Division of Russia between the Western world and China

[Linkey]

Russian economy is now totally dependent on China: if China stops buying Russian oil, Russia would experience economic collapse and famine. Xi does not want to go this way yet, since he as a dictator supports dictator Putin. But Xi is probably unsatisfied with Putin's nuclear threats. I have already said that the West should declare that, in case of a very massive nuclear strike from Russia, the United States should retaliate not only against Russia, but also against of China.
At the same time, there is a possibility to interest Xi with the following proposal. China will firstly join the sanctions; then Russia will experience an economic collapse and Putin's rating will fall to zero. And then Xi will give Putin an offer to become the governor of the province of Siberia in PRC. The Sibiria will go to China, the European part of Russia will go to the West. Putin, trying to save his life from a coup, will agree to these conditions and ensure the control over Russian nuclear arsenals. What do you think about this plan?

Edited Wednesday at 05:12 PM by Linkey

[iNow]

13 minutes ago, Linkey said:

the West should declare that, in case of a very massive nuclear strike from Russia, the United States should retaliate not only against Russia, but also against of China.

Absurd

14 minutes ago, Linkey said:

Sibiria will go to China, the European part of Russia will go to the West. Putin, trying to save his life from a coup, will agree to these conditions

Also absurd

14 minutes ago, Linkey said:

What do you think about this plan?

The only thing it’s missing is invisible unicorns stealing gold from leprechauns 

[TheVat]

8 minutes ago, Linkey said:

What do you think about this plan?

You kind of lost me with "in case of a very massive nuclear strike from Russia...."  In case of a massive nuclear strike, we are all dead, and probably a lot of the planet's ecosystem.  And the notion of annihilating a billion people in China who DIDN'T attack us is vicious and insane and would pretty much ensure a clean wipe of all animal species (cockroaches excepted) from the planet.  Nations, specifically their governments, making these kinds of threats is one of the worst things about the human race in its tech phase.  We might survive, some of us,  runaway global warming or other ecodisasters, but a full-scale thermonuclear exchange would end us.  As iNow says, absurd.  

[swansont]

In addition to this absurdity, there is likely a lot of diplomacy that happens that never makes the news, because it’s secret, and a lot of that is probably because certain public posturing is required to placate the citizenry, and any private agreements that are contrary to that won’t be received well. 

We see that in the US when public vs secret votes happen in congress with different outcomes. e.g. the Gaetz ethics report, which is just the latest example 

 

[Linkey]

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

China who DIDN'T attack us

China is supporting Putin. If China stops supporting him, the war would end.

[studiot]

Just now, Linkey said:

What do you think about this plan?

Which plan ?

You have mentioned at least 2

Just now, Linkey said:

I have already said that the West should declare that, in case of a very massive nuclear strike from Russia, the United States should retaliate not only against Russia, but also against of China.

1)

Who do you mean by 'the West'  ?

Who exactly has the capability to carry out such retaliation ?

 

2) The division of Russia.

What do you think the russian people would make of this, and would they cooperate, or dig in like they did against first the French then the Germans then the Chinese ?

[Linkey]

4 hours ago, studiot said:

You have mentioned at least 2

They are both together.

 

4 hours ago, studiot said:

What do you think the russian people would make of this, and would they cooperate, or dig in like they did against first the French then the Germans then the Chinese ?

I have an idea, that Russia usually overcame Europe, because Russia is placed geographically at the East related to Europe. And all countries which are placed at the East always win the wars with those which are placed to the West. The Mongols overcame Russia in 13th century, and so on. USA won the war with Japan in 1945, because USA is placed at the East for Japan.

