Forum menu
The states wanted to be part of Europe for the socioeconomic benefits, but also wanted their relationship with the former Soviet to continue.
Thats an incompatible pair of ‘wants’ from a Russian leadership perspective.
Although I’ve no doubt the West, particularly some in the West, are leveraging things in an attempt to draw Ukraine further away from Russia. And god only knows what’s going on in the upper echelons of Ukrainian political influence.
I see no innocent parties here. Apart from people of no influence.
Its more a case of Russia wanted the states to remain in its sphere of influence, but relationships were good. Something changed and that was the proposed membership to nato. Nato had promised not to form bases in those states and regaled on those assurances.
Thats when it all went tits up.
Its a bit like Cuba. Cuba is so close to the US, the US was worried about their strategic security. I see that Russia feels the same, aand i dont see any country thinking any differently. So what I've been saying is i understand Russias point of view, not that im siding with them
Beside, why would we even want the Ukraine anyway. Its corruption is legendary, and 9th down the list of most corrupt countries in the world, and certainly as if not more corrupt than countries that the west has forced a change of government in.
Must be some reason eh 😉 😆
Beside, why would we even want the Ukraine anyway.
We don't (although I'm not sure who you think "we" is). Ukraine wants closer ties to Europe and does not want Russian troops in its territory. Ukraine asked NATO for help in order to maintain its independence from Russia.
So what I’ve been saying is i understand Russias point of view, not that im siding with them
Maybe you need to spend some time thinking about the Ukrainian point of view. (Hint: they are angry with Russia because Russia invaded their territory and they do not want to be forced back into a Russian empire.)
By Ukraine do you mean Crimea ?
A country of some 15% Ukrainians and 65% Russian who had a referendum and voted to become independent of Ukraine ? then had 90% voting for reunification with Russia. That the Ukraine you want me to consider.
Crimea was part of Ukraine through treaty. Russia also invaded border areas of Ukraine. They are pretending that those are not Russian soldiers, but nobody seriously believes that. Putin seems to have completely misunderstood how his invasion would be viewed by Ukrainians and now he's bogged down in a war that he cannot afford to abandon, but cannot win without a much larger commitment of Russian troops. So, if you are serious about wanting peace, the first step would be for Russia to withdraw all it's soldiers from eastern Ukraine. It's difficult to take you seriously if you think that Ukraine should just surrender to Russia in order to avoid provoking Russia.
Its a roundabout argument Thols that neither of us can fully judge. So I'm finishing with a bit of humor
This is unlikely to happen. An invasion of Ukraine by Russia would be a death sentence for Russia's already weak economy. Blocking the accounts of the oligarchs and an even greater crisis.
I think this is all just Putin flexing his muscles to get himself some privileges on the world stage.
All the money of the oligarchs and Putin himself is in the EU and the USA, as well as their children live and study there. This is all a show.
By Ukraine do you mean Crimea ?
A country of some 15% Ukrainians and 65% Russian who had a referendum and voted to become independent of Ukraine ? then had 90% voting for reunification with Russia. That the Ukraine you want me to consider.
Are you seriously suggesting that election wasn't in any way corrupt? Have a look at who the observers were and how likely they would be to provide impartial monitoring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum#Allegations_of_fraud
They secured the area of their black sea fleet if thats what you are referring to.
Sevastopol is one of only a few proper deepwater ports available to Russia. It is key to routes between the Black sea, marmara and therefore the Med and out into the Atlantic.
You can if you wish look at the annexation of Crimea from a short term perspective if you want(Or whatever narrative), but no country especially the superpowers are going to think like that.
Clearly it was never about Russian speaking peoples living there, the entire reason was strategic.
So, if it's not about the people and all about power why are you so keen to defend them?
Also, as a strategic area it's only as useful as the ships you already have in there, the other end is two narrow straits controlled by Turkey followed by the Suez or Gibralter which could/would all be under NATO control.
As to countries to be concerned about specifically. Arent you even in part concerned about how the US is acting ?. Middle east, Asia, Latin America, South America. How many conflicts have they been involved in ?. Considerably more than Russia has, and none of them on the US border.
What shows your blinkers is that Russia was/is operating in all these areas.
Anyway, at the moment we have Belarus essentially occupied, as also parts of Georgia, whilst we all fret about Ukraine.
NATO is a defensive alliance. It’s no surprise that countries which harbour expansionist territorial aspirations are opposed to any expansion of defensive alliances. NATO does not pose any threat to either China or Russia, but it will make it more difficult for them to fulfil their territorial aims.
Russia mounts a significant military build up on the border with Ukraine and sends troops into Belarus
China and Russia sign a military bilateral
"Cui bono"
https://www.voanews.com/a/himalayan-bridge-project-sparks-fresh-china-india-tension/6392630.html
Russia mounts a significant military build up on the border with Ukraine and sends troops into Belarus.
Anyway, at the moment we have Belarus essentially occupied
Yes well we know about the build up of troops thats been happening for a few months, speculated long about it, speculated some more and finally decided its likely nothing is going to become of it.
As to Belarus, they are a member of the CSTO, so if invited in thats hardly an invasion is it. No different in fact to any of NATO's allies inviting them in. And in fact President Lukashenka has stated that Belarus will support Russia if they did in fact invade the Ukraine(though theres been a bit of a constitutional change there and while support would likely be offered, it wouldnt be acknowledged)..Plus use the country as a base for Russian nuclear weapons, etc etc.
They regularly conduct military exercises with Russian forces. Is that an invasion by an occupying force 😕 So not sure where you got that info from Big'n'Daft, but it appears to be wrong.
Now, Russia might retain its forces in Belarus as a way to mirror NATO's permanent rotation of troops as part of its Enhanced Forward Presence initiative. But again these sort of situations dont improve peaceful prospects, and its more like a Mexican standoff, which never turns out too well for anyone.
Its a shame though that Russia didnt invade, given Belarus's record on human rights is horrendous, it's endemic corruption and as far from a democracy as it's possible to get.
Defending Squirrelking ?. Im not defending anyone. Im saying playing such games are a danger to everyone. It is you who appears to be defending the rights of these countries to threaten the security of another and drive them into games of brinkmanship.
This is how Russia sees it. Wouldn't it be prudent to take note of those concerns and perhaps pull back.
--------
But yet again the STW mob is attacking the individual for daring to question the narrative.
I'll bet you lot were cheering the house over weapons of mass destruction lies and wanting an invasion of whomever to take place soon as possible. From whats been said thus far, any dissenting voices expressing concern would have been descended upon.
Tell you what. Go argue amongst yourselves, I'll not be checking back into this thread.
Its a shame though that Russia didnt invade
Bit hard to say you hope for peace and also say you wish Russia had invaded another country. Bye.
Hopefully he doesn’t “accidentally” fall out of a window like Maskin Borodin did after criticism of the regime.
I’ll bet you lot were cheering the house over weapons of mass destruction lies and wanting an invasion of whomever to take place soon as possible. From whats been said thus far, any dissenting voices expressing concern would have been descended upon.
Personally I think all involved in the dodgy dossier should have been up on charges of Treason ( or whatever the most appropriate significant charge is)
It's the biggest decision you can take to commit UK lives to inflict extreme violence on another country. You don't do it on a web of deceit. There needed to be consequences to ensure it doesn't happen again.
As for Belarus, it's hardly a normal functioning state, the influx of Russian troops is clearly to bolster the dictatorship, Russia has to be willing to deploy troops to keep these dodgy regimes in place.
The Belarus statement is confusing, it’s with Russian support it continues to exist.
I also can’t see anyone here indicating they want western military intervention, or even cheering a conflict on. Have I missed a few pages of “gosh I hope it kicks off”?
