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

Status
Not open for further replies.
cheesyboy said:
What world do these news sources live in?
Click to expand...
the one where people are morons who don't know history at all, or the ones that think we lived in peace for decades... when there's always been multiple wars the west has been involved in

probably the same idiots that say violence is never the answer when clearly it's the ultimate answer as set by our world leaders, and I will use that defence in court after I move my neighbours fence a few metres, then chin him when he comes out to dispute it.
 
ubersonic said:
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.



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.



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.
Click to expand...


I'll apologise for calling you pro Putin but
he has no opposition because he kills or imprissones them, low percentage doesn't mean it's still not rigged, make it look like he could have lost etc to the wider world


They had a vote after they were invaded, tell me, if they had a vote and wanted to stay in the Ukraine do you think Putin would have said ' fair doos, I'll leave'...?
 
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...


I know we really need mother Russia to free Ukraine right.....

Go Putin wooooooo
 
alchal said:
They had a vote after they were invaded, tell me, if they had a vote and wanted to stay in the Ukraine do you think Putin would have said ' fair doos, I'll leave'...?
Click to expand...
It's an interesting question, IIRC the vote was on reunifying with Russia (effectively making things like they were prior to the 90's) or restoring their constitution/autonomy (forcibly removed by Ukraine in the mid 90's) so it would have been interesting to see how choosing the latter would have played out, for my money Putin would probably have been fine with that outcome as long as the Crimean government allowed his bases to remain indefinitely, which the Crimean government would have been fine with as it would prevent Ukraine from sending the tanks in to dissolve them like last time.

An interesting thing to note is that the UN conducted numerous surveys on Crimean reunification with Russia in the 2000s as they knew the subject would boil over eventually. The overall consensus was ~65-70% in favour, 16-25% opposed and 9-15% undecided. So well they were always going to do it as soon as they got the opportunity, it's noteworthy that the coup in Kiev and the first actions of the new government must have played a notable role in swinging many of the undecided/against around.

To be clear I wasn't a fan of Crimea joining Russia, I was a fan of them finally getting the chance to determine their own future, whatever they chose.
 
alchal said:
They had a vote after they were invaded, tell me, if they had a vote and wanted to stay in the Ukraine do you think Putin would have said ' fair doos, I'll leave'...?
Click to expand...
Do you think the Russian elections are rigged? if yes why wouldn't that other vote about Ukraine be rigged too


there was no UN over sight or whatever right? like some countries had in the past as far as I recall
 
Lot of talk on social media, etc. now ascribed to unknown government spokesman or not supported with video, etc. claiming things like medical stuff being moved up, partial troop movement from units stationed elsewhere in Russia westward, etc. - where I have been able to geolocate photos or video and identify units, etc. as above it seems to be of units returning to base although that in itself doesn't mean much. Checking satellite imagery tends to show bases in general across Russia at a higher state of readiness, more vehicles, new buildings or knocking down old buildings to put temporary structures in place or use them for parking, etc. etc. compared to months back which isn't really inspiring.
 
ubersonic said:
It's an interesting question, IIRC the vote was on reunifying with Russia (effectively making things like they were prior to the 90's) or restoring their constitution/autonomy (forcibly removed by Ukraine in the mid 90's) so it would have been interesting to see how choosing the latter would have played out, for my money Putin would probably have been fine with that outcome as long as the Crimean government allowed his bases to remain indefinitely, which the Crimean government would have been fine with as it would prevent Ukraine from sending the tanks in to dissolve them like last time.

An interesting thing to note is that the UN conducted numerous surveys on Crimean reunification with Russia in the 2000s as they knew the subject would boil over eventually. The overall consensus was ~65-70% in favour, 16-25% opposed and 9-15% undecided. So well they were always going to do it as soon as they got the opportunity, it's noteworthy that the coup in Kiev and the first actions of the new government must have played a notable role in swinging many of the undecided/against around.

To be clear I wasn't a fan of Crimea joining Russia, I was a fan of them finally getting the chance to determine their own future, whatever they chose.
Click to expand...

There was a documentary on channel 4 I believe where they were asking some people after they voted leave after being invaded if they were happy about being part of Russia, the vast majority were, however they went back months later and the opinions had changed, they moaned about more corruption, far less tourism just a massive downturn in the economy as a whole, apart from the giant bridge they built, what has Russia provided to the Crimean region.

I wonder what they would vote now?
 
alchal said:
There was a documentary on channel 4 I believe where they were asking some people after they voted leave after being invaded if they were happy about being part of Russia, the vast majority were, however they went back months later and the opinions had changed, they moaned about more corruption, far less tourism just a massive downturn in the economy as a whole, apart from the giant bridge they built, what has Russia provided to the Crimean region.

I wonder what they would vote now?
Click to expand...

It's a pretty poor region that is costing Russia an awful lot of money. The Kerch Strait bridge was $4bn. It ought to be a good target for destruction in any war. Moscow is having to pump 10s of billions into Crimea, and the region's main revenue, tourism as has been badly damaged. Some Russians make up the shortfall, but as the Russian economy isn't exactly in great shape especially if further sanctions bite.
 
Last edited:
I've been looking in to this situation with Ukraine and I can't figure out why its any of our business, or Nato's business. Ukraine isn't in Nato, nor is it in the EU.

The NS2 pipeline as now changed the way oil/gas distribution happens in europe, which is going to change how things work. But again, what as it got to do with us? Why are we poking our noses in to this?

It's not even that its like Poland in WW2. At least Poland was nearby us and we could see if Poland fell then we'd be in the firing line. Ukraine is on the other side of europe, and if countries like Germany are ok with the situation, then why are we getting hysterical about it? Also a similar question to the US too. America must have predicted this would happen once they removed sanctions off NS2. They must have known that German support for Ukraine was likely based on how much Germany relied on the gas/oil coming in via Ukraine, so now with that need removed Germany aren't bothered about them anymore.

The West effectively cast Ukraine out and then are complaining about the consequences they instigated.
 
BowdonUK said:
I've been looking in to this situation with Ukraine and I can't figure out why its any of our business, or Nato's business. Ukraine isn't in Nato, nor is it in the EU.

The NS2 pipeline as now changed the way oil/gas distribution happens in europe, which is going to change how things work. But again, what as it got to do with us? Why are we poking our noses in to this?

It's not even that its like Poland in WW2. At least Poland was nearby us and we could see if Poland fell then we'd be in the firing line. Ukraine is on the other side of europe, and if countries like Germany are ok with the situation, then why are we getting hysterical about it? Also a similar question to the US too. America must have predicted this would happen once they removed sanctions off NS2. They must have known that German support for Ukraine was likely based on how much Germany relied on the gas/oil coming in via Ukraine, so now with that need removed Germany aren't bothered about them anymore.

The West effectively cast Ukraine out and then are complaining about the consequences they instigated.
Click to expand...

One aspect is assurances given in return for them giving up legacy nuclear weapons they ended up with post leaving the USSR.
 
BowdonUK said:
I've been looking in to this situation with Ukraine and I can't figure out why its any of our business, or Nato's business. Ukraine isn't in Nato, nor is it in the EU.

The NS2 pipeline as now changed the way oil/gas distribution happens in europe, which is going to change how things work. But again, what as it got to do with us? Why are we poking our noses in to this?

It's not even that its like Poland in WW2. At least Poland was nearby us and we could see if Poland fell then we'd be in the firing line. Ukraine is on the other side of europe, and if countries like Germany are ok with the situation, then why are we getting hysterical about it? Also a similar question to the US too. America must have predicted this would happen once they removed sanctions off NS2. They must have known that German support for Ukraine was likely based on how much Germany relied on the gas/oil coming in via Ukraine, so now with that need removed Germany aren't bothered about them anymore.

