Russia-Ukrainian War

[Xerxes]

3 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

 

Blocking EU aid to Ukraine, dragging feet on Russian sanctions, trying to block Finland and Sweden from NATO, trying to block Ukraine EU bid, cozying up to Putin, etc, etc etc.

 

I'm all for reconsidering once Orban is out of power.

 

@Luca is German

[Luke]

9 hours ago, ValueArb said:

Blocking EU aid to Ukraine, dragging feet on Russian sanctions, trying to block Finland and Sweden from NATO, trying to block Ukraine EU bid, cozying up to Putin, etc, etc etc.

 

I'm all for reconsidering once Orban is out of power.

Leaving nato ultimately would be a good thing for germany honestly, we can finally stop the non sense in ukraine, get our cheap energy back and drive up our industrial machine, not be involved in military conflicts all over the world and time to focus on our economy...getting to a position like switzerland, neutral...one can dream. 

 

 

[Xerxes]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html

 

“The war has absolutely “transformed” Russia’s economy, the NATO official said, from the post-Soviet period when oil was the leading sector. Now, defense is the largest sector of the Russian economy, and oil is paying for it.

That creates some long-term imbalances that will likely be problematic for Russia, but for now, it’s working, the NATO official and Basham, the US European Command official, both said.

“In the short term — say, the next 18 months or so — it may be unsophisticated, but it’s a durable economy,” the NATO official said.”

 

 

 

 

Edited March 11 by Xerxes

[ValueArb]

6 hours ago, Luca said:

Leaving nato ultimately would be a good thing for germany honestly, we can finally stop the non sense in ukraine, get our cheap energy back and drive up our industrial machine, not be involved in military conflicts all over the world and time to focus on our economy...getting to a position like switzerland, neutral...one can dream. 

 

 

 

Germany is the beneficiary of at least a trillion in US subsidies the last 70 years to rebuild it and protect it from the USSR and Russia. It leaving NATO would be great for the US, we could reduce NATO spending obligations by pulling our troops out and closing Ramstein, and use Germany as buffer space in the next big european war. While its being overrun would give us more time to align defenses for the rest of free europe. 

[Luke]

7 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

Germany is the beneficiary of at least a trillion in US subsidies the last 70 years to rebuild it and protect it from the USSR and Russia. It leaving NATO would be great for the US, we could reduce NATO spending obligations by pulling our troops out and closing Ramstein, and use Germany as buffer space in the next big european war. While its being overrun would give us more time to align defenses for the rest of free europe. 

About time we get independent from the US, especially considering what kind of presidents are voted for...is Trumpe a reliable nato partner? Absolutely not. 

 

Germany upsizes military spending, either gets control of french nuclear weapons in an alliance between the two countries, or asks for their own (lol). 

 

As you can see by my illustration, your nato partners already provide enough buffer space for us were you have to protect these countries before russia or china reaches us: Win Win. The rocket defense domes are produced in germany too, we shall up the spending! 

 

 

 

With better russian relations we can built/reuse our pipelines again, start a large industrial stimulus and germany will be great again! 

 

On top comes that we dont get drawn between the US and China, can keep china as an ally/market/ressource partner! 

[Luke]

So yes, leaving nato, stopping being a US puppet and looking out for our own interests will make a lot of sense. 

 

But hey, perhaps the US will start sanctions if we miss behave? Maybe stop sending the AI chips to germany too? lol! 

 

Imagine what could be possible in eurasia and how much wealth we could create? Short SP 500, long Eurasia 500?

Edited March 11 by Luca

[Xerxes]

For clarity, UK’ nuclear arsenal are close coordinated with that of US, both at the technical level and as well as planning purposes. 

Whereas the French nuclear forces is truly independent and sovereign. That French nuclear deterrence by extension de facto strengths NATO nuclear umbrella as well. But it is independent.  Cannot say the same about UK. 
 

Source: The Economist

 

[adesigar]

30 minutes ago, Luca said:

About time we get independent from the US, especially considering what kind of presidents are voted for...is Trumpe a reliable nato partner? Absolutely not. 

 

Germany upsizes military spending, either gets control of french nuclear weapons in an alliance between the two countries, or asks for their own (lol). 

 

As you can see by my illustration, your nato partners already provide enough buffer space for us were you have to protect these countries before russia or china reaches us: Win Win. The rocket defense domes are produced in germany too, we shall up the spending! 

 

 

 

With better russian relations we can built/reuse our pipelines again, start a large industrial stimulus and germany will be great again! 

 

On top comes that we dont get drawn between the US and China, can keep china as an ally/market/ressource partner! 

 

So in one post you went from. Trump is terrible to MGGA(Make Germany Great Again). Also the westernmost part of Russia is Kaliningrad. which is west of Lithuania and right above Poland.

Edited March 11 by adesigar

[John Hjorth]

16 hours ago, ValueArb said:

 

Blocking EU aid to Ukraine, dragging feet on Russian sanctions, trying to block Finland and Sweden from NATO, trying to block Ukraine EU bid, cozying up to Putin, etc, etc etc.

 

I'm all for reconsidering once Orban is out of power.

 

@ValueArb,

 

This is to me personally not a satisfactory reply to @Lucas polite request for elaboration of your personal postion [and I suppose to many other CoBF members] by posting "... cozying up to Putin, etc etc etc."

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Please just start a new topic in the general discussion forum here on CoBF about "Germany out of NATO", and I'll personally take care of getting it reported to get it ditched.

[Luke]

26 minutes ago, adesigar said:

So in one post you went from. Trump is terrible to MGGA(Make Germany Great Again). Also the westernmost part of Russia is Kaliningrad. which is west of Lithuania and right above Poland.

Trump is terrible for us and you have to counter him with his own medicine. America great again? Sure! Germany great again too  No more "common interests", sure! Then we all look out for our own and i think thats best. Germany is in a great position, lots of industry, lots of neighbors and potential. 

 

We need missile defenses for germany but most of all we need good relationships with russia

 

I am very sure putin is not interested in attacking germany, he actually rather looks at the US with pessimism if you read his speeches so i think he will be quite happy if we get back to diplomacy and the US chills on their own island. 

[Luke]

I have recently watched the navalny documentary and also his 1.5 hours video about putins abuse of his political power, stealing taxes etc. Yes, russia became an authoritarian regime with a few people with lots of power, with putin at the top. But he is also very paranoid and he hates having missiles close to his border that could bomb him away because of "missing democracy in russia" or whatever reason the US might make up. He is not interested in conquering the world but rather preserving a wide margin of safety around his country so he can live in peace and play his emperor game. That's for the Russian people to solve and not for us, we try to be diplomatic and take the resources necessary and maintain peaceful relations and focus on our own...

[Luke]

 

Highly recommended

 

 

[Luke]

1 minute ago, Luca said:

I have recently watched the navalny documentary and also his 1.5 hours video about putins abuse of his political power, stealing taxes etc. Yes, russia became an authoritarian regime with a few people with lots of power, with putin at the top. But he is also very paranoid and he hates having missiles close to his border that could bomb him away because of "missing democracy in russia" or whatever reason the US might make up. He is not interested in conquering the world but rather preserving a wide margin of safety around his country so he can live in peace and play his emperor game. That's for the Russian people to solve and not for us, we try to be diplomatic and take the resources necessary and maintain peaceful relations and focus on our own...

It's highly likely that one can get peace with Putin taking his regions of interests and Ukraine promising to stay a neutral country. 

 

We won't get peace with "Ukraine is independent and can decide to join NATO" and "Ukraine gets everything back". 

[Gregmal]

As an American I’ve been disgusted by all the warmongering that’s been brought about by the current regime…but it gets to another level when the SOTU headlines are that we’re “determined to avoid sending troops to Ukraine”….huh???? Who TF was ever even talking about sending US troops? It’s bad enough we re wasting billions so a dementia ridden puppet can play stratego….now we need to kill our own over some foreign pissing match? Fuck these people.

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, Luca said:

 

 

Every powerful nation with significant regional muscle likes a buffer zone around it (Monroe Doctrine anybody?) - in fact as I've argued the Russian invasion of Ukraine was principally triggered by its slow slide from a kind of ambiguous buffer zone (providing both NATO countries & Russia comfort)......into something much more akin to a US/EU client state....ya know the type of place where the US Vice President's son is on the board of the largest company there.....and where a current US sitting president is so secure in his leverage over a sitting Ukrainian president (due to aid payments) that he can instruct him on a phone call to investigate a domestic political rival.

 

The great tragedy of Ukraine - is that we in the West put it so firmly 'in play' with our hubristic liberal democratic nation building dreams and superior economic resources vs. Russia....to be clear I'm not advocating for some kind of past Ukraine abandonment strategy where we ceded the country to Putin to become a Russian vassal state....I'm advocating for a Kissenger-esque balance of power strategy for Ukraine in the 2000's one where it was neither fully a Russian nor USA vaseel state......a strategic approach that never put it firmly in the Russian column or the West's column......put more crudely....just because you can afford to pump billions more of aid/economic investment into Ukraine than Russia could in the 2000's to buy their allegiance doesn't mean you should have. We failed at this game in Belarus might I add....seems all our love and attention was spent on Ukraine in this period.

 

That's ancient history - the correct strategy moving forward is to give Ukraine exactly what it needs to regain most of the territory lost with the highest priority placed on the economically important regions which allow Ukraine in the longer term to be somewhat self-sustaining economically and militarily. Some landlocked Oblasts in the East are not hugely important economically and due to Ukrainian populations fleeing there are no longer ethnically hybrid regions...they are simply now edge outs of Russia...pragmatism would suggest that these regions form the basis of concessions to Russia in the future.

Edited March 11 by changegonnacome

[Xerxes]

It is worse than that, after betting all on “making sure Russia cannot win, making sure Ukraine does not lose”, we might be living in a world in 2025 where there is a change in US administration and policy for better or worse. 

If it was matter of national security under Biden, how could “national security” shifts so suddenly due to an election.

if there is a 180 degree a year from now, maybe it was not a matter of national security, but a nice to have. 

 

[changegonnacome]

33 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

If it was matter of national security under Biden, how could “national security” shifts so suddenly due to an election.

 

Exactly - cause the reality no wants to hear is that Ukraine, like Afghanistan.....when push comes to shove is not truly strategically important to the United States.....its unimportance is DEMONSTRATED by the fact that it has become a political football in D.C........this rarely ever occurs with truly important matters of national security which, in the main, unite the political parties......Biden is doing an extreme version of the most repeated trick in history which Russian threat inflation as per his State of the Union speech (which he may actually believe btw but he's on the face of it wrong).....Trump is correctly stating the obvious by questioning such deep US involvement....where he's wrong to a certain extent is that America has by its INVOLVEMENT there made Ukraine strategically important...not because Ukraine itself is important.....but because China is watching what happens there and how the US deals with the problem its got itself into....China is now measuring US political resolve.....and attempting to apply what it learns to whatever aspirations it has in the South China sea....for this reason Ukraine has become IMO hugely strategically important but not for the reasons of 'defeating' Russia.....but as a mechanism by which China might be deterred in Asia.

Edited March 11 by changegonnacome

[Luke]

45 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Every powerful nation with significant regional muscle likes a buffer zone around it (Monroe Doctrine anybody?) - in fact as I've argued the Russian invasion of Ukraine was principally triggered by its slow slide from a kind of ambiguous buffer zone (providing both NATO countries & Russia comfort)......into something much more akin to a US/EU client state....ya know the type of place where the US Vice President's son is on the board of the largest company there.....and where a current US sitting president is so secure in his leverage over a sitting Ukrainian president (due to aid payments) that he can instruct him on a phone call to investigate a domestic political rival.

 

The great tragedy of Ukraine - is that we in the West put it so firmly 'in play' with our hubristic liberal democratic nation building dreams and superior economic resources vs. Russia....to be clear I'm not advocating for some kind of past Ukraine abandonment strategy where we ceded the country to Putin to become a Russian vassal state....I'm advocating for a Kissenger-esque balance of power strategy for Ukraine in the 2000's one where it was neither fully a Russian nor USA vaseel state......a strategic approach that never put it firmly in the Russian column or the West's column......put more crudely....just because you can afford to pump billions more of aid/economic investment into Ukraine than Russia could in the 2000's to buy their allegiance doesn't mean you should have. We failed at this game in Belarus might I add....seems all our love and attention was spent on Ukraine in this period.

+

45 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

That's ancient history - the correct strategy moving forward is to give Ukraine exactly what it needs to regain most of the territory lost with the highest priority placed on the economically important regions which allow Ukraine in the longer term to be somewhat self-sustaining economically and militarily. Some landlocked Oblasts in the East are not hugely important economically and due to Ukrainian populations fleeing there are no longer ethnically hybrid regions...they are simply now edge outs of Russia...pragmatism would suggest that these regions form the basis of concessions to Russia in the future.

The problem is the current government in ukraine is just nuts, selensky is on a suicide mission, there is likely more corruption than we know. All we can do is force them to do the right thing, cut off any weapon supply, force them into capitulation and then organize peace talks with the russians. Best outcome would be that the west agrees to neutrality for ukraine, probably the regions putin wants will remain in his hand and then some rebuilding can take place with stimulus from the the larger nations, US, europe, china, russia. 

 

But you need willing leaders for that and i really dont see that right now unfortunately.

[changegonnacome]

3 minutes ago, Luca said:

The problem is the current government in ukraine is just nuts, selensky is on a suicide mission, there is likely more corruption than we know. All we can do is force them to do the right thing, cut off any weapon supply, force them into capitulation and then organize peace talks with the russians. Best outcome would be that the west agrees to neutrality for ukraine, probably the regions putin wants will remain in his hand and then some rebuilding can take place with stimulus from the the larger nations, US, europe, china, russia. 

 

But you need willing leaders for that and i really dont see that right now unfortunately.

 

Covered my thought on this in the post above your in this bit down below - which I think is a point orginally made by Niall Ferguson....and for which when he raised I must say I totally agree with the logic.

 

"Trump is correctly stating the obvious by questioning such deep US involvement....where he's wrong to a certain extent is that America has by its INVOLVEMENT there made Ukraine strategically important...not because Ukraine itself is important.....but because China is watching what happens there and how the US deals with the problem its got itself into....China is now measuring US political resolve.....and attempting to apply what it learns to whatever aspirations it has in the South China sea....for this reason Ukraine has become IMO hugely strategically important but not for the reasons of 'defeating' Russia.....but as a mechanism by which China might be deterred in Asia."

Edited March 11 by changegonnacome

[Luke]

5 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Covered my thought on this in the post above your in this bit down below - which I think is a point orginally made by Niall Ferguson....and for which when he raised I must say I totally agree with the logic.

 

"Trump is correctly stating the obvious by questioning such deep US involvement....where he's wrong to a certain extent is that America has by its INVOLVEMENT there made Ukraine strategically important...not because Ukraine itself is important.....but because China is watching what happens there and how the US deals with the problem its got itself into....China is now measuring US political resolve.....and attempting to apply what it learns to whatever aspirations it has in the South China sea....for this reason Ukraine has become IMO hugely strategically important but not for the reasons of 'defeating' Russia.....but as a mechanism by which China might be deterred in Asia."

Yeah this is a very good point i think fukuyama pointed something like this out in 2022 after the invasion in a newspaper article. 

 

I previously thought chinas population would rage about the death count if they invade but in russia they only send the rural low educated guys who nobody misses. Educated st petersburg/moscow folks are not drafted. Combine that with a very staged media sector and you can prevent public concern easily, could happen in china too....

Edited March 11 by Luca

[ValueArb]

1 hour ago, Luca said:

It's highly likely that one can get peace with Putin taking his regions of interests and Ukraine promising to stay a neutral country. 

 

We won't get peace with "Ukraine is independent and can decide to join NATO" and "Ukraine gets everything back". 

 

How can Ukraine promise to stay a neutral country when Putin has already said its always been a part of Russia? How does that work exactly to stop Putin from finishing what he started?

[Xerxes]

As the saying goes:

”war takes a life of its own”. 
 

who / why / when it all started becomes all meaningless with passage of time. 
 

———-

Ex: It didn’t matter if the Iraqi started the war in 1980. By 1988 the notion of “winning” was no longer the same as it was in 1981. 
———-

 

Worse, scares of a long war, shapes the thinking of that generation that fought the war. Who later became decision makers. War may have ended but the politics and the hard feeling stays. It takes another full generation to get past that. Long past the attention timespan of an average Westerner, itching for his/her war from safety. 

 

One thing for sure, post-ceasefire in the Eastern Europe is the perfect ground for Kremlin to continue “its work”. There will be enough “grey zone” and holes to drive several An-225 through (not that the plane still exists). What will be an “exit valve” for Western powers after being too tired of playing game of thrones will be an open field for the Kremlin. After all, what happens on your border is actually a matter of national security. As it is for the Kremlin. 
 

The cycle will go on 

[ValueArb]

2 hours ago, John Hjorth said:

 

@ValueArb,

 

This is to me personally not a satisfactory reply to @Lucas polite request for elaboration of your personal postion [and I suppose to many other CoBF members] by posting "... cozying up to Putin, etc etc etc."

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Please just start a new topic in the general discussion forum here on CoBF about "Germany out of NATO", and I'll personally take care of getting it reported to get it ditched.

 

Point out where I was impolite and I'll edit my posts to remove the offending statements, that wasn't my intent.

 

But please don't tell me that pointing out how Germany, Hungary and Turkey are unreliable partners is impolite, when it's just a statement of fact. 

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/us-ambassador-slams-hungary-pm-viktor-orban-embracing-russia-over-nato/

[Luke]

5 minutes ago, ValueArb said:

How can Ukraine promise to stay a neutral country when Putin has already said its always been a part of Russia? How does that work exactly to stop Putin from finishing what he started?

Retired german general of our air forces, ex chief of staff german forces and ex nato military committee chairman for 3 years (Harald Kujat): 

 

 

"ukraine was prevented from signing the peace treaty"

"at the 29th of march Zelensky posted on the internet how the negotiations were, on the 28th we find interviews in Russian television of positive feedback by such negotiations. The istanbul communique was even already initialed BUT ukraine was urged by foreign parties to stop negotiations..."

 

English subtitles available. 

 

[Luke]

Putin doesnt want to take over ukraine completely, nor does he want to go further than ukraine. Main concerns were foreign interventions in ukraine regarding their security positioning...the peace treaty was almost there and the chinese published their 10 point plan of which one point was to get back to the negotiating table. 

 

Whats the end game? Complete destruction of ukraine and capitulation after 1m+ of men were killed slowly in this war...they will never beat the russian forces and only if we really go into this war which would lead to what exactly? 

 

 

EDIT: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Kujat

 

Edited March 11 by Luca