All Things Russia & Ukraine

[old salt]

It's difficult to distinguish your humor from snark. Get funnier.

Can't. You get upset when I get funnier.

You making fun of me a few posts ago? Saying that you agree that "it's Biden's fault" that Putin invaded, turning the tables on me?

That was funny....you were giving me sh(t.

When I do that to you? You get mad. So sorry, I don't get to be funny with you.

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything. It becomes tedious & takes the fun out of it. It comes across as an attempt to silence me (as others try). Get better material.

You made plain your intent. It's hard, after the fact, to pass it off as humor or good natured banter.

[Typical Lax Dad]

It's difficult to distinguish your humor from snark. Get funnier.

Can't. You get upset when I get funnier.

You making fun of me a few posts ago? Saying that you agree that "it's Biden's fault" that Putin invaded, turning the tables on me?

That was funny....you were giving me sh(t.

When I do that to you? You get mad. So sorry, I don't get to be funny with you.

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything. It becomes tedious & takes the fun out of it. It comes across as an attempt to silence me (as others try). Get better material.

You made plain your intent. It's hard, after the fact, to pass it off as humor or good natured banter.

[old salt]

It's difficult to distinguish your humor from snark. Get funnier.

Can't. You get upset when I get funnier.

You making fun of me a few posts ago? Saying that you agree that "it's Biden's fault" that Putin invaded, turning the tables on me?

That was funny....you were giving me sh(t.

When I do that to you? You get mad. So sorry, I don't get to be funny with you.

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything. It becomes tedious & takes the fun out of it. It comes across as an attempt to silence me (as others try). Get better material.

You made plain your intent. It's hard, after the fact, to pass it off as humor or good natured banter.

Mr MeToo wingman. Late to the fight. What took you so long.

[Typical Lax Dad]

It's difficult to distinguish your humor from snark. Get funnier.

Can't. You get upset when I get funnier.

You making fun of me a few posts ago? Saying that you agree that "it's Biden's fault" that Putin invaded, turning the tables on me?

That was funny....you were giving me sh(t.

When I do that to you? You get mad. So sorry, I don't get to be funny with you.

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything. It becomes tedious & takes the fun out of it. It comes across as an attempt to silence me (as others try). Get better material.

You made plain your intent. It's hard, after the fact, to pass it off as humor or good natured banter.

Mr MeToo wingman. Late to the fight. What took you so long.

Waiting to see how long before the victim mentality emerged.

[old salt]

It's difficult to distinguish your humor from snark. Get funnier.

Can't. You get upset when I get funnier.

You making fun of me a few posts ago? Saying that you agree that "it's Biden's fault" that Putin invaded, turning the tables on me?

That was funny....you were giving me sh(t.

When I do that to you? You get mad. So sorry, I don't get to be funny with you.

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything. It becomes tedious & takes the fun out of it. It comes across as an attempt to silence me (as others try). Get better material.

You made plain your intent. It's hard, after the fact, to pass it off as humor or good natured banter.

Mr MeToo wingman. Late to the fight. What took you so long.

Waiting to see how long before the victim mentality emerged.

Come on. No unfunny video.

[old salt]

Let's see the drone's video of the "environmentally unsound" intercept.

Given the position of the prop on the Reaper, right behind to the taller V tail, it's difficult to picture a mid-air collision without also striking the tail structure. That could have also brought down the SU-27.

Our US statement indicates that it was still in controlled flight, since a decision was made to ditch it in the sea.
It could have been gliding after engine failure or severe vibrations from an unbalanced, damaged prop.

A more likely tactic to bring down the Reaper was to dump fuel, which would have been ingested into the Reaper's engine intake, causing a compressor stall (possibly explosive), or engine fire & engine failure.

[a fan]

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything.

That's your view.

Mine is that since Trump arrived, I've TRIED get you to admit that you're being ridiculous when you won't back down from an obviously absurd position that no rational person would take. And to make matters worse? In EVERY case, you're parroting a FoxNation talking point. Which makes the position doubly absurd.

So I start with softer phrases like: "come on". Or: "you can't be serious". Banter. Giving you a chance to show an ounce of humility. MULTIPLE times.

Example? Telling us that Flynn was "tricked", and not simply owning that he's a grown man---------not to mention a General with top security clearance------and had 1,000,000 options at his disposal, other than lying to the FBI. AT SOME POINT, a reasonable person would stop backing, admit that his lying for no reason whatsoever is part of the reason people thought there were shenanigans between Trump and Putin....wasting our nation's time chasing nothing.

And after giving you 1,000 chances to stop with the stupidity-----yep, the humor goes away, and it's replaced by mocking. Because sorry man, it's earned.

And again---you didn't use to do this when Obama was in office. There was give and take. And some humility on your part.



What you're seeing from me the last few weeks? I recognize that everything you write is like the tablets from Moses. Etched in stone. Immutable. The word of G8d. And your reaction to questioning your takes is the same you'd get a from a 50's Catholic nun, reacting to a kid who asks too many questions about the contradictions in the Bible.

You don't change your mind about ANYTHING. Your first call from your gut is the end of it. Getting more information doesn't change your first call even a whit.

So I'm just trying to roll with it. I miss the guy from the Obama era......who actually discussed stuff. And had a sense of humor about not just himself, but the Republican party.....

[old salt]

It's hard to find humor in your constant stream of harassment. You take issue with nearly everything I post & try to pick a political fight about everything.

That's your view.

Mine is that since Trump arrived, I've TRIED get you to admit that you're being ridiculous when you won't back down from an obviously absurd position that no rational person would take. And to make matters worse? In EVERY case, you're parroting a FoxNation talking point. Which makes the position doubly absurd.

