Ukraine
-
Where do put the fact that Putin asked to join NATO (Clinton and Bush).
That was the opportunity to end the Cold War once and for all. Now Putin is worried about nukes being stationed in Ukraine.
Whatever you think of Putin, it was reckless foreign policy to offer NATO membership to Ukraine
What happened when Putin asked to join?
Both Clinton and Bush were interested/positive and both got overruled by bureaucrats stuck in a 1960s mindset.
And many in the West (particularly Europe) looked down on Russia and failed to treat it with respect. Obama completely failed to engage with Russia and called them a weak, regional power. That went well.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
Where do put the fact that Putin asked to join NATO (Clinton and Bush).
That was the opportunity to end the Cold War once and for all. Now Putin is worried about nukes being stationed in Ukraine.
Whatever you think of Putin, it was reckless foreign policy to offer NATO membership to Ukraine
What happened when Putin asked to join?
Both Clinton and Bush were interested/positive and both got overruled by bureaucrats stuck in a 1960s mindset.
And many in the West (particularly Europe) looked down on Russia and failed to treat it with respect. Obama completely failed to engage with Russia and called them a weak, regional power. That went well.
Obama was a terrible president.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
Where do put the fact that Putin asked to join NATO (Clinton and Bush).
That was the opportunity to end the Cold War once and for all. Now Putin is worried about nukes being stationed in Ukraine.
Whatever you think of Putin, it was reckless foreign policy to offer NATO membership to Ukraine
What happened when Putin asked to join?
Both Clinton and Bush were interested/positive and both got overruled by bureaucrats stuck in a 1960s mindset.
And many in the West (particularly Europe) looked down on Russia and failed to treat it with respect. Obama completely failed to engage with Russia and called them a weak, regional power. That went well.
Obama was a terrible president.
Worst in my lifetime. Even Trump & Biden was/are more competent.
-
Germany might be getting a little pissed off
Scholz's comments are understood to be the first time British troops have been claimed to have supported Ukrainian troops in a military capacity.
Tobias Ellwood, the former chairman of the Commons defence committee, told the Telegraph: 'This is a flagrant abuse of intelligence deliberately designed to distract from Germany's reluctance to arm Ukraine with its own long-range missile system. This will no doubt be used by Russia to racket up the escalator ladder.'
-
Scholz's comments are understood to be the first time British troops have been claimed to have supported Ukrainian troops in a military capacity.
Don't understand what the fuss is about. It's open knowledge UK forces have been in Ukraine providing military support since before 2022 and the UK government has acknowledged it.
As Sunak said in response to Macron's ideas of troops in Ukraine: " Britain has no plans for a large-scale deployment of troops to Ukraine...beyond the small number of personnel we do have in country supporting the armed forces of Ukraine"
-
In the context of Germany doubling its Defence budget and Trump telling NATO allies he'd invite Russia to invade them, I'm not surprised Germany is discussing being nuclear-armed.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/28/germany-reconsiders-using-nuclear-weapons/
-
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Kiwiwomble said in Ukraine:
surely ukraine joining Nato is only a problem for Russia if say they want to invade Ukraine
If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?
I'd think invading Ukraine would be disastrous as that led directly to Nordic nations joining Nato...
-
@reprobate said in Ukraine:
So to sum it up: pro-war is bad, but Putin is good?
I could be wrong of course.
But I really don't think Putin wants war. Or to expand Russia.
In a surprise twist, journalists on Ukraine media sites won't agree with you
https://www.ukrainer.net/russian-wars/of course, you could always say you believe in Putin's notion of history
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/22/putin-speech-ukraine-war-history-russia/ -
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
Kristaps Andrejsons / Feb 22, 2022 / Analysis
Putin’s Speech Laid Out a Dark Vision of Russian HistoryThere’s no room for Ukraine in the Russian leader’s distorted telling
This really is no more than a silly anti-Putin article.
Take this
Putin followed this remark up with the following statement: “And in 1954, [then-Soviet leader Nikita] Khrushchev took Crimea away from Russia for some reason and also gave it to Ukraine. In effect, this is how the territory of modern Ukraine was formed.”
This is a fact. It was Russian until 1954. It was given to Ukraine by the USSR. Did the Crimean people want this? Unlikely no. if they voted fairly today, would they prefer to stay as a part of Russia or Ukraine. I think we both know the answer to this
I think the same would apply to Donbass. The majority would either vote to be independent. or a part of Russia not Ukraine
But let's start WW3 and risk killing billions for a small part of land where the majority want out of Ukraine and rejoin / join with Russia.
-
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
Kristaps Andrejsons / Feb 22, 2022 / Analysis
Putin’s Speech Laid Out a Dark Vision of Russian HistoryThere’s no room for Ukraine in the Russian leader’s distorted telling
This really is no more than a silly anti-Putin article.
Take this
Putin followed this remark up with the following statement: “And in 1954, [then-Soviet leader Nikita] Khrushchev took Crimea away from Russia for some reason and also gave it to Ukraine. In effect, this is how the territory of modern Ukraine was formed.”
This is a fact. It was Russian until 1954. It was given to Ukraine by the USSR. Did the Crimean people want this? Unlikely no. if they voted fairly today, would they prefer to stay as a part of Russia or Ukraine. I think we both know the answer to this
I think the same would apply to Donbass. The majority would either vote to be independent. or a part of Russia not Ukraine
But let's start WW3 and risk killing billions for a small part of land where the majority want out of Ukraine and rejoin / join with Russia.
-
There was Ukrainian Nationalism before 1954.
https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter/ukraine-history-fact-checking-putin-513812/ -
Putin's view of the history is unreliable at best. Deliberately wrong at worst.
*Most of Crimea want to join Russia? https://www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/society/were-crimeans-really-pro-russian-before-annexation
"My research shows that it is likely that Crimea was not passportised by Russia prior to annexation because Crimea’s residents viewed Russian citizenship as inaccessible, undesirable, illegitimate, and illegal."
*if you don't want war and many killed, good for you. You should not be supporting Putin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
-
-
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Kiwiwomble said in Ukraine:
surely ukraine joining Nato is only a problem for Russia if say they want to invade Ukraine
If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?
I'd think invading Ukraine would be disastrous as that led directly to Nordic nations joining Nato...
That appears to me to be a classic post facto argument which doesn't adequately explain the benefit of controlling a warm port, let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014.
-
Putin's point re Crimea has merit but historically Moscow was an outpost of greater Kyiv. Putin's selective memory ignores that.
Prior to Stalin 'giving' Crimea to the UkraineSSR he ethnically cleansed it so it could be Russified. A programme that was repeated in places like the Kaliningrad enclave and Eastern Ukraine.
-
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Kiwiwomble said in Ukraine:
surely ukraine joining Nato is only a problem for Russia if say they want to invade Ukraine
If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?
I'd think invading Ukraine would be disastrous as that led directly to Nordic nations joining Nato...
That appears to me to be a classic post facto argument which doesn't adequately explain the benefit of controlling a warm port, let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014.
no, it's called weighing up the likely consequences. Russia should have thought of that possibility if Putin hadn't surrounded himself with cronies and yes-men. My European friends in the Nordic and E European countries indicated this might happen to me before and during COVID. Russia was testing missiles over Finland since 2021 at least. People were edgy even then.
And I didn't see you outline other reasons Russia might have decided to invade Ukraine.
Yes he didn't want to lose influence in E Europe
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/12/russia-ukraine-what-does-putin-wantbut he also wanted Ukraine's resources
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/28/ukraine-war-russia-resources-energy-oil-gas-commodities-agriculture/and to shore up support:
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/a-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-could-be-vladimir-putins-downfall/"let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014"
Well it isn't part of Nato, being part of Ukraine. But if there is one thing to unite Ukraine, Russia seems to have done it.Although it seems that Russia has flooded the Crimea with Russians
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/time-to-remind-russia-that-crimea-is-ukraine/... I don't know if current support or dissension in Crimea has changed since this article:
https://www.dw.com/en/vladimir-putins-crimea-effect-ebbs-away-5-years-on/a-47941002 -
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Kiwiwomble said in Ukraine:
surely ukraine joining Nato is only a problem for Russia if say they want to invade Ukraine
If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?
I'd think invading Ukraine would be disastrous as that led directly to Nordic nations joining Nato...
That appears to me to be a classic post facto argument which doesn't adequately explain the benefit of controlling a warm port, let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014.
no, it's called weighing up the likely consequences.
I literally just described two of them.
Russia should have thought of that possibility if Putin hadn't surrounded himself with cronies and yes-men. My European friends in the Nordic and E European countries indicated this might happen to me before and during COVID. Russia was testing missiles over Finland since 2021 at least. People were edgy even then.
And I didn't see you outline other reasons Russia might have decided to invade Ukraine.
Was I supposed to? Must have missed that homework assignment.
Yes he didn't want to lose influence in E Europe
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/12/russia-ukraine-what-does-putin-wantBecause Simon from the Guardian knows, exactly, what Putin wants.
but he also wanted Ukraine's resources
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/28/ukraine-war-russia-resources-energy-oil-gas-commodities-agriculture/Second paragraph: Energy security also looms large—in particular, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s determination to ensure the continued flow of Russian oil and gas to European markets, including through Ukraine’s pipelines.
Am I supposed to take this analysis seriously?
and to shore up support:
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/a-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-could-be-vladimir-putins-downfall/Still waiting on this downfall. When's that scheduled?
"let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014"
Well it isn't part of Nato, being part of Ukraine. But if there is one thing to unite Ukraine, Russia seems to have done it.So united they're conscripting 40 year olds and have suspended democracy.
-
Not to mention there are Russian separatist groups (mainly from the Donbas region) fighting against the Ukrainian government so in part this is a civil war.
To present the war as a "united Ukraine against an imperialist Russian invader" is just incorrect.
-
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
but he also wanted Ukraine's resources
Maybe or maybe not.
But isn't this in part what this war is all about? Western elites wanting to get their hands on Russia's and Ukraine's resources. And it looks like they have succeeded with Ukraine. Ukraine's been destroyed and the country will now be divvied up.
Zelensky has sold out Ukraine to JPMorgan and BlackRock. While everyone was distracted with trivial news stories, BlackRock and JPMorgan partnered with the Ukrainian government to “establish a reconstruction bank that will serve as a conduit for public seed capital to fund rebuilding projects.” They are aiming to steer “public steer capital,” government grants that do not require repayment, to their fund as well. This money comes from private taxes. The corruption goes extremely deep and will affect the global economy forever.
-
Our leaders seem to want war
Secret call by German air force chief who claimed British troops were 'on the ground' in Ukraine is intercepted by Russian spies
Story by Frankie ElliottA German air force chief has revealed secret UK operations in Ukraine after discussing highly sensitive military secrets on a telephone line.
A call between the Lieutenant General Ingo Gerhartz and senior Luftwaffe officers was bugged by Russian spies after they used an unsecured telephone line to discuss military planning.
The talks included confirmation that the British military is deployed in Ukraine and important details on the transport of British Storm Shadow missiles to the country.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz confirmed a recording released by Russia's state broadcaster was genuine and described the security breach as 'very serious'.
The breach could compromise Britain and France 's arms transfers to Ukraine and hamper the vital use of cruise missiles by Kyiv in its war against Russia. -
Western elites wanting to get their hands on Russia's and Ukraine's resources. And it looks like they have succeeded with Ukraine. Ukraine's been destroyed and the country will now be divvied up.
So are you now arguing Russia's losses of c 350,000 men is all part of the Western Elites plan to get their hands on Ukraine?
Is Putin is being played by the Western elites? Or is he part of the Western elites?
-
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@nostrildamus said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@Kiwiwomble said in Ukraine:
surely ukraine joining Nato is only a problem for Russia if say they want to invade Ukraine
If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?
I'd think invading Ukraine would be disastrous as that led directly to Nordic nations joining Nato...
That appears to me to be a classic post facto argument which doesn't adequately explain the benefit of controlling a warm port, let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014.
no, it's called weighing up the likely consequences.
I literally just described two of them.
Not a good enough rebuttal. To adequately explain benefits one should also adequately explain risks.
Russia should have thought of that possibility if Putin hadn't surrounded himself with cronies and yes-men. My European friends in the Nordic and E European countries indicated this might happen to me before and during COVID. Russia was testing missiles over Finland since 2021 at least. People were edgy even then.
And I didn't see you outline other reasons Russia might have decided to invade Ukraine.
Was I supposed to? Must have missed that homework assignment.
Because you wrote "> > > > > If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?"
Oh and btw it was Russia prancing along the borders with its big army show, not Nato.
Yes he didn't want to lose influence in E Europe
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/12/russia-ukraine-what-does-putin-wantBecause Simon from the Guardian knows, exactly, what Putin wants.
The Observer. And you keep missing the word "could." It is in the article.
but he also wanted Ukraine's resources
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/04/28/ukraine-war-russia-resources-energy-oil-gas-commodities-agriculture/Second paragraph: Energy security also looms large—in particular, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s determination to ensure the continued flow of Russian oil and gas to European markets, including through Ukraine’s pipelines.
Am I supposed to take this analysis seriously?
Given you wrote "If you're Russia and see your borders being subsumed into a giant military alliance with no other purpose than to combat you, what would you think?"
the answer is no, I don't expect you to take any analysis - apart from your predetermined opinion - seriously.
and to shore up support:
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/a-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-could-be-vladimir-putins-downfall/Still waiting on this downfall. When's that scheduled?
Could. The article said "could".
"let alone an area least likely to induce a direct confrontation from NATO after 2014"
Well it isn't part of Nato, being part of Ukraine. But if there is one thing to unite Ukraine, Russia seems to have done it.
So united they're conscripting 40 year olds and have suspended democracy.They are running out of men, but given their internal problems and being bombed into ruination they put up a damn good show of united resistance far longer than many predicted. Your sarcasm isn't a rebuttal.
I return to my original point. Russia could have and I believe would have guessed there was a risk of Nato membership escalation. If they didn't that surprises me but it isn't important. If they just wanted to control a small and volatile Crimean area it seems rather risky to me, now and then when it happened. Risky for the world as well, if Putin isn't bluffing.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/02/29/putin-threat-nuclear-weapons-nato-warning-war-russia/