Politics Will Russia Attack Ukraine?

^^^
Sacha made a prophetic movie, it is scary how close real Putin or real Lukashenko are to this parody:

 
US, Canada and Europe moving to take Selected Russian Banks (I assume the ones that are directly tied to Putin and the Oligarchs that back him) out of the Swift system. Just breaking.
 
Tomenable said:
Interesting, such a "classical Christian educator", Doctor Steve Turley - https://classicalu.com/steve-turley/

Seems happy about a Muslim horde's attack on a Christian country - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3zGwDalZWM
Click to expand...

Just looked him up because I had never heard of him. That fat fool is a disgrace to both Education and Christianity. How the hell is a person on the extreme right a Putin apologist? He somehow thinks Russia is a friend of the average American? It still wants to bury us. So, why?

How are extreme leftists turning on a dime to support a people refusing to live under Russian rule?

The whole world has gone mad.
 
bigsnake49 said:
I see a lot of partisan attacks on Biden. Save them for the appropriate thread. Keep this thread for Ukraine and their heroic defense of their country. I cheer for you, Ukrainian heroes!
Click to expand...

Would it be okay with you if we referred to him as "The Oval Office" instead or would that hurt your feelings as well? :LOL:
 
firetown said:
Would it be okay with you if we referred to him as "The Oval Office" instead or would that hurt your feelings as well? :LOL:
Click to expand...

You actually can't hurt my feelings, you're just a faceless person on the internet. I just want this thread clear of politics. I don't want this thread to turn into a Trump vs Biden thread. There is already another thread where you can complain about Biden.
 
bigsnake49 said:
You actually don't hurt my feelings. I just want this thread clear of politics. I don't want this thread to turn into a Trump vs Biden thread. There is already another thread where you can complain about Biden.
Click to expand...
I am actually too disgusted with Biden to discuss him and that goes far beyond his politics.
But I will say this much:
This didn't happen under Trump's watch.
Isn't a big part of this discussion what next step The Oval Office can take to end this?
 
firetown said:
I am actually too disgusted with Biden to discuss him and that goes far beyond his politics.
But I will say this much:
This didn't happen under Trump's watch.
Isn't a big part of this discussion what next step The Oval Office can take to end this?
Click to expand...

Nothing Americans can do except to supply Ukranians with weapons and ammunition. Like we have been doing for the past 8 years. Now there is nothing stopping you or anybody else that think Americans should go and fight in Ukraine from volunteering to fight in Ukraine.

I have quite a few Iranian friends that think that the US should invade Iran to liberate them from the Mullahs. I give them the same advise. Nothing stopping them from going over there to fight the mullahs themselves.
 
An interesting take on psychological portrait of Putin:

 
Tomenable said:
An interesting take on psychological portrait of Putin:

Click to expand...

There was a article that I linked in my previous post that shared opinions from Russian analysts that noticed a change in his behavior. He has isolated himself from advisors and sees himself as a messianic figure for Russia.
 
This is a surprisingly even-handed account of Russian strategic motivations for invading Ukraine ==

 
Reporters close to the scene are saying the Russians bombed an oil depot. My God, the poor Ukrainians can't catch a break. They had to live through the Chernobyl disaster and now it's oil fires polluting the environment.

Maybe Putin really has gone off the deep end; absolute power does corrupt absolutely. It also can drive some men mad. Look at Ceausescu, the leaders of North Korea, Stalin in his heyday, Hitler, Mussolini at the end too.

If ever there was a time for a palace coup in Russia, now is the time.
 
I am really sick and tired of these crazy populations enabling dictators based on national pride and then acting like victims. Russia hopefully will now be put in its place for good after spreading nothing but misery for many decades.
 
bigsnake49 said:
Nothing Americans can do except to supply Ukranians with weapons and ammunition. Like we have been doing for the past 8 years. Now there is nothing stopping you or anybody else that think Americans should go and fight in Ukraine from volunteering to fight in Ukraine.

I have quite a few Iranian friends that think that the US should invade Iran to liberate them from the Mullahs. I give them the same advise. Nothing stopping them from going over there to fight the mullahs themselves.
Click to expand...

The SWIFT boycott is great, because in the end, money seems to win.
 
Angela said:
If ever there was a time for a palace coup in Russia, now is the time.
Click to expand...

Is there a man among the Russian circles of power that has both the foresight and the guts? The oligarchs are losing a lot of money.
 
Angela said:
If ever there was a time for a palace coup in Russia, now is the time.
Click to expand...

They will probably do that a long time from now after the population of Russia has to suffer greatly as a result of this.
In other words:
When it's too late, they will kill him.
The upcoming damage will have to be severe to become a lesson.
 
Document:Nyet means Nyet

February 2008 classified diplomatic cable from US ambassador to Russia William J Burns to the State Department about how Russia views NATO involvement in Ukraine

​
diplomatic communication by William J Burns dated 2008/02/01
Subjects: Ukraine, NATO, Russia, The Great Game, Ukraine coup 2014
Example of: Diplomatic communication
Source: Wikileaks (Link)

Text highlighting by Wikispooks

Wikispooks Comment
This cable is solid evidence that the US was well aware of the potential consequences of western interference in Ukraine. The likelihood of civil war is clearly spelled out and gives the lie to any and all expressions of surprise and fauz-outrage by western leaders at the course of events since November 2013

Nyet means Nyet: Russia's NATO enlargement red lines
Cable: 08MOSCOW265_a

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2018
TAGS: PREL, NATO, UP, RS
SUBJECT: NYET MEANS NYET: RUSSIA'S NATO ENLARGEMENT
REDLINES

Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns. Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

1. (C) Summary. Following a muted first reaction to
Ukraine's intent to seek a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP)
at the Bucharest summit (ref A), Foreign Minister Lavrov and
other senior officials have reiterated strong opposition,
stressing that Russia would view further eastward expansion
as a potential military threat. NATO enlargement,
particularly to Ukraine, remains "an emotional and neuralgic"
issue for Russia, but strategic policy considerations also
underlie strong opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine and
Georgia. In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue
could potentially split the country in two, leading to
violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force
Russia to decide whether to intervene. Additionally, the GOR
and experts continue to claim that Ukrainian NATO membership
would have a major impact on Russia's defense industry,
Russian-Ukrainian family connections, and bilateral relations
generally. In Georgia, the GOR fears continued instability
and "provocative acts" in the separatist regions. End
summary.

MFA: NATO Enlargement "Potential Military Threat to Russia"
--------------------------------------------- --------------

2. (U) During his annual review of Russia's foreign policy
January 22-23 (ref B), Foreign Minister Lavrov stressed that
Russia had to view continued eastward expansion of NATO,
particularly to Ukraine and Georgia, as a potential military
threat. While Russia might believe statements from the West
that NATO was not directed against Russia, when one looked at
recent military activities in NATO countries (establishment
of U.S. forward operating locations, etc. they had to be
evaluated not by stated intentions but by potential. Lavrov
stressed that maintaining Russia's "sphere of influence" in
the neighborhood was anachronistic, and acknowledged that the
U.S. and Europe had "legitimate interests" in the region.
But, he argued, while countries were free to make their own
decisions about their security and which political-military
structures to join, they needed to keep in mind the impact on
their neighbors.

3. (U) Lavrov emphasized that Russia was convinced that
enlargement was not based on security reasons, but was a
legacy of the Cold War. He disputed arguments that NATO was
an appropriate mechanism for helping to strengthen democratic
governments. He said that Russia understood that NATO was in
search of a new mission, but there was a growing tendency for
new members to do and say whatever they wanted simply because
they were under the NATO umbrella (e.g. attempts of some new
member countries to "rewrite history and glorify fascists").

4. (U) During a press briefing January 22 in response to a
question about Ukraine's request for a MAP, the MFA said "a
radical new expansion of NATO may bring about a serious
political-military shift that will inevitably affect the
security interests of Russia." The spokesman went on to
stress that Russia was bound with Ukraine by bilateral
obligations set forth in the 1997 Treaty on Friendship,
Cooperation and Partnership in which both parties undertook
to "refrain from participation in or support of any actions
capable of prejudicing the security of the other Side." The
spokesman noted that Ukraine's "likely integration into NATO
would seriously complicate the many-sided Russian-Ukrainian
relations," and that Russia would "have to take appropriate
measures." The spokesman added that "one has the impression
that the present Ukrainian leadership regards rapprochement
with NATO largely as an alternative to good-neighborly ties
with the Russian Federation."

Russian Opposition Neuralgic and Concrete
-----------------------------------------

5. (C) Ukraine and Georgia's NATO aspirations not only touch
a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about
the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does
Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine
Russia's influence in the region, but it also fears
unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would
seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us
that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions
in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the
ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a
major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war. In
that eventuality, Russia would have to decide whether to
intervene; a decision Russia does not want to have to face.

6. (C) Dmitriy Trenin, Deputy Director of the Carnegie
Moscow Center, expressed concern that Ukraine was, in the
long-term, the most potentially destabilizing factor in
U.S.-Russian relations, given the level of emotion and
neuralgia triggered by its quest for NATO membership. The
letter requesting MAP consideration had come as a "bad
surprise" to Russian officials, who calculated that Ukraine's
NATO aspirations were safely on the backburner. With its
public letter, the issue had been "sharpened." Because
membership remained divisive in Ukrainian domestic politics,
it created an opening for Russian intervention. Trenin
expressed concern that elements within the Russian
establishment would be encouraged to meddle, stimulating U.S.
overt encouragement of opposing political forces, and leaving
the U.S. and Russia in a classic confrontational posture.
The irony, Trenin professed, was that Ukraine's membership
would defang NATO, but neither the Russian public nor elite
opinion was ready for that argument. Ukraine's gradual shift
towards the West was one thing, its preemptive status as a de
jure U.S. military ally another. Trenin cautioned strongly
against letting an internal Ukrainian fight for power, where
MAP was merely a lever in domestic politics, further
complicate U.S.-Russian relations now.

7. (C) Another issue driving Russian opposition to Ukrainian
membership is the significant defense industry cooperation
the two countries share, including a number of plants where
Russian weapons are made. While efforts are underway to shut
down or move most of these plants to Russia, and to move the
Black Sea fleet from Sevastopol to Novorossiysk earlier than
the 2017 deadline, the GOR has made clear that Ukraine's
joining NATO would require Russia to make major (costly)
changes to its defense industrial cooperation.

8. (C) Similarly, the GOR and experts note that there would
also be a significant impact on Russian-Ukrainian economic
and labor relations, including the effect on thousands of
Ukrainians living and working in Russia and vice versa, due
to the necessity of imposing a new visa regime. This,
Aleksandr Konovalov, Director of the Institute for Strategic
Assessment, argued, would become a boiling cauldron of anger
and resentment among the local population.

9. (C) With respect to Georgia, most experts said that while
not as neuralgic to Russia as Ukraine, the GOR viewed the
situation there as too unstable to withstand the divisiveness
NATO membership could cause. Aleksey Arbatov, Deputy
Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, argued that Georgia's
NATO aspirations were simply a way to solve its problems in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and warned that Russia would be
put in a difficult situation were that to ensue.

Russia's Response
-----------------

10. (C) The GOR has made it clear that it would have to
"seriously review" its entire relationship with Ukraine and
Georgia in the event of NATO inviting them to join. This
could include major impacts on energy, economic, and
political-military engagement, with possible repercussions
throughout the region and into Central and Western Europe.
Russia would also likely revisit its own relationship with
the Alliance and activities in the NATO-Russia Council, and
consider further actions in the arms control arena, including
the possibility of complete withdrawal from the CFE and INF
Treaties, and more direct threats against U.S. missile
defense plans.

11. (C) Isabelle Francois, Director of the NATO Information
Office in Moscow (protect), said she believed that Russia had
accepted that Ukraine and Georgia would eventually join NATO
and was engaged in long-term planning to reconfigure its
relations with both countries, and with the Alliance.
However, Russia was not yet ready to deal with the
consequences of further NATO enlargement to its south. She
added that while Russia liked the cooperation with NATO in
the NATO-Russia Council, Russia would feel it necessary to
insist on recasting the NATO-Russia relationship, if not
withdraw completely from the NRC, in the event of Ukraine and
Georgia joining NATO.

Comment
-------

12. (C) Russia's opposition to NATO membership for Ukraine
and Georgia is both emotional and based on perceived
strategic concerns about the impact on Russia's interests in
the region. It is also politically popular to paint the U.S.
and NATO as Russia's adversaries and to use NATO's outreach
to Ukraine and Georgia as a means of generating support from
Russian nationalists. While Russian opposition to the first
round of NATO enlargement in the mid-1990's was strong,
Russia now feels itself able to respond more forcefully to
what it perceives as actions contrary to its national
interests.
BURNS

 
For those of you who may be interested in breaking free of CIA-fed media hysterics, I suggest Consortium News, in particular the video series on the Ukraine crisis hosted by Joe Lauria. Mr Lauria is a longtime UN correspondent, writing for numerous papers over the years, and I daresay a credit to Italian-Americans everywhere.

https://consortiumnews.com/tag/joe-lauria/

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 307297 times.

Back
Top