Russian Soldiers Refuse To Fight as Morale Deteriorating, Ukraine Says

[oneworld2]

Actually the Ukrainian Navy had stated those soldiers are alive. And propaganda is an inevitability in war, on both sides.

One question: Are you a tankie?

Are you a GW Bush clone?

I wished I had read this post first because you wouldn't have gotten other ones.

The initial report, the one used for international propaganda purposes by Ukraine, stated they had all been killed fighting of Russians and using Bruce Willis type rhetoric. No guesses for the writers.

It was only after the Russians had announced that they were all alive and being held as POWs that the BS became apparent.

You get the chronological significance that completely undermines what you are trying to push here?

So now I know where you are coming from don't always expect a decent response

 

[oneworld2]

You ask why the USSR enquiries were pushed away? Simple answer; because the terms of membership demanded by the Soviet Union would have reduced the USA to mere 'observer status'. That could never be allowed.

History of Yesterday: Uncovering the Events That Shaped Our World

History of Yesterday delves into the rich tapestry of our past to uncover the people, events, and cultures that have shaped the world we know today.

historyofyesterday.com

Very interesting read thx and we are into the realms of historiography

I wonder what Europe would look like with the global hegemon reduced to observer status wrt European security

Personally I would have liked to have seen NATo disbanded in the 90's and replaced by a Russian inclusive security arrangement replace it.

 

[Irredentist]

Very interesting read thx and we are into the realms of historiography

I wonder what Europe would look like with the global hegemon reduced to observer status wrt European security

Personally I would have liked to have seen NATo disbanded in the 90's and replaced by a Russian inclusive security arrangement replace it.

Ah yes, because Russian security guarantees are so trustworthy, historically speaking.

 

[oneworld2]

Ah yes, because Russian security guarantees are so trustworthy, historically speaking.

Like as though people in the West can lecture Russians on security or criminality and/or the abuses of stated intentions.

When they have as much blood on their hands as your lot has on theirs, then maybe you will be taken seriously

 

[Irredentist]

Like as though people in the West can lecture Russians on security or criminality and/or the abuses of stated intentions.

When they have as much blood on their hands as your lot has on theirs, then maybe you will be taken seriously

I'll lecture all I want, because I'm not responsible for the actions of the US government, any more than I'm responsible for the actions of Vladimir Putin. When I see evil I name it as such, and evil is what Vladimir Putin is perpetrating in the Ukraine.

 

[Geoist]

Well, let's put your question into reverse too. NATO members have the same capacity to destroy the world ,so what threat does Russia pose?

But NATO is not the one doing the invading.

Recall this has been the ongoing justification for NATOs continuing and imo outdated existence, along with it's justification for wreckless eastward expansion .

Russia's actions since at least the invasion of Georgia and Crimea prove NATO is as relevant as ever.

Your argument could also have been applied to the Cuban missile crisis event. So why did the US risk a nuclear exchange to have that threat removed?

Are there nukes in Ukraine?

NATO was set up , allegedly, to counter the " Russian threat", so it's not as if they were never the intended target/focus.

It was set up to counter the Soviet threat. When the Soviet Union fell that did not remove the chance of there being another threat that would rise, whether it be Russia or some other autocratic power. Turns out Russia decided it wants to carry the torch of the USSR.

Add to that the fact that Russian enquiries to join NATO istself have been pushed away. Why?

NATO has certain requirement for membership that Russia cannot or will not fulfill. Their opposition to democracy, in particular, seems to be a sticking point.

 

[Geoist]

Are you a GW Bush clone?

I hate neocons.

I wished I had read this post first because you wouldn't have gotten other ones.

So what's the answer? Are you a tankie or not? I want to know from what perspective you are coming from. Do you read the Gray Zone? Do you watch Caleb Maupin? Do you read Aaron Matte? Truly curious.

The initial report, the one used for international propaganda purposes by Ukraine, stated they had all been killed fighting of Russians and using Bruce Willis type rhetoric. No guesses for the writers.

It was only after the Russians had announced that they were all alive and being held as POWs that the BS became apparent.

You get the chronological significance that completely undermines what you are trying to push here?

So now I know where you are coming from don't always expect a decent response

Initial reports are often wrong. The difference is whether they correct the record. Ukrainian Navy corrected the info. Russia's government, though, doesn't even acknowledge a war is going on.

 

[Geoist]

I'll lecture all I want, because I'm not responsible for the actions of the US government, any more than I'm responsible for the actions of Vladimir Putin. When I see evil I name it as such, and evil is what Vladimir Putin is perpetrating in the Ukraine.

Tankies can only engage in whataboutisms to justify their immoral positions. Most lefties will condemn war crimes whether it's coming from their government or a foreign government. Tankies/red fascists have the mindset of meathead sports fans and will cheer for their team no matter what.

 

[rhinefire]

As far as I know Russian soldiers refusing to fight are executed. As far as the Ukraine goes those people will never stop fighting so even if Russia doe overpower the opposition they will have drank poison with their meal.

 

[bluesmoke]

It's actually not unusual during war time. I'm sure some of the allies did it during WWII.

The Soviets had as a policy in certain battles to have officers at the back of an attack to shoot any retreating soldier. I don't know of any other allied armies. Do you?

 

[oneworld2]

I hate neocons.

You sound just like them in virtually everything you are saying here. You are with us or you are with the terrorists. That's you position from what I am seeing. I will highlight it as we go along

So what's the answer? Are you a tankie or not? I want to know from what perspective you are coming from. Do you read the Gray Zone? Do you watch Caleb Maupin? Do you read Aaron Matte? Truly curious.

AFAIK the term " tankie" is used to describe a person who adored or wishes for the return of the old USSR. I have listened to Grey zone commentators ( Matte/Blumenthall) and have never come across anything like what you are suggesting in the tankie accusation. If they have I must have missed it.

My main reading/watching are people like Chomsky, Parenti, Klein , Finkelstein, Fisk, Pilger etc etc if you think that this is a list of tankies I would seriously question your objectivity. That said the others you mentioned never struck me as USSR romantics either

From what I see I think a lot of leftists these days are just closset fascists that are like spoiled brats if any dare to disagree with them. That's why I asked you about your neocon flirtations

Initial reports are often wrong. The difference is whether they correct the record. Ukrainian Navy corrected the info. Russia's government, though, doesn't even acknowledge a war is going on.

The point was the first reference from Ukraine was a falsehood propaganda coup. If you want to ignore that and think that they corrected it only after the Russians supplied the evidence of the POW status because they are honest types that's your choice, it's just not mine. What has become obvious is that there is a very well executed western information handling of the Ukrainian side. You can ignore that too but it doesn't mean everyone else has to or if they do it's because they are missing the USSR lol

Yep the Russians are , stupidly imo, referring to it as a special military operation but that's militarists naming stuff for you. I mean " Operation Iraqi freedom " lol that was the name given to your own illegal war on Iraq. They have told the US to get the military out and they still won't go 20 years on

 

[Roadvirus]

It's a leftist that defends authoritarian leftist regimes. Stalinists, Maoists, Marxist-Leninists (MLs, for short), etc. They are essentially the authoritarian stereotype the right likes to throw at the left/liberals.

Tankie - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

Thanks!

 

[oneworld2]

But NATO is not the one doing the invading.

They have been in Afganistan for 20 years after an illegal invasion and regime change war. They have also attacked Libya, Syria, Serbia, Iraq. Where have you been?

Whatever crimes the Russians ( and the Ukrainians) are committing right now they will be dwarfed by the crimes referenced above. If the Russian occupy Ukraine for 20 years and destroy the place while doing it, and then rob the bank on the way out, we might be able to make some better comparisons

Russia's actions since at least the invasion of Georgia and Crimea prove NATO is as relevant as ever.

Funny you mention Georgia because they too were given mixed messages of support and were the first to attack in that war because of it. NATO and the US were, once more, behind a war with Russia as they are wrt Ukraine today. Crimea wouldn't have happened had not the US backed a coup to overthrow the Ukrainian govt. Seems like you have a problem with chronology in your support for US imperialsim

Are there nukes in Ukraine?

There won't be now. Had they been allowed to join NATO what guarantee would the Russians have that similar weapons would not be deployed there?

Do you think the US would accept Russian missile bases in Mexico today?

It was set up to counter the Soviet threat. When the Soviet Union fell that did not remove the chance of there being another threat that would rise, whether it be Russia or some other autocratic power. Turns out Russia decided it wants to carry the torch of the USSR.

Haha, we created it for a certain threat and then when that went we will keep it going until we can create another threat to justify its existence lol

I get it now, you are a liberal US imperialist. All of your crimes and threats are justified because they are wrapped up in the bs of a noble causes

NATO has certain requirement for membership that Russia cannot or will not fulfill. Their opposition to democracy, in particular, seems to be a sticking point.

Yeah , Ukraine is a thriving democracy. The coupsters oust the leadership with US support and then set about sticking it to the ethnic Russians causing a war that has lasted for 7 years and cost thousands of lives. Regular shelling of civilians during all of that time but now you people care because you are told about democracy and freedom, human rights, national sovereignty etc etc lol Where have you been again ?

 

[oneworld2]

Tankies can only engage in whataboutisms to justify their immoral positions. Most lefties will condemn war crimes whether it's coming from their government or a foreign government. Tankies/red fascists have the mindset of meathead sports fans and will cheer for their team no matter what.

Whataboutisms aren't the sole preserve of one group or other . Liberal imperialists like yourself are just as likely to support them/use the tactic.

People who don't like whataboutisms imo are those who wish to hold onto a bias about their own. You appear to be well supportive of western/US imperial adventures so it's obvious you would dislike whataboutisms that completely undermine both the US illegitimacy in trying to dupe people they have some sort of moral high ground and/or they actually stick/support the values they have useful idiots believing they do.

Show where any here actually " cheer for" Russia. They have a right to defend themselves as do the Ukrainians and everyone else. How is understanding that cheering for anyone in particular?

 

[watsup]

They have been in Afganistan for 20 years after an illegal invasion and regime change war. They have also attacked Libya, Syria, Serbia, Iraq. Where have you been?

Whatever crimes the Russians ( and the Ukrainians) are committing right now they will be dwarfed by the crimes referenced above. If the Russian occupy Ukraine for 20 years and destroy the place while doing it, and then rob the bank on the way out, we might be able to make some better comparisons




Funny you mention Georgia because they too were given mixed messages of support and were the first to attack in that war because of it. NATO and the US were, once more, behind a war with Russia as they are wrt Ukraine today. Crimea wouldn't have happened had not the US backed a coup to overthrow the Ukrainian govt. Seems like you have a problem with chronology in your support for US imperialsim






There won't be now. Had they been allowed to join NATO what guarantee would the Russians have that similar weapons would not be deployed there?

Do you think the US would accept Russian missile bases in Mexico today?



Haha, we created it for a certain threat and then when that went we will keep it going until we can create another threat to justify its existence lol

I get it now, you are a liberal US imperialist. All of your crimes and threats are justified because they are wrapped up in the bs of a noble causes



Yeah , Ukraine is a thriving democracy. The coupsters oust the leadership with US support and then set about sticking it to the ethnic Russians causing a war that has lasted for 7 years and cost thousands of lives. Regular shelling of civilians during all of that time but now you people care because you are told about democracy and freedom, human rights, national sovereignty etc etc lol Where have you been again ?

Same old lies as always,

 

[Geoist]

You sound just like them in virtually everything you are saying here. You are with us or you are with the terrorists. That's you position from what I am seeing. I will highlight it as we go along

Where did I say, "you are with us or the terrorists?" Nowhere. Quit lying.

AFAIK the term " tankie" is used to describe a person who adored or wishes for the return of the old USSR. I have listened to Grey zone commentators ( Matte/Blumenthall) and have never come across anything like what you are suggesting in the tankie accusation. If they have I must have missed it.

The term originates from those who defended the USSR's actions against Hungary. It is now a term to describe those who claim to be leftist and defend the actions, past and present, of authoritarian 'leftist' regimes. Max Blumenthal is a perfect example.

My main reading/watching are people like Chomsky, Parenti, Klein , Finkelstein, Fisk, Pilger etc etc if you think that this is a list of tankies I would seriously question your objectivity. That said the others you mentioned never struck me as USSR romantics either

Lol, then you're not paying attention.

From what I see I think a lot of leftists these days are just closset fascists that are like spoiled brats if any dare to disagree with them. That's why I asked you about your neocon flirtations

The closet fascists would be the tankies like Blumenthal, Dore, Matte, Maupin, Hasan, Haz, etc. Considering you get your info from them that would at the very least make you tankie-adjacent.

The point was the first reference from Ukraine was a falsehood propaganda coup. If you want to ignore that and think that they corrected it only after the Russians supplied the evidence of the POW status because they are honest types that's your choice, it's just not mine. What has become obvious is that there is a very well executed western information handling of the Ukrainian side. You can ignore that too but it doesn't mean everyone else has to or if they do it's because they are missing the USSR lol

I don't consider the Ukrainian military to be filled with saints. At the same time, I am not going to play 'both sides bad' when one is being invaded and the other is imprisoning and torturing its own citizens for protesting a war they insist isn't happening.

Yep the Russians are , stupidly imo, referring to it as a special military operation but that's militarists naming stuff for you. I mean " Operation Iraqi freedom " lol that was the name given to your own illegal war on Iraq. They have told the US to get the military out and they still won't go 20 years on

The American government did not ban the word 'war' or 'invasion' in reference to Iraq. Once again, all you tankies can do is play the 'both sides'/whataboutism game.

 

[Geoist]

They have been in Afganistan for 20 years after an illegal invasion and regime change war. They have also attacked Libya, Syria, Serbia, Iraq. Where have you been?

You seem to have trouble grasping tenses. NATO is not currently invading anyone. Russia is the one invading. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq posed no threat to Russia. Russia is a nuclear state and practically untouchable. There is no justification for Russia's actions no matter the sins NATO committed in the past.

Whatever crimes the Russians ( and the Ukrainians) are committing right now they will be dwarfed by the crimes referenced above. If the Russian occupy Ukraine for 20 years and destroy the place while doing it, and then rob the bank on the way out, we might be able to make some better comparisons

Actually, if terrorists killed thousands of Russians on their own land and were holding up in Ukraine I would consider Russia's invasion at least somewhat understandable.

We don't let a murderer get away with it just because serial killers exist. Your argument is completely asinine.

Funny you mention Georgia because they too were given mixed messages of support and were the first to attack in that war because of it. NATO and the US were, once more, behind a war with Russia as they are wrt Ukraine today. Crimea wouldn't have happened had not the US backed a coup to overthrow the Ukrainian govt. Seems like you have a problem with chronology in your support for US imperialsim

Georgia invaded Russia? Evidence please?

And once again you make an excuse for Russia's invasions. Russia does not own Ukraine. It is a sovereign state.

There won't be now. Had they been allowed to join NATO what guarantee would the Russians have that similar weapons would not be deployed there?

So invasion of any non-nuclear country is justified because of the prospective they MAY one day have nukes. Sounds like you are the neocon. You are making the same arguments neocons make about invading Iran.

Do you think the US would accept Russian missile bases in Mexico today?

Actually, what Russia did would be akin to the US invading Mexico because Mexico had some talks with Russia. And yes, the US invading Mexico and murdering its citizens over that would be completely unjustified.

Haha, we created it for a certain threat and then when that went we will keep it going until we can create another threat to justify its existence lol

I get it now, you are a liberal US imperialist. All of your crimes and threats are justified because they are wrapped up in the bs of a noble causes

Are you against military alliances? When did military alliances = imperialism? You are making zero sense but I guess it's just all those years of red fascist propaganda polluting your mind.

Yeah , Ukraine is a thriving democracy.

Ukraine is not a part of NATO.

 

[Geoist]

Whataboutisms aren't the sole preserve of one group or other .

No, but it is especially prevalent in tankie discourse. You are a prime example of it.

Liberal imperialists like yourself are just as likely to support them/use the tactic.

It's hilarious how you think defending a invaded nation against its aggressor is imperialism. Hilarious and sad.

People who don't like whataboutisms imo are those who wish to hold onto a bias about their own.

Actually it's the other way around. People who can only engage in whataboutisms have no other way of defending their positions. It's like a serial murderer who blames his abusive mom for him turning out the way he did.

You appear to be well supportive of western/US imperial adventures

You have provided zero evidence of that.

Show where any here actually " cheer for" Russia. They have a right to defend themselves as do the Ukrainians and everyone else. How is understanding that cheering for anyone in particular?

Never said Russia doesn't have a right to defend itself. But they are not engaged in a defensive war but an aggressive war.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

This is just more of the western media telling us what we want to hear. Four stories over and over: Bucha, Mariupol, Russian army is incompetent, and Ukrainian heroes.

There are many, many Russians ready to bomb Ukrainian cities on command, roll in, rape Ukrainian children, and steal blenders.

Yes and no. Both can be true. There can be small scale unit desertion and large scale moral issues as well as plenty of Russians still willing to follow commands.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Yes and no. Both can be true. There can be small scale unit desertion and large scale moral issues as well as plenty of Russians still willing to follow commands.

The hot stories are what the MSM concentrates on. It's been that way forever.

That said, everyone is welcome to contribute credible articles on other aspects of the invasion of Ukraine.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Whataboutisms aren't the sole preserve of one group or other . Liberal imperialists like yourself are just as likely to support them/use the tactic.

The thing is it is so obvious you wouldn't apply this same level of moral standard if the US wasn't involved. You have your little "stand with Yemen" flag and I'm sure you support the Palestine. I support both those two. Yet both the Yemen government and Hamas commit horrible atrocities. As leftists we theoretically understand that in spite of the actions of certain groups in the fighting it is important to support the people who face horrible oppression from a foreign invader every day.

Yet that analysis seems to have completely gone out the window with Ukraine. You draw such an obviously undo amount of attention to the Azov Battalion and parts of the Ukrainian government that you would criticize someone if they did that with Hamas. In the same way that people use Hamas to undermine the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle you use the actions of the West to undermine supporting the Ukrainian struggle.

You appear to be well supportive of western/US imperial adventures so it's obvious you would dislike whataboutisms that completely undermine both the US illegitimacy in trying to dupe people they have some sort of moral high ground and/or they actually stick/support the values they have useful idiots believing they do.

The supply of US weapons to Ukraine is maybe the most moral use of the military industrial complex in the last 20 years.

Show where any here actually " cheer for" Russia.

Your general stance seems to be "yeah Russia invading was bad but lets focus on how the US made them do it".

So , the Wests use of, or rather sickening misuse of, Ukrainians as proxies to bleed and threaten Russia/Russians is a moral high ground?

^ taking away agency from Ukraine and implying it wasn't their choice to stand up to Russia

Recall the west is where the Swedes invaded Russia. Where the French invaded Russia. Where the Germans invaded Russia, twice.

^ legitimizing Russia's "security concerns" as though there was ever any chance of a land invasion of Russia from the west

It's comments like these that people criticize you for. You're like the people that focused on the rioting that happened during BLM to deflect from the legitimate issues and causes of the protests.

They have a right to defend themselves

I'll start talking about Russia's right to defend themselves when Ukraine/NATO/USA attacks Russia.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Are you against military alliances? When did military alliances = imperialism?

When the US is part of the alliance that's imperialism. If Russia is part of the alliance that's anti-imperialism.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Yet that analysis seems to have completely gone out the window with Ukraine. You draw such an obviously undo amount of attention to the Azov Battalion and parts of the Ukrainian government that you would criticize someone if they did that with Hamas.

The Azov Battalion was disbanded by government decree in 2014. It's militia members were provided an opportunity to join a NG regiment if they passed a vetting process. Azov leadership (Andriy Biletsky) opted out the military and founded the National Corps political party. In the 2019 elections, the National Corps formed a united radical right nationwide-party list with the Yarosh, Right Sektor, and Svoboda far-right political parties This coalition won a combined 2.15% of the nationwide electoral list vote and ultimately failed to win any seat in the Parliament. (Political parties are required to meet a 5% vote threshhold to qualifty for parliament seats). Ergo, there are zero far-right politicians in the Ukraine Executive and Legislative branches of government.

---

The Ukraine governmnet is basically the "Servant of the People Party". It holds the Ukraine Presidency and 254 seats in the 450 seat Parliament. SOTP party ideologies are Populism, Liberalism, and pro-Europeanism. President Volodmyr Zelenskyy is Jewish. There is not a trace of any far-right ideology in the SOTP party or the Ukraine government.

---

oneworld2 is a flaming hypocrite. He constantly whines about the Israeli military occupation of Palestine, yet he has no problem with Russia's military occupation of Ukraine.