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

[Eric the meek]

I wonder when the penny will drop with Vlad the Lad that he has managed to unify almost the whole World against Russia?

Even Hitler didn't quite manage that.

 

[The Clamp]

I thought I heard the Russian ambassador to the UN state that no attacks on civilians had occurred?

Is being headlined on the bbc live updates..

 

[ManOfSussex]

As a result of my work increasing IT security etc due to a greater risk of cyber attacks from Russia, NSC is now banned on my work laptop.

'Message boards and forums' are no longer accessible.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I’m going for ‘removed by his own people’.

I think it will be announced he has become 'unwell' as a face-saving option for him. Executive powers will be discharged by his security council, which will be their opportunity to pull back from this.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Russia considering halting attacks on civilians. While hardly a galant move, and possibly a lie, it’s a dialogue. And that is a good sign.

Also

Patel says waiving Visa procedures would pose security risk and she won’t allow it.

What a ****.

Considering ?

That's noble of them.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Russia considering halting attacks on civilians. While hardly a galant move, and possibly a lie, it’s a dialogue. And that is a good sign.

Also

Patel says waiving Visa procedures would pose security risk and she won’t allow it.

What a ****.

Not sure where to begin with either of these statements.

The first one - for Russia to 'consider halting attacks on civilians' would be de facto admission that they were currently carrying out deliberate attacks on civilian targets, which would be completely contrary to international law.

The second one - anyone currently fleeing Ukraine for safer shores, is clearly and obviously a refugee from war. Surely by definition, such refugees don't require visas?

 

[essbee1]

Superb flag banner for NSC now. Good work Bozza and Co.

 

[The Clamp]

Considering ?

That's noble of them.

Well, quite.

With some luck, Putin won’t be considering anything for much longer.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

I'll take that as a shining light in the gloom..

Hopefully a flash in the dark!

 

[MJsGhost]

Hopefully we dont join NATO as it is an act of aggression and I dont like war.

The Finnish people absolutely do not want to join NATO so it will be trouble on many levels if they do.

Just one random on Twitter, but might suggest that opinion is changing...


[tweet] 1496047676718301190 [/tweet]

Just one poll, but it looks like the Finnish mindset re NATO is shifting...

According to the poll, conducted last week over three days before and immediately after the attacks with a representative sample of nearly 1,400 people, 53% of Finns would now support Finland’s accession to Nato, with 28% opposed and 19% unsure.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/feb/28/russia-ukraine-war-latest-news-update-conflict-belarus-putin-nuclear-deterrence-order-kyiv-russian-invasion-live-updates?CMP=share_btn_tw&page=with:block-621ce6898f08f0ccfaeb0cc5#block-621ce6898f08f0ccfaeb0cc5​

 

[The Clamp]

Not sure where to begin with either of these statements.

The first one - for Russia to 'consider halting attacks on civilians' would be de facto admission that they were currently carrying out deliberate attacks on civilian targets, which would be completely contrary to international law.

The second one - anyone currently fleeing Ukraine for safer shores, is clearly and obviously a refugee from war. Surely by definition, such refugees don't require visas?

Patel has proven on a number of occasions not to have a grasp on international law. Remember not so long ago when she thought drowning babies in the channel would be okay? Or shipping them all to Ghana? Without asking Ghana.

Refugees will arrive here and there is nothing she can do about it.

 

[happypig]

honestly dont think this is so clever. apart from whether EU will change rules to fast track, it wouldnt happen in weeks, doesnt give any protection in itself and kinda proves the case from Russia that Ukraine wants to go west, they can play on that. there was talk of neutrality, seems to go the other way.

Alternatively, Russia agrees to support Ukraine's application to join the EU and agrees to withdraw all it's forces if Ukraine agrees not to join Nato.

 

[Poojah]

****WARNING GRAPHIC CONTENT****

Not something I'd usually look at but this is the reality of what's happening in Kharkiv.

[TWEET]1498299957912166406[/TWEET]

Absolutely heartbreaking. War is always a messy business, and there will always be collateral damage in the form of civilian casualties - the UK is not whiter than white in this regard.

But it’s the sheer needlessness of this which galls me. This is a peaceful, democratic and stable nation - this is just mindless, lethal violence.

 

[A1X]

I mean, when you think about it, Vladimir Putin has achieved some incredible things many of us would have thought impossible

- He's turned a Ukranian president most in the west thought was a bit of a lightweight into arguably the most inspirational global leader this century so far
- He's bought the UK and the EU back closer together after years of bickering
- He's managed to unite both sides of the aisle in the US Senate behind the current President
- He's managed to almost entirely destroy the fearsome reputation of the Russian military
- He's managed to force the German, Swedish and Swiss governments into abandoning decades (and in one case centuries) of neutrality to turn against him
- He's utterly wrecked his own country's economy
- He's managed to fall out with China
- He's forced the Taliban into issuing a statement saying basically "um, guys...chill?"
- He's made FIFA, the FIA and UEFA actually do something worthwhile

Really, it's remarkable. If you'd said this a week ago I'd have never, ever believed this was possible.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Not sure where to begin with either of these statements.

The first one - for Russia to 'consider halting attacks on civilians' would be de facto admission that they were currently carrying out deliberate attacks on civilian targets, which would be completely contrary to international law.

The second one - anyone currently fleeing Ukraine for safer shores, is clearly and obviously a refugee from war. Surely by definition, such refugees don't require visas?

I found this that may answer your question;

https://immigrationandmigration.com...sa-free-travel-with-refugee-travel-documents/

The UK, France, Belgium, Poland and Portugal amongst others require visas from refugees (if that list is up to date). Presumably those requirements can be waived but my point is that our rules are no different to a number of other European countries.

 

[Happy Exile]

How does this end? Increasingly clear that Ukraine are going to resist strongly even if they are ultimately "conquered". So how does this play out? - no way Putin will back down and lose face. He will only up the ante in the face of defeat. And I won't speculate what that would look like as it's too scary..

Controversial, but would our best outcome in the West have been for Ukraine to roll over and submit to Russian rule?

Others have pointed out already how wrong it would be to consider Ukraine sacrificing itself for our benefit as any kind of positive outcome, so I won't do that. But also, that won't stop Putin.

There's an (entirely reasonable) view that because Putin isn't constrained by the same electoral cycles as politicians in democracies and has exceptional patience he's been planning everything several years ahead - look at Georgia, Crimea, Belarus etc. It's all part of a plan. This is being called a continuation of the information wars that began(?) with the "B" word I won't mention here - potentially even the Scottish referendum before that where some of the same groups were involved in the background, continued with Trump, was attempted in France etc. As one thought if you're thinking "here we go again, conspiracy": think back to the Russia Report that didn't get released before the last election - Dominic Grieve, a hugely respected Tory, chair of the security and intelligence committee, expressed deep alarm at how the government hadn't just failed to investigate, but actively taken steps to avoid investigating Russian interference in our electoral system and then how they'd taken unprecedented action to stop that fact being made public knowledge. Why would they do that? There are people who have never been near a tinfoil hat in their lives who consider us to be already at war with Russia, just covertly and without weapons.

So we've already had years across the world of Putin's steady attempt to undermine and weaken any coalition against him that nearly worked in some cases (France, Trump to an extent), and if you believe the Russian Ambassador to the UK, friend of Arron Banks, Nigel Farage and others about the success of the Russian information war here that ran for many years (which yes, didn't influence everybody but just had to influence enough) - “we have crushed the British to the ground, they are on their knees and they will not rise for a very long time” - was highly successful in some instances too. It's also being called the first of the "resource wars" - Ukraine has incredible natural resources and natural resources and who controls them is going to be a significant factor in who the major global powers of the future will be. Putin isn't / wasn't going to stop at Ukraine. His next act may have been a few years ahead, but it's all part of a plan to secure the future of Russia. If you read the most severe predictions of climate change we've got 10-15 years before resources like those Ukraine has are even more valuable than they are now. Relatively conservative estimates might put that at 30 to 40 years - but Putin is planning now however long it takes.

It is scary. He, I'm sure, absolutely believes it when he says that a world without Russia isn't worth existing, and he's doing all he can to preserve Russia when he can see it is under existential threat from growing nations, particularly in Asia, and that the world is changing away from the gas and oil and coal that his economy relies on to a large extent. Who knows how he's going to react if it becomes clear that not only can he not save Russia from diminished importance, but his actions to secure alternative sources of wealth for Russia have accelerated its decline?

Ukraine rolling over would have solved nothing, just emboldened Putin. The best outcome, perhaps, is a peace that somehow means he doesn't lose face (can't see how that's possible) or him being overthrown (also hard to see). Any other outcome feels like it's going to be very bleak for us all.

 

[The Clamp]

If the U.K. government doesn’t offer a safe, Visa free route into the U.K. I can guarantee, absolutely guarantee that they will go the trafficker / dinghy route. And that will be on Patel.

 

[hampshirebrightonboy]

Putin won't withdraw, he's gone too far now. Likeliest outcome I can see is that he eventually gains control of Kyiv, and installs a puppet government who the people of Ukraine will refuse to acknowledge. The whole country then descends into years and years of guerilla warfare between Russian troops and Ukrainian rebels, with no end in sight.

And where would that leave Putin/Russia? The sanctions would not be lifted then for years.

 

[WhingForPresident]

Massive explosions going off in Kyiv again.

 

[Poojah]

Others have pointed out already how wrong it would be to consider Ukraine sacrificing itself for our benefit as any kind of positive outcome, so I won't do that. But also, that won't stop Putin.

There's an (entirely reasonable) view that because Putin isn't constrained by the same electoral cycles as politicians in democracies and has exceptional patience he's been planning everything several years ahead - look at Georgia, Crimea, Belarus etc. It's all part of a plan. This is being called a continuation of the information wars that began(?) with the "B" word I won't mention here - potentially even the Scottish referendum before that where some of the same groups were involved in the background, continued with Trump, was attempted in France etc. As one thought if you're thinking "here we go again, conspiracy": think back to the Russia Report that didn't get released before the last election - Dominic Grieve, a hugely respected Tory, chair of the security and intelligence committee, expressed deep alarm at how the government hadn't just failed to investigate, but actively taken steps to avoid investigating Russian interference in our electoral system and then how they'd taken unprecedented action to stop that fact being made public knowledge. Why would they do that? There are people who have never been near a tinfoil hat in their lives who consider us to be already at war with Russia, just covertly and without weapons.

So we've already had years across the world of Putin's steady attempt to undermine and weaken any coalition against him that nearly worked in some cases (France, Trump to an extent), and if you believe the Russian Ambassador to the UK, friend of Arron Banks, Nigel Farage and others about the success of the Russian information war here that ran for many years (which yes, didn't influence everybody but just had to influence enough) - “we have crushed the British to the ground, they are on their knees and they will not rise for a very long time” - was highly successful in some instances too. It's also being called the first of the "resource wars" - Ukraine has incredible natural resources and natural resources and who controls them is going to be a significant factor in who the major global powers of the future will be. Putin isn't / wasn't going to stop at Ukraine. His next act may have been a few years ahead, but it's all part of a plan to secure the future of Russia. If you read the most severe predictions of climate change we've got 10-15 years before resources like those Ukraine has are even more valuable than they are now. Relatively conservative estimates might put that at 30 to 40 years - but Putin is planning now however long it takes.

It is scary. He, I'm sure, absolutely believes it when he says that a world without Russia isn't worth existing, and he's doing all he can to preserve Russia when he can see it is under existential threat from growing nations, particularly in Asia, and that the world is changing away from the gas and oil and coal that his economy relies on to a large extent. Who knows how he's going to react if it becomes clear that not only can he not save Russia from diminished importance, but his actions to secure alternative sources of wealth for Russia have accelerated its decline?

Ukraine rolling over would have solved nothing, just emboldened Putin. The best outcome, perhaps, is a peace that somehow means he doesn't lose face (can't see how that's possible) or him being overthrown (also hard to see). Any other outcome feels like it's going to be very bleak for us all.

That’s what worries me; the plausibility of positive outcomes. I can think of lots of scenarios where this goes wrong and escalates; Putin moves beyond Ukraine, gets riled by the devastation of the Russian economy, commits unacceptable atrocities or gets backed into a corner. None of those would surprise me.

On the flip side, we essentially appear reliant on Russia and Ukraine finding a peaceful compromise or an internal assassination of Putin. Perhaps neither are impossible, but they both seem a lot more fanciful than those scenarios which lead to things going properly tits up.

Grim.