The Situation in the Ukraine. #29

Looks like US Navy backed out of sending ships to the Black Sea or the Turks were trolling Biden with a fake announcement.

FoxNews National Security Correspondent:

@JenGriffinFNC wrote:Pentagon again says there are no plans to send US warships to the Black Sea following reports from Turkey that the US alerted it otherwise. Russia using the false report to justify military build up on border with Ukraine.

watch this lol

Asked by @APDiploWriter how Russia moving troops within Russian borders – as the US and other nations do in their own territory – qualifies as intimidation/a threat of invasion, State Dept spox @nedprice fumbles for a coherent answer

https://nitter.fdn.fr/MaxBlumenthal/status/1382015537010589705#m

Experts say troop build-up may be designed as a 'test' for President Biden after he took a tough line with Putin

Those experts are bloody idiots then... Russias troop build up is a direct response and counter to Kievs massive troop build up.

The difference is that Russian troops build ups in its own territory are legal, while Kiev moving military hardware this way violates the Minks agreements which called for heavy weapons to be taken away and for dialogue.

Problem is one of them ambulances is a Humvee, useless. Our local boys brought a few back from Gruzya in 08, drove them around this berg, which is, or was, relatively open and not congested, and our lads hated them and turned them back to motor pool as fast as possible. Narrow village streets and city back streets, the damned things are too wide, too heavy and at least the ones from Gruzya broke down with regularity.

The funny thing is that the Humvee is supposed to replace the jeep, which was light and mechanically simple and fast and zippy and could go most places and with a winch get out of most bad situations too because it was light.

When they got the Humvees they thought that being so heavy they must be armoured, so they started using them in places you would not take a jeep, places that needed armour and it does not have any, which came as a bit of a shock to the users and commanders.

So they asked for armoured models and they were even heavier.

As mentioned they are big and heavy and hard to manouver in narrow streets and terribly vulnerable to even small arms fire.

Their weight even in the unarmoured versions means pressure and stress on everything.... engine, transmission, suspension, meaning they are not as cheap and simple and light and FUN as a Jeep.

In many ways they are what is wrong with the west... flashy, but no real substance... they are like Tigr MRAPs but totally unarmoured.... which is why you put up with the weight and size and cost of an MRAP, because it stops bullets and protects you from mines.

Humvees don't even do that.

“There are different turns in history, everything can happen. Russia may fall apart tomorrow, which would be nice for the Russians themselves, and Crimea may either become an independent state, friendly towards Ukraine, or return to [the composition of] Ukraine, ”Tabakh suggested."

Wonder what sort of coverage a Russian General would get for saying:

“There are different turns in history, everything can happen. The USA may fall apart tomorrow, which would be nice for the Americans themselves, and Alaska, Hawaii, most of north Mexico, and Guantanimo may either become an independent state, friendly towards the rest of the world, or return to [the composition of] the rest of the world, ”Uncle Joe Stalin suggested."

What a clown The worse thing is that he probably believes it along with his 404 audience

Nah... even he knows it is bullshit, but if you want to grow roses you need to be an expert with manure.... its creation and its deployment...

The Daily Mail? I'm sure we should also have another reliable English source....such as the Sun.

Or English Breakfast... (ie tea leaves).

Ukrops on the other hand are used as a dumping ground for used-up crap that no longer works and it shows

Maybe the ones from Georgia are better... they were the sophisticated communications models I think... and I believe they still want them back...

watch this lol

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA.... Russia is being the bully?


Hilarious. The US finances a coup and overthrows an elected government and imposes its own puppet regime.... picking and choosing members of the heirarchy that include Americans amongst positions in government, and then bans a particular language from being spoken in the country and shells and bombs a region of the country for not falling into line. There may or may not have been Russian volunteers getting involved in the fighting there, there certainly is not proof of Russian military action, except in the Crimea.

Where exactly is the bullying?

Kiev has moved a large force to the borders of the conflict and Russia has responded by moving its forces while remaining inside its own country.

The only provocation has been from Kiev shelling its own people for the last half decade, not to mention open threats to attack a Russian bridge and cutting off water supplies to a populated area.

mavaff wrote:watch this lol

Asked by @APDiploWriter how Russia moving troops within Russian borders – as the US and other nations do in their own territory – qualifies as intimidation/a threat of invasion, State Dept spox @nedprice fumbles for a coherent answer

https://nitter.fdn.fr/MaxBlumenthal/status/1382015537010589705#m

Um no....the matter is a bit more nuanced than that.

