War Games: Russia Takes Ukraine, China Takes Taiwan. US Response?

[iNow]

Mother of all bombs is an actual ordinance dropped on actual territories. Mother of all sanctions is a turn of phrase used over the weekend by some politicians on the Sunday shows. The effectiveness or aforementioned futility of either is a topic for another thread. 

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Sorry if I'm being thick, but doesn't NK and Iran demonstrate the futility of such a "mother of all bombs"?

 

[mistermack]

I don't like the way that the Uknainian problem is reported. There are two sides to it, but none of our media even adresses the Russian side.

Russia gave up control of Ukraine voluntarily. It was part of the USSR. Would the USA do the same for Alaska, or Hawaii? Not a chance. But instead of getting credit for that, they get villified. 

Crimea was historically part of Russia, till a rather drunk Nikita Krushchev (a Ukranian) signed it over to Ukraine on his birthday. (from memory) When Ukraine was given independence, the understanding was free access to Crimea for Russia. When it became obvious that the West was doing all it could to gain control of Ukraine, and hence severely damage the Russian Black See fleet, Putin did the obvious, and took Crimea back. In hindsight, Russia should have retained Crimea, when Ukraine was cut loose. In even better hindsight, Ukraine should have been made to sign up to neutrality agreements as a price for independence, but that was done by Boris Yeltzin who was drunk most of the time. 

The west has been interfering in Ukrainian politics from the word go, with money and encouragement for anti-russian factions, all with the intention of denying Russia a base on Crimea for the Black Sea Fleet. When Putin put an end to that, it caused major rage in the US and CIA, they didn't like being thwarted. 

In view of all that, it's hardly surprising that Putin would object to Ukraine joining NATO. NATO is just an anti-russian military alliance, it has no other purpose. Why would Putin just roll over and accept all that?

The politics of Ukraine is just about the most rotten in all Europe, they've never run a free and fair election. Both sides are as bad as each other. The idea of Ukraine being a member of Nato is pretty much an invitation to world war 3.

If everyone could forget their egoes, the best way to progress would be for NATO to agree to Ukraine not being eligible to becoming a member, and for the West to stop trying to squeeze the pips out of Russia. The Russians lost nearly thirty million people in WW2. They have a right to be paranoid. 

What if Russia and China formed their own version of NATO ? Where one committed to fight alongside the other, in any conflict? That would be a nightmare, but it's not exactly impossible if we keep pushing. 

[iNow]

53 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Russia gave up control of Ukraine voluntarily. It was part of the USSR. Would the USA do the same for Alaska, or Hawaii? Not a chance. But instead of getting credit for that, they get villified. 

They did get credit for releasing them and letting them operate as a sovereign territory all those decades ago. Now they're being "vilified" for ignoring that sovereignty in the present and seeking to forcibly overpower the will of their democratically elected government.

How we vilify Russia is not the topic of the thread, though. Trying to focus mostly on US response or lack thereof.

54 minutes ago, mistermack said:

What if Russia and China formed their own version of NATO ?

That could be an interesting topic to explore. You should open a new thread to do exactly that. 

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

I don't like the way that the Uknainian problem is reported. There are two sides to it, but none of our media even adresses the Russian side.

Perhaps it is your choice of news sources that is the problem.

Edited January 31, 2022 by StringJunky

[beecee]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

What if Russia and China formed their own version of NATO ? Where one committed to fight alongside the other, in any conflict? That would be a nightmare, but it's not exactly impossible if we keep pushing. 

 

2 hours ago, iNow said:

That could be an interesting topic to explore. You should open a new thread to do exactly that. 

Just quickly, if any world conflict did break out ( god forbid!) wouldn't  the likes of China and Russia and North Korea be on the same side? 

6 hours ago, iNow said:

Mother of all bombs is an actual ordinance dropped on actual territories. 

First used (I think) by Saddam Hussein. With regards to I recall, bunker busting bombs. 

Edited February 1, 2022 by beecee

[Prometheus]

10 hours ago, beecee said:

the likes of China and Russia and North Korea be on the same side?

They have deep ideological divisions running back to the communist era and competing strategic interests in the post-Soviet states of central asia. The only reason to be friends is the enemy of my enemy...

[dimreepr]

2 hours ago, Prometheus said:

They have deep ideological divisions running back to the communist era and competing strategic interests in the post-Soviet states of central asia. The only reason to be friends is the enemy of my enemy...

And they won't be too friendly if Putin invaded during the Olympics... 

[SergUpstart]

In his video message, Soros invited Chinese citizens to change the leadership of the country.

