You're welcome to read the attached link but, if Russia/Putin wants Ukraine, it's his for the taking. Especially with the leadership in the Oval Office we currently have. It's a small country and they have overwhelming force. It really is, no contest.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-20-2022).]
The same people forcing us to watch BLM and Antifa burn our country down, deface our statutes, let fake trannies rape our school children in school bathrooms and let illegals flood the border are provoking Russia.
Russia keeps asking for the USA to return to their long ago promise that NATO would not expand to their border, which puts strike missiles closer to Moscow...
...but people like Victoria (real name Nudelman) Nuland keep telling Russia to get screwed. She was hacked on a cell phone saying, "F___ the EU!".
After what they do to us here, why would you believe they aren't doing dirty in another country? Because a phony like Hannity tells you, right?
This is 1961-62 all over again. The US provoked with nukes in Georgia, the Soviets missiled up Cuba and the USA backed down. And the USSR brought the missiles home.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 01-20-2022).]
After what they do to us here, why would you believe they aren't doing dirty in another country? Because a phony like Hannity tells you, rigjt?
Hannity? I didn't see his name on any of the article is linked to........... Please re-read what I posted, Russia has overwhelming force if they want to take Ukraine. Did you even read the linked article or just jump to some conclusion?
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-20-2022).]
Remember how Russia defeated our Syrian rebels? Con Inc hasn't forgotten.
Our media does nothing but lie to.us. All.of it to some degree. They're paid to. Even Tucker lies about China and Russia.
Hannity is a metaphor for Conservative Inc. Con Inc is all the same. They present them for the right to consume from. They're all the same thing no matter who's name.
Remember the constant lies about how Russia invaded Crimea? False. Our media does nothing but lie to us. Crimea voted to rejoin as a Russian protectorate. It's historical.
The people in DC who hate us want to inject strife against Russia. They promised long ago not to expand NATO Eastward.
Remember how Russia defeated our Syrian rebels? Con Inc hasn't forgotten.
Our media does nothing but lie to.us. All.of it to some degree. They're paid to. Even Tucker lies about China and Russia.
Hannity is a metaphor for Conservative Inc. Con Inc is all the same. They present them for the right to consume from. They're all the same thing no matter who's name.
Remember the constant lies about how Russia invaded Crimea? False. Our media does nothing but lie to us. Crimea voted to rejoin as a Russian protectorate. It's historical.
The people in DC who hate us want to inject strife against Russia. They promised long ago not to expand NATO Eastward.
Well, what I posted about had nothing to do with the issues of the past you are bringing up. My comments were strictly addressing the military might Russia has versus Ukraine and the supposed assistance President Biden and NATO are offering. With the reported military might they have massed, it won't take very long to overcome any resistance. I didn't begin to address the issues you want to bring into the discussion so, don't point any fingers at me. I didn't reference Hannity or any of the other commentators you want to bring ito the discussion.
It would not matter who is in the Oval Office. If Russia wants Ukraine, they will take as little or as much as they desire and it will be over before NATO or the US and Nato can do anything about it. (The same is true regarding PRC and Taiwan) The fly in the buttermilk no one wants to talk much about is Germany and France's significant dependence on Russia for cheap O&G, especially NG. (Natural Gas) Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia under the Baltic Sea would provide additional cheap nat gas to Western Europe via their Gazprom hub at Greifswald Germany. From Germany other lines would carry product to France and other European nations. The old Gazprom lines crossed Ukraine and there was always a bone of contention there, and Ukraine at times either charged large fees or even siphoned off Gazprom O&G product to sell as their own.
The undersea line was copleted late last year but it needs certification from Germany and so far, due to international politics, Germany has yet to certify the line.
The US wants to sell more nas to western Europe, but it is in the form of liquified natural gas (LNG) delivered via tanker. US has been pushing France and Germany to construct a modern large offshore tanker terminal to recieve US LNG as dock space is limited in france, it's dangerous to have a tanker of LNG at a large city port. (The expanding fireball from an exploding LNG tanker would encompass an area about the size of NYC) Even if France/Germany did build the offshore terminal, it would be several years hence and the LNG from the US/Canada would still be more expensive than the NG from the Nordstream pipeline. Germany is not completely landlocked but it is a longer trip by ship to go either around the West side of the Uk or up thru the tumultuous English Channel & offload at Germany than it is to Frances much longer coastline. About 1/2 of Germany's coastline is on the Baltic Sea, with most of the rest on the North Sea and not prominently on the Atlantic Ocean, while France has 2000 miles of Atlantic coastline, making France the more logical place for US/Canadian O&G productsto offload.
The above, is why Germany and France (especially Germany )really haven't gotten behind the US/Russia debate.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-20-2022).]
It would not matter who is in the Oval Office. If Russia wants Ukraine, they will take as little or as much as they desire and it will be over before NATO or the US and Nato can do anything about it. (The same is true regarding PRC and Taiwan)
So, we're headed into another but more intense coldwar with even less support from our NATO Allies?
So, we're headed into another but more intense coldwar with even less support from our NATO Allies?
Rams
not like the last one. just more intense only because the public has more access to news overseas now, but colder than last cold war. There won't be disposale tank companiess on the Fulda Gap or 200,000 US troops garrisoned in Germay this time. All the hardware is already built. Biggest concern is if Xi gets emboldened by what Putin does and at what Washington's response (or lack thereof) is. It's about big $$ in Europe this time and about rhetoric in the West Pacific. Not about military power and land.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-21-2022).]
not like the last one. just more intense only because the public has more access to news overseas now, but colder than last cold war. There won't be disposale tank companiess on the Fulda Gap or 200,000 US troops garrisoned in Germay this time. All the hardware is already built. Biggest concern is if Xi gets emboldened by what Putin does and at what Washington's response (or lack thereof) is. It's about big $$ in Europe this time and about rhetoric in the West Pacific. Not about military power and land.
I tend to agree on the Russia front but, my concern with China is, how dependent we've become on China since we sent so much of our production activities and technologies to China. I don't see our influence to be nearly as great with China. Especially since China has been so involved in forming "friendships" with Central American countries.
I have serious doubts about this administration's ability to handle either situation, much less both.
So, we're headed into another but more intense coldwar with even less support from our NATO Allies?
Rams
Much of Europe is /very/ socialist and sympathetic to communism. This was a war that was fought, and lost, during the 1950s and 1960s. Even with the fall of the Berlin wall, and the obvious failure of the USSR... Russia's investments in these countries were wildly successful.
During the 1950s-1970s, Russia and the US spent 100s of billions (yesterday's value) on propaganda. The USSR sponsored the Communist party in every country they could get one to actually stick. They infiltrated political groups everywhere they could, and pushed hard. Alternately, the United States was always on the defense... and they sponsored anyone that we felt would be competitive against the Communist party. In many cases, this meant sponsoring the Socialist leaning parties.
What resulted? We now have an extremely liberal society in both South America and Western Europe, created by both Russia and the United States.
I don't know that we had any alternative, quite honestly... would we just allow the USSR to fund the Communist party unabated? What would Europe look like now? What we have now was the alternative.
Unfortunately, they're wildly sympathetic to Russia, and they always have been. When I was growing up, I used to visit the Netherlands every summer since that's where my dad was from, and I had dozens of cousins... I mean a lot. My dad had 5 siblings, and each had 2-3 kids. They loved coming to America because everything was big... (everything from boobs to big semi trucks, which they'd never seen before). But it never stopped my cousins from telling me how they felt Russia was better than the US. They said... "Russia will take over the US..." etc. This was in the 1980s of course, so the propaganda was still rampant in their schools.
But these people are all adults, all my age... in their early 40s. They are the ones now making decisions for Europe, and in government.
That's a long way of me saying that I totally agree with you, we will likely go into another cold war, with significantly less support to our allies. We'll probably eventually be looked upon as the French are to the United States. Even though the French helped us win the Revolutionary War through their significant support to the Continental Army, we look at them today as fools and idiots (common consensus in the United States)... because no one remembers.
The good thing is, Russia is a shadow of its former self (as you well know yourself) when they were the USSR. They are a poor nation desperately seeking relevance. Even with our berated, demoralized, and woke military brass, Russia still wouldn't hold a candle to us. As an example, last time I checked, they only have two air craft carriers. One of them isn't running, and the other has significant fire damage. Both are from the 1980s and are ski-slope carriers. For countries like this, they have to focus their efforts on things they can allow themselves to be superior on... like hyper-sonic missiles and other technology that can give them an edge where sheer power fails. The overwhelming vast majority of their nuclear weapons are 1980s or older-era technology. They've recently begun redeveloping some new stuff with hyper-sonic technology, but they simply don't have that in numbers... though it might not matter if we cannot intercept these. End of the day, a nuclear war with them means absolute death for their entire country, and only some devastation for us.
Gone are the days when Russia had the power and money to build air bases all over the world:
Personally, my opinion is that we should have begun arming Ukraine and supporting them with better conventional hardware and surface to air missile intercept deployments. We should have done this from the very beginning. We don't have to get involved in a fight per-se, but we can leverage our power to ensure one does not happen. What Biden seems to be doing is basically telling Russia... if you want to come across, we won't do anything. And as MJ has stated, don't expect any support from Germany and the rest of Europe other than some harshly written PDF letters sent by e-mail.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 01-21-2022).]
not like the last one. just more intense only because the public has more access to news overseas now, but colder than last cold war. There won't be disposale tank companiess on the Fulda Gap or 200,000 US troops garrisoned in Germay this time. All the hardware is already built. Biggest concern is if Xi gets emboldened by what Putin does and at what Washington's response (or lack thereof) is. It's about big $$ in Europe this time and about rhetoric in the West Pacific. Not about military power and land.
You mean if XI gets gets emboldened by how the USA failed in Afghanistan and gets fed up with the USA constantly meddling in every facet of China's and Russia's dealings.
Boomer mentality is still upside down in understanding. It thinks we're the good guy.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Much of Europe is /very/ socialist and sympathetic to communism. This was a war that was fought, and lost, during the 1950s and 1960s. Even with the fall of the Berlin wall, and the obvious failure of the USSR... Russia's investments in these countries were wildly successful.
During the 1950s-1970s, Russia and the US spent 100s of billions (yesterday's value) on propaganda. The USSR sponsored the Communist party in every country they could get one to actually stick. They infiltrated political groups everywhere they could, and pushed hard. Alternately, the United States was always on the defense...
Uh, no. The USA was constantly on the march. It played offense and defense as it went along. The propaganda machine told you it was just defense. Afterall, we funded and armed the USSR, making into an entity that we could match against later. We gave them.half of Europe on purpose in a meeting in Feb 1945 in Yalta. Look.up where Yalta is located. It ain't Club Med.
quote
and they sponsored anyone that we felt would be competitive against the Communist party. In many cases, this meant sponsoring the Socialist leaning parties.
What resulted? We now have an extremely liberal society in both South America and Western Europe, created by both Russia and the United States.
I don't know that we had any alternative, quite honestly... would we just allow the USSR to fund the Communist party unabated? What would Europe look like now? What we have no is the alternative.
Unfortunately, they're wildly sympathetic to Russia, and they always have been. When I was growing up, I used to visit the Netherlands every summer since that's where my dad was from, and I had dozens of cousins... I mean a lot. My dad had 5 siblings, and each had 2-3 kids. They loved coming to America because everything was big... (everything from boobs to big semi trucks, which they'd never seen before). But it never stopped my cousins from telling me how they felt Russia was better than the US. They said... "Russia will take over the US..." etc. This was in the 1980s of course, so the propaganda was still rampant in their schools.
You never stop using the word Russia instead of what it really was; the USSR.
quote
That's a long way of me saying that I totally agree with you, we will likely go into another cold war, with significantly less support to our allies. We'll probably eventually be looked upon as the French are to the United States. Even though the French helped us win the Revolutionary War through their significant support to the Continental Army, we look at them today as fools and idiots (common consensus in the United States)... because no one remembers.
You do know our soldiers are becoming transsexuals now, and that our government pays them for that, right?
quote
The good thing is, Russia is a shadow of its former self (as you well know yourself) when they were the USSR.
No, that's a total non-sequitur. They have no affiliation with the USSR. The statement you made has no credible basis.
quote
Gone are the days when Russia had the power and money to build air bases all over the world:
Russia never built air bases all over the world as you're claiming.
quote
Personally, my opinion is that we should have begun arming Ukraine and supporting them with better conventional hardware and surface to air missile intercept deployments. We should have done this from the very beginning. We don't have to get involved in a fight per-se, but we can leverage our power to ensure one does not happen.
You really just won't ever understand that we're the reason there is a fight there right now. It's our goal to make every nation on Earth to come under the thumb of woke, to accept infinity 3rd world migrants and to upend the natural order of the nuclear family.
quote
What Biden seems to be doing is basically telling Russia... if you want to come across, we won't do anything. And as MJ has stated, don't expect any support from Germany and the rest of Europe other than some harshly written PDF letters sent by e-mail.
That's just parroting. German officials, including Merkel, knows who was spying on them down to their personal cell phones. They know the USA isn't going to heat their houses. The USA is a failed state.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 01-21-2022).]
I read everything you said, but I think you are looking at things from a very radical approach. The United States absolutely does have intent and interest in maintaining world-power, and we engage in a lot of global manipulation; however, you greatly misstate the extent, and seem to believe the United States (as a willing country) is leading the charge in reshaping the world into some crazy single-world Government.
The United States is /as much/ a victim of a push towards a one-world Government, as other countries are. This is as a result of powerful oligarchs that reside in the US, Europe, Russia, middle-east, etc. The rest of your comments are wildly inaccurate, so respectfully, I won't waste my time on a back and forth.
I read everything you said, but I think you are looking at things from a very radical approach. The United States absolutely does have intent and interest in maintaining world-power, and we engage in a lot of global manipulation; however, you greatly misstate the extent, and seem to believe the United States (as a willing country) is leading the charge in reshaping the world into some crazy single-world Government.
To be exact, the reality is that the US military, CIA and State Dept are used as a means to force the entire world into submitting to one order.
quote
The United States is /as much/ a victim of a push towards a one-world Government, as other countries are. This is as a result of powerful oligarchs that reside in the US, Europe, Russia, middle-east, etc. The rest of your comments are wildly inaccurate, so respectfully, I won't waste my time on a back and forth.
There's only 1 way to view it. Reality. You're living in 1980s propaganda land.
The oligarchs are very specifically NOT in Russia and were defanged there by Putin. Putin was placed in power by them and he ultimately betrayed them by giving the country back to Russians. THAT is main reason Russia is targeted. Victoria Nudleman Nuland, look at her Wikipedia Early Life drop down. See where family came from?
Putin denied any person holding dual citizenship or even having traveled with a passport from holding some top positions, because they repeatedly betrayed Russian interests. Dual citizens rule the US government and our policies of foreign aggression.
Russia is not the USSR. The system was destroyed. The people were forced out of power. They held it briefly after the USSR. Not anymore.
Everything I said that you cant address is not possible for you to refute.
We are not fighting for the American family, nor family values.
You are here weekly complaining about what the US is doing to us just as I am and still you're presenting us as the good guy in international affairs.
Personally, my opinion is that we should have begun arming Ukraine and supporting them with better conventional hardware and surface to air missile intercept deployments.
A few days ago I ran across this article discussing Ukraine:
When I examined the photo more closely it was obvious to me that the Ukraine forces might have a big problem:
The Kalashnikov rifle in all of it's variants is one of the most prolific and cheap small arms on the planet so this kind of photo has to make you wonder.
Some kind of punishment (no rifle for you !) maybe...or recruits not yet qualified on it ? The guy on the right sure isnt scanning for anything besides the gravel right in front of him.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 01-21-2022).]
Some kind of punishment (no rifle for you !) maybe...or recruits not yet qualified on it ? The guy on the right sure isnt scanning for anything besides the gravel right in front of him.
Hey Bubba, you don't recognize an IED/Mine specialist?
The Kalashnikov rifle in all of it's variants is one of the most prolific and cheap small arms on the planet so this kind of photo has to make you wonder.
Hahah! Oh man, that is hilarious! I guess they're training, but man... that's gold right there.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Hahah! Oh man, that is hilarious! I guess they're training, but man... that's gold right there.
It is decidedly NOT funny.
There isn't a single capable, modern, military anywhere in the world today that trains it's troops with cardboard cut-out weapons.
Ukraine has been trying to stand down the constant threat of a Russian invasion for over 7 YEARS now.....longer if you want to add their efforts at independence after 1991.
Granted there is a good bit of "who, what, when, where and why" associated with that single photo, but it isn't a good look and to me it suggests there might be a TO&E problem.
That said, I have a lot of "strategic theory" of my own based on a long familiarity with the region and in particular the Donbass and the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, which IMHO is at the direct heart of the issue.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-22-2022).]
Personally, my opinion is that we should have begun arming Ukraine and supporting them with better conventional hardware and surface to air missile intercept deployments. We should have done this from the very beginning. We don't have to get involved in a fight per-se, but we can leverage our power to ensure one does not happen.
...
Haven’t we done that enough elsewhere to see it come back and bite us?
I don’t want Ukraine taken over, but at what point is it just… not our problem? Sounds callous, but I’m actually asking. Ukraine is actually very interesting with this because they’re one of the more capable nations that have faced this in the last few decades.
There isn't a single capable, modern, military anywhere in the world today that trains it's troops with cardboard cut-out weapons.
Ukraine has been trying to stand down the constant threat of a Russian invasion for over 7 YEARS now.....longer if you want to add their efforts at independence after 1991.
That said, I have a lot of "strategic theory" of my own based on a long familiarity with the region and in particular the Donbass and the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, which IMHO is at the direct heart of the issue.
No, they haven't. The Ukraine has been at the center (in the region) of globalist internationalists who have been instigating an overthrow and selling out of the power to their cohorts and the USA is the instrument they used to do it.
As proof you're wrong, the 2 break away regions that are led by Russian separatists have not been recognized by Russia for what, 7-8 years now?
NATO and the US State Dept created this situation and the region has been living under threat due to what they have created.
Haven’t we done that enough elsewhere to see it come back and bite us?
I don’t want Ukraine taken over, but at what point is it just… not our problem? Sounds callous, but I’m actually asking. Ukraine is actually very interesting with this because they’re one of the more capable nations that have faced this in the last few decades.
Non-Intervention is definitely a "libertarian" trait; however, we can also be an ally. They supported us militarily and politically during the Afghan war that we engaged everyone else to participate in, with the "You are with us, or against us" speech. Granted, I think Ukraine only had maybe ~50 soldiers, if even that... but they also supported us politically in that regard. I don't expect us to fight their war for them, but they are an ally, period.
The United States still provides "foreign aide" to China, for God only knows what reason. We could use that money instead for a lot of things, but one could be to assist Ukraine with supporting their defenses. I'm more on the side of Trump's idea of ending these constant wars, and not starting new ones. But I'm also a fan of holding our adversaries accountable... which includes not allowing our enemies to "grow their power." We can do both, without involving our own troops.
Originally posted by randye: It is decidedly NOT funny.
There isn't a single capable, modern, military anywhere in the world today that trains it's troops with cardboard cut-out weapons.
Those are most likely, members of the recently formed Territorial Defense Units. In-Active reservists and local formed militia called up and trying to get quickly 'trained'.
The young Marine was weary and he sought a little rest With his helmet for a pillow And his rifle on his chest. He has seen the gunships fire. He had heard the cannons roar. He had seen the Navy's power as he made his way ashore. Then he thought about his rifle And he found it rather small, With the gunships and the cannons It was nothing much at all. The efforts of a rifleman Meant little, it would seem. Then, as he slipped to slumber, He dreamed himself a dream.
The man who stood beside him Held a musket in his hand And close around his neck he wore A heavy leather band. "When I was on Old Ironsides" The apparition said "There were cannonballs and cutlasses Wherever danger led. There were pistols too, and daggers At every fighter's side When the ships would come together On the rolling, heaving, tide. But when it came to boarding, With the battle fury hot It was Rifles, always Rifles That made the telling shot."
The apparition faded And standing in its place Beneath a shallow helmet He saw another face. "When we were in the trenches In the wood they called Marine There were mortars, tanks and cannons, More than I had ever seen. But when the final charge was made To push the Germans back It was Rifles, always Rifles At the point of the attack."
The face changed only slightly And the helmet stayed the same But the island that he spoke of Had a more familiar name. "They hit us very early On the day the war begun. On the wings of all their bombers We could see the Rising Sun. Our pilots and our gunners Who fought and fell at Wake Wrote a story full of glory That time can never shake. But when the enemy drew near To make his final reach It was Rifles, always Rifles That met him on the beach."
There next appeared a shadow In a swirl of stinging snow And it breathed a fierce defiance And its eyes were all aglow. "In Fifty at the Chosin When the big guns couldn't talk And the First Marine Division Took a fighting, freezing walk, When all the world, except the Corps Had counted us as gone It was Rifles, always Rifles That let us carry on."
The scene was changed to summer And the face was hard and lean And the tired eyes were fired With the light that says "Marine". "At Khe Sahn when they shelled us We were wrapped in rolling smoke And the thought of our survival Was a grim and ghastly joke. But when the waves came swarming in To finish the assault It was Rifles, always Rifles That called the final halt."
There next appeared a General As solid as a tank With three stars on his collar to signify his rank. His stature and demeanor Were the military type And in his hand he carried A stubby little pipe. His jaw was squarely chisled, His eyes were clear and keen And his bearing left no question. He was all Marine's Marine.
"The message they're conveying" The burly General said "Is that through our troubled history The rifles always led. We've had cannons, tank and mortars. We've had weapons by the score, We've had Battleships and fighter planes To complement The Corps. We've a most impressive arsenal. That's obviously true, But the final thrust for victory Has always been with you. It was Rifles, always Rifles When The Corps was sorely pressed And the rifle that you carry Must meet the final test. So sling that rifle proudly, For everything we do With mortars, tanks and cannons Is just an aid to you."
The young Marine awakened And put the dream aside, Though now he clutched his rifle With a certain touch of pride. And then he chanced to notice That lying near his hand Was a stubby little pipe And a heavy leather band.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:But I'm also a fan of holding our adversaries accountable... which includes not allowing our enemies to "grow their power."
Aren't you just whacking it and doing nothing of importance? Because our enemies occupy our government just as.they do.the Ukrainian govt and you're talking about a war in Afghanistan as though it was a relevant action.
No, what the normie believes is what his govt tells him to think.
Berlin won't provide permits necessary to export weapons of German origin.
Germany has faced criticism in Washington amid the Ukraine crisis, particularly over Nord Stream 2.
Germany is preventing fellow NATO member Estonia from providing Ukraine with military support by declining to offer export permits for weapons of German origin, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.
"Germany, they have a lot of hesitation to deliver to us," Ukraine's defense minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, told The Journal.
A German government spokesperson explained to the outlet that the decision on the exportation of weaponry is a result of a long-standing policy.
"The principle governing arms exports is always the same—whether they come directly from Germany or from third countries—and no permission has been issued at this stage," the spokesperson said, adding that "it is not possible to estimate the outcome of the process at this moment."
Estonia is lobbying for Germany to change course so that it can send Ukraine D-30 howitzers. The Soviet weapons were left in Germany after its reunification before being exported to Finland and later Estonia, The Wall Street Journal report said.
Unlike other NATO members, including the US and UK, Germany has refused to provide weapons to Ukraine amid tensions with Russia.
Over the past year alone, the US has provided more than $400 million in security assistance to Ukraine. Since 2014, the US has provided Ukraine with Javelin anti-tank missiles, small arms and ammunition, and patrol boats, among other equipment.
But the German government has opposed sending weapons to Ukraine to avoid provoking Russia, while also citing Germany's own history of atrocities in the region under the Nazis during World War II.
"Our restrictive position is well known and is rooted in history," Germany's foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, said while visiting Kyiv this week.
Ukraine has urged Germany to alter its policy, pushing back against its justifications for declining lethal aid.
"This responsibility should apply to the Ukrainian people, who lost at least 8 million lives during the Nazi occupation of Ukraine," Ukraine's ambassador to Germany, Andrij Melnyk, told the DPA news agency, according to Deutsche Welle.
Russia in recent months has gathered tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine's borders, raising alarm across Europe about the prospect of an invasion. The White House earlier this week said that a Russian invasion of Ukraine could be imminent, and the Biden administration has warned Moscow it will face severe economic consequences in the event of an invasion.
The Kremlin has said Russia has no plans to invade Ukraine while making demands for binding security guarantees that the US and NATO have dismissed as non-starters. Russia, among other things, has insisted that Ukraine and Georgia be barred from ever joining NATO. The alliance has been adamant that its open door policy is not up for negotiation.
Ukraine has sought to join NATO for years and maintains a robust partnership with the alliance despite not being a member. This has angered Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has blamed NATO for the contentious dynamic between Moscow and the West.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in Berlin on Wednesday that it is "absurd" to point the finger at NATO, citing Putin's history of aggression in the region. Russia in 2014 invaded and annexed Crimea from Ukraine. Since that year, the Kremlin has supported separatists in a war against Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbass region.
Diplomatic efforts to prevent a conflict have not led to any major breakthroughs so far. But Blinken met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Geneva on Friday, and they both agreed that it was important to continue diplomatic talks.
As the US searches for a peaceful resolution to the crisis, Germany has been the target of criticism in Washington. Some Republican lawmakers have effectively accused Berlin of abandoning Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. Nord Stream 2, a Russia-to-Germany gas pipeline, has landed at the center of this discussion.
The pipeline, which is completed but not operational (pending German approval), is opposed by congressional lawmakers on both sides of the aisle as well as the Ukrainian government. The undersea pipeline bypasses Ukraine. Opponents contend the pipeline would give Russia dangerous leverage over Europe, while depriving Ukraine of billions in gas transit fees.
The Biden administration has pushed back against sanctions on the pipeline in order to stay on Berlin's good side but has also urged Germany to halt Nord Stream 2 should Russia invade Ukraine.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has signaled that he is open to this, but he has not explicitly stated that the pipeline would be scrapped as part of a response to a military incursion. Scholz on Tuesday said it is "clear that there will be a high price to pay and that everything will have to be discussed should there be a military intervention in Ukraine."
Russia has maintained a naval base there since the early 1800s and it is the home of the Russian "Black Sea Fleet", their southernmost "warm water" naval base and their primary naval access to the Mediterranean.
Opening the Nordstream pipeline into Germany will effectively nullify the agreement that the Russians and Ukranians had for maintaining the Russian "lease" of Sevastapol until 2042
The specter of Ukraine joining NATO, real or not, would have also put Sevastopol in question / jeopardy as it is highly unlikely that NATO would condone a Russian naval base IN an allied country, and NATO membership would have potentially given Ukraine sufficient political and military clout to evict the Russians .
Back in 2014 the Ukrainian navy component of the old Russian "Black Sea Fleet" was "voluntarily evicted" from Sevastopol and moved to port in Odessa.
Russia has maintained a naval base there since the early 1800s and it is the home of the Russian "Black Sea Fleet", their southernmost "warm water" naval base and their primary naval access to the Mediterranean.
Opening the Nordstream pipeline into Germany would have effectively nullified the agreement that the Russians and Ukranians had for maintaining the Russian "lease" of Sevastapol until 2042
The specter of Ukraine joining NATO, real or not, would have also put Sevastopol in question / jeopardy as it is highly unlikely that NATO would condone a Russian naval base IN an allied country, and NATO membership would have potentially given Ukraine sufficient political and military clout to evict the Russians .
Back in 2014 the Ukrainian navy component of the old Russian "Black Sea Fleet" was "voluntarily evicted" from Sevastopol and moved to port in Odessa.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: He said his biggest regret was the collapse of the USSR. He's basically stated he wants that back...
Yep, it's gotta be hard on the ego when going from a Super Power to basically an also ran......... Especially when some of your former friends change sides.
Saw on Twitter that we've closed the Embassy in Ukraine, and it is being evacuated on Monday.
Interesting, Sec. of State said on the Meet the Press this morning that the situation was being monitored but, no decision had been made. Chuck Todd was saying that dependents were being evacuated on Monday. Guess we'll see what happens.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-23-2022).]
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: He said his biggest regret was the collapse of the USSR. He's basically stated he wants that back...
No, he didn't. No he doesn't. That's just the John McCain Republican Party talking.
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:Yep, it's gotta be hard on the ego when going from a Super Power to basically an also ran......... Especially when some of your former friends change sides.
Rams
Lol! The guy who diplomatically outflanks every single US President and the Israeli Prime minister isn't suffering from any ego problems. The man defeated ISIS in Syria, which was a creation of the highest levels of org crime in our Western governments.
You guys are why the US will just fail as you support the status quo indefinitely.
“First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” Putin said.
“As for the Russian people, it became a genuine tragedy. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and countrymen found themselves beyond the fringes of Russian territory."
I tend to agree on the Russia front but, my concern with China is, how dependent we've become on China since we sent so much of our production activities and technologies to China. I don't see our influence to be nearly as great with China. Especially since China has been so involved in forming "friendships" with Central American countries. 
