Jump to content

FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine


z1812

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

And how much nukes were deployed in Baltic countries, bordering with Russia throughout years of their NATO membership? 

I don't know. Do you know?

Modern nukes can be deployed in many types of missile warheads or large calibre artillery shells. 

There is virtually no way to check it.

Edited by dbsapp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of us know how this whole thing is going to shake out.  But one thing is for sure:  Putin is saying to Europe, Ukraine, & the US "I am a military threat and I cannot be trusted in business dealings".  Does this is make it more or less likely that NATO countries will increase military spending?  That Ukraine will get advanced AT & AA weap;ons from NATO? 

If Putin wants to feel more secure, he might start by actually being a good trading partner and nieghbor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Putin is saying to Europe, Ukraine, & the US "I am a military threat and I cannot be trusted in business dealings".  Does this is make it more or less likely that NATO countries will increase military spending?  That Ukraine will get advanced AT & AA weap;ons from NATO? 

If Putin wants to feel more secure, he might start by actually being a good trading partner and nieghbor.

Once again, you mess up miltary propaganda and reality. It's really mad to claim that Putin said it or meant it. 

By the way Russia is the 2nd trading partner of Ukraine and the 5th trading partner of EU.

Edited by dbsapp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

I don't know. Do you know?

Modern nukes can be deployed in many types of missile warheads or large calibre artillery shells. 

There is virtually no way to check it.

How? Mighty Russian GRU, SVR, satellites, spies, hosts of EU politics, corrupted with Gazprom money didn't take any info? There are no huge military maneuvers near Estonia, there are no statements "you deployed nukes in Narva, take them back immediately!" So, maybe there are no any nukes in Baltic states.

Edited by Haiduk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dbsapp said:

That is precisely why NATO rules forbid membership of countries with territorial disputes.

If you know this, how is it that you don't see that it undermines the whole Russian demand that "Ukraine must not join NATO" argument as the conflict in Donbas prevents Ukraine joining.

( probably why Russia started the whole "separatist" thing in the first place, but that's a different thread )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I am most concerned about is the Ukrainians pairing up with other uber-aggressive entities to coordinate their attacks.  I heard from my totally real friend Q that Ukraine was coordinating an invasion of russia w a Belgian attack on France and an Austrian attack on Germany.  When this happens remember you heard it here first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Haiduk said:

Did Russia threaten Ukraine with "consequenses" if we do not agree on Russian conditions around Donbas?

Ukraine already agreed to them when it signed Minsk agreements. The problem is Ukraine was ready for a compromise when there was a real and imminent threat. When the threat went away - it threw the agreements it signed in a trash bin.

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Haiduk said:

If these TV channels continuosly provide Russian propaganda narratives about "civil war", dividing of Ukraine, when showmens and guests allow themeselve  to pour mud on own country, language, culture, these channels must be closed.

I am not a big expert on U.S. internal politics, but I think that your rhetoric is somewhat ultra conservative, like right wing in Republican party. And outdated a bit, from 1970-s may be. It's ironic that Biden supports exact copies of his internal opponents.  In addition, many Ukrainian nationalists think, that Russians are actually "Asiatic race". Ideals cost nothing nowadays. (

Russia is ruled by same right conservatives, to be fair. Best receipt for war - to let your local rightists become a government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motivation of Putin is a little like Viagra, the original prescription was for angina. Nowadays it is sold for a well-known side effect. Same with his policies, it has caused an increase in the price of oil. So far, he has made an extra $3 Billion US this year. Not bad for a little sabre rattling. 

Russia Oil Exports - 2021 Data - 2022 Forecast - 2000-2020 Historical - Chart - News (tradingeconomics.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, IMHO said:

Ukraine already agreed to them when it signed Minsk agreements. The problem is Ukraine was ready for a compromise when there was a real and imminent threat. When the threat went away - it threw the agreements it signed in a trash bin.

This is exactly the Russian problem with "half way measures".  This would have to change. The agreement would have to be monitorable and enforceable from the Russian side.

In my personal opinion country that ignores treaties signed at gunpoint by a aggressor have my support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DMS said:

your rhetoric is somewhat ultra conservative, like right wing in Republican party

If you remember Haiduk openly said in a discussion in 2014 or 2015 that people from the East of Ukraine who want to speak Russian should pack up and move to Russia. And if they don't do it by themselves then ideologically pure Ukrainians (obviously from the Western Ukraine) will make sure they do. As a side note I'm far from being a fan of the current brinkmanship - certain folks in Russia should stop living in the past, start thinking about economy of today etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

In my personal opinion country that ignores treaties signed at gunpoint by a aggressor have my support.

Obviously Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan have your support :) Because their respective surrender documents of WWII were signed exactly at gunpoint. Diplomatic agreements exists not to make one side morally superior to the other but to avoid / stop wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, danfrodo said:

None of us know how this whole thing is going to shake out.  But one thing is for sure:  Putin is saying to Europe, Ukraine, & the US "I am a military threat and I cannot be trusted in business dealings".  Does this is make it more or less likely that NATO countries will increase military spending?  That Ukraine will get advanced AT & AA weap;ons from NATO? 

If Putin wants to feel more secure, he might start by actually being a good trading partner and nieghbor.

Well said, Dan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dbsapp said:

Russia doesn't have any obligations to sell gas to Europe that had not been contracted. 

It's worse than that. European energy companies CAN buy additional gas from Russia as part of the long term contracts. Yet they chose not to do so since this gas is sold at current spot market prices and European energy companies believe they will fall after the winter period ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, IMHO said:

Obviously Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan have your support :) Because their respective surrender documents of WWII were signed exactly at gunpoint. Diplomatic agreements exists not to make one side morally superior to the other but to avoid / stop wars.

Difference is that Germany and Japan were the aggressors.

I said: "gunpoint by a aggressor"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, IMHO said:

Obviously Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan have your support :) Because their respective surrender documents of WWII were signed exactly at gunpoint. Diplomatic agreements exists not to make one side morally superior to the other but to avoid / stop wars.

What a brilliant example of Russian curved reality! Comparing us with Germany and Japan, is equal to assertion that Ukraine is aggressor. But reality is other. Russia is internationally recognized aggressor and occupant. Because Russia started the war with occupation of Crimea, hybrid attemts to ruine our state with so-called "people republics" with creating of so-called Novorossia, and finally, with Strelkov band, which started military phase. So, we as a recognized victim of aggression, have full right do not execute any agreements "under gunpoint", according to article 52 of Viena Convention of the laws and treaties. Occupied part of Donbas never be incorporated back to Ukraine on Russian terms like a lever of influence. Any Ukrainian politician, which dare to do that, will fly to Rostov, like Yanukovich. If he has a time to fly, of course..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The usual suspects trying to derail a thread with whatsaboutism, name calling, false equivalency statements to side track the main issue.

How about addressing the title of the thread a give us an insight on what you think Putin is trying to achieve? 

Personally I think he is creating a context to annex more of Ukraine to solve the water crisis in Crimea and perhaps even get regime change, but I think he has overlooked the downside and is in a corner which he is struggling to get out of. Even geniuses make mistakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, IMHO said:

Ukrainian Su-25 bombs Lugansk on 02.06.2014.

War is ugly business. When bullets start flying grannies and babies are going to die. I cannot say anything about this case you linked, but things like it happen for many possible reasons.

I was referring to who was the aggressor in starting the conflict. Of course when war is ongoing both sides are aggressive and things get very ugly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...