Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Actually, Putin tried his best to be a “western” lapdog, as well. It was only his obsession with reanimating the USSR and his growing need to play Super Power leader that has caused this current crisis.
What could Russia do back then anyway. You forget that when Putin came into power the Russian military was in shambles and they had an ongoing conflict on Chechnya funded by the Muslim world and the US. Most people back then expected Russia to fragment again.
Russia only managed to start army modernization in the late 2000s. Even so they did the conflict on Georgia in 2008 before their armed forces had modernized. They still easily won it with basically Soviet era equipment.

All the more reason that gas supplies to Europe were a priority and those to China an afterthought.
There were talks but China back in the 1990s had limited need for energy imports in general. Up to like 1993 China was self sufficient in oil for example. Russia made contracts with Japan in the late 1990s to explore gas deposits in Sakhalin island and sell it to Japan and later South Korea as LNG. In the early 2000s Russia tried to convince China into the Altai gas pipeline project. This would have been a West bound pipeline which would be the cheapest to build for Russia since it was the closest route from existing Russian gas resources to the Chinese border. China scrapped the project because they had already invested in gas pipelines from Central Asia. A route similar to Power of Siberia 2 was also proposed by Russia. But China back then wanted its own gas supply independent of the European one. It was hard for the Russians to justify the massive project cost to build all new extraction facilities and transport pipes over such a long route. For reference Power of Siberia is 3968 km long and NordStream is 1222 km long. That is just the pipes, the gas fields are much more expensive to develop, and are still in the process of ramping up.

Who are these ardently Europhilic Russian oligarchs I keep hearing about? I've heard the term countless times but never a single name.
It started as a bunch of people who do not like the fact Putin forced them to pay taxes and salaries.

The Russian government also decided it had to control the "commanding heights" of the economy. This means energy companies, military industrial complex, and part of the communications sector. The military industrial complex was easy to nationalize since most of it was bankrupt, but getting the energy companies back, and the communications sector under control was harder. Try reading about Mikhail Khodorkovsky of Yukos Oil for example. The communications sector was a platform for oligarchs to control Russian politics and destabilize the country. So Putin made sure they had to concede their companies to more pliable control interests. This includes oligarchs like Boris Berezovsky.

Make me remember that they have a draft on new Iran nuclear deal, don't know how much gaz reserve they have ?
Iran has quite a lot of gas resource but it needs massive investment to get out and transport. Getting Iranian gas into Europe via pipe would not be that easy since the route would be quite long and pass way too many countries. Good luck getting that done in less than a decade even if you had all the deals signed.

How serious a threat are those ATGMs to a Russian armoured advance? I tend to think that Ukraine's flat terrain and cold weather would make ATGM teams vulnerable to detection by drones equipped with thermal vision. Thoughts?
If it ever becomes a problem Russia does have APS like Arena-M. It can be installed on T-72 or T-90.
Afghanit APS is supposed to come standard with T-14 when that comes out.
I assume they would use fighter bombers and helicopters in the open.

Ironically, the months before this conflict have been Putin's weakest domestically. Russia was affected very badly by the pandemic, and he withdrew from public for a month. The communists were stronger than they've been since the USSR.
No way. Back when Yeltsin was in power the Communists and opposition were much stronger really. To the point Yeltsin sent tanks against the Russian Duma and basically assumed dictatorial powers. Today the Communists are really weak opposition, it is just that the other parties are even weaker.

Do it quickly please. Its time to accelerate the collapse of the financial dollar empire

"Senior Biden administration official on call with reporters says SWIFT-related punishment, like kicking Russia out of the international banking system, is still an option: "We are not taking SWIFT off the table, it will remain an option that we can deploy.""
If they stop paying for oil and gas, do they assume Russia would continue supply out of the goodness of their hearts? Are these people idiots or something?

Can you explain this in more detail? How does EU sanctions on Russia hurt itself more? Doesn't Russia have a GDP smaller than Italy?
The Russian ruble is way undervalued. Russia has a GDP (PPP) close to that of Germany.

Russia is a huge supplier of commodities. Not just oil and natural gas but also aluminium, titanium, palladium, and others.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Ok, a few days old but reeks of desperation, because the UK knows what'll happen to NATO orientation if Ukraine goes hot(ter).
Global Britain need backup.
NATO is already sending ships into the South China Sea. They might not call it a NATO deployment but all those countries are in NATO.

Instead of Taiwan, the closest analogy would be Mongolia or Vietnam if they sought US-alliance on China border, and China citing past shared history, culture, geography to restore imperial control over Mongolia/Vietnam. Which is obviously bullshit and requires massive revisionism and mental gymnastics. You can't take Russian propaganda on "Muh Blood brother" irredenticism/revanchism at face value.
Yes, because China didn't have a conflict with Vietnam in 1979. Don't be silly.
 

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
@gelgoog Bro I'm a Russophile and let me explain, from studying its history especially after the Fall of SU and the year of Yeltsin, Russia had experience its 30 years of humiliation, eerily similar with China Hundred years of fighting imperialism, being dismembered, humiliated and demonized the Slavic culture. With Putin and Xi being an ardent student of history , they understand each other thus the Unofficial Alliances is easily form.
 
Last edited:

InfamousMeow

Junior Member
Registered Member
Guys, I think this content creator has a great understanding of the reality of geopolitics, but his podcast are not only limited to geopolitics. I suggest watching all his past podcasts, pretty fun.

The only catch is that all of his streams are in Chinese. If anyone want to have a try:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Also, he might be an infrequent lurker in this forum too.;)
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
'Chinese analysts' disagree on comparison between Ukraine and Taiwan.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Instead of Taiwan, the closest analogy would be Mongolia or Vietnam if they sought US-alliance on China border, and China citing past shared history, culture, geography to restore imperial control over Mongolia/Vietnam. Which is obviously bullshit and requires massive revisionism and mental gymnastics. You can't take Russian propaganda on "Muh Blood brother" irredenticism/revanchism at face value.
I agree that China is literally using mental gymnastics to find excuses for Russia. Because what Russia had done is very troublesome, when interpreted from the angle of respecting territorial sovereignty. I had fully expected them to do so. Russia is an important ally, and Russia's reason to do so is quite justified. It is a reaction to the aggressive meddling by the West in Eastern Europe, and their potential threat to Russian security.

Russia and China are no stranger to bending international laws to their interests. They are forced to do so because of the West, especially the USA, who wantonly does it all the time. The US aggressively flouts international law to the point of threatening the security of Russia and China. But also dares to cite the same international law to restrain their response. China and Russia citing international laws all the time to chide the US looks quite hypocritical, and it is. But this is just classic geopolitics. Those were counter moves against US actions to undermine their security through underhanded means. China and Russia are an overall balancing force for good in this crazy world run by Western imperialists and their slaves in Japan and India.
 

Laviduce

Junior Member
Registered Member
Insanity and a total disconnect from reality are on display here:

1645596994709.png
1645597076443.png
1645597125941.png
1645597265523.png

The map of Eastern Europe was redrawn by US (NATO) expansion eastward and US instigated illegal coups repeatedly but for some reason that is totally OK with MP Ellwood.

It seems to me a lot of people in the Anglosphere and Russophobic nutjob sphere really want a war to end all wars.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
I agree that China is literally using mental gymnastics to find excuses for Russia. Because what Russia had done is very troublesome, when interpreted from the angle of respecting territorial sovereignty. I had fully expected them to do so. Russia is an important ally, and Russia's reason to do so is quite justified. It is a reaction to the aggressive meddling by the West in Eastern Europe, and their potential threat to Russian security.

Russia and China are no stranger to bending international laws to their interests. They are forced to do so because of the West, especially the USA, who wantonly does it all the time. The US aggressively flouts international law to the point of threatening the security of Russia and China. But also dares to cite the same international law to restrain their response. China and Russia citing international laws all the time to chide the US looks quite hypocritical, and it is. But this is just classic geopolitics. Those were counter moves against US actions to undermine their security through underhanded means. China and Russia are an overall balancing force for good in this crazy world run by Western imperialists and their slaves in Japan and India.

Ukraine is an UN recognised sovereign country, and its territorial integrity is agreed by all five members of the security council as per the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. The trouble here is indeed Russia is violating Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances and violating Ukraine territorial integrity. Russia argues that they have an verbal agreement from the west that Ukraine will never join NATO which is being trampled, hence the Budapest agreement no longer applies. Weather that's true or not and is the current Russian actions a reasonable response that's for Russia and US to argue about.

Republic of China is not a country recognised by the vast majority of UN (backed by the veto proof General Assembly Resolution 2758), only 14 members (among them the likes of Haiti, Holy See, Honduras and Swaziland) recognise it as a real country. Therefore outside of context of this small group it does not have de jure sovereignty. Were PRC to launch military action against ROC it's not a violation of sovereignty as the sovereignty of the island of Taiwan rests with PRC and not the unrecognised country called ROC. Similarly other such civil wars such as the American Civil War, or the current civil war ongoing in Ethiopia does not involve the question of violation of sovereignty because a civil war is two parties fighting over who has sovereignty of a country, and not a war between two sovereign nations.
 

Laviduce

Junior Member
Registered Member
Ukraine is an UN recognised sovereign country, and its territorial integrity is agreed by all five members of the security council as per the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. The trouble here is indeed Russia is violating Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances and violating Ukraine territorial integrity. Russia argues that they have an verbal agreement from the west that Ukraine will never join NATO which is being trampled, hence the Budapest agreement no longer applies. Weather that's true or not and is the current Russian actions a reasonable response that's for Russia and US to argue about.

Republic of China is not a country recognised by the vast majority of UN, only 14 members (among them the likes of Haiti, Holy See, Honduras and Swaziland) recognise it as a real country. Therefore outside of context of this small group it does not have de jure sovereignty. Were PRC to launch military action against ROC it's not a violation of sovereignty as the sovereignty of the island of Taiwan rests with PRC and not the unrecognised country called ROC. Similarly other such civil wars such as the American Civil War, or the current civil war ongoing in Ethiopia does not involve the question of violation of sovereignty because a civil war is two parties fighting over who has sovereignty of a country, and not a war between two sovereign nations.

There is no doubt that the US promised no to expand its military block past the border of a united Germany:


1645598405400.png
FMHiJIPXwAElK1Q.jpg

Also, the US violated the Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine's sovereignty and international law in general by funding and organizing the coup that toppled the government of Ukraine in 2014. Most likely, if the US had not done what it did in 2014, we would not be having this conversation right now.
 

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
Ukraine is an UN recognised sovereign country, and its territorial integrity is agreed by all five members of the security council as per the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. The trouble here is indeed Russia is violating Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances and violating Ukraine territorial integrity. Russia argues that they have an verbal agreement from the west that Ukraine will never join NATO which is being trampled, hence the Budapest agreement no longer applies. Weather that's true or not and is the current Russian actions a reasonable response that's for Russia and US to argue about.

Republic of China is not a country recognised by the vast majority of UN (backed by the veto proof General Assembly Resolution 2758), only 14 members (among them the likes of Haiti, Holy See, Honduras and Swaziland) recognise it as a real country. Therefore outside of context of this small group it does not have de jure sovereignty. Were PRC to launch military action against ROC it's not a violation of sovereignty as the sovereignty of the island of Taiwan rests with PRC and not the unrecognised country called ROC. Similarly other such civil wars such as the American Civil War, or the current civil war ongoing in Ethiopia does not involve the question of violation of sovereignty because a civil war is two parties fighting over who has sovereignty of a country, and not a war between two sovereign nations.
Agreed.

When I was talking about China violating 'international rules'. We must ask ourselves: Are those international laws actually fair to China? It is not just about Taiwan. There are also issues in the SCS, the Indian border, and maybe Australia.

In the case of Taiwan, the documentations are clear as day. Yet the US routinely violates Chinese sovereignty by selling arms to Taiwan, sending troops into Taiwan, and meddling in Taiwanese elections. The One China Principle, agreed by the US since 1971, is routinely ignored. US actions violate international laws, but have the US been punished for this? Never! So what gives the US and the West the right to lecture China on international laws?

The problem in the SCS is the twisting of the laws by the West and ASEAN countries to deny Chinese sovereignty in the SCS. Instead they cite the the UNCLOS, which favours their positions the most. With such confusing, and clearly biased laws against China, China was justified to conduct grey zone operations in the SCS.

At the Indian border, the same trick is being used by India and the West to deny China's historical claim in Aksai Chin and South Tibet. They cite the McMahon Line and other British Empire Lines, but totally ignore Chinese historical maps. With laws like this, why should China follow them?

China imposed trade tariffs on Australia as punishment. But under WTO laws, its not entirely legal. But why should China care about WTO laws, when Australia casually ignores ICC laws and wants to subvert the WHO's Covid-19 virus origin investigation?

Russia recognizing Donbass and Luhansk as independent of Ukraine is a violation of UN laws on respecting national sovereignty, there are no debates here. The problem is that before this, for over 20 years, the West had been ignoring those same laws by sponsoring Color Revolutions in Eastern Europe. Worse still, they have ignored their promise to Russia not to move NATO east of the river Elbe. As NATO got closer to the Russian borders, so too are their troops and weaponry. Russia had raised this issue for decades with the West and the UN, but nothing was done. So why should everyone blame Russia for violating the laws?

If gangsters mess with your family, but the police won't do anything about it because they are corrupt. Would you trust the law and wait for them to eventually give you justice? Or would you take matters into your own hands and start to defend your family first? Even if it 'violates the law'?
 

getready

Senior Member
How come that's the case, and what do they have against Dongbei and Henan?
Way off topic. So I will be brief. There are more than one reason and I am not entirely clear in this situation as someone who isn't from China but merely follow Chinese internet. 地域歧视 is less common with censorship but still pretty common in overseas Chinese website.

I think it has some similarity with hk and tw prejudice against mainland. Not the politics or colonial history I guess but sense of superiority from economic conditions. There is also bit of the north vs south thing. Plus The unique history and economy of dongbei. I once heard a Manchu from dongbei tried to explain to me (and this was a decade ago) that dongbei people have a very strong sense of self identity that is quite unique in mainland. I can't remember the finer details of his speech now though. And I guess this rubs off the wrong way with some people. Mostly I find those from hk, guangdong, shanghai, Beijing have an animosity towards this.

Finally, one last point. This is entirely my viewpoint and is very subjective. And that is I find north-eastern people I come across tend to be more strongly patriotic and outspoken on this. and this maybe rubs off some people the wrong way.
 

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
Biden's speech is one of the weirdest press conferences I've ever heard from a US president.

He points out that if Russia invades Ukraine, US soldiers won't fight to defend Ukraine. He specifically states that America isn't obliged to help Ukraine if they are invaded as they aren't a NATO member.

Shouldn't he at least be leaving the option of a military response if Ukraine is invaded? I'm not saying he should say that directly, but why hold a press conference to specifically take that option of the table? It sounds very much like a green light to Putin to invade Ukraine.

Could you imagine that happening the next time tensions rise with Taiwan?

Either this is a backdoor deal with Putin, or Biden and America are weak and incredibly incompetent. Whichever is true it seems the Ukranian regime has been sacrificed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top