petep
Legend
Posts: 25,971
|
Post by petep on Mar 16, 2022 14:13:53 GMT
The worst thing the US could do is get involved in negotiations after sitting on the sideline for so long...the sanctions were months overdue, and now we are going to get involved at this level?
This is a time to let the EU take the lead...and the UK seems to be leading the EU in this regard...they have far more at stake than we do and they should be at the forefront of negotiations...if we participate, it should be as support to the EU. nothing more.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 16, 2022 14:15:35 GMT
Sitting on the sideline for so long? What are you smoking?
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 17, 2022 13:47:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Mar 17, 2022 13:52:51 GMT
So once again NATO membership plays a key role in the negotiations.
This is the deal that could have been made before all of this death and destruction.
Ukraine loses NATO membership, which wasn't happening any time soon anyway. Russian as an official language is nothing. And foreign bases was already illegal under Ukrainian law anyway.
No mention of the Donbass and Crimea territories, but I have to imagine that those will be part of the deal, too.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Mar 17, 2022 15:06:50 GMT
Sitting on the sideline for so long? What are you smoking?
Jimson weed?
|
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Mar 17, 2022 15:17:33 GMT
Why did Putin go about it this way?
He's putting forth conditions now to stop the war. Did he put those conditions forth earlier to prevent the war in the first place? I wasn't paying attention, so he may have.
But if he didn't, it seems like he skipped a step.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 17, 2022 15:22:01 GMT
Why did Putin go about it this way? He's putting forth conditions now to stop the war. Did he put those conditions forth earlier to prevent the war in the first place? I wasn't paying attention, so he may have. But if it didn't, it seems like he skipped a step. Ukrainian neutrality has been a condition since before this invasion started (see here). We weren't going for it back in January, and Ukraine wouldn't accept it right before the invasion (see here). Well, it's on the table now. |
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Mar 17, 2022 15:33:12 GMT
Why did Putin go about it this way? He's putting forth conditions now to stop the war. Did he put those conditions forth earlier to prevent the war in the first place? I wasn't paying attention, so he may have. But if it didn't, it seems like he skipped a step. Ukrainian neutrality has been a condition since before this invasion started (see here). We weren't going for it back in January, and Ukraine wouldn't accept it right before the invasion (see here). Well, it's on the table now. These stories all seem to be after Putin's military moves toward Ukraine. The invasion hadn't started yet, but the forces were being moved into place. Had there also been previous indications from Putin, before any military moves were made, that if conditions were not met, military action would follow? Can the current predicament be traced back to a particular decision that could have been made differently that would have avoided the outcome we are now seeing? It seems that something went wrong quite a while back, either that Putin did not clearly spell out his conditions and what would follow if they were not met, or that he did do so, but the conditions were refused. I think what I'm wondering is when Putin stated his conditions for the first time. It seems to me that should have been done before any military moves were made, and all other avenues should have been exhausted first before bringing in military force. Perhaps they were. But the way it seems to me is that some of those more diplomatic type avenues may have been skipped. But that could be because I don't know what happened. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 17, 2022 16:20:33 GMT
These stories all seem to be after Putin's military moves toward Ukraine. The invasion hadn't started yet, but the forces were being moved into place. Had there also been previous indications from Putin, before any military moves were made, that if conditions were not met, military action would follow? I can probably go and look, but given the invasion of Georgia in 2008 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2014, that should've been obvious. Lots of decisions. For example, we can start with the George W. Bush administration and NATO's Bucharest Declaration in 2008 (which was followed by the Russian invasion of Georgia). Ukraine adding NATO membership to its constitution ( Source). And many others along the way which were neither necessary nor irreversible. Russia has been saying the same thing about Ukraine and NATO for 30 years - well before Putin. US policy makers clearly understood Russia's concerns during the 1990s, and there's ample proof of that. We just ignored it. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 18, 2022 13:52:26 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2022 14:17:50 GMT
The offramp for public hysteria has been provided.
"See? Ukraine won! Viva la social media!"
Russia got everything they asked for ... but if we don't report that we can mask that. Because with a narrative fabricated about them wanting all of Ukraine ... Ukraine heroically sacrificed thousands of their citizens and managed to prevent Russia from taking what Russia never wanted to begin with!
Viva la social media! Everyone who changed their avatars to Ukrainian flags made this happen!
