• Does NATO cross the line? Or is it contributing to peace?

    From ltlee1@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jan 28 08:48:16 2023
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its allies into
    direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.
    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr Zelenskyy's
    troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From stoney@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jan 29 01:20:14 2023
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its allies
    into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.
    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr Zelenskyy's
    troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ltlee1@21:1/5 to stoney on Mon Jan 30 17:49:31 2023
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:20:16 AM UTC, stoney wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its allies
    into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.
    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr Zelenskyy'
    s troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.

    Pankaj Mishra's article published in WashingtonPost was given the title of "The West Is Getting in Too Deep in Ukraine".

    Pankaj Mishra does express negative views on Putin and the operation common in most Western
    presses. NATO getting in too deep in UKraine is an excellent description of the situation.

    Currently, there is no sign that significant number of Russians are disillusioned with the endeavor
    and Putin's government is not eager to negotiate. Russia has historical reason to start the conflict,
    good or bad depends on ones perspective.

    In contrast, it is not clear that "most people in Western nations support a deepening of their
    confrontation with Russia. In fact, their opinion is hardly being sought. ... Western governments benefit today from a broad and largely unchallenged consensus among
    think tanks and mainstream periodicals: Russia’s defeat, if not outright capitulation..."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ltlee1@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 1 09:26:58 2023
    On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 1:49:33 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:20:16 AM UTC, stoney wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its
    allies into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.

    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr
    Zelenskyy's troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.
    Pankaj Mishra's article published in WashingtonPost was given the title of "The West Is Getting in Too Deep in Ukraine".

    Pankaj Mishra does express negative views on Putin and the operation common in most Western
    presses. NATO getting in too deep in UKraine is an excellent description of the situation.

    Currently, there is no sign that significant number of Russians are disillusioned with the endeavor
    and Putin's government is not eager to negotiate. Russia has historical reason to start the conflict,
    good or bad depends on ones perspective.

    In contrast, it is not clear that "most people in Western nations support a deepening of their
    confrontation with Russia. In fact, their opinion is hardly being sought. ...
    Western governments benefit today from a broad and largely unchallenged consensus among
    think tanks and mainstream periodicals: Russia’s defeat, if not outright capitulation..."

    Rand has a thorough and methodical report on the conflict. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

    Currently, the Russia-Ukraine is at a stalemate and neither side is willing to negotiate.
    Allowing the war to drag on would increase the risk of nuclear confrontation and direct
    Russia-NATO conflict. Not beneficial to the US and/or NATO allies.

    My take:
    To persuade Ukraine to the negotiation table and accepting territorial loss, Ukraine is
    encouraged/allowed to counterattack with MAXIMAL NATO support until it loses its
    forward momentum.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From A. Filip@21:1/5 to stoney on Wed Feb 1 19:20:18 2023
    stoney <papajoe168@yahoo.com> wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a
    stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The
    President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade
    military equipment, lest it drags America and its allies into direct
    conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a
    speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment,
    and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots
    and American crews - just understand.
    Related articles
    […]

    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and
    may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and
    dust, that Medvedev said.

    Vladimir Vladimirowich Putin left only bad and worse choices.
    Peace at any price may be as costly as World War 2 [P4OT-2]
    Putin gets something "cheaply" Putin wants more, not quite unlike
    Chancellor of 3rd German Reich Adolf Hitler.

    IMHO The most likely outcome of current West/USA Ukrainian policy is
    costly+ limited victory of Russia (incorporation of Eastern Ukraine).
    It may be a close thing to Pyrrhic Victory [PV]. IMHO Something more is possible bur less likely. Something _much_ less is also possible but
    even less likely.

    Any idiot chief can _start_ a war.

    [P4OT-2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
    "Peace for our time" was a declaration made by British Prime Minister
    Neville Chamberlain in his 30 September 1938 remarks in London
    concerning the Munich Agreement and the subsequent Anglo-German Declaration.[1].

    [PV] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory


    --
    A. Filip : Big (Tech) Brother is watching you.
    | When the blind lead the blind they will both fall over the cliff.
    | (Chinese proverb)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ltlee1@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 2 05:09:36 2023
    On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 5:27:00 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 1:49:33 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:20:16 AM UTC, stoney wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its
    allies into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.

    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr
    Zelenskyy's troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.
    Pankaj Mishra's article published in WashingtonPost was given the title of "The West Is Getting in Too Deep in Ukraine".

    Pankaj Mishra does express negative views on Putin and the operation common in most Western
    presses. NATO getting in too deep in UKraine is an excellent description of the situation.

    Currently, there is no sign that significant number of Russians are disillusioned with the endeavor
    and Putin's government is not eager to negotiate. Russia has historical reason to start the conflict,
    good or bad depends on ones perspective.

    In contrast, it is not clear that "most people in Western nations support a deepening of their
    confrontation with Russia. In fact, their opinion is hardly being sought. ...
    Western governments benefit today from a broad and largely unchallenged consensus among
    think tanks and mainstream periodicals: Russia’s defeat, if not outright capitulation..."
    Rand has a thorough and methodical report on the conflict. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

    Currently, the Russia-Ukraine is at a stalemate and neither side is willing to negotiate.
    Allowing the war to drag on would increase the risk of nuclear confrontation and direct
    Russia-NATO conflict. Not beneficial to the US and/or NATO allies.

    My take:
    To persuade Ukraine to the negotiation table and accepting territorial loss, Ukraine is
    encouraged/allowed to counterattack with MAXIMAL NATO support until it loses its
    forward momentum.

    Time is not of essence. Russia will fight until it could secure the nation for whose who want to remain part of Russia.

    ""All of us want this to be over, but what matters here is not the timing, but the essence and the quality of the outcome
    that we could secure for our nation, for those people who want to remain part of Russian culture and who have for years
    been deprived of all things Russian by the Kiev junta with Western connivance," he maintained.

    According to Lavrov, diplomats today should clarify things from a geopolitical point of view.

    "<…> The more efficient we are in explaining what’s going on in terms of geopolitical games, the faster the world will realize,
    perhaps, that we should be done with it. And we should be done with it as soon as we see that the US-led West drops its
    stubborn insistence to keep [this conflict] simmering until they decide that any threat to their hegemony has been removed,"
    the Russian foreign minister emphasized.

    "Currently, we are working toward a pledge our Western counterparts have made - winning on the battlefield. This is their
    formula, and they were the ones who refused to negotiate, since they forced the Kiev regime to abandon negotiations in late
    March, precisely when it was still possible to find a political solution to this," Russia’s top diplomat concluded."

    https://tass.com/politics/1570421

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ltlee1@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 3 10:09:22 2023
    On Thursday, February 2, 2023 at 1:09:38 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 5:27:00 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 1:49:33 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:20:16 AM UTC, stoney wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its
    allies into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.

    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr
    Zelenskyy's troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets.
    Then everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.
    Pankaj Mishra's article published in WashingtonPost was given the title of
    "The West Is Getting in Too Deep in Ukraine".

    Pankaj Mishra does express negative views on Putin and the operation common in most Western
    presses. NATO getting in too deep in UKraine is an excellent description of the situation.

    Currently, there is no sign that significant number of Russians are disillusioned with the endeavor
    and Putin's government is not eager to negotiate. Russia has historical reason to start the conflict,
    good or bad depends on ones perspective.

    In contrast, it is not clear that "most people in Western nations support a deepening of their
    confrontation with Russia. In fact, their opinion is hardly being sought. ...
    Western governments benefit today from a broad and largely unchallenged consensus among
    think tanks and mainstream periodicals: Russia’s defeat, if not outright capitulation..."
    Rand has a thorough and methodical report on the conflict. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

    Currently, the Russia-Ukraine is at a stalemate and neither side is willing to negotiate.
    Allowing the war to drag on would increase the risk of nuclear confrontation and direct
    Russia-NATO conflict. Not beneficial to the US and/or NATO allies.

    My take:
    To persuade Ukraine to the negotiation table and accepting territorial loss, Ukraine is
    encouraged/allowed to counterattack with MAXIMAL NATO support until it loses its
    forward momentum.
    Time is not of essence. Russia will fight until it could secure the nation for whose who want to remain part of Russia.

    ""All of us want this to be over, but what matters here is not the timing, but the essence and the quality of the outcome
    that we could secure for our nation, for those people who want to remain part of Russian culture and who have for years
    been deprived of all things Russian by the Kiev junta with Western connivance," he maintained.

    According to Lavrov, diplomats today should clarify things from a geopolitical point of view.

    "<…> The more efficient we are in explaining what’s going on in terms of geopolitical games, the faster the world will realize,
    perhaps, that we should be done with it. And we should be done with it as soon as we see that the US-led West drops its
    stubborn insistence to keep [this conflict] simmering until they decide that any threat to their hegemony has been removed,"
    the Russian foreign minister emphasized.

    "Currently, we are working toward a pledge our Western counterparts have made - winning on the battlefield. This is their
    formula, and they were the ones who refused to negotiate, since they forced the Kiev regime to abandon negotiations in late
    March, precisely when it was still possible to find a political solution to this," Russia’s top diplomat concluded."

    https://tass.com/politics/1570421

    Another piece of news indicating things are not going well in Ukraine as reported by the
    Atlanticist media:

    "... a report in the international media claiming that US President Joe Biden offered 20%
    of the war-ravaged nation to Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war has created
    a political storm. A report published in Swiss-German newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung
    (NZZ) and Washington Post claimed that CIA Director, William Burns, offered Russian
    President Vladimir Putin a fifth of Ukraine's territory in order to end the ongoing war as
    part of a peace plan drawn up on behalf of President Joe Biden."

    https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/did-us-president-joe-biden-offer-20-of-ukraine-to-vladimir-putin-to-end-war-heres-the-truth/ar-AA174fYt

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ltlee1@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 27 08:11:25 2023
    On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 5:27:00 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Tuesday, January 31, 2023 at 1:49:33 AM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 9:20:16 AM UTC, stoney wrote:
    On Sunday, January 29, 2023 at 12:48:19 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
    News articles:
    1. 'That's called WW3': Biden crosses own red line by giving 'offensive equipment' to Ukraine
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/us/1726468/Joe-biden-Ukraine-ww3-warning-tanks-us-germany-latest-dxus

    "Joe Biden's decision to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine is a stunning U-turn on the President's previous pronouncements. The President has been reluctant to send in tanks and other high-grade military equipment, lest it drags America and its
    allies into direct conflict with Russia. Back in March last year, Biden said in a speech: “The idea that we're going to send in offensive equipment, and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews - just understand.

    Related articles

    "Don't kid yourself. No matter what you all say, that's called World War III. Okay? Let's get it straight here guys."

    Commenting on the decision to send in tanks, the President said the armoured capability has been "critical for Ukraine" and the US "will train Ukrainian troops as soon as possible" - adding that Germany had "really stepped up support" of Mr
    Zelenskyy's troops.
    ...
    Planes and trains are still off the table but the decision to send in Abrams will be viewed by Moscow as a significant escalation in the conflict.

    Last week, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy head of Russia’s Security Council and key ally of President Vladimir Putin, warned that defeat for Russia in Ukraine could lead to nuclear conflict.

    The timing of the warning seems calibrated to deter allies from sending more military equipment to Ukraine ahead of a fresh offensive.

    The former Russian president made the threat in a Telegram post ahead of a key meeting of NATO allies and other nations in Germany, where they are expected to make additional pledges of military support to Kyiv.

    “The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war,” Medvedev wrote.

    “Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends."

    2. WWIII would come if Russian tanks get to Kyiv says Crosetto https://www.ansa.it/english/news/2023/01/27/wwiii-would-come-if-russian-tanks-get-to-kyiv-says-crosetto_521abcb4-2d75-4b87-a28b-273be784d61a.html

    "World War III would start the moment Russian tanks arrived in Kiev and on the borders of Europe. Making sure they do not arrive is the only way to stop World War III," said Crosetto during an event in Rome."

    3. "If WWIII breaks out, it won’t start on tanks or fighter jets, warns Medvedev"
    https://tass.com/politics/1568437

    "MOSCOW, January 28. /TASS/. Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has lambasted Western attempts to justify arms deliveries to Kiev as an alleged effort to prevent a world war.

    "Firstly, defending Ukraine, which nobody needs in Europe, will not save the senile Old World from retribution if anything occurs. Secondly, once the Third World War breaks out, unfortunately it will not be on tanks or even on fighter jets. Then
    everything will definitely be turned to dust," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel on Saturday."


    Americans will hate their president and cronies for sending tanks and may even boots when the risk on them is evidence to them is ash and dust, that Medvedev said.
    Pankaj Mishra's article published in WashingtonPost was given the title of "The West Is Getting in Too Deep in Ukraine".

    Pankaj Mishra does express negative views on Putin and the operation common in most Western
    presses. NATO getting in too deep in UKraine is an excellent description of the situation.

    Currently, there is no sign that significant number of Russians are disillusioned with the endeavor
    and Putin's government is not eager to negotiate. Russia has historical reason to start the conflict,
    good or bad depends on ones perspective.

    In contrast, it is not clear that "most people in Western nations support a deepening of their
    confrontation with Russia. In fact, their opinion is hardly being sought. ...
    Western governments benefit today from a broad and largely unchallenged consensus among
    think tanks and mainstream periodicals: Russia’s defeat, if not outright capitulation..."
    Rand has a thorough and methodical report on the conflict. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html

    Currently, the Russia-Ukraine is at a stalemate and neither side is willing to negotiate.
    Allowing the war to drag on would increase the risk of nuclear confrontation and direct
    Russia-NATO conflict. Not beneficial to the US and/or NATO allies.

    My take:
    To persuade Ukraine to the negotiation table and accepting territorial loss, Ukraine is
    encouraged/allowed to counterattack with MAXIMAL NATO support until it loses its
    forward momentum.

    "The West wants to force Zelensky to peace talks with Moscow"
    See more at https://english.pravda.ru/news/world/155904-zelensky_peace/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)