[iNow]

5 minutes ago, Linkey said:

And all countries which are placed at the East always win the wars with those which are placed to the West

If you go far enough, Russia is also west of Europe. Your thesis is ridiculous 

[Linkey]

9 hours ago, TheVat said:

In case of a massive nuclear strike, we are all dead, and probably a lot of the planet's ecosystem

Such replies usually have the meaning "if someone threatens me with nukes, it is rational for me to surrender". No, it is not rational:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_(game)

 

If Putin and Kim win through their nuclear threats, their appetites will increase and at the next step Putin will say that he will start a nuclear war if the West don't purchase the Russian oil at a high price.

[CharonY]

12 hours ago, Linkey said:

I have an idea, that Russia usually overcame Europe, because Russia is placed geographically at the East related to Europe. And all countries which are placed at the East always win the wars with those which are placed to the West. The Mongols overcame Russia in 13th century, and so on. USA won the war with Japan in 1945, because USA is placed at the East for Japan.

...? You do know the shape of the Earth?

 

[exchemist]

14 hours ago, Linkey said:

Such replies usually have the meaning "if someone threatens me with nukes, it is rational for me to surrender". No, it is not rational:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_(game)

 

If Putin and Kim win through their nuclear threats, their appetites will increase and at the next step Putin will say that he will start a nuclear war if the West don't purchase the Russian oil at a high price.

Nobody is winning anything due to “nuclear threats”. What gives you that idea? The war in Ukraine is conventional ( save for some alleged use of chemical weapons by Russia, which was the justification given by Ukraine for assassinating the general they held responsible, a couple of days ago)  all the signs are that it will remain so.

Furthermore it is quite idiotic to suggest anybody would start a nuclear war unless certain countries bought their oil.

Edited Thursday at 06:06 PM by exchemist

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 hours ago, exchemist said:

Nobody is winning anything due to “nuclear threats”. What gives you that idea?

If Russia had no nuclear threats, implied or otherwise, Russia would have already lost their "special military operation".

Presumably, Russia still has a chance to "win" it. 

[iNow]

30 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Presumably, Russia still has a chance to "win" it. 

An even greater chance after January 20

[exchemist]

6 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

If Russia had no nuclear threats, implied or otherwise, Russia would have already lost their "special military operation".

Presumably, Russia still has a chance to "win" it. 

Surely that is because Russia is a nuclear power, rather than because of any nuclear threats it has made, isn’t it? 

Edited Friday at 07:11 AM by exchemist

[iNow]

7 hours ago, exchemist said:

Surely that is because Russia is a nuclear power, rather than because of any nuclear threats it has made, isn’t it? 

This is perhaps a false dichotomy. It can be and IMO has been both. Putin has repeatedly suggested nuclear responses are being actively considered since his illegal incursion into Ukraine. This is on top of having his troops take control of nuclear power facilities and threatening to allow meltdowns. 

[exchemist]

16 minutes ago, iNow said:

This is perhaps a false dichotomy. It can be and IMO has been both. Putin has repeatedly suggested nuclear responses are being actively considered since his illegal incursion into Ukraine. This is on top of having his troops take control of nuclear power facilities and threatening to allow meltdowns. 

Yes, Putin has indeed made threats. My contention is that none of them has had any influence on how the war is being fought. They seem to have been chest-beating stuff, aimed at his domestic audience, with no effect, so far as I can see, on the posture of Ukraine or its supporters in the West.

The refusal of NATO members to get into direct confrontation with Russian forces is long-standing NATO policy, not the result of any threats by Putin.

Edited Friday at 02:44 PM by exchemist

[iNow]

56 minutes ago, exchemist said:

My contention is that none of them has had any influence on how the war is being fought.

One possible counterpoint: The US for several years now has been telling Ukraine they CANNOT use US-supplied weapons inside of Russia for fear of provoking nuclear response. 

[MigL]

Perhaps Russia is a little too vague ( V Putin stays quiet, lets his puppet D Medvedev make the threats ) about their nuclear posturing and threats, INow.

A much clearer example is North Korea and KJU.
For the last 30-40 years they've been extorting and blackmailing with nuclear threats and missile tests.