ukaine or russia?

[DennisF]

Ex-military is dime-a-dozen. They are all over the place and that fact tells me nothing about the trustworthiness of the speaker.

I get my info on the war almost exclusively from persons who speak at least Russian and usually Ukrainian as well. (That includes the propagandists on Russian state TV.) I get none of it from conspiracy theorists who go on InfoWars.

1. "Ex-military is dime-a-dozen. They are all over the place and that fact tells me nothing about the trustworthiness of the speaker."

Of course; that's where the Two Skills come in - two skills too few possess:

1. dig: find out the facts and how to assess their factuality;
This involves weighing what is said by sources (such as Ray McGovern, who ran the Soviet desk at the CIA and is fluent in the Russian language).
2. think - for yourself - put the facts together rationally into a coherent explanation. You must become good at thinking to do this. Few are.

Ex-CIA and ex-mil-intel people have extensive connections to people close to or at where reportable events occur. The goal is to find sources as close to the events as possible, unfiltered by layers of editing and propagandizing and selective omission.

2. Do you know where the expression that you are a victim in using, that of "conspiracy theory", came from?
https://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Theory-America-Discovering/dp/0292757697
"Lance deHaven-Smith reveals that the term “conspiracy theory” entered the American lexicon of political speech to deflect criticism of the Warren Commission and traces it back to a CIA propaganda campaign to discredit doubters of the commission’s report."

The CIA has three branches; one is counter-intelligence. When Wm. Casey was head of the CIA, he said this:
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William J. Casey, CIA Director (1981)
The Spread of Disinformation and How We Respond
Too many people eager to discredit beliefs often tend to be gullible about much else. By zealously guarding the front door of their minds they inadvertently leave the back door open and become prey to powerful methods of mind control.

 

[Hans Blaster]

"Did you forget Mearschmidt?" I don't know of any "Mearschmidt". Have you perhaps meant John Mearsheimer?

I sometimes get the precise names the minor vatniks wrong.

If you cannot get your facts straight on something as simple as the spelling of proper nouns, how can we trust you when you pontificate about there not being any God?

SMH. That's not what I am here for. Not generally and very much not so on a thread about Putin's war.

As for Ritter, have you not heard that for the criminals in power, truth is illegal? Has Ritter been telling too much of the truth about Russia that is damaging to the propaganda attempting to villainize it?

So far his public crimes have been of the pervert kind.

 

[Hans Blaster]

1. "Ex-military is dime-a-dozen. They are all over the place and that fact tells me nothing about the trustworthiness of the speaker."

I said that because the poster I was replying to had used "ex-military" as some sort of credential for the Australian in the video they posted. That Australian starts with flat out Russian propaganda ("The" Ukraine is not a sovereign state, It has not recognized borders, it is still part of Russia). These are also flat out false.

Note that I stated that his status as ex-military did not make him *trustworthy* (and if it had, he would have blown it in 15 seconds or less with his Russian lies), it wasn't a characterization of his expertise on military matters. At least half of the analysts in this space are "ex-military" and that alone tells us nothing about their trustworthiness or bias.

 

[DennisF]

I sometimes get the precise names the minor vatniks wrong.

Yes, it can happen to any of us.

SMH.

?

That's not what I am here for. Not generally and very much not so on a thread about Putin's war.

By saying "Putin's war" you seem to be implying that from Putin came the causus belli. If so, please respond to the refutation of this by John Mearsheimer on the aforementioned link:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=on1RrmspFIQ
Similar agruments have been made by Macgregor, Larry C. Johnson, ex-CIA Russian analyst Ray McGovern,

or Ritter, for instance, demonstrating here that he has some expertise in the Ukraine war:

So far his public crimes have been of the pervert kind.

That is what he has been accused of, but have you heard what Ritter himself has said about it? This is standard operating procedure in the CIA, to go after someone's credibility by impugning their character. What Scott has been accused of is rather minor, in fact. He did not do anything perverted. Even if he might bear some culpability, that does not discredit him from knowing much about geopolitics involving the Ukraine war. He has extensive background involving Russia and is ex-mil-intel. (And there are not many such mil-intel people, as you suppose, from the level that Ritter, Macgregor, Johnson, or McGovern come from.) And that is what we are discussing, right?
Be specific and fact-driven.

 

[Hans Blaster]

That is what he has been accused of, but have you heard what Ritter himself has said about it? This is standard operating procedure in the CIA, to go after someone's credibility by impugning their character. What Scott has been accused of is rather minor, in fact. He did not do anything perverted. Even if he might bear some culpability, that does not discredit him from knowing much about geopolitics involving the Ukraine war. He has extensive background involving Russia and is ex-mil-intel. (And there are not many such mil-intel people, as you suppose, from the level that Ritter, Macgregor, Johnson, or McGovern come from.) And that is what we are discussing, right?
Be specific and fact-driven.

Not accused of, convicted of.

 

[DennisF]

Yes, it can happen to any of us.

?

By saying "Putin's war" you seem to be implying that from Putin came the causus belli. If so, please respond to the refutation of this by John Mearsheimer on the aforementioned link:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=on1RrmspFIQ
Similar agruments have been made by Macgregor, Larry C. Johnson, ex-CIA Russian analyst Ray McGovern,

or Ritter, for instance, demonstrating here that he has some expertise in the Ukraine war:

That is what he has been accused of, but have you heard what Ritter himself has said about it? This is standard operating procedure in the CIA, to go after someone's credibility by impugning their character. What Scott has been accused of is rather minor, in fact. He did not do anything perverted. Even if he might bear some culpability, that does not discredit him from knowing much about geopolitics involving the Ukraine war. He has extensive background involving Russia and is ex-mil-intel. (And there are not many such mil-intel people, as you suppose, from the level that Ritter, Macgregor, Johnson, or McGovern come from.) And that is what we are discussing, right?
Be specific and fact-driven.

Here is Larry Johnson:

"Larry C. Johnson is a veteran of the CIA and the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. He is the founder and managing partner of BERG Associates, which was established in 1998. Larry provided training to the US Military’s Special Operations community for 24 years. He has been vilified by the right and the left, which means he must be doing something right."

 

[DennisF]

Not accused of, convicted of.

By whom? A U.S. District Court. And who influences the Courts? Do you think anyone who goes against what the CIA wants could get an unbiased jury in East Virginia? Courts are often wrong; at least, Edwin Vieira has told me that on occasion. He spent his career arguing (and winning) cases before the Supremes (or as he calls them, "The Gang of Nine"). Cases are appealed when there is good evidence that the court opinion was incorrect. The Supreme Court recently overturned the incorrect decision in Roe v Wade, for instance, and it is not the only incorrect court decision in history! So i do not put too much faith in a U.S. District Court to tell me what or who is right or wrong. Neither should you if you exercise the Second of the Two Skills.

 

[Hans Blaster]

By whom? A U.S. District Court.

The State of Pennsylvania.

And who influences the Courts? Do you think anyone who goes against what the CIA wants could get an unbiased jury in East Virginia? Courts are often wrong; at least, Edwin Vieira has told me that on occasion. He spent his career arguing (and winning) cases before the Supremes (or as he calls them, "The Gang of Nine"). Cases are appealed when there is good evidence that the court opinion was incorrect. The Supreme Court recently overturned the incorrect decision in Roe v Wade, for instance, and it is not the only incorrect court decision in history! So i do not put too much faith in a U.S. District Court to tell me what or who is right or wrong. Neither should you if you exercise the Second of the Two Skills.

I can see you suffer from some sort of government persecution complex.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Here is Larry Johnson:

"Larry C. Johnson is a veteran of the CIA and the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. He is the founder and managing partner of BERG Associates, which was established in 1998. Larry provided training to the US Military’s Special Operations community for 24 years. He has been vilified by the right and the left, which means he must be doing something right."

In his very first statement he claims the US/west has been providing information used to make long range missile strikes *inside* Russia and the specifically mentions Crimea. No strikes of that kind have taken place inside Russia. (Crimea is not part of Russia.) He is either to unaware (I doubt it) or he is promoting the Russian claim that Crimea is part of Russia. I smell a stooge.

 

[DennisF]

The State of Pennsylvania.

I can see you suffer from some sort of government persecution complex.

And I can see that you prefer an ad hominem response instead of addressing the topic of the Ukraine war and sources that provide information about it.

 

[DennisF]

In his very first statement he claims the US/west has been providing information used to make long range missile strikes *inside* Russia and the specifically mentions Crimea. No strikes of that kind have taken place inside Russia.

How much of the discussion did you hear? The first two minutes? I hope your attention span is longer than this because if not, you will not get anywhere in understanding our time.

(Crimea is not part of Russia.)

It is now. Where have you been?

He is either to unaware (I doubt it) or he is promoting the Russian claim that Crimea is part of Russia. I smell a stooge.

Go to work on the First of the Two Skills. You will need it! You are hardly in a position to draw such a conclusion. What are your credentials? Your experience in geopolitical affairs involving Russia? Your credibility depends in large part on whether you can convincingly refute the facts about the situation that Johnson states. Facts, evidence, and logic are what the Two Skills are in practice. Do you have them? I only want to hear you give factual refutation of the key facts Johnson states.

 

[Hans Blaster]

How much of the discussion did you hear? The first two minutes? I hope your attention span is longer than this because if not, you will not get anywhere in understanding our time.

It was enough to get a very big red flag (see next reply).

It is now. Where have you been?

Earth, external to RF. Crimea is part of Ukraine under international law and is currently under occupation by Russia. Calling Crimea part of Russia is a red flag for people soaked in Russian propaganda.

Go to work on the First of the Two Skills. You will need it! You are hardly in a position to draw such a conclusion. What are your credentials? Your experience in geopolitical affairs involving Russia? Your credibility depends in large part on whether you can convincingly refute the facts about the situation that Johnson states. Facts, evidence, and logic are what the Two Skills are in practice. Do you have them? I only want to hear you give factual refutation of the key facts Johnson states.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Hans Blaster]

And I can see that you prefer an ad hominem response instead of addressing the topic of the Ukraine war and sources that provide information about it.

You claimed that Ritter was prosecuted for his speech. He was not.

His prosecution for working as an agent of Russia is likely coming soon though.

 

[DennisF]

It was enough to get a very big red flag (see next reply).

Earth, external to RF. Crimea is part of Ukraine under international law and is currently under occupation by Russia. Calling Crimea part of Russia is a red flag for people soaked in Russian propaganda.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

"I have no idea what you are talking about."
And that is just the problem. We have insufficient shared understanding of the world to have a meaningful conversation.

 

[Hans Blaster]

"I have no idea what you are talking about."

I don't know what your "two skills" are.

And that is just the problem. We have insufficient shared understanding of the world to have a meaningful conversation.

I guess I don't view enough Russian propaganda to converse with you.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

Why do I need to take a side? I have a friend who spent time as a missionary to the Ukraine and I have friends who were missionaries to Russia. I will proclaim the gospel and will stay out of the politics of other countries!

I think the US should stay the heck out of this matter rather than try to provoke WWIII!

 

[DennisF]

It was enough to get a very big red flag (see next reply).

Earth, external to RF. Crimea is part of Ukraine under international law and is currently under occupation by Russia. Calling Crimea part of Russia is a red flag for people soaked in Russian propaganda.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

"I have no idea what you are talking about."
Sorry; I didn't know that you were referring to the Two Skills:

1. dig out the facts - develop the skill of assessing the factuality of assertions.
2. think for yourself - put the facts together logically and rationally.

Neither of these are skills most people are good at. (I'm not necessarily referring to you!)

Do you know the history of Crimea? I don't mean back when it was part of Scythia but more recently, when Khrushchev gave it, a part of Russia for centuries, to Ukraine as a goodwill gesture. The Crimeans voted on whether to rejoin Russia and 97 % of them said yes. That is an overwhelming majority. If you are an ardent fan of democracy, then you can readily see the validity of Crimea rejoining Russia. That's how democracy works; the will of the people, as expressed by a vote, is respected. That is not how the rule-based international hegemonic Washington order likes to operate.

Along this same line, when asked where I was born, I tell people: "I was born in the Mexican state of California, presently under U.S. jurisdiction."
Is California "currently under occupation by" the United States of America?

 

[Hans Blaster]

"I have no idea what you are talking about."
Sorry; I didn't know that you were referring to the Two Skills:

1. dig out the facts - develop the skill of assessing the factuality of assertions.
2. think for yourself - put the facts together logically and rationally.

Neither of these are skills most people are good at. (I'm not necessarily referring to you!)

Just like this morning, you keep making these condescending posts about those who disagree with you. That's not the only reason some one would disagree with you.

Do you know the history of Crimea? I don't mean back when it was part of Scythia but more recently, when Khrushchev gave it, a part of Russia for centuries, to Ukraine as a goodwill gesture.

I know about how the Tsars conquered it from the Tartars and then "Russified" it with colonists a couple centuries back.

The Crimeans voted on whether to rejoin Russia and 97 % of them said yes. That is an overwhelming majority. If you are an ardent fan of democracy, then you can readily see the validity of Crimea rejoining Russia. That's how democracy works; the will of the people, as expressed by a vote, is respected. That is not how the rule-based international hegemonic Washington order likes to operate.

Elections conducted with "random" soldiers patrolling the territory (Little Green Men, ahem, VDV) is not a fair election.

Along this same line, when asked where I was born, I tell people: "I was born in the Mexican state of California, presently under U.S. jurisdiction."
Is California "currently under occupation by" the United States of America?

There is an internationally recognized treaty between the US and Mexico (Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo) that ratifies the transfer of territory. Russia has their own treaty obligations (with Ukraine and USA) to recognize the 1991 border of the Ukrainian SSR as the boundaries of the nation of Ukraine. It is Russia that has violated that boundary with invasions of Ukrainian territory in 2014 and 2022.

 

[DennisF]

Just like this morning, you keep making these condescending posts about those who disagree with you. That's not the only reason some one would disagree with you.

You seem to know me better than I know myself! No condescension is intended by me, so you need not read it that way.

I know about how the Tsars conquered it from the Tartars and then "Russified" it with colonists a couple centuries back.

Elections conducted with "random" soldiers patrolling the territory (Little Green Men, ahem, VDV) is not a fair election.

Evidence? The dispute over the Crimean election was never resolved, and could not be. Those claiming it to be illegal were all very anti-Russian. From Prensa Latina:

A group of international observers is working in the polling stations of the peninsula, the Crimean Ministry of Internal Affairs, Information, and Communications confirmed, according to a Sputnik report this Friday. The group includes representatives from Slovakia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, and Serbia.​

Over the three days, those observers will visit dozens of polling stations in several cities of the peninsula, including Simferopol, Yalta, Alushta, Sudak, Feodosia, and Sevastopol.​

The 2020 election in the USA was also highly disputed, with many reports of irregularities and even video evidence of illicit vote counting, ballot stuffing, and electronic (Internet) interference. Do you have the same criticism for the illegalities of the U.S. election? And of the earlier one where Al Gore was denied the presidency by the swing vote in Florida?

There is an internationally recognized treaty between the US and Mexico (Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo) that ratifies the transfer of territory. Russia has their own treaty obligations (with Ukraine and USA) to recognize the 1991 border of the Ukrainian SSR as the boundaries of the nation of Ukraine. It is Russia that has violated that boundary with invasions of Ukrainian territory in 2014 and 2022.

Are there any conditions which subordinate the Ukrainian boundary agreement, such as an existential threat to Russia? Are agreements ever nullified by conditions not existent at the time of their ratification?

In 1991, the USSR was dissolving and the new Russian govt was hardly in a stable state to make any treaties. Could they possibly have had undue foreign influence upon them at that time? Possibly from the USA?

As for Mexico, how do you suppose the USA gained land that once belonged to Mexico? Did the Mexicans offer it freely as a gift? Or were they compelled by a superior military force to surrender it?

You are leaving out essential aspects in your telling of history. Answers to the above questions will fill some of it in.

Just like this morning, you keep making these condescending posts about those who disagree with you. That's not the only reason some one would disagree with you.

I know about how the Tsars conquered it from the Tartars and then "Russified" it with colonists a couple centuries back.

Elections conducted with "random" soldiers patrolling the territory (Little Green Men, ahem, VDV) is not a fair election.

There is an internationally recognized treaty between the US and Mexico (Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo) that ratifies the transfer of territory. Russia has their own treaty obligations (with Ukraine and USA) to recognize the 1991 border of the Ukrainian SSR as the boundaries of the nation of Ukraine. It is Russia that has violated that boundary with invasions of Ukrainian territory in 2014 and 2022.

 

[Hans Blaster]

You seem to know me better than I know myself! No condescension is intended by me, so you need not read it that way.

Your demands that others "perform better" or "use better methods" are dripping with condescension.

Evidence? The dispute over the Crimean election was never resolved, and could not be. Those claiming it to be illegal were all very anti-Russian. From Prensa Latina:

A group of international observers is working in the polling stations of the peninsula, the Crimean Ministry of Internal Affairs, Information, and Communications confirmed, according to a Sputnik report this Friday. The group includes representatives from Slovakia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, and Serbia.​

Over the three days, those observers will visit dozens of polling stations in several cities of the peninsula, including Simferopol, Yalta, Alushta, Sudak, Feodosia, and Sevastopol.​

Never heard of this source (Prensa Latina). Sputnik is Russian state media. You seem to be missing the Russian troops on the street.

The 2020 election in the USA was also highly disputed,

only by losers.

with many reports of irregularities and even video evidence of illicit vote counting, ballot stuffing, and electronic (Internet) interference.

baseless and debunked conspiracy theories.

Do you have the same criticism for the illegalities of the U.S. election? And of the earlier one where Al Gore was denied the presidency by the swing vote in Florida?

An election disputed over a few hundred votes out of millions is not a fake election. It is just close.

Are there any conditions which subordinate the Ukrainian boundary agreement, such as an existential threat to Russia?

No. Only Russia's paranoia.

Are agreements ever nullified by conditions not existent at the time of their ratification?

In 1991, the USSR was dissolving and the new Russian govt was hardly in a stable state to make any treaties. Could they possibly have had undue foreign influence upon them at that time? Possibly from the USA?

It was signed (by Putin himself) in 2003 and ratified in 2004.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Russian-Ukrainian_border#:~:text=On%20January%2028%2C%202003%2C%20during,Russian%20Federation%20on%20April%2022.

As for Mexico, how do you suppose the USA gained land that once belonged to Mexico? Did the Mexicans offer it freely as a gift? Or were they compelled by a superior military force to surrender it?

International agreements at the end of WW2 forbid wars of conquest. Such agreements did not exist before then.

You are leaving out essential aspects in your telling of history.
Answers to the above questions will fill some of it in.

This is what I mean by condescension.