4 ms·
>who literally own a 60k strong army Prigozhin had never own an army. He was just high-ranking Putin's clerk. He "owned" a 60k army in a meaning, in which any
by Ray20 2y ago
>who literally own a 60k strong army
Prigozhin had never own an army. He was just high-ranking Putin's clerk. He "owned" a 60k army in a meaning, in which any general owns an army.
>Russian style oligarchical hellscape
Russia has nothing to do with oligarchs. There's none left. Because oligarchy is about political power via the money, political will of capitals. And capitals have about zero political power in Russia.
>he is rich and powerful either way.
In Russia it works the other way around: you are powerful - and because of that you have money, and Zuck is NOT powerful. Literally one government decree - and he owns nothing and decides nothing, and considers himself lucky enough if after that decree he is allowed to get tenth of the marketprice for meta, or maintain his position as formal owner of de facto government controlled meta
- aguaviva 2y agoHe "owned" a 60k army in a meaning, in which any general owns an army. Except going by the estimates of casualties inflicted on government forces -- to a non-trivial extent they were loyal primarily to him, not Putin: 13–29 killed 1–6 helicopter(s) shot down 1 Il-22M airborne command-center plane shot down
- Ray20 2y agoI suppose it's called in english "chain of command" - it is not about loyalty, it is about execution of orders. Literally any army in the world are built on this principle. More then this, that "mutiny" was not about overthrowing of the government. It was сonflict between different branches of the army, and Prigozhin tried to put pressure on Putin to resolve it. The closest thing to a private army that you can find in Russia - is Kadyrov's ~2k core forces. Everything else - is de facto government forces.
- aguaviva 2y agoDo you think the Russian soldiers who shot down their own government's helicopters + command center did so on their own initiative -- or were they following Prigozhin's "chain of command"?
- Ray20 2y agoThey were following the orders of their immediate commanders, just like any soldiers are supposed to do. Prigozhin's "chain of command" at that moment was part of the government's chain of command
- aguaviva 2y agoMeaning they were answerable to Prigozhin, not Putin during the revolt. But even more fundamentally (apart from what happened during "revolt time"): as an organization and in terms of the laws that applied to it, it was entirely separate from the regular Russian army (and supposedly didn't technically exist on paper at all). That's why it's official name was PMC Wagner, where PMC stands for, drum roll... Private Military Company. I'm really not sure what you're trying to get at with this "not a private army" angle, when it by all indications it was exactly that, or with the idea that Prigozhin was just like any other commander in a regular army, when of course he wasn't. But that's okay, you can model and label this information however you want.
- Ray20 2y ago>why it's official name was PMC Wagner, where PMC stands for, drum roll... Private Military Company. Yes, and North Korea is a Democratic Republic. >by all indications it was exactly that There is no such indications, only name. Other than name - PMC Wagner had nothing to do with a private army. It was a government-organized, government-funded, government-chai-of-command-integrated experimental military force >idea that Prigozhin was just like any other commander Rather something like government-appointed director of the special service
- aguaviva 2y agoIt was a government-organized, government-funded, government-chai-of-command-integrated experimental military force Whose members shoot down government helicopters and an airborne command center when its government-appointed director orders them to. Following the government-chain-of-command, we imagine.