Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 15786
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:18 am

For Russia to come back into the fold there would have to be a long term plan. Clearly it can't be with Putin. The Ukraine situation would have to be settled in a satisfactory manner for Ukrainian people, which seems like an impossible task right now : what borders ? How much reparations ? Then some kind of guarantees from Russia to not do it again, and I don't know how you can get that either.

In the meantime the west will have found ways around the sanctions, not to help Russia but making it totally irrelevant, so there might not be a big incentive to bring Russia back into the concert of nations. The idea might be that we tried after the cold war, it ended badly, oh well...
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:20 am

jaro76 wrote:

I agree with you. But IMHO first priority shall be stopping the war. The others are secondary. If we put any of those above stopping the war, we let more and more people die.



Death is the cost many have to pay for freedom.
Tyranny and submission to oppressive authoritarian regimes on the other hand, and ironically, happens a lot more peacefully.
This is a lesson that has been taught countless times throughout history but that we have started to forget since the last time a major conflict was fought over it last century.

You or I don't get to decide the price Ukrainian people should or shouldn't pay for their freedom and to not live in a dysfunctional dictatorship. They do. And they've decided to fight and put their lives on the line.
 
jaro76
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:48 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:29 am

Aesma wrote:
For Russia to come back into the fold there would have to be a long term plan. Clearly it can't be with Putin. The Ukraine situation would have to be settled in a satisfactory manner for Ukrainian people, which seems like an impossible task right now : what borders ? How much reparations ? Then some kind of guarantees from Russia to not do it again, and I don't know how you can get that either.

In the meantime the west will have found ways around the sanctions, not to help Russia but making it totally irrelevant, so there might not be a big incentive to bring Russia back into the concert of nations. The idea might be that we tried after the cold war, it ended badly, oh well...


I would disagree with you. IMHO they were never treated on par with lets say Poland or Baltics. Our banks helped to launder dirty money stolen from Russia. But that is for other discussion why we did that. IMHO we should have a plan ready similar to the one that was ready for ww2 Germany.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 15786
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:30 am

Aaron747 wrote:
I understand the sentiment and rationale for establishing a no-fly zone - but I think enabling it instead of providing it directly is more wise. Direct NATO involvement and potential engagement with Russian forces gives Putin the pretext to tell his domestic audience he was right - that this is indeed all about NATO.


If we get to that point, and aren't incinerated in a nuclear holocaust, what Putin says will not matter anymore.
 
GDB
Posts: 15738
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:33 am

art wrote:
I don't see the Ukrainians being able to stem the Russian advance. They have received thousands of anti-tank missiles (Javelin, NLAW and today I read 2,700 Russian weapons inherited from East Germany are being sent). How many Russian tanks/associated armed armoured vehicles/artillery pieces have been knocked out? If it were a significant number, I am sure Ukraine would be publicising it.

Ukraine has received hundreds or thousands of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. How many Russian aircraft have been downed?

I get the feeling that Russia is advancing inexorably, albeit far more slowly than anticipated by Moscow. Thousands of Ukraine citizens are being slaughtered by Russian artillery, missiles and aircraft. Millions of refugees are to be expected. I hope that plans for resistance after the country has fallen are being implemented. The only way I see Ukraine restoring its liberty is when a combination of sanctions and occupying troop losses through armed resistance forces Putin's hand or forces his removal from power.

My sympathy and admiration to the valiant people of Ukraine.


Putin expected a rapid operation, that the Ukrainian leadership would flee (admittedly so did the US with very recent and bitter experience from Afghanistan), resistance would be limited, that he could ride out any expected sanctions and he thought a divided West would remain so.
The weapons sent also are generally not crew served like artillery for the most part, rather they are man portable anti tank and anti air, so suitable for a protracted partisan style operations, in a part of the world that saw a lot of that last century. Whatever happens to the cities.
I seriously doubt that over a week later he thought that most of the cities would not be in Russian hands and that there would still be a functioning Ukrainian leadership, you can only imagine his reaction to the Ukrainian President becoming an international hero, hence the reported attempts to kill him. Putin’s fragile ego won’t like that.

The fact he had to play the nuclear card is not the sign of a successful operation, rather it is more likely that in now planning to repeat the targeted mass slaughter of civilians using illegal weapons, his Plan B, as seen in Chechnya and in propping up Assad in Syria, he fears a worldwide backlash that might force NATO into sweeping the skies of his so far underperforming Air Force and with SEAD missions, he has to raise that specter of nuclear war, despite Mutually Assured Destruction since he knows otherwise he faces a military humiliation that would be the end of him.
Then again he also has stated ‘if there is no Russia, there is no world’, be interested to hear Jaro76’s take/excuse/denial of that, be aware he did state that in public.

As things stand, he instead faces a determined resistance in a country with 40 million people and a lot of territory. That will bleed his also very underperforming army.
With a collapsing economy too.
 
marcelh
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:50 am

jaro76 wrote:

I would even add to it, that we shall think how to offer Russia equal place, not an outcast position. After ww1 Germany was outcast. WW2 was result. After cold war end, all could join NATO, but not Russia.

And again you are spreading fake news. Russia never applied for NATO membership, that’s how it works (and also admitted by you earlier in this thread)

Well before Putin, when Russia was down, traying hard to become friend, democaracy and integrate, NATO was enlarged to help with historical paranoia in Poland, Baltics etc.

It’s clear they knew they were dealing with.
But no one was looking at Russian historical paranoia. They were treated to a large degree as outcast. One of the reasons why we today where we are.

BS. Russia didn’t want to become NATO member, otherwise they had applied for it (never did). They did cooperate closely with NATO.
[url] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–NATO_relations[/quote]
Nothing about treated as an outcast” before things went south (no pun intended) in 2014:
“On 1 April 2014, NATO unanimously decided to suspend all practical co-operation with the Russian Federation, in response to the Annexation of Crimea, but the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) was not suspended.”
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1471
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:54 am

Let's also not forget that Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons at the fall of the USSR to gain assurances of their own safety.

Doing a deal with Satan doesn't seem to have worked out too well for them in the past, so I can't for one moment blame them for not wanting to do it again.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 15786
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:54 am

jaro76 wrote:
I would disagree with you. IMHO they were never treated on par with lets say Poland or Baltics. Our banks helped to launder dirty money stolen from Russia. But that is for other discussion why we did that. IMHO we should have a plan ready similar to the one that was ready for ww2 Germany.


Yes mistakes were made but Russian leaders were on board with them. Clearly a gradual "decommunization" would have been better, but it's easier said than done. Regardless of that, if Putin had wanted, he could have made Russia at least as successful as China. Russia had plenty of scientists, engineers, innovative people. He chose total corruption instead of competition.
 
SRQLOT
Posts: 853
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:56 am

art wrote:
I don't see the Ukrainians being able to stem the Russian advance. They have received thousands of anti-tank missiles (Javelin, NLAW and today I read 2,700 Russian weapons inherited from East Germany are being sent). How many Russian tanks/associated armed armoured vehicles/artillery pieces have been knocked out? If it were a significant number, I am sure Ukraine would be publicising it.

Ukraine has received hundreds or thousands of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. How many Russian aircraft have been downed?

I get the feeling that Russia is advancing inexorably, albeit far more slowly than anticipated by Moscow. Thousands of Ukraine citizens are being slaughtered by Russian artillery, missiles and aircraft. Millions of refugees are to be expected. I hope that plans for resistance after the country has fallen are being implemented. The only way I see Ukraine restoring its liberty is when a combination of sanctions and occupying troop losses through armed resistance forces Putin's hand or forces his removal from power.

My sympathy and admiration to the valiant people of Ukraine.


Ukraine has been publishing updated russian losses on a daily basis. I have posted most of them.

In polish For some reason there is no easy polish to English translation option like on my computer. And I don’t have the time to translate right now.

russian losses. - are they all damaged or include abandonment and self sabotage?? I don’t know.
Personel - 9166 osób,

Czołgi - 251

Bojowe pojazdy opancerzone - 939

Systemy artyleryjskie - 105

MLRS - 50

Systemy przeciwlotnicze wojenne - 18

Samoloty - 33

Śmigłowce - 37

Pojazdy bojowe - 404

https://wiadomosci.onet.pl/swiat/wojna- ... wo/ztv0qk4
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14915
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 10:59 am

marcelh wrote:
And again you are spreading fake news. Russia never applied for NATO membership, that’s how it works (and also admitted by you earlier in this thread)

Well before Putin, when Russia was down, traying hard to become friend, democaracy and integrate, NATO was enlarged to help with historical paranoia in Poland, Baltics etc.

It’s clear they knew they were dealing with.
But no one was looking at Russian historical paranoia. They were treated to a large degree as outcast. One of the reasons why we today where we are.

BS. Russia didn’t want to become NATO member, otherwise they had applied for it (never did). They did cooperate closely with NATO.
[url] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–NATO_relations

Nothing about treated as an outcast” before things went south (no pun intended) in 2014:
“On 1 April 2014, NATO unanimously decided to suspend all practical co-operation with the Russian Federation, in response to the Annexation of Crimea, but the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) was not suspended.”


Heck, even now Russia is invited to observe NATO wargames.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... orway.html

Best regards
Thomas
 
art
Posts: 4983
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 11:11 am

tommy1808 wrote:
art wrote:
If it were a significant number, I am sure Ukraine would be publicising it..


they do that daily.

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/stat ... 3802541057

Esspechially the Javelin seems to work really well:

https://t.co/3hmMBbdcBI (not available in the EU w/o VPN)
https://twitter.com/JackMurphyRGR/statu ... 1964235781

best regards
Thomas


Thanks for the info.

Heard an interesting story on LBC radio station in London. Cannot vouch for it but apparently a woman in Ukraine rang her mother in Moscow to tell her she was being shelled. Her mother would not believe her. The woman sent images to her mother. Her mother would still not believe she was being shelled. I guess it's a case of

TV news propaganda 1
Reality 0
 
jaro76
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:48 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 11:54 am

marcelh wrote:
jaro76 wrote:

I would even add to it, that we shall think how to offer Russia equal place, not an outcast position. After ww1 Germany was outcast. WW2 was result. After cold war end, all could join NATO, but not Russia.

And again you are spreading fake news. Russia never applied for NATO membership, that’s how it works (and also admitted by you earlier in this thread)

Well before Putin, when Russia was down, traying hard to become friend, democaracy and integrate, NATO was enlarged to help with historical paranoia in Poland, Baltics etc.

It’s clear they knew they were dealing with.
But no one was looking at Russian historical paranoia. They were treated to a large degree as outcast. One of the reasons why we today where we are.

BS. Russia didn’t want to become NATO member, otherwise they had applied for it (never did). They did cooperate closely with NATO.
[url] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–NATO_relations

Nothing about treated as an outcast” before things went south (no pun intended) in 2014:
“On 1 April 2014, NATO unanimously decided to suspend all practical co-operation with the Russian Federation, in response to the Annexation of Crimea, but the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) was not suspended.”[/quote]

I'm basing my opinion on what I read:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book ... tsin-heard

Washington, D.C., March 16, 2018 – Declassified documents from U.S. and Russian archives show that U.S. officials led Russian President Boris Yeltsin to believe in 1993 that the Partnership for Peace was the alternative to NATO expansion, rather than a precursor to it, while simultaneously planning for expansion after Yeltsin’s re-election bid in 1996 and telling the Russians repeatedly that the future European security system would include, not exclude, Russia.


Here: https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/21/worl ... -nato.html
In yet another sign that the disintegration of the Soviet Union was turning global politics upside down, the Russian President, Boris N. Yeltsin, wrote to NATO today saying Russia hoped to join the alliance some time in the future.

Mr. Yeltsin's letter was sent in conjunction with the first meeting ever held at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization between NATO foreign ministers and those of the former Warsaw Pact -- the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and Romania.


https://warontherocks.com/2019/11/promi ... matters-2/

t had been less than a year since Yeltsin was told “Partnership for all, not NATO for some.” He made clear his displeasure at a December 1994 meeting in Budapest of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), which was being upgraded to the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a pan-European security framework. Yeltsin shocked his American and European colleagues by stating, “Europe, even before it has managed to shrug off the legacy of the Cold War, is risking encumbering itself with a cold peace.” He continued:

NATO was created in Cold War times. Today, it is trying to find its place in Europe, not without difficulty. It is important that this search not create new divisions, but promote European unity. We believe that the plans of expanding NATO are contrary to this logic. Why sow the seeds of distrust? After all, we are no longer adversaries, we are partners.
...
Despite Clinton’s efforts, Yeltsin’s remained upset about enlargement but could do nothing to prevent it (as was similarly the case with the Kosovo War in 1999). Russian foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev in mid-1994 had said, “The greatest achievement of Russian foreign policy in 1993 was to prevent NATO’s expansion eastward to our borders.” As it turned out, this achievement was to be short-lived. But the problem for the U.S.-Russia relationship was not so much enlargement per se, but rather that neither the West nor Russia ever found a place for the latter in what Gorbachev had called the “Common European Home.”


Further reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... is-yeltsin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ters-today
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50945596
 
jaro76
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:48 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 11:57 am

Aesma wrote:
jaro76 wrote:
I would disagree with you. IMHO they were never treated on par with lets say Poland or Baltics. Our banks helped to launder dirty money stolen from Russia. But that is for other discussion why we did that. IMHO we should have a plan ready similar to the one that was ready for ww2 Germany.


Yes mistakes were made but Russian leaders were on board with them. Clearly a gradual "decommunization" would have been better, but it's easier said than done. Regardless of that, if Putin had wanted, he could have made Russia at least as successful as China. Russia had plenty of scientists, engineers, innovative people. He chose total corruption instead of competition.


That choice was done well before Putin during Yeltsin times with out help. Look at what Russia was in 90'
They were trying to become democracy. Do you propose that they should have been going China way e.g. full on dictatorship?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 21257
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:08 pm

jaro76 wrote:
I agree with you. But IMHO first priority shall be stopping the war. The others are secondary. If we put any of those above stopping the war, we let more and more people die.


WE are not letting Ukrainians die, Russians are killing them.

One man can stop this instantly. He resides in the Kremlin. Give him a call.
 
User avatar
speedygonzales
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:01 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:19 pm

Commentary from Russian stock analyst (Russian with English subtitles):
https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/14 ... BZPPIj.mp4
Dear stock market, you were close to us, you were interesting, rest in peace dear comrade
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 6194
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:30 pm

jaro76 wrote:
They were trying to become democracy.


Democracies does not come easily. Even success stories like So. Korea and Taiwan took decades of authoritarian rule coupled with economic development to make it a reality. Even with Korea, it took some unrest to kick it over the top.

Same can be said with the on-going struggles of South and Central America's democracies.

Even with Putin in charge, if Russia's economy continued to developed, the leadership succesion would eventually find one who would put it over the top.

But with this war, progress have been pushed back.

bt
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 18159
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:35 pm

Interesting thread of commentary here from a Russia expert who taught at the Naval War College:

https://twitter.com/radiofreetom/status ... 83650?s=21
 
marcelh
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 1:27 pm

jaro76 wrote:
I'm basing my opinion on what I read:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book ... tsin-heard

Washington, D.C., March 16, 2018 – Declassified documents from U.S. and Russian archives show that U.S. officials led Russian President Boris Yeltsin to believe in 1993 that the Partnership for Peace was the alternative to NATO expansion, rather than a precursor to it, while simultaneously planning for expansion after Yeltsin’s re-election bid in 1996 and telling the Russians repeatedly that the future European security system would include, not exclude, Russia.


Here: https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/21/worl ... -nato.html
In yet another sign that the disintegration of the Soviet Union was turning global politics upside down, the Russian President, Boris N. Yeltsin, wrote to NATO today saying Russia hoped to join the alliance some time in the future.

Mr. Yeltsin's letter was sent in conjunction with the first meeting ever held at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization between NATO foreign ministers and those of the former Warsaw Pact -- the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and Romania.


https://warontherocks.com/2019/11/promi ... matters-2/

t had been less than a year since Yeltsin was told “Partnership for all, not NATO for some.” He made clear his displeasure at a December 1994 meeting in Budapest of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), which was being upgraded to the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a pan-European security framework. Yeltsin shocked his American and European colleagues by stating, “Europe, even before it has managed to shrug off the legacy of the Cold War, is risking encumbering itself with a cold peace.” He continued:

NATO was created in Cold War times. Today, it is trying to find its place in Europe, not without difficulty. It is important that this search not create new divisions, but promote European unity. We believe that the plans of expanding NATO are contrary to this logic. Why sow the seeds of distrust? After all, we are no longer adversaries, we are partners.
...
Despite Clinton’s efforts, Yeltsin’s remained upset about enlargement but could do nothing to prevent it (as was similarly the case with the Kosovo War in 1999). Russian foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev in mid-1994 had said, “The greatest achievement of Russian foreign policy in 1993 was to prevent NATO’s expansion eastward to our borders.” As it turned out, this achievement was to be short-lived. But the problem for the U.S.-Russia relationship was not so much enlargement per se, but rather that neither the West nor Russia ever found a place for the latter in what Gorbachev had called the “Common European Home.”


Further reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... is-yeltsin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ters-today
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50945596




I am aware of the way Russia is looking at NATO and calling it “betrayal”
You still ignoring the facts that NATO and Russia were cooperating very closely until Russia confiscated Crimea … ALSO ignoring Russia didn’t apply for a membership. Not to mention the “reward” Russia took in 2014 killing almost 300 innocent people with a BUK missile.

You are also stating that Russia was treated as “outcast”, but still theu signed this: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm
This was 1997, so the inco

Bot as stated before, IMO you are continuing trying to derail this thread with statements that Russians were treated badly and we should give them a reward…. Feel free to start a new thread, this is about Russia invaded Ukraine, but it seems you do care less about that…
And remember who provided the BUK missile which shot down MH17 by separatists….
Last edited by marcelh on Fri Mar 04, 2022 1:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2429
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 1:58 pm

NATO will extend information exchange with Sweden and Finland and those two countries will also be invited to all talks as longs
the conflict in Ukraine is ongoing according to Jens Stoltenberg

https://www.dn.se/varlden/nato-bjuder-i ... aggningar/

In response to Russia’s aggression, we have decided to strengthen our coordination and information sharing with Finland and Sweden.
Both countries are now taking part in all NATO consultations about the crisis.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opin ... dLocale=en

A Chinese banks stops business witgh Russia.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/2-ch ... sia-2022-3
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 2:18 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
alfa164 wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
Largest nuclear plant in Europe under attack. Live stream here. This is insane https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8


I think this creates the perfect reason for Europe - with US backing - to establish a "no fly" zone over Ukraine. An attack on a nuclear facility obviously creates a clear and present danger to the entire region, and ultimately the world as a whole. Whatever reasons existed to avoid creating the zone is now outweighed by its need.

Everyone here - and everyone you know - should contact their governmental representatives to demand such action, making it clear that the justification for it is to prevent serious danger to the entire region. Establishing such a perimeter would give the Ukrainians a fair footing to stop ground troops from attacking facilities, assaulting cities, and aiming at the civilian population.


tomcat wrote:
As far as I am concerned, I'm aware that being a resident of this planet (more precisely a few km from the NATO headquarters) would get me exposed in case of a nuclear conflict. But so what? The prospect of living with Putin using permanent threats to drive the destiny of an entire continent isn't any greater than taking a chance of confronting his shitty army with conventional forces and taking the risk of having Russia resorting to nuclear bombs. History will remember that they would have been first to use these bombs during the conflict, if they would actually dare to use them, and if they work better than their poorly maintained military equipment's. But let's see, the economic sanctions will have some effects. And let's hope that the Ukrainians will resist long enough for the sanctions to inflict deeper wounds to the Russian economy.


This. Putin clearly doesn't care whom he attacks; his deranged sense of Russian superiority has proven to be a fairy tale, and the sooner we call his bluff, the safer we will be. Neville Chamberlain didn't save Europe from Hitler; standing up to him did.


drew777 wrote:
I suspect when this is all over, there will be a lot of people asking why NATO didn't respond sooner. Today it's shelling at the nuclear plant tomorrow it'll be something worse. Will use of a tactical nuke in Ukraine draw in foreign forces?


As the saying goes, "give him and inch, and he will take a mile."


I understand the sentiment and rationale for establishing a no-fly zone - but I think enabling it instead of providing it directly is more wise. Direct NATO involvement and potential engagement with Russian forces gives Putin the pretext to tell his domestic audience he was right - that this is indeed all about NATO.


https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/04/russia- ... dates.html

"Russian forces seize Ukrainian nuclear power plant; NATO says it is not seeking war with Moscow"

How does Putin interpret that?
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 2:28 pm

GDB wrote:
art wrote:
I don't see the Ukrainians being able to stem the Russian advance. They have received thousands of anti-tank missiles (Javelin, NLAW and today I read 2,700 Russian weapons inherited from East Germany are being sent). How many Russian tanks/associated armed armoured vehicles/artillery pieces have been knocked out? If it were a significant number, I am sure Ukraine would be publicising it.

Ukraine has received hundreds or thousands of Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. How many Russian aircraft have been downed?

I get the feeling that Russia is advancing inexorably, albeit far more slowly than anticipated by Moscow. Thousands of Ukraine citizens are being slaughtered by Russian artillery, missiles and aircraft. Millions of refugees are to be expected. I hope that plans for resistance after the country has fallen are being implemented. The only way I see Ukraine restoring its liberty is when a combination of sanctions and occupying troop losses through armed resistance forces Putin's hand or forces his removal from power.

My sympathy and admiration to the valiant people of Ukraine.


Putin expected a rapid operation, that the Ukrainian leadership would flee (admittedly so did the US with very recent and bitter experience from Afghanistan), resistance would be limited, that he could ride out any expected sanctions and he thought a divided West would remain so.
The weapons sent also are generally not crew served like artillery for the most part, rather they are man portable anti tank and anti air, so suitable for a protracted partisan style operations, in a part of the world that saw a lot of that last century. Whatever happens to the cities.
I seriously doubt that over a week later he thought that most of the cities would not be in Russian hands and that there would still be a functioning Ukrainian leadership, you can only imagine his reaction to the Ukrainian President becoming an international hero, hence the reported attempts to kill him. Putin’s fragile ego won’t like that.

The fact he had to play the nuclear card is not the sign of a successful operation, rather it is more likely that in now planning to repeat the targeted mass slaughter of civilians using illegal weapons, his Plan B, as seen in Chechnya and in propping up Assad in Syria, he fears a worldwide backlash that might force NATO into sweeping the skies of his so far underperforming Air Force and with SEAD missions, he has to raise that specter of nuclear war, despite Mutually Assured Destruction since he knows otherwise he faces a military humiliation that would be the end of him.
Then again he also has stated ‘if there is no Russia, there is no world’, be interested to hear Jaro76’s take/excuse/denial of that, be aware he did state that in public.

As things stand, he instead faces a determined resistance in a country with 40 million people and a lot of territory. That will bleed his also very underperforming army.
With a collapsing economy too.


Its only been 8 days and Putin is about to take Odessa to the south. Putin played the Nuclear card to remind NATO and the rest of the world what a generation did not know. Irrespective of his present conventional military performance, he carries a big stick too, and he has the most sticks of anyone in the world.

Sadly, Putin doesn't care that you like him, but he wants you to respect him. People and criminals like that are dangerous.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 4035
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 2:30 pm

scbriml wrote:
jaro76 wrote:
I agree with you. But IMHO first priority shall be stopping the war. The others are secondary. If we put any of those above stopping the war, we let more and more people die.


WE are not letting Ukrainians die, Russians are killing them.

One man can stop this instantly. He resides in the Kremlin. Give him a call.


True, easy to loose that perspective.
 
Klaus
Posts: 21777
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 2:53 pm

art wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
My question with this kind of wanton destruction is - what kind of occupation do they have in mind?? There is no way there will be a compliant local population when the territory is secured.


Good question. It is one thing to govern your own people using repressive measures to quell opposition (imprisoning the political opposition, citizens demonstrating opposition) where much of the population supports the government. It is a different thing to govern a foreign people where opposition is almost universal.

In Putin's deranged mind his goals are apparently:

1. Crush Ukraine as a nation. (failed so far)

2. Kill or at least drive out as many ukrainian citizens as possible. (in progress)

3. Subsume Ukraine as "lesser Russia" and incentivize russians to move there, the same way China is doing with han chinese in Tibet in order to over time completely erase even the concept of a unique nation and population there. (um, slightly behind schedule...)

4. With an iron fist suppress any residual resistance (same as in the rest of Russia). (planned / in progress in Russia)

5. Have Vladimir Putin recorded as the new glorious ruler who established the new russian empire. (delusional)

6. Repeat the same process with any further neighbouring countries at will. (clearly the objective)
 
 
Klaus
Posts: 21777
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 3:14 pm

Virtual737 wrote:

Putin (desperate, enraged): "Nuke them all!!"
Computer: "Windows needs to update now; Please stand by..."
Computer: "An error has occurred: Your license is no longer valid. Please contact your service representative!"
 
