Politics Will Russia Attack Ukraine?

Northener said:
I guess this is not a matter of negotiations. Putin's aim is to concur Ukraine. The question is if this will inclusive the western part or not. So nothing neutral or plebisciet that were options of the past, not in the current war.
Click to expand...

Its pretty clear that there is a general problem between the Putin and Selenski regime. They are at odds with each other and Putin want a new Ukrainian government. If this would come, he would agree to the mentioned terms I guess. Problem is, that Selenski was very smart in positioning himself nationally and internationally as the defender of Ukrainian sovereignty, so his position is now better and more entrenched than it was before. Since his regime doesn't really care and will probably go on to the bitter end, we are facing a very problematic situation in which both sides are pretty much all-in and are not really open to serious negotiations. Especially Selenski probably never was, which caused all that mess together with Putins overreaction to the constant provocations. That's a dire situation.
 
Riverman said:
Its pretty clear that there is a general problem between the Putin and Selenski regime. They are at odds with each other and Putin want a new Ukrainian government. If this would come, he would agree to the mentioned terms I guess. Problem is, that Selenski was very smart in positioning himself nationally and internationally as the defender of Ukrainian sovereignty, so his position is now better and more entrenched than it was before. Since his regime doesn't really care and will probably go on to the bitter end, we are facing a very problematic situation in which both sides are pretty much all-in and are not really open to serious negotiations. Especially Selenski probably never was, which caused all that mess together with Putins overreaction to the constant provocations. That's a dire situation.
Click to expand...

I have a view that is 180 degrees different. The initial act of aggression came with the declaration of war by Putin. Since then talking was over and shooting came in the place. Putin was never interested in negotiations only in his own particular agenda.

What would be another option for Zelenski than to defend the attacked country? Immediately give "the keys" to him? The populations stands beside him and even more after the declaration of war by Putin.....

So the biggest provocateur even agressor is seated in the Kremlin, with his clique or paladins around him, with a revanchist agenda, completely lyrical of the unification of Rus in cradle Kiev.

The Ukrainians are involved against their will in that 'turn backed time world' and Europe will also have to deal with the aftermath for a long time to come.
 
Northener said:
I have a view that is 180 degrees different. The initial act of aggression came with the declaration of war by Putin. Since then talking was over and shooting came in the place. Putin was never interested in negotiations only in his own particular agenda.

What would be another option for Zelenski than to defend the attacked country? Immediately give "the keys" to him? The populations stands beside him and even more after the declaration of war by Putin.....

So the biggest provocateur even agressor is seated in the Kremlin, with his clique or paladins around him, with a revanchist agenda, completely lyrical of the unification of Rus in cradle Kiev.

The Ukrainians are involved against their will in that 'turn backed time world' and Europe will also have to deal with the aftermath for a long time to come.
Click to expand...

One important question in this respect is whether or not the Ukrainian side did constantly shell and threaten the Donbas regions separatist territories. Because constant shelling and ignoring the Minsk Agreement would be of course a major provocation. If they even shelled deliberately civilian residential areas, this would have been a crime and reason for an escalating war, beside the threat of getting a NATO membership in the current official borders.
I can't say who did what in Donbas for sure, because both sides have different versions of the incidents, but fact is, that in Donbas there was never peace for the last 8 years and its an open question who sought the escalation there first.

In any case, the big step forward was indeed done by Putin, and it was wrong to do so, I can agree on that, even if I see a large part of the responsibility for the this escalation in the Selenski regime also. The reaction of Putin was disproportionate and definitely not justified the way its being done. But ignoring the Ukrainian provocations and share of the escalation is nothing but one-sided propaganda. Russias Putin did the final step in the wrong direction, therefore its to blame first, but the Selenski regime contributed to this escalation all the way up to this point.

They had 8 years to come to terms, but as far as I know there was no reasonable offer from the Ukrainian side, and things got worse over time. Selenski was initially voted for as a peacemaker, to make an end to the conflict by negotiations. Obviously there was never a serious intention to do so, as it seems by now.
 
Those crap with No-Fly-Zones we had on various occasions, most notably in Iraq and Lybia. Its always a declaration of war, nothing else. And as long as the Ukraine not even made an attempt for serious negotiations, as they did in the last years, its still the primary, but not only the fault of Russia that this war goes on. The Ukraine needs to take negotiations seriously and as long as the Selenski regime believes it can win this war with brute force, they seem to be unwilling to compromise. Probably Putin is not able to form a compromise either, but this has to be seen, if the Ukrainians take negotiations seriously and make a fair offer. As long as they don't, they are as much responsible for any escalation. The minimum is obviously a permanent neutral status of the Ukraine, giving up on Crimea and Russian minority rights. If they would have offered that before the war, I would be 100 percent on the side of the Ukrainians. As things are, the Ukrainian government is part of the problem and not an innocent victim. The main perpetrator is of course Russia, because they made the big step forward to that level of escalation. But even if they are to blame first, its not an exclusive war guilt.
 
Angela said:
See:
(1) Garry Kasparov on Twitter: "Risk and costs are higher now because the "reasonable" people in the West always choose lower risk today to guarantee higher risk tomorrow. Clearing the UKR skies after a warning period is risky. Letting Putin destroy Ukraine is riskier, & a human and moral disaster. 8/13" / Twitter
Click to expand...

It's up to Zelenski to draw a line. When the major cities (last but not least Kiev) are becoming in the hands of the Russians and/or the casualties are getting higher and higher it's wise to surrender.

A direct involvement of the NATO now would be ww3.

I don't disagree with Kasparov, in the long run Putin's Russia will not be able to occupy Ukraine. And this battle will bring Russia to a total crisis.

There will be a new iron curtin in Europe.....
 
^^Cave now and we'll just have to face him in the future.

"
This is already World War III. Putin started it long ago & Ukraine is only the current front. He will escalate anyway, and it's even more likely if he succeeds in destroying Ukraine because you have again convinced him you won't stop him even though you could."

"As I said in 2014 and a fateful week ago, the price of stopping a dictator always goes up. What would have been enough to stop Putin 8 years or 6 months or 2 weeks ago is not enough today, and the price will rise again tomorrow. Fight. Find a way."


"If the #West had stopped Milosevic right after the war against Croatia, we would not have had the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. If the #west had stopped Milosevic right after the war in #Bosnia we would not have had the genocide and ethnic cleansing in #Kosovo."



 
Elon Musk has announced that Space X will rescue the International Space Station if Putin attempts to drop it.

I'm glad, but it's frightening how much power he has. Let's hope he stays a good guy.
 
Angela said:
^^Cave now and we'll just have to face him in the future.

"
This is already World War III. Putin started it long ago & Ukraine is only the current front. He will escalate anyway, and it's even more likely if he succeeds in destroying Ukraine because you have again convinced him you won't stop him even though you could."

"As I said in 2014 and a fateful week ago, the price of stopping a dictator always goes up. What would have been enough to stop Putin 8 years or 6 months or 2 weeks ago is not enough today, and the price will rise again tomorrow. Fight. Find a way."


"If the #West had stopped Milosevic right after the war against Croatia, we would not have had the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. If the #west had stopped Milosevic right after the war in #Bosnia we would not have had the genocide and ethnic cleansing in #Kosovo."
Click to expand...

It's a definite upscaling when NATO get's involved. It's still not ww3.

Putin has not unlimited resources, this war alone while bring his regime to the brink of a deep crisis. A containing of the (economic) paria status will do the rest....

A next step of him, for example to the Baltics will immediately lead to ww3. That's NATO art 5. This can't be compared with the situation from Yugoslavia of the nineties.
 
This is what the world will look like if there is no Pax Americana. Without a strong America leading the way, the West Europeans will dither away all of Eastern Europe.

It helps absolutely no one, including the U.S. for that buffoon Trump to be calling in to news programs saying this is China's time.

How does he ******* think America will fare with Iran, China, and Russia all aligned against the U.S. IDIOT!

Meanwhile, the stupidest man in the Senate, the only one of Obama's advisors who voted not to go in after Bin Laden because he's such a coward, now the President of the U.S. and senile to put the icing on the cake, sends ******* Kamala Harris, who even the Democrats are desperate not to have in the President's chair to coordinate the fight against Putin.

The man is letting his troops shell the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, and people think he would stop at Ukraine? What do western Europeans want to do, tear up NATO? Why don't you just tell him to roll into Germany?

This is unbelievable.
 
Angela said:
This is what the world will look like if there is no Pax Americana. Without a strong America leading the way, the West Europeans will dither away all of Eastern Europe.

It helps absolutely no one, including the U.S. for that buffoon Trump to be calling in to news programs saying this is China's time.

How does he ******* think America will fare with Iran, China, and Russia all aligned against the U.S. IDIOT!

Meanwhile, the stupidest man in the Senate, the only one of Obama's advisors who voted not to go in after Bin Laden because he's such a coward, now the President of the U.S. and senile to put the icing on the cake, sends ******* Kamala Harris, who even the Democrats are desperate not to have in the President's chair to coordinate the fight against Putin.

The man is letting his troops shell the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, and people think he would stop at Ukraine? What do western Europeans want to do, tear up NATO? Why don't you just tell him to roll into Germany?

This is unbelievable.
Click to expand...

I'm a defender of Pax Americana (almost last one standing here I guess ;)

Those internal shit sounds in my ears really "spoiled". Biden has acted in this crisis real well imo.

Besides give the Ukrainians weapons and the refugees a good stay etc we can't do anything right now. That's a bitter fact.
 
So, a piece of paper will change everything? If he next goes into one of the Baltic countries, which are indeed in NATO, Western Europe will go in militarily?

I'll believe it when I see it.

I'm sorry, but where you get this idea Biden has done a "good" job I have no idea. Plus, it's not Biden. It's Ron Klain so far as I can tell. Biden is just reading cue cards. By the admission of his own administration, they're letting Western Europe "take the lead". I've seen what effect that has had, which is absolutely nothing.

I think Putin and China are moving in because they've made a calculus that Biden is weak and without a strong America at the helm Western Europe will blink, and they were right.

I said at the beginning of this thread that Ukraine is the new Czechoslovakia. We'll see if Poland or the Baltics are next and if Western Europe will finally step up.
 
Angela said:
I said at the beginning of this thread that Ukraine is the new Czechoslovakia. We'll see if Poland or the Baltics are next and if Western Europe will finally step up.
Click to expand...

The whole story of Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union was a completely different thing. With the attitude you are displaying we're heading towards a totally unnecessary nuclear war. Russia showed absolutely no intention to ever threaten a current NATO member. Its just about the NATO having crossed various red lines and the Ukraine becoming a hostile neighbour, primarily due to massive propaganda in the country, with ambitions to join NATO in its current borders. Both the Russians and the Ukrainians didn't play fair and nice. Ukraine is just a completely different thing from other Eastern European countries, not comparable.
And Selenski and his regime did do a lot in the last years to change everything to the worse, together with the USA and UK supporting a war course of the country. Russia is not better, that's not it, but playing the card of Ukraine did everything right and the Russians were just the bad guys all the years is just one sided. Nobody should start a war over Ukraine if Selenski and his guys want a prolonged, dirty, costly, inhumane war and neither showed nor show any intention to come to a peaceful and diplomatic solution with Russia. Both Putin and Selenski are gamblers which seem to not care about human suffering and losses. They need to pushed to the negotiation table, both of them!
 
A Pax America is vital to upholding Western Democracy but we're in a vulnerable position internally...this is the time for a stronger candidate to emerge I would argue the right has a better shot right now...to re-emphasis the importance of Democracy pass a damn bill to make elections more transparent win back trust of both sides, denounce those within that praise Autocracies. As for Ukraine geez at this point I would concede territory and see if you can save a portion to preserve Democracy and save the most lives the EU should immediately recognize the independent portion. I bear no ill will to either Russians or Ukrainians peoples but I strongly support Democracies I think that is the virtue of the west. There are those that argue Democratic Monarchies are superior to Democratic Republics...either way you need to let the populace have a voice and uphold the majority consensus...I also agree that if enough people are fed up and want to unite and find their own independent states they should be allowed to do so peacefully, look at Sealand :)
 
Angela said:
So, a piece of paper will change everything? If he next goes into one of the Baltic countries, which are indeed in NATO, Western Europe will go in militarily?

I'll believe it when I see it.

I'm sorry, but where you get this idea Biden has done a "good" job I have no idea. Plus, it's not Biden. It's Ron Klain so far as I can tell. Biden is just reading cue cards. By the admission of his own administration, they're letting Western Europe "take the lead". I've seen what effect that has had, which is absolutely nothing.

I think Putin and China are moving in because they've made a calculus that Biden is weak and without a strong America at the helm Western Europe will blink, and they were right.

I said at the beginning of this thread that Ukraine is the new Czechoslovakia. We'll see if Poland or the Baltics are next and if Western Europe will finally step up.
Click to expand...

Not a piece of paper it is the nucleus of the NATO, an attack on one member is an attack on all. NATO is funded as defense organization.

Biden has imo the right timing and right combination of strength and of restraint, and let's not overestimate 1 person, it's the whole administration. But I agree it gives a difference if there is a experienced president in foreign affairs in stead of reigning by twitter or other unguided projectile actions....;)

Germany will catch up, and has made an over night turn, from dove to hawk, nevertheless an upgrade of 100 million takes time.
 
Last edited:
Vallicanus said:
What a stupid statement.
Click to expand...

So you continue to support all the oppressive measures Western governments took against their own populations in the name of combatting Covid over the past two years?

Notice how seamlessly the media machine shifts from pushing the vaxx program to full-on anti-Russia propaganda. And notice how it's the same people who march in lockstep with the propaganda.
 
Northener said:
Not a piece of paper it is the nucleus of the NATO, an attack on one member is an attack on all. NATO is funded as defense organization.

Biden has imo the right timing an right combination of strength and of restraint, and let's not overestimate 1 person, it's the whole administration. But I agree it gives a difference if there is a experienced president in foreign affairs in stead of reigning by twitter or other unguided projectile actions....;)

Germany will catch up, and has made an over night turn, from dove to hawk, nevertheless an upgrade of 100 million takes time.
Click to expand...

Add to that reinforced NATO groups being present in all those border countries. So any Russian attack would immediately involve e.g. US American, British, German, French etc. troops, not just the Poles and Estonians etc. In the first attack, Western soldiers would be dying in the hundreds to thousands, so there is no easy way back from this, NATO would be completely in, in an unpredictable war with Russia which might go nuclear. This is exactly the reason why Russia can't accept an Ukraine in NATO, especially as long as there are such severe disputes about Crimea, the naval base in Sevastopol, the Donbas region and potential American troops, even missiles, in a country which was traditionally part of the Russian nation and sphere, and is in a strategically very important position.

There is no way anyone could equate e.g. Poland with the Ukraine. That's apples and oranges.
 
Riverman said:
Add to that reinforced NATO groups being present in all those border countries. So any Russian attack would immediately involve e.g. US American, British, German, French etc. troops, not just the Poles and Estonians etc. In the first attack, Western soldiers would be dying in the hundreds to thousands, so there is no easy way back from this, NATO would be completely in, in an unpredictable war with Russia which might go nuclear. This is exactly the reason why Russia can't accept an Ukraine in NATO, especially as long as there are such severe disputes about Crimea, the naval base in Sevastopol, the Donbas region and potential American troops, even missiles, in a country which was traditionally part of the Russian nation and sphere, and is in a strategically very important position.

There is no way anyone could equate e.g. Poland with the Ukraine. That's apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

Beside that it's up to the Ukrainians if they want to member of NATO and not of Putin I agree with your story.
 
"Russian Godfathers" is an excellent 3-part BBC documentary from 2005. If you are looking for a wider lens through which to view today's events, I recommend it.

The first part, "The Fugitive," focuses on the exiled oligarch Boris Berezovsky and his campaign against Putin, with particular attention to his funding of the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. The segment closes with Berezovsky meeting with his new business partner, Neil Bush, younger brother of then president GW. Yes, before we had Hunter Biden sitting on the board of Burisma, we had the Bush clan lining their pockets with the same sorts of people in pursuit of the very same agenda

It’s Russian revolution with a difference. It's 2004 and the billionaire Oligarch, Boris Berezovsky, is attempting to overturn President Putin of Russia from the quiet of the south of England. The exile, whose personal fortune is estimated at £800 million, fled Russia in 2000 and now leads a comfortable life in political asylum at his palatial home outside London. The Fugitive follows Berezovsky’s political wheeling and dealing as he attempts to turn the UK to his world view, destabilises Latvia with one visit, funds the Orange revolution in Ukraine, forms alliances with key US figures and foments dissent inside Russia.


The second part, "The Prisoner," looks at Putin's alleged persecution of Mikhail Khodorkhovsky. If the first part puts Berezovsky in a bad light (or maybe it was impossible to make him appear sympathetic?), this chapter seems slightly biased toward Khodorkovsky. We get side trips to Tel Aviv for interviews with Leonid Nevzlin, Khodorkhovksy's partner in Yukos Oil, the company that Putin expropriated from them in 2003. We also hear from lots of disenchanted Texas oil men and the international lawyer Robert Amsterdam, who represented Khodorkhovsky at his trial.

The battle between President Putin and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. The trial of Russia’s once richest man, oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and the dismemberment of Yukos, the multi billion dollar gas and oil company he'd created. The episode follows the trial from the inside and talks to all the major players. Contributors include the lawyers, the parents, the bit players caught up in it all – and, of course, Khodorkovsky’s business partner, Nevzlin, who reveals his outspoken views about the corruption of the regime from exile in Israel.


The third part, "The Politician," is the most balanced and, for me, the most revealing, examining parts of Russian society that I had never seen before. The focus is on the mayor of Moscow, Yuri Luzhkov, who comes across as a vulgar opportunist responsible for desecrating the architecture of Moscow. But lots of interesting characters and scenes in this third episode.

With fellow oligarchs Khodorkovsky banished to a Siberian prison and Berozovsky in exile, Luzhkov, the mayor of Moscow, and his wife are the last elected opposition to Putin. They also happen to be the richest couple in the country, and that is their Achilles heel. This episode focuses on the billionaire mayor and his wife who preside over one of the most corrupt, violent and spectacular cities on Earth.











 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 304274 times.

Back
Top