ADVERTISEMENT

Russia and Ukraine

Most here should recall ”The Charge of the Light Brigade”
Whether by Errol Flynn swashbuckler, or “The Blind Side” essay from cable.
Annexing Crimea was step 1.
If we don’t stop step 2 … will the last step be to repartition Germany East and West?
Finland and the Baltic Republics deserve better.
So does Ukraine.
Punishment after the crime is too late, here.
Threat of punishment afterward is not presumed to be a real deterrent.
 
Probably sanctions and stationing more troops in NATO members in the Balkans as a sign of solidarity.
is Russia's goal to make Ukraine a part of Russia or to put in a puppet regime that answers to Russia. One of the conservatives above made some comment about nobody standing up to Russia, which was a typical response, unless we have the will to defend Ukraine what can we do to stop Russia. I'm not convinced an invasion if a foregone conclusion, will open a whole can of worms internationally
 
Ukraine isn’t exactly armed with bows and arrows, so I don’t particularly think Russia wants to invade. At the same time, no one from the West, not the least of which is the USA, has the stomach for an actual war with Russia over Ukraine. So for now it’s a staring contest. Unfortunately, we’re going into a staring contest with a SoS named Blinken.
 
is Russia's goal to make Ukraine a part of Russia or to put in a puppet regime that answers to Russia. One of the conservatives above made some comment about nobody standing up to Russia, which was a typical response, unless we have the will to defend Ukraine what can we do to stop Russia. I'm not convinced an invasion if a foregone conclusion, will open a whole can of worms internationally
I think Russia's primary goal is to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence. However, I also heard Vindman on NPR this week suggest a secondary goal: making Ukraine a failed state, because having a successful democracy in a neighboring country would undermine Putin's authority. As such, it's in Putin's interest to have fellow autocrats in charge in Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc. Not sure how much I buy that one.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lucy01
I think Russia's primary goal is to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence. However, I also heard Vindman on NPR this week suggest a secondary goal: making Ukraine a failed state, because having a successful democracy in a neighboring country would undermine Putin's authority. As such, it's in Putin's interest to have fellow autocrats in charge in Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc. Not sure how much I buy that one.
Doesn’t it matter how far they intend to invade? I’ve met several Crimeans in my life and they all consider themselves Russians.
 
I think Russia's primary goal is to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence. However, I also heard Vindman on NPR this week suggest a secondary goal: making Ukraine a failed state, because having a successful democracy in a neighboring country would undermine Putin's authority. As such, it's in Putin's interest to have fellow autocrats in charge in Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc. Not sure how much I buy that one.
I think they also fear Ukraine being aligned with the west. From Russia's historical perspective they are surrounded. Ukraine really eliminates their buffer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrHoops
Doesn’t it matter how far they intend to invade? I’ve met several Crimeans in my life and they all consider themselves Russians.
Matter to whom and for what purpose? From a purely intellectual point of view, sure, I guess. It's not hard to argue that Russia had a historical claim to Crimea, and you could extend that thinking to some sort of cultural claim to eastern Ukraine, as well. But I really doubt there's a line Russia could cross that would suddenly invoke a serious response from the West. I think if Russia truly wanted to conquer the entire country, they'd probably get away with it.

Edit to add: I really doubt Russia's gameplan here is to annex anything else. I think they will invade Ukraine and replace the government with something more to their liking.
 
Matter to whom and for what purpose? From a purely intellectual point of view, sure, I guess. It's not hard to argue that Russia had a historical claim to Crimea, and you could extend that thinking to some sort of cultural claim to eastern Ukraine, as well. But I really doubt there's a line Russia could cross that would suddenly invoke a serious response from the West. I think if Russia truly wanted to conquer the entire country, they'd probably get away with it.
Agreed
 
I think they also fear Ukraine being aligned with the west. From Russia's historical perspective they are surrounded. Ukraine really eliminates their buffer.
Yes, Russia has long felt that the Caucasus, Ukraine, eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Finland belong in their empire, whether as de jure parts of it, or technically independent states under their thumb. NATO has been encroaching on their putative empire for years, now, and they've decided that Ukraine would be a step too far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stollcpa
Yes, Russia has long felt that the Caucasus, Ukraine, eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Finland belong in their empire, whether as de jure parts of it, or technically independent states under their thumb. NATO has been encroaching on their putative empire for years, now, and they've decided that Ukraine would be a step too far.
Cuba unhinged us, I can imagine what NATO in Ukraine or Baltic States must do to the Russian psyche.
 
Matter to whom and for what purpose? From a purely intellectual point of view, sure, I guess. It's not hard to argue that Russia had a historical claim to Crimea, and you could extend that thinking to some sort of cultural claim to eastern Ukraine, as well. But I really doubt there's a line Russia could cross that would suddenly invoke a serious response from the West. I think if Russia truly wanted to conquer the entire country, they'd probably get away with it.

Edit to add: I really doubt Russia's gameplan here is to annex anything else. I think they will invade Ukraine and replace the government with something more to their liking.
What's the pretext?
 
Ukraine isn’t exactly armed with bows and arrows, so I don’t particularly think Russia wants to invade. At the same time, no one from the West, not the least of which is the USA, has the stomach for an actual war with Russia over Ukraine. So for now it’s a staring contest. Unfortunately, we’re going into a staring contest with a SoS named Blinken.
Maybe the Europeans could step up and help out Ukraine?
 
Maybe the Europeans could step up and help out Ukraine?
They could, but they don't want to get involved in a war any more than anyone else does.

Honestly, this all seems very reminiscent of the 1930s as far as appeasing a strongman dictator to achieve "peace in our time."
 
I know some on here think he is a right wing nut but he is often right. Now I cannot really see how a military conflict would help Biden as most in the USA are sick of wars. It will be interesting to see what happens.


Jack Posobiec
The Biden Administration has negative political capital. They are desperate. And desperate people do desperate things. Internally they are discussing military options in Eastern Europe. Wag the Dog begins.
 
I know some on here think he is a right wing nut but he is often right. Now I cannot really see how a military conflict would help Biden as most in the USA are sick of wars. It will be interesting to see what happens.


Jack Posobiec
The Biden Administration has negative political capital. They are desperate. And desperate people do desperate things. Internally they are discussing military options in Eastern Europe. Wag the Dog begins.
Is he often right? If he is, he's waaaaay more often wrong. He made his bones with Pizzagate & Seth Rich conspiracies. And it didn't end there by any stretch of the imagination.

He's got background in military intelligence I believe, so he might be on target with something like what's going on in Eastern Europe. But on the whole, he's trash and emblematic of the worst kind of politics.
 
Is he often right? If he is, he's waaaaay more often wrong. He made his bones with Pizzagate & Seth Rich conspiracies. And it didn't end there by any stretch of the imagination.

He's got background in military intelligence I believe, so he might be on target with something like what's going on in Eastern Europe. But on the whole, he's trash and emblematic of the worst kind of politics.
So you follow him daily I take it? I have been following him for like a year and yes he has been right alot of the time and I do not consider him trash. Do you consider Joy Reid and her theories trash? She basically said Kristen Sinema " the white woman" was all about white supremacy last night. She refers to her as " the white woman". Is that real journalism to you?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
He's not wrong. Biden is extremely desperate. Bad things are almost guaranteed to happen. Chaos and tyranny are the only moves the Dems have left.

You quoted CNN I am not sure what he will say now. CNN is like the gold standard to liberals.
 
So you follow him daily I take it? I have been following him for like a year and yes he has been right alot of the time and I do not consider him trash. Do you consider Joy Reid and her theories trash? She basically said Kristen Sinema " the white woman" was all about white supremacy last night. She refers to her as " the white woman". Is that real journalism to you?
I personally can't stand Joy Reid.

And "Jack Posobiec is trash" is one of those things I'll take a stand on. He's a troll and little else.
 
You quoted CNN I am not sure what he will say now. CNN is like the gold standard to liberals.

Jack is worse than CNN by far so if he is the gold standard for GOP, then God help your party.
 
Is he often right? If he is, he's waaaaay more often wrong. He made his bones with Pizzagate & Seth Rich conspiracies. And it didn't end there by any stretch of the imagination.

He's got background in military intelligence I believe, so he might be on target with something like what's going on in Eastern Europe. But on the whole, he's trash and emblematic of the worst kind of politics.
Actually military analysts don't take him seriously, either. Bailey and others like him for his opinions, but when it comes to reporting facts, he's never right. Most people think he's just making stuff up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Its good that Presidents can’t declare war.

I can’t see the US or NATO going to war for Ukraine. Give ‘em aid? Sure. But the Russkies are safe from us until they roll west again. (Wouldn’t want to live in Poland or Slovakia right now. Buffers have a way of growing.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
I was just speaking with someone who gives lectures to the alphabet agencies and the military on foreign conflicts. He said Putin was simply wanting to be seen as restoring Russia to it's former greatness. Ukraine is critical to that. Sanctions can make it costly but the Europeans want that pipeline. That makes sanctions less costly. To go down in history as creating the next Russian empire means a lot to Putin and militarily there isn't much we can do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: largemouth and TMFT
I was just speaking with someone who gives lectures to the alphabet agencies and the military on foreign conflicts. He said Putin was simply wanting to be seen as restoring Russia to it's former greatness. Ukraine is critical to that. Sanctions can make it costly but the Europeans want that pipeline. That makes sanctions less costly. To go down in history as creating the next Russian empire means a lot to Putin and militarily there isn't much we can do.
Militarily? Sure there is. We are still the most powerful nation in the world. If Russia thought we would go to war over Ukraine, they wouldn't be doing this.

Politic will for war here? Let's hope not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMFT
Militarily? Sure there is. We are still the most powerful nation in the world. If Russia thought we would go to war over Ukraine, they wouldn't be doing this.

Politic will for war here? Let's hope not.
We could not stop them from taking Ukraine. It has been wargames, along with the Baltic States. They get them and then we have to dislodge them. That is harder. If we want to go into a longer, more protracted war, we could. But that opens up a much more disturbing question, what does China do? What does North Korea do? If we are tied down in Europe, South Korea and Taiwan (Japan?) Could be sacrificed.

No way do we have war on the table. No president would.
 
  • Like
Reactions: i'vegotwinners
the US/Europe has the same problem with Ukraine and Russia, that the working class has with both parties and SCOTUS.

knowing what's in the greater good/best interests, and being able to do anything about it, are two completely different things.

that said, Ukraine isn't Crimea, Russia 2021 isn't the USSR at it height, and not sure Russia wants to bite off more than it can chew.

how has the US done against much weaker countries since WWII.

that said, i have zero idea how the Ukraine citizenry back being part of Russia, and how much they don't, but if they are united against being annexed, i question if Russia would really want to get mired down in that.

that said, "the west" isn't going to war with Russia over Ukraine, and only the US military industrial complex would even think about it..

that said, the west promised not to extend NATO there, and doing so is just looking for trouble and prodding Russia.

that said, "the complex" just loves trouble, or even just the prospect of it.


that said, Russia doesn't want NATO in Ukraine any more than the US wanted nukes in Cuba, and for the same reason.

is talk of adding Ukraine to NATO only prodding Russia to go into Ukraine first?

Washington D.C., December 12, 2017 – U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu).
 
We could not stop them from taking Ukraine. It has been wargames, along with the Baltic States. They get them and then we have to dislodge them. That is harder. If we want to go into a longer, more protracted war, we could. But that opens up a much more disturbing question, what does China do? What does North Korea do? If we are tied down in Europe, South Korea and Taiwan (Japan?) Could be sacrificed.

No way do we have war on the table. No president would.
I agree we don’t have war on the table and most presidents, including Trump and Biden, wouldn’t do it.

But that’s a choice (and a good one!).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
That seems a rather odd response.
The West has interfered in Ukrainian affairs. And each side of the political divide in America thinks the other side engaged in corrupt dealings in Ukraine. Re imperialism, a lot of the world (and a lot of Americans) believe we are an empire.

I think that characterization, and the possible Russian pretext Goat hypothesized, is not accurate and certainly not enough to legitimately (by whose definition is a deep question) invade (especially the Russians who are more corrupt and in a different, worse way).

My response was just to point out that to much of the world—and to many Americans—there is a lot of truth to that story.
 
the US/Europe has the same problem with Ukraine and Russia, that the working class has with both parties and SCOTUS.

knowing what's in the greater good/best interests, and being able to do anything about it, are two completely different things.

that said, Ukraine isn't Crimea, Russia 2021 isn't the USSR at it height, and not sure Russia wants to bite off more than it can chew.

how has the US done against much weaker countries since WWII.

that said, i have zero idea how the Ukraine citizenry back being part of Russia, and how much they don't, but if they are united against being annexed, i question if Russia would really want to get mired down in that.

that said, "the west" isn't going to war with Russia over Ukraine, and only the US military industrial complex would even think about it..

that said, the west promised not to extend NATO there, and doing so is just looking for trouble and prodding Russia.

that said, "the complex" just loves trouble, or even just the prospect of it.


that said, Russia doesn't want NATO in Ukraine any more than the US wanted nukes in Cuba, and for the same reason.

is talk of adding Ukraine to NATO only prodding Russia to go into Ukraine first?

Washington D.C., December 12, 2017 – U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University (http://nsarchive.gwu.edu).
It’s def understated what a redline Ukraine is for Russia. Kiev is 500 easy miles from Moscow. They would/ will absolutely test NATO’s will. This is primary strategic imperative stuff for Russia. Ukraine either tilts towards them or has to be a failed state. The messages were sent with Crimea and Georgia.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT