Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (762803)	5/12/2022 9:16:25 PM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Recommended By Hoa Hao Maple MAGA Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793824

Fortunately for you, though I was going to not bother doing more reasoning for you as it's apparently a waste of time, I'm willing to correct yet another bung-thinking idea: .I ask AGAIN ......how does the Russians current stated goals and actions now square with the stated limited goals before the war?.......the answer is THEY DON'T.......get that thru your head Maurice. Before the war, aka special military operation, Russia had a negotiation position to try to resolve the conflict without gunfire. It was as stated. It should not surprise you that AFTER Russia gave up negotiations and went for military force, their aims were totally different. The goals became maximum victory over Ukraine, and see how far they could go. They had their military as ready as it could be to conduct a larger scale operation. Of course the limited pre-war stated goals were less than what they prepared for militarily, which would hopefully result in them getting their initial aims achieved. The fact that the pre-war negotiations didn't square at all with the invasion goals should not be the slightest surprising. They were two totallly different situations. From before the invasion, I warned that because Russia was such a pathetic military force, it looked like an April Glaspie/Saddam trap for Russia. You can click back upstream and read for yourself. It looks as though yet again, as usual, I was right. It's not quite a turkey shoot, but it's pretty bad advertising for World War II type tank operations, and aircraft attacks. The man-pad devices were good decades ago [as used against USSR in Afghanistan] but they were obviously going to be vastly better now with all mod cons added. So they have proved to be. Of course I'm not privy to Putin and advisors thinking, but I guess they thought they were doomed if they didn't and buggered if they did, so they decided the fire was as good as the frying pan. They have atomic bombs galore if things get too dire and from early on they rattled their nukes which of course is going into MAD territory so that will be a last gasp decision. If Russia thought they had the great miltary power that everyone seemed to think they had, they wouldn't have needed to do any rattling of nuclear weapons. USA never bothered to threaten atomic bombs in their many wars of choice [as they are called] and invasions of sovereign countries [apparently a bad thing unless done by USA/UK]. The Russians probably hoped the mere threat would get USA/NATO to be careful. Obviously that didn't work. Russians drove into the trap, and like Saddam, refused to back down. So now they face the fantastically vast military power of USA/NATO and supporters such as Oz, Aotearoa-Zimbabwe, Canada and whatnot, which is not being used other than supplying the people in Ukraine with the clever devices, satellite intelligence and whatnot. It might be that Putin and co simply grossly misjudged the effectiveness of their military and I guess that's the case, as they didn't seem likely to me to be as good as they apparently thought. Saddam also seemed to think his huge military would be a pretty powerful show, but his soldiers were just collecting their pay, and like Italian soldiers in WWI took every opportunity to surrender. Nobody wanted to fight and die for Saddam. The 8th army troops would joke about taking Italians prisoner by the acre. My father said that one Kiwi soldier could take hundreds captive and the prisoners would carry his gun for the captor soldier. So the current situation leaves Russia with consolidating around the possibly successful eastern parts and southern, and coping with the continued attrition attacks from the west, hopefully ending sooner rather than later in another Minsk agreement to stop the murdering. I guess Russian soldiers are a lot better than Iraqi and Italian soldiers, even if they aren't all keen on Putin. They are likely to love Mother Russia. But there are still the tactical and megaton nuclear weapons to come into action. I will be surprised if they are not used, at least up to initial escalation stages to cause a bit of a think. And maybe come to an agreement. I suppose initially on supply lines from NATO/USA rather than on an aircraft carrier fleet, 10 Downing Street or Devonport, New Zealand. I continue to note that neither you nor any of the other warmongers will discuss voting and democracy as the way to end things, nor to have stopped them starting. When people refuse to discuss things, it's because they have other agendas. They WANT the killing. Listen to the whoops of delight as people are blown up in tanks and when aircraft explode in the sky. England voted Brexit = no need for whooping and murder. Scotland voted to remain with England. No bombs and killing. Northern Ireland just voted for Sinn Fein. Bosnia and the others do voting among local yokels. It's civilized but you obviously prefer murdering people. Weird, but I know there are people who enjoy killing other people. Perhaps you could explain why you prefer chimp-type murder to voting and democracy, even if it's not the new-fangled Tradable Citizenship variety. Mqurice