So I start with softer phrases like: "come on". Or: "you can't be serious". Banter. Giving you a chance to show an ounce of humility. MULTIPLE times.

Example? Telling us that Flynn was "tricked", and not simply owning that he's a grown man---------not to mention a General with top security clearance------and had 1,000,000 options at his disposal, other than lying to the FBI. AT SOME POINT, a reasonable person would stop backing, admit that his lying for no reason whatsoever is part of the reason people thought there were shenanigans between Trump and Putin....wasting our nation's time chasing nothing.

And after giving you 1,000 chances to stop with the stupidity-----yep, the humor goes away, and it's replaced by mocking. Because sorry man, it's earned.

And again---you didn't use to do this when Obama was in office. There was give and take. And some humility on your part.

What you're seeing from me the last few weeks? I recognize that everything you write is like the tablets from Moses. Etched in stone. Immutable. The word of G8d. And your reaction to questioning your takes is the same you'd get a from a 50's Catholic nun, reacting to a kid who asks too many questions about the contradictions in the Bible.

You don't change your mind about ANYTHING. Your first call from your gut is the end of it. Getting more information doesn't change your first call even a whit.

So I'm just trying to roll with it. I miss the guy from the Obama era......who actually discussed stuff. And had a sense of humor about not just himself, but the Republican party.....

You need to understand that it's insulting to dismiss my every opinion as Fox induced. I was often ahead of them on things like the Deep State agenda, leaks, the Russia collusion hoax & Flynn being targeted as soon as he joined the Trump campaign, & events proved me right. Which you still refuse to acknowledge. You don't recognize how hypocritical your attitude toward me is. I recognize you for who are & respect your beliefs & opinions when you state them, even when I disagree.

74 million of your fellow citizens voted for Trump (& I wasn't one of them), because they agreed with his policies, decisions & the people he appointed. I rolled with much of Obama's BS because there was no available alternative. Now we have 2 clear choices. You lIbs were a lot less nasty before Trump.

I lose my sense of humor when a stubborn, dottering old fool gives us the Afghan pullout disaster & is dragging us into WW-III over a border dispute between corrupt Russian oligarchs, while our southern border collapses & the cartels & home grown criminals run amok in our country. Not to mention what he's doing to the economy. And you wonder why citizens are buying guns. Things are not heading in a good direction.

[MDlaxfan76]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Captain John Foreman cbe is a retired Royal Naval officer. He served in Moscow from 2019 to 2022. He was previously Britain’s defence attaché in Kyiv.

On february 11th 2022, as Russia piled up men and armour along Ukraine’s border, I listened as General Valery Gerasimov, the Russian chief of the general staff, lied to Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, his British counterpart. General Gerasimov denied planning to invade Ukraine, saying Russia didn’t need any more land. He claimed that his modernised armed forces had achieved parity with those of America. Earlier, after rehearsing a litany of false grievances, Sergei Shoigu, Russia’s defence minister, told his British equivalent that Russia had no intention of going outside its borders. But neither could explain the build-up of troops.

The British pair were in Moscow to warn General Gerasimov and Mr Shoigu, regime insiders with direct access to Vladimir Putin, that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a catastrophic mistake with tragic consequences. This prescient warning went unheeded. Mr Shoigu and General Gerasimov have subsequently overseen the Ukrainian people’s terrible suffering, the widespread destruction of Ukraine and staggering losses of their own soldiers and equipment. Far from parity with America, their “modern” army has not even achieved parity with Ukraine. The conflict has demonstrated the intellectual, physical and moral weakness of the Russian armed forces—and of General Gerasimov himself.

At the start of the war, General Gerasimov’s braggadocio appeared justified. His armed forces had received billions of dollars to implement a strategy of “active defence” in order to keep war away from Russian soil. He placed emphasis on professionalism and long-range precision weapons, and upgraded Russia’s nuclear and conventional forces. Annual scripted exercises focused on defending Russia from attack before expelling the invader. General Gerasimov planned for swift victory.

In practice, his new-look army, designed for a quick, defensive and simple war of necessity, turned to dust in a slow, offensive and complex war of choice. Blinded by chauvinism, he and the regime ignored the words of Alexander Suvorov, an 18th-century Russian general: “Never despise your enemy, do not consider him stupider and weaker than you.” Arrogance prevented General Gerasimov and his officers from anticipating either Ukrainian readiness to fight or the reaction of the West. His armed forces—just as the Russian state from which they are drawn—proved incompetent, brutal and corrupt.

Russia’s senior military officer since 2012, General Gerasimov is responsible for many of these failings. Far from being the ground-breaking reformer and military theorist of Western imagination, he and his army have displayed intellectual rigidity and unprofessionalism, fragmenting in the face of resolute Ukrainian resistance into a squabbling militia of differing political, ethnic and business interests. If, as reported recently by the Financial Times, the fsb security service convinced General Gerasimov to broaden his initial offensive along multiple axes, he is guilty of a dereliction of duty. One of his wartime predecessors wrote that the Russian general staff should be the “brain of the army”; General Gerasimov has presided over a lobotomy.

His failings have not gone unnoticed. All the field generals who led the invasion of Ukraine, including those once identified as General Gerasimov’s upcoming protégés, have been sacked, or moved on. After disappearing from view, including missing the annual Victory Day parade, and a close call with a Ukrainian himars missile, he and Mr Shoigu have feuded over the conduct of the war with the pro-war right, including Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the Wagner mercenary outfit, Chechen satrap Ramzan Kadyrov and with even the general’s own subordinates. Yet General Gerasimov has not only remained in post, but he has been promoted. In an unusual move in January he was appointed in overall war command in addition to his weighty duties of manning, training and equipping the army, and leading further longer-term defence reforms.

Having led the disastrous invasion, the rationale for his new role is opaque. It may be an attempt to bring order to the chaos of the past year, and regain the strategic initiative. General Gerasimov is promised unlimited funds, replacement equipment (possibly from China) and many more soldiers. Despite supply difficulties, his army still enjoys artillery superiority and can inflict heavy Ukrainian casualties before Ukraine can launch its own spring offensive. Western hesitancy on the supply of arms last year provided him with breathing space to regroup after setbacks in Kharkiv and Kherson. American and European commitment may wobble further. Mr Prigozhin is being forced back into line. Time will tell whether General Gerasimov can pull a victory out of the bag, unlikely though this seems.

It is just as probable, however, that Mr Putin has kept General Gerasimov in place because of his obedience. He has pressed on with an ill-prepared offensive in recent weeks without having fixed the qualitative problems seen over the past year. Russia’s minister of war during Napoleon’s invasion in 1812 was described in a poem as a “servant to the Tsar, and a father to soldiers”. Although General Gerasimov has proven the former, he is certainly not the latter judging by his ropey tactics, indifference to expending Russian lives for minimal strategic gains, and the terrible morale of his troops.

But General Gerasimov’s most shocking failing has been moral. The Russian defence ministry claimed last year that its soldiers are motivated by “good, honesty, [and] an uncompromising attitude towards evil”. Rather their deliberate deafness to human suffering has become the monster in Russia’s war machine, to paraphrase the Polish-British mathematician Jacob Bronowski. By planning, initiating and waging a war of aggression, and facilitating war crimes, General Gerasimov has abetted Mr Putin’s belief that the subjugation of Ukraine justifies all means necessary.

Through political-military education, General Gerasimov has disseminated Mr Putin’s racist, dehumanising narrative that Ukrainians are “Nazis” and “fascists” through the ranks, inexorably leading to the raping, killing, torture and deportation of civilians. On February 18th America determined that members of Russia’s armed forces and Russian officials had committed crimes against humanity in Ukraine. Regrettably Britain has yet to do the same.

General Gerasimov himself is culpable for these appalling atrocities. Although in Moscow he scoffed at the sanctions placed on him, he must, like Generals Jodl and Mladic before him, be held to account with a clear resolve—however long it takes—to try him over his role in the martyrdom of Ukraine.

[Typical Lax Dad]

International | Potemkin diplomacy
Russia’s allies are a motley—and shrinking—crew
They are a coalition of the failing; the Soviet Remembrance Society; and a gang of opportunists

“The west’s plans to isolate Russia by surrounding us with a sanitary cordon have been a fiasco,” Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, gloated recently. “We are strengthening good neighbourly relations…with the international majority.” At first glance Mr Lavrov seems to have a point. On February 23rd, the day before the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, 39 countries refused to back a un resolution condemning it. Despite America and its allies imposing sanctions, Russia’s economy and trade have held up surprisingly well. Mr Lavrov has merrily racked up air miles to foreign capitals.

On paper, Russia’s geopolitical clout looks impressive. It has troops and mercenaries posted to at least 16 other countries. Some prop up friendly autocrats, as in Mali and Syria. Others sustain “frozen conflicts” that keep countries such as Georgia in line and out of nato. Over the past decade Russia has accounted for more than half of arms imports in 22 different countries, including big ones such as China and India. At the un it has benefited from the support, or at least useful abstentions, of dozens of countries.

Natural resources and technology amplify its power. In the decade before the invasion Russia was the dominant natural-gas supplier to more than a dozen countries, giving it an energy weapon that it has not hesitated to wield against Europe: in 2005, 2009 and again last year. Ten countries generate a major share of their electricity from Russian-built nuclear reactors, or else co-operate closely with Russia on nuclear technologies.

Russia’s diplomatic resilience has many in the West wringing their hands. Peter Frankopan, a history professor at Oxford University, recently wrote that resentment at the West and sky-high energy prices were transforming the international system in ways that favour Russia. Newspapers, think-tanks and pundits lament that the West has failed to isolate Russia or win over large numbers of developing countries. Yet data collated by The Economist on a broad array of military, economic and diplomatic measures—call it the “Putin’s pals index”—show a fuzzier picture.

The index looks at 11 different measures of support or potential for coercion in three broad areas. The first is diplomatic. Have they voted against Russia or abstained on key un resolutions, or voted with Russia at least twice on these resolutions? The second is military. Are they treaty allies with Russia? Do they have Russian troops or mercenaries on their territory? Have they supplied arms to Russia since the war began? Do they depend on Russian arms? Have they done manoeuvres with Russia since the start of the war?

The third looks at energy and economics. Do they rely on Russian gas, and do they depend on Russian nuclear power stations or technology. Is trade with Russia a large share of their total trade? Have exports to Russia risen since the war?

The categories are unweighted, so countries are scored on a simple total. This rough-and-ready index is not intended to capture the finer nuances of diplomatic stances that many countries adopt. But it provides a framework for assessing how countries choose to act towards Russia and whether they could be vulnerable to coercion by it. (Readers wanting to browse the full index can find it here.)

The half a dozen countries that score most highly are those bound to Russia mainly by politics, history and geography, such as Armenia, Belarus, Iran and Kyrgyzstan. Beneath these is a long list of countries with looser links to Russia, including giants such as China and India and tiddlers such as Bolivia and Mali.

The B Team
One way to think about the universe of countries with links to Russia is to group them into three categories: a “coalition of the failing”; the “Soviet remembrance society”; and an “axis of opportunists”.

Start with the coalition of the failing. Mr Putin is fond of quoting Tsar Alexander III: “Russia has just two allies: the army and the navy.” That is closer to the truth than Mr Putin might like. On paper Russia has five formal allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (csto): Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. All are bound by treaty to come to each other’s aid if attacked. Yet not one csto member has backed Russia’s war in Ukraine with troops. Belarus has let itself be used as a military base, but has sent no troops of its own.

Instead, some csto members are trying to distance themselves from the war. Armenia is angry that the 3,500 Russian troops on its territory did not come to its aid during a war with Azerbaijan in 2020. It has refused to host this year’s csto war games, and now seems to be hedging its bets when it comes to political patrons, by inviting an eu mission to monitor its border with Azerbaijan.

Kazakhstan has long been a close ally of Russia. Last year Mr Putin sent paratroopers to put down anti-government protests in several Kazakhstani cities. Yet that did not stop Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Kazakhstan’s president, from criticising the Ukraine war in front of Mr Putin during a visit to St Petersburg in June. In February Kazakhstan hosted Antony Blinken, America’s secretary of state. Mark Galeotti of the Royal United Services Institute (rusi), a think-tank, draws parallels between Russia’s waning influence and Britain’s post-imperial decline. Central Asia’s drift away from Moscow, he wrote, is “Putin’s Suez moment”.

Besides Belarus, only Iran and North Korea have sent arms to Russia. America’s government reckons North Korea has delivered a “significant” number of artillery shells, but not enough to alleviate Russia’s shortage or change the course of the war. Iran has sent explosive-laden drones that have helped Russia keep bombing Ukraine, even as its own stocks of missiles have run low. It has also posted “military advisers” to help Russia operate the drones.

Yet Iran, which was determinedly non-aligned during the cold war, is divided over how much to cosy up to Moscow. Hardliners in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps hope their support will be repaid with modern fighter jets and anti-aircraft missiles. But relative moderates in Iran’s foreign ministry worry about further antagonising the West or condoning the invasion of neighbouring countries—particularly since the Soviet Union conquered much of Iran during the second world war. Set against this group of three allies willing to arm Russia is a Western alliance of 31 countries that have publicly confirmed they are sending weapons to Ukraine.

Diplomatically, Russia seems almost as isolated. Only four countries (Belarus, Nicaragua, North Korea and Syria) have voted consistently against the seven un General Assembly resolutions that have condemned Russia’s behaviour in Ukraine since 2014, when its troops seized the Crimean peninsula. Another half dozen, including Bolivia, Eritrea, Mali and Nicaragua, have voted with Russia at least twice.

Countries in the coalition of the failing have much in common. None is a proper democracy. Some, such as Syria, depend directly on Russian troops or mercenaries for the survival of their governments. Others, such as Eritrea, are themselves global pariahs that rely on Russia for diplomatic support in the un Security Council. The coalition is also shrinking. In 2014, when the un voted to condemn the annexation of Crimea, Russia had the support of ten countries. Several have since withdrawn their backing. These include Bolivia, previously under the thumb of Evo Morales, a leftist strongman, and Sudan, which was ruled by Omar al-Bashir, a genocidal dictator who hated the West.

Goodbye Lenin
Roughly 30 other countries are nominally neutral and tend to abstain on un votes on Ukraine. Many refuse to take sides, says Dmitri Alperovitch, the head of Silverado Policy Accelerator, an American think-tank. Instead, he says, their attitude is: “a pox on both your houses; this is two white countries fighting each other.”

A subset of these make up the Soviet remembrance society. While not offering any serious diplomatic or military help, they tend to lean towards Russia, doing such things as holding military drills with its armed forces or echoing its arguments that nato expansion or Ukraine itself is to blame for the war.

Untangling their motives is not straightforward, but some common threads emerge. Some, such as Algeria, Angola and South Africa, profess sympathy for Russia partly because of historical links to the Soviet Union (they seem to forget that Ukraine was also part of the ussr); or, even more ironically, because they remember the ussr as an ally of oppressed people fighting imperialists.

Yet Soviet nostalgia is not the only factor at play, particularly in Africa, where most of the countries abstaining on the key un votes are found. In many cases ruling parties or politicians owe Russia favours for its help in financing or trying to sway elections. South Africa’s ruling African National Congress, for instance, has taken large donations from a mining firm linked to Russia. That may have influenced its decision to host Mr Lavrov and to hold military exercises with the Russian navy.

Russian diplomacy in Africa focuses on security assistance and weapons sales. The Atlantic Council, a think-tank in Washington, noted in a recent report that whereas Russia had signed seven military co-operation agreements in Africa between 2010 and 2017, it inked 20 between 2017 and 2021, more than half of them with countries with which it had no previous military ties.

Russia is not just a big supplier of weapons. It has also become the arms dealer of last resort, gaining influence in countries that are cut off from Western supplies because of coups and human-rights abuses, such as Mali and the Central African Republic. Western arms embargoes “opened the door [for the Russians],” says J. Peter Pham, America’s special envoy for the Sahel under the Trump administration. “We can’t really blame the Malians for taking what they can get.”

Yet in some cases Russia’s attempts to win influence have failed spectacularly. Madagascar, for instance, turned against Russia after it was caught trying to swing a presidential election towards pro-Russia candidates in 2019. After five fighters from Wagner, a Russian mercenary firm, were captured and beheaded by jihadists in Mozambique, the country turned to Rwanda and the West for security assistance.

