Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

NATO isn't an offensive threat to Russia, regardless of who joins it. NATO has been on the Russian border for years at this point via the Baltic Republics (and if you want to be pedantic, Poland as well thanks to the Kalingrad salient)

The notion that the Ukraine is suddenly more a threat in NATO because missiles fired from Kyiv could hit Moscow in 6 minutes is ridiculous when you recall NATO could just as well position them in Germany and still hit Moscow inside of 10 minutes.

 

I think Putin sees it more like the straw that broke the camels back, especially when it was a given that the west's blatant interference deposed the legally elected pro Russian Yanukovych and replaced him with a series of corrupt fascist extremists who were nothing other than puppets of the West.

Of course the USA would never act like this (Cuba) and of course the UK would be overjoyed if an independent Scotland signed a partnership deal with Russia or China to allow them to base their fleet in Faslane and the Holy Loch.

I think not........

[Captain Saintsible]

The current Ukrainian leader is a puppet of the west, installed after a western led coup, toppling a democratically elected leader.

The crisis was created by the west. 

[vikingTON]

12 minutes ago, tarapoa said:

 

Belarus is really a fancy post-Soviet breakup name they came up with for White Russia.

The Russian civil war a millennium or so back was the White Russians v Red Russians.

They really shouldn't be that pally.........although like everything else, it's never that simple.

The White armies in the Civil War aren't connected to the 'White Russia' name for Belarus. I think there are similar colour-based descriptions of territory such as 'Red Ruthenia' knocking around as well. 

Belarus didn't open itself up to a capitalist free-for-all and by no coincidence now enjoys a much higher standard of living than its neighbour Ukraine: which left the CIS as soon as possible to pursue the folly of free market 'development'. 

[ICTChris]

This will be a good thread to keep track of what is happening in the war.

 

 

[renton]

3 minutes ago, Captain Saintsible said:

So there really was no point in NATO expanding east then, was there?

From the collective leadership point of view it makes no difference. Geographic proximity doesn't mean that much to strategic forces.

For the nations that joined NATO, it gives access to that nuclear umbrella, collective security and training, westernisation and access to Western defence contracts/money/markets which can be a gateway to moving forward into the EU.

[Melanius Mullarkey]

2 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

This will be a good thread to keep track of what is happening in the war.

 

 

I'll bet he didnt expect to be doing this when he was playing for Newcastle United in the 1990s.

[DMCs]

18 minutes ago, tarapoa said:

 

Belarus is really a fancy post-Soviet breakup name they came up with for White Russia.

The Russian civil war a millennium or so back was the White Russians v Red Russians.

They really shouldn't be that pally.........although like everything else, it's never that simple.

The terms are unrelated. Belarus as a name is hundreds of years older. 

The White Russians never called themselves that either - that was a pejorative used by the other side to describe them.

[Jambomo]

1 minute ago, AlbionSaint said:

Russia apparently advancing quickly. I suspect the US/UK hawks thought this would be a costly and bloody war that would embroil Russia for years, so that they could change regimes in Syria and God knows where else without opposition. 

Hopefully it's a quick, decisive and relatively bloodless war. 

It’s already not bloodless.

[Patrick Noubissie]

Is literally anyone on here a supporter of America's history of military aggression and political interference in the Middle East/Central and South America etc? Maybe if there is, they could step forward and take on the Old Firm level debate on offer here. 

[vikingTON]

2 minutes ago, renton said:

From the collective leadership point of view it makes no difference. Geographic proximity doesn't mean that much to strategic forces.

For the nations that joined NATO, it gives access to that nuclear umbrella, collective security and training, westernisation and access to Western defence contracts/money/markets which can be a gateway to moving forward into the EU.

In what way is NATO membership even remotely 'a gateway for moving forward into the EU'?

Economic and military/security integration are two completely separate things and it is the arrogant folly of the West to see this that has contributed to the situation today. 

[williemillersmoustache]

Question to Jens Stoltenberg from Ukrainian Inter-fax journalist:
"I know you won't send troops to Ukraine but isn't it about time for NATO to stand up to Hitler, excuse me, Putin?"

[LongTimeLurker]

The bizarre angle to all this is that Putin had the chance to try to prop up his favoured regime in Kiev relatively easily back in 2014 when the Ukrainian state apparatus was riddled with Yanukovych supporters and its armed forces were still relatively weak.

Now with Zelenskyy in place with a clear democratic mandate, stingers, javelins and drones supplied from the west along with effective command and control...

[Highlandmagar]

10 minutes ago, Captain Saintsible said:

The current Ukrainian leader is a puppet of the west, installed after a western led coup, toppling a democratically elected leader.

The crisis was created by the west. 

A leader who siphoned off $70 billion of the country's treasury to foreign accounts?

[renton]

1 minute ago, AlbionSaint said:

You don't think making someone make the most monumental decision a human being ever has to make in a couple of minutes only adds to the pressure? He had the time to make phone calls, check the system wasn't malfunctioning, etc.

We've already been here in the 80s. The Russians deployed the SS-20 missiles that could hit European targets and the US retaliated with the Pershing 2 in Germany that could hit Moscow without enough warning to fire back.

Depending on how close you could sail one, you could achieve the same today with a submarine launched ballistic missile.

[ICTChris]

2 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

The bizarre angle to all this is that Putin had the chance to try to prop up his favoured regime in Kiev relatively easily back in 2014 when the Ukrainian state apparatus was riddled with Yanukovych supporters and its armed forces were still relatively weak.

Now with Zelenskyy in place with a clear democratic mandate, stingers, javelins and drones supplied from the west along with effective command and control...

One of the starting points of all this was the purchase of TB2 drones from Turkey, which were then deployed against the Russian-backed forces in Donetsk and Luhansk.  These are weapons that would be very effective against the forces in the occupied East but Russia has the weapons to defeat them easily, both in terms of destroying them directly, jamming them with electronic warfare equipment and destroying the operating bases.  IIRC, the analyst I quoted above said it would likely be the first thing done in the war, probably in the first hour.  That's likely what the Russian missile attacks that footage has been seen of were doing.

[Ron Aldo]

At least this is distracting her from talking pish about Covid.

[welshbairn]

Evil neighbours thread for this pish.

 

[Ross.]

8 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

The bizarre angle to all this is that Putin had the chance to try to prop up his favoured regime in Kiev relatively easily back in 2014 when the Ukrainian state apparatus was riddled with Yanukovych supporters and its armed forces were still relatively weak.

Now with Zelenskyy in place with a clear democratic mandate, stingers, javelins and drones supplied from the west along with effective command and control...

Maybe the Unionists were right and Vlad really does want the UK to break up. He has decided to help aid that by doing his best to see us qualify for the World Cup, to boost our sense of national pride before the next referendum.

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

One of the starting points of all this was the purchase of TB2 drones from Turkey, which were then deployed against the Russian-backed forces in Donetsk and Luhansk.  These are weapons that would be very effective against the forces in the occupied East but Russia has the weapons to defeat them easily, both in terms of destroying them directly, jamming them with electronic warfare equipment and destroying the operating bases.  IIRC, the analyst I quoted above said it would likely be the first thing done in the war, probably in the first hour.  That's likely what the Russian missile attacks that footage has been seen of were doing.

I though Russia had already mobilised before the Turkish drone deal?

[williemillersmoustache]

3 minutes ago, AlbionSaint said:

Doesn't that kind of trivialise the Holocaust? I mean...that was what made Hitler bad, right? It wasn't invading the Sudetenland, was it?

Doing a very bad thing doesn't make the other not quite so bad things just disappear. I think ol' Adolfs "portfolio of bad" is known to be quite extensive and varied.