Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Page 113 of 195 [ 3108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116 ... 195  Next

Jakki
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,120
Location: Outter Quadrant

05 Oct 2022, 4:31 pm

magz wrote:
According to an urban legend here, Yeltsin lost a drinking competition with Kwaśniewski, whith agreement to NATO expension as the stake.
But it's only an urban legend.

Anyway, several nations in East Europe are genuinely celebrating that we can be part of the "first world" now, with all that it means - and Ukrainians are literally fighting for a right to join us.


Still have the idea that NATO was suppose to expand beyond East Germany … regardless of any other changes made with NATO ..I know I have brought this up before , but the dichotomy of the situation still bothers .
But Yes , I do think Ukrainians have a right to self governance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse 8O


_________________
Diagnosed hfa
Loves velcro,
Quote:
where ever you go ,there you are


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 3:40 am

Jakki wrote:
magz wrote:
According to an urban legend here, Yeltsin lost a drinking competition with Kwaśniewski, whith agreement to NATO expension as the stake.
But it's only an urban legend.

Anyway, several nations in East Europe are genuinely celebrating that we can be part of the "first world" now, with all that it means - and Ukrainians are literally fighting for a right to join us.


Still have the idea that NATO was suppose to expand beyond East Germany … regardless of any other changes made with NATO ..I know I have brought this up before , but the dichotomy of the situation still bothers .
But Yes , I do think Ukrainians have a right to self governance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse 8O


I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 4:17 am

Nades wrote:
I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.

Minsk agreements were quite close to this idea.
Russia openly violated them.

Or do you mean whole Ukraine as demilitarized zone? Well, try yourself to demilitarize when living next to an agressive neighbour who openly violates treaties, who already annexed part of your territory and supports a war for more of it.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 4:44 am

magz wrote:
Nades wrote:
I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.

Minsk agreements were quite close to this idea.
Russia openly violated them.

Or do you mean whole Ukraine as demilitarized zone? Well, try yourself to demilitarize when living next to an agressive neighbour who openly violates treaties, who already annexed part of your territory and supports a war for more of it.


No an actual demilitarised zone hundreds of kilometres wide along the entire Ukraine border. Remember, Ukraine invited an enemy of Russia into their nation, the onus was on Ukraine. A demilitarised zone across all of NATO's borders with Russia might have actually thawed tensions over they years.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 4:49 am

And what about Russia? Would they still be allowed to send little green men to the "republics" and boast about pointing nukes at Warsaw?
And if not - who would ensure it?

Why do you think one-sided demilitarizing would result in peace and not in easy conquer?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 5:38 am

magz wrote:
And what about Russia? Would they still be allowed to send little green men to the "republics" and boast about pointing nukes at Warsaw?
And if not - who would ensure it?

Why do you think one-sided demilitarizing would result in peace and not in easy conquer?


Someone has to make a start. While Ukraine is a sovereign nation, it comes with responsibility and ideally they should have known better than to knowingly wind up Russia.

I have some eastern European friends and it honestly reminds me of the hostility I was stuck between with my Pakistani and Indian friends with both throwing shade at me for daring to have an opinion on the politics in the area. Nothing was ever right and somehow it everyone's problem but themselves.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 6:36 am

Ukrainians are trying to follow the path that Poland and Baltic States have walked.
Would you claim that we should also remain a sh!thole semi-independent republic not to anger Russia? That we should have been wiser than to start all this Solidarity movement because it was too risky?

We are so sympathetic to Ukrainians because we know it could have been us.

No one was pointing weapons at Russia. It was one of strict NATO policies up to this invasion. Ukraine just wanted to leave its "sphere of influence". Like we have.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,882
Location: temperate zone

06 Oct 2022, 6:51 am

Nades wrote:
Jakki wrote:
magz wrote:
According to an urban legend here, Yeltsin lost a drinking competition with Kwaśniewski, whith agreement to NATO expension as the stake.
But it's only an urban legend.

Anyway, several nations in East Europe are genuinely celebrating that we can be part of the "first world" now, with all that it means - and Ukrainians are literally fighting for a right to join us.


Still have the idea that NATO was suppose to expand beyond East Germany … regardless of any other changes made with NATO ..I know I have brought this up before , but the dichotomy of the situation still bothers .
But Yes , I do think Ukrainians have a right to self governance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse 8O


I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.


You mean a 'buffer zone'. Not a 'demilitarized zone'. Buffer states between Russia, and NATO member states. It WAS the idea originally. Trouble is...the countries in the buffer zone dont wanna be in the buffer zone, and have all been banging on the door demanding to be allowed into NATO since the moment the Berlin Wall fell because they are all afraid of Russia.



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 7:11 am

naturalplastic wrote:
Nades wrote:
Jakki wrote:
magz wrote:
According to an urban legend here, Yeltsin lost a drinking competition with Kwaśniewski, whith agreement to NATO expension as the stake.
But it's only an urban legend.

Anyway, several nations in East Europe are genuinely celebrating that we can be part of the "first world" now, with all that it means - and Ukrainians are literally fighting for a right to join us.


Still have the idea that NATO was suppose to expand beyond East Germany … regardless of any other changes made with NATO ..I know I have brought this up before , but the dichotomy of the situation still bothers .
But Yes , I do think Ukrainians have a right to self governance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse 8O


I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.


You mean a 'buffer zone'. Not a 'demilitarized zone'. Buffer states between Russia, and NATO member states. It WAS the idea originally. Trouble is...the countries in the buffer zone dont wanna be in the buffer zone, and have all been banging on the door demanding to be allowed into NATO since the moment the Berlin Wall fell because they are all afraid of Russia.


Nope demilitarised zone. I don't even care if Ukraine joins NATO or not as long as they negotiate the entirety of their Russian border for 200 kilometres into Ukraine as a demilitarised zone barred from any military equipment or soldiers. It's the best of both worlds as Russia invading a demilitarised zone in a sovereign nation will probably rub people up the wrong way more than an invasion of land we all know was going to be militarized to sabre rattle Russia.

It's one of those deals Russia might have agreed too but it's not like ex Soviet block states will ever use common sense when dealing with Russia.

Made their bed I guess.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,882
Location: temperate zone

06 Oct 2022, 7:31 am

Nades wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Nades wrote:
Jakki wrote:
magz wrote:
According to an urban legend here, Yeltsin lost a drinking competition with Kwaśniewski, whith agreement to NATO expension as the stake.
But it's only an urban legend.

Anyway, several nations in East Europe are genuinely celebrating that we can be part of the "first world" now, with all that it means - and Ukrainians are literally fighting for a right to join us.


Still have the idea that NATO was suppose to expand beyond East Germany … regardless of any other changes made with NATO ..I know I have brought this up before , but the dichotomy of the situation still bothers .
But Yes , I do think Ukrainians have a right to self governance.
Sorry to beat a dead horse 8O


I personally never understood why a demilitarised zone was never put on the table. It's like Ukraine never bothered to negotiate and never intended to with the sole intention of irking Russia into a confrontation.

My sympathy is still limited towards Ukraine.


You mean a 'buffer zone'. Not a 'demilitarized zone'. Buffer states between Russia, and NATO member states. It WAS the idea originally. Trouble is...the countries in the buffer zone dont wanna be in the buffer zone, and have all been banging on the door demanding to be allowed into NATO since the moment the Berlin Wall fell because they are all afraid of Russia.


Nope demilitarised zone. I don't even care if Ukraine joins NATO or not as long as they negotiate the entirety of their Russian border for 200 kilometres into Ukraine as a demilitarised zone barred from any military equipment or soldiers. It's the best of both worlds as Russia invading a demilitarised zone in a sovereign nation will probably rub people up the wrong way more than an invasion of land we all know was going to be militarized to sabre rattle Russia.

It's one of those deals Russia might have agreed too but it's not like ex Soviet block states will ever use common sense when dealing with Russia.

Made their bed I guess.


Utter nonsense.

Ukraine was 'militarized' for self-defense against its bigger aggressive neighbor.

you're blaming the victim nations of Russia for the fact that Russia is continuing to victimize them.



carlos55
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,779

06 Oct 2022, 7:54 am

I think what your all referring to is a neutral zone.

Countries in the neutral zone don’t belong to a military block and have no foreign military bases on them.

Sounds a perfectly sane and good idea but many E European countries have an ancient hatred ( justified ) to Russia and they use the US who wants to dominate the world ( look up new American century) to stick it to Russia.

Ellon Musk’s idea sounds good have a referendum in these areas along with Crimea ( UN supervised ) both sides respect decision. But neutral zone is still in place.

Then we can jointly better spend tax payers money on humanitarian technology rather than nukes and stop threatening each other.


_________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."

- George Bernie Shaw


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 16,283
Location: Poland

06 Oct 2022, 8:04 am

The problem is - we don't want to be buffer / neutral / demilitarized zone. Not when we have a neighbour who readily "intervenes".
I know USA are not saints but if their trigger-happines can help protect us from an invasion - so be it.
It's our interest.

Elon is just a dreamer. To make any valid referendum, you need peace first. Otherwise, it's impossible to organize it fairly.
But why stop at this? Why not ask people in Sachalin if they want to join Japan? North Russia if they want to join Norway or Finland? Buryats, Chechens and Dagestani if they want independence? Or, our beloved meme here, organize a referendum for Kaliningrad District to change the name to Kralovec and join Czechia.
Why not go further with referenda? Does Tibet want to remain in China? Wouldn't North Koreans like to re-unite if they could safely vote for it? Maybe redraw the Indian-Pakistani border? Or give independence to areas controlled by Boko Haram? Why didn't we propose a referendum to accept ISIS as a state?

Can you imagine how many more wars that attitude would spawn?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

06 Oct 2022, 8:30 am

There was no reason for Russia to invade Ukraine.

Russia made up excuses all along. And they constantly lied about their true intentions before they invaded.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,882
Location: temperate zone

06 Oct 2022, 9:16 am

carlos55 wrote:
I think what your all referring to is a neutral zone.

Countries in the neutral zone don’t belong to a military block and have no foreign military bases on them.

Sounds a perfectly sane and good idea but many E European countries have an ancient hatred ( justified ) to Russia and they use the US who wants to dominate the world ( look up new American century) to stick it to Russia.

Ellon Musk’s idea sounds good have a referendum in these areas along with Crimea ( UN supervised ) both sides respect decision. But neutral zone is still in place.

Then we can jointly better spend tax payers money on humanitarian technology rather than nukes and stop threatening each other.


Utter nonsense.

Ten years ago you could have had- an outbreak of sanity- and had a UN supervised plebiscite (elections) in Ukraine. And eastern parts of Ukraine might have voted to rejoin Russia.

But its too late for that kinda peaceful rational solution now after Russia launched this war of aggression.

After this war even form Russian loyalist in the eastern Ukraine region probably hate Russia now- after living under its occupation briefly.

NATO is not a threat to Russia. Russia has no need to defend itself from NATO. But former Soviet bloc, and former Soviet Republics, DO fear Russia. Hense their desire to bang on the door of NATO.

The two factors are not mutually exclusive. Ukraine wants to be free. And the west sympathizes.

But though the US is not "trying to stick it to Russia" the US and NATO do not want to see the territories that once made up the old Soviet Union reunite into one empire again. The Russian republic is authoritarian and adversarial to us. So we dont want to see Russia recreating the old Czarist/Soviet geo political empire again.

So yes...the US wants former Soviet Republics to stay separate from Russia for its self interest to keep our Moscow adversary cut down to size .

But Britain had an even larger empire than the Czars/Soviets. And you dont see Britain trying to reconquer the US, Ireland, and India. Why is Russia entitled to hold on to its old colonial empire when France and Britain are not?



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 9:32 am

magz wrote:
The problem is - we don't want to be buffer / neutral / demilitarized zone. Not when we have a neighbour who readily "intervenes".
I know USA are not saints but if their trigger-happines can help protect us from an invasion - so be it.
It's our interest.

Elon is just a dreamer. To make any valid referendum, you need peace first. Otherwise, it's impossible to organize it fairly.
But why stop at this? Why not ask people in Sachalin if they want to join Japan? North Russia if they want to join Norway or Finland? Buryats, Chechens and Dagestani if they want independence? Or, our beloved meme here, organize a referendum for Kaliningrad District to change the name to Kralovec and join Czechia.
Why not go further with referenda? Does Tibet want to remain in China? Wouldn't North Koreans like to re-unite if they could safely vote for it? Maybe redraw the Indian-Pakistani border? Or give independence to areas controlled by Boko Haram? Why didn't we propose a referendum to accept ISIS as a state?

Can you imagine how many more wars that attitude would spawn?

Perhaps they would be less willing to "intervene" if they knew there wasn't a domino effect towards NATO.

They knew of Ukraine's intentions for a long time so it's not a surprise they've been acting frosty for equally as long.



Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1933
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,771
Location: wales

06 Oct 2022, 9:34 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
There was no reason for Russia to invade Ukraine.

Russia made up excuses all along. And they constantly lied about their true intentions before they invaded.


Russians have always been like that but meh. What did Ukraine expect?