Live data from Hacker News

Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

znak.com

121–130 of 428 posts

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#121
post #97
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europeans don't hate Russians as much as Americans do - probably because they've actually got Russians visiting and know that Russia doesn't really represent the threat that the American military-industrial complex needs you to believe is real in order to justify their trillion dollar misadventures and further subjugation of NATO member states into puppetry. In fact, a lot of Europeans would like to see peace made wi…

Americans don't hate Russians any longer. They no longer represent a threat to us and most people have no interest in minor eastern European conflicts.

Sure they don't, which is why American media doesn't go a day without beating the war-with-Russia-drums ..

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#122

Perhaps you should read a bit more Russian sources. There is a Minsk peace agreement, Ukraine was supposed to stop fighting, organise elections, get new government and recognise autonomous regions. Instead it continued fighting. Russia has obligation to those two autonomous regions.

For anyone else reading this, the Minsk Protocol (and, after it failed, Minsk 2) were ceasefire agreements from shortly after Russia invaded, signed 5+ years ago. They failed because they didn't do some pretty important things, like determine who controls what, so fighting continued along disputed territories.

Hard to justify saying Ukraine should follow a treaty that Russia also isn't following, after Russia's surprise invasion.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#123
post #96

Interesting as I think we are witnessing a global shift in power to the East. China’s rise and the US’s fall from hegemony is starting to be felt in geopolitics. Russia (IMO)may simply be pressing ahead while it sees the US’s power currently diminished. The US withdraw of Afghanistan has not helped matters. It demonstrated that although the US military’s budget is 10 times more than its closest rival, this expense do…

It’s not a matter of power but a matter of morals I think. The U.S has every ability annihilate any enemy but the collateral damage to do so restricts it heavily. If the goal of the US was straight up imperialism/colonialism it would be a very different story.

It’s not about morals - nobody in US seems to care about the million people they killed in Middle East - it’s about dead American soldiers looking bad in the TV.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#124
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And therein lies the rub: the EU would not be able to do much of anything without the rest of NATO to back them up. And in spite of Europe being dragged along in many American adventures in the middle east I wouldn't count on NATO sticking together either. Way too much 'realpolitik' going on to count on that for long term stability.

You suddently jumped to conclusion that EU could not do much without NATO, but that's just your speculation. - EU is basically the third largest economy in the World. Meanwhile, Russia is about similar size economy as Italy. The combined EU military spending and capability/equipment is well above Russia's. So, in terms of economic and military power, the EU certainly has means, but see below. - Would EU have politica…

The EU has downsized their military capability steadily over the last 40 years, so I wouldn't count out Russia based on spending alone, the size of the army that you can field, and how far afield you can support it is a pretty important factor and Russia is within that zone at the moment as good as unopposed. Russia has historically been able to hold their own surprisingly well when it came to Dollars spent versus Rubles spent. Bluntly: they would be able to use Belarus as a base and connect that to Kaliningrad in a very short time. They might not be able to hold it over the longer term but the damage would be done: it would require the EU to declare where their loyalty lies and if the interaction so far is any guide I would not want to bet on the outcome.

I'm pretty well connected to the Baltics and have spent a lot of time in that part of Europe, both in North Eastern Poland, Lithuania and Latvia (less so in Estonia though I've been there a couple of times I never spent a lot of consecutive time there). From what I gather there is some fierce nationalism there, and a pretty strong cultural identity, in spite (possibly because) of years of Russian efforts to destroy those. At the same time, and in spite of financial/cross border integration with the rest of Europe those countries are an island surrounded on their land borders by borderline hostiles with a tiny little bridge to the rest of Europe.

But you have a point about the Nordics and Poland who definitely would have a big stake in this. But for your average person from Madrid, Paris or Rome it likely would not be something they even realize is in play, they might not even know Kaliningrad exists and they might not know much about the Baltics and their history or present day role in Europe.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#125
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europeans don't hate Russians as much as Americans do - probably because they've actually got Russians visiting and know that Russia doesn't really represent the threat that the American military-industrial complex needs you to believe is real in order to justify their trillion dollar misadventures and further subjugation of NATO member states into puppetry. In fact, a lot of Europeans would like to see peace made wi…

> Europeans don't hate Russians as much as Americans do I don't think Americans hate Russians at all, in my experience. Just Putin and a handful of oligarchs. > probably because they've actually got Russians visiting and know that Russia doesn't really represent the threat that the American military-industrial complex needs you to believe is real in order to justify their trillion dollar misadventures and further sub…

>Some of these Russians just happen to carry Novichok or polonium and assassinate dissidents living in Europe, no big deal right?

Whereas every single American tourist can be trusted not to be a gullible fool and just believe everything they've been told to think about Russia by talking heads on the television? Come on, we know that all states assassinate their enemies, including the USA. This standard is no longer relevant.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#126
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europeans don't hate Russians as much as Americans do - probably because they've actually got Russians visiting and know that Russia doesn't really represent the threat that the American military-industrial complex needs you to believe is real in order to justify their trillion dollar misadventures and further subjugation of NATO member states into puppetry. In fact, a lot of Europeans would like to see peace made wi…

Western Europeans are generally ambivalent towards the threat from comfortable complacency. Have you met Ukrainians or Georgians? They're not NATO states. They understand full well the threat and seizures they're under and will tell you so. The closer the proximity to the Russian state, the more the people are concerned. Places like Poland and Slovakia are similar only somewhat less so.

Here in Austria, I know a lot of Ukraine and Georgian expats who don't have the issue with Russia that they do with the USA.

These are just not vocal enough to warrant attention in Western media, nor does it serve the purpose of giving the American-led NATO powers a new purpose for existence.

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#127
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And therein lies the rub: the EU would not be able to do much of anything without the rest of NATO to back them up. And in spite of Europe being dragged along in many American adventures in the middle east I wouldn't count on NATO sticking together either. Way too much 'realpolitik' going on to count on that for long term stability.

You suddently jumped to conclusion that EU could not do much without NATO, but that's just your speculation. - EU is basically the third largest economy in the World. Meanwhile, Russia is about similar size economy as Italy. The combined EU military spending and capability/equipment is well above Russia's. So, in terms of economic and military power, the EU certainly has means, but see below. - Would EU have politica…

Just a note, while Baltic banks are well integrated into the EU (especially after the Danske bank scandal and others before it made integration with Russia politically toxic) the energy grid of the region is still very tied into Russia which is of a critical concern right now (see EU energy prices and issues with the harmonization across the union).

I will also have a very negative posture on the EU military spending/capability unfortunately after working for a Baltic government and being familiar at a high level at capabilities in the region and somewhat familiar of Germany/France. In the EU today now that Britain has left, France is the only real military power who has 1) the forces to deploy and 2) the will to do so. German forces are in a terrible state of disrepair and the new government does not seem like one to invest further (Ulrike Franke has a great writeup and is worth a twitter follow) and even the old gov is under fire for blocking military aid as they have supported nonlethal NATO equipping only to Ukraine, I would guess partially because they are addicted to Russian gas but there are some rumors that Merkel will join some Russia affiliated boards (gotta love a little government graft). Poland I am less clear about but I have never heard anything about them having a really solid air force and anti-air capabilities which is one of the most critical things Ukraine needs (at this point Ukrainian ground forces are actually pretty good and are well versed in how to fight; what they need is to be able to ward off incursions by sea and air).

https://www.airforcemag.com/ukraine-says-it-can-deter-a-russ... https://www.ft.com/content/1336c9be-f1c9-4545-9f85-3b07fcb74...

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And therein lies the rub: the EU would not be able to do much of anything without the rest of NATO to back them up. And in spite of Europe being dragged along in many American adventures in the middle east I wouldn't count on NATO sticking together either. Way too much 'realpolitik' going on to count on that for long term stability.

Russia has a military budget of 60bn, Germany and France spend 52bn each. Within the EU they are on home turf, with existing rail and road infrastructure. The EU isn't equipped to fight in Russia or to fight a nuclear war (even though France has nukes), but I don't see why the EU shouldn't be able to defend it's own territory in a conventional war.

>Within the EU they are on home turf, with existing rail and road infrastructure

Baltic countries are better connected to Russia and Belarus via rail, road, electricity grid, etc than to the rest of the EU.

EU was reluctant to fund infrastructure projects to change that, e.g. the railway from Poland through all the three Baltic capitals

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#129
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will NATO come for let’s say Latvia or Lithuania? I don't know about NATO, but I strongly hope that EU defends its territory integrity. And I am not sure Russia wants to find out either…

How EU will do this? NATO is very clear about not being able to defend Baltic countries, they just don't have sufficient militarily presence. Polish army is currently even to weak to protect Poland, maybe this will change in next 10 years, as there are significant investments into army and military industry planned, but not now. EU would have to deploy immediately at least two heavily armed divisions to be able to pr…

The Polish army isn't meant to be able to defend Poland, it's meant to provide enough time for NATO to respond (which they're capable of within 72 hours). That, combined with the logistical challenges of a Russian invasion and the lack of motivation for the Russians to do so makes it very unlikely that they would attack.

More details on the logistical issues within the Russian army: https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-...

Re: Russian court accidentally confirmed Russian military presence in Ukraine

#130
post #108

The talk about the impending russian invasion of Ukraine has been on for a while. Since I'm based in Poland, I'm trying to get as much information as possible, as this makes me nervous and will probably affect me in some ways. The one thing I'm wondering is, in the horrible event of invasion of Ukraine, is how it's going to affect the markets and how to protect what little wealth I've got saved up. Anyone got any ide…

As a long term investor, geographic diversification is always a good idea. For example the Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) can be a good way to hedge against risks in Poland. You might not be able to purchase VT specifically, but you probably have access to something similar.

https://investor.vanguard.com/etf/profile/overview/VT

Post reply on HN