Defending Squirrelking ?. Im not defending anyone. Im saying playing such games are a danger to everyone. It is you who appears to be defending the rights of these countries to threaten the security of another and drive them into games of brinkmanship.
This is how Russia sees it. Wouldn’t it be prudent to take note of those concerns and perhaps pull back.
It's Russia playing the games though, it's been explained how NATO expansion works a few times so I'm not going to rehash this argument, suffice to say Putin is the one rattling sabres.
But yet again the STW mob is attacking the individual for daring to question the narrative.
I'd say it's more stubbornness on your part to see things from the other side. Of course you could use the argument that Russia are defending themselves but where that falls apart is that they acted first. By all means question the narrative but you have to bring facts to the table, even better if they have sources.
I’ll bet you lot were cheering the house over weapons of mass destruction lies and wanting an invasion of whomever to take place soon as possible. From whats been said thus far, any dissenting voices expressing concern would have been descended upon.
You couldn't be more wrong about that actually. Personally speaking of course.
I’ll bet you lot were cheering the house over weapons of mass destruction lies and wanting an invasion of whomever to take place soon as possible. From whats been said thus far, any dissenting voices expressing concern would have been descended upon.
You couldn’t be more wrong about that actually. Personally speaking of course.
He's just frustrated because people keep pointing out how ridiculous his comments are. I doubt that he actually believes that we are all warmongering nutters, he's just lashing out with insults because he has nothing else to use.
Have I missed a few pages of “gosh I hope it kicks off”?
Only in the imagination of a few
A significant conflict with Russia is the last thing anyone wants, at the same time a democratic state falling to an invasion by a kleptocracy isn't what anyone outside a small Putincentric group want
So we have the fudges we have now, in effect there is a shadow war going on with each side flexing it's response and young Ukrainians still dying at the points of contact
NATO has it's faults, US foreign and military policy has to be in part countered by Western diplomatic pressure. But when the Russians or Chinese start preparing for a land grab then everyone wants to be their friend.
He’s just frustrated because people keep pointing out how ridiculous his comments are. I doubt that he actually believes that we are all warmongering nutters, he’s just lashing out with insults because he has nothing else to use.
The internet is a terrible place to have a discussion, I personally let it wash over me. He is right on some points NATO isn't perfect, US and UK have done things they shouldn't have for dubious reasons.
Where the issues centre around Ukraine then the context shifts, a deployment of a third of the strength and probably 2/3 of the fighting capability of Russia in the area on a offensive footing isn't a defensive act. The precursor activities are not a defensive act. The NATO baddddd argument doesn't correlate with what is happening. If NATO didn't exist I doubt the Baltic States would exist in their current democratic form etc
Yep, the whole thing is super weird. Is it normal to amass this many troops and then.....just sit there? For weeks? Is it a bit like the phoney war in WW2?
The Economist reckons they are waiting until the Olympics is finished. What, because Putin's a sports fan? It jaut seems so incongruous!
Putin has: Attacked Georgia, purposefully bombed Syrian civilians, annexed Crimea at gunpoint, destabilised Donbas, let's not forget MH17, all the cyber attacks, and the fact that 100% of non NATO Russian bordered states have Russian troops in them...And the US, EU and NATO are being aggressive?
The Economist reckons they are waiting until the Olympics is finished. What, because Putin’s a sports fan? It jaut seems so incongruous!
Posted 1 hour ago
Or because Xi has asked him to?
Also, let's the ground dry out a bit and get a bit more tank-friendly.
China won't be imposing any sanctions, and if a big as a player as that doesn't how much effect can ours really have?
Also, let’s the ground dry out a bit and get a bit more tank-friendly.
Spring is a few months away yet, how long can Russia afford to keep thousands of troops (some of them conscripts) living in tents? And how long before some of those vehicles become un-serviceable. I think time's not on Putin's side here.
The Economist reckons they are waiting until the Olympics is finished. What, because Putin’s a sports fan? It jaut seems so incongruous!
