Russia - threadbanned users in OP

IMO I think that the following is what the RU invasion is all about:-

Overall, Putin/Ru leadership wants to create as much social cum financial hardship;confusion; mis information; conflict , etc , as it can throughout the world as it can on an ongoing basis and AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY. It does not really matter which side wins in any conflict, in elections, in negotiations or wherever as long as it creates decision, conflict , suspicion, etc, etc.

• the overall objective is to weaken the ‘opposition’ as he sees it
• Putin pounces when an opportunity presents itself - he having set it up beforehand by putting ‘ his supporters’into the area . Eg Donbas, part of Georgia, part of Transnistra, Chrimea.
• As an aside the last time ‘ RUSSIA/USSR lost or gained ‘ soverign land’ or under threat - WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN PUTINS BIG AND ONLY ISSUE- is in 1991 when the USSR unilaterally. Decided to split up into 14 ‘independant ‘ states. Russia has not been attacked since Putin came to power or since then . BUT he has GAINED land as described above. And in addition to that RUssia is in ‘ control of a number ox ex states eg Belaruse
• - iMO, Putin is not too pushed if he eventually has to vacate Ukraine - including Crimea. Why? Because:-
• (q) he will have substantially lLEVELLED a significant part of UKR. Including significant infrastructure re steel mil , port facilities , roads , railways, etc, etc, etc. and the cost of rebuilding all of that and the strain that will put on international finances
• (b) the number of deaths and the way that they were carried out and the psychological effect that will have.
• (c) the actual experience of the war and especially on those trying to survive in bomb shelters And the psychological effect that will have
• (d) the whole refugee situation and the cost / disruption that will have on host nations and on Ukr.
• (E)the international issue with regards to the possibility of famine in up to 20 countries and the extra financial cost to some of them
• (f) the disruption of international trade and the extra cost of same

And , well and good if he successfully annex’s part of UKR that he has levelled , in addition to the above, he can leave it ‘ grow weeds ‘ for all he cares , . He will put in his army and populate with Kremlin supporting civilians - and probably financially enticed ones

so the idea of Putin blaming The expansion of NATO for all of this is ABSOLUTE NONSENCE.

pits all about exercising a certain type of power ie. Authoritianism and resetting the clock back to the USSR era. As he said recently the greatest geopolitical mistake made on an international level by any country ever was the break up of the USSR

I wonder what’s their thinking? IMO, it is sticking out by the proverbial mile what Germany and France are at. Given their stance since feb 24 They will be first out of the traps to get back to business as usual with RU. 46241. And they will get very favourable terms . I hope the US has the total opposite point of view.

Given the points I made in post no46241 above Russia MUST BE NEUTERED so that it can never threaten any soverign state again in any shape or form. But let it do what it wants to within its own boundaries. Neutering would also include putting an end to cyber attacks. George Orwell would agree with this - based on his last utterances and NHS’s 1984 novel

But they don't arrive in Moscow. And Moscow puts out the information. And all remains well.