Wars & Rumours of Wars

J Randall Murphy

Trying To Stay Awake
"Russia plotting major European offensive" is just a pile of fear mongering balloney.
Equally baloney is saying that Ukraine wanted to join NATO so that it could invade Russia — and therefore Russia had to invade them first. Why so many people believe that totally ludicrous logic is pure gullibility. Russia is the clear aggressor here, and it's already at war with another nation. If it doesn't want war, all it has to do is pack it's bags and go home.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
Perhaps Clooney and his wife should mind their own business...Israel is defending itself as any sovereign country would when attacked...The ICC is a clown court...

...

George Clooney called White House to complain about Biden’s criticism of ICC and defend wife’s work

Actor George Clooney reportedly called one of President’s Biden’s top aides last month to complain about the president’s critique of the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeking an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a case his wife, lawyer Amal Clooney, worked on.

As first reported by The Washington Post, the Academy Award-winning actor called Steve Ricchetti, counselor to the president, to push back on Biden’s dismissal of arrest warrants sought by the ICC targeting Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

Clooney was particularly irked the Biden administration was initially open to slapping the ICC with sanctions, given his wife could be potentially subjected to penalties, according to the report.

The report comes more than a week before Clooney, a major supporter of Biden, is scheduled to appear at a fundraiser for Biden’s re-election campaign June 15 in Los Angeles.


(More on the link)

.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
It's an election year - we're always in an election cycle. Much of the nonsense generated is intended for domestic consumption. Arms manufacturing means jobs and that means congressional representation which means special interest.

We literally need an aggressor - a China or Russia. It's good for the business our GDP is addicted to and I think that is behind a lot of the paranoia.

The world's a nasty place full of people who absolutely will take advantage of you and try to do so regularly but you'd think at some point we'd have enough weaponry on hand to deal with about anything yet we never seem to.
 

J Randall Murphy

Trying To Stay Awake
Who made this claim, and who believes it?
It's been expressed over and over again in various ways by so many pro-Russian pundits that it's practically impossible for anyone following the war to miss. It generally takes the form of justifying Russia's invasion of the Ukraine because otherwise Ukraine will join NATO and put missiles along its border — implying that doing so would be for an aggressive move against Russia that needs to be preemptively countered. I've also encountered this argument over and over in my discussions with others. Nevertheless, I suppose it's possible that you haven't.
 

AD1184

Celestial
It's been expressed over and over again in various ways by so many pro-Russian pundits that it's practically impossible for anyone following the war to miss. It generally takes the form of justifying Russia's invasion of the Ukraine because otherwise Ukraine will join NATO and put missiles along its border — implying that doing so would be for an aggressive move against Russia that needs to be preemptively countered. I've also encountered this argument over and over in my discussions with others. Nevertheless, I suppose it's possible that you haven't.
You described a variant on the above where "Ukraine wanted to join NATO so that it could invade Russia". I have not seen anyone claim that Ukraine wanted to join NATO to invade Russia. And now you seem to have rowed back on this claim. I am aware of various claims that NATO's courting of Ukraine caused the war, which is different.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine is not justified. However, it is a foreseeable risk of western manoeuvring in the region of eastern Europe departed by Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. What is the purpose of NATO? It is not mentioned explicitly in the founding treaty, but we know, its membership knows, and the Soviet Union knew, that it was implicitly an anti-Soviet military alliance when it formed. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, what is its purpose? Again, it is implicitly an anti-Russian military alliance, as we all know, the one European country which was never considered elligible for NATO membership. Would you expect Russia would respond favourably, or disfavourably, to the gradual encroachment of an implicitly anti-Russian military alliance towards its borders? Russia has said as far back as the 1990s that any expansion of NATO into what were former Soviet republics would lead to a collapse in relations with the west, when Boris Yeltsin made remarks to that effect.

As I mentioned two posts of mine back in this thread, the NATO rule book requires aspiring members to have proven secure borders. Therefore, if you are Russia, and you study this rulebook, you can see that one way of preventing the accession of a country you do not want to join the organization (in this instance Ukraine) would be to invade it.

NATO membership is but one factor. There is also the movement of the European Union into the same area. The European Union erects giant economic barriers between its members and what it refers to as "third countries" (hence the political fallout after the Brexit vote). Prior to the Euromaidan revolution in 2014 (which despite western media representation, was an anti-democratic mob putsch against the legitimate elected leader of Ukraine, unloveable though he may have been), the European Union had been planning an Association Agreement with the country (see here for details: EU Referendum). It is difficult to underestimate how provocative the EU's actions towards Russia were in the years up to 2014. It sought to cleave all of the former Eastern Bloc countries and the former Soviet republics out of the Russian sphere of influence and into the European Union's (and in many cases granting full membership) in an arrangement from which Russia was specifically excluded.

You can claim that Ukraine has a right to national self-determination and only it should be able to decide its alliances and alignment, and that Russia is evil for forcing its will on Ukraine and invading it, but this ignores the facts of realpolitik. The ones who have suffered greatest for this type of thinking have been the Ukrainians. The west had little to gain in courting Ukraine in this way, due to its lack of strategic value, and much to lose. The two factors mentioned above (EU and NATO expansionism) did not cause the war, but they created the conditions. And it is not pro-Russian to say this (I could not care less if Russia was bombed off the map by Ukraine in retaliation for its invasion, implausible as this outcome may be). The war in Ukraine is a result of a mismanagement of western relations with Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
 
Last edited:

J Randall Murphy

Trying To Stay Awake
You described a variant on the above where "Ukraine wanted to join NATO so that it could invade Russia". I have not seen anyone claim that Ukraine wanted to join NATO to invade Russia . . .

You're either missing or sidestepping the point.

I completely agree that the Ukraine had no interest in attacking Russia, and I never said that the Ukraine made any such claim. However those who support Russia's invasion have used the rationale that Ukraine joining NATO constitutes aggression against Russia, and have made comparison's to the Cuban missile crisis.

Now maybe you haven't experienced that line of defense on behalf of Russia, but I have — lot's of times ( example below ).

As I'm sure you're aware, the big fear there is that Russian missiles in Cuba would be used to attack the USA. Now we can quibble about me using the word "invade" rather than "attack" — but in an informal discussion like this — it's just semantics. There's no substantial difference to the point.

 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
It's been expressed over and over again in various ways by so many pro-Russian pundits that it's practically impossible for anyone following the war to miss. It generally takes the form of justifying Russia's invasion of the Ukraine because otherwise Ukraine will join NATO and put missiles along its border — implying that doing so would be for an aggressive move against Russia that needs to be preemptively countered. I've also encountered this argument over and over in my discussions with others. Nevertheless, I suppose it's possible that you haven't.
Unfortunately war is a normal human condition. You can't even put ten people on a bus for any length of time before one of them starts in about something. Add millions all crammed together, sure, they'll start killing one another over something.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/11/midd...srael-ceasefire-hostage-talks-intl/index.html

Hamas leader said civilian death toll could benefit militant group in Gaza war, WSJ reports​


By Mostafa Salem and Kylie Atwood, CNN
Updated 11:49 AM EDT, Tue June 11, 2024

gettyimages-1239960966-20240611120346267.jpg

Hamas' Gaza chief Yahya Sinwar attends attends a meeting with members of Palestinian groups in Gaza City, Gaza in April 2022.
Ali Jadallah/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

The military leader of Hamas has said he believes he has gained the upper hand over Israel and that the spiraling civilian death toll in Gaza would work in the militant group’s favor, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal, citing leaked messages the newspaper said it had seen.

We have the Israelis right where we want them,” Yahya Sinwar told other Hamas leaders recently, according to one of the messages, the WSJ reported Monday. In another, Sinwar is said to have described civilian deaths as “necessary sacrifices” while citing past independence-related conflicts in countries like Algeria.

The WSJ said it reviewed dozens of messages sent to ceasefire negotiators from Sinwar, who has not been seen in public since Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel left 1,200 people dead and another 250 taken hostage. The ensuing Israeli assault aimed at eliminating the group has killed more than 37,000 Palestinians in the strip, according to health authorities there.

