Putin threatens military action

@kevin-eleven said
Oh, the poor Russians! Never involved in any genocides themselves.

Interesting to see you playing on Moscow's team, Shav.

I sure as hell am not on Moscow’s team.
And I certainly think Putin is as mad as they come.

However, when I step back from the brink, I see nothing that’s changed since the Summer on the Eastern front.
I do see a whole lot of Western escalation, tough talking, threatening, etc.

I’ve also noted Russia’s problems with NATO and their muscle flexing along the Russian border, which is ongoing for more than a decade. And that, from Russia’s viewpoint, the expansion of NATO is a very bad thing indeed.

If you zoom into Ukrainian politics, you see extreme right-wing groups supporting the West and impoverished Eastern Ukrainians supporting Russia.
Not to mention the removal of the pro-Russian government (albeit not as democratically elected as one would hope), by means which were funded by the West.

So, constant dabbling in volatile political situations by the US and UK (and in this case, to a lesser extent, even the EU).

Do you really think Biden and Boris are concerned about the well being of Ukrainian civilians?

Like hell they are. They’re ramping up the war-speak in a situation they could not concievably win in a military intervention.
Knowing full well that Russia doesn’t want to escalate further than the proxy war which has been fought since 2014.

So Putin has goals. A warning about NATO expansion.
And the US and UK have goals (which sanctioning is a tool and not as MB suggests, a goal).
And the EU has a goal of cheaper gas.

What further goals do you suppose the US and UK have in that region?
If not the ones I stated in my previous post.

@shavixmir said
The US is ramping up the war mongering PR.
And the pussy-whipped Netherlands and UK are following suite like little bitches.

I wonder what oil and gas deals are driving this little wart of a drama…

Right. After Russia has surrounded the Ukraine with 130,000 troops.

I think troops talk louder than words, yappy-pants.

@kevin-eleven said
Right. After Russia has surrounded the Ukraine with 130,000 troops.

I think troops talk louder than words, yappy-pants.

It’s 100.000 troops. And they’ve been there since the Summer (actually before, then some left and then came back in October).

The extra 30.000 are in training exercises near Belarus.

NATO exercises:
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/3/pdf/2103-factsheet_exercises.pdf

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_exercises

How well would the US handle Russian training excersises with 20.000 troops in Cuba, do you think?

@shavixmir said
It’s 100.000 troops. And they’ve been there since the Summer (actually before, then some left and then came back in October).

The extra 30.000 are in training exercises near Belarus.

NATO exercises:
https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/3/pdf/2103-factsheet_exercises.pdf

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_exercises

How well would the US handle Russian training excersises with 20.000 troops in Cuba, do you think?

Is there a reason you're not working for some government, somewhere?

@kevin-eleven said
Is there a reason you're not working for some government, somewhere?

Who says I don’t work for a government?

Certainly wouldn’t be the Russian one, though.

But, more to the point, carefully tiptoeing around the subject of the NATO exercises, I notice…

Why’s that? Because it shines a light on the fact that Russia isn’t the only bad guy in this scenario?

@shavixmir said
Who says I don’t work for a government?

Certainly wouldn’t be the Russian one, though.

But, more to the point, carefully tiptoeing around the subject of the NATO exercises, I notice…

Why’s that? Because it shines a light on the fact that Russia isn’t the only bad guy in this scenario?

No one knows what Putin is thinking of but he’s surrounded Ukraine on three sides and from the Belorussian position he’s a couple of hours in a tank away from Kiev. I hope he’s bluffing but when you bluff you cannot complain about the opposition reacting to that bluff.
All NATO is doing is alerting Russia and the wider world to the economic and humanitarian consequences of invading the Ukraine. The most positive noises I’ve heard are coming from Kiev who have muted the idea that they might be prepared to forego nato membership but Putin’s other demand is that nato has to leave Eastern Europe and that’s not going to happen no matter how many troops he puts on Ukraines border. For one thing it’s not really practical for the poles, checks, Hungarians etc to leave Eastern Europe. Putin is clearly bent on recreating a greater Russia at the expense of his smaller neighbours and for that reason nato should stay right up in his face whilst giving Ukraine the wriggle room to come to their own arrangements with their cousins to the east.

