How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[barbos]

I've never really understood why the US and India don't have better relations.

It's really simple. "better" relations with US means India would have to be US proxy against China. Indians don't want that.

Pretty certain India isn't big on China. Any relationship with them is one born more out of self-survival.

“It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.”
― Henry Kissinger

 

[Harry Bosch]

Putin has not agreed to any reasonable concessions.

You call Russia leaving everything (including Crimea) and allowing US nuclear missiles in Ukraine a reasonable concession?

Not sure what you are talking about. This war will end someday. And when it does, it is Ukraine that will lose land. Russia will lose nothing. When they talk about swapping land, it is swapping land that was owned by Ukraine. And there are no nuclear missiles in Ukraine. Not sure where you are getting that.

 

[barbos]

Not sure what you are talking about

I am talking about ukrainian/EU demands.

When they talk about swapping land, it is swapping land that was owned by Ukraine

Kiev regime is not ready accept loss of anything. It offers temporary freeze, that's bullshit.

And there are no nuclear missiles in Ukraine.

Thanks to Putin.

Not sure where you are getting that.

I am talking about what your former secretary of state told Lavrov.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Not sure what you are talking about

I am talking about ukrainian/EU demands.

When they talk about swapping land, it is swapping land that was owned by Ukraine

Kiev regime is not ready accept loss of anything. It offers temporary freeze, that's bullshit.

Your side conquered the Donbas area. Congratulations! Yipee. Might wins. What more does your side want? Belly rubs and bon bons? If you want some kind of weird friendly relationship with Ukraine, you're going to have be nice and make some concessions. But that isn't in the Russian DNA. And so yea, most likely this will end up as a very unfriendly frozen border, very similar to north/south Korea. Sorry, but belly rubs for the invaders isn't going to happen.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I've never really understood why the US and India don't have better relations.

It's really simple. "better" relations with US means India would have to be US proxy against China. Indians don't want that.

Pretty certain India isn't big on China. Any relationship with them is one born more out of self-survival.

“It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.”
― Henry Kissinger

For fuller context.

Nixon should be told that it is probably an objective of Clifford to depose Thieu before Nixon is inaugurated. Word should be gotten to Nixon that if Thieu meets the same fate as Diem, the word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.

link

Yes, America has foreign policy issues. Much like how Russia/USSR has lots of blood on its hands too. The big boys in the sandbox all have lots of blood on their hands.

None of this means the US shouldn't have had better ties with India. We don't. Granted, the self-interest is likely the reason for this, and that sucks.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I've never really understood why the US and India don't have better relations.

It's really simple. "better" relations with US means India would have to be US proxy against China. Indians don't want that.

Pretty certain India isn't big on China. Any relationship with them is one born more out of self-survival.

“It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.”
― Henry Kissinger

For fuller context.

Nixon should be told that it is probably an objective of Clifford to depose Thieu before Nixon is inaugurated. Word should be gotten to Nixon that if Thieu meets the same fate as Diem, the word will go out to the nations of the world that it may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.

link

Yes, America has foreign policy issues. Much like how Russia/USSR has lots of blood on its hands too. The big boys in the sandbox all have lots of blood on their hands.

None of this means the US shouldn't have had better ties with India. We don't. Granted, the self-interest is likely the reason for this, and that sucks.

Well, India is in a very difficult location! They are geographically located right next to the two most aggressive imperialistic countries in the world: Russia and China. They are at constant war or threat of war with a third neighbor, Pakistan. They have to be very careful and pick their battles wisely. I get it. It's easier for us to stand up to Russia/China when we are so far away. But we are both democracies. We both have similar goals. We should be closer. Sadly, Trump is not the kind of President who is good at working with other countries and developing relationships.

 

[ZiprHead]

Not sure what you are talking about

I am talking about ukrainian/EU demands.

When they talk about swapping land, it is swapping land that was owned by Ukraine

Kiev regime is not ready accept loss of anything. It offers temporary freeze, that's bullshit.

No, the war you started is bullshit.

And there are no nuclear missiles in Ukraine.

Thanks to Putin.

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

 

[barbos]

No, the war you started is bullshit.

You started it.

 

[barbos]

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

There would have been american nukes there already, if it was not for SMO. Blinken said as much.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

There would have been american nukes there already, if it was not for SMO. Blinken said as much.

That was resolved over the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US took the missiles out of Turkey. Besides, why have nuclear missiles in Ukraine when we could have just catapulted nuclear warheads into Russia from there?

 

[barbos]

For fuller context.

No need for that.

None of this means the US shouldn't have had better ties with India.

Well, they prefer China and Russia it seems. And I told you why.

 

[barbos]

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

There would have been american nukes there already, if it was not for SMO. Blinken said as much.

That was resolved over the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US took the missiles out of Turkey. Besides, why have nuclear missiles in Ukraine when we could have just catapulted nuclear warheads into Russia from there?

Ukraine is closer to Moscow and really, ask Blinken, that was his fucking idea.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

There would have been american nukes there already, if it was not for SMO. Blinken said as much.

That was resolved over the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US took the missiles out of Turkey. Besides, why have nuclear missiles in Ukraine when we could have just catapulted nuclear warheads into Russia from there?

Ukraine is closer to Moscow and really, ask Blinken, that was his fucking idea.

Blinken stopped taking my calls when he realized I wasn't really Madeline Albright.

 

[barbos]

The last nuke left Ukraine in 1996. Putin didn't become PM until 1999.

There would have been american nukes there already, if it was not for SMO. Blinken said as much.

That was resolved over the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the US took the missiles out of Turkey. Besides, why have nuclear missiles in Ukraine when we could have just catapulted nuclear warheads into Russia from there?

Ukraine is closer to Moscow and really, ask Blinken, that was his fucking idea.

Blinken stopped taking my calls when he realized I wasn't really Madeline Albright.

Strange, he takes mine.