Taken in by a fake interview. The real one does deserve analysis. Putin made the shocking claim that Ukraine is Russia
20240209
The fake interview contained the same claim, with Tucker not responding. It was a short sentence that Tucker appeared simply to let go. Wrong. It was a long exposition.
This will get all of the butterflies out of the trees. It is not what Putin claimed at the start of the war. It is closer to what Dugin said in his books.
I will be very interested to see how others react. In particular, how can the conservatives in the USA defend Russia now? Looks difficult. But I will watch the full interview today. I expect what I say will be lost in the wind. This is a historical moment.
Graham
At 1h33m, it's much the same as I've seen and heard from Putin, lots of bluff and nonsense intertwined with a lot of very reasonable stuff (about 50/50), although put in a very pedagogical way, as if Putin is the professor and Tucker is the student. And Tucker is a "C" student. Putin has been talking about how Russia is such a great economic power, has been for a decade, has advanced weapons which no country can withstand, and so forth - but Tucker doesn't ask the obvious question: "If all of that is so, then why haven't Russia's forces advanced more than 5 miles at most for the past 18 months? Why is the capture of a half mile into Avdiivka such a great victory? Surely if Russia were such a great power with such great weapons, why is it that they aren't at the Polish border by now? They haven't done that, they aren't at the banks of the Dnieper, they haven't even captured half of Donetsk Oblast, which they claim is Russian in its entirety. For that matter, what's up with Russia's air defense? Why is it that Ukraine can strike military targets deep within Russia - and Crimea - and on the Black Sea, so that the Black Sea Fleet has to be withdrawn all the way to Novorossisk, on the eastern shore of the Black Sea? Something doesn't add up, here. There seems to be a gap between your statements and the reality of the situation - please explain..." I could go on - and I still have a half hour to go. Putin does do that "voice of reason" thing quite well, though, I'll give him that. The best propaganda has a considerable amount of truth to it, Putin is well-practiced at it. I've got to wonder how much of it he really believes to be true.
a little bit more: The history - Putin's version - is to establish Russia's land claims. Lots of errors and omissions, going up until 1922 - here's a detailed history: https://www.torugg.org/History/history_of_ukraine.html Eastern Ukraine was finally colonized by Catherine the Great in 1783, Western Ukraine was colonized by the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1772, ending in 1918 with the end of World War I. From 1918 to 1922, Nestor Makhno and his anarchists were part of the government, as well as the White Russians, but both were overthrown by the Bolsheviks, and Bolshevik rule persisted until 1991, when Ukraine - including Crimea - declared independence from Moscow's rule. Russia has the same sort of historical land claim to Ukraine as the British Monarchy has to the US - none. The current invasion is analogous to the British Invasion of the US in 1812, 29 years after the signing of the Paris Treaty in 1783 - that invasion was an attempt to recolonize a former colony, the Russian invasion is the same sort of thing.