The Ukraine War

[BaaLocks]

2 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I saw they were debating it today however, I do wonder if they really would be fast tracked. They might well be Russia's next target but, if they were admitted and then attacked it would force NATO's hand and result in full scale war between NATO and Russia. NATO and the west (as well as other parts of the world) might prefer to defeat Russia and/or deter them from taking any further action by way of sanctions. Even if Ukraine falls I'm sure sanctions, the likes of which have never been seen before, will remain in place and possibly further enhanced. I'm no economics expert but I do wonder how long Russia can withstand the economic pressures they must be under.

Why would Russia invade Finland? Despite a catastrophic war with them in 1939 there has been no interest since they gained independence in 1917.

To your point on sanctions, Russia has an estimated €600bn of currency reserves, plus significant natural reserves. As an earlier poster said, their GDP is actually small so that will go a long way. Cuba has shown that sanctions impact but don't destroy those who are resilient enough to carry on. The only people who will suffer are the Russian people, just received notification that first friend has lost her job with BP on their exit from Russia.

I know, simple answer, retreat back into Russia then Mr Putin and this will all be solved. I'll tell her to give him a call and make that point.

[cstand]

Margi Willis Estates Ltd
0115 930 5555
https://goo.gl/maps/fFAFKzi5uxFNc31B9

[ramit]

7 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

I saw they were debating it today however, I do wonder if they really would be fast tracked. They might well be Russia's next target but, if they were admitted and then attacked it would force NATO's hand and result in full scale war between NATO and Russia. NATO and the west (as well as other parts of the world) might prefer to defeat Russia and/or deter them from taking any further action by way of sanctions. Even if Ukraine falls I'm sure sanctions, the likes of which have never been seen before, will remain in place and possibly further enhanced. I'm no economics expert but I do wonder how long Russia can withstand the economic pressures they must be under.

i hope Finland does not join Nato, the situation is edgy enough as it is.  For what it's worth, i've seen tweets suggesting Nato promising to fast track membership, but it's hard to keep up with facts with so much disinfo about, fog of war.

Russia has the Chinese market to fall back on, Europe has who to buy their gas from?  i hope this gets resolved by diplomacy.

[BaaLocks]

7 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Isn't this a big problem for an invading army though - having troops who don't really get why they are there and have no appetite for killing those who resist their invasion?

Yes, and it could end up being a way out of this mess. Like in 1917 (we've all seen Doctor Zhivago haven't we?) the troops just down arms and go home. But that won't happen tomorrow or the day after, even if it would be a solution.

[Stive Pesley]

9 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I know, simple answer, retreat back into Russia then Mr Putin and this will all be solved. I'll tell her to give him a call and make that point.

What are your thoughts on how much Putin cares what the Russian people think of him? Is he such a maniac that he doesn't care or will he be spooked if suddenly the protests amongst his own population become too big to supress?

 

[sage]

8 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Why would Russia invade Finland? Despite a catastrophic war with them in 1939 there has been no interest since they gained independence in 1917.

To your point on sanctions, Russia has an estimated €600bn of currency reserves, plus significant natural reserves. As an earlier poster said, their GDP is actually small so that will go a long way. Cuba has shown that sanctions impact but don't destroy those who are resilient enough to carry on. The only people who will suffer are the Russian people, just received notification that first friend has lost her job with BP on their exit from Russia.

I know, simple answer, retreat back into Russia then Mr Putin and this will all be solved. I'll tell her to give him a call and make that point.

There was the continuation war of 1941 to 44 too. @Cisse on here (from Finland) has been saying for years that Putin keeps threatening Finland.

[Leeds Ram]

24 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

Or "Russian tanks choose not to kill civilians in cold blood" - freedom fighter or terrorist / suicide bomber or jihadist. If you've written a PhD thesis you're surely smart enough to see that?

If the soldiers on the ground are unwilling and thus unable to move around easily it amounts to a similar problem they've got i.e., the pacification of Ukraine not being as easy as they imagined. You've picked up on one of the tweets highlighting domestic opposition that the Russians can't easily mitigate but just ignored the many others showing convoys of Russian units that have been taken out by Ukrainian forces. 

[Stive Pesley]

3 minutes ago, sage said:

There was the continuation war of 1941 to 44 too. @Cisse on here (from Finland) has been saying for years that Putin keeps threatening Finland.

Indeed - I learned a new word today

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finlandization

 

 

[ramit]

A national TV reporter obtained an interview with the Russian ambassador to Iceland Mikhaíl V. Noskov and loosely translated said this:  You live in a western society and follow discussions there, do you think anyone outside of Russia will believe your claim of there being actual Nazis in Ukraine?  Mr Noskov appeared stunned and replied with something along the lines of well you are free to believe what you like.

To give an idea of the hysterics at play locally, an online newspaper had a question for readers a few hours later.  Should the Russian ambassador be kicked out of Iceland?  84% answered yes.  Emotions be king, thought matters not.

[Tamworthram]

1 minute ago, BaaLocks said:

Why would Russia invade Finland? Despite a catastrophic war with them in 1939 there has been no interest since they gained independence in 1917.

To your point on sanctions, Russia has an estimated €600bn of currency reserves, plus significant natural reserves. As an earlier poster said, their GDP is actually small so that will go a long way. Cuba has shown that sanctions impact but don't destroy those who are resilient enough to carry on. The only people who will suffer are the Russian people, just received notification that first friend has lost her job with BP on their exit from Russia.

I know, simple answer, retreat back into Russia then Mr Putin and this will all be solved. I'll tell her to give him a call and make that point.

I'm not saying they would invade Finland but, I assume their reasons for considering joining NATO is because they feel at risk.

As I say, I'm not economist, but I'm sure the sanctions will start to hurt before too long. I also don't know how long their currency reserves will last. 600bn certainly sounds a lot and their GDP is tiny compared to the likes of the US and China but it's still $1.4 trillion. A doubling of interest rates, the Rouble at almost an all time low and the Russian stock exchange struggling to even function doesn't make the situation sound too sustainable.

I know it's the ordinary Russian people that will suffer most from the sanctions (I suspect the vast majority don't want this war any more than people in the west and have no burning desire for Ukraine, or parts of it, to return to the fold) but surely the state, small, medium and big business will suffer as well.

[mozza]

Let her go, Vlad, it's obvious she doesn't want you..

[Eddie]

52 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Isn't this a big problem for an invading army though - having troops who don't really get why they are there and have no appetite for killing those who resist their invasion?

If you are invading someone else's land, it's very difficult to prove that you are in the right. If that invasion is proved to include the use of banned weaponry (cluster and thermobaric armaments), said difficulty becomes a near impossibility.

[BaaLocks]

33 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

What are your thoughts on how much Putin cares what the Russian people think of him? Is he such a maniac that he doesn't care or will he be spooked if suddenly the protests amongst his own population become too big to supress?

It matters a lot, if you go back about 15 pages you will see me suggesting that I don't consider Putin a despot (let's not, we've done it to death) but that was part of my rationale. The Russian people are important to him and up until now he has enjoyed significant popularity - indeed this could well be the first time in his tenure where he is likely to feel a significant groundswell of opposition (Navalny, Nemtsov, Yavlinsky were all irritations - and yes, we all know what happened to two of those - but not really a threat).

It could, to your earlier point, lead to disillusionment in the armed forces but more importantly there are civil fissures that could erupt at any time. Chechnya is no longer a large concern, due to the funding it now receives (ifyou are interested Google images of Grozny, it is like Las Vegas now) but Dagestan, Ossetia and others could see this as opportunity to re-open previous conflicts.

Which is why I repeat, the people pulling the strings at the moment don't understand half of what are the implications of their potential actions. All through the Cold War the one thing that was avoided was destabilisation of Russia, a power vacuum there is potentially catastrpohic for us all. And no, before anyone piles on, that is not me saying let Ukraine fall to prevent that - I'm just saying that is a potential consequence of what has been put in motion on all sides. But there will be little sympathy to prevent it given the sort of tweets and information shared earlier in this thread.

[BaaLocks]

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

If you are invading someone else's land, it's very difficult to prove that you are in the right. If that invasion is proved to include the use of banned weaponry (cluster and thermobaric armaments), said difficulty becomes a near impossibility.

As your namesake would say - we managed it for a good few years. Off topic, but even this thread needs a smile.

 

[1of4]

1 hour ago, BaaLocks said:

Which bit of Ukraine are you referring to that was defining it's own futher? The part given to the Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic as a present from Khruschev in the Soviet times? The bit added on by Stalin when taken from Hungary? The part from Poland? Or the part that joined on the break up of the Austro-Hungarian empire? Or maybe the islands 'given' to Ukraine by Romania?

I don't debate Ukraine has been invaded but if you think it has been a homogenous state with clear borders defined by the ages then I'm sorry to disabuse you of that opinion. It doesn't make the invasion right but it does help understand the thinking of those who also have claim to it - the same way both the UK and Argentina have claim to the Falklands, the way Mauritius and UK have claim to the Chagos islands, the way Spain and UK both believe Gibraltar is theirs. Nobody is at war over those, I grant you, but they are disputed and the world is not so simple that every corner of the world is clearly defined.

As you state the area knowed as Ukraine as come under the rule of many countries. 

I never claimed that Ukraine and it's present borders was an ancient and long established entity.

I was referring to the area that after the breakup of the USSR became the independent country called Ukraine and was recognized as such by the rest of the world and thus was able to make it's own rules.

At the time of becoming an independent country and for some years after it still fell under the influence of Russia. But with passing years this influence deminised, which gave them more control of their own destiny. An episode you seem to be advocating, should be repeated.

Going by your logic, because Ukraine's borders weren't set in the mists of time,  Russia will have the right to invade Ukraine every time Ukraine tries set it's own independence and devine it's own future, if it doesn't fit with Russian ideology.

[Cisse]

1 hour ago, sage said:

There was the continuation war of 1941 to 44 too. @Cisse on here (from Finland) has been saying for years that Putin keeps threatening Finland.

We have been threatened long before Putin. Basically we have been waiting for the next attack since 1945.

[TigerTedd]

4 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

It would, you are right, but they have.

I suppose it’s the like the theory like if Russia pushed the button, the only sensible thing to do really is declare them the winner and not retaliate. Retaliation results in mutual annihilation.

I always thought, in a nuclear war, whoever pushes the button first wins, or everyone looses. Which isn’t really very fair. The aggressor really should get what’s coming to them, but maybe they will over time. 

Let Russia have Ukraine, but financially sanction them into the dark ages for the next 50 years, til they give ukraine back its independence. 

[BaaLocks]

8 minutes ago, 1of4 said:

Going by your logic, because Ukraine's borders weren't set in the mists of time,  Russia will have the right to invade Ukraine every time Ukraine tries set it's own independence and devine it's own future, if it doesn't fit with Russian ideology.

Go on then, find the bit where I suggested that? Have fun!

[BaaLocks]

2 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

Let Russia have Ukraine, but financially sanction them into the dark ages for the next 50 years, til they give ukraine back its independence. 

There are only three options on the table.

OPTION ONE: Leave Ukraine to fight it's own bitter and elongated war with one of two conclusions. Vietnam or Afghanistan style, they grind the aggressor into realising it isn't worth the fight but burn their country to rubble in the process. Or, alternately, they are subsumed either quickly or slowly and become an extension of Russia.

OPTION TWO: Send in troops to help repel Russia and spin the wheel where that one ends, anywhere from stalemate to nuclear annihilation. Your point on sanctions is an extension of this, though imho the last thing they will cause is Putin to throw in the towel and admit he's a busted flush. And sanctions will likely harden opinion against the West, just look at Iraq, Cuba or wherever to see how well they work.

OPTION THREE: Let the conflict play out but negotiate for some form of compromise in the background. This feels like the option the likes of Macron are promoting at the moment.

Russian troops are in Ukraine now, we can argue it till we drop on whether it is right or wrong, whether the reasons are understood, whether Putin is evil or not. And he is not going to retreat or withdraw, no matter how wrong he is to be there. These are the facts, and this is what all parties have to work with.

Horrible though it is to say, the people who will decide how many die in the conflict are not the Russians, who undeniably have the firepower to cause untold misery, but those on the other side who need to decide how much resistance is enough. Czech Republic is one example here, both in 1939 and 1968. They accepted that strong resistance would only lead to extreme casualties, it was unimaginable in both scenarios that sixty years later they would be free, an EU member and independent in every single respect.

And that is where I hope the West have their focus, on ensuring that whichever of the conclusions we end up we do so with the least possible loss of life.

[Alph]

Well done Liz Truss. 

You've got people going out there to earn tiktok follows now. Oh, I mean fight. 

I'm sure they'll be able to tell the difference between one Slav and the next. I'm sure they'll know how to work under extreme stress, possibly operate and maintain weapons. No problem with the language being able to read or communicate. And then there's the matter of insurance for death, injuries etc. 

Wonder if they'll feel good about the fine work of Ukraine's Azov Batalion. Or how they're prepared to be taken prisoner by Russian forces. 

Excellent work Liz. Up there with 

"We'll cut them off at the knees" and suggestions that this is the start of a bigger war with Europe/NATO. 

Is it not enough that Russia is reacting to security threats and conflict in Crimea and Donbas by mounting a full scale assault on Ukraine. Is that not enough truth? 

Does she have to play the whole new Hitler angle. 

Go free citizens of the world. Go to Ukraine and fight for NATO so that NATO doesn't break their treaties officially