Connect with us

RussiaFeed

History

Culture

Solzhenitsyn: A HERO in the struggle against Soviet tyranny

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was the first man who exposed the horrific Soviet Gulag camps to the world.

Anna Lutskova

Published

on

27 Views

Alexander Solzhenitsyn:

“Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence.”

On July 21, 1994, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn returned to Moscow after spending 20 years in exile for writing his book “The Gulag Archipelago,” where he described the horror of the Soviet prison camps.

Solzhenitsyn stepped off at Yaroslavsky Station in Moscow and was greeted by thousands of people with flowers and posters that said:

“Thank you Solzhenitsyn! He described our suffering and exposed the Gulag camps to the entire world.”

The Nobel Prize-winning author personally went through everything that he wrote about. A World War II veteran, he spent eight years in a prison camp after being sentenced for criticizing Joseph Stalin in his private letters. After living through the horror system of Stalin’s labor camps, he was the first author to reveal to the West the dreadful realities of the “Gulag” (Chief Administration of Corrective Labor Camps and Colonies).

Solzhenitsyn in Gulag (1953)

The author saw his mission as writing about his experience as a Gulag survivor. In 1962, he published his “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich,” a novel which gives an account of one day in life of a Gulag prisoner.

The Gulag Archipelago (1918-1956)

In 1973, just after his next most famous book, “The Gulag Archipelago,” was released to the West, Solzhenitsyn was arrested by the KGB, charged with treason, and exiled to the United States. The author’s work was labeled anti-Soviet propaganda.

In 1991, the year the Soviet Union collapsed, Mikhail Gorbachev, the last President of the USSR, dropped the treason changes against Solzhenitsyn and restored his citizenship.

Shortly after arriving back to Moscow, Solzhenitsyn emerged as a critic of Russia’s post-Soviet government, and particularly, of then-President Boris Yeltsin:

“I have concluded Russia is in a very serious condition. There are groans resounding across the country… Nobody expected the way out of communism would be painless, but nobody expected it to be so painful… The government is not fulfilling its duties.”

The Russian White House under tank attack (October 3, 1993)

Solzhenitsyn has expressed dismay that Russia seemed not to want to listen to him. He was so frustrated with “the modern Russia” that he even rejected the Order of St. Andrew the Apostle (the highest civilian award in Russia) presented to him by Yeltsin in 1998 for “outstanding services to the fatherland and for his great contribution to world literature”:

“I cannot accept an award from the supreme authority which brought Russia to its current disastrous state. Under present circumstances, when people hold hunger strikes in order to get their salaries, I cannot accept this award. Maybe after a long time, when Russia finds its way out of its troubles, my sons will be able to receive it in my place.”

Toward the end of his long life full of struggle and unrest, Solzhenitsyn finally found a political system he could embrace: Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Vladimir Putin visits Alexander Solzhenitsyn in the outskirts of Moscow (2007)

Vladimir Putin about Alexander Solzhenitsyn:

“We are proud that Alexander Solzhenitsyn was our compatriot and contemporary. We will remember him as a strong, courageous person with a great sense of dignity. His activities as a writer and public figure, his entire long, thorny life journey will remain for us a model of true devotion, selfless service to the people, motherland and the ideals of freedom, justice and humaneness.”

His last years the author spent in isolation with his wife Natalya.

Solzhenitsyn and his wife Natalia

The man who survived the revolution, WWII, the Gulag, cancer, KGB persecution, and exile, died on August 3, 2008, at the age of 90.

Solzhenitsyn’s works comprise more than 30 volumes. He was an outstanding writer, a historian, a social philosopher, and the first man who was not afraid to reveal the truth about the monstrous place that was the Gulag.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
24 Comments

24
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
19 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
my2CentsLe RuscinoRoddy WehrmachtNatylie BaldwinMao Cheng Ji Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

Bla Bla Bla – Most of what Solzhenitsyn wrote was proved to be a clever fabric of lies & truth. Do the research ! He suited a US propaganda agenda at the time.

Addison DePitt
Guest
Addison DePitt

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. This was even recognized during his own lifetime, even though, as usual, the Western (pro-capitalist) propaganda noise drowned out the facts. It is also pretty irritating that Russia Feed should be spreading MORE anti-communist propaganda at a moment when the attacks on Russia are already being repackaged by prominent political figures in the US establishment (i.e., Democrat apparatchik Donna Brazile, etc.) as a fight against communism. Russia Feed has lost my trust entirely. As supporters of Russia’s decent, pro-peace internal policies, we will not be dragged into a new cult of anti-sovietism by a media channel that purports… Read more »

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Call me dumb, but when it comes to Russian Gulags I go with a Russian who experienced 7 year of it…rather than a “clever” American who sat on the other side of the globe and “knows better” because he’s “exceptional. Yeah…you know my journalist father ALWAYS told us question the talker. European history does not come from ANY American source. Did you ever live through a war? Spent a few years in a Gulag? Yet you have an opinion. My daughter did her thesis in Europe on WW2Propaganda (most likely because her mother survived it) It makes for very interesting… Read more »

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Oy – And he knew that when he started writing these books stuck in a camp that this would be pleasing to Americans…Yes..and the moon is made of cheese. No clue about war do you.???

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

The following appeared in my mailbox but is conspicuously missing from this thread as well as from his own list.. Thus not allowing me to respond ..So this is a private lecture not to be seen by anyone…..Interesting FROM Patrice de Bergeracpas Sorry my2cents but you are simply wrong. And on several important grounds. First, you overrate firsthand experience. You conveniently forget that ideology, temperament and other facts color ALL human perceptions, rendering everything we say or report as truth subjective. What such subjective understanding of reality usually does is blur or massacre the context of history, without which it… Read more »

Roddy Wehrmacht
Guest
Roddy Wehrmacht

So the USSR wasn’t a corrupt totalitarian shithole? That was all just western propaganda then?
Lol.

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

USSR had the same GDP as US so it wasn’t all bad ? Putin put it best when he said “anyone who doesn’t miss the Soviet Union has no soul but anyone who wants to g back there has no brain” – Nothing is Black & White ! But Solzhenistsyn was a clever fraud & a useful idiot for the West.

Doug Brown
Guest
Doug Brown

A very great man. A fearless and prolific writer. I remember reading many of his works as a youth. How noble, a true hero. He and Father Malachi Martin were both tremendously influencial in my development.

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

& a liar !

Doug Brown
Guest
Doug Brown

He is a great man, and a great writer. You are a little man that cannot write.

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Why was he a liar?

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

He wove truth with lies & exaggerations – this was exposed clearly even when he was alive but it sold well to the West & some still does as can be seen by some poorly informed sheep on here.

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

In 1945, after criticizing Stalin, he spent 8 years in jails and Gulags after which 3 more years in exile…He lied, you say, according to WHOM? And WHO exposed him?. . The Soviets? When a writer is imprisoned for the things he writes logic tells me he’s stating an inconvenient truth that must not be made known. AND, of course there are always those in a camp/Gulag who, for some incentive/reward, contradict certain statements. There is no black and white during war or in any camps/Gulags. It’s survival. But because the “West” liked his writings he became a liar and… Read more »

Mao Cheng Ji
Guest
Mao Cheng Ji

The image you identify as “The Gulag Archipelago (1918-1956)” is in the wikipedia article for Ebensee (Austria) concentration camp: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebensee_concentration_camp : “Inmates of Ebensee concentration camp after their liberation by American troops on May 6, 1945 (Photograph by Arnold E. Samuelson)”. Also here, colorized: http://imgur.com/r/ImagesOfThe1940s/iSnq86Y

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

The allies had a vast amount of photos and film they used for propaganda purposes. One German doctor saw himself on film “walking among the dead in a Concentration camp” He was never in any concentration camp. He was walking among the dead in Dresden after 3 days and nights of non-stop fire bombings killing around 350,000 people, looking for anyone still alive. Photos of mass graves filled with emaciated bodies claiming to have been starved to death were typical victims of Typhus…. I have seen many fotos of German concentration camps and the picture used in the Wikipedia story… Read more »

Mao Cheng Ji
Guest
Mao Cheng Ji

Oh really, just like that: “most likely”, in your esteemed opinion, eh?

I wonder what Mr Arnold E. Samuelson and his crew of photographers attached to the 80th Infantry Division (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_E._Samuelson ) would’ve said about it…

…not to mention the lawyers working for this organization: https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10006177

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Let me say this….real….slowly… There..is…NOTHING….coming …..from ….ANY….American source…..that…I…believe….about WW2….Read that again. After having survived Nazi occupation and THREE fire bombings by the American Army Air Corps, claiming a faulty atlas, attending bombed out schools watching “Allied” propaganda films I can say that EVERY American photographer accompanying Eisenhower in the camps had their footage used not for historical purposes but solely for propaganda purposes. Read THAT again…….And guess what, the allies committed far worse war crimes and killed far more people than the Germans ever did. Read THAT again . “Most likely” was in error. please read “definitely”. The Holocaust did… Read more »

Mao Cheng Ji
Guest
Mao Cheng Ji

I don’t care what you do or don’t believe; your apparent hobby-horse doesn’t interest me.

All I’m saying is that this photo is completely unrelated to Solzhenitsyn/GULAG, which is the topic here. To publish it here with the caption “The Gulag Archipelago (1918-1956)” is simply dishonest.

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

It certainly is not related to Mauthausen. (Ebensee is Mauthausen) nor is it related to Arnold E. Samuelson
Wake up, you are being had…..brainwashed.
You make a patently false claim based on imgur and Wikipedia…seriously?
Did you ever finish school?
But you insist that imgur/wikipedia are better sources than this Russia site.
NO one in ANY German/Austrian Concentration camp dressed like that.
Arnold E. Samuelson did not take this picture (another lie) because he had no access to any Russian Gulag. Research is not imgur or Wiki
Got it now.

Natylie Baldwin
Guest

My first reaction at seeing that photo was that it reminded me more of a Nazi concentration camp than a Gulag camp. I just visited the Gulag Museum in Moscow a couple of months ago and the photos of prisoners and the camps did not have the look in the above photo.

my2Cents
Guest
my2Cents

Does that look like a concentration camp uniform to you?

Natylie Baldwin
Guest

What I’m mainly saying is that it doesn’t look like the Gulag images that I saw.

Frank frivilous
Guest
Frank frivilous

I tend to agree with Solzhenitsyn’s critics, the fact that he was traded to the west and became a popular dissident. But I also think he was courageous in his decision to write his final book “200 years together” exposing the Jewish tyranny in the Soviet Union and elsewhere. This book has yet to be published officially in english particularly in targeted countries like United States. The complete story of our quest for humanity, including that of Solzenitsyn, has yet to be told.

Le Ruscino
Guest
Le Ruscino

Russia Feed is in dire need of employing some genuine Russian academics & historians to avoid publishing more of this horse manure!

Latest

Is the Violent Dismemberment of Russia Official US Policy?

Neocons make the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Erik D’Amato via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity:


If there’s one thing everyone in today’s Washington can agree on, it’s that whenever an official or someone being paid by the government says something truly outrageous or dangerous, there should be consequences, if only a fleeting moment of media fury.

With one notable exception: Arguing that the US should be quietly working to promote the violent disintegration and carving up of the largest country on Earth.

Because so much of the discussion around US-Russian affairs is marked by hysteria and hyperbole, you are forgiven for assuming this is an exaggeration. Unfortunately it isn’t. Published in the Hill under the dispassionate title “Managing Russia’s dissolution,” author Janusz Bugajski makes the case that the West should not only seek to contain “Moscow’s imperial ambitions” but to actively seek the dismemberment of Russia as a whole.

Engagement, criticism and limited sanctions have simply reinforced Kremlin perceptions that the West is weak and predictable. To curtail Moscow’s neo-imperialism a new strategy is needed, one that nourishes Russia’s decline and manages the international consequences of its dissolution.

Like many contemporary cold warriors, Bugajski toggles back and forth between overhyping Russia’s might and its weaknesses, notably a lack of economic dynamism and a rise in ethnic and regional fragmentation.But his primary argument is unambiguous: That the West should actively stoke longstanding regional and ethnic tensions with the ultimate aim of a dissolution of the Russian Federation, which Bugajski dismisses as an “imperial construct.”

The rationale for dissolution should be logically framed: In order to survive, Russia needs a federal democracy and a robust economy; with no democratization on the horizon and economic conditions deteriorating, the federal structure will become increasingly ungovernable…

To manage the process of dissolution and lessen the likelihood of conflict that spills over state borders, the West needs to establish links with Russia’s diverse regions and promote their peaceful transition toward statehood.

Even more alarming is Bugajski’s argument that the goal should not be self-determination for breakaway Russian territories, but the annexing of these lands to other countries. “Some regions could join countries such as Finland, Ukraine, China and Japan, from whom Moscow has forcefully appropriated territories in the past.”

It is, needless to say, impossible to imagine anything like this happening without sparking a series of conflicts that could mirror the Yugoslav Wars. Except in this version the US would directly culpable in the ignition of the hostilities, and in range of 6,800 Serbian nuclear warheads.

So who is Janusz Bugajski, and who is he speaking for?

The author bio on the Hill’s piece identifies him as a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, a Washington, D.C. think-tank. But CEPA is no ordinary talk shop: Instead of the usual foundations and well-heeled individuals, its financial backers seem to be mostly arms of the US government, including the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the US Mission to NATO, the US-government-sponsored National Endowment for Democracy, as well as as veritable who’s who of defense contractors, including Raytheon, Bell Helicopter, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Textron. Meanwhile, Bugajski chairs the South-Central Europe area studies program at the Foreign Service Institute of the US Department of State.

To put it in perspective, it is akin to a Russian with deep ties to the Kremlin and arms-makers arguing that the Kremlin needed to find ways to break up the United States and, if possible, have these breakaway regions absorbed by Mexico and Canada. (A scenario which alas is not as far-fetched as it might have been a few years ago; many thousands in California now openly talk of a “Calexit,” and many more in Mexico of a reconquista.)

Meanwhile, it’s hard to imagine a quasi-official voice like Bugajski’s coming out in favor of a similar policy vis-a-vis China, which has its own restive regions, and which in geopolitical terms is no more or less of a threat to the US than Russia. One reason may be that China would consider an American call for secession by the Tibetans or Uyghurs to be a serious intrusion into their internal affairs, unlike Russia, which doesn’t appear to have noticed or been ruffled by Bugajski’s immodest proposal.

Indeed, just as the real scandal in Washington is what’s legal rather than illegal, the real outrage in this case is that few or none in DC finds Bugajski’s virtual declaration of war notable.

But it is. It is the sort of provocation that international incidents are made of, and if you are a US taxpayer, it is being made in your name, and it should be among your outrages of the month.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

At Age 70, Time To Rethink NATO

The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

Patrick J. Buchanan

Published

on

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:


“Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.”

So said President Charles De Gaulle, who in 1966 ordered NATO to vacate its Paris headquarters and get out of France.

NATO this year celebrates a major birthday. The young girl of 1966 is no longer young. The alliance is 70 years old.

And under this aging NATO today, the U.S. is committed to treat an attack on any one of 28 nations from Estonia to Montenegro to Romania to Albania as an attack on the United States.

The time is ripe for a strategic review of these war guarantees to fight a nuclear-armed Russia in defense of countries across the length of Europe that few could find on a map.

Apparently, President Donald Trump, on trips to Europe, raised questions as to whether these war guarantees comport with vital U.S. interests and whether they could pass a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

The shock of our establishment that Trump even raised this issue in front of Europeans suggests that the establishment, frozen in the realities of yesterday, ought to be made to justify these sweeping war guarantees.

Celebrated as “the most successful alliance in history,” NATO has had two histories. Some of us can yet recall its beginnings.

In 1948, Soviet troops, occupying eastern Germany all the way to the Elbe and surrounding Berlin, imposed a blockade on the city.

The regime in Prague was overthrown in a Communist coup. Foreign minister Jan Masaryk fell, or was thrown, from a third-story window to his death. In 1949, Stalin exploded an atomic bomb.

