Russian invasion of Ukraine

Dadsupportedthem said:
Why do you say Biden wants war?
Click to expand...
Because unlike Trump, he’s gone on tv and told Putin he’s not allowed to invade and he’s sent a few ships close enough to actually be useful in the event Ukraine needs the help it was promised by the US and U.K. (and Russia funnily enough).

That apparently makes Biden the aggressor in crazy **** land.
 
Dadsupportedthem said:
Why do you say Biden wants war?
Click to expand...
Because he's tuned into Right-wing nonsense media.

Here we have an aggressive, disguised dictatorship government about to invade a Democratic neighbor and we get Right-wing commentary to the effect that "Biden wants war," "Russia is within their rights to invade the Ukraine," and so on.

Unbelievable.

Except that this is a Right-wing-inspired school of thought. A common theme among Right nonsense is that if inconvenience attaches to rational action, then either the facts behind the action are wrong or the action itself is misjudged. Climate change; response to a pandemic; the need to curb militaristic foreign powers; environmental protection; and on and on and on.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Because he's tuned into Right-wing nonsense media.

Here we have an aggressive, disguised dictatorship government about to invade a Democratic neighbor and we get Right-wing commentary to the effect that "Biden wants war," "Russia is within their rights to invade the Ukraine," and so on.

Unbelievable.

Except that this is a Right-wing-inspired school of thought. A common theme among Right nonsense is that if inconvenience attaches to rational action, then either the facts behind the action are wrong or the action itself is misjudged. Climate change; response to a pandemic; the need to curb militaristic foreign powers; environmental protection; and on and on and on.
Click to expand...

That may be how it is being reported over the pond, with those in opposition to the democrats and the preseident on the right calling him out.

I have no interest in US politics or the propoganda game going on over their on your news or social media, if this was a republican president then more likely the centerist or left leaning media would be calling him a hawk also.

But reading our news and other news around europe, it seems only two people.are pushing for this, one being Biden, hence why people on the left, right and centre in europe have a view that he is up for conflict.

NATO doesn't want it, Europe certainly doesn't and all you hear are European leaders (bar our clown) trying to play it down not ramp it up.

In europe criticism of this escalation isn't some right wing plot it may be in America
 
bluethrunthru said:
I am in the older echelons on here and I remember this sort of shit was regular fodder - each side was testing the others out through the 70's , 80's and some of the 90's. Russia sending nukes to Cuba and the Yanks sending cruise to Greenham didn't conclude in all out warfare so why should this. Only the failure of statesmanship on one side or both would result in disaster and never forget that post Perestroika the Russian threat was found to be greatly exaggerated with a few good frontline troops and munitions but little but numbers of personnel to back it up ( always the Russian way ) - Russia has been skint for years - it is geographically huge but economically small - I doubt they have had the cash to have first class armed forces throughout

Edit/PS

Younger Bluemooners Google Brixmis to see how we kept an eye on each other
Click to expand...
The US cruise missiles were sent to the UK as a reaction and counter to the Soviet deployment of SS20 intermediate ballistic missiles in Eastern Europe.
The huge additional cost of the 80s arms race to the Soviet Union was eventually to lead to Perestroika and Glasnost as they couldn't compete with the industrial might of the US.
 
urban genie said:
That may be how it is being reported over the pond, with those in opposition to the democrats and the preseident on the right calling him out.

I have no interest in US politics or the propoganda game going on over their on your news or social media, if this was a republican president then more likely the centerist or left leaning media would be calling him a hawk also.

But reading our news and other news around europe, it seems only two people.are pushing for this, one being Biden, hence why people on the left, right and centre in europe have a view that he is up for conflict.

NATO doesn't want it, Europe certainly doesn't and all you hear are European leaders (bar our clown) trying to play it down not ramp it up.

In europe criticism of this escalation isn't some right wing plot it may be in America
Click to expand...
Why on earth do you think that Biden wants war with Russia of all things?

Russia is a rinky-dink nation with roughly - but not quite - the GDP of Italy.

Biden rightly views China as the biggest threat to Democracy - and this has been widely reported in the news. He's expended considerable political capital getting America out of the war in Afghanistan so that he could focus on China. The last thing in the world that Biden wants is a conflict with Russia.
 
NPBlue said:
Well, it's taken a turn, hasn't it? Russia getting into bed with China.

Which direction will they be looking, East, West, or both?

There are lots of possibilities that will be concentrating minds at the moment.
Click to expand...
Russia, China and N.Korea are all linked politically by somewhat different forms of communism.
Think on this.
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Why on earth do you think that Biden wants war with Russia of all things?

Biden sees China as the biggest threat to America which has been widely reported in the news. He's expended considerable political capital getting America out of the war in Afghanistan so that he could focus on China. The last thing in the world that Biden wants is a conflict with Russia.
Click to expand...

Well he certainly talks like a hawk but whether he wants war or just likes to talk tough only he knows, we already know he has ruled out setting foot in the Ukraine even if an invasion happens, but he is ramping up the tension and has been for months, so he doesn't want a direct war with russia, but his rhetoric has still been spoiling for it.

People should also not bother citing the budapest memmorandum as reasons why this escalation has happened on the US side (NATO seem more calm about it) as it is pointless, Russia has breached that agreement several times without sanction that is becomes obsolete.
 
SWP's back said:
Do people think they’re being edgy or anti-establishment in trying to blame the West for doing exactly as they signed a binding agreement to do (ie protect the sovereignty of Ukraine)? It’s really quite bizarre.
Click to expand...

No idea. It seems to be more about established prejudices and views than reality.

Ukraine, a sovereign nation, wants to pivot to the West economically. Russia would rather it pivot East and join those other nations who have been ‘encouraged’ to do likewise. They even have their version of the EU to join - the EAEU which will come with the guarantee of Russian troops in your country if the populace ever think about revolting.

To help Ukraine come to the ‘right’ decision, Russia has invaded part of the country, ran a semi-insurgency campaign for years and has now parked 200,00 troops on the borders while banging on about NATO aggression, which is little more than a convenient distraction.

For me, it’s simple. I support the right of Ukraine to decide its future, as do the rest of Europe and the Americans. Russia believes it has a ’right’ to dictate otherwise. Russia and Putin can go fuck themselves.
 
urban genie said:
Well he certainly talks like a hawk but whether he wants war or just likes to talk tough only he knows, we already know he has ruled out setting foot in the Ukraine even if an invasion happens, but he is ramping up the tension and has been for months, so he doesn't want a direct war with russia, but his rhetoric has still been spoiling for it.

People should also not bother citing the budapest memmorandum as reasons why this escalation has happened on the US side (NATO seem more calm about it) as it is pointless, Russia has breached that agreement several times without sanction that is becomes obsolete.
Click to expand...
How instead would you have Biden act?

Immediately acquiesce to Russia's demands?

Acknowledge that the Ukraine has no right to join NATO ever, at all?

Russia is a dangerous bully - testing just how far they can push other nations to see what they can get away with. Russia may or may not end up invading the Ukraine - but the entire episode has played out so far to Putin's advantage. Domestically, his threat to invade The Ukraine is popular among Russians. Internationally, the Ukraine crisis has pushed Russia into prominence on the world stage and will at least significantly enhance Russia's chances for extracting demands from the West.

Failing to forcefully push back against Russia will only encourage even more dangerous actions in the future.

For example, it's been reported that several Russian generals advocate the use of tactical nuclear weapons - as their deployment would so frighten the West as to result in minimal consequences - and would simultaneously amplify Russian military might.
===
Edit:

In case you somehow believe that you're dealing with a reasonable adversary in Putin, think again.

Putin is a psychopathic megalomaniac.

Two stories in support leap to mind, the 2nd being the most alarming...

1)
Putin found out that Angela Merkle was afraid of dogs. And so, in a meeting with the former German chancellor, Putin intentionally brought his pet labrador to a meeting with her:
www.cnn.com

Vladimir Putin: I didn't mean to scare Angela Merkel with my dog | CNN

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he did not mean to scare German Chancellor Angela Merkel when he brought his pet Labrador along to meet her in 2007.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

2)
Putin was reportedly behind a series of apartment bombings of Russians in order to boost his popularity.
en.wikipedia.org

1999 Russian apartment bombings - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
How instead would you have Biden act?

Immediately acquiesce to Russia's demands?

Acknowledge that the Ukraine has no right to join NATO ever, at all?

Russia is a dangerous bully - testing just how far they can push other nations to see what they can get away with. Russia may or may not end up invading the Ukraine - but the entire episode has played out so far to Putin's advantage. Domestically, his threat to invade The Ukraine is popular among Russian's and his tough stance has increased his popularity. Internationally, the Ukraine crisis has pushed Russia into prominence on the world stage and will at least significantly enhance Russia's chances for extracting demands from the West.

Failing to forcefully push back against Russia will only encourage even more alarming actions in the future.
Click to expand...
Putins a lonn I a have already said that repeatedly, he thinks he is a Tzar and does what he likes.


On Putin long standing claim this is all about NATO on his border well it plays well at home and I can gaurentee if Central America was had a joint strategic miltary alliance capable of being a threat to America and they asked Mexico to join then your president and media would be against it too much as Russians hear about NATO in Ukraine and then back Vlad.

Putin has shown over decades he doesn't care about people challenging him, as long as it plays well in the motherland, plus Russia has been at this for centuries in this region, overstepping only as far as they deem they can get away with it, they will never give up the idea that Ukraine, belarus, and the baltic states are meant to be part of greater russia, even once Putin is gone this will hold true.


I don't mind Biden trying to de-escalate, but his language has been more aggresively tone has only let tlit escalate and that is my issue with it.
 
urban genie said:
On Putin long standing claim this is all about NATO on his border well it plays well at home and I can gaurentee if Central America was had a joint strategic miltary alliance capable of being a threat to America and they asked Mexico to join then you would be against it too much as Russians hear about NATO in Ukraime amd then back Vlad.

Putin has shown over decades he doesn't care about people challenging him, as long as it plays well in the motherland, plus Russia has been at this for centuries in this region, overstepping only as far as they deem they can get away with it, they will never give up the idea that Ukraine, belarus, and the baltic states are meant to be part of greater russia, even once Putin is gone this will hold true.


I don't mind Biden trying to de-escalate, but his language has been more aggresively tone has only let tlit escalate and that is my issue with it.
Click to expand...
We seem, then, to be, mostly in accord.

I think, however, that Biden's actions and tone has been exactly appropriate - if Russia invades Ukraine the USA won't go to war - but at the same time if this occurs there will be serious ramifications.

In the face of Russian aggression - sugar-coating has no place.
 
Rascal said:
I take a lot of shouting down pal :)

Many on here will not realise it was Atlee who played a huge role in establishing NATO and it was the right thing to do at the time. The authoritarian Soviet Union under Stalin was a threat to Western Democracy.

NATO without any doubt played a role in keeping the peace between the opposing blocs. MAD assured that.

Since the fall of the USSR and the disintegration of the Warsaw pact, NATO has become an organisation looking for a role, the USSR were no longer there so it served as an arm of US expansionism. It became a tool for US imperialism. NATO morphed from being a defender of peace in NATO countries to an imposer of peace in non NATO countries. It started with Bosnia, which I supported, but that got the hawks excited and they saw NATO as a tool they could hide behind without using the name America. That gave them the confidence to go onto the middle east with which most would possibly agree has had disastrous consequences.

NATO, the clue is NA (North Atlantic) Georgia and Macedonia are nowhere near the supposed area of influence that was the original intention of the treaty of Brussels (1949) It is expansionism pure and simple.

Of course Putin is a ****, he is a far right nationalist with the fascistic traits you see across many parts of the west now, he is leader of an Oligopoly and in my opinion he shows the same narcissistic traits we see in Trump and Johnson, Russia are no longer trying to spread Communism around the world, they are insular Nationalists who just like the Faragists in this country want to control and make safe their own borders.

Biden as i did say in the USA politics thread is a hawk, he appears to be pushing the narrative of war. American Imperialism , who would have guessed. I despise Trump but he wouldnt have let this get so bad.

As for us, London is awash with Russian Oligarch money, its seeped into our country. how far its influence goes is scary,

I went to the Ukraine to watch City play Shaktar in Kharkiv, had a great time and they were lovely people, i do hope they stay safe and this madness is averted, because if it not i fear for the planet.
Click to expand...
Rascal, stop watching RT and don't get sucked in by your beliefs vs what is actually happening in this situation and what NATO actually is.

NATO has not expanded as a territorial threat to Putin because NATO is not a country nor does it hold territory. The real threat territorially to Russia is EU expansionism and certainly EU military expansion but I'll just leave that to stew for some of the anti-UK/US, pro-EU type folk on here.

In any event this has nothing to do with imperial expansionism. Putin is not doing this because he's threatened at his borders because who is the threat? The US could attack Russia quite easily without involving NATO at all. In many respects the US could attack and destroy Russian cities from the mainland US.

The problem Putin has is the Eastern bloc is increasingly aligning with the west and not Russia, the reason why is obvious, because these countries can be prosperous and remain as sovereign nations. Putin wants the opposite, Putin wants these countries to form into a all powerful Russian bloc as they were under the USSR. He therefore can only act against these countries making 'bad decisions' to align with the west by invading or bullying them.

You keep banging on about western imperialism but you don't seem to have any criticism of this form of Russian imperialism so I can't help but think this is just pure bias because of your brand of politics. You've already mentioned Georgia but Georgia was invaded by Russia in 2008 and several areas in Georgia are still under Russian occupation. We talk of invasion in Ukraine but Ukraine was invaded by Russia 8 years ago in Crimea and is now part of Russia.

With all of this in mind, how in the hell can it be our fault?
 
inbetween said:
Rascal, stop watching RT and don't get sucked in by your beliefs vs what is actually happening in this situation and what NATO actually is.

NATO has not expanded as a territorial threat to Putin because NATO is not a country nor does it hold territory. The real threat territorially to Russia is EU expansionism and certainly EU military expansion but I'll just leave that to stew for some of the anti-UK/US, pro-EU type folk on here.

In any event this has nothing to do with imperial expansionism. Putin is not doing this because he's threatened at his borders because who is the threat? The US could attack Russia quite easily without involving NATO at all. In many respects the US could attack and destroy Russian cities from the mainland US.

The problem Putin has is the Eastern bloc is increasingly aligning with the west and not Russia, the reason why is obvious, because these countries can be prosperous and remain as sovereign nations. Putin wants the opposite, Putin wants these countries to form into a all powerful Russian bloc as they were under the USSR. He therefore can only act against these countries making 'bad decisions' to align with the west by invading or bullying them.

You keep banging on about western imperialism but you don't seem to have any criticism of this form of Russian imperialism so I can't help but think this is just pure bias because of your brand of politics. You've already mentioned Georgia but Georgia was invaded by Russia in 2008 and several areas in Georgia are still under Russian occupation. We talk of invasion in Ukraine but Ukraine was invaded by Russia 8 years ago in Crimea and is now part of Russia.

With all of this in mind, how in the hell can it be our fault?
Click to expand...

This in my view is largely correct. Economics, where Russia is weak, is driving this. The NATO argument is for Russian domestic consumption. A thriving Ukraine plugged into the European economy on Russia’s borders is a long term threat to Russia’s idea of itself as the premier European power. Absorbing Ukraine into Russia weakens/stalls the EU while boosting itself within its EAEU zone.

Russia has no fears of European military expansion. Personally, I think a European army or force is long overdue, but it’s years away, assuming it ever happens at all. Russia’s biggest enemy is GDP, or lack of it, not military force.
 
BobKowalski said:
This in my view is largely correct. Economics, where Russia is weak, is driving this. The NATO argument is for Russian domestic consumption. A thriving Ukraine plugged into the European economy on Russia’s borders is a long term threat to Russia’s idea of itself as the premier European power. Absorbing Ukraine into Russia weakens/stalls the EU while boosting itself within its EAEU zone.

Russia has no fears of European military expansion. Personally, I think a European army or force is long overdue, but it’s years away, assuming it ever happens at all. Russia’s biggest enemy is GDP, or lack of it, not military force.
Click to expand...
Yes and economics is largely why I think a war is impossible. Russia does not have the capability to sustain a war and it is definitely impossible for it to sustain any war vs a country backed by the west.

Where we might disagree though is that an EU army will not help, it will almost certainly provoke the inevitable. EU politicians are generally very anti-Russia and there is a real liability there for an EU backed and controlled army to provoke the bear.

In any event Putin won't let Ukraine push towards EU membership which is perhaps why he might well invade hence why I think EU expansion is a far greater threat to us all with Russia than NATO. Pushing the UK/US influence out of the EU is probably a major reason why he tried to influence the EU referendum. He also pushed for Trump because Trump generally had a policy of keeping the US out of what happens elsewhere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top