American billionaire George Soros said that the head of the People's Republic of China Xi Jinping represents the "greatest threat" that open societies face today. He called on the West to persuade China to change its political leadership.

Ipnews reports this with reference to a video message by George Soros. According to him, Xi Jinping rules by intimidation, and no one dares to tell him what he does not want to hear.

Xi Jinping, he said, unlike former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, "really believes in communism." Therefore, Soros called on China to change its leadership and development vector.

Taiwan is changing its position and their delegation will take part in the opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympics

[iNow]

According to FiveThirtyEight, Intelligence assessments suggest that a Russian invasion of Ukraine will likely be preceded by cyberattacks on Ukraine’s electric grid, its communications systems, and its government. The US is sending an official expert in this space to NATO to help brace and prepare for the attacks. 

[iNow]

In addition to the 8,500 US troops already on standby, another 3,000 US troops are being deployed to Eastern Europe in the Baltic states, focused primarily in spots where Russian tanks are most likely to cross. 

That number obviously pales in comparison to the over 100,000 troops Russia has amassed, so is more likely intended to send a message / use as a bargaining chip in talks about pulling back. 

[dimreepr]

I can't help but think that both side's are like that guy in the bar "hold me back hold me back, I'll f'ing kill him..."

No one stands to win if I loose my grip...

[geordief]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

I can't help but think that both side's are like that guy in the bar "hold me back hold me back, I'll f'ing kill him..."

No one stands to win if I loose my grip...

That is common behaviour  in the animal kingdom.Here we call it brinkmanship.

 

It is a rational  behaviour  and can reap dividends but it is risky for sure.

 

I suppose Putin may feel he is taking the lesser risk as he is in his back yard and the other Europeans  depend for their security  largely on the US which has vacated the moral high ground and  also faces an existential  threat at home these days.

 

[mistermack]

Like somebody said earlier, I think Putin is just holding back for the winter olympics, to be nice to China. 

He really doesn't have much to lose, invading Ukraine. Russia already has sanctions imposed, and to go much further would severely damage the European energy market. Sanctions or Russia in the past have given a boost to some home industries, and damaged foreign ones, as well as hurting Russia. 

I don't know why they don't make concessions on Ukraine. Ukraine would be a ticking time bomb, if it ever joined NATO, so giving Russia an assurance wouldn't actually cost anybody anything, it would be better all round. 

It's all about maintaining face. The west doesn't want to do a deal under duress, they would lose face. 

Kennedy did a secret deal with the Russians over the Cuban Missile Crisis. He made concessions, but he did it secretly, so he didn't lose face. In fact, the world media bought it, and the headlines were that Kennedy stared out Kruschev. In reality, he caved in. I personally admire him for caving in, I might not be here, if he hadn't. 

And the world was a better place for it all. Cuba and Turkey ended up with no nukes, which was better for everybody. 

In WW2, the US had a strategy of squeezing Japan, just like they are trying to squeeze Russia. Then they looked on in amazement, when the Japs blasted Pearl Harbour. They don't seem to have learned anything. 

[iNow]

16 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I don't know why they don't make concessions on Ukraine. Ukraine would be a ticking time bomb, if it ever joined NATO, so giving Russia an assurance wouldn't actually cost anybody anything

It's a really bad precedent to set. "We'll completely abandon our ideals that people should be allowed to rule themselves democratically. So long as you threaten to attack them and you're serious, then we'll also abandon the principle that sovereign nations should not be invaded by neighboring armies.."

Yeah, that sounds like a brilliant idea. Worked really well when Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler, too. 

When the bully threatens you, you don't stop them by giving them your lunch money. You stop them by punching them back in the throat or exploding their nose across their face. 

Edited February 3, 2022 by iNow

[geordief]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

It's a really bad precedent to set. "We'll completely abandon our ideals that people should be allowed to rule themselves democratically. So long as you threaten to attack them and you're serious, then we'll also abandon the principle that sovereign nations should not be invaded by neighboring armies.."

Yeah, that sounds like a brilliant idea. Worked really well when Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler, too. 

When the bully threatens you, you don't stop them by giving them your lunch money. You stop them by punching them back in the throat or exploding their nose across their face. 

If Trump succeeds in intimidating his way back into power (Jan 6  type of events outside courtrooms?) we may end up seeing the US as the bully in the years to come.

 

Even if he does not ,measures to prevent this may  achieve a similar result. 

 

 

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

In addition to the 8,500 US troops already on standby, another 3,000 US troops are being deployed to Eastern Europe in the Baltic states, focused primarily in spots where Russian tanks are most likely to cross. 

