Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

RedDevilQuebecois

Full Member
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
8,127
Won’t happen for a while.
Not good enough of a message to send considering that Pooh (Xi) already made his bed with Putin. For Biden to stand next to Zelensky would be a perfect response to all anti-democratic forces out there. And besides, how many times did we have POTUS making an unannounced trip to Iraq or Afghanistan during an ongoing war before?
 
Last edited:

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
I'm not saying that I do either, because I've no idea who would likely take over if Putin took a bullet to the back of his head. But I do think that someone taking over is more likely - more realistic - than is the notion of a breakup of Russia in separate nations, although I'd like to see that happen.
Even if someone replaces Putin, Ukraine is an existential threat for Russia and they will still engage in this kind of conflict over it
 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
Even if someone replaces Putin, Ukraine is an existential threat for Russia and they will still engage in this kind of conflict over it
Maybe a successor would still see it that way, but maybe not, and that's the hope.

Or even if they do still see it that way, they might still recognise a more immediate need to halt the ongoing destruction of Russia's ground forces by withdrawing them back to the pre-February 24th borders, a withdrawal they can blame on Putin's gross blunders. Then we might at least have an end to most of the fighting, barring sporadic shelling in both directions. After which, who knows what might develop from there.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
Maybe a successor would still see it that way, but maybe not, and that's the hope.

Or even if they do still see it that way, they might still recognise a more immediate need to halt the ongoing destruction of Russia's ground forces by withdrawing them back to the pre-February 24th borders, a withdrawal they can blame on Putin's gross blunders. Then we might at least have an end to most of the fighting, barring sporadic shelling in both directions. After which, who knows what might develop from there.
I just can't see any Russian leadership accepting Ukraine leaving their sphere of influence for the EU/Nato

Putin may have made huge blunders during the war but the reasons for doing so still make geopolitical strategic sense
 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
More cracks showing on Russian TV:

 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
I just can't see any Russian leadership accepting Ukraine leaving their sphere of influence for the EU/Nato

Putin may have made huge blunders during the war but the reasons for doing so still make geopolitical strategic sense
They don't, for the simple reason that there is no existential threat to Russia from NATO and the West and never has been. The only existential threat that exists is to the survival of Putin. Moreover, it's hardly geopolitically sensible to see your economy wrecked by sanctions, your international reputation dragged through the mud, your brightest and best fleeing the country, and your conventional forces suffering huge losses that will take many years to replace, if indeed they ever can be.
 

frostbite

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
3,260
Even if someone replaces Putin, Ukraine is an existential threat for Russia and they will still engage in this kind of conflict over it
Where do you base this? Ukraine is no threat to Russia, existential or not. As far as I know, most ordinary Russians do not have any problem with Ukraine as a member of EU and NATO.


 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
9,381
I don't think a Nato power would invade Russia but I can understand their concern with having a pro-America country on their door step. Considering how pro regime change the USA is
I can sort of understand that but I guess it highlights how ideologically bankrupt Russia is since the collapse of Soviet communism, that they have nothing that they can offer that can appeal against a more Western facing Ukraine making their own independent choice.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,423
Location
South Carolina
Also… irony is dead here regarding regime change. Russia literally sent in units to kill Zalensky in the opening stage of the war.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
89,052
Location
Centreback
In my opinion I think Nato could be used for aggressive wars in the future like Libya and Serbia. If I was Russian I would be wary of this fact and make sure they aren't on my door step. I think Nato is an expansion of US foreign power.
Russia like everyone else know NATO isn't going to invade if for no other reason than to avoid nuclear war. Russia don't want NATO expansion because they dream of recreating the USSR and not because they think NATO will invade.

I think Russia is thinking for the long term future. I said Ukraine is an existential threat to Russia because of its proximity to their major population centres and the terrain in that area. I understand Ukraine to be mostly flat land which would be ripe for an invasion into Russia.
Why would Ukraine want to invade Russia? What possible motivation is there?

You might think an invasion into Russia is a laughable scenario but I think from their perspective they have been invaded twice in the last 100 years and the leadership will ensure it won't happen again.
It is laughable. Nobody apart from Putin wants war.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,423
Location
South Carolina
In my opinion I think Nato could be used for aggressive wars in the future like Libya and Serbia. If I was Russian I would be wary of this fact and make sure they aren't on my door step.
But you also just said yourself that you don’t think NATO would invade Russia. You’re playing both sides of the argument here.
the leadership will ensure it won't happen again.
Their massive nuclear arsenal will ensure that won’t happen again.
 

GlastonSpur

Also disliked on an Aston Villa forum
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
17,716
Supports
Spurs
A defensive alliance which sometimes engages in offensive actions

If you were a Russian leader would you not be wary of this kind of group being on your borders?

For me I see Russias stance on Ukraine similar to the Monroe Doctrine where no one is allowed to mess around on the USA's border
No, because as I've already said, no one thinks that NATO would even remotely consider invading a nuclear-armed Russia.

If Russia has the right, in your eyes, to invade Ukraine because it's on the Russian border and Russia doesn't like Ukraine's west-ward leanings, then presumably you also think that Finland has the right to invade Russia ... because it too has a border with Russia and doesn't like Russia..

feck the Monroe doctrine - I'm not here to defend some 19th century BS. There are zero excuses for Russia's actions in Ukraine.
 

Lemoor

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
849
Location
Warsaw
I just can't see any Russian leadership accepting Ukraine leaving their sphere of influence for the EU/Nato
Just as they will never accept any former Eastern Bloc countries leaving their sphere of influence?
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
But you also just said yourself that you don’t think NATO would invade Russia. You’re playing both sides of the argument here.

Their massive nuclear arsenal will ensure that won’t happen again.
Yes I don't think Nato countries would invade Russia because its insane. But I understand the Russian leadership taking actions against that prospect.

Nato can't say they are just a defensive alliance when they have waged offensive wars before

stop playing the got ya card
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,423
Location
South Carolina
Yes I don't think Nato countries would invade Russia because its insane. But I understand the Russian leadership taking actions against that prospect.

Nato can't say they are just a defensive alliance when they have waged offensive wars before

stop playing the got ya card
So you understand the Russian high command acting on an idea that has its basis in insanity?

It isn’t a “gotcha” card. It’s a “you’re overlooking the fact that Russia is being aggressive because they wanted to be aggressive” card. Russia isn’t doing this to keep NATO away. Hell, if they conquered Ukraine, NATO would be closer with more countries on Russia’s border than before. What you’re “understanding” makes zero sense.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
No, because as I've already said, no one thinks that NATO would even remotely consider invading a nuclear-armed Russia.

If Russia has the right, in your eyes, to invade Ukraine because it's on the Russian border and Russia doesn't like Ukraine's west-ward leanings, then presumably you also think that Finland has the right to invade Russia ... because it too has a border with Russia and doesn't like Russia..

feck the Monroe doctrine - I'm not here to defend some 19th century BS. There are zero excuses for Russia's actions in Ukraine.
It's not 19th century bullshit.

The great powers will play their games. Russia is one of them
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,255
Location
Hollywood CA
Yes I don't think Nato countries would invade Russia because its insane. But I understand the Russian leadership taking actions against that prospect.

Nato can't say they are just a defensive alliance when they have waged offensive wars before

stop playing the got ya card
So you understand why a authoritarian dictatorship would want to destroy an alliance of democratic countries from expanding towards its borders. It’s to stop democracy from reaching Russia, not because Putin thinks NATO is going to attack Russia.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,822
Location
Florida
It's not 19th century bullshit.

The great powers will play their games. Russia is one of them
McCain described them perfectly, but not as a great power. Their strength comes from fossil fuels & their aging nuclear arsenal.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
So you understand the Russian high command acting on an idea that has its basis in insanity?

It isn’t a “gotcha” card. It’s a “you’re overlooking the fact that Russia is being aggressive because they wanted to be aggressive” card. Russia isn’t doing this to keep NATO away. Hell, if they conquered Ukraine, NATO would be closer with more countries on Russia’s border than before. What you’re “understanding” makes zero sense.
I think you are overlooking the geopolitical aspect of this conflict. you are way too emotional over it
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,061
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
So you understand why a authoritarian dictatorship would want to destroy an alliance of democratic countries from expanding towards its borders. It’s to stop democracy from reaching Russia, not because Putin thinks NATO is going to attack Russia.
This is a good point. A democracy in Ukraine would feck Putin
 

Frosty

Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
17,243
Location
Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango!
A great power with an economy smaller than Italy’s (soon to be smaller than Belgium’s). That’s some great power.
If we regress to the "great power" theory of international relations then we might as well also accept that small countries have zero agency and cannot complain when invaded or exploited.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,255
Location
Hollywood CA
If we regress to the "great power" theory of international relations then we might as well also accept that small countries have zero agency and cannot complain when invaded or exploited.
Technically they can’t, unless larger states swoop in to defend them. The international system is an anarchic dominance hierarchy like that.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,423
Location
South Carolina
what fantasy hypotheticals did I make?
NATO invading Russia and Ukraine invading Russia…

Russia knows good and well neither of those is going to happen. Basing an “understanding” of Russia’s actions in Ukraine based on those two scenarios is basing your understanding on fantasy.
 

Lemoor

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
849
Location
Warsaw
What makes this essential difference then? Russia didn't leave those other countries alone out of goodness of their heart, but because costs of keeping that empire were much bigger than advantages coming from that and capabilities that Russia had at that point. It is an entirely plausible scenario that this too will happen with Ukraine.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,423
Location
South Carolina
as if nato didn't bomb the feck out of Serbia and Libya

I was making the point they can be an offensive power
And once again, neither of those have the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

Interesting though that you keep bringing up Serbia, considering what brought about them getting bombed by NATO.