Russia is sending a shipment of drones to Iran including upgraded versions of the drone technology that Tehran originally supplied to Moscow after its invasion of Ukraine, U.S. and European officials told The Associated Press.
The articles talks about russia providing intel to strike the usa not israel. You can read about russia praising russia and russia praising israel and collaborations during the war in syria
You can read about russia praising russia and russia praising israel and collaborations during the war in syria
So in your book “praises” is more important than extensive military involvement on the opposing sides? Even wiki lists Russia firmly at the same side as government, together with Iran and Palestinians, against (among others) Israel.
In October 2015, Israel and Russia held meetings to coordinate over Syria, and avoid accidentally clashing or scrambling each other’s communications while operating over the country
In March 2016, Putin said the relations with Israel were special and based “on friendship, mutual understanding and the long common history”. Putin stated: “Russia and Israel have developed a special relationship. 1.5 million Israeli citizens come from the former Soviet Union, they speak the Russian language, are the bearers of Russian culture, Russian mentality. They maintain relations with their relatives and friends in Russia, and this make the interstate relations very special”. In a meeting with Netanyahu in June 2016, Putin described Israel and Russia as “unconditional allies” in “efforts to counter international terrorism”.
At the 2018 Russia–United States Summit in July 2018, U.S. President Donald Trump and Putin agreed to cooperate in Syria to ensure Israel’s security.
On 3 March 2019, Netanyahu announced the establishment of a joint Israeli-Russian team to pursue the withdrawal of all foreign troops deployed in Syria.[71] On 18 March 2019, Putin suggested inviting Netanyahu to Crimea for the opening of a new synagogue there
In 2006, Israeli troops found evidence of Russian made Kornet-E and Metis-M anti-tank systems in Hezbollah’s possession in southern Lebanon. In 2007, in response to accusations that it was supplying terrorist groups with weapons, Russia said it was conducting inspections of Syrian weapons storage facilities to prevent the weapons from reaching unintended customers.
On 19 October 1999, Defence Minister of China, General Chi Haotian, after meeting with Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlass in Damascus, Syria, to discuss expanding military ties between Syria and China, flew to Israel and met with Ehud Barak, the Prime Minister and Defence Minister of Israel, where they discussed military relations. Among the military arrangements was a $1 billion Israeli-Russian sale of military aircraft to China, which were to be jointly produced by Russia and Israel
It’s basically all words contrary to actions, even in your own quotes there is Russia supplying weapons to Hezbollah, and btw there seems to be strange coincidence between Russia supplying anti-tank missiles to Hezbollah and the significant losses in tanks Israel is taking from their hands every time IOF invade Lebanon.
Oh but i guess inviting Netanyahu to synagogue 7 years ago (most recent event you quote) is more significant than years of military support to all countries fighting against Israel.
That is simply false. A simplification that is not helpful. Ukraine is allied with Europe and was a strong ally of the US under Biden. Now Ukraine has a practical approach: in no way makes sense to help Russia and Iran as both are bombing Ukraine, so it is better to help the US to force them not to further help Russia and help with NATO cohesion as Ukraine depends on NATO working for them on continuing support against Russia.
2014 was not a US-backed coup, you would need to demonstrate that. The scale and spontaneous origin of the protests, the leaked US diplomatic phone calls, and the immediate return to democratic elections monitored by OSCE are all clear indication that it was not an US-backed coup. Stop spreading false propaganda
Playing a part in Ukraine’s “color revolution.” During the 2004 Orange Revolution, NED provided US$65 million to the Ukrainian opposition. Between 2007 and 2015, NED allocated more than US$30 million to support Ukrainian NGOs and promote “civic participation.” During the 2013-2014 Euromaidan, NED financed the Mass Media Institute to spread inflammatory information. NED also spent tens of millions of dollars in the use of such social media platforms as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and Instagram to spread disinformation, heighten ethnic tensions in Ukraine, and stir up ethnic antagonism in eastern Ukraine.
you are saying this like Russia propaganda machine and hybrid warfare is not multiple times more extensive and pervasive. Moscow financed the pro Russian government with between US$50 and US$300 million and further energy schemes in the billions. To prevent an agreement with the EU Russia invested 15 billions.
Russia was pouring millions in Ukraine before 2014
This argument rests on a false equivalence that collapses fundamentally different material relations into the same category. Loans, energy agreements, and diplomatic engagement with a neighboring state, however one judges Moscow’s intentions, are sovereign economic transactions operating in the realm of interstate relations. What the NED, USAID, and affiliated NGOs executed in Ukraine was something else entirely: a long-term, coordinated program to infiltrate civil society, capture media infrastructure, and mobilize ethnic divisions toward regime change.
You cite a Google Books snippet and a Guardian article as if they settle the matter. But that Guardian piece simply repeats State Department claims without independent verification, without naming sources, without contextualizing the declassified cable’s purpose. That’s not analysis. That’s amplification. When US intelligence says Russia spent hundreds of millions to influence officials, it’s important to ask: influence how? Through what mechanisms? With what evidence? And while we’re asking, where is the equivalent scrutiny of the millions to billions the NED and other cutout NGOs funneled directly into opposition groups, media outlets, and digital mobilization tools globally?
Let’s talk scale. You want to compare Russia’s hybrid warfare to the West’s? Open the Snowden documents. Look at Tailored Access Operations, the NSA’s elite unit for infiltrating foreign networks, hardware, and infrastructure. Recall Eternal Blue, the exploit the NSA developed, lost control of, and which later powered WannaCry(one of if not the largest ransomware attack in history) and more. Remember Stuxnet, the joint US-Israeli cyberweapon that physically destroyed Iranian centrifuges, a precedent for offensive cyber operations against sovereign states. These are documented capabilities, deployed globally, under a command structure that answers to no international body. Add Five Eyes: a transnational intelligence alliance with unparalleled signals intelligence reach, sharing raw data, coordinating disinformation, and shielding each other from accountability. Assange and Snowden were targeted for revealing this architecture. Russia’s media outreach, however aggressive, does not operate at this level of technical penetration, global integration, or institutional impunity.
Then there’s the propaganda machinery. The Nayirah testimony, fabricated by Hill & Knowlton and funded by the Kuwaiti government, was aired before Congress to manufacture consent for Gulf War I. The WMD lies, repeated across every major Western outlet, were used to justify invasion, occupation, and the destruction of a sovereign state. These weren’t fringe operations. They were central, coordinated, and successful. They reveal a system where intelligence, media, and political power fuse to produce narrative as weapon. To claim Russia’s apparatus surpasses this ignores the material base of Western ideological production: ownership of global platforms, control of financial messaging, dominance of academic and think-tank ecosystems. Russia rents space in that system. The West owns the building.
On Euromaidan itself: spontaneous protests don’t receive sustained, pre-planned funding from foreign government-linked foundations. They don’t feature trained organizers, pre-positioned media teams, and real-time social media amplification calibrated to escalate tension along ethnic lines. The leaked Nulands-Pyatt call was a glimpse of the coordination. And the return to democratic elections you cite occurred after a constitutional rupture, after an elected president fled under threat of violence, after parliament was reconstituted under duress, after the legal order was suspended. OSCE monitoring a vote does not retroactively legitimize the process that produced it. Legitimacy isn’t procedural alone. It’s material. It’s about who holds power, how they got it, and whose interests that power serves.
Then there’s the Donbas, the post-coup government’s first legislative acts included rolling back language protections for Russian speakers. And the response, armed resistance, Russian support, the descent into conflict, was foreseeable (predicted even as the coup in Ukraine to use them as the tip of the spear against Russia was entirely the point). To frame this as purely Russian aggression erases the internal fractures that external intervention exploited. That erasure serves a purpose. It simplifies a complex class and national question into a moral fable which is simply a fairytale.
We are not discussing US vs Russia. We are discussing Ukraine vs Russia. I do not care if Russia is worse or US is worse. Both are terrible, and Ukraine deserves to be his own country. Removing Ukraine from euromaidan and pretend it is a US coup is ridiculous.
Both Russia and US are imperialistic nations. So in Russia (the imperialistic invader) vs Ukraine (the victim of invasion), we must stand with Ukraine.
you are saying this like Russia propaganda machine and hybrid warfare is not multiple times more extensive and pervasive.
to my comment about the NED. Directly bringing up the omparuson of Russian and US hybrid warfare. You claimed Russian operations dwarf American ones. When confronted with the facts of the matter from the NSA to the WMD lie, you pivot to say we are not discussing that. Please at least try stay consistent.
Ukraine deserves sovereignty. Absolutely. But sovereignty is material, not abstract. In 2014, an elected government was removed under threat of violence. The constitutional order broke. US-backed forces took power and immediately positioned Ukraine as a spearhead against Russia. Sovereignty for Ukraine was ended in that moment and it wasn’t by Russian hands.
You call Russia imperialist. Materially, it is not. Imperialism requires export of capital, enforced unequal exchange, subordinated peripheral economies to a core. Russia does not command the IMF. It does not control SWIFT. It does not own global platforms or academic gatekeeping. It is an oligarchic kleptocracy with regional ambitions and security concerns. Conflating it with US hegemony serves Western propaganda.
I stand with the Ukrainian people, not the Banderite government in Kyiv. That government has banned opposition parties, consolidated media control, and committed its population to a war of attrition directed from abroad. Fighting to the last Ukrainian is not liberation. It is sacrifice for US strategic interests.
Since 2014, the population of the Donbas has resisted Kyiv. They have endured shelling, blockade, marginalization. Their preference for association with Russia has been tested under fire for nearly a decade. When this is over they should be given the right to choose who they associate with.
The position that serves Ukrainian workers is not escalation. It is negotiation. It is ending the war, not prolonging it for geopolitical gain. That is not Russian propaganda. That is the only position that centers the lives of the people you claim to support.
Expansions with military conquest is imperialism. Imperialism may use economic coercion but it is not required. Ukrainian people support their current government. Russia does not want to negotiate anything short of full surrender. There is nothing else to add
You can call millitant expansion imperialism, but Marxists don’t have a problem with the word, but the actual, material process of what we call imperialism. Millitant expansion can be done for progressive reasons, like when the Statesian north liberated the slaves in the Statesian south. The actual economic form of international extraction as a special, necessary part of late-stage capitalism is what Marxists are trying to dismantle, due to it being the biggest obstacle to global socialism.
As for Ukrainians supporting their government, you’re half-right. Western Ukrainians tend to support their government, while those in the Donbass seceded from it after the Euromaidan coup, and voted to join the Russian Federation.
Overall, we aren’t arguing about words, but processes. If you insist on calling millitant expansion “imperialism,” then we have to agree to what we call the Marxist understanding of late-stage capitalist imperialism as a special term as well, so that we don’t get mixed up on terms.
You define imperialism as military conquest alone. That renders the term useless. By that logic, every war in history is imperialist. The distinction collapses. Materially, imperialism is the export of capital, the enforcement of unequal exchange, the structural subordination of peripheral economies. That framework explains why the US has 800 military bases globally. Why they can sanction the entire world. Why they support Israel and the constant destabilisation of the periphery.
You claim the Ukrainian people support their current government. Under martial law, with opposition parties banned, media consolidated, dissent criminalized, what does that support actually measure? Polls in a war zone with no free press are not evidence. They are propaganda tools.
You say Russia wants full surrender. That is false. Russia has offered terms: neutrality, demilitarization, recognition of Crimea, self-determination for the Donbas. That is not surrender. That is negotiation. The Donbas has resisted Kyiv since 2014. They have endured shelling, blockade, political erasure. Their preference is not fabricated. It has been tested under fire for nearly a decade. To deny them the right to choose is not solidarity. It is imposition.
You ignored the core of my last message because you have no rebuttal. You cannot refute the NED funding. You cannot explain away the Nulands-Pyatt call. You cannot reconcile your definition of imperialism with the material reality of global capital. You cannot reckon with the fact that US-backed forces shattered Ukrainian sovereignty in 2014, or that fighting to the last Ukrainian for US strategic interests is not in the interest of the average Ukrainian worker. So you retreat to cheap slogans.
If you really stood with the Ukrainian people, you would stand for ending this war. Not prolonging it for US strategic gain. Not fighting to the last Ukrainian. Not sacrificing a generation so Washington can weaken a rival. The position that serves Ukrainian workers is peace, sovereignty, and the right to determine their own future, free from Western patrons. That is the only position that centers human life over geopolitical abstraction.
2014 was not a US-backed coup, you would need to demonstrate that. The scale and spontaneous origin of the protests, the leaked US diplomatic phone calls, and the immediate return to democratic elections monitored by OSCE are all clear indication that it was not an US-backed coup. Stop
Iran been victim of the west since they removed their puppet the shah. Sanctions hurt normal iranians. How does it make sens to try to destroy iran economy and then tell Iran do not strengthen ties with russia and china. If you can negociate with Russia you can also negociate with Iran but ukrsine never did that and hurted iran economy with sanctions in 2007
Ukraine is an ally of Israel and the gulf states. Ukraine itself is governed by Nazis thanks to the US-backed coup in 2014.
Russia has good relation with Israel too
Yet they are providing weapons, intel and whatnot to mortal enemy of Israel which is currently in a hot war against it.
The articles talks about russia providing intel to strike the usa not israel. You can read about russia praising russia and russia praising israel and collaborations during the war in syria
So in your book “praises” is more important than extensive military involvement on the opposing sides? Even wiki lists Russia firmly at the same side as government, together with Iran and Palestinians, against (among others) Israel.
Syria was a very important country for iran and the axis of resistance. Russia and syria collaborated multiple time
Yes, that’s my point, Russia is consistently if not directly opposing Israel
Sorry I mean israel and russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel–Russia_relations
It’s basically all words contrary to actions, even in your own quotes there is Russia supplying weapons to Hezbollah, and btw there seems to be strange coincidence between Russia supplying anti-tank missiles to Hezbollah and the significant losses in tanks Israel is taking from their hands every time IOF invade Lebanon.
Oh but i guess inviting Netanyahu to synagogue 7 years ago (most recent event you quote) is more significant than years of military support to all countries fighting against Israel.
That is simply false. A simplification that is not helpful. Ukraine is allied with Europe and was a strong ally of the US under Biden. Now Ukraine has a practical approach: in no way makes sense to help Russia and Iran as both are bombing Ukraine, so it is better to help the US to force them not to further help Russia and help with NATO cohesion as Ukraine depends on NATO working for them on continuing support against Russia.
2014 was not a US-backed coup, you would need to demonstrate that. The scale and spontaneous origin of the protests, the leaked US diplomatic phone calls, and the immediate return to democratic elections monitored by OSCE are all clear indication that it was not an US-backed coup. Stop spreading false propaganda
Playing a part in Ukraine’s “color revolution.” During the 2004 Orange Revolution, NED provided US$65 million to the Ukrainian opposition. Between 2007 and 2015, NED allocated more than US$30 million to support Ukrainian NGOs and promote “civic participation.” During the 2013-2014 Euromaidan, NED financed the Mass Media Institute to spread inflammatory information. NED also spent tens of millions of dollars in the use of such social media platforms as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and Instagram to spread disinformation, heighten ethnic tensions in Ukraine, and stir up ethnic antagonism in eastern Ukraine.
The National Endowment for Democracy:What It Is and What It Does
you are saying this like Russia propaganda machine and hybrid warfare is not multiple times more extensive and pervasive. Moscow financed the pro Russian government with between US$50 and US$300 million and further energy schemes in the billions. To prevent an agreement with the EU Russia invested 15 billions.
Russia was pouring millions in Ukraine before 2014
Russia has spent $300m since 2014 to influence foreign officials, US says
How do not see how anything that I have shared or that you have shared change the fact that 2014 Euromaidan was not a US-backed coup
Source: it came to me in a dream.
This argument rests on a false equivalence that collapses fundamentally different material relations into the same category. Loans, energy agreements, and diplomatic engagement with a neighboring state, however one judges Moscow’s intentions, are sovereign economic transactions operating in the realm of interstate relations. What the NED, USAID, and affiliated NGOs executed in Ukraine was something else entirely: a long-term, coordinated program to infiltrate civil society, capture media infrastructure, and mobilize ethnic divisions toward regime change.
You cite a Google Books snippet and a Guardian article as if they settle the matter. But that Guardian piece simply repeats State Department claims without independent verification, without naming sources, without contextualizing the declassified cable’s purpose. That’s not analysis. That’s amplification. When US intelligence says Russia spent hundreds of millions to influence officials, it’s important to ask: influence how? Through what mechanisms? With what evidence? And while we’re asking, where is the equivalent scrutiny of the millions to billions the NED and other cutout NGOs funneled directly into opposition groups, media outlets, and digital mobilization tools globally?
Let’s talk scale. You want to compare Russia’s hybrid warfare to the West’s? Open the Snowden documents. Look at Tailored Access Operations, the NSA’s elite unit for infiltrating foreign networks, hardware, and infrastructure. Recall Eternal Blue, the exploit the NSA developed, lost control of, and which later powered WannaCry(one of if not the largest ransomware attack in history) and more. Remember Stuxnet, the joint US-Israeli cyberweapon that physically destroyed Iranian centrifuges, a precedent for offensive cyber operations against sovereign states. These are documented capabilities, deployed globally, under a command structure that answers to no international body. Add Five Eyes: a transnational intelligence alliance with unparalleled signals intelligence reach, sharing raw data, coordinating disinformation, and shielding each other from accountability. Assange and Snowden were targeted for revealing this architecture. Russia’s media outreach, however aggressive, does not operate at this level of technical penetration, global integration, or institutional impunity.
Then there’s the propaganda machinery. The Nayirah testimony, fabricated by Hill & Knowlton and funded by the Kuwaiti government, was aired before Congress to manufacture consent for Gulf War I. The WMD lies, repeated across every major Western outlet, were used to justify invasion, occupation, and the destruction of a sovereign state. These weren’t fringe operations. They were central, coordinated, and successful. They reveal a system where intelligence, media, and political power fuse to produce narrative as weapon. To claim Russia’s apparatus surpasses this ignores the material base of Western ideological production: ownership of global platforms, control of financial messaging, dominance of academic and think-tank ecosystems. Russia rents space in that system. The West owns the building.
On Euromaidan itself: spontaneous protests don’t receive sustained, pre-planned funding from foreign government-linked foundations. They don’t feature trained organizers, pre-positioned media teams, and real-time social media amplification calibrated to escalate tension along ethnic lines. The leaked Nulands-Pyatt call was a glimpse of the coordination. And the return to democratic elections you cite occurred after a constitutional rupture, after an elected president fled under threat of violence, after parliament was reconstituted under duress, after the legal order was suspended. OSCE monitoring a vote does not retroactively legitimize the process that produced it. Legitimacy isn’t procedural alone. It’s material. It’s about who holds power, how they got it, and whose interests that power serves.
Then there’s the Donbas, the post-coup government’s first legislative acts included rolling back language protections for Russian speakers. And the response, armed resistance, Russian support, the descent into conflict, was foreseeable (predicted even as the coup in Ukraine to use them as the tip of the spear against Russia was entirely the point). To frame this as purely Russian aggression erases the internal fractures that external intervention exploited. That erasure serves a purpose. It simplifies a complex class and national question into a moral fable which is simply a fairytale.
We are not discussing US vs Russia. We are discussing Ukraine vs Russia. I do not care if Russia is worse or US is worse. Both are terrible, and Ukraine deserves to be his own country. Removing Ukraine from euromaidan and pretend it is a US coup is ridiculous.
Both Russia and US are imperialistic nations. So in Russia (the imperialistic invader) vs Ukraine (the victim of invasion), we must stand with Ukraine.
You said
to my comment about the NED. Directly bringing up the omparuson of Russian and US hybrid warfare. You claimed Russian operations dwarf American ones. When confronted with the facts of the matter from the NSA to the WMD lie, you pivot to say we are not discussing that. Please at least try stay consistent.
Ukraine deserves sovereignty. Absolutely. But sovereignty is material, not abstract. In 2014, an elected government was removed under threat of violence. The constitutional order broke. US-backed forces took power and immediately positioned Ukraine as a spearhead against Russia. Sovereignty for Ukraine was ended in that moment and it wasn’t by Russian hands.
You call Russia imperialist. Materially, it is not. Imperialism requires export of capital, enforced unequal exchange, subordinated peripheral economies to a core. Russia does not command the IMF. It does not control SWIFT. It does not own global platforms or academic gatekeeping. It is an oligarchic kleptocracy with regional ambitions and security concerns. Conflating it with US hegemony serves Western propaganda.
I stand with the Ukrainian people, not the Banderite government in Kyiv. That government has banned opposition parties, consolidated media control, and committed its population to a war of attrition directed from abroad. Fighting to the last Ukrainian is not liberation. It is sacrifice for US strategic interests.
Since 2014, the population of the Donbas has resisted Kyiv. They have endured shelling, blockade, marginalization. Their preference for association with Russia has been tested under fire for nearly a decade. When this is over they should be given the right to choose who they associate with.
The position that serves Ukrainian workers is not escalation. It is negotiation. It is ending the war, not prolonging it for geopolitical gain. That is not Russian propaganda. That is the only position that centers the lives of the people you claim to support.
Expansions with military conquest is imperialism. Imperialism may use economic coercion but it is not required. Ukrainian people support their current government. Russia does not want to negotiate anything short of full surrender. There is nothing else to add
You can call millitant expansion imperialism, but Marxists don’t have a problem with the word, but the actual, material process of what we call imperialism. Millitant expansion can be done for progressive reasons, like when the Statesian north liberated the slaves in the Statesian south. The actual economic form of international extraction as a special, necessary part of late-stage capitalism is what Marxists are trying to dismantle, due to it being the biggest obstacle to global socialism.
As for Ukrainians supporting their government, you’re half-right. Western Ukrainians tend to support their government, while those in the Donbass seceded from it after the Euromaidan coup, and voted to join the Russian Federation.
Overall, we aren’t arguing about words, but processes. If you insist on calling millitant expansion “imperialism,” then we have to agree to what we call the Marxist understanding of late-stage capitalist imperialism as a special term as well, so that we don’t get mixed up on terms.
Got any actual evidence for any of those claims?
You define imperialism as military conquest alone. That renders the term useless. By that logic, every war in history is imperialist. The distinction collapses. Materially, imperialism is the export of capital, the enforcement of unequal exchange, the structural subordination of peripheral economies. That framework explains why the US has 800 military bases globally. Why they can sanction the entire world. Why they support Israel and the constant destabilisation of the periphery.
You claim the Ukrainian people support their current government. Under martial law, with opposition parties banned, media consolidated, dissent criminalized, what does that support actually measure? Polls in a war zone with no free press are not evidence. They are propaganda tools.
You say Russia wants full surrender. That is false. Russia has offered terms: neutrality, demilitarization, recognition of Crimea, self-determination for the Donbas. That is not surrender. That is negotiation. The Donbas has resisted Kyiv since 2014. They have endured shelling, blockade, political erasure. Their preference is not fabricated. It has been tested under fire for nearly a decade. To deny them the right to choose is not solidarity. It is imposition.
You ignored the core of my last message because you have no rebuttal. You cannot refute the NED funding. You cannot explain away the Nulands-Pyatt call. You cannot reconcile your definition of imperialism with the material reality of global capital. You cannot reckon with the fact that US-backed forces shattered Ukrainian sovereignty in 2014, or that fighting to the last Ukrainian for US strategic interests is not in the interest of the average Ukrainian worker. So you retreat to cheap slogans.
If you really stood with the Ukrainian people, you would stand for ending this war. Not prolonging it for US strategic gain. Not fighting to the last Ukrainian. Not sacrificing a generation so Washington can weaken a rival. The position that serves Ukrainian workers is peace, sovereignty, and the right to determine their own future, free from Western patrons. That is the only position that centers human life over geopolitical abstraction.
NATO is allied with Israel…
Color revolution, not the first time.
Iran been victim of the west since they removed their puppet the shah. Sanctions hurt normal iranians. How does it make sens to try to destroy iran economy and then tell Iran do not strengthen ties with russia and china. If you can negociate with Russia you can also negociate with Iran but ukrsine never did that and hurted iran economy with sanctions in 2007