Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
It doesn't stop individuals sat cosey in western countries, trying to be edgy, claiming themselves as so
You know, like the hard left, super pronoun brigade with hammer and sickle tattoos who, in reality, would be thrown in the gulag.
Zelenskiy says Ukraine thwarts coup plot involving Russians; Kremlin denies role
Welp.
On the one hand I imagine the Ukraine government is tired of being ignored by NATO (a member ship that Ukraine is never going to get) and has an incentive to force the issue, but on the other it would make sense for the Kremlin to try to destablise Kyiv immediately before an invasion as well as 'justify' it with the pretence that the Russian minority in Ukraine is being oppressed.
Welp.
On the one hand I imagine the Ukraine government is tired of being ignored by NATO (a member ship that Ukraine is never going to get) and has an incentive to force the issue, but on the other it would make sense for the Kremlin to try to destablise Kyiv immediately before an invasion as well as 'justify' it with the pretence that the Russian minority in Ukraine is being oppressed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,030
Considering that Putin recently stitched up his communist party rival with trumped up charges to discredit him, its not quite on the Nevalny scale of trying to murder him and throw in jail, but its enough to say he's not exactly a fan.
Soldato
Ukraine at one point had the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world, inheriting a shedload of ICBM’s and nuclear capable bombers left behind on their territory when the Soviet Union collapsed. However, Ukraine agreed to give these up in exchange for economic aid and security assurances in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, signatories of which included the UK, US and rather ironically, Russia.
Last edited:
Its being called fake news in Ukraine itself. Zelenskiy is losing popularity left right and centre and this is seen as some perverse way getting attention. Not that this could not be true mind you.
Last edited:
Just the U.S? Are you serious? This is some serious mental gymnastics to suit your own agenda. Are you going to argue against that U.S is de-facto leader of NATO?
Furthermore, I specifically said NATO/Members.
Soldato
It appears that it is you with the agenda. Proceed.
Soldato
Having visited Ukraine for the last 8/9 years it is very noticeable that new money has been pouring in from somewhere. Building work that has been stalled every since I've been going has been completed. The one building in the square that was burnt out in 2014 is now rebuilt. Russia has seen this.
Ukraine want closer ties to NATO. They are years away, and currently unable to join the EU. Russia is forcing NATO's hand to deny Ukraine closer ties.
Hopefully some kind of deal will be available rather than ultimatums.
China has been throwing a lot of money at countries like this - not sure what their full motives are but I doubt much good for those countries. Montenegro for instance is finding the realities of it now.
I have not been following this crisis as closely as I used to but from what I understand the recent heat up seems to be a bit more serious than annual/semi-annual "Russia is going to invade"
So Russia is saying Ukraine is amassing troops near Donbas, which means they will try to retake those regions by force, Russia of course cannot allow this and given Ukrainian army improvements and considerable help from NATO, including recent drones, would mean that Russia would not be able to support separatists with marginal support but will have to fully formally invade whereby plausible deniability is not feasible.
This is very similar to Russo-Georgian conflict over South Ossetia, in so far that Russia does not really have any incentive to invade unless Ukraine will try to take Donbas by force.
The lesson from Russo-Georgian conflict was that the US did not think that Saakashvili was crazy enough to attack separatist regions knowing they had the Russian backing. Results are known.
This time if Russia intervenes, the sanctions from the west-align economic bloc can do significant further damage and NATO support of Ukraine can ensure perpetual hot conflict to wither away the Russian economy.
Russia is essentially saying Ukraine is their red line, a hill that they are willing to die on.
So the question is, how feasible it is that Ukraine will try to retake Donbas by force? Is the Ukrainian military build up just political theatrics to bolster internal support or does this conflict has a possibility of heating up?
I hope this is just the annual/semi-annual sober rattling. They had been fairly frequent but this one feels a bit off compared to previous posturing.
So Russia is saying Ukraine is amassing troops near Donbas, which means they will try to retake those regions by force, Russia of course cannot allow this and given Ukrainian army improvements and considerable help from NATO, including recent drones, would mean that Russia would not be able to support separatists with marginal support but will have to fully formally invade whereby plausible deniability is not feasible.
This is very similar to Russo-Georgian conflict over South Ossetia, in so far that Russia does not really have any incentive to invade unless Ukraine will try to take Donbas by force.
The lesson from Russo-Georgian conflict was that the US did not think that Saakashvili was crazy enough to attack separatist regions knowing they had the Russian backing. Results are known.
This time if Russia intervenes, the sanctions from the west-align economic bloc can do significant further damage and NATO support of Ukraine can ensure perpetual hot conflict to wither away the Russian economy.
Russia is essentially saying Ukraine is their red line, a hill that they are willing to die on.
So the question is, how feasible it is that Ukraine will try to retake Donbas by force? Is the Ukrainian military build up just political theatrics to bolster internal support or does this conflict has a possibility of heating up?
I hope this is just the annual/semi-annual sober rattling. They had been fairly frequent but this one feels a bit off compared to previous posturing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 8,030
Its called a pretext for invasion Stalin shelled russian villages and then blamed it on the Finns and used that as a pretext for invasion of Finland a.ka. get your retaliation in first. This is the same thing wouldn't be surprised if theres some kind of provocation involving russian troops or their proxy in Donbas and that'll be the trigger for the invasion when the ukrainians dare to shoot back.
The real question is what if anything the West and america will do about it, judging by recent comments by Biden that would appear to be not much, lots of words of condemnation blah blah but nothing remotely military.
Shelling of Mainila was used as a pretext for either getting territories around Leningrad to increase defences or outright conversion of Finland into either a communist state or integration into USSR because Stalin thought that Finnish communists were ready and just needed a catalyst to take the country, he was wrong.
In this instance Russia does not want to occupy Ukraine. The objective had been completed back in 2014, create a frozen conflict and through Minks Agreement to federalise Ukraine so that Donbas region could veto any NATO ascension. Russian objective and interest is a frozen conflict.
The point I am making is that USSR-Finnish winter war of '39 and what is happening now are two completely different situations.
As for the US response, do not underestimate sanctions, I do not think Russia can win war of attrition against NATO economic block, the scale is just not there, $23tr US GDP and $17tr EU GDP vs Russia's $1.7tr. It will not be a swift victory for the west but it will mean slow erosion of Russia's relevancy over the next 50 years due to even slower economic development and thus widening gap between the west and Russia.
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1466823737764892682?s=20
I mean when Russia doesn't even consider Ukraine to be a sovereign nation then it's a little bit worrying.
And wtf is this crap about having a buffer zone of nations, they do realise that all these eastern European countries want to join NATO because they are affraid of Russia and it's past history of oppressing them.
I mean when Russia doesn't even consider Ukraine to be a sovereign nation then it's a little bit worrying.
And wtf is this crap about having a buffer zone of nations, they do realise that all these eastern European countries want to join NATO because they are affraid of Russia and it's past history of oppressing them.
Soldato
WW3 or not?
No, unfortunately the west will not back Ukraine even under a full invasion, we might send them a little bit of equipment but it will not alter the outcome if Russia goes full on, that and some sanctions will be the western response.
Will only make China and Russia etc more brazen however and will possibly show that the west is now indeed week willed to support other countries sovereignty, Taiwan can kiss thier asses goodbye if they see us standback.
History shows appeasement and limp wristed actions eventually lead to bigger problems down the road.
Would like to think we have the balls to not repeat that history, sometimes you have to sacrifice to stop the bullies.
The EU , including the UK has done nothing but chop thier land forces especially the heavy elements that would be needed in a large peer v peer war, would play into Russia's hands if there ever was conflict.
Soldato
I know this isn't "technically correct" but in the most basic terms Russia wants a buffer because people keep invading it (France, Germany) and Russia loses a metric crap ton of men, equipment & money kicking out the invaders (approx 30 million dead) so post WW2 Russia annexed its neighbours to give itself a buffer zone as it always feared the US etc (later called NATO) would invade at some point (typical Russian paranoia to us but a huge driver for them).
Post Warsaw Pact break-up Russia effectively told NATO "don't encroach our borders by accepting our neighbours into NATO" which NATO then started to do by accepting places like Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania etc. So now, to the Russians, their paranoia goes through the roof. They see NATO surrounding them, see the US as an ever bolder threat, happy to invade countries they don't like. So putting those pieces together, in typical Russian fashion, they've confirmed their own bias and decided "yeap, at some point they're coming for us", hence the upgrades to the military, some small incursions to test out troops/kit/tactics and gain operational experience plus alliances with US/NATO enemies.
From our viewpoint everything we do is non-threatening and we're amazed Russia thinks we'd invade, we'd never do that!!!!! However seeing the other side to this makes it far easier to understand why Russia is doing what their doing.
- Status