For Expats only. Thinking the unthinkable.

[steven100]

9 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO Russia is heading for collapse, either as a failed state or a vassal of China.

Economically, it's a basket case. Interest rates of 14%, the Russian rouble can't buy a box of cornflakes. All the companies that were bringing in capital and skills from the West are gone. Who wants to do business in a country where one's assets can be confiscated with a stroke of a pen?

Russia's best and brightest have fled Russia to escape conscription. The last of its competent engineers and technicians are in their sixties. The Russian education system went into a steep decline in the mid-eighties. Its domestic air fleet is 70% Boeing and Airbus, those aircraft are not getting spare parts. The oil fields are freezing for lack of proper maintenance.

Prighozin has shown how vulnerable Putin is to internal revolt. I don't think Europe has much to worry about.

 

 

 

I think this is a very realistic and plausable comment ....     

[Moonlover]

14 hours ago, swissie said:

You, an Expat living in Thailand having certain Assets in Europe? Some food for thaught:

Let's face it: Without US support, it's "game over" for the Ukraine. After that, the only question remaining is: Will the Russians stop at the Hungarian border or march into the heart of Europe, as the Hungarians will not shoot at any Russians?

European armies have been stripped to the bone, running out of ammo after 2 weeks.

Real Estate can't be moved out of a country. But "liquid assets" can. As an Expat are you considering moving your liquid assets to a trusted Thai Bank as long as this is still possible? Easily returned if this scenario should not unfold.

-Not during the Tsarist age nor during the Soviet age has Europe been so militarily vulnerable. The temptation for Putin to become the new age "Alexander The Great" is high.

Needless to say, that under the rule of Tsar Putin, any sort of pension-money transfers will come to a grinding halt.
All just food for thaught. 

What a load of rubbish Swissie. What you fail to realize is that NATO has been fighting proxy war against Russia all along. They have not had 'boots on the ground' of course (at least not knowingly) but Russia has been up against the west's modern and superior weaponry and tactics for most of this war and they have been found to be inferior in all respects. Even with far superior airpower they have not been able to make any notable headway.

 

This war has ground to a halt in much the same way as did WW1 for the first three years, or the Iran/Iraq during the 1980s. I predict that that is how it will remain as the west's support dwindles to a trickle, providing just enough to maintain the status quo and Zelensky will come under increasing pressure to come to a peace deal with Putin based on the de facto borders. He won't like it, but in the end he'll have no choice.

 

Russia has had its nose thoroughly bloodied now and it knows better than to try it on with the west. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

What a load of rubbish Swissie. What you fail to realize is that NATO has been fighting proxy war against Russia all along. They have not had 'boots on the ground' of course (at least not knowingly) but Russia has been up against the west's modern and superior weaponry and tactics for most of this war and they have been found to be inferior in all respects. Even with far superior airpower they have not been able to make any notable headway.

 

This war has ground to a halt in much the same way as did WW1 for the first three years, or the Iran/Iraq during the 1980s. I predict that that is how it will remain as the west's support dwindles to a trickle, providing just enough to maintain the status quo and Zelensky will come under increasing pressure to come to a peace deal with Putin based on the de facto borders. He won't like it, but in the end he'll have no choice.

 

Russia has had its nose thoroughly bloodied now and it knows better than to try it on with the west. 

The government of Poland is concerned. Is that the west?

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, howerde said:

The Russians are never going to allow the US AND EUROPE to install their nuclear missiles on its border any more than the US would allow Russia to put missiles in Mexico OR Cuba, as for Ukraine t is already game over,  the don't have a an army they are mostly dead, the airforce was wiped out long ago, what happened to the awesome patriot missile  system that was going to protect Kiev the Russians dealt with it, the Russians hold land in Ukraine that is held by a Russian speaking population that is also ethnically Russian, as for invade Europe why would Putin be bothered, America is pulling out fast the Israel crisis has given them the chance to cut their losses and get out like Afghanistan,  Iraq, Libya etc etc  

Remember the US and its allies are prepared to fight til the last Ukrainian (sadly)

The Ukrainians are well aware Putin's objective is genocide, along the same lines as Stalin's Holodomor. The Ukraine war has already cost Russia more deaths and injuries than their nine years in Afghanistan. They are reduced to pulling WWII tanks out of storage, having lost half their tanks. The Black Sea fleet has been forced to retreat to Novorossiysk. Not bad for a nation with no navy.

 

If the war in Ukraine has shown anything, it is the Russians are reasonable at defending territory. They are also pitifully incompetent at the logistics needed for successful attacks, which is why there is something of a stalemate presently. The 50 km convoy heading for Kiev that ran out of fuel established their logistical abilities. Nations such as India must be having significant buyer's remorse, after seeing the military equipment they bought from Russia being ignited on the battlefield like Roman candles.

 

The Russians in Eastern Ukraine are not ethnic to the region. They were transplanted there on Stalin's orders to fill the vacuum created by the 6 million Ukrainians he killed by famine.

 

If anything is sad, it is what should be a rich, prosperous nation descending to a pariah state through the ambition of a single man.

 

 

[GypsyT]

A few reports from front lines:

 

https://news.err.ee/1609183456/polish-security-chief-nato-eastern-flank-states-have-3-years-to-prepare-for-russia-attack

https://news.err.ee/1609178242/retired-general-so-far-us-has-not-fully-committed-to-ukrainian-victory

https://news.err.ee/1609182235/edf-colonel-russia-s-budget-increase-means-war-can-continue-at-same-intensity

https://news.err.ee/1609188475/mihkelson-russia-is-not-as-isolated-as-we-would-like-it-to-be

 

[Prubangboy]

Russia will ultimately win against Ukraine just by hanging on and not outright losing. They have more bodies and money.

 

The USA consults with China before giving Ukraine new weapons. Because China is afraid of Russia using a tactical nuke if they start actually, noticably losing. Russia has a lot of problems, but also a lot of leverage. 

 

I wish it were otherwise, but long term, I'd bet on a negotiated settlement that is advantageous to Russia. If Trump gets back in, then it's Russia for the win, sometime in mid-'24.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Prubangboy

[Moonlover]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

The government of Poland is concerned. Is that the west?

Is there a government in the west that is not concerned? And it would be no surprise that the closer to the Russian border a country is, the more they would be concerned, hence the scramble by Sweden and Finland to get into bed with NATO.

 

IMO the west (read NATO) just needs to hold its nerve long enough for both Russia and Ukraine to fully realize that this costly war ain't going nowhere. Then they will come to the table, which where all wars end.

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

Is there a government in the west that is not concerned? And it would be no surprise that the closer to the Russian border a country is, the more they would be concerned, hence the scramble by Sweden and Finland to get into bed with NATO.

 

IMO the west (read NATO) just needs to hold its nerve long enough for both Russia and Ukraine to fully realize that this costly war ain't going nowhere. Then they will come to the table, which where all wars end.

Russians think differently. You are very naive.

[MangoKorat]

16 hours ago, swissie said:

Let's face it: Without US support, it's "game over" for the Ukraine. After that, the only question remaining is: Will the Russians stop at the Hungarian border or march into the heart of Europe, as the Hungarians will not shoot at any Russian

I very much doubt that.  However, the europeans are much better organised now than they were in WW2.  Don't forget that we have NATO now.  Should the Russians set foot on one sqm of a Nato member's soil or attack them in any way, the US would be obliged to re-engage as they are a Nato member.

 

The Russians would never be allowed to 'march into the heart of Europe' - besides, I seem to remember the Russians trying to march into the heart of Kyiv - they didn't get too far did they?  The so called military might of Russia has been tested and found to be lacking - its also been somewhat depleted over the last couple of years.

 

Both the US and European countries have only themselves to blame for the current stalemate in Ukraine.  We have sent far too little and taken far too long to do it - still no F16's for example.  Worrying about escalation has worked against us - Putin should have been hit hard and fast. Why did Vietnam go so wrong? Why couldn't the US, UK and others sort out Afghanistan - same old story, not enough equipment or boots of the ground, trickle fed over the long term - actually costs more in cash and lives in the long run. Far too much restraint shown as well. Never seen the Taliban act with restraint.

 

Why did Hitler march across Europe so easily - Blitzkrieg (lightning war). In addition, in return for the assistance he's received, Zelensky's had to promise not to attack Russian territory - mistake.  If a few Russian towns and cities had been bombed, maybe Putin's support would have been under pressure.

 

Yes Putin was making nuclear noises a while back, I doubt that even he's that stupid but if he is, the performance of his conventional weapons hasn't been too good, no reason to believe that his nukes will be any better. He knows though, that the chances of any winners in a full nuclear conflict is extremely slim.

 

What Nato has done by this 'trickle feeding' is create a situation where Ukraine might just lose.

 

If Nato had got involved and helped Ukraine out in 2014 when Putin walked in to Crimea, the current 'special military operation' might not have even started.  That little escapade was a test - a test the West failed.

[Prubangboy]

6 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

Yes Putin was making nuclear noises a while back, I doubt that even he's that stupid. 

 

What Nato has done by this 'trickle feeding' is create a situation where Ukraine might just lose.

 

 

It's not your back yard. Europe will set its pants on fire to avoid a land war. No appetite among brit youth to fight a Great War, partic one where nukes are a real possibility, despite your bland assurances.

 

And China can not let an ally just get trounced. They're in the same quandary as us: how to de-escalate and manage a hot war with a crazy government.

[novacova]

16 hours ago, swissie said:

Will the Russians stop at the Hungarian border or march into the heart of Europe,

Highly doubt Putin intends to push past Ukraine, yet…maybe a few misfires into Poland. The overall scope is to deplete the resources of the West. Let’s wait to see if the US starts hitting Iran to see Russias or china’s next move.

[CanadaSam]

11 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

What Nato has done by this 'trickle feeding' is create a situation where Ukraine might just lose.

 

It is quite the contrary, in fact, the "minimum" help given to Ukraine is to ensure there is no obvious fast military win in this war with Russia, because they don't want the Russians backed into a corner which may result in them trying desperate measures (nuclear, etc.).

[Dan O]

16 hours ago, swissie said:

You, an Expat living in Thailand having certain Assets in Europe? Some food for thaught:

Let's face it: Without US support, it's "game over" for the Ukraine. After that, the only question remaining is: Will the Russians stop at the Hungarian border or march into the heart of Europe, as the Hungarians will not shoot at any Russians?

European armies have been stripped to the bone, running out of ammo after 2 weeks.

Real Estate can't be moved out of a country. But "liquid assets" can. As an Expat are you considering moving your liquid assets to a trusted Thai Bank as long as this is still possible? Easily returned if this scenario should not unfold.

-Not during the Tsarist age nor during the Soviet age has Europe been so militarily vulnerable. The temptation for Putin to become the new age "Alexander The Great" is high.

Needless to say, that under the rule of Tsar Putin, any sort of pension-money transfers will come to a grinding halt.
All just food for thaught. 

Thai banks are not as secure as you imply, trusted is not tge word that comes to my mind. There insurance backing for default is minimal and interest rates are very poor. 

[novacova]

2 minutes ago, Prubangboy said:

And China can not let an ally just get trounced.

Really don’t think China gives a dammed about what happens to Russia except the longer the war keeps going it only serves China’s ultimate goal.

[MangoKorat]

7 minutes ago, Prubangboy said:

It's not your back yard. Europe will set its pants on fire to avoid a land war. No appetite among brit youth to fight a Great War, partic one where nukes are a real possibility, despite your bland assurances.

So you think we'll just let Putin march into Europe?  Not a hope in hell. Germany has tried that, twice.

[MangoKorat]

2 minutes ago, novacova said:

Really don’t think China gives a dammed about what happens to Russia except the longer the war keeps going it only serves China’s ultimate goal.

I agree, China's only real friend is China. They would drop Putin like a hot potato if it was in their interest.

[sirineou]

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I'm more concerned by the imminent zombie apocalypse, stock up on shelf stable foods and swords!

 

The end is near .....,

Not worried about zombies, 

I would just walk a little faster than them and make fun of them,

and they can growl "Brains. Brains" all they want!

They are not getting any of that around me.

[Prubangboy]

They don't love Russia, but a big fellow commie nation right next door being taken down is not in their interest. China's influence in the war has already raised their status. Would China mind if that neighbor was weakened? Sure.

 

As long as we're comically pretending to be geopolitical experts, China's watching how Russia gets sorted out with an eye up the road to Taiwan. If it's a bankrupting slog to only get part of Taiwan, it's a no-go. If Russia can bluff and exhaust its way to getting what they want with no downside for the war, it's more of a go. It's a big bluff poker game.

 

Putin maybe not be rolling tanks through the Arc De Triumph any time soon, but will French youth be willing to dodge bullets to defend Estonia? No. Likewise America's real desire to fight to defend Taiwan is an idea best left untested.

 

I derive these opinions from reading The Economist.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Prubangboy

[GypsyT]

11 minutes ago, novacova said:

Highly doubt Putin intends to push past Ukraine, yet…maybe a few misfires into Poland.

Baltic countries and Finland are first on Putin's firing line. He has said that himself.

[scorecard]

15 hours ago, nausea said:

Panic is in the air, I see.

And is Ukraine really finished?

 

Seems to me they still need a lot of support but will eventually prevail. 

 

Is the US about to abandon them? I very much doubt it, and wouldn't surprise me if Biden pulls a rabbit out of the hat to give more support.

 

Re the US public, I wonder whether the general public would really be happy to just stop supporting Ukraine? Or would they see an emboldened Putin as a very serious threat to be pushed back at any cost?

 

 

[Prubangboy]

16 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

So you think we'll just let Putin march into Europe?  

Who is this "we" you speak of? I am assuming that you, like me, are well, well past draft-age.

 

Europe is broke. And up to their neck in migrants. They will bend over very backwards to split the diff and not fight.

 

Like they did with Crimea. Like Obama did when he retreated from his line in the sand in Syria. It'll be a death by a thousand cuts for Europe, not a dramatic conventional war. 

 

If only there was a film about a superpower direct throw down to get the pulse racing.

 

Wait a minute:

 

 

 

[NoDisplayName]

6 hours ago, mfd101 said:

The Op is a load of codswallop.

 

Why has Finland joined NATO all of a sudden? Why is Sweden going to join as soon as Turkey can get over their tantrums? Why was Ukraine actually invaded & still fighting for its life?

 

Because the key to survival is NATO membership, which obliges ALL members including Usofa to fight.

 

That is incorrect.

 

Article 5

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

 

Article 5 has each individual nation "assist"  by undertaking "such action as it deems necessary."

 

There is no guaranteed military response.  Assistance can take any form.........including sternly worded letters to ambassadors or fiery speeches at the UN, or nothing if that's what is deemed necessary.

[mfd101]

32 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

That is incorrect.

 

Article 5

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

 

Article 5 has each individual nation "assist"  by undertaking "such action as it deems necessary."

 

There is no guaranteed military response.  Assistance can take any form.........including sternly worded letters to ambassadors or fiery speeches at the UN, or nothing if that's what is deemed necessary.

So Finland, then Sweden and eventually Ukraine joining up is - in current circumstances - a waste of time, is it?

[NoDisplayName]

11 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

So Finland, then Sweden and eventually Ukraine joining up is - in current circumstances - a waste of time, is it?

 

Did I say that?  I simply noted the actual text of the treaty, as opposed to the common perception.

 

Of course, if Germany or France were to be attacked, we'd be there with boots on the ground.

 

But the Baltic nations, or in a mad dream what may be left of Ukraine when this is over?  Not a chance we'd risk our blood for the proxy war nations.  It's their purpose in life to die for our interests.

[Drumbuie]

6 hours ago, howerde said:

The Russians are never going to allow the US AND EUROPE to install their nuclear missiles on its border any more than the US would allow Russia to put missiles in Mexico OR Cuba, as for Ukraine t is already game over,  the don't have a an army they are mostly dead, the airforce was wiped out long ago, what happened to the awesome patriot missile  system that was going to protect Kiev the Russians dealt with it, the Russians hold land in Ukraine that is held by a Russian speaking population that is also ethnically Russian, as for invade Europe why would Putin be bothered, America is pulling out fast the Israel crisis has given them the chance to cut their losses and get out like Afghanistan,  Iraq, Libya etc etc  

Remember the US and its allies are prepared to fight til the last Ukrainian (sadly)

Mate. Look at the map of US military bases around the world, especially in Europe, Japan and S Korea: Russia has been ringed by missiles, some of them nuclear,  since WW2 ended. Not to mention ICBMs (InterContinental Ballistic Missiles) in underground silos on the other side of the world. Now death can be delivered by drones as well. 

[mfd101]

3 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

But the Baltic nations, or in a mad dream what may be left of Ukraine when this is over?  Not a chance we'd risk our blood for the proxy war nations.  It's their purpose in life to die for our interests.

If that were the outcome, that would be the end of NATO and - with it - the end of US strategic credibility. Taiwan would disappear next. Noone would ever trust the Yanks again. China and its Russian acolyte would run the world. 

 

All of which is perfectly obvious to any US administration and to any European or NATO country that has a collective brain (ie probably not Hungary, possibly not Turkey).

[Thailaces]

A scholar on the topic of power and war... (jump to 42:15 for the "Why did Russia invade Ukraine?" question.)

 

John Mearsheimer

 

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, Thailaces said:

A scholar on the topic of power and war... (jump to 42:15 for the "Why did Russia invade Ukraine?" question.)

 

John Mearsheimer

 

That's his theory which is blindly believed by a lot of pro Putin westerners but you can find 100 other scholars who think he's full of crap. But I agree everyone should be exposed to his view to understand the debate. 

[schweizer]

This December marks the 29th anniversary of the Budapest Memorandum, in which the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia provided security commitments to Ukraine in exchange for the latter joining the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear state. As part of the agreement, Ukraine relinquished the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world (which it inherited from the U.S.S.R.) and Russia agreed (among other things) “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine”.

One could question why people sign treaties just to ignore them when it suits

[Thailaces]

16 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That's his theory which is blindly believed by a lot of pro Putin westerners but you can find 100 other scholars who think he's full of crap. But I agree everyone should be exposed to his view to understand the debate. 

The other side of coin, to be sure.