That number obviously pales in comparison to the over 100,000 troops Russia has amassed, so is more likely intended to send a message / use as a bargaining chip in talks about pulling back. 

The leaders are sparring on the advice of their respective military experts, we can't expect our news or their words to reflect their true positions... BS, omission and bluff is necessarily very much on the menu atm, methinks.

18 minutes ago, iNow said:

When the bully threatens you, you don't stop them by giving them your lunch money. You stop them by punching them back in the throat or exploding their nose across their face. 

oooh! That's a very hawkish comment  from you. Has the dove flown?  I agree, generally, you can't keep walking backwards to keep the peace.

Edited February 3, 2022 by StringJunky

[SergUpstart]

The yield of 10-year US treasuries jumped 3.8 percent to 1.83 today. All this military hysteria is needed in order for money to be transferred to the United States.

[StringJunky]

Just now, SergUpstart said:

The yield of 10-year US treasuries jumped 3.8 percent to 1.83 today. All this military hysteria is needed in order for money to be transferred to the United States.

Someone is being very disingenuous in this rising conflict, it is not hystera. Putin is trying very hard to reverse the blame. He's probably doing that to justify any future Russian actions to his domestic audience, who are blinkered news-wise by government design.

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, geordief said:

I suppose Putin may feel he is taking the lesser risk as he is in his back yard and the other Europeans  depend for their security  largely on the US which has vacated the moral high ground...

Not that it is difficult to see many of the US failures, but curious which moral high ground you are referring to here.

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

Ukraine would be a ticking time bomb, if it ever joined NATO

In what way? Are any of the other NATO countries ticking time bombs?

[StringJunky]

31 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Not that it is difficult to see many of the US failures, but curious which moral high ground you are referring to here.

In what way? Are any of the other NATO countries ticking time bombs?

If you look at this map and turn Ukraine to the NATO colour, that's a big extra chunk of direct border with Russia, hence their likely concern, even if the effect is just psychological.

https://i.inews.co.uk/content/uploads/2022/01/image-9.png

Edited February 3, 2022 by StringJunky

[zapatos]

13 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If you look at this map and turn Ukraine to the NATO colour, that's a big extra chunk of direct border with Russia, hence their likely concern, even if the effect is just psychological.

https://i.inews.co.uk/content/uploads/2022/01/image-9.png

I'll go along with "psychological", although it seems more likely it might be portrayed as a ticking time bomb only for political purposes.

As far as I know NATO doesn't have a big history of invading Russia, whereas Russia/Soviet Union has a long history of invading its neighbors. If anything Putin may not like it because another NATO country simply means one less country he can reasonably get away with attacking. 

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I'll go along with "psychological", although it seems more likely it might be portrayed as a ticking time bomb only for political purposes.

As far as I know NATO doesn't have a big history of invading Russia, whereas Russia/Soviet Union has a long history of invading its neighbors. If anything Putin may not like it because another NATO country simply means one less country he can reasonably get away with attacking. 

Yes, that as well. Bullies, thieves and other miscreants judge others by their own standards of conduct... it's all they know.

[geordief]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Not that it is difficult to see many of the US failures, but curious which moral high ground you are referring to here

I had in mind the moral high ground  it had as a defender of the principle of free and  fair elections.(and acceptance of the result)

Critically wounded by the obeisance of the Republican party to the Big Lie  and its tolerance of the thuggish politics of  the last so called President .

[StringJunky]

Just in:

Quote

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. accused the Kremlin on Thursday of an elaborate plot to fabricate an attack by Ukrainian forces that Russia could use as a pretext to take military action against its neighbor.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the scheme included production of a graphic propaganda video that would show staged explosions and use corpses and actors depicting grieving mourners.

The plan for the fake attack on Russian territory or Russian-speaking people was revealed in declassified intelligence shared with Ukrainian officials and European allies in recent days. It is the latest allegation by the U.S. and Britain that Russia is plotting to use a false pretext to go to war against Ukraine.

The White House in December accused Russia of developing a “false-flag” operation to create pretext for an invasion. Britain recently named specific Ukrainians it accused of having ties to Russian intelligence officers plotting to overthrow Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The U.S. also released a map of Russian military positions and detailed how officials believe Russia will try to attack Ukraine with as many as 175,000 troops.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-business-europe-belarus-jens-stoltenberg-43c9151532de706a2edec5684dfcf07d

 

[zapatos]

13 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Just in:

 

Guess it is time to rewatch Wag the Dog.

https://www.imdb.com/video/vi920715545?ref_=tt_pv_vi_aiv_1