Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

fergieisold said:
Im a bit confused. At what point has NATO threatened Russia?
Click to expand...

The same way the US felt threatened by Vietnam, and multiple other countries in Central America, moving towards communism, that resulted in them invading/bombing those countries, killing scores of innocent people (either through invasion or supporting a murderous anti communist leader).

Power brings a hunger to influence around r world and also paranoia at losing it, NATO haven't threatened Russia at all but they should know that Putin is a loon who could react aggressively to NATO looking to accept Ukraine.

World powers play the politics game and it's smaller countries (economically and influence wise) that sadly suffer because of it.
 
Pintu said:
Click to expand...


After over a decade of mis-steps Turkey appears to be trying to revert to Davutoglu’s “Zero problems with neighbors” approach. Still some way to go though.
 
sun_tzu said:
If Russia attacked Estonia for example I honestly couldn't see macron scholz or Trudeau committing troops and going to fight

Biden... Honestly not sure if he would but I suspect domestic politics would factor at least as heavily in the decision as honouring the article 5 commitments

Boris ... I think he would (if America did) but mainly to live out some elaborate Churchillian cos play rather than any sense of honour.

Looking at that lot possibly putin read the room pretty well
Click to expand...

yes they would because as members of NATO they are legally bound to defend fellow NATO members, which is why Russia will not attack a fellow NATO member, that would be suicide for Russia.
 
moses said:
Are we sure some of those things are not happening? I always presume we're not privvy to all the info and time usually proves that stance correct.
Click to expand...

This is almost certainly completely correct. In 20 years we’ll almost certainly hear stories of all of the behind closed doors work that’s been going on the last few weeks but that obviously can’t be publicised right now.
 
Beans said:
I don’t know what that means, but the goat *is* my zodiac sign. I enjoy Texas Holdem and my favorite thing is calling bluffs.

I have a problem with the stance of “Putin will use nukes if anyone dares to face his troops in the field (except Ukraine) so we can’t use any military tools to stop him, because he’ll end the world.” This is defeatist thinking that can be applied to any type of resistance.

i thought it was very interesting that there was no response by Putin to the initial shipments of arms to Ukraine. I can only guess he didn’t think they would make any difference. He was expecting a short campaign, it was only when jets were discussed that we got a threat. By this point it may have become clear that it would be a longer campaign, and jets are very impactful. But he could have used that threat right away and I expect it would have worked.

Why not threaten Ukraine with nukes if they resist? Well, Russia has a huge advantage in firepower and manpower already. But against NATO all he has to his advantage are tactical nukes. So he threatens because he cannot win, he must bluff, it’s the only way he can win

For me, Putin wants to win, mutually assured destruction isn’t something he wants. He could destroy the world any time he wants if that’s his goal, no one can stop him, if that’s his wish.

The West may not be ready to do anything more until they’ve moved some troops. I’m not a military expert so I’m not sure what the exact best move is. If this is a real statemate on the ground, then it may be best to do nothing.
Click to expand...

Why threaten a non-nuclear power with nuclear weapons when you have the more superior military and an array of other horrifying weapons you can call upon?

The Ukraine doesn’t pose any threat to Russia itself and is simply defending itself. If NATO were to enter the war you’re talking three nuclear powers and the capability of crushing Russia or even invading it and overthrowing Putin.

I don’t think it’s difficult to see the major difference and escalation?
 
hasanejaz88 said:
The same way the US felt threatened by Vietnam, and multiple other countries in Central America, moving towards communism, that resulted in them invading/bombing those countries, killing scores of innocent people (either through invasion or supporting a murderous anti communist leader).

Power brings a hunger to influence around r world and also paranoia at losing it, NATO haven't threatened Russia at all but they should know that Putin is a loon who could react aggressively to NATO looking to accept Ukraine.

World powers play the politics game and it's smaller countries (economically and influence wise) that sadly suffer because of it.
Click to expand...

The US was misguided in many of those cases but it was acting in the context of the cold war - a global competition between Western capitalism versus communism. There is no clash of ideologies in Ukraine - no one signs up for authoritarian kleptocracy unless it’s at gun point. This is a colonial ruler refusing to accept that its former colony wants genuine independence and, as part of that strategy, even denying that the colony has a genuine independent identity. There are parallels but you won’t find them by looking at the US.
 
Redlyn said:
I find it hilarious how sanctions are supposed to severely punish Russia meanwhile the west is fueling their war through oil and gas exports. They might as well sit and fold their arms for all it's worth.
Click to expand...

The welfare state many citizens in western countries enjoy is heavily based on oil and gas and has been for many years. I find surprising that so many people -politicians included- speak about their easy substitution so spontaneously. As Vaclav Smil says: is there anything guys in Washington and Brussels know that engineers are not aware of?
 
TheReligion said:
Why threaten a non-nuclear power with nuclear weapons when you have the more superior military and an array of other horrifying weapons you can call upon?

The Ukraine doesn’t pose any threat to Russia itself and is simply defending itself. If NATO were to enter the war you’re talking three nuclear powers and the capability of crushing Russia or even invading it and overthrowing Putin.

I don’t think it’s difficult to see the major difference and escalation?
Click to expand...
Minor point: it's not "the Ukraine" but just "Ukraine".
 
MoskvaRed said:
The US was misguided in many of those cases but it was acting in the context of the cold war - a global competition between Western capitalism versus communism.
Click to expand...


It wasn't, Vietnam wasn't aligned, only in Korea and Afghanistan and Cuba did the Cold War really play out to any degree.

Anti-Communism was a carte blanch for naked imperialism.

The US interfered to varying degrees with 81 sovereign States between 1946 and 2000. That's a lot of misguidance.

Also the knew from the mid 60s they had the upper hand on the Soviets in every regard.
 
JPRouve said:
It seems to be the way to go in the US and UK. I don't know why but it's very common.
Click to expand...

It only changed in 2012, but Western media now use Ukraine after they requested it. Interestingly it came from the word ukrania meaning borderland, hence "the borderland".
 
Balljy said:
It only changed in 2012, but Western media now use Ukraine after they requested it. Interestingly it came from the word ukrania meaning borderland, hence "the borderland".
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the etymology but the dropping of the definite article is not just stylistic but represents their freedom and statehood. Use of The is what one may term the language of the oppressor. These things that seem like minor details can be symbolically huge to the post colonial psyche.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
I just wish there was a way to shut his program and/or to arrest him. Let the bitchers and moaners at Fox complain and bring the government to court later, but that cnut deserves to be silenced after such open treasonous behavior.



Using Putin's pre-invasion playbook and turn it against him has to be a top priority alongside arming Ukraine even more. The Kaliningrad Oblast is a small piece of land surrounded by Poland, Lithuania and the Baltic Sea. There are just a little less than one million people in there. The idea has been floated around before the Russian invasion began, and it still stands as of now. All that NATO has to do is to mass troops at the oblast's border and basically cut Kaliningrad off from the entire world while sending a warning (or a bluff, you name it): Putin, it's either the safety of your own people to whom you swore to protect, or it's your ego in Ukraine. Regardless, you can't have both.

Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (retired) brought that point back to the surface just 2-3 days ago on CNN's Jim Sciutto's morning show. Doing so would take Putin's eyes off the ball as a primary purpose, but I would go further as to say that Kaliningrad should become a massive bargaining chip in this war.
Click to expand...

You want to start arresting journalists and surround Russian territory? Cool...........
 
phelans shorts said:
As others have said it’s how it was referred to back in the USSR days, but it absolutely should be moved away from (and seemingly has started to be in recent weeks, just as the Kyiv/Kiev thing)
Click to expand...

Thanks. In french I have only known Ukraine. But then french is a bit special since we will have an l' in front of Ukraine depending on the sentence.
 
Smores said:
You want to start arresting journalists and surround Russian territory? Cool...........
Click to expand...
That cnut is not a journalist. And for the record, treason is described as such in the United States penal code:

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason said:
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
Click to expand...

And as for Kaliningrad, does the notion of bargaining chip mean anything to you?
 
TheReligion said:
Why threaten a non-nuclear power with nuclear weapons when you have the more superior military and an array of other horrifying weapons you can call upon?

The Ukraine doesn’t pose any threat to Russia itself and is simply defending itself. If NATO were to enter the war you’re talking three nuclear powers and the capability of crushing Russia or even invading it and overthrowing Putin.

I don’t think it’s difficult to see the major difference and escalation?
Click to expand...
I didn't say NATO should attack Russia in Ukraine, and I've not questioned the difference between that and arming the Ukranians, there's no need for the attitude.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
That cnut is not a journalist. And for the record, treason is described as such in the United States penal code:



And as for Kaliningrad, does the notion of bargaining chip mean anything to you?
Click to expand...

Yeah you're off your rocker. If you've ended up in a position thinking locking up journalists and surrounding a nation out of some show of force is a good idea then you're probably the exact sort who'd be excusing actual autocratic/tyrannical behaviour if born in another territory. That isn't how any civilised nation acts.

Another one for the ignore.
 
moses said:
I think he has actually used 'not a journalist' as a legal defence, saying he is an entertainment host. I may have made that up.
Click to expand...

It was used by Fox News in a lawsuit, claiming they were an "entertainement network" but either way, the 1st amendment is very broad and Carlson's stupidity is protected.

Even calls to violence are protected speech unless intended to and directed to inciting immediate lawless action.
 
Now this is an interesting thread on the crisis presented by the prospect of Ukrainian independence in 1991:

 
Oly Francis said:
It was used by Fox News in a lawsuit, claiming they were an "entertainement network" but either way, the 1st amendment is very broad and Carlson's stupidity is protected.
Click to expand...


Yes, that's it.

I hate him but I'm glad he's free to be a knob..
 
Smores said:
Yeah you're off your rocker. If you've ended up in a position thinking locking up journalists and surrounding a nation out of some show of force is a good idea then you're probably the exact sort who'd be excusing actual autocratic/tyrannical behaviour if born in another territory. That isn't how any civilised nation acts.

Another one for the ignore.
Click to expand...
And you bring no suggestion to the debate whatsoever. At least, I back my arguments with comments from experts and excerpts from existing laws.

Ignore yourself.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
And you bring no suggestion to the debate whatsoever. At least, I back my arguments with comments from experts and excerpts from existing laws.

Ignore yourself.
Click to expand...


But you want to ban journalists and get into non linear war. That's not the means to any good end surely?
 
Oly Francis said:
It was used by Fox News in a lawsuit, claiming they were an "entertainement network" but either way, the 1st amendment is very broad and Carlson's stupidity is protected.

Even calls to violence are protected speech unless intended to and directed to inciting immediate lawless action.
Click to expand...

moses said:
But you want to ban journalists and get into non linear war. That's not the means to any good end surely?
Click to expand...

The problem I have with Tucker Carlson's shenanigans is as to where the line can and should be drawn between free speech and outright treason as described in the United States Code of Laws. When do you start applying treason charges when this is arguably the first time since WW2 that we have an American cheering up so much for the other side? If one does the entire nomenclature of what he said for Russia and against his own country in the context of this conflict, Carlson sounds and smells really treasonous by definition.

For the record, Mildred "Axis Sally" Gillars was found guilty of treason and served 12 years in prison for disseminating Axis propaganda as an American broadcaster during WW2. Hence we have a precedent if Carlson has to be arrested and put on trial on such charges.
 
Paxi said:
Click to expand...

VorZakone said:
Positive news.
Click to expand...
It sounds positive... But I am not overly hopeful

Ultimately for putin to end this he is going to want sanctions lifted ... I can see him using a ceasefire to resupply troops and then say something along the lines of Ukraine and Russia are happy with the terms but NATO won't lift their sanctions...