@kevcvs57 said
No one knows what Putin is thinking of but he’s surrounded Ukraine on three sides and from the Belorussian position he’s a couple of hours in a tank away from Kiev. I hope he’s bluffing but when you bluff you cannot complain about the opposition reacting to that bluff.
All NATO is doing is alerting Russia and the wider world to the economic and humanitarian consequences of ...[text shortened]... st giving Ukraine the wriggle room to come to their own arrangements with their cousins to the east.

What are the West's goals?
To prevent a humanitarian crisis? Don't make me laugh.

You seem to think NATO is a force for good. And you seem to think that Russia is a force for evil.
Oh, but was the world but so simple.

Russia's goals are clear. Move back NATO. And as I've linked to, NATO has been doing extensive exercises on the Russian border for years.
And as I've pointed out, most of the States you name aren't in Russia's sights, for a number of reasons.

But what, according to you, does the US want there? Or the UK?

@vivify said
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ukraine-war-news-putin-retaliatory-military-technical-measures/

President Vladimir Putin used some of his most direct language to date on Tuesday in his escalating standoff with the U.S. and its European allies. The Russian leader warned that if the U.S. and NATO do not halt what Moscow considers aggressive actions along the country's border with Ukraine, Russia would respond in a "retaliatory military" manner.

The title of this thread is a lie. Putin never threatened military action.
Show me the exact quote.

Retaliation is not a threat. It is a warning not to start crap.

@kevin-eleven said
Right. After Russia has surrounded the Ukraine with 130,000 troops.

I think troops talk louder than words, yappy-pants.

Russia could wait until Ukraine has nuclear missiles like the US put in Turkey when JFK was POTUS. Perhaps they don't want another Cuban missile crisis again. That is what it took to get the USSR to remove those missiles they put in Turkey.

Surrounding Ukraine is easier. No reason to bring Cuba into it again, especially since Castro was angry that the USSR for pulling their missiles out of Cuba once both agreed to pull all missiles out of each other's back yards so to speak.

Besides, this is also a way to give incentive to the US to not impose sanctions using a lame excuse that makes no sense. One thing is for sure, if the US imposes sanctions Russia will invade Ukraine for certain.

Not imposing sanctions will overt war. That is the clear message. The US says Russia could invade in days. If that happens it will only be because the sanctions came first. It appears that the US is planning sanctions imposed on Russia in days. That will be the first domino to fall that will lead to a war and proxy war between the US and Russia.

The US government is confident they can outspend Russia's relatively small economy. That is why the US wants proxy wars. We have the economic advantage of being able to outspend anyone in the world. How do you think Reagan won the cold war? We outspent them then and we can do it again.

@shavixmir said
What are the West's goals?
To prevent a humanitarian crisis? Don't make me laugh.

You seem to think NATO is a force for good. And you seem to think that Russia is a force for evil.
Oh, but was the world but so simple.

Russia's goals are clear. Move back NATO. And as I've linked to, NATO has been doing extensive exercises on the Russian border for years.
And as ...[text shortened]... sights, for a number of reasons.

But what, according to you, does the US want there? Or the UK?

