201–210 of 218 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
home here being Russia not mearly Ukrainian land the Russians have been illegally occupying for a bit longer.
Yeah, let our imagination run wild and suppose this happens. How would you deal with the Crimeans who got overly cozy showered with Russian Oil/Gas money?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Finland doesn't need NATO, then why is Finland now joining NATO after 60 years? Finland's policy was one of soft appeasement. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has revealed this to be a bad idea, so Finland continuing as it was is no longer a responsible option.
Because everything gets more polarised as we are moving towards WW3. Nothing to be celebratory about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
thats not ideal either a bunch of breakaway states would be eaten by china which is not something NATO wants either. from the wets prospective a quick internal cue falloewed by regim change to a more western friendly pro democracy leader that ideally is afraid of china would be the best outcome.
The best outcome, temporarily. It's not a stable situation. What happens next? Russia will get eaten by China anyways, the question now is, will it be piecemeal or in one big chunk.
Wonder what is the realistic incentive for that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, let our imagination run wild and suppose this happens. How would you deal with the Crimeans who got overly cozy showered with Russian Oil/Gas money?
They would end up in court, but more likely they will flee while the bridge to Russia still stands.
I'm just curious why do you suppose that there would be no friction or resistance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would end up in court, but more likely they will flee while the bridge to Russia still stands.
Do you actually plan to court martial sizable fractions of population? I'm just curious why do you suppose that there would be no friction or resistance.
Maybe I misunderstood who you meant. I was thinking about business leaders striking lucrative deals, mayors appointed by the Russian administration, and so on.
I think there will probably be some resistance, but once the Russian troops leave Crimea, I can't see a popular uprising against the Ukraine as a state or something like that. Time will tell. I don't think Russia can hold Crimea in the long run. I'm not qualified to even guess, but when did that stop anybody?! :-D
I think it's likely Kiev will control Crimea within 24 months.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best outcome, temporarily. It's not a stable situation. What happens next? Russia will get eaten by China anyways, the question now is, will it be piecemeal or in one big chunk.
> Russia will get eaten by China anyways Wonder what is the realistic incentive for that?
Russia is on its way to becoming hamstrung by China. Who else can Russia turn to?
China does not want Russia to implode and fracture, because that is an unstable situation for them. But if Russia was to fracture, you can be sure that China will want to control the pieces bordering China. They don't want chaos on their borders, or the power vacuum there somehow filled by western powers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Russia will get eaten by China anyways Wonder what is the realistic incentive for that?
China will not annex Russia or anything like that. But their government has everything to gain from extracting concessions from Russia. Russias influence is already waning in Central Asia, and China is eager to fill that role. Russia is on its way to becoming hamstrung by China. Who else can Russia turn to? China does not want Russia to implode and fracture, because that is an unstable situation for them. But if Russ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China will not annex Russia or anything like that. But their government has everything to gain from extracting concessions from Russia. Russias influence is already waning in Central Asia, and China is eager to fill that role. Russia is on its way to becoming hamstrung by China. Who else can Russia turn to? China does not want Russia to implode and fracture, because that is an unstable situation for them. But if Russ…
But how would the relationship you're describing be different from early post-Cold War era relationships between Russia and Europe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to be clear: Russia invaded Ukraine. I’m not sure why you are both-sidesing this. Also, who are you talking about when you say "both sides"?Are you talking about Ukraine and Russia? Withdraw to where? Agreement with whom? Please be specific.
Sorry, I thought it was clear that I meant US and Russia. That is the overarching narrative here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because everything gets more polarised as we are moving towards WW3. Nothing to be celebratory about.
Finland having powerful allies as we move closer to WW3 is well worth celebrating. The only people not celebrating are vatniks and vatnik sympathizers. Polarized indeed.