Jump to content

Assault on Kiev: Russian helicopters swoop above Ukraine's capital


Recommended Posts

Posted
19 hours ago, tgw said:

 

cause : Russia / USSR nearly raped every country that was under their control.

effect : all these countries want to join EU / NATO and be protected against crazy Ivan.

Everyone or many of those most actie here predicted a russia with broken back already in june 2022, and here we are. The war depending on the Republicans in USA. 

 

I got alot heat for my opinions, and I understand your point of view, but still think and say, Ukraine is one piece in a much bigger game, and being used as a buffer zone. At which cost? 

 

This is not just a border conflict escalating in to a war. 

 

Look at Georgia, how did they do? Was that an mistake? We do not know yet before this ends, but so far it doesnt look promising especially as I have said before, other crises and wars start to escalate around the world. 

 

 

  • Confused 2
Posted
46 minutes ago, tgw said:

 

I might have been guilty of being too optimistic as well.

 

But : you portray the war as depending on the USA, instead of the perpetrator. The war would end instantly if Putin withdrew his troops from Ukraine.

 

Then big blocks and buffer zones theory with the untold "bigger game" is there to further muddy the waters. After being painted as being equally responsible for the conflict in the previous argument, Ukraine is now totally insignificant except for its geographic position and is merely a pawn in the hands of superpowers.

 

So, that was another leap of logic. Or of illogism.

 

But let's look at big blocks and buffer zones and how that is itself a flawed theory :

The one entity which needs buffer zones is a fascist Ruzzia.
Buffer zones are useful in a context of conventional ground war. Who has been building up ground troops ?

It is obvious that NATO has not been preparing for conventional ground war at all, and Ruzzia was fully aware. That certainly was one of the arguments in favour of Putin's attack. Weakness of NATO.

As a defensive pact of countries with insufficient ground troops, NATO doesn't need buffer zones. While countries like France or Germany will of course feel more comfortable having Poland and Ukraine on the Eastern border, NATO itself doesn't care much about buffer zones. The reason is that it's a defensive pact, if one country is attacked, all NATO countries will defend that country.

 

In fact, the situation we have now with Ukraine resembles more a buffer country situation than if Ukraine was a NATO member.

 

But of course, the other side, ex-Warsaw Pact people don't understand this. For them, Warsaw pact members were all expendable pawns in the grand scheme of Ruzzia's supremacy. They think of NATO as their nemesis, and that NATO's goal is to attack Ruzzia and that NATO will sacrifice its member countries in the process, which is a ridiculous thought, but one that can gain hold in the minds of Putin and cronies, where one can find paranoia, narcissism and an inferiority complex.

 

"This is not just a border conflict escalating in to a war."

 

This isn't a border conflict. It is a 20+ year attempt by Putin to subjugate Ukraine. Because he was unsuccessful, he gradually escalated from covert influence into an all-out war.

 

There are indeed bigger plans at play, but these bigger plans are Ruzzian.

 

It's funny that you should mention Georgia, as many aspects of that country's misfortunes in since 2007 are pretty similar to Ukraine's.

How is Georgia for a NATO buffer zone ?

Nah, it's purely a piece of what Putin considers the Ruzzian empire. What Georgians have to say about it is meaningless.

Georgia is pro-EU and pro-Democracy. Sounds familiar ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia–Russia_relations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikheil_Saakashvili

 

 

 

 

We know Russia will not give up, there is resources and strategic reasons why so, so therefor is Ukraine and Crimea important for Russia, and need Ukraine. The west alliance knows this, so to cut down to the big lines, there is alot on stakes here.

 

The pressure Nato have executed against russians, cant be overlooked. Simple reasons

 

Im a tax payer of Norway, and I agree all support given for Ukraine, and I believe for each capital we are pretty high up there in contribution of necessary equipment. So far there have not been any discussion about our contribution to Ukraine because we are unified in the support. Still it should bee room to discuss reasons, and whats next for Ukraine, and that is pretty much in the hands of Us next president, and what he manage to pull through in the congress. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Hummin said:

We know Russia will not give up, there is resources and strategic reasons why so, so therefor is Ukraine and Crimea important for Russia, and need Ukraine. The west alliance knows this, so to cut down to the big lines, there is alot on stakes here.

 

The pressure Nato have executed against russians, cant be overlooked. Simple reasons

 

Im a tax payer of Norway, and I agree all support given for Ukraine, and I believe for each capital we are pretty high up there in contribution of necessary equipment. So far there have not been any discussion about our contribution to Ukraine because we are unified in the support. Still it should bee room to discuss reasons, and whats next for Ukraine, and that is pretty much in the hands of Us next president, and what he manage to pull through in the congress. 

 

regarding the pressure put on Russians by NATO, I suggest you examine the war in ex-Yugoslavia.

Posted
59 minutes ago, tgw said:

 

regarding the pressure put on Russians by NATO, I suggest you examine the war in ex-Yugoslavia.

We bombed there to, and a complicated ethnically post Warsaw pact war where Nato intervened quite prompt and effective, almost without hesitation even it was blocked by russia and china. The Chineese embassy was bombed if I recall correctly.

 

An ethnicall war not so different from Gaza some would say. 

  • Confused 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
49 minutes ago, tgw said:

 

what I take away from that war is that Russia supported war criminals there too.

I know, and if you turn it around, so have we done in many wars. Again world politics is deleted

  • Agree 1
Posted
23 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Except that those two things are not mutually exclusive. According to an analysis in Time Magazine of where the money actually goes, around 90% of the money for Ukraine aid is spent in the US (and creates thousands of US jobs).

 

Why the U.S. Has the Most to Gain From Supporting Ukraine

 

 

America, the land of death ( dealing industry )!

 

Have you considered that if the taxpayer's money was spend on things that benefit ALL Americans, like non war industries ( so the US doesn't need to depend on China ), and rebuilding the infrastructure, that would create more jobs than the death industry?

 

Do you want the 1% to get rich while the infrastructure disintegrates for lack of money and skilled workers?

  • Confused 3
Posted

they are allowed to their opinion..... but they may suffer from short term memory loss syndrome

Russia says US support for Ukraine will end as ‘humiliating fiasco’ like ‘Vietnam and Afghanistan’

https://au.yahoo.com/news/russia-says-us-support-ukraine-222005241.html

 

The war in Afghanistan became a quagmire for what by the late 1980s was a disintegrating Soviet Union. (The Soviets suffered some 15,000 dead and many more injured.)

 

https://www.britannica.com/event/Soviet-invasion-of-Afghanistan

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...