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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Washout said:
So, what could Biden have done differently in your eyes to not be seen as 'weak'? Keeping in mind Russia hasn't gone on the offensive (yet). I say they're doing all that can be reasonably done. Arm the Ukrainians with as much anti-armour as they can to deter as much as possible. If they cross the line sanction them hard. Hopefully going after the oligarchs and all their assets internationally.

Sad thing is I'm not sure Putin can back down now? He's pretty much pushed Ukraine into Nato if they don't take over asap. The exact opposite of what his deployment was (publicly anyway) hoping to avoid.
Click to expand...

Russia went on the offensive in 2014 with Crimea and are still occupying cities in ukraine.

What measures have been put in place to ensure their withdrawal? None.

This has emboldened Russia.
 
The Running Man said:
Russia went on the offensive in 2014 with Crimea and are still occupying cities in ukraine.

What measures have been put in place to ensure their withdrawal? None.

This has emboldened Russia.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, they still manage to hold big sporting events etc , bugger all sanctions, you name it.

It's a joke, but that's what happens when you have a nuclear arsenal.
 
The Running Man said:
Russia went on the offensive in 2014 with Crimea and are still occupying cities in ukraine.

What measures have been put in place to ensure their withdrawal? None.

This has emboldened Russia.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I was asking what more Biden could be doing now to not seem weak. As you say this has been going on with a stalemate for a long time, he's only been in power for a year.
 
alchal said:
Pretty much, they still manage to hold big sporting events etc , bugger all sanctions, you name it.

It's a joke, but that's what happens when you have a nuclear arsenal.
Click to expand...
Yeah, nuclear weapons are only good for avoiding annihilation but embolden those holding them to do more or less everything else.
 
Putin is a mastermind and always seems to be a few steps ahead of other leaders.

Russia involvement in Syria seems to make more sense now. Prevent any potential new gas pipelines to Europe so they can put the squeeze on supply and keep Europe in their pocket.

I can just imagine Russia and China forming a pact so they can get both of their land grabs done and dusted by end of year. I suppose the best NATO can do in this situation is make it as brutal as possible that if they do win, that it doesn't set a precedence for other invasions.
 
Russia's involvement in Syria had many reasons for it, mostly I think for experience and showing strength, but also to protect their naval base at Tartus as a new leadership would likely have western sympathies.

When it comes to Crimea, again Sevastopol is crucial for the Russian Navy, but Russian ethnonationalism (which is really just a front for Slavic ethnonationalism) gained a big victory with Crimea's annexation and the two contended areas in the Donbas region. Continuing to allow this will only contribute to the Balkans and Baltics being subjected to similar assaults.
 
Last edited:
StriderX said:
Russia's involvement in Syria had many reasons for it, mostly I think for experience and showing strength, but also to protect their naval base at Tartus as a new leadership would likely have western sympathies.

When it comes to Crimea, again Sevastopol is crucial for the Russian Navy, but Russian ethnonationalism (which is really just a front for Slavic ethnonationalism) gained a big victory with Crimea's annexation and the two contended areas in the Donbas region. Continuing to allow this will only contribute to the Balkans and Baltics being subjected to similar assaults.
Click to expand...

Yeah - came at a time when Russia was trying to reform its armed forces, improve its ability to rapidly deploy and logistic at distance and build combat experience. Their naval facilities in Syria are of huge strategic importance as well.
 
alchal said:
Also you think the elections in Russia are not rigged for Putin!?
Click to expand...
Honestly? Not I don't think they are because you don't win rigged elections by the skin of your teeth thanks to poor turnouts. The only time Putin has ever won by a high margin was in 2018, when the Trump administration had driven the USA's anti Russian rhetoric to a 30 year high. As explained in the post you quoted he only does well in polls when the west are threatening Russia economically or militarily, normally he polls on par with Yeltsin and below Medev-whatever his name is.


alchal said:
Also as has been stated numerous times...

Crimea had zero vote on being part Russia until they had been taken over by Russia, I'm not sure why all the pro Putin mob keep coming out with this crap.
Click to expand...
Okay firstly, not being overtly anti-Russia is not the same as being pro-Putin (the added comedy here is I've literally just replied to a post on a US forum where an actual Russian was flaming me for "Russophobia" xD).

Secondly, nobody is coming out with this crap, I'm not sure if you're intentionally strawmanning or just not reading properly but nobody is trying to say Russia didn't have troops in Crimea prior to their referendum, they've had troops stationed their for over a century, hell I even said they did in the post you quoted.

What you seem to be missing is that the fact Russia had troops their is completely irrelevant to the legitimacy of the referendum as they had zero effect on it's outcome, because as has been stated numerous times, the history of Crimea did not begin in 2014. This wasn't the first referendum Crimea have had on restoring their Russian citizenship (the last one in 1994 passed overwhelmingly however the result was Ukraine sending in the military to arrest the Crimean president, dissolve their government and effectively annex the republic).

Crimea never wanted to become part of the Ukrainian SSR, never wanted to become part of Ukraine when it became a country in it's own right and had basically been fighting to reunify with Russia for nearly 25 years when the vote took place. Of course it was going to pass overwhelmingly, nobody with even a moderate understanding of the regions history would expect any other outcome.


Washout said:
So, what could Biden have done differently in your eyes to not be seen as 'weak'? Keeping in mind Russia hasn't gone on the offensive (yet). I say they're doing all that can be reasonably done. Arm the Ukrainians with as much anti-armour as they can to deter as much as possible. If they cross the line sanction them hard. Hopefully going after the oligarchs and all their assets internationally.
Click to expand...
IMO he should grow some balls and start the sanctions rolling now to force them to pull back.

There's only really two reasons to move such a massive amount of your military equipment/troops to a neighbours border when they aren't being even slightly threatening. Either you plan to invade, or you just want to threaten them with invasion for political reasons. Either is completely deplorable and should warrant immediate punishment by the international community.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
You say that, but in reality there is a direct correlation between Putin's popularity and how hard Russia's security is being "threatened" by the west and their economy sanctioned as a result of his actions. It's like the more **** he brings down on his people the more popular he becomes because all they see is the US and friends raining **** down on them and him standing up to them.
Click to expand...

Doubt that will be the impact if/when Russian troops start suffering mass casualties in an unpopular war and he's hit with serious sanctions on top.

Their Crimean "invasion" didn't really involve mobilising troops just the ones already stationed there (as they had bases from the Soviet era there thanks to agreements with Kiev) albeit sans uniforms. Again this couldn't have been pre-planned as it was a response to Crimea's decision to hold a referendum on reunification which was a response to the new Ukrainian government (following the coup that removed the Crimean backed president) begin implementing anti-Crimean laws.
Click to expand...

That's just false, that they had troops in Crimea doesn't negate that they also sent Russian troops there to invade, who do you think the little green men were?

Also, it clearly was pre-planned.
 
dowie said:
Doubt that will be the impact if/when Russian troops start suffering mass casualties in an unpopular war and he's hit with serious sanctions on top.
Click to expand...
You may be right, but I'm fairly you're not, it would be extremely easy for the Russian government to frame the west as the aggressors in a war over Ukraine and from what I've seen of their statements that seems to be what they're going for. I.E I've seen Larov on the BBC issuing repeated warnings against NATO deploying assets in Ukraine and calls for the west to de-escalate, it all seems to be aimed at framing any invasion as some kind of pre-emptive defensive action.

This is the problem with countries that have state controlled media, they don't have the freedom of information we do to see past those kind of tricks.


dowie said:
That's just false, that they had troops in Crimea doesn't negate that they also sent Russian troops there to invade.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it did, I was replying to that poster who asked about correlation between Russia's build up for Georgia/Crimea and their build up here, and pointing out you can't use Russia's tactics in regards to Crimea to draw conclusions about their tactics here as they have obviously put a lot of planning into a potential invasion whereas their Crimean invasion wasn't pre-planned (as they had no advanced knowledge of the coup that was going to happen in Kiev). We all know they sent additional troops to Crimea, but they would have done it much sooner if they had pre-planned it.
 
areksnumbr1sxylady said:
Yeah I had a look at my message and was like, yeah I cant even bother to re-read it myself...

So in short my opinion;

Its great that they ousted a stupid President, but it seems that they have given way to ultra nationalists who have Nazi tendencies and already showed it in the square by waving flags of Nazis and cheering for calls of ethnic cleansing of Ukraine from Russians, Russians make up something around 40% of Ukraine population.

Ukranians seem to not understand that no one offered to join EU, they think that if they sign the deal they will be able to work in EU.

Ukranians also dont seem to realize that the deal that was offered to them will ruin whole countries industry. While the Russian deal has seemed to be economically a lot more viable, but they seem to have this belief that once they join EU, they will live like Germany or UK... Completely dispersing countries like Portugal,Greece,Baltics saying that they will never be like them.

Currently, very anti-Russian and Nationalistic people are getting into power in Ukraine, they simply openly discriminate against Russian population, they are talking about banning Russian language completely and removing and banning all things reminding them of Russia or Soviet Union, while Nazi flag and insignia are allowed..... They see Nazis as liberators.

Overall it seems we supporting radicals once again, just like we do in Syria... I wonder how Germany feels about proposition of Ukraine government to teach kids that Nazis were pretty much the good guys and those who carried out ethnic cleansing were also good people fighting for freedom. This isnt being made right now, but the people who are getting into power right now are from very radical parties and they talked about this a lot, but been dismissed as idiots before.
Click to expand...

Can you summarize your summary? :cry: nah just kidding... that's a good summary.... these days obviously I've heard about "WW3" but I haven't had the chance to sit down and read about it.

Wow.. I had no idea that radical ppl are rising to Ukranain gov power... banning Russing language smh..... I already saw this movie and it doesn't have a happy ending :(

Why does history has to repeat over and over?
 
Hannibal Buress said:
Can you summarize your summary? :cry: nah just kidding... that's a good summary.... these days obviously I've heard about "WW3" but I haven't had the chance to sit down and read about it.

Wow.. I had no idea that radical ppl are rising to Ukranain gov power... banning Russing language smh..... I already saw this movie and it doesn't have a happy ending :(

Why does history has to repeat over and over?
Click to expand...

https://www.france24.com/en/20180920-ukraine-region-ban-russian-culture-sparks-controversy

It's like they followed a rule book on what not to do to lower tensions. Germany is probably thinking behind closed doors, What the heck are they dragging us into?, But have to follow the NATO SOP on "Russia is acting aggressive, be firm and show unity".
ubersonic said:
Crimea never wanted to become part of the Ukrainian SSR, never wanted to become part of Ukraine when it became a country in it's own right and had basically been fighting to reunify with Russia for nearly 25 years when the vote took place. Of course it was going to pass overwhelmingly, nobody with even a moderate understanding of the regions history would expect any other outcome.
Click to expand...
They probably wanted to secure their Naval base in Sevastopol and cement their access to the Black Sea and Med.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom