Oh. Right, as I were then. Sorry.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Now I don't know if you're being sarcastic or you missed my sarcasm
Look, my post was to say Russia is obviously up to no good and they're killing people. Denying that by saying it's just a boogeyman made up by the west is silly. None of that invalidates that other actors in the conflict might also be doing evil shit. I have very little sympathy towards most governments in eastern europe (Ukraine, Poland, Hungary).
I think they’re both up to no good. The bottom line is, those people in that video and countless more are dead, though. Pro Russian rebels like Givi (now dead) and others are guilty of war crimes, without a doubt. So I absolutely don’t condone their actions. Both sides have a lot of blood on their hands.Now I don't know if you're being sarcastic or you missed my sarcasm
Look, my post was to say Russia is obviously up to no good and they're killing people. Denying that by saying it's just a boogeyman made up by the west is silly. None of that invalidates that other actors in the conflict might also be doing evil shit. I have very little sympathy towards most governments in eastern europe (Ukraine, Poland, Hungary).
Then we agree Russia is not a boogeyman made up by the west.
I never absolved Russia of anything.
Fair enough, I interpreted your reply as you trying to shift the blame. My bad.
Tony Blinken was on a podcast today and said this issue is about more than Ukraine and it is about not letting a country create a power of influence so strong that it can dictate terms of foreign policy to its neighbors and instead let their democratically elected representatives make choices on whether to join NATO or be more closely aligned to Europe. Cool man, if the Mexican government woke up tomorrow, signed a defence treaty with Russia and China and started doing joint military exercises with them in Monterrey, Juarez and Tijuana, America would go into a rage worse than a 100 neighborhood Karens harassing a black door dash delivery guy.
At least make an effort to make the lie stick.
At least make an effort to make the lie stick.
Tony Blinken was on a podcast today and said this issue is about more than Ukraine and it is about not letting a country create a power of influence so strong that it can dictate terms of foreign policy to its neighbors and instead let their democratically elected representatives make choices on whether to join NATO or be more closely aligned to Europe. Cool man, if the Mexican government woke up tomorrow, signed a defence treaty with Russia and China and started doing joint military exercises with them in Monterrey, Juarez and Tijuana, America would go into a rage worse than a 100 neighborhood Karens harassing a black door dash delivery guy.
At least make an effort to make the lie stick.
The issue is that Russia has no obvious boundaries and has a paranoia about the other side closing up. It may seem ridiculous but that state of mind is a fact. From our Western point of view, most Russian wars have been caused by expansionism into Swedish/Polish/Turkish areas. From their point of view, it’s never their fault and they were merely establshing borders (similar to the French in some respects when they created the hexagon by annexing chunks of the Holy Roman Empire).
Epic film.
I understand Russia's paranoia and in a sense its completely justified but I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of the US citing someone else craving a power of influence when that has been the CIA's full time hobby in South America for over a century now.
Is it only the UK and US looking to do anything about this?
Where’s the EU! Let’s be having you
Where’s the EU! Let’s be having you
The EU will be facing the side effects of the US doing. Not sure what the UK is looking to do, maybe they'll throw a party.
There’s only the US and UK actually doing practical things to help the Ukraine seemingly.
The UK have sent special forces into the country.
Source for that?
Spain have sent a warship and I’m sure I read Canada had sent special forces to Ukraine: https://tvpworld.com/58057335/spain-dispatches-warship-to-the-black-sea-to-boost-ukraines-defences
Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are sending American made weapons to Ukraine.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...ates-send-us-made-weapons-ukraine-2022-01-20/
The way I understood you initially was as if some of the snake eating types have been sent to Ukraine. From the article it appears that these are instructors for the anti tank gear that UK is providing. From the EU, I believe France is also supplying arms. Germany, very much not though.
Why are people shocked by this development? All the Superpowers have done shit like this for a very long time. Deny countries (usually neighboiring countries) an ideology shift that differs from their own. The US has done it, China is doing it and Russia the same. They can mask it however they want but it's the same BS that has been going on since WW2.
I think the point is the UK are sending in actual people.
Changes the whole dynamic is the country gets invaded.
Canadian troops are already on the field to train Ukrainian troops. That military cooperation has been there since April 2015, and the non-NATO Swedes are also involved.
Operation Unifier
Operation Unifier
During the last invasion I met a Ukrainian boy who had been called up.
He said that the news that arrived were very pessimistic, that the Russian heavy artillery was devastating and they were destroying them.
I read that part about heavy artillery some time later in a press article.
Now it seems that each country is committed to sending weapons but my doubt, and from ignorance, is whether they are effective measures that can have immediate utility or something improvised.
Looking at the map and how they are surrounded, it seems reasonable that they manage to advance and eat a little more of Ukraine, but can those weapons and that cooperation be able to stop them from the first minute?
Or rather, it is assumed that they are going to take some province and that in two months there will be a meeting of various leaders and a ceasefire, leaving those lands in limbo, if not on Russian territory.
He said that the news that arrived were very pessimistic, that the Russian heavy artillery was devastating and they were destroying them.
I read that part about heavy artillery some time later in a press article.
Now it seems that each country is committed to sending weapons but my doubt, and from ignorance, is whether they are effective measures that can have immediate utility or something improvised.
Looking at the map and how they are surrounded, it seems reasonable that they manage to advance and eat a little more of Ukraine, but can those weapons and that cooperation be able to stop them from the first minute?
Or rather, it is assumed that they are going to take some province and that in two months there will be a meeting of various leaders and a ceasefire, leaving those lands in limbo, if not on Russian territory.
Implement the Minks agreement and then hammer The Russians if they don't abide by it. What business do the Russians have in expanding their borders right up to NATO countries?
Liz Truss laying down a warning to Putin is objectively funny.
So, just an update on the psyche of some Ukrainians (I speak to at least two UKR every day):
- The chances of a Russian invasion this year is between 10 and 20%
- The chances of a Russian invasion over the next few decades is 100%
- More than half of Russians back Putin's aggression against Ukraine - mainly due to vast propaganda
- Russians believe UKR/BEL/etc will be better off with RUS
- UKR want democracy, Europe, Nato
- The people I spoke to generally like "the uncorrupted" Zelensky, but prefer the stronger leader and "corrupted" Poroshenko in this crisis
- Most have back-up plans if Russia invades
- None want to physically fight for the country they love
- Putin wants all the USSR's old territory
- Germany apparently doesn't want to confront Russia
- Poland is worried they're next
I think a russian invasion of the parts of Ukraine that are pro russian is likley...
A large part of that population would be happy and rush to a poll to show its their democratic will
The people who were not happy Russia would let leave, Ukraine would allow in
Don't think Russia would fancy trying to occupy the whole country from a military or political perspective
The inevitable economic sanctions would probably be worth the price politically for Putin domestically
So yeah I would actually say the odds of a limited invasion this year are higher than the 10% to 20%
Cant see any coordinated military response against it - Though I could see a political response beyond sanctions of making Finland, Sweden, Ukraine full Nato members as a future line in the sand.
Eastern UKR is pro-RUS, for sure, but Russia actually invading is not likely at all. They would try to use subterfuge to achieve their goal, but the West will not let another Crimea happen. Not now. Putin is smart. He'd cause a distraction first - say incite a war somewhere else and then "when no-one is looking", force a referendum. BUT, you must wonder how often other countries would let that happen. Everyone is aware of RUS intentions.
As for sanctions, it'll hurt RUS ever so slightly, but China is right there. They'll be there for their buds if this had to happen. I don't think Putin is scared of sanctions. He controls the gas.
Local administrations declaring independence and asking Russia to recognise them and protect them would be my guess as to how it starts ... that would at least be the way that provided best diplomatic cover
If all of this was just to get Eastern UKR, then how is that good for Russia? UKR joining Nato is their biggest gripe (supposedly), and seizing Donetsk and Luhansk wouldn't stop that. UKR has already given up on those cities in the far East. What about Kharkiv, though? No way UKR would let Kharkiv leave.
What the hell was Biden trying to say. Was it just a mistake ?
technically having EasternUKR as an independent (but satelite) region would potentially stop Nato being on the russian border if UKR joins - from a political point of view if not necessarily a practical military perspective this would have some benefit to him I believe
An honest politician playing poker - badly."We are sometimes united! Well, most of the times anyway."
I thought it was quite a reasonable speech from Biden. It achieved two things at a smallish cost. On the plus side, it puts pressure on the rest of NATO to back up the US properly should the prediction come true and Putin invades, and second it is more public explanation of Putin's destabilisation tactics which do serve to undermine them. The cost is that it exposes NATO not being fully united, but needs must.
Nato is already on Russia's NW boundary. Having a tiny buffer zone in the SW won't mean anything to Russia (now, if they were to annex it, then fair enough. They can freely move to Crimea, but that would result in war.) UKR are simply not allowed to join Nato. And, I don't think they will. The West will compromise. UKR isn't that important. Not worth risking war.
Indeed.
People say that things have changed from the old world order.
But this clearly illustrates that in reality, nothing has changed.
Putin has and will continue to try to rebuild a Soviet Union style buffer between Russia and the West/NATO.
And his success in Crimea has emboldened him.
But my biggest concern is the increasing weakness of NATO especially differences within key member states in Europe.
This will be a major test for NATO and the way it does or does not unify and respond will send a fundamental message to Putin.
Money, natural gas dependency, status quo, selfishness - why is Europe so divided? Why do democratic countries not stand together on key political issues? Right now I really doubt that the West can stop Putin. Itty-bitty sanctions? Pah!
Division is always trumped by solidarity. And the West is divided. The countries, leaders, political parties and individual ideologies and motivations of the West stand against Putin's Russia - where there can be no dissent.
Oh, and China would love to interfere behind the scenes. They want it. Add NK into the mix and we have a World War.
I think China does not much care and certainly wouldnt get involved in a practical level in any dispute
Strategically I think they would probably be officially neutral (abstaining for example in the security council) - though in reality they will back Russia economically and not apply any sanctions fully expecting that to be repaid when they take Taiwan (again nobody will do much about that either, save a few sanctions)
Edit - if they really did both want to work together for maximum impact Russia would go in to Ukraine in a coordinated timeline with China going into Taiwan... I dont expect that to happen but if they really did want to stir up trouble that would be the best route
Last edited:
Absolutely. I my view, NATO is both a victim of its own success, as well as a natural deterioration over time.
NATO has maintained peace since it was founded.
But far too many nations refuse to properly fund the minimum 2% of their GDP. Added to that is the superiority complex and posturing of some European leaders.
They need to be very careful what they wish for.
Unity among the nation states, especially at this time is crucial.
I disagree with the first bit (because a weak West equates to a strong East), but the rest is spot on.
Russia won’t dare enter Ukraine