The Struggle For Ukraine

[LiveFromUkraine]

I won't go into "disinformation" regarding the press, though I do know a thing or two about disinformation campaigns.  I recall back in the mid 1980's, suggesting that Sinyavsky and Daniel, two Soviet "dissidents" were fake trials, and both were KGB agents or affiliated with them.  That was not a popular opinion then.  But in the early to mid 1990's, when KGB archives were released by Roy Medvedev, that was absolutely correct.  My point is, most disinformation isn't particularly sophisticated, and can be recognized.


The West is not culpable.  The Ukrainian constitution wasn't written by the West.  It was written by a team of diaspora Ukrainians.  Two I know who were at the forefront were Bohdan Hawrylyshyn and Halyna Freeland.  The US provided funding to build the foundations of government, but it was not the sole source of funds.  Early, Soros provided funding, but eventually was thrown out of the country.  The Canadian government provided funding.  Diaspora Ukrainians provided significant funding, and time.  The Ukrainian banking system, for example, was modeled on Canada's system, and Ukrainians came here to work in banks and learn how to operate banks.


I am not suggesting that things were perfect in Ukraine - far from it.  It's corrupt, but I think with time, that would have lessened, if Ukraine were to join the EU.


Ukraine may become a part of the EU.  NATO was never in the cards.  The reality is that Ukraine was moving away from Russia in terms of freedom, and that is what Putin could not abide.  That and losing Kyiv.


Hunter Biden is a false canard, misunderstood by most Americans.  I have posted in the past about this.  It's also irrelevant to the invasion.


As for the biolabs, if one is studying diseases such as H5N1, the pathogens do need to be controlled.  That doesn't mean there is a nefarious purpose behind the laboratory.

Hi Bo! 


I was trying to respond and got timed out. lol

"My point is, most disinformation isn't particularly sophisticated, and can be recognized."

I used to think that until the past 4 years.  People looked like they lost their minds.  People that I thought were intelligent and reasonable.  After some time I saw how the media, along with politicians, were all saying the same thing.  Even the wording was the same.

If you watch this over and over again you will begin to think the same way.  We are assigned our views by what we watch.  I don't believe anyone is immune to this type of programming.  It's just part of how we are wired to get through day by day.  Robert Cialdini wrote some awesome books, on persuasion, talking about this type of stuff

Sorry, I'm not sure what your point about the Ukrainian constitution was.  Is a country a country because of a constitution or whether they can defend their country when attacked?  I wish we were above all of this violence, but maybe it will never happen.

That brings me to the next point about why I brought up Biden and our politicians.  Our funding to other countries tend to make it's way back to our politicians.  Either through family members or other means. 

I don't think it is irrelevant since we are talking about the same people being in charge as when Ukraine went into civil war.  Those military contractors end up hiring our retired generals.  America is corrupt.  Our system makes it that way and really needs to change.  I doubt our elites are doing this to help if there wasn't some kind of incentive for them.  Either monetarily or staying in power.

The really weird thing is I saw a clip on Twitter of Alex Jones saying last year there was going to be a major war in February of this year.  Still trying to wrap my head around that one.  haha

No, the bio labs doesn't necessarily mean nefarious or bio weapons.  It also doesn't mean it is being conducted for the benefit of human kind.  Why would any country want to be next to that type of lab after Covid killed millions of people. Of course, when people stated Covid came from a lab they were labeled disinformation.

I wonder how the USA would handle Russia conducting "research" in Mexico. I know we didn't like missiles in Cuba even though Cuba should be able to decide for themselves.  I don't think it's a stretch to say we should think of others if we want peace.  Even brutal dictators like Putin need to be considered.

Poland just outmaneuvered the US.  The US tried to push Poland into giving Ukraine MIGS.  Poland said they would drop them off at the US base in Germany and they could give the planes to Ukraine.  The US decided it was a bad idea after that.  Why would the US be ok with Poland doing it but then not do it themselves? 

[LiveFromUkraine]

Sure.  A site that refers to Ukrainians as "nazis" is an absolutely credible source of information.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the nazis stuff.  Are they talking about that Azov group or are they saying Ukraine government?  Also, I've been reading a lot of things about how citizens in the Donbas region having been tortured.  Is this true or propaganda?  Hard to tell, but I do hope it's just propaganda. 

[Chelseaboy]

That's Kyiv.

Wiki says Kyiv OR Kiev.


I prefer Kiev and anyway it's still called Chicken Kiev in the Supermarket here.

[Chelseaboy]

Should Ukraine be able to pick and choose it's destination.  Absolutely. 
Should Ukraine be able to choose whether they want a relationship with the west or with Russia.  Absolutely.

Unfortunately, that isn't reality and was never a reality unless the west was going to go to war with Russia.

If you think the West isn't culpable for this than you're showing your bias.  Holding the NATO/EU carrot on a stick didn't help Ukraine at all.  It just made Ukraine believe they had other options when they didn't.  It would have been better for Ukraine if they were told they would never be part of EU/Nato so they could make decisions based on reality.

I totally agree....NATO should hang it's head in shame.

[Chelseaboy]

What is your source? Think for yourself just for a moment. What would the Russian military benefit from doing this? It doesn't make any sense.

It's also contrary to (unverified) reports I have read. Apparently the Azov Battalion are headquartered in the Mariupol Drama Theater and holding civilians hostage in the lobby. They have also, allegedly, occupied two major factories (Ilyich, Azavstal; total 24,000 employees). It has already been demonstrated that the Ukrainian military are taking up positions in civilian locations.

This is not a battle between 'good guys and bad guys'. The Ukrainian military is using guerilla warfare tactics deliberately putting civilians at risk. Foreign mercenaries are being sent to Kyiv with no gear/ammo. It is shambolic. Russia obtains no strategic or tactical benefit from dead civilians, the Ukrainian government does. It's not to say it doesn't happen but wouldn't be central to their planning. It is evident they prefer to lay siege to a city and squeeze it, much like what Krimster was saying.

It's impossible to obtain the truth in the fog of war, but the western narrative is a fairy tale - complete with a Snake Island and "Ghost of Kyiv", LOL. Have the British press reported on all those dead British mercenaries blown up in western Ukraine? LOL, I don't think that is hitting the press...

The hawks at the Pentagon are absolutely love this. Make a killing on arms sales and not put one American soldier at risk. Inflict damage to Russia without directly going to war with them. But at some point the Russian government may decide to put their foot down and drop a nuke in Western Ukraine. Much like the USA in 1945 they'll use the pretext that it was a way to end the conflict sooner than it would have played out. They like using historical references such as the Balkans conflict in the 90s so may decide to "press the button".

The west didn't accept the surrender treaty in 2015 and still won't accept it. The modus operandi of the USA is to drag out the conflict to create a greater number of casualties, because you can stick a fork in Ukraine - it's done.

My source is Sky News,BBC and Euro News.....i did end the post by saying " If True " .

[fathertime]

Should Ukraine be able to pick and choose it's destination.  Absolutely. 
Should Ukraine be able to choose whether they want a relationship with the west or with Russia.  Absolutely.

Unfortunately, that isn't reality and was never a reality unless the west was going to go to war with Russia.
 

Lots of people try to escape reality.   
Of course I agree with what should be, but reality is much different. 
Once Russia invaded it seemed pretty clear to me that they would keep escalating. 

Fathertime!   
 

[Chelseaboy]

You have to take all perspectives and then use logic and reasoning (not emotion). The fact that Zelensky has stated Ukraine should drop the idea of NATO membership is to me a sign that they don't have the upper hand in negotiations.

It does appear that the Ukrainian military dropped a cluster bomb on civilians in Donetsk, but it won't appear in western media:

http://thesaker.is/three-important-missile-strikes/

So much for CB's noble freedom fighters...

Maybe you can explain the cluster bomb dropped by Russia in Kharkiv ?


Yes the Ukrainians ARE fighting for their freedom.


Last time i looked it was Russia invading Ukraine..or maybe you missed that bit.

[Bee Farmer]

Poland just outmaneuvered the US.  The US tried to push Poland into giving Ukraine MIGS.  Poland said they would drop them off at the US base in Germany and they could give the planes to Ukraine.  The US decided it was a bad idea after that.  Why would the US be ok with Poland doing it but then not do it themselves? 

Why? Because  America's political leadership is full of cowards.

There is already precedence for a nuclear power to giving fighter aircraft to another nation that is at war with a different nuclear power.

Remember the Vietnam War?  Russia gave North Vietnam tons of weaponry, anti-aircraft defense, and fighter planes to fight the US.  A lot of the fighter planes were piloted by Russians.  Over 1200 US aircraft got shot down.

We never nuked Russia.

Putin isn't the only one who makes the decision to use a nuclear weapon.  There are other individuals involved who know that it would be wrong to attack the US (much less use nukes) if we supplied fighter jets to Ukraine.  Yeah, they'd be unhappy about it, but they also know that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.  They gave fighter jets to Vietnam to shoot down US aircraft, so they have no room to complain if the US gave jets to Ukraine.

But Biden doesn't have any intestinal fortitude to stand up to a bully.  He's a coward.

[LiveFromUkraine]

Lots of people try to escape reality.   
Of course I agree with what should be, but reality is much different. 
Once Russia invaded it seemed pretty clear to me that they would keep escalating. 

Fathertime!

I was reading an article about Putin and how he was bullied as a kid.  He ended up hating bullies and would go after them violently.  He's supposedly a narcissist with violent behavior towards bullies.  I can see it.  I wouldn't be surprised if he views NATO as a bully.  I couldn't say if that was what led him to invade Ukraine but I would guess it was part of it.  It kind of just seems like he exploded and went all in. 

[Chelseaboy]

What is your source? Think for yourself just for a moment. What would the Russian military benefit from doing this? It doesn't make any sense

Seriously you can't see how it would make any sense ?


Imagine you're in a group of Russian soldiers advancing into Mariupol.


You come under heavy fire taking heavy losses..and you see that the Hospital is nearby and gives cover from the incoming Bullets flying around your head.


You and the remaining survivors manage to get to the Hospital ,find staff and patients in there, and hold them hostage against the Ukrainian soldiers or your dreaded Azov Battalion coming in and slaughtering you and your mates...whilst you wait for reinforcements to arrive.


It ain't rocket science 

[LiveFromUkraine]

Why? Because  America's political leadership is full of cowards.

There is already precedence for a nuclear power to giving fighter aircraft to another nation that is at war with a different nuclear power.

Remember the Vietnam War?  Russia gave North Vietnam tons of weaponry, anti-aircraft defense, and fighter planes to fight the US.  A lot of the fighter planes were piloted by Russians.  Over 1200 US aircraft got shot down.

We never nuked Russia.

Putin isn't the only one who makes the decision to use a nuclear weapon.  There are other individuals involved who know that it would be wrong to attack the US (much less use nukes) if we supplied fighter jets to Ukraine.  Yeah, they'd be unhappy about it, but they also know that what is good for the goose is good for the gander.  They gave fighter jets to Vietnam to shoot down US aircraft, so they have no room to complain if the US gave jets to Ukraine.

But Biden doesn't have any intestinal fortitude to stand up to a bully.  He's a coward.

You might be right Bee Farmer.  Though, if Russia attacked Poland we would have to respond so why would it matter if Poland did it or we did it?  Russia knows NATO would have to respond if they went after Poland.  That is why it didn't make sense to me to push Poland into doing it.

[Bee Farmer]

Though, if Russia attacked Poland we would have to respond so why would it matter if Poland did it or we did it?  Russia knows NATO would have to respond if they went after Poland.  That is why it didn't make sense to me to push Poland into doing it.

I don't understand how you think anyone was pushing Poland into giving Ukraine their Migs.  That was a no-brainer on Poland's part.  Why wouldn't they want to give Ukraine their Migs if they could upgrade to F-16's?

It's surprising to me that anyone would even ask why Poland would transfer the Migs to the US, and then the US would transfer the planes to Ukraine.  I'm going to assume that you're not being facetious, so I will answer.

Poland doesn't have a military strong enough to fight Russia on their own.  Yes, NATO is required to respond, but by the time NATO reacts, Russia could have inflicted severe damage to Poland and possibly taken control of parts of Poland.  Russia has a ton of missiles that can reach Poland.  Not only that, once NATO did mobilize, Russia could call for a cease-fire and negotiations.  Russia could quite possibly end up getting to keep any territorial gains they had made in Poland.  Poland also is not a nuclear power - Russia could theoretically nuke Poland...and then what?  (Can the US use nukes in response to a NATO member state being nuked, or can we only use nukes if the US is nuked?)

Keep in mind that NATO is a paper agreement.  For the most part (excluding the US) it is a joke, just like the EU military defense.  You basically have a group of cheerleaders with pom-poms telling each other that they have their backs.  None of them want to fight.  They think they can get away with having a weak military, since everyone else will protect them.  They aren't bright enough to realize that everyone else thinks the same way and has a weak military too.  Without the US military, NATO is meaningless.

Now if US transfers the planes, since America is across the ocean, Russia is more limited in what missiles they could use to attack the US.  A land invasion would be almost impossible.  Russia's bombers would have a hard time flying to America for bombing runs, assuming they could knock out our air defenses.  America is a nuclear power, and can immediately retaliate with nukes in the event of a nuclear attack.  If Russia attacked America, we don't need to wait around for NATO bureaucracy to mount a defense.  America has enough military force to immediately defend ourselves.  For all intents and purposes, America is NATO. 

Think of it this way.  Imagine a really wimpy kid who has a badass friend.  Nobody will mess with that wimpy kid, because they know the friend will protect them.  But if that wimpy kid annoys someone bad enough, they will get their butt beat.  Yes, the friend may get revenge and beat them up, but the wimpy kid still got a beatdown.  Poland doesn't want to be the wimpy kid who gets a severe beating, even if their friend will get revenge afterwards.  The damage inflicted can still be quite painful.

[LiveFromUkraine]

Hey Bee Farmer,


No, I wasn't be facetious.  I understand why Poland was interested in giving up the MIGS.  Your comment confirmed what it looked like to me.  The US was trying to set up Poland to be the scapegoat so to speak.  Luckily Poland didn't fall for it and called their bluff as they have a lot more to lose being in harms way. 


Regarding the use of nukes... I think if Russia used any nukes to attack Poland it will be instant nuclear war.  The US won't sit around and wonder if they are next. I also wouldn't think Russia would stop with Poland anyway. 


I appreciate the response from you and others.  It helps me see where I might be making mistakes with my thought process.

[Jumper1]

LFU- 
my.take:
I think you guys are forgetting Poland borders kaliningrad, russia is on their  very doorstep,with military bases there and nuke capable jets etc.

But yes if Russua nuked poland there is zero doubt they would receive in return.

I wonder how the USA would handle Russia conducting "research" in Mexico. I know we didn't like missiles in Cuba even though Cuba should be able to decide for themselves.  I don't think it's a stretch to say we should think of others if we want peace.  Even brutal dictators like Putin need to be considered.

We did lots of diry deeds in. Cuba, but we did not invade and demilitarize and set up a favourable regime.(although we tried in other.ways)
It would have been easy for us to over run it.

That said  the reasons we cared then ,were before the reach of  newer ICBMs,  and later responce time of defense systems so it was critical  the distance missles were located from.a country.
We did secretly agree at that time to pull our nukes out of Turkey, which is really why the standoff deesculated.

Now with the missle reach  thats capable  and the  nuke sub capabilities its really mostly a mute point ,other than missle defense systems reactive times.

I still do not buy that there are  u.s. bio weapons/warfare labs in ukraine.
Bio labs yes,  bio weapons no.
It makes zero sense to have them.there.
You dont need to develop a deadlier strain of a bio weapon in close proximity to your adversary.
You dont do it in your enemies common language culture. Or doorstep
You do not  do so in an unstable area that has on going conflicts,civil war  and reasonable chance of the adversary invading.
Its stupid.its beyond stupid.
If russia had proof they would show it.period.
It's a game changer at the negotiation table they attend.daily.


As far as nazism.
There is a azov battalion, that leans neo nazi as part of the.Ukrainian guard, it wascfirmedcas a militia when the.troubles started in donbas.

The separatist troubles were started, stirred,and quickly led by russian funded  neo nazi paramilitary groups like wagner pmc,task force ruscich etc, their.leader was a former GRU lieutenant colonel ,and completely neo nazi with ss epilates tattooed in his collar bones. He was decorated at a Kremlin reception for his performance in donbas, so dont let.the nazi claims distract you. Putin  is  just.fine with using nazis,as long as they are doing his bidding.

The Ukrainian government has been firing on its citizens for the past eight years. Why do you think they will stop now? Particularly when captured "Ukronazis" will be summarily executed by Russian soldiers.

Early in 14 troubles the  Russian Wagner pmc burned.and mutilated 17 Ukrainian military soldiers they captured. In.maripol, this is the city the Ukrainian azov battalion sprang up.  Was it in responce? So chicken or the egg stiff
Girken, a russian leader also ordered the execution of a  regional official, intentional  sparking.the  entire violent conflict.

As far as *its citizens* you seem.to be implying Russian citizens.

They would be citizens of Ukraine  in Ukraine,  with russian funded  separatist guerillas trying to break away  that section.
Ukraine being sovereign had every right to try and  put down a russian funded rebellion , people forget it was Ukraine,Ukrainians live.there.
Regardless thier various politucal slants.
The fighting got dirty,civilian casualties happen,sadly and no real.justification on either side for it.
 

Tell me, why would the Russian government want to drop a cluster bomb on Donetsk? You're a smart cookie. I'm sure you can either find a logical explanation or realize it was the Ukrainian military?

Possibly,  but
How many times does Russia need to  have knowingly false.flag for that to.also be considered a real possibility  .?

How quickly a Malaysian airliner is forgotten.
Or ask.the fins how they got in a war with russia back.in the day  without.firing.a shot initially.

As far as Russua possibly targeting ukranian civilians,  its fear and intimidation.
 Facing a hostile occupation even if temporary,  you better get fear  of consequences burned into the 40.million populace fast, if you plan to not have anarchy  trying to hold it.with.90k troops.
🤷‍♂️






 

[BC]

In many of these discussions, I note efforts to either justify or critique current actions with somewhat similar actions in the past.  I've done so as well, so not throwing stones with this post. But I have learned to recognize when I do and think twice before hitting the post button.

I used to balk at history classes in high school, thinking such is useless.  Teachers tried to tell me that the value of history is learning from past mistakes.  The older I get, the more I agree and am more interested in history today than years ago.  It helps provide proper context and the ability to identify and not repeat past mistakes. OTOH I am mistaken when leveraging past history to justify actions that I know are wrong.

In discourse, I find using past mistakes to justify or judge current actions is not constructive and hinders progress.  I recognize Ukraine has a checkered history regarding precursors to this crisis, as does Russia, the EU, and the US.  Heck, any country for that matter.

For example, Putin's history lesson a short while back, declaring Ukraine is historically a part of Russia and thus does not have the right to be independent.  His claim is as absurd as the image below.



His claim that he is somehow aiding Ukraine to rid the 'territory' of bad actors is also faulty.  There would be very little resistance or need to exert military force if true.

Putin's failure or inability to accept that Ukraine and many former USSR countries are moving on is the root of his perceived problem.  It matters not what the US or NATO or China or any other country did or did not do in the past.  Having to resort to false propaganda and officially muting opposition voices of citizens in Russia is evidence that more is amiss within than outside RU.

Ukraine did not invade or even present a credible offensive military risk to Russia.  Neither does NATO nor the US, who have drawn down forces over past decades.  This downsizing trend will reverse now but poses no offensive military threat to Russia. The only encroaching threat that confronts Putin is his dwindling political power and ever-increasing difficulties maintaining his charade.

So yeah, look back in history and learn, but don't let it define the future, which is exactly what Putin is doing.

[Patagonie]

In many of these discussions, I note efforts to either justify or critique current actions with somewhat similar actions in the past.  I've done so as well, so not throwing stones with this post. But I have learned to recognize when I do and think twice before hitting the post button.

I used to balk at history classes in high school, thinking such is useless.  Teachers tried to tell me that the value of history is learning from past mistakes.  The older I get, the more I agree and am more interested in history today than years ago.  It helps provide proper context and the ability to identify and not repeat past mistakes. OTOH I am mistaken when leveraging past history to justify actions that I know are wrong.

In discourse, I find using past mistakes to justify or judge current actions is not constructive and hinders progress.  I recognize Ukraine has a checkered history regarding precursors to this crisis, as does Russia, the EU, and the US.  Heck, any country for that matter.

For example, Putin's history lesson a short while back, declaring Ukraine is historically a part of Russia and thus does not have the right to be independent.  His claim is as absurd as the image below.



His claim that he is somehow aiding Ukraine to rid the 'territory' of bad actors is also faulty.  There would be very little resistance or need to exert military force if true.

Putin's failure or inability to accept that Ukraine and many former USSR countries are moving on is the root of his perceived problem.  It matters not what the US or NATO or China or any other country did or did not do in the past.  Having to resort to false propaganda and officially muting opposition voices of citizens in Russia is evidence that more is amiss within than outside RU.

Ukraine did not invade or even present a credible offensive military risk to Russia.  Neither does NATO nor the US, who have drawn down forces over past decades.  This downsizing trend will reverse now but poses no offensive military threat to Russia. The only encroaching threat that confronts Putin is his dwindling political power and ever-increasing difficulties maintaining his charade.

So yeah, look back in history and learn, but don't let it define the future, which is exactly what Putin is doing.

+1

[Bee Farmer]

I understand why Poland was interested in giving up the MIGS.  Your comment confirmed what it looked like to me.  The US was trying to set up Poland to be the scapegoat so to speak.  Luckily Poland didn't fall for it and called their bluff as they have a lot more to lose being in harms way. 

Where are you coming up with this narrative that the US was trying to set Poland up as a scapegoat?  I get the impression that you think the US was trying to instigate Poland into giving Ukraine Migs.

From what I understand some NATO countries (Poland, Hungary, etc.) had expressed a willingness to send Mig-29's to Ukraine along with other military weaponry.  But the devil is always in the details.  Poland wanted to give Ukraine their Migs, but said it would deplete their air force, and asked the US if they could buy F-16's to backfill and replace the Migs.  The Pentagon and US diplomats were in favor of providing F-16's to Poland.

As they worked out final details of how the transfer would be made, Joe Biden turns into a scared chicken and says no to the transfer.  He starts spouting garbage about how all decisions have to be made by NATO.  He forgets that the US is allowed to act by itself.  (It wasn't NATO agreeing to provide F-16's...it was the US.)

I don't know where you come up with the narrative of the US trying to set up Poland.  If Biden hadn't said no, the jets would have been transferred to the US at Ramstein and then flown to Ukraine.  The only fly in the ointment was Biden.

[LiveFromUkraine]

LFU- 
my.take:
I think you guys are forgetting Poland borders kaliningrad, russia is on their  very doorstep,with military bases there and nuke capable jets etc.

But yes if Russua nuked poland there is zero doubt they would receive in return.

I hear you.  That is why I think Poland was smart to do what they did. 

I still do not buy that there are  u.s. bio weapons/warfare labs in ukraine.
Bio labs yes,  bio weapons no.
It makes zero sense to have them.there.
You dont need to develop a deadlier strain of a bio weapon in close proximity to your adversary.
You dont do it in your enemies common language culture. Or doorstep
You do not  do so in an unstable area that has on going conflicts,civil war  and reasonable chance of the adversary invading.
Its stupid.its beyond stupid.
If russia had proof they would show it.period.
It's a game changer at the negotiation table they attend.daily.

I'd like to know if the US was involved like they were with the Wuhan lab.

As far as nazism.
There is a azov battalion, that leans neo nazi as part of the.Ukrainian guard, it wascfirmedcas a militia when the.troubles started in donbas.

The separatist troubles were started, stirred,and quickly led by russian funded  neo nazi paramilitary groups like wagner pmc,task force ruscich etc, their.leader was a former GRU lieutenant colonel ,and completely neo nazi with ss epilates tattooed in his collar bones. He was decorated at a Kremlin reception for his performance in donbas, so dont let.the nazi claims distract you. Putin  is  just.fine with using nazis,as long as they are doing his bidding.

Sure, Putin probably doesn't care about neo-nazis just like the US doesn't care about arming them when they are advantageous.  I'm seeing the same people warning about arming the Azov battalion with modern weapons when Trump was in office only to cheer for it now.  It's all political theater man.  lol

[LiveFromUkraine]

So yeah, look back in history and learn, but don't let it define the future, which is exactly what Putin is doing.

History is constantly repeating itself because the actions of certain countries never change.  There is a good chance this war could have been stopped before it began.  The constant "Russia is bad" thumping from the US politicians makes things worst.  Russia is our boogey man that is being used to scare people.  Why would Russia not think Nato is a security risk when all they hear, from the US, is how terrible they are and they need to be stopped.  We don't have to like Putin, but we sure should try to get along with him.  Maybe it wouldn't have changed things, but what I am seeing right now is downright heartbreaking. 

[LiveFromUkraine]

Where are you coming up with this narrative that the US was trying to set Poland up as a scapegoat?  I get the impression that you think the US was trying to instigate Poland into giving Ukraine Migs.

From what I understand some NATO countries (Poland, Hungary, etc.) had expressed a willingness to send Mig-29's to Ukraine along with other military weaponry.  But the devil is always in the details.  Poland wanted to give Ukraine their Migs, but said it would deplete their air force, and asked the US if they could buy F-16's to backfill and replace the Migs.  The Pentagon and US diplomats were in favor of providing F-16's to Poland.

As they worked out final details of how the transfer would be made, Joe Biden turns into a scared chicken and says no to the transfer.  He starts spouting garbage about how all decisions have to be made by NATO.  He forgets that the US is allowed to act by itself.  (It wasn't NATO agreeing to provide F-16's...it was the US.)

I don't know where you come up with the narrative of the US trying to set up Poland.  If Biden hadn't said no, the jets would have been transferred to the US at Ramstein and then flown to Ukraine.  The only fly in the ointment was Biden.

Poland wouldn't do anything without the US approval.  The US even threw in some F-16's if Poland would give Ukraine their Migs.  Not a bad enticement for Poland to arm Ukraine.  The US was in favor of this up until Poland offered to hand over the Migs to the US base in Germany so they could give them to Ukraine .  All of a sudden it wasn't a good idea and the US rejected that plan.  I'm having a hard time seeing this any other way to be honest.

[ML]

As someone posted here before:

During Vietnam, Russia provided planes and even pilots to North Vietnam to attack U.S. forces.  We didn't threaten Russia with a nuclear attack and did not conduct a nuclear attack on Russia.

Straight analogy to the current situation of Poland or Poland and U.S. providing planes to heroic Ukrainians.

[Jumper1]

I'd like to know why they were there.  Was what they were studying only found in Ukraine.  It's just strange to be seeing more of these labs pop up after Covid killed so many people.

They are everywhere. Hungary, Poland ,China,  etc etc  etc
Beo posted links to the contractors  website stating they were starting work on one when they got the bid,hardly secret.

Most were  prior to covid, but with covid the incredible amount of funding became available to build or update or refurbish most any biolab anywhere to research covid19, so I don't find it the least bit strange.In fact covid upped the need for it dramatically.

Those labs often collaborate amongst many nations  on all kinds of  work. Dna sequencing ,plant,  animal medical research, historical research etc.

The lab in Hungary(?) Subcontractually working on prior soil samples taken in Antarctica, from a China lab (not Wuhan) found sar2/ covid19.
  The samples were thought to be cross contaminated at the China lab before transfer. The catch is those samples were transfered pre outbreak. As far.as I've followed they are still working in this,but it's an example of the wide spread collaboration on simple things like soil samples and across thousands of biolabs everywhere.

I find it telling they are claiming multiple bio warfare .
Medical research would have need of many,
exactly how many high security.level  bio warfare labs do you need to fund and be effienct in research?

You need a LOT if you want maximum press impact for finding them*

You don't need a dozen in Ukraine, in an unstable area to develope bio weapons

They more they claim found,they more it looks a ploy.

I've stated why I believe Russia is just trying to use this as post justification.

Flash words like nazism,biolab  ,nukes.
Gain more traction even if zero actial proof, a grain of evidence of what might be construed as such, is enough  to be effective,even if only for a short time.
Continued deflection is about the only game they have media wise, what else would we expect?


I predicted they would *find  nuclear labs working on turning nuclear plant fuel into dirty bombs. Another fantasy and unrealistic.
Yet some reports have claimed that now also.

Its absolutely a media and political  circus.


Meanwhile peoples lives and livelihoods are destroyed.

[ML]

The proposed arms shipments are significantly less provocative than the Soviets killing Americans in North Korea and Vietnam.

http://thefederalist.com/2022/03/10/sending-fighter-jets-to-ukraine-raises-the-specter-of-the-cold-war/

[LiveFromUkraine]

Appreciate the post Jumper.  I'm completely ignorant on these bio-labs.  After the covid virus and hearing talk about "gain-of-function" makes my eyebrows raise wondering what the heck is going on. lol

[Jumper1]

History is constantly repeating itself because the actions of certain countries never change.  There is a good chance this war could have been stopped before it began.  The constant "Russia is bad" thumping from the US politicians makes things worst.  Russia is our boogey man that is being used to scare people.  Why would Russia not think Nato is a security risk when all they hear, from the US, is how terrible they are and they need to be stopped.  We don't have to like Putin, but we sure should try to get along with him.  Maybe it wouldn't have changed things, but what I am seeing right now is downright heartbreaking.

Yet the only realistic danger to Russia is them being confined to their existing borders.
Should he be.heard? Sure
Where his demands reasonable?  no.

This harping of his on Ukraine being  eu nato ,is more about russia losing the that sphere of influence .
Nato countries latvia , Estonia ,are already on his border for decades and just as reasonably close to st pete/ Moscow. Notvto.mention kaliningrad surrounded by nato and coexisting  fine.
They do not have nuclear missles .
Its unnecessary in thier position and modern times.

 I think this is about control of ukraine
( he is pissed its not his puppet) ,the black sea , influence in Europe.
Are those legit Russian concerns?
Sure, but
Only if we negate ukraine being sovereign ,and having the right to
lean towards EU as most eastern European countries have done.

They gave up nukes  in a big way for this possibility of continued  sovereignty.

I'd be (and am) bitter at all parties involved.
None of this would be going on if  the parties had honored the agreement.
Or if Ukraine kept the nukes.
They are the only party that kept thier part of the  agreement,one that was already  lopsided  in the favor of the other signatories.