대반격 공식화 하루 만에 도네츠크주 전투서 첫 승전보
바그너 그룹 수장 “러 국방부와 어떤 계약도 안 맺을 것”
우크라이나 군인들이 11일(현지시간) 대반격으로 처음으로 탈환했다고 주장하는 동부 도네츠크주 블라호다트네 마을의 한 건물에서 국기를 달고 있다. 로이터연합뉴스
우크라이나군이 영토 수복을 위한 ‘대반격’ 개시 이후 처음으로 동남부 도네츠크주의 3개 마을을 러시아군의 수중에서 탈환했다고 11일(현지시간) 밝혔다. 전날 볼로디미르 젤렌스키 우크라이나 대통령이 대반격을 공식화한 지 하루 만에 발표한 첫 승전보다. 러시아군은 지난 4일 우크라이나군이 대반격 작전에 돌입했다고 발표했지만, 우크라이나는 일주일 가까이 대반격에 대한 입장 표명을 자제해왔다.
우크라이나 육군은 이날 “제68특전여단이 도네츠크주 블라호다트네 마을에 입성했다”고 발표하며 이곳에 우크라이나 국기를 게양하는 동영상을 공개했다. 이어 도네츠크주 국경수비대와 한나 말랴르 우크라이나 국방차관은 네스쿠치네와 마카리우카 마을 역시 차례로 수복했다고 밝혔다. 발레리 세르셴 우크라이나 육군 대변인은 “탈환한 마을들은 도네츠크와 자포리자 지역 경계에 있으며, 우크라이나 국기가 이 마을들에 게양됐다”면서 “반격 작전의 첫 성과”라고 말했다. 미국 싱크탱크 전쟁연구소(ISW)도 이날 우크라이나군이 주말 사이 최소 3개 지역에서 반격 작전을 펼쳤고, 일부 영토를 확보한 것으로 보인다고 분석했다.
우크라이나가 탈환했다고 밝힌 3개 마을은 약 4.8㎞에 걸쳐 있는 소규모 마을이다. 규모는 작지만 동부 최대 격전지인 바흐무트로 연결되는 보급로에 위치해 있으며, 블라호다트네에서 남쪽 95㎞ 거리에는 러시아가 점령 중인 도시 마리우폴이 있다. 이런 지정학적 위치 때문에 우크라이나군이 마리우폴을 공략하기 위한 거점 확보를 목적으로 이번 작전을 펼쳤다는 분석도 나온다. 개전 초부터 러시아군이 점령을 시도했던 마리우폴은 우크라이나 동부와 남부를 잇는 군사적 요충지로, 이 도시를 탈환하면 러시아군을 양분하고 보급로를 끊을 수 있다.
BBC방송은 전문가의 말을 인용해 우크라이나군이 향후 몇달 안에 마리우폴 탈환을 시도할 것이라고 내다봤다. 뉴욕타임스(NYT)는 우크라이나군이 탈환한 마을에서 남쪽으로 더 진격하면 대반격의 핵심 목표인 크름반도와 러시아 본토 사이를 잇는 육로를 끊을 수 있다고 보도했다.
그러나 우크라이나가 러시아의 1차 방어선을 돌파했는지는 아직 불분명하다. NYT는 “(우크라이나가 되찾은) 마을들이 러시아의 1차 방어선 너머에 있는지 분명하지 않다”면서도 “분명한 것은 오랫동안 기다려온 우크라이나의 대반격이 완전히는 아니지만 진행 중이라는 것”이라고 전했다. 가디언도 우크라이나군이 최근 치열한 전투가 벌어졌던 도네츠크주 서부에서 남쪽으로 진격한 것은 현재까지 이뤄진 대반격의 가장 중요한 성과를 의미하지만, 러시아의 주요 방어선에 도달하기에는 아직 갈 길이 멀다고 보도했다. 러시아는 우크라이나의 점령지 탈환에 대해 아직까지 공식 반응을 내놓지 않고 있다.
‘2차 세계대전 이후 최대 규모 군사작전’(NYT)이라는 이번 작전에서 우크라이나군은 서방이 지원한 무기를 앞세워 진격하고 있지만, 이 과정에서 손실도 적지 않은 것으로 전해졌다. NYT는 익명을 요구한 미국 관리들의 말을 인용해 우크라이나군이 지난 일주일간 작전에서 최소 3대의 독일제 레오파르트2 전차와 미국 브래들리 장갑차 8대를 잃었다고 보도했다.
우크라이나군이 오랫동안 예고했던 대반격이 진행되고 있는 시점에서 러시아군 내부의 갈등이 극에 달했다는 보도도 이어졌다. 바흐무트에 투입됐던 러시아의 민간군사기업(PMC) 바그너그룹의 수장 예브게니 프리고진은 이날 “바그너그룹은 세르게이 쇼이구 러시아 국방부 장관과 어떠한 계약도 맺지 않을 것”이라고 밝혔다. 전날 쇼이구 장관이 우크라이나 전쟁에 참전한 모든 비정규군이 이달 말까지 국방부와 계약을 체결하라고 지시한 것을 두고 거부 의사를 분명히 한 것이다. 이런 지시를 두고 러시아군이 국방부에 공개적으로 날을 세워온 바그너 그룹을 통제하려는 시도라는 분석이 나왔다.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
자칭 진보언론이라는 것들의 논조도...국내 문제...국내 문제에서도 분명하게 패가 갈려 쌈질이 가능한 곳에서나 ..다른소리는
내는 척 (척만) 합니다..
그 문제도 문제의 본질에 대한 다름이나 차이 라기 보다는 피상적인 겉 햙기인 경우가 거의 대 부분입니다.
외신에 관해서는 ....수구 꼴통들과 눈꼽 만큼의 차이가 없습니다..
오히려 수구 꼴통놈들이 독자의 관심을 끌 수 잇는 재료 배합에 훨씬 더 능숙해 보입니다.
어차피 누가 꼼꼼히 타져 물을것도 아니고...본 사람이 잇는것도 아니고
어차피 서구의 주류미디어의 보도 말고...더 많은 신뢰와 검증을 주는 메체도 없습니다..
그러니 줄창 서구주류언론의 소리만 번역하여 뿌려 주는데....
이것이 알게 모르게 참 대단한 선전선동을 만든다는 것입니다..
이슬람= 악귀들
짱골라= 음흉하고 나쁜 쇗깨..............라는 정신질환에 쩌들려 버린 것이지요...
우리것이 아닌것, 우리의 방식이 아닌것, 우리에게 익숙하지 않는 것, 우리의 뱃짱과 감성에 맞지 않는 모든것이 다 ..........
악귀화 되엇습니다.
나름 똑똑해 보이는(즉 사람다운 사고를 하는) 사람도....패 갈라 해골 깨지게 쌈질이나 처 하는 국내문제에서 만 그럽니다.(그런척 보입니다) 그런데 외국의 문제에는 ....순간적으로 믿어지지 않을 만큼 완전한 백색의 빠가가 되 어 버리는 어처구니 없는 현상은 .어쩜 당연합니다.
이 사람의 눈에는 ...국내인 유럽 이외의 세상은 다 백색 빠가들의 세상으로 보엿습니다..
그가 만낫던 엄메리카 원주민들은 ...예수를 몰랏던 ..비교도들이엇고,,소유의 개념이 없는 야만인들이엇습니다..
컬럼버스는 이들 야만인들을 싹 쓸어 노예로 팔아 버렛고....그곳에 ...주님의 성전을 세웟지요....그리고 외첫습니다..
-할레루으야~~~
대한민국은 그들의 예수와 십자가 위에 ....1945년 해방을 맞을 것이지요..
그런데 그만 그 바탕위에 경제성장이라는 놀라운 기적을 만들어 내 버린 것이지요.
-할렐루흐오ㅑ...ㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑㅑ
컬럼버스의 눙깔로 보앗던 그 엄메리나 야만 원주민이 ...노예로 팔려 가는 저주을 벗어나.. 서양의 신 예수님과 서양인 미국 덕분에 세계 10위의 대국이 되는 엄청난 축복을 받아 버린 것이지요..
에휴..
니기미.................차라리 아갈통이 없엇쓰면 좋겟써....암도 암말도 못 하게...
https://www.scottritterextra.com/p/finally-the-bull-charged?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Finally the Bull Charged
2023. 6. 11.
Finally the bull charged, the horse leaders ran for the barrera, the picador hit too far back, and the bull got under the horse, lifted him, threw him onto his back.
Zurito watched. The monos, in their red shirts, running out to drag the picador clear. The picador, now on his feet, swearing and flopping his arms. Manuel and Hernandez standing ready with their capes. And the bull, the great, black bull, with a horse on his back, hooves dangling, the bridle caught in the horns. Black bull with a horse on his back, staggering short-legged, then arching his neck and lifting, thrusting, charging to slide the horse off, horse sliding down. Then the bull into a lunging charge at the cape Manuel spread for him.
Ernest Hemingway, The Short Stories
Finally the bull charged.
The long-awaited Ukrainian counter-offensive has finally begun. After months of handwringing and speculation, the western investment in Ukrainian military might has been put on display for the whole world to see—billions of dollars of advanced weaponry, drawn from NATO stocks, manned by Ukrainian soldiers who have been trained by NATO instructors, and whose actions have been shaped by NATO intelligence and directed by NATO planners. Let there be no doubt—this is a NATO offensive, a sad reflection on the reality that what was once called a simple proxy conflict has morphed into so much more—direct force-on-force combat between the collective west and Russia.
For Anne Applebaum, this offensive is an answer to her prayers. The Polish-American Pulitzer Prize-winning historian has for some time now been calling for such an action, a decisive blow by the collective west and Ukraine against a Russia she characterizes as autocratic and dangerous. The lessons of history have been shunted aside in favor of her feverish lust for Russian blood. Killing Russians, Applebaum believes, is the only way for the civilized west to show the Russian nation—autocrats and automatons alike—that the price for regional hegemony is too high for the Russian people and their government to bear.
Anne Applebaum (Photo: Olga Majrowska)
In a new article she penned for The Atlantic, Applebaum—a staff writer for the journal— writes of things she has no knowledge of or experience in, namely military operations, both operational and psychological. Like the dilletante she is, Applebaum throws about buzz phrases as if by putting them down on paper, it somehow makes them real, and the schemes they describe possible.
Applebaum, however, is hampered by her inadequacy as a military analyst and—perhaps more importantly—her total ignorance of the character of the Russian people, their leadership, and the nation they represent collectively. Elegantly stated ignorance is Applebaum’s forte, especially when it comes to glossing over both the causation and consequences of a conflict she has been promoting her entire adult life.
Scott Ritter will discuss this article and answer audience questions on Ep. 73 of Ask the Inspector.
Applebaum has turned an extensive stint in academia, inclusive of a six-month exchange program as a student to Leningrad circa 1985, into the intellectual foundation of a career spent sorting through the detritus of Soviet history, to reimagine Stalin and the Soviet experience in the worst possible light. It is not that one would be desirous of reimagining Stalin and Stalinism as the golden era of Soviet rule.
But perspective, and historical accuracy, do matter, and Applebaum’s writing seems destined to a particular brand of Russophobic western elite pre-programmed into accepting at face value anything negative about Stalin and his times. Her hatred for everything Russian, especially its leader, Vladimir Putin, drips from every paragraph she pens. She sees herself and the collective west as combatants in the greater struggle against what she derisively calls “Putinism.”
“[A]s long as Russia is ruled by [Vladimir] Putin,” Applebaum wrote recently, “then Russia is at war with us [i.e., the collective west] too.”
This fight is not theoretical. It requires armies, strategies, weapons, and long-term plans…NATO can no longer operate as if it might someday be required to defend itself; it needs to start operating as it did during the Cold War, on the assumption that an invasion could happen at any time.