Congratulations! It's like you were in the trenches with them. Medals should probably be awarded. Participation trophies if you will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2022 14:18:35 GMT
Just needs a "little thought."
Truer words never written.
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,971
|
Post by petep on Mar 18, 2022 14:21:40 GMT
and in all of this no one has asked the most basic question....what does ukraine want?
dont you feel thats odd...everything is positioned as what does russia want.
thats the flaw in all your arguments
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2022 14:24:09 GMT
and in all of this no one has asked the most basic question....what does ukraine want? dont you feel thats odd...everything is positioned as what does russia want. thats the flaw in all your arguments We've been telling you what Ukraine wants.
They want the West to start World War 3 and force the people of the Donbar region and Crimea to stay with Ukraine so their oligarchy can tap those sweet sweet fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are bad until they aren't y'know. No blood for oil is a rallying cry until it isn't y'know.
|
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Mar 18, 2022 14:28:41 GMT
and in all of this no one has asked the most basic question....what does ukraine want? dont you feel thats odd...everything is positioned as what does russia want. thats the flaw in all your arguments
The article does mention what Ukraine wants. Unification. Westernization. Sovereignty. All of these are mentioned directly or described indirectly.
Not mention the very obvious one: stop being bombed, shelled, shot, attacked, killed, maimed, property destroyed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2022 15:06:17 GMT
I wonder if Halliburton will get some no bid contracts to rebuild Ukraine.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 18, 2022 15:38:18 GMT
I know this BBC story has been posted in another thread, but just to memorialize it here... SourceAnd then there's this... SourceThat seems incredibly dangerous, not to mention that this would completely undermine the current negotiations if NATO accepted this proposal. |
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Mar 18, 2022 15:50:16 GMT
If Ukraine pledges neutrality and not to join NATO and acknowledges Crimea and Donbas as part of Russia, that still seems like a win for Russia. What the West should want is some kind of guarantee that these gains for Russia aren't used as stepping-stones for later Russian expansion. And Russia promising to be a good boy from now on wouldn't be a sufficient guarantee. More appropriate might be a hardening of NATO, buildup of forces, and that kind of thing. So what might we see from NATO once this thing is all settled? |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,199
|
Post by demos on Mar 18, 2022 15:57:53 GMT
If Ukraine pledges neutrality and not to join NATO and acknowledges Crimea and Donbas as part of Russia, that still seems like a win for Russia. Depends on what you think Putin's aims were. Of which there are 3 general schools of thought: maximalist aims (completely taking over Ukraine and making it part of Russia; honestly, not much evidence of that); bringing Ukraine back into the Russian sphere of influence with a pro-Russian government, etc. (based on Putin's statements and concerns since 2014, seems likely that was his best case scenario); or, limited aims (neutrality, control of Crimea, some kind of status for Donbas separatists). Well, the Ukrainian defense thus far seems like a pretty good guarantee of that. |
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Mar 18, 2022 16:07:34 GMT
If Ukraine pledges neutrality and not to join NATO and acknowledges Crimea and Donbas as part of Russia, that still seems like a win for Russia. Depends on what you think Putin's aims were. Of which there are 3 general schools of thought: maximalist aims (completely taking over Ukraine and making it part of Russia; honestly, not much evidence of that); bringing Ukraine back into the Russian sphere of influence with a pro-Russian government, etc. (based on Putin's statements and concerns since 2014, seems likely that was his best case scenario); or, limited aims (neutrality, control of Crimea, some kind of status for Donbas separatists). Well, the Ukrainian defense thus far seems like a pretty good guarantee of that. Even if his aims were big (all of Ukraine), this was still a partial win for Russia, and in the fullness of time it may be seen as having put the pieces in place for a more complete realization of Putin's larger aims. In 2014, Russia took Crimea. But Putin's aims were not fully realized. In 2022, Russia used Crimea to take Donbas. But Putin's aims were not fully realized. In 2030, Russia will use Crimea and Donbas to take what? Ukraine's defenses were against Russia as it existed in January 2022. A Russia in future years will be a different Russia, with borders expanded further west. Where Ukraine's defenses in 2022 were not enough to stop the expansion of Russia, and reduction of Ukraine, as far as they went in 2022, this might also be true in future years, as Russia, with new borders each time, takes piece by piece. That step-by-step process is something I think the West would want guarantees against. Ukraine's defenses were not enough to stop this most recent step by Russia westward. Will they also not be enough for the next step, however far it might go? |
|
