Ukraine invasion

[CavaliereVerde]

 

[DT5]

Would like to see him in the ring with a couple of Klitscho's

 

[Mumpsimus]

Imho, Putin will lose the war if he wins it. Sanctions won't disappear just because he's slaughtered the resistance and reality will eventually permeate enough of the Kremlin and wider society to make his tenure, um, untenable....otoh, if he stops right now, does a mea culpa, lets the Ukrainians choose their own destiny and throw his remaining Rubles at an amazingly generous reconstruction programme... then, and only then, pigs will fly.

 

[Oscar Reed]

Russia lost Chelsea.

Abramovich says he will sell Chelsea

Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich says he plans to sell the Premier League club.

www.bbc.com

 

[CavaliereVerde]

a couple of Klitscho's

 

[tomorton]

Putin has justified his action in Ukraine by the possibility of NATO membership leading to NATO tanks being parked along Russia's border. If he somehow takes the whole of Ukraine that is exactly what he ends up with - he will have moved his own border right up against NATO's and lost the buffer state between NATO tanks and Russia that he has told his allies he wanted.

More likely he will wish to see Ukraine split in two, rather like East and West Germany post-1945. Then he keeps NATO tanks away from Russia, plus he has a puppet government in East Ukraine. He may not need to take the capital to do this. It might be worth more for him to leave Kyiv in Ukrainian hands, especially as Ukrainian resistance in the city is likely to be the toughest conceivable. Its even possible to see Kyiv as the new Berlin, an island occupied by Ukraine but isolated within East Ukraine.

This end-game might also explain why Russian armed forces have made such tentative advances.

 

[Mumpsimus]

Putin has justified his action in Ukraine by the possibility of NATO membership leading to NATO tanks being parked along Russia's border. If he somehow takes the whole of Ukraine that is exactly what he ends up with - he will have moved his own border right up against NATO's and lost the buffer state between NATO tanks and Russia that he has told his allies he wanted.

More likely he will wish to see Ukraine split in two, rather like East and West Germany post-1945. Then he keeps NATO tanks away from Russia, plus he has a puppet government in East Ukraine. He may not need to take the capital to do this. It might be worth more for him to leave Kyiv in Ukrainian hands, especially as Ukrainian resistance in the city is likely to be the toughest conceivable. Its even possible to see Kyiv as the new Berlin, an island occupied by Ukraine but isolated within East Ukraine.

This end-game might also explain why Russian armed forces have made such tentative advances.

I agree that this was possibly the desired result pre-invasion but things have changed so much in the last week or so that this must have at least some effect on his expectations. As you pointed out, he has just managed to bring about the very situation that he wanted to avoid....so now what? Granted that the EU is going to suffer high energy prices in the short term but again, Putin has provoked it into ditching current energy policy that relied on Russia to a great extent to one where there may well be no demand for their oil and gas within a very few years. If the scramble to switch to renewables and grid-scale battery storage accelerates then that, along with reduced Ukrainian demand could be that being short oil might be a thing in the near future. This may shunt Russia closer to China and I can see the Chinese bailing out their failing economy - but, there will be a substantial quid pro quo and Russia might end up being on a leash and very much a junior. Meanwhile, we'll be grateful to Putin for helping the West toward energy autonomy, reduced pollution and quite possibly, a Russian society that wants to make a break with the cold war dinosaurs.

 

[timsk]

The conflict is going to be resolved in one of three ways . . .
1, Annihilation of Ukraine.
2. Annihilation of the world.
3. At the negotiating table.

Assuming that no one is in favour of the first two options (including Putin), then option three must prevail. This invites the obvious question: how does one get the great big grizzly Russian bear to the negotiating table? Well, however one goes about it, the one thing one absolutely should not do is to take it's honey pot and poke it with a bloody great big stick. That's the height of stupidity and the consequences of which are pretty much inevitable: the bear will take one almighty dump on Europe. (For those not quite following the analogy, this means either options 1 or 2, above.) Unless and until we move beyond the playground politics of good guys Vs bad guys and accept that Putin and Russia have legitimate concerns that the west (thus far) have refused even to acknowledge - then this isn't going to end well. For anyone.

Here's an excellent article that addresses these issues and what the west - not Putin - needs to do to bring an end to this crisis. Enjoy . . .

A Response to Toby Young’s Babyish Piece About Ukraine​

NB: It's well worth reading the comments btl - some good posts there with useful links, IMO.
Tim.

 

[tomorton]

Two things have surprised me about Russia's 2022 attack on Ukraine. Let's recognise this didn't come out of the blue, its a continuation in the same war of the Crimea and Donbas campaigns from 2014.

Firstly, the unity and depth of the west's response. Secondly, the tentative Russian advance.

The west's response suggests we believe Russia can't be stopped militarily in Ukraine but there is ample range for gradually relaxing diplomatic and commercial sanctions if Russia is cooperative. Russia's cautious advance suggests they really don't want to gobble up Ukraine - all that would do is move Russia and NATO nose to nose along the new Iron Curtain border, a face-off that Putin has told his allies he wanted to prevent.

Both sides are now playing for the division of Ukraine. Zelenskyy and his fighters are fighting for West Ukraine, not Ukraine. He will want it to be as big as possible - whereas the west will want it to be only as big as necessary - big enough (with East Ukraine) to be a true NATO-Russia buffer, but not so big that this looks like a Russian military defeat, which Putin or his successor might feel they need to avenge.

 

[Mumpsimus]

The conflict is going to be resolved in one of three ways . . .
1, Annihilation of Ukraine.
2. Annihilation of the world.
3. At the negotiating table.

Assuming that no one is in favour of the first two options (including Putin), then option three must prevail. This invites the obvious question: how does one get the great big grizzly Russian bear to the negotiating table? Well, however one goes about it, the one thing one absolutely should not do is to take it's honey pot and poke it with a bloody great big stick. That's the height of stupidity and the consequences of which are pretty much inevitable: the bear will take one almighty dump ....

Weeell, yes, of course, any sane person would go for option three. Actually getting Russia to make agreements on which it does not renege has long been problematic and imo Putin only understands the Big Stick and mistook the wimpy western velvet glove as license to do anything he wanted. I agree completely that national interests persist longer than friendship/enmity but I think that both the West and Putin have got the wrong end of the stick - if the West really wanted to eff Russia decisively, the time to do that was 20 years ago when they were on their knees. The fact that there have been no western military invasions during that period should give credence to the line that NATO is defensive.

I hope that the increasing internal pressure will encourage Putin toward a more peaceful and pragmatic approach and that some kind of deal can be brokered....which will probably end up leaving everybody unhappy

 

[CavaliereVerde]

Both sides are now playing for the division of Ukraine. Zelenskyy and his fighters are fighting for West Ukraine, not Ukraine.

I disagree, I think they will concede only Crimea, everything more would be a victory for Putin and would create a precedent that western coutries can't protect a democracy from an aggression.

 

[tomorton]

I disagree, I think they will concede only Crimea, everything more would be a victory for Putin and would create a precedent that western coutries can't protect a democracy from an aggression.

Conceding Crimea is just a formality, on the ground its already "independent" and Russian-controlled, so Putin would find it damaging to have to argue to his allies that the Ukrainian invasion was necessary to secure recognition of Crimea.

The west is not the military protector of all democracies. Whether the west can or can't protect a neutral democracy outside its alliances is irrelevant.

Whatever outcome is reached in Ukraine, it has to stand on its own feet and the three sides must think they each got something. Otherwise we'll be back here again in 5 years.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

Whatever outcome is reached in Ukraine, it has to stand on its own feet and the three sides must think they each got something. Otherwise we'll be back here again in 5 years.

There was no comeback fo Nazis after WW2.
Putin has already lost his war, it is just a matter of what will be the price to pay for him, for ukraine and for western countries.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

The west is not the military protector of all democracies. Whether the west can or can't protect a neutral democracy outside its alliances is irrelevant.

Nothing will be the same after this war, EU , NATO and UN will be different.
A new world order.

 

[Mumpsimus]

I think this still comes back to Putin: if he is to remain at the helm then he must deliver a discernible "win" and the only way that just settling for Crimea would be possible is if he gets replaced (or novichokked) so the new leadership can blame him. Atm I can't see the latter happening anytime very soon but ya never know as he is already 70 and theoretically could fall off his perch almost anytime.

 

[Mumpsimus]

There was no comeback fo Nazis after WW2.

...eh? The top guys were executed or imprisoned and the country was occupied. ...and of course, the wilier amongst them changed their identities and fled to warmer climes but still, living out your days in some South American village whilst looking over your shoulder for Mossad is not "no comeback" in my book.

 

[Farm Yard Forex]

...eh? The top guys were executed or imprisoned and the country was occupied. ...and of course, the wilier amongst them changed their identities and fled to warmer climes but still, living out your days in some South American village whilst looking over your shoulder for Mossad is not "no comeback" in my book.

Also the difference is with this war the impression is that the Russian people don't want this while Hitler had brainwashed Germany. Putin has left his position completely untenable regardless of the outcome of this war now.

 

[Mumpsimus]

Also the difference is with this war the impression is that the Russian people don't want this while Hitler had brainwashed Germany. Putin has left his position completely untenable regardless of the outcome of this war now.

You may well be right that many Russians never wanted the war in the first place but equally, an awful lot did. What seems to be unbelievable through western eyes can make perfect sense if you've been fed a steady stream of single message propaganda. Russian scepticism has to drastically increase, so much so that the anti-war folk are able to have any influence on the Kremlin. As it is, I see fat chance of that happening before the Ukrainians have been bludgeoned into submission which means that it will either be due to the scenario I mentioned earlier where Russia loses its best energy customers (2 to 3 years at an absolute minimum imo) or that the Ukrainian occupation degenerates into an asymptomatic war along the lines of Afghanistan, which of course would probably mean the deliberate destruction of any useful infrastructure and mass murder. Large numbers of coffins coming back home to Russia might sway things in the shorter term but it hasn't bothered Putin in the past so one has to hope that the cracks show around him rather than hoping that he's going to turn over a new leaf.

 

[CavaliereVerde]

 

[Atilla]

I'm not condoning the Russian invasion into Ukraine but I do think there is a lot of hypocrisy here...

I would respect your pov more if you had consistent sentiments about Iraq, Syria, Iran and Libya and Latin America but there is no consistency from my perspective. The same goes for Afghanistan and no idea why the US didn't attack Saudi but you guys get the gist.

US, UK and France have caused countless regime changes all over the World. The US ranks 1st and France 2nd with Africa. The UK is a big player of sorts too but far more subtle.

Iraq war was illegal, there was no justification for war. US and UK went in alone. They basically killed, raped and pillaged the country key interest being oil of course. No WMD or Nukes ever found but US told UN and the world they knew Saddam had them and that they were hidden. Slam dunk case.

The US did the same in its background in Latin America, opposing any democratically elected socialist government. They supported Juntas who tortured the sh!t out of anybody with an ounce of social integrity in them.

Today in Iraq there are well above average deformed babies due to the use of uranium tipped weapons left all over the country.


I beg to differ with the mega skewed news reporting on our MSM. Russians have gone in very gently. The mission is not to kill or destroy but clearly to implement regime change. No need to go into the history or the rights and wrongs but anybody who remembers the Cuban missile crisis should understand Ukraine joining NATO will get an extremely cold reaction.

I feel very sorry for the Ukrainian people and support their freedom and independence, however, one has to tread a carefully balanced line when one has such troubles on one's borders.

I think there is or was a great opportunity to play off Russia and the US off against each other whilst conducting affairs. Swiss model comes to mind. However, the level of diplomacy required is well above the comedian's abilities. He is indeed a brave man. The situation doesn't require bravery imo but some cool heads and common sense.

I fear if the Ukrainian people choose to fight the bear, Ukraine will become just another one of those proxy countries; much like Iraq, Syria and Iran in the war between US and Russia.

Very sad and tragic situation and I do hope peace will prevail.

I suspect the Russians will use the utilities such as electric power, water and food to bring the people into control and submission in their efforts to navigate to a new level of authoritarian control over the country. They will establish their friendly political party and leader no doubt. Not ideal but at least better than war death and destruction. Then after many decades there will come a day, much like Germany, Ukraine can carry on as before.

IMO negotiations and diplomacy better than death and destruction and Zelensky whilst a super guy and has done well, Russians have left him a back door he can leave out of with his head held high.

I wish peace for Ukraine and hope they can see US and the West have no interest in their country or people but to peddle wars, separation and opportunity to sell weapons.