Perhaps you could show me where I claimed.NATO was a force for good? It is certainly not a force for good when it comes to the wider world, it was nato that invaded and occupied Afghanistan for 20 years but when it comes to curtailing Russias territorial ambitions in Europe then it’s the only game in town.
Your being incredibly naive by even talking about morality in terms of NATO versus Putin.
All Russia has to do is not invade a neighbouring country and start a European war. No one is making any demands of Putin are they?
Oh well I’m sure those countries bordering an expansionist Russia will be relieved to hear of your analysis concerning Russia's intentions.
Putin has made it perfectly clear in his demands to the White House that he wants a return to the soviet sphere of influence in Eastern Europe.
It’s very nice of you to give Putin carte blanch from your cosy little world in the Netherlands.
The US and UK want what they’ve always wanted and that’s a Russia that stays within its borders and respects the sovereignty of its neighbours. Oh yeah and if they could possibly stop assassinating their enemies in the uk with polonium, that would be nice.

@metal-brain said
The title of this thread is a lie. Putin never threatened military action.
Show me the exact quote.

Retaliation is not a threat. It is a warning not to start crap.

Putin amassed 130,000 troops at Ukraine's border because it wants to join NATO. Russia is the aggressor here.

That's the on top of the fact that Russia still controls an area of Ukraine they took over by force.

Right-wingers have a strange fixation on defending Russia that heightened ever since Trump, who sided with Russia over US intelligence.

@vivify said
Putin amassed 130,000 troops at Ukraine's border because it wants to join NATO. Russia is the aggressor here.

That's the on top of the fact that Russia still controls an area of Ukraine they took over by force.

Right-wingers have a strange fixation on defending Russia that heightened ever since Trump, who sided with Russia over US intelligence.

It was Kiev, and not Moscow, who abandoned the Minsk agreements.

@vivify said
Putin amassed 130,000 troops at Ukraine's border because it wants to join NATO. Russia is the aggressor here.

That's the on top of the fact that Russia still controls an area of Ukraine they took over by force.

Right-wingers have a strange fixation on defending Russia that heightened ever since Trump, who sided with Russia over US intelligence.

Yes they are painting themselves into a very dark and counter intuitive corner on this one but given how right wing the Putin regime is it might make sense for the US ultra right to have developed links with them. They would be very useful idiots for Putin from his perspective.

@kevcvs57 said
Yes they are painting themselves into a very dark and counter intuitive corner on this one but given how right wing the Putin regime is it might make sense for the US ultra right to have developed links with them. They would be very useful idiots for Putin from his perspective.

The Minsk agreements, written in 2014 by the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine, consisting of the Kiev government, Russia, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), with mediation from France and Germany in the so-called Normandy Format, seeks to end war in the mostly Russian-speaking Donbass region of eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is desperate to stay in power and is afraid that a Maidan-style coup will oust him. To avoid such a situation, he abandoned the Minsk agreements to instead appease the Ukrainian military and its Far-Right militia allies by authorizing in February 2021 the mobilization of troops towards the frontier with Donbass – a fact ignored by Western leaders and commentators.

@kevcvs57 said
Perhaps you could show me where I claimed.NATO was a force for good? It is certainly not a force for good when it comes to the wider world, it was nato that invaded and occupied Afghanistan for 20 years but when it comes to curtailing Russias territorial ambitions in Europe then it’s the only game in town.
Your being incredibly naive by even talking about morality in terms ...[text shortened]... if they could possibly stop assassinating their enemies in the uk with polonium, that would be nice.

Lovely framing you're doing there.
"The expansionist" Russia.

As if financial expansion isn't just as bad. And in that respect (do what the US wants or we'll target you), the West is much worse.
Just thinking of Afghanistan... Iraq... Libya... regime changes in God knows how many bloody countries... sanctions on nations as small as Cuba for over 40 years...

Yeah. Cosy, cosy good guys.

I think it's you being completely naieve to what's going on over there.
Russia has two issues: Ukraine not in NATO, and get NATO away from their doorstep.
And considering the US's behaviour in the last 60 years all over the planet, their expansionist drift and their constant exercises... can you blame Russia?

And no. I don't trust Putin any more than I could throw him.
But, don't think for a bloody second that Biden, Boris or any of these capitalist cronies have anything positive to add to the world or Ukraine at all.

They are not in it for the civilians.