Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
So, I would pose this set of counterarguments to everyone freaking out over Russia's war in Ukraine and saying that China needs to supply Russia with arms so Russia can "win" in Ukraine:
A) It is of significant interest to China to ensure that Russia remains a stable nation that is able to maintain a trajectory where its future as a nation is not under existential threat, and China should be willing to make proportionate sacrifices and endure proportionate pain to ensure that Russia is not under existential threat of collapsing.
B) Regardless of how much Russia "wins" in a war in Ukraine, its economic consequences from the US/Europe/client states is already sealed and unlikely to be lifted.
C) The greatest existential threat to Russia is not how much Russia "wins" in Ukraine, but rather the economic and technological threats that it faces going forwards. How much Russia "wins" in Ukraine will not change those aforementioned economic and technological threats.
D) If China did provide Russia with military arms in the short term, it will only influence how much Russia "wins" in its war in Ukraine, but it will not change the economic and technological threats that Russia faces. However, China providing Russia with military arms will almost certainly result in greater economic and technological decoupling from the US/Europe/client states, in a manner that may be sooner and more destabilizing than China wishes.
E) Therefore, because Russia not being able to attain all of its political aims in Ukraine is not an existential threat to Russia, it does not make sense for China to provide military arms to Russia on the basis that China's interests for seeking Russia remains stable and not under threat of collapse. China providing military arms does not change Russia's own domestic stability.
F) Instead, the best thing China can do for Russia, is to provide Russia with economic and technological support in the short, medium and long term -- which China can best achieve, by further economically and technologically developing and advancing itself, which benefits from continued trade and somewhat stable relationships with the US/Europe/client states. China's trade and relationships with the US/Europe/client states therefore are only worth being degraded or sacrificed if there is a sufficient gain or risk that requires it to be done (for example, in event of a conflict over Taiwan).
Click to expand...

China and West are already at war, and in the thick of it.

I believe you missed the whole point of what exactly is a modern war. War is not only for situations where bullets, bombs and body parts fly. Like you implied, war also includes and entails economic, technological, information and financial dimensions. In that sense, the war between US led western nations and China had already started and it's an open secret that somehow got hidden in plain sight. Just pick up any news sites and headlines screaming ongoing wars in stealth. So all your A to F gambles are kind of pointless procrastination bordering on pleading with an invincible power trying to avoid any and all pains as long as possible, landing you somewhere around denial and bargaining stages. The gloves are off really. I'm not sure why anybody still would want to stay in Western nations' good book. Russia is a litmus test for what level of prepared strategic mindset China leadership has, and so far I haven't found any disappointment yet.
 
J

Jj888

New Member
Registered Member
ArmchairAnalyst said:
Rationality isn't always inherent in any form of government and democracies aren't necessarily meritocracy based.
My take:
EU's hands are essential forced right now by strategic concerns, old fears/enmity, public sentiment and the whole concept of one big united European family. EU is basically struggeling to find a meaningful way to respond in kind to the completely surprising Russia's invasion of Ukraine without actually having to declare war. Whatever sticks seems to be the current approach.
And also remember that EU isn't a singular entity but a coalesced voice of 27 different countries which sometimes can seem (and often is) pretty schizophrenic to those outsider and even to those inside.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing your pro Europe view.

We see ukraine situation arising from their leader being under the thumb of external forces. Including likely to win nobel peace awards at the expense of his country.

If Europe cannot stand firm & united in their own interest but continued to be pushed to conflict against Russia. We might be looking at next year nobel peace award going to another Eu leader at great expense but to great advantage to US & others.

EU might just be next Ukraine to the eyes of some
 
james smith esq

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
enroger said:
From our laymen viewpoint It might seem that way but who knows. My guess is that Putin assesses the timetable is not on their side, Ukraine's situation with NATO may deteriorate to a point of no return for Russia in the imminent future... and losing Ukraine permanently to NATO is not an option for Russia
Click to expand...
But, was this Putinini’s assessment of his personal timetable, or that of the Russian Federation?
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
zgx09t said:
China and West are already at war, and in the thick of it.

I believe you missed the whole point of what exactly is a modern war. War is not only for situations where bullets, bombs and body parts fly. Like you implied, war also includes and entails economic, technological, information and financial dimensions. In that sense, the war between US led western nations and China had already started and it's an open secret that somehow got hidden in plain sight. Just pick up any news sites and headlines screaming ongoing wars in stealth. So all your A to F gambles are kind of pointless procrastination bordering on pleading with an invincible power trying to avoid any and all pains as long as possible, landing you somewhere around denial and bargaining stages. The gloves are off really. I'm not sure why anybody still would want to stay in Western nations' good book. Russia is a litmus test for what level of prepared strategic mindset China leadership has, and so far I haven't found any disappointment yet.
Click to expand...

I bolded that part for emphasis.

For China, the longer with which it can delay an economic and technological decoupling and the longer with which it can build up its own domestic warchests (in terms of finances, resources, technologies), the better it will be.

It is not "pointless procrastination" -- if anything, it is vital time. The later and longer into the future that any large scale economic and technological confrontation between China and the US/Europe occurs, the better China will be able to manage it.

Why on earth would anyone want to seek such confrontation earlier, without necessary geopolitical cause for it?
 
RottenPanzer

RottenPanzer

Junior Member
Registered Member
Maikeru said:
Drive update and article about Khinzal strike on a farm.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

For the second article, i don't know why he stated that video to be the result of the Kinzhal CM even though Russian MOD explicitly stated that was the result of a precision missile strike, not kinzhal, if it was kinzhal then the MoD would surely stated it as the result of Kinzhal strike.
 
james smith esq

james smith esq

Senior Member
Registered Member
I find it fascinating how arguments evolve into folks taking positions on statements not made!

So, I’ll provide my own example.

It seems, to me, that this is a debate between:

1) those that believe that China, by absolute sovereign right, has the authority to make its own foreign-policy decisions, based upon its own internal decision-making structures, and to express these policies at its own discretion, and

2) those that believe that China has a limited form of sovereignty, and may be required by foreign, even hostile-foreign, power-structures, to agree to externally imposed foreign-policy decisions, and, further, be compelled, at the timing of such foreign powers, to make public-policy-statements acknowledging their agreement to such externally imposed imprimaturs.

If this is the case, then this debate may have revealed the true intentions of those, here, that, while they may claim to be Chinese patriots, in fact, are actually something other than.

So, now, how’s that for a straw-man construction?
 
Z

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
I bolded that part for emphasis.

For China, the longer with which it can delay an economic and technological decoupling and the longer with which it can build up its own domestic warchests (in terms of finances, resources, technologies), the better it will be.

It is not "pointless procrastination" -- if anything, it is vital time. The later and longer into the future that any large scale economic and technological confrontation between China and the US/Europe occurs, the better China will be able to manage it.

Why on earth would anyone want to seek such confrontation earlier, without necessary geopolitical cause for it?
Click to expand...

I think you are going in reverse order, going from a sunny spot to an absolute horrible thunder storm, to prepare for an inevitability. You should start from where it would finally end up, and walk back to now to have a clear thinking and sort of a detail plan. That way there will not be any unplanned trigger point along the way that throws off your sunny day plan. China has to assume decoupling is already there and find the choke points and plug those in asap, and I believe that's what's happening now. Anything else over and above it is just a bonus, because confrontation is and will be forced upon China, no fault of China's own. Doesn't matter the fake weapons issue like now or bank transfers later, it will always be something of hot button issue that will challenge the leadership and throw the off the path if they don't already have the prepared mindset and a stormy day plan. When it is time to press the button, press the button.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top