IIRC the US did supply some weapons early in Trump’s term but then stopped later on when they refused to frame Joe Biden’s son for corruption.
Yes, big mistake (Probably advice from the Blob) which gives Ukraine the impression someone is coming to help them. Now, they are in dilemma.
Ukraine is standing on Russian/Putin’s foot.
This is utter nonsense. Ukraine did absolutely nothing to provoke Russia apart from trying to be a liberal democracy. What you're saying isn't even that Ukraine spilled Russia's pint, it's more like they refused to buy Russia a pint so Russia decided to pummel the life out of them. And you think that's justified? Why on earth do you twist yourself into such knots trying to justify the actions of a murderous tyrant?
This is utter nonsense. Ukraine did absolutely nothing to provoke Russia apart from trying to be a liberal democracy. What you’re saying isn’t even that Ukraine spilled Russia’s pint, it’s more like they refused to buy Russia a pint so Russia decided to pummel the life out of them. And you think that’s justified? Why on earth do you twist yourself into such knots trying to justify the actions of a murderous tyrant?
Just showing the intention to join NATO is a good enough existential threat to Russia.
I am just viewing it from Russian's perspective as this is no ordinary politics.
Justification or not does not even come into the equation at all, because a nuclear power is threaten and that is not good.
Also I am not trying to twist anyone's arm but to let people know the world is walking into a huge mistake or disaster if situation escalate.
If all things kick off we will all be regretting for a very long time as this is a war with no winners but full of regrets which is too late.
If the nuclear war starts there will be no goodies or baddies because those who survive will be starving.
Also notice the effect of sanctions? Funny thing is that we are feeling it as well.
Just showing the intention to join NATO is a good enough existential threat to Russia. I am just viewing it from Russian’s perspective as this is no ordinary politics.
There was no existential threat to Russia. That's just nonsense that Russia trots out to justify invading other countries.
Can we stop going round and round on NATO/Russia - it's been done previously on this thread. Keep this discussion for updates/information etc
There is no existential threat to Russia. There is a definite threat to Putin's regime and popularity at home. He knows if public discourse turns against him enough someone might pop him off. His popularity has naturally increased due to this war. It seems one of the most naturally catastrophic aspects of human nature that when the big chief decides war, everyone gets behind him regardless. We are merely looking at domestic politics being played out in geopolitical processes. I think Putin has actually hastened his end as the west will not stop now in marginalising both Putin and Russia until he goes. It probably won't be next week or month but Russians, particularly richer ones really love their new found lifestyles and will likely work to get them back.
Chewk you are not arguing from Russia's perspective
You are arguing from the perspective of Putins made up narrative, that he's using to justify his latest land grab
I think what Chewkw is trying to say is that whilst there wasn't an existential threat, Putin thought there was, which was enough apparently.
I think what Chewkw is trying to say is that whilst there wasn’t an existential threat, Putin
thoughtsaid there was, which was enough apparently.
FTFY. He's just uncritically repeating Putin's claims.
I think what Chewkw is trying to say is that whilst there wasn’t an existential threat, Putin thought there was, which was enough apparently.
Although there is seemingly a deep rooted fear of invasion from the West in Moscow, I think this regimes “fear of threat” is different in the Putin has framed himself as the defender of Russia from that threat, regardless of that threat not being real (except perhaps in retaliation). Combine that with long standing Imperialist ambitions and you have enough for Putin to invade.
A “good” reason doesn’t really have anything to do with it. And no, that doesn’t justify sacrificing countries to pander to a regimes desire for domestic control and Imperial ambitions.
I think what Chewkw is trying to say is
He's got a hard on for "strong" leaders?
Last English “strongman” was Cromwell and he was a mass murderer too.
So, educated, wealthy people can evade the draft by bribing someone to issue some sort of certificate about technical skills but poor kids get sent out as cannon fodder. I have a feeling this won't actually persuade anyone with real tech skills to stay in Russia.
https://twitter.com/leonidragozin/status/1508717087191187458
Reading this last page or two is depressing, NATO have done nothing wrong, bar countering Russia's recent aggression and being a bit slow with responses, Ukraine is a country with a population of 45 million, they are not some little provincial area of Russia, they have decided their own fate for a generation now, and are fighting to continue that.
As for threats to Russia in joining NATO, the only valid threat is that if Ukraine had joined NATO, then the Russian invasion would have meant a NATO response, as for strategic importance, honestly, anywhere that borders or that can launch an attack is 'strategic', so you're saying that Russia also have the likes of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, etc in mind.
The reality is that this is all happening because of the whim of one person, who has dreams of past Soviet glory from a long time ago and astounded that tens of millions of people don't want to revert back to those times!
Must be difficult to run a social media misinformation bot campaign without techies.
Im sorry Chewy, but you've lost the plot. Acting as you suggest is what caused WW2. Europe cannot give in to the bully.
Our biggest error is our addiction to Russian gas/oil, which MUST be cut off. If Russia wants to be a part of the world economy, it needs to play within the rules.
Our biggest error is our addiction to Russian
gas/oilmoney laundering, which MUST be cut off.
FTFY. The gas/oil is the second biggest error.
Is there any chance that this thread can stick to updates and useful/interesting information? Not the who fault it is which has been has been round the houses plenty.
I've not seen this on the BBC/Guardian websites, but who many tanks and planes does Russia have? before the start of the war? There was something on here, I think, that said the number of tanks lost was about the same as the total number owned by Britain or France.
I know Russia had hundreds of tanks more than most of Europe combined, but not all of them would be active, how long would it take to get them from long term storage (saw something on here about the terrible state of some of there vehicles, to they may not be good to go). Same with Aircraft.
At some point they are going to start running low on these things, even if they have lots of ammunition.
I commented at the beginning of this thread that I did not want to interact with Chewkw in any way - this sums up why:
FTFY. He’s just uncritically repeating Putin’s claims.
Chewkw has a habit of repeatedly parroting what he's heard on Fox News or read on Breitbart and conflating with reality. He's done it with practically every controversial subject that I can recall. It's the reason why I choose not to interact with him - the lack of critical thinking there really irks. This is the reason why I choose not to interact with him until such a time as his behaviour changes.
I'm very troubled with the notion that a nation of 44m people should immediately capitulate and do whatever Putin wishes - I would imagine that the people of Czechoslovakia felt similarly in 1938 when their country was sacrificed to appease a dictator bent on territorial expansion and genocide under flimsy pretexts.
It seems they have a reasonable supply of cruise missiles.
Looks to me that if those (and perhaps bombing runs also) were countered the situation would be quite different right now.
Although there is seemingly a deep rooted fear of invasion from the West in Moscow
You can understand it though - the north European plain goes from France all the way to the Urals, and has been used by multiple invading forces in the last few hundred years.
the north European plain goes from France all the way to the Urals, and has been used by multiple invading forces in the last few hundred years.
Though never successfully?
You can see the confirmed Russian losses on this site:
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Russia inherited thousands upon thousands of tanks etc. from the Soviet Union. Some of that stuff has been upgraded and they've built some new stuff, but I doubt anyone has an accurate count of how much of it is actually serviceable, even the Russians. Their entire system is plagued by corruption and incompetence so what their maintenance records show is probably just made up numbers. They will be able to have some tank shaped objects to deliver up to the front lines, but whether they have modern sensors and armour is another question. Also, whether they have trucks to deliver fuel and ammo is probably more of an immediate concern for them than tanks.
Russia has lots of tanks, but a lot of them are old and rubbish, as is being seen now. What's being iøllustrated now is that while on paper Russia has lots of stuff, in reality a lot of it is rubish, and the tactics, organisation of units and training are very substandard. This is especially true with aircraft. Apparently on paper Russia has amazing SAM's , best in the world, but in reality, as in Syria they're not very good. They have super aircraft, but in reality, can't get air superiority, and lack of training means they can't do ground support, especially if people shoot back. They have amazing tanks, apparently, but how many Armata - 50 delivered.? And if crappy organisation and logistics mean they have no fuel or ammo??
Corruption is also an issue - the government pay for one thing, the quality delivered is something rather different.
In reality , versus Nato, Russia will suffer horribly as they will get thrashed in the air, and that leads to a thrashing on the the ground. Remember Hitler and his praying for salvation from a miracle weapon . when you hear about the Russians launching 'hypersonic missiles' from a Mig 31, that's rather equivalent
If all things kick off we will all be regretting for a very long time
We'll be regetting it for as long as it takes for food stores to run out and then however it takes for us to starve to death. So not very long at all, probably 6-12 months?
https://twitter.com/LukeDCoffey/status/1508603600767004679
Russia has lots of tanks, but a lot of them are old and rubbish, as is being seen now.
https://twitter.com/The_Tech_Son/status/1508621269587087360
Though never successfully?
Yes and no. Whilst it's true that they've never (so far as I know) been defeated and occupied by an invading force, they lost the Crimean war and their naval presence in ice-free waters. The cold war saw them lose much of their western territory, since the USSR/ Warsaw pact was essentially an enlarged Russian empire. Don't forget that most of the Russian population is in Europe so inevitably they consider perceived threats from the west.
