There are two conditions in which Russia will invade. The first is if NATO decides to station troops in Ukraine, the second is if Ukraine starts a military offensive against the Russian enclaves (not the small skirmishes that happens from time to time). Both of these scenarios are highly unlikely to happen. Russia is trying to get a promise from the West never to station troops in Ukraine. This is very unlikely to come to fruition. The future of Ukraine will be a continuation of the past, war torn, broken. They don't have wise leadership and the leaders at the top don't care that much about their own people. This was the way Ukraine ran even during the days when they were close to Russia.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
We passed the liner events point, now we are in a chaotic atractor.
It is now not like " we send X amount of stuff, and will receive Y=0.9*X amount of answer".
The feedback loop between USA actions and resulting answers will be bigger and bigger.
Check the Iran-USA relationship, as an answer for the murdering of an Iranian representative / diplomat of state they conducted a full scale missile attack against an USA miltary base.
Now, supply for Ukraine could result in say nuclear weapon share with Venezuela. Or with Iran. Or who know.
I guess getting anything free from the west will help them.USAF E-8 JSTARS over Ukraine running tracks.
I
Russia did increase build-up, but the narrative of a possible invasion came from the Americans.
I disagree. It feels like this whole story is coming from the Americans. It was Blinken who signaled Russian military build up first. Then news outlets picked up on it. Then the Ukrainian president wrote a piece on one of those American geopolitical sites. Then Russians began giving their reasoning and demands. The entirety of this 'crisis' and discussion started from the American media.
Russia did increase build-up, but the narrative of a possible invasion came from the Americans.
Off topic, this will be my only comment on this matter.
General Qasem Soleimani was at the time of his murder the numero uno military man, literally the commander-in-chief got Iran’s armed forces. He was lured to a meeting in Iraq and his entourage was blasted into smithereens enroute from the airport to the meeting. The Americans didn’t even bother to deny that they planned the ops to execute him, if you remember, Trump answered on Twitter with an American flag when asked if it was a CIA operation.
It was definitely outside all boundaries of decency and an act of war but the Iranians were careful in their reprisal missile attack in the sense that they deliberately avoided areas with American troops. Why? Probably because the Iranians know that a much more powerful bully was egging them for a fight and had they directed their rockets on American barracks, the only beneficiary would be Israel.
This action is going to have grave consequences in the future though. It may not be apparent now but really, if the USA does going into a societal, economic and natural disaster crisis all at the same time and yet has to endure a civil war, odds will be good that Iran may stand to be able to avenge the death of Solemanis death many times over given that well, the number of Allie’s that actually matter for the USA is decreasing over time and really, picking a fight with Russia and China and even Iran at the same time is almost beyond stupid for words
They had captured Russian inteligence, and the sat pictures. And they eat all quickly.
All that events hapened at the same time with the natural gas crisis and the demands.
Check the pictures of the aftermath.
The Iranians targeted the barracks / installations.
The USA used the old, poor man air defence, disperse and duck.
Even with that lot of service member suffered injury.
- Status