Ukraine: Invasion Imminent?

[L00b 441]

7 minutes ago, OlegAney said:

 

If the United States and its European allies continue their current policy, this will exacerbate hostilities with Russia and devastate Ukraine in the process. Alternatively, they can switch gears and work to create a prosperous but neutral Ukraine, one that does not threaten Russia and allows the West to repair its relations with Moscow. With that approach, all sides would win.

 

But according to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Putins’s aggression…

 

In reality the taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement. Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement and in recent years they have made it clear that they would not stand by while Ukrainians turned into a Western bastion. (Imagine the outrage in Washington if China built an impressive military alliance and tried to include Mexico in it!).

 

Also of note, given that most Western leaders continue to deny that Putin’s behaviour might be motivated by legitimate security concerns, they have tried to modify it by doubling down on their existing policies supplying ‘more lethal aid’ to the Ukraine and thus provoking Zelensky to say ‘we will fight until the end’. Nevertheless, this is something that only 11% of Ukrainians can agree to, providing that every third or forth Ukrainian has a relative in Russia. (e.g. I live in Russia, my wife’s brother lives in Zaporozhie (Ukraine), my uncle lives in Simferopol (Crimea), my son is in Bielorussia).

 

I would like to say again that there is a solution to the crisis in Ukraine, however—although it would require the West to think in a fundamentally new way. The United States and its allies should abandon their plan to westernise Ukraine and instead aim to make it at least a neutral buffer between NATO and Russia, akin to Austria’s position during the Cold War.

 

If Putin’s goal was to forestall a NATO enlargement, his unprovoked aggression against Ukraine is the worst geopolitical blunder since the Cold War, by an intergalactic mile.

 

Finland’s accession to NATO is already a done deal, but for the t’s to cross and i’s to dot.

 

Sweden isn’t long/far behind.

[geared 319]

2 minutes ago, L00b said:

If Putin’s goal was to forestall a NATO enlargement, his unprovoked aggression against Ukraine is the worst geopolitical blunder since the Cold War, by an intergalactic mile.

 

Finland’s accession to NATO is already a done deal, but for the t’s to cross and i’s to dot.

 

Sweden isn’t long/far behind.

I wouldn't be surprised if many countries in that area are scrambling to put the NATO paperwork together.

 

Clearly being friendly with Russia means nothing, even having a peace treaty in place means nothing.  They cannot be trusted.

[L00b 441]

1 minute ago, OlegAney said:

You've missed the point! Every third or forth Ukrainian has a relative in Russia. But this is not true for the Scandinavian countries.

My view is that you don’t have one, since the ‘root’ of the issue is NATO enlargement according to you, and Putin’s actions are precipitating that enlargement to countries which did not consider it (any more than usual) prior to February.

[L00b 441]

2 minutes ago, OlegAney said:

The claim that Ukraine has the right to determine whom it wants to ally with and the Russians have no right to prevent Kiev from joining the West is a dangerous way to think about foreign policy choices. The sad truth is that might often makes right when great-power politics are at play.

 

Abstract rights such as self-determination are largely meaningless when powerful states get into brawls with weaker states. Did Cuba have the right to form a military alliance with the Soviet Union during the Cold War? The United States certainly did not think so, and the Putin's men think the same way about Ukraine joining the West. 

Welcome to my ignore list.

[harvey19 541]

5 minutes ago, L00b said:

 

 

In the meantime, it is the Ukrainians’ sole and absolute right  to keep up the fight for maintaining their sovereignty and it is, equally, western democracies’ sole and absolute right to lend them a hand when asked.

Should British troops get involved if asked ?

Should the West reintroduce large armed forces stationed in Europe as we had with BAOR ?

[L00b 441]

Just now, harvey19 said:

Should British troops get involved if asked ?

That’s your government’s shout (and/or the UN’s) no point asking me.
 

But FWIW, if Putin goes biowarfare or nuclear, yes, absolutely.

 

Them and any other troops mandated by their respects governments/the UN.

1 minute ago, harvey19 said:

Should the West reintroduce large armed forces stationed in Europe as we had with BAOR ?

The West is doing that right now, under the guise of exercises.

 

So some heads of state must be thinking that we should.

[geared 319]

12 minutes ago, OlegAney said:

The claim that Ukraine has the right to determine whom it wants to ally with and the Russians have no right to prevent Kiev from joining the West is a dangerous way to think about foreign policy choices. The sad truth is that might often makes right when great-power politics are at play.

 

Abstract rights such as self-determination are largely meaningless when powerful states get into brawls with weaker states. Did Cuba have the right to form a military alliance with the Soviet Union during the Cold War? The United States certainly did not think so, and the Putin's men think the same way about Ukraine joining the West. 

Are you some sort of idiot?

[harvey19 541]

3 minutes ago, L00b said:

That’s your government’s shout (and/or the UN’s) no point asking me.
 

But FWIW, if Putin goes biowarfare or nuclear, yes, absolutely.

 

Them and any other troops mandated by their respects governments/the UN.

The West is doing that right now, under the guise of exercises.

 

So some heads of state must be thinking that we should.

I asked you because of your statement "western democracies sole and absolute right to lend them a hand when asked "

That seems to me a way to escalate the problem and widen its areas of hostilities.

The reinstating  of large garrisons in Germany as we had with BAOR was targeted at introducing a deterrent force to stop future occurrences as are happening now. Unfortunately it would recreate a "Cold War" situation again. 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, OlegAney said:

The claim that Ukraine has the right to determine whom it wants to ally with and the Russians have no right to prevent Kiev from joining the West is a dangerous way to think about foreign policy choices. The sad truth is that might often makes right when great-power politics are at play.

 

Abstract rights such as self-determination are largely meaningless when powerful states get into brawls with weaker states. Did Cuba have the right to form a military alliance with the Soviet Union during the Cold War? The United States certainly did not think so, and the Putin's men think the same way about Ukraine joining the West. 

Sheffbrick or whatever name was is back?

[Annie Bynnol 612]

2 hours ago, cuttsie said:

We are now sending troops to  Eastern Europe , this is looking more and more like 1938 all over again , History always seems to repeat its self .

Yes, we still have Right wing appeasers here in France, US, the UK etc. are still defending the right of dictators who invade other eastern European countries. 

No, we did not send any troops to protect Finland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia and Poland.

 

The result of doing what our right wing appeasers wanted? 70+ million dead.

[L00b 441]

41 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

I asked you because of your statement "western democracies sole and absolute right to lend them a hand when asked "

That seems to me a way to escalate the problem and widen its areas of hostilities.

The reinstating  of large garrisons in Germany as we had with BAOR was targeted at introducing a deterrent force to stop future occurrences as are happening now. Unfortunately it would recreate a "Cold War" situation again. 

That statement is simply stating a fact:  western democracies have a right to help Ukraine if Ukraine asks.
 

Whether they do or not, and how much if they do, is a geopolitical choice by their respective government.

 

After that, whether they help free Ukraine (-only) and stop at the Russian border or not, is a NATO choice.

 

The only escalation to date, has been by Putin, first with his unilateral aggression of Ukraine, next with doubling down on the aggression at every occasion. Any escalation to a wider area as you suggest, would be by Putin hitting targets beyond Ukraine, as I simply cannot see NATO troops attacking Russia preemptively, ever.

 

So if he considers western democracies staging more khaki people and hardware ever nearer Ukraine, in preparation should Putin step further on his appendage by hitting a NATO state, as an “escalation”, maybe he should consider toning down his aggression in the first place, of which he has full control, so that western democracies do not feel compelled to take such preventive measures.

 

Why should the West endorse any degree of responsibility for Putin’s own actions?

 

Would you prefer to sit down quietly and let him have at it, until he comes knocking at Dover like Adolf did last time? Appeasement worked well then, didn’t it?

Edited April 29, 2022 by L00b

[Guest makapaka]

2 hours ago, L00b said:

More diplomatic routes have been tried ceaselessly since 24 February, and I’m old enough to remember the bile which Macron got for keeping comms open with Putin all along.

 

To no avail so far, and these comms are still ongoing AFAIK.

 

Again, nothing stops Putin from back-pedalling more, than he already did by abandoning the assault on Kyiv and Ukraine’s north generally.

 

In the meantime, it is the Ukrainians’ sole and absolute right  to keep up the fight for maintaining their sovereignty and it is, equally, western democracies’ sole and absolute right to lend them a hand if and when asked.

 

We’re a little past the “jaw jaw” stage, here, and that’s solely at the continuing initiative of Putin. Lest you propose that we give him a hand in his aggression by withholding assistance to Ukraine?

Moldova certainly is, and not a minute too late.

What was the ceaseless diplomacy undertaken - I haven’t seen any