M
M
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Russian invasion of Ukraine
- Thread starter feedmpenzaandhewillscore
- Start date
The Future’s Blue!
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2019
- Messages
- 13,664
- Team supported
- City
There is no winner in this and the fact that we, the UK, will only send an extra 800 troops (USA 3000 into Poland), says that we know how this will go.Agreed.
I still think all sides will put their docks away eventually
Russia may invade, backed by China in some ways, but they know they won’t win the war. All of them will be priced out if it goes to the market, especially us.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,600
If I lived in eastern Ukraine I’d still be shipping myself.Agreed.
I still think all sides will put their docks away eventually
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 22,005
I’ll bite, even though I addressed this elsewhere…
Other than extreme hyperbole, it is amusing to see the US, often counted on to be the world’s policeman, described as the “greatest threat to world peace.”
The UK, Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and for 70 years the Philippines have all welcomed that “threat”!
As to the dictators yo whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them.
So, which is it you’d like?
Prop up and ally with dictators or coups? Just let us know!
It is in the US backyard! And, just as Europe has been to Britain, South America is to the US.
As for the Pacific, I guess when you’ve fought a brutal war across the worlds largest ocean, you tend to try to develop allies in the region so you don’t have to project (naval) strength from across thousands of miles of open ocean.
Accordingly, once that foothold has been secured…at great loss of life, I might add…you gave every right to patrol those international waters, including steaming through the 100 mile wide Taiwan Strait to ensure China understands that Taiwan is still an independent, western style democracy.
If you find long telegraphed cruises through international waters aggressive, then I guess we are going to have to have a more serious discussion about building new archipelagos in those open waters and setting up military outposts including deep water ports and looong runways!
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
My goodness! I think you really need to review US history and foreign policy in South America. The Monroe Doctrine is still alive and kicking, though perhaps targeted at different nations. The US has absolutely no problem supporting dictatorships. Take the support for Pinochet as an obvious example. That was the case before Trump, during Trump and after Trump. It was the case in South America and, even more notably at present, in the Middle East. It has engaged in countless coups, which are undemocratic by nature, and killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in order to enforce regime changes. During my lifetime, the US has caused vastly more death and destruction across the globe than Russia. It has imposed orders of magnitude more suffering on ordinary people through sanctions and economic warfare than all other countries combined. This is why, outside of certain Western countries, most people view the US as the greatest threat to world peace.
Other than extreme hyperbole, it is amusing to see the US, often counted on to be the world’s policeman, described as the “greatest threat to world peace.”
The UK, Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and for 70 years the Philippines have all welcomed that “threat”!
As to the dictators yo whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them.
So, which is it you’d like?
Prop up and ally with dictators or coups? Just let us know!
With regards to the buildup of military forces, you have to be blind, death and stupid not to see the constant operations of the US Navy in the South China Sea or in the Persian Gulf. A cursory glance at a map of US military bases will show that the US has completely encircled all its “enemies”. Most recently, Biden talked about South America being the US’s back yard.
It is in the US backyard! And, just as Europe has been to Britain, South America is to the US.
As for the Pacific, I guess when you’ve fought a brutal war across the worlds largest ocean, you tend to try to develop allies in the region so you don’t have to project (naval) strength from across thousands of miles of open ocean.
Accordingly, once that foothold has been secured…at great loss of life, I might add…you gave every right to patrol those international waters, including steaming through the 100 mile wide Taiwan Strait to ensure China understands that Taiwan is still an independent, western style democracy.
If you find long telegraphed cruises through international waters aggressive, then I guess we are going to have to have a more serious discussion about building new archipelagos in those open waters and setting up military outposts including deep water ports and looong runways!
Claptrap!The US threatened nuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis and would not today tolerate a Chinese military buildup on its borders, so it has absolutely no moral footing. I could perhaps accept such arguments from countries like Norway or Iceland, but the US cannot lecture anyone from any kind of moral authority.
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
That's true, but let's also remember, through diplomatic negotiations, the USA agreed to remove it's nuclear weapons from Turkey, which ended the crises.
Both sides yielded at the eleventh hour.
That's true, but let's also remember, through diplomatic negotiations, the USA agreed to remove it's nuclear weapons from Turkey, which ended the crises.
Both sides yielded at the eleventh hour.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 22,005
History says they were not nukes. In fact, it was Turkey that wanted the weapons and Congress that sought not to activate them, in favor of simply having a nuke sub patrol for all of Europe.The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
That's true, but let's also remember, through diplomatic negotiations, the USA agreed to remove it's nuclear weapons from Turkey, which ended the crises.
Both sides yielded at the eleventh hour.
