Printable View
I was just wondering what everyone thought about the current situation in that part of the world.
Who do you support? Do you think Putin is justified or flat out wrong with a capitol W.
I understand he threatened Finland and Sweden if they joined NATO.
Do you think this will expand and turn into WWlll?
OK, I'll go first.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
I support neither. Both sides of my family are from there -- father's parents from Ukraine (Zaslav), mother's parents from "White Russia"/Belarus (Minsk) -- but they left during the 1890s, so I've got no skin in the game.Quote:
Who do you support? Do you think Putin is justified or flat out wrong with a capitol W.
I think Putin is justified. I also think that the US has played a dangerous game by adding countries from the former USSR (and its "satellites") to NATO, insofar as doing so has removed much-or-all geographic buffers between Western Europe and Russia. That is, even the idea of having NATO missiles in Ukraine -- Russia's next-door neighbor -- is unacceptable.
Dunno... IIRC, they're OK with their "neutrality".Quote:
I understand he threatened Finland and Sweden if they joined NATO.
Nope. Ukraine isn't part of NATO; heck, NATO really isn't part of NATO, anymore. We (the US) drew-down our forces in West Germany post-1989, following German reunification, so we're no longer in a position to become involved. As for West European countries, I don't see them going to war; certainly not Germany! And France? I doubt it. So who's left? Those countries that were part of the USSR, and those that were "satellites" of the USSR. I don't see any of them fighting (at least, not over Russian reclamation of all-or-part of Ukraine).Quote:
Do you think this will expand and turn into WWlll?
This is what is happening in my view. Putin's move into Ukraine can not be justified no matter what he claims his reasoning is. That matters not. What does matter is it has given the new alliance, Russia/China, a chance on the world stage to become very important. That might have been Putin's real reason for invading the Ukraine with China's acquiescence. You now have two choices. Does the West go to war with Russia over Ukraine which is not likely given NATO's charter, or does the West engage with the New Alliance seeking a diplomatic solution? Who knows, there might be a few more chest pieces to be put on the board yet.
OTH, there is always the possibility that some isolated local incident between Russian and Western military units that escalates out of control. That would clear the carefully laid out chess board and then you have to deal with the fog of war.
A hell of a game all sides are playing for very high stakes.
Bob
Could a Mod fix the title to this thread. It's Ukraine not The Ukraine. sheeesh
Ukraine, It depends on what you want to believe. You won’t find the truth from mainstream media though.
My understanding is that Ukraine has always remained part of Russia and Putin has been invited in to remove the Khazarian mafia who have been running the place since 2014 following a corrupt election rigged by the CIA and George Soros’ gang.
For those who ask: “Why does Ukraine matter"?
This is why Ukraine matters.
It is the largest country by area in Europe and has a population of over 40 million.
Ukraine ranks
:
1st in Europe in proven recoverable reserves of uranium ores;
2nd place in Europe and 10th place in the world in terms of titanium ore reserves;
2nd place in the world in terms of explored reserves of manganese ores (2.3 billion tons, or 12% of the world's reserves);
2nd largest iron ore reserves in the world (30 billion tons);
2nd place in Europe in terms of mercury ore reserves;
3rd place in Europe (13th place in the world) in shale gas reserves (22 trillion cubic meters)
4th in the world by the total value of natural resources;
7th place in the world in coal reserves (33.9 billion tons)
Ukraine is an important agricultural country
:
1st in Europe in terms of arable land area;
3rd place in the world by the area of black soil (25% of world's volume);
1st place in the world in exports of sunflower and sunflower oil;
2nd place in the world in barley production and 4th place in barley exports;
3rd largest producer and 4th largest exporter of corn in the world;
4th largest producer of potatoes in the world;
5th largest rye producer in the world;
5th place in the world in bee production (75,000 tons);
8th place in the world in wheat exports;
9th place in the world in the production of chicken eggs;
16th place in the world in cheese exports.
Ukraine can meet the food needs of 600 million people.
Ukraine is an important industrialised country
:
1st in Europe in ammonia production;
Europe's 2nd’s and the world’s 4th largest natural gas pipeline system;
3rd largest in Europe and 8th largest in the world in terms of installed capacity of nuclear power plants;
3rd place in Europe and 11th in the world in terms of rail network length (21,700 km);
3rd place in the world (after the U.S. and France) in production of locators and locating equipment;
3rd largest iron exporter in the world
4th largest exporter of turbines for nuclear power plants in the world;
4th world's largest manufacturer of rocket launchers;
4th place in the world in clay exports
4th place in the world in titanium exports
8th place in the world in exports of ores and concentrates;
9th place in the world in exports of defence industry products;
10th largest steel producer in the world (32.4 million tons).
A wise man a long time ago once said that only the dead will not see any more war. Anything can be rationalized anyway. It's complicated of course. I hope the best thing happens. But I don't know what that is.
I personally don't think that another country ever has the right to invade and install their own Govt, annex or conquer another country regardless of their perceived justification. That is exactly how Britain got into war with Germany in 1939.
I think Putin could have at least started by airing his grievances and trying some diplomacy.
He has made veiled threats that if any other country gets in his way he will press the button and I think he's capable of doing it.
It has been said that however World War III is fought, World War IV will be fought with bows and arrows.
Putin has already warned Finland about even thinking of joining NATO. Finland has fought 2 wars with the old Soviet Union and lost territory to them and had to pay massive repatriations to them after WWII. Putin's style of dealing with neighbouring countries seems not much different from the old Soviet Union. New boss same as the old boss.
Bob
I suppose you can't expect to much civility from an ex high KGB Officer.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
Yeah the Russians. They get invited places. They got "invited" to Czechoslovakia in 1968, stayed till 1989.
Why do you think the Czechs joined the NATO? It was the previous experience with their Slavic brothers.
WOW, can of worms here!!
To think that the U.S. has the ability to add countries at will to join NATO is a joke.
Countries must WANT to join and are Unanimously voted in if it does happen at all.
If invading another county unprovoked to conquer the people and "aquire" the country is acceptable to anyone, I feel for you.
Going backwards is where this is headed for Russia. This will cost the people who live there and everyone else as well.
If anyone thinks Germany and France will not defend NATO countries think again.
Putin lies, cannot be trusted by anyone and China will watch as a precedent to what would happen if they decide to do the same.
Who will be the next if nothing is done.
I will freely admit that I don't know what I'm alking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneandstrop
I thought Ukrain was in NATO already, if that is the case why aren't the Nato countries already in Ukrain. I thought that was what NATO was all about, looking after each other.
Like I said, I don't know what I'm talking about probably.
I think the real danger here is Russia could launch crippling cyber attacks in the U.S and NATO countries which could bring them to their knees. That could be viewed as an act of war.
Things could deteriorate badly in Ukraine and casualties could start to pile up massively.
That's why this is a very dangerous game. Putin holds the key. Does he really have a plan here.
He refers to history and how Ukraine has been related to Russia thus giving him justifications.
Well, what if Mexico invaded Texas and New Mexico or Britain invaded Canada?
On the other hand what if Mexico signed a treaty with Russia and he put ICBMs 100 miles south of El Paso? Oh, wait we went through that with Cuba.
By the way I entitled this thread "The Ukraine" not referring to the country title but to the situation or crisis.
No they are not part.Quote:
Originally Posted by STF
The sole reason for the invasion is because they want to be part of NATO and Russia will not allow it - ever!
And yes, that is what NATO is about. Slogan - an attack on one is an attack on all.
The fear from the Baltic states is this will continue to them which NATO is already preparing for collectively.
It will be world war if Russia attempts to invade any of them.
Don't even joke about a war between Britain and Canada. I am English and also a Citizen of Canada,.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
I would of course fight for Canada (probably), but against my family in England!!
Thanks Spendur, I doubt if I can ever sleep again.
Now you know how some Russians and Ukrainians are feeling right now. They are in that boat right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by STF
Bob
Yes, Putin knows Ukraine is not in NATO and is using that to his advantage. He knows full well NATO can't militarily counter him in Ukraine because the NATO charter only concerns NATO countries. The Baltic states, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, are NATO members and if Putin were to attack anyone of them it would trigger a direct military response on Russia from NATO. I have no idea if Putin is nuts enough to do that and run a real risk of starting WWIII. Your guess is as good as mine or the next guys regarding that. Lets hope not anyway.
Bob
Well, I see this from a totally different perspective. This is all about money, greed, control and power. No political gains or land acquisitions. Putin isn't a stupid man. Far from it! The world is trying to change the carbon footprint of everything. Fossil fuel will take a backseat in the near future. That means more electric modes of all transportation.
How, you say, does that have anything to do with this? Lithium! Ukraine has large deposits of lithium. Control the lithium and you control the market and maybe the world when it comes batteries that will be needed to power all the transportation. Maybe not today but tomorrow. There are also large deposits of lithium in South America countries. Who are their allies? Why Russia of course.
Besides, Ukraine is and has always been part of Russia. It is what it is!
Yes and Texas and N.M and Southern California was always part of Mexico and Spain. We pretty much forced them out but there are still many spanish speaking folks there and many who look fondly on Mexico.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johntoad57
It is what it is. Does that give Mexico a right to want it back?
My view is Putin wants a buffer from the West first and foremost. After that he has a score of types to settle with Ukraine and that is driving him.
Ukraine might have been part of Russia but they have their own language and culture apart from Russia. In a way it's like Hawaii. It's a state now but they had a King and their own language and culture too and still do.
Both World Wars were escalated by treaties with "All for One" clauses like Article 5, I would like to think we have learned from the past..
It is quite apparent that we haven't ..
The USA is war weary, other than the Washington Elites, I haven't heard one person on either side of the aisle call for US troop involvement.
Personally, yes I want to help, but I don't think the USA or NATO is in any position to get involved right now..
2/3 of NATO haven't paid what they owe in years, perhaps this might incentivize them..
Sweden and Finland were warned about joining NATO, but they also have pretty capable forces that would really help bolster NATO and deter Putin if they joined..
Russian Federation's foreign affairs spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said yesterday: "Finland and Sweden should not base their security on damaging the security of other countries and their accession to NATO can have detrimental consequences and face some military and political consequences."
Looking at a map you can see why that is a fear for Russia, the Baltic is easily choked off, BTW can somebody explain Kallingrad to me ?? I don't get that arraignment at all. Yes I already searched it and read but it still makes no sense..
Although I have zero proof my opinion is that Ukraine was denied NATO membership because everyone felt this was coming, the opposite was also a possibility that NATO membership might have stayed Putin's hand.. It is also my understanding that Ukraine deployed troops to Afghanistan with NATO, how does that work ???
We won't really know until Putin threatens a NATO country ..
My biggest fear right now is the Media Talking Heads mentioning that, "Cyber-Attacks" could trigger Article 5, talk like that worries me ...
I admire the Ukrainian people and their spirit to fight, but I fear for innocent lives, not sure if you have seen and heard the vid of the Russian APC crushing a fleeing Ukrainian car, that is pretty shocking as to how brutal war is ..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCBaH1Pjywc
My understanding is the civilian in the car survived as of now
Just think if the U.S invaded Mexico for whatever reason. What is the world going to do? They might do the same as they are doing now. In the end any major power can do as they please.
If China invaded Taiwan it would be the same. A lot of talk and nothing else.
In the end it's a matter of who the foreign player is and how rational he is and how far the world is willing to go for a faceoff.
It very well could be a repeat of the Cuban Missile Crisis not too far down the road. I hope not but history has shown again and again if you do not face a bully he keeps taking and getting stronger.
The situation in Ukraine has been brewing since the end of the Cold War in some ways.
The West I feel wasted a huge opportunity to bring the Russian nation into the European community, in many ways the end of the Warsaw pact was seen as an "end of history" scenario, with the feeling that liberal democracy was the inevitable end state of the world. In that scenario, Russia in particular as well as places like the former Yugoslavia were left in a limbo bereft of any real support, and what was labelled as support was mostly an excuse for looting, not just by the mafia in those places but by Western powers themselves, particularly the US, where various schemes were drawn up for the US government by the Harvard Institute for International Development which contained guys like Andrei Schleifer, Larry Summers, Jeffrey Sachs, etc.
Andrei Schleifer was a personal adviser to Anatoly Chubais, who managed the privatization of former state industries under the Yeltsin government through what was termed "shock therapy", the initial implementation of which was under the auspices of Jefrrey Sachs, the US appointed economics adviser to Russia, collaborating with Yegor Gaidar, Yeltsins Deputy PM.
Schleifer would eventually be investigated by the General Accounting Office for insider trading in the Russian securities market, along with his wife Nancy Zimmerman, resulting in USAID pulling the plug on HIID.
A swift and radical re-orientation of the Russian economy to the "free market" followed. Various US backed schemes were used to supposedly invest in the economy, one of the most destructive being the shares for loans scheme. The auctions for the scheme were rigged to the point where shares were being sold for incredibly low amounts, cents on the dollar kind of thing. The Harvard Management Company was the only foreign entity allowed to participate in the auctions. Needless to say large shares were acquired by Harvard in important companies such as Novolipetsk due to the rigged auctions. The oligarchs enabled by these schemes ended up controlling an estimated 50-70% of the economy. The major player was Boris Berezovsky, who had already made a lot of money from the illicit activities of his own consultant firm, LogoVAZ, during Perestroika. Notably, current UK billionaire, Roman Abramovich, was something of a right hand man to Berezovsky.
Needless to say, the economic "reforms" were a disaster when implemented, but further yet, whilst they were going on they were deeply unpopular with the population, so much so that Chubais was at one point labeled the most hated man in Russia, and he ended up relying on Yeltsin to pass the reforms by decree, bypassing the parliamentary process.
The Yeltsin presidency became more and more unpopular, the president having an approval rating of 6% going into the 1996 election, the communist opposition leader Gennady Zyugenov was the clear front runner and was expected to oust Yeltsin. The oligarchs pumped about $200 million into the Yeltsin campaign, and Berezovky's near monopoly on the media allowed constant propaganda against Zyugenov, in the midst of this the Clinton administration send advisors to help Yeltsins' failing public image out, and lot's of cash. Under campaigning rules Zyugenov couldn't spend more than $3 million on his campaign, while estimates put the campaign spending for Yeltsin at anywhere from $700 million to $2.5 billion. At this time the IMF gave Russia a $10 billion emergency fund, ostensibly to buoy the poor economic situation. Most of the money dissappeared.
The result of this economic plundering was that the life expectancy fell from 65 years to 57 years, capital flight was estimated at $1-2 billion a month, Russian GDP fell by half, surplus deaths from poverty, substance abuse, was is estimated at 5-6 million between 1992 and 2000.
And who was watching from the sidelines? None other than Vladimir Putin, eventual successor to Yeltsin. Yeltsin thought Putin would follow through on the shock therapy, but soon after his election, he gathered the oligarchs to the Kremlin and basically told them that everything they had plundered was going back to the state. Many fled to cities like London, which is now awash in oligarch cash, currently being targeted by sanctions, yet most was made under the prior admin.
So what was the average Russians experience of US style capitalism, democracy and "human rights" after the end of communism. Well not great would be to put it mildly.
Not to dismiss the personal wealth Putin has looted for himself in the years since, but the average Russian is much better off today than they were in the 90's.
And on top of that, in the military sphere, NATO was eating up all it could, much of this pushed diplomatically by Helmut Kohl, Chancellor of Germany. Kohl's Defense Minister suggested a more cautious approach to expansion. To quote Defense Minister Genscher, "Foreign policy was (for Kohl) like mowing grass for hay, you had to gather what you had cut in case of a thunderstorm." The gains weren't exactly a curse for Washington. Regardless of the actual reasons for expansion, Russia was obviously being treated with mistrust at a time it was also being robbed blind, not a winning 'realpolitik' strategy in the long run.
Bismarck called politics 'the art of the possible' but in the heady days at the end of the Cold War, the possible was neglected for what we thought would be inevitable.
As far as Ukraine, it isn't exactly clear if there wasn't direct interference from the USA in the fall of the Yanukovych government. We have the leaked Nuland-Pyatt call for sure, not to mention acknowledged US operations to collapse democratically elected governments such as the Mohammed Mossadegh government of Iran. And that's just the ones we are allowed to know about officially. Calls to "defend democracy" ring hollow, as well as calls for respect for sovereignty. If the powers who continually talk about how important the rules are, keep breaking the rules, at some point another power is going to take the chance also. All sides have been lazy in implementing Minsk II, with the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission reporting violations from all sides, a side effect of Russian armed insurgents and huge weapons shipments from the USA. Ukraine is a victim of a proxy war that was simply frozen after the wall fell.
Politics is a dirty business from a town with a population of a thousand with little dirt to New York City with a lot. On a national scale the dirt becomes orders of magnitude greater and on the international stage it's greater still.Quote:
Originally Posted by thp001
The U.S has it's fingerprints on regime changes all over the world going back a very long time. Other countries do too and it was probably going on during the Roman Empire.
You could go back to WWll or heck before that and argue what was Ukraine and who was it aligned with and who has a hand in the current situation. No doubt there is plenty of blame to go around. Who knows, if our generals after WWll had their way they would have invaded Russia and gotten rid of Stalin and history might be different.
The fact is right now Ukraine is an independent sovereign country and it has been invaded by a foreign power. You can try and ameliorate Russia as you please but the basic fact is just the facts. A bankrobber can justify hitting a bank because they destroyed his business but he's still a bank robber. Really, when it comes down to it you can justify just about anything and the history of the world is replete with colonialism and Imperialism and all the other isms you can think of. Everyone is guilty of something.
I don't know much about the geopolitical landscape between Russia and Ukraine, but what I do know is.
Ukraine was not always part of Russia, it was part of the former USSR and only because it was annexed. If it were always part of Russia it would be called Russia, not Ukraine.
I was in the British Army (Royal Tank Regiment) during the cold war and spent many hours in vehicle recognition lectures and lectures about Russian tactics etc, every exercise (maneuvers) we did, the USSR was the imaginary enemy.
My humble opinion is that the west (NATO) is worried, even frightened of Russia, in the same way Russia is frightened of NATO.
Putin has the button and can with one finger destroy the States, the world in fact. The US could do exactly the same to Russia and also the world so this mutual destructive power kept the status quo. I don't think the day will ever dawn when we see NATO boots on the ground in Ukraine unless Russia withdraws first, and even then I don't think it's likely.
Now of course we have a Russian leader, ex KGB that wants the glory days of the USSR back and will I think actually press the button if he feels pushed.
I of course did a lot of NBC training as a soldier in the Cold War and know that I don't want to live through a Nuclear exchange and the radiation sickness, nuclear winter etc that would follow, forget duck and cover, that will not help at all. Assuming the blast and shock wave didn't kill me first, I live 45 minutes from Detroit and 30 minutes from the Nuclear Power Station so I imagine I am very close to a primary target. For the best probably.
Of course, Russia is not nearly as big and powerful as the former USSR was, a situation that will change if Putin gets his way in the fomer USSR countries like Ukraine.
On the up side, the Ukrainians will be able to stop footing the bill for the upkeep of Chernobyl and Pripyat.
Just my humble opinion of course.
As amazing and interesting a country's history is pre it becoming an independent sovereign country, once that country is invaded by an aggressor nation knowing that background will not get the aggressor country to stop it's invasion and leave. The only relevant question post invasion becomes what the world will do to stop the invasion and get the aggressor nation to leave.
Active military intervention in Ukraine will likely not come from NATO as it's charter only covers NATO members of which Ukraine is not. The UN is not likely to intervene militarily as both Russia and China are permanent members of the UN Security Council and will no doubt veto any such action. That leaves only a coalition of independent countries to intervene militarily. In any military intervention there is always the risk of starting WWIII in the shadows.
Then there is the option of a negotiated truce and withdrawal of Russian military forces involving China backed up by sanctions against Russia.
Lastly, do nothing and let the chips fall where they may. No matter which it turns out to be Ukraine's citizens will bear the brunt of the suffering as long as the present invasion is allowed to continue.
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
"Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." — Lavrentiy Beria
I read this morning that the UN votes on Russia/Ukraine will have no veto's. Just a majoriy vote is all that will be needed to take whatever action they deem fit!
Please provide a link to where you read that. I believe you may have misread the article.Quote:
Originally Posted by STF
Bob
UNITED NATIONS -- Russia vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution on Friday demanding that Moscow immediately stop its attack on Ukraine and withdraw all troops, a defeat the United States and its supporters knew was inevitable but said would highlight Russia’s global isolation.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobH
The vote was 11 in favor, with Russia voting no and China, India and the United Arab Emirates abstaining, which showed significant but not total opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of his country's smaller and militarily weaker neighbor.
The resolution's failure paves the way for supporters to call for a quick vote on a similar resolution in the 193-member U.N. General Assembly, where there are no vetoes. There was no immediate word on a timetable for an assembly vote.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/...raine-83119442
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rhum...=RussiaInsight
If they approve it, it's just a piece of paper.
Thanks for posting the link Steve. I had wondered if they had changed the UN Charter regarding voting in the UN Security Council which is the only vote that counts. The General Assemble can vote whatever it wants and no real action is taken. It still takes a unanimous vote in the UN Security Council for the UN to go to war.
There is a way around it but Russia and China are not boycotting the UN Security Council now to make the even possible.
https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/educat...-nations-korea
Bob
Well this is interesting, multiple sources
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...edium=referral
That is a shift for them, I am also seeing that Finland is thinking about sending arms
It seems the Europeans are finally waking up. Germany is reconsidering the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and building up their military spending.
Kaliningrad is the Westernmost city in Russia and is sandwiched between two other countries, as I recall Poland and one of the Baltic republics. It is cut off from Russia proper and you have to go through one of these countries to get to the rest of Russia. However it is part of Russia with mostly Russians residing there and administered by Russia. As I recall travel documents are issued to folks who need to travel back and forth. It's all a WWll thing with treaties and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
It's kind of like if Boise was part of Canada but you had to travel through the U.S to get there and back.
Like I said I searched it and I read all that, I guess my question really is why is it still open,, But I guess that would be too provocative to shut it downQuote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
This a better example and it does exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Angle
Bob
it's a big and very prosperous city and the biggest port on that sea. That's reason enough.
I get the Boise being part of Canada analogy, it makes a lot of sense.
What about West Berlin, there was a time not that long ago when Berlin was firmly inside East Germany and there was a Motorway with a fence on each side of it to get there (Berlin Corridor).
One of the reasons that Canada is not keen on Quebec separating is that it would cut the country in half. A passport to go from Ontario to New Brunswick or Nova Scotia maybe?
For Russia, the obvious prequel solution would have been to....
join NATO.
Seriously I am afraid we are going to get sucked into this one quite deeply. Putin is obviously losing his marbles. I think we have a new Hitler out there, at least the expansionist, "Liebensraum" part. Is it any different from "manifest destiny"? I like to think that by now the world has learned that it is wrong to expand one's borders at the expense of another country.
Ukraine is NOT a NATO member and we have no legal obligation to come to their aid, nor does NATO. However I do believe that Putin needs to be stopped, and territorial gains rolled back to where the borders were at the time of the breakup of the USSR. Ukraine ought to be an independent nation and able to determine its own destiny without being invaded and punished or even annexed by another country. Ukraine is at least nominally a democracy, and the installation of a pro Russian puppet government would be a terrible thing to happen. And if it can happen to Ukraine, it can happen to other countries. NATO is not as cohesive as it was pre-Reagan. Article 5 had very strong and sharp teeth, back then. I am afraid that smaller countries could be rolled up by the Russian expansionist juggernaut while NATO tries half hearted measures and the US waffles on engaging directly in a European war.
One thing you can be sure of, though. Big business thrives in a war. Buy NASDAQ ETF's and futures, that's all I will say.
It is what it is. Does that give Mexico a right to want it back?
Well it would be fun to see them try