Please use this thread to continue discussing the war in Ukraine.
All mod instructions from the previous thread remain in force here
Original thread:
absolute total yahoo crap. Russia is up the creak and going back to the Stone Age, Don Don cant save them. Poland alone could trash Russia if it had the need to do so.
I am very pro EU but VDL is feeding what smells awfully like bullcrap when it comes to very weak justifications for not using those frozen Russian assets immediately, and it has a particular tinge of the nonsense we all experienced during the euro crisis where the solution was staring everyone in face and it took ECB to make a move to save the Euro and EU
Seizing and using Russian state assets is easier than seizing oligarch personal assets as it be impossible for Russia to argue in international courts that they didn’t break international laws and started an illegal war.
Yes European (not just EU) countries have stepped up in 2-3 years since but
Your points are getting weaker and weaker, if the CAB seized assets from a criminal gang in Dublin but the victims are paid from another government fund, it doesn’t matter to the victims that they didn’t get those particular seized euros if there were any (or seized assets then converted to euros in auction)
Money is fungible
Those Russians assets for most part are in form of bonds earning interest not cash just sitting there
And yes it took Belgium unilaterally to move to agree to not charge tax on the interest these seized assets receive as euroclear is located there, once again bypassing EU which is being held hostage and made impotent by likes of Orban
Which is why the EU alone will not be enough to keep Ukraine in the game despite what certain raging fantasists claim. The UK will hopefully stay committed, the big worry is the US under Trump...
The US and UK sent something like 150bn in mostly military aid which helped stop the Russians cold and kill half a million of them, while it took two years for European aid to start to flow despite lofty and large promises which often get held back by either Macron, Germany or Orban
And thanks for confirming that yea the EU yet again is dragging feet on helping Ukraine
As for seizure of assets here is in-depth interviews systematically addressing the “concerns” that are being used as justification for not handing over these assets
The Russians seized company assets not sovereign assets. There's a massive difference.
Why haven't the UK or US handed over Russian seized assets to Ukraine? Poster is quite quick pointing out the US and UK were pushing the EU to send the 300bil to Ukraine but fails to release both the UK and US have sent Ukraine none of the assets they seized either.
Experts disagree with you re: the significance of Trump victory with Vance as VP:
And really, the same old resorting to personal attacks and accusations of being pro Russian when I'm as pro Ukrainian as anyone on here? You'd think you'd learn by now...
The Russians had no problem with redistributing seized western assets in Russia. They stole plenty of aircraft and healthy businesses and franchises.
A 17 year old faces up to 7 years in prison for comments on social media in Russia.
Investigative bodies in Omsk have opened a criminal case against 17-year-old city resident Mikhail Petrov under the article on calls for terrorism (Part 2 of Article 205.2 of the Criminal Code). The reason for opening the case was a comment on the social network VKontakte under a post about a drone attack on the Kremlin.
"Glory to Ukraine. Work, brothers. Putin has probably already prepared fifteen suitcases for feces there))", Petrov wrote.
The russian government is actively hiding the figures for deaths in Ukraine and deaths from injuries in Ukraine. No surprise there. In the governments compiling of deaths of citizens they had a section with external causes where it would list cause of death. External causes included deaths of soldiers in combat, road accidents, murders and suicides. Before it listed each death and how they died. Now it's hidden in the section with no cause of death. Just their level of education.
Rifles are being collected from Irkutsk residents. Claimed they are wanted on the front line in Ukraine.
Another way it is reducing the weapons held by the civilian population in case of insurrection.
Trump is totally and utterly compromised by the Russians. There is zero chance he does anything to make their life harder. Name one instance of Trump going against Russia in the 4yrs he was president. He spent most of it fawning over Putin and cozying up to dictators.
If Europe has any sense it will press the accelerator on arms production now all over the continent whilst trying to negotiate supplies from South Korea. Allow this to backfill the fall off in US supplies to Ukraine which will inevitably happen and head off a wider war in Europe which be infinitely more expensive and destructive.
The French nuclear deterrent is fine for France. But it doesnt cover the rest of the EU. Other EU states have declined to have their own independent nuclear arsenals for two main reasons - cost and the availability of the NATO/US nuclear umbrella. With rising tensions and nuclear weapons proving an effective deterrent against a conventional ground invasion (Ukraine hasnt invaded actual Russian territory) if the US were to pull out of NATO there would be a pressing need for an EU wide nuclear deterrent or at least one for countries like Poland, maybe Italy etc. Germany might not for, ahem, historical reasons.
But in any event its a side point
That's a bit like proving a negative. Maybe you can show the EU law that allows for sized assets to be given away to a third country. A bit like the CAB here, there's a bill that allows them to seize assets they believe are from crime.
Iraq assets were seized, but (I'm open to correction) they were only distributed to victims when the UN security council agreed to do it. I can't see Russia agreeing to that.
If it's so easy to do and you mention the UK and US urging the EU to do it, why don't the UK and US hand over the Russian assets they have also seized? Lead by example and all that?
We heard the same during the euro crisis
For years we heard “oh no can’t break rules” until the euro crisis got so bad and so many countries including this one were teetering and needed IMF interventions
Until one day the ECB done just that and solved the crisis overnight … and the world didn’t end
Multiple international law professors have made it clear including on a BBC podcast on subject that there is no legal issue, neither is there a fear of setting bad precedent, Russia invested these assets despite having example (and knowing they were about to start a war) of Iraq state assets being seized in 90s
If there is you are welcome to point at the exact laws that are causing trouble and provide an explanation as to why they can’t be changed
The EU legally cannot just give Ukraine the seized Russian assets. It's going to be a long legal process to go through.
The UK and US have also seized Russian assets.... How much of that have they handed over to Ukraine.... Zero!
The feet dragging is EU law. Last thing the EU needs is to hand over the assets to Ukraine and the ECJ rules in Russia's favour and now the EU is on the hook for 300bil plus interest.
Bad point made there
The US and UK were the ones pushing for this 300bn to be handed to Ukraine with EU protesting and opposing this move especially VDL
Maybe this silly opposition is dropped eventually but no good argument was made for the feet dragging
EUrope is sitting on 300bn of Russian assets that the US can do fuk all about. That would go some way to funding Ukraine.
There are 32 members of NATO and all but 2 are in Europe, namely USA and Canada. NATO isn't lead by the USA in fact its HQ is in Brussels and its SG is from the Netherlands, Mark Rutte.
Ukraine isn't in serious trouble. Putin is **** himself. The VP is as relevant as tits on a bull. The EU is a real Superpower. Macron outfoxed Le Pen because fascists are fcuking idiots. Germans don't support Ukraine giving up territory. The UK isn't in the EU yet they provide a siht load of very nice toys to smash putins slaves with. Who's gonna defeat russia you say? Those who are at it right now and doing a fine job too I must say with so little.
Go spend your rouble you absolute failure of a person
Mod
Warning applied.
Major General Richard Shirreff I find is an excellent source for straight up cold opinions on the war in Ukraine. I can't think of any of his projections that were wrong so far. His latest with Times radio.
The VP pick should CFTrump and he get elected, will be odds-on favorite for the GQP nomination in 2028, too.
Exactly. If Trump is elected Ukraine is in serious trouble (even more serious than is already the case) and Putin will be emboldened. This gobsh*te VP pick is extremely anti Ukraine and I don't think aid can be made "Trump proof".
The EU is in a hopeless position, Macron can do nothing now, a majority of Germans support Ukraine giving up territory for "peace", and Britain isn't even in the EU. So who's going to defeat Russia without American help? The Baltic States, Poland? No chance.
Worrying times. NATO needs strong American leadership to be an effective force, with Trump it could collapse entirely
I wish he'd go away too (or could be ignored) but unfortunately we are where we are and currently US aid to Ukraine is very important. The US role as coordinator/leader of NATO is also important.
It's up in the air to my mind how the others will respond to a new US admin. that tries to cut off Ukraine, and perhaps is even hostile to what it sees as the European "minions" trying to frustrate the new US Ukraine policy e.g. by supplying more aid themselves, and also pulls back from its role in NATO.
Maybe European countries will rise to this challenge + hang together under stress vs hanging separately, maybe not...Would rather not see it all play out and get tested in reality, so better that He Who Shall not be Named loses the election.
I wasn't quoting you in particular im trying to highlight the hysteria around him and how it distracts from real-time issues.
Then what was all the fuss about the passing of the recent US aid package about?
And also, I did not bring him to the thread, look back at the mentions in the page and see the course of what happened.
98 times he's been mentioned in this page. He isn't in control he isn't in power he might not ever be again. Even if NATO was dissolved the EU could still kick russia back into the stone age. Get a grip lads.
Remember "Fort Trump?" It didn't go that far, but it did see a US Division HQ and supporting assets relocated to Poland. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/06/12/its-not-fort-trump-but-a-us-division-headquarters-heading-to-poland/
It is completely reasonable to say likelihood is that he will cut off aid in line with his previous actions both as President and more recently via his stooges in Congress, in line with the public pronouncements of his recent VP on the subject. In response all you have is speculative "wild card" uncertainty and "no one knows" and "may be bad or good for Ukraine". Zero evidence provided as this deal would be good for Ukraine, or better than anything they could get with a different administration backing them. Not a credible or convincing position.
Trump will just pin anything bad that happens on Ukraine on Biden. We've seen the US cut and run before… the fall of Saigon, the fall of Kabul.
I'll stick to the facts and evidence and how Trump has actually conducted himself towards Ukraine. And nothing in his previous foreign policy conduct or conduct towards Ukraine suggests any basis for claims he will be better for Ukraine in a second term.
Hold on, Trump stands for Trump and the Trump family. He'll do whatever he believes will give him a legacy as a great US leader. His primary instincts are to self serve that image.
If there's some advantage to be gained by Brand Trump with intervention in Ukraine, he'll go for it. If there isn't, not so good if he gets in.
Thought this was interesting and goes in hand with article in Telegraph which made points that no Russia does not have endless manpower despite what Russians try to paint
Was Ukraine invaded in 2014?
Crimea was annexed in 2014, so yea it was.
But we can make reasonable forecasts
Neigh on impossible with Trump for many reasons mentioned.
And it is entirely reasonable to propose that the overwhelming likelihood is that a Trump win means cutting off of support to Ukraine.
No, it's not, for many reasons again outlined, not just by me, but others.
It's not reasonable to suggest that Trump will cut off aid, and say to Putin, have at it.
Putin rolling tanks into Kyiv while creating a **** show on TV is not in his interest.
Most likely is that he will look to do some sort of deal, which may be bad or good for Ukraine. No one knows.
