Paweł Lisicki, editor-in-chief of the weekly For Things, revealed another installment of Russian propaganda. That he doesn't hide with his longing for russian rule? He writes about inciters, or individuals calling for opposition against Moscow:
]]>html]]>
Summing up his surface: he writes what Lavrow says: opposition in vain, causes only victims due to the fact that the Red Army is invincible and her triumph is inevitable. Victims are not the responsibility of Putin and Russia, but of Ukraine and Poland. If they gave up without a fight, there wouldn't be any casualties.
In this statement, he refers to the message by Malcolm Davis in Gazeta Wyborcza, which I read within the free limit [1]. If individual doesn't read Wyborcza, they have a chance to get to know the limit. This is simply a certain accomplishment – an article in Do Things worse than in Wyborcza. Michnik's happy. Interestingly, I wrote about Lisicki [2] last August and nothing changed. It's the same thought line it presents, only more. What a failure.
II
Speech is about the Russian atom and the threat of its use. Contrary to Lisicki's statements, the case was clarified and formulated by Dr. Bartosiak, which Lisicki does not mention. Without Bartosiak's memory, it's impossible. First they will compose briefly what is going on with the aid of Ukraine and the Russian atom and then show the meaning of the misconceptions of ed. Lisicki.
Ukraine's assistance before the russian attack was limited for the following reasons:
1. Unbelief in maintaining Ukraine, it may fall, so it makes no sense to invest besides much.
2. Russians can hit an atom and that could be a problem.
3. any (Germany, France) were behind Russian.
4. No weapons available.
The first reason he fell, Ukraine made it. So that leaves the atom. Russia in its atomic doctrine has reserved that it will strike an atom in the event of an attack on its territory. Even conventional. However, there was a problem after the annexation of Crimea and Donbas: Russia for them is not the borders of 2013, but the new, self-proclaimed ones. At the time of the annexation, however, Chersonia overstepped the pole, due to the fact that they immediately withdrew from this Chersonia and now from their formal point of view their territory is under abroad business and do not pound the atom. The sense of Chersonia's annexation pains Girkin-Strielkow rightly beating over his absurdities.
Additionally, the Chinese banned Russian atom pounding, or even atom pounding. This is not in the hands of China, about which ed. Lisicki doesn't mention it. This is contrary to the line of authoritative russian propaganda. If it turns out that the atomic power always wins with non-atomic due to the fact that it threatens to fire an atom - or even attacks – then countries specified as Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea, Australia, etc. will produce their own atomic arsenals and there will be no mercy here – that it cannot be distributed.
The second anticipation of utilizing an atom is that the Russians can punch due to the fact that they want to. No formal reason. There is simply a subtext opinion that crazy people are and if they get annoyed, they will start. So it's better not to annoy them and do whatever they want. They want Crimea – give. They want Donbas – give. They want Zadnieprz – give. What about Kiev? And Warsaw? And erstwhile the Prigozhyn comes and demands Lisicki to blow his dick? Lisicki, this is our mechanized brigade. Either you suck her dick or we drop the atom!. And he's going to do it or not? I've utilized this example before.
One must be able to read the meaning of the voices saying that peace must be saved at all costs, that we cannot join the war. Etc. As at all costs it means that we must capitulate in front of the Primogyn without a fight, due to the fact that if we defend ourselves, we will not avoid war. And if we capitulate, we avoid it. It was specified a digression. If we teach the Russians that if they endanger the atom, they get everything they want, they'll do it. And that is the moral of this fairy tale: the Russians will tell that peace is the most important. Always.
III
You can't avoid an atom attack. You can make rocket shields, etc., but something will always break through and smash. Only a real threat of retaliation can halt a Bolshevik aggressor. But if they don't care, we're dead. What happens if Putin says he's even a flood? An Austrian watercolorist, dying at the Reich Chancellery, would surely have fired up if he had. But he didn't. possibly Putin's surroundings want to live. That would aid a small 'cause they could halt the launch. In this situation, escalation is inevitable: you gotta nuclearly shoot Putin before anything more weapons.
And, normally, we request a circumstantial US warrant that it will retaliate. We request the presence of American soldiers to shoot something in them.
IV
The hysteria of ed. Lisicki is called upon to defeat Moscow. That's what Davis puts him on. I go further formulating the conditions of maximum success: not only to expel Russia from Ukraine, but besides to deatomize, specified a knock that they are incapable to attack us and others for decades or even centuries. Moscow decolonization. I've written about this [3]. It's like red. Lisicki read of specified plans with respect to his beloved mattiusz rassiji would most likely burst from outrage. possibly it's a good thing, due to the fact that he's kidding me with a poem. He cannot compose straight that he means a fart: Russia is to get time to rebuild, a stream of equipment from France and Germany is to power her army and then the Red Army will decision in an unstoppable momentum to the West to make a unified political area on the Vladivostok-Lisbon line. This is the main problem with his publicist. It formulates a highly vague thesis that if we let Russia to triumph and occupy half of Ukraine then Russia will calm down and see the effectiveness of its atomic blackmail will not usage it to defeat us without a fight. If he openly stated that resistance, even the victorious, would consequence in greater losses than the Russian occupation, so we must surrender to it that he would present any coherent thought lines openly. But no.
And I simply, clearly, emphatically and sensibly claim that it will usage atomic blackmail to usage the Soviets erstwhile we give in to it. Why should he delight none? I think that's what he's trying to say erstwhile we quit half of Ukraine, Putin will be happy with it. And what are his guarantees for that? That he won't decision on in a fewer years? Russia thus wages war, that it first suffers terrible disasters and then it is known.
Yes, the West is afraid of atomic fire, but it's little afraid. He accepted frog cooking tactics. If he had sent tanks, hard and Leos and Centuriones, HIMARS, Crabs, PanzerHaubice, Migi and F 16 to Ukraine immediately last February, Moscow would have boiled. But that's not a groundbreaking minute to change things.
To sum up: Red. Lisicki does not mention to the concept of piedica, that is, giving Russia time to prepare another attack. Russia may be in 2 phases: preparation of attack and attack. As she prepares, she is polite, signs agreements, observes, gives hope for democratisation, etc. opens up prospects. And then the attack goes, and it all goes to the basket. Marek Budzisz mentioned that he had participated in the discussion on which red. Lisicki formulated the view that the most crucial thing is to apologize for Volyn. Let Moscow take over Kiev, Warsaw, Poznań, Kraków, let us do another Buche but as Ukrainians apologize for Volyn it is enough. Did anyone see that? This will be in the next entries. erstwhile upon a time.
PS: More about this Munich: note that France and England with pain sacrificed Czechoslovakia giving distant Sudeta. But they didn't value the area adequate to give something back. Even German colonies occupied after the First War wouldn't return. Shouldn't they give Menchester to Germany to save peace? Think about it sometime.
What his own is willing to sacrifice red. Lisicki to save the room? The problem is that it is rightly challenged from onuc due to the fact that it qualifies. But you can't halt calling names, you just gotta mention to the meaning. The erstwhile entry was about a meritum.
Footnotes:
1- ]]>https://election.pl/7,75399,29787658, expert-Ukrainian-not-win-war-without...]]>
2 - ]]>https://www.salon24.pl/u/smoky-foaming/1245813,compromise]]>
3 - ]]>https://www.salon24.pl/u/smoky-foam/1301585, goals-war]]>
In the image: Only by giving up will we avoid the destiny of Bachmut?
