International Politics

[stan]

Yep, he hasn’t got the balls.
He is only taking on Ukraine as he knows no one will seriously come to their aide

I reckon he does have the balls. If he gets Lithuania, then with Belarus as his ally, he would then have a port in the Baltic sea.

He already has Kaliningrad which is the only ice free port in the Baltic.
He won’t attempt to take a NATO country in Lithuania as the return fire would be swift and decisive from all NATO members.
As it is the Ukrainians are holding him at bay and are even taking back cities like Kharkiv. His army is getting destroyed currently and there has even been soldiers refusing to join the battle or turning around and heading home. Massive failure so far

I reckon if there is one bloke on earth who did have the balls it would be Putin.

Nothing he says at the moment can be trusted, I mean even in this Ukraine war it was thought at first he was just after a small region but its clear he wants the entire Ukraine back.

I don't normally get to worried about international affairs but got to be honest his little moment in time has me slightly concerned especially the increasing relationship between Russia and China.

China's aggression towards us politically has escalated around the same time Russia has escalated with Ukraine...….potentially all coincidence BUT if you were ever going to start a world war the number one step would be splitting the US defence forces resources no better way to do that then have them fighting a couple of battles one in Europe in the Pacific. Throw in western world morale at a low point on the back of the Covid era and some what financial uncertainty the timing is somewhat right if that was the path you wanted to take. Obviously that is a shitload of speculation and almost fairytale stuff but I've never trusted Russia or China less than I have now.

Some good points in there. The problem is Russia have NATO first up to contend with, the US may or may not look to get in that. NATO itself has the resources to look after themselves without the US.

[MW]

It's all irrelevant if they want to play with their nukes...

[Jim05]

It's all irrelevant if they want to play with their nukes...

Hopefully the Russian nukes are as reliable or useful the rest of their machinery or weapons.
They have had dozens of tanks taken out by Molotov cocktails and hundreds of vehicles break down or run out of fuel.
Was hilarious seeing the Ukrainian farmer using his tractor to tow a Russian tank that had ran out of fuel.

[stan]

It's all irrelevant if they want to play with their nukes...

Hopefully the Russian nukes are as reliable or useful the rest of their machinery or weapons.
They have had dozens of tanks taken out by Molotov cocktails and hundreds of vehicles break down or run out of fuel.
Was hilarious seeing the Ukrainian farmer using his tractor to tow a Russian tank that had ran out of fuel.

Mate where are you getting this from?

[whufc]

It's all irrelevant if they want to play with their nukes...

Hopefully the Russian nukes are as reliable or useful the rest of their machinery or weapons.
They have had dozens of tanks taken out by Molotov cocktails and hundreds of vehicles break down or run out of fuel.
Was hilarious seeing the Ukrainian farmer using his tractor to tow a Russian tank that had ran out of fuel.

Mate where are you getting this from?

Tik tok is where it is all at.

[Jim05]

It's all irrelevant if they want to play with their nukes...

Hopefully the Russian nukes are as reliable or useful the rest of their machinery or weapons.
They have had dozens of tanks taken out by Molotov cocktails and hundreds of vehicles break down or run out of fuel.
Was hilarious seeing the Ukrainian farmer using his tractor to tow a Russian tank that had ran out of fuel.

Mate where are you getting this from?

https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1498025265510830080?s=20&t=4pqN_xJLQvVWHcX2MrLy2Q

[Wedgie]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

[whufc]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

For us over here in Oz if it avoids WW3 it seems an extremely small price to pay.

[RB]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

Depends on what is meant by neutrality.

If the Ukrainian people want their country to enter into alliances, or have closer ties with the West, then that's entirely their business; not the Russian government's.

NATO is no threat to Russia, which is of course free to enter into its own alliances or unions if it wishes.

The aggressor here is Russia, and while I suppose making demands themselves doesn't harm anyone, the fact that the Ukrainians haven't accepting them is no justification whatsoever for Russia's actions, IMO.

In some ways Ukraine is already neutral - it has not really done anything to Russia.

Also, Ukraine is a democracy, albeit it a flawed one. Russia is not, and thus you're playing a dangerous game if you cave into its demands. Really I should be saying Putin's demands, as it's not at all clear the extent to which the Russian people support the invasion.

In terms of Russia demanding Crimea to be given back, well, if every state or province which was formerly part of a different country was given back, the world map would look very different. Part of Europe's stability since 1945 is owed to the fact that political borders - though in some cases arbitrary - have been respected (mainly).

However, if the Crimean people want to join Russia, then no that demand isn't in and of itself one that I would call extreme.

[Wedgie]

NATO is no threat to Russia

Gee whiz, not even I believe that, I doubt Russia would!
NATO is Russia's biggest threat!

I don't think we would be too happy if Tasmania decided to become apart of China.

And yeah as Crimea is made up of a majority of Russians and technically the transfer to Ukraine was unlawful then it doesn't seem a biggy.

[RB]

NATO is no threat to Russia

Gee whiz, not even I believe that, I doubt Russia would!
NATO is Russia's biggest threat!

Having semi-westernized semi-democracies on Russia's doorstep may indirectly make Putin's continued reign as Russian president shakier.

But yes, absolutely NATO is no threat to the security of Russia itself, as evidenced by its never having acted aggressively towards Russia or the former Soviet Union since it was founded seventy years ago.

[Wedgie]

NATO is no threat to Russia

Gee whiz, not even I believe that, I doubt Russia would!
NATO is Russia's biggest threat!

Having semi-westernized semi-democracies on Russia's doorstep may indirectly make Putin's continued reign as Russian president shakier.

But yes, absolutely NATO is no threat to the security of Russia itself, as evidenced by its never having acted aggressively towards Russia or the former Soviet Union since it was founded seventy years ago.

Disagreed, NATOs build up of military personnel on Russia's doorstep over the last few years would be inerpreted as a threat by most people!
Not to mention their bombing of Serbia which was a Russian ally and their continuing expansion into Eastern Europe.
If Canada and Mexico joined the old Soviet Union do you think the US would have felt threatened?

[RB]

There's a difference between feeling threatened and being threatened, although even then I don't think Putin's actions can be attributed to genuine concern.

Given the extraordinary unlikelihood of NATO deciding to invade Russia, or conduct any sort of unilateral military operation against it which isn't solely in defence of a NATO country or ally, I am very comfortable saying NATO is no threat to Russia.

[shoe boy]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

Depends on what is meant by neutrality.

If the Ukrainian people want their country to enter into alliances, or have closer ties with the West, then that's entirely their business; not the Russian government's.

NATO is no threat to Russia, which is of course free to enter into its own alliances or unions if it wishes.

The aggressor here is Russia, and while I suppose making demands themselves doesn't harm anyone, the fact that the Ukrainians haven't accepting them is no justification whatsoever for Russia's actions, IMO.

In some ways Ukraine is already neutral - it has not really done anything to Russia.

Also, Ukraine is a democracy, albeit it a flawed one. Russia is not, and thus you're playing a dangerous game if you cave into its demands. Really I should be saying Putin's demands, as it's not at all clear the extent to which the Russian people support the invasion.

In terms of Russia demanding Crimea to be given back, well, if every state or province which was formerly part of a different country was given back, the world map would look very different. Part of Europe's stability since 1945 is owed to the fact that political borders - though in some cases arbitrary - have been respected (mainly).

However, if the Crimean people want to join Russia, then no that demand isn't in and of itself one that I would call extreme.

There has been Russian insurgents(freedom fighters) fighting for the past 8 years.
As for NATO would the US accept Russia suppling Venezuela , Mexico , Cuba with weapons and Russian military bases?

[MW]

There's a difference between feeling threatened and being threatened, although even then I don't think Putin's actions can be attributed to genuine concern.

Given the extraordinary unlikelihood of NATO deciding to invade Russia, or conduct any sort of unilateral military operation against it which isn't solely in defence of a NATO country or ally, I am very comfortable saying NATO is no threat to Russia.

Is this a hobby for you? Impressive knowledge on all this.

[Wedgie]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

Depends on what is meant by neutrality.

If the Ukrainian people want their country to enter into alliances, or have closer ties with the West, then that's entirely their business; not the Russian government's.

NATO is no threat to Russia, which is of course free to enter into its own alliances or unions if it wishes.

The aggressor here is Russia, and while I suppose making demands themselves doesn't harm anyone, the fact that the Ukrainians haven't accepting them is no justification whatsoever for Russia's actions, IMO.

In some ways Ukraine is already neutral - it has not really done anything to Russia.

Also, Ukraine is a democracy, albeit it a flawed one. Russia is not, and thus you're playing a dangerous game if you cave into its demands. Really I should be saying Putin's demands, as it's not at all clear the extent to which the Russian people support the invasion.

In terms of Russia demanding Crimea to be given back, well, if every state or province which was formerly part of a different country was given back, the world map would look very different. Part of Europe's stability since 1945 is owed to the fact that political borders - though in some cases arbitrary - have been respected (mainly).

However, if the Crimean people want to join Russia, then no that demand isn't in and of itself one that I would call extreme.

There has been Russian insurgents(freedom fighters) fighting for the past 8 years.
As for NATO would the US accept Russia suppling Venezuela , Mexico , Cuba with weapons and Russian military bases?

Exactly. I don't think his request is that ridiculous and that's with us hearing what is probably a very skewed version of events.

[RB]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

Depends on what is meant by neutrality.

If the Ukrainian people want their country to enter into alliances, or have closer ties with the West, then that's entirely their business; not the Russian government's.

NATO is no threat to Russia, which is of course free to enter into its own alliances or unions if it wishes.

The aggressor here is Russia, and while I suppose making demands themselves doesn't harm anyone, the fact that the Ukrainians haven't accepting them is no justification whatsoever for Russia's actions, IMO.

In some ways Ukraine is already neutral - it has not really done anything to Russia.

Also, Ukraine is a democracy, albeit it a flawed one. Russia is not, and thus you're playing a dangerous game if you cave into its demands. Really I should be saying Putin's demands, as it's not at all clear the extent to which the Russian people support the invasion.

In terms of Russia demanding Crimea to be given back, well, if every state or province which was formerly part of a different country was given back, the world map would look very different. Part of Europe's stability since 1945 is owed to the fact that political borders - though in some cases arbitrary - have been respected (mainly).

However, if the Crimean people want to join Russia, then no that demand isn't in and of itself one that I would call extreme.

There has been Russian insurgents(freedom fighters) fighting for the past 8 years.
As for NATO would the US accept Russia suppling Venezuela , Mexico , Cuba with weapons and Russian military bases?

There's been plenty of military co-operation between Russia and Cuba and Venezuela over the years and I daresay the Americans haven't been happy with it. You'll notice though that the Americans haven't invaded either of these countries.

The Russians are welcome to oppose (peacefully) Ukraine being part of NATO all they like. I suspect that current events actually make Ukraine more likely to be allowed to join NATO than they were previously, so possibly an own goal there by Putin.

To me 'threat' means that there has to be a reasonable possibility of causing harm. The idea that NATO would decide to invade or bomb Russia is remote, to say the least.

Plenty of countries are diametrically opposed to their neighbours politically. That is by no means a barrier to peace.

If the people of Ukraine want to join NATO, and NATO accept them (which wasn't a certainty at least until the last week), then the Russians can holler all they like, but that doesn't make NATO a threat, and certainly doesn't justify Putin's murderous actions.

[Jim05]

Is Putin's demands of returning Crimea to Russia and the neutrality of the Ukraine really that extreme?

Depends on what is meant by neutrality.

If the Ukrainian people want their country to enter into alliances, or have closer ties with the West, then that's entirely their business; not the Russian government's.

NATO is no threat to Russia, which is of course free to enter into its own alliances or unions if it wishes.

The aggressor here is Russia, and while I suppose making demands themselves doesn't harm anyone, the fact that the Ukrainians haven't accepting them is no justification whatsoever for Russia's actions, IMO.

In some ways Ukraine is already neutral - it has not really done anything to Russia.

Also, Ukraine is a democracy, albeit it a flawed one. Russia is not, and thus you're playing a dangerous game if you cave into its demands. Really I should be saying Putin's demands, as it's not at all clear the extent to which the Russian people support the invasion.

In terms of Russia demanding Crimea to be given back, well, if every state or province which was formerly part of a different country was given back, the world map would look very different. Part of Europe's stability since 1945 is owed to the fact that political borders - though in some cases arbitrary - have been respected (mainly).

However, if the Crimean people want to join Russia, then no that demand isn't in and of itself one that I would call extreme.

There has been Russian insurgents(freedom fighters) fighting for the past 8 years.
As for NATO would the US accept Russia suppling Venezuela , Mexico , Cuba with weapons and Russian military bases?

There's been plenty of military co-operation between Russia and Cuba and Venezuela over the years and I daresay the Americans haven't been happy with it. You'll notice though that the Americans haven't invaded either of these countries.

The Russians are welcome to oppose (peacefully) Ukraine being part of NATO all they like. I suspect that current events actually make Ukraine more likely to be allowed to join NATO than they were previously, so possibly an own goal there by Putin.

To me 'threat' means that there has to be a reasonable possibility of causing harm. The idea that NATO would decide to invade or bomb Russia is remote, to say the least.

Plenty of countries are diametrically opposed to their neighbours politically. That is by no means a barrier to peace.

If the people of Ukraine want to join NATO, and NATO accept them (which wasn't a certainty at least until the last week), then the Russians can holler all they like, but that doesn't make NATO a threat, and certainly doesn't justify Putin's murderous actions.

And I think Ukraine joining NATO is just an excuse by Putin. He wants the old Soviet Union back and wants to install his own puppet government in Ukraine like he has done in Belarus. He would then move on to Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova etc.
Even if Ukraine had zero intent to join NATO I believe they still would have been invaded eventually

[RB]

There's a difference between feeling threatened and being threatened, although even then I don't think Putin's actions can be attributed to genuine concern.

Given the extraordinary unlikelihood of NATO deciding to invade Russia, or conduct any sort of unilateral military operation against it which isn't solely in defence of a NATO country or ally, I am very comfortable saying NATO is no threat to Russia.

Is this a hobby for you? Impressive knowledge on all this.

Haha, not really but I suppose I've always followed world events and taken some interest in history.

I'm not generally very political but would describe myself as strongly 'pro democracy' and am well aware of all the tricks authoritarians play.

[shoe boy]

There has been Russian insurgents(freedom fighters) fighting for the past 8 years.
As for NATO would the US accept Russia suppling Venezuela , Mexico , Cuba with weapons and Russian military bases?[/quote]

There's been plenty of military co-operation between Russia and Cuba and Venezuela over the years and I daresay the Americans haven't been happy with it. You'll notice though that the Americans haven't invaded either of these countries.


Bay Pigs?
CIA continue to undermine the Venezuelian government on numerous occasions , maybe something to do with Venezuela having the largest oil reserve on the planet.