Page 136 of 216 FirstFirst ... 3686126135136137146186 ... LastLast
Results 4,726 to 4,760 of 7535

Thread: Ukraine

  1. #4726
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    new zealand
    Posts
    6,034

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadim 68 View Post
    Read the Geneva Accords/ Minsk Protocol/ Minsk 2. Kyiv broke every agreement made.........then Russia invaded. Not suggesting it is right, to keep repeating myself.
    Excuse me? Read the Budapest Memorandum. Moscow broke every agreement, invaded Crimea, covertly invaded Donetsk/Luhansk with "volunteers", and THEN we got this miserable piece of appeasement.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_...central%20part.
    Which by the way seems to have been widely ignored by both sides.

    Pete
    The Ignore feature, lowering blood pressure since 1862. Ahhhhhhh.

  2. #4727
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gypsie View Post
    The Guardian is reporting the M777's from the US are wearing away. They're furiously reverse engineering parts to keep them alive and firing. Same with the HIMARs systems.
    This is a dimension i didn't think of.

    The design lifespan of the M777 gun tube is 2,650 rounds, so yes.

    Willing to bet we're sending them spare gun tubes. And training up Ukie mechanics.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  3. #4728
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    7,200

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Looking for ways to support Ukraine; Saint Javelin.
    They're printing T-shirts and the profits go to the war.

    https://www.saintjavelin.com/product...n-adult-tshirt

    (Tank and Tractor tee's available )
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  4. #4729
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    7,200

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Iranian drones are problematic.....

    NYT reported. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/18/w...s-inmates.html

    But as Ukraine’s counteroffensive enters a third week, replenishing morale and heartening allies, Russia’s Army is increasingly making use of a new and, Ukrainian officers say, frighteningly effective, weapon: Iranian-made attack drones.
    In its first use in Ukraine, an Iranian drone blew up an American-supplied M777 howitzer, Col. Rodion Kulagin, the commander of artillery operations in the Kharkiv counteroffensive, said in an interview.Half a dozen strikes destroyed howitzers and armored vehicles, killing four soldiers and wounding 16, he said.
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  5. #4730
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    Well, you have that mostly wrong.

    No. You might want to read your history there.

    Cuba allowed Russia/Soviet Union to place nuclear missiles on Cuban territory, operated and under the control of the Russian military. Cuba wasn't in the chain of command.

    A quote from Nikolai Leonov, chief of the KGB’s Department of Cuban Affairs in 1962, during a conference in Havana on the 30th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis:

    https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2002...missile-crisis

    Leonov: During the missile crisis, the Soviet sailors and soldiers on the island were dressed in Cuban uniforms, even though they had Soviet uniforms with them. On the morning of October 27, they received orders to wear their Soviet uniforms.

    Why? Because they were told they were preparing for battle, and they wished to die in the uniforms of their own country. This is very important, it seems to me. Not only the Cubans were prepared to fight to the death, but the Soviets as well. This was the situation. They believed they were about to be destroyed, and they wished to behave honorably, as soldiers. Pliyev was a very good soldier, a tough soldier, as he proved in the Second World War. In this situation, it is inconceivable to me that he would have neglected to arm and fire his tactical nuclear weapons! Inconceivable!
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  6. #4731
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    sweden
    Posts
    304

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by epoxyboy View Post
    Read the Budapest Memorandum.
    See section 3.


    1. Refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by the signatory of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.


    US actions:

    On Sunday, in his interview with CNN, Obama admitted that the United States “had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine.”
    “Obama’s statement is reiterating something that the world public opinion already knew — the US was involved in the coup of [ex-Ukrainian President] Viktor Yanukovych from the start. History shows us that the US has overthrown numerous governments in Latin America, Asia and Africa and replaced them with leaders that ruled with a fascist ideology that proved useful for Washington’s geopolitical interests,”

    US also a signatory on the Budapest Memorandom, the above actions, in the Kremlins view, was breach. Ask any of the experts here to fill you in on the billions of $ (and Euros) pumped into Ukraine, and for what purpose, if you was unaware.

  7. #4732
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,411

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The US is certainly not an angel in much of it's foreign interferences. But US foreign policy is, at best, served up in 4 or 8 year segments so what can you expect. The nations security apparatus's necessarily require a more consistent approach. But the trouble with that is the mindset of the people it attrracts and recruits, and the separate command structure it builds by virtue of it's continuity. Of course with a man like 45 in the WH continuity might not be such a bad idea.

  8. #4733
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    new zealand
    Posts
    6,034

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Vadim 68 View Post
    See section 3.


    1. Refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by the signatory of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.


    US actions:

    On Sunday, in his interview with CNN, Obama admitted that the United States “had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine.”
    “Obama’s statement is reiterating something that the world public opinion already knew — the US was involved in the coup of [ex-Ukrainian President] Viktor Yanukovych from the start. History shows us that the US has overthrown numerous governments in Latin America, Asia and Africa and replaced them with leaders that ruled with a fascist ideology that proved useful for Washington’s geopolitical interests,”

    US also a signatory on the Budapest Memorandom, the above actions, in the Kremlins view, was breach. Ask any of the experts here to fill you in on the billions of $ (and Euros) pumped into Ukraine, and for what purpose, if you was unaware.
    Thats a very selective snippet of Budapest, and I'm not sure what real economic advantage the US stood to gain. Clearly both sides were playing the "economic coercion" and political interference" game. Your choice of articles seems to imply a belief that Moscow was squeaky clean where the US was not, but don't forget that ultimately the Ukrainian people decided which side of that argument to back - Putin feeling butthurt about the result or the means justifies nothing.

    Here's some economic coercion for you - Russian billions:
    When Moscow gave Kyiv a $3 billion loan in 2013 as part of incentives to keep its distance from the European Union, many Ukrainians regarded it as a poisoned chalice and a further reason to get rid of then-President Viktor Yanukovych.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russia-loan-looms-as-threat-to-bailout/27235882.html

    Pete
    The Ignore feature, lowering blood pressure since 1862. Ahhhhhhh.

  9. #4734
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    sweden
    Posts
    304

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by epoxyboy View Post
    Thats a very selective snippet of Budapest.

    Your choice of articles seems to imply a belief that Moscow was squeaky clean where the US was not, but don't forget that ultimately the Ukrainian people decided which side of that argument to back - Putin feeling butthurt about the result or the means justifies nothing.

    Here's some economic coercion for you - Russian billions:

    https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-russia-loan-looms-as-threat-to-bailout/27235882.html

    Pete
    Is best to to get to the point.no?

    There are no squeaky clean on any side. Ukraine was soaking up roubles like a wet sponge via aid and discounted gas and transit fees for decades, it kept the oligarchs happy and the average ukrainian from freezing to death in winter, and obviously within a sphere of influence, nothing unusual about that when it is a neighbouring country.. But, the US is not a neighbouring country, and history has shown what can and does (and did) happen when the US starts to pour money into a country to effect regime change.

    Of course it is up to the Ukrainian people to decide, but they did not need McCain and Nuland to tell them, and at worst, offer things that were beyond their remit, promises of joining the EU and NATO; knowing the latter would have been a red flag for the Kremlin, and here we are.

    Its tragic beyond words for the simple reason that without US interference, this conflict would have been unlikely to have started. If the US believes in democracy and the will of the people, which as you agree, they, the people of Ukraine should decide, then the agreements to allow the people of the East an enclave of their own should have been respected, after all, Kyiv did agree with it until others suggested otherwise.

    I am not sure, if anything, ownership by US corporations/hedgefunds and others of millions of hectares of farm land in the East of Ukraine has anything to do with it, suffice to say if the land is not being farmed, the investments are not paying.

