Latest developments and discussion of recent events in the Ukraine War

[beautifulthailand99]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

They have history on that. In Afghanistan they apparently did that by supplying just enough weapons to keep them in the game against Russia without winning. That didn't change till some US politician forced them to supply ground to air shoulder launched missiles.

Yup and cooked up Bin Laden in that toxic stew, that worked out well. Unintended consequeces from a hegemon that doesn't give a sh!t about the chaos they leave in their wake. Can I hate them all for their perfidy and lies is is it just Putin who needs to be the object of my wrath ? Yeah , Meet the new boss , same as the old boss. I won't get fooled again.

[beautifulthailand99]

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems some would prefer Thailand to have been ruined by fighting against an undefeatable army. It took the atom bomb to defeat them.

Phibun was no angel but I respect post 1932 he tried to carve out a new Thailand , imperfect as it was sandwiched beween rapacious colonial powers. That said the real hero with Seri Thai was Pridi Banomyong - the greatest Thai who ever lived bar none. But that's another story ......

[Gweiloman]

8 hours ago, Hummin said:

I would be careful to use obvious propaganda and conspirecy theories such as these channels produce. Half truths and plenty false statements. It is a great mix of everything that sounds plausible. 

 

 

Like this channel, there is alot and some common sense, and some far out like this General. The old judge have an agenda. 

 

That’s why we should analyse what’s being said and think for ourselves as to what could be the possible truth and not blindly follow the crowd, especially western msm which, in my view, is no longer independent, impartial or objective. This professor of economics for example, makes a great case of one of the weaknesses of capitalism vs a more centralised government, using empirical data and his conclusions are what we actually see today.

 

I love how some posters will just brand every word that for example, Putin says as falsehood or lies. These posters are so consumed by their own biases and prejudice that they have lost the ability of intelligent thought and blindly eats up whatever sources they choose to follow tells them to. 

[Danderman123]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

One assumes that to accept defeat will be so humiliating for Zelensky and his western supporters that they would rather continue to the bitter end that concede it's over.

I have no confidence that an iota of consideration for the cannon fodder troops that will die exists in their hearts when it's their positions in power at risk.

I can think of another "leader" is a similar situation too, somewhat far away from Ukraine.

Instead of what you imagine, consider that Ukrainians don't want to be conquered by Russia. Just like the Vietnamese fought off invaders for decades.

[Gweiloman]

11 hours ago, rabas said:

 

Watch (2 min)  Russian born Russia/Putin expert Julia Ioffe discuss NATO guarantees. This is a short clip from her longer talk Putin and the Presidents. Also see The Putin Files.

 

 

Here are a lot of details.

What a load of rubbish. This woman has zero credibility. Some examples:

 

The tweet had included a link to a CNN news article claiming the president elect was planning to assign the East Wing of the White House, traditionally the First Lady's domain, to his eldest daughter Ivanka. The news article was later determined to be false, with CNN publishing a retraction. After deleting the tweet from her page, Ioffe tweeted several apologies.^[56]
 

On October 29, 2018, Ioffe appeared on CNN's The Lead with Jake Tapper, where she took part in a discussion about President Trump's rhetoric in the wake of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting. She opined that, "this president has radicalized so many more people than ISIS ever did", pointing to a 60% rise in antisemitic attacks during 2017. The comment received pushback from fellow panelists David Urban and Mona Charen. Ioffe later apologized for the comment during the broadcast and on Twitter calling her comments "hyperbole"
 

In November 2019, Ioffe accused a writer on the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on Twitter of being a Russian troll after noticing one of its stories about Hunter Biden used a symbol that she mistakenly identified as a Russian-style quotation mark. After her mistake was pointed out to her, Ioffe deleted her tweets and tweeted an apology.

 

 

Just another example of a low level headline grabbing journalist who doesn’t bother much with the truth. Amazing that some people believes such nonsense.

 

 

[niccodemi]

18 hours ago, jvs said:

Did you watch the video i posted by Times Radio?A lot is explained in there.

Even in 2014 Russia was the aggressor also with Georgia.

 

Yes, I watched it. I couldn't find much new information apart from what we hear from mainstream media in West, basically Russia is bad, Putin is bad and he wants to conquer Ukraine while provoking NATO and West will prevail by supplying more and more weapons to Ukraine. There are some truths in there for sure, even war in Georgia in 2008 is mentioned however there is no attempt to explain the root cause of all these issues with Russia.

By the way the war in Georgia happened only a few months after NATO summit which I mentioned earlier and I believe that that was not a coincidence. Russia opposed previous NATO expansions in 1999 and in 2004 but couldn't do anything about it. Following is what US ambassador to Moscow at the time had to say about expansion to Ukraine:

 

Quote

“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin),” he wrote in a 2008 memo to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”

 

His leaked cable (NYET MEANS NYET) is also interesting to read.

 

The best explanation is provided by J. Mearsheimer who predicted Russia wrecking Ukraine already back in 2015.

 

Link to video.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[beautifulthailand99]

7 minutes ago, niccodemi said:

Yes, I watched it. I couldn't find much new information apart from what we hear from mainstream media in West, basically Russia is bad, Putin is bad and he wants to conquer Ukraine while provoking NATO and West will prevail by supplying more and more weapons to Ukraine. There are some truths in there for sure, even war in Georgia in 2008 is mentioned however there is no attempt to explain the root cause of all these issues with Russia.

By the way the war in Georgia happened only a few months after NATO summit which I mentioned earlier and I believe that that was not a coincidence. Russia opposed previous NATO expansions in 1999 and in 2004 but couldn't do anything about it. Following is what US ambassador to Moscow at the time had to say about expansion to Ukraine:

 

 

His leaked cable (NYET MEANS NYET) is also interesting to read.

 

The best explanation is provided by J. Mearsheimer who predicted Russia wrecking Ukraine already back in 2015.

 

Link to video.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 great links I hadn't read the cable before but it was all there years before. The US has been fully cognisant at to what they are doing all along. Hell can't be hot enough for Victoria Nuland the chief artcictect of Ukaraine meddling  - like Paul Wolfowitz or Henry Kissinger they have been responsible by their drving of US policy for millions of deaths. But at that level it's just about global chess and power not principles. They get pasted on after the event as required then comes out the flags and sloganeering. Democracy,freedom and human rights. Russia is trolling right back in their own backyard , everyone is playing with fire here.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/07/russia-nuclear-powered-submarine-kazan-to-visit-cuba

[niccodemi]

19 hours ago, rabas said:

 

Watch (2 min)  Russian born Russia/Putin expert Julia Ioffe discuss NATO guarantees. This is a short clip from her longer talk Putin and the Presidents. Also see The Putin Files.

 

 

Here are a lot of details.

From the link which you posted:

 

Later that day, at a meeting with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, he acknowledged that "It is important for the Soviet Union and other European countries to have guarantees that if the United States maintains its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, there will be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction or military presence by a single inch in the eastern direction". and, in addition, he asked Gorbachev whether he would prefer a united Germany "outside NATO, completely independent, without American troops, or a united Germany that retains ties with NATO, but with a guarantee that, that the jurisdiction or NATO troops will not extend to the east of the current line." When Gorbachev replied that "the expansion of the NATO zone is unacceptable," Baker agreed with this.

 

It's clear that there was no written agreement about NATO not expanding eastward but her (Julia Loffe) claim that promises were all a fiction is not a serious argument - plenty of records in the link you posted.

Regardless of the above, I fail to understand why anyone would think that expanding NATO towards Russia's borders, considering it was Russia's mortal enemy throughout the Cold War, is a good idea.

[niccodemi]

19 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Obviously, you don't believe that nations have the right of self determination.

 

What limits on *your* country's decision making are acceptable to you? 

Of course people / nations have a right to self determination. But some countries (especially those in vicinity of more powerful neighbors) have to be mindful of their surroundings. As history shows it was not wise for Cuba to seek military alliance with Soviet Union - don't you see any similarities with NATO - Ukraine situation?

[beautifulthailand99]

https://archive.ph/F7T2c

 

Yatsenko says other prisoners told him they will see how he and other convicts fare before deciding. On a recent visit to their prison, bored-looking men stood in courtyards smoking. Some labored under a hot sun making concrete obstacles known as dragon’s teeth for the military.
“But prison life is like a summer holiday camp” compared with the front, said Barandich.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

https://archive.ph/F7T2c

So what....Is this today's nugget from the Red side...........?  🤔

[beautifulthailand99]

9 minutes ago, transam said:

So what....Is this today's nugget from the Red side...........?  🤔

The Kraken awakes.

[transam]

3 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

The Kraken awakes.

Your breakfast cereal.......

[Rimmer]

An unapproved video source and replies has been removed

 

[rabas]

1 hour ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

https://archive.ph/F7T2c

 

Yatsenko says other prisoners told him they will see how he and other convicts fare before deciding. On a recent visit to their prison, bored-looking men stood in courtyards smoking. Some labored under a hot sun making concrete obstacles known as dragon’s teeth for the military.
“But prison life is like a summer holiday camp” compared with the front, said Barandich.

 

But you forget to mention the Russian and Ukraine conditions of recruitment are completely different.

 

[beautifulthailand99]

1 minute ago, rabas said:

 

But you forget to mention the Russian and Ukraine conditions of recruitment are completely different.

 

I mentioned nothing I posted an article and a qoute from the article. The Russian deal apparently open to all, was 6 months and death or freedom (well released into Putin's Russia which isn't the same). Prigi didn't get that deal but got executed for his sins.

 

 

[beautifulthailand99]

4 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

I mentioned nothing I posted an article and a qoute from the article. The Russian deal apparently open to all, was 6 months and death or freedom (well released into Putin's Russia which isn't the same). Prigi didn't get that deal but got executed for his sins.

 

 

And this was the recruitment. 

 

[rabas]

2 hours ago, niccodemi said:

From the link which you posted:

 

Later that day, at a meeting with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, he acknowledged that "It is important for the Soviet Union and other European countries to have guarantees that if the United States maintains its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, there will be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction or military presence by a single inch in the eastern direction". and, in addition, he asked Gorbachev whether he would prefer a united Germany "outside NATO, completely independent, without American troops, or a united Germany that retains ties with NATO, but with a guarantee that, that the jurisdiction or NATO troops will not extend to the east of the current line." When Gorbachev replied that "the expansion of the NATO zone is unacceptable," Baker agreed with this.

 

It's clear that there was no written agreement about NATO not expanding eastward but her (Julia Loffe) claim that promises were all a fiction is not a serious argument - plenty of records in the link you posted.

Regardless of the above, I fail to understand why anyone would think that expanding NATO towards Russia's borders, considering it was Russia's mortal enemy throughout the Cold War, is a good idea.

 

Yes, that's why I put the link to more details in the post, it is controversial. In fact, the title of the link page is “Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of Eastward NATO expansion”.  It's a good summary.

 

If you read the link, “not one more inch” comes from discussions on Germany reunification, at which time the Warsaw Pact was still intact and would not collapse for more than a year. Can you imagine the West promising Russia that they would not move one more inch into Warsaw Pact countries until their unforeseen collapse? So not one inch was about Germany reunification.

 

The other point, there are no recorded notes, not even on a paper napkin, no mention of the issue in the agreement itself, and no statements about its absence in the agreement after signing.

 

I don't know, not sure anyone does but as Julia said Putin's statement that it was guaranteed seems to hold little water. It was a Putinism. But note Julia seems to suggest Putin believed it. She has made similar points before about what is in Putin's mind versus reality. That is something that needs consideration.

 

[rabas]

4 hours ago, niccodemi said:

Yes, I watched it. I couldn't find much new information apart from what we hear from mainstream media in West, basically Russia is bad, Putin is bad and he wants to conquer Ukraine while provoking NATO and West will prevail by supplying more and more weapons to Ukraine. There are some truths in there for sure, even war in Georgia in 2008 is mentioned however there is no attempt to explain the root cause of all these issues with Russia.

By the way the war in Georgia happened only a few months after NATO summit which I mentioned earlier and I believe that that was not a coincidence. Russia opposed previous NATO expansions in 1999 and in 2004 but couldn't do anything about it. Following is what US ambassador to Moscow at the time had to say about expansion to Ukraine:

 

 

His leaked cable (NYET MEANS NYET) is also interesting to read.

 

The best explanation is provided by J. Mearsheimer who predicted Russia wrecking Ukraine already back in 2015.

 

Link to video.

 

 

The leaked cable is indeed very interesting. Mostly a detailed summary of Russian views from various sources. But again note there is no mention (that I could see) of any Western promise to not expanding NATO. You would think the Russians would have at least mentioned it if there were.

 

[niccodemi]

17 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

Yes, that's why I put the link to more details in the post, it is controversial. In fact, the title of the link page is “Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of Eastward NATO expansion”.  It's a good summary.

 

If you read the link, “not one more inch” comes from discussions on Germany reunification, at which time the Warsaw Pact was still intact and would not collapse for more than a year. Can you imagine the West promising Russia that they would not move one more inch into Warsaw Pact countries until their unforeseen collapse? So not one inch was about Germany reunification.

 

The other point, there are no recorded notes, not even on a paper napkin, no mention of the issue in the agreement itself, and no statements about its absence in the agreement after signing.

 

I don't know, not sure anyone does but as Julia said Putin's statement that it was guaranteed seems to hold little water. It was a Putinism. But note Julia seems to suggest Putin believed it. She has made similar points before about what is in Putin's mind versus reality. That is something that needs consideration.

 

 

You make valid points, but let's consider for a moment that there were absolutely no promises on NATO expansion and that Putin could not use such non-existent promises or agreements as a reason to invade Ukraine. Don't you think that bringing NATO closer and closer to Russia's borders would just be asking for trouble, especially in an area as sensitive as Ukraine?

On the other hand, the US has the Monroe Doctrine, which essentially states that no foreign great powers should form military alliances with countries in the Western Hemisphere. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a prime example of how this doctrine was applied in practice and what happens to countries that don't comply. Russia likely wants this same principle respected on their side, though within a much more limited area since Russia cannot project its power as far as the US can.

[mikebike]

4 minutes ago, niccodemi said:

 

You make valid points, but let's consider for a moment that there were absolutely no promises on NATO expansion and that Putin could not use such non-existent promises or agreements as a reason to invade Ukraine. Don't you think that bringing NATO closer and closer to Russia's borders would just be asking for trouble, especially in an area as sensitive as Ukraine?

On the other hand, the US has the Monroe Doctrine, which essentially states that no foreign great powers should form military alliances with countries in the Western Hemisphere. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a prime example of how this doctrine was applied in practice and what happens to countries that don't comply. Russia likely wants this same principle respected on their side, though within a much more limited area since Russia cannot project its power as far as the US can.

Russia may "want" the same sort of thing as the Monroe Doctrine, but without the ability to force project (let's be real it is military might, not diplomatic "wants" that enforce any doctrine like this) they are going to be sadly disappointed. 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, niccodemi said:

 

You make valid points, but let's consider for a moment that there were absolutely no promises on NATO expansion and that Putin could not use such non-existent promises or agreements as a reason to invade Ukraine. Don't you think that bringing NATO closer and closer to Russia's borders would just be asking for trouble, especially in an area as sensitive as Ukraine?

On the other hand, the US has the Monroe Doctrine, which essentially states that no foreign great powers should form military alliances with countries in the Western Hemisphere. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a prime example of how this doctrine was applied in practice and what happens to countries that don't comply. Russia likely wants this same principle respected on their side, though within a much more limited area since Russia cannot project its power as far as the US can.

Sovereign nations are just that, they can do what they want if an aggressor is at the door....

Cuba was a different kettle of fish, they were going to let the USSR install nukes on their island, nowhere near Russia...

Putin is just making big mistakes, he created the Finland and Sweden move, nobody else, the Russian people know it too.......... 

[0ffshore360]

25 minutes ago, transam said:

Sovereign nations are just that, they can do what they want if an aggressor is at the door....

Cuba was a different kettle of fish, they were going to let the USSR install nukes on their island, nowhere near Russia...

Putin is just making big mistakes, he created the Finland and Sweden move, nobody else, the Russian people know it

26 minutes ago, transam said:

Sovereign nations are just that, they can do what they want if an aggressor is at the door....

Cuba was a different kettle of fish, they were going to let the USSR install nukes on their island, nowhere near Russia...

Putin is just making big mistakes, he created the Finland and Sweden move, nobody else, the Russian people know it too.......... 

Whistling  Dixie ........again ? ......... 

 

[tgw]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

The leaked cable is indeed very interesting. Mostly a detailed summary of Russian views from various sources. But again note there is no mention (that I could see) of any Western promise to not expanding NATO. You would think the Russians would have at least mentioned it if there were.

 

there were no such promises.

"not one inch to the East" referred to the reunification of Germany, where NATO promised to not shift troops to Eastern Germany.

 

another thing to consider is that the cable isn't a recap of the situation, it's a report about what Lavrov said.

 

I was in Ukraine before the Orange Revolution. Lots of things (loads and loads of criminal acts by Russia) had already happened by then. Ukraine's bid for NATO membership at the time was a move to get protection from Russia.

[rabas]

31 minutes ago, tgw said:

 

there were no such promises.

"not one inch to the East" referred to the reunification of Germany, where NATO promised to not shift troops to Eastern Germany.

 

another thing to consider is that the cable isn't a recap of the situation, it's a report about what Lavrov said.

 

I was in Ukraine before the Orange Revolution. Lots of things (loads and loads of criminal acts by Russia) had already happened by then. Ukraine's bid for NATO membership at the time was a move to get protection from Russia.

 

I'll add that the Orange revolution was a result of the poisoning (and assassination attempt) of Viktor Yushchenko, then pro Western (and NATO) candidate in Ukrainian's 2004 presidential election, and subsequent massive election corruption that led to pro Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovych's temporary election, which was later nullified.

 

Yushchenko was poisoned by dioxin, a horrific poison that left his face scared. Dioxin is in the same genre as other Putin toxins like radioactive polonium and banned nerve gasses.

[beautifulthailand99]

7 hours ago, transam said:

Sovereign nations are just that, they can do what they want if an aggressor is at the door....

Cuba was a different kettle of fish, they were going to let the USSR install nukes on their island, nowhere near Russia...

Putin is just making big mistakes, he created the Finland and Sweden move, nobody else, the Russian people know it too.......... 

Yes but no but..... JFK was,  actually we now know prepared to destroy the world, and lest we forget the only country on earth to have used atomic weapons on cities. Thank God Russia backed down. But keep on whistling Dixie and looking out for those reds under the bed.

[beautifulthailand99]

6 hours ago, rabas said:

 

I'll add that the Orange revolution was a result of the poisoning (and assassination attempt) of Viktor Yushchenko, then pro Western (and NATO) candidate in Ukrainian's 2004 presidential election, and subsequent massive election corruption that led to pro Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovych's temporary election, which was later nullified.

 

Yushchenko was poisoned by dioxin, a horrific poison that left his face scared. Dioxin is in the same genre as other Putin toxins like radioactive polonium and banned nerve gasses.

It's a lot more nuanced than you suggest re  Viktor Yanukovych as this article from the Brooking's Institute reported at the time (2011) and when we talk about Maidan you cannot ignore the armed militancy of a not insignificant far-right element that went quickly to violence and fanned the flames of insurrection. Ukraine has always been murky at the centre and it still is.

 

Yanukovych took office in early 2010 after defeating former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko in a hotly-contested presidential ballot. At the time, many in Ukraine and the West worried that the supposedly “pro-Russian” Yanukovych would turn Kyiv back toward Moscow. In fact, he has pursued a far more nuanced foreign policy.

True, the president extended the stay of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Crimea and ruled out pursuing membership in the NATO military alliance.

He has made clear, however, his goal of concluding a free trade arrangement with the European Union while fending off Moscow’s persistent entreaties to join a customs union with Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Military cooperation with NATO continues, as evidenced by the June Sea Breeze exercise.

 

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/can-ukraine-join-europe-as-yanukovych-moves-away-from-eu-values/

 

Nearly a decade on, the 2014 Revolution of Dignity, as it’s known in Ukraine, remains one of the more widely misunderstood episodes of recent history. Yet understanding it is critical to understanding the ongoing standoff over Ukraine, which can largely be traced back to this polarizing event — depending on who you ask, an inspiring liberal revolution or a far-right coup d’état.

 

https://jacobin.com/2022/02/maidan-protests-neo-nazis-russia-nato-crimea

 

As to election corruption ;

 

International monitors on Monday described Ukraine's presidential election as free and fair, putting pressure on Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko to concede defeat despite a tight vote count and charges of irregularities.

 

 But international observers said they detected no serious faults in Sunday's polling, a reversal of the position they took in the Orange Revolution five years ago when Yanukovych was accused of fabricating votes in his first Kremlin-backed bid for the presidency.

Joao Soares, president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, said the election was an "impressive display of democracy" and called on politicians to honor the outcome.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/08/AR2010020803583.html

[Gweiloman]

5 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Yes but no but..... JFK was,  actually we now know prepared to destroy the world, and lest we forget the only country on earth to have used atomic weapons on cities. Thank God Russia backed down. But keep on whistling Dixie and looking out for those reds under the bed.

Those reds under the bed keeps him awake as he races towards 100k cfmps.

[transam]

7 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Yes but no but..... JFK was,  actually we now know prepared to destroy the world, and lest we forget the only country on earth to have used atomic weapons on cities. Thank God Russia backed down. But keep on whistling Dixie and looking out for those reds under the bed.

I can't wait for your today's episode..........

[jvs]

Come on guys,last week there were some good discussions,lets not fall back on childish behaviour?

I can understand some points if view from both sides and i am really reading a lot about this topic and what lead up to what is going on.

I still think putin is the aggressor and many people on both sides are dying for just his crazy ideas.

That needs to stop!