War with Russia

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

briantrumpet

New Member
Seems that Trump swallowed wholesale the Russian propaganda that the UA Kursk incursion had been encircled. Meanwhile UA are partially doing that back in Ukraine. Still stalemate in effect, I suspect, despite the off-on US support (arms and intel).
 

Psamathe

Well-Known Member
Seems that Trump swallowed wholesale the Russian propaganda ...
I'm looking forward to finding out this reason Putin will accept the ceasefire, the reason that Trump declared "Only I know..,". Now is time for Trump to step up and show he's actually got something beyond spin & bullshit and can start to do what he keeps claiming only he van do. Which means stopping being a mouthpiece for Putin.

Ian
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R

Pblakeney

New Member
I'm looking forward to finding out this reason Putin will accept the ceasefire, the reason that Trump declared "Only I know..,". Now is time for Trump to step up and show he's actually got something beyond spin & bullshit and can start to do what he keeps claiming only he van do. Which means stopping being a mouthpiece for Putin.

Ian
Wake up man! You were dreaming. All Trump has is spin & bullshit.
 
Sure, Trump makes no sense bigly regularly, but even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
Sure, like when he said and was mocked that is was strange that Russia was seen as enemy but at the same time they(european countries like Gemany) did gas deals with them.(think somewhere in 2016/17 during his first term)
Re Ukraine, think you have cause and effect backwards – hadn’t the prior administration shown the war can’t be won without starting WW3?
The general idea in western goverments including the ukranian leadership itself is that Russia would overran them, they just wouldn't go down without a fight. Trump is one of the first to table the WW3 threat but even with Russia on war footing with defense spending, and Europe in lay-backish mode, the joint defence budget triples Russia. Us is excluded from this picture, so who would really reasonably need to fear WW3? it isn't europe. And Russia know that that's why they repeat they have nukes so many times. Whilst the France, the UK and some other european countries have them too(albeit not officially) so even without US a nuke would be suicide.

Shouldn’t they have forestalled the bloodbath and destruction by telling Ukraine to remain neutral in the first place?
Yes it would have helped in terms of de-escalation but the point has been made before and you think that even you than come back later you just rinse and repeat your earlier point it changes the outcome, two things, even Gorbachev said right before his passing, Nato non-expansion which Putin continuedly claimed would have been an agreement on was never on the table, there was never an agreement that Nato would not expand to anywhere including the former sovjet countries. Nato in contrary ro for example the EU doesn't really have an need to expand that much, as the powers that Nato had after the second World war was already strong enough to be such a strong deterrent nobody would dare to challenge them. A country also joins Nato by asking the question ''can i jpin your club nato sir'' who then says ''let me ask all the other members'' and if all the other member say yes and they meet other conditions, the application is approved. But it requires countries to apply instead of them contacting countries to apply which on itself contradicts the expansionist agenda theory.

Secondly the invasion of Ukraine did not start in 2022 it did not even start in 2014 but long before that, and not only there ever since Putin grappled power, he has been trying to get the sovjet block back, that alone has lead to former sovjet countries wanting to join Nato and many of them succeeding their application. and or countries like Poland arming themselves to the teeth, not just the last few years but they have been at it for years, as they did see the threat, maybe because they are the closer target?
The Netherlands did the same albeit too little too late when they saw what an nutjob Hitler was before he invaded.


The consequence, is now Putin is the only one who has the cards - something you won’t hear in the West, because stating the obvious would mean political and credibility freefall for most European leaders, making continued self-arm and delaying the inevitable preferable – this is the wage of hubris and telling porkies for decades, including calling a rational counterparty Hitler incarnate. Putin’s position was no different to Kennedy’s in the Cuban missile crisis, the only difference is Khrushchev stepped back while Biden didn’t.
He claimed and was expected to take Ukraine within 3 days, he lost so many troops he flew in North koreans, poeple from colombia and many other countries, Military he has shown his army is an shitshow and primarily his previously highly ranked S300/400/600 air defense is pretty useless as are it's tanks and most of it's other military hardware. The only reason the man is still standing is that his ''opposition'' all dies, by falling out of a window or eating something with something in it that mysteriously kills them. And the fact that he has so many Russians to feet to the meat grinder.
So no he doesn't hold any cards but he is very good in playing poker and pretending his has the ace and the joker, it worked on you clearly.

What you consider propaganda, is actually timeless, universal truth in geopolitics - "If his state is small but he does not take a humble stance, if his power is slight but he does not fear the strong, if he is impolite and rude to his sizeable neighbours, if he is greedy and stubborn and inept at striking good relations, then his state is likely to be ruined." Han Feizi 280 BC (hf 15.1.19, pg202)
Ukraine has good relations with the EU for example, hell Russia at some point was even in consideration to join Nato, but then Putin came to power and it all changed. and then you come with ''they should have been humbled and bent over for Putin...''
It is just realpolitik, the result of no higher authority above states, and has nothing to do with right or wrong, unlike what people come to expect in life, BUT which paradoxically makes it is a convenient, useful foil for Western leaders to whip up self-righteous, nationalistic sentiment (no matter how ironic and self-destructive) to shore up their own popularity, since their hold on power depends on it. If most people are still holding the conventional view on Ukraine after 3 years seeing what they can see, why should Joe Public be trusted in influencing political decisions?
Again you ignore Putin leadership did not start in ''22 but a hell of a lot earlier and looking away as if nothing really happended has already been tried tirelessly and was about to happen in ''22 up until the moment Ukraine with much lower resources fought back against Russia and forced them to re-treat. it was only after that they got more support. You continually make it sound like war-hungry Joe biden was ready with his abraham tanks, humvee's, 100k soldiers etc. but the fact is it started with small arms. and there are still no American or European solders on the ground, the US also before Trump didn't want this war and Europe sure as hell didn't want it either. But we did supply Ukranians with materials to give them a better chance.
 
Sure, like when he said and was mocked that is was strange that Russia was seen as enemy but at the same time they(european countries like Gemany) did gas deals with them.(think somewhere in 2016/17 during his first term)

The general idea in western goverments including the ukranian leadership itself is that Russia would overran them, they just wouldn't go down without a fight. Trump is one of the first to table the WW3 threat but even with Russia on war footing with defense spending, and Europe in lay-backish mode, the joint defence budget triples Russia. Us is excluded from this picture, so who would really reasonably need to fear WW3? it isn't europe. And Russia know that that's why they repeat they have nukes so many times. Whilst the France, the UK and some other european countries have them too(albeit not officially) so even without US a nuke would be suicide.

Yes it would have helped in terms of de-escalation but the point has been made before and you think that even you than come back later you just rinse and repeat your earlier point it changes the outcome, two things, even Gorbachev said right before his passing, Nato non-expansion which Putin continuedly claimed would have been an agreement on was never on the table, there was never an agreement that Nato would not expand to anywhere including the former sovjet countries. Nato in contrary ro for example the EU doesn't really have an need to expand that much, as the powers that Nato had after the second World war was already strong enough to be such a strong deterrent nobody would dare to challenge them. A country also joins Nato by asking the question ''can i jpin your club nato sir'' who then says ''let me ask all the other members'' and if all the other member say yes and they meet other conditions, the application is approved. But it requires countries to apply instead of them contacting countries to apply which on itself contradicts the expansionist agenda theory.

Secondly the invasion of Ukraine did not start in 2022 it did not even start in 2014 but long before that, and not only there ever since Putin grappled power, he has been trying to get the sovjet block back, that alone has lead to former sovjet countries wanting to join Nato and many of them succeeding their application. and or countries like Poland arming themselves to the teeth, not just the last few years but they have been at it for years, as they did see the threat, maybe because they are the closer target?
The Netherlands did the same albeit too little too late when they saw what an nutjob Hitler was before he invaded.

He claimed and was expected to take Ukraine within 3 days, he lost so many troops he flew in North koreans, poeple from colombia and many other countries, Military he has shown his army is an shitshow and primarily his previously highly ranked S300/400/600 air defense is pretty useless as are it's tanks and most of it's other military hardware. The only reason the man is still standing is that his ''opposition'' all dies, by falling out of a window or eating something with something in it that mysteriously kills them. And the fact that he has so many Russians to feet to the meat grinder.
So no he doesn't hold any cards but he is very good in playing poker and pretending his has the ace and the joker, it worked on you clearly.

Ukraine has good relations with the EU for example, hell Russia at some point was even in consideration to join Nato, but then Putin came to power and it all changed. and then you come with ''they should have been humbled and bent over for Putin...''

Again you ignore Putin leadership did not start in ''22 but a hell of a lot earlier and looking away as if nothing really happended has already been tried tirelessly and was about to happen in ''22 up until the moment Ukraine with much lower resources fought back against Russia and forced them to re-treat. it was only after that they got more support. You continually make it sound like war-hungry Joe biden was ready with his abraham tanks, humvee's, 100k soldiers etc. but the fact is it started with small arms. and there are still no American or European solders on the ground, the US also before Trump didn't want this war and Europe sure as hell didn't want it either. But we did supply Ukranians with materials to give them a better chance.

Actually NATO incl. US' economy and military budget are circa 22x and 14x Russia's respectively, so why do you think they haven't won and can't win, kindness in their hearts?

Also US' economy and military budget was over 1000x that of Afghanistan's, so why do you think they were kicked out with tail between legs?

Let me give you a clue - in both cases war was considered existential by one side, but just a foreign adventure to the other. From the other side of the table, this is also one of the reasons Putin never indicated he wants to occupy Western Ukraine, or anywhere else not populated by persecuted Russians.

Re WW3, I am sure I mentioned this months if not years ago here, but it was probably too profound for you to absorb - US and Europe know they CAN'T LET Ukraine "win", because if they do Russia will take the nuclear option, certainly on Ukraine, and might even hit someone irksome to set an example. Let's say that is Poland, or Holland. Will US then risk MAD for these far away, poxy, non-nuclear armed countries? Wot? So that China can pick up everything for free after? This is why Ukraine never received the most lethal, advanced weapons, and this is why Ukraine has been nothing but a sucker as I indicated 3 years ago, and hence so are their legions of supporters, supporters who think they are patriotic, righteous, but actually too stupid to appreciate they have been doing the exact opposite.

Instead of going round and round in circle, why don't we put a little marker down in this debate? I believe since Ukraine can't win we will see no real ceasefire and certainly no end of war until these Putin's terms are agreed: i) Ukraine neutrality commitment incl. no NATO membership, ii) Ukraine's loss of Crimea plus the 4 Eastern oblasts, iii) no NATO peacekeepers (i.e. Starmer is an embarrassing poseur) and no US/UK/France etc. security guarantee, and iv) Ukraine will essentially be de-fanged militarily ever after. In short, capitulation is prerequisite. If you (or anybody else in this Parish) disagree, say so now, so that we can review at leisure over time to see whose assessment is closer to the truth, and who still can't think for themself after 3 years. Fair?
 

laurentian

New Member
With regard to Russia and the possibility of them deploying nukes, I heard some authority on this (don't ask me who) on the radio a couple of weeks ago saying that this was highly unlikely as Xi has told Putin not to . . . and Putin is scared of Xi.

I'm afraid that Zelensky reminds me of the guy in Goodfellas who has no option but to go to Pauly for protection for his restaurant. Pauly agrees and the guy's restaurant is used as a money laundering operation until there is no business left, is ruined and eventually burned down.
 

Psamathe

Well-Known Member
I believe since Ukraine can't win we will see no real ceasefire and certainly no end of war until these Putin's terms are agreed: i) Ukraine neutrality commitment incl. no NATO membership, ii) Ukraine's loss of Crimea plus the 4 Eastern oblasts, iii) no NATO peacekeepers (i.e. Starmer is an embarrassing poseur) and no US/UK/France etc. security guarantee, and iv) Ukraine will essentially be de-fanged militarily ever after. In short, capitulation is prerequisite. If you (or anybody else in this Parish) disagree, say so now, so that we can review at leisure over time to see whose assessment is closer to the truth, and who still can't think for themself after 3 years. Fair?
1. I'm not a diplomat. I pay lots of tax for people who specialise in finding answers to such questions on my behalf. So I doubt I'd have "the answer".

2. But my impression from many specialist commentators taking different stances is:
a. Ukraine hasn't "won" because we/US have been providing only enough weapons and constraining the use of what weapons we do supply to just "stop them losing".
b. If Putin is allowed to "win" then international law will become a joke and he will be empowered to take more both from Ukraine and other Baltic states.
c. If international law becomes a joke and Putin is allowed to win there are undoubtedly other leaders who will take the impunity and try to create their own legacies with land grabs.
d. Do we want to allow the world to become a few leaders who regard themselves are powerful deciding how to split the spoils and resources of the rest of the world?

I'd hope (without expertise) that were we to suitable arm and assist Ukraine then they'd manage to push Putin back to the point where he can't regard his actions as a "win". Quite a few reports are now saying that Putin can't sustain his war indefinately.
I also suspect that when Putin & Trump split up Ukraine into what each gets (ie what Trump takes and what Putin takes) then Ukraine would continue fighting anyway.

Ian
 

Psamathe

Well-Known Member
With regard to Russia and the possibility of them deploying nukes, I heard some authority on this (don't ask me who) on the radio a couple of weeks ago saying that this was highly unlikely as Xi has told Putin not to . . . and Putin is scared of Xi.
I've heard the same for a couple of military experts interviewed (senior ex UK military).

Ian
 
In that case we may as well acknowledge that China will rule the world once it is finished watching us squabble amongst ourselves.

Perhaps not. Despite China being the greatest world power for millennia before c1800, they have no equivalent history of colonisation, crusades or mass enslavement of other races. It would appear they figured out trade is preferable to war, and harmony is better than conflict. Modern China appears to be investing 95% of efforts in self-improvement despite achieving world #1 GDP in PPP terms since 2014, contrast "we" in the West still think how others run their countries is our business, AND if Japan pre Plaza Accord and now China are doing too well, hell then they must be 'contained'. I hope future Chinese leaders remain forgiving, if not forgetful.
 
1. I'm not a diplomat. I pay lots of tax for people who specialise in finding answers to such questions on my behalf. So I doubt I'd have "the answer".

b. If Putin is allowed to "win" then international law will become a joke and he will be empowered to take more both from Ukraine and other Baltic states.
c. If international law becomes a joke and Putin is allowed to win there are undoubtedly other leaders who will take the impunity and try to create their own legacies with land grabs.

Crikey. Since when has your "international law" (whatever way you might choose to define it) not been a joke? How many countries have US invaded without UN approval and how many have died as a result? What has Israel been doing in the Palestine for 75+ years and which countries provided them with arms and $s? Where is your "international law" and why is it not already a wildly hilarious joke given US and indeed UK are aiding and abetting the Genocide of Palestinians right now? Is your "international law" only applicable to Putin (and China, Iran, N Korea I suspect) but nobody else?

Please think carefully before you answer.
 

matticus

Guru
Instead of going round and round in circle, why don't we put a little marker down in this debate? ...
...
In short, capitulation is prerequisite. If you (or anybody else in this Parish) disagree, say so now, so that we can review at leisure over time to see whose assessment is closer to the truth, and who still can't think for themself after 3 years. Fair?

Are you offering to sign a Ceasefire??
over to you @dutchguylivingintheuk . Bring your own pen, but no need to wear a suit!
 

the snail

Active Member
Perhaps not. Despite China being the greatest world power for millennia before c1800, they have no equivalent history of colonisation, crusades or mass enslavement of other races...

Apart from invading, or attempting to invade Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Siberia, Tibet, Lhasa, Java etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
Top Bottom