How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[The_MonkeyKing]

Saddam and Argentina got Exocet, shot them at US and UK. Strange for Ukraine not to get them

[Huba]

38 minutes ago, DMS said:

It's ironic that I read this topic to find another source of information and avoid official propaganda, but I find here confirmation of official propaganda scary tales about NATO leaders who plan to destroy and disintegrate Russia. (Well, you are not NATO leaders - but if public is ok with that, why leaders would not) And you ask: why Russians are stuck around that disgusting government. Because they (we) are scared of you, Putin is bad, but if he looses - here come people like Haiduk, who "will show Sudetes" and your collaborators like Grig, who will help disintegrating Russia. No way out. Ok, then we are cornered rats.

The disintegration of Russian empire has already started more than a 100 years ago, that is a fact. Another fact is that there are still many nations either in RU "sphere of influence" or in the Russian Federation itself that are only there cause of coercion, not their free will (Chechens for example). I don't think that anybody here argues about the need to erase Russia from the map, but you guys giving up on imperial possessions would only do you good - yes, it means less international clout, but it also means less blood to be spilled by your citizens, and an overall better quality of life for average Ivan. UK or France are quite good points in case here - it is possible to decolonize, and still prosper as a nation.

Edited June 28, 2022 by Huba

[DMS]

15 minutes ago, Huba said:

The disintegration of Russian empire has already started more than a 100 years ago, that is a fact. Another fact is that there are still many nations either in RU "sphere of influence" or in the Russian Federation itself that are only there cause of coercion, not their free will (Chechens for example). I don't think that anybody here argues about the need to erase Russia from the map, but you guys giving up on imperial possessions would only do you good - yes, it means less international clout, but it also means less blood to be spilled by your citizens, and an overall better quality of life for average Ivan. UK or France are quite good points in case here - it is possible to decolonize, and still prosper as a nation.

Russian Federation in not an empire, it is populated by one political nation with common (Soviet based) culture, economics, language. Eastern parts are weakly populated, Russia just looks on the map like very big. Partition of Russia would have one main purpose, to get oil and gas from Siberia without paying fair market price to Russian business. I doubt that life of average Russian would become better without taxes, paid by Gazprom, Lukoil and others. Even pro-western upper middle class in Moscow would suffer, if Moscow stops being government and trading centre. I strongly dislike concept of one, single, united nation without classes. But in this particular case all Russian people, all classes would stick together.  Their interests would be common, for businessmen and working class. West should not turn this imperialistic war (with limited support) in national-liberation war for Russian people.

Yes, there are some regional elites (most notable - in Yekaterinburg) with separatist intentions. They would be ok with leaving taxes in their region, even if they have to sell for lower prices. But, unfortunately for them, they are too close to People Republic of China and I doubt, that any gun would be fired in direction of PLA, if they come to help.

[Grigb]

Hello, Misha, glad to see you again. 

39 minutes ago, DMS said:

It's ironic that I read this topic to find another source of information and avoid official propaganda

No, Misha, you read this topic to report on heinous foreigners to your LJ community. 

 

40 minutes ago, DMS said:

but I find here confirmation of official propaganda scary tales about NATO leaders who plan to destroy and disintegrate Russia.

No, Misha, you are experiencing confirmation bias. You attack Europe claiming Europe is going to attack you. And when Europe says that the best way to stop your attacks once and for all is to break you up - you scream that AHA, YOU PLANED THIS FROM THE BEGINING.

No, Misha, you are a liar. You were given a unique unbelievably peaceful chance in 90s. Instead, you rearmed and attacked again. So, the next after the first chance solution to your aggressiveness is to break you up. Blame yourself for that.

 

46 minutes ago, DMS said:

And you ask: why Russians are stuck around that disgusting government. 

No, Misha. Russians do not stick around Government otherwise government would call mobilization like months ago. You yourself, Misha, are avoiding enlisting at all costs. Stop making fact less statements.

 

49 minutes ago, DMS said:

Because they (we) are scared of you, Putin is bad, but if he looses - here come people like Haiduk, who "will show Sudetes" and your collaborators like Grig, who will help disintegrating Russia. No way out. Ok, then we are cornered rats.

Thanks, for confirming my words - you are essentially mad cultists who hate foreigners more than Putin because you are indoctrinated to believe foreigners are after you.

I have nothing to add [mic drop]

[Grigb]

1 hour ago, Slaughterhouse-Five said:

Galeev is right. Break up of RU is the best-case scenario. But it will be good even for Russians. Because it will put an end to their imperialist siege mentality indoctrination. 

In its place will appear 10 smaller countries with Putin-like dictators with the nuclear codes. It will be bad for everyone.

In your imagination, comrade, maybe. But you forgot that I know you all very well. 10 Putin-like dictators will not be able to pull all resources together to threaten anybody. Look at other Soviet republics - as soon as they got free they moved away from your aggressive policy toward Europe, comrade. 

You know perfectly well, comrade, Siberians are really dislike Moscow pulling their resources away. They have no incentive to fight either Ukraine or Europe. Simple separation of RU along Urals will bring peace to both RU and Europe. Because without Siberia, you, comrade will not have resources to threaten anybody. 

And it will help Siberians enormously because Moscow governance is awful for locals.

Edited June 28, 2022 by Grigb

[Huba]

23 minutes ago, DMS said:

Russian Federation in not an empire, it is populated by one political nation with common (Soviet based) culture, economics, language.

Oh come on, tell that to Chechens or indigenous people from Siberia. Forced Russification/ Sovietisation does not a nation make, as was proven by Poland, Balts and now is being made painfully obvious by the Ukrainians. 

How do you think the "collective West" would go about forcefully partitioning Russia, who is a nuclear power? We talk about what would be nice from your former subjects POV, so we would stopped feeling threatened, but it is not a realistic perspective and even @kraze agrees with that I think. 

 

In other news, apparently UA soldiers are being trained  on NASAMS already!

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Huba

[Beleg85]

18 minutes ago, Huba said:

Russian Federation in not an empire, it is populated by one political nation with common (Soviet based) culture, economics, language.

RF is empire by all possible definitions, and an empire of old type by that. It entails a lot forced nationalities (some of them more absorbed, some less), constantly do aggresive policy toward neighours, is pursuing imperial idee fixe that nobody from outside find attractive ("Russkiy mir") and is ruled by oligarchic cleptocratic elite.

Whatever definition of empire and imperialism one take, even "soft ones" based on emotions - Russia has all that.

Always had.

As to breaking Russia apart- it would be better for anybody, unfortunatelly it will almost certainly not happen without some serious war. It's old idea from XIX-cent. romanticists whose countries were under brutal russian yoke. But even during Russian Civil Wars all factions fought for entire piece of cake, even mode nowadays.

 

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Beleg85

[The_MonkeyKing]

Any guesses what will become the go to "lend lease" IFV for Ukraine? My hope and guess is the Bradley. In sort, there is enough of them and it is real overmatch weapon system. Light system with simple enough logistics.

Another one is what will be the go to "lend lease" the MBT? Indeed hard because western MBTs are so heavy and different than soviet ones. Only Abrams really has availability but cannot see that happening because logistical tail and weight of the system. My guess is all the soviet tanks Europe has and Leo1 for good measure if run out of T-72. (leo1 same weight as T-tanks)

APC seems to be track M113 and moto France VAB. Good choices imo.

[DMS]

2 minutes ago, Huba said:

Oh come on, tell that to Chechens or indigenous people from Siberia. Forced Russification/ Sovietisation does not a nation make, as was proven by Poland, Balts and now is being made painfully obvious by the Ukrainians. 

How do you think the "collective West" would go about forcefully partitioning Russia, who is a nuclear power? We talk about what would be nice from your former subjects POV, so we would stopped feeling threatened, but it is not a realistic perspective and even @kraze agrees with that I think. 

"Sovietisation" doesn't equal to "Russification", it was opposite thing. Communists started politics of "rootification" ("коренизация", I don't know how to translate this), giving ethnic minorities more places in councils, giving them leader's positions. Russian population was forced to learn local languages. Russian nationalists curse communists for that, you know that Putin says that Lenin created Ukraine. Don't underestimate Soviet internationalism, it helped to neutralise hatred between ethnic groups. Baltic states, Ukraine were republics in union. They exited the union. Poland was not a part of union, Poland just changed block. Not good examples. 

Nuclear weapons are not a guarantee. There are ways. Proxy wars, bribing elites, regime change. And in case of "traditional" war, when to nuke? When border is crossed? When Smolensk is lost? When U.S. armored divisions are 50 km far from Moscow? If they are at 51 km, may be there is a chance to negotiate? Are you sure that NATO won't probe this? Well, if I am wrong and nuclear weapons make 3-rd world war impossible - ok then. 

13 minutes ago, Beleg85 said:

RF is empire by all possible definitions

I would disagree, but ok, I don't think that this is worth arguing.

[Huba]

2 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

Any guesses what will become the go to "lend lease" IFV for Ukraine? My hope and guess is the Bradley. In sort, there is enough of them and it is real overmatch weapon system. Light system with simple enough logistics.

Another one is what will be the go to "lend lease" the MBT? Indeed hard because western MBTs are so heavy and different than soviet ones. Only Abrams really has availability but cannot see that happening because logistical tail and weight of the system. My guess is all the soviet tanks Europe has and Leo1 for good measure if run out of T-72. (leo1 same weight as T-tanks)

APC seems to be track M113 and moto France VAB. Good choices imo.

For APC, M113 seems to be chosen already, and for wheeled VAB might join it. I was actually surprised about how many are there, according to Wiki France has almost 4000 in stock. Most are not in active service probably, but the available pool has to be huge anyway.

For MBTs the various T-types are a no brainer, there are still some available in NATO countries. MBTs also seem to not be on the top of UA needs list at the moment.

The case of IFVs is the most interesting. In general my impression is that IFVs used in it's primary role, i.e. maneuvering with MBTs in LOS of the enemy is something that is not happening at all in this war, instead we see a return of APC. If that's something specific to this conflict, with it's lack of large scale mobile ops, or a general trend to observe in the future, I don't feel competent to guess. There are still at least a few hundreds of BMP-1s available from Polish and other NATO armies stocks ( but like in case of MBT's, the stocks would have to be backfilled by some western types). IF UA really needed IFVs, and BMPs would be deemed insufficient, then as you said, Bradleys are the way to go, as it is the only type available in sufficient numbers. 

[The_MonkeyKing]

7 minutes ago, Huba said:

For MBTs the various T-types are a no brainer, there are still some available in NATO countries. MBTs also seem to not be on the top of UA needs list at the moment.

I think we will see Ukrainian mechanized offensive warfare when(or if) the the balance of power shifts enough. Going to be interesting to see. Both sides have essentially "one shot one" kill situation to both directions. 

At this point if Ukraine had overmatch level mechanized forces (modern Leo2/Abrams, Bradley platform equipped brigades) that would be a sight to behold. I am sure we would see success, the imbalance of forces would be similar to Bradley and Abrams attacking in CMCW, one would indeed operate quite traditionally. But this is just me day dreaming...

[Haiduk]

Just for a picture of warfare intensity in Izium-Lysychansk-Bakhmut area. According to Zaluzhnyi statement, Russians conducted for the last day 270 artillery/mlrs strikes, used 45000 of shells, two missile strikes and 32 airstrikes

Edited June 28, 2022 by Haiduk

[Huba]

31 minutes ago, DMS said:

"Sovietisation" doesn't equal to "Russification", it was opposite thing. Communists started politics of "rootification" ("коренизация", I don't know how to translate this), giving ethnic minorities more places in councils, giving them leader's positions. Russian population was forced to learn local languages. Russian nationalists curse communists for that, you know that Putin says that Lenin created Ukraine. Don't underestimate Soviet internationalism, it helped to neutralise hatred between ethnic groups. Baltic states, Ukraine were republics in union. They exited the union. Poland was not a part of union, Poland just changed block. Not good examples. 

They were forced to live in peace by extermination, forced deportations, terror, generally be very imperialistic methods. Central Asia took 20 years after the revolution to be pacified (by force of course). The only difference was that instead of forcing everyone to be a Russian, Soviet Union forced everyone to be a homo sovieticus. Really the same type of oppression, and also directed from Moscow, quite understandable that the oppressed don't care to try to see the difference...

Quote

Nuclear weapons are not a guarantee. There are ways. Proxy wars, bribing elites, regime change. And in case of "traditional" war, when to nuke? When border is crossed? When Smolensk is lost? When U.S. armored divisions are 50 km far from Moscow? If they are at 51 km, may be there is a chance to negotiate? Are you sure that NATO won't probe this? Well, if I am wrong and nuclear weapons make 3-rd world war impossible - ok then. 

Now try to see that in reverse, from perspective of nations that are both weaker conventionally, and non-nuclear, like all your neighbours. If possessing the biggest nuclear stockpile in the world, backed up by huge army and ginormous strategic depth does not make Russians feel secure, then there isn't anything in the world that would. Nobody is out there to get you, we would all be really happy if you just acted friendly, and if that's not possible, just buggered off...

Edited June 28, 2022 by Huba

[chuckdyke]

16 minutes ago, Huba said:

Bradleys are the way to go, as it is the only type available in sufficient numbers. 

Still Australia still has not replaced the M113 t is heavily modified and equipped with thermals the .50 Browning is replaced too with a 76 mm L5A1 gun. The big thing is it can cross rivers like the Russian IFV. The armour is only proof against light infantry weapons. Australia is in the process to replace the old workhorse. The German Lynx is the likely candidate. 

[Grigb]

15 minutes ago, DMS said:

Russian Federation in not an empire, it is populated by one political nation with common (Soviet based) culture, economics, language.

In your imagination maybe. Misha, do you what me to remind you that you yourself cannot be considered a true Russian? You are southerner who have more in common with Ukrainians than with Russians. Your dialect is what Russian speaking Ukrainians speak. Your cultural trait (Resourcefulness) is that of Ukrainians.  Do you want me to remind what true Russians think of southerner Kubanoids? 

For those who are not familiar with the subject I will explain it using Brits as an example. There are true Russians (area around Moscow. This is from where I am) who are like Brits. Then we have Siberians who like Americans and Ural Russians who are in between like Canadians. Finally, we have southerners who are like loyalist Irish.  Oh, well we have also northers. But they are like Faulkenders. Also, It is debatable whether Moscow is Russian city. For true Russians, they are more like rich youngsters without culture.

 

15 minutes ago, DMS said:

Partition of Russia would have one main purpose, to get oil and gas from Siberia without paying fair market price to Russian business. 

You confused Russian business and Moscow puppet business who extracts everything for the sake of Moscow regime. Moscow basically steals resources from Siberian without investing in much needed Siberian infrastructure. Separating Siberia will significantly improve Siberian locals' life. 

 

15 minutes ago, DMS said:

I doubt that life of average Russian would become better without taxes, paid by Gazprom, Lukoil and others. .

Except their life's would be significantly better because as you know perfectly well Moscow pulls all taxes to Moscow instead of investment into local infrastructure. Misha, whom you are trying to lie to? You think I do not know how bad the local Ru infrastructure? Locals in my hometown are joking that NATO secretly bombs their roads at night - because local roads are that bad. And it is not a small village from nowhere. It is the regional capital and an important economic and cultural center.   

Local regions would live significantly better without Moscow burning their money in aggressive imperialist wars no one needs.

15 minutes ago, DMS said:

Even pro-western upper middle class in Moscow would suffer, if Moscow stops being government and trading centre. 

Somewhat. What you do not talk about is the intellectual crisis in all other towns. All other towns are suffering because they literally have no high-quality workers left. Everybody left for high Moscow salaries (due to taxes are pulled to Moscow)

For example, Vladimir city big businesses are trying to pay big premiums to get high quality workers from Moscow back. All other businesses are left to rot as they do not have money to compete with Moscow. Whole Russia is suffering from Moscow is a center of everything. 

15 minutes ago, DMS said:

I strongly dislike concept of one, single, united nation without classes. But in this particular case all Russian people, all classes would stick together.  Their interests would be common, for businessmen and working class. West should not turn this imperialistic war (with limited support) in national-liberation war for Russian people.

As I already said even you do not stick to RU government. RU liberals are simply waiting for Putin to die.

 

59 minutes ago, DMS said:

Yes, there are some regional elites (most notable - in Yekaterinburg) with separatist intentions. 

Glad you started to admit the hard reality that RU is not a homogenous entity. Except you lied about Yekaterinburg. It is not a notable example. It is just a city you hate because Yeltsin is from that city. 

 

59 minutes ago, DMS said:

They would be ok with leaving taxes in their region, even if they have to sell for lower prices. But, unfortunately for them, they are too close to People Republic of China and I doubt, that any gun would be fired in direction of PLA, if they come to help.

Misha, liberal Russians call you madman because you literally have no clue about reality. Let me remind you:

1. Moscow are selling far east resources to China without limits and very cheaply. Far east is already suffering enormously from catastrophic fires due bad practices of tree cutting.
2.  Moscow will not help much Siberians in case of troubles with China - because of years of divestments there is not much infrastructure left for successful military campaign.
3. Competence of RU military is low. China just beat the crap out of weak RU units that managed to arrive to battle.

Do you want me to remind you about RU Damansky island? That's China territory now despite all the Nationalist rhetoric.

C'mon, Misha, study the real life your own country!

[chuckdyke]

26 minutes ago, DMS said:

Sovietisation" doesn't equal to "Russification

We used to have a friend from Kazakhstan oh the Soviet Union didn't allow him to return home till 1980 to visit his mother. He had the audacity to become a POW without asking for permission. Please stop your apologetics, the problem is their idea of progressiveness stalled in the 19th century. Apartheid used to be a progressive code of conduct with your neighbors of a different culture that had its roots in the 19th century too. That is the problem in this conflict the fact that two countries have a similar culture doesn't mean they are one. 

[Grigb]

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

"Sovietisation" doesn't equal to "Russification", it was opposite thing.

Except it was Russification. Ask all non-ru local who were forced to learn RU language.

 

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

Communists started politics of "rootification" ("коренизация", I don't know how to translate this),

 You do not need to translate your imaginary word. 

 

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

giving ethnic minorities more places in councils, giving them leader's positions. Russian population was forced to learn local languages.

That's why Ukrainians have difficulties using their own language. They just decided on their own to use Ru language instead. Whom are you lying to Misha?

 

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

Russian nationalists curse communists for that, you know that Putin says that Lenin created Ukraine. Don't underestimate Soviet internationalism, it helped to neutralise hatred between ethnic groups. Baltic states, Ukraine were republics in union. They exited the union. Poland was not a part of union, Poland just changed block. Not good examples. 

And now back to reality - Baltic people hate toward Russians became Soviet meme. Hatred among different nations was well known but not reported in Soviet newspapers. All these national conflicts did not appear suddenly, they were just suppressed during USSR time and flared up when there was nobody to brutally suppress them. 

 

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

Nuclear weapons are not a guarantee. There are ways. Proxy wars, bribing elites, regime change. And in case of "traditional" war, when to nuke? When border is crossed? When Smolensk is lost? When U.S. armored divisions are 50 km far from Moscow? If they are at 51 km, may be there is a chance to negotiate? Are you sure that NATO won't probe this? Well, if I am wrong and nuclear weapons make 3-rd world war impossible - ok then. 

So, we are back to the root of the issue - you believe heinous foreigners are after you. Also, you believe that you will not have the will to use Nukes. That's why you must have RU lebensraums to ensure survival of RU race.

That's why only break up will stop you from further attacks - you are mad cultists with whom negotiations are useless.

[DMS]

42 minutes ago, Grigb said:

No, Misha, you are experiencing confirmation bias. You attack Europe claiming Europe is going to attack you. And when Europe says that the best way to stop your attacks once and for all is to break you up - you scream that AHA, YOU PLANED THIS FROM THE BEGINING.

No, Misha, you are a liar. You were given a unique unbelievably peaceful chance in 90s. Instead, you rearmed and attacked again. So, the next after the first chance solution to your aggressiveness is to break you up. Blame yourself for that.

Why do you always call me "Misha", it isn't my first name. (Because of M in DMS? No) I am ok when you say it in Russian (sort on nickname, ok), but in English it sounds bad. It's a little impolite to bring personal discussions to forum where no one cares about us, isn't it?

What do you expect, that if you find some words and prove that Russia is "bad", Russians are ok with disintegration and partition? Like: "It's our fault? ok then, partition us free, kill us, take away our resources." I don't think so.

And why that Putin is our fault? Yeltsin was approved by U.S. Congress. Anti-Yeltsin rebellion in 1993 was crushed with support of U.S. embassy. Elections of 1996 were openly frauded. I don't think that Yeltsin's appointee Putin wasn't approved by U.S. embassy in 1999. Bush and Clinton liked him, he was Russian Zelensky who helped to fight terror. Putin was usual pro-western dictator, like Mubarak in Egypt. West tried to shift him in 2011, he was hurt and gone wild. Deal with him. I have no relation to this imperialistic contention, but if someone come to my home to "de-rushificate" me, to punish for some "collective fault" - ok, I will have to support this dictator. (Not just me, but "average Russian") Quite simple logic, I don't understand what's wrong with it. 

8 minutes ago, Grigb said:

In your imagination maybe. Misha, do you what me to remind you that you yourself cannot be considered a true Russian? You are southerner who have more in common with Ukrainians than with Russians. Your dialect is what Russian speaking Ukrainians speak. Your cultural trait (Resourcefulness) is that of Ukrainians.  Do you want me to remind what true Russians think of southerner Kubanoids? 

I think that here are too much discussions about Russia, so in short: are you serious? South Russia is concentrated in few big cities, like rest of the country. That big cities are populated by people with roots from all over the country. Ukrainians use to say that Russians are "mudblood", "race mix". Well, ok. People try to hide their village roots, avoiding local dialects. You buy internet memes and jokes as true stories? Sounds like "American hillbillies are preparing to secession, because they are too different to New York city".

19 minutes ago, Grigb said:

Do you want me to remind you about RU Damansky island? That's China territory now despite all the Nationalist rhetoric.

You missed the point or my English is too bad. Anyway, ok. Please let's stop this wall of text. Here are too much of us.

[Taranis]

1 hour ago, Huba said:

For APC, M113 seems to be chosen already, and for wheeled VAB might join it. I was actually surprised about how many are there, according to Wiki France has almost 4000 in stock. Most are not in active service probably, but the available pool has to be huge anyway.

VABs are/were everywhere (at least until I left) in the French army. Each unit has them from infantry (although the VBCI largely equipped the 1st RI) to artillery, via signals and engineers (even the gendarmerie!). In my case, it was the 120mm mortar towing vehicle but it was also used for orientation (for 120mm mortars), for transporting ammunitions but also for platoon command (mortar and CAESAR). I'm not surprised at all that there are a lot of them

PS: However, it's not even worth thinking about its amphibious capability. I have NEVER seen a single VAB maintained for this.

PS2 : In Afghanistan, sorts of small cells of ERA were added on the vehicle to improve the armour. So it's a possibility. Finally, in the video we see boxes that on the roof at the rear 3/4 of the vehicle. They are simply storage box to leave more room for the men inside. It is a practice that appeared towards Afghanistan because it was there the first time that I saw this practice.

Edited June 28, 2022 by Taranis

[Huba]

A thread by Trelenko about how GMLRS/ Tochka  strikes circumvent RU air defense. Quite an interesting read for a layman:

Video of missiles hitting Kremenchuk, scary stuff:

 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Huba

[akd]

1 hour ago, DMS said:

Are you sure that NATO won't probe this?

Yes. It is a defensive alliance.

[Haiduk]

52 minutes ago, Grigb said:

You do not need to translate your imaginary word

In this statement about "rootification" DMS is correct. After period of "military communism", Soviet authorities were forced to start so-called "New Economy Policy" (NEP), together with raising of national cultures as opposed to Russian Empire national oppression, so it called "jail of nations". 

So between approx 1923/24 and up to 1927/29, when collectivisation began,Ukraine had a period, which our official history calls "Red Renaissance". There was intensive growth of new Ukrainian intelligentsia - artists, writers, social leaders. But "rootification" policy in Soviet Ukraine gave also growth of national identity, which distinguished from forms, which desired in Moscow. So, "Red Renaissance" was changed by Holodomor, and after it period of "Shot-out Revival" came, when almost all intelligentsia, elite of nation was eliminated in repressions. And since this we had full Sovetization as russification with short break in 60th-beginning of 70th

Edited June 28, 2022 by Haiduk

[dan/california]

37 minutes ago, DMS said:

Why do you always call me "Misha", it isn't my first name. (Because of M in DMS? No) I am ok when you say it in Russian (sort on nickname, ok), but in English it sounds bad. It's a little impolite to bring personal discussions to forum where no one cares about us, isn't it?

What do you expect, that if you find some words and prove that Russia is "bad", Russians are ok with disintegration and partition? Like: "It's our fault? ok then, partition us free, kill us, take away our resources." I don't think so.

And why that Putin is our fault? Yeltsin was approved by U.S. Congress. Anti-Yeltsin rebellion in 1993 was crushed with support of U.S. embassy. Elections of 1996 were openly frauded. I don't think that Yeltsin's appointee Putin wasn't approved by U.S. embassy in 1999. Bush and Clinton liked him, he was Russian Zelensky who helped to fight terror. Putin was usual pro-western dictator, like Mubarak in Egypt. West tried to shift him in 2011, he was hurt and gone wild. Deal with him. I have no relation to this imperialistic contention, but if someone come to my home to "de-rushificate" me, to punish for some "collective fault" - ok, I will have to support this dictator. (Not just me, but "average Russian") Quite simple logic, I don't understand what's wrong with it. 

I think that here are too much discussions about Russia, so in short: are you serious? South Russia is concentrated in few big cities, like rest of the country. That big cities are populated by people with roots from all over the country. Ukrainians use to say that Russians are "mudblood", "race mix". Well, ok. People try to hide their village roots, avoiding local dialects. You buy internet memes and jokes as true stories? Sounds like "American hillbillies are preparing to secession, because they are too different to New York city".

You missed the point or my English is too bad. Anyway, ok. Please let's stop this wall of text. Here are too much of us.

DMS, Russia has started the most unnecessary war in approximately forever. Then proceeded to wage it with a unique blend of genocidal barbarity and complete incompetence. Russia then turns around and tries to play the victim, and claim everyone is out to get them. To put it mildly that isn't going to work. Russia has managed to focus at  least two continents on ensuring that Russia can't do this again for generations. I mean what did you expect would happen? Putin's fantasy of a quick victory and a parade in Kyiv? That ship hasn't just sailed, it sunk with all hands

I ma going to repeat Von Rundstet's quote to the German high command when it became clear D-Day had been a success. "Make peace, you fools". It was good advice then, and even better advice now. Because if Putin ruins the ENTIRE Russsian army in pursuit of his Ukrainian fantasy Russia will find out how much of its outer reaches are unhappy with Moscow's less than enlightened ruling style. You won't like the answer very much.

Edited June 28, 2022 by dan/california

[Grigb]

Just now, DMS said:

Why do you always call me "Misha", it isn't my first name. (Because of M in DMS? No) I am ok when you say it in Russian (sort on nickname, ok), but in English it sounds bad. It's a little impolite to bring personal discussions to forum where no one cares about us, isn't it?

Because "Misha" is the nickname you accepted a long time ago. You even once said that you like it because it sounds more respectable than the other nicknames you was called (I do have modicum of respect for you because of our CM games. that's why I continue to use it).   

 

Just now, DMS said:

(Because of M in DMS? No) I am ok when you say it in Russian (sort on nickname, ok), but in English it sounds bad. It's a little impolite to bring personal discussions to forum where no one cares about us, isn't it?

No, it is because until recently you did not make secret that you use variations of DMS for your other nicknames. Like for your LiveJournal blog for example.

 

Just now, DMS said:

What do you expect, that if you find some words and prove that Russia is "bad", Russians are ok with disintegration and partition? Like: "It's our fault? ok then, partition us free, kill us, take away our resources." I don't think so.

I am glad you admitted the "words" I translate do in fact exist and make RU looks bad.  But the thing is I do not care what Russians would feel when their cult collapses. Unlike you I have seen how USSR collapsed and it was like nobody cared. The fact is Russians will feel much better than Ukrainians whom they got killed. So, spare me your lectures about how poor Russians would feel. They will be fine. And with the time they will feel much better.

 

28 minutes ago, DMS said:

And why that Putin is our fault? Yeltsin was approved by U.S. Congress. Anti-Yeltsin rebellion in 1993 was crushed with support of U.S. embassy. Elections of 1996 were openly frauded. I don't think that Yeltsin's appointee Putin wasn't approved by U.S. embassy in 1999. Bush and Clinton liked him, he was Russian Zelensky who helped to fight terror. Putin was usual pro-western dictator, like Mubarak in Egypt. West tried to shift him in 2011, he was hurt and gone wild. Deal with him. I have no relation to this imperialistic contention, but if someone come to my home to "de-rushificate" me, to punish for some "collective fault" - ok, I will have to support this dictator. (Not just me, but "average Russian") Quite simple logic, I don't understand what's wrong with it. 

Everything you said is a lie akin to a flat earth conspiracy. But thank you for showing how Russian cultists will throw under the bus Putin and his war criminals - it is not our fault, they were West puppets! 

 

31 minutes ago, DMS said:

I think that here are too much discussions about Russia, so in short: are you serious? South Russia is concentrated in few big cities, like rest of the country. That big cities are populated by people with roots from all over the country.

Good that you are not denying that Southerners are viewed differently by true Russians. 

 

35 minutes ago, DMS said:

Ukrainians use to say that Russians are "mudblood", "race mix".

In your imagination maybe. In reality you yourself was a witness of antiemetic and anti-gypsies slur from your RU community members toward me when I said I might have Jewish blood and definitely have Gypsie blood.

Never had any issues with Ukrainians. On the contrary as soon as I showed them, I am not a typical RU nationalist they always treated me like their brother.

 

41 minutes ago, DMS said:

Well, ok. People try to hide their village roots, avoiding local dialects. You buy internet memes and jokes as true stories? Sounds like "American hillbillies are preparing to secession, because they are too different to New York city".

No, it is you who totally missed the point. Unlike in your imaginary internet based world you as a southerner is not welcome in the true Russia up north. You are like hmm... Mexican. Hence your claims that Russians are one united nation are rather funny.

 

53 minutes ago, DMS said:

You missed the point or my English is too bad. Anyway, ok. Please let's stop this wall of text. Here are too much of us.

No, Misha, you are wasting everybody's time with your imaginary alternative facts. So, I will factcheck everything you say to force you to lie less.

[Grigb]

26 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

In this statement about "rootification" DMS is correct. After period of "military communism", Soviet authorities were forced to start so-called "New Economy Policy" (NEP), together with raising of national cultures as opposed to Russian Empire national oppression, so it called "jail of nations". 

1. "New Economy Policy" (NEP) was not about nationalities.
2. The process Misha mentioned was not about other nationalities as well. It was about USSR not having enough cadre locals would view as legitimate. It is like Allies were forced to use old Nazis in government.
3. Коренизация is imaginary word that has no bearing with reality and quickly forgotten thereafter. 

37 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

So between approx 1923/24 and up to 1927/29, when collectivisation began,Ukraine had a period, which our official history calls "Red Renaissance". There was intensive growth of new Ukrainian intelligentsia - artists, writers, social leaders. But "rootification" policy in Soviet Ukraine gave also growth of national identity, which distinguished from forms, which desired in Moscow. So, "Red Renaissance" was changed by Holodomor, and after it period of "Shot-out Revival" came, when almost all intelligentsia, elite of nation was eliminated in repressions. And since this we had full Sovetization as russification with short break in 60th-beginning of 70th

I see you still do not get it. You (and others) were given a toy to play in order to distract you from any resistance while Ru were weak after Civil War. NEP had the same purpose just for economy. As soon as RU consolidated they continued to do what they planned to do from the beginning.