence: those, who fight in a heavy-populated industrial and urban region, must be held responsible for any civilian losses of life in the combat zone, regardless of the side of the conflict or the political agenda. Especially, if the fighters are NOT elected and commanded by civilian political entities of Donbas. Which was the case in Donbas, I think: Strelkov, Borodai and others were ‘imports’ from Moscow.
@Judith, if anybody could have defended Slavjansk-Kramatorsk (and later the Lysychansk-area), then it would have been Strelkov and his comrades like Leshiy and Mozgovoi. Slavjansk was encircled and pulverized by Kiev Artillery. The civilian population could not stand the siege any longer – and so the Militia fighters. Breaking out of the encirclement was the best option for Strelkov’s fighters, though not necessarily for the remaining civilians, who are victims of Kiev’s surveillance, torture and murder (Concentration Camps included) since the beginning of July 2014. Nobody would have defended Slavjansk and the other northern border cities of Donbas. It’s too large an area and too far away from the logistical main centers (Donetsk & Lugansk). When Strelkov and his fighters left Slavjansk, they even had not 1 single tank, as far as I know – but were confronted with hundreds of concentrated heavy enemy weaponry. You cannot defend yourself against that. Would be hopeless and stupid, unless you wanna die for good. Or nothing. So Strelkov, as lots of influential people in Donetsk hoped, that he would die there, decided to go south – and ‘purge’ and organize Donetsk Defense with an iron fist. Which he did. By the way, Caesar had far more Legions and Patton far more tanks to command than Strelkov. You should consider the circumstances of the Militia at Slavjansk in May to July 2014 in your judgements, @Judith.
You can also count on it, @Judith, that Strelkov (and others) were sent by Russian High Command to Donbas. He is not just a (cheap) mercenary, but a Special/Secret Forces Officer with close connections to ‘Unconstitutional Warfare’ and ‘Ethnical Conflict Operations’. He is a specialist for the type of Civil War you see at Donbas.
Nevertheless all this specialisation of professional military does not stop the suffering of civilians in times of war. Quite the contrary.
“My concern is (for some time now), that the majority of Donbas population has never asked Strelkov or any other ‘specialist’ to come to Donbas and organize a Civil War. Which means alot of suffering for the population of Donbas so far. Those decisions about armed and professional warfare were made elsewhere – outside of Donbas. Strelkov’s affiliation with the Russian Right Wing ideology of Dugin, his preference of pre-1917 society models and his (likely) involvement in very bloody and brutal wars like Bosnia and Chechenia make me wonder, if Strelkov is responsible for the torture and murder of civilians and POW at Slavjansk and Donetsk – as indicated by sources on this blog.”
I very much agree with you. That has been my point of view since this ‘character’ showed up in Slavyansk. I believe he used Slavyansk as bait to tie-up the Ukiestani bungling hordes.
Streljov-Girkin did a massive disservice to the ordinary citizens of Slavyansk by leading them to believe that he was there to defend them, when, in fact, it looks like he intended to use their town as a feint; i.e. bait. This is a terrible thing when you consider how many innocent children and elderly died there due to inadequate warning of known (by Strelkov) destruction that was going to befall them. Something else that raised red flags about this guy is the relish and pride with he announced his [first] signed execution orders of 2 minor alleged looters. One of these poor guys was accused of ‘stealing’ a shirt from his neighbor’s abandoned and smashed house (this at a time people in Slavyansk were low on supplies, the neighbour had much earlier fled to Russia). One got the impression that Strelkov was relishing this experience as another “tickmark” on his list of ‘reenactment’ accomplishments – in short, it was disgusting and petty. (So Judy, despite my admonishment, I do partially agree with your assessment of Strelkov’s personality/psychological profile (he’s comes across as a psychopath, he might not be, but his own boasting in video interviews do give that impression). )
That said, while the tactics that Strelkov used can be questioned (i.e. the lack of ethics and regard for the unsuspecting local people), I do believe that the fate of the overall people of Eastern Ukraine (now Novorossiya) would be far worse if they had meekly acquiesced to the scum criminals running the Junta in Kiev (Neo-Nazis, Mafia criminal (aka oligarches), the insane (Tymoshenko, etc.)). The people in Donbass would have been destroyed thru a process of slow and systematic ‘virtual’ looting (via devaluation, bank-seizures, destruction of their industry and mining) and overt terror. Many elderly, young and poor would die thru neglect (unfunded medical care), malnutrition (people on shrinking pensions can’t afford to buy nutritious food), stress (from constant worry of whether to eat or to buy medicines or pay the rent), and lack of shelter (due to the planned EU/IMF criminally unnecessary quadrupling of utility bills while stealing/shrinking people’s pensions – leading to insufficient rental money). The number of civilian deaths under these conditions would be huge yet not noticed, because the vulnerable would pass away in silence, the birthrate would crash and go negative (all of this being a slow, covert and insidious form of genocide). You may notice that the same fate was meted out on the Russian people after that moronic pig Yeltsin destroyed the Russian economy (BTW I’m not Russian, I’m from Asia, however, our common humanity horrified me to what was done to innocent Russian civilians).