For a fuller context, from the Turkish perspective, rather than the US or Russia…
I think you will find the missiles in Turkey, which were removed as part of the negotiation, were NEVER an offensive threat to Russia. Their removal allowed America to look like it was giving, and the Soviets looked like they’d traded nukes on their doorstep for nukes on America’s doorstep.
And the whole charade satisfied Khrushchev and the Soviets, and they withdrew.
Last edited:
Just a quick point. It's often forgotten that the US had nukes in Turkey pointing at Moscow before the Soviets installed theirs in Cuba.I’ll bite, even though I addressed this elsewhere…
Other than extreme hyperbole, it is amusing to see the US, often counted on to be the world’s policeman, described as the “greatest threat to world peace.”
The UK, Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and for 70 years the Philippines have all welcomed that “threat”!
As to the dictators yo whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them.
So, which is it you’d like?
Prop up and ally with dictators or coups? Just let us know!
It is in the US backyard! And, just as Europe has been to Britain, South America is to the US.
As for the Pacific, I guess when you’ve fought a brutal war across the worlds largest ocean, you tend to try to develop allies in the region so you don’t have to project (naval) strength from across thousands of miles of open ocean.
Accordingly, once that foothold has been secured…at great loss of life, I might add…you gave every right to patrol those international waters, including steaming through the 100 mile wide Taiwan Strait to ensure China understands that Taiwan is still an independent, western style democracy.
If you find long telegraphed cruises through international waters aggressive, then I guess we are going to have to have a more serious discussion about building new archipelagos in those open waters and setting up military outposts including deep water ports and looong runways!
Claptrap!
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
You are correct, my comment was a complete brain-fart (sorry, looking at other stuff). The Baltic states wanted to prove that they were democracies at the time and move away from the Soviet Union. The cyber attack in 2007 got my dates mixed up.
What does spring out is that Russia has lived with the ‘threat’ of NATO on their doorstep for nearly 20 years and only now is it an issue.
Does the Ukraine doing well in a democratic society have an impact on a country that have no option other than Putin?
I had wondered where you got it from.
Yes - it's blatantly clear that they went to NATO because they don't trust Russia.
I pointed out earlier in response to claims about poor Russia having nasty NATO in Ukraine made little sense when there are already NATO countries bordering Russia. Putineering being done for him.
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Everything the Americans stick their fukin big nose in turns to shit.Just a quick point. It's often forgotten that the US had nukes in Turkey pointing at Moscow before the Soviets installed theirs in Cuba.
For a nation with so much inner problems why do they think they are the greatest nation on earth ( they have still never won a war on their own ) for all of the military power they have.
How have we come to this with so many inept leaders in the world at any one time........the perfect storm ?
So glad to be living here in Spain
History says they were not nukes. In fact, it was Turkey that wanted the weapons and Congress that sought not to activate them, in favor of simply having a nuke sub patrol for all of Europe.
For a fuller context, from the Turkish perspective, rather than the US or Russia…
I think you will find the missiles in Turkey, which were removed as part of the negotiation, were NEVER an offensive threat to Russia. Their removal allowed America to look like it was giving, and the Soviets looked like they’d traded nukes on their doorstep for nukes on America’s doorstep.
And the whole charade satisfied Khrushchev and the Soviets, and they withdrew.
So the USA agreed to install nuclear missiles in Turkey, Turkey paid for the missiles, then the USA wouldn't provide the nuclear warheads.
And did Kruschev know that these warhead-less missiles that could strike Russia were never an offensive threat?
I'm sure we're relieved that history means all that anxiety at the time was misplaced.
"Dummy weapons nearly led to Armageddon" doesn't exactly sound too reassuring.
D
D
Deleted member 77198
Guest
The thing is, Russia’s long term aim is to do to Europe what has happened in the Middle East and North Africa since the 1970s.Agreed.
I still think all sides will put their docks away eventually
It started back in the late 00s with Putin’s “new age of hostility” speech. Since then we’ve seen (or not seen!) them having their fingers all over Brexit, Trump’s elections, BLM unrest, Covid conspiracy theories, anti-vacc shit, gas price rises, rises in political extremism, and probably many more day-to-day areas of unrest that we haven’t cottoned onto yet.
They want to destabilise our society by causing societal divisions and unrest, and are succeeding very well with it. This Ukraine situation is only a minor thing in their overall aim and that part of it is just a bit of dick waving, it’s almost then taking the piss out of the West, popping their head out from behind the curtain to say “Cooee!, it’s us, the reason you’re all arguing with each other hahahahaa”. They probably don’t have anywhere near the military might to enact what they’re posturing to do anyway compared to NATO powers, but in the wider picture they are succeeding very successfully with their aims.
I don’t think they’ll ever get their eventual goal of causing civil wars and collapses of societies in the West, but they don’t really need to as the civil unrest is enough to have people forever arguing with each other, destroy social harmony, send our economies spinning downwards, and decrease our standard of living.
And it’s exactly the same with China and the West n’all. Nobody is taking about China and Taiwan, but they’re in a similar situation as Russia and Ukraine. But, again, the overall aim from China is to destabilise the West.
Last edited by a moderator:
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,600
Chicago Blue won’t like this one little bit.Everything the Americans stick their fukin big nose in turns to shit.
For a nation with so much inner problems why do they think they are the greatest nation on earth ( they have still never won a war on their own ) for all of the military power they have.
How have we come to this with so many inept leaders in the world at any one time........the perfect storm ?
So glad to be living here in Spain
BlueRockape
Well-Known Member
Don't give a shit mate the truth is just the truth ; )Chicago Blue won’t like this one little bit.
I hadn't realised you were quite so "my country right or wrong.I’ll bite, even though I addressed this elsewhere…
Other than extreme hyperbole, it is amusing to see the US, often counted on to be the world’s policeman, described as the “greatest threat to world peace.”
The UK, Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and for 70 years the Philippines have all welcomed that “threat”!
As to the dictators yo whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them.
So, which is it you’d like?
Prop up and ally with dictators or coups? Just let us know!
It is in the US backyard! And, just as Europe has been to Britain, South America is to the US.
As for the Pacific, I guess when you’ve fought a brutal war across the worlds largest ocean, you tend to try to develop allies in the region so you don’t have to project (naval) strength from across thousands of miles of open ocean.
Accordingly, once that foothold has been secured…at great loss of life, I might add…you gave every right to patrol those international waters, including steaming through the 100 mile wide Taiwan Strait to ensure China understands that Taiwan is still an independent, western style democracy.
If you find long telegraphed cruises through international waters aggressive, then I guess we are going to have to have a more serious discussion about building new archipelagos in those open waters and setting up military outposts including deep water ports and looong runways!
Claptrap!
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
I'll just pick on a couple of bits.
"As to the dictators to whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them."
I'm not sure i understood this, but would this include the dictators the US supported or installed in a coup?
And as for brutal war in the Pacific, does 20 million dead in Russia sound more brutal?
And I certainly haven't welcomed the American threat in Europe, as it meant the USSR threatened Europe with nuclear weapons (well, western Europe, they were already in the East, but that was what they got for having 20 million dead before the USA joined in).
I’ll bite, even though I addressed this elsewhere…
Other than extreme hyperbole, it is amusing to see the US, often counted on to be the world’s policeman, described as the “greatest threat to world peace.”
The UK, Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and for 70 years the Philippines have all welcomed that “threat”!
As to the dictators yo whom the US has cozied up, it is clear that absent coups, the US has had to deal with them.
So, which is it you’d like?
Prop up and ally with dictators or coups? Just let us know!
It is in the US backyard! And, just as Europe has been to Britain, South America is to the US.
As for the Pacific, I guess when you’ve fought a brutal war across the worlds largest ocean, you tend to try to develop allies in the region so you don’t have to project (naval) strength from across thousands of miles of open ocean.
Accordingly, once that foothold has been secured…at great loss of life, I might add…you gave every right to patrol those international waters, including steaming through the 100 mile wide Taiwan Strait to ensure China understands that Taiwan is still an independent, western style democracy.
If you find long telegraphed cruises through international waters aggressive, then I guess we are going to have to have a more serious discussion about building new archipelagos in those open waters and setting up military outposts including deep water ports and looong runways!
Claptrap!
The Soviets tried to ship offensive nukes to Cuba, creating a clear and present danger AT THE HEIGHT OF THE COLD WAR and the US had no choice BUT to blockade the ships and meet nuclear threat with nuclear threat!
WW1 1917-18
WW2 1941-45
For that - sowing division - they have had the help of "useful idiots", notably the Brexiteers here and the Trumpers in the States. In fact, the divisions were sown and home-grown domestically, Russia (Putin) has just exploited them.The thing is, Russia’s long term aim is to do to Europe what has happened in the Middle East and North Africa since the 1970s.
It started back in the late 00s with Putin’s “new age of hostility” speech. Since then we’ve seen (or not seen!) them having their fingers all over Brexit, Trump’s elections, BLM unrest, Covid conspiracy theories, gas price rises, rises in political extremism, and probably many more day-to-day areas of unrest that we haven’t cottoned onto yet.
They want to destabilise our society by causing societal divisions and unrest, and are succeeding very well with it. This Ukraine situation is only a minor thing in their overall aim and that part of it is just a bit of dick waving, it’s almost then taking the piss out of the West, popping their head out from behind the curtain to say “Cooee!, it’s us, the reason you’re all arguing with each other hahahahaa”. They probably don’t have anywhere near the military might to enact what they’re posturing to do anyway compared to NATO powers, but in the wider picture they are succeeding very successfully with their aims.
I don’t think they’ll ever get their eventual goal of causing civil wars and collapses of societies in the West, but they don’t really need to as the civil unrest is enough to have people forever arguing with each other, destroy social harmony, send our economies spinning downwards, and decrease our standard of living.
And it’s exactly the same with China and the West n’all. Nobody is taking about China and Taiwan, but they’re in a similar situation as Russia and Ukraine. But, again, the overall aim from China is to destabilise the West.
100% this. Watch dirty wars and the Mauritanian. It is an absolutely abhorrent country, I despise almost everything about it’s foreign policy, it’s also a complete shit hole too.Everything the Americans stick their fukin big nose in turns to shit.
For a nation with so much inner problems why do they think they are the greatest nation on earth ( they have still never won a war on their own ) for all of the military power they have.
How have we come to this with so many inept leaders in the world at any one time........the perfect storm ?
So glad to be living here in Spain
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 34,082
Having just watched Truss on GMB I think she actually wants Russia to invade Ukraine.
Saddleworth2
Well-Known Member
There are allegedly deep connections between Russian oligarch and the Government. I would think that Putin is using that and is happy as hell that Johnson remains in post.For that - sowing division - they have had the help of "useful idiots", notably the Brexiteers here and the Trumpers in the States. In fact, the divisions were sown and home-grown domestically, Russia (Putin) has just exploited them.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
The threat of Global Thermonuclear War has been present since the 50s, yet not occurred, even though “conventional” war is omnipresent.
If it were as simple as “Fuck off or we will nuke you!” then every government on earth has wasted trillions of dollars on “lesser” arms, the USA and Russia included!
Defensive weapons don’t make all offensive weapons impotent, nor is that an achievable intent. What they do do, though, is help create time to launch an offensive response and may help maintain key infrastructure.
We are getting deep in the weeds and starting to stray from the facts staring us in the face…
Russia is creating instability in Ukraine.
Ukraine is a key geopolitical territory for Russia, both militarily and economically.
The timing of Russia’s show of force is noteworthy. It undermines key European, American and old Soviet foes at a time when the global economy in a period of inflection, and that inflection may aid Russia (increasingly higher oil & gas revenues).
Putin SEES an opportunity, which often leads him to SEIZE the opportunity.
We shall see if he seizes it shortly, and how that plays out will be instructive for the next generation.
Do economic sanctions work, in the absence of retaliatory military actions, or can a country be so vital to greasing the wheels of the global economy it makes any economic hardship one seeks to impose on the antagonist unreasonably painful to the protagonist(s)…or their allies?
Will Germany succumb to the will if the U.S. and stall N2 if German gas prices go vertical or Germans start to complain of American interference?
Is France appeasing Russia or will Macron stand up, and by his German, American and Ukrainian ally?
What CAN America do in the presence of a weak, or fractured, Europe?
Just how important to global stability is an independent Ukraine, and how much is the west willing to do to maintain it?
Putin looks like he’s willing to ask these questions.
Interesting questions.
I think the US would firstly want to target the state owned banks. There are two benefits to this - firstly none have been subject to blocking sanctions (unlike the energy sector albeit with some notable exemptions such as Gazprom) and secondly the US can act unilaterally however it really only needs the UK to join them to make them really effective - I think the EU would join these as well given the limited impact either way however slight risk Germany might block but I suspect everyone has agreed to this already.
The next best option is probably sanctions against metals and mining - again they’ve only been subject to really targeted sanctions previously - and if the US and UK act together it could make them pretty effective - but here it would be much better if EU joined.
Germany can act unilaterally by mothballing nord stream 2 - the Germans have already signalled this will be a casualty of any war in Ukraine however haven’t specifically stated it. There is a medium term risk in this one; that if the Germans don’t mothball it, the EU stand by and do nothing, and the situation deteriorates following a full scale invasion then the US might end up imposing sanctions against Germany and potentially the EU. And I’ve no comprehension how that could play out but it won’t look good and Putin will probably laugh his nuts off having achieved a divided NATO.
We can expect Russian retaliation so if Russia responded by limiting gas and/or oil exports then I think the west would be more united in widening the scope of sanctions on energy exports, shipping, and insurance. The US can also act to limit trading in Russian debt.
So my money is on banks and NS2 being the first - they do the least damage to the west and aren’t all that contentious compared to other options; and then we increase other sanctions as time goes by. Now the west may not wait for a just go full on sanctions from day 1 as they have threatened a severe response. Nonetheless however these sanctions manifest themselves (and they take time to work) it’s going to hurt us as well.