Then basically bomb people till NATO lets him use his credit card again

It's certainly more positive than negative but ultimately any settlement is going to have to look at the sanctions and I think the republican hawks in America are prepared to sacrifice a lot of ukranians to be able to blame gas prices on biden
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
The problem I have with Tucker Carlson's shenanigans is as to where the line can and should be drawn between free speech and outright treason as described in the United States Code of Laws. When do you start applying treason charges when this is arguably the first time since WW2 that we have an American cheering up so much for the other side? If one does the entire nomenclature of what he said for Russia and against his own country in the context of this conflict, Carlson sounds and smells really treasonous by definition.

For the record, Mildred "Axis Sally" Gillars was found guilty of treason and served 12 years in prison for disseminating Axis propaganda as an American broadcaster during WW2. Hence we have a precedent.
Click to expand...

Is the US at war with Russia?

Carlson is too smart to say such things if a real engagement commenced.

He's an awful shit stirring bastard who I'd hate even more if it was my country he was polluting with his dangerous bile, but you can't ban him or kill him for treason.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
The problem I have with Tucker Carlson's shenanigans is as to where the line can and should be drawn between free speech and outright treason as described in the United States Code of Laws. When do you start applying treason charges when this is arguably the first time since WW2 that we have an American cheering up so much for the other side? If one does the entire nomenclature of what he said for Russia and against his own country in the context of this conflict, Carlson sounds and smells really treasonous by definition.

For the record, Mildred "Axis Sally" Gillars was found guilty of treason and served 12 years in prison for disseminating Axis propaganda as an American broadcaster during WW2. Hence we have a precedent if Carlson has to be arrested and put on trial on such charges.
Click to expand...
Tuckyo Rose
 
Beans said:
Russia has the territory with all the oil now, and a lot of the wheat production. He’s not advancing easily, I expect he’d be happy to stop with taking the territory he’s currently holding.

Which would be a disaster for Ukraine, surely.
Click to expand...
Yup. Anyone who thinks Ukraine has won this war if both sides settle and lands stay occupied as they are now is misguided. That would be a big loss for Ukraine. Only the future will tell us whether Russia’s gains will have been worth the cost or not.
 
The Anonymous hacker group apparently took over a live TV broadcast in Russia a few days ago (I don't if this has been confirmed as having actually happened) and showed some footage of the destruction in Ukraine.

This got me thinking, can't GCHQ do the same thing? How difficult is it to do?
 
Raoul said:
I'd agree. I honestly don't think the current group of NATO leaders (Biden, Bojo, Macron, Scholz, Trudeau) are have the fortitude or political courage to come to grips with the idea of going to war, and are using article 5 as a way to limit their involvement in Ukraine, while making it appear like they are leaning forward on the matter.
Click to expand...
I think that is too cynical. Any reading of history between nuclear armed states shows they'll do whatever they can to avoid direct conflict. I think Biden is wisely doing everything he can to avoid escalation games with Putin, despite Putin's provocations. At the moment, Putin is making mis-step after mis-step and his options are narrowing as a result. Patience is the name of the game, if Ukraine can hold out. Let's see which way China jumps in the next week or so, that could be crucial.
 
moses said:
It wasn't, Vietnam wasn't aligned, only in Korea and Afghanistan and Cuba did the Cold War really play out to any degree.

Anti-Communism was a carte blanch for naked imperialism.

The US interfered to varying degrees with 81 sovereign States between 1946 and 2000. That's a lot of misguidance.

Also the knew from the mid 60s they had the upper hand on the Soviets in every regard.
Click to expand...

Ho Chi Minh was both an independence fighter and a marxist - the US put way too much emphasis on the latter and not enough on the former but you can’t assert the communist influence in North Vietnam was imperialist make believe. Also, the Cold War played out in a major way in Europe too - Poland, Czechoslavakia, Hungary, East Germany. Those were the high profile ones for Europeans and in none of those cases was the US the bad guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.