Europe at War

[LKB]

Russia's take on who done blew up them pipelines: Russia says UK navy blew up Nord Stream, London denies involvement

I like this bit of the British response: "To detract from their disastrous handling of the illegal invasion of Ukraine, the Russian Ministry of Defence is resorting to peddling false claims of an epic scale"

And as we all know, the Russian government would never lie about anything...

[Todd]

Russians lie.  Brits lie.  Americans lie.

...What you will see is an accumulation of facts and disturbing patterns of behavior. The facts on Iraqis' behavior - Iraq's behavior demonstrate that Saddam Hussein and his regime have made no effort - no effort - to disarm as required by the international community. Indeed, the facts and Iraq's behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction...

[Christo]

Russians lie.  Brits lie.  Americans lie.

Not at the same level, the comparison is wrong.

[Karl Henning]

Not at the same level, the comparison is wrong.

A well, a new day, the same troll ....

[Todd]

Not at the same level, the comparison is wrong.

There is some truth to this.  Russian lies have not resulted in as many civilian deaths this century as British and American lies.

[JBS]

There is some truth to this.  Russian lies have not resulted in as many civilian deaths this century as British and American lies.

The sound of disgust you hear comes from the people of Syria, with assistance from various Chechens and Dagestanis.

[Todd]

HUMAN COSTS The number of people killed directly in the violence of the U.S. post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere are estimated here. Several times as many more have been killed as a reverberating effect of the wars — because, for example, of water loss, sewage and other infrastructural issues, and war-related disease. Posted September 1, 2021.

Source: Watson Institute, Brown University.

I am quite sure that Syrians are also disgusted at the US for destroying Raqqa and slaughtering 1600 civilians in the process.  I suspect a fair number of Syrians are disgusted that the US continues to maintain a military presence in the country even now.  They probably don't care that it violates international law and US law.  Why should they?  The US can and does act lawlessly with impunity, but boy does it display inherent resolve, amiright?

'Murica.

[JBS]

The Syrians are probably too busy trying not to get killed by Assad's soldiers and Russia's barrel bombs to care about the relatively small US presence there.

And of course to call Yemen and Syria U.S. wars is to ignore the role of Iran in both and Russia in Syria.

BTW the number of civilian deaths in Syria is much higher than that chart shows

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war#:~:text=Estimates%20of%20the%20total%20number,had%20died%20in%20the%20war.

[Todd]

The Syrians are probably too busy trying not to get killed by Assad's soldiers and Russia's barrel bombs to care about the relatively small US presence there.

How do you know?  Is it the same way you know about their disgust?  I strongly suspect most Syrians want all foreign troops out of their country and most non-Alawite Syrians want Assad gone.  Even a goodly number of Alawites probably want Assad gone.  That's a Syrian problem.  But as your response shows, ongoing illegal action by the US is acceptable to a goodly number of people.

And of course to call Yemen and Syria U.S. wars is to ignore the role of Iran in both and Russia in Syria.

I've of course ignored neither.

BTW the number of civilian deaths in Syria is much higher than that chart shows

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war#:~:text=Estimates%20of%20the%20total%20number,had%20died%20in%20the%20war.

Note that the stats I chose are conservative.  High end estimates of Iraqi deaths are 1.2 million+ (from ORB) and even Esquire ran with the headline grabbing one million figure.  I have no reason to try to minimize the horrors unleashed by and the crimes committed by the US.  You do.  The Russians are no worse than the US; the Russians are no better than the US.

Oh, wait, Americans are good guys and Russians are bad guys.

'Murica.

[BasilValentine]

There is some truth to this.  Russian lies have not resulted in as many civilian deaths this century as British and American lies.

Well, yeah, this is obviously true. But not really fair to the Russians because they were hampered by economic chaos and political collapse and didn't really have a chance at winning that contest. And you haven't accounted for the follow-on effects of the U.S. destabilizing the regional balance of power with the Iraq nonsense, so the U.S. win is even more impressive than you've painted it. Given the subject of this thread, however, it's just what-aboutism. 

[Todd]

Well, yeah, this is obviously true. But not really fair to the Russians because they were hampered by economic chaos and political collapse and didn't really have a chance at winning that contest. And you haven't accounted for the follow-on effects of the U.S. destabilizing the regional balance of power with the Iraq nonsense, so the U.S. win is even more impressive than you've painted it. Given the subject of this thread, however, it's just what-aboutism.

I have not given an account of all deaths attributable to US foreign policy this century because that would take too long.

And of course is not what-aboutism at all.  The US established the conditions that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  It was part of a decades-long pattern of aggressive, interventionist US foreign policy.

[BasilValentine]

I have not given an account of all deaths attributable to US foreign policy this century because that would take too long.

And of course is not what-aboutism at all.  The US established the conditions that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  It was part of a decades-long pattern of aggressive, interventionist US foreign policy.

You're losing the thread of your argument. What U.S. and British lies are responsible for the Russian invasion? The conditions were the condition of one man's brain.

[Todd]

The conditions were the condition of one man's brain.

Incorrect.  Even Robert Gates, hardly a dove or soft on Russia, wrote that inviting Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO was going too far.  The US established the conditions that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  The US engages in provocative policies from time to time.  That proud tradition started no later than the Intervención estadounidense en México.

Quite separately, British and American lies were used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which not only resulted in the excess deaths of hundreds of thousands but destabilized the greater Middle East.  That, in turn, led to more violence and excess deaths in multiple countries.  These excess civilian deaths exceed those caused by any other country this century.  If one considers the entire post-war period, the record looks even worse.

We do not yet know the extent of British and American lies regarding the Russo-Ukrainian War.  I suspect information will start to trickle out this decade, with more information forthcoming next decade.  Whatever the case, that is separate, though if/when the lies are revealed, they will simply be more evidence of a pattern of behavior.  This is to be expected.  The US is a great power and acts like a great power.  The UK is a former great power that partners with the leading great power of the day to increase its influence.

[BasilValentine]

Incorrect.  Even Robert Gates, hardly a dove or soft on Russia, wrote that inviting Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO was going too far.  The US established the conditions that led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  The US engages in provocative policies from time to time.  That proud tradition started no later than the Intervención estadounidense en México.

Quite separately, British and American lies were used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003, which not only resulted in the excess deaths of hundreds of thousands but destabilized the greater Middle East.  That, in turn, led to more violence and excess deaths in multiple countries.  These excess civilian deaths exceed those caused by any other country this century.  If one considers the entire post-war period, the record looks even worse.

We do not yet know the extent of British and American lies regarding the Russo-Ukrainian War.  I suspect information will start to trickle out this decade, with more information forthcoming next decade.  Whatever the case, that is separate, though if/when the lies are revealed, they will simply be more evidence of a pattern of behavior.  This is to be expected.  The US is a great power and acts like a great power.  The UK is a former great power that partners with the leading great power of the day to increase its influence.

NATO membership isn't bestowed by U.S. invitation. NATO isn't a threat to Russia — but we've been through this and it's useless rehashing it since you can't tell the interests of autocrats/would-be autocrats from those of nation states at home or abroad. In fact you don't even recognize aspiring autocrats when it's perfectly clear they're about to stage a coup.   

[Todd]

NATO membership isn't bestowed by U.S. invitation. NATO isn't a threat to Russia — but we've been through this and it's useless rehashing it since you can't tell the interests of autocrats/would-be autocrats from those of nation states at home or abroad. In fact you don't recognize them even when it's perfectly clear they're about to stage a coup.

NATO is a manifestation of and method of expanding US power.  NATO membership is pushed by the US, though of course the public process relies on countries requesting membership and unanimous acceptance by existing members.  Existing members will bow to US pressure.  Their security relies on the US.

As Robert Taft clearly and accurately wrote long before NATO was established, "[a] military alliance is always an alliance against someone".  NATO is perceived by Russia as a direct threat.  That makes it a threat to Russia.  George Kennan warned of this in the 90s before the US undertook the foolish, aggressive, and needless expansion of NATO.  Robert Gates wrote about it in 2014.  Jeffrey Sachs has written and talked about it since.  So not just left wing (eg, Chomsky) and right wing (eg, the Pauls) sorts warn about the dangers, but established intellectuals and practical men have and do as well.  The current war represents the failure of NATO; there is large-scale war in Europe.

Your last sentence appears detached from reality. 

[Madiel]

There is some truth to this.  Russian lies have not resulted in as many civilian deaths this century as British and American lies.

What proof do we have that this account is still originating from Oregon rather than Moscow? It's getting hard to tell.

[Todd]

Bad news from Reuters: Russia announces wider evacuation of occupied southern Ukraine

Bad news from AP (apparently 40% of Ukrainian energy infrastructure is now destroyed): Ukrainians grapple with power outages as winter approaches

[Todd]

Two from AP:

Russian soldiers enter Kherson homes, dig in for urban war

Power blackouts across Ukraine amid Russian shelling


A negotiated settlement is unacceptable.

[BasilValentine]

Your last sentence appears detached from reality.

I was referring to Trump, your blindness to his impending coup attempt, and your diagnosis of TDS for those who could clearly see coming what you could not. That's reality.

[Todd]

I was referring to Trump, your blindness to his impending coup attempt, and your diagnosis of TDS for those who could clearly see coming what you could not. That's reality.

Definitely detached from reality.