Ukraine and Endless War for Profit

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Peter,

btw - I agree with what you posted from Roger.

 

Michael

[anthony]

5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

EDIT: You wrote, characterizing an argument, "Ukraine somehow initiated the force used against themselves."

That's not accurate. Nazi Ukrainians--during peacetime--bombed the shit out Russian Ukrainians in the Donbas region and elsewhere after the 2014 coup.

The CIA favors the Nazi Ukrainians.

Michael, this is correct. And since the newly enlarged (with NATO arming and training) UAF Army was poised for a fresh attack on the region, early 2022, Putin was faced with a hard choice. Now or never. Wait longer and the Donbas would be overrun, the resident inhabitants (property and business owners and others who'd lived there for generations) would have had to flee for their lives into Russia as some millions had already done.

The territory would be 'ethnically cleansed' of Russian Ukrainians, and you can bet the predatory corporates were ready to move in on valuable land, mining concessions, etc.,when emptied - de-Russification, terrorising and expelling the locals as well as killing some was the point of sustaining that civil war.

Publicly and to their discredit, a blind eye was turned on this ongoing injustice by western politicians.

Much is made of NATO "expansion!" as Putin's main rationale. True, but people also forget - and are seldom directed to by MSM - the plight of the Donbas citizens. Ukraine's admission to NATO was still years away, not an immediate threat. The Donbas situation was urgent and impending, what I think "pulled the trigger" for rapid invasion before they were invaded. Those separatists appealed for help, and after refusing to earlier, Putin eventually obliged. Legally by UN Charter (and "R2P"- UN's 'responsibility to protect' to prevent genocides).

In his words and by his non-actions for 8 years, it seems most plasuible that Putin was counting upon Minsk to be implemented. The ex-Ambassador Jack Matlock is on record for his conviction that Putin wouldn't have invaded if MInsk (autonomy within Ukraine, etc.) had been implemented, bears it out. Did Russia need the headache of gaining territory and people at huge, somewhat predictable, risks and expense?

"Unprovoked and unjustified invasion", the unquestioned, genius product of psy-ops propagandists, and false.

Anybody mention "Initiation of force"?:

IOF: the overthrow of a democratic govt. and Maidan, aided-funded by the CIA's "National Endowment for Democracy" (- Ha!)

IOF: The repression and rights abuses of, and a lengthy and illicit war against, their own people by the non-democratic Kyiv regime

IOF: (Fraud) - The sabotage of the Minsk protocols agreed to by all participants (we know now, a farce, only a ploy "to buy time" for the Ukr Army buildup, as Merkel and the other two admitted lately. The militias at that point were whipping the Ukraine forces and had to stopped by a ceasefire trickery. Putin was duped).

IOF: The concentration of Kyiv troops and increased shelling in preparation for the final assault at the Donbas borders in early 2022.

As consequence, "pre-emptive/defensive force" - by Putin's SMO.

Of course Putin (or any Russians) can never be seen - in part explanation for the conflict - to have been acting humanely for a population's protection. Western indoctrination eliminated that. "Evil!" doesn't correspond with humaneness.

 

 

[Peter]

EU countries agree on a new package of Russia sanctions over the war in Ukraine Yesterday 10:27 AM European Union countries Wednesday agreed on a new package of sanctions on Russia for its war against Ukraine.

Sweden, which currently holds the rotating EU presidency, said that the package includes individuals to be penalized and measures aimed at countering sanctions-circumvention.

Details of the measures will be unveiled later this week when the sanctions are officially adopted by written procedure. The EU has previously imposed 10 rounds of sanctions on Russia since President Vladimir Putin ordered his forces into Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. Banks, companies and markets have been hit, as well as parts of the sensitive energy sector. More than 1,000 officials are subject to asset freezes and travel bans. Much work has involved closing loopholes so that goods vital to Putin’s war effort don't get through.

 

From Huff Post England. Vladimir Finally Admits What We've Always Known About His Ukraine Invasion Story by Kate Nicholson • Yesterday 8:25 AM . . . . It was widely thought that Putin was trying to avoid mobilising the general public for battle by describing his invasion of Ukraine as a “special military operation” – – so the brutality of the battlefield would remain far away from the lives of the regular Russians.

A “special military operation” also suggested that it would be an easily won offensive, needing just specialised soldiers. He also claimed Russia was acting defensively against the expansion of NATO and made the baseless allegation that Kyiv needed liberating from the “Nazis” running the government . . . .

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here is a very good question:

Jack Poso on GETTR : Notice no leaders ever talk about opening borders for Ukrainian refugees to the US like they do for all the others. No massive media campaigns for it either. Why is that?

GETTR.COM

---

Notice no leaders ever talk about opening borders for Ukrainian refugees to the US like they do for all the others. No massive media campaigns for it either. Why is that?

I have a speculation as to why no leaders are trying to get Ukrainian refugees to the US.

Money launderers don't want refugees from the money laundering operation.

The press will interview them to talk bad about Russia. But they will tell their story, which will be different than the story in the mainstream press right now. And they will not be able to be ignored because of "muh victim" (the favorite plotline in the mainstream press).

And that will turn into a holy mess.

Another way of saying it is that the money launderers don't want to get busted.

 

Michael

[Peter]

RFK Jr says Russia acted 'in good faith' in Ukraine and blames US for war Story by Sky Palma • 24m ago. During an interview on SiriusXM’s The Briefing with Steve Scully, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that he thinks Russia acted in "good faith" with its invasion of Ukraine – and blamed the U.S. for the war. Kennedy, who is running as a Democrat for president, said that the solution to the conflict is "baby steps" towards negotiation. When the show's host, Steve Scully, pointed out that Russian President Vladimir Putin has rejected calls for negotiation unless Russia can keep the territory it has claimed, Kennedy claimed that "Putin has repeatedly said yes."

“In fact, he negotiated — two times he agreed to agreements. He agreed to the Minsk Accord, and then he agreed in 2022 to an agreement that would’ve left Ukraine completely intact," Kennedy said. “It was us who forced Zelensky to sabotage that agreement. It was already signed,” he continued. “So, you know, the Russians were acting in good faith. ... So, no, I think we’re the ones who have not been acting in good faith.”

As HuffPost pointed out, the U.S. has repeatedly called on Putin to end the war since the invasion began in February of 2022 and Kennedy has a history of pushing pro-Russia talking points. In a speech on Tuesday. Kennedy said the U.S. was responsible for contributing to the situation "through repeated deliberate provocations of Russia going back to the 1990s.” end quote

And now it is I, Czar Peter. Wow. Pro left winger and Russian enthusiast RFK Jr., echoes some of the sentiments expressed here on OL! “. . . . he thinks Russia acted in "good faith" with its invasion of Ukraine . . . but all I can think of is that a rational person needs to rethink their position on NIOF, or non initiation of force principle. Stop finding excuses for the initiation of force.

And now a scene from the soap opera, The Bold and the Bestial, where a younger Vlad before his stint in the KGB, screams: "Igor made me hit him and Salivata deserved to be pushed off the jungle gym so you can’t make me go to an insane asylum. And now, it is Ukraine’s fault I am killing, murdering and destroying their country. They made me do it!"

[Peter]

I don’t remember The Beatles song “Back in the U.S.S.R., mentioning Ukraine but it does. I can’t seem to get cut and paste to work without those shadows around some letters. Peter

Flew in from Miami Beach, B.O.A.C
Didn't get to bed last night
On the way, the paper bag was on my knee
Man, I had a dreadful flight

[Chorus]
I'm back in the U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are, boy
Back in the U.S.S.R.

[Verse 2]
Been away so long, I hardly knew the place
Gee, it's good to be back home
Leave it 'till tomorrow to unpack my case
Honey, disconnect the phone

[Chorus]
I'm back in the U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are, boy
Back in the U.S.
Back in the U.S.
Back in the U.S.S.R.

[Bridge]
(Well) The Ukraine girls really knock me out (Ooh, ooh-ooh-ooh)
They leave the West behind
And Moscow girls make me sing and shout (Ooh, ooh-ooh-ooh)
That Georgia's always on my mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mind
Oh, come on!

[Guitar Solo]
Hoo, hey
Hoo, hey, hoo-hoo, yeah
Yeah-yeah

Chorus]
Yeah, I'm back in the U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are, boys
Back in the U.S.S.R.

[Bridge]
(Well) The Ukraine girls really knock me out (Ooh, ooh-ooh-ooh)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Meanwhile, China is stockpiling missiles in Cuba. Bahamas...

And installing hacking devices for all those juicy US underwater cables in that region.

What could possible go wrong?

Shall we wait for the initiation of force before doing anything?

Here's an idea. Let's launder another $100 billion in Ukraine.

That'll show those sleeping on the NIOF job.

 

Michael

[tmj]

The aspects of the trader principle that are inherent in the Constitution are not the 'things' that lead to the initiation of force that Russia feels they were/are responding to , they are responding to  an existential threat they identified in the actions of NATO/US policy toward the function of the Ukrainian state.

I'm not a leftist antiAmerican when I say fuck Russia and fuck the Ukraine( and I don't mean the innocent people who live in these areas, I mean the governmental structures/ institutions that control the military activity therein).

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

7 hours ago, tmj said:

... they are responding to  an existential threat they identified in the actions of NATO/US policy toward the function of the Ukrainian state...

T,

I like the term "existential threat.

Kinda like China stockpiling missiles in Cuba, right?

I mean, if the US bombs those missile sites before too long, I wonder how those worried about initiation of force would peg that...

 

Michael

[tmj]

What do we do with ‘Gitmo’ btw , wtf? 

[anthony]

10 hours ago, Peter said:

he thinks Russia acted in "good faith" with its invasion of Ukraine . . . but all I can think of is that a rational person needs to rethink their position on NIOF, or non initiation of force principle. Stop finding excuses for the initiation of force.

 

The one-sided view of IOF.  It doesn't wash, simply finding excuses for the status quo.

I've made a fair explanation backed by the facts for Russia's intervention, one in part, to immediately rescue lives from force initiated by Kyiv, fallen on deaf ears.

The broader and long term cause is against NATO pressing to Russia's borders, and all this implies - fixed military bases and icbms a couple of kms over the border aimed your way. The implicit hostility of which should be self-evident. No self-respecting people would tolerate it. Most countries would not be powerful enough to prevent it. "Rule-based international order" is useless to stop such grievances. But who makes the rules?

(Visibly, Putin is most aware of "implications" - pragmatic like most leaders, but irrational he isn't).

NATO is culpable for 'creeping' or incremental initiation of inherent force. That's the potential threat nearby nuclear weapons bring. Even unused, they are a permanent psychological constraint to the freedom of action by citizens of a country. (A hold-up man never needs to 'use' - to fire - his gun at anyone he robs; pointing it at the victim is enough to get anything he wants).

Striking first, a pre-emptive (and defensive) force is wholly objectively moral : One is not required to wait for and receive the blow that you can see is coming. 

Of course with many who believe that other (lesser) countries should never have a "sphere of influence" which extends even to their immediate vicinity, while the USA/NATO can and should extend its "sphere" faraway across the world, one is going to meet an impasse.

Then we can go into what nations/collectives/individuals are - intrinsically- superior, as contrasted to objectively better.

[Peter]

4 minutes ago, anthony said:

NATO is culpable for 'creeping' - incremental - initiation of inherent force.

Say it slowly. North Atlantic TREATY . . . . Does the world need to fear Russia or NATO? Who has NATO attacked using the initiation of force? The Soviet Union and Russia are one and the same . . . only with fewer puppet states for the U.S.S.R. now called Russia. Would you rather live in Russia or the United States, Anthony? Obviously, you prefer to salvage Russia. You know where this is going with Russia now threatening the world with bigger missiles with more megatons? Who does the world majority fear and loath? NATO OR RUSSIA?       

[anthony]

I fear NATO.

[anthony]

I tried to dig into where Russia has - in that post Cold War period - explicitly threatened European and western countries - and come up short. With all their predictable growth pangs away from hateful Communism, their ideology has been mostly eliminated.

Largely my impression is Putin has acted in good faith, and been receptive of and conciliatory to the West, and been rebuffed.

My question: prior to 2022 what was the threat that Russia posed to others?

[Peter]

Anthony wrote, “My question: prior to 2022 what was the threat that Russia posed to others?”

Soooooo? We are to suppress all our intellect until 2022 And the world should do the same? Why were Sweden, Finland, etc. etc. trying to become NATO members unless they feared Vlad The Impaler and Russia? Yawn. You should come to Massachusetts in the U.S. Or better yet go to Russia. 
 

From the Newz. Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. suggested Wednesday that Russia has been “acting in good faith” in various efforts to end the war in Ukraine and placed blame on the U.S. for the 16-monthlong conflict.

Kennedy said in an interview on SiriusXM’s “The Briefing with Steve Scully” that Russian President Vladimir Putin has “repeatedly said yes” to negotiations.

“In fact, he negotiated, two times he agreed to agreements,” Kennedy said. “He agreed to the Minsk Accord, and then he agreed in 2022 to an agreement that would’ve left Ukraine completely intact.”

[tmj]

NATO bombed Yugoslavia without UN sanction, establishing ‘their’ autonomy to act without international consent , no ?

[Marc]

17 hours ago, tmj said:

What do we do with ‘Gitmo’ btw , wtf? 

I thought Obama closed Gitmo the first day of his Preaidency, no?

I recall him stating same during his campaign.

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

James O'Keefe busted a Blackrock dude who said the Ukraine war is great for business.

 

 

Here's an article that gives a few nice quotes.

BlackRock Recruiter Claims Senators Can Be 'Bought' For $10k, War 'Good For Business': O'Keefe

BlackRock Recruiter Claims Senators Can Be 'Bought' For $10k, War 'Good For Business': O'Keefe

WWW.ZEROHEDGE.COM

---

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

From the article:

Quote

Blackrock is also apparently loving the war in Ukraine, which Varley described as "real fuckin' good for business."

"Ukraine is good for business, you know that right? Russia blows up Ukraine’s grain silos and the price of wheat is going to go mad up. The Ukrainian economy is the wheat market. The price of bread goes up, this is fantastic if you’re trading.  Volatility creates opportunity for profit…"

According to Varley, it's "exciting when shit goes wrong." 

"So what are you gonna do if you’re a trading firm? The moment that news hits, within a millisecond, you’re going to pump trades into whoever the wheat suppliers are. Into their stocks. Within an hour or two that stick goes f*cking up and then you sell and you just make, I don’t know, however many mil," he continued. "The Ukrainian economy is tied very largely to the wheat market, global wheat market, prices of bread, you know, literally everything goes up and down. This is fantastic if you’re trading.

"Volatility creates opportunity to make profit. War is real fucking good for business."

 

In other words, Blackrock WANTS Russia to blow up the grain silos in Ukraine.

Outside of normal embezzlements, this makes them money because war causes the price pump in a pump and dump situation. And if you are smart enough to see it, and maybe encourage that it keeps happening in the backrooms, you can make a killing.

(While killing Ukrainians and Russians, but who cares about them, right?)

 

btw - Varley also said US Senators only cost $10k a piece. According to him, they are real fucking cheap.

 

Michael

[Peter]

Russia’s invasion and its media defenders sure sound a lot like they’re speaking from the mouth of Vlad “the Impaler” Putin. Nobody in the world likes either side so Ukraine should be murdered because some Russian speaking citizens of Ukraine were minimized or harmed? This is not an invasion but a rescue mission? The collateral and territorial losses suffered by Ukraine are its own fault? And one side is not the aggressor? Russia and Ukraine are simply defending themselves from each other? Russia’s defense of itself is on Ukrainian territory but that is not an invasion, etc.? Putin wouldn’t / shouldn’t leave until he wins, and now he is threatening to use new missiles with nuclear warheads?

If it were your country suffering this invasion you would see it differently, but “this Putin slant” seems to be permanent?    

[Peter]

6 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

btw - Varley also said US Senators only cost $10k a piece. According to him, they are real fucking cheap.

I wonder if there is already an "investigation?" Since it is about world wide bribing the CIA should be involved.  

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Peter,

You might take a look at investing in wheat...

In and out trades, though...

 

Michael

[Peter]

Wheat? Is that a euphemism for bread which is a euphemism for money? I have no doubt that Russia has hung on this long, and had its own soldiers killed, for money and territory. I can’t tell if Putin will somehow ‘save face” in this monstrous situation or which Oligarch’s will give Putin his share of the loot, and if any of the world’s other citizens are profiting from invasion and murder they should be locked up. I also wonder what will be implemented if and when Trump is reelected President.

Tmj wrote, “NATO bombed Yugoslavia without UN sanction, establishing ‘their’ autonomy to act without international consent , no ?”

Maybe not NATO’S finest hour tmj, but Wikipedia says it was done to help an ethnic minority that was being exterminated.

And now from the latest news. Russian mercenary boss says Moscow's war in Ukraine based on lies Story by By Andrew Osborn LONDON (Reuters) - Russian mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin said on Friday that the official Kremlin-backed version of why Moscow invaded Ukraine was based on lies concocted by his perennial adversary - the army's top brass.

Prigozhin has for months been accusing Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and Russia's top general, Valery Gerasimov, of rank incompetence, but on Friday he for the first time rejected Russia's core justifications for invading Ukraine on Feb. 24 last year in what it calls a "special military operation".

"... the Defense Ministry is trying to deceive society and the president and tell us a story about how there was crazy aggression from Ukraine and that they were planning to attack us with the whole of NATO," Prigozhin said in a video clip released on Telegram by his press service, calling the official version "a beautiful story".

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

Wheat? Is that a euphemism for bread which is a euphemism for money?

Peter,

No.

It's a reference to the post I made on how and why Blackrock makes money from the Ukraine war.

Since your post indicates you did not read the passage from the article, let me summarize it and clarify a point or two. Please read it this time. You might want to invest in wheat after you do.  

Here's how the scheme works.

1. The Russians bomb Ukrainian grain silos, most of which contain wheat.

2. The price of wheat goes way up throughout the world since Ukraine is a major wheat supplier. This includes a huge spike in the the price of bread.

3. The moment the Ukrainian grain silos get hit, if you are a savvy investor like Blackrock (as told by their employee Serge Varlay in the O'Keefe sting), you immediately buy a lot of stock in non-Ukrainian wheat suppliers the world over while the price of their stock is still normal. 

4. Within an hour or two, news of the destroyed Ukrainian grain silos gets out and the stocks of these non-Ukrainian wheat suppliers go straight up into the stratosphere.

5. Then, right after that happens, you sell. You sell before governments or others can step in and normalize the wheat market.

Boom.

Money in. Money out.

Within a couple of hours, you have made a few million if you invested a good solid sum.

And that's just one gobs-of-moolah Ukraine war situation out of many.

 

As Serge Varlay from Blackrock said about the Ukraine war in the video: "We don't want the conflict to end."

Those are his words. Go to about 6:30 in the video and hear him say them for yourself. They do not want the conflict to end.

 

If the message is not clear, try this version.

They do not want the US or NATO to win the war against Russia.

They do not want to win.

They do not want to beat Putin.

They want the war to continue and never end.

 

And there's this. Blackrock owns enough Senators and other American politicians to make sure their gravy train keeps on chugging no matter what facts emerge.

Or so their employee says...

 

Michael

[tmj]

Even in today’s world, which could be different in a few months or so, it would be slightly beyond the pale still for Blackrock to actually bomb the silos to disrupt grain production. It’s just a happy coincidence that America’s role and practice of protecting their democracies worldwide means Russia will continue grinding up Ukraine and its people, for as long as it takes.

[anthony]

8 hours ago, Peter said:

 Putin wouldn’t / shouldn’t leave until he wins, and now he is threatening to use new missiles with nuclear warheads?

  

When questioned, Putin has reiterated often that Russia's policy is "no first use". BUT, specified the 4 conditions for use. Naturally the media jumped on that, out of context.

Headlines:

"Putin threatens nuclear weapons!!!

How the MSM consumers are hoodwinked. Unfailingly, writers told us that obviously Putin has no "red lines". He didn't respond to hostile provocation, here or there. Then we can push him over the limit with no reactions. Such people don't get others' self-restraint: Russia has been constantly ultra-cautious to not be the cause of escalated war. 

Whatever the propagandists and/or military 'experts' assured everybody, the 'winning' by Russian forces was an eventual foregone conclusion. (Even Obama remarked in 2016 that Russia "...has escalation dominance" - i.e. fighting in their front yard, no one will beat them).

So what would rational people have done with the reality of certain defeat? Or, second best - even a long drawn-out war without certain victory? Clear -  diplomatically end the conflict, soonest. One has to have zero value in human lives to welcome a losing (or Pyrrhic) war by one's supposed ally.

Are human sacrifices the enlightened "Western values" the (undemocratic, corrupt and semi-Nazified) Ukraine regime are "defending"?

(So long as Russians are dying also, we don't mind you being killed...)

Only the insane wanted this war to go on. But being crazed, they have avoided and blocked Zelensky from partaking in two peace initiatives agreed to by Russia early in 2022, and still want it to go on today. To gain a "better bargaining position"! (Blinken, I think)

Russia is winning by conventional warfare means. They have no need for nukes.

The loser is always the one desperate to escalate. Everybody knows that repeatedly doubling-down until broke is the loser's strategy, known as the Gambler's Fallacy.

Their last throw of the dice, the promoted Ukr counter-offensive is failing.

Western publicity has been 'prepping' the west for human 'survivability' in "a limited" nuclear war. It's been raised in high level discussions, you can bet on it.

If a tactical nuke is used, perhaps as a false flag, blamed like all previous incidents upon Russia, odds are overwhelming it will be by NATO.

Right this moment is the critical time for saner heads to prevail.