The West effectively cast Ukraine out and then are complaining about the consequences they instigated.
Click to expand...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
 
alchal said:
There was a documentary on channel 4 I believe where they were asking some people after they voted leave after being invaded if they were happy about being part of Russia, the vast majority were, however they went back months later and the opinions had changed, they moaned about more corruption, far less tourism just a massive downturn in the economy as a whole, apart from the giant bridge they built, what has Russia provided to the Crimean region.
Click to expand...
So basically voting to join Russia is functionally the same as voting for Brexit however you actually get the massive bridge you were promised xD

On a serious note I think if they held another vote now they understand the disappointing reality of what they spent 70 years fighting for then the enthusiasm would be far lower.
 
sanaxe1 said:
BowdonUK said:
I've been looking in to this situation with Ukraine and I can't figure out why its any of our business, or Nato's business. Ukraine isn't in Nato, nor is it in the EU.
Click to expand...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances
Click to expand...

To elaborate on that, Wikipedia has a summary of the text but fails to highlight the main issue that's caused much drama.

4. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
Click to expand...

The problem, if you haven't spotted it, is that the last sentence is missing punctuation resulting in ambiguity. Ukraine believed they were giving away their nuclear weapons/bombers/etc in exchange for a promise of UN assistance if they were attacked conventionally or threatened with nuclear weapons. We claim to believe we were only promising to provide UN assistance if they were attacked with or threatened with nuclear weapons.

Personally I'm enticed to believe Ukraine's side of the story because to me the text looks more like that was the intention, but as you can see it's a matter open to much debate.
 
ubersonic said:
So basically voting to join Russia is functionally the same as voting for Brexit however you actually get the massive bridge you were promised xD

On a serious note I think if they held another vote now they understand the disappointing reality of what they spent 70 years fighting for then the enthusiasm would be far lower.
Click to expand...

Everyone loves a bridge..
 
ubersonic said:
To elaborate on that, Wikipedia has a summary of the text but fails to highlight the main issue that's caused much drama.

The problem, if you haven't spotted it, is that the last sentence is missing punctuation resulting in ambiguity. Ukraine believed they were giving away their nuclear weapons/bombers/etc in exchange for a promise of UN assistance if they were attacked conventionally or threatened with nuclear weapons. We claim to believe we were only promising to provide UN assistance if they were attacked with or threatened with nuclear weapons.

Personally I'm enticed to believe Ukraine's side of the story because to me the text looks more like that was the intention, but as you can see it's a matter open to much debate.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the reply, and @sanaxe1 and @Rroff

I think the situation would have been easier to choose if Ukraine had joined either the EU or Nato.

I think we'd have to wait until Ukraine was actually attacked before anyone did anything.

Though I have to wonder of the other countries listed in the agreement, how many are looking to enforce the agreement? It looks like only UK is making an issue of it. What is France doing about it? They currently have the lead chair in the EU yet I've not heard much from the EU. The only thing I've read about France is Putin told them that the US/Nato response didn't address Russian security concerns.

Unless other countries make a serious effort, particularly european countries, then I don't think its in our interest to go out of our way to be taking on Russia. We'd be making an already bad situation worse with our relations with Russia.
 
ubersonic said:
Personally I'm enticed to believe Ukraine's side of the story because to me the text looks more like that was the intention, but as you can see it's a matter open to much debate.
Click to expand...
it's kind of ukraine got duped though? so we can have a get out of assistance clause?? Ukraine should have asked for a comma? like this?
if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression, or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
Click to expand...
even then it's still kinda bad...

" a threat of agression in which nuclear weapons are used"
so A threat and actually using a nuclear weapon ? surely? or we don't have to help


just being threatened with nuclear weapons isn't enough Russia has to actually use them right
 
In theory they could just invite Ukraine into Nato behind closed doors and have it resolved in a week.

Once they are in nato it would be too late for Russia to strike or demand a 'no nato' status for ukraine.

Maybe this kind of thinking is too blue sky.
 
Theres a bigger picture here, if Russia gets a free run at Ukrain that will give the Chinese the green light to reclaim Taiwan.

Make no mistake about it, this will escalate out of control, and powerful countries will try and take back what they believe is theirs, all it takes is a spark.

That spark right now is Russia getting away with it. If they do who will it stop there?

They will have Belarus and Ukrain back, who's next?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom