Page 150 of 214 FirstFirst ... 50100140149150151160200 ... LastLast
Results 5,216 to 5,250 of 7473

Thread: Ukraine

  1. #5216
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    29,035

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Originally Posted by HRDavies


    You could try Smedley Butler next but I know you won't, too set in your self-righteous indignation. Yeah, "remarkable". Reality is often "remarkable" to people who live in their own self-satisfied sanctimonious bubbles.

  2. #5217
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,282

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Ukraine has applied for NATO membership now, as a direct consequence of Russia annexing more parts of Ukraine. A common defence towards Russia is the best course for states bordering Russia.
    /Erik

  3. #5218
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia
    Posts
    13,281

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Release the Leopards!

    The Leopard 2's that is!
    Skip

    ---This post is delivered with righteous passion and with a solemn southern directness --
    ...........fighting against the deliberate polarization of politics...

  4. #5219
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    855

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by L.W. Baxter View Post
    some are arguing that it is within the power of the u.s. to mediate peace between russia and ukraine. that it is the desire of "the u.s." that the war continues, and for that reason, the war continues. etc..
    So they say. However for USA to stop the war permanently would involve sending troops to Ukraine and missiles to Moscow. Within days we would have a full blown Tienhaara (two steps worse than Armageddon) all along the western border of Russia.
    Those who argue that USA can and should stop the war immediately have probably no idea of what a full blown world war means in practice.

    Forcing Ukraine to cede territories to Russia or accept Russian sovereignity would not end the war. It would only give us a couple of years of respite while Russia is busy with ethnical clensings and various sorts of oppression and Russification and mass murder in Ukraine. Then the war would continue. Either in Finland or in Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania or all four countries at once. Against a much stronger and better equipped Russia.
    Those who argue that USA can and should force Ukraine to cede territory or power to Russia would probably give up the next country too and then the next. I wish they would tell us outright how far they are willing to let Russia go? Sweden? Germany? England? Ireland? Iceland? Greenland? Newfoundland? Massachusetts?
    Last edited by heimlaga; 09-30-2022 at 03:01 PM.
    Amateur living on the western coast of Finland

  5. #5220
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    30,805

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Lyman surrounded. Bakhmut still hanging in.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  6. #5221
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    30,805

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Ukraine submits application to NATO. I can’t see how this would get approved by 30 nations while the war rages on. What a Gordian Knot.

    From the day he was elected Zelensky has has the odds stacked against him and faced incredible obstacles that would have driven most to tears years ago. Recalling his dealings with Trump when he came to my attention. I was impressed by how well he walked the tightrope between Trump’s pressure program and the longer view that he ultimately took. It must have been unbearably frustrating to have Trump delay and pressure the Zelensky government while dealing with corruption at home, with the Hunter Biden specter making the rounds all the while knowing what was coming and balancing Ukraine’s complications. I can’t imagine the pressure and the frustrations.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  7. #5222
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,399

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The phoney war is almost at its end…..

  8. #5223
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,809

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by heimlaga View Post
    Those who argue that USA can and should stop the war immediately have probably no idea of what a full blown world war means in practice.

    Forcing Ukraine to cede territories to Russia or accept Russian sovereignity would not end the war. It would only give us a couple of years of respite while Russia is busy with ethnical clensings and various sorts of oppression and Russification and mass murder in Ukraine. Then the war would continue. Either in Finland or in Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania or all four countries at once. Against a much stronger and better equipped Russia.
    Those who argue that USA can and should force Ukraine to cede territory or power to Russia would probably give up the next country too and then the next. I wish they would tell us outright how far they are willing to let Russia go? Sweden? Germany? England? Ireland? Iceland? Greenland? Newfoundland? Massachusetts?
    Three quick points: 1. stop with the straw men, and putting words on our keyboards. NOBODY wrote the US should or can stop the war immediately.

    2. Your prognostication sounds just like the Neo-cons in 2002/3. You prolly drank that Kool-aid back then too.

    3. You seem unaware that the US/UK in all likelihood blocked a UKR/Russia peace deal back in April. per Jeff Sachs

    Y'all people are rewriting history . .

    The war would likely have been ended in March 2022, when the governments of Ukraine and Russia exchanged a draft peace agreement based on Ukrainian neutrality. Behind the scenes, the US and UK pushed Zelensky to reject any agreement with Putin and to fight on.

  9. #5224
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,399

    Default Re: Ukraine

    G'day heimalga, I wondered how you were faring.
    Take notice of our local bot. Any concessions now would just make matters worse of course, and as for brokered peace deals, Vladimir P would never have been interested then because he was going to win, and now it means he is not. Not a tenable position for his own safety at this stage as you, and our bot well know.

  10. #5225
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    71,399

    Default Re: Ukraine

    "in all likelihood"

    pffft……...

  11. #5226
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,524

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I think the application to join NATO is just a statement that Ukraine has given up all hope of peace with Russia, now.

    And a statement that Ukraine will defeat Russia.

    Its worth noting that the biggest supplier of heavy weapons -tanks, APVs IFVs artillery of all sorts - to Ukraine is … ​Russia
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  12. #5227
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,845

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by L.W. Baxter View Post
    how bout the tiki torch right, osborne.

    Attachment 120391
    They're proud to be freaks.

    Knee-jerk leftists claim to speak for humanity if not for life on earth.
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  13. #5228
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    29,035

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by sandtown View Post
    Three quick points: 1. stop with the straw men, and putting words on our keyboards. NOBODY wrote the US should or can stop the war immediately.

    2. Your prognostication sounds just like the Neo-cons in 2002/3. You prolly drank that Kool-aid back then too.

    3. You seem unaware that the US/UK in all likelihood blocked a UKR/Russia peace deal back in April. per Jeff Sachs

    Y'all people are rewriting history . .

    The war would likely have been ended in March 2022, when the governments of Ukraine and Russia exchanged a draft peace agreement based on Ukrainian neutrality. Behind the scenes, the US and UK pushed Zelensky to reject any agreement with Putin and to fight on.
    No, you are not saying the US should stop the war immediately. You are arguing that it should already have stopped the war.

    Interesting that you would mention Sachs, since you have mainly relied on an article in Responsible Statecraft written by Connor Echols, if memory serves.

    https://responsiblestatecraft.org/20...al-in-ukraine/

    I followed up on his sources. Pravda, a Russian propaganda organ, really did say that the US and the UK sabotaged the peace talks, and he dishonestly implied that Fiona Hill's Foreign Affairs article said the same. I have repeatedly demonstrated that Hill's article does not make this claim, but you continue to cling to it, knowing that Echols' only source was Russian propaganda.

    Once again, here's what Hill actually wrote:



    Despite calls by some for a negotiated settlement that would involve Ukrainian territorial concessions, Putin seems uninterested in a compromise that would leave Ukraine as a sovereign, independent state—whatever its borders. According to multiple former senior U.S. officials we spoke with, in April 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement: Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries. But as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated in a July interview with his country’s state media, this compromise is no longer an option. Even giving Russia all of the Donbas is not enough. “Now the geography is different,” Lavrov asserted, in describing Russia’s short-term military aims. “It’s also Kherson and the Zaporizhzhya regions and a number of other territories.” The goal is not negotiation, but Ukrainian capitulation.
    Now you've shifted your ground, and are relying on Jeffrey Sachs. Didn't see your link to him, so I googled the text, hoping to learn what his source was.

    https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-...ypd6rjgfesszm4

    He cites no source, just makes a bald assertion. At least this means that his source cannot be traced back to Russian propaganda.

  14. #5229
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    29,035

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by twodot View Post
    I think that the 'likelihood' that the US/UK blocked a UKR/Russia peace deal back in April needs well considered elaboration.
    It seems to be more an article of faith.

  15. #5230
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    23,222

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The Russian Consulate in New York City this morning:

    7239D585-D7B8-42F9-B20E-B8B4D9C2DF61.jpg

  16. #5231
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,845

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by twodot View Post
    That is, Sachs is being played?
    A wanna be playa gettin played? What's the likelihood?

    In their 2020 book Hidden Hand, Clive Hamilton and Mareike Ohlberg comment on one of Sachs' articles in which he accuses the U.S. government of maligning Huawei under hypocritical pretenses. Hamilton and Ohlberg write that Sachs' article would be more meaningful and influential if he did not have a close relationship with Huawei, including his previous endorsement of the company's "vision of our shared digital future". The authors also allege that Sachs has ties to a number of Chinese state bodies and the private energy corporation CEFC China Energy for which he has spoken.

    During a January 2021 interview, despite the interviewer's repeated prompting, Sachs evaded questions about China's repression of Uyghur people and resorted to whataboutism by alluding to "huge human rights abuses committed by the U.S." Subsequently, 19 advocacy and rights groups jointly wrote a letter to Columbia University questioning Sachs' comments. The letter's signatories wrote that Sachs took the same stance as China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a digression to the history of U.S. rights violations as a way to avoid discussions of China's mistreatment of Uyghurs. The rights groups went on to say that Sachs "betrayed his institution's mission" by trivializing the perspective of those who were oppressed by the Chinese government. Stephan Richter, editor-in-chief at The Globalist, and J.D. Bindenagel, a former U.S. Ambassador, wrote that Sachs is "actively agitating(!) for a classic Communist propaganda ploy".

    -- wikipedia
    So now he's pimpin for Putin? To remedy "huge human rights abuses committed by the U.S" ?
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  17. #5232
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Farmington, Oregon
    Posts
    20,981

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Osborne Russell View Post
    They're proud to be freaks.

    Knee-jerk leftists claim to speak for humanity if not for life on earth.
    ok, but you didn't answer the question. are these adzwipes also "substantially discredited"?

    AC9AFBD1-C2A3-4794-8DF9-06CD82B9365D.jpg

  18. #5233
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,809

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by twodot View Post
    If he were to comment on Ukraine/Russia/UK/USA/NATO I would listen, but weigh other possibilities as being equally or more likely.
    I consider that a fair observation . . .

    But note that previously some few of us have posted a number of credible cites about the events of April.

    I am not goint to keep on doing that , , .

  19. #5234
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,851

    Default Ukraine

    Interesting.

    If it was pipeline pigs dropping satchel charges, that kind of reduces the suspect pool considerable.

    [Edited to note: visual observation should show whether or not the blasts originated inside the pipe or outside: if the explosive was inside the pipe, the pipe wall should be stove outward.

    https://apple.news/AJP5kZ8R_SWO4bjMwSVAvOg

    Size of Nord Stream blasts equal to large amount of explosive, UN told

    Experts suggest maintenance robots may have planted bombs, as concern grows over methane buildup

    Denmark and Sweden have said leaks from the Nord Stream pipelines in the Baltic Sea were caused by blasts equivalent to the power of “several hundred kilograms of explosive”.
    The conclusions were made in a joint report by Denmark and Sweden which was delivered to the United Nations. The UN environment programme said on Friday the ruptures are likely to have led to the biggest single release of climate-damaging methane ever recorded.

    German authorities have also said they believe that highly explosive detonations were responsible for the sabotage attacks on the two pipelines. The EU, Nato and the governments of Poland, Sweden and Denmark have all said they believe the leaks were caused deliberately.

    Data analysis has revealed huge clouds of methane gas are hovering over the leaks, from natural gas that has been pouring into the Baltic Sea from both pipelines since Monday, the ICOS, a greenhouse gas observation system operating across Europe, reported.

    The pipes, built to transport gas from Russia to Germany, and only one of which was ever activated but both of which were full of gas, are said to be unusable due to the damage caused by the ruptures.

    Intelligence sources quoted in the news magazine Spiegel believe the pipelines were hit in four places by explosions using 500kg of TNT, the equivalent to the explosive power of a heavy aircraft bomb. German investigators have undertaken seismic readings to calculate the power of the blasts.

    The first signs of explosions were registered on Monday morning by a Danish earthquake station after suspicious activity in the waters of the Baltic Sea. A monitoring station on the Danish island of Bornholm measured severe tremors.

    A representative of the Swedish coastguard told AFP: “There are two leaks on Swedish territory and two on the Danish side.”
    It remains a mystery as to how the explosives reached the pipeline. According to initial reports, the explosions happened at depths of between 70 and 90 metres.

    There has been speculation that mini submarines might have been used to deliver the explosives. However, the amount of explosives that would have been necessary to cause such large blasts make this theory increasingly unlikely.

    Instead, experts are suggesting that maintenance robots operating within the pipeline structure may have planted the bombs during repair works.

    If this theory proves to be right, the sophisticated nature of the attack as well as the power of the blast would add weight to suspicions that the attacks were carried out by a state power, with fingers pointed at Russia. Moscow has repeatedly underlined its capability to disrupt Europe’s energy infrastructure.

    On Friday, Vladimir Putin blamed the US and its allies for blowing up the pipelines, raising the temperature in the crisis. Offering no evidence for his claim, the Russian president said in a speech to mark the annexation of four Ukrainian regions: “The sanctions were not enough for the Anglo-Saxons: they moved on to sabotage. It is hard to believe but it is a fact that they organised the blasts on the Nord Stream international gas pipelines.”

    The methane clouds are being monitored closely. The ICOS, which is analysing the air quality, has shown footage of a huge gas cloud hovering above the Baltic Sea and moving across Europe.
    Methane measuring stations in Sweden, Norway and Finland had indicated sharp rises in methane in recent days. Observation satellites are believed to have failed to record the emissions due to cloudy weather, the ICOS said.

    It said the emissions were equivalent to an entire year’s methane output for a city “the size of Paris or a country like Denmark”.
    “This is really bad, most likely the largest emission event ever detected,” Manfredi Caltagirone, acting head of UNEP’s International Methane Emissions Observator told Reuters. “This is not helpful in a moment when we absolutely need to reduce emissions.”

    Prof Stephen Platt, from the Norwegian Institute for Air Research, said: “We assume the wind on the leak area blew the methane emissions north until the Finnish archipelago, then bent towards Sweden and Norway.”

    Germany’s federal environment agency has estimated that emissions equivalent to 7.5m tons of CO2 have been released into the atmosphere. That equates to about 1% of Germany’s entire annual emissions. Gregor Rehder, of the Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research in the northern town of Warnemünde, told Spiegel: “That is quite a considerable amount of greenhouse gas that has been released.”

    Methane is one of the strongest greenhouse gases, warming the atmosphere about 30 times more than carbon dioxide over a period of 100 years. The timing and scale of the leak should be viewed with even more alarm owing to the immediate necessity to slow down climate change, the ICOS said.

    German investigators told media that divers or remote-controlled robots may be able to visit the site of the leaks as early as this weekend.
    Last edited by Nicholas Carey; 09-30-2022 at 11:55 PM.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  20. #5235
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Mull, Scotland
    Posts
    10,229

    Default Re: Ukraine

    ^^ yep.

  21. #5236
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,404

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The latest speculation on the Nord stream attacks is that the Russian sail training vessel Sedov was sailing at the exact location of the pipelines and the explosions and sailed in the area with it's AIS switched off during some time 2 days before the explosions. Was she providing cover for a submarine or is the Sedov the terrorist ship?
    Sedov plaatje.jpg
    The Sedov.
    And a map of the plotted locations.
    Sedov posities.jpg
    The source is the Dutch newspaper NRC
    https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2022/09/30...tream-a4143743
    ( which is probably behind a paywall )
    Last edited by dutchpp; 10-01-2022 at 03:44 AM.

  22. #5237
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,524

    Default Re: Ukraine

    There’s no reason for a sail training ship in European waters to turn her AIS off!
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  23. #5238
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    new zealand
    Posts
    6,029

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by johnw View Post
    So, you spew a bunch of stuff at me, then announce the conversation over? That's lame. You can't explain why, in what you term an 'information vacuum,' you know of motives and stated goals that don't appear in the public record.

    I think it's just as well you stop trying to justify this contradiction.
    You do realise that when I say "hypothetical", I'm referring to something made up, a pretend "what if" scenario? Because that is critical to understanding why this is going so badly wrong.
    Unless of course you're just winding me up.


    I'll try one last time.
    I stated exactly which two pieces of information an information vacuum pertains to - specifically and only, who blew up nord stream and how. This is real, it has actually happened, but we don't know who or how - the information vacuum. Hopefully we can agree on that?


    I also stated very clearly that "motive and stated goals" were in-part hypothetical (they're made up, pretend, but they have to be at least slightly plausible).
    They are a way of test driving the hypothetical scenario "Might the US have been involved, and if so, why"?

    As a hypothetical exercise, it goes like this:
    Did Biden say he would stop NS2? Yes. This is real, he actually said that. He didn't say how.

    Could Biden go a bit further than just sanctioning NS2? Yes, if he chose to. Unlikely, but not impossible, the means exist.

    We have to try and answer why on earth would he do that, or the exercise fails right there. At this point, we're flying kites, trying ideas out, seeing if they fly. It's ALL hypothetical, made up from here, but if an answer isnt at least vaguely plausible it doesn't fly.
    I used:
    Does Germany need vast amounts of LNG? Yes.
    Are there hundreds of billions of dollars at stake? Yes
    Are both NS pipelines out of commission? Yes
    Does the US produce LNG, and might it benefit from the situation? Yes, and maybe.

    Have we satisfied the whiff of plausibility test for this hypothetical, made up, pretend answer? On the surface at least, yes.
    Are we still on the same page? You understand clearly all of that ^ is nothing more than a mental exercise?

    And that trying to say an information vacuum applies to that stuff ^ (our hypothetically possible goal and motive), would be a nonsense. We asked a hypothetical question, and provided a possible answer using information that is available.
    Yes? Hopefully.



    But you're persisting with:
    You can't explain why, in what you term an 'information vacuum,' you know of motives and stated goals that don't appear in the public record.

    Well no .
    That would be because hypothetical (made up, what-if, pretend) stuff I post on WBF is not a matter of public record. The stated goal was a hypothetical extension of what Biden did say, and the hypothetical motive was answered with information that is all common knowledge - as listed a couple of paragraphs above.
    There is no information vacuum around these hypothetical points, there is no contradiction, there is no mysterious information that only I know - if that's what you're implying . I'm at a complete loss as to why you keep banging this drum.

    Your continued failure to acknowledge the distinction between the real (nord stream was damaged by an unknown party), and the hypothetical (might the US have been involved, and why?) is where your perceived contradiction comes from.
    Either I've been spectacularly bad at explaining this, God knows I've had several attempts, or...you tell me.
    Continuing with that level of disconnect seems fruitless though, that's why I said I'm done with it.
    I can't explain it any more simply than I already have.



    Pete
    Last edited by epoxyboy; 10-01-2022 at 04:09 AM.
    The Ignore feature, lowering blood pressure since 1862. Ahhhhhhh.

  24. #5239
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,282

    Default Re: Ukraine

    ISW has an article on Putin's nuclear threats:
    Special Report: Assessing Putin’s Implicit Nuclear Threats After Annexation | Institute for the Study of War (understandingwar.org)

    The conclusion, with which I agree, is:
    The more confident Putin is that nuclear use will not achieve decisive effects but will draw direct Western conventional military intervention in the conflict, the less likely he is to conduct a nuclear attack.
    The peacenicks, trolls and apologists who spread doubt regarding the Western response are dangerous to us all. By saying what Putin wants to hear they might convince Putin that the West will yield if nukes are used. That won't be the case.
    /Erik

  25. #5240
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,524

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by ERGR View Post
    ISW has an article on Putin's nuclear threats:
    Special Report: Assessing Putin’s Implicit Nuclear Threats After Annexation | Institute for the Study of War (understandingwar.org)

    The conclusion, with which I agree, is:

    The peacenicks, trolls and apologists who spread doubt regarding the Western response are dangerous to us all. By saying what Putin wants to hear they might convince Putin that the West will yield if nukes are used. That won't be the case.
    /Erik
    Thanks for the link; I’ve read the article and I also agree.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  26. #5241
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: Ukraine

    This was particularly hard to read. From today:

    https://ukrainevolunteer297689472.wo...s-a-slaughter/

  27. #5242
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    2,404

    Default Re: Ukraine

    ^the harsh reality of war.

  28. #5243
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,282

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Post #5253 maps with other info on the Lyman encirclement. Here's an account by Tom Cooper:
    Ukraine War, 30 September 2022: Lyman Pocket | by Tom Cooper | Oct, 2022 | Medium
    /Erik

  29. #5244
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: Ukraine

    I feel like we missed an opportunity this summer to reduce/eliminate payments to the russian regime for energy. To finish this sooner. What we find acceptable and unacceptable seems wrong.

    The destruction of the russian pipelines puts the focus on shipping.

  30. #5245
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,282

    Default Re: Ukraine

    The flow of money into Russia is of minor importance as long as we block them from buying anything useful for the war effort. European industry weakened from energy shortage is a far greater problem for Ukraine.
    /Erik

  31. #5246
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    29,989

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by bluedog225 View Post
    I feel like we missed an opportunity this summer to reduce/eliminate payments to the russian regime for energy. To finish this sooner. What we find acceptable and unacceptable seems wrong.

    The destruction of the russian pipelines puts the focus on shipping.
    Hindsight is generally more accurate, and useless. 'what to do, and at what cost?'
    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  32. #5247
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,845

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by L.W. Baxter View Post
    ok, but you didn't answer the question. are these adzwipes also "substantially discredited"?
    I thought it was a joke. These guys had no credit to be dissed. Reds generally, supporters and enablers of Trump, were they further discredited? I guess. But it's different because for the most part they're only following where Trump leads. Many of them I bet still couldn't find Ukraine on the map. So whatever there is about Russia to bring further discredit, it's doesn't bring much compared to the totality of MAGA.

    Whereas the Wounded Knee faction of the left (Putin was provoked by the US) has a theory of history and is making a factual case. Trying, anyway.
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  33. #5248
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,845

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by ERGR View Post
    The conclusion, with which I agree, is:

    The more confident Putin is that nuclear use will not achieve decisive effects but will draw direct Western conventional military intervention in the conflict, the less likely he is to conduct a nuclear attack.
    Yeah. Especially the "not achieve decisive effects". A small nuke on a civilian target? Is going to terrify the Ukrainians into surrender? They don't seem like that kind of people. Terrify the West into surrender? Be serious.

    When it comes to conventional forces, they can enter Ukraine and Russia, up from both sides of the Black Sea, and up the Caspian sea, right? Not just through Poland or the Baltic states. If Putin nukes them or even lobs some conventional ordinance at them, it's war. Iran would not be happy to to irradiated, we can assume. And, maybe, through the Stans, who suddenly decide, the time has come to get out from under Putin.

    Quote Originally Posted by ERGR View Post
    The peacenicks, trolls and apologists who spread doubt regarding the Western response are dangerous to us all. By saying what Putin wants to hear they might convince Putin that the West will yield if nukes are used. That won't be the case. /Erik
    Bears repeating.
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  34. #5249
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,738

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by ERGR;[URL="tel:6734013"
    6734013[/URL]]The flow of money into Russia is of minor importance as long as we block them from buying anything useful for the war effort. European industry weakened from energy shortage is a far greater problem for Ukraine.
    /Erik
    That’s nice thing to believe.

  35. #5250
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    28,524

    Default Re: Ukraine

    Perun’s lecture for today covers Russia’s mobilisation. As usual, it is an hour long and comprehensive:

    https://youtu.be/6hXnQNU8ANo
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

Posting Permissions

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