Russian Tensions
- This topic has 5,312 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 3 weeks, 2 days ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Not only is it the arms trade taking advantage of the war to increase profits.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said the fossil fuel industry for trying to use Russia’s war on Ukraine to boost polluters’ profits at the expense of the global climate and all life on Earth.
“Fossil fuel interests are now cynically using the war in Ukraine to try to lock in a high carbon future,” Guterres tweeted. “A shift to renewables is crucial to mending our broken global energy mix and offering hope to millions suffering climate impacts today.”
Not only is it the arms trade taking advantage of the war to increase profits.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said the fossil fuel industry for trying to use Russia’s war on Ukraine to boost polluters’ profits at the expense of the global climate and all life on Earth.
“Fossil fuel interests are now cynically using the war in Ukraine to try to lock in a high carbon future,” Guterres tweeted. “A shift to renewables is crucial to mending our broken global energy mix and offering hope to millions suffering climate impacts today.”
I did publish another message indicating that the fossil industry have had quadruple earnings
The Maoists said that the Soviet Union was the social imperialism because they had disagreements with kruschev and then hoxha said that china was imperialist
They supported a bunch of reactionary governments based on the three world theory including augusto Pinochet and created a división into two camps and many maoists supported enver hoxha and left Maoism One group rejected mao, hoxha and Stalin but they did not reject Lenin which is the root of state capitalism The stampede was enormous
Shows just how shallow and ludicrous leader-following and mere name-following is. Unfortunately, most people, although not as extremist and violent as these sects, are followers of leaders, if passively, and judge by name (“socialist”, “communist”, “Nazi”, “liberal”) and not by substance and analysis. It’s easier. Especially when most have to eke a monotonous living and depend on the state for education.
Marxism Leninism is a hybrid created by Joseph Stalin and Marxism can not be combined with Leninism, they are two opposite trends
Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Kim , and Castro are apologists of state capitalism
and they are not communistsMost of those organization support the so called national liberation which only liberate one ruling class from another ruling class and anti imperialism which ask workers from one country to support and die for their own ruling class
They have removed the first page of the communist manifesto which says that workers do not have any country
Imperialism is not the higher stage of capitalism, it is the opposite, imperialism or expansionism is a product of capitalism All countries, small or large are potentially expansionists
The tankies supported the ruling class of the Soviet Union and the repressions against the workers
Now some Stalinists and Leninists groups are either supporting the ruling class of Russia or the ruling class of Ukraine and it does not matter who released the first shot
The real problem is capitalism it is not a problem of leadership or the pretext against nazism
Anyone who supported the communist party after 1956 when the tanks rolled in and crushed the Hungarian Uprising:
I thought it referred to those members of the British CP (and their descendants) who supported the Russian tanks crushing of protests in Czechoslovakia in 1968 which the party’s leadership criticised (and which turned out to be the beginning of the end for the party since, apart from loyally supporting everything the Russian government did, the party had no reason to exist). In 1956 the leadership of the British CP supported Russian tanks crushing an uprising in Hungary. But I don’t think they were called “tankies” at the time.
Unfortunately yesterday’s MayDay march in London turned out to be another Bokshevikfest rather than a trade union event. Without contingents from Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Greece and Sri Lanka it would have been a rather small event.
Each Bolshevik group presented its case on the Ukraine War. Most supported Russia. At least one, calling itself the “Communist League”, supported Ukraine. The Ukraine Solidarity Campaign were handing out a leaflet, in English and Ukrainian, from some Trotskyists in Ukraine (“Social Movement” which presents itself as an NGO so as not to get banned by the government) which called for “free supply of modern weapons to Ukraine, in particular, air defence systems that would allow to minimise civilian casualties.”
The pro-Russia ones based their case on Lenin’s mistaken theory of imperialism which divides capitalist states into “imperialist” and “non-imperialist”. They were at pains to classify Russia (and China) as “non-imperialist”. According to “Socialist Fight” (whoever they are):
“Neither Russia not China are imperialist powers, they are not integrated into the IMF and World Bank and cannot extract surplus value from the global south in that way, though China in particular aspires to do so. (…) Russia‘a and China’s spending on their military and naval warships are completely defensive …”
Oh yeah, pull the other one.
Another group proclaimed “For the right of Russia to defend itself against imperialist encroachment!”:
“Although Russia has been capitalist since 1991 it is not an imperialist power in its own right. Imperialism is more than when one state employs military force against another. Imperialism is a stage of capitalism represented by the dominance of finance capital. Russia is not part of the ‘imperialist club’ but a relatively backward dependent capitalist economy.”
Maybe, but why is that a reason to abandon socialist internationalism and support one capitalist state against a group of other capitalist states? (Incidentally, what are the Russian oligarchs if not finance capitalists?)
This is an interesting long article on RT:
Ukraine is winning the battle on twitter.For a propaganda channel, it contains some interesting admissions of Russian failure:
“Within the first week of the Russian operation getting underway, it was clear to most that many of the assumptions that had been made were flawed and/or misplaced. First and foremost, Moscow had opted not to employ its forces according to standard doctrine, opting instead to take a light approach, which appeared to be born from a concerted effort to minimize civilian casualties and harm to civilian infrastructure that itself was derived from a fundamental misunderstanding of the reality of the situation on the ground in Ukraine.[…]
the statements by Russian leadership suggesting that the Ukrainian military might remain in its barracks and that civilian leadership would not interfere with Russia military operations suggest that these assumptions were made using intelligence provided by the 5th Department. That such assumptions, if indeed they were made, proved to be so fundamentally off target, when combined with the preparedness of the Ukrainian military to engage the initial columns of Russian forces, suggests that the work of the 5th Department had been disrupted by Ukrainian security services, who took control of Russian human networks and fed false reports back to the Russian leadership.”Ritter suggests that despite all that, the attack in the North on Kyiv was a feint, and substantially the military operation is on track, and that attrition might tell in the coming month.”Perception, when subjected to the harsh light of reality, is exposed as little more than wishful thinking. This is very much the case regarding the so-called “Battle for Kiev,” where the Ukrainian military was left holding territory which no longer served any useful purpose for the Russians. Russia was able to redeploy its forces to better support its prime objective, the seizure of Donbass, leaving the Ukrainian forces in Kiev frozen in place.”
“This is the current situation with the Ukrainian military facing off against the Russians in Donbass today. The Ukrainians, lacking any meaningful artillery support of their own, are at the mercy of the Russian artillery and rocket launchers that pound their positions day in and day out, without respite. The Russian troops have taken a very deliberate approach to engaging with their Ukrainian opponents. Gone are the rapid advances by unprotected columns and convoys; now, the Russians isolate the Ukrainian defenders, pound them with artillery, and then carefully close in and destroy what remains with infantry supported by tanks and armored fighting vehicles. The casualty ratio in this fighting is unforgiving for Ukraine, with hundreds of soldiers lost each day in terms of killed, wounded and surrendered, while Russian casualties are measured in scores.”
Now, this is still propaganda, but I think it is worth taking this as what Russia wants us to believe, and I think there is a grain of truth in it. After all, Ritter is admitting to a ‘turkey shoot’ and heavy losses.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.