Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Options
1145814591461146314643691

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    It doesn't matter 'who the West finds acceptable'. And Abramovich is as scummy s they come. You didn't get to make that amount of money in those times in Russia by observing scrupulous business ethics.

    It's not like the West finds Viktor Orban acceptable. Or PiS in Poland. Or Boris for that matter.

    The West won't get a say in who the next leader is, that's a fundamental flaw in your thinking.



  • Registered Users Posts: 732 ✭✭✭techman1


    Yes true , but that has always been the case. The fact is that China has adopted alot of technology and ideology from Russia ,very little has actually flowed the other way even though China is now the dominant economic power. But that power is still very brittle as it still depends on access to western markets and technology

    Look at all the things China has taken from Russia , communism adopted from the Russian revolution and China still clings to this.

    China would not have got the nuclear weapon in the 60s without being given the blueprints by the Russians who themselves got it from the manhatan project via a rogue German scientist.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,015 ✭✭✭JoChervil


    Ukrainian artillerymen use a special situational awareness system. Arta's GIS, as this tool is called, identifies enemy targets and indicates nearby weapons from which to attack them.





  • Registered Users Posts: 4,048 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    Well you argued that he wouldn’t be acceptable to the west so I argued back. I take ur point on it not mattering.

    overall he likely won’t be the next leader of Russia. Saying he has no chance and it’ll definitely be one of Putin’s stooges is not the certainty you believe it is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Field east


    Can the sharing of the Black Sea be part of the negotiations. After all why would one nation not try to help out another nation to progress for lots people and visa versa when the occasion arises !!!!! . Is it not the neighbourly thing to do ?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭Perseverance The Second


    I think you will find Renault will quickly be coming back to the Russian market the sooner the conflict ends. It's an important market for Renault and for a lot of French Companies



  • Registered Users Posts: 241 ✭✭Perseverance The Second


    From today's Politico Paybook.

    On Sunday, JENS STOLTENBERG, NATO’s secretary general, summed up the implications of these developments: “Ukraine can win this war.”

    And that is exactly the problem according to a growing number of western officials and analysts who fear the fallout from what French President EMMANUEL MACRON called the “humiliation” of Russia.

    Macron is not alone. Matthew Karnitschnig, reports this morning:

    “After weeks spent fretting over what would happen if Russia crushed Ukraine, Western European leaders are now worried about what might happen if Ukraine actually wins. … One big concern is that a Ukrainian win could destabilize Russia, making it even more unpredictable and putting a normalization of energy links further out of reach. That’s why some western European capitals quietly favor a ‘face-saving’ resolution to the conflict, even if it costs Ukraine some territory.”

    The leaders of France, Germany and Italy are all stressing a ceasefire and peace deal at precisely the moment when Ukraine has reversed the tide.

    Karnitschnig notes that their fears of victory put them out of step with the Biden administration, which in recent weeks has talked about how Ukraine, in the words of Defense Secretary LLOYD AUSTIN, “can win.”

    In an important column over the weekend, NYT’s Ross Douthat noted that the possibility of Ukrainian advances would make nuclear escalation “much more likely”:

    “We know that Russian military doctrine envisions using tactical nuclear weapons defensively, to turn the tide in a losing war. We should assume that Putin and his circle regard total defeat in Ukraine as a regime-threatening scenario. Combine those realities with a world where the Russians are suddenly being routed, their territorial gains evaporating, and you have the most nuclear-shadowed military situation since our naval blockade of Cuba in 1962.”



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,928 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Driving your Lada to a Mc-Borsch drive through is just as good if not better.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Doubt it ,as seen in the past and present Russia can't and won't be trusted ,the only real reason they took Crimea in the first place was they knew the Ukrainians would tell them to vacate the port so they could use it themselves



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭Curious_Case




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,059 ✭✭✭purplepanda


    . My brother went on holiday to Uzbekistan week before last, he booked it months before the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    Hopefully he'll be back next weekend safe.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,499 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    I'm with Biden on this one. Any scenario where Putin 'doesn't' lose means he will be back for Round 2.

    I'm baffled that Macron and Scholz think that a menacing Putin on the borders of Europe still itching for a fight would somehow be a good outcome.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    I mean it's hardly surprising people want an end to hostilities. The longer hostilities continue the more expensive it is for everyone involved; including Ukraine. And that's ignoring the various paths Russia might pursue in terms of further escalation.

    Not only that but the same way Ukraine is prioritising its own people and future; other governments and leaders must also do the same w.r.t. their own peoples and collective futures.

    Also I'm pretty sure when people are saying Ukraine "can win" they're not necessarily saying "Ukraine will likely militarily evict all Russian forces from all Ukrainian territory"; they're saying that Ukraine is likely to be able to force a resolution to the conflict on more beneficial terms than they have been offered or could reasonably expect from Russia at the current time.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr



    If you buy into the EU PR of Europe being one big happy familiy committed to fairness, equality and lollipops then it's hard to fathom. If you understand France and Germanys selfish aims in cosying up to Russia as did they many times before, it makes sense.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,015 ✭✭✭JoChervil


    USA are not doing a charity job by sending weapons. Russia will no longer be able to compete with them in LGN gas sale. So US will earn additional billions thanks to it. Germany has no LGN terminals because they put their bets on Nord Streams, so their situation is completely different. Longer war means gains for US, while big losses for Germany.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    It's a hierarchy of competing priorities. Short-term and long-term.

    1. Short-term; do we want to give Ukraine all assistance to fight off Russia and ultimately defeat them? Yes.
    2. Long-term: do we want an angry, aggrieved nuclear-armed state on our EU borders? No

    So yes, we want to weaken Russia's ability to wage war on Ukraine in the short-term but in the long-term we want to help them become a more open, trusted partner - such that they won't menace 'us' again.

    It truly is a balancing act of incredible delicacy.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    @ronivek Also I'm pretty sure when people are saying Ukraine "can win"


    That's exactly what they are saying and meaning , they are winning and will continue to win , considering they were only given 72 hours at best they are steam rolling the Russians and I believe they won't be stopping until the last Russian leaves by the kirch straight



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    And thus we see the delusion that was the Wests policy towards Russia before Vlad disabused them of such nonsense by invading Ukraine

    Obviously there's still a few stragglers who havent got the memo that jig is up on Russia as a trusted partner 😂



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭Curious_Case


    Does it make any difference though? - all the raw materials that would have been used will now be available to be eaten in other forms.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,145 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    In this clusterfúck that the fúckwit putin kicked off by invading Ukraine; the Ukrainians lose, even if(and it looks more and more like when) they win, thousands of their men women and kids are dead, millions have left the country, a generation scarred, a lot of their infrastructure is shot to hell, a number of their cities destroyed, their already tiny economy fúcked.

    Russia has lost. Their economy is in freefall, sanctions are a long way away from being lifted. Their international commercial and political reputation shot, never mind their military rep. Never mind their own men lying dead in foreign fields and their brain drain has accelerated and so has their demographic time bomb.

    The EU are losing too. Energy prices up, a looming food shortage, inflation and likely a recession on the back of this and the Woo Flu and the costs of more refugees on top of the previous refugee crisis that hasn't gone away. Plus the infighting among some EU members isn't helping.

    Further afield those poorer nations relying on wheat from Ukraine are likely to be hit badly. Much of the Middle East wlll think are we invisible here, most of Africa being quite sure they are, while China stands to the side, as usual, looking at their own woes that could blow up in their face.

    The only winner in this is pretty much the US, or those in the US who will profit from this in one way or another. They get a weakened Russia that's getting weaker by the day. Result. Increased influence in Ukraine as that lend lease isn't charity, nor are the weapons. Result. Any chance of a mashup of the EU and Russia which they really didn't want to happen since the 1990's, as the EU and Russia would be an economic and political force to reckon with, all now a distant memory. Result. The British or again those Britons in the position to make hay with this, will have a bit of a win too. As US lapdogs post their empire falling, they'll get a pat on the back and soon enough it'll be business as usual in the City of London.

    Putin, you utter fúcking moron. You've screwed Russia, screwed Ukraine, screwed Europe and increased NATO and US influence with bugger all cost for them. Well done moron.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,919 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe




  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Seeing how the Europeans are still, still trying for normalcy and "stability" I'm glad the yanks have stuck their oar in. Will they make money back out of what they're sending? Yeah, sure. Is it the right thing to do since most of the local powers are rolling the clocks back 80 years and being little bitches and pleading for calm so Russia can take what they want? Again, I'll go with yes, and I'm glad they're doing it.

    Taking your 2nd point word-by-word...

    Angry? Nothing anyone can do about that short of bending over, they're always angry. After 20 years of the kid-glove treatment they're still angry. It doesn't work.

    Aggrieved? Sure this is why they invaded, they're aggrieved about reality. Again, other than everyone bending over and lubing up there's not much to be done.

    Nuclear-armed? Not much can be done about that either.

    The nicely-nicely approach hasn't worked so eh, maybe we need to be even nicer?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sweden said they would apply if Finland did,and Finland applied yesterday.

    Only thing that can stop them now is the voting in NATO,hopefully that turns out well



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,201 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    I've said it before but I don't want to see them humiliated. I understand where it comes from but i think it's wrong. A complete collapse of a nuclear power could be horrific. No-one knows what could happen. And a humiliated country with nukes? Sure the chance they use them might be slim, but that's not a gamble I want to make.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Look, I hear you.

    But (and this might be hard to fathom from where we are right now), we can always make choices that don't make a future confrontation even worse. Or, ideally, avoid that future confrontation entirely.



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Except that the last 20 years of letting them do what they like has led to this confrontation. Poisoning Litvinenko? Ah shure.Georgia? Ah shure. Crimea? Ah shure. Donbas? Ah shure. Poisoning the Skripals? Ah shure.

    If the Russians want to run a criminal state that's their business. The West tried the hands-off approach, treating them like a normal country with normal relations and it didn't work. Maybe all the Russians' "hardman" talk betrays what they really want and need, to be put in their place?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,287 ✭✭✭Raoul Duke III


    Not clear what 'put Russia in its place means' though.


    What are you suggesting - Iraq style invasion and regime change? Which is impossible for very obvious reasons so I imagine you're not.


    Or something along the lines of 'sanction them to death'? Or something else?



  • Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    They need to be faced down. There are quotes from 15 years ago (and many more more recently and often) from insiders that Putin will keep pushing and pushing til he's stopped. Even without those quotes it's pretty obvious from his actions that it's true. The big EU players seem to want to play things down and follow the playbook as much as possible, they're dying to get back to normal.

    They'll be "humiliated" and "angry" no matter what, if that's what they choose. As a few of us have been saying they could have pulled out after 2 weeks with most of the Donbas semi-secured and claimed victory. They've decided not to. So they're happy to continue to inflict misery and death on 10s and 10s of thousands of people for no reason, just because they can.

    The next confrontation, whenever it comes, will be in roughly the same place. Certain European countries want to keep playing like they have for the last 20 years and let on like it'll turn out differently. The Scandinavians are showing both self-interest and some morality by joining NATO. The Baltics have been sounding the alarm all along. I'm going to listen to them over Macron who's busy making memes or Scholz who'd probably stop on the street to pick up a 1c coin.

    The best (for the world aggregately) semi-realistic outcome is when Putin goes he's replaced some cadre of oligarchs who are happy to just rape and pillage within Russia's borders. Otherwise a pause now will just be a chance for Russia to build up militarily and of course it would only take one or two appointments in the right place to change their tactics from human wave attacks.

    Post edited by Ten of Swords on


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,658 ✭✭✭storker


    Putin already has an off-ramp to avoid humiliation - he can pull out of Ukraine and declare that his "Special Punishment Operation" was a howling success and he'll have a number of ruined Ukrainian cities to prove it. All his dead Einstazgruppski members can be proclaimed Heroes of the Motherland with gongs all round. His media lapdogs will parrot this round the clock, and most Russians will be happy to believe it and the ones who don't will keep their mouths shut because they know what's good for them.

    Alternatively, he may be allowed to keep some of his territorial gains and...goto paragraph 1.

    If he wants more than that then we're looking at a real victory for him and then the west is in full-on Chamberlain mode if it grants it: give him what he wants and hope he goes away. But history has taught us that those types never do go away. At some point a halt must be called. If not, the west might as well disband every army and destroy every weapon it has, because Putin will just need to say "nuke" and everyone will roll over.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    I mentioned it earlier and I'm not sure about it. I also think that if they got that far, and tried that, Russia might mobilise it's full army since in Russian eyes, Crimea is part of Russia.

    By the time that happens a full army may be down to 50% of a crap army. Russia has made some very impressive threats during this but has also shown it cannot back any of it up.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement