UK: 97% of Moscow army is in Ukraine

[beagle9]

They threatened catastrophic consequences when we offered support, guns, drones, tanks... Whatever we do they saber rattle. Are you blind?


Russias "defense" excuse is stupid since you know, they aren't defending anything. They're in a country they don't belong in.

We say they are in a country they don't belong in, but the Russians feel undoubtedly very strongly and different about that, and isn't Ukraine in Russia's sphere of influence over in that part of the world ????

Is not Ukraine in what Russia considers it's security buffer zone against NATO, and wasn't Ukraine a former Soviet Union state or territory ?????

So us being involved in that part of the world is a huge issue with Russia I would imagine, and then us choosing to support Ukraine (a nation that has been in a semi hot war with Russia since 2014), and who for some reason the average American can't really understand why Russia saw the need to go to war with Ukraine, but we are convinced that it's the right thing by our government, even if we don't understand it still..........

The war has since caused great tensions between us and Russia the two great Nuclear powers in the world still....So if one is helping another to kill the soldier's of the other said Nuclear power, then do we expect the other to say nothing in response to that ??

 

[Confederate Soldier]

We say they are in a country they don't belong in, but the Russians feel undoubtedly very strongly and different about that, and isn't Ukraine in Russia's sphere of influence over in that part of the world ????

Russians are assholes, no they don't belong. Ukrainians think so too. They remember the 1930s famines, and the secret police days.

Is not Ukraine in what Russia considers it's security buffer zone against NATO, and wasn't Ukraine a former Soviet Union state or territory ?????

Too bad the Russians don't have a say. If we went by what they want, they'd move the goalposts every damn year.

So us being involved in that part of the world is a huge issue with Russia I would imagine, and then us choosing to support Ukraine (a nation that has been in a semi hot war with Russia since 2014), and who for some reason the average American can't really understand why Russia saw the need to go to war with Ukraine, but we are convinced that it's the right thing by our government, even if we don't understand it still..........

It doesn't take a lot to see Russia, a classic enemy, and see Ukraine, and support the little guy.

The war has since caused great tensions between us and Russia the two great Nuclear powers in the world still....So if one is helping another to kill the soldier's of the other said Nuclear power, then do we expect the other to say nothing in response to that ??

If they want to live, yes.

 

[beagle9]

Russians are assholes, no they don't belong. Ukrainians think so too. They remember the 1930s famines, and the secret police days.




Too bad the Russians don't have a say. If we went by what they want, they'd move the goalposts every damn year.


It doesn't take a lot to see Russia, a classic enemy, and see Ukraine, and support the little guy.






If they want to live, yes.

Reread my last statement, and your last answer, it made no sense the answer to it didn't.

Again if we align ourselves with the nation that is at war with Russia or Russia with them, and we aid that nation to kill Russia's soldier's and destroy it's equipment by the tonnage, then you expect for Russia not to make a statement or threat against us doing that ??

 

[Confederate Soldier]

Reread my last statement, and your last answer, it made no sense the answer to it didn't.

Again if we align ourselves with the nation that is at war with Russia or Russia with them, and we aid that nation to kill Russia's soldier's and destroy it's equipment by the tonnage, then you expect for Russia not to make a statement or threat against us doing that ??

Yes, because they should know that they're outmanned, outgunned, outsmarted, and we aren't going to listen...

 

[beagle9]

Yes, because they should know that they're outmanned, outgunned, outsmarted, and we aren't going to listen...

True, but they also have the nukes that evens the score, so you should expect that they would saber rattle in rhetoric while at war with their neighbour... I wasn't surprised, and so are they bluffing or not ? Undoubtedly NATO thinks that they aren't bluffing or it would have went in gun's a blazing to help the Ukranian nation, but it didn't. So escalation is the buzz word that everyone is trying their damnedest to avoid, but as Russia is pushed backwards at the severe cost of it's forces and equipment, it could be setting the stage for a tactical nuke to be used in Ukraine. Not good, but it's possible if desperation wins the day.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

True, but they also have the nukes that evens the score, so you should expect that they would saber rattle in rhetoric while at war with their neighbour... I wasn't surprised, and so are they bluffing or not ? Undoubtedly NATO thinks that they aren't bluffing or it would have went in gun's a blazing to help the Ukranian nation, but it didn't. So escalation is the buzz word that everyone is trying their damnedest to avoid, but as Russia is pushed backwards at the severe cost of it's forces and equipment, it could be setting the stage for a tactical nuke to be used in Ukraine. Not good, but it's possible if desperation wins the day.

That's if you think the Rusks somehow kept their nukes up to date, but not every other piece of military equipment they own...

 

[beagle9]

That's if you think the Rusks somehow kept their nukes up to date, but not every other piece of military equipment they own...

True, but it's a gamble for sure.

 

[Kruska]

Putin could do nothing in the way you described above. After taking Crimea and virtually taking a half of Donbas, there were no chances of pro-Russian government ever getting majority. It is somewhat like taking out California and New York and expecting the Dems regaining power.

I don't quite get your meaning.

Let's keep right and wrong out of this issue as we have done before - just a rundown and analysis of factual occurrences.

During 1990-1991 The Soviet-union State-council and representatives of it's Soviet-republics had numerous discussions/meetings in regards to the further future of the Soviet-union. The U.S.S.R. was officially dissolved on December 26, 1991.
On Aug. 23rd 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declares itself independent.
On Aug. 24th 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic changed its name to Ukraine. (UN added admission, since the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had already been a UN member.
On Aug. 28th 1991, Russia (Boris) recognizes Ukrainian independence.
On Dec. 1st 1991, Ukraine holds it's referendum for independence.

It's clearly of notice that Boris had recognized Ukrainian independence more or less 4 month before Ukraine itself even held an official referendum in that matter. Not just simply due to Moscow not being able to stop the falling apart of the Soviet-union, but with clear intentions deriving from previous discussions and probable agreements-resolutions.

Such a probable agreement-resolution was the Almaty deceleration on December 21st 1991, confirming the founding of CIS - it's initial founding members are Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
The main context in this declaration is the respect of CIS states amongst each others sovereign borders and a joint command under Russian leadership in regards to nuclear weapons.
In 1992-1994 several amendments are concluded between the CIS members.
It's main context - economic cooperation and military cooperation also in conjunction with a joint armed forces - again under Moscow command, and the clear commitment of not engaging into actions or deliberations that would jeopardize or endanger the national security of it's member states.

In 1994 The USA and the UK bring themselves into the picture via concluding an agreement together with Russia in regards to the hand-over and dismantling of the nuclear arsenal stationed in Ukraine. Furthermore the USA unilaterally issuing security assistance towards Ukraine if the latter commits itself to the NPT treaty.
Also in 1994 despite the Almaty deceleration and it's signed amendments by it's CIS members - NATO welcomes Ukraine into its Partnership for Peace program - including others, even including Russia.

It's this year 1994 that gives birth to all future Ukraine/USA-Russia issues and disputes, mostly due to the USA's unilateral security assistance deceleration towards Ukraine on Feb. 8th 1994.
This contradiction or double standard of Ukraine resulted into the Budapest memorandum Dec. 5th 1994 - the UK, USA and Russia commit all to respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, and promise to not threaten or use force against Ukraine. However the US unilateral declared security assistance still stands, and so does the Almaty deceleration in regards of CIS states/members not endangering each others security.

NATO welcoming active CIS members to join the NATO partnership for peace program - results in a collision of interests between two military blocks - One the Russian lead CIS and that of the US lead NATO. Actually it forms the basis for a diplomatic nightmare.
To make things even more problematic Ukraine on July 9th 1997 - Kuchma meets with NATO leaders in Madrid, where they sign a document establishing a distinctive partnership between Ukraine and NATO. Latest by then a clear/obvious conflict of interests arrises between Ukraine, also being an Almaty signatory and it's amendments - In case other CIS members should feel their national security threatened by NATO or amongst each other.

In March 2000 a "new" political figure becomes Russian president - Putin makes absolutely no secret of his detest toward Global dominance by the USA and his objection towards a continued NATO Eastward expansion. In Nov./Dec. 2004, the second so-called color revolution in Ukraine - a year after Georgia’s Rose Revolution sets up the alarm bells in Moscow.

There is no commitment or clear declaration by NATO - to refrain from it's Eastward expansion - especially not in regards to Ukraine. (e.g. neutrality) On the contra the standard formulation being continuously forwarded; - it's any countries free choice to become a member of NATO.

In 2006 due to the increasing political friction between a (pro-Western Ukraine) and Russia - Putin for the first time makes use of cutting of gas-supplies as a political weapon.

April 3rd 2008, NATO debates about whether it should offer Membership Action Plans (MAPs)—forerunners to membership—to Croatia, Georgia, and Ukraine. But in discussions between NATO officials and Russian President Putin, Putin expresses opposition to extending MAPs to Georgia and Ukraine. Unable to reach a consensus, NATO members decline to offer a MAP to either. During a separate meeting, Putin reportedly tells U.S. President George W. Bush that Ukraine is “not even a real nation-state.”

Shorty after that on August 2008 - It is Georgia that deploys military towards the breakaway province of South Ossetia. Just as if Boris would have deployed Soviet military towards the break away province of Ukraine in 1991. !! In a response Russia attacks Georgia - Yushchenko (Ukraine) sides with Georgia, further increasing tensions between Kyiv and Moscow. Russia subsequently recognizes both republics as independent states, though neither is recognized as an independent state by most countries.

September 2008 - The EU and Ukraine begin talks on a new “association agreement” and issue a communique that “Ukraine’s future is in Europe.” The EU considers such agreements to be legally binding contracts that commit countries to developing closer political, legal, and trading ties with the EU and sometimes lead to accession to the bloc. Implementation of the association agreement could mean major changes in Ukraine that would bring it closer to EU standards.

This now brings about the second double standard beheld by Ukraine in regards to its role with NATO and being a CIS member, and now between being a CIS member and declaring a parallel association to the EU.
Let's keep in mind - Ukraine's official process of withdrawing from cooperation agreements within the CIS started only after the coup d'etat in February 2014. In August 2018, Ukraine closed its representative office at the statutory and other bodies of the CIS in Minsk.

From 2008 - 2014 Ukraine faces endless internal political unrest - due to it's prevailing corruption issues - vividly exploited by the Western and Russia's government and their institutions.

e.g.; in May 2013 Yanukovych has Tymoshenko arrested for “abuse of office,” and she is sentenced to seven years in prison. International observers see the prosecution as a politically motivated way for Yanukovych to sideline his main opponent, and the U.S. ambassador calls the trial a farce, a view shared by many. The jailing stalls negotiations with the European Union over improving trade and political ties. Brussels refuses to finalize the association agreement at the December EU-Ukraine summit in Kyiv.
e.g.; November 2013, The Ukrainian government states that it will not sign the association agreement at an upcoming EU-Ukraine summit in Lithuania. Yanukovych’s administration announces it will resume dialogue with Russia about joining the Eurasian Customs Union. Protests begin in Kyiv almost immediately.

Feb. 2014 the Euromaidan protests lead to Ukraine's government collapse. Ukraine’s acting president and acting prime minister make it clear that a top priority will be to bring Ukraine closer to Europe. aka NATO.
Feb/March 2014 - due to Ukraine's government's chaotic situation - Putin seizes the chance to take Crimea more or less unopposed, where the majority of residents are ethnically Russian. Soon after, Russian authorities hold a referendum in which Crimean voters choose to secede and join Russia. A major criteria of the UN charter - beholds "The peoples right to self-determination" Instead of absolutely ensuring a 'correct" peoples vote - only the EU (no legal rights at all in this matter) and the USA (also no legal rights at all in this matter) declared the referendum “illegal and illegitimate,” and Washington promises it will never be accepted.
Even though the UN never committed itself or demanded a re-vote under UN observation, the UN General Assembly votes 100–11 against recognizing the referendum result and Russia is expelled from the group of eight. Whether Putin would have accepted such a re-vote or objected towards it - we will never know - also he is to blame solely for not conduction or requesting such an UN observed re-vote.
So the fault lies clearly with the UN and Putin.

April 2014 - civil war breaks out in the Donbas area - an armed pro-Russian separatist movement to seize government buildings across eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region. By early 2022, fighting has resulted in more than fourteen thousand deaths, a quarter of them civilians, and two million internally displaced Ukrainians. Parts of two regions—Donetsk and Luhansk—declare themselves independent republics. If Putin incited this situation or if Ukrainian methods directed towards Ukrainian-Russians caused the final outbreak - I wasn't there so I wouldn't know.

However it is common knowledge that all big military powers are playing, initiating such scenarios all the time, and the methods used by all sides to deal with such occurrences are also known.

May 2014, Ukraine's Poroshenko promises to battle corruption and U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration signals interest in helping Poroshenko battle corruption and assigns Vice President Joe Biden as it's chief envoy for Ukraine. The US government "officially" becomes directly involved in the internal politics of Ukraine - a sovereign country, prone to becoming a place of war!!
Feb. 2015, Putin and Poroshenko meet in Minsk to negotiate a cease-fire in eastern Ukraine. They reach an agreement, shepherded by French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The cease fire agreement is in general observed - fighting and shelling along the line of contact still flare up from time to time. Both sides trade accusations on violations of the deal, Russia withdraws it's heavy military equipment.

Putin and Ukraine in general stick to the agreement - though it is foreseeable that sooner or later both will continue to incite or support civil unrest along the ceasefire line.
Despite this fragile situation and the Minsk accord, on Dec. 2017, US President Trump approves lethal arms sales to Ukraine, moving beyond the nonlethal military assistance that the Obama administration had allowed. Around Spring 2017, the U.S. Congress created the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which authorized hundreds of millions of dollars in additional military aid for Ukraine. NATO personal actively and ever increasingly became involved within Ukraine and provided training grounds (mostly in Germany) for the UAF.

April 21st. 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian and political novice, wins a presidential runoff with more than 70 percent of the vote. Two months later, Zelensky’s party also wins a majority of parliamentary seats, marking the first time since independence that Ukraine’s president has a majority party in the parliament. Zelensky had campaigned against corruption and poverty, and pledged to end the war in the east.
Never-mind the comedian part, the simple fact that a political novice is supposed to run Ukraine under the prevailing circumstances - beholds ultimately - that professional politicians and institutions from the West will be running the show.

June 2020, Ukraine is named a NATO Enhanced Opportunities Partner in June, joining Australia, Georgia, Finland, Jordan, and Sweden as countries with deeper cooperation on NATO-led missions and exercises. The alliance says the new status “does not prejudge any decisions on NATO membership.” In September, Zelensky approves Ukraine’s new National Security Strategy, which provides for the development of a distinctive partnership with NATO with the aim of gaining membership. The previous year, Zelensky’s predecessor signed a constitutional amendment committing Ukraine to become a member of NATO and the EU.

Feb. 2021, Zelensky orders a series of measures against oligarchs, notably Viktor Medvedchuk, a businessman, chairman of Ukraine’s largest pro-Russia political party, and close friend of Putin’s. The government freezes his financial assets for three years and shuts down three pro-Russia TV channels that Medvedchuk controls, alleging that they broadcast “misinformation.” That May, authorities lodge treason charges against Medvedchuk, claiming that he transferred oil and gas production licenses in Crimea to Russian authorities. Zelensky says the moves are necessary to defend the country, while Putin blasts them as motivated by anti-Russia bias.

Feb. 2021, further, continued substantial weapon packages are forwarded by the USA and NATO members towards the UAF. From April onward Russian moves are observed towards assembling a larger military formation.
Nov.-Jan. 2021/22, Russia continues to mobilize tens of thousands of troops along the border with Ukraine, the Russian government demands a set of security assurances from the United States and NATO. This includes a draft treaty calling for tight restrictions on U.S. and NATO political and military activities, notably a ban on NATO expansion. The Biden administration delivers written responses in January; few details are made public, but it rejects Russia’s insistence that Ukraine never be accepted into NATO and proposes new parameters for security in the region.

Feb. 2022 Russian forces are deployed to Ukraine’s separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk after the Kremlin recognizes them as independent. The military action raises concerns that Russia will try to assert full control over the regions, which are partially governed by Ukraine. In an address to Russia, Putin says the government in Kyiv is a "Puppet Regime" run by foreign powers and that NATO ignored Moscow’s security demands.

24th February 2022 - well we all know what happened.

 

[beagle9]

I don't quite get your meaning.

Let's keep right and wrong out of this issue as we have done before - just a rundown and analysis of factual occurrences.

During 1990-1991 The Soviet-union State-council and representatives of it's Soviet-republics had numerous discussions/meetings in regards to the further future of the Soviet-union. The U.S.S.R. was officially dissolved on December 26, 1991.
On Aug. 23rd 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declares itself independent.
On Aug. 24th 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic changed its name to Ukraine. (UN added admission, since the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had already been a UN member.
On Aug. 28th 1991, Russia (Boris) recognizes Ukrainian independence.
On Dec. 1st 1991, Ukraine holds it's referendum for independence.

It's clearly of notice that Boris had recognized Ukrainian independence more or less 4 month before Ukraine itself even held an official referendum in that matter. Not just simply due to Moscow not being able to stop the falling apart of the Soviet-union, but with clear intentions deriving from previous discussions and probable agreements-resolutions.

Such a probable agreement-resolution was the Almaty deceleration on December 21st 1991, confirming the founding of CIS - it's initial founding members are Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
The main context in this declaration is the respect of CIS states amongst each others sovereign borders and a joint command under Russian leadership in regards to nuclear weapons.
In 1992-1994 several amendments are concluded between the CIS members.
It's main context - economic cooperation and military cooperation also in conjunction with a joint armed forces - again under Moscow command, and the clear commitment of not engaging into actions or deliberations that would jeopardize or endanger the national security of it's member states.

In 1994 The USA and the UK bring themselves into the picture via concluding an agreement together with Russia in regards to the hand-over and dismantling of the nuclear arsenal stationed in Ukraine. Furthermore the USA unilaterally issuing security assistance towards Ukraine if the latter commits itself to the NPT treaty.
Also in 1994 despite the Almaty deceleration and it's signed amendments by it's CIS members - NATO welcomes Ukraine into its Partnership for Peace program - including others, even including Russia.

It's this year 1994 that gives birth to all future Ukraine/USA-Russia issues and disputes, mostly due to the USA's unilateral security assistance deceleration towards Ukraine on Feb. 8th 1994.
This contradiction or double standard of Ukraine resulted into the Budapest memorandum Dec. 5th 1994 - the UK, USA and Russia commit all to respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, and promise to not threaten or use force against Ukraine. However the US unilateral declared security assistance still stands, and so does the Almaty deceleration in regards of CIS states/members not endangering each others security.

NATO welcoming active CIS members to join the NATO partnership for peace program - results in a collision of interests between two military blocks - One the Russian lead CIS and that of the US lead NATO. Actually it forms the basis for a diplomatic nightmare.
To make things even more problematic Ukraine on July 9th 1997 - Kuchma meets with NATO leaders in Madrid, where they sign a document establishing a distinctive partnership between Ukraine and NATO. Latest by then a clear/obvious conflict of interests arrises between Ukraine, also being an Almaty signatory and it's amendments - In case other CIS members should feel their national security threatened by NATO or amongst each other.

In March 2000 a "new" political figure becomes Russian president - Putin makes absolutely no secret of his detest toward Global dominance by the USA and his objection towards a continued NATO Eastward expansion. In Nov./Dec. 2004, the second so-called color revolution in Ukraine - a year after Georgia’s Rose Revolution sets up the alarm bells in Moscow.

There is no commitment or clear declaration by NATO - to refrain from it's Eastward expansion - especially not in regards to Ukraine. (e.g. neutrality) On the contra the standard formulation being continuously forwarded; - it's any countries free choice to become a member of NATO.

In 2006 due to the increasing political friction between a (pro-Western Ukraine) and Russia - Putin for the first time makes use of cutting of gas-supplies as a political weapon.

April 3rd 2008, NATO debates about whether it should offer Membership Action Plans (MAPs)—forerunners to membership—to Croatia, Georgia, and Ukraine. But in discussions between NATO officials and Russian President Putin, Putin expresses opposition to extending MAPs to Georgia and Ukraine. Unable to reach a consensus, NATO members decline to offer a MAP to either. During a separate meeting, Putin reportedly tells U.S. President George W. Bush that Ukraine is “not even a real nation-state.”

Shorty after that on August 2008 - It is Georgia that deploys military towards the breakaway province of South Ossetia. Just as if Boris would have deployed Soviet military towards the break away province of Ukraine in 1991. !! In a response Russia attacks Georgia - Yushchenko (Ukraine) sides with Georgia, further increasing tensions between Kyiv and Moscow. Russia subsequently recognizes both republics as independent states, though neither is recognized as an independent state by most countries.

September 2008 - The EU and Ukraine begin talks on a new “association agreement” and issue a communique that “Ukraine’s future is in Europe.” The EU considers such agreements to be legally binding contracts that commit countries to developing closer political, legal, and trading ties with the EU and sometimes lead to accession to the bloc. Implementation of the association agreement could mean major changes in Ukraine that would bring it closer to EU standards.

This now brings about the second double standard beheld by Ukraine in regards to its role with NATO and being a CIS member, and now between being a CIS member and declaring a parallel association to the EU.
Let's keep in mind - Ukraine's official process of withdrawing from cooperation agreements within the CIS started only after the coup d'etat in February 2014. In August 2018, Ukraine closed its representative office at the statutory and other bodies of the CIS in Minsk.

From 2008 - 2014 Ukraine faces endless internal political unrest - due to it's prevailing corruption issues - vividly exploited by the Western and Russia's government and their institutions.

e.g.; in May 2013 Yanukovych has Tymoshenko arrested for “abuse of office,” and she is sentenced to seven years in prison. International observers see the prosecution as a politically motivated way for Yanukovych to sideline his main opponent, and the U.S. ambassador calls the trial a farce, a view shared by many. The jailing stalls negotiations with the European Union over improving trade and political ties. Brussels refuses to finalize the association agreement at the December EU-Ukraine summit in Kyiv.
e.g.; November 2013, The Ukrainian government states that it will not sign the association agreement at an upcoming EU-Ukraine summit in Lithuania. Yanukovych’s administration announces it will resume dialogue with Russia about joining the Eurasian Customs Union. Protests begin in Kyiv almost immediately.

Feb. 2014 the Euromaidan protests lead to Ukraine's government collapse. Ukraine’s acting president and acting prime minister make it clear that a top priority will be to bring Ukraine closer to Europe. aka NATO.
Feb/March 2014 - due to Ukraine's government's chaotic situation - Putin seizes the chance to take Crimea more or less unopposed, where the majority of residents are ethnically Russian. Soon after, Russian authorities hold a referendum in which Crimean voters choose to secede and join Russia. A major criteria of the UN charter - beholds "The peoples right to self-determination" Instead of absolutely ensuring a 'correct" peoples vote - only the EU (no legal rights at all in this matter) and the USA (also no legal rights at all in this matter) declared the referendum “illegal and illegitimate,” and Washington promises it will never be accepted.
Even though the UN never committed itself or demanded a re-vote under UN observation, the UN General Assembly votes 100–11 against recognizing the referendum result and Russia is expelled from the group of eight. Whether Putin would have accepted such a re-vote or objected towards it - we will never know - also he is to blame solely for not conduction or requesting such an UN observed re-vote.
So the fault lies clearly with the UN and Putin.

April 2014 - civil war breaks out in the Donbas area - an armed pro-Russian separatist movement to seize government buildings across eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region. By early 2022, fighting has resulted in more than fourteen thousand deaths, a quarter of them civilians, and two million internally displaced Ukrainians. Parts of two regions—Donetsk and Luhansk—declare themselves independent republics. If Putin incited this situation or if Ukrainian methods directed towards Ukrainian-Russians caused the final outbreak - I wasn't there so I wouldn't know.

However it is common knowledge that all big military powers are playing, initiating such scenarios all the time, and the methods used by all sides to deal with such occurrences are also known.

May 2014, Ukraine's Poroshenko promises to battle corruption and U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration signals interest in helping Poroshenko battle corruption and assigns Vice President Joe Biden as it's chief envoy for Ukraine. The US government "officially" becomes directly involved in the internal politics of Ukraine - a sovereign country, prone to becoming a place of war!!
Feb. 2015, Putin and Poroshenko meet in Minsk to negotiate a cease-fire in eastern Ukraine. They reach an agreement, shepherded by French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The cease fire agreement is in general observed - fighting and shelling along the line of contact still flare up from time to time. Both sides trade accusations on violations of the deal, Russia withdraws it's heavy military equipment.

Putin and Ukraine in general stick to the agreement - though it is foreseeable that sooner or later both will continue to incite or support civil unrest along the ceasefire line.
Despite this fragile situation and the Minsk accord, on Dec. 2017, US President Trump approves lethal arms sales to Ukraine, moving beyond the nonlethal military assistance that the Obama administration had allowed. Around Spring 2017, the U.S. Congress created the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which authorized hundreds of millions of dollars in additional military aid for Ukraine. NATO personal actively and ever increasingly became involved within Ukraine and provided training grounds (mostly in Germany) for the UAF.

April 21st. 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian and political novice, wins a presidential runoff with more than 70 percent of the vote. Two months later, Zelensky’s party also wins a majority of parliamentary seats, marking the first time since independence that Ukraine’s president has a majority party in the parliament. Zelensky had campaigned against corruption and poverty, and pledged to end the war in the east.
Never-mind the comedian part, the simple fact that a political novice is supposed to run Ukraine under the prevailing circumstances - beholds ultimately - that professional politicians and institutions from the West will be running the show.

June 2020, Ukraine is named a NATO Enhanced Opportunities Partner in June, joining Australia, Georgia, Finland, Jordan, and Sweden as countries with deeper cooperation on NATO-led missions and exercises. The alliance says the new status “does not prejudge any decisions on NATO membership.” In September, Zelensky approves Ukraine’s new National Security Strategy, which provides for the development of a distinctive partnership with NATO with the aim of gaining membership. The previous year, Zelensky’s predecessor signed a constitutional amendment committing Ukraine to become a member of NATO and the EU.

Feb. 2021, Zelensky orders a series of measures against oligarchs, notably Viktor Medvedchuk, a businessman, chairman of Ukraine’s largest pro-Russia political party, and close friend of Putin’s. The government freezes his financial assets for three years and shuts down three pro-Russia TV channels that Medvedchuk controls, alleging that they broadcast “misinformation.” That May, authorities lodge treason charges against Medvedchuk, claiming that he transferred oil and gas production licenses in Crimea to Russian authorities. Zelensky says the moves are necessary to defend the country, while Putin blasts them as motivated by anti-Russia bias.

Feb. 2021, further, continued substantial weapon packages are forwarded by the USA and NATO members towards the UAF. From April onward Russian moves are observed towards assembling a larger military formation.
Nov.-Jan. 2021/22, Russia continues to mobilize tens of thousands of troops along the border with Ukraine, the Russian government demands a set of security assurances from the United States and NATO. This includes a draft treaty calling for tight restrictions on U.S. and NATO political and military activities, notably a ban on NATO expansion. The Biden administration delivers written responses in January; few details are made public, but it rejects Russia’s insistence that Ukraine never be accepted into NATO and proposes new parameters for security in the region.

Feb. 2022 Russian forces are deployed to Ukraine’s separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk after the Kremlin recognizes them as independent. The military action raises concerns that Russia will try to assert full control over the regions, which are partially governed by Ukraine. In an address to Russia, Putin says the government in Kyiv is a "Puppet Regime" run by foreign powers and that NATO ignored Moscow’s security demands.

24th February 2022 - well we all know what happened.

Hope this gets a lot of responses, because it sure seemed detailed and well written IMO, but I'm just an amature political analyst that is very strained on foreign political activities or news that happens around the world historically, so I'm not a good decifering specialist or interpreter of whether or not your post is flawed or spot on...... So where does someone like you think that this thing is going ??

In all of the world's nation's and countries, they have their cultures and political differences, and they have their militaries also. The amount of warring activity going on now is quite disturbing, because no one wants the wild pride driven escalation of war's in the world, and not even the Russian people for that matter, so everything is riding on agreement's and disagreements of politician's that are hell bent on making decisions that place their militaries in direct conflict with one another. Then the world wakes up and realizes that war isn't necessary, and the deaths of thousand's were even more unnecessary, yet the war monger's figured that it was necessary even though it wasn't.

 

[Kruska]

Hope this gets a lot of responses, because it sure seemed detailed and well written IMO, but I'm just an amature political analyst that is very strained on foreign political activities or news that happens around the world historically, so I'm not a good decifering specialist or interpreter of whether or not your post is flawed or spot on...... So where does someone like you think that this thing is going ??

In all of the world's nation's and countries, they have their cultures and political differences, and they have their militaries also. The amount of warring activity going on now is quite disturbing, because no one wants the wild pride driven escalation of war's in the world, and not even the Russian people for that matter, so everything is riding on agreement's and disagreements of politician's that are hell bent on making decisions that place their militaries in direct conflict with one another. Then the world wakes up and realizes that war isn't necessary, and the deaths of thousand's were even more unnecessary, yet the war monger's figured that it was necessary even though it wasn't.

Thanks for your comment.

You can read most of my post up in more detail at:

A historical timeline of post-independence Ukraine

Ukraine has been dogged by corruption scandals, economic mismanagement, and Russian interference since it achieved independence in 1991. Russian threats have intensified as Ukraine's ties with the United States and Europe have improved in recent years.

www.pbs.org

I find this Western-US source to be very neutral - without be-holding some obvious government induced agenda

As you know, unfortunately most people do not go into detailed accounts or larger run-ups - they usually prefer short headlines that fit their existing personal conviction.

I have worked for the Armed Forces directly and indirectly now for a bit more then 40 years. Met a lot of high ranking military and political people including quite a lot of Ministers and Head of States.
It is really mostly very disappointing (actually heartbreaking) to meet such people face to face - especially politicians - and having to realize that they mostly don't know what they are talking about and possess a rather low intellectual level. Even though most politicians do realize that there are different cultures, socioeconomic aspects on this planet - what rules and drives them all are simply $ or Euro if you prefer.

As such permit me a very short answer in regards to "where this thing is going" - Nowhere for the common people but where the money is to be made.

The moment that certain group/circles of people realize that the direction they are pursuing isn't making money as expected - they will abandon their path within minutes.
Right now this ridiculous war is making big money in all kind of aspects/fields - not just in regards to military hardware. Therefore these circles will keep it going.

No politician or circle in Western Europe is interested in ruining Russia - their overall economy and it's political lobbies are making far more $ with Russia then with that war.
But the common people have been told that this is all about preserving democracy and freedom. Now the politicians and those circles are simply waiting to see how far the common people are willing to sacrifice their ($) for democracy and freedom.

There is an obvious reason as to why NATO isn't simply stuffing Ukraine with every weapon system they have since day one of this war. Cost-profit relationship, and an escalation process that might get out of their hands.

Therefore IMO until there is no imminent danger of Russia going bankrupt and as such politically/economically into total chaos - NATO/EU or e.g. China will not pursue or enforce peace terms onto both Ukraine and Russia. Till then (anyone's guess) some believe 6 month, some 3-4 years, keep on this war.

 

[beagle9]

Thanks for your comment.

You can read most of my post up in more detail at:

A historical timeline of post-independence Ukraine

Ukraine has been dogged by corruption scandals, economic mismanagement, and Russian interference since it achieved independence in 1991. Russian threats have intensified as Ukraine's ties with the United States and Europe have improved in recent years.

www.pbs.org

I find this Western-US source to be very neutral - without be-holding some obvious government induced agenda

As you know, unfortunately most people do not go into detailed accounts or larger run-ups - they usually prefer short headlines that fit their existing personal conviction.

I have worked for the Armed Forces directly and indirectly now for a bit more then 40 years. Met a lot of high ranking military and political people including quite a lot of Ministers and Head of States.
It is really mostly very disappointing (actually heartbreaking) to meet such people face to face - especially politicians - and having to realize that they mostly don't know what they are talking about and possess a rather low intellectual level. Even though most politicians do realize that there are different cultures, socioeconomic aspects on this planet - what rules and drives them all are simply $ or Euro if you prefer.

As such permit me a very short answer in regards to "where this thing is going" - Nowhere for the common people but where the money is to be made.

The moment that certain group/circles of people realize that the direction they are pursuing isn't making money as expected - they will abandon their path within minutes.
Right now this ridiculous war is making big money in all kind of aspects/fields - not just in regards to military hardware. Therefore these circles will keep it going.

No politician or circle in Western Europe is interested in ruining Russia - their overall economy and it's political lobbies are making far more $ with Russia then with that war.
But the common people have been told that this is all about preserving democracy and freedom. Now the politicians and those circles are simply waiting to see how far the common people are willing to sacrifice their ($) for democracy and freedom.

There is an obvious reason as to why NATO isn't simply stuffing Ukraine with every weapon system they have since day one of this war. Cost-profit relationship, and an escalation process that might get out of their hands.

Therefore IMO until there is no imminent danger of Russia going bankrupt and as such politically/economically into total chaos - NATO/EU or e.g. China will not pursue or enforce peace terms onto both Ukraine and Russia. Till then (anyone's guess) some believe 6 month, some 3-4 years, keep on this war.

It would seem that war wouldn't be profitable in any long termed or short termed outlook, otherwise all due to the economies that it wrecks, and the huge rebuild cost along with the loss of life, corruption it causes, trust it destroy's, equipment losses, and etc in the world. Otherwise no one should ever want war, so it should be avoided at all cost or over any perceived profits to be made from it.

What it seems to me that goes on is pure testosterone and pride once it starts, the awe of feeling like a god begins to take hold on those who see themselves as god's, otherwise when at their command they can observe the powerful weapons of war with a kid like awe as they see their militaries in action.

It's almost like they close their eyes like a big cat who has captured it's prey in order to protect those eye's from allowing itself to be distracted once a grip has been established, and this takes place even if it's eye's are about to be gouged out in an attempt to stop the attack.

Time to wake up and want peace before this thing serves nobody but the devil himself in the end.

 

[ESay]

I don't quite get your meaning.

Let's keep right and wrong out of this issue as we have done before - just a rundown and analysis of factual occurrences.

During 1990-1991 The Soviet-union State-council and representatives of it's Soviet-republics had numerous discussions/meetings in regards to the further future of the Soviet-union. The U.S.S.R. was officially dissolved on December 26, 1991.
On Aug. 23rd 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declares itself independent.
On Aug. 24th 1991, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic changed its name to Ukraine. (UN added admission, since the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had already been a UN member.
On Aug. 28th 1991, Russia (Boris) recognizes Ukrainian independence.
On Dec. 1st 1991, Ukraine holds it's referendum for independence.

It's clearly of notice that Boris had recognized Ukrainian independence more or less 4 month before Ukraine itself even held an official referendum in that matter. Not just simply due to Moscow not being able to stop the falling apart of the Soviet-union, but with clear intentions deriving from previous discussions and probable agreements-resolutions.

Such a probable agreement-resolution was the Almaty deceleration on December 21st 1991, confirming the founding of CIS - it's initial founding members are Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
The main context in this declaration is the respect of CIS states amongst each others sovereign borders and a joint command under Russian leadership in regards to nuclear weapons.
In 1992-1994 several amendments are concluded between the CIS members.
It's main context - economic cooperation and military cooperation also in conjunction with a joint armed forces - again under Moscow command, and the clear commitment of not engaging into actions or deliberations that would jeopardize or endanger the national security of it's member states.

In 1994 The USA and the UK bring themselves into the picture via concluding an agreement together with Russia in regards to the hand-over and dismantling of the nuclear arsenal stationed in Ukraine. Furthermore the USA unilaterally issuing security assistance towards Ukraine if the latter commits itself to the NPT treaty.
Also in 1994 despite the Almaty deceleration and it's signed amendments by it's CIS members - NATO welcomes Ukraine into its Partnership for Peace program - including others, even including Russia.

It's this year 1994 that gives birth to all future Ukraine/USA-Russia issues and disputes, mostly due to the USA's unilateral security assistance deceleration towards Ukraine on Feb. 8th 1994.
This contradiction or double standard of Ukraine resulted into the Budapest memorandum Dec. 5th 1994 - the UK, USA and Russia commit all to respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, and promise to not threaten or use force against Ukraine. However the US unilateral declared security assistance still stands, and so does the Almaty deceleration in regards of CIS states/members not endangering each others security.

NATO welcoming active CIS members to join the NATO partnership for peace program - results in a collision of interests between two military blocks - One the Russian lead CIS and that of the US lead NATO. Actually it forms the basis for a diplomatic nightmare.
To make things even more problematic Ukraine on July 9th 1997 - Kuchma meets with NATO leaders in Madrid, where they sign a document establishing a distinctive partnership between Ukraine and NATO. Latest by then a clear/obvious conflict of interests arrises between Ukraine, also being an Almaty signatory and it's amendments - In case other CIS members should feel their national security threatened by NATO or amongst each other.

In March 2000 a "new" political figure becomes Russian president - Putin makes absolutely no secret of his detest toward Global dominance by the USA and his objection towards a continued NATO Eastward expansion. In Nov./Dec. 2004, the second so-called color revolution in Ukraine - a year after Georgia’s Rose Revolution sets up the alarm bells in Moscow.

There is no commitment or clear declaration by NATO - to refrain from it's Eastward expansion - especially not in regards to Ukraine. (e.g. neutrality) On the contra the standard formulation being continuously forwarded; - it's any countries free choice to become a member of NATO.

In 2006 due to the increasing political friction between a (pro-Western Ukraine) and Russia - Putin for the first time makes use of cutting of gas-supplies as a political weapon.

April 3rd 2008, NATO debates about whether it should offer Membership Action Plans (MAPs)—forerunners to membership—to Croatia, Georgia, and Ukraine. But in discussions between NATO officials and Russian President Putin, Putin expresses opposition to extending MAPs to Georgia and Ukraine. Unable to reach a consensus, NATO members decline to offer a MAP to either. During a separate meeting, Putin reportedly tells U.S. President George W. Bush that Ukraine is “not even a real nation-state.”

Shorty after that on August 2008 - It is Georgia that deploys military towards the breakaway province of South Ossetia. Just as if Boris would have deployed Soviet military towards the break away province of Ukraine in 1991. !! In a response Russia attacks Georgia - Yushchenko (Ukraine) sides with Georgia, further increasing tensions between Kyiv and Moscow. Russia subsequently recognizes both republics as independent states, though neither is recognized as an independent state by most countries.

September 2008 - The EU and Ukraine begin talks on a new “association agreement” and issue a communique that “Ukraine’s future is in Europe.” The EU considers such agreements to be legally binding contracts that commit countries to developing closer political, legal, and trading ties with the EU and sometimes lead to accession to the bloc. Implementation of the association agreement could mean major changes in Ukraine that would bring it closer to EU standards.

This now brings about the second double standard beheld by Ukraine in regards to its role with NATO and being a CIS member, and now between being a CIS member and declaring a parallel association to the EU.
Let's keep in mind - Ukraine's official process of withdrawing from cooperation agreements within the CIS started only after the coup d'etat in February 2014. In August 2018, Ukraine closed its representative office at the statutory and other bodies of the CIS in Minsk.

From 2008 - 2014 Ukraine faces endless internal political unrest - due to it's prevailing corruption issues - vividly exploited by the Western and Russia's government and their institutions.

e.g.; in May 2013 Yanukovych has Tymoshenko arrested for “abuse of office,” and she is sentenced to seven years in prison. International observers see the prosecution as a politically motivated way for Yanukovych to sideline his main opponent, and the U.S. ambassador calls the trial a farce, a view shared by many. The jailing stalls negotiations with the European Union over improving trade and political ties. Brussels refuses to finalize the association agreement at the December EU-Ukraine summit in Kyiv.
e.g.; November 2013, The Ukrainian government states that it will not sign the association agreement at an upcoming EU-Ukraine summit in Lithuania. Yanukovych’s administration announces it will resume dialogue with Russia about joining the Eurasian Customs Union. Protests begin in Kyiv almost immediately.

Feb. 2014 the Euromaidan protests lead to Ukraine's government collapse. Ukraine’s acting president and acting prime minister make it clear that a top priority will be to bring Ukraine closer to Europe. aka NATO.
Feb/March 2014 - due to Ukraine's government's chaotic situation - Putin seizes the chance to take Crimea more or less unopposed, where the majority of residents are ethnically Russian. Soon after, Russian authorities hold a referendum in which Crimean voters choose to secede and join Russia. A major criteria of the UN charter - beholds "The peoples right to self-determination" Instead of absolutely ensuring a 'correct" peoples vote - only the EU (no legal rights at all in this matter) and the USA (also no legal rights at all in this matter) declared the referendum “illegal and illegitimate,” and Washington promises it will never be accepted.
Even though the UN never committed itself or demanded a re-vote under UN observation, the UN General Assembly votes 100–11 against recognizing the referendum result and Russia is expelled from the group of eight. Whether Putin would have accepted such a re-vote or objected towards it - we will never know - also he is to blame solely for not conduction or requesting such an UN observed re-vote.
So the fault lies clearly with the UN and Putin.

April 2014 - civil war breaks out in the Donbas area - an armed pro-Russian separatist movement to seize government buildings across eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region. By early 2022, fighting has resulted in more than fourteen thousand deaths, a quarter of them civilians, and two million internally displaced Ukrainians. Parts of two regions—Donetsk and Luhansk—declare themselves independent republics. If Putin incited this situation or if Ukrainian methods directed towards Ukrainian-Russians caused the final outbreak - I wasn't there so I wouldn't know.

However it is common knowledge that all big military powers are playing, initiating such scenarios all the time, and the methods used by all sides to deal with such occurrences are also known.

May 2014, Ukraine's Poroshenko promises to battle corruption and U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration signals interest in helping Poroshenko battle corruption and assigns Vice President Joe Biden as it's chief envoy for Ukraine. The US government "officially" becomes directly involved in the internal politics of Ukraine - a sovereign country, prone to becoming a place of war!!
Feb. 2015, Putin and Poroshenko meet in Minsk to negotiate a cease-fire in eastern Ukraine. They reach an agreement, shepherded by French President Francois Hollande and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The cease fire agreement is in general observed - fighting and shelling along the line of contact still flare up from time to time. Both sides trade accusations on violations of the deal, Russia withdraws it's heavy military equipment.

Putin and Ukraine in general stick to the agreement - though it is foreseeable that sooner or later both will continue to incite or support civil unrest along the ceasefire line.
Despite this fragile situation and the Minsk accord, on Dec. 2017, US President Trump approves lethal arms sales to Ukraine, moving beyond the nonlethal military assistance that the Obama administration had allowed. Around Spring 2017, the U.S. Congress created the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which authorized hundreds of millions of dollars in additional military aid for Ukraine. NATO personal actively and ever increasingly became involved within Ukraine and provided training grounds (mostly in Germany) for the UAF.

April 21st. 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian and political novice, wins a presidential runoff with more than 70 percent of the vote. Two months later, Zelensky’s party also wins a majority of parliamentary seats, marking the first time since independence that Ukraine’s president has a majority party in the parliament. Zelensky had campaigned against corruption and poverty, and pledged to end the war in the east.
Never-mind the comedian part, the simple fact that a political novice is supposed to run Ukraine under the prevailing circumstances - beholds ultimately - that professional politicians and institutions from the West will be running the show.

June 2020, Ukraine is named a NATO Enhanced Opportunities Partner in June, joining Australia, Georgia, Finland, Jordan, and Sweden as countries with deeper cooperation on NATO-led missions and exercises. The alliance says the new status “does not prejudge any decisions on NATO membership.” In September, Zelensky approves Ukraine’s new National Security Strategy, which provides for the development of a distinctive partnership with NATO with the aim of gaining membership. The previous year, Zelensky’s predecessor signed a constitutional amendment committing Ukraine to become a member of NATO and the EU.

Feb. 2021, Zelensky orders a series of measures against oligarchs, notably Viktor Medvedchuk, a businessman, chairman of Ukraine’s largest pro-Russia political party, and close friend of Putin’s. The government freezes his financial assets for three years and shuts down three pro-Russia TV channels that Medvedchuk controls, alleging that they broadcast “misinformation.” That May, authorities lodge treason charges against Medvedchuk, claiming that he transferred oil and gas production licenses in Crimea to Russian authorities. Zelensky says the moves are necessary to defend the country, while Putin blasts them as motivated by anti-Russia bias.

Feb. 2021, further, continued substantial weapon packages are forwarded by the USA and NATO members towards the UAF. From April onward Russian moves are observed towards assembling a larger military formation.
Nov.-Jan. 2021/22, Russia continues to mobilize tens of thousands of troops along the border with Ukraine, the Russian government demands a set of security assurances from the United States and NATO. This includes a draft treaty calling for tight restrictions on U.S. and NATO political and military activities, notably a ban on NATO expansion. The Biden administration delivers written responses in January; few details are made public, but it rejects Russia’s insistence that Ukraine never be accepted into NATO and proposes new parameters for security in the region.

Feb. 2022 Russian forces are deployed to Ukraine’s separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk after the Kremlin recognizes them as independent. The military action raises concerns that Russia will try to assert full control over the regions, which are partially governed by Ukraine. In an address to Russia, Putin says the government in Kyiv is a "Puppet Regime" run by foreign powers and that NATO ignored Moscow’s security demands.

24th February 2022 - well we all know what happened.

Well, thanks for this history resume, but I don't understand what you were trying to say by it. My point was that the Putin regime couldn't return Ukraine back into their orbit by political means.

It is not by mistake I draw a parallel between Ukraine and the US above. Politically, Ukraine could be 'divided' on two main parts - a pro-Western part (Western Ukraine) and a pro-Moscow part ( Eastern and Southern Ukraine). With Central Ukraine, for the most part, being a 'swing state'.

Kuchma, for the most part of his presidency, managed to smooth this division, but nevertheless it became obviously acute at the end of his second term.

Crimea and the Donbas were the hotbed of pro-Moscow sentiments. They were, for pro-Russian politicians, what California and New York are now for the Dems in the US. And Putin by his own hands took away these regions from Ukraine’s political spectrum taking away any hope for pro-Moscow candidate ever gaining needed majority. After 2014-15, being Pro-Moscow meant a lost cause.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Moscow horde´s war record :-

1856 defeated by Britain and France

1905 defeated by Japan

1917 defeated by Germany

1920 defeated by Poland, Finland, Estonia and all Baltic states

1939 defeated by Finland

1969 defeated by China

1989 defeated by Afghanistan

1989 defeated in the Cold War.

1996 defeated by Chechnya

2022 defeated by Ukraine

WW2 won USA/Britain , meanwhile Stalin's officers were shot or sent to the Gulags. Millions went to the Gulags, including Solzhenitsyn

Moscow's only victories come from invading smaller countries :-

a) Hungary 1956

b) Czechoslovakia 1968

c) Moldova 1992

d) Georgia 2008

Moscow has amassed almost its entire army in Ukraine, U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told BBC on Feb. 15.

However, he said Moscow has not been able “to punch through” Ukraine’s defenses, but we have rather seen an effort to advance.

Ukraine's Chief of Defense Intelligence Kyrylo Budanov earlier said in an interview with the Washington Post that approximately 326,000 Moscow soldiers are currently fighting in Ukraine.

czar Putin has started new offensive actions in Ukraine, “sending in thousands and thousands more troops,” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said on Feb. 13, as quoted by the Financial Times.

“It is clear that we are in the race of logistics. Key capabilities like ammunition...must reach Ukraine before Moscow can seize the initiative on the battlefield.”

Wallace: 97% of Russian army is in Ukraine

Russia has amassed almost its entire army in Ukraine, U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told BBC on Feb. 15.

kyivindependent.com

You are going to be sorely disappointed in this.

 

[Kruska]

It would seem that war wouldn't be profitable in any long termed or short termed outlook, otherwise all due to the economies that it wrecks, and the huge rebuild cost along with the loss of life, corruption it causes, trust it destroy's, equipment losses, and etc in the world. Otherwise no one should ever want war, so it should be avoided at all cost or over any perceived profits to be made from it.

What it seems to me that goes on is pure testosterone and pride once it starts, the awe of feeling like a god begins to take hold on those who see themselves as god's, otherwise when at their command they can observe the powerful weapons of war with a kid like awe as they see their militaries in action.

It's almost like they close their eyes like a big cat who has captured it's prey in order to protect those eye's from allowing itself to be distracted once a grip has been established, and this takes place even if it's eye's are about to be gouged out in an attempt to stop the attack.

Time to wake up and want peace before this thing serves nobody but the devil himself in the end.

I think you got me a bit wrong - or I did not precise it enough

The war itself isn't making $ - neither are dead or mutilated citizens, its simply the cost factor in this cost-profit ratio. A war is just the means to make or ensure an anticipated profit. What Clausewitz failed to mention is that war is not just the continuation of diplomacy via other means - but the way to make money if diplomacy fails. And if war fails it's back to diplomacy to reduce losses and regain profit.

Loans of all kind to e.g. Ukraine ain't for free - just like we pay interest on a loan so does Ukraine. these loans are not just simply secured by Ukraine via a signature - but via prospects upon their future GDP. Land-lease systems - who knows, maybe e.g. 80% of Ukraine's corn production already belongs to Western cooperation's backing up these loans.

Ukraine is an extremely rich country in regards to untapped natural resources - e.g. in around 10-20 years after the war Ukraine could completely replace Russia in regards to supplying gas and oil to Europe. Being a politically stable country it would be a hotbed for foreign investment. China is presently seen as a market on it's own by foreign investors - basically no one invests into China in view of cheap labor - so as to export Made in China, e.g. back to Germany. A lot of global needed technology is controlled by China simply due to initial previous foreign investments and China's own huge market - that can't be controlled by the West anymore.

Ukraine would be politically and economically controlled by the West (Western circles) it provides far cheaper labor for the next 20-30 years then presently e.g. China. Logistic related costs are a fraction in regards to those importing from China, Vietnam or India. The infrastructural cost to rebuild are estimated at $3-5 Trillion. A hyper boom for any e.g. construction related company. New airports, new railways, new highway's, schools, hospitals, government buildings - you name it, all paid for and financed via loans and private investors.
This entire Ukraine issue-war is ONLY about $, and this damned Putin (with his greater Russia vision) actually greater $$ vision, was hindering all that. Since he doesn't want Russia's economy to loose out to Ukraine respectively to a NATO/Europe/US controlled Ukraine, this war is also to him simply a cost-profit relation. And Russia IMO and it's own and pro-Russian foreign circles have far more to loose or at risk then those NATO/EU/US circles. E.g. China and India are not just simply interested in a wrecked or downsized Russian economy that only provides cheap oil and gas. This war also serves the interest of those Western circles who believe that such a war might even bring Russia back into their controlled fold.

And for politicians, e.g. thousands of new positions towards Ukraine related functions. Loads of conventions, and new organizations, Ukraine board this, Ukraine board that, and illustrious meetings/gatherings, where they can babble their nonsense and collect media headlines. E.g. ex German cabinet ministers get a chance to preside Ukraine related forums and organizations - NGO's such as those that presently exist globally, and are all paid for via government and private company funding. Which $ minded politician doesn't want to become a well paid lobbyist?

The pride and ego of a politician usually only set's in after their wallet and social/political acceptance has reached certain proportions. They got used to a certain style of live and social standing - which they simply can't abandon or loose. A German minister (not military) upon retirement was driving out a government compound and said to his chauffeur - see now, the day I am retired, the guard already doesn't even salute me anymore. Terrible isn't it - poor fellow.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

How aiding a Ukrainian victory helps the USA and the world, and thus enrages the surrender-monkeys:

1. It destroys the Russian army for a pittance, removing the threat of Russia to europe in general, and requiring less future spending from the USA.

2. It halts atrocities. No more need be said about that, at least by moral people.

3. It preserves the legal international order, the believe that nations can't just overrun and annex other nations.

4. It ends the era of imperialism.

5. It strengthens the European Union and NATO.

6. It weakens the prestige of not just the Putin-tyrant, but all tyrants and corrupt cronies, and makes it more likely that tyrant states will be overthrown by their people.

7. It reminds the world that democracy is better than fascism.

8. It scares the Chinese into submission. They've seen just how badly Russian-type weapons fail against the west.

9. It reduces nuclear proliferation. By showing how nations with nukes aren't given a free pass, it makes possessing nukes less desireable.

10. It makes global food supplies more stable, and makes the world economy less dependent on Russian fossil fuels.

And this folks is the mental gymnastics a shitlib goes through to defend regime change war, unlimited foreign aid and the military industrial complex

 

[Kruska]

....My point was that the Putin regime couldn't return Ukraine back into their orbit by political means.....

Got you - you are absolutely correct.

He was certainly betting too much onto a pro-Russian government in Kiev, and dreaming that Ukraine will stick to it's Almaty deceleration - with Russia being clearly supported, backed up by the other CIS members. That is why I gave the historic timeline run-down. If signed political treaties/declarations would guarantee their implementations as such - Ukraine would be in the Russian, aka CIS fold.
He certainly also was convinced that the Ruble could battle/match the Euro/$ offers towards Ukraine. - actually IMO his biggest mistake.

 

[Ringo]

 

[Litwin]

You are going to be sorely disappointed in this.

sure

"Looks like meat's back on the menu, boys" Orcs do always have infighting going on.



VIDEO : GRU Wagner do not allow Moscow soldiers to leave their positions by force under the threat of physical violence.