  10. #4735
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    7,200

    Default Re: Ukraine

    https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/19-sep...ska-oblast131g

    All very quiet from the UA along the entire front today - except the airforce were hammering the Russians north of Kherson.
    Hammering...? Softening up....?

    British saying the Russians lost 4 combat jets in the last 10 days - inside Ukraine.
    That brings confirmed looses of planes up to 55 since the start of the war.
    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ys-2022-09-19/
    Last edited by gypsie; 09-19-2022 at 06:34 AM.
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  11. #4736
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,535

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Olena Zelenskya is in London for the State Funeral today.

    I am sure she is spending her time constructively.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62947898
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  12. #4737
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    sweden
    Posts
    304

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Aljazeera:

    Pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine jail OSCE employee for 13 years

    Moscow-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine sentenced an employee of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to 13 years in jail on treason charges, Russian news agencies have reported.
    “A panel of judges found Dmitry Pavlovich Shabanov guilty … and sentenced him to 13 years in prison,” the RIA Novosti news agency reported, quoting the Supreme Court of the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR).
    Shabanov, who was arrested in April, is accused of passing confidential information to foreign intelligence services.
    The OSCE has “unequivocally” condemned the charges against Shabanov, saying he is being “held unjustifiably on fabricated charges”.




  13. #4738
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,835

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I heard the retired NATO commander (1987-1992) Gen John Galvin speak in Cinncy in the early 1990s'

    He was distraught at what he saw developing - a continuing military face-off and the looting of state property in the former USSR.

    He called for a "new Marshall Plan" that would bring Russia into the European community, and make them "a permanent friend" of the West.

    He was right.

    Just consider how much cheaper the Galvin alternative would have been, and how much more likely to keep peace.

  14. #4739
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,835

    Default Re: Ukraine

    (sorry for the double post - I tried to fix it)

    I heard the recently retired NATO commander (1987-1992) Gen John Galvin speak in Cinncy in the early 1990s'

    He was distraught at what he saw developing - a continuing military face-off and the looting of state property in the former USSR.

    Instead, he called for a "new Marshall Plan" that would bring Russia into the European community, and make them "a permanent friend" of the West.

    He was right.

    Just consider how much cheaper the Galvin alternative would have been, and how much more likely to establish and maintain peace.

  15. #4740
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    30,023

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Current management wants exactly the opposite. (I'm talking putin)
    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  16. #4741
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Marblehead MA
    Posts
    3,279

    Default Re: Ukraine

    @sandtown You're assuming that the people (Russians) you want to rescue wish to be rescued. You're not alone, the entire nation of Germany assumed that if they bought Russian gas Putin would become more peaceful. However its very clear that the Russians did not want to be rescued, and that Galvin was condescending. (don't get me started about the team from Harvard advising privatization).

    Putin wants to kill people until the survivors do what he wants. Hell, I met Russian who died killing Chechens. Putin killed Chechens, and lots of Russians, until the survivors did what he wants. Putin seems confident that he can kill Ukrainians until the survivors do what he wants.

    I'm not sure you're able to address this without talking about the US. But really, this is not about you, or US.
    Yachting, the only sport where you get to be a mechanic, electrician, plumber and carpenter

  17. #4742
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,866

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    I heard the retired NATO commander (1987-1992) Gen John Galvin speak in Cinncy in the early 1990s'

    He was distraught at what he saw developing - a continuing military face-off and the looting of state property in the former USSR.

    He called for a "new Marshall Plan" that would bring Russia into the European community, and make them "a permanent friend" of the West.

    He was right.

    Just consider how much cheaper the Galvin alternative would have been, and how much more likely to keep peace.
    The West screwed up big-time following the implosion of the Soviet Union.

    There was a lot of pressure put on Russia and the ex-SSRs — by the IMF, the G7 and others — to unload all the state-owned enterprises as quickly as possible.

    https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2...path-for-putin

    How 'shock therapy' created Russian oligarchs and paved the path for Putin

    March 22, 20226:30 AM ET
    Greg Rosalsky
    .
    .
    .
    .
    The Rise Of The Oligarchy

    The Russian oligarchy arose out of the mayhem of rapid privatization in the 1990s. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russian president Boris Yeltsin, a leader in the revolt against communism, had to figure out how to transition from a command-and-control economy to a market one. Yeltsin turned to the Russian economists Yegor Gaidar and Anatoly Chubais, who, with the aid of Western advisers, hammered out the details.

    There were many economists — including even Gaidar and Chubais themselves before they became government officials — who believed that the transition to capitalism would best be handled gradually. They knew the transition would be complex and painful, and it made sense for Russia to first create the institutions that healthy, competitive markets need to flourish — like independent courts, functioning capital markets, and strong regulatory bodies.

    But Yeltsin and his allies believed that time was not on their side. An attempted coup in August 1991 by Soviet hardliners against the reformers almost derailed the whole project. Entrenched Soviet industrialists and party insiders wanted a return to the old order. The Yeltsin administration decided that a program known as "shock therapy" — rapidly unleashing market forces — was the way to electrocute the old Soviet system and jolt Russia into embracing capitalism.

    American advisors and global creditors, especially the International Monetary Fund, played a notable role advocating for shock therapy. But some influential shock therapists, like the economist Jeffrey Sachs, then at Harvard, believed such a radical program needed support. He proposed the United States and multilateral development agencies help Russian reformers succeed with a $30 billion aid package, akin to what America had provided Europe after WWII with the Marshall Plan. Sachs also called for the cancellation of Russia's debts. But these ideas were rejected by American leaders.

    President Yeltsin delivered the first big shock to the Russian economy when he lifted price controls in December 1991. As the Soviet economy collapsed, however, the policy ended up unleashing hyperinflation. By 1994, consumer prices in Russia would skyrocket to almost 2000 times what they had been in 1990. That candy bar that had cost $1 now cost $2000. Hyperinflation devastated ordinary Russians.

    Meanwhile, Chubais was tasked with overseeing mass privatization. That entailed transforming a nation whose almost entire economy consisted of state-controlled industries — manufacturing plants, oil refineries, mines, media outlets, biscuit factories, you name it — into private enterprises. It was, to date, surely the biggest transfer of state assets to private owners in world history.

    Privatization was conducted in two waves. The first wave, which began in October 1992, had at least the veneer of being a fair and open process. Russia issued 148 million "privatization checks," or vouchers, to Russian citizens. These vouchers could be freely sold or traded. They could then be used to buy shares of state enterprises going private at public auctions around the nation. It was like the former Soviet Union was holding the world's largest garage sale and vouchers were the tickets to shop.

    The people on their way to becoming Russia's first class of oligarchs scoured the nation, trying to buy as many vouchers as they could. Many of the oligarchs had come from nothing. They had initially gotten rich — but not quite buy-superyachts rich just yet — by hustling in the black market or through legitimate businesses when the Soviet Union first allowed private entrepreneurship in the late 1980s. For example, Roman Abramovich made his first pot of money selling rubber ducks and other random objects to Russians out of his Moscow apartment (seriously). He was also a mechanic. By the time privatization began, many soon-to-be oligarchs owned banks and had enough money to buy lots of vouchers.

    The oligarchs went on a buying spree, purchasing hundreds of thousands of vouchers, each of which were worth 10,000 rubles, or about $40 or less back in the 1990s. Average Russians, who were struggling during hyperinflation, were often eager to sell. After amassing vouchers, the oligarchs — both come-up-from-nothing hustlers and former Soviet government insiders — used them at auctions to buy up stocks in newly private companies. By all accounts, many of these enterprises were shockingly undervalued — and those who were able to get large chunks of lucrative enterprises became fabulously wealthy in a very short period of time. Between 1992 and 1994, about 15,000 state-run enterprises went private under the program.

