heybruce

Lavrov went on to say "Also, the check is in your mouth and I won't cum in the mail." Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Right, all Putin has to do is slaughter Russia's cash cow. Russia exports a lot of commodities and it will be inconvenient for the rest of the world while alternative sources are found. However Russia exports little beyond commodities, and any reduction in that trade hurts Russia much more than the rest of the world.

Neither of us know what is going on in Putin's head. However I think it is more likely that Putin doesn't see NATO as a threat but as an impediment in his goal of recreating the Russian empire as it existed when it was the Soviet Union.

"For any peace to occur which should be everyone's goal,Ukraine Russia will not be left with an arsenal of NATO weapons." Fixed if for you. After all, Russia was the aggressor.

Russia has been humiliated but not defeated, and still has lots of military power it can bring to bear on Ukraine. It remains to be seen if the latest re-definition of objectives is an attempt at a face-saving withdrawal or a distraction to buy time to prepare for worst attacks.

The US debt China holds is largely in the form of treasuries. China can stop buying treasuries and attempt to sell what it holds, but if it does this too fast it will lose a lot of money. All this also spills over into the interest treasuries yield, the US's ability to purchase goods from China, and a lot of other stuff. The bottom line is that China can not use the US debt it holds to significantly hurt the US without significantly hurting itself.

Putin has wasted a great deal of Russia's conventional forces, given the west motivation to become less dependent on Russian energy, strongly re-invigorated NATO, and now must choose between a costly indefinite occupation of Ukraine or withdrawing and having a hostile nation on its border. Difficult to see that as a win.

China wants Russia to win; it will preoccupy the West with concerns in Europe and validate China's preferred world view that it is the natural order of things for great powers to dominate their regions. China wants to become a great imperial power. However China doesn't need Russia to win. China can learn useful lessons from a Russian loss, and a weakened Russia will be more dependent upon China, a dependency that China can use and abuse--good deals on energy and other commodities, nuclear weapon technology transfers, an obedient ally in the UN, etc. The war is a no-lose situation for China. It's a no-win situation for Russia.

Possibly a combination of ethnic cleansing and pawns/hostages to be used during peace negotiations.

Even a limited nuclear war would severely damage or destroy the technical systems the global economy depends upon. Semiconductors and microprocessors, on earth and in orbit, have little tolerance for the electromagnetic radiation released by nuclear explosions. The internet will be gone, information exchange stops, trading stops, deliveries stop, goods disappear, electricity stops flowing (on the power lines not burned out by the radiation from distant nuclear explosions--look up Starfish Prime test to see how that works), hunger and panic sets in and then things start to get really bad. Those killed by the initial explosions will be a small fraction of the total casualties. If things go really bad, it will be really bad for everyone, everywhere. As an ironic aside, when the internet goes so will cryptocurrencies. So much for protection from the risks of 'fiat money'. Of course paper money probably won't last long after that.

"The paper, Komsomolskaya Pravda, said in an article that 9,861 Russian soldiers had died and 16,153 had been injured during the invasion, according to data from the Defense Ministry. However, the article was reposted minutes later without the paragraph providing information on casualties." https://www.yahoo.com/news/russian-tabloid-says-defense-ministry-210355759.html Less than one month in and an invasion force of 190,000 has suffered 26,000 dead or wounded. That is not just a human tragedy (I doubt many of the Russian soldiers wanted to invade) it is also a military disaster. Putin's stupid arrogance has left him with nothing but terrible options for Russia and Ukraine. Pulling out would leave an enraged Ukraine on Russia's border, staying put or continuing to advance will grind down his conventional forces to an empty shell, and escalating by using chemical or nuclear weapons would lead to consequences no one wants to consider. I think it is unlikely, but I hope someone in Russia is arranging a coup. Perhaps this 'accidental' disclosure of casualties is a step towards laying the groundwork.

Actually the US has been trying for better relations with Russia since the Bush administration. It only seemed to make Putin bolder. Regarding separating Russia from China; that won't happen until it suits China. They are both autocratic nations that want an empire. "Asked to describe China’s strategic goal, diplomats at more than a dozen embassies in Beijing are in near unanimity. They say China wants a world order built around spheres of influence, with China in control of Asia, Russia wielding a veto over security arrangements in Europe and America pushed back to its own shores. If such an order is helped into existence by Russia’s war in Ukraine, so be it." https://www.economist.com/china/chinas-friendship-with-russia-has-boundaries-despite-what-their-leaders-say/21808197 However China correctly sees Russia as the minor partner in an duopoly that controls the Eurasian continent, and an expendable one at that. If supporting Russia becomes inconvenient China will dump Russia.

Have you noticed how many countries that were part of the former Soviet Union have joined or are attempting to join NATO? Would you deny these countries the right to determine their own destinies? What about the former Warsaw Pact countries; Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc.? Would you let Russia have them as well?

There was also nothing to prevent the Soviet Union from destroying Afghanistan. Instead Afghanistan destroyed, or at least contributed mightly to the destruction of, the Soviet Union.

Fourteen years ago Ukraine was welcomed to aspire to NATO membership. Since then, nothing....no membership, no firm date for membership, no clear path to membership. Does that justify Russia's invasion?

"you have a truly impressive ability to ignore the obvious" Back atcha. Ukraine was never offered NATO membership, or even promised that it would be allowed at some time in the future. No matter how often you and others claim that Russia had to invade Ukraine to keep it out of NATO, it remains an obvious lie. Regarding the off-topic conspiracy theory about the second Iraq War; it was a stupid mistake caused by the vanity and ambitions of the chicken-hawks of the Bush Jr. administration. It was not a sinister plot orchestrated by the defense industries of the US.

There were always arguments for and against NATO expansion. The fact that Russia has now invaded a nation that was not in NATO has made those who joined the club extremely happy they did so.

Let me summarize the logic of you and other Russia apologists: Ukraine asked to be admitted to NATO, and instead of NATO saying "Hell No!" it said "Maybe later, much later." In your mind this makes the west responsible for Russia's invasion. So far nobody has attempted to answer a very obvious question: Why do so many countries that border on Russia feel the need to join NATO to protect themselves from Russia?

You think it's plausible that Putin's goal is to waste a great part of his military, have most of the free world unite against him and bring devastating economic sanctions on Russia in order to have a failed state on Russia's border? You must think Putin is incredibly stupid. As to your thought's on the goals of the US in Afghanistan and Iraq; I think you are so locked into a conspiracy theory mindset you are unable to be objective.

As the US demonstrated in Afghanistan and Iraq, winning the peace is much more difficult than winning the war. Even if Russia manages to win the war (there are estimates that Russia lost 10% of its invasion force, killed or wounded, in just a few weeks) it won't be able to win the peace at an acceptable cost. If Putin is smart he will find an excuse to declare victory and clear out of Ukraine. I don't think he's that smart.

A desire to expand the Russian Empire is not a legitimate reason to invade another country. Also, if you think Afghanistan, the country where the Taliban government hosted and protected Al Qaeda while it planned, organized and directed the 911 attack, had nothing to do with 911 you have an amazing ignorance of recent history. In addition, America didn't use 911 to justify either Iraq war.

I see...You think the US is not a sovereign nation because Russia interfered in elections. I think that so long as the voters decide, a nation is still sovereign. That is the case in both the US and Ukraine.

Another poster blaming a war initiated by Russia on anyone but Russia. What rapprochement with Russia has the West prevented? What rapprochement has Russia sought? When and how was the hand extended by Gorbachev refused? The West does not actively recruit members for NATO. Countries that think they need to join a defensive alliance for protection ask to join NATO. If the consensus in NATO is that allowing the country in adds more benefits than risks to the alliance they are accepted. Many countries that request admission, such as Ukraine, are years from being allowed in, if ever. Russia/Putin thinks it has a right to dominate its neighbors. That is why so many of its neighbors have sought NATO membership. The NATO countries that have nuclear weapons (the U.S., U.K., and France) and the countries that allow them (Germany, Italy, Turkey, Netherlands, and Belgium) have not changed with NATO expansion; they are all long-time NATO members.

From the full article: "The allegation that the new consular office, upon completion, will become a US spy centre in Southeast Asia was made by former media tycoon Sondhi Limthongkul, who headed a movement against the Shinawatras, later known as the “yellow-shirt” royalist political movement." "In one of his online talk programs in September 2020, Sondhi said that Chiang Mai is an ideal location from which to spy on Chinese military communications in Sichuan province, especially its capital of Chengdu, which is home to several military installations and the Qionglai Air Base." "Sondhi, however, did not provide any evidence to support his allegations or suspicions." Media tycoon turned talk show host makes a claim without evidence. Why to people believe this BS? BTW: Sichuan province is deep inside China. There isn't an "ideal location" for spying on it that isn't also deep inside China.

"The school was not named as they never are in defamation crazy Thailand." Here's the other problem; in Thailand spreading unfavorable true information can get you sued for defamation.