War with Russia

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
Agreed. It's kinda tricky to know who or what to believe, which makes having an understanding or even an opinion a little tricky.

Do I think Putin is a wrong-un that'll take any opportunity to try to destabalise the West and keep his own stock high at home? Yep
Do I think the US (sorry NATO) will stick a load of bases in Ukraine given the chance? Yep.
Would I want US (sorry NATO) bases surrounding my country is I was Russia? Nope
Would I say that the US were planning on putting bases in Ukraine if I was Putin, even if they weren't? Yep.
Do I think Russia should invade Ukraine? Nope.

Isn't the worrying bit WILL Russia invade Ukraine?
 

Mugshot

Über Member
Isn't the worrying bit WILL Russia invade Ukraine?
Well absolutely.
I suppose if pushed I think it's sabre rattling at the moment, and there'll be a whole lot of big talk from both sides before they each claim victory.

I'd add as well though that the amount of laundered Russian money sloshing around in the UK and US, and the influence they have had on certain recent election and referendum results, and the vast sums of Russian money that continue to used to buy access to certain political parties, does make a lot of the big talk and harsh words a little difficult to take seriously.
 
Last edited:

Rusty Nails

Country Member
Isn't the worrying bit WILL Russia invade Ukraine?
They have furthered troubles along the border with Russia on the pretext of protecting the rights of the Russian speaking populations of those areas. They already have troops in there and I would not be surprised if they did, somehow or other, take control of that region. They have history when it comes to "protecting" neighbouring countries.

I doubt that they would want a full invasion as that would cause a huge amount of damage and problems for them for many years.
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
They have furthered troubles along the border with Russia on the pretext of protecting the rights of the Russian speaking populations of those areas. They already have troops in there and I would not be surprised if they did, somehow or other, take control of that region. They have history when it comes to "protecting" neighbouring countries.

I doubt that they would want a full invasion as that would cause a huge amount of damage and problems for them for many years.

Yes, I would agree with all that. As I said, I think it (ie the Invasion talk) will fade away, eventually, excluding a slip-up by one side or the other. Much more likely the Russians will ease their way in, under the pretext of "helping", but, ultimately, I do think they will take over Ukraine, and, perhaps, one or two other of their former satellite states. But, I refer you back to my initial post ie "This is my uneducated guess".
 

Milkfloat

Active Member
NATO were reducing the number of troops in Eastern Europe over many years before Putin ’rescued’ sections of Ukraine. I don’t have too much sympathy for Putin’s Russia although I do for the Russians who have to put up with him.
 

Unkraut

Master of the Inane Comment
Location
Germany
Weirdly...soon after my post it seems that it's all still going ahead. In fact as I was writing this I just had a call from them! Business as usual until we know different....
The opinion (or is it wishful thinking?) here is that Putin is establishing a negotiating position and is unlikely actually to invade the Ukraine, as much as he would like to part restore the Soviet Empire. A correspondent in the Ukraine said most Ukrainians don't believe a major war is imminent, although it is the topic of conversation at present.

The only way the West could guarantee no invasion would be to threaten to intervene militarily, and as that has been discounted in advance, sanctions are all that is left, and they don't exactly have a good track record of concentrating the minds of dictators. After all dictators don't have to worry too much about public opinion.

I think Putin has some legitimate concerns about security and NATO expansion eastwards. I don't blame him for not trusting the Americans. On the other hand, if the Ukraine can make a go of a liberal democracy, the populations of Belarus and Russia itself might quite like to follow suit.

I hope if push comes to shove and Germany has to stop/reduce importing gas from Russia that the Americans will stop importing oil as well. They seem to be remarkably quiet about that at the moment. Surely they couldn't possibly want sanctions that hurt Russia and other countries in the West, but leave America relatively unscathed ...
 
With the daily, loud warning of Russian invasion from Biden and Boris/Truss, don't we find it instructive that it was the Ukrainians who wanted the US to tone down such rhetoric - they say the current Russian build up is no greater than last April's.

Isn't it also instructive, given the threats of sanctions, that US have long decided nobody is going to go to war with Russia, i.e. nothing about Ukrainian is a hill to die on?

Additionally, is it beyond imagination that the US wouldn't be at all unhappy if Ukraine became Russia's Afghanistan? Or at the very least help arms sales to Europe?

Is it therefore also any surprise, that France, Germany and other European states are horrified by US/UK's current rhetorics, and would much rather the issues be resolved diplomatically, quietly and amicably, given any potential flood of refugees, and heavy dependence on Russia on energy:

Russia-gas-EU-3903826.webp


How then are the Ukranians ever going to come out of this with a win?

So, in reality, given the situation, what better option does Ukraine truly have, but finlandisation of what they still control till another day?

If finlandisation is the best Ukraine could hope for, why hadn't the current Ukrainian leaders acted more wisely for the security and welfare of their people, but for popularity and/or naivety?

As for the US, just like Afghanistan, have they not demonstrated again with action that others' interests come last?

Wouldn't Taiwan do well to observe and learn?
 
Not sure if this should go here or the U.K. being laughed at thread.

I will admit up front that I’d heard of Rostov although I couldn’t accurately place it on a map, but then I’m not the Foreign Secretary posturing on the world stage.

View attachment 699
To be fair to poor Liz she was a lamb (Australian) to the slaughter. In no way should she have been sent in the first place. All it does is pander to Putins need to look good....

Still, on a positive note it makes the UK look on the world stage as ineffectual as it really is....
 
In no way should she have been sent in the first place.
I agree, she was always going to be out of her depth, and the same goes for most of the previous Foreign Secs. I just worry that the current vogue for ignoring subject matter experts could have unintended but real consequences here.
 
The opinion (or is it wishful thinking?) here is that Putin is establishing a negotiating position and is unlikely actually to invade the Ukraine, as much as he would like to part restore the Soviet Empire. A correspondent in the Ukraine said most Ukrainians don't believe a major war is imminent, although it is the topic of conversation at present.
Yet, if you look for it(not even very hard) you can find corespondants saying the opposite. Fact is that both US/ Russia and the EU/UK are not shy of using tactics like giving false information, i don't trust all those reports claiming Russia is already inside for example, in terms off it's nothing new. The research into the downing of MH17 also pointed into the direction of Russia although Ukraine isn't completely cleared either.(the fact that an radar is claimed to be''out of service'' during wartime is not really credible for example) However back then there where already very strong indications of Russian precedence so i don't see how that has changed.
So if they say the Russians are already inside they either bring old news as new news or it's the same as Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
The only way the West could guarantee no invasion would be to threaten to intervene militarily, and as that has been discounted in advance, sanctions are all that is left, and they don't exactly have a good track record of concentrating the minds of dictators. After all dictators don't have to worry too much about public opinion.
I think that is an way to get that war, the west is backing the Ukrainian goverment so it's likely it comes clashes with the Ukrainiang separtist who are in terms backed by Russia it's i assume clear to see how this could escalate?



I think Putin has some legitimate concerns about security and NATO expansion eastwards. I don't blame him for not trusting the Americans. On the other hand, if the Ukraine can make a go of a liberal democracy, the populations of Belarus and Russia itself might quite like to follow suit.
The posturing Belarus and Russia are doing right now is a way of building their fanbase, along with jailing any opposition and so on. But i agree with you that the NATO isn't very smart escalating tensions further by expanding. Not only doe the anger Russia but it also makes them look as toothless as they are these days. Look for example at Russia's invasion of Georgia back in ''07 i think? The world and NATO stood and watched and said Russia was'nt very nice that was about it.
I hope if push comes to shove and Germany has to stop/reduce importing gas from Russia that the Americans will stop importing oil as well. They seem to be remarkably quiet about that at the moment. Surely they couldn't possibly want sanctions that hurt Russia and other countries in the West, but leave America relatively unscathed ...
Not relying on other countries oil was a Trump policy, Biden just sends Hunter do do shady deals with shady regimes.. But yes given the position and conflicts with Russia in the past XX years it's remarkable how much we depends on their gas. (in Europe as a whole)
 
Top Bottom