User avatar
PixelPilot
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 3:23 pm

Virtual737 wrote:


Wish they issued a mandatory update with all the news from Ukraine right before issuing the statement.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 1471
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 3:49 pm

With all the horror going on, nice to see the brighter side of humanity. Surprise birthday party for a young refugee.

https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-invasion-romanian-camp-holds-surprise-birthday-party-for-refugee-girl-12557278
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 24356
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 4:25 pm

Have sources for factual information.
Post on topic
Respect other users

Do *not* post conspiracy theories

This is a naturally emotional topic. Abide by forum rules or be banned. The mods are having to work an amazing amount of time on these Ukraine threads.
 
jaro76
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:48 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 4:33 pm

marcelh wrote:
jaro76 wrote:
I'm basing my opinion on what I read:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book ... tsin-heard

Washington, D.C., March 16, 2018 – Declassified documents from U.S. and Russian archives show that U.S. officials led Russian President Boris Yeltsin to believe in 1993 that the Partnership for Peace was the alternative to NATO expansion, rather than a precursor to it, while simultaneously planning for expansion after Yeltsin’s re-election bid in 1996 and telling the Russians repeatedly that the future European security system would include, not exclude, Russia.


Here: https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/21/worl ... -nato.html
In yet another sign that the disintegration of the Soviet Union was turning global politics upside down, the Russian President, Boris N. Yeltsin, wrote to NATO today saying Russia hoped to join the alliance some time in the future.

Mr. Yeltsin's letter was sent in conjunction with the first meeting ever held at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization between NATO foreign ministers and those of the former Warsaw Pact -- the Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and Romania.


https://warontherocks.com/2019/11/promi ... matters-2/

t had been less than a year since Yeltsin was told “Partnership for all, not NATO for some.” He made clear his displeasure at a December 1994 meeting in Budapest of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), which was being upgraded to the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a pan-European security framework. Yeltsin shocked his American and European colleagues by stating, “Europe, even before it has managed to shrug off the legacy of the Cold War, is risking encumbering itself with a cold peace.” He continued:

NATO was created in Cold War times. Today, it is trying to find its place in Europe, not without difficulty. It is important that this search not create new divisions, but promote European unity. We believe that the plans of expanding NATO are contrary to this logic. Why sow the seeds of distrust? After all, we are no longer adversaries, we are partners.
...
Despite Clinton’s efforts, Yeltsin’s remained upset about enlargement but could do nothing to prevent it (as was similarly the case with the Kosovo War in 1999). Russian foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev in mid-1994 had said, “The greatest achievement of Russian foreign policy in 1993 was to prevent NATO’s expansion eastward to our borders.” As it turned out, this achievement was to be short-lived. But the problem for the U.S.-Russia relationship was not so much enlargement per se, but rather that neither the West nor Russia ever found a place for the latter in what Gorbachev had called the “Common European Home.”


Further reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... is-yeltsin
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... ters-today
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50945596




I am aware of the way Russia is looking at NATO and calling it “betrayal”
You still ignoring the facts that NATO and Russia were cooperating very closely until Russia confiscated Crimea … ALSO ignoring Russia didn’t apply for a membership. Not to mention the “reward” Russia took in 2014 killing almost 300 innocent people with a BUK missile.

You are also stating that Russia was treated as “outcast”, but still theu signed this: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm
This was 1997, so the inco

Bot as stated before, IMO you are continuing trying to derail this thread with statements that Russians were treated badly and we should give them a reward…. Feel free to start a new thread, this is about Russia invaded Ukraine, but it seems you do care less about that…
And remember who provided the BUK missile which shot down MH17 by separatists….


I'm aware, that they signed the founding act and that they cooperated a lot with NATO. They never applied formally as any time they were interested and asked informally, they were rejected. To a degree that some officials called Russia in NATO being farcical.

The only points that I'm trying to show here is:
a; there was a path to situation today along which all sides made mistakes. Including Russia as well as USA. I backed my reasoning with links to articles based on the archives from both sides or politicians with a lot of experience in international politics (Henry Kissinger)
b; Moral outrage now is nice, but we need to get logical and practical. Solution has to be something that can work long term. Not +- tactical adhoc things
c; Providing a long time working solution might not be 100% ideal from "principle point of view" (see 1962 Cuban crisis)

I'm off from discussing this as I do not want to derail the tread. Before doing so, I would like to know whether you believe that West (USA, UK, EU ...) made a perfect work in getting Russia to be a friend and equal partner since 1991? That you honestly believe, that there is absolutly 0 blame on the west for current situation?

NOTE: It would be probably nice to have a tread where we can discuss what reactions to the war in Ukraine is showing about all sides involved beside Ukraine and Putin. Probably starting why India and Pakistan, who normally can't stand each other and will do opposite things just on principle are not supporting West here? Why we are super outraged and acting at high speed when there is attack on Ukraine, but things like Izrael/Palestin, Yemen are leaving us +- cold? Why UAE and SA is outside?
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 3208
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 5:37 pm

victrola wrote:
We need to send them some mobile missile launchers and some A-10 Warthogs. I don't think the Russians are suffering enough. Russia does not have the resources to go to war with NATO given the fact that the bulk of its army is bogged down in Ukraine. As far as his nukes are concerned, he and the people around him know that the use of nuclear weapons would mean subsequent incineration of every major Russian city. Word must get out to the Russian people that their President is weighing the nuclear option and what it would mean for them if he does use them.


The Russians' convoys are arrayed as sitting ducks for A-10 atacks! If they have supply problems now, they would really have one after most of their trucks and tanks are destroyed. Fuel trucks would be nice juicy targets.
 
victrola
Posts: 914
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 5:51 pm

Back in the old days, it was relatively easy for the USSR to block information coming in from outside. Today, it is much more difficult, if not impossible to block out all sources of information. Hopefully a concerted effort is being launched to get as much video of the atrocities and carnage into Russia along with messages from the Ukrainian people to the Russian people.
 
