Ian H
Legendary Member
Over the centuries it was mostly by war and invasion.
But I wasn't commenting on the moral aspect of Putin's 'special operation'. That was partly to bolster his popularity at home with what he thought would be an easy victory.
War with Russia
- Thread starter Milzy
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Over the centuries it was mostly by war and invasion.
But I wasn't commenting on the moral aspect of Putin's 'special operation'. That was partly to bolster his popularity at home with what he thought would be an easy victory.
Yeah, but most recently by agreed treaties. War and invasion appears to be fine with Trump (and Putin obviously) as you then "have all the cards". Doesn't bode well for the future worldwide.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
The US has no claim other than the power...and a leader with few restrictions on his actions.
Do you mean Europe or the EU? They would first need to agree on a unified approach to negotiation including backup military support. Until they get that right they are unable to approach negotiations from a point of strength.
The UK and European countries have not helped in this by overly relying on the US for our defence while happily spending the peace dividend.
Last edited:
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Except Russia would not like to have the US owning even more of the north Atlantic. The US is so flaky at the moment that Russia knows it cannot always depend on having a friend in the White House.
Ian H
Legendary Member
Putin is confident he can run rings around Trump.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
He probably can.
I still have some hope that the US can get their act together and see that they have been duped by Trump.
The mid-terms will be interesting, although still a long way away given the havoc Trump can cause in a short period.
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Oh goody, do we get Australia and New Zealand too? But, who will we play (lose) cricket and rugby with? 😂
Rusty Nails
Country Member
In true Orwell style those will go to China.
I agree and it worries me eg Trump's attempted asset stripping of Ukraine. But I think Ukraine is savy enough to realise what is happening, they must realise US support is time limited so my guess is they'll play along for as long as possible and do what they can to mitigate the impact of Trump's next tantrum.
Maybe suggest some worthless assets could benefit from "Trump Ownership" (as Trump can't really carry out any "due diligence" ...
Ian
CXRAndy
Über Member
They dumped hundreds of billions in military aid, to what end? Hundreds of thousands dead or injured. Europe, nor democrats were willing to seek another solution other than let's keep funding the killing.
briantrumpet
Regular
If nothing else, Zelenskyy does seem to be very savvy politically, both in encouraging wide support, but in not reacting unwisely (maybe *that* press appearance with Trump/Vance excepted) to provocation from people who ought to be allies against despotism.
Xipe Totec
Something nasty in the woodshed
That's the 'guarantee of security' that the US agreed to in order for Ukraine to give up its nuclear arsenal in 1994.
Do you imagine Putin would have invaded if they'd kept them?
CXRAndy
Über Member
Honestly the history of fall of Soviet Union and the creation of former states is mind boggling complicated.
The political/military shenanigans over the years since 1990 have so many twists, it's hard to actually believe either side in with total belief.
Re the Nukes, doubtful, but wasn't it mainly the soviet unions stockpile strategically places in Ukraine against the west?
HMS_Dave
Regular
Ukraine had already started the process of decommissioning the Nukes under the START I treaty in 1991. I'm not sure by 1994 whether Ukraine had any functioning launchers left as they were the first (and cheapest) thing to go. The decommissioning of the Nuclear Warheads themselves would have cost billions of dollars and they lacked the expertise to do so. Giving them to Russia in exchange for security and border sovereignty seemed like a no brainer for them, perhaps even impossible for them to turn down. So, even if they had the weapons today, they would have no operational use and would be 50 years old and have had no maintenance. Even Russia only have a handful of this type left.