Germany’s decision to raise defense spending by 100 billion euros is a good start; so is Denmark’s declaration that it too will boost defense spending. But deeper military and intelligence coordination might require new institutions—perhaps a voluntary European Legion, connected to the European Union, or a Baltic alliance that includes Sweden and Finland—and different thinking about where and how we invest in European and Pacific defense.
Applebaum’s words are a direct reflection of the sentiment expressed by one of her mentors, the Hungarian billionaire George Soros. In 1993, Soros wrote an article where Applebaum’s “new institution” thematic was expressed in more direct terms. Soros wrote of the need for a new world order “based on the United States as the remaining superpower and on open society as the organizing principle.”
It consists of a series of alliances, the most important of which is NATO and, through NATO, the Partnership for Peace which girds the Northern Hemisphere. The United States would not be called upon to act as the policeman of the world. When it acts, it would act in conjunction with others. Incidentally, the combination of manpower from Eastern Europe with the technical capabilities of NATO would greatly enhance the military potential of the Partnership because it would reduce the risk of body bags for NATO countries, which is the main constraint on their willingness to act. This is a viable alternative to the looming world disorder.
The combination of manpower from Eastern Europe with the technical capabilities of NATO as a mechanism for reducing the risk of body bags for NATO countries sounds very much like precisely what is taking place today in the current struggle between Ukraine and Russia. The imagery of destroyed Leopard tanks and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles belies the reality that the charred bodies trapped inside these wrecked vehicles and scattered in the fields surrounding the scene of their collective demise, are Ukrainian.
NATO technical capabilities and Ukrainian manpower does, in fact, reduce the risk of NATO body bags. It also emboldens western writers such as Applebaum to urge the Ukrainians on in a fight with Russia neither they nor the west has a chance of winning. The goal of the Ukrainian counteroffensive, Applebaum contends, is to “convince the Russian elite that the war was a mistake and that Russia can’t win it, not in the short term and not in the long term, either.”
Applebaum would do well to reflect on the reality that the anti-Putin Russian elite she fantasizes about influencing through the nexus of NATO technical capabilities and Ukrainian blood does not exist inside Russia any longer. Liliya Vezhevatova, an anti-war and LGTBQ activist from Novosibirsk who fled to Armenia following the initiation of Russia’s Special Military Operation in February 2022, noted that before the conflict started her organization could boast around 2,000 activists. Today that number is down to around 200.
“It is an irony of this conflict,” Vezhevatova laments, “that the female relatives of perished soldiers often hold the most ardent pro-war positions.” Vezhevatova explains this phenomenon by declaring that these mothers have been raised on the mythology of the “Great Patriotic War” (World War II), which casts the mother of a soldier as a heroic figure. “The situation is complicated by deep psychological mechanisms at play,” Vezhevatova notes. “It is hard to accept that a loved one perished for no reason.”
Vezhevatova has a point—no mother would like to see the son she bore and raised die for no reason. But what Vezhevatova and Applebaum fail to see is the reality that the mothers and wives of the men fighting for Russia against Ukraine and the collective west are, in their minds, fighting for Mother Russia’s very survival. The monuments in Volgograd erected to commemorate the heroism of the Russian soldier in defense of his homeland (“Stand to Death”) and the awe-inspiring sight of Mother Russia beckoning her men forward in defense of their homeland (“The Motherland Calls”) is more than simple mythology weaponized for psychological manipulation. It is reflective of a deep patriotism that runs through the blood of most Russian women today.
Vezhevatova has abandoned her country, opting to live abroad while supporting westerners like Applebaum who are content with sacrificing Ukrainian men in the name of furthering western anti-Russian objectives. She has forsaken her homeland. Not so the women of Russia who remain. They know what is at stake. They know, as did their grandmothers before them, what needs to be done, inclusive of the horrible sacrifices that entails.
The statues “Stand to Death” (foreground) and “The Motherland Calls” (background), Volgograd
Meanwhile, Applebaum sits in the relative safety of her writer’s perch, claiming to be a friend of Ukraine all the while urging the men of Ukraine forward to slaughter.
Applebaum’s bloodlust brings to mind a passage from Ernest Hemingway’s 1926 classic novel, The Sun Also Rises. Hemingway touches upon the dichotomy of killing one’s friends in a short conversation between Romero, a Spanish bullfighter, and Lady Brett Ashley, a British widow.
“The bulls are my best friends,” Romero says in Spanish. His words are translated into English by Jake, an American expatriate and friend of Lady Ashley.
“You kill your friends?” Lady Ashley replies.
“Always,” Romero says in English, laughing.
It is the imagery of the bullfight that best describes Anne Applebaum’s desire to see Ukrainians killed in battle against the Russians. She treats the Ukrainian counteroffensive as a blood sport, a dance to the death between a matador and a fighting bull.
Finally the bull charged…
The contemporary Lebanese writer, Malak El Halabi, wrote about her experience watching a bullfight.
[T]o watch the bull enter the arena…To watch one bull surrounded by a matador and his six assistants. To watch the matador confronting the bull with the capote, performing a series of passes, just before the picador on a horse stabs the bull’s neck, weakening the neck muscles and leading to the animal's first loss of blood…Starting a game with only one side having decided fully to engage in while making sure all the odds will be in the favor of him being a predetermined winner. It was this moment precisely that made me feel part of something immoral. The unfair rules of the game. The indifferent bull being begged to react, being pushed to the edge of fury. The bull, tired and peaceful. The bull, being teased relentlessly. The bull being pushed to a game he isn't interested in. And the matador getting credits for an unfair game he set.
Yes, I went to watch a bull fight and yes the play of colors is marvelous. The matador’s costume is breathtaking and to be sitting in an arena fills your lungs with the sands of time. But to see the amount of claps the spill of blood is getting was beyond what I can endure. To hear the amount of claps injustice brings is astonishing. You understand a lot about human nature, about the wars taking place every day, about poverty and starvation…You understand a lot about humans’ thirst for injustice and violence as a way to empower hidden insecurities. Replace the bull and replace the matador. And the arena will still be there. And you'll hear the claps. You’ve been hearing them ever since you opened your eyes.
Finally the bull charged…
Yes, the great Ukrainian counteroffensive has finally begun. The Ukrainian bull has been prodded into the arena by the collective west. The Ukrainian bull, weakened by the provision of inadequate weaponry and filled with the false promise of western support, does not comprehend that he is merely a pawn in a greater game, Eastern European manpower to be married up with NATO technology in a bid to weaken Russia. Maddened by the pain, blinded with fury, the Ukrainian bull sees the red cape…
Finally the bull charged…
Close your eyes, and you can hear the claps of the collective west urging the Ukrainian bull on.
Open your eyes, and you will see Anne Applebaum and her ilk reveling in the blood being spilt, cheering the slaughter and indifferent to the Ukrainian bull’s agony as the Matador slides the blade into his flesh.
Finally the bull charged…
This war will end one day, and when it does, Anne Applebaum and the collective west will have much to answer for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
물론
다른소리도 무엇이 진실인지는 알지 못 합니다......하지만
늘 다른소리가 말 하듯이......한 가지는 분명하게 알고 잇지요..
-다른것이 잇다............라는 것입니다..
1년전 서구주류언론의 보도 중에서 사실인 것이 얼마나 잇엇던지..
그럼 언론만 집중적으로 해석하여 유별난 전문가라도 되는 듯이 한껏 나발 거렷던 사람들의 말 중에 사실에 가까운 것이
얼마나 잇엇던가를 생각하면...................결론은 뜻 밖에 쉽습니다..........두고 보면 됩니다..
다른소리가 다른것은 몰라도 두고보기 하나는 끊내주게 잘 한다고 햇지요..
다른소린 두고 볼 것입니다..
판단은 여러분이 하시기 바랍니다..