Are we on the brink of World War III?

[Tulpa | 3,492]

2 hours ago, Estil said:

I don't get why Russia is invading (or at least trying to) invade Ukraine.  I mean, how exactly do they hope to come out ahead on something like this?  AFAIK Ukraine wasn't even bothering no one so it looks to me like Russia/Putin is just being a big bully   Just like when that North Korean guy was threatening to nuke Guam of all places...what the heck did little ol' Guam ever do to anybody?  

1. They know they can get away with it.

2. There's a famous saying in Eastern European diplomacy. "Russia by itself is a country. Russia with the Ukraine is an empire."

[fox | 1,666]

[Californication | 1,477]

7 hours ago, phart010 said:

No WW3.

Europe already knows the extent of Russias expansionist goals. They just want to reclaim former Soviet territory, but they will not touch any countries that are already in NATO. Because NATO would respond militarily.

Europe will make empty threats to Russia over Ukraine, but won’t actually do anything if Russia invades. They don’t want to piss off Russia because they are dependent on Russian natural gas for energy security. Also Ukraine is not in NATO so they have no obligations to protect them. They are just virtue signaling.

Russia is a nuclear superpower, so US will never fight them directly, it would quickly escalate to nuclear war, which means everyone loses. Instead, we would only have proxy wars, economic wars and cyber wars. Economic war is no longer effective because after Crimea, Russia built up economic resilience so that they will not be hurt by  future sanctions. Cyber warfare is as much a risk to US as it is to Russia.

Unfortunately, Ukraine isn’t strategically important enough to US or Europe to warrant fighting for. I think we will just let Russia have them. Ukraine will probably surrender as fighting Russia would be suicide for the Ukrainians.

Also, I think little would actually change in the lives of the Ukrainians under Russian military control. There lives would quickly go back to normal after the invasion is finished. The only difference is that Russia would kick NATO forces out of the country.

China may see this as an opportunity to move for Taiwan while US is distracted. But unlike Ukraine, US would respond to threats against Taiwan because Taiwan is strategically important. But since China is not interested in a direct confrontation with the US, they would de-escalate any moves towards taking Taiwan at the first indication that the US is making an intervention. 
 

China is interested in taking global superpower status from the US. But they know they can’t do it by winning a fighting war. They are instead planning to play the long game and win over several decades by slowly increasing their influence and by having economic superiority

Not sure if I've ever agreed with Phart010 before, yay 2022!

That is pretty well said. To continue, China is doing great, they have no reason to rock the boat with their steady growth. I mean it's not impossible, but the talking point is annoying since it is complete conjecture and it doesn't add anything except fear and mis-direction to the state of things. Someone said CNN was pushing the China nonsense.

At the end of the day, the U.N./U.S. planted a flag they weren't going to stand up for by using oil sanctions.

This is a win for the arms industry, and a loss for everyone else.

[phart010 | 1,707]

33 minutes ago, Californication said:

Not sure if I've ever agreed with Phart010 before, yay 2022!

That is pretty well said. To continue, China is doing great, they have no reason to rock the boat with their steady growth. I mean it's not impossible, but the talking point is annoying since it is complete conjecture and it doesn't add anything except fear and mis-direction to the state of things. Someone said CNN was pushing the China nonsense.

At the end of the day, the U.N./U.S. planted a flag they weren't going to stand up for by using oil sanctions.

This is a win for the arms industry, and a loss for everyone else.

Much easier for us Americans to agree on foreign politics than on domestic

Edited February 24, 2022 by phart010

[themisfit138 | 523]

[fcgamer | 4,723]

Well with the situation in Ukraine, some of the regions are filled with ethnic Russian people, who quite likely want to be Russian. Then there's the economic situation at play as well, those are the issues that are at the heart of the Russian situation.

TBH, I can't say that I necessarily disagree with Putin and his ambitions here.

The China situation is much, much different though, which is why I stated earlier it's apples and oranges. Taiwan has never in history been under the control of the mainland's current government, and even when it was controlled by the mainland, it was viewed as a haven for pirates, in a very very bad light. Furthermore, the majority of people here DO NOT identify as Chinese, especially the younger generations. That creates a very large problem.

 

[Tulpa | 3,492]

43 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

TBH, I can't say that I necessarily disagree with Putin and his ambitions here.

Funny, Tucker Carlson had a similar take.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/business/fox-news-russia-ukraine.html

 

[Dr. Morbis | 2,088]

If Trump had won the last US election, we'd all be in real big trouble right now...

[Jono1874 | 144]

No, for a myriad of reasons. The most important being that niether Russia nor NATO are interested in World War 3 and China/Iran aren't about to rock the boat for the exact same reason. 

[Tulpa | 3,492]

What'll probably happen is Russia will take a yard, and then when all the drama unfolds, appear to barter peace by negotiating to keep a foot of what they annexed.  On an international, diplomacy level, that will seem OK to everyone - and Russia will have expanded their empire.

[OptOut | 8,883]

7 hours ago, phart010 said:

My belief is that as aggressive as this invasion appears, Russia is acting defensively. They don’t intend to show aggression to the West and the West doesn’t intend to show any aggression to Russia.
 

But superpowers are always militarily positioned for the worst case scenario. So the US, via NATO forces keeps some bases in Ukraine to keep an eye on Russia. They also keep some missiles positioned just in case they need them for leverage. It’s only about 200 miles from the Ukraine border to Russias capital, Moscow.

Basically the US/NATO want to have Russia feeling vulnerable as part of geopolitical strategy. Russia doesn’t like having NATO forces so close to their capital. They would prefer for Ukraine to be a neutral buffer zone to increase the distance between Moscow and opposing forces. However, these negotiations to remove NATO forces from Ukraine have not been going anywhere. So the next best thing for Russia to do is to take military control of Ukraine and kick NATO out.

It sucks because I don’t believe that either Russia or the West actually intend to harm each other, but this military positioning strategy is nonetheless being pursued and people will die as a result.

My two cents. I think Ukraine will be taken and life goes back to normal. US doesn’t actually care about the Ukrainian people, they just see this as a loss of a base. It’s possible Russia does something with some smaller countries adjacent to Ukraine if the opportunity presents itself, but definitely they will not touch Poland. That would mean war with the West.

Also, they might shuffle around in the Caucus countries, but as long as that region is unstable then it equally serves their goal of achieving a buffer zone around the Russian border

Actually a lot of what you said here was incorrect.

NATO do not have and never had any forces stationed in Ukraine, and certainly no bases there.

Ukraine has sought, unsuccessfully, to apply for NATO and EU membership, specifically to help protect them from exactly the scenario that is playing out right now.

The West HAVE been supplying arms, legally, to the government of Ukraine, and NATO troops have been in the country training Ukrainian national forces, but NOT in any sort of combatant role, and they have all left as of last week anyway.

 

Blaming this situation on anything other than Russian aggression is victim blaming and apologia for Imperialism IMO.

[phart010 | 1,707]

On 2/24/2022 at 9:37 PM, OptOut said:

Actually a lot of what you said here was incorrect.

NATO do not have and never had any forces stationed in Ukraine, and certainly no bases there.

Ukraine has sought, unsuccessfully, to apply for NATO and EU membership, specifically to help protect them from exactly the scenario that is playing out right now.

The West HAVE been supplying arms, legally, to the government of Ukraine, and NATO troops have been in the country training Ukrainian national forces, but NOT in any sort of combatant role, and they have all left as of last week anyway.

 

Blaming this situation on anything other than Russian aggression is victim blaming and apologia for Imperialism IMO.

I’m certainly not a Russian apologist. Need that to be clear from the start. US is hands down most fit for keeping order in the world today, nobody else. 
 

And I’m not denying that what Russian is doing in Ukraine is aggressive, it definitely is. I’m just giving my prediction of what is going to happen and also what Russias motivations are.

Ukraine has been seeking to join NATO, but since they have not yet completed the process of joining, there’s no obligation for NATO to defend them.
 

It seems like coming to their aid would be the right thing to do. But you have to consider what results you place the most priority on. If you prioritize the national sovereignty of Ukraine and keeping Russia in check, then you obviously have to fight. If you prioritize preventing as many deaths as possible, then there is a case to be made for a Ukraine surrender.

Regardless of what NATO has or has not been doing, the main concern that Russia has is the vulnerability of Moscow. This is my opinion, but it’s also the opinion of many Western scholars on this topic. I didn’t hear this from Russian news or Fox News.

Also, this is anecdotal and I won’t attempt to argue this point any further because you most likely won’t find any published info on it, but I heard from someone who said he was stationed there.

Edited March 1, 2022 by phart010

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

1 minute ago, phart010 said:

I’m certainly not a Russian apologist. Need that to be clear from the start. US is hands down most fir for keeping order in the world today, nobody else. 
 

And I’m not denying that what Russian is doing in Ukraine is aggressive, it definitely is. I’m just giving my prediction of what is going to happen and also what Russias motivations are.

Ukraine has been seeking to join NATO, but since they have not yet completed the process of joining, there’s no obligation for NATO to defend them.
 

It seems like coming to their aid would be the right thing to do. But you have to consider what results you place the most priority on. If you prioritize the national sovereignty of Ukraine and keeping Russia in check, then you obviously have to fight. If you prioritize preventing as many deaths as possible, then there is a case to be made for a Ukraine surrender.

Regardless of what NATO has or has not been doing, the main concern that Russia has is the vulnerability of Moscow. This is my opinion, but it’s also the opinion of many Western scholars on this topic. I didn’t hear this from Russian news of Fox News.

Also, this is anecdotal and I won’t attempt to argue this point any further because you most likely won’t find any published info on it, but I heard from someone who said he was stationed there.

What you are saying makes 100% sense to me, Moscow is literally 200 miles away from Ukraine’s border. 
 

 

[OptOut | 8,883]

1 minute ago, phart010 said:

I’m certainly not a Russian apologist. Need that to be clear from the start. US is hands down most fit for keeping order in the world today, nobody else. 
 

And I’m not denying that what Russian is doing in Ukraine is aggressive, it definitely is. I’m just giving my prediction of what is going to happen and also what Russias motivations are.

Ukraine has been seeking to join NATO, but since they have not yet completed the process of joining, there’s no obligation for NATO to defend them.
 

It seems like coming to their aid would be the right thing to do. But you have to consider what results you place the most priority on. If you prioritize the national sovereignty of Ukraine and keeping Russia in check, then you obviously have to fight. If you prioritize preventing as many deaths as possible, then there is a case to be made for a Ukraine surrender.

Regardless of what NATO has or has not been doing, the main concern that Russia has is the vulnerability of Moscow. This is my opinion, but it’s also the opinion of many Western scholars on this topic. I didn’t hear this from Russian news of Fox News.

Also, this is anecdotal and I won’t attempt to argue this point any further because you most likely won’t find any published info on it, but I heard from someone who said he was stationed there.

Of course I understand why Russia would be concerned about a NATO build-up, especially considering their clear geopolitical goals.

I also don't believe NATO should intervene directly in this current conflict, the Ukrainian people are sadly on their own.

But, NATO and the west cannot let this go on indefinitely, Russia cannot be allowed to just attack and consume whichever independent countries they wish.

Sanctions have already been applied, and it's already had devastating consequences for their economy. Although, it would seem they literally don't care about that any more, and so it is a big question about what possibly would be enough to deter them at this point...

[phart010 | 1,707]

2 minutes ago, OptOut said:

Of course I understand why Russia would be concerned about a NATO build-up, especially considering their clear geopolitical goals.

I also don't believe NATO should intervene directly in this current conflict, the Ukrainian people are sadly on their own.

But, NATO and the west cannot let this go on indefinitely, Russia cannot be allowed to just attack and consume whichever independent countries they wish.

Sanctions have already been applied, and it's already had devastating consequences for their economy. Although, it would seem they literally don't care about that any more, and so it is a big question about what possibly would be enough to deter them at this point...

If it’s any consolation George Friedman has accurately predicted many of the geopolitical events in the decade 2010-2020. And he also predicted by the end of this decade, Russian imperialism will collapse and the country will split up into several smaller regions.

He says they will get burned out economically trying to defend their border.

[OptOut | 8,883]

13 minutes ago, phart010 said:

If it’s any consolation George Friedman has accurately predicted many of the geopolitical events in the decade 2010-2020. And he also predicted by the end of this decade, Russian imperialism will collapse and the country will split up into several smaller regions.

He says they will get burned out economically trying to defend their border.

We can only hope so! 

[Estil | 1,264]

8 hours ago, Tulpa said:

1. They know they can get away with it.

In terms of how the international community feels about all this...NO WAY.  NO CHANCE.

[Tulpa | 3,492]

2 minutes ago, Estil said:

In terms of how the international community feels about all this...NO WAY.  NO CHANCE.

Do you see anyone coming to Ukraine's aid?

[Link | 2,709]

17 minutes ago, Estil said:

In terms of how the international community feels about all this...NO WAY.  NO CHANCE.

Crimea river.

[Estil | 1,264]

35 minutes ago, Link said:

Crimea river.

Dude that's not funny.  How'd you like to live in a country where they were just minding your own business, not bothering anyone...and some neighboring big bully is trying to invade you for no apparent reason, other than to be a big bully?  

Surely Putin can't figure on anything GOOD coming out of this?

Edited February 25, 2022 by Estil

[OptOut | 8,883]

16 minutes ago, Estil said:

How'd you like to live in a country where they were just minding your own business, not bothering anyone...and some neighboring big bully is trying to invade you for no apparent reason

Welcome to MY world! 

[Tulpa | 3,492]

59 minutes ago, Estil said:

Surely Putin can't figure on anything GOOD coming out of this?

Some thought it was a "savvy" and "genius" move.

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-ukraine-invasion-justification-genius-savvy-2022-2

[Estil | 1,264]

21 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Some thought it was a "savvy" and "genius" move.

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-ukraine-invasion-justification-genius-savvy-2022-2

I don't see how...

[Tulpa | 3,492]

17 minutes ago, Estil said:

I don't see how...

Putin's done it at least twice before. The Crimea was part of the Ukraine, now it belongs to Russia. And he wrestled South Odessa from the Republic of Georgia. You know what the international community did for both of those?

Jack shit.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Tulpa

[Estil | 1,264]

56 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Putin's done it at least twice before. The Crimea was part of the Ukraine, now it belongs to Russia. And he wrestled South Odessa from the Republic of Georgia. You know what the international community did for both of those?

Jack shit.

Well there were all these economic sanctions and formal condemnations from the international community...what else realistically can be done (outside of Russia/Ukraine themselves I mean)?

I mean we certainly can't do like that HS computer program I once saw (homemade I'm guessing) that gave as an option "Screw the talks and nuke 'em!"  

Edited February 25, 2022 by Estil