Sweden is also protected by the simple fact that it hasn't got a common border with Russia. Russia would either have to take Finland first, or would have to launch the invasion through the Baltic Sea. Looking at the state of their fleet, that wouldn't be an invasion, that would be a bloodshed. Only Russian blood most likely.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
No, the longer this carries on the more carnage this causes to the Ukraine and Russia, but nearly all other countries will not touch this with a 10 foot barge pole. The biggest impact will be felt by Russia.
This is literally their fight, or more specifically, Putin’s fight and the West and China are waiting in the wings to pick up the spoils.
I hope you are right.
If sweden joined nato now it would divide the country, not unite it. While there is decent fluctuating casual support for nato there are also large groups with very strong sentiments against nato especially left of center.
What are the arguments against joining NATO presented by the left of centre?
Is it not better to stay neutral?
Sure, until you’re invaded.
Beyond that, Sweden has participated in 4 NATO led military campaigns and has an agreement in place to let NATO use bases in the country for training and for combat if Sweden were attacked, so…
Neutral in the face of a brutal dictator? And when the alternative is banding together with other democracies in an alliance that pretty much ensures that Russia will never dare to attack Sweden?
The answer to those questions is obvious to me.
They are not a former Soviet State.
That is where I was going with this.
The history of Ukraine is well documented.
Rightly or wrongly Russia/Putin think they have a say with what happens in Ukraine. They have a sizeable Russian population that wants to be part of Russia. The Maidan conflict.
It would be wrong to lump Ukraine and Sweden together in this.
EDIT:
You can also include Finland that is neutral in this.
No one is saying Putin is a nice guy.
He does not have a rationale to invade Sweden. See my answer to CR.
First, they're not Russians. They are Ukrainians who happen to speak Russian as their first language.
Second, they've now seen first-hand what life under Russia means. I'd doubt if more than 5% of them want to be part of Russia - and many of those will have already moved to Crimea or the eastern "independent republics"
Good. Then he'd have even less of a rationale to invade a Sweden protected by NATO forces that would destroy any Russian attack in a matter of hours.
Fair enough.
But these people wanted a pro Russian government which was removed.
As I said Russia does not have a 'claim' to Sweden.
We must disagree here.
The evidence for that is what? Rigged elections held under Putin's instruction?
Don't bother"debating" with him.
Those people who fought and died against the new government.
14,000 . Why should that happen?
Just wrongly, big guy. Just wrongly.
Dunno why you’re bringing up “they’re not a former Soviet state” bit. We’re talking about joining NATO or not, not if they’ve got history. Which… they do… it’s just from the Russia Empire era.
And about Finland, sure… if you ignore the whole getting invaded by the USSR twice thing.
The former Soviet states issue was where the conflict between the US (NATO) and Russia started.
East Germany been reunified was ok with Russia. But the other states joining NATO was not ok with Russia.
But Ukraine was the Red Line for Russia.
So Sweden and Finland do not arise as issues.
It doesn’t matter if it wasn’t okay with Russia. They have no right to tell a sovereign state what alliances they can or can’t join.
The Ukrainian parliament had already voted overwhelmingly to approve finalising an agreement with the EU. Putin told his puppet - Yanukovych - to stop it and instead go for closer ties with Russia.
When this triggered a popular uprising, Yanukovych fled the country. And then that same Parliament voted 328–0 in favour of removing Yanukovych from office.
It's abundantly clear that a big majority of Ukrainians supported the ousting of Yanukovych and thugs/goons that kept him power. If some brain-washed idiots died trying to turn the clock back to some mythic golden age of the USSR, then that's their bad choice.
He doesn't get this. Instead he seems to imagine that the prior existence of the USSR - held together through brutality and oppression - gives Putin the right to use the same brutality and oppression on whatever nations he likes. Them days are over.
The main ones I've been hearing:
1 "Freedom of alliance serves us well". (We haven't been at war for ages.)
2 "There are no concrete threats." (Russia only attacks countries they see as theirs, ones that used to be under Russia ). Though all will admit Gotland is a strategic place, and Russia would want to take it if they were invading Baltic countries.
3. "We may be forced to fight for illegitimate allies." (like "hypothetically having to defend Erdogan regime against a Kurdish liberation movement coming from Syria")
4. "It is unnecessary to provoke Russia." (They don't see Sweden as a threat, but with permanent NATO bases, they would)
5. "We are already protected." (We have EU mutual defense clause, and the EU is a democratic union. No need for purely "military alliances" that include undemocratic regimes..)
@Red Dreams Are you from Russia or anywhere else where Russian language is wide-spread? Do you know the history? Were you present in Ukraine when "maidan" took place? Russian Federation have nothing absolutely sweet fook all in terms of their "right" to attack Ukraine.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I dont see the point. How will the spares for these aircraft be provided? The aircraft are as good as junk in 6 months time.
I don't think he cares much about that. He's just showing everyone he can because he's so "powerful"
And here is what France has been doing, in breach of EU’s sanctions.
"France has delivered military equipment to Russia until 2020, after the embargo decided by the EU"
Edit: it seems to be less serious. And not really a breach.
"France has delivered military equipment to Russia until 2020, after the embargo decided by the EU"
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Edit: it seems to be less serious. And not really a breach.
Last edited:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I note that Ukraine overwhelmingly (92.3%) voted for independence at the end of 1991. According to Wikipedia 55% of “ethnic Russians” (a category open to interpretation?) voted for independence. Every oblast with the exception of Crimea did so comfortably - well over 80% - including Donetsk and Luhansk. Crimea stands out as just 54% voted in favor there.
So two questions:
Are the results of this referendum considered reliable? I.E. was there manipulation or rigging?
Is there any reliable data to suggest that such sentiment has significantly changed in the last thirty years, especially with regards to Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea? In other words, how can we accurately assess the actual popularity of the separatist agendas in these regions today?
So two questions:
Are the results of this referendum considered reliable? I.E. was there manipulation or rigging?
Is there any reliable data to suggest that such sentiment has significantly changed in the last thirty years, especially with regards to Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea? In other words, how can we accurately assess the actual popularity of the separatist agendas in these regions today?
It's a good question and I wonder what these "ethnic Russians" in Ukraine think of the invasion.