I’m probably misreading. You dont mean UK doesnt allow protests do you? Theyre regular around London (in Trafalgar Square at the weekend)
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Will they and should they be? Lots of blame on west for allowing Putin to arm and prepare for full invasion for 8 years, guy has proved to be deranged, him stepping down should be bare minimum now before anything changes.
Also, cedeing any territory should be a no-no, saying Crimea is pro russian, is giving into their propaganda. There were no fair elections. As I said earlier in the topic, any pro-russian on Ukrainian soil can make couple mile trip eastwards and live in eternal harmony. Maybe they should start sending russian civilians in Kiev flats and in 5 years say, we don't want Ukraine here, Russia come help?
Stay safe pal. We appreciate all the efforts from within. It’s a shame that great pain will come to the normal Russian people through economics and death of sons in the army.
all because of one man
May be a really ignorant question by me but if they did withdraw their troops why would the sanctions remain in place?
So he gets a lot of things he wants? Wouldn’t that justify his actions to him/generals/Russian public, make him more popular and potentially give him encouragement to do something similar again?
I think people should stop freaking out about the nukes. It's one thing for Putin to waive them around as a threat, but to actually use one of them against the west would be as good as simultaneously using one of their own in Moscow. Now if Putin told his generals to nuke their own City, do you think they would do that? I'll believe that when it happens.
This isn't even an existential threat against Russia itself. The west has zero intention to even step on Russian soil. So when it comes to it do you think the Russian command (as in generals and others who would have to facilitate the use of nukes) would rather see their own country, with all their families in it, laid to ashes than retreat and perhaps regroup, try again another time?
Isn't this extremely risky? Given Putin's rhetoric about the Ukrainian leadership, I wouldn't rule out anything.
You mean that exact tweet or a tweet about the ruble? I looked back but I didn't find a duplicate post quoting this specific tweet by myself.
It's obviously not without risk.
On what basis? And please don't just say because they speak Russian, because there is no more ignorant assumption about Ukraine right now as assuming Russian native speakers in Ukraine are Russian, want to be independent from Ukraine and/or want to be part of Russia. It's about as stupid as thinking that all English-speakers in Wales and Ireland aren't Welsh and Irish and want to be part of England.
To make sure he doesnt do it again.
Not that much, attacking a diplomatic delegation would have massive consequences. Even in the nastiest wars it rarely happened.
They shouldn't be but they will be in a short time.
Hope you are right. I just see a situation where the Russians would create a lie about Ukraine being the aggressor in the meeting, and that they were forced into arresting them, or something similar.
It's my anxiety speaking not sense.
No doubt the US is also monitoring it and told Russia not to do any shenanigans.
I am not sure I follow how that works.
If I was a mad evil world leader I would take the view that if I am going to continue to be punished either way then I may as well do what I want to do. I know the sanctions could get worse but if they have the effect of forcing the government to do the right thing then I don't understand continuing to punish innocent Russian people (a lot of which have protested and made it clear this isn't a war they want). Obviously this may be naïve from me and I may be missing some context.
Great post. As good as killing yourself.
Putin is apparently terrified of covid but doesn’t mind dying from nuclear war if cornered. Just look at some of the front pages of the news today in the tabloids with complete fearmongering.
Bojo, Biden and Macron would never let it come to that point and would not be trying to strangle Russia economically if they feared it was a viable response from Moscow.
Speaks so much better than Boris, hit the nail on the head as well. It's always somebody else's child going to war. Not the big wig rich or politicians who instigate and start these wars.
Was different tweet, but same ruble graph, down c28%, cheers.
Completely agree. He would be very well-suited to the job of PM at this current time in my opinion. Shame.
Are Ukraine willing to give up Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea?
I'm not talking about whether or not it's the right thing to do, but it might be what's needed for the war to end, and I think that's an end-game Putin might be content with.
I'm not talking about whether or not it's the right thing to do, but it might be what's needed for the war to end, and I think that's an end-game Putin might be content with.
On the other hand, he insists on calling it the Ukraine time and time again, which Ukrainians are frequently affronted by.
No. Next.
Sadly the older generation and other pockets of people over here didn't want to give him a chance. I know people also had concerns over his opinion towards military which i sort of understand.
What's his negotiated political settlement that's palatable to both the Russians and Ukranians?
I do that, never realised it was a bad way to say it.
Corbyn was never able to compromise or act politically. His principles came first come what may. Unfortunately that is not the way to win elections. I won't relitigate all of the issues but he was his own worst enemy.
This Twitter account is well worth a follow for updates on Russian state TV.
You don't need one when you can never hope to command a majority to actually have a chance of proposing and implementing it on the international stage.
Yeah i was going to say, he would have been tough to deal with when it came to certain issues and he might have alienated a lot of allies.
You do need one for the wars to end, though.
Edit: Sorry, misunderstood the post. You were talking about Corbyns chance of proposing it on the international stage, at first I thought you meant Russia/Ukraine didn't need a political settlement.
What is it about Russia that makes it particularly susceptible to authoritarian rule?
They only managed a couple real democratic election in the last 100 years or so (1991). I believe 1996 was rigged by Yeltsin, and I'm not sure about Putin's first 2 elections.
They only managed a couple real democratic election in the last 100 years or so (1991). I believe 1996 was rigged by Yeltsin, and I'm not sure about Putin's first 2 elections.
If Zelenskyy recognizes Crimea as part of Russia and gives Donetsk and Luhansk away, he will lose all the credibility in the eyes of Ukranian citizens. It will mean a defeat for them. Mass protests will follow. Zelenskyy will never ever win any election. They are in war, and they hate Putin. After everything that Putin said and did, I doubt the sanctions will be lifted even if he withdraws the troops.
Because they have already killed people, Ukraine has no sovereignity in Putin's eyes and the fecker has started using the nuclear arms card. It will not go unnoticed and should not.
That takes a lot of courage and balls to do what you are doing harms. Respect.
Privatization in the 90s resulted in a small elite getting control over many former state companies, hence the oligarchy. And former security services members tightened their control over the government. I think that's why the country has a hard time getting out of this authoritarian setup.