Ukraine on the brink of civil war. Mod Warning in OP.

Gatling

InTheTrees wrote: »

Yes. America sets the example for the world.

Its okay for a powerful country to invade a weaker neighbour if they feel threatened by western influence apparently.

??

Imagine David Cameron decided he wanted Dublin , Galway, Cork to go along with Belfast and derry.

All in the name of fear from democracy

Playboy

Gatling wrote: »

Imagine David Cameron decided he wanted Dublin , Galway, Cork to go along with Belfast and derry.

All in the name of fear from democracy

Lol wasn't that the status quo for hundreds of years?

Playboy

InTheTrees wrote: »

Yes. America sets the example for the world.

Its okay for a powerful country to invade a weaker neighbour if they feel threatened by western influence apparently.

??

Who said its ok? Who is apologising? Point me to posts please.

Lemming

Playboy wrote: »

Who said its ok? Who is apologising? Point me to posts please.

You are. Because you keep trying to deflect from Russia's behaviour by saying "but America has done xyz!!!!11111eleventyone".

This is not a thread about America. It's a thread about Russia's beligerence towards a neighbour. If you want to start a thread criticising American behaviour around the world and throughout the centuries then you are free to do.

BoJack Horseman

Playboy wrote: »

Who said its ok? Who is apologising? Point me to posts please.

Whataboutery is the calling card of the apologist.

Playboy

Lemming wrote: »

You are. Because you keep trying to deflect from Russia's behaviour by saying "but America has done xyz!!!!11111eleventyone".

This is not a thread about America. It's a thread about Russia's beligerence towards a neighbour. If you want to start a thread criticising American behaviour around the world and throughout the centuries then you are free to do.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Whataboutery is the calling card of the apologist.

If you dont want to discuss the conflict in its entirety then just say so. Whether you like it or not the U.S. is a major contributor to the current crisis. Why should we ignore that fact and instead only focus on Russia? Its lazy after lazy rebuttal that anyone with a different perspective is an apologist for Russian actions even when they outright condemn them. If you have nothing to contribute then just be quiet as I'm getting tired of having to defend myself against false claims of an anti-american/pro-russian agenda, its not furthering the conversation in anyway. If you only want to read opinions that you agree with then go read your favourite newspaper.

Lemming

Playboy wrote: »

If you dont want to discuss the conflict in its entirety then just say so. Whether you like it or not the U.S. is a major contributor to the current crisis. Why should we ignore that fact and instead only focus on Russia? Its lazy after lazy rebuttal that anyone with a different perspective is an apologist for Russian actions even when they outright condemn them. If you have nothing to contribute then just be quiet as I'm getting tired of having to defend myself against false claims of an anti-american/pro-russian agenda, its not furthering the conversation in anyway. If you only want to read opinions that you agree with then go read your favourite newspaper.

Russia has invaded a neighbour. Further to that, not only invaded but annexed territory belonging to said neighbour. No amount of whataboutery can get around those two very pertinent facts.

What you are trying to do is compare apples & oranges and claim it's all the same. It's not. They're not. And not by a wild, wild country mile.

Gatling

Playboy wrote: »

If you dont want to discuss the conflict in its entirety then just say so. Whether you like it or not the U.S. is a major contributor to the current crisis. Why should we ignore that fact and instead only focus on Russia? Its lazy after lazy rebuttal that anyone with a different perspective is an apologist for Russian actions even when they outright condemn them. If you have nothing to contribute then just be quiet as I'm getting tired of having to defend myself against false claims of an anti-american/pro-russian agenda, its not furthering the conversation in anyway. If you only want to read opinions that you agree with then go read your favourite newspaper.

The only thing America is guilty of is inaction in Ukraine .For all of the so called conspiracy theories from cia killing protestors to the Obama brokered deal to allow a peaceful transition of power .
not one shred of evidence has been posted by either the kremlin or other sources .
as for Germany and France leading the peaceful negotiations all that's done is split the EU and Nato exactly what putin wanted .
The 2nd minsk agreement was all about giving russia what it wanted and nothing else .
A complete and utter abuse of the Ukrainian peoples wishes .
Ask why all the Baltic states have requested american troops and equipment to be posted in there individual states .
simple answer the Baltics don't believe or thrust the Germans or French to protect them from Russian aggression

Playboy

Lemming wrote: »

Russia has invaded a neighbour. Further to that, not only invaded but annexed territory belonging to said neighbour.

What you are trying to do is compare apples & oranges and claim it's all the same. It's not. They're not. And not by a wild, wild country mile.

What are you talking about? Stop trying to be so reductive and isolate the crisis to one party. War and reasons for it are always complex with many different factors acting as a catalyst. Are you afraid of the truth or something? Did you read this link? http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault

Playboy

Gatling wrote: »

The only thing America is guilty of is inaction in Ukraine .For all of the so called conspiracy theories from cia killing protestors to the Obama brokered deal to allow a peaceful transition of power .
not one shred of evidence has been posted by either the kremlin or other sources .
as for Germany and France leading the peaceful negotiations all that's done is split the EU and Nato exactly what putin wanted .
The 2nd minsk agreement was all about giving russia what it wanted and nothing else .
A complete and utter abuse of the Ukrainian peoples wishes .
Ask why all the Baltic states have requested american troops and equipment to be posted in there individual states .
simple answer the Baltics don't believe or thrust the Germans or French to protect them from Russian aggression

totally and utterly absurd.. take the blinkers off will you.

AbusesToilets

Gatling wrote: »

The only thing America is guilty of is inaction in Ukraine .For all of the so called conspiracy theories from cia killing protestors to the Obama brokered deal to allow a peaceful transition of power .
not one shred of evidence has been posted by either the kremlin or other sources .
as for Germany and France leading the peaceful negotiations all that's done is split the EU and Nato exactly what putin wanted .
The 2nd minsk agreement was all about giving russia what it wanted and nothing else .
A complete and utter abuse of the Ukrainian peoples wishes .
Ask why all the Baltic states have requested american troops and equipment to be posted in there individual states .
simple answer the Baltics don't believe or thrust the Germans or French to protect them from Russian aggression

Which should be no surprise for anyone who spends 5 minutes reading about European history

Playboy

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Which should be no surprise for anyone who spends 5 minutes reading about European history

The European History where Ukraine was the route millions of soldiers poured through not once but twice and causing the deaths of 27 million russians in WW2 alone out of total causalities of 60 million. No you are right, it doesnt make any sense that Russia is concerned with Ukraine joining the EU and NATO.

Lemming

Playboy wrote: »

What are you talking about? Stop trying to be so reductive and isolate the crisis to one party. War and reasons for it are always complex with many different factors acting as a catalyst. Are you afraid of the truth or something? Did you read this link? http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...he-wests-fault

So much truth; Page not found.

Oh the irony.

Gatling

Playboy wrote: »

totally and utterly absurd.. take the blinkers off will you.

It's fact 2 uprisings against russian puppet governments in 11 years .
Yanukovich only got elected with the help of an attempted political asssination and sham fraud trials against any one who wasn't pro russian .
Yanukovich promised a whole ukraine referendum on removing russian troops and ships from the port of Sevastopol permanently he even went and learned Ukrainian then all of a sudden he becomes putins best friend and very rich .
80% of all government subventions was then given to pro russian companies in eastern Ukraine.
Which covers something around 6-14 % of the population of Ukraine .
Now kindly explain how we've had repeatedly had pro russian puppet governments elected in Ukraine while only representing a very small minority of Ukraine.
Now in all of that where was the American interference exactly

Playboy

Lemming wrote: »

So much truth; Page not found.

Oh the irony.

Link working now

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141769/john-j-mearsheimer/why-the-ukraine-crisis-is-the-wests-fault

WakeUp

Lemming wrote: »

You are. Because you keep trying to deflect from Russia's behaviour by saying "but America has done xyz!!!!11111eleventyone".

This is not a thread about America. It's a thread about Russia's beligerence towards a neighbour. If you want to start a thread criticising American behaviour around the world and throughout the centuries then you are free to do.

nope. but the Americans and American foreign policy is knee deep in this and therefore American behaviour relevant to the discussion. though continue to try and deflect from this if thats indeed what you would like to do.

Gatling wrote: »

The only thing America is guilty of is inaction in Ukraine .For all of the so called conspiracy theories from cia killing protestors to the Obama brokered deal to allow a peaceful transition of power .
not one shred of evidence has been posted by either the kremlin or other sources .
as for Germany and France leading the peaceful negotiations all that's done is split the EU and Nato exactly what putin wanted .
The 2nd minsk agreement was all about giving russia what it wanted and nothing else .
A complete and utter abuse of the Ukrainian peoples wishes .
Ask why all the Baltic states have requested american troops and equipment to be posted in there individual states .
simple answer the Baltics don't believe or thrust the Germans or French to protect them from Russian aggression

thank god for cooler heads. if the Americans eventually get their way and arm Ukraine and Ukraine is stupid enough to go on the rampage its game over for them. and beyond.

Playboy

Gatling wrote: »

It's fact 2 uprisings against russian puppet governments in 11 years .
Yanukovich only got elected with the help of an attempted political asssination and sham fraud trials against any one who wasn't pro russian .
Yanukovich promised a whole ukraine referendum on removing russian troops and ships from the port of Sevastopol permanently he even went and learned Ukrainian then all of a sudden he becomes putins best friend and very rich .
80% of all government subventions was then given to pro russian companies in eastern Ukraine.
Which covers something around 6-14 % of the population of Ukraine .
Now kindly explain how we've had repeatedly had pro russian puppet governments elected in Ukraine while only representing a very small minority of Ukraine.
Now in all of that where was the American interference exactly

You see I'm not going to deny any of that, I never have. Its quite clear that Russia have been and want to continue to control the internal affairs of Ukraine to the detriment of the Ukrainian people.

What I am claiming is that the US has been for nearly two decades trying to bring Ukraine and Georgia into the Western Sphere of influence and NATO by funding pro democracy groups and campaigns to influence public opinion... the $5 billion dollars that has been invested.

From the article I just posted

Then NATO began looking further east. At its April 2008 summit in Bucharest, the alliance considered admitting Georgia and Ukraine. The George W. Bush administration supported doing so, but France and Germany opposed the move for fear that it would unduly antagonize Russia. In the end, NATO’s members reached a compromise: the alliance did not begin the formal process leading to membership, but it issued a statement endorsing the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine and boldly declaring, “These countries will become members of NATO.”

Moscow, however, did not see the outcome as much of a compromise. Alexander Grushko, then Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said, “Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership in the alliance is a huge strategic mistake which would have most serious consequences for pan-European security.” Putin maintained that admitting those two countries to NATO would represent a “direct threat” to Russia. One Russian newspaper reported that Putin, while speaking with Bush, “very transparently hinted that if Ukraine was accepted into NATO, it would cease to exist.”

Its quite clear that Russia has been saying for some time that they will resist any attempts to bring Ukraine into NATO. The West knew what to expect when it helped oust Yanukovich.

You could take the view that the US are trying to bring Ukraine into the fold because it has truly benevolent motivations but history tells us otherwise. Russia has always feared NATO encirclement and to them that is exactly what looks like is happening. This is a geopolitcal strategy that has been in place since the end of the cold war even though the US had agreements in place with the Russia to not do what they have done and continue to do in expanding NATO eastwards.

The Russians do not trust the US and I dont blame them for not trusting them. I also dont blame Putin and Russia for being paranoid when it comes to US and European objectives for Eastern Europe. I personally would prefer if Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine became fully fledged members of the EU and Russia got rid of Putin and replaced him with someone with wanted to integrate further into the West. This isnt the reality however and the US are forcing an issue with Russia that has led to War and will only get worse if they dont back down like they did in Georgia.

K-9

Gatling wrote: »

So we're still at russia bad, but it's all America's fault

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Whataboutery is the calling card of the apologist.

Mod:

Enough of this stuff please. People are entitled to have a different view from the mainstream and the consensus without being called apologists or putinbots.

Playboy wrote: »

Yup that's exactly where we are :rolleyes:

Playboy wrote: »

totally and utterly absurd.. take the blinkers off will you.

Please don't respond in kind. While comparisons to the US are valid there's a limit to how far they can go on a thread about Russia and the Ukraine.

AbusesToilets

Playboy wrote: »

You see I'm not going to deny any of that, I never have. Its quite clear that Russia have been and want to continue to control the internal affairs of Ukraine to the detriment of the Ukrainian people.

What I am claiming is that the US has been for nearly two decades trying to bring Ukraine and Georgia into the Western Sphere of influence and NATO by funding pro democracy groups and campaigns to influence public opinion... the $5 billion dollars that has been invested.

From the article I just posted

Then NATO began looking further east. At its April 2008 summit in Bucharest, the alliance considered admitting Georgia and Ukraine. The George W. Bush administration supported doing so, but France and Germany opposed the move for fear that it would unduly antagonize Russia. In the end, NATO’s members reached a compromise: the alliance did not begin the formal process leading to membership, but it issued a statement endorsing the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine and boldly declaring, “These countries will become members of NATO.”

Moscow, however, did not see the outcome as much of a compromise. Alexander Grushko, then Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said, “Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership in the alliance is a huge strategic mistake which would have most serious consequences for pan-European security.” Putin maintained that admitting those two countries to NATO would represent a “direct threat” to Russia. One Russian newspaper reported that Putin, while speaking with Bush, “very transparently hinted that if Ukraine was accepted into NATO, it would cease to exist.”

Its quite clear that Russia has been saying for some time that they will resist any attempts to bring Ukraine into NATO. The West knew what to expect when it helped oust Yanukovich.

You could take the view that the US are trying to bring Ukraine into the fold because it has truly benevolent motivations but history tells us otherwise. Russia has always feared NATO encirclement and to them that is exactly what looks like is happening. This is a geopolitcal strategy that has been in place since the end of the cold war even though the US had agreements in place with the Russia to not do what they have done and continue to do in expanding NATO eastwards.

The Russians do not trust the US and I dont blame them for not trusting them. I also dont blame Putin and Russia for being paranoid when it comes to US and European objectives for Eastern Europe. I personally would prefer if Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine became fully fledged members of the EU and Russia got rid of Putin and replaced him with someone with wanted to integrate further into the West. This isnt the reality however and the US are forcing an issue with Russia that has led to War and will only get worse if they dont back down like they did in Georgia.

Please expand upon what threat exactly you feel the European nations would represent to Russia? Given the paltry level of military funding and complete lack of any infrastructure necessary to support expeditionary warfare, I struggle to see what grounds Russia has for claiming a threat coming from those regions as a basis for it's current actions in the Ukraine and Georgia previously.

Even it's heyday in the 80's, NATO's forces were postured defensively to counter a Russian thrust. This claim that Russia is reacting to some threat present in the Ukraine is a fantasy.

The only possible threat to Russia is as others have stated, a social one. If they were to turn their economy around and achieve a higher standard of living for their citizens, then that would stand in stark contrast to the situation in Russia, which would cause problems for Putin and his cronies.

AbusesToilets

WakeUp wrote: »

nope. but the Americans and American foreign policy is knee deep in this and therefore American behaviour relevant to the discussion. though continue to try and deflect from this if thats indeed what you would like to do.



thank god for cooler heads. if the Americans eventually get their way and arm Ukraine and Ukraine is stupid enough to go on the rampage its game over for them. and beyond.

Better they roll over and submit to their Russian masters, how dare they fight for their country.

US is knee deep in it alright, trying to support a fledgling democracy against outside invasion. Scoundrels, the lot of them. They should follow the shining example set by Germany and France and do nothing bar offering vacuous sound bites whilst brokering peace deals that are broken before the ink has dried on the paper.

WakeUp

Playboy wrote: »

You see I'm not going to deny any of that, I never have. Its quite clear that Russia have been and want to continue to control the internal affairs of Ukraine to the detriment of the Ukrainian people.

What I am claiming is that the US has been for nearly two decades trying to bring Ukraine and Georgia into the Western Sphere of influence and NATO by funding pro democracy groups and campaigns to influence public opinion... the $5 billion dollars that has been invested.

From the article I just posted

Then NATO began looking further east. At its April 2008 summit in Bucharest, the alliance considered admitting Georgia and Ukraine. The George W. Bush administration supported doing so, but France and Germany opposed the move for fear that it would unduly antagonize Russia. In the end, NATO’s members reached a compromise: the alliance did not begin the formal process leading to membership, but it issued a statement endorsing the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine and boldly declaring, “These countries will become members of NATO.”

Moscow, however, did not see the outcome as much of a compromise. Alexander Grushko, then Russia’s deputy foreign minister, said, “Georgia’s and Ukraine’s membership in the alliance is a huge strategic mistake which would have most serious consequences for pan-European security.” Putin maintained that admitting those two countries to NATO would represent a “direct threat” to Russia. One Russian newspaper reported that Putin, while speaking with Bush, “very transparently hinted that if Ukraine was accepted into NATO, it would cease to exist.”

Its quite clear that Russia has been saying for some time that they will resist any attempts to bring Ukraine into NATO. The West knew what to expect when it helped oust Yanukovich.

You could take the view that the US are trying to bring Ukraine into the fold because it has truly benevolent motivations but history tells us otherwise. Russia has always feared NATO encirclement and to them that is exactly what looks like is happening. This is a geopolitcal strategy that has been in place since the end of the cold war even though the US had agreements in place with the Russia to not do what they have done and continue to do in expanding NATO eastwards.

The Russians do not trust the US and I dont blame them for not trusting them. I also dont blame Putin and Russia for being paranoid when it comes to US and European objectives for Eastern Europe. I personally would prefer if Georgia, Belarus and Ukraine became fully fledged members of the EU and Russia got rid of Putin and replaced him with someone with wanted to integrate further into the West. This isnt the reality however and the US are forcing an issue with Russia that has led to War and will only get worse if they dont back down like they did in Georgia.

this is the part that those calling for escalation and arming Ukraine and trying to force the issue dont seem to get. ignorance combined with reality on the ground and the fact that the Russians are not going to back down, ignoring this and believing a military solution can either work or is the answer, is the domain of the politically deluded. believing Ukraine is capable of fighting a winning war against Russia no matter how many weapons given is the domain of the deluded. some might even say fools. you would nearly think some would like to see world war 3 come to fruition. ignorance is bliss apparently. there might just be some truth to that statement afterall.

Realists’ Warn Against Ukraine Escalation

The neocons’ war-and-more-war bandwagon is loaded up again and rolling downhill as “everyone who matters” in Washington is talking up sending sophisticated weapons to Kiev to escalate Ukraine’s civil war, but some “realists,” an endangered species in U.S. foreign policy, dissent, notes Robert Parry.

In recent years, Official Washington – the politicians, the think tanks and the major news media – has been dominated by neoconservatives and their sidekicks, the “liberal interventionists,” with the old-school “realists” who favor a more measured use of American power largely marginalized. But finally, on the dangerous issue of Ukraine, some are speaking up.

Two of the few remaining “realists” with some access to elite opinion circles, Stephen M. Walt and John J. Mearsheimer, have written articles opposing the new hot idea in Washington to arm the Kiev regime so it can more efficiently kill ethnic Russians battling to expand their territory in eastern Ukraine.

Citing the “spiral model,” Walt warns that the current popular idea of arming the Kiev forces “will only make things worse. It certainly will not enable Ukraine to defeat the far stronger Russian army; it will simply intensify the conflict and add to the suffering of the Ukrainian people.

“Nor is arming Ukraine likely to convince Putin to cave in and give Washington what it wants. Ukraine is historically linked to Russia, they are right next door to each other, Russian intelligence has long-standing links inside Ukraine’s own security institutions, and Russia is far stronger militarily. Even massive arms shipments from the United States won’t tip the balance in Kiev’s favor, and Moscow can always escalate if the fighting turns against the rebels, as it did last summer.”

