Current Affairs Ukraine

[FrenchDarrenBent]

Three elements should be taken into consideration policy-wise, with the US going more and more isolationist...

- Europe needs it's own defence alliance with a military industry.
As it stands we would be throwing rocks at the Russians three months into the conflict. According to the WSJ we only have 150 tanks in service.

Alarm Grows Over Weakened Militaries and Empty Arsenals in Europe

Budget cuts and an eroded weapons industry have hollowed out armed services. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has revealed the risk.

www.wsj.com

- Dont assume the next Russian attack (if it comes) will be as big a failure as this one. Be prepared for the worst. Being prepared is an excellent deterrent.
Don't be like Tyson Fury in that Ngannou fight. It's a laxist behaviour like that that will get mainland Europe into trouble.

- When Putin's gone, push for appeasement when possible and be open to rework them into our economic plans. Long-term shunning doesn't work security wise.

 

[Martin Alvito]

As per the post above in response to Drico but also to note that Putin has admitted that he is not bothered about NATO moving to Russias borders (Finland etc) as he believes no power would invade a nuclear power. He is in Ukraine for resources and management of pipelines, shipping and the like, the usual economic drivers behind wars.

He's deflecting from the actual problem by using that 'invasion' word again. He's a former KGB agent. Never expect him to tip his hand.

His actions say his stated reasons are a lie. Once he lost the Baltics in 2004, he took steps. Yushchenko was poisoned during the Ukrainian presidential campaign later that year while running against his puppet, Yanukovych. Putin's involvement in that one has always been suspected. There has also been the constant push-pull with Belarus for decades now, using tools like subsidies and cutting off oil/gas flows, to keep Lukashenko from straying too far from the Russian orbit.

If, as @Mutzo Nutzo says, Putin is simply a colonial imperialist, why not start with the low-hanging fruit? Why not destabilize Belarus by poisoning Lukashenko instead, then move in to provide 'stability' under the pretext of the Union State, once tensions arose after Putin came to power? There are certainly elements of that in Putin's behavior, but outcomes suggest it isn't quite that simple. Putin is juggling internal and external security threats, as well as his personal ambitions.

If, as you say, Putin is in Ukraine for economic reasons, what was the purpose of throwing all that money into tearing up the eastern part of the country? The notion that economics drives war doesn't hold water after the Napoleonic Wars. If it did, someone would have fished it out of J. David Singer's dataset in the last fifty-five years.

 

[Martin Alvito]

Three elements should be taken into consideration policy-wise, with the US going more and more isolationist...

- Europe needs it's own defence alliance with a military industry.
As it stands we would be throwing rocks at the Russians three months into the conflict. According to the WSJ we only have 150 tanks in service.

Alarm Grows Over Weakened Militaries and Empty Arsenals in Europe

Budget cuts and an eroded weapons industry have hollowed out armed services. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has revealed the risk.

www.wsj.com

- Dont assume the next Russian attack (if it comes) will be as big a failure as this one. Be prepared for the worst. Being prepared is an excellent deterrent.
Don't be like Tyson Fury in that Ngannou fight. It's a laxist behaviour like that that will get mainland Europe into trouble.

- When Putin's gone, push for appeasement when possible and be open to rework them into our economic plans. Long-term shunning doesn't work security wise.

I would go a step further, and take covert steps to ensure his successor is as open to reintegration with the West as possible. If Putin wants to interfere with our elections, we can interfere in his succession plan. Turnabout is fair play.

 

[Drico]

The issue with Putin is that he is a classic bully who has been allowed to run riot without any consequences.

I do not for one second believe that he thought that the west and NATO would react to his SMO as has been the case.

This mentallity that has been allowed to grow has seen Putin and Russia emboldened enough to carry out hits within the UK using highly dangerous nerve agents which were left in the local community at Salisbury. The same in a hospitality venue for Litvinenko, and offering bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing American troops in Afghanistan.

So did he fear NATO and the west during this period, clearly no. Would he still hold the same opinion now, I am not so sure, especially as a fraction of NATOs budget to arm a limited power in Ukraine has shown how poor the Russian military is. I suspect he now knows that if he went toe to toe with NATO he would face having to use nukes or he'd be defeated.

His big hope now, as you say is his puppet, Trump, and the GOP. If Trump won, Europe would have to stand up and take responsibility for its own back yard.

Indeed.

And if Europe does have to stand up, that means Germany. And it means lots of other countries getting used to that reality. It's fascinating to see so many articles telling us - rightly - that Germany needs to "assume leadership" when it comes to political, economic, and geostrategic issues in Europe. However, with leadership comes authority. You want German leadership? That means more power for Germany. A trade off. But a necessary one. I recall during the financial crisis the uproar in Ireland when it emerged that an Irish budget was being discussed in the German Bundestag. But the Germans were, essentially, underwriting the bailout. What did people expect? Lots of people in Europe, used to German money and a benign Germany, might not like a more "assertive" Germany...

 

[Drico]

It's more, "If we normalize wars of territorial aggression, Taiwan is next." Trouble is, we're undercutting that in Gaza. That warps the message to, "Our friends may feel free to bash the neighbors over the head and take their land away if they like, but our enemies may not."

That's foolish of us. It creates enemies, who realize it's band together against the cool kids' club or be next up on the docket if there's a squabble.

Agreed. I've taken the view after the appalling hypocrisy and brutality in Gaza that Taiwan can take a run and jump. If the Americans think that's a problem, tough. We either stand for universal human rights or we don't. I see no reason for the EU, for example, to involve itself in America's wars if America is not standing for human rights for all - regardless of colour, creed, or geographic location. And, by the way, if the Americans - who are the NATO hegemon - throw Ukraine under a bus and tell Europe to look after itself, then turnaround is fair play when Taiwan is invaded.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

He's deflecting from the actual problem by using that 'invasion' word again. He's a former KGB agent. Never expect him to tip his hand.

His actions say his stated reasons are a lie. Once he lost the Baltics in 2004, he took steps. Yushchenko was poisoned during the Ukrainian presidential campaign later that year while running against his puppet, Yanukovych. Putin's involvement in that one has always been suspected. There has also been the constant push-pull with Belarus for decades now, using tools like subsidies and cutting off oil/gas flows, to keep Lukashenko from straying too far from the Russian orbit.

If, as @Mutzo Nutzo says, Putin is simply a colonial imperialist, why not start with the low-hanging fruit? Why not destabilize Belarus by poisoning Lukashenko instead, then move in to provide 'stability' under the pretext of the Union State, once tensions arose after Putin came to power? There are certainly elements of that in Putin's behavior, but outcomes suggest it isn't quite that simple. Putin is juggling internal and external security threats, as well as his personal ambitions.

If, as you say, Putin is in Ukraine for economic reasons, what was the purpose of throwing all that money into tearing up the eastern part of the country? The notion that economics drives war doesn't hold water after the Napoleonic Wars. If it did, someone would have fished it out of J. David Singer's dataset in the last fifty-five years.

In 2013, Ukraine was in the process of privatising oil and gas and the pipelines that carry Russias energy supply Europe which caused a fall out with Putin. He invaded in 2014.

https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine-gas-pipelines/ukraine-govt-introduces-bill-to-allow-pipeline-privatisation-idUKL6N0DD3K920130426/

Ukraines huge natural resources remain underdeveloped. In 2017 Ukraine sought to implement a strategy of developing its mineral resources and diversifying away from Putins cash cow and creating a local competitor in his backyard.

Russia’s Resource Grab in Ukraine

Ukraine’s extraordinary riches in energy, minerals, and agriculture are a prize for the Kremlin.

foreignpolicy.com

Putin understands the value of food supply from Ujraine and Russia and has sought to weaponise this.

The same for critical minerals as was discussed by Prigozhin, and that Russias elite's were in Ukraine to plunder its resources, nothing else.

Redirect Notice

Its the same for there actions in Africa, plundering precious minerals (gold/diamonds etc) and battery metals.

It's the same issue also happening in the middle east.

 

[Wizard]

Too easy to lie about this stuff now. In fairness to Twitter the Community Notes are pretty good and they called it out too. Just wonder how many people saw the Tweet before Notes called it out

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[davek]

Putin's take on the current state of the war.

No peace until Russia’s goals in Ukraine achieved, says Putin

Russian president holds first end-of-year news conference since the Ukraine war began.

www.aljazeera.com

Fielding questions from the public and the media in Moscow, the Russian leader said peace will be possible after “denazification, demilitarisation and a neutral status” of Ukraine – something he has repeated since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

Russia alleges that Ukraine’s government is heavily influenced by “radical nationalist” and neo-Nazi groups, something Kyiv and the West dispute. Putin has also consistently demanded that Ukraine remain neutral and not join the NATO military alliance.

“As for demilitarisation, they don’t want to negotiate, so we are then forced to take other measures, including military measures,” Putin said.

“Either we agree or we need to resolve [the issue] by force,” he added.

Putin said there are some 617,000 Russian soldiers currently in Ukraine, including about 244,000 who were called up to fight alongside professional Russian military forces. But there was no current need for a further mobilisation of reservists, he added.

He said an estimated 486,000 people had so far signed up voluntarily as contract soldiers, on top of the 300,000 people called up last year, and “the flow is not diminishing”.

Last December, in a break from tradition, Putin cancelled the event. It was the first time in a decade he did not hold the conference.

This year, key themes of the conference were the fighting in Ukraine, payments to soldiers and their families and the economy, Russian media said.

Speaking to reporters, Putin said Ukraine had lost some of its best troops in an attempt to secure a foothold on the east bank of the Dnipro in the Kherson region. “It is a tragedy, I believe, for them,” he said.

 

[COYBL25]

Putin's take on the current state of the war.

No peace until Russia’s goals in Ukraine achieved, says Putin

Russian president holds first end-of-year news conference since the Ukraine war began.

www.aljazeera.com

What a guy.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Putin debunks his own propaganda by disarming Russia’s NATO borders

Putin publicly blames NATO for provoking the invasion of Ukraine, but Russia's recent demilitarization of the country's borders with neighboring NATO members makes a mockery of such claims, writes Peter Dickinson.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

 

[COYBL25]

Does his wife like Gucci handbags too ?

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Does his wife like Gucci handbags too ?

Most certainly. She's probably a nazi too.

 

[davek]

That's a sliver of hope for Ukraine that in the future they can join the bloc.