That might have been a part of reason why US felt obliged, but for Ukraine they could have just cited the Budapest agreement if they wanted a context to act.
Nope, not at all. But you should be aware that if you attack me in my home with a 10lb sledge hammer, that I also have a sledge hammer, and it's figuratively speaking a 20lb sledge hammer, and I will use it if I have to. Now what do you want to do? Go on...make your mind up. But don't say afterwards that you were not warned.
Reading back on my post, I probably wasn't clear enough. That Indeed was the point of the post!
It's really down to the Russian people what kind of leader would emerge if Putin were to be ousted, but the last few hundred years doesn't fill me with any real hope they're interested in someone open and egalitarian. I've seen the argument made that you can't really run Russia as a western styled democracy, given the diversity of peoples in it, with conflicting cultures and regional interests.
Personally, I don't care how Russia runs itself so long as they keep their cráp within their own borders. If Russia truly looks up to China, they would do well to take the example of how China has emerged as a world power - not by threatening the countries around them (not until recently, anyway), but by becoming an industrial powerhouse.
Not well up on Russian politics, but didn't Gary Kasparov have brief attempt, how suitable all round would he be as a candidate?
That the Red Cross do marvelous work is well understood ( recent prisoner exchanges, Amnesties', safe passages etc ) but to expect them to cover all the bases in a situation like Ukraine is expecting a bit much. Especially when dealing with Putin, who does not have a humanitarian thought in his mind, let alone a humanitarian bone in his body. No, there are limits to what they can do, but within these limits, they are doing fantastic work in Ukraine ( and elsewhere in the world too at the present time, same as in the past )
There was also no vast echo chamber of discord with easily-manipulated emotions that bad actors could instantly tap into.
Trump could not have become US president in those days...
Nobody outside of Russia takes those sham referendums seriously, and I would say Putin privately acknowledges what they're really about as well. Putin would be as well to hold referendums among all Russian diaspora in the former Warsaw Pact territories and falsify the results, if necessary, to say that all this land is rightfully Russia and the rest of the world has one week to recognise that or it will be considered that Russia is occupied by a hostile foreign force and appropriate response will be meted out. The way he's going, it wouldn't come entirely as a surprise if he did do something like that.
Think I vaguely remember that but wasn't the context something to do with Georgia sending troops to Iraq?
Before mobile phones, there was this morning ritual of exiting your front door, picking up the rolled newspaper that had been thrown onto your front lawn in darkness and collecting the milk bottles.
Not only did the mik have a layer of cream on top and taste much better, the quality of the journalism and news coverage in the paper and on the radio you might have listened to at breakfast while perusing the paper, was much better.
While there was a slightly longer delay in the spread of news, it was better presented and analysed in the better papers.
There was no deficit in communocations prior to the internet. The newspapers, radio and TV conveyed news that was only a few hours old. There was short wave radio and it was pretty easy to hear in real time, news on the BBC world service, Voice Of America, Deutscha Welle, from Australia.
Most housholds wouldn't have a short wave, but there were those that did. I grew up in Australia, which apart from NZ is about as isolated from the rest of the world as you can get, but there was no deficit in news and awareness of world events.
Just reading through the posts on what would be the likely response if Putin uses a tactical nuclear weapon.
This article is pretty instructive and interesting
This particular section stood out when reading......
"Perry has met Putin on a number of occasions, dating back to when he was the deputy mayor of St. Petersburg—and thinks Putin will use tactical weapons in Ukraine if it seems advantageous to do so. Although the Russian Federation’s declared policy is to use nuclear weapons only when confronted with an existential threat to the state, public declarations from Moscow should always be taken with a grain of salt."
Look at the part in bold and the referendums happening in those 'annexed' states are now Putin excuse to do just that.
Bush sent US troops into Georgia during Russia's incursion, delivering 'humanitarian aid', and basically said if they were attacked or endangered they would defend themselves. Something similar could have done in Western Ukraine, Kyiv, the grain ports etc.
R.I.P. to the dead. A horrible way to go at the hands of a madman
Despite the state controlled media, it's surely the case than many of these 140 million citizens can sense a bad smell off this war operation. They have chosen to date out of habit and culture to ignore the odour and carry on their normal lives. Now it's starting the affect them more directly and clearly there is dissent.
But they are complicit in supporting the regime, you can jail several thousand protestors but you can't jail or control hundreds of thousands if they had sufficient backbone. I don't think the EU should facilitate fleeing Russians, let them stay and sort out their own problems.
Personally I don't much care for the description 'orc' for Russian armed forces but it is simpler, quicker to type and more PC than labeling them as 'disgusting pieces of excrement that should be eliminated' which is a more apt description.
That was an odd detail that stood out for me, especially as the BBC article quoted the Russian state news agency as the source of that info.
I wouldn't be one for conspiracy theories and my initial response is that it was someone frustrated at the Government or taking advantage of the current chaos in Russia to pull off their attack.
The idea that any country, at such a moment, would orchestrate an attack on its most vulnerable citizens is horrifying and yet it happens all around the world. This Russian administration has already shown how ruthless it can be. And why would we trust Russian reporting and investigation on this matter when all the information they are releasing at this moment is highly questionable.
Its a story to keep an eye on and it raises plenty of questions: Is it a stunt to show how 'lawless' the world can be if Russia doesn't crack down on its citizens? Or a warning to not distract officials with protests while the war is going on? Or simply a 'lone wolf' attack?
It's fun A young man #Nga #Russia mobilized gave his commander what the end of #Ukraine was like by giving his commander 4 shots to the chest. It is better to go to jail than die
This notion has never been remotely feasible, for the simple reason that Ukraine is not in NATO. No serious commentator has ever suggested it.
First thing that came to mind when I saw the reports.
I'm sure it will be announced that shooter was a member of the Azoz battalion and he had his unit Id on him at the time, followed by the whole nonsense of see they Ukrainian Nazis are coming to kill our children,we must now escalate the war even further now
1917 is obviously the historical analogy that comes to mind.
I would look to history for the answer. Typically the government falls and is replaced by a more democratic system, or the whole system implodes and a power vacuum pulls Russia into a civil war.
Macron tried a non aggressive approach to conflict resolution. How successful was that? Russia is the aggressor, no other nation is in any way at fault in their response to that except for not responding aggressively enough before this kicked off.
Biden made a huge mistake by not putting US troops in Ukraine when Putin was lying about his intentions. Now, thanks to that non-aggresive response, Biden is looking at a situation of a probable use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine and response options that are all considerably more robust than having US troops in Ukraine in the first place. One of the few likely response options to come from war gaming scenarios is to overwhelmingly pit US forces against Orc forces in Ukraine and to swiftly obliterate them. That is some really sick irony, right there.
People use the expression 'orc' for a good reason. Of course we understand there are good Russians, we are not stupid, but Russia is, and has always been, a very sick country and that is what orc means.
I remember reading an article on how monstrous and evil Russia is and that article was written in 1900. I have tried to find the quote but can't locate it. Russia needs a serious cleansing.
Or maybe it's just a Nazi?
Not everything is a conspiracy theory, false flag or lizard people.
What perturbs me about it is how well filmed it is. Could be fake, could be Ukrainian disinfo trying to stir up the locals. A war during the Twitter era...
Burn down every police station in Russia.
Be careful of making a false equivalence.
Edit - wrong thread
That would make for a very big civil war in Russia.
That gunman in the Russian school - could it be a false flag a la the apartment bombings of the early 00’s? BBC reporting the gunman was wearing Nazi insignia, could this be an orchestrated attack by the kremlin to win over public opinion? “Look lads, those Nazis we’re trying to eradicate are attacking our people on our land, they must be stopped”. Would make for an easier time convincing the clowns there for conscription….just my initial thoughts.
The question is: what is the endgame?
Russia has strategically lost. It lost even before the war started. It has lost any semblance of international credibility it retained. Its army has been exposed as a bad joke. Its remaining allies are slowly backing away. Its economy is falling to pieces. Its most educated citizens are fleeing for the exits. The Mad Tsar becomes ever more unhinged.
Ukraine grows stronger by the day, Its people are united. Its leader is globally admired. It has strong international support. And now it has proven it can defeat Russia on the battlefield.
So the calculus on the ground doesn't change: Putin must lose and be seen to lose.
But that's not the endgame. Say these reservists get blown to hell over the next few months - very likely - and Ukraine liberates more and more of its territory. Good. Say it even liberates all of its territory. Even better (but less likely).
The endgame for Ukraine is visible and, even damaged, partially occupied and reeling from the invasion, its future looks optimistic.
But what of Russia? What happens there? Who leads it - and, critically, how does it engage with the world? I have no idea but it's a topic that will have to be reckoned with.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/877aa92d1fda3704e03b5aa206affea2.svg)