Whenever a country moves a high concentration of forces to the border of another country that is going to alarm and worry them.

Because that is how land invasions work, forces are gathered at the borders and then they move into the other country.

Your remark displays a gross misunderstanding of how matters like these work.

Also the entire reason Russia did that was to intimidate Ukraine, as Russia seemed to believe Ukraine was gearing up to attack Donbass.

A lot of theater going on regarding "cooler heads prevailing"... but the build up continues unabated that literally contradicts political theater. The U.S military "taking part" in some public, flashy manner was never on the table - it doesn't help with the sell job and only raises unnecessary enemy alarms. Its absence is thus not a sign of anything. They'll obviously lead from behind, and covertly - as they're doing. If anything, on an eventual case of Russia pushing pass the Dniper river... at most quickly drop in some NATO troops West into Ukraine proper to attempt to bluff a demarcation line to divide Ukraine to their acceptable taste (depending on where "NATO" decide that line to be... it may need to be ignored - aka let the chips fall where they may). But that obviously depends on whether Putin will continue to protect the wishes of Russian oligarchs who fear war beyond the Donbass to be bad for their business, or fight for Russia now, before it gets worse for future generations.

Here, in crayon painting for kids is what's completely unacceptable for Russia imo (if it wants to be a future viable state and not a colonial outpost of regions aka "new nations" in the future):



Limited action in the Donbass as some folk here adamantly believe is the correct course is not acceptable. It will not prevent Ukraine becoming part of NATO. Who needs Donbass when the Americans can roll through Kharkov and Sumy to Moscow proper. I mean the land corridor through Estonia and Latvia was already bad enough.... but back then the implicit excuse to be understood (for Putin and the Russian leadership of the time) was that Russia was too weak to do anything about it. But now? I thought things were different now?

Kinda sounds familiar don't it? To preside over almost all of the historically Russian territory West of Moscow becoming part of NATO will surely be one of Putin's greatest achievements. I'm sure historians will look kindly to that.     Obviously Russian stenographers of the time will protect their leader from flack, shaping opinion of their targets but it's not them who judge - history does.

Once the Americans and EU allies get Ukraine in official blue, the matter of Belarus is trivial (if even needed at all). If you think just for a second that the Americans and their stooges will stop and give up after the recently failed color revolution in Belarus, and won't go for a second, third or fourth try until they reach their goal... as they did in Ukraine (successfully) you're dumber than a rock.

If Ukraine becomes blue, Russia itself falling is only a matter of when, not if - a simple chronological end to well oiled remapping design. The methods change - to adapt to their time - the objective will always be the same. The Americans and their EU allies can definitely feel it, they can taste it now.... Moscow is literally, in hands reach. Less bloody than ever before in history too. A marvel of social, psychological and economic engineering.. bluffing Russians with fear and deceit literally - and it fucking works. A marvel to watch as an observer.

To a lot of folks here (outside the robotic damage control propagandist/apologist - they know who they're) .... I say this...Keep believing nonsense, keep underestimating the gravity of the situation so you can sleep better, and keep being fearful of supporting what must be done. It's that very weakness that results in a chain of decisions, made throughout the years that lead to events which result in the current state of matters.

The U.S is right in their assessment that Russia is a declining power geopolitically. I can't disagree with that... specially if the U.S and allies, with their NATO/EU construct continue, successfully, to push them East. Moscow proper is literally a bridge away. Putin has had his time to build up Russia for the inevitable decision he has to make. Now, what's the purpose of buying time, IF, you're not going to use that which time gifted you (the ability to respond).

When is enough enough. Hopefully Putin and company decide correctly sooner rather than later, for every-time they pass the buck to subsequent leadership (Gorby -> Yeltsin -> Putin -> ???) their situation gets worse on the map. Catastrophically worse.

The options are clear. The situation is clear. Russia's enemies are well defined. Russia's enemies long-term geopolitical designs are well known. What did Putin do to stop them? Will he go down as the man that rolled over and allowed almost all of the historical Russian territory West of Moscow become part of the reigning Western empire construct of the time? The clock is ticking on his legacy - he doesn't have that many useful years left in the grand scheme of history - matter of fact it has been a rather fast deteriorating process in this regard under his watch.

Clearly Russia's enemy will not wait a second more.... for the more they do the more Russia gets stronger, the more time it has to position its chips. Plus, they got the rising dragon in the East to deal with. Cleaning house in Europe and finishing unfinished business is obviously of upmost importance. In other words, if you're the U.S, it's your responsibility to push East, and push now - for waiting will only make your options worse. And so they'll push until they meet a wall. That wall better be near Kiev or close about instead of Russia's current borders within Ukraine. The Donbass region is a side-show - which should be used properly by Russia to remake the "Ukranian" map. The ultimate failure is to allow a situation in the Donbass to fall within the Empire's expected Russian response. Failure to do so... well... you can't explain it more. At this point choosing to be blind is a choice.

Your analysis is predicated on assumptions on warfare that were rendered obsolete decades ago. Obtaining staging areas ever closer to Moscow is not going to do you any more good than polishing cannonballs to further their range. Not when the other side can wipe entire divisions and brigades using salvos of conventional, not even nuclear weaponry.

lyle6 wrote:Your analysis is predicated on assumptions on warfare that were rendered obsolete decades ago. Obtaining staging areas ever closer to Moscow is not going to do you any more good than polishing cannonballs to further their range. Not when the other side can wipe entire divisions and brigades using salvos of conventional, not even nuclear weaponry.

The goal has never been to bomb Moscow into nuclear ash and oblivion. The goal is to dismember Russia into manageable fiefdoms - thus erasing it from the map - without a nuke salvo involved. That's where your assumption of the "get out of jail free card nuclear option" saving Russia fools you. Did the Americans co-op the elites of all of those regions through cannon fire and nukes? No.

It's the constant pressure built up that does it and breaks wills to resist - the one that changes minds and hearts.

It's a slow dismembering process - proven to work. It will eventually reach Moscow once the staging areas that serve as a buffer to destabilizing political and economic activity fall (which, in falling succession, they then become breeding grounds for). It's a full toolkit of offensive armaments. NATO membership is thus meant to serve as a demarcation line, backed by military might, that limits where Russia is allowed to go, to prevent and cap economic potential, and cultural expansion West by Russia (instead, pushing the Russians East until there is nowhere else to go, but fall).

But even strictly speaking in military terms, staging areas are highly valuable to have, specially on first strike scenarios, and specially considering where the population density of the Russian state resides. Who will wipe out who first and how fast? That's easy to predict looking at the map.

So your solution is an all out invasion of Ukraine?, if Russia does that Europe will cut it off completely. The cost economically that invading would bring is immeasurable, that means Russia needs to rely on China for economic survivability and China will abuse that as it does to others.

There is no easy way out here if Russia wants to stop Ukraine from going NATO it would need to evade right now and seize every piece of Ukraine but then it would be invading a sovereign nation.

You are right that Ukraine IS going to end up in NATO just a matter of time unless Russia decides to fully invade and annex the region.

ATLASCUB wrote:
It's the constant pressure built up that does it and breaks wills to resist - the one that changes minds and hearts.

It's a slow dismembering process - proven to work. It will eventually reach Moscow once the staging areas that serve as a buffer to destabilizing political and economic activity fall (which, in falling succession, they then become breeding grounds for). It's a full toolkit of offensive armaments. NATO membership is thus meant to serve as a demarcation line, backed by military might, that limits where Russia is allowed to go, to prevent and cap economic potential, and cultural expansion West by Russia (instead, pushing the Russians East until there is nowhere else to go, but fall).

But even strictly speaking in military terms, staging areas are highly valuable to have, specially on first strike scenarios.

You are also ignoring the financial and political issues facing the US/NATO countries and the impact of China. You can only borrow money (the 'wealth' of the US in particular is based on debt) for a while, as we all know from our credit cards. Whilst State versus Federal political pressures are building in the US.

The US was probably at peak power 20-30 years ago. The banksters had Russia on its knees, thought they had control and didn't think they needed the military to go in for the kill as it would damage their assets. Then everything changed but they didn't know it. Along came, out of the blue, Putin, a Russian nationalist, and very carefully and almost imperceptibly Russia slipped out of their grip.

Even as late as 2014/5 the power of the US was visibly waning when they were powerless to effect the civil war in the Ukraine. Russia saw this and felt safe to hit back in Syria, to the horror of Washington. A real contrast in proxy support that did not pass unnoticed in the rest of the World, especially China.

The current futile whining in Washington/EU and I have to say London, proves my point. The situation is in the hands of Russia and there is F A they can do about it.

Either Ukraine gets hit hard now and gets it over with or they suffer 3 1/2 years of pain, for that is all the time they have with the $1.5B/PA gas transit revenue. I have no doubt that after the Ukrops get crushed or pulled out, one way or another before December 2024 the current demarcation line/grey area is going to move west/north as the rest of the oblasts get recovered a section at a time.

Whatever happens this will have been another huge strategic mistake by the US. Thinking complacently that they had engineered a painful running sore on Russia's border, they forgot that their proxy had a crap military. As a result they handed the Russians on a plate the opportunity to face them down, with a royal flush. Anyone who thinks, given the current diplomatic relationships, that Russia is not going to exploit this to the full is probably deluding themselves.

Meanwhile in Beijing they are watching with interest, Taiwan's days are numbered.

If Germany and France cut off Russia from the EU economically completely using the Ukranian issue as an excuse I think nothing more needs to be said of their elites. To me their intentions have always been very clear as they work in concert with the U.S but for some it's still puzzling. Some folks don't want to believe it... to accept the historical reality of the nature of the relationship between Russia and those states.... it's a zero sum game for the control of the European region. Always has been. As Zarakova likes to say on her media briefs.... it's always been about "who's boss?"

So the threat is.... "Russia will be cut off from the EU completely".....

In other words? Accept slow death, by giving up Ukraine or else lose our meager business - considering the current state? I'll take the buffer and the people any day over some Euro notes printed in Frankfurt or wherever the fuck else.

Between a rock and a hard place.

If those EU states were really friendly and accommodating to Russian interest they would understand that Ukraine is a red line. As such they would've never supported the coup in Ukraine in the first place. Nor, outside of theatrics on eventual Russian military action to correct the matter, completely cut off Russia as a response. They wouldn't have induced the Baltic states into the EU/NATO etc....

These states know exactly what they're doing. Don't project caricatures built in your own head of their stupidity, neutrality, hostage (to the U.S) or whatever else... it's dumb.

The Americans and EU drew blood, knowingly knowing the potential consequences, and what it meant. Germany more or less asking for NS2 was implicit German realization of the fact that Russia could potentially respond in such a manner militarily and thus put at risk the energy security and competitiveness of the German state - the engine of the EU. That's why the direct line feed known as NS2 exists and is being built. If they make Ukraine the "it" between them and Russia what else needs to be said? Tomorrow it will be something else as they move East. Tomorrow it could be Belarus, or Georgia.... it never ends, and it never will end. It's all a matter of when are they going to hit a wall... they'll continue to push until they hit one, but not an inch less. Accept that fact. But if you can't accept it because your brain has been wired a certain way... reality hits hard so it cares little if you live under delusions for all your life.

Cutting Russia from the EU completely will be as hurtful to the EU as it will be to Russia. So while the U.S will "win"... their allies will become weaker and less competitive. Russia can do with an EU that becomes less competitive and prosperous, even if it hurts them as well. The European Union crumbling is in Russia's interests. Much easier to trade with a Europe without the EU construct than a united EU. Yes, divide and conquer - tried and true.

What are people's illusions of the elites in the EU? Like I said, it's a marvel to watch how, in "peace", they achieve, what in war, they could not. I guess it's understandable that Russians will react angrily to a gun pointed at their head on top of marching tanks instead of reacting similarly to losing ground as they're divided by the numbers bit by bit (Ukranians, Latvians, Belarussians etc etc etc etc...). Sometime ago, the "West" figured that out.

ATLASCUB wrote:

The goal has never been to bomb Moscow into nuclear ash and oblivion. The goal is to dismember Russia into manageable fiefdoms - thus erasing it from the map - without a nuke salvo involved. That's where your assumption of the "get out of jail free card nuclear option" saving Russia fools you. Did the Americans co-op the elites of all of those regions through cannon fire and nukes? No.

It's the constant pressure built up that does it and breaks wills to resist - the one that changes minds and hearts.

It's a slow dismembering process - proven to work. It will eventually reach Moscow once the staging areas that serve as a buffer to destabilizing political and economic activity fall (which, in falling succession, they then become breeding grounds for). It's a full toolkit of offensive armaments. NATO membership is thus meant to serve as a demarcation line, backed by military might, that limits where Russia is allowed to go, to prevent and cap economic potential, and cultural expansion West by Russia (instead, pushing the Russians East until there is nowhere else to go, but fall).

Domino theory is bullshit. Russia is no more susceptible to destabilization from the enrollment of former Soviet States into NATO anymore than say if Burkina Faso is to somehow join NATO. Instead the exact opposite has happened. By bringing their barbarians selves ever closer to Russia's doorstep, all NATO has achieved is unifying Russia's peoples behind their leadership. Nothing bands peoples together than presenting them a common adversary but if that isn't enough incentive NATO was more than willing to demonstrate what would happen to its enemies upon their defeat.

ATLASCUB wrote:
But even strictly speaking in military terms, staging areas are highly valuable to have, specially on first strike scenarios, and specially considering where the population density of the Russian state resides. Who will wipe out who first? That's easy to predict looking at the map.

Nobody cares if everyone involved dies anyway. It might be hours later from cruise missiles or even months from a Poseidon mega torpedo, but you're still dead in the end.

ATLASCUB wrote:If Germany and France cut off Russia from the EU economically completely using the Ukranian issue as an excuse I think nothing more needs to be said of their elites. To me their intentions have always been very clear as they work in concert with the U.S but for some it's still puzzling. Some folks don't want to believe it... to accept the historical reality of the nature of the relationship between Russia and those states.... it's a zero sum game.

So the threat is.... "Russia will be cut off from the EU completely".....


In other words? Accept slow death, by giving up Ukraine or else lose our business? I'll take the buffer any day over some Euro notes.

Between a rock and a hard place.

If those EU states were really friendly and accommodating towards Russia they would understand that Ukraine is a red line, and they would've never supported the coup in Ukraine in the first place. Nor, outside of theatrics on eventual Russian military action, completely cut off Russia.

The Americans and EU drew blood, knowingly knowing the consequences, and what it meant. Germany more or less asking for NS2 was implicit German realization of the fact that Russia could potentially respond in such a manner militarily and thus put at risk the energy security and competitiveness of the German state. That's why the direct line feed exists. If they make Ukraine the "it" between them and Russia what else needs to be said?

What are people's illusions?

Europe is not the economic center of the planet - its Asia. If they want to isolate themselves from Russia - good. Without Russian energy and minerals their industries would slowly but surely lose in competitiveness compared to their Asian counterparts. And when they lose that one edge they have they're fucked.

Well I don't see Russia, attempting to annex Ukraine. They have simply let to much time go by and that isn't how Putin operates.

The guy has yet to absorb Belarus dispute his wishes to do so.

In the end, if annexing Ukraine is your view on what should happen, you will be disappointed as Putin will never do that.

Putin does have a habit of giving us openings and we have taken them but he has also gotten in our way at times.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:So your solution is an all out invasion of Ukraine?, if Russia does that Europe will cut it off completely. The cost economically that invading would bring is immeasurable, that means Russia needs to rely on China for economic survivability and China will abuse that as it does to others.

There is no easy way out here if Russia wants to stop Ukraine from going NATO it would need to evade right now and seize every piece of Ukraine but then it would be invading a sovereign nation.

You are right that Ukraine IS going to end up in NATO just a matter of time unless Russia decides to fully invade and annex the region.

Good summary.

I don't think there is a bat in hell's chance of a real Russian boots on the ground invasion, even in the Donbass, they don't need to and, as you say, it would play into the hands of the US. If Russia is forced to act it will be very fast, hours not days, it has to be to minimise US propaganda opportunities.

From the start Russia has shown no inclination to take over Ukrainian territory that, unlike Crimea, it had no historic right too. It needs Donbass to be in Ukraine as a counter political force.

There is currently a game of chicken running with two players and their proxies. If Kiev pulls back there will be big pressure on Minsk implementation, if they don't and they end up with little military left it will be forced on them. Either way the US, stupidly, has the losing hand.

Whether at that point Ukraine joins NATO would be an interesting on many levels.

"Minimize U.S propaganda" by doing exactly what the enemy expects - as they've done their best to lay out "the consequences" if Russia does anything else other than a limited op....in other words bluffing so Russia doesn't do what they don't want... retake Ukraine.

Why would the U.S put the "consequences" on the line and laid them out?

Why would the EU go along with those consequences? Are they then complicit in their hostility?

Why are you reacting positively to those consequences? In effect you're giving them power over your decisions and are allowing them to shape your decision making process and freedom. In other words, you're doing what they want. You believe you're smart, measured and deliberate but the reality is you're being strung along like a marionette by heeding to the fear of  the "consequences" as defined by your enemy. Your enemy defines those consequences to achieve particular outcomes, and induce particular decisions.

If you heed to their will and you're that dumb not to see it, then you deserve to lose. They're simply, smarter. They've shown that so far in the past 30-35 years or so.

You know you've lost the plot when you think "minimizing U.S propaganda" is an actual strategy with any weight

You can't manage the propaganda machine of the West. It's outside Russian control lmao.

@John

Russia goals in Ukraine are simple.

1. Keep NATO out

2. Use the Minsk agreements to attempt to gain leverage back over Ukraine.

This is clear has day, if the agreement is implemented properly they can use their control over the breakaway regions, to prevent NATO from entering Ukraine and keep some type of leash on it.

The problem is, this won't really work. Putin is hoping to just delay until a favorable condition pops up but at this point, unless some insane happens there will be no more bones.

US goals are very very simple, further isolation of the Russian state. Seizing Ukraine is a key part of doing this, sure lots of people here like to think Ukraine is worthless and pointless but no it's central and a test, how much can we rip away from Russia before they actually majorly oppose us.

This is why Russia is going through all the trouble.

It knows if we sink out teeth into Ukraine then we will look for the next place to nibble at, etc Belarus.

It was never about war but control, the more and more we take away from Russia the weaker and weaker it gets.

We don't want to beat Russia fully just weaken it, much like how Alexander the Grat left Sparta alive because it was a great bogeyman, Russia is our Sparta. We want them weak, with little influence that is all.

The next step is to wait until the children grow up and then we start our mind games with them, he who controls the youth controls the future.

You are right there is a game of chicken going on but it's not us with the timetable it's Russia. We did take a minor L in Syria for now sure, but we have had far more victories over Russia than losses.

Everyone here really misses the grand chess game going on.

lyle6 wrote:

Domino theory is bullshit. Russia is no more susceptible to destabilization from the enrollment of former Soviet States into NATO anymore than say if Burkina Faso is to somehow join NATO. Instead the exact opposite has happened. By bringing their barbarians selves ever closer to Russia's doorstep, all NATO has achieved is unifying Russia's peoples behind their leadership. Nothing bands peoples together than presenting them a common adversary but if that isn't enough incentive NATO was more than willing to demonstrate what would happen to its enemies upon their defeat.

Bullshit? Why anex Crimea (regardless of method)? Why save the Donbass? Abkhazia? etc etc... if territory is not valuable why did Russia fought for that? Why did Russia "enrage" "the West" into sanctioning them for taking part in those skirmishes? If the cost ain't worth it why they do it? Who cares right? Somehow other territory don't count because "consequences"... "fear" "fear".... exactly what the U.S wants as they move forward little by little.

In your effort to be dismissive of every point made you're not sounding coherent. Domino theory is not bullshit. It's common sense. If you're completely surrounded by hostile states that actively work to undermine you, both politically and economically, your chances for exploiting and achieving your maximum economic potential as well as guarantee peace is absolutely 0. And it has always, in one way or another, led to war. The Americans are gaming collapse. The offensive side always pushes and pushes. It's the way it's.

Ideally, Ukraine would be part of the Eurasian Economic Union today... had it not being for a coup that literally blew all of those plans out of a Kremlin window. Belarus, Ukraine, Russia, and the Central Asian states all within an economic union - that was the plan, that was the dream - which the Americans and the EU both took a massive dump on. Domino pieces like Ukraine are valuable. It's like robbing someone's lunch, and then smacking the owner in the face with it. This ain't no checkers.

Nobody cares if everyone involved dies anyway. It might be hours later from cruise missiles or even months from a Poseidon mega torpedo, but you're still dead in the end.

You're assuming a lot of things. You're assuming Russia's second strike capabilities will respond optimally when tested by actual war and are enough to wipe the whole EU, and the U.S together (as potentially configured future wise if Ukraine and Belarus fall to NATO). Better not to assume anything, other than the fact that Russia will be massively out manned and outgunned.

Europe is not the economic center of the planet - its Asia. If they want to isolate themselves from Russia - good. Without Russian energy and minerals their industries would slowly but surely lose in competitiveness compared to their Asian counterparts. And when they lose that one edge they have they're fucked.

Yes, which is why, the "ultimate consequence" of retaking Ukraine bites back both ways to Russia and the EU. BTW, that's the EU nuclear option, which folks are assuming they'll take, for the sake of Ukraine. It's an assumption, not a fact. That's what the U.S wants Russians to fear, to force them to take decisions within American gamed outcomes. It could happen just as well as it not happening if Russia moves into the Ukraine.

And that option will be there tomorrow, and just as useful if they move in and coup Belarus, or Georgia etc... like I said, it never ends until they hit a wall. Stop trying to dodge the confrontation by ceding ground - they clearly want it. Better now, than after there is no more ground left to cede.

Asia is dominated by China, and will be contested by the U.S. While the option of an open Asia to Russia is a lifeline, it's not enough to sustain Russia as a great power vying for top dog status. Eventually Russia will butt heads with China..... unless being third rate fiddle is what the Russian people picture themselves as (that is, if Russia doesn't fall to the political and economic destabilization coming from their Western periphery, and Central Asia first).

ATLASCUB wrote:
Bullshit? Why anex Crimea (regardless of method)? Why save the Donbass? Abkhazia? etc etc... if territory is not valuable why did Russia fought for that? In your effort to be dismissive of every point made you're not sounding coherent. Domino theory is not bullshit. It's common sense. If you're completely surrounded by hostile states that actively work to undermine you, both politically and economically, your chances for exploiting and achieving your maximum economic potential as well as guarantee peace is absolutely 0.

Let me rephrase that question for you. Why didn't they do more? Why annex not just the Crimea, but the east of Ukraine from the Dniepr as well? Why call off the Russian offensive just before they could enter Tblisi?

Its because they wanted to inflict damage on their opponents. They weren't there to lock in gains so much as to enforce the status quo. A molotov to keep the enemies busy trying to extinguish the flames instead of attacking you directly. A reminder that NATO isn't the only one who can go on the offensive.

ATLASCUB wrote:
You're assuming a lot of things. You're assuming Russia's second strike capabilities will respond optimally and are enough to wipe the whole EU, and the U.S together (as potentially configured future wise if Ukraine and Belarus fall). Better not to assume anything, other than the fact that Russia will be massively out manned and outgunned.

I'm not assuming anything - Russia's arsenal is more than sufficient for wiping the entirety of NATO many times over. With the INF dead and buried Russia can concentrate all of its intercontinental range weaponry on the US alone, while much shorter ranged weapons can target Europe instead.

ATLASCUB wrote:
Yes, which is why, the "ultimate consequence" of retaking Ukraine bites back both ways to Russia and the EU. BTW, that's the EU nuclear option, which folks are assuming they'll take, for the sake of Ukraine. It's an assumption, not a fact. That's what the U.S wants Russians to fear, to force them to take decisions within American gamed outcomes. It could happen just as well as it not happening if Russia moves into the Ukraine.

Ukraine is dead weight. What they lack for in military capability they more than make up for in being bottomless money pits. The only winning move is not to play - kick the board and laugh in their faces as they restock the pieces again.

ATLASCUB wrote:
Asia is dominated by China, and will be contested by the U.S. While the option of an open Asia to Russia is a lifeline, it's not enough to sustain Russia as a great power. Eventually Russia will butt heads with China. Unless being third rate fiddle is what the Russian people picture themselves for (that is, if Russia doesn't fall to the political and economic destabilization coming from their Western periphery, and Central Asia first).

Who says? Asia has 4.5 billion people, Europe has what- 1/10 of that? As an example the Russians could quit selling piped gas to Europe and switch to LNG and they would make a killing with Asian customers alone.

Ukraine is a cesspit. Trying to pass it off as some strategic asset for the yanquis is ludicrous.

The whole argument rests on the moronic assumption that Russia has no ability to counteract any yanqui move.
So, what happened to the touted and hyped ABM shield? Russia's nuclear arsenal was supposed to be neutralized
by this wonder of human achievement.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:@John

Russia goals in Ukraine are simple.

1. Keep NATO out

2. Use the Minsk agreements to attempt to gain leverage back over Ukraine.

This is clear has day, if the agreement is implemented properly they can use their control over the breakaway regions, to prevent NATO from entering Ukraine and keep some type of leash on it.

The problem is, this won't really work. Putin is hoping to just delay until a favorable condition pops up but at this point, unless some insane happens there will be no more bones.

US goals are very very simple, further isolation of the Russian state. Seizing Ukraine is a key part of doing this, sure lots of people here like to think Ukraine is worthless and pointless but no it's central and a test, how much can we rip away from Russia before they actually majorly oppose us.

This is why Russia is going through all the trouble.

It knows if we sink out teeth into Ukraine then we will look for the next place to nibble at, etc Belarus.

It was never about war but control, the more and more we take away from Russia the weaker and weaker it gets.

We don't want to beat Russia fully just weaken it, much like how Alexander the Grat left Sparta alive because it was a great bogeyman, Russia is our Sparta. We want them weak, with little influence that is all.

The next step is to wait until the children grow up and then we start our mind games with them, he who controls the youth controls the future.

You are right there is a game of chicken going on but it's not us with the timetable it's Russia. We did take a minor L in Syria for now sure, but we have had far more victories over Russia than losses.

Everyone here really misses the grand chess game going on.

I think that's true. Russia was trying to make more time to build up militarily, economically, socially etc...but did some mistakes in the process. USA and NATO have their agenda going for the whole time and they are sticking to it.

It's on Russia to decide what to do, I don't think they have much time regarding Ukrainian issue. If/when Ukraine becomes a part of NATO, Washington will come extremely close to Moscow, form north-west and south-west flanks, without firing a single bullet by themselves. Can you remember how many casualties had 3rd reich to achieve that?

Can you imagine how many effort and resources would Russia spend to keep Belarus, Crimea and Kaliningrad in that situation? It would be a strategic nightmare, Kremlin knows that and I'm sure they have some kind of response to cope with this threat. We will see what is it, very soon. This game can't last for any longer.

Of course, the collective West is in not so good shape at this moment (economically, socially etc.), so I believe they will speed up things.

Russia should be extra careful and alerted, as they are at the moment.

So the Banderites want Patriot missile systems deployed by NATzO to fend off Russia.

I don't think many of you know how dire the situation in orcland is. Everyone we know has friends/relatives up north and there are no restrictions from Mother about sending them aid. The orc economy is dead, gone, never to return. Almost all heavy industry is dead and buried. Small and medium enterprises are either shut or on very limited work schedules because of the plague. The monies pouring in from private citizens to relatives/friends is the only thing keeping many of those dear ones from literally starving and/or freezing in winter.

With Russian Spring in early '14 and the same in Novorossiya shortly after, the Land of Orcs has lost considerable population. The official figure in late '13 was 42 millions but even then hundreds of thousands had left to work in EU, Byelorus and Russia. The loss of Novorossiya and Krimea/Sevastopol cost 8 millions of citizens, ergo over 20% of populace and the vast majority of workers who left, often with their families, cost the orcs untold numbers of skilled workers who are now working in other countries.

The billions being sent to Kiev from either Uncle Sugar or IMF are instantly stolen, not a kopek goes to the ordinary workers and peasants, but the repayment of these huge sums will be on the necks of the citizens, another cross to carry in the not too distant future.

Uncle Sam's coup in '13-early '14 had one purpose and one purpose only, to take Sevastopol. The locals told the orcs in no uncertain terms 'screw dat', took Sevastopol and Krimu and then handed the two entities on a silver platter to Moskau. The polite young men in green were 95% already here, stationed by treaty on the island. Less than 500 actually 'invaded' and they were more of a field training exercise than anything else, when the bows of the landing ships hit the sand near Kerch the locals were waiting to toss flowers on them. However, these young men in green made not one move until it became publik knowledge what the locals did. Did VVP know what would happen and why? I have no idea, he and I don't speak often, but in this berg from 1994 until 23 February '14 there were constant, and often violent, confrontations between the orcs and local citizens. Uncle Sugar had a not small cadre in this berg and Feodosiya on south coast for years before the coup. The Sevastopol contingent was invited to leave in afternoon of 23 February and they refused. By dawn the next day they were gone. The 'advisors' in Feodosiya, on an orc Spetznaz base, screamed at the orcs to resist when Mother had enough of their delaying tactics and entered the base compounds and some were roughed up pretty good. Don't know who done it, but roughed up they were and promptly send north to the borders and expelled. End of story for this island.

As for Novorossiya, Mother has made it patently clear what the result will be if a serious attack is made, and this info has been communicated to the likes of Mutti and Macron and I'd bet to the vaunted halls of power in Foggy Bottom on the Potomac. Will they listen? Don't know, but only a total idiot with the intelligence level of an amoeba crawling through Protozoan mush would dare to toss so much as a pebble to this island or this Federal City or attack Novorossiya. As for what we see, what we hear breaking the pristine silence of our little valley, I'll say not a word, although I will remind that we are close enough to Belbek Aerodrome to hear them taking off if under full military power.

Auslander
Author