Sometimes I get the impression that chewkw is simply trying to give the perspective of the Russian state (i.e. Putin, or at least it seems that way at this point) but the way he puts it certainly gives the impression that he buys into that perspective.
If Russia wanted to keep Ukraine within its "sphere of influence" it should have tried harder to make it seem like an enticing prospect rather than screeching a demand that it do so and sending in the army when Ukraine declines.
Sometimes I get the impression that chewkw is simply trying to give the perspective of the Russian state
Seems to me he's an advocate for authoritarian regimes, which is a refreshing perspective but I'd not want live or be influenced by one.
Though never successfully?
Irony being that they should be most worried about what's coming from the east if its history setting the precedent.
The big question is does our forumite who shall not be named think Putin is a Zombie Maggot or not?
Sometimes I get the impression that chewkw is simply trying to give the perspective of the Russian state
In chewkw's defence he has stated that quite clearly on more than one occasion. Though admittedly through the lens of someone from the Far East where there are ample examples of strong man politics.
Germany completed defeated Russia in World War One.
Despite the hype, the Soviet victory in WW2, was only achieved with unbelievable losses. It would of been unacceptable or impossible for any other nation.
They lost 45,000 T-34's alone. Something like 150,000 AFV's in total.
Despite the hype, the Soviet victory in WW2, was only achieved with unbelievable losses. It would of been unacceptable or impossible for any other nation.
They lost 45,000 T-34’s alone. Something like 150,000 AFV’s in total.
Not forgetting the huge amount of lend-lease and equipment that enabled them.
But when it comes down to it, the individual is cannon fodder for such regimes.
Sometimes I get the impression that chewkw is simply trying to give the perspective of the Russian state
He clearly is. From his point of view we're all Western as hell and we clearly have no idea of how things work in other parts of the world.
Doesn't seem too keen on the point of view of the Ukrainian people though.
When everyone in the room is expounding the same points why join in? Surely the view that's not being discussed is the one that needs bringing up?
Are you all unable to distinguish between explaining a point of view and supporting it?
Doesn’t seem too keen on the point of view of the Ukrainian people though.
Exactly.
Surely the view that’s not being discussed is the one that needs bringing up?
There's a whole lot of views that haven't been discussed on here. For example, we haven't had anyone explain Hitler's view that the German's were stabbed in the back and had the right to invade other countries. If you really believe that views that haven't been discussed need to be raised, why not start there? (Clue: some viewpoints are flat out wrong. Hitler's views were wrong, that's why nobody intelligent tries to "explain" them. Same goes for Putin - he's flat out in the wrong here and trying to explain why he's misunderstood is something no sensible person would get into.)
For example, we haven’t had anyone explain Hitler’s view that the German’s were stabbed in the back and had the right to invade other countries.
That view has been explained a great deal over the years. It's wrong, obviously, but that's what he was thinking and it's crucial to understand that.
Again - explaining and understanding isn't the same as condoning or agreeing with.
trying to explain why he’s misunderstood is something no sensible person would get into
That's not what's happening. Chewkw is trying to explain how he thinks Putin is thinking, which is vitally important. This is not the same as supporting it!!
Same goes for Putin – he’s flat out in the wrong here
Absolutely 100%. All I'm saying is there are some geographical and historical reasons why Russia fears the west.
Clue: some viewpoints are flat out wrong. Hitler’s views were wrong, that’s why nobody intelligent tries to “explain” them.
Whilst wrong intelligent people did pay attention to them and tried to figure out how to negate them. Hence why in WWII there was the unconditional surrender strategy to try and avoid the entire cycle repeating again.
That said I think the uncritical repeating of them doesnt add anything especially when its linked to the claims about Nato expansion missing that its countries which ask to join.
That’s not what’s happening. Chewkw is trying to explain how he thinks Putin is thinking, which is vitally important. This is not the same as supporting it!!
He's gone a lot further than that. He keeps saying that he thinks the Ukrainians should surrender in order to end the war. That's basically just endorsing the view that Ukraine is not a legitimate country and has no right to exist. That's Putin's view, so he's endorsing Putin's world view, not trying to explain it.
historical reasons why Russia fears the west.
the biggest one of course being the rise of liberal democracies. The west hasn’t presented even an abstract threat to Russia since the Cold War ended. I think the only explanation that the anti anti-putins apologists can come up with is that the institutions of the west present an existential threat to Putins notion of an historical Russia.
it’s still not a reason to invade another country though
