Discussion about this post

User's avatar
samoan62's avatar

"Defeating either side militarily was never the aim."

I don't get why this is so hard to understand. As soon as someone says "failed counter offensive" I know to ignore them. How did the counter offensive fail? Tons of young untrained Ukrainian men got sacrificed to blow up expensive tanks. Sounds like exactly what Washington wants.

This not war may last several more years. It doesn't matter how unpopular it is. Everyone seemed to forget the US- instigated war in Syria which is now 12 years old.

Expand full comment
Archangel's avatar

Anglo-russian history time.

After Ivan IV the Terrible destroyed Novgorod, Russia was left without the ability for foreign trade because the Hanseatic league, Poland and Sweden were charging exorbitant taxes. A major mistake by the tsar.

Enter the English and Muscovy trading company. Ivan IV had to grant a trade monopoly and exorbitant advantages to the English in order to trade with Europe and acquire goods and technology (weaponry, construction, ship-building). Everything that Russia used to get through Novgorod.

A very incomplete historical overview here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscovy_Company

The relationship with the company was very much to the benefit of the English but it was indispensable for Russia. Satisfying Anglo greed and trying to escape from it prompted Russia to expand south towards the Black and Caspian seas and the east towards China and the Pacific. Long-term positives but one century and half of submission to the English.

England did not like the moves to shake off the monopoly and advantages of its trading company and has harboured long-term hostility against Russia in its great game. Of course the hostility would wane during the periods of Russian submissiveness. Echoes from the past resonating until today and for a while in the future.

Expand full comment
17 more comments...

No posts