- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:02 pm to lowspark12
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:02 pm to lowspark12
I have nothing nice to say about the South African today.
1
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:04 pm to SlimTigerSlap
What in his tweets in that post do you disagree with him on?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:05 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
I dont know where I fall on this. On one hand, does Russia feeling that Crimea is Russia magically supercede Ukraine feeling the same?
Not imo, but
quote:
On the other hand, that does seem like a legitimate red line moment
Seems like we agree with Elon here. Whether it should be is irrelevant to the fact Russia might really see it as the redline to begin a nuclear campaign.
quote:
Gun to my head would tend to agree with Elon in this instance that we should probably be trying to avoid this hornets nest but idk
Largely agree, but disagree with Elon’s proposal. Personally, I don’t think there’s a clean way to achieve it and also partly think we should push right to the redline to maximize the long term damage to Russia while avoiding nukes and returning as much of Ukraine to Ukraine as possible.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:11 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
LINK
Fiona Hill explains it better than I can.
Fiona Hill explains it better than I can.
quote:
It’s very clear that Elon Musk is transmitting a message for Putin. There was a conference in Aspen in late September when Musk offered a version of what was in his tweet — including the recognition of Crimea as Russian because it’s been mostly Russian since the 1780s — and the suggestion that the Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia should be up for negotiation, because there should be guaranteed water supplies to Crimea. He made this suggestion before Putin’s annexation of those two territories on September 30. It was a very specific reference. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia essentially control all the water supplies to Crimea. Crimea is a dry peninsula. It has aquifers, but it doesn’t have rivers. It’s dependent on water from the Dnipro River that flows through a canal from Kherson. It’s unlikely Elon Musk knows about this himself. The reference to water is so specific that this clearly is a message from Putin.
Now, there are several reasons why Musk’s intervention is interesting and significant. First of all, Putin does this frequently. He uses prominent people as intermediaries to feel out the general political environment, to basically test how people are going to react to ideas. Henry Kissinger, for example, has had interactions with Putin directly and relayed messages. Putin often uses various trusted intermediaries including all kinds of businesspeople. I had intermediaries sent to discuss things with me while I was in government.
This is a classic Putin play. It’s just fascinating, of course, that it’s Elon Musk in this instance, because obviously Elon Musk has a huge Twitter following. He’s got a longstanding reputation in Russia through Tesla, the SpaceX space programs and also through Starlink. He’s one of the most popular men in opinion polls in Russia. At the same time, he’s played a very important part in supporting Ukraine by providing Starlink internet systems to Ukraine, and kept telecommunications going in Ukraine, paid for in part by the U.S. government. Elon Musk has enormous leverage as well as incredible prominence. Putin plays the egos of big men, gives them a sense that they can play a role. But in reality, they’re just direct transmitters of messages from Vladimir Putin.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:11 pm to lowspark12
quote:
- NATO/US would not necessarily respond with nukes.
It’s been indicated they won’t, but I also think severity of the nuclear attack matters to the decision.
quote:
- I don’t understand the fascination with Crimea… the likelihood of Russia losing crimea is very slim at this point.
Seems a whole lot more likely today than even 2-3 months ago much-less the outset of the war. More importantly is how likely Russia thinks it is to be attempted. They have to have some degree of internal anxiety of what’s taken place over the last 6-8 weeks.
quote:
- by caving to Russia’ nuclear posturing, we create an extremely lucrative incentive for rouge nations like Iran and NK to develop nuclear weapons.
Completely agree, just seems we’re are potentially heading to a point where avoiding nukes while not giving into the posturing is more difficult to achieve.
quote:
It is in our (the western democratic developed world) best interest to draw and very clear public line on nuclear weapons… IF they are used, the full wrath will be felt swiftly and immediately.
Also agree, but even worse than caving to the posturing is saying this and not following through completely and unambiguously. Doing so would also potentially lead to global nuclear war though.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:12 pm to DabosDynasty
The problem I have with Elons proposal is Ukraine has to be on board with the plan… if not, you’re creating tons of resentment that will only lead to more violence down the road.
Both parties have to be the major players in any peace agreement… having the west or NATO or the US dictate terms is the worst case scenario imo… we’ve already seen that these two countries can’t honor past peace agreements… why would this be any different?
Unfortunately, I also think some third party (the UN) will need boots on the ground to ensure whatever agreement is signed is upheld by both parties.
Both parties have to be the major players in any peace agreement… having the west or NATO or the US dictate terms is the worst case scenario imo… we’ve already seen that these two countries can’t honor past peace agreements… why would this be any different?
Unfortunately, I also think some third party (the UN) will need boots on the ground to ensure whatever agreement is signed is upheld by both parties.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:12 pm to SlimTigerSlap
Okay cool. Is he wrong?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:19 pm to DabosDynasty
quote:
quote:
- NATO/US would not necessarily respond with nukes.
It’s been indicated they won’t, but I also think severity of the nuclear attack matters to the decision.
I don't have the time to provide a link, but the "gist" of the statement to this question was something like this...
Our response to a tactical nuke would be devastating to Russia and we would not need to use the nuclear option to achieve that...
This post was edited on 10/17/22 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:22 pm to lowspark12
quote:
The problem I have with Elons proposal is Ukraine has to be on board with the plan… if not, you’re creating tons of resentment that will only lead to more violence down the road.
Both parties have to be the major players in any peace agreement… having the west or NATO or the US dictate terms is the worst case scenario imo… we’ve already seen that these two countries can’t honor past peace agreements… why would this be any different?
Unfortunately, I also think some third party (the UN) will need boots on the ground to ensure whatever agreement is signed is upheld by both parties.
Agree completely.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:25 pm to klrstix
quote:
Our response to a tactical nuke would be devastating to Russia and we would not need to use the nuclear option to achieve that...
That’s what I was referencing, but imo that could change with severity of Russias use or maybe even Russias response to the non-nuclear NATO response.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:30 pm to DabosDynasty
What I am missing is that if Russia is such a peaceful place as it claims to be and has no more imperia ambitions, why do they need their beloved Crimea so much?
Why not make due with what they have - Like St Petersberg?
And again, what will happen a decade from now if they simply say "we want the Baltics. Call us irrational or whatever, fine, but we want them, and if we don't get them, we will use the nukes".
What if China does the same with Taiwan now?
France with Algeria? Britain with India?
Iran?
You think we have a nuclear arms race NOW? Just wait until having nukes is your ticket to doing whatever you want AND the only way to have security from being raped by another country!
Why not make due with what they have - Like St Petersberg?
And again, what will happen a decade from now if they simply say "we want the Baltics. Call us irrational or whatever, fine, but we want them, and if we don't get them, we will use the nukes".
What if China does the same with Taiwan now?
France with Algeria? Britain with India?
Iran?
You think we have a nuclear arms race NOW? Just wait until having nukes is your ticket to doing whatever you want AND the only way to have security from being raped by another country!
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:44 pm to SlimTigerSlap
quote:
Putin has managed to seed hostile sentiment toward Ukraine. Even if people think they are criticizing Ukraine for their own domestic political purposes, because they want to claim that the Biden administration is giving too much support for Ukraine instead of giving more support to Americans, etc. — they’re replaying the targeted messaging that Vladimir Putin has very carefully fed into our political arena. People may think that they’re acting independently, but they are echoing the Kremlin’s propaganda.
Damn, Fiona Hill nailed the poliboard.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 3:48 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:Thanks. Good article from those that know the Russians best. The biggest differences between Russian society and the West are twofold - a total lack of agency and the historic need for autocracy:
This is an amazing story in an Estonian magazine. It's written by an Estonian journalist who extensively interviewed Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian intelligence officials.
“The atmosphere was infused with something intrinsically foreign to the West – Russian society is accustomed to suffering. An injustice that sends Parisians out onto the streets won’t make a single resident of Novosibirsk scratch the back of their necks.”
“The cruel culture pervading Russia’s modern army was entrenched during the era of Stalin’s Gulags. It isn’t random, but systematic. Rigid hierarchies, an inability to account for variation, autocrats locked in information bubbles, and, at the same time, a population yearning for autocracy – perhaps the hardest aspect for Westerners to wrap their heads around – have existed in Russia for centuries and will only persist.”
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:00 pm to SlimTigerSlap
quote:"Clearly is a message from Putin"?
It’s dependent on water from the Dnipro River that flows through a canal from Kherson. It’s unlikely Elon Musk knows about this himself. The reference to water is so specific that this clearly is a message from Putin.
Really?
This is the kind of mouth-foaming rabid stupidity that should boil everyone's blood, regardless of side.
Nearly every poster on this board is aware of the North Crimean Canal. Nearly every poster on this board is aware of its importance, and the related importance of the Kakhovka/Tavriysk area on the Dnieper to Crimea and the Russians. But supposedly Musk couldn't possibly know about the NCC as he assembles diplomatic suggestions.
The NCC, and its 2014 daming by Ukraine, has been in the news for eight effing years! Unless Fiona Hill contends the NY Times gets its information from Putin, she is an imbecile!
This post was edited on 10/17/22 at 4:27 pm
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:04 pm to klrstix
quote:
quote:
quote:
- NATO/US would not necessarily respond with nukes.
It’s been indicated they won’t, but I also think severity of the nuclear attack matters to the decision.
I don't have the time to provide a link, but the "gist" of the statement to this question was something like this...
Our response to a tactical nuke would be devastating to Russia and we would not need to use the nuclear option to achieve that...
Petraeus was likely a strategic messaging proxy to the Russians for what would happen if they were to use a nuclear weapon on Ukrainian soil.
Horizontal escalation - the conventional Russian military would no longer exist on Ukrainian soil but we likely wouldn't resort to tit for tat nuclear retaliation.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:19 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Okay cool. Is he wrong?
Who? Musk? Given the Ukrainian reaction to that proposal, what do you think?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:34 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:They keep turning down proposals which six-months hence they'd gladly accept. It's unfortunate.
Given the Ukrainian reaction to that proposal, what do you think?
At some point they'll get serious. Right now though, the Ukrainian junta is enjoying the west lining its pockets. As long as that continues, Ukraine's power players will send the sons of everyday Ukrainians off to war.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:36 pm to stout
quote:
Elon is 100% correct here
He is not. Think this through. If the consequences for Russian bad behavior are 'we have to give them what they want or else they will use nuclear weapons' then where does it stop? What other geopolitical endeavors can they justify with the use of nuclear rhetoric alone? In other words, how do you enforce a peace agreement when one side is willing to completely destroy the lands it supposedly wants to incorporate into its own lands as a buffer region? The fact they can use the rhetoric of nuclear weapons and at the same time talk about annexing portions of Ukraine is at odds and it is fundamentally insane that people are taking any of their initial claims seriously. It makes no sense, but we apparently have to be held hostage to this strategy because of the fear of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, any agreement such as the one posed by Musk doesn't preclude the future use of nuclear weapons in the same exact way. You are just creating another problem to deal with in a few decades, and pretending that you are virtuous and interested in peace. It is a nonsensical position.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:39 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
They keep turning down proposals
Propaganda
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:41 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
They keep turning down proposals which six-months hence they'd gladly accept. It's unfortunate.
You think they would accept a situation where Russia has more land than it did on February 23rd? Based on what? Give me something specific.
quote:
At some point they'll get serious. Right now though, the Ukrainian junta is enjoying the west lining its pockets. As long as that continues, Ukraine's power players will send the sons of everyday Ukrainians off to war.
Your suggestions have amounted to giving Russia everything they want, despite what goes on in the battlefield. I'm more comfortable with the decisions of the Ukrainians than I am with any of the analysis you've offered so far, given your absolute lack of interest in what has gone on in the field.
This post was edited on 10/17/22 at 4:43 pm
Page 2010 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News