    By 1994, when the voucher program ended, around 70 percent of the Russian economy had been privatized. But some of the biggest, most valuable industries remained in the government's hands. Chubais had plans to privatize these state enterprises and raise much needed funds for the government by selling them off for cash to the highest bidder in legitimate auctions. However, politics got in the way of the increasingly unpopular privatization drive — and even threatened to reverse it. That's when the Yeltsin administration resorted to a much shadier form of privatization.

    The "Loans For Shares" Scheme

    By 1995, Boris Yeltsin was very unpopular. Hyperinflation. The decline of law and order. The rise of the mafia and execution-style killings on the streets of Moscow. Russia's inability to pay government salaries and pensions. The sense that unscrupulous men in suits were the only ones winning in the new economy. Plus, Yeltsin was a notorious drunk with serious health problems. Just a year away from reelection, Yeltsin's approval rating fell to the low single digits, and he faced the specter of an increasingly popular Communist challenger who looked like he could win the 1996 presidential elections.

    With privatization stalling, the government desperate for money, and a growing fear that Russia was about to slide back into communism, Chubais and the Yeltsin administration turned to a shady scheme known as "Loans For Shares." The secret plot basically worked like this: the richest oligarchs loaned the government billions of dollars in exchange for massive shares of Russia's most valuable state enterprises. When the government defaulted on paying back the loans, as the schemers expected they would, the oligarchs would walk away with the keys to Russia's most profitable corporations. In exchange, the government would get the money it needed to pay its bills, privatization would keep moving forward — and, most importantly, the oligarchs would do everything in their power to ensure Yeltsin was reelected.

    Between November and December 1995, twelve of Russia's most profitable industrial enterprises were auctioned off to the oligarchs, including a mining company, two steel companies, two shipping companies, and five oil companies. The auctions were a complete farce. Chubais and his team had predetermined with the oligarchs who would get what and for roughly how much. And the prices the oligarchs paid for these corporations were a steal — almost literally. For example, Boris Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich, now well beyond his days of selling rubber ducks, got a large stake in the oil company Sibneft for about $200 million. In 2009, when Putin renationalized the company, Abramovich sold his stake back to the government for $11.9 billion. Talk about a payday.

    "Chubais never advertised it publicly — he attempted to keep the goal obscure so as not to alarm the opposition— but loans for shares should really have been called 'tycoons for Yeltsin,'" writes David Hoffman, the former Moscow bureau chief for The Washington Post, in his book The Oligarchs: Wealth And Power In The New Russia. "Chubais was willing to hand over the property without competition, without openness, and, as it turned out, for a bargain price, but in a way that would keep the businessmen at Yeltsin's side in the 1996 reelection campaign."

    [continued...]
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  18. #4743
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,866

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Part II

    How 'shock therapy' created Russian oligarchs and paved the path for Putin

    March 22, 20226:30 AM ET
    Greg Rosalsky
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Yeltsin Is Reelected With Oligarch Money


    Holding up their end of the bargain, the oligarchs, who often fought with each other, united forces behind Yeltsin's reelection campaign. They donated millions of dollars to the effort. They hired the best political operatives they knew. They laundered government money with their banks, and fed it into the Yeltsin campaign machine. Two of the oligarchs, Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gusinsky, controlled two of the three major Russian television networks — and they blanketed the airwaves with pro-Yeltsin propaganda. Fueled by the immense power of the oligarchs, Yeltsin conducted Russia's first American-style presidential campaign.


    As the election approached, Yeltsin made a cynical move to placate critics of his privatization scheme, publicly firing his super unpopular privatization czar Chubais. "He sold off a big industry for next to nothing," Yeltsin told the press. "We cannot forgive this."


    Despite waving the banner of free markets and democracy, the reformers of the 1990s — perhaps ironically — did much of their reforms undemocratically, often by presidential decrees that were hammered out through backroom deals with the rich and powerful. Thanks in no small part to the oligarchic beneficiaries of these deals, Yeltsin beat the odds and won reelection. Russian-style crony capitalism was here to stay.


    Weeks after the victory, Boris Berezovsky bragged to The Financial Times that he and six other Russian oligarchs controlled half of Russia's economy. That number seems to have been significantly inflated. Nonetheless, by 1996, the world could see that Russia had a new class of industrialists and bankers who wielded enormous power. A class that made their fortunes not through society-improving ideas, consumer-pleasing products, or technological innovations — but rather through corruption, skullduggery, and the plunder of Russia's raw materials. Many Russians would come to resent the oligarchs and the liberal reformers who empowered them.


    As Yeltsin's health continued to deteriorate in the late 1990s, the oligarchs began to worry about who would be his successor. The natural heir to Yeltsin would be whoever occupied the post of prime minister. If Yeltsin stepped down, the prime minister automatically became acting president and would have the advantage of incumbency during election time.


    In 1999, Boris Yeltsin and his oligarchic allies agreed that an obscure former KGB officer named Vladimir Putin was the man to become Yeltsin's prime minister, and soon Russia's next president. He was a nobody, barely a public figure, but he had a reputation for loyalty. They trusted that, once in power, he would look after their interests. Little did they know that they were unleashing a monster they soon would be unable to control.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  19. #4744
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Between Bourgeoisie and Proletariat - Australia
    Posts
    7,200

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Nice article Nicholas.

    Russia has been under tzarist type control forever. They embraced Putin because that's the type of government that makes sense to them. Its a comfy familiar cardigan that you know will be warm on a chilly evening, even though its not perfect.

    Have the Russians no agency? No way of creating the governance system they want without 'The West' interceding? Did they have no opportunity?

    My impression is they are at best ambivalent about democracy and gravitate toward making 'ruling' someone else's problem. They strike me as a people who largely simply don't want the responsibility of democracy. ('They' being the majority).

    Its all good to say some NATO general thought it'd be a great idea - but how would he have done it against the instincts and will of the people of a country?
    The 'unlock-your-inner-westerner' has been tried.
    It's all fun and games until Darth Vader comes.

  20. #4745
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,855

    Default Re: Ukraine

    All this retrospecting is made irrelevant by the invasion, except in terms of the conditions we will impose after. This time they will be made to stick. Russia as it stands has proven itself incapable of forming a peaceful nation. Some fairly strong measures will be necessary.
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  21. #4746
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,835

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Hunter View Post
    @sandtown You're assuming that the people (Russians) you want to rescue wish to be rescued. You're not alone, the entire nation of Germany .
    The "entire nation of Germany" was "rescued" - so to speak - circa 1946

    Galvin thought Marshall Plan type approaches could work in Eastern Europe too.

  22. #4747
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,835

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Osborne Russell View Post
    . Russia as it stands has proven itself incapable of forming a peaceful nation. Some fairly strong measures will be necessary.
    You have drunk deeply of the de-humanization kool aide . .

    What a ridiculous example of personification/reification/collective punishment - ism

  23. #4748
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,535

    Default Re: Ukraine

    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  24. #4749
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,411

    Default Re: Ukraine

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyvYu-dH0Cw

    Be interedting if the Chechens decided they wanted their country back………….. They fought Stalin for it…...

  25. #4750
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Poznań, Poland
    Posts
    3,457

    Default Re: Ukraine

    There are rumours of a group inside kremlin trying to plot against Putin, inventing or exposing an illness to make way for a velvet power change.
    An interesting concept, but if rumours reach even the western media, I assume them to either be false or the conspirators already having unfortunate accidents.
    The best case scenario is that rumours are supposed to carefully probe possible reactions to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    de-humanization
    You're either using words you don't understand or mix meanings deliberately
    WszystekPoTrochu's signature available only for premium forum users.

  26. #4751
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Beachport, South Australia
    Posts
    2,093

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I apologise if this question is seen as thread rift but, in the event of Putin departing the scene shortly, who would be likely to fill his position and what would that mean for the conflict in Ukraine and what other consequences might follow?
    Bald, ugly, not too bright but incredibly sexy in an unattractive sort of way....

  27. #4752
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    sweden
    Posts
    304

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by doorstop View Post
    I apologise if this question is seen as thread rift but, in the event of Putin departing the scene shortly, who would be likely to fill his position and what would that mean for the conflict in Ukraine and what other consequences might follow?
    You are asking a question on the wrong forum. No one here can answer that, as no one knows. No doubt you will be offered some regurgitated media story with some spin, but the best anyone has is wild speculation.

  28. #4753
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    Clackmannanshire, Scotland
    Posts
    112

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I don't often (hardly ever) agree with young Vadim, but the second part of his post is probably quite correct, no one knows. Perhaps this question should be on a thread of it's own, or somewhere else entirely, I don't know. As to the "regurgitated media story with some spin", well, that's very possibly also correct, depending on the sources we use.
    Dwedais "Gwirion", nid "Twp"

  29. #4754
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Marblehead MA
    Posts
    3,279

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Putin has not created a succession plan. That is very deliberate on his part. It's possible that he would be replaced by someone who wishes to end the war. It's also possible he will be replaced by someone who calls for a general mobilization and formal declaration of war. I don't think anyone can actually fill Putin's position but Putin. Anyone new would have many powerful factions to deal with. That can lead to behavior that appears strange or foolish to those like us, who don't have a complete picture.
    Yachting, the only sport where you get to be a mechanic, electrician, plumber and carpenter

  30. #4755
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulgong. Central west N.S.W. Australia
    Posts
    6,491

    Default Re: Ukraine

    If Putin was going to call for general mobilisation, maybe he should have done it before Ukraine blew up most of his hardware. JayInOz

  31. #4756
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Farmington, Oregon
    Posts
    21,002

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    The "entire nation of Germany" was "rescued" - so to speak - circa 1946

    Galvin thought Marshall Plan type approaches could work in Eastern Europe too.
    entire nation of germany? except the half occupied by you-know-who.

    you mean half the german nation minus its young men and its army and all its weapons, and with an occupying force in place.

    how is that at all similar to russia, the well-armed nuclear power, in the era of soviet collapse? what were we gonna do, invite ourselves in?

    there is no question that opportunities are lost every day. but a "marshall plan" for russia in the 90's is pure fantasy.

  32. #4757
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    20,468

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by JayInOz View Post
    If Putin was going to call for general mobilisation, maybe he should have done it before Ukraine blew up most of his hardware. JayInOz
    Strikes me that any mobilization will take a great deal of time and that training on more complex equipment will take even longer to replace those specialists.

    Considering Russia's economic position and the inability to build and field "new" equipment, these individuals are going to be relatively poorly equipped when they go into the field.

    The other thing to consider is that Ukraine continues to train soldiers. They are also getting new equipment on a regular basis - from a variety of nations. With the US lend-lease act approved in May, you cannot tell me that there hasn't been on-going training of Ukrainian personnel on that equipment.

    I will be interested to see if the A10 is part of that lend-lease. It would certainly be a great tool to deal with armor.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  33. #4758
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,535

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I am seeing reports that the Kremlin press corps have been briefed to expect a statement to the nation by Putin and Shoigu tonight.

    Presumably this will be the announcement of a referendum in Luhansk and Donetsk, but there may be more.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  34. #4759
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    20,468

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    I am seeing reports that the Kremlin press corps have been briefed to expect a statement to the nation by Putin and Shoigu tonight.

    Presumably this will be the announcement of a referendum in Luhansk and Donetsk, but there may be more.
    I'm betting on more.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  35. #4760
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,855

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    You have drunk deeply of the de-humanization kool aide . .

    What a ridiculous example of personification/reification/collective punishment - ism
    It's no different from the Allied post-WW2 administration of Germany.
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •