He doesn't have to go to war or look like a prat. He can do what the hell he likes. Including go to war. Or not. Whatever he does will make NATO more defensive which he will pretend is a threat.
Hmm. He certainly seems to be rattling Mr Biden's cage.
What do you make of this apparent shelling by rebels in the east of Ukraine? Is this a Cunning Plan of Mr Putin's, to make it look as though Ukraine fired the first shot?
Hmm. He certainly seems to be rattling Mr Biden's cage.
What do you make of this apparent shelling by rebels in the east of Ukraine? Is this a Cunning Plan of Mr Putin's, to make it look as though Ukraine fired the first shot?
You mean the one where a Kindergarten was hit? Piece of Shit, I mean, Work.
Hmm. He certainly seems to be rattling Mr Biden's cage.
What do you make of this apparent shelling by rebels in the east of Ukraine? Is this a Cunning Plan of Mr Putin's, to make it look as though Ukraine fired the first shot?
You mean the one where a Kindergarten was hit? Piece of Shit, I mean, Work.
Yes, that's the one. Nasty indeed - whoever did it...
the former don't tend to do anything without the latter's say so. And the former are currently busy evacuating their women, children and elderly into Russia.
Rather weird how Boris and Truss started shouting false flag about the shelling. How does that work? The separatists shelling Ukraine, in order to pretend that the Ukraine is shelling itself ? Or Boris is hungry for more dead cat.
Rather weird how Boris and Truss started shouting false flag about the shelling. How does that work? The separatists shelling Ukraine, in order to pretend that the Ukraine is shelling itself ?
Biden said the same thing, and it's not at all weird. The separatists are claiming Ukrainian forces opened fire on them.
Rather weird how Boris and Truss started shouting false flag about the shelling. How does that work? The separatists shelling Ukraine, in order to pretend that the Ukraine is shelling itself ? Or Boris is hungry for more dead cat.
It's a very odd use of the phrase. Maybe they initially thought the nursery was in Donetsk (shelled by the rebels/Russia to blame Ukraine)?
Or had become so used to saying false flag that they squeezed it in the box (it kind of works if you say the rebels are a 'false flag' to hide Russian activity. But that really requires hitting a Russian objective)
Rather weird how Boris and Truss started shouting false flag about the shelling. How does that work? The separatists shelling Ukraine, in order to pretend that the Ukraine is shelling itself ?
Biden said the same thing, and it's not at all weird. The separatists are claiming Ukrainian forces opened fire on them.
But Boris shouted false flag about the separatists shelling Ukraine.
Rather weird how Boris and Truss started shouting false flag about the shelling. How does that work? The separatists shelling Ukraine, in order to pretend that the Ukraine is shelling itself ?
Biden said the same thing, and it's not at all weird. The separatists are claiming Ukrainian forces opened fire on them.
But Boris shouted false flag about the separatists shelling Ukraine.
Yes, because if you don't accept that the separatists are legitimate, then Ukraine has been shelled. By the separatists. In a false flag operation designed to look like the Ukrainians have attacked the separatists.
Now, I make no judgement either way on the truth of that, but it is a logical use of false flag as far as it goes. I understand what the UK and US are saying/meaning.
The pro-Russian separatists say they're evacuating civilians from Donbas, on the pretext that Ukraine is threatening them. Putin has accused Ukraine of genocide in the Russian-occupied east. The separatists say the shelling was in response to Ukrainians firing on them. And so, US Sec of State Blinken says Russia is creating "false provocations" and Biden says they're engaged in "a false flag operation." The NATO secretary general says in general shelling in the area is Moscow carrying out "false flag operations." So Johnson has the same script. And given the way Putin likes to operate, I don't disbelieve any of them.
I can't find an account of what Johnson said with any kind of context. If he was talking about just that single event and just that single sentence, yeah, I can see why you'd say it doesn't make sense. But in the context of the situation, it does make sense. Yes, he's a buffoon, and I'm sorry the UK is stuck with him for the time being, but it's a bit of a distraction to get hung up on one sentence from someone who seems to be motivated by trying to stay relevant on the world stage.
One of the more interesting things to me going on right now is that the Biden administration is releasing so much intelligence to the public. They keep telling us a lot about what they know about what Putin is doing, I assume for strategic reasons: Putin loses any advantage stealth would bring, it blunts the edge of Russian disinformation campaigns, and it means the Western public and the stock markets might be more prepared if Russia does invade.
One of the more interesting things to me going on right now is that the Biden administration is releasing so much intelligence to the public.
With respect, they are not. They are making claims and providing very little in the way of evidence, something that AP reporter Matt Lee pulled them up on earlier in the month.
Yes, good point, and the state dept guy whose name escapes me now was pretty full of it, saying Lee was taking solace from Russian propaganda, or some such nonsense. So -- they are making claims that they say are based on intelligence. But they're making a lot of claims, and they're specific. The former US ambassador to Ukraine says it's unprecedented, comparing it only to the Cuban missile crisis or the build-up to invading Iraq (yes, I remember how screwed-up that was). We get repeated updates on the numbers of troops Russia has in position, that they've moved in medical supplies, that they've tried to recruit Ukrainians to destabilize their own government, that they want to install a puppet government, that they're making cyber attacks on Ukrainian banks.
We get repeated updates on the numbers of troops Russia has in position, that they've moved in medical supplies, that they've tried to recruit Ukrainians to destabilize their own government, that they want to install a puppet government, that they're making cyber attacks on Ukrainian banks.
There are some incentives to overstate the chance of an attack. If Putin does something the White House can say they told us so, if he doesn't then they can credit their strategy with deterrence.
We're amongst those on the Ship who can remember the great Cuban crisis. Even in remote and little Australia, things were pretty scary and our parents (and many others around here) were making plans for a quick trip over the Blue Mountains if it got much scarier. That feeling is not around at the moment.
I think that Russian spokesman must have drink taken. History speaks for itself...
Meanwhile, latest news reports a very long phone conversation between Mr Putin and M Macron, and a possible summit meeting in the next few days involving Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany, with a view to de-escalation.
I find it bizarre how British observers seem to want to make this about Boris: his opponents even more so than his supporters. It seems incredibly parochial! ISTM that this crisis would be developing in much the same way whoever the British PM was or what they did.
I quite agree - but Johnson is desperate to be seen to be as a World Leader™, and he is also desperate to have everyone's attention drawn away from his lies over Partygate, Brexit etc.
I find it bizarre how British observers seem to want to make this about Boris: his opponents even more so than his supporters.
I was narrowly commenting on the content of that cartoon. I agree in general that the UK isn't going to go to war over the Ukraine, unless it's as part of a US led operation. Johnson has - if anything - been even more eager than the US to highlight the possibilities of Russian action.
It's perhaps not surprising that British observers tend to home in on the British Prime Minister, who seems to be enjoying making portentous remarks and prophecies, even though no-one else appears to be taking any notice of him (or of his Foreign Secretary, who is more interested in posing for photographs...).
I have noticed that Macron seems to be slipping comfortably into Merkel's sensible shoes. I recall reading an article (sorry, I can't remember where, but if it comes to mind I'll try to link it) asking who would lead Europe after her retirement, and it had scant regard for Macron. While he hasn't yet earned an A+, brokering a possible Biden-Putin summit is an achievement. With spring approaching, time is running out for an offensive (soil too soft for heavy vehicles), so might was well jaw jaw
I have noticed that Macron seems to be slipping comfortably into Merkel's sensible shoes. I recall reading an article (sorry, I can't remember where, but if it comes to mind I'll try to link it) asking who would lead Europe after her retirement, and it had scant regard for Macron. While he hasn't yet earned an A+, brokering a possible Biden-Putin summit is an achievement. With spring approaching, time is running out for an offensive (soil too soft for heavy vehicles), so might was well jaw jaw
If he pulls it off then that will be all to the good. Although there was a comment on the radio at lunchtime from the Times' Europe editor (I think) along the lines of 'every time Macron has announced something re Ukraine, he has been humiliated* by Russia stating that they don't recognise his account.' This in the context, and I appreciate things are moving fast, that at lunchtime Russia was saying the equivalent of 'actually we've not agreed to anything' re his suggestion.
*that word was used, thought the rest of the quote is a paraphrase.
I have noticed that Macron seems to be slipping comfortably into Merkel's sensible shoes. I recall reading an article (sorry, I can't remember where, but if it comes to mind I'll try to link it) asking who would lead Europe after her retirement, and it had scant regard for Macron. While he hasn't yet earned an A+, brokering a possible Biden-Putin summit is an achievement. With spring approaching, time is running out for an offensive (soil too soft for heavy vehicles), so might was well jaw jaw
If he pulls it off then that will be all to the good. Although there was a comment on the radio at lunchtime from the Times' Europe editor (I think) along the lines of 'every time Macron has announced something re Ukraine, he has been humiliated
I'm not much of a fan of Macron, but the British media rarely say anything good about the French.
It is indeed a bad sign and consonant with the existing bad sign of a stack of Russian troops positioned in Belarus. This is not the place to have them if your intention is simply to annex Luhansk and Donetsk.
The Russian troops in Belarus are dual purpose: (a) in position to threaten or invade Ukraine; (b) make sure that Lukashenko or someone of his ilk remains in power, as the anti-Lukashenko opposition and demonstrations caused some concern in the Kremlin. Even if Ukraine is to be absorbed by Russia, I would expect that a sizable Russian presence will remain in Belarus, as there has been since their joint manoeuvres.
Even if Ukraine is to be absorbed by Russia, I would expect that a sizable Russian presence will remain in Belarus, as there has been since their joint manoeuvres.
That would seem a most uncomfortable prospect for the Baltic states. Still I suppose they have a most uncomfortable prospect already.
Indeed. Two weeks ago I had a conversation with a woman whose parents and a sister moved (back, in the parents' case) to Estonia some years ago, and the customary wariness beneath the surface is now voiced concern. The woman was hoping that her family, and cousins, come to Canada.
Actually another country that has intense cause for concern is Bosnia. I am sure Serbia would serve as a "deniable but deliberately obvious" proxy for Russia.
Actually another country that has intense cause for concern is Bosnia. I am sure Serbia would serve as a "deniable but deliberately obvious" proxy for Russia.
Never mind Bosnia - Serbian re-entry to Kosovo would be epic trolling of the West.
Comments
What do you make of this apparent shelling by rebels in the east of Ukraine? Is this a Cunning Plan of Mr Putin's, to make it look as though Ukraine fired the first shot?
You mean the one where a Kindergarten was hit? Piece of Shit, I mean, Work.
Yes, that's the one. Nasty indeed - whoever did it...
Who do you think was responsible?
The *rebels*? Putin?
the former don't tend to do anything without the latter's say so. And the former are currently busy evacuating their women, children and elderly into Russia.
...who apparently intends to do some practice with nuclear weapons, in league with his good friend Lukashenko.
Biden said the same thing, and it's not at all weird. The separatists are claiming Ukrainian forces opened fire on them.
It's a very odd use of the phrase. Maybe they initially thought the nursery was in Donetsk (shelled by the rebels/Russia to blame Ukraine)?
Or had become so used to saying false flag that they squeezed it in the box (it kind of works if you say the rebels are a 'false flag' to hide Russian activity. But that really requires hitting a Russian objective)
But Boris shouted false flag about the separatists shelling Ukraine.
Yes, because if you don't accept that the separatists are legitimate, then Ukraine has been shelled. By the separatists. In a false flag operation designed to look like the Ukrainians have attacked the separatists.
Now, I make no judgement either way on the truth of that, but it is a logical use of false flag as far as it goes. I understand what the UK and US are saying/meaning.
I can't find an account of what Johnson said with any kind of context. If he was talking about just that single event and just that single sentence, yeah, I can see why you'd say it doesn't make sense. But in the context of the situation, it does make sense. Yes, he's a buffoon, and I'm sorry the UK is stuck with him for the time being, but it's a bit of a distraction to get hung up on one sentence from someone who seems to be motivated by trying to stay relevant on the world stage.
One of the more interesting things to me going on right now is that the Biden administration is releasing so much intelligence to the public. They keep telling us a lot about what they know about what Putin is doing, I assume for strategic reasons: Putin loses any advantage stealth would bring, it blunts the edge of Russian disinformation campaigns, and it means the Western public and the stock markets might be more prepared if Russia does invade.
With respect, they are not. They are making claims and providing very little in the way of evidence, something that AP reporter Matt Lee pulled them up on earlier in the month.
There are some incentives to overstate the chance of an attack. If Putin does something the White House can say they told us so, if he doesn't then they can credit their strategy with deterrence.
Meanwhile, latest news reports a very long phone conversation between Mr Putin and M Macron, and a possible summit meeting in the next few days involving Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany, with a view to de-escalation.
One can only hope and pray that it works. 🙏
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2022/feb/20/nicola-jennings-on-emmanuel-macron-last-minute-diplomatic-bid-in-the-ukraine-crisis-cartoon
See if you can spot Boris. I laughed out loud, and nearly spilt my evening mug of Bovril...
The Normandy format was responsible for Minsk and Minsk II for all their flaws - which is more than Johnson has done recently (or Cameron in 2014).
I was narrowly commenting on the content of that cartoon. I agree in general that the UK isn't going to go to war over the Ukraine, unless it's as part of a US led operation. Johnson has - if anything - been even more eager than the US to highlight the possibilities of Russian action.
If he pulls it off then that will be all to the good. Although there was a comment on the radio at lunchtime from the Times' Europe editor (I think) along the lines of 'every time Macron has announced something re Ukraine, he has been humiliated* by Russia stating that they don't recognise his account.' This in the context, and I appreciate things are moving fast, that at lunchtime Russia was saying the equivalent of 'actually we've not agreed to anything' re his suggestion.
*that word was used, thought the rest of the quote is a paraphrase.
I'm not much of a fan of Macron, but the British media rarely say anything good about the French.
wow, thanks for sharing this!
(Brothers in Arms comes to mind too)
(Crossposted - I deleted the post you quoted, because I just read the bbc news site and posted this instead.)
Saying Ukraine is not really a country is a very bad sign, and he has basically annexed another two provinces.
That would seem a most uncomfortable prospect for the Baltic states. Still I suppose they have a most uncomfortable prospect already.
The 2014 war never finished. Happy days, the bi-pole world is back.
Never mind Bosnia - Serbian re-entry to Kosovo would be epic trolling of the West.