Sinwar’s whereabouts are unknown but he is assumed to be hiding deep underground in Hamas’ labyrinthine tunnel system below Gaza. The messages reported by the WSJ offer a rare glimpse into the mind of the man steering Hamas’ thinking on the war and suggest an uncompromising determination to continue fighting, regardless of the human cost.

In another exchange that took place as Israel set a deadline in February to enter Rafah before the Muslim month of Ramadan, the WSJ reported that Sinwar urged Hamas’ political leaders not to make concessions and instead push for a permanent end to the war, adding that high civilian casualties would ramp up global pressure on Israel to halt the conflict.

“Israel’s journey in Rafah won’t be a walk in the park,” Sinwar allegedly said in a message to the Hamas political leadership.

CNN has not seen the leaked messages viewed by the WSJ and is not able to confirm the authenticity of the communications.

Commenting on the WSJ report, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said on X: “Sinwar profits off the deaths of Gazan civilians, calling them “necessary sacrifices” in order to urge international pressure on Israel’s efforts to eliminate his terrorist organization.”

Mediators are waiting for a Hamas response to an Israeli proposal presented by US President Joe Biden last month, which aims to release the hostages in Gaza and implement a lasting ceasefire there.

‘Waiting on’ Sinwar​

Sinwar’s alleged comments emerged as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was on another tour through the Middle East to push all sides to agree to the latest proposal. Speaking from Tel Aviv on Tuesday, Blinken made it clear that the US believes Sinwar is the ultimate decision-maker.

“I think there are there those who have influenced, but influence is one thing, actually getting a decision made is the is another thing. I don’t think anyone other than the Hamas leadership in Gaza actually are the ones who can make decisions,” Blinken said, adding that “that is what we are waiting on.”

Blinken said that Hamas’ answer to the proposal will reveal the group’s priorities.

“We await the answer from Hamas in and that will speak volumes about what they want, what they’re looking for, who they’re looking after,” Blinken said. “Are they looking after one guy who may be for now safe … I don’t know, 10 stories underground somewhere in Gaza, while the people that he purports to represent continue to suffer in a crossfire of his own making? Or will he do what’s necessary to actually move this to a better place, to help end the suffering of people to help bring real security to Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

In early messages to ceasefire negotiators, Sinwar seemed “surprised” by the brutality of the October 7 attack on Israel.

Things went out of control,” Sinwar said in one of his messages, according to the WSJ, adding he was “referring to gangs taking civilian women and children as hostages.”

People got caught up in this, and that should not have happened,” Sinwar said, according to the WSJ.

The US-designated terrorist had also expressed discontent after not being consulted for a meeting between the Hamas political leaders with other Palestinian factions, calling the meeting “shameful and outrageous.”

“As long as fighters are still standing and we have not lost the war, such contacts should be immediately terminated,” he said, adding that “we have the capabilities to continue fighting for months.”

He had also compared the war in Gaza to a 7th-century battle in Karbala, Iraq, a monumental moment in Islamic history where the grandson of the Prophet Mohammed was killed.

“We have to move forward on the same path we started,” Sinwar reportedly wrote. “Or let it be a new Karbala.”

On Monday, 14 of the 15 United Nations Security Council members voted in favor of a US-drafted resolution around the latest ceasefire proposal, with only Russia abstaining – the first time the council has endorsed such a plan to end the war. Israel is not a member of the UNSC, and so did not vote.

The comprehensive three-stage peace deal, which sets out conditions intended to lead to the eventual release of all remaining hostages, in return for a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces, was first laid out publicly by US President Biden on May 31.

The landmark vote means the UNSC now joins other major global bodies in backing the plan, increasing international pressure on both Hamas and Israel to end the conflict.

Hamas welcomed the adoption of the UNSC resolution, saying in a statement it was ready to engage with mediators to implement measures such as the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, prisoner exchange, returning residents to their homes and the “rejection of any demographic change or reduction in the area of the Gaza Strip.”

The resolution says Israel has accepted the plan, and US officials have repeatedly emphasized Israel had agreed to the proposal – despite other public comments from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that suggest otherwise.
 

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/11/midd...srael-ceasefire-hostage-talks-intl/index.html

Hamas leader said civilian death toll could benefit militant group in Gaza war, WSJ reports​


By Mostafa Salem and Kylie Atwood, CNN
Updated 11:49 AM EDT, Tue June 11, 2024

gettyimages-1239960966-20240611120346267.jpg

Hamas' Gaza chief Yahya Sinwar attends attends a meeting with members of Palestinian groups in Gaza City, Gaza in April 2022.
Ali Jadallah/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

The military leader of Hamas has said he believes he has gained the upper hand over Israel and that the spiraling civilian death toll in Gaza would work in the militant group’s favor, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal, citing leaked messages the newspaper said it had seen.

We have the Israelis right where we want them,” Yahya Sinwar told other Hamas leaders recently, according to one of the messages, the WSJ reported Monday. In another, Sinwar is said to have described civilian deaths as “necessary sacrifices” while citing past independence-related conflicts in countries like Algeria.

The WSJ said it reviewed dozens of messages sent to ceasefire negotiators from Sinwar, who has not been seen in public since Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel left 1,200 people dead and another 250 taken hostage. The ensuing Israeli assault aimed at eliminating the group has killed more than 37,000 Palestinians in the strip, according to health authorities there.

Sinwar’s whereabouts are unknown but he is assumed to be hiding deep underground in Hamas’ labyrinthine tunnel system below Gaza. The messages reported by the WSJ offer a rare glimpse into the mind of the man steering Hamas’ thinking on the war and suggest an uncompromising determination to continue fighting, regardless of the human cost.

In another exchange that took place as Israel set a deadline in February to enter Rafah before the Muslim month of Ramadan, the WSJ reported that Sinwar urged Hamas’ political leaders not to make concessions and instead push for a permanent end to the war, adding that high civilian casualties would ramp up global pressure on Israel to halt the conflict.

“Israel’s journey in Rafah won’t be a walk in the park,” Sinwar allegedly said in a message to the Hamas political leadership.

CNN has not seen the leaked messages viewed by the WSJ and is not able to confirm the authenticity of the communications.

Commenting on the WSJ report, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said on X: “Sinwar profits off the deaths of Gazan civilians, calling them “necessary sacrifices” in order to urge international pressure on Israel’s efforts to eliminate his terrorist organization.”

Mediators are waiting for a Hamas response to an Israeli proposal presented by US President Joe Biden last month, which aims to release the hostages in Gaza and implement a lasting ceasefire there.

‘Waiting on’ Sinwar​

Sinwar’s alleged comments emerged as US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was on another tour through the Middle East to push all sides to agree to the latest proposal. Speaking from Tel Aviv on Tuesday, Blinken made it clear that the US believes Sinwar is the ultimate decision-maker.

“I think there are there those who have influenced, but influence is one thing, actually getting a decision made is the is another thing. I don’t think anyone other than the Hamas leadership in Gaza actually are the ones who can make decisions,” Blinken said, adding that “that is what we are waiting on.”

Blinken said that Hamas’ answer to the proposal will reveal the group’s priorities.

“We await the answer from Hamas in and that will speak volumes about what they want, what they’re looking for, who they’re looking after,” Blinken said. “Are they looking after one guy who may be for now safe … I don’t know, 10 stories underground somewhere in Gaza, while the people that he purports to represent continue to suffer in a crossfire of his own making? Or will he do what’s necessary to actually move this to a better place, to help end the suffering of people to help bring real security to Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

In early messages to ceasefire negotiators, Sinwar seemed “surprised” by the brutality of the October 7 attack on Israel.

Things went out of control,” Sinwar said in one of his messages, according to the WSJ, adding he was “referring to gangs taking civilian women and children as hostages.”

People got caught up in this, and that should not have happened,” Sinwar said, according to the WSJ.

The US-designated terrorist had also expressed discontent after not being consulted for a meeting between the Hamas political leaders with other Palestinian factions, calling the meeting “shameful and outrageous.”

