That's exactly what it is. They smell opportunity and this is a good pretense from a pr angle. They can simultaneously cut and run on agreements they made within the eu for sweetheart deals and increase their profits through relocation. So they ran off to what, four different bidness rags, and shed a few crocodile tears? Smart play.

There is also a short comment I would like to make on these “big boys” like Putin because of today’s recent events. This type of leader tend to be an appeal for some “tough guys” who “believe in national interest” or “believe in the (past or present) greatness of their fatherland” etc. etc. but in reality this type of rulers are the greatest enemy of the national interests of the country they are ruling. Many of the examples about Putin have already been mentioned.
So I am going to talk about my own “leader”. Again there are countless examples of his undermining of the countries national interests while pretending to be “returning the country to it’s past glory” (that didn’t even exist before the foundation of the very republic that his political ideology is trying to destroy), but the most recent examples is this: Greece and Turkey have always had rivalries about the control of some Aegean and Mediterranean islands. For this reason there are agreements dating to 1923 / 1947 agreements on the demilitarization of the Aegean islands. (The island belong to Greece but Greece is not allowed to construct new military bases on them). With ups and downs this position has always been maintained by both countries during the many years of tension and rivalry.
Now this new “leader” (His supporters call him “our leader”) kept harassing Greece weaponising the Afghan and Syrian migrants who wanted to enter Europe via Greece, Gas probations around the island of Cyprus, the occupation of zones that were declared as neutral after the end of the conflict in Cyprus in 1974, needless sorties of Turkish airplanes in Greek air-defense zones or the exertion of pressure on Greece for the returning of some dissidents (whish the Greek government refused to do because of the widespread practices of torture on this type of detainees in Turkey) and many other issues. Now Olaf Scholz (the German chancellor) is giving his newest Leopard Tanks to Greece. Greece is giving its old soviet era tanks to Ukraine and Mytokratis (who “doesn’t exist anymore*” for his excellency) is placing those tanks in the previously demilitarized island saying that these tanks are posing no threat to Turkey. (https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20...nst-greece)
And this is just one example of the many enormous mistakes that are being made that even a person like me who isn’t a diplomat or a government officer etc. can clearly see.
In the same way, Putin is believed to be living in his own universe. All the thing that were mentioned by Bel. Here are said to be things that Putin is also believing. And this to a point where Putin is being seen on live television silencing one of his key advisors on issues about the war in Ukraine. In fact his advisors are compared to school children who are there to mainly guess what Putin is willing them to tell.
So that the unbeatable supremacy of autocracies as Xi-Chi-Ping likes to put it. They sincerely believe to be doing everything so right and nothing goes right and they just don’t get it.
One interesting movie on this is a 2004 movie by Oliver Hirschbiegel called “Downfall” (Ger.: Der Untergang).

tl:dr

(October 27, 2022 at 6:53 pm)Leonardo17 Wrote: They sincerely believe to be doing everything so right and nothing goes right and they just don’t get it.

This seems like a fair description of US military policy in the last few decades. 

With the exception of some realist cynics at the very top, most military people probably believe that what they are doing is right. Yet the results seem not to bear that out. Look at our great success in Afghanistan, for example. 

For people who still sincerely hold to the faith that the US brings democracy and freedom to other countries, it certainly does appear that "nothing goes right." 

For the people who actually make the decisions, however, there are probably different plans in place. For them, two outcomes are acceptable: 

1) the leaders of a country become obedient to US demands and let us control their economy, or

2) the country is thrown into chaos, the economy goes to shambles, and there is no possibility of that country challenging US hegemony in any way. 

Examples of the second goal include Libya, for example. 

Option number one is possible if Ukraine manages to come out of the war without being nuked to ashes. In that case it will certainly be under a crushing debt burden. This is the way the IMF, the World Bank, and the US like it. Managing the debt means austerity for the Ukrainian people, and forced privatization of their industry (which means that the profits go to international corporations, not Ukrainians). 

Option number two is always a possibility, if the US continues to refuse negotiations. The US government currently seems willing to fight the war until the last Ukrainian is dead. A strange sort of victory, but it achieves US foreign policy goals.

Who had Libya on their Bel excuse BINGO card?

Add it to Italy, Haiti, China, Germany, etc., etc., etc.

Quote:This seems like a fair description of US military policy in the last few decades. 

With the exception of some realist cynics at the very top, most military people probably believe that what they are doing is right. Yet the results seem not to bear that out. Look at our great success in Afghanistan, for example. 

For people who still sincerely hold to the faith that the US brings democracy and freedom to other countries, it certainly does appear that "nothing goes right." 

For the people who actually make the decisions, however, there are probably different plans in place. For them, two outcomes are acceptable: 

1) the leaders of a country become obedient to US demands and let us control their economy, or

2) the country is thrown into chaos, the economy goes to shambles, and there is no possibility of that country challenging US hegemony in any way. 

Examples of the second goal include Libya, for example. 

Option number one is possible if Ukraine manages to come out of the war without being nuked to ashes. In that case it will certainly be under a crushing debt burden. This is the way the IMF, the World Bank, and the US like it. Managing the debt means austerity for the Ukrainian people, and forced privatization of their industry (which means that the profits go to international corporations, not Ukrainians). 

