Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Beans said:
Of course they can take the risk, US Presidents took far greater risks standing up to the USSR.

And as insane ideologues as the leaders of the USSR were, none of them wanted to use nukes. Sacrificing Ukraine because of that threat…doesn’t sit will with me.

I mean look at all the destruction already caused. Surely much, much greater than the destruction that would be caused by one “normal” nuke (perhaps their biggest bomb on Kyiv would have been worse, but then Russia aren’t done).
Click to expand...


I agree with you.

The Western leaders made NO THREATS vs Russia in December 2021. Why not? Biden was certain they will invade. Why didn't he threaten Putin's army with USAF? With bombing every Russian soldier inside Ukraine. With something concrete and scary.

They told us that this is because Biden is careful and tried not to make Putin angry, because if Putin is angry he may invade Ukraine. These were the "calculations" of Biden, Scholtz, etc. If we do nothing, Putin may not invade. How good were these calculations?
 
frostbite said:
But their calculations were that if they do not offend Putin in December, he may not invade. Did their calculations work?
Click to expand...
1) Remind me again who told Zalensky that Putin was going to invade.

2) Again… you’re asking the US Air Force and NATO to chance starting World War III for a non-NATO country. That isn’t smart.
 
I feel like blaming the likes of Biden for not reading the situation exactly correctly at every turn is a bit unfair. It's not like there is a manual for nuclear war, you have to make your judgements as you go along and you can argue they've been too cautious but then...can you be too cautious about starting the end of the world? Much better to be overly cautious than overly hawkish in such a situation, not that it's perhaps much comfort to the people of Ukraine right now.
 
Beans said:
You were saying that if Russia invaded a Ukraine that was defended by the US, and got destroyed, that it would be the beginning of the end of the world, that Russia would launch either a full nuclear volley at NATO countries or launch smaller nukes that would lead to escalation and then Armageddon.

I’m not sure why you’re now responding about how Russia would respond to an invasion. I said that no one would do that because of nukes, so I agree that’s a bad way go. Russia doesn’t have to worry about their army being destroyed because no one will invade.

But that’s not at all the same as helping a country destroy an invading Russian army.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about an invasion?
You've lost me.
 
frostbite said:
Not really. A direct hit by NATO on Russian forces INSIDE UKRAINE, is no existential threat for Russia. They can just retreat back into Russia.

But what I am saying is that in December 2021, just a (serious) threat of NATO doing that, would have prevented the invasion altogether.
Click to expand...

I'm saying they will take it as such.
Given how much they've amped it up to their own population, their people would take it as such on their own with no further propaganda push needed.
 
Weapons manufacturer prays for lasting peace. Well that's a new one!
 
I was reading somewhere that the effect of large drones like the bayraktar has diminished in this phase of the war, hence we’re seeing nowhere near as much footage as in the first phase.

Allegedly it’s because now the war efforts are concentrated in smaller areas where Russians have deployed air defences thus making the large, slow drones easy targets.
 
At this rate, this is going to continue until Trump is President again, and he tells Putin to keep the east of the country and to stop the attack.

I don't see any other way for this to end...unless Ukraine surrender?
 
frostbite said:
But their calculations were that if they do not offend Putin in December, he may not invade. Did their calculations work?
Click to expand...
The bigger picture you’ve missed is NATO would be revealing itself to the world as an organisation who were offensive when it suited them. Basically the whole ‘world police’ image the US had. Yes they would carry a huge threat but it would create a need for Russia and China (and others) to work more closely together to combat them and, make no mistake, the US (who are basically NATO’s trump card) is vastly more concerned with China than Russia.

As it stands China is doing a lot less than people suspected to help Russia (they could do less but I’m not sure that’s realistic) and a big part of that is because Russia isn’t facing NATO directly. They can’t really go asking for military hardware without looking weak (whereas they could with direct NATO intervention) and so by supplying Ukraine but not directly engaging Putin is now locked in this ridiculous conflict where he’s losing record amounts of troops, has united NATO and even got it looking likely that NATO will grow all whilst his country slowly economically collapses. Ukraine is suffering, we shouldn’t forget that but the outcome of your scenario was either WW3 or the above
 
MadMike said:
I was reading somewhere that the effect of large drones like the bayraktar has diminished in this phase of the war, hence we’re seeing nowhere near as much footage as in the first phase.

Allegedly it’s because now the war efforts are concentrated in smaller areas where Russians have deployed air defences thus making the large, slow drones easy targets.
Click to expand...

I heard it mentioned on a twitter space that Turkey, or the manufacturer, had requested they stop publishing Bayraktar footage. Though I can't find anything to back that up.

Though the air defense line makes sense. It was a massive shock at the beginning that these things were so successful, as they shouldn't be too difficult to shoot down.
 
This is utter madness. Eventually Putin is going to lash out. Why should the world be destroyed because the Americans and the Europeans have a fight between themselves and the Russians? The majority of the World don't want anything like this. They don't want the Russian invasion of Ukraine, neither do they want NATO to expand and create problems for the majority of the World.
 
Foxbatt said:
This is utter madness. Eventually Putin is going to lash out. Why should the world be destroyed because the Americans and the Europeans have a fight between themselves and the Russians? The majority of the World don't want anything like this. They don't want the Russian invasion of Ukraine, neither do they want NATO to expand and create problems for the majority of the World.
Click to expand...

Joke of a post. This is on Putin and Russia. Not NATO or the west (and BTW I am a big critic of US/western foreign policy). History shows appeasement doesn't work.
 
Foxbatt said:
This is utter madness. Eventually Putin is going to lash out. Why should the world be destroyed because the Americans and the Europeans have a fight between themselves and the Russians? The majority of the World don't want anything like this. They don't want the Russian invasion of Ukraine, neither do they want NATO to expand and create problems for the majority of the World.
Click to expand...

Jesus, could we please stop this NATO expansion nonsense?
 
NM said:
Joke of a post. This is on Putin and Russia. Not NATO or the west (and BTW I am a big critic of US/western foreign policy). History shows appeasement doesn't work.
Click to expand...

No appeasement never works. But it was not appeasement before the invasion. Are forgetting the Cuban missile crisis?
The majority of the people in this world don't think they should suffer for the fight between two super powers to show whose got the bigger dick.
 
Zehner said:
Jesus, could we stop this NATO expansion nonsense?
Click to expand...

Presume you are young and from a NATO county or a NATO affiliated country? This story was told many times during the Gorbachev era. It's not a new one that has come up now. This has got nothing to do with Putin.
 
Foxbatt said:
This is utter madness. Eventually Putin is going to lash out. Why should the world be destroyed because the Americans and the Europeans have a fight between themselves and the Russians? The majority of the World don't want anything like this. They don't want the Russian invasion of Ukraine, neither do they want NATO to expand and create problems for the majority of the World.
Click to expand...

Yeah the majority of people in South America, Africa and Asia care deeply about NATO 'expanding'.

This is a problem created solely by Putin and Russia, the best thing for the people of Ukraine, the world and even Russia would be if they ended this unjustified attack tomorrow. Which they could but they won't.
 
Foxbatt said:
Presume you are young and from a NATO county or a NATO affiliated country? This story was told many times during the Gorbachev era. It's not a new one that has come up now. This has got nothing to do with Putin.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with Putin.
 
How come expansion of NATO become a problem for the world. If anything, the further NATO expands towards Russia, the better. The more stability there will be in Eurasia, thus the whole world. Put-ler has gone way too far by occupying lands of sovereign states only because these countries were not NATO members. Deputinization and de-rushizification of Russia is the only way forward. More sanctions on rushist regime, more arms to Ukraine to help defend their land.
 
Wow,, "This has got nothing to do with Putin" takes the cake.
 
Foxbatt said:
Presume you are young and from a NATO county or a NATO affiliated country? This story was told many times during the Gorbachev era. It's not a new one that has come up now. This has got nothing to do with Putin.
Click to expand...

Look bringing up the cuban missile crisis is stupid. Several Nato members already border Russia and with modern tech the US can lob nukes at Russia without having to place them at their doorstep not to mention from submarines. Essentially Putin went mad when Ukraine got democracy and wanted to be part of the EU instead of being a puppetstate of Russia like Belarus. I'm happy the west are at the very least providing aid, intel and arms to defend themselves against a large neighbor trying to annex them and they have exceeded expectations so far.
 
stevoc said:
Yeah the majority of people in South America, Africa and Asia care deeply about NATO 'expanding'.

This is a problem created solely by Putin and Russia, the best thing for the people of Ukraine, the world and even Russia would be if they ended this unjustified attack tomorrow. Which they could but they won't.
Click to expand...

Currently there is a bit of Lunacy in Africa and africans leaders aren't really against Russia. Macky Sall and the African Union are perfectly happy to tell the world how close they are to Russia and Putin.

I think people are being a bit too naive here, the rest of the world isn't looking at the situation the way Europe and the US are and the latters know that which is likely why they are being careful with the words and attitude that they display.
 
JPRouve said:
Currently there is a bit of Lunacy in Africa and africans leaders aren't really against Russia. Macky Sall and the African Union are perfectly happy to tell the world how close they are to Russia and Putin.

I think people are being a bit too naive here, the rest of the world isn't looking at the situation the way Europe and the US are and the latters know that which is likely why they are being careful with the words and attitude that they display.
Click to expand...

I'm aware that some countries especially in Africa are on the face of it pro Russian because of their history with the Soviet Union in the past and the prevalence of Russian propaganda in those countries media. But some countries leaning more towards Russia than the West isn't the same as the majority of the world being against eastern European countries joining a defensive alliance that will prevent them form being invaded and annexed.
 
stevoc said:
I'm aware that some countries especially in Africa are on the face of it are pro Russian because of their history with the Soviet Union in the past and the prevalence of Russian propaganda in those countries media. But some countries leaning more towards Russia than the West isn't the same as the majority of the world being against eastern European countries joining a defensive alliance that will prevent them form being invaded and annexed.
Click to expand...

This isn't just some countries in this case but the African Union and the issue is that there is a widespread sentiment that a handful of countries are a menace to sovereignties, namely the US, UK and France. There is a need to be careful and not help certain optics and it would be even worse if NATO went on the offense. It's not that they are against Eastern European Countries joining NATO, it's that NATO expending is seen as a neo-colonialism, the US, UK or France involved in regional conflicts far from their borders is seen as neo-colonialism and it would be a lie to think that it's just russian propaganda, it's an old sentiment.

These three countries that are the main NATO members, the ones that can actually do something have to deal with optics because for a lot of people they are the villains.
 
Last edited:
TMDaines said:
Malaysia surprises me, but Singapore really does:

Click to expand...

The one that surprises me is Israel, 19% favourable to Russia despite Russia historically supporting their enemies. My lack of knowledge of course.

It's a limited list mind, missing the whole of Africa, India and South Asia, China, the Americas south of the US, missing too much to claim 'overwhelmingly negative'.
 
JPRouve said:
This isn't just some countries in this case but the African Union and the issue is that there is a widespread sentiment that a handful of countries are a menace to sovereignties, namely the US, UK and France. There is a need to be careful and not help certain optics and it would be even worse if NATO went on the offense. It's not that they are against Eastern European Countries joining NATO, it's that NATO expending is seen as a neo-colonialism, the US, UK or France involved in regional conflicts far from their borders is seen as neo-colonialism and it would be a lie to think that it's just russian propaganda, it's an old sentiment.

These three countries that are the main NATO members, the ones that can actually do something have to deal with optics because for a lot of people they are the villains.
Click to expand...

First off I interpreted the post I first replied to be referring to people in general not governments or supranational organizations, which is why I said people as that's who I was talking about.

Yeah the majority of people in South America, Africa and Asia care deeply about NATO 'expanding'.
Click to expand...

In your opinion are the majority of the World's population against former Soviet block countries joining NATO for protection?
 
stevoc said:
First off I interpreted the post I first replied to be referring to people in general not governments or supranational organizations, which is why I said people as that's who I was talking about.



In your opinion are the majority of the World's population against former Soviet block countries joining NATO for protection?
Click to expand...

I think that close to the majority in non European-North American countries would see it negatively. The issue is that you add for protection or in the previous post you labelled NATO as a defensive alliance, while I agree with you, it's not actually that easily accepted.
 
Foxbatt said:
Presume you are young and from a NATO county or a NATO affiliated country? This story was told many times during the Gorbachev era. It's not a new one that has come up now. This has got nothing to do with Putin.
Click to expand...
Zehner said:
It has everything to do with Putin.
Click to expand...
Gehrman said:
Wow,, "This has got nothing to do with Putin" takes the cake.
Click to expand...

While Putin is obviously is the driving force behind it, it's also important to remember that it's not like he's surrounded by democratic doves who would immediately deescalate if they were to take over.


I disagree with and think it's cheap to somehow blame NATO for all this, which is obviously untrue. But I also think it's easy to underestimate just how confused and traumatized the Russian nation has been since the early 90s. We simply don't see eye to eye on modern geopolitical history. I genuinely don't think the kind of politician we in the West would like can succeed in Russia today. The only demographic who might be symathetic to this are the youngest milennials/oldest generation Z, while the rest of society to some extent share Putin's view of how Russia is basically threatened from all sides.

Obviously this doesn't mean that we can't confront and contain Russias expansionism, but I really don't think it's adviseable to enter a game of chicken with a country we (the 'west', or whatever we want to call it) barely seem to understand, like @frostbite seems keen on. That's not to pick on you or anyone else who feels the same, but Russia really is a very strange place...
 
Tbh I'm coming around to the view that this will be a forever war without a western led coalition to drive out Russia from Ukraine. I don't Ukraine can do even with weapons and aid. Also both the US, UK and well Russia made a pledge to come to Ukraines aid if they were attacked as part of the nuclear disarment treaty.
 
pierrethesnack said:
While Putin is obviously is the driving force behind it, it's also important to remember that it's not like he's surrounded by democratic doves who would immediately deescalate if they were to take over.


I disagree with and think it's cheap to somehow blame NATO for all this, which is obviously untrue. But I also think it's easy to underestimate just how confused and traumatized the Russian nation has been since the early 90s. We simply don't see eye to eye on modern geopolitical history. I genuinely don't think the kind of politician we in the West would like can succeed in Russia today. The only demographic who might be symathetic to this are the youngest milennials/oldest generation Z, while the rest of society to some extent share Putin's view of how Russia is basically threatened from all sides.

Obviously this doesn't mean that we can't confront and contain Russias expansionism, but I really don't think it's adviseable to enter a game of chicken with a country we (the 'west', or whatever we want to call it) barely seem to understand, like @frostbite seems keen on. That's not to pick on you or anyone else who feels the same, but Russia really is a very strange place...
Click to expand...
The only reason those people share that view is due to the consistent and aggressive propaganda for more than two decades now since early days of Putin regime. You ask people in 90s this question and nobody felt threatened then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.