Russia threatening to invade Ukraine 2.0

[Kellhound]

Do you see Russia as the only actor there that can do something, and Ukraine is denied any agency?

What solution would you accept exactly?

For empires to peacefully pack up and leave their holdings?

It's not actually impossible; you just need to pay enough for them to be worth it. Something like proper NATO membership would do it. Or pan-European Defense Treaty including Russia. That would make them a lot less scared of releasing their grip.

That would go against Western imperialism however.

Which is why political settlement is the only choice Ukraine actually has at the moment.

Everything else will just prolong their suffering.

- - - Updated - - -

You would rather Ukraine got nothing back? Wouldn't that reward Russia just the same?

Everything points out to fatigue with Ukrainian situation building up. Ukraine cannot keep pushing their "Russian card" forever to get sympathy and support - at least as far as EU is concerned. Soon Nord Stream 2 will be finished and Ukraine will become irrelevant.

And if they'll not agree to some kind of actual resolution... they'll likely will not get anything back at all.


...i mean, they just shown Victory Day Parade in Donbass in official parade lineup among other Russian cities.

I would rather see Russia cut off from all of Europe.

- - - Updated - - -

I hope when its done it will diffuse a lot of future tensions because Russia and the NATO states will have a trade relationship that is pretty vital and Russia will probably be a lot less paranoid knowing they control the gas and oil supply and that NATO probably isn't going to invade and continue aggressive belligerence against the guy that keeps the lights on just because a country in another hemisphere has some wild grudge.

Russia only has a couple of decades at best before Europe's need for its hydrocarbons declines to the point it loses all negotiating power, and Russia offers Europe little else.

[Theodarzna]

Russia only has a couple of decades at best before Europe's need for its hydrocarbons declines to the point it loses all negotiating power, and Russia offers Europe little else.

At present I see no sign of a Europe not needing hydrocarbons. Only France has a power source of any real viability that isn't based on petrol of some sort. The rest have had a lousy run of not using coal, and in the case of Germany hilariously has to use even more of it.

In the case of your seeming grudge against Russia, I am unsure where it comes from. Russia didn't do anything to the United States, nothing as severe as what the United States has done to it in the last century so where is this fury and anger coming from?

[Kellhound]

At present I see no sign of a Europe not needing hydrocarbons. Only France has a power source of any real viability that isn't based on petrol of some sort. The rest have had a lousy run of not using coal, and in the case of Germany hilariously has to use even more of it.

In the case of your seeming grudge against Russia, I am unsure where it comes from. Russia didn't do anything to the United States, nothing as severe as what the United States has done to it in the last century so where is this fury and anger coming from?

The EU is moving away from them. Natural gas needs will increase in the near term then decline as more clean energy sources come on line.

Russia is an unneeded distraction from more serious issues.

[Theodarzna]

The EU is moving away from them. Natural gas needs will increase in the near term then decline as more clean energy sources come on line.

Russia is an unneeded distraction from more serious issues.

I remain unconvinced of the viability of green energy over all. Plus for the sake of peace, the assurance's it creates essentially solves the whole problem without going lets say invasions and warfare route. But hey, you do you.

[Kellhound]

I remain unconvinced of the viability of green energy over all. Plus for the sake of peace, the assurance's it creates essentially solves the whole problem without going lets say invasions and warfare route. But hey, you do you.

Russia losing most of its income would render it unable to continue to pose a threat to Eastern Europe. It would be able to keep enough nukes to prevent it from being invaded by China though. No one in modern Europe wants to take over Russia, it has little to offer.

[Theodarzna]

Russia losing most of its income would render it unable to continue to pose a threat to Eastern Europe. It would be able to keep enough nukes to prevent it from being invaded by China though. No one in modern Europe wants to take over Russia, it has little to offer.

An injured bear, cornered and with lots of dangerous weapons and fearing foreign invasion or annihilation is IMHO way more dangerous. As for a threat, given Russia has been invaded, rather brutally well within the living memory of Russians alive today, I am unsure why their concerns about hostile aggression, particularly from the West are not even treated as worthy of consideration.

[Xarkan]

I hope when its done it will diffuse a lot of future tensions because Russia and the NATO states will have a trade relationship that is pretty vital and Russia will probably be a lot less paranoid knowing they control the gas and oil supply and that NATO probably isn't going to invade and continue aggressive belligerence against the guy that keeps the lights on just because a country in another hemisphere has some wild grudge.

Or.. since it (kinda) moves through at least one nato country that does not need or benefit from the pipeline.. it will become a source of increased tension

[Kellhound]

An injured bear, cornered and with lots of dangerous weapons and fearing foreign invasion or annihilation is IMHO way more dangerous. As for a threat, given Russia has been invaded, rather brutally well within the living memory of Russians alive today, I am unsure why their concerns about hostile aggression, particularly from the West are not even treated as worthy of consideration.

Because they don't think Eastern Europe's concern about being invaded by Russia again isn't worthy of concern. Or the fact that Russia knows they cannot be invaded because they have significant nuclear weapons capability.

[Theodarzna]

Or.. since it (kinda) moves through at least one nato country that does not need or benefit from the pipeline.. it will become a source of increased tension

Why? It's a tube.

- - - Updated - - -

Because they don't think Eastern Europe's concern about being invaded by Russia again isn't worthy of concern. Or the fact that Russia knows they cannot be invaded because they have significant nuclear weapons capability.

Is Eastern Europe in danger of being invaded? Right now the conflict zones appear to be Ukraine; after a CIA backed putsch and attempts to create another NATO satellite with weapons installations and all.

Lets see? The Cold War ends and Russia/USSR gave up MILLIONS of square miles of territory without firing a single shot at anyone. Likewise the Warsaw Pact only came into existence after WW2, when Russia had been invaded from the west and lost 30 Million of their population trying to repel an invasion no thanks to anyone and then after applying to join NATO, even offering a reunification of Germany as a Neutral state as their main condition right there at the end of the war and were completely refused. Recognizing that a big belligerent pact was being arrayed against them and seeing the US building up bomber squadrons and a massive arsenal, I too would want a buffer between myself and a seemingly hostile and aggressive bully especially after repelling the last one cost so much. The only belligerent here seems to be the United States, and the UK merely continuing "The Great Game" all over again.

[Kellhound]

Why? It's a tube.

- - - Updated - - -



Is Eastern Europe in danger of being invaded? Right now the conflict zones appear to be Ukraine; after a CIA backed putsch and attempts to create another NATO satellite with weapons installations and all.

Lets see? The Cold War ends and Russia/USSR gave up MILLIONS of square miles of territory without firing a single shot at anyone. Likewise the Warsaw Pact only came into existence after WW2, when Russia had been invaded from the west and lost 30 Million of their population trying to repel an invasion no thanks to anyone and then after applying to join NATO, even offering a reunification of Germany as a Neutral state as their main condition right there at the end of the war and were completely refused. Recognizing that a big belligerent pact was being arrayed against them and seeing the US building up bomber squadrons and a massive arsenal, I too would want a buffer between myself and a seemingly hostile and aggressive bully especially after repelling the last one cost so much. The only belligerent here seems to be the United States, and the UK merely continuing "The Great Game" all over again.

Russia invaded the Baltics and Poland in WWII. The concern (as shown in Ukraine) is Putin has a desire to recreate the Russian Empire by retaking (be it de facto or de jure) the territory it lost.

[Theodarzna]

Russia invaded the Baltics and Poland in WWII. The concern (as shown in Ukraine) is Putin has a desire to recreate the Russian Empire by retaking (be it de facto or de jure) the territory it lost.

Here is an alternative theory, one that doesn't exactly rely on the CIA and the patronage machine of Northrop Gruman, Boeing and Raytheon to offer it. Russia surrendered all that territory willingly and even had an agreement of sorts to not install hostile weapons on their border. The United States promptly ignored that, pushed NATO (A hostile alliance) up to Russia's border, put in heavy weapons systems and even overthrow the democratic will of Russians rather directly and bragged about it in the 90s, and only now with Ukraine being the latest place the US seeks to involve itself to the detriment of Russia, does Russia even start to act in its own defense. Putin hasn't expressed any grand imperial aspirations, unless not being under Washington's thumb is an imperial aspiration. So I think your take on this might as well have been written in Langley Falls by Stan Smith himself.

[Howel]

Here is an alternative theory, one that doesn't exactly rely on the CIA and the patronage machine of Northrop Gruman, Boeing and Raytheon to offer it. Russia surrendered all that territory willingly and even had an agreement of sorts to not install hostile weapons on their border. The United States promptly ignored that, pushed NATO (A hostile alliance) up to Russia's border, put in heavy weapons systems and even overthrow the democratic will of Russians rather directly and bragged about it in the 90s, and only now with Ukraine being the latest place the US seeks to involve itself to the detriment of Russia, does Russia even start to act in its own defense. Putin hasn't expressed any grand imperial aspirations, unless not being under Washington's thumb is an imperial aspiration. So I think your take on this might as well have been written in Langley Falls by Stan Smith himself.

Yeah booo US and NATO, how dare they move their defense closer to a crumbling and unstable nation, who wields the largest armory on earth and second largest nuclear arsenal. What an absolutely unmotivated and illogical thing to do, should have just planted roses in the ground and call it a day.

[Easo]

Nordstream? I wonder what the future of it is. Europe is moving away from the Russian oil needle, there is no long term for it. And there is no one to replace Europe's ability to pay for gas.

Here is an alternative theory, one that doesn't exactly rely on the CIA and the patronage machine of Northrop Gruman, Boeing and Raytheon to offer it. Russia surrendered all that territory willingly and even had an agreement of sorts to not install hostile weapons on their border. The United States promptly ignored that, pushed NATO (A hostile alliance) up to Russia's border, put in heavy weapons systems and even overthrow the democratic will of Russians rather directly and bragged about it in the 90s, and only now with Ukraine being the latest place the US seeks to involve itself to the detriment of Russia, does Russia even start to act in its own defense. Putin hasn't expressed any grand imperial aspirations, unless not being under Washington's thumb is an imperial aspiration. So I think your take on this might as well have been written in Langley Falls by Stan Smith himself.

Somehow you keep missing the part which says sovereign nations and their people have the right to choose. Baltics, Poland, they do not have to ask for any kind of permission what to do from Russia. Get that in your head, do not be Shalcker.

Is Eastern Europe in danger of being invaded?

We would have been by now, but we joined NATO just in time, while Russia was weak. Otherwise there would have been Narva and Latgale "republics" now, the moment we tried to change our course.

[Kellhound]

Here is an alternative theory, one that doesn't exactly rely on the CIA and the patronage machine of Northrop Gruman, Boeing and Raytheon to offer it. Russia surrendered all that territory willingly and even had an agreement of sorts to not install hostile weapons on their border. The United States promptly ignored that, pushed NATO (A hostile alliance) up to Russia's border, put in heavy weapons systems and even overthrow the democratic will of Russians rather directly and bragged about it in the 90s, and only now with Ukraine being the latest place the US seeks to involve itself to the detriment of Russia, does Russia even start to act in its own defense. Putin hasn't expressed any grand imperial aspirations, unless not being under Washington's thumb is an imperial aspiration. So I think your take on this might as well have been written in Langley Falls by Stan Smith himself.

Oh no, the US and the rest of NATO allowed countries that wanted nothing to do with their former oppressors into their alliance and now Russia is butthurt that friendship worked better than intimidation. News flash, Russia is not the king of all Slavs.

[jonnysensible]

Putin hasn't expressed any grand imperial aspirations,.

i mean he absolutely has. he talks about them in his speeches lol.

[Shalcker]

Nordstream? I wonder what the future of it is. Europe is moving away from the Russian oil needle, there is no long term for it. And there is no one to replace Europe's ability to pay for gas.

The point of Nord Stream 2 isn't to have EU on Russian gas needle but to have Ukraine off Russian gas transit needle.

Which is clearly a win for Ukrainian independence!

Russia willingly relinquishing their economic stranglehold on Ukrainian gas transit system!

- - - Updated - - -

i mean he absolutely has. he talks about them in his speeches lol.

Could you quote what exactly do you see as "grand imperial aspirations"?

[jonnysensible]

Could you quote what exactly do you see as "grand imperial aspirations"?

so russias actions in ukraine, the baltics, the middle east and africa arent based on imperialist ambitions?

russia is a neoliberal imperialist state, its not up for debate.

[Easo]

The point of Nord Stream 2 isn't to have EU on Russian gas needle but to have Ukraine off Russian gas transit needle.
Which is clearly a win for Ukrainian independence!
Russia willingly relinquishing their economic stranglehold on Ukrainian gas transit system!

Yeahhh, how does your fantasy changes that it is not a long term solution and it absolutely is not in Russia's favour to loose the gas money?

[Shalcker]

so russias actions in ukraine, the baltics, the middle east and africa arent based on imperialist ambitions?

You talked about speeches specifically, those are easy to look up as each of them is there on Kremlin site, complete with english translations.

russia is a neoliberal imperialist state, its not up for debate.

Just like US or UK, sure.

Where did you see it in Putin's speeches though?

What exactly do you see as "grand imperial aspirations"? As opposed to usual imperial aspirations.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeahhh, how does your fantasy changes that it is not a long term solution and it absolutely is not in Russia's favour to loose the gas money?

Not long-term solution for what exactly? It deals with Ukrainian problem quite nicely - once NS2 happens significant reason why they have to be considered "our problem" (or "EU problem") disappears.

And if gas will stop being needed decades later then we'll still have nuclear (and possibly fusion if that ever gets to point of commercial viability).

[Santti]

so russias actions in ukraine, the baltics, the middle east and africa arent based on imperialist ambitions?

russia is a neoliberal imperialist state, its not up for debate.

Not to mention fellating over Stalin.

Russia is still very much the Soviet Union, in all but name.