“Everywhere they go, they seem to be struggling in terms of political interference,” says Samuel Ramani, also of rusi and the author of “Russia in Africa”, a book published last month. The mistakes Russia makes in poor countries are often similar to its intelligence blunders in Ukraine, such as overestimating the popularity of local proxies or leaders. “Most of it is general incompetence, and also a misreading of local situations,” says Mr Ramani.

Nuclear energy offers Russia another lever. Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear-energy firm, is the world’s biggest exporter of reactors. A paper published in Nature Energy last month by Kacper Szulecki and Indra Overland at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs notes that at least nine countries, including Bangladesh and Egypt, could be vulnerable to political pressure because they depend on Russian-built or -operated nuclear plants. Several other countries have high levels of nuclear co-operation with Russia. Yet this, too, may be weakening. Russia’s interruption of gas exports to Europe may undermine its general reputation as a reliable supplier of energy.

Taking what they can get
The third group of countries—the axis of opportunists—see Western sanctions as a chance to boost their own trade with Russia on juicy terms. Russian imports of goods collapsed by more than 40% in the first few months after its invasion, according to an analysis by Silverado Policy Accelerator. Yet by September they had largely recovered, as China and Turkey in particular stepped in to replace exports from Europe and America. The West has so far proved unable to completely shut down Russian imports of high-tech widgets such as computer chips, which are used in missiles and other weapons. Russia has continued to import between a third and a half as many chips as it did before the war, largely thanks to a big increase from China.

China initially seemed to have been caught off-guard by Russia’s attack on Ukraine. It had agreed to a strategic partnership with “no limits” just weeks before the tanks rolled in. Since then China’s supreme leader, Xi Jinping, has sought to turn the situation to his advantage, sensing an opportunity to distract America from its efforts to confront China, especially over Taiwan. At the same time, he has calibrated his response to try to insulate China from any American or allied retaliation. Chinese officials thus profess neutrality on Ukraine, refusing to condemn Russia’s invasion but blaming the war on nato expansion. One big question is whether China will begin supplying weapons to Russia. That could help relieve Russian shortages, and change the course of the war. More may be revealed when President Xi visits Russia, which could be as soon as next week.

Turkey’s relationship with Russia is more complex. Turkey is a nato member. It has sold armed drones to Ukraine and is thought to have sent precision-guided artillery and rockets too. It competes with Russia for influence, from the Middle East to Central Asia, and has even fought proxy wars against it in Syria and Libya. Yet it also depends on Russia for natural gas and assistance in building nuclear power plants. It earns billions of dollars a year from Russian tourists. This locks both countries into an embrace of mutual dependence. Turkey finds it advantageous to play Russia and the West against each other. Russia, in turn, seems willing to overlook Turkish support for Ukraine so long as trade continues to flow.

India could be benefiting far more from trade with Russia than it is. It has studiously refused to condemn Russia’s invasion and has increased its imports of discounted Russian oil (though now says it will stick to a price cap imposed by the West). It remains a big buyer of Russian weapons. Yet at the same time it does not seem to have become a critical conduit for getting goods under sanctions into Russia. Indeed, the value of India’s exports to Russia has fallen since the invasion.

The West has been doing its best to tug some of Putin’s remaining pals away. And it has so far deterred countries such as Belarus from playing a more active part in the war, and Iran from supplying ballistic missiles, which would be a serious escalation in its support. But Ukraine’s allies have floundered over how—or even whether—to counter Russian influence in poor countries.

The first step may be to avoid over-inflating the importance of soft support offered to Russia by its fellow travellers, particularly when it leads to little more than abstentions on un votes or symbolic gestures of solidarity. “I worry about setting ourselves up for an unprofitable game of whack-a-mole if we try to counter each and every manifestation of Russian influence,” says Andrew Weiss of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, an American think-tank. “In some cases, we risk overpaying to deal with problems that don’t have all that much strategic importance.”

At the same time the West could be taking relatively cheap steps to counter the spread of Wagner in Africa, largely by arming and supporting regional security forces and friendly governments so that they are not forced to turn to Russia. Similarly, when dealing with Russia’s axis of opportunists, the West needs to carefully calibrate its own red lines, spell them out and not protest at increased trade outside of military and high-tech goods. It should keep its economic powder dry to deter China or others from sending arms and ammunition. Russia is not as isolated as the West had hoped, but Mr Lavrov’s claim that it is surrounded by close friends is wide of the mark. ■

[old salt]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

Only you don’t call it “propaganda”….spouting propaganda before FoxNews is an achievement……and Rudy Giuliani used to chase crooks before he became one….



Not funny…..to you…

[a fan]

You need to understand that it's insulting to dismiss my every opinion as Fox induced.

I agree. Except---that's not what I do. The ONLY time I dismiss your opinion is under three conditions:

1. it's a ridiculous position that you would NEVER hold if we were discussing Democrats instead of Republican, or vice versa.

2. It's the flavor of the month at Fox.

3. You use the EXACT same language....verbatim....as FoxNews to describe your complaint or excuse.

That's it. When you do those three things? Come on, man. Of COURSE it's FoxNation nonsense.

So if you'll recall? I was on board with your INTIAL accusations of your Deep State. Listened to your complaints. And waited for evidence of what your claim was: that multiple people in the Federal Government were conspiring------conspiring together-----to take Trump out. I was good with that.

The problem, as you STILL won't admit is where the FoxNonsense comes in.

1.there's ZERO evidence of this. Zippo. Did you change your mind after six (SIX!) investigations into your Deep State found nothing? Nope. Did you say "well, I guess I was wrong. No evidence of this conspiracy". Nope. Can you not understand how annoying this is?

2. Did you, at the same time, DEMAND evidence of Trump's Russia collusion. You bet your sweet bippy. For that? Old Salt wants evidence. If there's no evidence, he mocks the very idea of Russian Collusion. This is the FoxNonsense----one standard for Collusion, totally different standard for your Deep State. Your Deep State doesn't need evidence. Do you not see how annoying this game is? Sorry man, but on this count, you DESERVE to be mocked.

3. You ignored every single piece of TrumpNonsense, and pretend it never happened. Classic FoxNonsense. Nonsense that we now know the Tuckers and Hannity's don't believe themselves. They're selling you this stuff......that hiring Manafort, a guy on Putin's payroll who was convicted of trying to hide said business with Putin is no biggie. That the FBI would be NUTS to look into that relationship, and ask "why the F did Trump hire this guy...what's going on?"

Or TrumpTower Moscow....."Tower? What Tower?" Trump gets caught with documents about building said Tower Then you get "Oh THAT Tower.

Or "forgetting" to tell election officials about meeting a Russian spy, looking for dirt on Hillary. That's TeamTrump TRYING to work with Russia. Did this bother you? Even a little? F no. Instead of flipping out at those idiots for not calling the FBI IMMEDIATELY....you give them excuses for being stupid. And then go right back railing against the FBI for daring to investigate this stuff. These excuses are just....exhausting.

4. You called all the lying TeamTrump did.....felonies...."process crimes". Mocking them on one hand, while on the other act like you're too stupid to understand that it was all the lying that attracted the attention of the FBI in the first place. Acting like that's a footnote, rather than the whole enchilada that wasted a Nation's time as we tried to figure out "why the F are ALL of these men lying every time we mention Russia".

Turns out, they're just idiots. But THAT is what led to all the investigations. Do you admit this? F no. And that's the FoxNonsense....ignoring obvious evidence because it ruins your conspiracy.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. You yourself said Trump is unfit for office. So why the F did you waste SO MUCH ENERGY defending all this shenanigans? Who fired Comey? That's right. Trump. Brought it all on himself. Don't want investigations? Don't lie. Simple.

5. The last one? You and FoxNation don't complain or run stories about your Deep State anymore. It's gone. Poof. What does that tell you?

It tells ME that neither of you believe in a Deep State. Because to top all of this off? Every FBI official dealing with Trump was a freaking Republican. All of them. Hunter's been under investigation for YEARS now. Have any complaints about that?

No. Why? Because suddenly, neither you nor Fox give a sh(t if the Deep State is targeting Dems. It never once occurs to you to complain. Or ask "why the F is the FBI investigating a private citizen who's not in government...and taking longer to rake him over the coals than we spent investigating 9/11?

So guess what all that does to me? It annoys the heck out of me, because it tells me that this was nothing more than whining about "your guy" getting rightfully investigated. When the shoe is on the other foot, and they're going after a Dem? You lose interest, and don't care.

Sorry man, what am I supposed to conclude here?

I was often ahead of them on things like the Deep State agenda, leaks, the Russia collusion hoax & Flynn being targeted as soon as he joined the Trump campaign, & events proved me right.

Great. Make your case: who is in your Deep State? When did they meet? And what laws did they break?

You've got the floor.

Which you still refuse to acknowledge. You don't recognize how hypocritical your attitude toward me is. I recognize you for who are & respect your beliefs & opinions when you state them, even when I disagree.

Calling me "naive". Or just this week, mocking me for not "giving up a bone", implying that for the 1,000th time, your opinion is right, and mine is wrong?

74 million of your fellow citizens voted for Trump (& I wasn't one of them), because they agreed with his policies, decisions & the people he appointed.

Projection. You have NO CLUE why those people voted for him. But I have to say---the idea that they agreed with Trump's policies? I'd wager half of them couldn't name what those policies were. And as I said....his "policies" changed by the tweet, assuming he had one in the first place.

I rolled with much of Obama's BS because there was no available alternative.

Yeah....no. You didn't. Your criticism flowed. Come on...you're telling me you don't remember?

You lIbs were a lot less nasty before Trump.

Not a lib. This is an insult....as you know.

I lose my sense of humor when a stubborn, dottering old fool gives us the Afghan pullout disaster

Yeah, this is FoxNation nonsense. Know how I know? YOU taught us that when it comes to military stuff? If you can't come up with a better plan? It's just partisan whining.

And what did you say when I asked you "how would you pull out of Afghanistan, where you could GUARANTEE fewer than the KIA's in Biden's pullout.

Your answer, if you'll recall, was "don't leave". Sorry, by your own rules, this is partisan whining.

............ & is dragging us into WW-III over a border dispute between corrupt Russian oligarchs,

Meh. He stood up to Putin. Just like Republicans want. Next time? Complain when Trump sends arms. That put us on the slippery slope.

.........while our southern border collapses & the cartels & home grown criminals run amok in our country.

Same as it ever was. You're just convinced Trump shut it down. He didn't.

When DeSantis wins? Are you going to sit idly by, as he does nothing but theater to "fix" our immigration and Visa system? Or are you and your Republican voters going to hold him accountable for getting it done?

If you do the same thing you did with Trump: cheer, no matter what he does? DeSantis will do nothing but line pockets.

Not to mention what he's doing to the economy.

What did he do? Want to yell at him for inaction? Sure. Go right ahead, and I'll join you. Outside of his Infrastructure Bill and the Chips act? He's not helping the working class.

But what did he DO that you think led to this economy?

[MDlaxfan76]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

Yes, much of what you write is well informed, including a pretty good understanding of what Russia has been telling itself about its history...that they're blind to the perspectives of the peoples they have subjugated is not particularly "Russian" per se, as lots of those in dominant positions around the world have been blind to the perspectives of those who have been subjugated, oppressed, reservationed, redlined...whatever. Pretty human. Wrong, but human.

