Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
sorry but ive not been keeping up with this thread....
why does Putin want to take part/all of Ukraine?
i read something about him saying he's protecting russian speaking Ukrainians, but doesnt that mean we (England) can invade any English speaking country?
is this just a move on his part in the long run to increase the price of gas exports to the EU?
im no understanding situation here please learn me thankyou please
 
Last edited:
cainer said:
sorry but ive not been keeping up with this thread....
why does Putin want to take part/all of Ukraine?
i read something about him saying he's protecting russian speaking Ukrainians, but doesnt that mean we (England) can invade any English speaking country?
is this just a move on his part in the long run to increase the price of gas exports to the EU?
im no understanding situation here please learn me thankyou please
Click to expand...

All dictators need an enemy to stay in power and, right now, that enemy is the "Ukrainian Nazis". His propaganda machine convinced the Russians he's supporting an anti-nazi rebellion and the Russians are cheering for him as approval ratings have skyrocketed. Meanwhile, about 3k Ukrainian/Russians have died as well as around 300 Dutch. A true patriot, Putin.

In a nutshell, Putin considers Russian territory all territories formerly controlled by the Soviet Union and currently inhabited by (some) Russians. Hence, a region of Georgia is currently occupied, a region of Moldova and now two regions in Ukraine (Crimeea and the Eastern region).
 
ubersonic said:
Actually the treaty only requires NATO to intervene if Ukraine is attacked with nuclear weapons, it was supposed to mean both but a missing or additional comma (can't remember which) has made it nuclear only, something they were quite annoyed about when Crimea kicked off, one of their top politicians even said once the country was in order they would be re-arming with nukes because nobody invades you if you have nukes.
Click to expand...

IIRC the Budapest treaty itself doesn't compel member nations to actually do anything if Ukraine is under non-nuclear attack or another member breaks the terms of the treaty - it just asks them to respect it, however it ties into other NATO nuclear disarmament treaties that does compel NATO to take action under certain specific circumstances of non-nuclear aggression which is why Russia is acting the way they are.
 
cainer said:
sorry but ive not been keeping up with this thread....
why does Putin want to take part/all of Ukraine?
i read something about him saying he's protecting russian speaking Ukrainians, but doesnt that mean we (England) can invade any English speaking country?
is this just a move on his part in the long run to increase the price of gas exports to the EU?
im no understanding situation here please learn me thank you please
Click to expand...

russia want to keep a naval base where it is now, not actually in russia but in crimea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_Fleet

I guess the only way to guarantee that is to take Crimea

as always countries only goto war when their own assets are at risk , humanity comes as an after thought
 
Last edited:
arknor said:
russia want to keep a naval base where it is now, not actually in russia but in crimea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_Fleet

I guess the only way to guarantee that is to take Crimea

as always countries only goto war when their own assets are at risk , humanity comes as an after thought
Click to expand...

True a lot of time but there are exceptions such as the conflicts were the west has intervened because of wholesale humanitarian slaughter such Serbia/Bosnia/Kosavo and Serria Leone.
 
arknor said:
I guess the only way to guarantee that is to take Crimea
Click to expand...

Russia seem to want to take everything east/south east of the E105 and the spur of land above Crimea upto the natural water border - think things are gonna get a lot messier before they stabilise.
 
The European Union has given Russia one week to reverse course in Ukraine or face new sanctions.
Click to expand...

oh no! what will he do now. he's already taken crimea and is setting up to create a land bridge to it, a week will probably be enough time for him to get that job done, then he stops and everythings ok i guess. apart from him occupying a country that isnt his.

honestly the EU is getting nearly as bad as the UN for being useless.
 
One week? Is the overall staretgy to cause Putin to have a heart attack and die laughing? Absolutely pathetic cowardly and weak response to outrageous behaviour by Russia.
 
Just out of curiosity (and I'm not saying this vindictively) to all the people who are calling NATO weak, or saying that what's being done is cowardly and weak,

What additional measures could be taken which wouldn't perhaps be so weak?
 
V-Spec said:
Just out of curiosity (and I'm not saying this vindictively) to all the people who are calling NATO weak, or saying that what's being done is cowardly and weak,

What additional measures could be taken which wouldn't perhaps be so weak?
Click to expand...

I take that was bing partiality aimed at my comment but to be clear I was calling the response from the EU weak and cowardly not NATO. Until a NATO country is attacked by Russia NATO will let the US and EU governments handle the crisis.

As for addtional measures the EU should threaten reduce its purchases of Russian oil and gas, the UK and Germany should arm the Ukraine with modern military weaponry (eg new MBT's: the Challanger 2 and Leopard are far more advanced then cold war junk Russia is mostly using) the US could be more passive aggressive by sending a Nmitz class aircraft carrier to the Balck Sea.

A long shot and it would never happen but how about a European peacekeeping force sent to enforce the Russian-Ukrainian boarder rights and stop Russian army units "accidental" enterting Ukraine?

At the moment I'm embarrassed by EU's response Ukraine isn't some far flung country on the other side of the world this is war right on Europe's backyard. Growing up in the 90's I was hoping like many others the Balkans wars would be the last time in a lifetime Europe would see internal conflict but obviously its not a view shared as strongly as our leaders.
 
Zethor said:
All dictators need an enemy to stay in power and, right now, that enemy is the "Ukrainian Nazis". His propaganda machine convinced the Russians he's supporting an anti-nazi rebellion and the Russians are cheering for him as approval ratings have skyrocketed. Meanwhile, about 3k Ukrainian/Russians have died as well as around 300 Dutch. A true patriot, Putin.

In a nutshell, Putin considers Russian territory all territories formerly controlled by the Soviet Union and currently inhabited by (some) Russians. Hence, a region of Georgia is currently occupied, a region of Moldova and now two regions in Ukraine (Crimeea and the Eastern region).
Click to expand...

It was all peaceful until the Ukrainian government was overthrown, has everybody forgotten the leaked US telephone call already that came out before it all kicked off where American's were discussing who they would like in the new Ukrainian government and how "Russia would try to torpedo it"?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26072281

If the Russian's are Nazi's for meddling in a country next door to them where the US is already meddling then what does that make the US?

You talk about Russian propaganda but you sound about as balanced as a western 'news' reporter.
 
Last edited:
Did you read your link? The transcript is from after it kicked off, discussing who of the 3 maidans they would want to run the ukraine. Which by the way none of the 3 discussed by the US are doing as the Ukrainians elected someone else....
So how does it show meddling beyond basic diplomatic talk on preferences?

It is nothing compared to Russian overt and covert propaganda and actions we are seeing the fruits of now and during the crimea
 
Last edited:
The US are meddling in foreign politics where they don't belong, the fact that they were concerned that Russia would try to torpedo their actions is evidence that they're working against Russia's interests.

If this was Russia interfering in Canada or Mexico's politics the west might have a case for them being Nazi's.

US dictates most of the worlds organisations (UN/Nato etc).
US has been at war with countless countries most of the 20th and 21st century.
US has a history of foreign coup d'etats and political meddling (particularly in South America).
US has military bases in most countries on the planet.

...and Russia are the Nazi's out for world conquest?
 
Freddie1980 said:
As for addtional measures the EU should threaten reduce its purchases of Russian oil and gas, the UK and Germany should arm the Ukraine with modern military weaponry (eg new MBT's: the Challanger 2 and Leopard are far more advanced then cold war junk Russia is mostly using) the US could be more passive aggressive by sending a Nmitz class aircraft carrier to the Balck Sea.
Click to expand...

In terms of cutting oil and gas purchases, which the whole of the EU would have to agree for it to be effective, isn't that just more of the same ?

As for arming Ukrainians, that would escalate a military conflict - do we really want that, do we really want to be aiding military action against the Russians, in a conflict taking place in another country?

Can we afford to give away expensive modern military hardware (which I know is far superior) without any training, ammunition, support? Not being funny but I don't think we can conjure up a few hundred challenger 2 tanks for someone else.. Presumably for free (their economy is knackered)
 
Why not? Russia borders the US as well? And Of course they are working against Russian interests....just as Russia are working against the US's.
Although again if you read the transcript quotes they are worried the Russians will torpedo the Ukrainian uprising....which hindsight is showing they have done with an alarming reaction of annexation and troop deployment...where as the US was talking about going to the UN.

No one is saying world conquest but they are undeniably trying to resurrect the soviet block and evidently far more willingly to use force and economic sanctions than the west. (And yes we have used sanctions but only as a reaction to force and Russia's own sanctions in regards to food and gas, both of which threatened well before even the revolution)

And how on earth can you complain about political meddling and wars whilst defending Russia? Do you think the cold war was one sided? As with the military bases...if Russia had won.
 
V-Spec said:
Can we afford to give away expensive modern military hardware (which I know is far superior) without any training, ammunition, support? Not being funny but I don't think we can conjure up a few hundred challenger 2 tanks for someone else.. Presumably for free (their economy is knackered)
Click to expand...

The comedy is that Ukraine actually has about eight times the tanks we do, compared to our 400 odd C2's they have 10x T-84, 167x T-80, 1302x T-72 and 1780x T-64 lol.

Not just that, as Ukraine was one of the places those tanks were built/serviced they actually still have the factory, complete with a massive stockpile of parts and unused chassis, so if they needed more tanks the could knock some up relatively easily (Ukraine was the second biggest state in the USSR and many vehicles, ICBM's and even the entire Antonov air bureau was based there).
 
Indeed:

Pavlo Rizanenko said:
"We gave up nuclear weapons because of this agreement. Now there's a strong sentiment in Ukraine that we made a big mistake."

"In the future, no matter how the situation is resolved in Crimea, we need a much stronger Ukraine. If you have nuclear weapons people don't invade you."
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom