• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

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

laughing dog said:
You are seriously arguing that France, Germany, Great Britain and other European countries have no independent reasons for distrusting Russia?

BTW, NATO went slow on Russia because they didn’t trust them. In 1994, NATO’s for Peace program started with Russia, In 1997, the NAtO Russia Founding Act was signed, starting the NATO Russia Permanent Joint Council.
Click to expand...
You are correct there. They have no reason for distrusting Russia except for their desire to dominate the world.

NRC has not been much useful.
"Russia–NATO relations started to substantially deteriorate following the Ukrainian Orange Revolution in 2004–05 and the Russo-Georgian War in 2008. They deteriorated even further in 2014, when on 1 April 2014, NATO unanimously decided to suspend all practical co-operation as a response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. In October 2021, following an incident in which NATO expelled eight Russian officials from its Brussels headquarters, Russia suspended its mission to NATO and ordered the closure of the NATO office in Moscow."
en.wikipedia.org

Russia–NATO relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

They came to this state because Georgia and Ukraine wanted to join NATO.
 
ATTACMS are (still) not allowed to be launched into Russian territory!!

Map annotations:
  • Red pin = known military target
  • Airplane icon = airfield (16 airfields within ATTACMS range + 60-70 military targets)
  • Gray areas = Various ATTACMS maximum flight ranges: 77 km, 170 km, 300 km
It is almost impossible to shoot down ATTACMS, and their accuracy is very high. Russian planes launch glide bombs at Ukrainian positions from about 30 km inside Russian territory, making it impossible for Ukrainian air defense to shoot them down.

  • Ukrainian drones are ineffective because strong electronic jamming has been built around each airfield.
However, it appears that the USA is now "considering" allowing the use of ATTACMS on Russian territory as well.
Russia, however, has anticipated this (during the US deliberations) and has emptied many of the airfields shown in the image.

1723795788173.png

 
Last edited:

aupmanyav wrote:​

"They came to this state because Georgia and Ukraine wanted to join NATO."

So different countries should ask for permission from Russia about whatever they like to do?
That Russia can break international laws (e.g. Geneva IV) as they like?
It is really time to put Russia at its place in the (some day) upcoming peace-talks and lift the sanctions only after Russia has real elections.
 
Last edited:
aupmanyav said:
Henry-Finland said:
So, you were wrong.
And now you go befind whataboutism.
Click to expand...
I said all nations do it. Is my statement wrong?
Click to expand...
Yes, my and many other nations has never bombed its own people and used that as a "reason" to invade. I don't think that India has done that?

Stalin did it, Hitler did it, and Putin has done it. And Putin continues to do it every day as he bombs people in a country where he claimed to want to "free" the Russian-speaking citizens (including Zelensky, whose mother language is Russian?).

Stalin also used the same pretext when Hitler attacked Poland, and Stalin invaded Poland from the east 17 days later — in order to "protect" the Russian-speaking Poles. Sounds familiar?
 
Last edited:
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
It comes down to what you choose to stand for. Western liberal democracy, rules of law domestically and internationally, free speech, free elections, civil liberties, free press...or the authoritarian rule of China and Russia.
Click to expand...
It is not about what chooses, but about the wisdom of what to choose under the circumstances. These circumstances do not allow USA and India to accept Taiwan as an independent nation and station their ambassadors in that country.
Click to expand...
It is a simple choice, western liberties and freedom, or authoritarian rule.

As far as I can tell from reading the post WWII legal status of Taiwan is uncertain and would have to be determined in a court. In any case it should be left to the people of Tainan.

If Taiwan voted to become part of the mainland we would respect that.

Puerto Rico is an American territory. If they vote for independence they will have it, if they vote to become a state they will have that. Let Taiwan decide for itself.

Given the vast size and population of China and its resources the CCP obsession with Taiwan is probably the old Maoist-communist conditioning. Seize and control, suppress freedom of choice it is a threat.

Russia was never under a threat of invasion. The EU and NATO countries were busy relaxing in hot tubs and drinking wine. Enjoying economic prosperity. NATO was about Europeans relaxing form the constant threat of war.

They had gotten complacent until Crimea followed by Ukraine.
 
aupmanyav said:
laughing dog said:
You are seriously arguing that France, Germany, Great Britain and other European countries have no independent reasons for distrusting Russia?

BTW, NATO went slow on Russia because they didn’t trust them. In 1994, NATO’s for Peace program started with Russia, In 1997, the NAtO Russia Founding Act was signed, starting the NATO Russia Permanent Joint Council.
Click to expand...
You are correct there. They have no reason for distrusting Russia except for their desire to dominate the world.
Click to expand...
Other than Russia’s 80 year history up to the 1990’s of expansionism and more recently its invasion of Crimea, you’d have a valid point.
 
Kursk Is an ECONOMIC & Military Disaster for Putin!

Combat Veteran Reacts gives my take on military and national security news.




The railway in the area
1723817081826.png
 
Last edited:
Henry-Finland said:
Yes, my and many other nations has never bombed its own people and used that as a "reason" to invade. I don't think that India has done that?

.. and Putin has done it.
Click to expand...
But they had no compunction about bombing other people. USA for example - Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.
It is ready for a war with Iran. The armada is already in place.
India will never do it. It is not our way.
NATO created the conditions, always at the cost of other people, which made Putin go to wars.
It is useless to remember Hitler and Stalin, they lived in another age.
 
steve_bank said:
It is a simple choice, western liberties and freedom, or authoritarian rule.
In any case it should be left to the people of Taiwan.

Russia was never under a threat of invasion. The EU and NATO countries were busy relaxing in hot tubs and drinking wine. Enjoying economic prosperity.NATO was about Europeans relaxing form the constant threat of war.
They had gotten complacent until Crimea followed by Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Sure, about western liberties and freedom, and being in servitude of US.
Taiwan has its own president, ministers and parliament since 1949. So, what do we leave for people of Taiwan.
Of course, Russia would not be under the threat of invasion since they have some 5000 nuclear heads. But, for US and NATO, it is about weakening Russia in every way possible.
Oh, NATO and EU were not relaxing in hot tubs. They were fomenting and encouraging rebellions in countries which were formerly a part of USSR.
 
aupmanyav said:
They were fomenting and encouraging rebellions in countries which were formerly a part of USSR.
Click to expand...
Yeah they really REALLY wanted to be part of the Soviet Terror State, and the US made them leave.
:hysterical:
Whatever Modi says, right?

aupmanyav said:
Why should I read any essay?
Click to expand...
To keep you from saying more stupid, ignorant stuff? Just a guess.
 
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
It comes down to what you choose to stand for. Western liberal democracy, rules of law domestically and internationally, free speech, free elections, civil liberties, free press...or the authoritarian rule of China and Russia.
Click to expand...
It is not about what chooses, but about the wisdom of what to choose under the circumstances. These circumstances do not allow USA and India to accept Taiwan as an independent nation and station their ambassadors in that country.
Click to expand...
Except India and the US have accepted Taiwan as an independent nation. We just don't say it out loud. And for whatever ridiculous, petty reason, that seems enough to keep the peace. Well, that and a sea between China and Taiwan. Diplomacy is weird.
 
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
It is a simple choice, western liberties and freedom, or authoritarian rule.
In any case it should be left to the people of Taiwan.

Russia was never under a threat of invasion. The EU and NATO countries were busy relaxing in hot tubs and drinking wine. Enjoying economic prosperity.NATO was about Europeans relaxing form the constant threat of war.
They had gotten complacent until Crimea followed by Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Sure, about western liberties and freedom, and being in servitude of US.
Taiwan has its own president, ministers and parliament since 1949. So, what do we leave for people of Taiwan.
Of course, Russia would not be under the threat of invasion since they have some 5000 nuclear heads. But, for US and NATO, it is about weakening Russia in every way possible.
Oh, NATO and EU were not relaxing in hot tubs. They were fomenting and encouraging rebellions in countries which were formerly a part of USSR.
Click to expand...

How does it weaken Russia when it's border countries are free? If Ukraine were in Nato, no chance of Russian invasion; their military spending would go way down.
 
Harry Bosch said:
aupmanyav said:
steve_bank said:
It is a simple choice, western liberties and freedom, or authoritarian rule.
In any case it should be left to the people of Taiwan.

Russia was never under a threat of invasion. The EU and NATO countries were busy relaxing in hot tubs and drinking wine. Enjoying economic prosperity.NATO was about Europeans relaxing form the constant threat of war.
They had gotten complacent until Crimea followed by Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Sure, about western liberties and freedom, and being in servitude of US.
Taiwan has its own president, ministers and parliament since 1949. So, what do we leave for people of Taiwan.
Of course, Russia would not be under the threat of invasion since they have some 5000 nuclear heads. But, for US and NATO, it is about weakening Russia in every way possible.
Oh, NATO and EU were not relaxing in hot tubs. They were fomenting and encouraging rebellions in countries which were formerly a part of USSR.
Click to expand...

How does it weaken Russia when it's border countries are free? If Ukraine were in Nato, no chance of Russian invasion; their military spending would go way down.
Click to expand...
Because Europe has suffered from paranoia over the last several hundred years, especially the Russians. barbos exhibits this with the whole US invaded Ukraine thing. The idea that the former satellites of the Soviet Union would want to engage in a beneficial treaty with the West is such a foreign concept because "fear the west" is all Russia knows. And a good deal of that stems particularly from the ass kicking they were at the wrong end of in Crimean War (think of it as Russia to Crimean War as South is to Civil War), when Russia got a little stupid and the Western nations got a little overzealous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom