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

[Eric the meek]

I fully support Nato actions, but i'm still very happy to hear from those who take a different view. Echo chambers don't help anyone[/QUOTE]

You're right. They don't. But this isn't an echo chamber. What is an echo chamber is Russian state TV, which is important to watch for an insight into how a very different world view is presented to the Russian masses. That doesn't mean to say that we should accept, or be happy to hear, those views on our forum.

As an aside, I think the tone of Russian state TV has gone off-the-scale. It is worrying, which I assume was the objective of whoever controls its output.

 

[Brovion]

We had a few of those earlier on in the thread, who assumed the high moral ground and tried to blame the war on Nato expansion. They no longer post on here.

But they did take a long time to read the room. Perhaps it was the genocide, or the ethnic cleansing, or the war crimes uncovered after the Russians withdrew from Kyiv, that helped them decide it was becoming too awkward to keep blaming Nato.

Excuse me, I'm still posting on here. And yes, the attitude of the West and the reckless expansion of NATO in the post Cold War period has been a factor in this. No it wasn't the main reason, no it wasn't remotely a good excuse (for the invasion), but it did play a part. Look at the map of NATO countries before and after the Cold War. You don't have to be the type of Russian who won't attend Rugby matches because the forwards keep huddling together to talk about you to be slightly concerned that your former enemy has massively expanded and is now on your doorstep - just for 'defensive' purposes of course.

And no I don't expect you to agree so let's not get into a Triggaar-type spat over it. My position has shifted slightly though as the damage is done, and whereas before I was opposed to nations like Finland or Sweden joining I now think it's perfectly understandable.

 

[Eric the meek]

Excuse me, I'm still posting on here. And yes, the attitude of the West and the reckless expansion of NATO in the post Cold War period has been a factor in this. No it wasn't the main reason, no it wasn't remotely a good excuse (for the invasion), but it did play a part. Look at the map of NATO countries before and after the Cold War. You don't have to be the type of Russian who won't attend Rugby matches because the forwards keep huddling together to talk about you to be slightly concerned that your former enemy has massively expanded and is now on your doorstep - just for 'defensive' purposes of course.

And no I don't expect you to agree so let's not get into a Triggaar-type spat over it. My position has shifted slightly though as the damage is done, and whereas before I was opposed to nations like Finland or Sweden joining I now think it's perfectly understandable.

Actually, I do broadly agree. From the Russian perspective, I can see Nato 'expansion'. But the Russian perspective misreads it, just as you do. I don't think the expansion of Nato in the post cold war period was reckless at all. Without real regime change in Moscow, I think it was entirely reasonable, and quite understandable for those neighbours of Russia, who experienced decades of strong-arm, bully boy tactics from Soviet Russia. Fast forward 30 years, and nothing has changed ! If anything, it has got worse. There is now cybercrime, disruption and war by Russia against its new neighbours. Why wouldn't/shouldn't Nato expand? Long, hard, brutal experience tells us that - of course - it should.

 

[Baldseagull]

Excuse me, I'm still posting on here. And yes, the attitude of the West and the reckless expansion of NATO in the post Cold War period has been a factor in this. No it wasn't the main reason, no it wasn't remotely a good excuse (for the invasion), but it did play a part. Look at the map of NATO countries before and after the Cold War. You don't have to be the type of Russian who won't attend Rugby matches because the forwards keep huddling together to talk about you to be slightly concerned that your former enemy has massively expanded and is now on your doorstep - just for 'defensive' purposes of course.

And no I don't expect you to agree so let's not get into a Triggaar-type spat over it. My position has shifted slightly though as the damage is done, and whereas before I was opposed to nations like Finland or Sweden joining I now think it's perfectly understandable.

I don't think he was referring to you specifically, one other poster springs to mind that had a mild version of Kremlin propaganda he was pushing.
NATO membership for Ukraine would be a concern for Russia, not because NATO itself is a direct threat to Russia, but because to attain membership Ukraine would have to have a modern and capable military, and importantly, not have any border disputes on going.
That would mean that Ukraine would either have to come to some arrangement over Crimea and the Donbass, or retake Crimea, and put down the rebellion in the East. With the training and professionalisation of the Ukraine Military that has been going on since 2014, taking those areas back under control was becoming an option Ukraine could have taken. Personally, I don't think Russia gives a shit about Eastern Ukraine apart from easier access to Crimea, and that any Peace agreement is going to have to include some arrangement where Russia maintains control of Crimea, even if it is a lease, maybe a limit on Ukrainian Naval capabilities, and probably removing the name Azov Battallion from Ukrainian Military so he can claim some denazification bollocks at home.

He has NATO neighbours already, and Russia and NATO member Turkey seem to have good relations generally. The attempt to take the Black sea Coast of Ukraine is economically an militarily useful to Russia, but the threat of reduced trade because of EU agreements with Ukraine is real, and the threat of a NATO attack is not.

 

[Eric the meek]

I don't think he was referring to you specifically, one other poster springs to mind that had a mild version of Kremlin propaganda he was pushing.
NATO membership for Ukraine would be a concern for Russia, not because NATO itself is a direct threat to Russia, but because to attain membership Ukraine would have to have a modern and capable military, and importantly, not have any border disputes on going.
That would mean that Ukraine would either have to come to some arrangement over Crimea and the Donbass, or retake Crimea, and put down the rebellion in the East. With the training and professionalisation of the Ukraine Military that has been going on since 2014, taking those areas back under control was becoming an option Ukraine could have taken. Personally, I don't think Russia gives a shit about Eastern Ukraine apart from easier access to Crimea, and that any Peace agreement is going to have to include some arrangement where Russia maintains control of Crimea, even if it is a lease, maybe a limit on Ukrainian Naval capabilities, and probably removing the name Azov Battallion from Ukrainian Military so he can claim some denazification bollocks at home.

He has NATO neighbours already, and Russia and NATO member Turkey seem to have good relations generally. The attempt to take the Black sea Coast of Ukraine is economically an militarily useful to Russia, but the threat of reduced trade because of EU agreements with Ukraine is real, and the threat of a NATO attack is not.

You are spot on - I wasn't referring to [MENTION=177]Brovion[/MENTION] at all. It was remiss of me not to make that clear in my reply to Brovion.

 

[vegster]

Sounds like the poor sods in the steelworks at Azovstal are taking one hell of a battering but still holding out. I can't see the Russians sparing any of them including the wounded, it is simply a massacre.

If anyone follows Twitter, this bloke seems very close to the action and has some interesting insights..

@CanadianUkrain1

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Sounds like the poor sods in the steelworks at Azovstal are taking one hell of a battering but still holding out. I can't see the Russians sparing any of them including the wounded, it is simply a massacre.

If anyone follows Twitter, this bloke seems very close to the action and has some interesting insights..

@CanadianUkrain1

Sadly you are right. They are fighting merely to survive a little longer

 

[Brovion]

You are spot on - I wasn't referring to [MENTION=177]Brovion[/MENTION] at all. It was remiss of me not to make that clear in my reply to Brovion.

Ok, thankyou. And yes whilst we will never totally agree (and as I say I don't want to go the full Triggaaar on you, or anyone else, and break down every post - I haven't got the time) I do think we're not a million miles away. And like once WW2 had started discussions about what should or shouldn't have happened about Munich, the Sudetenland, German re-occupation of the Rhineland, etc became totally academic so are discussions now about what the West should or shouldn't have done with regard to Russia and its neighbours. All that matters now is the future and I totally support the actions that we, the West/NATO are taking. I AM worried about escalation, but we are where we are.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Still no confirmation of the rumours that another Russian ship ( frigate ) has been hit/sunk by a missile strike in the Black Sea.

 

[Scappa]

Still no confirmation of the rumours that another Russian ship ( frigate ) has been hit/sunk by a missile strike in the Black Sea.

Fake news. Merely Russia commissioning their latest submarine

 

[Eric the meek]

Ok, thankyou. And yes whilst we will never totally agree (and as I say I don't want to go the full Triggaaar on you, or anyone else, and break down every post - I haven't got the time) I do think we're not a million miles away. And like once WW2 had started discussions about what should or shouldn't have happened about Munich, the Sudetenland, German re-occupation of the Rhineland, etc became totally academic so are discussions now about what the West should or shouldn't have done with regard to Russia and its neighbours. All that matters now is the future and I totally support the actions that we, the West/NATO are taking. I AM worried about escalation, but we are where we are.

Thanks for that. I am also worried about escalation (the news in the link in my next comment will not have gone down well in Moscow). It is the constant stream of threats, coupled with the unpredictability and unreliability of Putin and the Kremlin that is the concern. But I am with you - I also fully support the actions, both military help and sanctions, that the west continue to get right. I've been very impressed with the unity and measured scale of it so far.

 

[Eric the meek]

This is what I was referring to above:

Moskva sinking: US gave intelligence that helped Ukraine sink Russian cruiser - reports
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61343044

While I wholeheartedly support the US actions, I'm not so sure about publishing it in the US media unless the US administration specifically want it out in the public domain.
Earlier, it was revealed that the US had helped the Ukrainians find - and kill - several Russian generals.

 

[beorhthelm]

This is what I was referring to above:

Moskva sinking: US gave intelligence that helped Ukraine sink Russian cruiser - reports
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61343044

While I wholeheartedly support the US actions, I'm not so sure about publishing it in the US media unless the US administration specifically want it out in the public domain.
Earlier, it was revealed that the US had helped the Ukrainians find - and kill - several Russian generals.

i fail to understand what they achieve with this, other than aid Putin with his narrative that Ukraine is in partnership with the west to bring down Russia. they probably know US intel was involved, it doesnt need to be publically announced and on the BBC.

 

[Eric the meek]

i fail to understand what they achieve with this, other than aid Putin with his narrative that Ukraine is in partnership with the west to bring down Russia. they probably know US intel was involved, it doesnt need to be publically announced and on the BBC.

The only benefit I can think of, is that by publishing these things, (or saying them in the first place in the knowledge that they will be published in a free press), they ensure the Russians are aware of that particular capability of the US in warfare.

I remember the Sophie Raworth interview on 6 March, with Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, Chief of Staff, in which he divulged that we knew that Russia was going to invade Ukraine, several months before they actually did, i.e. before they even moved their troops to surround Ukraine. That meant that we (either the UK or the US, or both) were listening in to conversations, presumably at a high level, and presumably encrypted. Why would he divulge that? Again, the only reason I can think of, would be to tell the Russians that we know what they are up to.

 

[carlzeiss]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdZ0KNWsV74

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdZ0KNWsV74

This is the frigate I referred to earlier.

I don't think it is officially confirmed yet.


The vessel's captain defected from the Ukrainian Navy in 2014 so it has a certain added impact if true.

 

[portslade seagull]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdZ0KNWsV74

Oh no what a shame.

 

[Eric the meek]

'Washington to send more military aid to Ukraine'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-61343815 22:11

I don't see any chance whatsoever of Russia prevailing. The will, and the ability of the west to finance that will, to help Ukraine, far, far outstrips the capacity of heavily sanctioned Russia to keep its ill-judged expedition going. Russia may as well give up now. It will save lives, both Ukrainian and Russian, and may even save the future integrity of Russia.

 

[Eric the meek]

'Viewpoint: Putin now faces only different kinds of defeat'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61348287

This is worth a read. It's by defence anayst Michael Clarke, visiting professor of defence studies, King's College London.

 

[vegster]

'Viewpoint: Putin now faces only different kinds of defeat'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61348287

This is worth a read. It's by defence anayst Michael Clarke, visiting professor of defence studies, King's College London.

Yes, he's not wrong, there is no decent exit for Putin. The Ukrainians have bravely pretty much fought Russia to a standstill and now they ate going on the offensive and taking back territory near Kharkiv...sanctions are biting and Russia can't replace its tanks and APC'S and trucks and it's starting to lose artillery capability as Western long range artillery with smart munitions floods in.....when you see cheap drones taking out Russian armour with a reconfigured anti tank grenade you can only see a grim future for Putin.