Post by Wayne Hall on Jun 5, 2023 10:12:12 GMT -5
Responding to attacks on civilian populations in Russia
Ukraine began some months ago to attack civilian populations within the pre-2014 borders of Russia.
Reacting appropriately represents a dilemma for the Russian government because although Ukrainian civilians have figured among the "collateral damage" from Russian attacks on Ukraine, Russia claims (plausibly in my opinion) not to be targeting civilians in Ukraine in the way that Ukraine repeatedly has, in Donbas and other areas in Eastern Ukraine, Crimea and now Russia proper. (This claim will be disputed by those who are persuaded by mainstream Western media coverage.)
Moreover, the Russian government says that it does not wish to start "reprisals" against civilian populations. Such attacks amount to war crimes.
So the question is: how can Russia adequately, but also legitimately, respond to these terrorist attacks against civilians in Russia?
In March 2023 a provocation apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-missile-strike-apartment-building-d2b8fc376956d2bedc44d3a0d711f260 was staged inside Russia, with civilians, including children, being killed and injured. Putin declared that there would be retaliation, and indeed there was: english.pravda.ru/world/156387-kinzhal_nato_bunker/ within days. A command bunker in Ukraine four hundred feet underground (too deep, it is said, for run-of-the-mill bunker-busting technology) was hit by two Russian hypersonic Kinzhal missiles, and numerous (hundreds?) of dignitaries and high-ranking NATO personnel were allegedly killed. The media were pretty silent about this.
Because the Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians are continuing theduran.com/opening-act-of-ukraines-big-offensive/, such that even Western governments are beginning to react www.azerbaycan24.com/en/nato-member-questions-kiev-about-attack-inside-russia/ more extreme responses are now being floated in Russia. One proposal which would revive, in reverse, the logic of the 1939 Ribbentrop-Molotov pact between Hitler and Stalin and assign present-day Ukrainian territory to Hungary, Poland and Romania, (unveiled in 2014 by extreme nationalist Russian parliamentarian Zhirinovsky) www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-partition-letter/russian-politician-proposes-new-divisions-of-ukraine-idUKL5N0ML1LO20140324 has been dusted off yet again and flashed for consideration.
These are responses which can proceed only with Russian government support but there are other ways of countering aggressive US and EU policy which are more susceptible to influence from citizens in "the West". The most radical oppositional politics in Western Europe today - certainly most radical in the sense of being least affected by divisive intra-European nationalisms - is to be found in the European Parliament:
arguably under Romanian leadership.
Even before the emergence into prominence of Romanian Europarliamentarian Cristian Terhes, members of the World Freedom Alliance were beginning to promote Romania as a European political centre alternative to Brussels: main.cse-initiative.eu/?p=891 (beginning from minute 39.15)
Would such a focus on Romania be strengthened or weakened by enlistment of the long-standing love affair of England's new king Charles with that country? Is this a ridiculous question?
An aristocrat who once contributed to awakening Charles' alleged commitment to organic agriculture
is Sir Julian Rose.
But Sir Julian today says this about Charles
www.globalresearch.ca/the-royal-crowning-of-king-charles-iii-and-the-wefs-great-reset/5818620
www.globalresearch.ca/disbelief-green-king-gives-royal-assent-new-gene-breeding-technology/5813577
Are Charles, the Windsors, and the City of London and the Rothshilds a package deal, together forever, however much this hybrid situation is hated and despised?
Ukraine began some months ago to attack civilian populations within the pre-2014 borders of Russia.
Reacting appropriately represents a dilemma for the Russian government because although Ukrainian civilians have figured among the "collateral damage" from Russian attacks on Ukraine, Russia claims (plausibly in my opinion) not to be targeting civilians in Ukraine in the way that Ukraine repeatedly has, in Donbas and other areas in Eastern Ukraine, Crimea and now Russia proper. (This claim will be disputed by those who are persuaded by mainstream Western media coverage.)
Moreover, the Russian government says that it does not wish to start "reprisals" against civilian populations. Such attacks amount to war crimes.
So the question is: how can Russia adequately, but also legitimately, respond to these terrorist attacks against civilians in Russia?
In March 2023 a provocation apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-missile-strike-apartment-building-d2b8fc376956d2bedc44d3a0d711f260 was staged inside Russia, with civilians, including children, being killed and injured. Putin declared that there would be retaliation, and indeed there was: english.pravda.ru/world/156387-kinzhal_nato_bunker/ within days. A command bunker in Ukraine four hundred feet underground (too deep, it is said, for run-of-the-mill bunker-busting technology) was hit by two Russian hypersonic Kinzhal missiles, and numerous (hundreds?) of dignitaries and high-ranking NATO personnel were allegedly killed. The media were pretty silent about this.
Because the Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilians are continuing theduran.com/opening-act-of-ukraines-big-offensive/, such that even Western governments are beginning to react www.azerbaycan24.com/en/nato-member-questions-kiev-about-attack-inside-russia/ more extreme responses are now being floated in Russia. One proposal which would revive, in reverse, the logic of the 1939 Ribbentrop-Molotov pact between Hitler and Stalin and assign present-day Ukrainian territory to Hungary, Poland and Romania, (unveiled in 2014 by extreme nationalist Russian parliamentarian Zhirinovsky) www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-crisis-partition-letter/russian-politician-proposes-new-divisions-of-ukraine-idUKL5N0ML1LO20140324 has been dusted off yet again and flashed for consideration.
These are responses which can proceed only with Russian government support but there are other ways of countering aggressive US and EU policy which are more susceptible to influence from citizens in "the West". The most radical oppositional politics in Western Europe today - certainly most radical in the sense of being least affected by divisive intra-European nationalisms - is to be found in the European Parliament:
arguably under Romanian leadership.
Even before the emergence into prominence of Romanian Europarliamentarian Cristian Terhes, members of the World Freedom Alliance were beginning to promote Romania as a European political centre alternative to Brussels: main.cse-initiative.eu/?p=891 (beginning from minute 39.15)
Would such a focus on Romania be strengthened or weakened by enlistment of the long-standing love affair of England's new king Charles with that country? Is this a ridiculous question?
An aristocrat who once contributed to awakening Charles' alleged commitment to organic agriculture
is Sir Julian Rose.
But Sir Julian today says this about Charles
www.globalresearch.ca/the-royal-crowning-of-king-charles-iii-and-the-wefs-great-reset/5818620
www.globalresearch.ca/disbelief-green-king-gives-royal-assent-new-gene-breeding-technology/5813577
Are Charles, the Windsors, and the City of London and the Rothshilds a package deal, together forever, however much this hybrid situation is hated and despised?