GDB
Posts: 15738
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:10 pm

victrola wrote:
Back in the old days, it was relatively easy for the USSR to block information coming in from outside. Today, it is much more difficult, if not impossible to block out all sources of information. Hopefully a concerted effort is being launched to get as much video of the atrocities and carnage into Russia along with messages from the Ukrainian people to the Russian people.


It really seems to be a generational thing there, older people mostly watch and probably largely believe, State TV, bearing in mind they would remember the USSR warts and all but also the post USSR economic meltdown too.
Younger people largely from other sources, if anyone is getting the real story and the sheer size and extent of the demos and 8000 arrests (justify that, Russian apologists), seems to demonstrate that.

They get the rough end of Putins's Russia as it is, not much future when 97% of the nation's wealth is held by less than 3% of the population, vast amounts looted and stashed abroad, rampant corruption (which is likely a factor in the poor performance of the military thus far in Ukraine), we know who holds all the wealth, how they are enabled, plus Putin himself being one of the world's richest men - likely decreasingly so now. And so do many Russians.
Plus if you are a young male, enjoy your conscription, very undesirable even without being sent into a war without knowing it.
 
cpd
Posts: 7390
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:15 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
victrola wrote:
We need to send them some mobile missile launchers and some A-10 Warthogs. I don't think the Russians are suffering enough. Russia does not have the resources to go to war with NATO given the fact that the bulk of its army is bogged down in Ukraine. As far as his nukes are concerned, he and the people around him know that the use of nuclear weapons would mean subsequent incineration of every major Russian city. Word must get out to the Russian people that their President is weighing the nuclear option and what it would mean for them if he does use them.


The Russians' convoys are arrayed as sitting ducks for A-10 atacks! If they have supply problems now, they would really have one after most of their trucks and tanks are destroyed. Fuel trucks would be nice juicy targets.



What a10s? Did something change?

As far as I can tell there are no new Western planes there in Ukraine and nothing to stop these attacks. NATO won’t do a no fly zone either. Maddening.

They are too soft. Yes Putin has nuclear weapons but so does nato and he needs to be reminded about that.
 
User avatar
Dahlgardo
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:46 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:31 pm

cpd wrote:
They are too soft. Yes Putin has nuclear weapons but so does nato and he needs to be reminded about that.


True.
About time NATO gets involved, and starts enforcing a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
Putins fallback strategy is just the usual tactic of total destruction and mass murder of civilians.
I can't see how NATO or western governments should accept this much longer.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 3208
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:34 pm

qf789 wrote:
The Russian embassy in Vilnius, Lithuania will change the street name of the Russian embassy to “Heroes of Ukraine” street

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/li ... 022-03-03/


A friend of mine who is in Kyiv right now suggested that cities all over the world rename streets after Volodymyr Zelensky. I know the perfect place in Houston for such a street. It's "Post Oak Park Drive" it borders two sides of the block containing the Russian consulate. Nobody will miss the name "Post Oak." It's as common a street name in the Galleria area of Houston as "Peach Tree" is in Atlanta. In fact renaming the street would eliminate an intersection of "Post Oak Park Drive" with "Post Oak Boulevard."
 
User avatar
NIKV69
Posts: 15111
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:41 pm

scbriml wrote:

WE are not letting Ukrainians die, Russians are killing them.

One man can stop this instantly. He resides in the Kremlin. Give him a call.


I am sure he will listen and withdraw immediately. Sadly Ukraine will be part of Russia within 60 days IMO. The Lip service that has been coming from the west is amazing. Shame that it fills content on the drive by media and makes for good campaign sound bytes but it's not helping the people of Ukraine. I guess the ones who get to the US and other countries will never go back and the ones who can deal with Russia will stay. Maybe if the calendar read "1941" things would be different.
 
User avatar
PixelPilot
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 6:42 pm

Is it possible that the "cautious" US approach is because of this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... OATES.html
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 6194
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:04 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
I guess the ones who get to the US and other countries will never go back and the ones who can deal with Russia will stay.


A bit too dramatic. First hand experience here after the fall of Saigon in 75. I have gone back to my birth place many times. So will have many Afghans to their native land.

Once the fighting stops, the rebuilding of family ties can begin. In fact, those that manage to establish a life elsewhere will be a source of hope and income for those who are left behind, thus becomes a conduit for social changes. It will take decades but it will happen.

bt
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 8901
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:05 pm

I am also puzzeled as to why the Ukraine airforce has not gone after the convoy to the north. They have been slowed down by a blown bridge and would make a good target. Natos planes have been keeping an eye of their progress from polish airspace so there must be another reason. :confused:
 
wingman
Posts: 4313
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:07 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
scbriml wrote:

WE are not letting Ukrainians die, Russians are killing them.

One man can stop this instantly. He resides in the Kremlin. Give him a call.


I am sure he will listen and withdraw immediately. Sadly Ukraine will be part of Russia within 60 days IMO. The Lip service that has been coming from the west is amazing. Shame that it fills content on the drive by media and makes for good campaign sound bytes but it's not helping the people of Ukraine. I guess the ones who get to the US and other countries will never go back and the ones who can deal with Russia will stay. Maybe if the calendar read "1941" things would be different.