“As long as fighters are still standing and we have not lost the war, such contacts should be immediately terminated,” he said, adding that “we have the capabilities to continue fighting for months.”

He had also compared the war in Gaza to a 7th-century battle in Karbala, Iraq, a monumental moment in Islamic history where the grandson of the Prophet Mohammed was killed.

“We have to move forward on the same path we started,” Sinwar reportedly wrote. “Or let it be a new Karbala.”

On Monday, 14 of the 15 United Nations Security Council members voted in favor of a US-drafted resolution around the latest ceasefire proposal, with only Russia abstaining – the first time the council has endorsed such a plan to end the war. Israel is not a member of the UNSC, and so did not vote.

The comprehensive three-stage peace deal, which sets out conditions intended to lead to the eventual release of all remaining hostages, in return for a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces, was first laid out publicly by US President Biden on May 31.

The landmark vote means the UNSC now joins other major global bodies in backing the plan, increasing international pressure on both Hamas and Israel to end the conflict.

Hamas welcomed the adoption of the UNSC resolution, saying in a statement it was ready to engage with mediators to implement measures such as the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, prisoner exchange, returning residents to their homes and the “rejection of any demographic change or reduction in the area of the Gaza Strip.”

The resolution says Israel has accepted the plan, and US officials have repeatedly emphasized Israel had agreed to the proposal – despite other public comments from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that suggest otherwise.

In translation to English, Hamas leader is benefiting from slaughter of his own people. More the better.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
Can't negotiate with terrorists, they only want more violence and death...

...

U.S. slams Hamas for refusing Israel ceasefire deal and warns war will keep going

Antony Blinken is fed up with the back and forth with Hamas negotiating for the release of Israeli hostages in exchange for a ceasefire in the Middle East conflict.

Speaking from Doha, Qatar on Wednesday, the Secretary of State told reporters that the terrorist group could have ended the war by just agreeing to the latest deal backed by the United Nations.

He said the U.S. is tired of 'haggling.'

'It was a deal that Israel accepted and the world was behind,' Blinken said. 'Hamas could have answered with a single word: 'Yes,''

The latest ceasefire proposal was nearly identical to one laid out by Hamas last month.

President Joe Biden announced the deal in May and Blinken also expressed frustration that it took Hamas so long to announce it was rejecting the proposal.

'They waited almost two weeks and then proposed more changes, a number of which go beyond positions it has previously presented and agreed to,' Blinken vented.

'As a result, the war will go on and more people will suffer.'


(More on the link)

.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
Palestine's only truly effective weapon against Israel is the suffering of its own people.
That strategy doesn't seem to be working out too well for them, they're going to run out of Palestinians before it gets them what they want.

Hamas reminds me of Japanese never enders hiding amongst civilian population on Okinawa.

I seriously doubt there is a solution to this. Remember the 72 Olympics? What's changed since then ?
 

nivek

As Above So Below
So they're expecting a 10 year war?...

...

Biden and Zelensky to ink 10-year deal meant to lock in U.S. military support for Ukraine: framework could box in Trump with U.S. election up for grabs

President Joe Biden is set to sign a deal with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky intended to commit the U.S. to a decade of military support – a move that could pressure rival Donald Trump if he takes the White House.

The move is a key 'deliverable' of Biden's G7 meetings set to begin in the Apulia region of Italy Thursday. The president arrived last night, and meets one on one with Zelensky before the two leaders are set to hold a joint press conference Thursday evening local time.

'We want to demonstrate that the U.S. supports the people of Ukraine, that we stand with them, and that we’ll continue to help address their security needs not just tomorrow but out into the future,' White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to the annual confab.

'This is a big deal,' he added Thursday. He called it a 'real marker of our commitment, not just for this month, this year, but for many years ahead, to continue to support Ukraine, both in defending against Russian aggression and in deterring future aggression.'

The bilateral deal would not have the strength of a treaty ratified by the U.S. Senate, so Biden or any successor could withdraw from it.


(More on the link)

.
 
Top