You have just signed a significant bilateral agreement with the host of the Olympics, you don't think it was discussed? Would the Chinese want one country competing to declare war on another during the games?
He only has to be there long enough for the other side to blink and give him the concessions he wants.
As for the army, they can stay there as long as he wants them to.
The Economist reckons they are waiting until the Olympics is finished. What, because Putin’s a sports fan? It jaut seems so incongruous!
China wants people to watch the Olympics and see China in a positive light, not to be distracted by a war in Europe.
Spring is a few months away yet, how long can Russia afford to keep thousands of troops (some of them conscripts) living in tents? And how long before some of those vehicles become un-serviceable. I think time’s not on Putin’s side here.
This is what the Twitter thread discusses, essentially Putin has a small window to make a go/no go decision. After the Olympics, before the conscripts go home, when the ground is good for manoeuvre. But that's the full invasion scenario, the disrupt and terrorise scenario continues regardless
As for the army, they can stay there as long as he wants them to.
With deteriorating combat power and morale, you can't keep them at a high state of readiness for ever
As for the army, they can stay there as long as he wants them to.
Lots of them are conscripts and their time's up in April. Now, he can make them stay on a bit under emergency powers, but Russia is as war casualty adverse as most other countries. (perhaps even more so) One of the reasons Russia withdrew from Afghanistan was the non stop 'parade' of returning injured and dead soldiers; it got so bad that they started bringing them back to Russia at night-time, and that was the old communist regime.
Putin is on the horns of dilemma, the longer he waits, the less threat his build-up is, and less likely he is to be able to invade, he's deeply unpopular at home, and needs a 'win' . So far it's not worked. he's running out of options, money, and time.
As for the army, they can stay there as long as he wants them to.
Frozen ground is better, tho not an obstacle
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/31/putin-russia-ukraine-frozen-ground/
Granted, but you can continuously move troops in and out. If you are exercising, you can rotate troops out to a rear area or their original station and bring in new troops to continue the training.
The troops moving would gain experience of having recent training and would then go on to get some rest, the troops coming in would be fresh and would be able to top up their training. As a benefit, while they are switching over, you'd have twice as many troops in place for a limited time.
If I had doctrine that relied in a significant part of overwhelming numbers of ground troops, I'd be looking at planning a phased relief in place a couple of weeks before I wanted to invade. My existing, trained troops would have had a couple of weeks to relax and pass experience on, the fresh new troops would have had a couple of weeks of training and would not be worn out yet.
I'd want equipment as well maintained as possible, so maybe bare minimum aircraft activity before that period as the bulk are serviced and made ready, same with IFVs and tanks.
Picture of liz truss on BBC website - she looks like an extra from Dr Zhivago.
I tend not to do politics on here but that woman is an absolute cockwomble wouldn't even make a third rate tictok influencer.
And sadly Putin has to do something I don't think he expected the support the Ukraine got and has backed himself into a corner.
The Ukraine army has dug in and has western support Evey inch of the Russian front will have been photographed.
It needs a huge diplomacy mind to unravel the mess.
They had some of her speech on the radio news.
She didn't sound as shit as Johnson, despite the stilted delivery.
How far have we fallen that Liz Truss is a better public speaker than the PM.
I love that childlike, almost vacant look she tends to do when trying to look stern and powerful.
My lad used to do a similar expression when on the potty.
It needs a huge diplomacy mind to unravel the mess.
Which presumably is why Liz Truss is in Moscow!
This thread will be redundant by teatime, you mark my words.
Didn't sound as shit as Johnson. That should be on the dust cover of her book. She will write a book or someone will for her.
That photo is the perfect example of why some of Russia believe Putin.
"See comrade the British still think Russian people dress like the emperor"
She should have worn a tracksuit and Prada trainers and had her phone above her head way more insta
My lad used to do a similar expression when on the potty.
She does look like she is curling one out...