Jump to content

Ukraine- War.


Ser Scot A Ellison
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Angela Merkel said something like this - before this current crisis. Putin was a Nineteenth-Century politician in the Twenty-First Century, according to her. The trouble is I think the jury is basically out on whether Putin's old fashioned techniques are going to work or not. Maybe the Twenty-First Century will operate in a similar way to previous centuries, in the relevant respects? 

He is going to be isolated but Russia is fairly well equipped to weather sanctions and China has an interest in seeing they don't collapse. He will strengthen NATO a bit but not sure that changes things too much. I think it is bit early to say whether the Russian forces have been shown to be weaker than supposed - if they have it is reminiscent of the Winter War where Stalin eventually beat Finland but lowered his prestige at a significant time.

The big risk for him is Ukraine turns into a quagmire like Iraq (supposing Russia wins this phase of the war) and ultimately weakens him. 

Yep. It’s a risk, with ultimate outcome unknown.
 

The question is, if he waits, does his position get stronger or weaker? If Ukraine joins NATO it’s over. Similarly, if a more aggressive US  president (with all his mental faculties still intact) takes over, things might be more difficult.

Merkel just left, so Germany is temporarily less sure of itself.

And does the military balance of power between Russia and Ukraine improve or deteriorate from Russia’s point of view as every year goes by?

After Covid, is the world desperate to just get on with life rather than engage in a conflict with Russia?

Is China’s Xi’s aggressive geopolitical stance guaranteed to continue with his eventual successor? Are tensions around Taiwan working in Russia’s favour right now?

Is Putin worried that his own inevitable ageing will make him less capable each year to lead this big push?

All things considered, the timing might well be better now than it ever wil be again.

Edited by Free Northman Reborn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Angela Merkel said something like this - before this current crisis. Putin was a Nineteenth-Century politician in the Twenty-First Century, according to her. The trouble is I think the jury is basically out on whether Putin's old fashioned techniques are going to work or not. Maybe the Twenty-First Century will operate in a similar way to previous centuries, in the relevant respects? 

 

Angela Merkel should just STFU.

Had she done more than paying half arsed lip service to investing in renewable energies and ending depedence on fossil fuels, we wouldn't be nearly as dependant on Russian energy supplies. 16 years of wasted opportunities and talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

If he only cared about himself, he need not take any of these immense risks. 

Also I should say this; he personally isn’t taking an immense risk in terms of his person.

His standard of living won’t deplete due to any sanctions. The Russian populace to which he lords over might.

His legs won’t be blown off due to any bombs; that would  be some the men and boys he’s sending to fight.

If he loses(though that’s unlikely) he will still be the dictator of a country of a 150 million people and nuclear arms at his disposal.

If you want say theirs a cold but logical reason for his power grab that’s fine; I agree.

But let’s not pretend the primary motivation isn’t ultimately benefiting himself with little care for anyone else.

He’s not a benevolent dictator; hence his abysmal management of the country in the decades he’s been in charge.

2 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

If Ukraine joins NATO it’s over. S

Sigh nato already said it wouldn’t accept Ukraine and the process would be a decade to finalize.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Yep. It’s a risk, with ultimate outcome unknown.
 

The question is, if he waits, does his position get stronger or weaker? If Ukraine joins NATO it’s over. Similarly, if a more aggressive US  president (with all his mental faculties still intact) takes over, things might be more difficult.

Merkel just left, so Germany is temporarily less sure of itself.

And does the military balance of power between Russia and Ukraine improve or deteriorate from Russia’s point of view as every year goes by?

After Covid, is the world desperate to just get on with life rather than engage in a conflict with Russia?

Is China’s Xi’s aggressive geopolitical stance guaranteed to continue with his eventual successor? Are tensions around Taiwan working in Russia’s favour right now?

Is Putin worried that his own inevitable ageing will make him less capable each year to lead this big push?

All things considered, the timing might well be better now than it ever wil be again.

It looks to me like this isn't a result of the West/Ukraine looking stronger - rather Russia has made improvements to its army and insulated itself more from economic warfare, so it can afford to take more risk (or thinks it can).

The rise of China is the central strategic fact - Putin knows the US is now prioritizing the Pacific more and more so its commitment to Europe is probably going to wane over the long term. 

So it is like pushing at a slightly weakening neighbour rather than desperation at the prospect of growing strength, unlike for example Germany vs Russia in 1914 (when Germany saw the balance of power shifting against it). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Too many people today have no concept of nationalism, patriotism and belonging to something greater then yourself, pride in your ancestors and ambition for the future of your people to be great long after you are gone.

I think you ought to change your nickname. You're clearly not into freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, sologdin said:

Too many people today have no concept of nationalism, patriotism and belonging to something greater then yourself, pride in your ancestors and ambition for the future of your people to be great long after you are gone.

dunno, FNR. these fascistic ideas are simple and easily refuted. more fair perhaps to say that they have been understood and rejected. i mean, 'your people,' really?

Eh I can agree to an extent; too many self-purported nationalists or patriots capsize their own nation’s power, divide their people(unless you live exactly as I do or look like me you ain’t a real x), and cheer on their nation’s adversaries wrestling influence from their nations because they(adversaries) look like them, and are acting like the autocrats they wish to be.

Edited by Varysblackfyre321
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched a CCTV video of a missle striking an apartment building in Kyiv, holy fuck 

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60517447

Quote

Moment a missile hits a Kyiv apartment block

We've been reporting on a missile strike on an apartment building in Kyiv, Ukraine's capital, earlier this morning - this CCTV image shows the moment of impact.

...

There is no confirmation of casualties from the incident yet but officials say 35 people were injured overnight

 

Edited by Lord of Oop North
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

The question is, if he waits, does his position get stronger or weaker? If Ukraine joins NATO it’s over.

What exactly is the ‘it’s’ here? What’s over? What intentions do NATO have if they found themselves in a much stronger position? It feels like the age-old problem of war; two sides who assume the worst of the other, and so fear leads to rash actions. But is there a particular sentiment in Europe to really diminish Russia culture or territory?

For context, I’m from the UK and when we learn about WWII, and the negotiations that happened and how Churchill dragged his heels over losing colonies and such, it seems bizarre to us that anyone cared so much. We just don’t think in terms of ‘Empire’ anymore, there’s barely any strong feelings toward even Northern Ireland just for being across the sea. Obviously there’s a sizeable chunk of bias here, as I’m obviously benefiting from the fact that we were once an Empire in numerous ways. But I think someone mentioned in the last thread, that Russia could have pivoted to being less isolationist, less aggressive and more open economically and they’d likely be a more prosperous nation today. A 21st century nation instead of a 19/20th century one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

People are also prone to viewing Putin as irrational and stupid, when he is in fact highly intelligent and quite rational, within the parameters of his overall aims and ambitions.

What is rational and limited about the full scale invasion of Ukraine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ran said:

But he, and the Ukrainian government, are better than Putin and the Russian government. Ukraine hasn't launched a war of aggression against anyone. Simple as that.

I never made the comparison between the russian and ukrainian regimes. I don't know if I was so unclear or opinions are already biased when reading my reply, but the context of my reply didn't came trough. Maybe both, but I definitely feel at fault. I tried to compare Zelensky to the western portrayal of him, which, in my opinion, elevates him to heights he doesn't deserve. That was supposed to be the message of my very first reply here as well, nothing pro-russian. Nothing to justify their offensiveness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Overall goals?
 

Shoring up Russia’s western front. Expanding the Russian Federation from 145m to maybe 170-180 million people. Expanding the Russian Federation’s GDP and Industrial base by whatever is currently generated by Ukraine.

Solidifying land access to Crimea and coast of the Black Sea to the West.

Emboldening China to also oppose the West.

Putting the West on notice that he is bite in addition to bark.

Bolstering Russian pride and Nationalism.

Why are all of these goals so difficult to grasp. They are quite logical.

I note the hysterical headlines in the Guardian and other papers that Putin has lost his reputation as a pragmatist, or that he has gone mad etc.

That’s a  ridiculous view. You just need to divorce yourself from your pre-conceived ideals and notions and view the world as a chess board, no more, no less.

Putin wants to be known as a conqueror you mean?  Oh… how rational and limited.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

That ignores China, who very much believes in Empire today, to the extent that they view the last few hundred years as just a temporary interval in their status as the pre-eminent world power.

So, the Chinese are overtly supporting the Russian war of conquest in Ukraine?  They are cheering Putin on? They are please by the geopolitical outcome of Putin’s use of the Russian Military?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Relic said:

Does every thread have to devolve into arguing with the same people over and over? 

Agreed, can we stop feeding the well known bad faith artists like mulard ducks?

Also, relevant to the asinine arguments made,

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

You know it's times like this when I wonder why people say there's no such thing as stupid questions.

I don’t know who Klay is and as such have no context for reading the tone of his comment.  My question, stupid or not, is sincere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...