Unfortunately, most civilians behave like cows/cattle (including many of the people of Donbass), very few are alert enough to see the medium-term picture, let alone long-term picture. So as terrible as the “armed and professional warfare”, you refer to, may have been, the sad truth is, that in the long run, more Donbass civilians will be alive because of this military movement than if the Junta, the EU and the IMF had been allowed to proceed unchecked. In addition, the society of Donbass has a good chance of coming out of this mess stronger and healthier than even before the ouster of Yankovich. I only wish that the local people had been informed of the price they were going to pay and more had been done to ensure their safety (instead of keeping them in the dark and using them as bait).
Western intelligence said he was present in Bosnia and Transnistria. Don’t forget he is a mercenary. Funny he is unemployed now.
Strelkov video on the same subject, listen carefully, sound very similar to, ivanov:
I don’t think any of us possess the intimate knowledge of what exactly went on in the self defense force and their military actions. Therefore, I bow to the judgement of the men who actually fought with him. I think everyone’s opinions about him overstep their knowledge.
Penelope – you measure military success by victory not by escaping a defeat a la Strelkov. He was a mercenary and not one of the best. He had blotted his copybook and the Russian wanted him out and that is why he got the boot. He was an embarrassment and he was incompetent and did not take orders very well from Moscow. Moscow runs the show – I am not saying that Moscow micromanages events – but I am saying that they do not let them go seriously wrong and Strelkov went seriously wrong .
There would have been no offensive and no Illovaisk of Strelkov was still hanging around. You can say all you want or deny but the Russian Army did come in and do the heavy lifting. For them to do that they needed people who took orders and what was why the there was big overhaul in leadership in Donetsk to get people more suitable to Moscow. Only Moscow had the trained men and armor to wipe out the Ukrainian army and let Poroshenko know that he had to settle for peace because no matter how many divisions from Kiev he sent in – the Russian could always send more and stop him. That realization brought on the non-ceasefire” – along with the fact that Winter was coming.
Moscow, I believe, wants a frozen conflict as that is a good scenarios for them. The reaction of the West and NATO and Sanctions probably kept them from taking Mariopul and creating the land bridge to Crimea. But I still think they have it in their mind. But they stopped because of the pressure of sanctions and decided to settle for Minsk – which gives them a frozen conflict. They have people in Donetsk who will take orders from Moscow whenever Moscow gives them. Moscow is supporting the elections and has stated it will recognize them as legitimate — giving heartburn to Poroshenko and Kiev.
Whether you like him or not Zakharchenko is doing a decent job of running a broken rump of a country and making some effort to find out what people want. I was surprised at his “campaign” trip — very American in style – I wonder who told him to do that as I doubt that he knows much about American Politics. But he is doing a decent job which is more than you can say about those who preceded him — who were called in the American Press “Dunces on the Don”
The most important factors in the militia success are threefold. First is resourcing and material support. Second is the will of the Donbas people to resist the ‘punishment’. Third is military and to do with morale and fighting skill etc.
That will to resist could not be broken so far. Military success has reinforced it even. That will is based mostly on what they do not want, i.e., rule by a puppet junta and the same fate for Donbas industry etc that was suffered by dismembered, plundered and indebted Yugoslavia. What the population does not want also largely suggests and defines the kind of Donbas they do want.
If the population was not so determined and strong, the terror tactics of Kiev would have been more successful for them. The resolve of the Donbas population is the key factor. Everything else would be futile without it. Therefore those who assist materially would do well to consider the desires of the Donbas people when making their political demands.
My concern is that if the Donbas people become disenchanted with what it appears the outcomes will be, then their will to resist can be diminished. Potential outcomes that satisfy the general desires of the Donbas people must be genuinely on the agenda, so as to encourage their continued resistance. The ordinary people need something for them out of all this. What is more, if they get the Donbas they want, populations of adjacent regions may want it too.
The potential outcomes are being dictated by the ambitions held by the various sources of material support. Solutions need to be found so the the ambitions of Donbas people are not overruled by the desired outcomes of those who assist them to resist, otherwise the determination to push for satisfactory outcomes for all could be diluted and neither wins.
Ukraine appears to be heading without doubt into the Western fold. A reconciled, whole, and neutral Ukraine appears to be the most unlikely and distant of possible outcomes. Whether or not that happens, Donbas will hopefully define itself on how it wants to be – either as a part of the whole or going it alone.
For a proper understanding of what is going on in (eastern) Ukraine, I think people need to know the bigger picture. I haven’t got the time to post in detail, so here are some pointers:
1. Read PNAC, the Project for the New American Century – US pre-eminence as the only world superpower for the 21st Century, and its containment of any other (lesser) superpowers. Note its signatories: rumsfeld, cheney, kagan et al. In conjunction with this, read the ORIGINAL wolfowitz (neocon Jew) doctrine. Note kagan, a Jew, one of the founders of PNAC, married to victoria JEWland.
2. The EU’s involvement in a greater area, encompassing the Union of the Mediterranean – sarkosy’s (a Jew) plan, and the Eastern Partnership, originated by Poland – which used to own western Ukraine – involving the former Soviet republics, e.g. Ukraine…camoron’s (British pm & a Jew) desire to have the EU expanded up to the Urals, and who bankrolled him? The same people who bankrolled bliar…
3. Read mearsheimer’s article, wherein he blames the USA for the war: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault
Extract (read it all): ‘it is clear that Washington backed the coup. [victoria] Nuland and Republican Senator John McCain participated in antigovernment demonstrations, and Geoffrey Pyatt, the US ambassador to Ukraine, proclaimed after Yanukovych’s toppling that it was “a day for the history books.” As a leaked telephone recording revealed, Nuland had advocated regime change and wanted the Ukrainian politician Arseniy Yatsenyuk to become prime minister in the new government, which he did.’
PNAC is no longer well thought of. The US public is not particularly interested in expansion as that always cost us money. American are generally disenchanted with our role in the world. We do not want to be the policeman of the world. The only international adventure in which the public is interested is in the defeat of ISIL.
The EU is going into recession and cannot afford to add any more countries. Too many EU countries are starting to need “bailouts.” The EU made the mistake of taking into too many countries with poor economies which required a lot of money. That is killing the EU too. I doubt if it is interested very much in expansion, and the UK is looking for the exit. The EU has really ruined Europe.
No one is interested in Ukraine anymore as we see that it costs money and we are not anxious to give money to Ukraine. Anything we give Ukraine is leftover stuff we don’t want or need.
PNAC no longer exists. It was a think tank and was no longer needed after its leaders and members took over the government.
BTW, Victoria Nuland is married to the founder of PNAC.
Cass, the aims of PNAC remain. After all, it was called the Project for a NEW AMERICAN Century, ie. this one, the 21st, regardless of which political party fronts the Government.
Nato wants this to drag on and on. Thats called the business of war. Should Russia allow this nonsense,the whole front will encircle russia,china in a short time fame.
Nato is having trouble with Turkey right now
You are wrong, NATO has not problem with Turkey, quite the opposite they go along,Turkey is doing the job assigned to them by NATO, be the rear of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq to rest and refit, in the same way that Pakistan has been the rear of the Mujaheddin-Taliban in Afghanistan for more than 30 years. I highly recommend you to read history, the true history of what has been happening in the world in the last 60 years, USA has been sponsoring this sort of world gangsters all around the world from Iran (1953) to Afghanistan (1979-2014).
About what you said before that “The US public is not particularly interested in expansion as that always cost us money.”, you are wrong again, the driving forces of US internal and external affairs are the private corporations, period. US public opinion is shaped in the best way to achieve multinational corporations goals, anything else is just conversation. US public opinion has never decided when and with who go to war, something that is very usual in US history.
About “The EU is going into recession and cannot afford to add any more countries. Too many EU countries are starting to need “bailouts.” The EU made the mistake of taking into too many countries with poor economies which required a lot of money.”
All the same, countries are added to the EU to grow the market for Multinational Corporations and not to make the European people happy, you can ask to the Romanians about that.
The Multinational Corporations need integrated markets like USA and the EU to reduce cost and increase grow, to achieve that is much better to divide countries that can create political problems such as the former’s Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.
Geopolitical discussion in Russian TV show:
Summarizing, they said that:
1. They (russians) are very aware of what NATO wants, total destruction of the countries that don’t go along with them with the final goal of reset the capitalism system.
2. Russian people has been fooled for 25 years by the American way of life propaganda.
3. Russia lost much of they industry and research base that they will create again (wishful thinking).
4. Russia need a new socio-economic system with the old soviet values, but don’t said which (wishful thinking).
5. They want to bet in a new constellation of powers BRICS……
You have an unrealistic picture of the US and the problem with Turkey. The us is VERY angry with Turkey – Turkey is NOT doing what is expected of them and they are not letting us use Incirlik Airbase instead we must fly off air craft carriers and do mid-air refueling. I am not saying our foreign Policy is perfect – far from it. It was wrong to interfere in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there – we got blowback in the form of Osama bin Laden. Pakistan is failed state and it is corrupt – we prop it financially because if we don’t things will be worth. I doubt that you listen to much US policy debates, but there are many debates and hearing on the question of Pakistan and Afghanistan. I look for their to be a move to cut aid to Turkey and find a way to punish it. Many people, myself included, think it should be kicked out of NATO.
NATO is popular with government officials, but not with the general public which is seeing NATO as an expensive luxury. There is some real anger over the failure of many member states to fail to keep their defense at the 2% of GDP required by NATO. More and more there is a feeling that we just let them hang on to our coattails. We are going into recession and will not want spend money on other country’s defense. We now have the expense of 3 Whack-A-MOLE wars going on and are not doing well because of Obama who has placed limits via the Rule of Engagement on the troops. If we could do a real “shock and awe” bombing campaign we could wipe out ISIS very quickly.
There is a rising mood in the US to curb some of the big multi-national corporation and depending on how the elections go you could see some curb on these multinationals. I can see it coming when I listen to the Congressional hearings.
We do have a vision of what we think the world should be, but we are less and less willing to try to make that happen. The $17 trillion debt puts a lot of things on hold. Also the US publics is insisting and that it does NOT want to be the Policeman of the World – the world’s 911. That rising sentiment is getting strong. which is why when the President was drawing red over chemical weapons and attacks in Syria, he found that Congress would not give him the authorization to do so. That would never have happened 10-15 years ago. He American appetite for global adventurism has diminished considerably and I look to see it diminish more.
As if the USA is run by its local government, corrupt Congress or The Powerless People even.
Corporate D.C. is a company with a selected (not elected) CEO, who obeys orders. If not: 22-11-1963.
The USA is a failed state but succesful corporation. The 1776 “Revolution” was instigated by the same powers that run the corporation (through the Fed mainly) today. The United States of Bases is a 2 century long global agony.
The American people should follow their State Constitutions and set themselves free.
Along with the Native People, by giving them back their lands.
The blood soaked USA cannot lecture the world whatsoever.
I will reply you with more detail later, but I want to let you know something very clear, and I believe that I am talking for everybody in this blog, Nobody has any problem with USA people, like the Russian, Chechen s, Kurd s, South Americans, Europeans…..and so on, you are our human brothers in this planet.
The big problem is that your central government in Washington is the manager (CEO?) of the multinational corporations imperial necessities. Bottom line, they behave in the way that they do because they need or they fall from the history as empire.
I hate to say this, but you seem to be clueless as to the real way US-EU-5-Eyes “Fiat-Dollar-Horde” operates. They don’t want to destroy ISIS/ISIL too quickly, if they did they could exterminate them in very short order. The ISIL bogeyman allows the dollar-alliance to stay involved in that region until the regional players there acquiese to American demands (a protection racket where we can stop our own thugs from smashing your store as long you play ball).
Nobody within the US power structure, except for true American nationalists within the Pentagon and intelligence organs, are upset with Turkey. Turkey’s intransigence is just a charade to provide an excuse to allow the US plausible deniability in explaining why it is taking America so long to destroy a pathetic conventional force of light infantry made up only 30,000 ISIL cannon fodder concentrated in Wahabist urban centers and in easily identifiable groupings within the Iraqi-Syrian desert. The US didn’t give a sh-t about Sunni sensibilities when they slaughtered the Sunni population of Fallujah, now suddenly we’re supposed to believe that they can’t bomb ISIL in Sunni areas (where the local scum support them) because the US doesn’t want to violate the human rights of Sunnis and alienate them?!??!! Oh please spare us the revisionist BS!
Your conventional arguments are not going to convince a single reader of this site as to the merits of your argument.
Obi-Juan’s argument that Turkey’s role is to provide ISIL with a rear base and sanctuary to allow ISIL to continue to resurrect just like Pakistan’s role toward the Taliban is right on the money. BTW a young rather attractive Iranian television journalist was murdered 2 weeks ago because she broadcast on-air video and pictures of ISIL convoys operating openly in Turkey using UN and WHO trucks (carrying the black ISIL flag). The ISIL trucks were being escorted by the Turkish military to the Syrian border (this was happening at the same time the US was bombing ISIL in Kobani). 2 days after this young woman broadcast her report she and her crew in Turkey were murdered in an ‘ accident ‘ that the Iranian govt is treating as a murder (the journalist had revealed that Turkish intelligence had threatened to kill her just days before she died). The story was reported on RT last week. So Obi-Juan’s contention holds more water than yours.
The short term goal is to use the useful idiots of ISIL to scare the incompetent iraqi regime to go running to Uncle Sam for help, to allow the US to moderate the production of cheap Iraqi oil, and provide the US the vector they need to bomb within Syria if they choose to. The longer term objective is to create a magnet or electrified mosquito trap for the next generation of moronic Jihadists to go and die in. While the idiots with Jihadist proclivities are busy killing each other and dying in Syria and Iraq, they’ll be too busy trying to make trouble in the US or for America’s allies (like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, the EU, etc.). This latter goal is applaudible, but the former is not.
1. “Turkey is NOT doing what is expected of them and they are not letting us use Incirlik Airbase”
Turkey is the puppet and USA is the puppeteer, that mean that the actual Turkey leadership has an extra points in the USA agenda for the destruction of the Assad regime, Turkey leadership want the destruction of the Kurdish guerrillas in Syria and Iraq.
2. “I am not saying our foreign Policy is perfect – far from it.”
Quite the opposite USA foreign policy is perfect, they try to destroy and divide countries that don’t go along with them, The fall and division of Yugoslavia (1989), Soviet Union (1991), Eastern Europe (1989), Afghanistan (1992), Iraq (2004), Libya (2011) was an USA strategic success.
3. “It was wrong to interfere in Afghanistan when the Soviets were there”
Former President James Carter signed the executive order to conduct covert operations in Afghanistan in July 1979, 6 month before Soviet intervention in the country. That means that USA interfere in Afghanistan to overthrow the communist Afghanistan party in power supporting people like Osama bin Laden and other Muslim gangsters.
4. “I doubt that you listen to much US policy debates,”
I do, I am a follower of Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Chris Hedges, Webster Tarpley and others. I don’t care what the Clintons, O’Reilly, Megen Kelly ……or another clowns have to say, they are the speakers of the corporations.
5. “There is a rising mood in the US to curb some of the big multi-national corporation and depending on how the elections go you could see some curb on these multinationals. I can see it coming when I listen to the Congressional hearings.”
It is just pep talk, they depend on USA corporations for make for a living.
6. “The $17 trillion debt puts a lot of things on hold. ”
For sure the don’t put on hold the wars of aggression, do you really believe that USA will step back in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Ukrainian, China and Russia? You are living in a world of delusion!
Quite the opposite, they need to destroy this countries to reset the debt, after that every american will be happy with the congress.
7. “If we could do a real “shock and awe” bombing campaign we could wipe out ISIS very quickly.”
That is not USA goal, the goal is to divide Iraq against Chias – Kurdish and Destroy Assad regime.
8. “which is why when the President was drawing red over chemical weapons and attacks in Syria, he found that Congress would not give him the authorization to do so. That would never have happened 10-15 years ago. He American appetite for global adventurism has diminished considerably and I look to see it diminish more.”
Congress didn’t give him the authorization in 2013 to bomb Syria because the Russian navy was deployed in the Eastern Mediterranean to protect Assad and delivery the S-300 Anti-air system, Hezbollah was in full alert to join the fight with Assad, for the own capacities of the Syrian Arab Army, besides what ever Iran can do to support Assad because they have mutual defense agreement, is for that the England scramble and the congress reacted in very different way that 10-15 years ago. Please read the real news.
When I meant listening to debates – I was referring to the debates in Congress – not the TV Pundits which is what you appear to be listening to. No wonder you are confused if you listen to TV pundits.
Bombing of Syria – the President could not get the votes in Congress for a AUMF – it had to do with the fact that there was a lot of opposition in the country against another war – although many TC pundits where for it, but the public wasn’t and Congress decided not to vote for AUMF.
Yes the administration would like regime change in Syria, but that right now is NOT the primary goal. We still have delusions about the Free Syrian Army.
The people you cite are not movers of Congress or public opinion. They have small audiences and appeal to non-Americans like yourself who have an already pre-determined view based on publicity.
Recently we have tried to do “nation building” and we simply are not that good at it. The British were ultimately better. The US public does not want to stay in a country that long — so Iraq, Libya etc. ended up worse than they were before. Webste Tarpley is a nut case and conspiracy theorist Not worth even listening to.
Judy your assertion that the British are better at nation building proves that you are stunningly ignorant and that no matter how much verbiage you spew on this site you are convincing no one as to the merits of your Langley-originated arguments.
The British are pathetic amateurs and understudy’s to their American counterparts in all intelligence matters. The British bungled the overthrow of Mosadehk in Iran and had to running to Uncle Sam cap in hand to bail out their bungled enterprise; the US turned that operation around in 2-weeks with the successful installation of the Shah.
Most of the wars/conflicts burning across the world today and in the latter-half of the 20th Century are a DIRECT result of the borders the British drew and their “nation-building” prowess as the world collectively threw their thieving parasitical asses out of Asia and Africa: Israel-Palestine (great stable nation building by the British, right Judy?), Iraq-Kuwait split, Iran-Iraq border-war, Egypt-Sinai-Israel, Yemen civil wars, Sudan civil wars, Kenya-Uganda conflict, the British brilliant installation of Idi Amin in Uganda (great nation building!), Apartheid-South-Africa, Racist-Rhodesia-British-built nation, implosion of the Zimbabwean economy after reneging on funding land reform, Northern Ireland insurrection (prior to Good Friday accords brokered by the US), Western Sahara-Morocco wars, India-Pakistan partition (millions killed in a premeditated act of malice by the British or due to British incompetence in Nationbuilding, you decide which you’d rather go with), India-Pakistan border wars, India-China border wars, Northern-Areas-Waziristan-Pakistan-Afghanistan partition and insurgency, the Pakistan-Bangladesh schism, India-Kashmir-Pakistan dispute, Burma-Karen rebel insurgency, Tibet-China problem (directly due to British forced treaties), Sri-Lanka-Tamil civil war (British nation building where the Brits import Tamil bonded labor from India to work like slaves in tea plantations instead hiring local Sri-Lankans at a decent wage), Fijian military coups and instability as a direct result of British imposed constitution and laws that institutionalized racism and tribal cronyism (only recently defeated by Fijian General and newly elected leader Frank Banimarama), Malaysian civil war/ insurgency, Thai-Malay border conflict and Islamic insurgency, World-war-1 instigated by Britain, the destabilization of Czarist Russia, the destruction and betrayal of Poland in WW-2, the instigation of the Russian civil war in the early 20th century, continued support for Chechen terrorists that walk openly in London, attempts to openly balkanize Modern Russia to this day, consistent and constant demonization of Slavs over the past 100 years to present (the British Establishment can never get over the fact that Russia had surpassed the British Empire in every measure), great nation building on the part of the British when they participated in the partition of Yugoslavia wasn’t it? Great nation building on the part of the Brits when they actively support nearly every insurgency against Russia isn’t it? I guess their idea of nation building in Russia involves the breaking up of that country into a bunch of primitive warring and weak ethnostans where millions will die? Great nation building by Britain to provide refuge for almost every insurgent or terrorist leader and oligarch in their capital, Londonistan isn’t it?
I think you need to overcome your obvious American handicap of being geographically and geopolitically challenged before you go around dismissing the arguments of people who have a much broader and deeper knowledge than you (such as Obi-Juan and others).
I agree Turkey supports ISIL and I find that a problem with Turkey. I think it should he kicked out of NATO. I was surprised when they let the Peshmerga enter. I suspect US pressure did that. I see we did punish Turkey – it didn’t get a SC seat that it wanted.
You are right the US should be able to knock ISIS of in short order. We simply are not bombing with the force we could. I think we should just wipe Raqqa off the fact of the map – civilians and all. Under Obama there is too much concern for civilian casualties and that is wrong. You win wars by killing the enemy and destroying everything he has. We are not doing that.
The reason Congress did not give its consent to 2013 bombing had nothing to do with the Russian Navy. You need to learn more about how thing work internally in the government or stop making wild assertion. The Senate lack the votes and Harry Reid did not want member up for reelection to have to take a tough vote, so he derailed the vote – plus it did not come out of committee unanimously. The House never voted. They had some statements from influential members who said they wouldn’t support it and after the Senate Failure there was no point in even taking the vote.
Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.