Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Laser101]

Withdrawing completely would be without a doubt a serious threat for Putin's political standing. Furthermore, the sanctions would not stop in that case until Russia is ready to pay long term reparations to Ukraine. It couldn't be more dire for Russia, therefore I couldn't disagree more, because I think it couldn't be more obvious.

Although I said that before Putin suddenly reversed course and pushed through the annexations. Still, if needs must he can probably unmake such a thing as easily as he made it; I doubt many Russians would care.
The problem is how long European countries would be willing to maintain sanctions if the war stopped; it's the EU and the Americans who make that decision, not Ukraine. Frankly for the West's part I don't see any benefit in maintaining them past that point regardless of what the Ukrainians think.

I don't agree that Putin didn't originally intend to take Ukraine outright. Going off his opening actions, it seems he genuinely expected that he could rapidly overrun Kiev and install a puppet government like with the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Hungary (or the Americans in Iraq for that matter), and to be honest a lot of Western analysts seemed to believe the same. I think ever since he's been making it up as he goes along.

Incidentally, I think that comparisons of Putin's Russia to Nazi Germany is being excessively generous; the Wehrmacht were actually competent (at least at the tactical level) and well motivated. If anything the Russians at the moment are more similar to the Italians.

[Papay]

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

[swabian]

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

As much as they deserve it, the Ukrainians won't get it. It's not only a symbolic act, it's supposed to be a strategic one. Oh well. Nobody can defend that border against a boiling Russia. Sure there will be hasty agreements now to establish an extramerital status with the EU, but it's worthless. The number of panzers isn't going to increase because of any of that.

[conon394]

China has a watchful eye on Ukraine, but it's well observable how they take up distance to Russia. They will not interfere, mostly because they cannot afford it. If they could finance the Russian war and establish a robust alternative trade network to Russia, they probably would, but geography ruins that.


The Taiwan thing is also not really comparable to Ukraine. Russia is acting like a desparate, hungry vampire. For China, to secure Taiwan would be an important addition, but it would potentially cost them too much. To be honest, I simply don't believe China is going to attack Taiwan (thinking about it calmly), because a Chinese onslaught would be so destructive, they would all but drive out the local computer hardware industry and therefore, in conquering Taiwan, lose everything that is valuable for them, aside from having another military port (which is a completely overestimated strategic point, because Taiwan, to my knowledge does nothing to inhibit the range of Chinese fleet power).

Rationally, Xi should know better, but if people are in positions of awful power, they lose their rational judgement very quickly. Xi is in a position of awful power since long.

The Chinese destroyer fleet is no mach to even a single US carrier group, and they know this. The question is, if Xi can overcome his megalomanic emotions and see reason.

Which rather than doddering points out Biden was correct to get rid of ambiguity part of the US guarantee to Taiwan. The situation for the US is sub optimal but essentially because of its position in the chip industry Taiwan being semi independent is more or less the most vital economic/security issue for the US (way more important that say the house of Saud back in the 70s)- The US simply cannot afford for it to be controlled by China. Which highlights the fact that in the long view Nixon and Kissinger and their Chinese diplomacy was perhaps one of the worst decisions made by any American administration in the 20th century. That was already clear by paving the way for China in the WTO, and the fact it was based on ludicrous assumptions about the strength of the USSR - but the current situation just is the icing on the cake of bad ideal executed poorly.

[Ludicus]

From the news,
Europe and Asia intensify battle to secure gas supplies- Financial Times

Higher prices in Europe mean trading companies have more incentive to send LNG cargoes there for higher profit margins.
Price differentials are so big that in some instances traders under long-term contracts in Asia can sever an existing contract, pay the penalty price, but still make a profit if they resell in Europe.
Europe and Asia are broadly competing to obtain LNG from the US.
The current market dynamic means “there will be times when Asia will need to pay over the odds” to lure LNG cargoes,
Moves from China, the largest importer of LNG, have been subdued in the global LNG market, but it remains the “joker” leading up to the winter
market is well aware of the risk that Chinese companies “come in at the last minute” to procure LNG cargoes.

If less LNG is available for Europe that means that Europe needs to rely on more domestic demand destruction as a result.

---
Let's also keep in mind that states make possible quasi-monopolies, a source of significant profit levels. The US made huge profits by selling oil to Europe,

As Russia’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies plummet, Europe is buying more gas from the US despite high prices, delivering unprecedented profits for US gas suppliers, with Each LNG carrier to Europe makes an average of more than $100 million in profit

"China Makes Huge Profits from American LNG"

Now, it turns out China has been selling not just Russian gas to Europe, but also American LNG.

Enlightening comment,
- "I for one, think it's AWESOME!!!! EU wishes to play STUPID, then let them. We bailed them once (WW 2)! Hopefully never again"
--
Demonstration censored by the EU media.



"Extremists", according to the N.Y.Times. Protests in Prague Signal a Troubled Winter Ahead in Europe

An old, worried "extremist" says,

It’s not only energy prices rising — grocery prices, too. I am raising my granddaughter, and I am worried,” said Miroslav Kusmirek, who came from a town 30 miles outside the capital to protest on a rainy afternoon. “I see companies now struggling and I worry; if the company that employs me collapses, so will I.

Thousands gather at 'Czech Republic First' rally over energy The Guardian

The justice minister, Pavel Blažek – a member of the prime minister’s party – warned last week “If the energy crisis is not resolved, the political system of this country is at risk”

Boris Cvek, a Czech commentator writing on the Britské Listy website, pointed to the number of people present. “When I read in the morning that there were 5,000 there, I waved my hand, thinking that there would be no more.

By the afternoon, it was 70,000. That blew my mind,” he said

And then, suddenly, he draws an unexpected conclusion: Trump, like God, is omnipresent,

The agenda is suspiciously reminiscent of Donald Trump’s agenda. When we see how this man can threaten the very essence of even an old and experienced democracy such as the American one, it certainly should not leave us in peace.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Worry not Ludi, things will be better once Russia surrenders. A couple more succesful regroupings and they'll be right back to Russia.

[conon394]

Let's also keep in mind that states make possible quasi-monopolies, a source of significant profit levels. The US made huge profits by selling oil to Europe,

Yes I am sure say the BMW my bought returned no profit to Europe it was sold at cost right?

-----

"China Makes Huge Profits from American LNG"

That's umm how markets work work China bought the LGN its theirs to sell. No different than my daughters going through Bella Sara and Pokemon cards and finding they were sitting on valuable pristine cards that were worth on ebay vastly more than they paid back in the day for them... so they reaped 'huge profits' on resale.

[Mithradates]

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

I dont know where you get your news from but right now Russia is already trying its best to "not let Ukraine do things" and they fail miserably, the myth of the "second best army" is gone. Ukraine doesnt need Russia's permission to anything.

[PointOfViewGun]

One thing this war established is that many modern armies in the world can easily beat the Russian army in conventional war.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

the myth of the "second best army" is gone

It's the second best army in Ukraine.

[reavertm]

From the news...

Ludicus, can you focus instead on answering important question you were given repeatedly?
We are all dying to know the answer. Since this thread started.

"Again Ludicus what actions do you approve of by the nations alone or collectively to deter aggression. If nobody feels any pain nothing is actually deterred."

[Nebaki]

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

Maybe for NATO but joining EU should be possible since there is the example of South Cyprus. Probably those new annexed areas will be another good spot for Money laundering for Russia while within EU Ukraine as Member would be a new favourable place dethroning South Cyprus from it.

[Cyclops]

This ongoing brigandage is becoming extremely perilous, now the thief Putin is staling the power stations.

I think this act alone justifies NATO mobilization and the destruction of the Russian military in Ukraine, the man is a known terrorist and may be planning some sort of false flag dirty bomb stunt. I mean his agents spread nerve agents on the streets of Britain, and polonium in someone's tea, he is murdering scum and cannot be trusted.

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

Thanks, that made me smile.

What if, and hear me out, they kick the Russians out of Ukraine and no one acknowledges Russia's unilateral land theft?

In the real world Ukraine needs to be a member of NATO and possibly the EU as it has been subject to a barbarous raid by a bandit leader and having armed allies on hand will serve to stop further raids by these lowlife thieves.

[PointOfViewGun]

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

What's the rationale for that?

[Coughdrop addict]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/putin-...te-tv?ref=home

Russia’s ill-fated invasion of Ukraine is coming apart at the seams, and top Kremlin propagandists are unraveling right along with it. In the absence of good news from the front, Putin’s regime is promoting other ideas on how to deal with the self-inflicted disaster.
Prominent experts routinely featured on Kremlin-controlled state television roundly reject the mere idea of negotiations, and none of them dare suggest Russia’s withdrawal from Ukraine in order to end the war. Instead, they’re doubling down—and proposing to kill leading Westerners in charge of helping Ukraine defend itself from the Russian invasion.

Appearing on the state TV show The Evening With Vladimir Solovyov Tuesday night, Yevgeny Satanovsky—one of Russia’s most prominent pro-Putin propagandists—proposed a deadly solution. Solovyov cut to the chase, asking Satanovsky: “How do we win? How should we react to the Americans? What should Russia do?”

Satanovsky, who serves as the president of Russia’s Institute of the Middle East after heading the Russian Jewish Congress, replied, “Russia is what it is, in terms of a nation. We’ll continue to be the way we are. Those who are with us will be fine, and the rest we will kill... Acting against us is a relatively small group that is in charge of this camp—they are menacing and fear nothing. Since Gorbachev’s time, once we started to play by their rules, they stopped fearing us. This is the main factor.”

****

Satanovsky said he gets enraged when people suggest that peace is better than war. “No, peace is not better. There will be no peace. The goal of these people is for our country not to exist, for the people who live here not to exist and even for the language we speak to be gone—or even a memory that any of that ever existed,” he said. “They want to make an entry in an encyclopedia: ‘There used to be Russians, there used to be Russia—but now it’s gone.’”

I highlighted the important parts so those who continue to claim the war is all the fault of big bad NATO and Ukraine refusing to negotiate with poor helpless victim-state Russia can refute them with examples of how Putin The Prince of Peace is desperately trying to end the war everyone but him is responsible for.

I know they won't though.

[Cyclops]

It's the second best army in Ukraine.

I dunno, maybe it goes:
1. Russian heroes, fighting brilliantly despite daily anthrax and radioactive waste attacks.
2. Wagner sturmgruppen, performing miracles n defeating legions of actual demons summoned from the Azovstal child organ fermenter.
3. American porn stars masquerading as Russian soldiers for faked drone strike images
4. Ubiquitous Israeli snipers (theres one at my place and I'm 10,000km from Kyiv)
5. Polish Nazi sympathisers.
6 Nazi Polish sympathisers.
7. Soviet era babushkas
8. Ukrainian forces that never existed, but also commit warcrimes aka Schroedinger's strawmen.

[conon394]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/putin-...te-tv?ref=home



I highlighted the important parts so those who continue to claim the war is all the fault of big bad NATO and Ukraine refusing to negotiate with poor helpless victim-state Russia can refute them with examples of how Putin The Prince of Peace is desperately trying to end the war everyone but him is responsible for.

I know they won't though.

Now Now your link is clearly just cherry picking a few Russian crazies. I'm sure all Putin needs is an off ramp. You know little things like Zelensky's head on the Kremlin Wall, all the places he just annexed and the land around Odessa such that Ukraine is land locked rump state that can never join NATO and the EU, and negotiations about the viscous anti Russian states of Poland and the Baltics leaving the EU and NATO and declaring neutrality oh and absorbing Transnistria. Then I am sure Vlad can sleep at night and turn the cheap gas back on. And you will never hear any demands again.

[Ludicus]

U.S. Believes Ukrainians -NYTimes

American officials said they were not aware of the plan ahead of time for the attack that killed Daria Dugina and that they had admonished Ukraine over it

Zelensky knew nothing, of course.
---
The term "barbarian" has always been problematic for modern historians of the Middle Ages. Perhaps the creators of the revolutionary mod "Europa Barbarorum" had this in mind when they created it around 2006.I think the time has come to create a new mod, adapted to the 21st century. Here’s my suggested title: "World Barbarorum". This occurred to me when I heard Biden say a few days ago that “It is now wartime for the whole civilized world”.

But do the Germans who live beyond the Limes Germanicus belong to the civilized world? I’m asking because, according to the result of a recent survey by the opinion research institute Forsa for the RTL/ntv "trend barometer", the majority wants negotiations on end of war.
How Germans see the war in Ukraine

In a survey conducted recently by opinion research institute Forsa for the RTL / ntv “Trend barometer” there are very strong majorities for “the West” to initiate peace negotiations (Graph 1) for “Western leaders” to keep talking to Russian President Putin (Graph 2).

Baltic States Wanted German Tanks in Ukraine Yesterday

If Germany would give to Ukraine proportionally what we have given to Ukraine, this war would be over,” Latvian Defense Minister Artis Pabriks told Foreign Policy.

So, should Germany supply heavy weapons? Nein, they say.



---
The civilized world Biden talks about excludes the contemporary barbarians, and puts the "civilized" west against the "barbarian" rest,

“The threats and lecturing have, however, fallen on deaf ears in many countries belonging to the Global South — a catchall term for a collection of Asian, African, and South American countries — some of whom have on occasion reacted angrily to the arm twisting”. The U.S. Can't Force the Rest of the World to Support Ukraine. Here’s Why. - Politico

For much of the Global South, this line of argument is hypocritical given Washington’s history of jettisoning these same principles when convenient. The U.S. would be better served if it were to live in a world of reality rather than a world of make-believe, in which countries reliably follow the lead of American policymakers.

The “civilized world” gets particularly upset and punishes or threatens the barbarians when some vulnerable nations don't follow the "civilized" lead. US' 'sanctions threat' to India

Interacting with India’s Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla, the visiting US Deputy National Advisor for International Economics, Daleep Singh, threatened India with sanctions if it did business with Russia.

In Brazil,the next President doesn’t seem too much intimidated US Sanctions on Russia a Mistake, Brazil Lula's Top Foreign

Brazil would have close ties with US, China, Russia under Lula.

And the current president of Brazil is against the Western sanctions. Bolsonaro on Ukraine and Sanctions Against Russia

In July, during a conversation with supporters, he openly criticized the sanctions against Russia…”we do not believe that the best path is the adoption of unilateral and targeted sanctions, contrary to international law. These measures have harmed the recovery of the economy and affected human rights of vulnerable populations, including in countries in Europe itself."

So far, so good.
But Bolsonaro is far from being a good diplomat. I doubt Zelensky will approve to be compared with the Argentinian dictator Galtieri, but I must clarify that given Bolsonaro's love for military dictators, in his eyes the comparison is flattering.

Bolsonaro stated that he would propose to Zelenski that he must do what Argentina did in the case of the Falklands in 1982- accept defeat and surrender.
"I will give my opinion on what I believe—the solution for the case. How did Argentina's war with the United Kingdom end in 1982? That's the way it goes. We regret it, the truth is that these are things that hurt, but we must understand it".

Well, history teaches that Galtieri later admitted he thought Britain would not put up a fight. And he almost got his predictions right: Reagan advised Thatcher to not attack Argentina, but the Iron Lady did not give in. That's how she earned that title.
--
Meanwhile in the US there are those who are against the use and abuse of broad sanctions,
‘We impose these things and then that’s it’: McGovern tears into US sanctions policy

(…) McGovern also contended that broad sanctions are ineffective, serving no purpose “except punishing people into ever-deepening misery and fueling anti-American sentiment”
(…) More generally, experts argued that the U.S. would be better off if it stopped using economic punishment as a knee-jerk response to issues around the world. “We need to stop making sanctions the default option,” said Jentleson.

It’s also not a bad idea to review the American long history of pre-emptive wars, and its consequences

In a leaked set of internal Pentagon military guidelines, Paul Wolfowitz argued that America’s “right” to pursue preventive wars arose, not out of an imperialist quest for power, but rather out of an “exceptional” American responsibility to promote democracy and open markets worldwide. The first venue in which these hawks argued for such a preventive war was Iraq.
The conservative historian, Paul Schroeder, warned in 2002 that one of the logical outcomes of America’s announcement of a preventive intervention policy would be that other countries would emulate it.
Indeed, Schroeder’s prediction has proven to be entirely justified. After the Bush administration started advocating for a preventive war in Iraq, other countries quickly joined the debate, announcing (or threatening to announce) their own policies of preventive intervention regarding their particular national security threats.
Thus, on 1 December 2002, Australian Prime Minister John Howard announced Australia’s "right" to preventive action in South East Asia to counter terrorist threats, much to the dismay of neighbouring countries there. He was joined on 9 April 2003 by Yashwant Sinha, Indian External Affairs Minister, who sparked howls of protest from neighbouring Pakistan when he argued that India’s case for preventive war against Pakistan was much better than America’s case against Iraq. One month later, Japanese Minister Junichiro Koizumi, announced his country’s right to the pre-emptive option, in a statement directed largely towards the North Koreans. In October, Russian President Vladimir Putin, announced his country’s right to pre-emptive strikes, citing specifically the North Korean crisis as well as the precedent for such a policy set by the United States. After the terrorist attacks in Beslan, he also declared that Russia has the right to strike against terrorism “anywhere in the world”. At that time, the French were also considering a shift in their nuclear policy, and Jacques Chirac announced the possibility of using pre-emptive strikes against “rogue states”. And – to close off the year – Israeli Defence Minister, Shaul Mofaz, in December threatened Iranians with a preventive strike along the lines of their 1981 action against Iraq’s Osirak reactor if Iran continued to develop its nuclear weapons programme.
Clearly, other countries do not share the view of some American commentators that America is so exceptional that only it can engage in a policy of preventive intervention.

[AqD]

The problem is how long European countries would be willing to maintain sanctions if the war stopped; it's the EU and the Americans who make that decision, not Ukraine. Frankly for the West's part I don't see any benefit in maintaining them past that point regardless of what the Ukrainians think.

I do, because Kremlin still stands.

Putin signed the annexation of Ukrainian territories to Russia. Whatever happens now, even if Ukraine manages to capture the areas Russia occupies, the idea of Ukraine joining EU and NATO is dead and burried. Unless a way is found to convince Moscow to let Ukraine in, then any talk about that is unrealistic

LOL. We're NATO and we can redefine our rules however we like.

The sovereignty of Russia is not relevant to the West. We should use the Moscow way to deal with Moscow and see how they like it!

[conon394]

On the German survey Ludicus one wonders how German opinion would change were outside of NATO and bereft of any security guarantees.

Meanwhile in the US there are those who are against the use and abuse of broad sanctions,
‘We impose these things and then that’s it’: McGovern tears into US sanctions policy

So Ludicus no sanctions, no arms so proposing harsh language? Or just I am comfortable and happy and already in a US backed security arrangement so I really just don't care?

It’s also not a bad idea to review the American long history of pre-emptive wars, and its consequences

Pretty funny read. I like the end where I discover only the US has agency we discover and nope not China nor the USSR/Russia nor India has ever engaged in preemptive war before the Bush doctrine. The Real knee slapper has got to be

"According to some, even Nazi Germany in 1936 could have been thwarted had there been a less divided and apathetic regional approach to renewed German expansionism."

Err yes I sure only if France and Britain had Sweden and Holland to add some harsh language Hitler would have stopped. An actual declaration of war did not deter him! The is the height of non seriousness analysis - according to some whom?