Option number two is always a possibility, if the US continues to refuse negotiations. The US government currently seems willing to fight the war until the last Ukrainian is dead. A strange sort of victory, but it achieves US foreign policy goals.

1. The United States is not a cartoon villain trying to take over the world and conquer everyone (that would be Russia and China) so this is just paranoia.

2. Russia is never going to use nukes and of course, Ukraine's going to have a bumpy recovery. You can thank Russia for that ....

3. America like every other Ukraine ally has made it clear the war stops with Russia GTFO of Ukraine ...

4. If you think Libya was a utopia under Gaddafi you are nuts. If you think Afghanistan was better under the Taliban or the Soviets you are even nuttier.

Typical "America Bad" Rubbish 

(October 27, 2022 at 7:58 pm)arewethereyet Wrote: Who had Libya on their Bel excuse BINGO card?

Add it to Italy, Haiti, China, Germany, etc., etc., etc.

I did. He's also brought up Syria.

Vladimir Putin’s Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov declares Ukraine war a ‘Big Jihad’

Vladimir Putin’s Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov has declared “Big Jihad” and urged Russian Muslims to fight Ukraine’s “demons” and “satanic democracy.”

Kadyrov, one of Putin’s most fanatical backers, urged his supporters to lay waste to Ukraine and backed calls from Russian allies to wipe cities “off the face of the f—ing Earth.”

Kadyrov also vowed that anyone who agreed to take up arms and fight would get to kill “shaitans,” an Islamic term for demons.

“And there will be lots of shaitans that you will have a joy to destroy.

“We will not capture those shaitans, but we will burn them. We will not stop anywhere.

Kadyrov also said he believed Russia was at war with all of the West, not just Ukraine.

“Satanic democracy is when the rights of atheists are protected, but believers are offended. Or when traditional couples are deprived of children who are transferred to same-sex families. Intentionally same-sex, not by chance.

“In Europe they have swallowed it. They consider it modern, civilized. The more liberated ‘below the belt’ topic, the better for them. And I see degradation and Satanism in this.

https://nypost.com/2022/10/26/vladimir-p...big-jihad/

(October 27, 2022 at 10:42 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: Vladimir Putin’s Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov declares Ukraine war a ‘Big Jihad’

Vladimir Putin’s Chechen warlord Ramzan Kadyrov has declared “Big Jihad” and urged Russian Muslims to fight Ukraine’s “demons” and “satanic democracy.”

Kadyrov, one of Putin’s most fanatical backers, urged his supporters to lay waste to Ukraine and backed calls from Russian allies to wipe cities “off the face of the f—ing Earth.”

Kadyrov also vowed that anyone who agreed to take up arms and fight would get to kill “shaitans,” an Islamic term for demons.

“And there will be lots of shaitans that you will have a joy to destroy.

“We will not capture those shaitans, but we will burn them. We will not stop anywhere.

Kadyrov also said he believed Russia was at war with all of the West, not just Ukraine.

“Satanic democracy is when the rights of atheists are protected, but believers are offended. Or when traditional couples are deprived of children who are transferred to same-sex families. Intentionally same-sex, not by chance.

“In Europe they have swallowed it. They consider it modern, civilized. The more liberated ‘below the belt’ topic, the better for them. And I see degradation and Satanism in this.

https://nypost.com/2022/10/26/vladimir-p...big-jihad/

These are the people Bel is defending
These are the people Bel is portraying as "victims" of US machhinations
These are "policies" and actions he never criticizes or even comments (unlike BASF, Libya, etc)

Bel rather wants Kadyrow to turn Ukraine into a splatter movie ..
Bel wants Ukrainians to "back down" in order to get literally slaughtered...
Bel wants people to get discriminated for their (lack of) religious belief (oh, if Augustine only knew!)...
...rather than keep any of his delusional (!) and fictional american policies going on.

Let that sink in for a while!

The Chechen Cause (like the Afghan cause) is another example of 21st century messed-up’ness. Putin has obtained the support of the news Chechen Leader in return for a permission he gave him to be able to spread political Islam and radical İslam in Chechenia.
But I believe the reality on the ground to be the same as in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the son of Ahmad Shah Massoud (1953-2001) Ahmad Massoud (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Massoud), is still struggling to create or recreated a real Afghan State out of the chaos that took over the country since the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.
I think the reality on the ground has to be similar in Chechynia. So
1) This much renowned Ramazan Kadyrov should not be seen as I representative of the Chechen People. If he believes in political or radical Islam, he naturally cannot be a believer of the Chechen cause (that is the right of Chechens to self-determination).
2) I believe in the right of the Chechen people to self-determination. So a) In a democratically governed Russia, there could obtain a degree of autonomy or b) They could or maybe even should declare their independence from the Russian Federation.
/ I am no longer afraid to say these things in a louder manner now because my conviction on the issue is basically this: A democratic state has the necessary flexibility to grant special rights to its minorities without requiring them to be clearly and openly independent (Like the scots of England for instance). But an autocratic government doesn’t have these tools, so the more autocratic a government is, the more I will believe in the right of self-determination of minorities living under the rule of this government. So I think that if Putin manages to stay in power and his regime stays for a few more decades, the fate of today’s Russia may be like the fate of the Soviet Union with even more new republics separating themselves from the Russian Federation.