Russia Invades Ukraine

[eZyT]

Russia Must Pay

Deterrence has failed. Now it’s time for Putin’s defeat.

newsletters.theatlantic.com

Note: "take in refugees" should be an undodgeable responsibility of going to war.

'Third, directly target the assets of Russian oligarchs. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, a small number of Russian citizens have grown both fantastically rich and disproportionately powerful. These Russian families park immense yachts in European ports, enjoy access to prime real estate in European capitals, and treat the world as their playground.'



So oligarch is a euphemism for horrible crooked entitled powerful c *smile* s ?

therefore Clive Palmer and Gina Rhinehart are Australian Oligarchs,

correct?

Is that what the AO's are that LNP hand out like lollies every happy genocide day?

 

[spook]

'Third, directly target the assets of Russian oligarchs. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, a small number of Russian citizens have grown both fantastically rich and disproportionately powerful. These Russian families park immense yachts in European ports, enjoy access to prime real estate in European capitals, and treat the world as their playground.'



So oligarch is a euphemism for horrible crooked entitled powerful c *smile* s ?

therefore Clive Palmer and Gina Rhinehart are Australian oligarchs,

correct?

I'd say.

 

[Harry]

'Third, directly target the assets of Russian oligarchs. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, a small number of Russian citizens have grown both fantastically rich and disproportionately powerful. These Russian families park immense yachts in European ports, enjoy access to prime real estate in European capitals, and treat the world as their playground.'



So oligarch is a euphemism for horrible crooked entitled powerful c *smile* s ?

therefore Clive Palmer and Gina Rhinehart are Australian Oligarchs,

correct?

Is that what the AO's are that LNP hand out like lollies every happy genocide day?

So you're asking fat rich powerful westerners to ban and freeze out their fat rich powerful Russian mates?

 

[DavidSSS]

A bit of perspective from someone who was a diplomat in the USSR many years ago:

https://johnmenadue.com/ukraine-shrinks-again/

So, why are we trying to have a cold war with Russia? Seems silly to me, forcing Russia onto a corner and then crying about their reaction seems silly to me.

DS

 

[mrposhman]

A bit of perspective from someone who was a diplomat in the USSR many years ago:

https://johnmenadue.com/ukraine-shrinks-again/

So, why are we trying to have a cold war with Russia? Seems silly to me, forcing Russia onto a corner and then crying about their reaction seems silly to me.

DS

Sounds a bit of an apologist for Putin. States down the bottom around genocide. I've seen zero reports of genocide in Ukraine. In fact the4re are numerous articles siting fake reports of genocide and others indicating that those enacting any sort of genocide in Ukraine as being the pro-Russian fighters.

Putin’s absurd genocide claims cannot hide his war crimes in Ukraine

Russian President Vladimir Putin likes to claim that an anti-Russian genocide is underway in Ukraine but in reality he is upset by the historical loss of influence suffered by representatives of the Russian state.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

This is a serious issue, as if there was actually genocide occurring, I support any action to protect those civilians (in any country) from that fate. Unfortunately this again sounds like baseless and false rhetoric to support the invasion. If genocide was indeed the reason for the invasion, then they would only have needed to invade and if needed annex the Donbas region, so why are Russia also in the rest of Ukraine. Its a bizarre support line that has zero sense in reality.

If you want to be contrarian thats fine, but history shows the aggressor here, and its not like its the 1st time. Putin has previously invaded Georgia, Ukraine previously, Crimea (in retaliation for losing his puppet government in an election) and now again he targets Ukraine.

Your rhetoric is strange on this, statements that NATO "amass" troops on Russias border, do you even know how many troops they have in the region and in each country, the country with the most permanent NATO troops is Poland that have 5,000, the rest are all well below 2,000. Hardly some sort of invading force is it??

 

[AngryAnt]

I think Ukraine and Georgia are different than the baltic states and most of Eastern Europe as they have much closer historical ties and claims of sovereignty.

So much for the right of people to choose their own independence and autonomy, these are trumped by "historical ties" and "claims of sovereignty" I guess. Why do you support the Russians of the "independent" areas of Ukraine to their right to self determination but not the right of Ukrainians to have the same?

It's true Russia is not as strong as the USSR was - but they've been steadily building up military strength over Putin's dictatorship. They'd like to get back there.

 

[Baloo]

I imagine when Pubs start running out of Chicken Kiev we'll see more interest in the conflict/invasion from the masses.

 

[jb03]

I imagine when Pubs start running out of Chicken Kiev we'll see more interest in the conflict/invasion from the masses.

Dunno, seems to have grabbed hold of the masses to me. People who normally have no interest seem to be talking about it, helped by lots of images pining about the internet.

 

[Baloo]

Dunno, seems to have grabbed hold of the masses to me. People who normally have no interest seem to be talking about it, helped by lots of images pining about the internet.

Have you checked the Pubs?

 

[DavidSSS]

The opportunities have existed for this to have been sorted out peacefully years ago. The west has pushed NATO towards Russia, pissing them off. The Russians have sabre rattled and threatened Ukraine. The Minsk accords have been broken by the West and the government they back, the Russians have encouraged, supported and supplied regions of Ukraine to secede.

Both sides throw accusations around, both sides push each other to the edge, and now here we are.

Simplistic analyses which ignore history are just that, simplistic.

As for Ukraine choosing their own leaders, when Russia installs a compliant regime I agree that is denying the people of Ukraine their own choice of government, but when the West engineers a coup I see that as the exact same thing.

Both sides pushing each other, there is blame on both sides, even the conservative Thomas Friedman is saying this, yet it's all Russia's fault according to many here.

NATO has no reason to exist if Russia is not their enemy, NATO's expansion has only one purpose - to upset and threaten Russia.

The irony here is that NATO is looking pretty useless at the moment so they have basically f*cked up. Putin will get away with invading Ukraine and it could all have been prevented if only there was a bit more give and take and a lot less pushing the limits on both sides.

DS

 

[jb03]

The opportunities have existed for this to have been sorted out peacefully years ago. The west has pushed NATO towards Russia, pissing them off. The Russians have sabre rattled and threatened Ukraine. The Minsk accords have been broken by the West and the government they back, the Russians have encouraged, supported and supplied regions of Ukraine to secede.

Both sides throw accusations around, both sides push each other to the edge, and now here we are.

Simplistic analyses which ignore history are just that, simplistic.

As for Ukraine choosing their own leaders, when Russia installs a compliant regime I agree that is denying the people of Ukraine their own choice of government, but when the West engineers a coup I see that as the exact same thing.

Both sides pushing each other, there is blame on both sides, even the conservative Thomas Friedman is saying this, yet it's all Russia's fault according to many here.

NATO has no reason to exist if Russia is not their enemy, NATO's expansion has only one purpose - to upset and threaten Russia.

The irony here is that NATO is looking pretty useless at the moment so they have basically f*cked up. Putin will get away with invading Ukraine and it could all have been prevented if only there was a bit more give and take and a lot less pushing the limits on both sides.

DS

When one country decides to invade another, not sure how you can shed any blame on the country being invaded.

 

[DavidSSS]

When one country decides to invade another, not sure how you can shed any blame on the country being invaded.

So The Allies should not have invaded Italy in 1944 then?

Sorry, you are being too simplistic there. The invasion of Ukraine did not occur in a vacuum, it occurred in the context of politics being played in Eastern Europe. Ukraine is the meat in the sandwich really, the fault is with both Russia and NATO who have been prodding each other ever since the end of the Cold War. NATO's expansion has been, and this is deliberate, a provocation to Russia. Russia have now effectively said: this far but no further.

FFS people really need to watch that video posted on page 2 of this thread. The USA and NATO knew exactly what they were doing provoking Russia. Germany and France certainly knew as they wanted to cool the situation down but the USA didn't.

DS

 

[MD Jazz]

Dud-Mo and Voldemort I would let off with regular bashings and seizure of all assets. Mince, a punch in the guts and a slap in the face would do.

I think a mild Chinese burn would stop mince in his tracks

 

[Giardiasis]

So much for the right of people to choose their own independence and autonomy, these are trumped by "historical ties" and "claims of sovereignty" I guess. Why do you support the Russians of the "independent" areas of Ukraine to their right to self determination but not the right of Ukrainians to have the same?

It's true Russia is not as strong as the USSR was - but they've been steadily building up military strength over Putin's dictatorship. They'd like to get back there.

You are twisting my words into an argument I didn’t make. You made the claim without NATO Russia would have taken over Eastern Europe I argue that is not true with Ukraine and Georgia as exceptions given the reasons outlined. Where have I not supported Ukrainian self determination?

Where do you come up with this claim about Russia wanting to take over the former soviets republics? Doing so would cripple Russia they can barely look after themselves let alone take on the enormous financial cost of having to control those areas. It’s rather moot even if you are right.

 

[Giardiasis]

Correct me if I'm wrong but NATO have only been the initial aggressor in Afghanistan (though the Sept 11th terrorist attack and the Talibans protection of Al-Qaeda could be seen as providing legitimacy).

NATO are a defensive pact, and when taking action (whether that is in Kosovo, Afghanistan etc) this has largely been in a reaction to actions taken within that country. When Serbs were committing genocide in Kosovo, thats a very different reaction from NATO than this pre-emptive strike by Russia.

You forgot Libya.

As I said defensive pacts to one side are aggressive pacts to the other. If Ukraine joined NATO you don’t think they would continue to pursue a hardline stance against Russia? Russia is right to fear Ukraine joining NATO.

 

[AngryAnt]

You are twisting my words into an argument I didn’t make. You made the claim without NATO Russia would have taken over Eastern Europe I argue that is not true with Ukraine and Georgia as exceptions given the reasons outlined. Where have I not supported Ukrainian self determination?

Where do you come up with this claim about Russia wanting to take over the former soviets republics? Doing so would cripple Russia they can barely look after themselves let alone take on the enormous financial cost of having to control those areas. It’s rather moot even if you are right.

You said Russia had historical and sovereign claims over Ukraine - that conflicts directly with a principle of self-determination of the Ukranian people and what they want today.

On the second point, Putin laid it all out in his bizarre speeches of the last few weeks.

On one point you are right though - he can't take back all those territories, because NATO exists. Whoops, tbere goes your "NATO shouldn't exist" argument.

 

[Giardiasis]

You said Russia had historical and sovereign claims over Ukraine - that conflicts directly with a principle of self-determination of the Ukranian people and what they want today.

On the second point, Putin laid it all out in his bizarre speeches of the last few weeks.

On one point you are right though - he can't take back all those territories, because NATO exists. Whoops, tbere goes your "NATO shouldn't exist" argument.

I said they had claims to it doesn’t mean I agree with it. Russia see Ukraine and Georgia very differently from the Baltic states and Eastern Europe. They tolerated Baltic NATO membership they said they wouldn’t tolerate Georgia and Ukraine and they have fought wars now over both.

I agree the Russian state impedes Ukrainian self determination but so does the Ukrainian state in eastern Ukraine impede their Russian speaking population from self determination. States only argue for self determination when it suits them it is not a guiding principle of the international order. The US was more than happy to interfere with Ukrainian affairs to topple the sitting president in 2014.

Even without NATO, Russia doesn’t have the capability to hold Eastern Europe, that’s the argument. There was never any reason for NATO to exist post 1991 all it has done is led to the current crisis.

 

[eZyT]

Russia kicked out of Eurovision Contest.

glam-trans disco death metal calisthenics fans will control The Kremlin by sundown.

 

[AngryAnt]

I said they had claims to it doesn’t mean I agree with it. Russia see Ukraine and Georgia very differently from the Baltic states and Eastern Europe. They tolerated Baltic NATO membership they said they wouldn’t tolerate Georgia and Ukraine and they have fought wars now over both.

I agree the Russian state impedes Ukrainian self determination but so does the Ukrainian state in eastern Ukraine impede their Russian speaking population from self determination. States only argue for self determination when it suits them it is not a guiding principle of the international order. The US was more than happy to interfere with Ukrainian affairs to topple the sitting president in 2014.

Even without NATO, Russia doesn’t have the capability to hold Eastern Europe, that’s the argument. There was never any reason for NATO to exist post 1991 all it has done is led to the current crisis.

Yep, fair points G.

On your last point, you could argue that retaining NATO was unnecessary post the Soviet collapse and was the US turning the knife. To imagine that Russia would have peaceably developed given its politically and economically corrupt systems post USSR seems unrealistic to me though - Russia may not currently be able to hold what it used to hold but increasing military strength (at the expense of social development) has clearly been a primary goal for Putin. And this is bound up in his KGB/control mindset - he's always been a total (if evil) pragmatist but his recent speeches about righting historical wrongs indicate that he's moving to a more aggressive ideological stance.

Russia is of course complex, and he has an uneasy relationship with the oligarchs or at least most of them. This is one reason they stash money in the UK and seek to influence politics there.

 

[mrposhman]

Just to add on other points made that invalidate the "reasoning" that Putin has used. He has expressed the desire to halt "NATO expansion" into Eastern Europe and reduce the number of troops in Eastern Europe.

What do you think a full scale invasion of Ukraine will do for the number of permanent NATO troops stationed in countries that border Russia and if Ukraine falls, Ukraine?? Will it increase or decrease??