- 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 4:45 pm to crazy4lsu
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:45 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Given the Ukrainian reaction to that proposal, what do you think?
It isn't just the Ukrainian position to take into account it is Russia's as well. Russia was too happy with his porposal.
If you propose to be the facilitator of a negotiation between two parties you must be careful with your first proposal. If it makes one side happy and the other side unhappy you have missed the center of gravity and things rarely go well from there. The initial proposal should make neither side happy if you strike the correct balance.
The reality is Ukraine will never be made whole even just in terms of property damages and loss of economic production. Ukraine has a bitter pill to swallow in any peace negotiation. As a result, Russia can't gain land or riches in any reasonable proposal with the balance of military power as it sits today.
At this point both sides still feel like they can improve their bargaining position with more warfare. Unless or until that changes there won't be a negotiated peace.
1
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:51 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
At this point both sides still feel like they can improve their bargaining position with more warfare. Unless or until that changes there won't be a negotiated peace.
That has been obvious since Putin rejected Macron's intervention before the actual invasion. That fact is never brought up by the people who continually bring up Ukrainian capitulation as the only way this ends.
Unfortunately, that is not the way things work in geopolitics. In order for their to be negotiations, you have to have leverage. Apparently stating that fact repeatedly to people doesn't resonate, maybe because the US is a fairly well-run country where gangsterism is mostly a thing of the past. This has to color people's view of human nature or something, because I can't fathom this level of naivety otherwise.
This post was edited on 10/17/22 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:51 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:No. No.
It makes no sense, but we apparently have to be held hostage to this strategy because of the fear of nuclear weapons.
We don't have to be held hostage.
We can continue escalation and brinkmanship right up to the point of initiating mutually assured destruction. The entire Northern Hemisphere will be destroyed most of the Southern Hemisphere population will starve to death. But by golly, Putin would be vaporized. So it would be a win!
All because NATO and PotatoBrain thought playing patti-cake in Ukraine was a dandy-fine idea.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:57 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
We can continue escalation and brinkmanship right up to the point of initiating mutually assured destruction. The entire Northern Hemisphere will be destroyed most of the Southern Hemisphere population will starve to death. But by golly, Putin would be vaporized. So it would be a win!
You take such great pains to give the Russians no agency at all. It is an intensely stupid way of discussing geopolitics.
quote:
All because NATO and PotatoBrain thought playing patti-cake in Ukraine was a dandy-fine idea.
Your brain has been broken man. The issue is that a nuclear power is attempting to dictate the security situation of another sovereign country, and has interfered with that countries politics for 20 years, despite several agreements, from the NATO-Russia Founding Act to the agreements between Ukraine and Russia about the use of Crimea for Russia bases, to not violate Ukrainian sovereignty. And yet, they do. Give them some credit for once. They weren't forced into this situation. Even if they get Crimea, they are still boxed in by virtue of Turkish control of the Bosporus, and the control of the Baltic by NATO. The situation in the Baltics and in the Nordic countries is completely untenable for Russian security. Should we give up those countries too?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 4:58 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
Putin rejected Macron's intervention before the actual invasion
In the last conversation Putin and Macron had prior to the invasion Putin noted a "lack of a substantive response from the United States and NATO to well-known Russian initiatives". This referred to a series of Russian security demands, including that it bar Ukraine from ever joining NATO.
Are you claiming those demands were set to be met?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:03 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:The Russians disagree .... publicly, viscerally. You can bitch about their perception till the cows come home, but their perception is their reality, and they've made that crystal clear.
The situation in the Baltics and in the Nordic countries is completely untenable for Russian security.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:03 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
NATO and PotatoBrain
Oh I get you know, your just a well educated (allegedly) ideologue.
So much for the poor Ukrainian boys I guess, you just want Biden and NATO to fail.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
In the last conversation Putin and Macron had prior to the invasion Putin noted a "lack of a substantive response from the United States and NATO to well-known Russian initiatives". This referred to a series of Russian security demands, including that it bar Ukraine from ever joining NATO.
This is referring to the February 7th conversation, with this statement taken from a release from the Kremlin (I think) on February 12(?). To counter that view, here is a description from the Guardian the day after the February 7th meeting. LINK
Here's a NYT description of that same meeting. LINK
I'm somewhat confused why you are quoting the Kremlin line directly here?
quote:
Are you claiming those demands were set to be met?
No, I'm claiming that Putin was never negotiating in good-faith.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:06 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The Russians disagree .... publicly, viscerally. You can bitch about their perception till the cows come home, but their perception is their reality, and they've made that crystal clear.
What? The Russians disagree that the Baltic and Nordic situation is untenable?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:09 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The Russians disagree .... publicly, viscerally. You can bitch about their perception till the cows come home, but their perception is their reality, and they've made that crystal clear.
So it’s their way or the Highway???
That’s what you are saying. And Russia has made it crystal clear that their end game is to destroy Ukrainian independence.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:11 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:Facts not in evidence. You're willing to "press Putin" to the last Ukrainian. We both understand that.
Oh I get ...
What if we could wind the clock back to early-February. Knowing what you know now, how would you suggest we could have avoided this Ukrainian catastrophe?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:17 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
What if we could wind the clock back to early-February. Knowing what you know now, how would you suggest we could have avoided this Ukrainian catastrophe?
Maybe we should have done what Putin is doing now, threaten nuclear attack. Then you would have been out front screaming that Putin should back down and America should get whatever it was demanding, or the world would risk nuclear annihilation. That's your winning hand, right? Wins every time, right?
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:19 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
This is referring to the February 7th conversation, with this statement taken from a release from the Kremlin (I think) on February 12(?). To counter that view, here is a description from the Guardian the day after the February 7th meeting. LINK
quote:The Guardian does not remotely counter the view.
Asked about Ukraine’s reluctance to implement the Minsk accords, Putin had responded on Monday night with a sinister-seeming phrase: “Like it or not, you’ll have to tolerate it, my beauty.”
...
It was not clear whether two days of intense French diplomacy had brought about modest concessions by Moscow, as Macron intimated, or nothing of the kind. French officials said Putin had pledged not to carry out any new “military initiatives”, after six hours of frank talks with Macron.
But the Kremlin quickly moved to ridicule any suggestion that it had made concessions.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:22 pm to doubleb
Nothing is what it seems
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:22 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
French officials said Putin had pledged not to carry out any new “military initiatives”, after six hours of frank talks with Macron.
But the Kremlin quickly moved to ridicule any suggestion that it had made concessions.
And then Russia invaded. Is this your evidence that Putin wanted or would have agreed to a deal? This is evidence of the exact opposite.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:22 pm to TBoy
quote:
Maybe we should have done what Putin is doing now, threaten nuclear attack. Then you would have been out front screaming that Putin should back down and America should get whatever it was demanding, or the world would risk nuclear annihilation. That's your winning hand, right? Wins every time, right?
You speak as if the United States is at war with Russia and our existence is at stake. Now you can make the whole proxy war argument I suppose but our existence as a nation isn’t in jeopardy. Is Ukraine’s existence worth a possible nuclear exchange? That’s the only question that matters.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:24 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
You speak as if the United States is at war with Russia and our existence is at stake. Now you can make the whole proxy war argument I suppose but our existence as a nation isn’t in jeopardy. Is Ukraine’s existence worth a possible nuclear exchange? That’s the only question that matters.
Edit:
NCTiger asked what we could have done.
Now You are changing the question?
Run back to your safe space, idiot.
This post was edited on 10/17/22 at 5:27 pm
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:27 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Knowing what you know now, how would you suggest we could have avoided this Ukrainian catastrophe?
You keep saying "we" which includes the Russians. The decision to invade was made long before February 2022. In Europe you dont mobilize your army unless you intend to use it. Mobilizations are difficult and expensive.
All this can end tomorrow with the Russians going home. I suppose you and Elon hadnt considered that option.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:30 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The Guardian does not remotely counter the view.
Wow, talk about that entire article going over your head.
Posted on 10/17/22 at 5:31 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
That’s the only question that matters.
What Russia is relying on is you asking this same question if it makes a move for Latvia or some other similar Baltic country.
Page 2011 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News