Hopefully in the very near future we can move away from gas altogether. Ive no issue with cutting off the gas supply from Russia as long as we don’t just turn around and become dependent on someone else in the long term.
Well this is speeding up the alternatives.
We won’t ever become as reliant on the US for gas.
How does this end in your view so? The resident nutjob outlined his endgame there recently which was Nato tanks rolling on Moscow, Putin peacefully accepting this without reaching for the last resort and then the US installing a puppet regime in Russia which all Russians will accept without a quibble.
Now that is clearly insane ramblings but it is an alternative outcome to the 2 I outlined earlier that will end this conflict. How do you see this ending.
Guys love the history references but seem to pay little heed to the lessons of history.
Instead of humiliating or isolating would we not be best served bringing Russia into the circle in the long-term?
3 Likes
Western Europe already conquered most of the World already, if you want to go back far enough in history. They never cracked the East.
If they get Russia will they stop there or point their eyes at China?
It’s fuck all to do with any ideology, or your latest bogeyman. It’s an escalation of an ongoing conflict, a failure to implement already negotiated settlements, nato expansion, strategic errors and previously predicted outcomes to warned against manoeuvres.
Since nobody else will state theirs, least of all our esteemed peaceniks, here are my basic terms for peace.
- All Russian military and political personnel, equipment, vehicles and infrastructure not already captured out of Ukraine
- 100km DMZ all along the inside of Russia’s western border and also along any other border who fancies it
Take the rest of it from there.
2 Likes
I believe point one is achievable based on previous Minsk agreements where Russia lied and said they didn’t have anybody there. They can’t lie now after invading so the Minsk treaties could actually more binding. It would involve Ukraine agreeing to remove forces from the conflict area too, which they agreed to and didn’t adhere too, because of Russia’s lying.
The 100km DMZ could be a red line issue though.
I posted two months ago. I’d still loosely feel the same…
1 Like
You’ve great faith in Vladimir and the lads
2 Likes
Who needs cages to go diving with great white sharks. All you need is blind trust of the Timothy Treadwell variety.
It’s within Ukraine’s remit to reach a “peace” but this will be short lived for Europe generally, unfortunately.
It isn’t up to us in the West to tell them to stop and we should support them as the next danger are Western countries. That’s just reality.
Unfortunately that means a long period of Russia in the cold. Lots of talk of them being like a bigger North Korea but I don’t think it will be possible to hold it together.
One way or the other, Russia will have to come to heel. Whether that’s in six months, one year or ten.
This is NATO territory. It isn’t going to happen.
Baltic states are not going to allow it. Something like 1 in 3 people in Estonia are ethnic Russians, Russia has laws that allows them to use them as a pretext for invasion of those places.
Nope, it’s completely to do with that.
Sure half the time you lads like to use “Russia’s concerns not being taken seriously by the West”. Russia’s concern is their historical spheres of interests.
The efforts to turn this into an ethnic conflict are hilarious. Yes there are preferences on where Ukraine goes but again that is driven largely by self interest whether that is Western Ukrainians looking west and wanting some of that or eastern Ukrainians wanting to retain a special relationship with Russia. What happened in 2014 is down to those to poles but from Russia’s perspective that fundamentally comes down to the Eurasian dream and Russian imperialism.
And you’ll concede that US interference in Ukraine is likewise in favour of US imperialism?
1 Like
The US has a long standing interest in globalisation. This has resulted in China (and Russia for a time) coming into the tent and an arguable reduction in US influence and power.
In fact under the John Mearsheimer view of the world the US gets more power if it agrees to allow Russia to maintain its “strategic” position. Both can gang up and face down China then.
With the US the problem is that you can always find an angle to blame them on (like you are trying now) because they remain numero uno in the world.
It was a very simple question that highlights there’s more than one player with vested interests in the region. Nothing more.
All countries have an interest in global conflicts, particularly one on the doorstep of a military alliance they are in.
Again, if the US had agreed with Russia for a carve up of both of their interests and then turning on China you would be doing the exact same US bashing.
1 Like
Right… Yeah. Ok.
Yup, they do. Hence the need for foreign affairs departments.