But where modern Russia under Putin and the right wing hardliners have been particularly gross is their anger at no longer holding this dominance over all those they previously bullied and oppressed.

And that's where you and I have parted, I'm not as willing to simply accept their perspective as valid.

[old salt]

You need to understand that it's insulting to dismiss my every opinion as Fox induced.

I agree. Except---that's not what I do. The ONLY time I dismiss your opinion is under three conditions:

1. it's a ridiculous position that you would NEVER hold if we were discussing Democrats instead of Republican, or vice versa.

2. It's the flavor of the month at Fox.

3. You use the EXACT same language....verbatim....as FoxNews to describe your complaint or excuse.

That's it. When you do those three things? Come on, man. Of COURSE it's FoxNation nonsense.

So if you'll recall? I was on board with your INTIAL accusations of your Deep State. Listened to your complaints. And waited for evidence of what your claim was: that multiple people in the Federal Government were conspiring------conspiring together-----to take Trump out. I was good with that.

The problem, as you STILL won't admit is where the FoxNonsense comes in.

1.there's ZERO evidence of this. Zippo. Did you change your mind after six (SIX!) investigations into your Deep State found nothing? Nope. Did you say "well, I guess I was wrong. No evidence of this conspiracy". Nope. Can you not understand how annoying this is?

2. Did you, at the same time, DEMAND evidence of Trump's Russia collusion. You bet your sweet bippy. For that? Old Salt wants evidence. If there's no evidence, he mocks the very idea of Russian Collusion. This is the FoxNonsense----one standard for Collusion, totally different standard for your Deep State. Your Deep State doesn't need evidence. Do you not see how annoying this game is? Sorry man, but on this count, you DESERVE to be mocked.

3. You ignored every single piece of TrumpNonsense, and pretend it never happened. Classic FoxNonsense. Nonsense that we now know the Tuckers and Hannity's don't believe themselves. They're selling you this stuff......that hiring Manafort, a guy on Putin's payroll who was convicted of trying to hide said business with Putin is no biggie. That the FBI would be NUTS to look into that relationship, and ask "why the F did Trump hire this guy...what's going on?"

Or TrumpTower Moscow....."Tower? What Tower?" Trump gets caught with documents about building said Tower Then you get "Oh THAT Tower.

Or "forgetting" to tell election officials about meeting a Russian spy, looking for dirt on Hillary. That's TeamTrump TRYING to work with Russia. Did this bother you? Even a little? F no. Instead of flipping out at those idiots for not calling the FBI IMMEDIATELY....you give them excuses for being stupid. And then go right back railing against the FBI for daring to investigate this stuff. These excuses are just....exhausting.

4. You called all the lying TeamTrump did.....felonies...."process crimes". Mocking them on one hand, while on the other act like you're too stupid to understand that it was all the lying that attracted the attention of the FBI in the first place. Acting like that's a footnote, rather than the whole enchilada that wasted a Nation's time as we tried to figure out "why the F are ALL of these men lying every time we mention Russia".

Turns out, they're just idiots. But THAT is what led to all the investigations. Do you admit this? F no. And that's the FoxNonsense....ignoring obvious evidence because it ruins your conspiracy.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. You yourself said Trump is unfit for office. So why the F did you waste SO MUCH ENERGY defending all this shenanigans? Who fired Comey? That's right. Trump. Brought it all on himself. Don't want investigations? Don't lie. Simple.

5. The last one? You and FoxNation don't complain or run stories about your Deep State anymore. It's gone. Poof. What does that tell you?

It tells ME that neither of you believe in a Deep State. Because to top all of this off? Every FBI official dealing with Trump was a freaking Republican. All of them. Hunter's been under investigation for YEARS now. Have any complaints about that?

No. Why? Because suddenly, neither you nor Fox give a sh(t if the Deep State is targeting Dems. It never once occurs to you to complain. Or ask "why the F is the FBI investigating a private citizen who's not in government...and taking longer to rake him over the coals than we spent investigating 9/11?

So guess what all that does to me? It annoys the heck out of me, because it tells me that this was nothing more than whining about "your guy" getting rightfully investigated. When the shoe is on the other foot, and they're going after a Dem? You lose interest, and don't care.

Sorry man, what am I supposed to conclude here?

I was often ahead of them on things like the Deep State agenda, leaks, the Russia collusion hoax & Flynn being targeted as soon as he joined the Trump campaign, & events proved me right.

Great. Make your case: who is in your Deep State? When did they meet? And what laws did they break?

You've got the floor.

Which you still refuse to acknowledge. You don't recognize how hypocritical your attitude toward me is. I recognize you for who are & respect your beliefs & opinions when you state them, even when I disagree.

Calling me "naive". Or just this week, mocking me for not "giving up a bone", implying that for the 1,000th time, your opinion is right, and mine is wrong?

74 million of your fellow citizens voted for Trump (& I wasn't one of them), because they agreed with his policies, decisions & the people he appointed.

Projection. You have NO CLUE why those people voted for him. But I have to say---the idea that they agreed with Trump's policies? I'd wager half of them couldn't name what those policies were. And as I said....his "policies" changed by the tweet, assuming he had one in the first place.

I rolled with much of Obama's BS because there was no available alternative.

Yeah....no. You didn't. Your criticism flowed. Come on...you're telling me you don't remember?

You lIbs were a lot less nasty before Trump.

Not a lib. This is an insult....as you know.

I lose my sense of humor when a stubborn, dottering old fool gives us the Afghan pullout disaster

Yeah, this is FoxNation nonsense. Know how I know? YOU taught us that when it comes to military stuff? If you can't come up with a better plan? It's just partisan whining.

And what did you say when I asked you "how would you pull out of Afghanistan, where you could GUARANTEE fewer than the KIA's in Biden's pullout.

Your answer, if you'll recall, was "don't leave". Sorry, by your own rules, this is partisan whining.

............ & is dragging us into WW-III over a border dispute between corrupt Russian oligarchs,

Meh. He stood up to Putin. Just like Republicans want. Next time? Complain when Trump sends arms. That put us on the slippery slope.

.........while our southern border collapses & the cartels & home grown criminals run amok in our country.

Same as it ever was. You're just convinced Trump shut it down. He didn't.

When DeSantis wins? Are you going to sit idly by, as he does nothing but theater to "fix" our immigration and Visa system? Or are you and your Republican voters going to hold him accountable for getting it done?

If you do the same thing you did with Trump: cheer, no matter what he does? DeSantis will do nothing but line pockets.

Not to mention what he's doing to the economy.

What did he do? Want to yell at him for inaction? Sure. Go right ahead, and I'll join you. Outside of his Infrastructure Bill and the Chips act? He's not helping the working class.

But what did he DO that you think led to this economy?

...too long & repetitive to merit a response. .I'm not going to waste any more time playing your chopped up cut & paste game, rehashing the same old tired debates of the past 7 years. You demanded evidence, I provided it, then you dismissed or ignored it.
e.g. -- the FBI lovebirds texts, the missing FBI Form 302 from the Flynn ambush, the torrent of leaks, the Alfa Bank server scam, the Clinton funded Steele dossier, on & on.
Yes, Fox was the only network that reported & opined some of this stuff, even after it was proven accurate.
So what if Trump explored building a hotel in Russia before he was a candidate ? He never followed through.
That pales in comparison to what Biden family members did while he was VP.
Just because I don't waste my time complaining about things I disagree with on Fox, does not mean I agree with them.
You've become insufferable since Rush passed & you've turned to Fox & picked me as their proxy for your venting.
Rant on, but you're not going to drive me away like you did tech, Petey & others who no longer waste their time being dragged down your rabbit holes. Just don't expect me to play your game.

[old salt]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

Yes, much of what you write is well informed, including a pretty good understanding of what Russia has been telling itself about its history...that they're blind to the perspectives of the peoples they have subjugated is not particularly "Russian" per se, as lots of those in dominant positions around the world have been blind to the perspectives of those who have been subjugated, oppressed, reservationed, redlined...whatever. Pretty human. Wrong, but human.

But where modern Russia under Putin and the right wing hardliners have been particularly gross is their anger at no longer holding this dominance over all those they previously bullied and oppressed.

And that's where you and I have parted, I'm not as willing to simply accept their perspective as valid.

I don't accept their perspective as valid. I realize our inability to alter it. There's only so much we can do to contain it. Our attempts to promote internal change in those nations have not gone well & have generated blow back. Not every battle is worth fighting on idealistic grounds.
Contain & deter when & where possible. Prioritize. We've ensured Ukraine's survival, even if they have to give back some territory to Russia, We now need to help Taiwan survive.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Not funny video

[PizzaSnake]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

Yes, much of what you write is well informed, including a pretty good understanding of what Russia has been telling itself about its history...that they're blind to the perspectives of the peoples they have subjugated is not particularly "Russian" per se, as lots of those in dominant positions around the world have been blind to the perspectives of those who have been subjugated, oppressed, reservationed, redlined...whatever. Pretty human. Wrong, but human.

But where modern Russia under Putin and the right wing hardliners have been particularly gross is their anger at no longer holding this dominance over all those they previously bullied and oppressed.

And that's where you and I have parted, I'm not as willing to simply accept their perspective as valid.

I don't accept their perspective as valid. I realize our inability to alter it. There's only so much we can do to contain it. Our attempts to promote internal change in those nations have not gone well & have generated blow back. Not every battle is worth fighting on idealistic grounds.
Contain & deter when & where possible. Prioritize. We've ensured Ukraine's survival, even if they have to give back some territory to Russia, We now need to help Taiwan survive.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Gotta admit, Salty has often been at least early in spouting Russian propaganda talking points, often in concert with, and sometimes even before, Fox started regurgitating them.

...backhanded compliment, but at least giving credit where credit is due. Guess I should not have taken those Russian & Soviet history courses, then spent my working career trying to figure out how to defeat them in war & chasing them all over the oceans. I suppose that was before I became a collaborator. I don't welcome the prospect of future generations having to do it all over again.
obtw -- did Desantis say anything in his Ukraine statement that I had not posted here ?

Yes, much of what you write is well informed, including a pretty good understanding of what Russia has been telling itself about its history...that they're blind to the perspectives of the peoples they have subjugated is not particularly "Russian" per se, as lots of those in dominant positions around the world have been blind to the perspectives of those who have been subjugated, oppressed, reservationed, redlined...whatever. Pretty human. Wrong, but human.

But where modern Russia under Putin and the right wing hardliners have been particularly gross is their anger at no longer holding this dominance over all those they previously bullied and oppressed.

And that's where you and I have parted, I'm not as willing to simply accept their perspective as valid.

I don't accept their perspective as valid. I realize our inability to alter it. There's only so much we can do to contain it. Our attempts to promote internal change in those nations have not gone well & have generated blow back. Not every battle is worth fighting on idealistic grounds.
Contain & deter when & where possible. Prioritize. We've ensured Ukraine's survival, even if they have to give back some territory to Russia, We now need to help Taiwan survive.