Ukraine Watch...

[invalid]

Remember, this was supposed to be a 'special operation', over in a few days....

Remind me Who actually said It was supposed to be over in a few days?

[Mark]

I can’t tell what the ‘points that remain the same’ that you think you’re making are?

The nato website is pretty clear about its direct involvement in Ukraine.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_208101.htm

Am I reading this wrong? “NATO steps up support for Ukraine, strengthens deterrence and defence”

NATO’s own website clearly states its direct involvement in Ukraine.

My main point is that Russia and Ukraine are both losers in this conflict...
The sooner they both realise that the better for all concerned...
You seem to think that Russia has (or will) win something, other than maybe a tiny bit of scorched and war damaged land...

To date, NATO has been indirectly involved by supplying some arms to Ukraine...
They've not been directly involved by putting troops into the conflict, supplying their full range of weapons, implementing 'no fly zones' etc. etc.
I guess it's 'semantics', whether we choose to agree on the definitions of 'directly' or 'indirectly' involved, but at the end of the day, NATO has a lot more firepower up its sleeve if it did get dragged further in...

[Default0ptions]

Remember, this was supposed to be a 'special operation', over in a few days....

Remind me Who actually said It was supposed to be over in a few days?

I’ve linked the text of Russia’s statement of what it was trying to achieve with it’s smo

You can play it any way and make it look ridiculous but that was the stated aim and that was the original objective.

You can be as rude and dismissive as you like about me but it doesn’t change anything

I’ve said before I have nothing to prove. Wait. See. There’s no way this ends well for Ukraine.

Remember this stuff very early in the conflict where Ukraine’s chief negotiator in the peace talks was shot?

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/u ... 86356.html

There’s a whole load of baggage, misdirection and plain stupidity going on here.

Here, for example https://www.osce.org/special-monitoring ... ine/512683

And I think the full text here of the smo https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_cond ... _operation

It really doesn’t matter how this ends. Except to the unfortunate Ukrainians. However this ends is insignificant. The combined conflict and sanctions have harmed Europe more than Russia and have failed to bring Russia to its knees

Get back to me in a couple of years and this’ll all be over and as shamefully tried to be covered over as Colin Powell and the Iraq debacle.

“Colin Powell knew his name would be forever tied to the ill-fated U.S. 2003 invasion of Iraq, and that the lending of his reputation and personal prestige to the faulty intelligence used to justify the ensuing war was an indelible stain.”

[Mark]

Remember, this was supposed to be a 'special operation', over in a few days....

Remind me Who actually said It was supposed to be over in a few days?

It mostly comes from Russian state media personalities constantly boasting about how they would take Kyiv in 3 to 8 days and the general expectation that the war would be over quickly....

Also, back in 2014 Putin claimed that he could take Kyiv in two weeks:
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-putin-eu ... 61609.html

But you already knew that.....

[invalid]

Media personalities hey. So just how 'constant' was this boasting.

Right, so nothing of the Sort: Two weeks, ten years ago.

But you already knew that.....

[Default0ptions]

I can’t tell what the ‘points that remain the same’ that you think you’re making are?

The nato website is pretty clear about its direct involvement in Ukraine.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_208101.htm

Am I reading this wrong? “NATO steps up support for Ukraine, strengthens deterrence and defence”

NATO’s own website clearly states its direct involvement in Ukraine.

My main point is that Russia and Ukraine are both losers in this conflict...
The sooner they both realise that the better for all concerned...
You seem to think that Russia has (or will) win something, other than maybe a tiny bit of scorched and war damaged land...

To date, NATO has been indirectly involved by supplying some arms to Ukraine...
They've not been directly involved by putting troops into the conflict, supplying their full range of weapons, implementing 'no fly zones' etc. etc.
I guess it's 'semantics', whether we choose to agree on the definitions of 'directly' or 'indirectly' involved, but at the end of the day, NATO has a lot more firepower up its sleeve if it did get dragged further in...

There’s no shame in falling for your own side’s propaganda Mark - but things will look very different in time.

I do begin to wonder about how this conversation will look in a few years time though

Nothing I’m saying here can possibly effect the way things turn out - so . . .

[Default0ptions]

Mark. Imagine Russia was about to put nukes in Cuba.

We just managed to back down from that before things got out of hand.

Why on earth should Russia have to accept potential nukes on its border?

If you just say that’s not what this is about you’re a hopeless lost cause and to stupid to cope with geopolitics

Are you being deliberately stupid?

[Default0ptions]

Remember, this was supposed to be a 'special operation', over in a few days....

Remind me Who actually said It was supposed to be over in a few days?

It mostly comes from Russian state media personalities constantly boasting about how they would take Kyiv in 3 to 8 days and the general expectation that the war would be over quickly....

Also, back in 2014 Putin claimed that he could take Kyiv in two weeks:
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-putin-eu ... 61609.html

But you already knew that..... :)

Taking Kiev. None of you will be able to get your heads around this but both sides had reached an understanding and then someone shot Ukraine’s chief negotiator.

https://metro.co.uk/2022/03/07/ukraine- ... -16227598/

Russia pulled back from threatening Kiev as a gesture of goodwill but our wonderful Boris nixed the deal

I don’t see any of you believing that and I’m too tired to care

But that’s what happened

[Mark]

Mark. Imagine Russia was about to put nukes in Cuba.

We just managed to back down from that before things got out of hand.

Why on earth should Russia have to accept potential nukes on its border?

If you just say that’s not what this is about you’re a hopeless lost cause and to stupid to cope with geopolitics

Are you being deliberately stupid?

There you go - resorting to insults again...
But if you are going to question my intelligence, at least try to spell it correctly... (it's 'too stupid', rather than 'to stupid')......

Regarding your point, Russia already has nukes on its border - Chinese ones - or weren't you aware of that geopolitical reality ?

[Default0ptions]

Mark. Imagine Russia was about to put nukes in Cuba.

We just managed to back down from that before things got out of hand.

Why on earth should Russia have to accept potential nukes on its border?

If you just say that’s not what this is about you’re a hopeless lost cause and to stupid to cope with geopolitics

Are you being deliberately stupid?

There you go - resorting to insults again...
But if you are going to question my intelligence, at least try to spell it correctly... (it's 'too stupid', rather than 'to stupid')......

Regarding your point, Russia already has nukes on its border - Chinese ones - or weren't you aware of that geopolitical reality ?

I don’t believe that Russia and China are in conflict right now?

So your point was?

[Default0ptions]

Mark. Imagine Russia was about to put nukes in Cuba.

We just managed to back down from that before things got out of hand.

Why on earth should Russia have to accept potential nukes on its border?

If you just say that’s not what this is about you’re a hopeless lost cause and to stupid to cope with geopolitics

Are you being deliberately stupid?

There you go - resorting to insults again...
But if you are going to question my intelligence, at least try to spell it correctly... (it's 'too stupid', rather than 'to stupid')......

Regarding your point, Russia already has nukes on its border - Chinese ones - or weren't you aware of that geopolitical reality ?

My bad. I failed in the ‘too stupid’ comment. I do appreciate a good pedantic put down though.

Thanks :))

[BritDownUnder]

I read the article on Kiev and it was great. Amazing how many owners it has had over the years. The fascist locals don't seem too keen on it being Russian right now though

You really did say this . . .

“The fascist locals don't seem too keen on it being Russian right now”?

Russia has claimed from the start that one of its aims was “Denazification“. So are you admitting that ‘the locals’ in Kiev are fascist?

If you remember this is what the whole Second World War was about

If you try really hard, BDU, you might eventually manage to open your mouth without putting your foot in it.

You bet I said it - with a slightly ironic tone.

They really are fascist, exactly the same as the National Coal Board was fascist in the minds of Arthur Scargill, and the police are fascist in the minds of the GLC and socialist worker protestors, in fact everyone who a far left totalitarian (and their kleptocratic successors in the Kremlin) thinks that anyone who doesn't agree with them is a fascist. I believe that even old Trotsky was a fascist for a while before he got the ice pick driven into his head.

Just another useful idiot earning their pennies from the FSB.

[Default0ptions]

I’m not following you here BDU - are you somehow not describing the Kiev regime as fascist by calling them fascist?

I haven’t called them fascist - though I do believe Russia has a point about ‘denazification’ - throwing labels about without close reasoning is unhelpful.

There is a lot of poorly understood background to this.

The BBC managed to try to address this in 2014 -

“the question of the presence of the far-right in Ukraine remains a highly sensitive issue, one which top officials and the media shy away from”

“Azov fighters are Ukraine's greatest weapon and may be its greatest threat”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ ... -neo-nazis

There really are many reasons for concern about the far right in Ukraine which are important in trying to understand the issues. It can’t simply be dismissed.

It’s ultimately a side issue, though, and one which whatever is left of Ukraine will have to sort out for itself.

Wars end either in a negotiated settlement where both sides reasons for going to war are addressed and a successful outcome for both sides is reached -

Or in ruins.

I still think and hope that something like peace can be negotiated to the satisfaction of all parties.

[BritDownUnder]

Russians flock to see captured British armoured vehicles in Moscow propaganda exhibition. Link.

The word on the flag behind them is (transliterated Pobyeda) Russian for victory. They have a park in Moscow called Park Pobyedy meaning Victory Park, that I visited, where this exhibit would be very well located.



I hear that an Australian Bushmaster vehicle was also there.

Note the comment at the end of the article

Ukraine has previously displayed destroyed Russian vehicles in the centre of Kyiv.

My guide particularly like this statue and remarked that the British and French soldiers looked very thin and weak compared with the glorious Russian soldier.

...the Monument dedicated to the Allied Countries of the Anti-Hitlerite Coalition, which features an obelisk and statues of soldiers representing the main allies: France, the USSR, the USA and the UK...

[clv101]

It's powerful domestic propaganda, reinforces the idea that Russia is fighting NATO, the west. That's a much more popular message for the local population than fighting Ukraine.