Similarly, Mearsheimer warns that the idea of shipping advanced weaponry to Ukraine “would be a huge mistake for the United States, NATO and Ukraine itself. Sending weapons to Ukraine will not rescue its army and will instead lead to an escalation in the fighting. Such a step is especially dangerous because Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons and is seeking to defend a vital strategic interest. …

“Because the balance of power decisively favors Moscow, Washington would have to send large amounts of equipment for Ukraine’s army to have a fighting chance. But the conflict will not end there. Russia would counter-escalate, taking away any temporary benefit Kiev might get from American arms. …

https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/10/realists-warn-against-ukraine-escalation/

and if they do get weapons who is going to fight the war for them lots of them dont seem to be too keen on doing that...

When Ukrainians Choose Not to Die in a War

The current war situation in eastern Ukraine and the decision of the government in Kyiv to begin a new, fourth wave of military conscription and mobilization is unleashing a firestorm of mass opposition and refusal to fight. Protest is rising in all the regions of the country. For sure, there are still nationalist fanatics and far-right militarists exercising violence and intimidation against antiwar protests, but their capacity to stamp out protest is diminishing.

But from the beginning of the conflict, Ukraine has seen refusals by soldiers to fire on their fellow citizens, desertions from the army and refusals to show up for conscription. Women—the mothers, wives, sisters and daughters of military conscripts—have held protests and even riots against the war or against force military service.

The protests have been sparked, first of all, by the fact that many Ukrainians do not accept the interpretation of the war as offered by the government. They don’t necessarily see foreign (ie Russian) aggression. They only know that when a Ukrainian soldier lifts his gun or artillery barrel, it is a compatriot, a fellow Ukrainian, who appears in the gunsight.

Secondly, many people don’t want to die for the current government which they view as composed of extreme nationalists and neoliberals. They are unwilling to be cannon fodder dying for the interests of Ukrainian oligarchs whose only apparent interest is to pursue a civil war, siphon Western financial aid and suppress opposition to their rule. A young woman recently voiced this sentiment searingly at a rally held in her village in south-central Ukraine.

Last but not least, many ordinary workers and farmers, (contrary to middle-class, urban dwellers), preserve entrenched, regional identities. They consider their homeland to be a region such as Donbas, Bukovyna, Transkarpathia or Volhynia as much as, or perhaps even more importantly, it is the entity called ‘Ukraine’. It is harder to sell to such people the war’s patriotic, pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia message.

The astonishing fact that almost no one is coming voluntarily to the military recruitment offices in this fourth, latest round of conscription is causing panic in the government and top army command of Ukraine. They are appealing, as always, to patriotic and nationalist sentiments, but this is falling increasingly on deaf ears.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/06/when-ukrainians-choose-not-to-die-in-a-war/

meanwhile in the US....

US House Votes 348-48 To Arm Ukraine, Russia Warns Lethal Aid Will "Explode The Whole Situation"

Yesterday, in a vote that largely slid under the radar, the House of Representatives passed a resolution urging Obama to send lethal aid to Ukraine, providing offensive, not just "defensive" weapons to the Ukraine army - the same insolvent, hyperinflating Ukraine which, with a Caa3/CC credit rating, last week started preparations to issue sovereign debt with a US guarantee, in essence making it a part of the United States (something the US previously did as a favor to Egypt before the Muslim Brotherhood puppet regime was swept from power by the local army).

The resolution passed with broad bipartisan support by a count of 348 to 48.

According to DW, the measure urges Obama to provide Ukraine with "lethal defensive weapon systems" that would better enable Ukraine to defend its territory from "the unprovoked and continuing aggression of the Russian Federation."

"Policy like this should not be partisan," said House Democrat Eliot Engel, the lead sponsor of the resolution. "That is why we are rising today as Democrats and Republicans, really as Americans, to say enough is enough in Ukraine."

Engel, a New York Democrat, has decided that he knows better than Europe what is the best option for Ukraine's people - a Europe, and especially Germany, which has repeatedly said it rejects a push to give western arms to the Ukraine army

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-24/us-house-votes-348-48-arm-ukraine-russia-warns-lethal-aid-will-explode-whole-situati

InTheTrees

WakeUp wrote: »

this is the part that those calling for escalation

A lot of people consider the Russian invasion of Ukraine to be an escalation.

..

TerrorFirmer

The idea is obviously not that Ukraine will take the fight directly to Russia. No-one believes that Ukraine could win such an event, no matter how many arms it received.

The goal is to equip Ukraine so that it can effectively engage and inflict heavy losses on separatists which are entirely supplied and bolstered by Russia.

Of course it is true that if the US sends arms, Russia will increase it's flow to the rebels in turn.

But the idea is that facing a much higher Russian death toll will lead to more unrest within the Russia populace, and in tandem with crippling sanctions, will put Putin under further heavy pressure to rethink his position on Ukraine.

The call here seems to be 'just give Russia what it wants'. We all understand that's the easiest option to avoid further bloodshed, but what sort of terrible precedent does that set?

As stated here before, it's pretty much Hitlers playbook from the 1930's. Play every card you have, and basically force your opponent to either commit to total conflict, or give you what you want in the hope that it will sate their lust.

It won't.

WakeUp

InTheTrees wrote: »

A lot of people consider the Russian invasion of Ukraine to be an escalation.

..

vis a vis arming Ukraine and escalating the conflict as it is now and making a bad situation a million times worse... what exactly is your point?....

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

The idea is obviously not that Ukraine will take the fight directly to Russia. No-one believes that Ukraine could win such an event, no matter how many arms it received.

The goal is to equip Ukraine so that it can effectively engage and inflict heavy losses on separatists which are entirely supplied and bolstered by Russia.

Of course it is true that if the US sends arms, Russia will increase it's flow to the rebels in turn.


But the idea is that facing a much higher Russian death toll will lead to more unrest within the Russia populace, and in tandem with crippling sanctions, will put Putin under further heavy pressure to rethink his position on Ukraine.

The call here seems to be 'just give Russia what it wants'. We all understand that's the easiest option to avoid further bloodshed, but what sort of terrible precedent does that set?

As stated here before, it's pretty much Hitlers playbook from the 1930's. Play every card you have, and basically force your opponent to either commit to total conflict, or give you what you want in the hope that it will sate their lust.

It won't.

if you believe arming Ukraine will do anything other than making the situation a whole lot worse I would suggest you are mistaken dangerously mistaken. Russians getting dead in large numbers especially at the hands of western weapons well there will be only one outcome to that. apart from them being really angry as opposed to backing down like you suggest. game over for Ukraine and possible all out war. the Germans have said quite correctly there is no military solution ( dont arm Ukraine ) and they are saying this for a reason whilst the Americans have said they might and have now voted to send weapons. another phuck you too Europe from Washington it would appear. but you know its our continent that will burn if war breaks out.

Risk of ‘World War’ between NATO and Russia on Ukraine as Yemen Bombed:

- World sleep walking from ‘Cold War’ to ‘Hot War’ and new World War
- U.S. resolution to supply Ukraine with lethal weaponry passed
- Russia warns such moves would “explode the whole situation”
- Minsk agreement remains intact – little justification for escalation and ignoring EU allies
- US continues to act as only global superpower despite powerful Russia and China and new multi-polar world
- Hubris could lead to a new World War

Geopolitical risk has escalated sharply this week after the Saudi bombing of Yemen and the U.S. House of Representatives voting overwhelmingly for the President to provide offensive weaponry to the Ukrainian army.

Both are likely to result in sharp escalation in tensions between NATO and Russia and see an intensification of war in Eastern Europe and the possibility of a regional war in the Middle East.

The move is concerning as European countries who have a real interest in maintaining stability in Ukraine – Germany and France, who are Europe’s de facto leadership, and Russia – have already restored a degree of stability through the Minsk agreement. Germany and France pointedly excluded the U.S. from the process.

The resolution comes despite Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov having previously warned in February that such a move would be a “major blow” to the Minsk agreements and would “explode the whole situation.”

http://www.goldcore.com/us/gold-blog/risk-of-world-war-between-nato-and-russia-on-ukraine-as-yemen-bombed/

Playboy

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Please expand upon what threat exactly you feel the European nations would represent to Russia? Given the paltry level of military funding and complete lack of any infrastructure necessary to support expeditionary warfare, I struggle to see what grounds Russia has for claiming a threat coming from those regions as a basis for it's current actions in the Ukraine and Georgia previously.

Even it's heyday in the 80's, NATO's forces were postured defensively to counter a Russian thrust. This claim that Russia is reacting to some threat present in the Ukraine is a fantasy.

The only possible threat to Russia is as others have stated, a social one. If they were to turn their economy around and achieve a higher standard of living for their citizens, then that would stand in stark contrast to the situation in Russia, which would cause problems for Putin and his cronies.

It doesnt matter what I think, it only matters what the russians think. 3 million german troops poured through Ukraine about 70 years ago and 27 million russians died and russian society was nearly extinguished. Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia are considered key strategic defensive interests by Russia to prevent any future attack on Russia. You may think that is deluded and it may be but thats how Russia see it. Even if there was some credibility to the Putin and his cronies being worried aboout the economic advancement of Ukraine doesnt really make any difference. Russia for decades has been telling the West that any attempts to encircle Russia with Nato or bring Ukraine into NATO would result in conflict. That is what is happening. The Russians dont want to expand into eastern europe again, they just dont want europe coming any closer to its border.

Gatling

Playboy wrote: »

It doesnt matter what I think, it only matters what the russians think. 3 million german troops poured through Ukraine about 70 years ago and 27 million russians died and russian society was nearly extinguished. Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia are considered key strategic defensive interests by Russia to prevent any future attack on Russia. You may think that is deluded and it may be but thats how Russia see it. Even if there was some credibility to the Putin and his cronies being worried aboout the economic advancement of Ukraine doesnt really make any difference. Russia for decades has been telling the West that any attempts to encircle Russia with Nato or bring Ukraine into NATO would result in conflict. That is what is happening. The Russians dont want to expand into eastern europe again, they just dont want europe coming any closer to its border.

But as we've been hearing from several posters on her Russia had nukes and russia has repeatedly threaten EU and NATO don't mess with us we have nukes .
As much as we're now using ww2 as an excuse we should then add poland Czechoslovakia, romania , right away across to east Germany .
Russia respects nothing or any other countries .
Merkel is only interested in money and keeping the Germans in control of the EU she's hasn't a clue about military actions .
all this talk about the minsk agreements both which were broken by pro russian and russian forces .
We're expected to say let's not upsets the kremlin mafia because the minsk agreement will be torn up .
It was Broken the moment hollande and Merkel appised putin .
If anything sanctions should be ramped up several notches against russia .
Then a peace keeping and peace enforcement mission should be sent to Ukraine especially Maripol to prevent any further push against the city .

Playboy

I really dont understand the appeasement argument like Putin is some new Hitler. Putin has never showed any interest in expansion until this current crisis. People dont seem to understand what war means and its consequences. Unless you would personally go die for the cause dont be so quick to encourage others to. War with Russia is a truly frightening prospect and there are enough nutters in the republican party in the US that it could come to that.

Gatling

Playboy wrote: »

I really dont understand the appeasement argument like Putin is some new Hitler. Putin has never showed any interest in expansion until this current crisis. People dont seem to understand what war means and its consequences. Unless you would personally go die for the cause dont be so quick to encourage others to. War with Russia is a truly frightening prospect and there are enough nutters in the republican party in the US that it could come to that.

Russia aren't ready or capable of fighting a multiple front conflict .
hence the who funding of 100's of right wing groups across Europe with one goal breaking the EU and NATO .
As long as europe stands together along with Nato russia won't succeed in its endeavours .
But when the likes or Merkel and Hollande are only out for there own countries financial gains then the future will be bleak especially along the Baltics

Playboy

Gatling wrote: »

Russia aren't ready or capable of fighting a multiple front conflict .
hence the who funding of 100's of right wing groups across Europe with one goal breaking the EU and NATO .
As long as europe stands together along with Nato russia won't succeed in its endeavours .
But when the likes or Merkel and Hollande are only out for there own countries financial gains then the future will be bleak especially along the Baltics

Russia will not let Ukraine join NATO... they will fight and lots of people will die. Russia also have lots of nukes if you hadn't noticed and Putin isnt exactly the most stable of people. What do you hope to achieve except death and destruction?

InTheTrees

Playboy wrote: »

What do you hope to achieve except death and destruction?

Russia has invaded its neighbour. The death and destruction has already begun.