[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
Exactly nor do they want to, Ukraine is a special situation, it has a soft spot in practically all Russian’s hearts. Kyivsky Rus, the first state of Eastern Slavs, the predecessor to the modern nations of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, was centered in Ukraine for the most part. There has always been a Moscovy ( before it was called Russia) policy to reclaim the “Ruska” land. So much history on why Putin sees Ukraine as fair ground, nothing to do with evil plans. And yes for sure if Ukraine sided with NATO a lot of Russians would feel betrayed. Like broken hearted betrayed.
But Russia definitely has no where near the military power to handle any long standing war. Last time Russia beefed in Ukraine they lost more troops in western Ukraine then they ever lost in Afghanistan.
[/quote]
Also you could consider the Russian reaction as preemptive strike, so Ukraine remains unstable enough that it will never join NATO, and to return to its sphere of influence.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
But they’d like to change all that. And that’s precisely what they’re attempting.
[/quote]
You also might want to tell the big stack of nukes sitting in Russia that they are a declining power. [/quote]
Absolutely. Putin is the greatest 18th century statesman of the 21st century. He lives and breaths Realpoltik. Russia, however, cannot hope to recover its former superpower status. Demography is destiny, after all. addressed Russia’s nuclear arsenal ad nauseum in this thread. Is Russia a great power? Yes. Does Russia possess the largest quantitative nuclear arsenal in the world? Yes. Is Russia’s power relative to its peers in the international system increasing? No, it is the opposite. Its actualized and latent power are declining while those of its peers are rising. [/quote]
[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
But they’d like to change all that. And that’s precisely what they’re attempting.
[/quote]
You also might want to tell the big stack of nukes sitting in Russia that they are a declining power. [/quote]
Absolutely. Putin is the greatest 18th century statesman of the 21st century. He lives and breaths Realpoltik. Russia, however, cannot hope to recover its former superpower status. Demography is destiny, after all. addressed Russia’s nuclear arsenal ad nauseum in this thread. Is Russia a great power? Yes. Does Russia possess the largest quantitative nuclear arsenal in the world? Yes. Is Russia’s power relative to its peers in the international system increasing? No, it is the opposite. Its actualized and latent power are declining while those of its peers are rising. [/quote]
[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
Exactly nor do they want to, Ukraine is a special situation, it has a soft spot in practically all Russian’s hearts. Kyivsky Rus, the first state of Eastern Slavs, the predecessor to the modern nations of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, was centered in Ukraine for the most part. There has always been a Moscovy ( before it was called Russia) policy to reclaim the “Ruska” land. So much history on why Putin sees Ukraine as fair ground, nothing to do with evil plans. And yes for sure if Ukraine sided with NATO a lot of Russians would feel betrayed. Like broken hearted betrayed.
But Russia definitely has no where near the military power to handle any long standing war. Last time Russia beefed in Ukraine they lost more troops in western Ukraine then they ever lost in Afghanistan.
[/quote]
Also you could consider the Russian reaction as preemptive strike, so Ukraine remains unstable enough that it will never join NATO, and to return to its sphere of influence.
[/quote]
Indeed, which is also why Russia went to war with Georgia when that country was attempting to reincorporate two separatist territories.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
But they’d like to change all that. And that’s precisely what they’re attempting.
[/quote]
You also might want to tell the big stack of nukes sitting in Russia that they are a declining power. [/quote]
Absolutely. Putin is the greatest 18th century statesman of the 21st century. He lives and breaths Realpoltik. Russia, however, cannot hope to recover its former superpower status. Demography is destiny, after all. addressed Russia’s nuclear arsenal ad nauseum in this thread. Is Russia a great power? Yes. Does Russia possess the largest quantitative nuclear arsenal in the world? Yes. Is Russia’s power relative to its peers in the international system increasing? No, it is the opposite. Its actualized and latent power are declining while those of its peers are rising. [/quote]
Am I incorrect in my understanding that the majority of the citizens of EASTERN Ukraine actually WANT to be a part of Russia, or at the very least, independent? Didn’t they have a vote on it several months ago?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Am I incorrect in my understanding that the majority of the citizens of EASTERN Ukraine actually WANT to be a part of Russia, or at the very least, independent? Didn’t they have a vote on it several months ago?[/quote]
it is split, there is lots of graffiti saying luhansk is ukraine and a lot of volunteer battalions operating there are majority eastern Ukrainian. and a lot of people that want to go independent have been hearing years of Russian propaganda. but yes there is a very large chunk that would like to, I think roughly a quarter a few years ago wanted to join russia.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Am I incorrect in my understanding that the majority of the citizens of EASTERN Ukraine actually WANT to be a part of Russia, or at the very least, independent? Didn’t they have a vote on it several months ago?[/quote]
Majority, ±50%. I don’t think civilian opinions have much weight at the moment.
If you were following russian news aimed at donbas residents, it was full of such bull. saying ukrainian soldiers were coming in to kill innocents, that they had crucified a 3 year old, neo nazi s were running the country. And for a group of people that pride themselves on being the most anti nazi people in the world ( and ironic because the seperatists have been troubling Jews, tartar s and even murdered a few baptists) then you can imagine the reaction of the average donbas resident.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Am I incorrect in my understanding that the majority of the citizens of EASTERN Ukraine actually WANT to be a part of Russia, or at the very least, independent? Didn’t they have a vote on it several months ago?[/quote]
Majority, ±50%. I don’t think civilian opinions have much weight at the moment.
[/quote]
that vote was rigged though, no international observers. Also towns that got taken by the Ukrainian army such as mariupol, you got civilians taking rifle courses, rallying at check points for ukraine and digging trenches for the Ukrainian army. but still on the flip side there still many seperatists supporters.
that vote was rigged though, no international observers. Also towns that got taken by the Ukrainian army such as mariupol, you got civilians taking rifle courses, rallying at check points for ukraine and digging trenches for the Ukrainian army. but still on the flip side there still many seperatists supporters.[/quote]
I know. But at the moment civilian opinion is of no value.
What do you think, is it realistic for Ukraine to keep it’s shores? Or should it become something like Finland was? There is no guarantee that the interests of Finland wouldn’t force it to slide back to the Soviet era politics. And I mean the aspect of security.
[quote]Bismark wrote:
Put yourself in the position of Russian strategic planners.[/quote]
Oh, I have. Yes indeedy.[/quote]
Russia is a declining great power. It doesn’t have the military capability or the economic wherewithal to forge a new empire. [/quote]
But they’d like to change all that. And that’s precisely what they’re attempting.
[/quote]
You also might want to tell the big stack of nukes sitting in Russia that they are a declining power. [/quote]
Absolutely. Putin is the greatest 18th century statesman of the 21st century. He lives and breaths Realpoltik. Russia, however, cannot hope to recover its former superpower status. Demography is destiny, after all. addressed Russia’s nuclear arsenal ad nauseum in this thread. Is Russia a great power? Yes. Does Russia possess the largest quantitative nuclear arsenal in the world? Yes. Is Russia’s power relative to its peers in the international system increasing? No, it is the opposite. Its actualized and latent power are declining while those of its peers are rising. [/quote]
that vote was rigged though, no international observers. Also towns that got taken by the Ukrainian army such as mariupol, you got civilians taking rifle courses, rallying at check points for ukraine and digging trenches for the Ukrainian army. but still on the flip side there still many seperatists supporters.[/quote]
I know. But at the moment civilian opinion is of no value.
What do you think, is it realistic for Ukraine to keep it’s shores? Or should it become something like Finland was? There is no guarantee that the interests of Finland wouldn’t force it to slide back to the Soviet era politics. And I mean the aspect of security.
[/quote]
ya unfortunately war really sucks for the civilians either way and they are really being used like pawns but I would say russia way more so then ukraine.
As for the shores, hell ya, ukraine has a lot of fighting spirit and it would cost poroshenko a lot to lose the shores politically. The volunteer battalions would march to kiev and protest, it could be devastating. I think the cease fire was a mistake for ukraine, unless they use this time accordingly to fire the bad generals, get the right leadership, consolidate defenses and prepare the counter strike the moment, that the rebels act aggressive. I don’t think ukraine should ever give up on those regions. it won’t stop there, it will just escalate the problem if they lose, they have to stick up to the bully and win.
As for a for a Finland role I’ll have to read more on the situation, I kind of understand what your getting at but I don’t know enough to comment on it. I have always felt Ukraines biggest problem is the rampant corruption, deal with that as a short term and a long term goal and most things should fall in place, and after that adopt a Swiss approach, very very strong military to deter anyone and neutral. And by all means have friendly ties to as mang nations as possible. Unfortunately I think friendly ties with russia will take some time and will come down to how willing russia is to give ukraine space to operate as it chooses.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Am I incorrect in my understanding that the majority of the citizens of EASTERN Ukraine actually WANT to be a part of Russia, or at the very least, independent? Didn’t they have a vote on it several months ago?[/quote]
Majority, ±50%. I don’t think civilian opinions have much weight at the moment.
[/quote]
also a few counties in donetsk tried switching from donetsk oblast to dnipropetrovsk oblast, as it was pro unity for the most part. It may not be so much a civil war in ukraine as it is in donbas.most of ukraine is pretty pro unity especially since russian military involvement in the donbas and Crimea, of course there is exceptions, where as in donbas it’s super divided.
I guess my point was that right now, Scotland is having a vote on whether or not to succeed from the UK and no one is batting so much as an eyelash. If the citizens WANT it, who the fuck is anyone else to stop it? I mean, obviously the Ukraine has a vested interest in keeping it, but it seems a bit hypocritical that we are sanctioning Russia because it supports independence from an area that is largely Russian speaking and has such historic ties.
I mean, why WOULDN’T Russia want that part of the Ukraine back? And who’s business (other than Ukraine, which is NOT a NATO member) is it to say otherwise? The EU and the NATO (the US) are the ones upsetting the status quo by accepting the new eastern block countries and removing the “buffer zone”… I mean, what did they expect? For Putin to sit there and “take it”?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I guess my point was that right now, Scotland is having a vote on whether or not to succeed from the UK and no one is batting so much as an eyelash. If the citizens WANT it, who the fuck is anyone else to stop it? I mean, obviously the Ukraine has a vested interest in keeping it, but it seems a bit hypocritical that we are sanctioning Russia because it supports independence from an area that is largely Russian speaking and has such historic ties. I mean, why WOULDN’T Russia want that part of the Ukraine back? And who’s business (other than Ukraine, which is NOT a NATO member) is it to say otherwise? The EU and the NATO (the US) are the ones upsetting the status quo by accepting the new eastern block countries and removing the “buffer zone”… I mean, what did they expect? For Putin to sit there and “take it”?[/quote]
but it is a different situation. russia helped put in a very crooked politician, that truly divided the country. Also a lot of politicians were crooked through the previous president, russia or both. russian state television was filling their heads with propaganda,saying that the Ukrainian government was preparing genocide for them, even claimed that they were building death camps for them.pro ukrainian newspaper, radio stations etc were attacked and their employees jailed or threatened. ukrainian orthodox churches and ukrainian Catholic churches were attacked, Baptists were murdered, a woman was lead outside to be be beaten up pro ukrainian views. The seperatist fighters have a huge chunk of foreign fighters basically all russian and on contract. Also as for historic ties, russia is making history up. those lands were zaporozhian cossack lands which happened to be ukrainian until they were forcibly moved all over russia. After the Ukrainian leader khmelnytskiy signed an agreement with russia as a protectorate with massive autonomy, and ukrainians helped push back the tartar s and turks, that that area was colonized with for most part ukrainians, with little outposts of Germans and serbian here or there. As for russia having a right to because of historic ties, well all 9 ukraine as historic ties to russia. and believe me the relationship has never been too favorable to ukraine, ukrainians and especially their culture.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I guess my point was that right now, Scotland is having a vote on whether or not to succeed from the UK and no one is batting so much as an eyelash. If the citizens WANT it, who the fuck is anyone else to stop it? I mean, obviously the Ukraine has a vested interest in keeping it, but it seems a bit hypocritical that we are sanctioning Russia because it supports independence from an area that is largely Russian speaking and has such historic ties. I mean, why WOULDN’T Russia want that part of the Ukraine back? And who’s business (other than Ukraine, which is NOT a NATO member) is it to say otherwise? The EU and the NATO (the US) are the ones upsetting the status quo by accepting the new eastern block countries and removing the “buffer zone”… I mean, what did they expect? For Putin to sit there and “take it”?[/quote]
as for the buffer zone totally. I understand russia s opinion on this, it is just unfortunate being ukrainian and seeing your family’s home being used as a pawn again lol
So why is this happening now? I mean Putin’s been in control for a long time. What was the tipping point? Loss of his ally Qaddafi in Libya, and potentially Assad in Syria? The creeping influence of Western Europe? Loss of Russian world wide prestige?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
So why is this happening now? I mean Putin’s been in control for a long time. What was the tipping point? Loss of his ally Qaddafi in Libya, and potentially Assad in Syria? The creeping influence of Western Europe? Loss of Russian world wide prestige? [/quote]
russia feels better off controlling ukraine.
I think it was that Ukraine was being courted by the EU (or vise verse). Either way, Russia wasn’t going to have that on it’s doorstep - it would have effectively lost control of it’s Black Sea fleet. What leader in their right mind would let that happen?
I’m not saying “right” or “wrong” here. I’m asking what did anyone THINK would happen? Anyone with half a strategic thought in their brain could have anticipated this reaction… But no one thought about the consequences. If you take broad strategic view, Russia isn’t ACTING, they are REACTING… To a poorly conceived and ill thought out foreign policy of liberal western countries who thought they could poke the bear and get away with it.
Like I said, “right” or “wrong” is simply a matter of perspective here. But no one should be at all surprised.
And now our “golfer in chief” is flirting with “red lines” again…