Israel v Hamas

[Hrolf The Ganger]

What is amazing is him taking credit for India/Pakistan!

He has knocked off the easy kills in Gaza and then literally claimed to have given world peace. I hope it has ended but let us judge in a month.

He has done harm/good/harm/good in Ukraine and Putin has largely played him. Again, let us see in time...

It's much easier to play someone when only one side wants peace.
Putin is happy to continue his steady assault on Ukraine to look good at home and to keep pressure on the West. He knows we won't risk an all out conflict by engaging him directly.

 

[chris123]

What is amazing is him taking credit for India/Pakistan!

He has knocked off the easy kills in Gaza and then literally claimed to have given world peace. I hope it has ended but let us judge in a month.

He has done harm/good/harm/good in Ukraine and Putin has largely played him. Again, let us see in time...

Bombing Iran as a prelude?

 

[silvertop]

It's much easier to play someone when only one side wants peace.
Putin is happy to continue his steady assault on Ukraine to look good at home and to keep pressure on the West. He knows we won't risk an all out conflict by engaging him directly.

Nor them us.

As you say, appearing tough at home plays good with the Russians, hence his regular incursions into NATO airspace. However, he knows he can only take it so far. Thus, Russian planes drifted way into Turkish airspace and the Turks blew them out of the sky. WWIII? Nope. And he didn't do it again.

 

[Spindle]

Find them guilty. Fine them the cost of policing and court processes. Take it from their pension pots.

Palestine Action: Dozens in court over alleged support of banned group - BBC News

About 2,000 people are likely to be charged, meaning 400 trials could need to be held.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Putin is happy to continue his steady assault on Ukraine to look good at home and to keep pressure on the West.

is that an offensive assault ? or a defensive measure to protect Russian-speaking territories on his own borders ?

NATO are the aggressors here, not Putin.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

is that an offensive assault ? or a defensive measure to protect Russian-speaking territories on his own borders ?

NATO are the aggressors here, not Putin.

Not aggressive in the military sense. In terms of influence, yes.

You can't justify bombing civilians. Ukraine were not a military threat to Russia.

 

[cryrst]

Find them guilty. Fine them the cost of policing and court processes. Take it from their pension pots.

Palestine Action: Dozens in court over alleged support of banned group - BBC News

About 2,000 people are likely to be charged, meaning 400 trials could need to be held.

www.bbc.co.uk

f*** that send them down. If hurty words get you some bird then being a terrorist, even as a supporter is enough. Then take all they have like they do with right wing jail birds.

 

[Stirlingsays]

Not aggressive in the military sense. In terms of influence, yes.

You can't justify bombing civilians. Ukraine were not a military threat to Russia.

They were in Nato.

At it's closest point Ukraine is five hours drive to Moscow.

A missile system there makes all of Russia vulnerable.....You could nuke it before it could respond.

Putin asked for a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn't join Nato and was refused.

He warned many times that Ukraine was a red line and its government was overthrown and the rest is history.....a very bloody history that never needed to happen.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

They were in Nato.

At it's closest point Ukraine is five hours drive to Moscow.

A missile system there makes all of Russia vulnerable.....You could nuke it before it could respond.

Putin asked for a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn't join Nato and was refused.

He warned many times that Ukraine was a red line and its government was overthrown and the rest is history.....a very bloody history that never needed to happen.

Here lies the problem.

In theory, Ukraine should have the right to join NATO. In practice, it should never happen.

Ukraine, with its history, should be the perfect buffer between East and West, but its alignment with Europe and the West has made it a perceived threat to Putin.

It seems to me that promises should have been made to Putin about Ukraine's military status. On the other hand, Putin is himself completely untrustworthy. How do you make any agreement with such a person?
The Ukrainians gave up their nukes 30 years ago. How much further should they have gone? If they still had them, Russia would not have invaded.

What would have satisfied Putin?

 

[Stirlingsays]

Here lies the problem.

In theory, Ukraine should have the right to join NATO. In practice, it should never happen.

Ukraine, with its history, should be the perfect buffer between East and West, but its alignment with Europe and the West has made it a perceived threat to Putin.

It seems to me that promises should have been made to Putin about Ukraine's military status. On the other hand, Putin is himself completely untrustworthy. How do you make any agreement with such a person?
The Ukrainians gave up their nukes 30 years ago. How much further should they have gone? If they still had them, Russia would not have invaded.

What would have satisfied Putin?

I'd say all that is true.

What I'd also say is that we have no business in Ukraine.....and it's all very corrupt and very murky in my view. If we had Russia in our border country we wouldn't tolerate that either.

An extremely avoidable war that puts us all in danger without need.....and I resent my sky high energy bill, which ultimately I blame on US state department policy.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Here lies the problem.

In theory, Ukraine should have the right to join NATO. In practice, it should never happen.

Ukraine, with its history, should be the perfect buffer between East and West, but its alignment with Europe and the West has made it a perceived threat to Putin.

It seems to me that promises should have been made to Putin about Ukraine's military status. On the other hand, Putin is himself completely untrustworthy. How do you make any agreement with such a person?
The Ukrainians gave up their nukes 30 years ago. How much further should they have gone? If they still had them, Russia would not have invaded.

What would have satisfied Putin?

This is indeed the problem. With a Russian leader with who trust had been established those undertakings would be given in a heartbeat. Not though with Putin.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

I'd say all that is true.

What I'd also say is that we have no business in Ukraine.....and it's all very corrupt and very murky in my view. If we had Russia in our border country we wouldn't tolerate that either.

An extremely avoidable war that puts us all in danger without need.....and I resent my sky high energy bill, which ultimately I blame on US state department policy.

This is where brinkmanship can be foolish. We were perceived to have poked the Bear and it reacted.

Did we anticipate an invasion?

How much of Ukraine's Western facing ambitions were about us, and how much came from them?

How much of Putin's decision to invade was about perceived threat, and how much of it was about his personal resentment over losing the Cold War?

 

[Stirlingsays]

This is where brinkmanship can be foolish. We were perceived to have poked the Bear and it reacted.

Did we anticipate an invasion?

How much of Ukraine's Western facing ambitions were about us, and how much came from them?

How much of Putin's decision to invade was about perceived threat, and how much of it was about his personal resentment about losing the Cold War?

All good questions.

It would be nice to know for real rather than guess or take a position based upon analysis....because that can be wrong as well.

Part of me thinks the west were genuinely surprised that the invasion happened, at least I thought Biden was, but who really knows....God knows how long it will be until the actual truth comes out, if ever.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

All good questions.

It would be nice to know for real rather than guess or a position based upon analysis....because that can be wrong as well.

Part of me thinks the west were genuinely surprised that the invasion happened, at least I thought Biden was, but who really knows....God knows how long it will be until the actual truth comes out, if ever.

I think we will never know. This is stuff that will be revealed in 50 years or longer, if ever.

As you say, this war was totally avoidable. It is a symptom of an apparent breakdown or relations and communication between the two sides. I find that quite astonishing in this era. I thought that kind of diplomatic environment was consigned to history.