As a Londoner, I'm not particularly keen to get fried, ,just in order to try to unwind Eastern European history to some arbitrary date in the past. If one takes that view of history, it would logically mean unwinding the USA and returning California and Tejas, for a start.
Surely the issue is the preservation of respect for international law and national boundaries in the present, isn't it? Though the moral case for that is somewhat weakened by the Iraq invasion, I suppose.
Furthermore, a full scale nuclear war would entail the death of millions of US citizens as well as Europeans - and might well leave China as the dominant world power.
By that argument you would be advocating the giving up of all empire globally, the military assistance to enact that, and economic and diplomatic isolation of those countries until achieved? So that would include handing back North America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc to the relevant indiginous populations? European powers expanded into other people's lands throughout their history, so we should look to reverse all that? How far back would you intend to look? Which boundaries do you consider "correct" and to be reestablished?
Or are you, as exchemist notes, more concerned with respect for the current boundaries.
Stereotyping like that is not helpful.As I said, most others likely won't share my opinion. I would personally prefer to have a nuclear war with Russia rather than allowing them to peacefully remain on over ten million square kilometres of stolen territory and resources, if they're willing to resort to a nuclear exchange in order to keep that land. In my opinion modern civilization is worthless if it accommodates nations full of dumb people built primarily on the rape and theft of their neighbours' lands and resources, as is the case with the Russian empire and its supporters.
How far back in history are you going to look? How many conquests do you plan to reverse? How many settlements?I'm in favour of the US, Canada and any other nation possessing stolen territory to return the specific territories that were stolen and/or compensate the victims with an independent state on equivalent lands.
Who gets to decide what is "significant"? You?My only stipulation is that there has to be good evidence the specific lands in question were being used in a significant manner.
Do you consider yourself personally responsible for all the decisions your President takes? Just wondering how far this responsibility-by-proxy thing of yours extends.I'm at the point where I no longer view the collective Russian people as being worthy of peaceful compromises that allow them to keep what they and their ancestors have stolen.
I'm not willing to accept nuclear war to satisfy your arbitary sense of "historical justice". That's my personal opinion. When push comes to shove, I doubt that you are, either, really. Would you really be willing to die in a nuclear blast if it meant the land you live on could be returned to the people who lived on it back in 1500 CE? Or 800 CE? Or 200 BCE? Or [insert arbitrary date]?It's just my personal opinion, but it can't be said that no one in the West is willing to accept nuclear war in order to impose historical justice on a nation dominated and led by proud low IQ criminals.
Source / details?It seems that the Ukraine Military are harassing Russian border infrastructure possibly in an attempt to divert Russian resources from the East.
Nothing solid. There have been reports of attacks on Russian depots over the border mentioned in local news occasionally.Source / details?
There are also rumours that Putin is really quite ill - physically rather than mentally - with suggestions ranging from blood cancer (e.g. leukemia) to parkinsons, but cancer seems to be the main one.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...retly-recorded-saying-Putin-blood-cancer.html
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/putin-very-ill-blood-cancer-26952057
Tabloid press, but, still, it's something.
If he is that sick, does it offer an explanation as to why he has chosen to take Russia into war with Ukraine: i.e. to give him a legacy that he thought he could achieve before he dies. Without such a move, what would he go down in history as having done on the world stage? Now, though, he may well go down in history for all the reasons he'd prefer not to.
Perhaps as a leader who brought Russia a long way into the 21st century. (post cold war, ww2) Now though it seems to be the opposite.Without such a move, what would he go down in history as having done on the world stage?
Will this now mean Putin can view Finland apartment blocks on the Finland - Russian border as legitimate military targets? Take out 'enemy' high observation points so to speak. Seems so ww2, what with drone warfare now.According to Reuters, Finland and Sweden have made formal application to join NATO.
It is going to be interesting to see how Putin responds, as I would guess it would be the last thing he wanted to happen.
Yes, this is where the old Statesmanship games come into play.Turkey have to agree to the request, though. Every NATO member has a veto, and Turkey are not happy that Sweden, especially, refuse to extradite people Turkey consider Kurdish terrorists.
Yeah, it's all political machinations and manoeuvering. Turkey's accession to the EU has stalled of late, due to one thing and another (you know, small things like human rights violations - and both current and former ), so this will undoubtedly be their opportunity to push for EU membership... IF it is still what they want. It's quite possible that Erdogan no longer wants Turkey to join and would actually prefer closer ties with Russia, and he's vetoing Sweden/Finland NATO bid to get on the good sides of Russia.Yes, this is where the old Statesmanship games come into play.
Couldn't the EU (of which Sweden and Finland are members) say to Turkey '' Hey, didn't you want to be a member of the EU ?''
Certainly Russian military have proved good at attacking civilian apartment blocks... (sarc)Will this now mean Putin can view Finland apartment blocks on the Finland - Russian border as legitimate military targets?
Just thoughts:Yeah, it's all political machinations and manoeuvering. Turkey's accession to the EU has stalled of late, due to one thing and another (you know, small things like human rights violations - and both current and former ), so this will undoubtedly be their opportunity to push for EU membership... IF it is still what they want. It's quite possible that Erdogan no longer wants Turkey to join and would actually prefer closer ties with Russia, and he's vetoing Sweden/Finland NATO bid to get on the good sides of Russia.
Plus I'm not sure the EU currently want to acept Turkey, and that taking them in as a deal for Turkey lifting their NATO veto is far too large a price, especially when alternative bilateral defence arrangements can be made with the two - as UK have recently announced.
It seems that the Ukraine Military are harassing Russian border infrastructure possibly in an attempt to divert Russian resources from the East.
Just thoughts:
There appears to be an interesting dynamic happening.. By Finland and Sweden formally applying to join NATO, Russia is under pressure to avoid the negative press of committing war crime and human rights atrocities. Thus whether they, Finland and Sweden, succeed in their application depends on the degree of Russian aggression. All in all the whole scenario provides a braking effect on Russian military activity and affords Ukraine a higher moral ground.
yes... Russia, like most nations, including the USA are considerably more vulnerable to major disruptions than most realize...theory is to cut off their rail supply
i hope they hit all their gas & oil pipes and blow them sky high and hit every gas station, fuel dump, transit point,
storage yards & warehouses where fuel or ammunition or military supplies are stored or moved through.
yes... Russia, like most nations, including the USA are considerably more vulnerable to major disruptions than most realize...
I would personally prefer to have a nuclear war with Russia rather than allowing them to peacefully remain on over ten million square kilometres of stolen territory and resources,