I couldn't find a suitable thread that hadn't been trolled to death, and am a bit surprised that there isn't a current one (if I'm wrong, mods please merge/lock).

I very much suspect the current round of Russian toing and froing has the aim of annexing the rebel held Donbas region and that will be it (for now).

That, or Putin has gone completely mental or has catastrophically miscalculated.

---

Heh - and as I type this the BBC news feed leads with:

People in the rebel-held city of Donetsk, in eastern Ukraine, will be evacuated to Russia, the area's leader has said.

Denis Pushilin, who is head of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DNR), announced on social media that Russia had agreed to provide accommodation for people leaving.

Women, children and the elderly should be evacuated first, he added.

There was no immediate comment from Russian officials or from Kyiv.

The US and its allies have raised concerns that rising violence in the Donbas region could form part of a Russian pretext to invade Ukraine.

Russia, which denies planning to attack, voiced alarm earlier today over an increase in shelling in the region.

The DNR is unrecognised by the outside world.

(From BBC Live newsfeed)

So I'm feeling annexation rather than outright invasion - although I suspect Putin has grossly underestimated the likely economic effects.

German foreign minister just called it a „Russia crisis, not Ukraine crisis“.

Agi Hammerthief wrote:German foreign minister just called it a „Russia crisis, not Ukraine crisis“.

Given that Russia is already at crisis point with the UK (by using a chemical weapon in a UK city resulting in the death of a UK citizen) with the Czech Republic (by blowing up 2 ammunition storage warehouses killing 2 Czech citizens) with the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Philippines (by shooting down flight MH-17 with 298 fatalities) - calling it a "Russia Crisis" is horribly non-specific given the shit they've been involved in over the last few years.

Good point.

Oh FFS - looks like it's kicking off:

Western and Ukrainian officials have warned that the information war could escalate ahead of any Russian military intervention.

In the past 24 hours, that war seems to have hotted up.

The leaders of both separatist “people’s republics” in the Donbass have put out statements urging civilians to flee what they say is a likely attack by Ukrainian government forces.

Pictures have already been released, showing children being gathered together, ready for evacuation.

Moscow has weighed in, announcing that the acting head of the Ministry of Emergency Situations is flying to Rostov to set up accommodation for refugees.

Everyone arriving, the government says, will be given 10,000 roubles (around £95).

All this despite there being no evidence that Ukraine plans to attack. Any such plans would be suicidal for the government in Kyiv, given the Russian forces currently massed along its borders.

Kyiv is clearly alarmed. The Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Lt. Gen. Valeriy Zaluzhnyy, released a statement on his official Facebook page, directed mainly at civilians living in the separatist areas, saying “such scenarios are not even considered.”

“Militants backed by the Russian federation continue to aggravate the situation,” he said, “by deliberately misleading residents of the temporarily occupied territories.”

Other reports coming from separatist areas speak of air-raid sirens being heard and an explosion which destroyed a jeep in Donetsk. None of the details have been independently verified and all such information needs to be treated with extreme caution.

this would be the perfect time for the USA to see how many troops they can fit into Alaska.

„what? invade Siberia?
of cause not, we are just doing a winter maneuver as far away from Ukraine as possible.“

Sending more troops will probably result in sending more troops ~ escalating conflict. What I do suggest then? I am not in a position to know but escalating does not seem like a way to end this crisis.

Let's go back to 2014:

Necessary background to the Ukraine crisis goes back to the early 1990s... http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news- ... l#p2047603

With no threat of actual military involvement from any other power, Putin's already got what he wants - he's showing the ex-Soviet satellite states that Russia's the top dog, and NATO's toothless. The economic sanctions will hurt, but Russia will keep spinning their concoction knowing that in 4 years a newly elected democratic leader of a given country could just as easily see the need to keep on Russia's good side, and start easing sanctions. Putin can afford to wait - his legacy is cemented.

The world is run by Baron Harkonnens.

Spearthrower wrote:With no threat of actual military involvement from any other power, Putin's already got what he wants - he's showing the ex-Soviet satellite states that Russia's the top dog, and NATO's toothless. The economic sanctions will hurt, but Russia will keep spinning their concoction knowing that in 4 years a newly elected democratic leader of a given country could just as easily see the need to keep on Russia's good side, and start easing sanctions. Putin can afford to wait - his legacy is cemented.

I think you're right in stating what he's thinking - but I think it's entirely possible he's miscalculated. Badly.

Unless Putin has an under-the-table deal with China in his back pocket (possible - they could use the gas, and I'm sure Xi wouldn't be averse to having a hold on Putin), the economic sanctions won't just hurt, they could well cripple Russia's economy. Dropping them from SWIFT and cutting Nordstream would do that (although the Germans wouldn't be keen!). Remember Russia's economy collapsed in 2014-2016 and there's no reason to think it's any more robust now. Another economic disaster would be by far the most likely thing to remove him from power.

As for NATO - the fact that he's been whining on about the "dangers" of Ukraine joining NATO has more than underlined the strength and value of being in the alliance for all those ex-soviet states that have already joined (he's not about to invade Poland or Lithuania). Given the way he's been leaning on Ukraine I could easily see Finland, for instance, joining NATO just to avoid a rerun of the shit they went through during the cold war (hence the term Finlandization). Looking at a list of countries that have been making donations to Ukraine's military is revealing, including as it does all the Baltic states.

I'd be surprised if he goes beyond annexing Donbas and Luhansk though. Although nowhere near as large as the Russian army, Ukraine's military is still one of the largest in Europe and has received some seriously nasty pieces of kit (mainly designed to counter armoured vehicles). Many body bags coming back from a protracted guerrilla campaign combined with serious economic issues is not a recipe for establishing himself as the Emperor of all the Russias with any longevity.

Seabass wrote:The world is run by Baron Harkonnens.

Unfortunately. We can take a moral position but at the end of the day, we need to deal with the reality in a pragmatic fashion, IMO.

The Russian MO is largely one of not going anywhere where the local populace, or at least the majority of it, won't welcome and assist them.

Donbas, being mostly in the hands of pro-Russian separatists anyway, fits that description. It's only really been a matter of time.

Nobody wants WW3, so NATO probably won't oppose it, at least not directly. They have given the Ukranian army around 3000 anti-tank missiles though, just to make sure Putin isn't tempted to push his forces any further. Otherwise, it's just strong words and sanctions.

It's tough for the rest of Ukraine, but what's left of the country ends up much keener on joining NATO and the EU so it's not exactly a loss for the West.

Ah well, that's what you get for not reading the fine print of the Budapest Memorandum.

would they actually loose any important resources?

Tortured_Genius wrote:the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand and Philippines (by shooting down flight MH-17 with 298 fatalities)

I don't think there is a lot of anti-Russian sentiment in these countries. Especially not in ASEAN countries.

Well Putin's playacting and speech today were utterly deranged, but fully in line with "The 7 Rules of Russian Nationalism":

1. If an area was ours for 500 years and yours for 50 years, it should belong to us -- you are merely occupiers.
2. If an area was yours for 500 years and ours for 50 years, it should belong to us -- borders must not be changed.
3. If an area belonged to us 500 years ago but never since then, it should belong to us -- it is the Cradle of our Nation.
4. If a majority of our people live there, it must belong to us -- they must enjoy the right of self-determination.
5. If a minority of our people live there, it must belong to us -- they must be protected against your oppression.
6. All the above rules apply to us but not to you.
7. Our dream of greatness is Historical Necessity, yours is Fascism.

(Stolen from the interwebs - not sure where from)

I especially liked the bit where Sergei Naryshkin let slip that he wanted Donbas to become a part of Russia rather than merely be recognized as an independent state.

So much for the self-determination narrative.

Tortured_Genius wrote:Well Putin's playacting and speech today were utterly deranged, but fully in line with "The 7 Rules of Russian Nationalism":

1. If an area was ours for 500 years and yours for 50 years, it should belong to us -- you are merely occupiers.
2. If an area was yours for 500 years and ours for 50 years, it should belong to us -- borders must not be changed.
3. If an area belonged to us 500 years ago but never since then, it should belong to us -- it is the Cradle of our Nation.
4. If a majority of our people live there, it must belong to us -- they must enjoy the right of self-determination.
5. If a minority of our people live there, it must belong to us -- they must be protected against your oppression.
6. All the above rules apply to us but not to you.
7. Our dream of greatness is Historical Necessity, yours is Fascism.

(Stolen from the interwebs - not sure where from)

Indeed.
As is shown by a comparison of Chechnya and Donetsk, if you are in Russia and want out, you get the big stick. If you are outwith Russia and want in, you get an open hand.

I'm just wondering how far into delusion Putin will slide. No person of any consequence in his own government will say a word against him and as time goes on he'll come to be more and more convinced of his own righteousness and increasingly divorced from reality.

don't get me started wrote:
I'm just wondering how far into delusion Putin will slide. No person of any consequence in his own government will say a word against him and as time goes on he'll come to be more and more convinced of his own righteousness and increasingly divorced from reality.

Putin is not deluded. He does not believe what he says. It is power politics of the Machiavellian sort. Other aspects of it are salami tactics and relying on "peace in our time" type responses to them.

In my opinion he'll finish up with all of Ukraine - slice after slice. It will be preferable to radioactive fallout we came to within a whisker of getting by dint of the brinkmanship during Cuban missile crisis in 1962. The net result of that one was a win for the USSR, by the way. In return for not going through with installing nuclear missiles in Cuba the USA removed all missiles it had already installed and operational in Turkey.

Neither deluded nor paranoid, that guy.



Anyone may join in, for only 600 currency units...



lol

Excellent speech from the Kenyan Ambassador to the UN: