Common sense isn't know all....Just looking at the realities of a situation without emotion and avoiding magical thinking is not being a 'know all'.

It's being a know something.

Again, Russia will be negotiated with. I keep hearing these excuses but it's people not accepting reality. It's not going to be a 'position of strength' where they are knocked out of Ukraine or anything like as good as March 21.

Anyone making the point that the point is to weaken Russia need to actually look at what's happened. The Russian economy has suffered sure, but it's also growing at three and a half percent because we forced them to become protectionist/economical nationalist and manufacture themselves.....Not a good idea.

It also pushed Russia into the arms of China....which was the worst outcome for the west....and what do we get for it....we have to pay for rebuilding the infrastructure and economy of Ukraine for how long?

It strengthened BRICs and along with the American supplied Israeli fit happening in Gaza means that BRICs will be a major challenge for both the petrol dollar and dollar generally as America and the west generally has lost soft power in the middle east.

If those nations stop buying dollars and start using their own system then the Americans have to stop printing dollars.....That's very bad future planning for the west.

Not only that but sanctions cut two ways. This war hurts us as well on energy prices in the future and not only that defence spending will have to increase at some point and that will cut into other budgets.

Wars are only worth fighting if they are existential.....This was only ever existential for Ukraine and Russia....and the US state department policy towards Russia helped cause that.

For us, this is an elite class who are good at group thinking bad decisions and bad at chess.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Dec 2023 2.22pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

It's almost like some people get to an old age and just never learn anything from history.

Anyone remember Stalin? Anyone?

Remember that war we had with Stalin when he invaded Hungry anyone? Anyone?

No, I don't either....because we didn't have one.

We made numerous agreements with Stalin....A guy who actually did have plans to take over most of Europe and partly did due to decisions we took in WW2 but don't talk about.

The point being that once agreements are reached with Putin Nato is free to build up behind that demilitarised zone. No one needs to 'trust' do they....If Nato don't trust Putin then build up the militaries. Putin has said he isn't interested in attacking Nato but you know....apparently you can live with Stalin, who killed tens of millions but Putin....nope.

These points are so obvious it's painful to have to make them because this stuff is going to happen anyway and all he has is blowhard waffle to try to cover the bad chess player stances he defended.

As for his attitude towards BRICs....it's like he just doesn't follow what's going on...the very reason they exist. Like discussing reality with someone living on a cloud. There is reality and then there is what he's chewing.

The very attitude he has is the reason they are there in the first place.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Dec 2023 8.30pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I love these examples you keep picking, they really are great examples of shooting your arguments in the foot. Firstly Stalin did not invade Hungary as he had been dead for 3 years. It was Khrushchev.

Stalin did threaten the allies a few years earlier when he blockaded West Berlin, the allies just ignored it and he relented. Almost as if calling the Russians bluff has consistently been a good policy. Thanks for highlighting.

Secondly, Hungary is a great example because the US did want to directly intervene in the crisis, however Britain and France attacked Egypt literally at the same times during the Suez Crisis which massively undermined western attempts to get involved. Almost like international rules apply to both sides.

It just keeps getting better. As per the link you shared Hungary was a German ally up until 1944 when the Soviets - allied to the West invaded and removed the German occupation force who had invaded in March of the same year after Hungary tried to switch sides.

[Link]

Also Pointing out the Soviet Union literally collaborated with the Nazis to invade defenceless European states doesn't really do your argument much good when the one country to really resist (Finland) got to keep it's independence.

Edited by snytaxx (18 Dec 2023 11.41pm)

Edited by snytaxx (18 Dec 2023 11.42pm)

Ignoring the person attacks.

Your history is still way off which makes the points you are trying to make rather non sensical if not actually really damaging to your argument - that's what I'm pointing out. The Soviets allied themselves with Nazi Germany form 1939 to 1941 to carve Europe up into spheres of influence via Molotov Ribbentrop.

The winter war occured in 1939-40 (you can check this in the link you shared) while the Soviets were a German ally. They did fight the Russians off for the most part off with only a fraction of the aid they really needed. Odd how this makes me see so many parallels with Ukraine. The Germans did not ally with the finns until the following year when they invaded the USSR and that's when you get the continuation war which is a separate thing. So you appear to be confused as to what war you are actually talking about. Like how you weren't sure when the Soviets invaded Hungary to put down the Hungarian revolution.

None of your other examples come close to the representing the situation in Ukraine given that while interventions have always occurred with differing levels of legality and support depending on your viewpoint. What is key is that Borders have remained static since 1945. This does not reflect Putin's ambitions to literally remove Ukraine from the map through might is right.

Edited by snytaxx (19 Dec 2023 12.24am)

Where? I'm replying to your posts. What you are saying is completely wrong and not supported by any form of history. The war was over in 1940 after the USSR received a mauling and signed a peace treaty. You seem to be insinuating that the USSR would have just restarted the war again 'but for the Germans'. Firstly there is literally no evidence of this as its alternate history. Secondly its a really silly point to be making because for someone who claims that Russia is a country we can 'do business with' and 'should trust' as it argues that if Ukraine was to appease as you want them to, Russia would just come back a year later and we would be back at square one? How can you not see what a undermining arguement this is?

Yes, calling someone a 'fanboy' of an intelligence service (previous post) and marking their contributions as 'passive agressive nonsese'and now a 'snowflake' are attacks on a persons character is not really relevant to your arguements. Tone it down please.

This is just completely untrue and very misleading. As per the House of commons library. Aid was minimal between 2014-2022. The US spent less than $4 billion over 8 years. None of it weaponary, apart from Trump who gave them million worth of Javelins (about 421 units given their cost). Which did not happen until 2018.

[Link]

The 700,000 is a quote from the Ukrainian defence minister where he actually says this would be the total number if the army was supplemented with revervists, border gaurds, national gaurd and the police. the active size was actually more like 250,000 which although large, was not shocking given the country had been fighting in the Donbas since 2014.

Russia for reference, had over a million active with millions more in reserve prior to 2022.

its €92 billion euros of military 'aid' totaled in almost 2 years which when carved up over time is about the same as what we, the UK spend on our military per year and about what half Russia spends. Given there are hundreds of donor countries, this really isnt the large sum of money you think it is. Not that this can really be compared because its a more a case that Ukraine has received €92 billion worth of assets which is essentially had to distribute over its front line and use as best they could due to training issues etc.

You cant have this both ways, intervening aginst Russia = super dangerous (which I doubt but thats the topic of another post).

Versus have Ukraine voluntarily causing Russia to dig its own grave also being 'highly risky'.

This is just a dog whistle for 'better appease Putin'.

Love that you just copied my point about how you can't openly admit to supporting Russia so it has to be 'Ukraine bad' but applied to Putin. Unfortunately, when the lynch pin of your arguement is 'please appease Putin'. I am duty bound to point out what a untrustworthy character he is as agreed by you given you seem to think he is at least one of the unintellgent people in charge making decisions.

Edited by snytaxx (19 Dec 2023 8.57am)