[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[GoldstoneVintage]

Erdogan is held in check by the secular part of Turkey, but he is an Islamist and given half chance would push for an Islamic state of some sort.

Yes, I'm thankful that he can be held in check, unlike the orange idiot and the murdering psychpath.

 

[Scappa]

Russia is calling the shots - makes me think again that Putin has compromat on Trump if he rolls over for this.

At this point what kompromat could actually do significant damage to Trump? His cultists will never change their minds and nothing will surprise his detractors.

 

[Triggaaar]

I can see a Trump-Putin deal along the lines of:

'don't attack anyone for four years. Don't do anything while I'm in power. What you do if the Democrats get in after me, is up to you'.

I also wouldn't put that past Trump, but those like Vance won't necessarily want to be part of that if they're hoping for some power once he's gone.

But I don't think it matters, because Ukraine and Europe aren't stupid enough to agree to a deal that doesn't come with some guarantees.

This idea that Russia/Trump agree a deal, that requires Europe to provide soldiers and Ukraine to stop fighting is completely laughable. It's never going to happen. As I've said before, I'm mostly worried about sanctions being reduced. If Russia's economy can improve thanks to the US, suddenly it'll look like they can fight on.

 

[raymondo]

Depressing, concerning, infuriating and cheated. That’s my feelings right now. I thought the US were like family. It really doesn’t feel like that currently. I am due to go there on business soon and just feel like telling work to f*** the trip off out of protest. I do imagine half of the US are in dispair currently.

Yes I'm sure you're right, 50% in despair.
I have good friends there, I emailed them 3 days ago asking what the f normal people there are thinking about this. No reply yet...

 

[raymondo]

At this point what kompromat could actually do significant damage to Trump? His cultists will never change their minds and nothing will surprise his detractors.

True - then it's promised business interests or some shit, Trump Towers Moscow and a piece of the Crimean riviera.

 

[NorthstandRacoon]

Yes I'm sure you're right, 50% in despair.
I have good friends there, I emailed them 3 days ago asking what the f normal people there are thinking about this. No reply yet...

Let us know what they say. Will be interesting.

 

[portlock seagull]

They've added varying sanctions slowly over time. Part of the reason they didn't all start on day 1 was to protect the other partners that would be affected (eg, ban them from selling oil and you affect those buying it as well as Russia), but it does seem they've been pretty slow, and Russia would be in a worse state if some of them had been applied earlier. For example, Gazprombank was sanctioned in Nov 24, which had a noticeable impact on Russia. Why the hell they weren't targeted earlier I don't know.

I don't know what further ones they could apply. I tend to hear what's just been applied and then wonder why they weren't sanctioned already.

I'm very concerned about Trump reducing sanctions, although I imagine he'd only do that if Russia offered him something in return, and I'm not sure what they can offer him. A blank cheque I suppose

Money, in a nutshell.

 

[Eric the meek]

I took note of what Lavrov said after the meeting.

1. Any Nato troops on Russian (=occupied territories) soil as peacemakers is completely unacceptable to Russia.
2. Russia wants the promise made to Ukraine (in 2008?) that Ukraine would one day join Nato, to be revoked.

What is the common denominator? Nato.

Either they really are scared of Nato (or 'Nato expansion'), or they regard it as a barrier for their future plans for western expansion.
Which of these would you put your money on?

 

[Eric the meek]

From Russia with love:

 

[SouthSaxon]

I took note of what Lavrov said after the meeting.

1. Any Nato troops on Russian (=occupied territories) soil as peacemakers is completely unacceptable to Russia.
2. Russia wants the promise made to Ukraine (in 2008?) that Ukraine would one day join Nato, to be revoked.

What is the common denominator? Nato.

Either they really are scared of Nato (or 'Nato expansion'), or they regard it as a barrier for their future plans for western expansion.
Which of these would you put your money on?

The second option, or both IMHO - but not the first alone

 

[A1X]

They've added varying sanctions slowly over time. Part of the reason they didn't all start on day 1 was to protect the other partners that would be affected (eg, ban them from selling oil and you affect those buying it as well as Russia), but it does seem they've been pretty slow, and Russia would be in a worse state if some of them had been applied earlier. For example, Gazprombank was sanctioned in Nov 24, which had a noticeable impact on Russia. Why the hell they weren't targeted earlier I don't know.

I see sanctions as being a bit like a game of Kerplunk. You could remove all the sticks in one go to release the ball, but it’s tricky and you end up with a right old mess to clean up (in this metaphor, a collapsed state and internal civil war with warlords and terrorists helping themselves to nuclear warheads, which is not an ideal outcome). Or you remove them slowly and see which ones move the ball and which do not. It might take longer for some than others, but if you achieve what you want while keeping the thing intact then that’s for the better.

I agree on Trump, though. The military funding is bad but can be made up, but the sanctions are huge.

 

[portlock seagull]

I took note of what Lavrov said after the meeting.

1. Any Nato troops on Russian (=occupied territories) soil as peacemakers is completely unacceptable to Russia.
2. Russia wants the promise made to Ukraine (in 2008?) that Ukraine would one day join Nato, to be revoked.

What is the common denominator? Nato.

Either they really are scared of Nato (or 'Nato expansion'), or they regard it as a barrier for their future plans for western expansion.
Which of these would you put your money on?

I don’t understand the point you’re making. Neither of these are news?

 

[studio150]

I agree on Trump, though. The military funding is bad but can be made up, but the sanctions are huge.

How much extra tax are you prepared to pay to get defence funding up to 5% of GDP?

 

[A1X]

How much extra tax are you prepared to pay to get defence funding up to 5% of GDP?

That’s…a weird question to ask in response to my post.

Personally? I’d rather we spent it on other things, but it’s imperative to western security that the US remains in NATO.

 

[armchairclubber]

I took note of what Lavrov said after the meeting.

1. Any Nato troops on Russian (=occupied territories) soil as peacemakers is completely unacceptable to Russia.
2. Russia wants the promise made to Ukraine (in 2008?) that Ukraine would one day join Nato, to be revoked.

What is the common denominator? Nato.

Either they really are scared of Nato (or 'Nato expansion'), or they regard it as a barrier for their future plans for western expansion.
Which of these would you put your money on?

Just catching up with developments.
How does this tie in with Starmers headline news yesterday that he's ready to commit UK troops to Ukraine?
Is seemed quite an acceptable and popular move on on here by some.

 

[portlock seagull]

How much extra tax are you prepared to pay to get defence funding up to 5% of GDP?

To achieve, it would effectively double the financial pain most households are currently feeling btw, after the toughest budget in 50 years. So sacrifices have to be seen in that context. Put it this way, are you prepared to give up the Albion, your annual holiday(s) or the like to improve security (assuming you put food and fuel first!)? Nearly everyone will say no, it would be deeply unpopular. Until we were invaded, naturally, then everyone would bleat about why our governments didn’t do more pre-crisis?! Nope, we never learn. But that’s democracy for yer!

 

[portlock seagull]

That’s…a weird question to ask in response to my post.

Personally? I’d rather we spent it on other things, but it’s imperative to western security that the US remains in NATO.

Oh, no, I think it’s the very core of the debate. Nothing remotely weird about in fact. How do we pay more for our security when nobody wants to?

 

[Triggaaar]

I took note of what Lavrov said after the meeting.

1. Any Nato troops on Russian (=occupied territories) soil as peacemakers is completely unacceptable to Russia.
2. Russia wants the promise made to Ukraine (in 2008?) that Ukraine would one day join Nato, to be revoked.

What is the common denominator? Nato.

Either they really are scared of Nato (or 'Nato expansion'), or they regard it as a barrier for their future plans for western expansion.
Which of these would you put your money on?

Russia are categorically not scared of Nato expansion. The two things they have against it are 1) as you say, it's a barrier to their expansion and 2) the security it would give Ukraine that would allow them to thrive with foreign investment.

I have a solution to Lavrov's points 1 & 2. Agree to his demands. Then disband Nato, and start a new treaty organisation that's identical but with Ukraine, and then move in to the occupied territories.

Also, Nato is not 'the' common denominator. Lavrov and Putin are also common denominators.

 

[Eric the meek]

I don’t understand the point you’re making. Neither of these are news?

Both are new news, when you consider the detail of the content, and the context in which they were made.

They are news because this is the first time they have been referenced by the Russian foreign sec. in the inaugural meeting in the peace negotiations.
In other words, no concessions. Even in the formal, one chance only, peace talks. They are not budging.

However....

In the past, Putin has said if any Nato troops were put in Ukraine, he threatened nuclear war. This time, he didn't.
I hadn't heard of the 2008 promise to Ukraine that they could join Nato. Nor have I previously heard of the Russian demand that the promise be revoked.

All of it is news. You need to pay closer attention.

 

[Triggaaar]

The second option, or both IMHO - but not the first alone

It's definitely not both.