Ukrainian War Developments

Protecting the existing credibility of independent nuclear deterrence is as sound and necessary a basis for launching an invasion as there can be. The world will in fact be worse, less diverse, and be more susceptible to, and greatly exaggerate the consequences of, foibles and craven self service of one hegemony that could put a trump on the trigger of half of the world’s arsenal to say nothing of invading countries purely for self aggrandizement with no vital security interest at stake whatsoever, if other nuclear powers can be deterred from doing so and thus lose the credibility of their nuclear deterrence.

Think of securing multiple independent credible nuclear deterrences as a measure to prevent the world from dying from forced inbreeding at the behest of the hegemon,

Deino said:

In fact I can only strongly contradict. There is no good and bad, fine and evil either West or East. Both sides similar to powers since ages compete on influence, power and whatever by any political means be that "bribery, corruption, CIA or FSB penetration, etc ..." That was always that way and will always be the same as long humans exist. The point however is that there is nothing like a certain countries backyard, where Russia has the right to dominate the will of a certain country and its peoples in the same way there is a right to say this is the "US' backyard". No one has the right to write roles for another independent country.

What however happens is a rivalry and as such an offer what system the peoples better like regardless if this is done by any political means be that again "bribery, corruption, CIA or FSB penetration, etc ...". What however is illegal, that this "writing of rules" for a foreign, independent and sovereign country is done by war and here it indeed does not matter if this is done by Russia, the USA or any one else.

In fact I'm most surprised and annoyed that some seem to rate this a legal war! No war like this is legal or justified.

Click to expand...

I think you are right to be anti-war. But I would go further to be anti "bribery, corruption, CIA or FSB penetration, etc ..." as well. War cause suffering, so does this stuff (sometimes leading to civil wars). Liberal hegemony has caused countless suffering and that is the result of western actions. You need to accept the old 'east' no longer export ideology but the west still is. a lot of people are 'anti-west', but really is just anti-liberal hegemony.

To me what's not acceptable is that most European countries sanctioned Russia for it's invasion of Ukraine, but didn't do it to the US when it invaded Iraq. I think there will be a lot less arguing on this matter is everyone states their criteria applies to all invasions.

manqiangrexue said:

To continue normal relations with Russia despite its invasion of another country is equivalent to giving it special rights to invade another country. This is what the EU does for the US. If things were fair, the US should have been sanctioned for its invasion of the middle east by every country that now sanctions Russia. Things aren't fair, but China makes them as fair as we can.

Click to expand...

I just think we are doing the same to Russia as what we did to the US after it invaded Iraq. because of this consistency, we are not really giving Russia any special rights.

I personally don't think China is supporting Russia. China is against all military alliances (as a principle. doesn't mean China won't enter alliance). so China against NATO expansion is not for Russia per se. China is strictly neutral. But the west treat this neutrality as picking a side because it does mean a lifeline for Russia in practice. I think intentionally supporting Russia vs unintentionally helping Russia is very different. and I think at least the Russians understand this even if the west doesn't appreciate it. I would characterize this difference as what China is doing is higher on durability (as it's based on principle of self-determination) and lower on scope (how much China will actually benefit Russia)

FairAndUnbiased said:

Russia revived 4000 troops, recovered 30 fuel trucks, recovered 50 SAMs and recovered 350 tanks. Am I understanding this correctly?

Click to expand...

Russia is asking comrade Kim to use his Juche necromancy with some extra power it can also revive vehicles and equipment.

FairAndUnbiased said:

China is not against all wars. PRC is not a pacifist nation. PRC is OK with defensive wars and in every defensive war, while being on the strategic defensive, China was on the tactical offensive to seize enemy territory as a buffer. PRC territory has never been invaded because of this doctrine, it has always been the PLA invading others, from a western perspective.

Russia is also in a defensive war and it is seizing enemy territory as a buffer, a precedent set by China in the Korean War, Sino-Indian War and Sino-Vietnamese War. Russia is not waiting for its territory to be seized.

If Russia is wrong then every war the PRC has fought in is also wrong. Can you clarify your beliefs?

Click to expand...

Korean and Vietnam was protecting treaty allies being invaded by foreign countries. Indian and Russian border wars were really escalations about territorial disputes during Mao era, which I wouldn't generalize to modern PRC.

Also, I would distinguish cold war era and post cold war era. History is moving forward and we are striving for higher standard now. I would say China is against all wars in today's world.

Lapin said:

In 1944-45, the USSR most likely could have invaded and conquered Finland if Stalin had decided that it was worth the cost in blood.
Instead, Stalin was satisfied with a permanently neutral and largely demilitarized Finland (its air force limited to 60 combat aircraft).

I don't expect that all Ukraine will become part of the new Russian Empire.

Click to expand...

I am not sure about 1945 Finland. but current Finland is of no interest to Russia. there is no logic to compare Finland with Ukraine.
Russia gravitates towards South. You can see the wealthy Russians connection to Israel. Russians buying real estate in Turkey.
Enormous cost to develop Sochi and Anapa. than you can add Crimea and its infrastructure. Southern and Eastern Ukraine comes in same category but added benefit of resources. Ukraine hasnt offered much resistance except for holed up in the cities.
credit is given to people of south with clear identity.

I do not think I saw this video with Scott Ritter about the Ukrainian conflict posted here before.

enroger said:

I hope people in this forum would not be naïve to relate war with notions of right or wrong or legality, really can you apply any of these notions to US's past wars?

All war is caused by miscalculation from one side or both. Ukraine miscalculated Russian resolve in the matter and keep poking them with the expectation that NATO will come to their aid. Russia may or may not have miscalculated the true cost of this war and went in anyway.

The true instigator of the war however is doing very well, the US managed to finally torpedo NS-2 and utterly destroy any chance of Russo-Euro cooperation in the future. Europe has lost their political and economical independence and is looking at extreme economical disruption in the near future, which can only be seen as good news for US economy as a safe financial haven.

Click to expand...

In the long run this will end with a weaker Europe and a weaker Europe may not be a very reliable ally for the USA to have, not to mention that none of these games really help to solve the fundamental problems that the USA has. In fact, you can say that it will simply make the problem worse since it will cause the USA to ignore these problems even more until it is simply too late to fix them.
In the end, wars shouldn’t be fought at all and ultimately all wars have a cost, I mean look at the debt and economic issues resulting from such that the USA has right now, all that printed money going into wars rather then developing the USA. The longer China can remain out of the fight, the better as it will give them more time to prepare so coming out on top will incur the least amount of damage as possible

This war, which began in 2014, has expanded due to the complete indifference of the so-called chancellor of supposedly Germany, a rag doll with neither mental sovereignty nor real sovereignty and a head full of insufferable Western narcissism. A single word put in writing would have sufficed. But the blind fanaticism of these people blows your head off.

Russia's anger is logical and natural. The leaders of the most colossal and deadly military empire the face of the earth has ever seen hate Russia with all their souls and since 2008- demand the privilege of militarily cornering Russia and demand since 2014- the right to kill Russians.

"The West Empire" has become a religious cult, we have seen it live, we are seeing it, there is no trace of freedom of speech left, the chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the parliament of Finland (which is not part of NATO) was forced to resign for one sentence, one single and reasonable sentence: "maybe someone should say that Ukraine should not join NATO". What the Russian government was asking for was fair, reasonable and beneficial to all. The inability to grant it is the clear sign that the West is a fanatical and violent religious cult.

The Taliban chiefs are reasonable in comparison to the Western chiefs who in reality are slaves to a mentality or collective mental bubble.


Even the author of the so-called "long telegram" that marked the beginning of the "cold war" warned of the madness, as did many other lucid voices. I studied in Germany and until yesterday I was a Germanophile; but I have already celebrated Germany's funeral. Germany is dead. Europe is dead, there is no trace left of the Europe I knew.