8,452
edits
Talk:Restless Souls/Summary: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
Paradox-01 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Paradox-01 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 251: | Line 251: | ||
::: USA had many shady military and secret intelligence missions (CIA) in foreign nations. This includes installation of new government in rogue nations. Consequently these are made pro-USA. And as side effect USA often profits economically in an intesified way. | ::: USA had many shady military and secret intelligence missions (CIA) in foreign nations. This includes installation of new government in rogue nations. Consequently these are made pro-USA. And as side effect USA often profits economically in an intesified way. | ||
:::: '''Among critics you can often hear the "blood for oil" thesis or "No blood for oil" sloagan, saying in quintessence that USA is using its military to protect its advantage in buying, producing or mining the resources. However, nations with less potential power or by simply being smaller are always in disadvantage and are in danger of getting exploited by economic dynamics.''' (Pretty everyone tries or tried to exploit African nations.) On the other hand there is the military-industrial-complex and ideological factors that add their bits and pieces to foreign policy - may it be the readiness to use military and the "sense of mission" (own belief in being forced) to bring democracy to nations with a different cultural environment. | :::: '''Among critics you can often hear the "blood for oil" thesis or "No blood for oil" sloagan, saying in quintessence that USA is using its military to protect its advantage in buying, producing or mining the resources. However, nations with less potential power or by simply being smaller are always in disadvantage and are in danger of getting exploited by economic dynamics.''' (Pretty everyone tries or tried to exploit African nations.) On the other hand there is the military-industrial-complex and ideological factors that add their bits and pieces to foreign policy - may it be the readiness to use military and the "sense of mission" (own belief in being forced) to bring democracy to nations with a different cultural environment. | ||
::: Sometimes these missions (for new governments / nation building) end up in unwillingly facilitating new radical forces - like the Taliban or the Islamic State. This makes its sometimes hard to believe that USA speaks the truth. '''The "collateral damage" - including the eavesdrop of global communication - is so massive that whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange (WikiLeaks) can reveal that many tons of mistakes and wrongdoing that they were declared public enemies. USA created an empire not simply by - but yet partially by - questionalable methods.''' Putin sees Russia as superpower that cannot catch up. The problem with this fact is that there are four reasons: 1) Climate and geography give Russia a disadvantage. 2) Putin's own growing corruption. 3) The economic heritage. 4) The political heritage: For many US-Americans the Russians are evil communists which must be indeed blocked in their development, this includes the sabotage Russia's connection to Europe. -- Putin reasons that if USA doesn't "play fair" that he also doesn't need to play fair. But since Russia is in disadvantage Putin sees himself forced to use even intensified level of ruthlessness. '''To overcome this position of weakness Putin decided to rule Russia in an autocratic style and take by force what he cannot get with legal methods.''' - Putin must be utterly frustrated that he could not lift Russia's status out of being an underdog. His entire second part of his lifespan was not enough to "restore" Russia. It seems that he snapped about that fact. - '''Besides the natural economic competition, military and political hardliners intensified a feedback loop in which USA and Russia still fight each each up to this day. - Anyway, the attack on Ukraine was the last red line Putin shouldn't have crossed. There is absolutely no credible justification for this attack.''' | ::: Sometimes these missions (for new governments / nation building) end up in unwillingly facilitating new radical forces - like the Taliban or the Islamic State. This makes its sometimes hard to believe that USA speaks the truth. '''The "collateral damage" - including the eavesdrop of global communication - is so massive that whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange (WikiLeaks) can reveal that many tons of mistakes and wrongdoing that they were declared public enemies. USA created an empire not simply by - but yet partially by - questionalable methods.''' Putin sees Russia as superpower that cannot catch up. The problem with this fact is that there are four reasons: 1) Climate and geography give Russia a disadvantage. 2) Putin's own growing corruption. 3) The economic heritage. 4) The political heritage: For many US-Americans the Russians are evil communists which must be indeed blocked in their development, consequently this includes the sabotage of Russia's connection to Europe. -- Putin reasons that if USA doesn't "play fair" that he also doesn't need to play fair. But since Russia is in disadvantage Putin sees himself forced to use an even intensified level of ruthlessness. '''To overcome this position of weakness Putin decided to rule Russia in an autocratic style and take by force what he cannot get with legal methods.''' - Putin must be utterly frustrated that he could not lift Russia's status out of being an underdog. His entire second part of his lifespan was not enough to "restore" Russia. It seems that he snapped about that fact. - '''Besides the natural economic competition, military and political hardliners intensified a feedback loop in which USA and Russia still fight each each up to this day. - Anyway, the attack on Ukraine was the last red line Putin shouldn't have crossed. There is absolutely no credible justification for this attack.''' | ||
* A simple end of maneuver sounds almost too good to be real - although it would be still a victory for Putin in having seriously pranked NATO and let them feel how it is to have enemy troops at the boarder (as an official version for mirroring their own security concerns). Though they might delay the final date to push NATO into making concessions. | * A simple end of maneuver sounds almost too good to be real - although it would be still a victory for Putin in having seriously pranked NATO and let them feel how it is to have enemy troops at the boarder (as an official version for mirroring their own security concerns). Though they might delay the final date to push NATO into making concessions. | ||
:: There are rumors that say that USA and Russia welcome the conflict to distract from their own internal problems - intensified by the pandemic - sometimes connected to US LNG fracking gas and Russian pipeline gas. (In the conspiracy | :: There are rumors that say that USA and Russia welcome the conflict to distract from their own internal problems - intensified by the pandemic - sometimes connected to US-American LNG fracking gas and Russian pipeline gas. (In the conspiracy theory near thoughts USA is the only profiteer.) While a distraction for own citizen is more plausible for Russia it rises the question how long they are willing to blow money with that gigantic maneuver. Aren't there natural limits to this? Two years? One year? Six month? | ||
::: Sure, generally USA wants to protect their zone of influence too but you cannot say their motives are specifically about fracking gas. It is an automatic consequence of the conflict (therefore irony of life) that Putin helps USA in selling their fracking gas to EU. Additional conspiracy theory-near constructs or let’s say further ulterior motives are not required to sufficiently explain this. (Our US friends won’t be unhappy about the bonus win though.) | ::: Sure, generally USA wants to protect their zone of influence too but you cannot say their motives are specifically about fracking gas. It is an automatic consequence of the conflict (therefore irony of life) that Putin helps USA in selling their fracking gas to EU. Additional conspiracy theory-near constructs or let’s say further ulterior motives are not required to sufficiently explain this. (Our US friends won’t be unhappy about the bonus win though.) | ||
* '''If Russia is not given any "security" guarantees''' (geopolitical ''cake slice'') they might acknowledge separatists areas (Luhansk and Donetsk) as independent - and annex them in a more far future. (A victory distributed in smaller steps.) The military maneuver right now is like holding a gun to the head of Ukraine to ensure step one. "Do you want to say no? What are you gonna do. Come on, it could be far worse." '''It could be a game about building up a massive wall of threats and very [https://www.nzz.ch/international/ukraine-und-russland-neues-szenario-fuer-den-donbass-ld.1666400?reduced=true high demands] and then let the enemy (NATO) agree to seemingly small points.''' It would be a [https://web.archive.org/web/20180222154736/https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2017-02/ostukraine-konflikt-russland-separatisten-paesse-anerkennung-waffenruhe continuation] of a dynamic that started [https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/separatistengebiete-in-ukraine-putin-deutet-anerkennung-an-a-1029376.html long ago]. -- Putin's calculation could be that mediocre sanctions come and go but soil is kept "forever". | * '''If Russia is not given any "security" guarantees''' (geopolitical ''cake slice'') they might acknowledge separatists areas (Luhansk and Donetsk) as independent - and annex them in a more far future. (A victory distributed in smaller steps.) The military maneuver right now is like holding a gun to the head of Ukraine to ensure step one. "Do you want to say no? What are you gonna do. Come on, it could be far worse." '''It could be a game about building up a massive wall of threats and very [https://www.nzz.ch/international/ukraine-und-russland-neues-szenario-fuer-den-donbass-ld.1666400?reduced=true high demands] and then let the enemy (NATO) agree to seemingly small points.''' It would be a [https://web.archive.org/web/20180222154736/https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2017-02/ostukraine-konflikt-russland-separatisten-paesse-anerkennung-waffenruhe continuation] of a dynamic that started [https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/separatistengebiete-in-ukraine-putin-deutet-anerkennung-an-a-1029376.html long ago]. -- Putin's calculation could be that mediocre sanctions come and go but soil is kept "forever". | ||
** A spiced up version of scenario 3 is that Russia more or less waits for the conflict between separatists and Ukrainian military to heat up. Western partners tell Ukraine not get provoked. Russia spoke bluntly of military technical responses if no concessions are made. Heavy counter attacks would give Russia the '''pretext to "secure" the conflict zone'''. This Scenario is the most probable as it goes hand in hand with the Russian domestic propaganda. -- Some people speculate that Putin overplayed his hand (geopolitical demands) so that he needs something else as a "victory" and exit. In reality it would be a pyrrhic victory but that is something more domestic propaganda would cover. | ** A spiced up version of scenario 3 is that Russia more or less waits for the conflict between separatists and Ukrainian military to heat up. Western partners tell Ukraine not get provoked. Russia spoke bluntly of military technical responses if no concessions are made. Heavy counter attacks would give Russia the '''pretext to "secure" the conflict zone'''. This Scenario is the most probable as it goes hand in hand with the Russian domestic propaganda. -- Some people speculate that Putin overplayed his hand (geopolitical demands) so that he needs something else as a "victory" and exit. In reality it would be a pyrrhic victory but that is something more domestic propaganda would cover. | ||
*** The rat tail of consequences: Ukrainian government was not impressed by Russia's threats. They said they would never accept the occupation of Luhansk and Donetsk. In order to prevent big scale of Western weapon deliveries and the take back of ground Putin attacked the entire Ukraine underlaid by weird historic justifications and the assertion to prevent a genocide (meant for domestic propaganda). For a long lasting effect he needs to destroy the entire military. And to prevent its rebuild he needs to replace the Ukrainian government as well. -- '''Putin might have miscalculated how bloody the war would get and therefore needs further justification.''' The take over of Chernobyl gives him a better possibility to fake Ukrainian plans for [[wp:Dirty_bomb|dirty bombs]]. | *** The rat tail of consequences: Ukrainian government was not impressed by Russia's threats. They said they would never accept the occupation of Luhansk and Donetsk. In order to prevent big scale of Western weapon deliveries and the take back of ground Putin attacked the entire Ukraine underlaid by weird historic justifications and the assertion to prevent a genocide (meant for domestic propaganda). For a long lasting effect he needs to destroy the entire military. And to prevent its rebuild he needs to replace the Ukrainian government as well. -- '''Putin might have miscalculated how bloody the war would get and therefore needs further justification.''' The take over of Chernobyl gives him a better possibility to fake Ukrainian plans for [[wp:Dirty_bomb|dirty bombs]]. In theory Putin could use brute force to accomplish his military goals but in practice the collateral damage in human lifes would make him the mass-murderer. His propaganda machinery in not powerful enough to cover that much damage. Also this would very probable trigger even further sanctions. | ||
*** The simpler interpretation of all this is that Putin wants geopolitical influence but cannot bluntly say so. At some point he actually did: that ''the West wants to hinder Russia's development''. While that is not completely untrue - in context of USA - the usual told version is that Russia feels threatened by NATO which is nonsense as NATO is an alliance for defense. - When NATO decided to not give in and reject future membership of Ukraine Russia went on to create facts. The invasion covers both: the pretextual argumentation to prevent NATO expansion and the actual geopolitical goal. | *** The simpler interpretation of all this is that Putin wants geopolitical influence but cannot bluntly say so. At some point he actually did: that ''the West wants to hinder Russia's development''. While that is not completely untrue - in context of USA - the usual told version is that Russia feels threatened by NATO which is nonsense as NATO is an alliance for defense. - When NATO decided to not give in and reject future membership of Ukraine Russia went on to create facts. The invasion covers both: the pretextual argumentation to prevent NATO expansion and the actual geopolitical goal. | ||
| Line 269: | Line 269: | ||
:::: Would Russia really cut us off from gas and coal if it is an important source of money for them? If they are cut off from SWIFT it's hard to pay them anyway - and if we do then further political questions would surface. - It turns out a (still difficult) compromise is in the making. | :::: Would Russia really cut us off from gas and coal if it is an important source of money for them? If they are cut off from SWIFT it's hard to pay them anyway - and if we do then further political questions would surface. - It turns out a (still difficult) compromise is in the making. | ||
:: If the invasion is not stopped the Ukraine or its undestroyed remains are in danger of becoming a Russian controlled police state. | :: If the invasion is not stopped the Ukraine or its undestroyed remains are in danger of becoming a Russian controlled police state. | ||
::: However, '''the Ukrainians are motivated to resist'''. The war could go on for a long time. Will the Ukraine become another Afghanistan for Russia? Too expensive to be continued by Russia? Some are [https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2022/02/22/will-ukraine-be-russias-next-afghanistan/?sh=32c4fe0763f2 not so sure.] On the other hand there are signs indicating that Putin's advisors and generals gave him too optimistic predictions. '''As for peace negotiations the West is unlikely to accept new border lines and Russia cannot not simply leave without face-saving. It is the task of diplomacy to find a solution.''' This hasn't been made easier as more politicians now support Ukraine's joining to EU and NATO. Also NATO members are going increase defense spending and Putin (officially) wanted a demilitarization. A messed up situation. -- Putin seems to lose but cannot easily retreat. Just in case he unfortunately manages to stay in the game. Here's an idea: '''To make this a success disclosure of all conditions is not advisable.''' UN peacekeeping forces should be stationed for two, three years in Luhansk and Donetsk guarantee their "security" and prevent discrimination of local Russians. After that face-saving grace period the areas return to Ukraine. Their should be economic aids to rebuild and modernize the | ::: However, '''the Ukrainians are motivated to resist'''. The war could go on for a long time. Will the Ukraine become another Afghanistan for Russia? Too expensive to be continued by Russia? Some are [https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2022/02/22/will-ukraine-be-russias-next-afghanistan/?sh=32c4fe0763f2 not so sure.] On the other hand there are signs indicating that Putin's advisors and generals gave him too optimistic predictions. '''As for peace negotiations the West is unlikely to accept new border lines and Russia cannot not simply leave without face-saving. It is the task of diplomacy to find a solution.''' This hasn't been made easier as more politicians now support Ukraine's joining to EU and NATO. Also NATO members are going increase defense spending and Putin (officially) wanted a demilitarization. A messed up situation. -- Putin seems to lose but cannot easily retreat. Just in case he unfortunately manages to stay in the game. Here's an idea: '''To make this a success disclosure of all conditions is not advisable.''' UN peacekeeping forces should be stationed for two, three years in Luhansk and Donetsk guarantee their "security" and prevent discrimination of local Russians. | ||
:::: For the sake of a quick freedom let Putin have face-saving propaganda. He could sell it as "most importantly we removed the neonazis from the areas around Luhansk and Donetsk. Ukrainian Russians will not longer be terrorized and killed. Through the effort of our heroic troops Ukraine is demilitarized and will stay that way. [Mission accomplished.]" | |||
After that also face-saving grace period the areas return to Ukraine. Their should be economic aids to rebuild and modernize the Ukraine but especially these areas to further support the social healing and strengthen the peaceful coexistence. Secret condition: make a green deal with Russia - with technology transfers and future cooperation in research and in the economic sectors. (We also need Russia to stop climate change!) The Ukraine would be allowed to join EU and NATO but they also need to demilitarize. '''The Ukraine will have the luxury to not need a military - Germany will fill that gap. The Ukraine can focus on economy, especially the hydrogen for EU. In return NATO partners GUARANTEE Ukraine's security so that no local troops are needed. They can rely on article 5.''' They would pay 0% for the defense budget during the first 20 years and 1% GDP in the next additional 20 years. (As real economic support but also as motivation to agree to the deal.) This can serve Putin's own narrative of "security" needs and name Ukraine a "buffer zone". | |||
:::: The longer the invasion continues the higher costs Russia will have to pay. The expulsion of millions of Ukrainians will make the negotiations extra, extra spicy. | :::: The longer the invasion continues the higher costs Russia will have to pay. The expulsion of millions of Ukrainians will make the negotiations extra, extra spicy. | ||
::::: If the Russians are unwilling to pay unrealistic high amount of compensation they need to give back the Crimea. Keep pressure high with continued SWIFT blockage. | ::::: If the Russians are unwilling to pay unrealistic high amount of compensation they need to give back the Crimea. Keep pressure high with continued SWIFT blockage. | ||
:: If no solution is found | :: If no solution is found the cold war scenario continues. -- A far-future normalization might have an interface in structural weak East Germany at first. The more sanctions there are the more Russia will be hit but also specifically East Germany. Pro-Russian (AfD, Linke) and tendential pro-Russian (SPD, CDU) political parties in that region will probably support a normalization in hope for economic improvements. (In East Germany it is common knowledge that sanctions hit the civil population harder than the sanctioned government.) The far right AfD will serve as a catalyst - as a mutual opponent to the democratic (or self-proclaimed democratic) parties (CDU/CSU, SPD, Grüne, FDP, Linke). As those do not want AfD to grow they might try to occupy (serve) the topic for themselves - or back it in coalitions at least. West German parties will remember the idiom that "elections are not won but lost in East Germany". They will not want to repeat past mistakes. So in total an absolute majority of German parties will probably support a cautious normalization given that the 2050/2060-future Russian government is honestly interested in such. | ||
====China==== | ====China==== | ||