Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Dans said:
From that article:


However, France and Germany broke the very rules that they had insisted on for everyone else.
Germany, the great European financial disciplinarian, was struggling because the cost of reunification with the former East Germany had left a big hole in its budget.
Mr Von Kyaw admits that Germany's government "really sinned".
Well, "not a real sin" he adds - Germany just "flexibilised the schedules."
"But when a big country does that, how can you afterwards impose on smaller countries, including Greece, to obey the rules?" he concedes.
And that affected the way Greece viewed the consequences of breaking the rules.
Click to expand...

Greece had a few 30-year old loans expiring between 2008 and 2010, and unfortunately it was very bad timing due to the world recession, and the interest rates to renew those were high. This created a (minor at the time) credit problem for Greece. Greece also had a huge housing sector because many people from the EU were buying houses in Greece, but then they stopped because of the 2008 crisis. So, the combination of these two problems created a very serious problem for the Greek banking system, they needed 30 billion in a relatively short time.

That was the beginning of the economic crisis for Greece in 2010.

Then Germany started calling Greece corrupt, asked for direct oversight, demanded that Greece should seek help from IMF, demanded that Greece changes their accounting system, and so on, and the crisis exploded. The Greek Prime Minister said that if this is the solution, then perhaps it is better to get out of the Eurozone. This was stupid, because it made the credit problem much worse. The next day the parliament voted him out! That was the start of the discussion for Grexit, long before the Brexit. This made a huge mess because everyone was scared about the future and all economic activity basically stopped. The banks did not give any loans any more and started demanding repayment for all old loans, using loopholes in the contracts. Everyday life for all small businesses in Greece was hell, and many small companies collapsed.

At the same time, USA was printing trillions. The 30 billion that Greece needed at the time was peanuts and the European Central Bank could easily provide with low interest loans in 2010. But Germany did not want to help, they wanted to punish Greece, and they did not want to let the Central Bank print money or give loans. And the Greek economy collapsed because this was going on for YEARS! And the cost of the final bailout was almost 10 times as much, because the crisis lasted 6 years. The 2010 bailout was only 30 billion. Germany has a GDP of 4 trillion, and they made a big fuss about 30 billion!!! And it was fecking LOANS, Germany did not give free money to Greece.

Of course, later the European Central Bank printed trillions, but this was after the Greek economy collapsed, it was too late for Greece.


(Sorry for the off topic, but many people do not have any idea what actually happened and we have the forum Germans that keep calling Greece corrupt... )
 
And the last off topic for me. Does Greece have corruption? Of course it has. Germany has corruption. USA has corruption. England has corruption. FIFA has corruption.

Does Greece have more corruption than Germany? I don't know. I don't think so, but really I don't know. The ex Chancellor of Germany works for Putin. Is this corruption? Of course it is, and I don't know any example in Greece worse than this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder

<<In March 2014, Schröder likened Russia's intervention in Crimea with NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, citing both cases as violations of international law and the UN Charter.[123][124] He further stated that there had been "unhappy developments" on the outskirts of the former Soviet Union since the end of the Cold War, leading Putin to develop justifiable "fears about being encircled".>>
 
frostbite said:
And the last off topic for me. Does Greece have corruption? Of course it has. Germany has corruption. USA has corruption. England has corruption. FIFA has corruption.

Does Greece have more corruption than Germany? I don't know. I don't think so, but really I don't know. The ex Chancellor of Germany works for Putin. Is this corruption? Of course it is, and I don't know any example in Greece worse than this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder

<<In March 2014, Schröder likened Russia's intervention in Crimea with NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, citing both cases as violations of international law and the UN Charter.[123][124] He further stated that there had been "unhappy developments" on the outskirts of the former Soviet Union since the end of the Cold War, leading Putin to develop justifiable "fears about being encircled".>>
Click to expand...

Not sure what your overarching point is from the last two posts ?
 
Raoul said:
Not sure what your overarching point is from the last two posts ?
Click to expand...

My point is that Germany has played a central, extremely negative role, in how we arrived at both those crises.

The topic we have been discussing on this thread for some time, is whether there are parallels between how Germany behaved in the Greek economic crisis, and how Germany behaved towards Ukraine in the past 20 years, including the past 12 months. I see clear parallels, our German friends in this forum said that there are no parallels because Greece is corrupt and created the crisis themselves (so it is fair that their economy has gone down 22%), while Ukraine was attacked. They called Greece "corrupt" multiple times, so I responded to that.

For a long time, Merkel was blaming Greece alone for the economic crisis. Our forum friends only parroted that. In a similar fashion, Merkel called Ukraine corrupt in 2008 and Schröder basically says that Ukraine and the West were to blame for Russia invading Crimea in 2014 (because he says it is a similar situation to Serbia and NATO).

Of course, Germany is not calling Ukraine corrupt anymore, and Germany does not call Greece corrupt anymore (and does not have any problems with ECB printing money anymore), but it's too late now, the damage has been done. But I'd like to see an official apology at some point.
 
frostbite said:
My point is that Germany has played a central, extremely negative role, in how we arrived at both those crises.

The topic we have been discussing on this thread for some time, is whether there are parallels between how Germany behaved in the Greek economic crisis, and how Germany behaved towards Ukraine in the past 20 years, including the past 12 months. I see clear parallels, our German friends in this forum said that there are no parallels because Greece is corrupt and created the crisis themselves (so it is fair that their economy has gone down 22%), while Ukraine was attacked. They called Greece "corrupt" multiple times, so I responded to that.

For a long time, Merkel was blaming Greece alone for the economic crisis. Our forum friends only parroted that. In a similar fashion, Merkel called Ukraine corrupt in 2008 and Schröder basically says that Ukraine and the West were to blame for Russia invading Crimea in 2014 (because he says it is a similar situation to Serbia and NATO).

Of course, Germany is not calling Ukraine corrupt anymore, and Germany does not call Greece corrupt anymore (and does not have any problems with ECB printing money anymore), but it's too late now, the damage has been done. But I'd like to see an official apology at some point.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but I'm not sure if I see any value in pointing out one country as enabling what Putin has done to Ukraine. He managed to create a fairly broad reliance on Russian energy across Europe and beyond, and ultimately its him alone who is responsible for all of this. No one European country could've stopped him by not doing business with him.
 
Raoul said:
I see your point, but I'm not sure if I see any value in pointing out one country as enabling what Putin has done to Ukraine. He managed to create a fairly broad reliance on Russian energy across Europe and beyond, and ultimately its him alone who is responsible for all of this. No one European country could've stopped him by not doing business with him.
Click to expand...

Depends on your perspective. About corruption, I mean. And about the role of Germany. A Greek or a Ukrainian has a very different viewpoint. Because they have suffered. Here is an interesting article about Ukraine and Germany. I see many parallels between how Ukrainians view Germany, and how many Greeks view Germany.

And as I said in another post, Germany has a past, it is not the same as France. Germany has invaded and killed Greeks and Ukrainians, the grandparents of current citizens. (10% of the Greek population died under German occupation, mainly from famine. )

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88764
10.01.2023

Can Ukraine and Germany Overcome Their Disagreements Over Russia?

[...]

France and Germany consistently supported Russia’s involvement in European security. This was in part why Europeans were skeptical about the prospect of a full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The Ukrainians saw this position as a sign of weakness, indecision, and even corruption. For their part, many Germans believed Ukraine had been exaggerating the Russian threat.

[...]
The Ukrainians responded with the narrative of “German betrayal,” which irritated Berlin.

[...]

Many Ukrainians hold former chancellor Merkel partly responsible for the start of the war. She is blamed for everything: the Nord Stream projects, calls to lift anti-Russian sanctions, and attempts to push Ukraine into signing the disadvantageous Minsk agreements. Her recent calls for negotiations with Russia have not improved her reputation.
 
Last edited:
frostbite said:
Depends on your perspective. About corruption, I mean. And about the role of Germany. A Greek or a Ukrainian has a very different viewpoint. Because they have suffered. Here is an interesting article about Ukraine and Germany. I see many parallels between how Ukrainians view Germany, and how many Greeks view Germany.

And as I said in another post, Germany has a past, it is not the same as France. Germany has invaded and killed Greeks and Ukrainians, the grandparents of current citizens.

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88764
10.01.2023

Can Ukraine and Germany Overcome Their Disagreements Over Russia?

[...]

France and Germany consistently supported Russia’s involvement in European security. This was in part why Europeans were skeptical about the prospect of a full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The Ukrainians saw this position as a sign of weakness, indecision, and even corruption. For their part, many Germans believed Ukraine had been exaggerating the Russian threat.

[...]
The Ukrainians responded with the narrative of “German betrayal,” which irritated Berlin.

[...]

Many Ukrainians hold former chancellor Merkel partly responsible for the start of the war. She is blamed for everything: the Nord Stream projects, calls to lift anti-Russian sanctions, and attempts to push Ukraine into signing the disadvantageous Minsk agreements. Her recent calls for negotiations with Russia have not improved her reputation.
Click to expand...

I think that's a fairly narrow interpretation of why the war started. Putin has always been all about neo imperialist conquest through ultra-nationalism, which means Ukraine was always going to be the target of his expansionist project. After all, when you're that corrupt, you have to distract the public from how bad it is domestically by providing them with a shiny new toy. There is nothing Germany or Greece, or even the US, could've done to avert this. But they do now have a chance of bringing Putin down by making sure Ukraine wins.
 
Raoul said:
I think that's a fairly narrow interpretation of why the war started. Putin has always been all about neo imperialist conquest through ultra-nationalism, which means Ukraine was always going to be the target of his expansionist project. After all, when you're that corrupt, you have to distract the public from how bad it is domestically by providing them with a shiny new toy. There is nothing Germany or Greece, or even the US, could've done to avert this. But they do now have a chance of bringing Putin down by making sure Ukraine wins.
Click to expand...

If Ukraine had joined NATO in 2008, as US wanted, we'd have no war today and Crimea would still be Ukrainian. Merkel is to blame for that.

And Sarkozy did not call Greece "corrupted". Merkel called Greece corrupted.

Germany is special.
 
frostbite said:
If Ukraine had joined NATO in 2008, as US wanted, we'd have no war today and Crimea would still be Ukrainian. Merkel is to blame for that.

And Sarkozy did not call Greece "corrupted". Merkel called Greece corrupted.

Germany is special.
Click to expand...

Yeah but who is to say Putin would've allowed Ukraine to actually join NATO back then. For all we know, it would've led to the identical predicament we're in now. The US didn't have a particular affinity for protecting Ukraine back then, so there wouldn't have been any meaningful check on Putin had he decided he needed to invade Ukraine to prevent them from drifting off to the West.
 
Raoul said:
Yeah but who is to say Putin would've allowed Ukraine to actually join NATO back then. For all we know, it would've led to the identical predicament we're in now. The US didn't have a particular affinity for protecting Ukraine back then, so there wouldn't have been any meaningful check on Putin had he decided he needed to invade Ukraine to prevent them from drifting off to the West.
Click to expand...

Do you mean that Putin would invade Ukraine in 2008?
 
frostbite said:
Do you mean that Putin would invade Ukraine in 2008?
Click to expand...

If Putin has always wanted Ukraine and thought it was about to join NATO (thereby putting a major Soviet block state on Russia's border under NATO) then he would've done something about it. He views it as a wayward part of the Soviet era Russian empire that can't be alllowed to ally with any western block.
 
Raoul said:
If Putin has always wanted Ukraine and thought it was about to join NATO (thereby putting a major Soviet block state on Russia's border under NATO) then he would've done something about it. He views it as a wayward part of the Soviet era Russian empire that can't be alllowed to ally with any western block.
Click to expand...

Here is an article from Germany's DW in 2008:

https://www.dw.com/en/merkel-affirms-german-stance-against-nato-expansion/a-3840175
"The outgoing administration of US President George W. Bush has proposed admitting them without waiting for them to qualify through a membership action plan."



US wanted to fast-track admission for both Ukraine and Georgia. It was very close to being done. And let's not forget that US provides the vast majority of NATO firepower and budget.

I don't think that Putin would be able to prepare an invasion in 2008. And I don't think he would ever attack a NATO country.

Compared to US, the Russian army in 2008 was a joke, actually the Russians have improved their military considerably since then! And Germany was not so dependent on Russian gas back then.
 
frostbite said:
Here is an article from Germany's DW in 2008:

https://www.dw.com/en/merkel-affirms-german-stance-against-nato-expansion/a-3840175
"The outgoing administration of US President George W. Bush has proposed admitting them without waiting for them to qualify through a membership action plan."



US wanted to fast-track admission for both Ukraine and Georgia. It was very close to being done. And let's not forget that US provides the vast majority of NATO firepower and budget.

I don't think that Putin would be able to prepare an invasion in 2008. And I don't think he would ever attack a NATO country.

Compared to US, the Russian army in 2008 was a joke, actually the Russians have improved their military considerably since then! And Germany was not so dependent on Russian gas back then.
Click to expand...

That was obviously never going to happen because Dubya left office the following year. Also, Putin literally invaded Georgia in 2008 using his usual BS excuse of protecting ethnic Russians. At the time, Brussels was setting up a NATO liaison office in Tblisi as a pretext to "increase cooperation", so we can easily see that Putin was more than prepared to squash any former Soviet states from jumping ship to the West. Ukraine, as far more important to Putin than Georgia, therefore wouldn't have been spared had they attempted the same.
 
frostbite said:
If Ukraine had joined NATO in 2008, as US wanted, we'd have no war today and Crimea would still be Ukrainian. Merkel is to blame for that.

And Sarkozy did not call Greece "corrupted". Merkel called Greece corrupted.

Germany is special.
Click to expand...


frostbite said:
And the last off topic for me. Does Greece have corruption? Of course it has. Germany has corruption. USA has corruption. England has corruption. FIFA has corruption.

Does Greece have more corruption than Germany? I don't know. I don't think so, but really I don't know. The ex Chancellor of Germany works for Putin. Is this corruption? Of course it is, and I don't know any example in Greece worse than this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schröder

<<In March 2014, Schröder likened Russia's intervention in Crimea with NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, citing both cases as violations of international law and the UN Charter.[123][124] He further stated that there had been "unhappy developments" on the outskirts of the former Soviet Union since the end of the Cold War, leading Putin to develop justifiable "fears about being encircled".>>
Click to expand...

I don't know if it is corruption or something else but Germany wasn't alone in tolerating Russian influence over the EU... And you'd be surprised about what politicians in other countries have done or said over the years... One of our current ministers (Niklas Wykman, he sits in the Swedish Government) supported Russia in its war against Georgia, he wrote the following (some of it with another close politician to him back then -Rola Brentlin-.. she now works for Abramovich):

"Russia is protecting a small population, of around 70,000 individuals, against an aggressor with superior military capabilities, in this case, Georgia."

"This time it is not about Russia or Georgia, but about a small country whose freedom has been restricted by Georgian troops. The action that should be condemned is Georgia's invasion and the world should support South Ossetia's independence.”


Of course we all accepted Nord Stream... Not only Sweden but even Denmark, the country that usually follows the US in all big decisions, approved Nord Stream 2 going through its waters.


Regarding the issue of Greece's bailout and austerity measures, I recall no resistance from our leaders towards Merkel's strategy back then. Most EU nations agreed with Germany's approach...
 
Pintu said:
I don't know if it is corruption or something else but Germany wasn't alone in tolerating Russian influence over the EU... And you'd be surprised about what politicians in other countries have done or said over the years... One of our current ministers (Niklas Wykman, he sits in the Swedish Government) supported Russia in its war against Georgia, he wrote the following (some of it with another close politician to him back then -Rola Brentlin-.. she now works for Abramovich):

"Russia is protecting a small population, of around 70,000 individuals, against an aggressor with superior military capabilities, in this case, Georgia."

"This time it is not about Russia or Georgia, but about a small country whose freedom has been restricted by Georgian troops. The action that should be condemned is Georgia's invasion and the world should support South Ossetia's independence.”


Of course we all accepted Nord Stream... Not only Sweden but even Denmark, the country that usually follows the US in all big decisions, approved Nord Stream 2 going through its waters.


Regarding the issue of Greece's bailout and austerity measures, I recall no resistance from our leaders towards Merkel's strategy back then. Most EU nations agreed with Germany's approach...
Click to expand...

Yes, in many decisions in the EU, countries just follow Germany, because it is the richest country and the most populous in the EU. And that's why Germany has the greatest responsibility.

It is understandable that you in Sweden (or any other country) only read about Greece once a while, but understandably it wasn't too important for you personally, and you could not notice a difference between Merkel and other leaders. After all, the biggest news is when all the EU leaders make an announcement together. However, for us in Greece, this crisis was the main news, for years, and yes there was a huge difference between Sarkozy and Merkel. For example, read this from March 6, 2010.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-46705220100306

Unfortunately, what happened in practice is not what Sarkozy says above, mainly because Merkel wanted to punish Greece. The whole problem could have ended back then, in March 2010, but it didn't, it became bigger and bigger, it lasted for years, because Germany did not want to solve it.

Now about Nord Stream, well... again, we have no idea what deals our leaders were making. For example, did you know that Nord Stream 2 was in Merkel's constituency (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania)? Was this a coincidence? Did you know this before? I didn't. Read the following article. Did anyone discuss all that before the war? Of course not, they just followed the Germans. There is a large number of people who made a lot of money, and there was a lot of corruption and deals. We know very little about how these decisions were made.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/world/europe/germany-russia-nord-stream-pipeline.html

Shadowy Arm of a German State Helped Russia Finish Nord Stream 2

The threat of U.S. sanctions jeopardized completion of a second direct gas pipeline from Russia. So Gazprom and German officials concocted a phony climate foundation to get the job done.

[...]

Mr. Damm and other lawmakers are drawing up a list of witnesses that could include not just Ms. Schwesig but two former chancellors, Ms. Merkel and Mr. Schröder.

But he worries the delays mean the investigation may not conclude before the end of the legislative term in 2026. Should that happen, the investigation would automatically expire.
 
Raoul said:
That was obviously never going to happen because Dubya left office the following year. Also, Putin literally invaded Georgia in 2008 using his usual BS excuse of protecting ethnic Russians. At the time, Brussels was setting up a NATO liaison office in Tblisi as a pretext to "increase cooperation", so we can easily see that Putin was more than prepared to squash any former Soviet states from jumping ship to the West. Ukraine, as far more important to Putin than Georgia, therefore wouldn't have been spared had they attempted the same.
Click to expand...

The Russian invasion of Georgia happened in August 2008. It was a response to this that the Americans decided to accept Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, in December 2008, and this was supposed to happen very quickly, in a couple of months.
 
frostbite said:
Yes, in many decisions in the EU, countries just follow Germany, because it is the richest country and the most populous in the EU. And that's why Germany has the greatest responsibility.

It is understandable that you in Sweden (or any other country) only read about Greece once a while, but understandably it wasn't too important for you personally, and you could not notice a difference between Merkel and other leaders. After all, the biggest news is when all the EU leaders make an announcement together. However, for us in Greece, this crisis was the main news, for years, and yes there was a huge difference between Sarkozy and Merkel. For example, read this from March 6, 2010.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-46705220100306

Unfortunately, what happened in practice is not what Sarkozy says above, mainly because Merkel wanted to punish Greece. The whole problem could have ended back then, in March 2010, but it didn't, it became bigger and bigger, it lasted for years, because Germany did not want to solve it.

Now about Nord Stream, well... again, we have no idea what deals our leaders were making. For example, did you know that Nord Stream 2 was in Merkel's constituency (Mecklenburg-West Pomerania)? Was this a coincidence? Did you know this before? I didn't. Read the following article. Did anyone discuss all that before the war? Of course not, they just followed the Germans. There is a large number of people who made a lot of money, and there was a lot of corruption and deals. We know very little about how these decisions were made.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/world/europe/germany-russia-nord-stream-pipeline.html

Shadowy Arm of a German State Helped Russia Finish Nord Stream 2

The threat of U.S. sanctions jeopardized completion of a second direct gas pipeline from Russia. So Gazprom and German officials concocted a phony climate foundation to get the job done.

[...]

Mr. Damm and other lawmakers are drawing up a list of witnesses that could include not just Ms. Schwesig but two former chancellors, Ms. Merkel and Mr. Schröder.

But he worries the delays mean the investigation may not conclude before the end of the legislative term in 2026. Should that happen, the investigation would automatically expire.
Click to expand...

I think you're dwelling a bit much on the Germans and Nord Stream 2. That's not what this conflict is about, nor did German reliance on Russian energy allow Putin to do what he's doing in Ukraine.
 
frostbite said:
The Russian invasion of Georgia happened in August 2008. It was a response to this that the Americans decided to accept Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, in December 2008, and this was supposed to happen very quickly, in a couple of months.
Click to expand...

Right. It happened about 6 months after the Bucharest Summit where NATO members agreed to pursue Georgia becoming a NATO member. Putin had no intention of allowing that to happen, just as it didn't with Ukraine.
 
This is all a bit off topic, but if we dwell into history: Nord Stream was created to secure the gas supply to Germany. Why was it needed? Because Ukraine wasn't a reliable transit country. Their discussions with Gazprom involved stealing gas and threatening to shuttle down pipelines if there is no agreement reached, if I remember correctly mainly around 2006.

Of course Germany in 2008 didn't support Ukraine joining the defence organisation NATO if they actually were acting hostile towards Germany to get leverage against Gazprom.
 
frostbite said:
Greece was not "faking its economy"? What does it ever mean, "faking its economy"? Why Germans keep blaming the victims? Merkel said that Ukraine is corrupt, that's why Germany did not accept them into NATO in 2008! USA wanted them into NATO but Germany, Putin's best friend, are the paragons of virtue who keep blaming all others as corrupt!
Click to expand...
They cooked their numbers before joining Euro, and essentially lied about their economy.
 
Raoul said:
It won’t be easy but it will happen eventually imo
Click to expand...

I hope you're right mate, Russia has a of potential if only they had someone in power who concentrated on making Russians lives better instead of foreign conquest.
 
stevoc said:
I hope you're right mate, Russia has a of potential if only they had someone in power who concentrated on making Russians lives better instead of foreign conquest.
Click to expand...
I have my doubts. Isn't it just so ingrained in their culture that political power is always exercised by power and the barrel of a gun? They gave the world Tolstoy, Medvedev, Tchaikovsky, Sputnik and Dostoyevsky, but when it comes to political culture, Russia always end up in the exercise of might, where civil society, democratic processes loses to raw power, every time?
I wonder if it has something to do with the size of the place? How the hell are you going to control such a vast area with a 'relatively' small population without using force. But Canada seems to do it just fine
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64341337.amp

Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky has made a direct appeal to Germany to provide tanks ahead of crunch talks involving dozens of Western allies at Ramstein air base in southern Germany.

The US and European nations have already promised Kyiv more equipment to fight Russia's invasion.

Berlin is under growing pressure to allow its Leopard 2 tanks to be sent.

"If you have Leopard [tanks], then give them to us," Mr Zelensky told German public TV.
"These leopards won't go through Russia. We're defending ourselves," he said, in remarks criticising the German government's hesitant attitude.

Defence officials from more than 50 countries are due to meet at Ramstein, a day after the US and several European nations pledged more equipment to help Ukraine fend off any further Russian offensives.
Almost 11 months after Russia launched its war against Ukraine, Nato military officials believe Moscow is planning a renewed spring offensive with troop numbers bolstered by a partial mobilisation since the end of September.

The UK also offered 14 of its battle tanks recently - but Kyiv wants more.
As the nation of manufacture, Germany has to give its permission before countries such as Poland or Finland commit to sending their own Leopard tanks. However, Polish deputy foreign minister Pawel Jablonski indicated on Friday that Warsaw might do so anyway.
"We'll see. I think if there is strong resistance, we'll be ready to take even such non-standard action. But let's not anticipate the facts," he told Polish radio.

Ukraine's allies faced a "simple choice" on Friday, an adviser to the defence minister in Kyiv remarked ahead of the summit.
"Tanks for Ukraine are tanks for freedom," Yuriy Sak told BBC's Newsnight programme. If these were not sent, other countries might one day "have to use them themselves" against Moscow, he warned.


Berlin said this week that a decision on the Leopard was conditional on the US agreeing to send Abrams tanks, which it is not intending to do. But the new German defence minister, Boris Pistorius, said he was not aware of "such stipulation".

Late on Thursday, Germany said its position would become clear in the coming hours, AFP reported.

Mr Zelensky has repeatedly taken aim at Berlin's perceived hesitancy and on Thursday criticised suggestions that the US and Germany were only planning to commit vehicles if the other nation did the same.

"I don't think this is the right strategy to go with", Mr Zelensky commented, while calling for "strong decisions" to be made during Friday's conference.

Retired US Army general David Petraeus said there was "legitimate reluctance" in Washington on the issue of sending Abrams tanks because it was difficult to maintain and had a jet turbine.

He told the BBC it was "imperative" that any Western tank donations were made "early enough, so [Ukrainian soldiers] can actually train on them".

For its part, Russia has warned Western countries that providing tanks to its enemy would mark an "extremely dangerous" escalation in the conflict.

On Thursday, Western nations pledged to send more vehicles, artillery and munitions to bolster the Ukrainian war effort.

The US committed a new package worth $2.5bn (£2bn), saying this took its spend on Ukrainian support to $26.7bn since last February's full-scale invasion by Russia.
Tanks were not included in the offer, but the Pentagon did promise an extra 59 Bradley armoured vehicles, 90 Stryker personnel carriers and Avenger air defence systems, among other provisions.

The announcement came after nine European nations promised more support of their own following a meeting in Estonia. This included:
  • UK - 600 Brimstone missiles
  • Denmark - 19 French-made Caesar self-propelled howitzers
  • Estonia - howitzers, ammunition, support vehicles and anti-tank grenade launchers
  • Latvia - Stinger air-defence systems, two helicopters, and drones
  • Lithuania - anti-aircraft guns and two helicopters
  • Poland - S-60 anti-aircraft guns with 70,000 pieces of ammunition
  • Czech Republic - produce further large calibre ammunition, howitzers and APCs
  • Netherlands - support expected to be detailed on Friday
 
RoyH1 said:
I have my doubts. Isn't it just so ingrained in their culture that political power is always exercised by power and the barrel of a gun? They gave the world Tolstoy, Medvedev, Tchaikovsky, Sputnik and Dostoyevsky, but when it comes to political culture, Russia always end up in the exercise of might, where civil society, democratic processes loses to raw power, every time?
I wonder if it has something to do with the size of the place? How the hell are you going to control such a vast area with a 'relatively' small population without using force. But Canada seems to do it just fine
Click to expand...

Lots of countries were similar in the past but changed. Maybe they just need a right leader/party to give them a chance to change, they had that chance 20 years ago but got despot in Putin. But you're right to become a true democracy Russian culture to an extent will have to change which won't be easy.
 
frostbite said:
Greece had a few 30-year old loans expiring between 2008 and 2010, and unfortunately it was very bad timing due to the world recession, and the interest rates to renew those were high. This created a (minor at the time) credit problem for Greece. Greece also had a huge housing sector because many people from the EU were buying houses in Greece, but then they stopped because of the 2008 crisis. So, the combination of these two problems created a very serious problem for the Greek banking system, they needed 30 billion in a relatively short time.

That was the beginning of the economic crisis for Greece in 2010.

Then Germany started calling Greece corrupt, asked for direct oversight, demanded that Greece should seek help from IMF, demanded that Greece changes their accounting system, and so on, and the crisis exploded. The Greek Prime Minister said that if this is the solution, then perhaps it is better to get out of the Eurozone. This was stupid, because it made the credit problem much worse. The next day the parliament voted him out! That was the start of the discussion for Grexit, long before the Brexit. This made a huge mess because everyone was scared about the future and all economic activity basically stopped. The banks did not give any loans any more and started demanding repayment for all old loans, using loopholes in the contracts. Everyday life for all small businesses in Greece was hell, and many small companies collapsed.

At the same time, USA was printing trillions. The 30 billion that Greece needed at the time was peanuts and the European Central Bank could easily provide with low interest loans in 2010. But Germany did not want to help, they wanted to punish Greece, and they did not want to let the Central Bank print money or give loans. And the Greek economy collapsed because this was going on for YEARS! And the cost of the final bailout was almost 10 times as much, because the crisis lasted 6 years. The 2010 bailout was only 30 billion. Germany has a GDP of 4 trillion, and they made a big fuss about 30 billion!!! And it was fecking LOANS, Germany did not give free money to Greece.

Of course, later the European Central Bank printed trillions, but this was after the Greek economy collapsed, it was too late for Greece.


(Sorry for the off topic, but many people do not have any idea what actually happened and we have the forum Germans that keep calling Greece corrupt... )
Click to expand...

Without wanting to continue this random segue... Requiring market reform as a condition of the largest bailout in history, is hardly as ridiculous as you make it seem.

As you state yourself, the economy was built almost like a developing country on things like holiday housing that are hugely affected by economic cycles and their pensions were completely unfunded (worst in Europe) with the issue getting worse every year. Saying they could have given 30bn but ended up giving many times that isn't fairly assessing the counterfactual. The Germans knew that without market reform, £30bn would not have been the end of the bailouts and bailouts without conditions would incentivise riskier behaviour among EU states, setting the precedent that governments could stop making difficult political decisions on things like pensions as Germany could bail them out.

I'm extremely on the fence about whether it was the right thing to do in hindsight, but their actions at the time weren't irrational.
 
Belgium are donating surface-to-air missiles, anti-tank weapons, machine guns and ammunition to Ukraine apparently.
 
stevoc said:
Lots of countries were similar in the past but changed. Maybe they just need a right leader/party to give them a chance to change, they had that chance 20 years ago but got despot in Putin. But you're right to become a true democracy Russian culture to an extent will have to change which won't be easy.
Click to expand...
I just don't know if it's possible for Russia as a massive transcontinental federation to become a democracy. Maybe it needs to break up into smaller, more manageable units for a democratic culture to arise.
 
RoyH1 said:
I just don't know if it's possible for Russia as a massive transcontinental federation to become a democracy. Maybe it needs to break up into smaller, more manageable units for a democratic culture to arise.
Click to expand...

It's definitely a barrier for sure. A state system is the only way I can imagine it would work without the country breaking up. Though when you think about it Russia is so vast that it has lots ethnic regions with little or no similarities to each other that are part of the country through no choice of their own. Maybe a break up into smaller countries is inevitable, scary proposition for the rest of the world though with so many Soviet Nukes laying around Russia.
 
stevoc said:
It's definitely a barrier for sure. A state system is the only way I can imagine it would work without the country breaking up. Though when you think about it Russia is so vast that it has lots ethnic regions with little or no similarities to each other that are part of the country through no choice of their own. Maybe a break up into smaller countries is inevitable, scary proposition for the rest of the world though with so many Soviet Nukes laying around Russia.
Click to expand...

Tbf, that can be said about most big countries in the world :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.