As the U.S. Army had gone home after V-E Day, the U.S. formed a new alliance to protect the crucial European powers — West Germany, France, Britain, Italy. Twelve nations agreed that an attack on one would be treated as an attack on them all.

Cross the Elbe and you are at war with us, including the U.S. with its nuclear arsenal, Stalin was, in effect, told. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops returned to Europe to send the message that America was serious.

Crucial to the alliance was the Yalta line dividing Europe agreed to by Stalin, FDR and Churchill at the 1945 Crimean summit on the Black Sea.

U.S. presidents, even when monstrous outrages were committed in Soviet-occupied Europe, did not cross this line into the Soviet sphere.

Truman did not send armored units up the highway to Berlin. He launched an airlift to break the Berlin blockade. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian rebels in 1956. JFK confined his rage at the building of the Berlin Wall to the rhetorical: “Ich bin ein Berliner.”

LBJ did nothing to help the Czechs when, before the Democratic convention in 1968, Leonid Brezhnev sent Warsaw Pact tank armies to crush the Prague Spring.

When the Solidarity movement of Lech Walesa was crushed in Gdansk, Reagan sent copy and printing machines. At the Berlin Wall in 1988, he called on Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.”

Reagan never threatened to tear it down himself.

But beginning in 1989, the Wall was torn down, Germany was united, the Red Army went home, the Warsaw Pact dissolved, the USSR broke apart into 15 nations, and Leninism expired in its birthplace.

As the threat that had led to NATO disappeared, many argued that the alliance created to deal with that threat should be allowed to fade away, and a free and prosperous Europe should now provide for its own defense.

It was not to be. The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

This, said Kennan, would “inflame the nationalistic and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion” and “restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations.” Kennan was proven right.

America is now burdened with the duty to defend Europe from the Atlantic to the Baltic, even as we face a far greater threat in China, with an economy and population 10 times that of Russia.

And we must do this with a defense budget that is not half the share of the federal budget or the GDP that Eisenhower and Kennedy had.

Trump is president today because the American people concluded that our foreign policy elite, with their endless interventions where no vital U.S. interest was imperiled, had bled and virtually bankrupted us, while kicking away all of the fruits of our Cold War victory.

Halfway into Trump’s term, the question is whether he is going to just talk about halting Cold War II with Russia, about demanding that Europe pay for its own defense, and about bringing the troops home — or whether he is going to act upon his convictions.

Our foreign policy establishment is determined to prevent Trump from carrying out his mandate. And if he means to carry out his agenda, he had best get on with it.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Photos of new Iskander base near Ukrainian border creates media hype

But research into the photos and cross-checking of news reports reveals only the standard anti-Russian narrative that has gone on for years.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Fox News obtained satellite photos that claim that Russia has recently installed new Iskander missile batteries, one of them “near” to the Ukrainian border. However, what the Fox article does not say is left for the reader to discover: that in regards to Ukraine, these missiles are probably not that significant, unless the missiles are much longer range than reported:

The intelligence report provided to Fox by Imagesat International showed the new deployment in Krasnodar, 270 miles from the Ukrainian border. In the images is visible what appears to be an Iskander compound, with a few bunkers and another compound of hangars. There is a second new installation that was discovered by satellite photos, but this one is much farther to the east, in the region relatively near to Ulan-Ude, a city relatively close to the Mongolian border.

Both Ukraine and Mongolia are nations that have good relations with the West, but Mongolia has good relations with both its immediate neighbors, Russia and China, and in fact participated with both countries in the massive Vostok-2018 military war-games earlier this year.

Fox News provided these photos of the Iskander emplacement near Krasnodar:

Imagesat International

Fox annotated this photo in this way:

Near the launcher, there is a transloader vehicle which enables quick reloading of the missiles into the launcher. One of the bunker’s door is open, and another reloading vehicle is seen exiting from it.

[Fox:] The Iskander ballistic missile has a range up to 310 miles, and can carry both unconventional as well as nuclear warheads, putting most of America’s NATO allies at risk. The second deployment is near the border with Mongolia, in Ulan-Ude in Sothern Russia, where there are four launchers and another reloading vehicle.

[Fox:] Earlier this week, Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, said authorities of the former Soviet republic are being “controlled” by the West, warning it stands to lose its independence and identity as a consequence. “The continuation of such policy by the Kiev authorities can contribute to the loss of Ukraine’s statehood,” Mr Patrushev told Rossiyskaya Gazeta, according to Russian news agency TASS.

This situation was placed by Fox in context with the Kerch Strait incident, in which three Ukrainian vessels and twenty-four crew and soldiers were fired upon by Russian coast guard ships as they manuevered in the Kerch Strait without permission from Russian authorities based in Crimea. There are many indications that this incident was a deliberate attempt on the part of Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko, to create a sensational incident, possibly to bolster his flagging re-election campaign. After the incident, the President blustered and set ten provinces in Ukraine under martial law for 30 days, insisting to the world, and especially to the United States, that Russia was “preparing to invade” his country.

Russia expressed no such sentiment in any way, but they are holding the soldiers until the end of January. However, on January 17th, a Moscow court extended the detention of eight of these captured Ukrainian sailors despite protests from Kyiv and Washington.

In addition to the tensions in Ukraine, the other significant point of disagreement between the Russian Federation and the US is the US’ plan to withdraw from the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Russia sees this treaty as extremely important, but the US point of view expressed by John Bolton, National Security Adviser, is that the treaty is useless because it does not include any other parties that have intermediate range nukes or the capability for them, such as Iran, North Korea, and China. This is an unsolved problem, and it is possible that the moves of the Iskander batteries is a subtle warning from the Russians that they really would rather the US stay in the treaty.

Discussions on this matter at public levels between the Russian government and the US have been very difficult because of the fierce anti-Russia and anti-Trump campaigns in the media and political establishments of the United States. President Putin and President Trump have both expressed the desire to meet, but complications like the Kerch Strait Incident conveniently arise, and have repeatedly disrupted the attempts for these two leaders to meet.

Where Fox News appears to get it wrong shows in a few places:

First, the known range for Iskander missiles maxes at about 310 miles. The placement of the battery near Krasnodar is 270 miles from the eastern Ukrainian border, but the eastern part of Ukraine is Russian-friendly and two provinces, Donetsk and Lugansk, are breakaway provinces acting as independent republics. The battery appears to be no threat to Kyiv or to that part of Ukraine which is aligned with the West. Although the missiles could reach into US ally Georgia, Krasnodar is 376 miles from Tbilisi, and so again it seems that there is no significant target for these missiles. (This is assuming the location given is accurate.)

Second, the location shown in the photo is (44,47,29.440N at 39,13,04.754E). The date on the “Krasnodar” photo is January 17, 2019. However, a photo of the region taken July 24, 2018 reveals a different layout. It takes a moment or two to study this, but there is not much of an exact match here:

Third, Fox News reported of “further Russian troops deployment and S-400 Surface to air missile days after the escalation started, hinting Russia might have orchestrated the naval incident.”

It may be true that Russia deployed weapons to this base area in Crimea, but this is now Russian territory. S-400s can be used offensively, but their primary purpose is defensive. Troops on the Crimean Peninsula, especially at this location far to the north of the area, are not in a position strategically to invade Kherson Oblast (a pushback would probably corner such forces on the Crimean peninsula with nowhere to go except the Black Sea). However, this does look like a possible defense installation should Ukraine’s forces try to invade or bomb Crimea.

Fox has this wrong, but it is no great surprise, because the American stance about Ukraine and Russia is similar – Russia can do no right, and Ukraine can do no wrong. Fox News is not monolithic on this point of view, of course, with anchors and journalists such as Tucker Carlson, who seem willing to acknowledge the US propaganda about the region. However, there are a lot of hawks as well. While photos in the articles about the S-400s and the Russian troops are accurately located, it does appear that the one about Iskanders is not, and that the folks behind this original article are guessing that the photos will not be questioned. After all, no one in the US knows where anything is in Russia and Ukraine, anyway, right?

That there is an issue here is likely. But is it appears that there is strong evidence that it is opposite what Fox reported here, it leaves much to be questioned.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending