- 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 6/4/24 at 8:48 am to Warfox
Posted on 6/4/24 at 8:48 am to Warfox
quote:
Russia has stated x100 times and for decades that they do not want NATO on their border,
Recent history but not for the first at least decade after the Soviet Union collapsed.
quote:
What is the U.S. gonna do to stop them? Provoke nuclear war?
Russia only has the capability to saber rattle via folks like Drunkle Medvedev for vagina boys an women to quake in their shoes.
quote:
Edit: why couldn’t we have just brought Russia into the Western fold after the fall of the USSR? We could have cemented an almost iron-clad geopolitical check against China.
Russia was a partner with NATO, no different than Finland has been for decades, but Putin didn't want to follow what was needed to be a full member so pulled out.
0
Posted on 6/4/24 at 8:55 am to Warfox
quote:
Edit: why couldn’t we have just brought Russia into the Western fold after the fall of the USSR? We could have cemented an almost iron-clad geopolitical check
Because Russia is a medieval backwater pit of misery that inherently has more in common with its allies Iran and other asiatic nations; so they (ie Putin) weren’t interested.
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 8:56 am
Posted on 6/4/24 at 9:28 am to Warfox
quote:
Because a blind man can see which way this is going…
I must be worse than blind. Because I can't see where this ends. But since it's obvious to you, tell us....
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 9:29 am
Posted on 6/4/24 at 9:32 am to Warfox
quote:
Edit: why couldn’t we have just brought Russia into the Western fold after the fall of the USSR? We could have cemented an almost iron-clad geopolitical check against China.
Because of the Neocons
Posted on 6/4/24 at 9:38 am to VolSquatch
quote:
sad because had the two sides reached a deal in 2022 its probably pretty similar to this
This has been debunked numerous times.
Russia demanded that Ukraine demilitarizate and surrender its government to a Russian puppet. Essentially total surrender and loss of sovereignty.
Ukraine has done so well on the battlefield that no one thinks Russia will accomplish this. So to the end of protecting Ukraine sovereignty, the war has been a huge success and not pointless at all.
I think most people believe the Donbas is gone. Nothing short of a revolution in Russia will dislodge the Russian army from their current defensive posture.
But Crimea is a real problem. It's 100% in rocket range of Ukraine. And it's very hard to keep supplied. Within 18 months Ukraine F16s will basically have unfettered access to the entire region.
The Russian navy that was based there is sunk. The bridge that supplied it can no longer be used. The ferrys are still smoking. And the RR that's still not finished is under Ukraine artillery control.
There's absolutely no reason for Ukraine to let Russia keep Crimea, except as a bargaining chip to get the terms it wants in other areas of the negotiations.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:20 am to No Colors
The war started in 2013 when Russia pushed Ukrainian leadership to abandon joining the EU, even though joining the EU is written into the Ukrainian constitution.
The "peace deal" required the Ukrainian government to surrender, demilitarize, and stop pursuing EU membership.
The "peace deal" required the Ukrainian government to surrender, demilitarize, and stop pursuing EU membership.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:36 am to RuLSU
Interactive database of components used by Russian & Iranian weapons. Search by country, manufacturer, weapon or component name.
Total of 3175 components used in 100 types of weapons.
components in weapons
Total of 3175 components used in 100 types of weapons.
components in weapons
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 10:42 am
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:00 am to Lima Whiskey
quote:
Ukraine is grossly poorer than Russia.
BUT Russians on average are grossly poorer than Ukrainians... Kleptocracies are funny that way.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:10 am to Warfox
quote:
1. Russia has stated x100 times and for decades that they do not want NATO on their border, so I’d imagine that Russia will wrap it up when they have brought Ukraine’s government low(and potentially to vassal-hood status), and certainly folded the separatists region of Ukraine into Russia’s hardened defense network/line.
2. What is the U.S. gonna do to stop them? Provoke nuclear war? Because a blind man can see which way this is going…
3. Edit: why couldn’t we have just brought Russia into the Western fold after the fall of the USSR? We could have cemented an almost iron-clad geopolitical check against China.
All of this has been answered and addressed at least 25 times in this thread...
1. - Russia, especially Putin but even in Yeltsin's day, wants their Empire back... because they are not truly that powerful without it and they can't make peace with being equals with, say, France, and not being a great world power...
2. Oh, they have nukes? well then they can do whatever they want. That's a great lesson... hear that Iran? North Korea? China?
3. to answer this, and the above questions again...
MOSCOW TIMES (2010): "5 Reasons Why Russia WIll Never Join NATO"
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:12 am to No Colors
quote:
This has been debunked numerous times.
I've heard this parroted a few times with no links, show me some sources and I will be happy to adjust priors. Thanks
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:14 am to No Colors
quote:
This has been debunked numerous times.
This feels like "Groundhog Day." The same zombie talking-point arguments keep being posted and debunked over and over, usually by the same posters...
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:17 am to VolSquatch
quote:
his has been debunked numerous times.
I've heard this parroted a few times with no links, show me some sources and I will be happy to adjust priors. Thanks
Why don't you post a link proving there was an agreement in 2022 that was almost reached in good faith by Russia?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:22 am to Lee B
quote:
2. Oh, they have nukes? well then they can do whatever they want. That's a great lesson... hear that Iran? North Korea? China?
Hopefully some in this thread will realize one day that saying we have to handle nuclear armed countries differently than non-nuclear armed countries doesn't mean we have to totally capitulate to them. One day.
quote:
1. - Russia, especially Putin but even in Yeltsin's day, wants their Empire back.
Oh boy, here we go
quote:
they are not truly that powerful without it and they can't make peace with being equals with, say, France, and not being a great world power...
I see Russia kind of in a similar way as I see Cuba.
Is it poorly run? Yes.
Does being locked out of certain markets economically negatively impact them as a nation? Also yes.
Even before the war the west got as little as it possibly could from Russia. Mostly just oil and gas. Some of that was with good reason though, because they don't produce the best products anyway and we also just don't' want to help them economically any more than we have to. And some (maybe most) of it was their own doing, they haven't exactly embraced the west since the USSR fell either.
With Cuba you have the economic superpower of the world who is also your closest neighbor locking you out trade wise. Without that, Cuba is probably doing for a caribbean country.
So I guess thats a long winded way of saying I think Russia could be a great nation without the empire, but it would need to drastically change how it operates and the west would need to open up on its end a little more as well.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:27 am to Lee B
quote:
Why don't you post a link proving there was an agreement in 2022 that was almost reached in good faith by Russia?
I was genuinely asking, if you can send a link I will adjust.
There are numerous sources that talks were close, and then shortly after Ukraine spoke to the west and got their long term backing they collapsed.
The two sides were sending drafts back and forth.
LINK
Per this article, it was hardly a terrible deal for Ukraine.
quote:
Russian negotiators reportedly insisted on concrete limits to Ukraine’s peacetime military, including specific caps on troop numbers and the maximum ranges of Ukrainian missiles. The Ukrainian delegation argued that the caps should be higher but did not oppose these limitations in principle, making it possible for the two sides to meet in the middle
quote:
t the heart of the draft treaty was a provision stipulating permanent neutral status for Ukraine. In exchange for renouncing any intention of ever joining NATO or hosting NATO forces on its territory, Ukraine was to receive robust multilateral security guarantees from a coalition of the willing, including Israel, Turkey, Canada and the U.S.
Not only did this arrangement leave the door open for Ukraine to join the EU, but it allegedly called on Russia to confirm its “intention to facilitate Ukraine’s membership in the European Union.” This marked a stunning reversal of Russia’s quest to block Kyiv’s European aspirations, laying the groundwork for Ukraine’s eventual integration into a common Western political, cultural and economic bloc.
quote:
The Istanbul talks did not try to reach consensus regarding the territories seized by Russia after February 2022, leaving that question for Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to decide in a planned summit. But Ukrainian negotiators managed to secure a substantial concession from their Russian counterparts on a closely adjacent issue: the two sides agreed to hold consultations on Crimea’s status for the next 10 to 15 years, despite Russia’s longstanding insistence that its control over the peninsula, annexed in 2014, is not up for discussion.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:29 am to Warfox
quote:
Russia has stated x100 times and for decades that they do not want NATO on their border, so I’d imagine that Russia will wrap it up when they have brought Ukraine’s government low(and potentially to vassal-hood status), and certainly folded the separatists region of Ukraine into Russia’s hardened defense network/line.
But their perspective is brutish. They acted in a way to ensure that NATO was on their doorstep. Their former Eastern European allies formed the Visegrad Group before the USSR even fell. Then those countries had to spend the entire 1990's reforming everything about their governments and economies to join the West. What does it say about the Russians that the way they behave in international relations determines the outcome they specifically do not want? That should be instructive in telling you what the long-term effects will be.
quote:
why couldn’t we have just brought Russia into the Western fold after the fall of the USSR
Because the ruling class that replaced the Communists did not want to join the West. They made that apparent from 1997 onwards. They had the same choice of reforming their governmental structures to integrate with the West, which nearly all their former socialist republic allies did, yet they went in a different direction. Why are we underrating their own agency? What is their aspirations are driven by revanchism rather than pragmatism?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:32 am to Lee B
quote:
BUT Russians on average are grossly poorer than Ukrainians... Kleptocracies are funny that way.
Ordinary Ukrainians are much poorer than ordinary Russians, and they live in towns and cities where the infrastructure is poorly kept by comparison.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:33 am to VolSquatch
Because by that point, the Russians had violated several already signed agreements that said they would respect Ukraine's sovereignty, such as the deal to continue to use the Sevastopol Naval Base, the 1994 agreement on Ukraine’s nuclear missiels in the Budapest Memorandum and they signed a 1997 agreement with NATO that they would not object to NATO expansion. By that point, Putin had already lied to Macron in the lead-up to the war and had capitulated along their northwestern front. There is no reason to think that the Russians wouldn't have undermined any agreed deal immediately, as has been their pattern.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:34 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Because the ruling class that replaced the Communists did not want to join the West.
Dude, that was their number one goal.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 11:35 am to Lima Whiskey
quote:
Ordinary Ukrainians are much poorer than ordinary Russians, and they live in towns and cities where the infrastructure is poorly kept by comparison.
The infrastructure in the non-European areas of Russia is extremely poor. Given the immediate increase in productivity and economic output that comes with foreign investment, it is a no-brainer why Ukraine would choose to join the EU.
Page 3858 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News