This is why I despise the regime media. The Ukraine thing is just an excuse to attack someone who dares to have his own opinion, who doesn’t carry water for the ruling elite that greases the wheels of all these hacks.
The regime media are all those media outlets that carry water for the govt and the ruling elite – those that never even question govt dogma and attack those that do. They attack those who question Covid policy, net zero, forever wars, open borders, gender wars, critical race theory etc…The regime media punches down. It never punches up.
Last edited 7 months ago by Jim Veenbaas
Tyler Durden
7 months ago
Russia regards Crimea as a sovereign country and, what’s more, their territory. Musk was right that if that country was bombed then a tactical nuclear device might be unleashed on Kiev.
I still don’t understand why Obama and Biden failed to respond. Was d**k Cheney having heart surgery at the time?
The eventual answer was the Minsk Accords to protect the Donbas. And that, indeed, was the root to peace in spring 2022 before Boris Johnson was sent to Kiev to plead for eternal war. In fact, it was still standing in winter 2021-2 – all Biden, Blinken and Nuland had to agree to was not to admit the Ukraine into NATO.
So the same Boris Johnson who couldn’t control his own party and had that little authority that he lost his job over some birthday cake, was simultaneously that powerful and influential that he could scupper plans that had been set by the world major nuclear powers?
Yes, he did seem to have established himself with Zelenskyy as Ukraine’s best friend and, even more remarkably, still evidently has influence in Kyiv. Very naive on their part, in my view.
So the fact that Putin couldn’t get his (very creative) interpretation of the Minsk Accords accepted, justified his invasion of Ukraine, and the now million plus casualties on both sides?
Allowing Donbas a veto over any action by Ukraine is unprecedented in the govt of any nation.
Which probably explains why they didn’t work.
Jürg Gassmann
7 months ago
Two comments:
In international law, there are only two categories: Belligerent, and neutral. There is no category for “non-belligerent ally”. The US needs to be clear whether it is an ally of Ukraine, and hence a belligerent (or a neutral, with the obligations incumbent on a neutral – but the US’ involvement currently is too deep to qualify as a neutral).
Also in international law, the Hague Conventions deal explicitly with telecommunications facilities based in neutral states and their status vis-à-vis belligerents. At the time (early 20th century), it was telegraph, but the principles apply.
laurence scaduto
7 months ago
My theory: Musk is so roundly hated simply because he can’t be nailed-down, pigeon-holed. (If he’s not Red Team or Blue Team then…OMG, the mind boggles!) We all know that consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds, and there are a lot of little minds around theses days; more all the time. The politically attuned, professional or not, are some of the most pea-brained. That includes most “journalists” – we were better off when we had “reporters”, instead. (Present company excluded.)
Of course, not being nailed-down is Musk’s entire M.O. in a nutshell. And it seems to work fairly well for him. A guy with that much money has every reason to not give a flying f**k what the rest of us think. I certainly wouldn’t. Would any of you?
I, for one, don’t see how the Ukrainians could have resisted the first assaults without Starlink.
Ukraine War Fatigue setting in!
As at 18.23 BST only 15 comments.
Whilst Starmer has 77, Brand 96 and Proud Boys 60.
QED.
Andrew Boughton
7 months ago
What a brilliant journalist, with a really thorough approach to research. Thank you again Thomas.
Frank McCusker
7 months ago
What a straw-man article. He hasn’t “betrayed” Ukraine, but he did allow himself to be cowed by Putin’s threats.
martin logan
7 months ago
The main point–that Fazi scrupulously avoids–is that the threat of “going nuclear” only works to deter a nuclear attack.
Threats of nuclear escalation, are just that, threats.
We’ve crossed every red line Putin has ever drawn, without consequences. Indeed, a man terrified of catching covid probably isn’t a plausible candidate to start a suicidal nuclear war. Bad for his re-election prospects, if nothing else.
This fact is obviously not apparent to people with little knowledge of military-political affairs, like Musk. Or people with a willfully-distorted view of reality, like Fazi.
And as with this sorry Starlink affair, their ignorance, willful and otherwise, costs lives, and lengthens this war.
Wow. Here’s some motivated reasoning. Musk is a private citizen. It’s not his job to assess the possibility of nuclear war. He’s obviously not as confident and well
Informed about military strategy as you are. And it’s not his job to be. Zelenski should have went through the US govt, rather than telling musk directly.
So Musk is obliged to listen to any leader involved in a war? And if he makes the wrong decision it’s okay to crap on him for his poor geopolitical decisions?
This is why I despise the regime media. The Ukraine thing is just an excuse to attack someone who dares to have his own opinion, who doesn’t carry water for the ruling elite that greases the wheels of all these hacks.
What are you talking about? What regime?
The regime media are all those media outlets that carry water for the govt and the ruling elite – those that never even question govt dogma and attack those that do. They attack those who question Covid policy, net zero, forever wars, open borders, gender wars, critical race theory etc…The regime media punches down. It never punches up.
Russia regards Crimea as a sovereign country and, what’s more, their territory. Musk was right that if that country was bombed then a tactical nuclear device might be unleashed on Kiev.
I still don’t understand why Obama and Biden failed to respond. Was d**k Cheney having heart surgery at the time?
The eventual answer was the Minsk Accords to protect the Donbas. And that, indeed, was the root to peace in spring 2022 before Boris Johnson was sent to Kiev to plead for eternal war. In fact, it was still standing in winter 2021-2 – all Biden, Blinken and Nuland had to agree to was not to admit the Ukraine into NATO.
So the same Boris Johnson who couldn’t control his own party and had that little authority that he lost his job over some birthday cake, was simultaneously that powerful and influential that he could scupper plans that had been set by the world major nuclear powers?
Yes, he did seem to have established himself with Zelenskyy as Ukraine’s best friend and, even more remarkably, still evidently has influence in Kyiv. Very naive on their part, in my view.
So the fact that Putin couldn’t get his (very creative) interpretation of the Minsk Accords accepted, justified his invasion of Ukraine, and the now million plus casualties on both sides?
Allowing Donbas a veto over any action by Ukraine is unprecedented in the govt of any nation.
Which probably explains why they didn’t work.
Two comments:
In international law, there are only two categories: Belligerent, and neutral. There is no category for “non-belligerent ally”. The US needs to be clear whether it is an ally of Ukraine, and hence a belligerent (or a neutral, with the obligations incumbent on a neutral – but the US’ involvement currently is too deep to qualify as a neutral).
Also in international law, the Hague Conventions deal explicitly with telecommunications facilities based in neutral states and their status vis-à-vis belligerents. At the time (early 20th century), it was telegraph, but the principles apply.
My theory: Musk is so roundly hated simply because he can’t be nailed-down, pigeon-holed. (If he’s not Red Team or Blue Team then…OMG, the mind boggles!) We all know that consistency is the hob-goblin of little minds, and there are a lot of little minds around theses days; more all the time. The politically attuned, professional or not, are some of the most pea-brained. That includes most “journalists” – we were better off when we had “reporters”, instead. (Present company excluded.)
Of course, not being nailed-down is Musk’s entire M.O. in a nutshell. And it seems to work fairly well for him. A guy with that much money has every reason to not give a flying f**k what the rest of us think. I certainly wouldn’t. Would any of you?
I, for one, don’t see how the Ukrainians could have resisted the first assaults without Starlink.
Refreshing to read such a clear-eyed opinion!
Ukraine War Fatigue setting in!
As at 18.23 BST only 15 comments.
Whilst Starmer has 77, Brand 96 and Proud Boys 60.
QED.
What a brilliant journalist, with a really thorough approach to research. Thank you again Thomas.
What a straw-man article. He hasn’t “betrayed” Ukraine, but he did allow himself to be cowed by Putin’s threats.
The main point–that Fazi scrupulously avoids–is that the threat of “going nuclear” only works to deter a nuclear attack.
Threats of nuclear escalation, are just that, threats.
We’ve crossed every red line Putin has ever drawn, without consequences. Indeed, a man terrified of catching covid probably isn’t a plausible candidate to start a suicidal nuclear war. Bad for his re-election prospects, if nothing else.
This fact is obviously not apparent to people with little knowledge of military-political affairs, like Musk. Or people with a willfully-distorted view of reality, like Fazi.
And as with this sorry Starlink affair, their ignorance, willful and otherwise, costs lives, and lengthens this war.
Wow. Here’s some motivated reasoning. Musk is a private citizen. It’s not his job to assess the possibility of nuclear war. He’s obviously not as confident and well
Informed about military strategy as you are. And it’s not his job to be. Zelenski should have went through the US govt, rather than telling musk directly.
The US govt does not own Starlink
So Musk is obliged to listen to any leader involved in a war? And if he makes the wrong decision it’s okay to crap on him for his poor geopolitical decisions?
It may not own it, but Starlink is incredibly reliant on it therefore it holds considerable sway
Rightly or wrongly, arms dealers exist to sell arms, subject to the law where they operate
Have no idea what this means
That does not surprise me!