News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

Started by mongers, August 06, 2014, 03:12:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Valmy

Quote from: mongers on March 03, 2025, 03:37:27 PMI welcome our possible future French speaking overlords.  :bowler:   :frog:

As long as he isn't named William.

Of course he won't. Maybe Guillaume.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Sheilbh

Quote from: Valmy on March 03, 2025, 03:32:50 PMPlenty of those countries have made political sacrifices as well as lent us their soldiers in our operations to support us over the years.  :mellow: I was concerned they seemed to be getting nothing but shit and abuse and paying a huge price for their willingness to help us. I would prefer countries be rewarded for helping us.
Yes. I have seen a fair bit of anger at this on the British internet over the last few days. I don't want to indulge but I can understand where it's coming from.
Let's bomb Russia!

Tamas

the White House has ordered options papers to be drafted on lifting Russian sanctions so they can take them to Russia to "make a deal".

I don't think Trump is an actual official Russian intelligence asset, but I do wonder how we are supposed to tell the difference. Maybe an actual asset would be more subtle about their unconditional support of Russia.

Valmy

Quote from: Tamas on March 03, 2025, 03:52:21 PMthe White House has ordered options papers to be drafted on lifting Russian sanctions so they can take them to Russia to "make a deal".

I don't think Trump is an actual official Russian intelligence asset, but I do wonder how we are supposed to tell the difference. Maybe an actual asset would be more subtle about their unconditional support of Russia.

I do have to say after I had little but scorn for most of the Russiagaters during his first term, I thought Russia helped get him elected but ultimately the idea he was owned by the Russians was just idiotic and undermined actual criticism of him, they sure look they were on to something now. Sorry Russiagaters.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

mongers

Quote from: Tamas on March 03, 2025, 03:52:21 PMthe White House has ordered options papers to be drafted on lifting Russian sanctions so they can take them to Russia to "make a deal".

I don't think Trump is an actual official Russian intelligence asset, but I do wonder how we are supposed to tell the difference. Maybe an actual asset would be more subtle about their unconditional support of Russia.

Exactly.
"We have it in our power to begin the world over again"

Valmy

#18545
Sanctions on our biggest trade partners! Close ties to a country that produces nothing and we barely trade with!

Trumponomics.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

HVC

Quote from: Tamas on March 03, 2025, 03:52:21 PMthe White House has ordered options papers to be drafted on lifting Russian sanctions so they can take them to Russia to "make a deal".

I don't think Trump is an actual official Russian intelligence asset, but I do wonder how we are supposed to tell the difference. Maybe an actual asset would be more subtle about their unconditional support of Russia.

I think he's just too dumb and senile to be subtle.
Being lazy is bad; unless you still get what you want, then it's called "patience".
Hubris must be punished. Severely.

Jacob

Quote from: Sheilbh on March 03, 2025, 03:43:52 PMYes. I have seen a fair bit of anger at this on the British internet over the last few days. I don't want to indulge but I can understand where it's coming from.

The UK and several other countries suffered a number of deaths per capita quite close to the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan

Zoupa

The only time that article 5 was triggered. Soldiers from all over the alliance answered the call and died for it. Raz doesn't care about that though.

Valmy

#18549
Quote from: Zoupa on March 03, 2025, 04:20:20 PMThe only time that article 5 was triggered. Soldiers from all over the alliance answered the call and died for it. Raz doesn't care about that though.

Somebody said something mean. Somebody. He won't say who exactly. But somebody in some country in NATO called us warmongering, theocratic, fascists at some point.

That is way more significant than something petty like dying for their American allies.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Sheilbh

Quote from: Jacob on March 03, 2025, 04:13:15 PMThe UK and several other countries suffered a number of deaths per capita quite close to the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan
Yeah. I've seen a few people posting pictures of the British Iraq and Afghan war memorial, and the British dead being flown back, commenting "have you said thank you once?"

It's not good and we're not in a position to do much. So we need to fix that. But very real anger over some of the comments about freeloaders coming from the US.
Let's bomb Russia!

Crazy_Ivan80

Ideally Europe finally does what it should have done a decade ago: build up it's military(ies).
The irony of such a buildup is that the European part of NATO will be less inclined to tow the US line (if at all after Trump).
Or how to turn an ally into a possible competitor

Sheilbh

Interesting read on what a European force in Ukraine could look like:
https://warontherocks.com/2025/03/willpower-not-manpower-is-europes-main-limitation-for-a-force-in-ukraine/

First time I've seen people try to actually break this down. I'm still, I'm afraid, a little pessimistic - do-able but requires political will and focus. Also basically will mean doing less elsewhere and, I think, a much higher risk of no US presence whatsoever. It's not insurmountable, I'm just not sure European leaders are ready to make those trade-offs or level with their people.

I hope I'm wrong.
Let's bomb Russia!

Zoupa

That article has the benefit of being the first I've also read with details on a possible deployment. Unfortunately, the owner is a trumpist and the authors are part of the Valdai club.

It's amazing really how deeply the kremlin has penetrated the west's intelligence/foreign policy landscape. I guess Krutchev was right in the end.

Sheilbh

I think Kofman's been a consistently useful analyst on Ukraine since the invasion began. From a Google search the last contribution he had a Valdai was in 2018 - though still on their site (his three contributions: "Great power competition in 21st century", "Russia's problems in Syria", "What makes great power war possible"). I would expect an American researcher specialising in Russia and the USSR from a defence and military perspective to engage with their equivalent community in Russia - I'd only really consider that a black mark if they've been going/contributing since the invasion.

FWIW other listed contributors on Valdai include western journalists - such as European editor of the Economist, or FT or NYT's correspondents. As with analysts specialising in a region, it's their job.

Don't think Watling ever did anything with Valdai (too young).

No idea about the owner - I think the piece is good (though I know nothing on military stuff). It seems do-able, but I'm not sure we'll do it.
Let's bomb Russia!