Russia - worrying?

[nugnug]

https://off-guardian.org/2023/06/24/discuss-an-attempted-coup-in-russia/

[David1819]

Seems Putler and Claus von Preghozin have come to an agreement. The treason charges have been dropped.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/

[gringo]

     Well whatever the entire theatre was about has now ended/moved on to Act II. The immediate response to this on here has been predictably knee jerk. It is reasonable to say that not everything is as seems, especially in war. I have no idea what the latest theatre was all about, but I am doubtful that it was a real attempted coup.
     Prigozhin has been a source of much disinformation and distraction, most of it contradictory. Some of it, such as complaining about lack of shells in Bakhmut, worked so well that it encouraged the Ukrainian command to pour more fodder into the extremely efficient Bakhmut meat grinder. Anything uttered by or done by Prigozhin is only taken at face value by the uninformed. A quick run through his contradictory statements and actions throughout the war show that. Everything is a psyop with Prigozhin. He works for the GRU(their speciality). 
     That Wagner are a cut out of the GRU is not really a secret to anyone, or shouldn't be. Same as Academi and Blackwater were cut-outs of US intel. "Aegis Defence Services", one of a handful of UK "so called" PMC's(Private Military Contractors). All of these mercenary groups are in reality state operatives. The reason that they exist is that they can operate outside of state oversight and give some sort of "plausible deniability" to the state they are working for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_military_contractors#US_companies
     Wagner, are in effect, the GRU(military intelligence).
     One of the effects of this whole coup/not coup could be the upgrading of the SMO(special military operation) to a CTO or ATO(Counter/Anti terrorist operation). Doing so removes some legal restraints on the use of armed forces. It frees the armed forces to operate outside of Russian territory. This has been a debate in Russia for some time with most Russians very hawkish. Was it set up for this purpose? Was it allowed to happen? Was it really an attempted coup?
    Wagner are now returning to bases after talks with Belorussian leader, Lukashenko? All very odd. I would await judgement on what has occurred for a few days. What happens over the next few days may help to clear some of the "fog of war"/smokescreen?
   

Seems Putler and Claus von Preghozin have come to an agreement. The treason charges have been dropped.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wagner-head-suggests-his-mercenaries-headed-moscow-take-army-leadership-2023-06-24/

   As i said, David, I would wait for the fog to clear. You, predictably, are working from the premise that it was definitely what it said on the tin. Was there a coup attempt? Was it something else?

     It looked like theatre. How many killed in this treason/mutiny? Stage managed pictures, footage of helicopters being shot down proven to be over a year old. I'm sure events over the next week or so will help towards enlightenment.

[gringo]

    Current possibilities, in no particular order, feel free to add others;

1) A real coup attempt by Prigozhin and Wagner Group
2) A "maskirovka" operation to out fifth columnists and break up possible future plans
3) A "maskirovka" operation to give credence to already laid plans to change the definition of the SMO into a ATO allowing Russia to expand the parameters of their actions in Ukraine
4) A power struggle between Russian MOD and GRU
5)
     Where we are now-Coup attempt ended-Prigozhin in Belarus, treason charges dropped, Wagner forces heading back to base starts to give some clues. The next week will give more!

[David1819]

Warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin to leave Russia as part of deal to end insurrection

https://www.ft.com/content/eb029083-ff02-4a8a-87ab-7813e5c01f11

[gringo]

    Current possibilities, in no particular order, feel free to add others;

1) A real coup attempt by Prigozhin and Wagner Group
2) A "maskirovka" operation to out fifth columnists and break up possible future plans
3) A "maskirovka" operation to give credence to already laid plans to change the definition of the SMO into a ATO allowing Russia to expand the parameters of their actions in Ukraine
4) A power struggle between Russian MOD and GRU
5)
     Where we are now-Coup attempt ended-Prigozhin in Belarus, treason charges dropped, Wagner forces heading back to base starts to give some clues. The next week will give more!

5) A "maskirovka" operation faking disunity/division in order to lure the Ukrainians and their Western sponsors into continuing their stalled and disastrous counter-offensive
6)

[gringo]

     It is worth noting that a lot of Russian troop movement occurred under cover of all this. I'm sure there is an Act II yet to come!

[gringo]

    Larry Johnson's take on the latest theatre (food for thought);

https://sonar21.com/russias-academy-award-winning-performance-for-best-coup-prigozhin-scores-best-actor/

     I suspect that the massive troop movement that occurred under cover of this theatre will reveal itself in Act II shortly.

[David1819]

    Larry Johnson's take on the latest theatre (food for thought);

https://sonar21.com/russias-academy-award-winning-performance-for-best-coup-prigozhin-scores-best-actor/

     I suspect that the massive troop movement that occurred under cover of this theatre will reveal itself in Act II shortly.

The clown on that website wrote -

"How about this as an explanation? The entire coup narrative was generated to allow for the movement of Russian military forces to areas north and west of Voronezh without raising the alarm among NATO planners."

Does he not realise Putin made a televisised address condemning the armed mutiny?  If he does then he wants readers to believe that Putin fabricated a challenge to his authority, risked a grass roots uprising and publicly dented his authority just so he can move troops around?

I know the creationists at the blogmire and Saker no longer support Russia and thus you have to sink lower into even more half baked, obscure corners of the internet. But that doesn't mean you have to embarrass yourself by posting it on here.

[gringo]

The clown on that website wrote -

"How about this as an explanation? The entire coup narrative was generated to allow for the movement of Russian military forces to areas north and west of Voronezh without raising the alarm among NATO planners."

Does he not realise Putin made a televisised address condemning the armed mutiny?  If he does then he wants readers to believe that Putin fabricated a challenge to his authority, risked a grass roots uprising and publicly dented his authority just so he can move troops around?

I know the creationists at the blogmire and Saker no longer support Russia and thus you have to sink lower into even more half baked, obscure corners of the internet. But that doesn't mean you have to embarrass yourself by posting it on here.

    The Saker closed his blog last February as he always said he would. He lives in USA and always stated that he would end the blog if/when Russia/US NATO confrontation began. He is married to A USA citizen and has family there which he doesn't want to jeopardise. Who said that he doesn't support Russia?
     The Blogmire has never been a source of mine for any Ukraine/Russia/NATO reporting so I have no idea on his views about it. He was the best source for any Skripal related info, however. Criticism coming from you, who has the most retarded views on this subject of anyone writing on the thread, is hilarious. Everyone is a paedophile, paleo conservative, creationist, conspiritard or whatever according to you. Fortunately for you, taking this approach means that you never have to wrestle with the validity of any analysis. This suits you because you are incapable of critical thinking. If it goes against your programming you simply resort to the talking points you have been trained to(ie. ad-hom attacks).
      Whatever happened will become clear in the next few days. I have made clear that in my opinion(a view shared by most informed observers) there are a few possibilities to explain events. Immediately assuming one scenario because it suits what you would like to believe is what dumb people do. Unsurprisingly you did just that.
     The rest of us are watching events play out and it isn't getting any better for the NATO/Ukraine counter offensive.
     
   
     
     

[gringo]

     Good interview with Scott Ritter on Redacted. It starts off with a warning about suicide/self harm which you have to "understand" before proceeding. Really good interview from one of the most informed commentators on the subject. His background speaks for itself as does the undoubted smear coming from our resident retarded conspiracy theorist, David, which I will preempt.
      "Resorting to quoting paedophiles now-you are really scraping the barrel", or something like that but definitely the paedophile smear.
      Scott Ritter was convicted of "sexual contact with a minor", a 15 year old girl via telephone. This is despite the fact that Ritter has never been known to have any sexual contact with any minors. There is one FBI agent, who definitely isn't 15, but no 15 year olds or any other minors were involved in the making of this conviction. Just one FBI agent, according to whom, Ritter believed she was 15. Ritter's wife and daughter stood by him in this and clearly also do not believe Scott Ritter to be a paedophile.
      Ritter, for those old enough to remember, was the US whistleblower on the fabricated WMD lies told by US/UK governments in order to give "legal" cover for their illegal and disastrous intervention in Iraq. The UK whistleblower, Dr. David Kelly, ended up dead in the woods in mysterious circumstances that we are told was suicide. Ritter got off lightly in comparison by only being labelled "paedophile". It gives the simple minded an excuse to ignore uncomfortable truths. Just smear the messenger.
     Of the two whistleblowers who exposed US/UK govt. lies about WMD- one ended up dead in the woods in a remarkably blood free wrist slashing suicide and the other was convicted of sexual contact with a minor despite no minors ever being involved.
     Sexual smears are the go to of intel services to silence dissidents and dissuade others to support them. Julian Assange(rape), Alex Salmond(rape), Craig Murray(sexual assault). I could go on. Notice a pattern? Anyway here is that interview with "non paedophile" Scott Ritter;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImjpzrsvLeM&ab_channel=Redacted

[David1819]

Storm Z Russian soldier unit slam Prigozhin for dismantling Wagner's convoy to Moscow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB5S275CAeg

[Steve_uk]

   To your first point, Steve, you have created a straw man. Your highlighted part of my post refers only to NATO missiles. Whether they are nuclear or non nuclear is not the issue. Any missile threat can become a nuclear missile threat.

    As you asked the question, how about you speculate as to the outcome/settlement. You asked me a question, I answered your question, made clear it was my opinion of what the outcome would be. How does that exchange lead coherently to your reply?

    You are wrong on every point anyway. Crimea wasn't taken by force. For the Ukrainian regime to control it they would have to take it by force even if the Russian military pulled out. Crimea is Russian and only became part of Ukraine in 1954 when Khrushchev added it to Ukraine's borders. As it was all part of the Soviet Union-it didn't seem to matter at the time. On the break up of the Soviet Union, Crimea held a referendum in 1991 and voted overwhelmingly (94%) to re-establish the autonomous Crimean Republic. This vote wasn't recognised by anyone including the newly created Russian Federation. It demonstrates quite clearly that Crimean people have never felt part of Ukraine. Sevastopol has been home to Russian/Soviet Black Sea fleet for longer than the USA has existed as a country. Russia didn't invade-they were already there with a supportive population. Ukraine would have to "deal with" that hostile population. How do you reasonably support Ukraine "liberating" Crimea? They want to "liberate" the territory from its current inhabitants.
    Where do you think it leads to if NATO carries on arming and funding Ukraine towards this goal? Why do you think that the Ukrainian regime should even control Crimea? For whose benefit is this? Why do you even think the "liberation" or attacking of Crimea is justifiable?
     

Why were Russian soldiers wearing unmarked uniforms during the annexation if they were so popular? I'm reminded somewhat of the Gleiwitz incident of August 31, 1939.

One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.

One view of Crimeans before the Russian intervention. https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/society/were-crimeans-really-pro-russian-before-annexation

[gringo]

Why were Russian soldiers wearing unmarked uniforms during the annexation if they were so popular? I'm reminded somewhat of the Gleiwitz incident of August 31, 1939.

One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.

One view of Crimeans before the Russian intervention. https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/society/were-crimeans-really-pro-russian-before-annexation

    Militias were wearing uniforms. How do you know that the Russian army were wearing unmarked uniforms? There is zero doubt, despite the wishful thinking of the Economist article you posted, that Crimeans want to be part of Russia.
     First of all-the 1991 referendum was unequivocal in its rejection of remaining part of Ukraine. Crimeans had never been asked if they wanted to join Ukraine. They wouldn't have voted for this. Khruschev simply made it so in 1954. Crimeans have never been Ukrainian. Link to 1991 referendum

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Crimean_sovereignty_referendum

    Secondly in 1994, there was another referendum in Crimea.
    A three-part referendum was held in Crimea on 27 March 1994 alongside regional and national elections. Voters were asked whether they were in favour of greater autonomy within Ukraine, whether residents should have dual Russian and Ukrainian citizenship, and whether presidential decrees should have the status of laws. All three proposals were approved.[1]
    Full link below;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Crimean_referendum

    Thirdly, in 2014, there was another referendum after the illegal Maidan Coup. Overwhelmingly(there's a pattern emerging isn't there, Steve) Crimeans given the choice of joining the Russian Federation or restore the 1992 constitution and restore Crimean status as part of Ukraine.

https://tass.com/politics/1589119

    The Crimeans have made clear their feeling since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. There is no doubt about what Crimeans want. There is nothing to negotiate. Crimea is Russian.


   

[gringo]

One solution might be to restore the autonomous Crimean Republic, to which you allude. But this would have to be subject to negotiation.

   The Autonomous Republic of Crimea, commonly known as Crimea, is an autonomous republic of Ukraine encompassing most of Crimea that was annexed by Russia in 2014. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the peninsula, while the City of Sevastopol (a city with special status within Ukraine) occupies the rest.

    It already is an autonomous Republic within the Russian Federation. What is there to negotiate? Crimeans have no interest in negotiating anything with Ukraine or any other NATO stooge. Why should or would they?