and speaking of shear brutality 

"Russia has drawn up plans for public executions in Ukraine as and when cities are captured by Russian troops, Bloomberg reports.

Bloomberg cites a European intelligence official as saying that Moscow has drafted strategies to break morale in order to discourage Ukrainians from fighting back as cities fall under the Kremlin’s control.

The official said Moscow plans to crack down on protest, detain opponents and potentially carry out public executions, the news agency writes."

 rgio wrote:
tbh it is the only angle I have read that at least makes Putin's actions consistent (and therefore not totally irrational). It honestly looks like he thinks he just has to hunker down, go overboard on the brutality, subjugate a people by the force of shear cruelty and wait for the international community to swallow its pride and start trading with him again.  This might be the only real angle that is consistent with all the facts. 

Teen Who Tracked Elon Musk's Private Jet Starts Following Flights Of Russian Oligarchs

BY TYLER DURDEN TUESDAY, MAR 01, 2022 - 12:30 PM

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

A teenager who was blocked on social media by Elon Musk after tracking the Tesla chief executive officer’s private jet has now started following the private planes of Russian oligarchs.

Jack Sweeney, 19, created a Twitter account called “Russian Oligarch Jets” in February amid President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
This is a pretty good summary (I think)....

Putin is a small man, physically, and growing up in postwar Leningrad must have been tough for him. It clearly taught him a lesson: if you are the smaller boy, hit first, hit hard and keep hitting. And the bigger boys will learn to fear you, and will back off. It is a lesson he has taken to heart. The US’s military budget for 2021 was about $750bn, Europe’s combined budget $200bn, and Russia’s about $65bn. Yet he still scares us a lot more than we scare him. It’s the advantage of fighting like a cornered rat, rather than like a pudgy boy gone soft on a diet of Coca-Cola, Instagram and 80 years of peace in Europe.

good opinion piece on Putin

re the discussion on a no-flight zone.

I tend to agree with Ben Wallace. The EU and NATO need to draw a line between passively and actively engaging the Russians. It looks to all intents and purposes to me that Putin is actively seeking a direct confrontation with NATO so we shouldn't give him an excuse.
Further, a no-fly zone wouldn't be accepted by the Russians and would immediately lead to an air battle. Then it is all on. 

But NATO and the EU can equip the Ukrainians to fight our war for us without that counting as direct hostilities. Also Ukraine has a lot of options still open to it, given the right equipment. The Russians, most strangely, haven't established air superiority and Ukrainian drones have inflicted a lot of damage.

But whatever way this pans out, it is going to be long and bloody and exact enormous human suffering. 

If true, this would be highly significant.

The Russian Federal Security Service leaked information that alerted Ukraine to an assassination plot against president Volodymyr Zelenskiy, according to the cyber-hacking collective Anonymous.

“Ukraine doesn’t want to be covered in bodies of soldiers,” he said. “Go home.”

 R_P wrote: 
Ah. What a quagmire. More clearly defined. Thanks.

 Red_Dragon wrote:
As quoted below, you (likely) can't establish a no-fly zone without Russia's agreement.

 R_P wrote:

Yes. I wonder if a Russian aircraft defending itself against an EU fighter would qualify as an attack on a NATO member. The devil is in the details, I suppose.

 oldviolin wrote:
The political arrangement includes foreign policy/defense.

 kurtster wrote: 
Indeed. I suppose I was referring to the original question by R_D. As to the overlaps, I'm sure further complications ensue at that point...

 oldviolin wrote: 
That is my understanding, too.  I was just trying to provide an answer to the question posed.

 kurtster wrote: 
It appears the EU is an economic and political arrangement rather than a treaty charter providing for militaristic protections in the guise of peacekeeping.

 R_P wrote: 
It would make a difference in that if Russia attacked a (or any) NATO member in reprisal, then Article 5 kicks in and everyone is involved by default and design.*

* again the same caveat as mentioned in the post below will apply.

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
If the EU country is a member of NATO, there is a problem*.  So of all the non NATO members of the EU, who is capable of undertaking such a task ?

* We all know that I am subpar in my intelligence compared to everyone else here, so my assessment is subject to your peer review and approval.

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Would make no difference to Russia, i.e. an escalation/interference.

Also:

No-fly zones have been enforced in the past with great success, said Rae, pointing to the landmark effort in 1991 in the skies over northern Iraq to protect Kurds from a genocidal regime in Baghdad ruled by the dictator Saddam Hussein.

The United States, Britain and France patrolled the skies over northern Iraq, which kept Hussein's war planes on the ground and left Kurdish Peshmerga fighters to wage a ground war for the survival of their people without having to endure hellfire from above.

"It's important to remember that the successful no-fly zones have been carried out successfully because no one challenged the power of the country that was providing the air cover," said Rae.

"For example, the Kurds in northern Iraq, the no-fly zone that was put in place ... was allowed to be maintained, because it was respected by Hussein, was respected by the Russians, respected by the Chinese, respected by the Saudis, respected by everybody."

That simply is not the case today in Ukraine, said Rae.

"One has to recognize what the risks of that would be," he said.

So, here's a thought.... Why couldn't the EU - not NATO - enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine? The EU has, collectively, an enormous air force. I'm certain someone will explain to me just how wrong this is.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
OBTW, I did notice that you did not criticize VV for mocking and changing the tone of the discussion with his comments on the use of maps.  It was gratuitous and certainly unnecessary, imo.

A double standard.