So all out war in Europe is your solution? Can you think of any negative consequences there or the scenario plays out Hollywood style and Rambo liberates Berlin, Warsaw and Kiev by June? Possibly you haven’t thought this through much at all.
 
SEAorPWM
Posts: 414
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:08 pm

boyindra wrote:
SEAorPWM wrote:
par13del wrote:



it happens that most of opec not coming from east or west. These country is used to get bullied by east and west. These country think this war is between west and east not with them. When Israel occupy west bank/palestine, west keep silent so they will only condemn but no real action.


I'm mainly referring to their involvement in the other humanitarian crisis - Yemen.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 840
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:13 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
victrola wrote:
We need to send them some mobile missile launchers and some A-10 Warthogs. I don't think the Russians are suffering enough. Russia does not have the resources to go to war with NATO given the fact that the bulk of its army is bogged down in Ukraine. As far as his nukes are concerned, he and the people around him know that the use of nuclear weapons would mean subsequent incineration of every major Russian city. Word must get out to the Russian people that their President is weighing the nuclear option and what it would mean for them if he does use them.


The Russians' convoys are arrayed as sitting ducks for A-10 atacks! If they have supply problems now, they would really have one after most of their trucks and tanks are destroyed. Fuel trucks would be nice juicy targets.


It feels like the convoy is there as bait for NATO to attack.
 
wingman
Posts: 4313
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:14 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
Is it possible that the "cautious" US approach is because of this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... OATES.html

This must be part of the “Putin is brilliant” thought camp. He’s a chess master so advanced in his stratactical magnificence that he has the US over a barrel. Small wonder he didn’t think to include the total annihilation of his economy on the “do not touchski” list. If only Trump were president-162 lightning strikes of the Twitter machine and Putin would’ve whimpered his way back to the dacha.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 15786
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:16 pm

readytotaxi wrote:
I am also puzzeled as to why the Ukraine airforce has not gone after the convoy to the north. They have been slowed down by a blown bridge and would make a good target. Natos planes have been keeping an eye of their progress from polish airspace so there must be another reason. :confused:


Never heard of the S-400 ?
 
wingman
Posts: 4313
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:18 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
Is it possible that the "cautious" US approach is because of this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... OATES.html

This must be part of the “Putin is brilliant” thought camp. He’s a chess master so advanced in his stratactical magnificence that he has the US over a barrel. Small wonder he didn’t think to include the total annihilation of his economy on the “do not touchski” list. If only Trump were president-162 lightning strikes of the Twitter machine and Putin would’ve whimpered his way back to the dacha.
 
User avatar
PixelPilot
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:20 pm

wingman wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
Is it possible that the "cautious" US approach is because of this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... OATES.html

This must be part of the “Putin is brilliant” thought camp. He’s a chess master so advanced in his stratactical magnificence that he has the US over a barrel. Small wonder he didn’t think to include the total annihilation of his economy on the “do not touchski” list. If only Trump were president-162 lightning strikes of the Twitter machine and Putin would’ve whimpered his way back to the dacha.


Brilliant or not, it does present few extra unpredictable elements into the geopolitical play doesn't it?
Plenty crazies on that list that will be happy to blow up something in EU to escalate.
Believing that something is too crazy these days is crazy in itself in my opinion.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 6194
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:29 pm

wingman wrote:
This must be part of the “Putin is brilliant” thought camp.


Just read this part of the article.

Victoria Coates served as the Deputy National Security Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa on the National Security Council staff and the Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of Energy in the Donald J. Trump administration


Why worry about someone who has nukes today when you can worry about someone who may get nukes tomorrow?

And if that doesn't work, try "Biden is paying too much attention on Ukraine and not paying enough attention on border wall".

bt
Last edited by bikerthai on Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 26445
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:29 pm

Seems Russia getting more paranoid over its citizens learning the truth . They just blocked Facebook


https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-inva ... a-12557637

Ukraine invasion: Facebook blocked in Russia over 'discrimination' against state-backed media
 
art
Posts: 4983
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:34 pm

wingman wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
Is it possible that the "cautious" US approach is because of this?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... OATES.html

This must be part of the “Putin is brilliant” thought camp. He’s a chess master so advanced in his stratactical magnificence that he has the US over a barrel. Small wonder he didn’t think to include the total annihilation of his economy on the “do not touchski” list. If only Trump were president-162 lightning strikes of the Twitter machine and Putin would’ve whimpered his way back to the dacha.

Well, the US has not been too clever where bolstering the defence of this east European country is concerned. The US (and European countries) could have encouraged and helped Ukraine to strengthen its defences as a non-aligned country, making any aggressive action less tempting to Russia.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 6194
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Russian Invasion of Ukraine - *Discussion* Thread

Fri Mar 04, 2022 7:40 pm

art wrote:
Well, the US has not been too clever where bolstering the defence of east European countries is concerned.


Well, blame it on 4 lost years under a Putin friendly administration. Still waiting for those compromising videos in a Russian Hotel room to finally be released. Perhaps when all this finally ends.

bt

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Badstig, journeyperson and 26 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos