d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Russia / Ukraine
Prev1184618471848184918504475Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 23,864
Joined: Jul 15 2008
Gold: 175,091.69
Warn: 10%
Dec 15 2022 04:19pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Dec 16 2022 01:07am)
Bold - "Nations have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent interests." Sure, so let's take a look at the interests.

Finland is a small, 5 million strong nation that historically fell within the bounds of the Russian Empire. What do you think their response to an invasion of the Baltics is going to be? They were concerned enough with the invasion of Ukraine to drop a policy of neutrality that had lasted for close to a hundred years. Sweden was concerned enough that it dropped a policy of neutrality that had lasted for 200 years. Poland is a 38 million strong nation that has spent the vast majority of the past ~150 years under the sway of the Russian Empire in some form or fashion. What is their attitude going to be with respect to renewed Russian aggression in the Baltics? The United States is the dominant military power in Europe. If we refer to Machiavelli's maxims on statecraft, should a large power (like the United States) seek to ally with small powers or other large powers? Machiavelli would say the small, it's almost always better to ally with powers that pose you no risk to the detriment of larger powers which do.

Russia has 143 million people. The former USSR has double that. Russia itself is not a threat to the United States in any meaningful sense of the word, on the other hand a renewed Russian Empire could be someday. And at the same time, Russia is an ideological ally to the Chinese, who represent the only realistic threat to American hegemony. I think the United States would be happy to be on good terms with Russia, but not on good terms with a Russia far stronger than it is today.

Besides all this, American credibility is on the line. If the United States does not defend NATO, then American credibility elsewhere is shattered. If the United States won't honor signed defensive pacts, is there any chance that they'd make a big deal over Taiwan? Japan?


Neither Finland or Sweden have been neutral since 1991. Especially Sweden, considering they took part in offensive NATO war in 2011 Libya as an example with 8 Gripes+tp-84. There are more examples, but don't take my word for it, Scholz straight up said this in an interview a while back.

As for the rest of what you said, most of it is naive and extremely unrealistic. Truth is, NATO did more for Ukraine than it would have done for an invaded Estonia 1000fold. You are talking about a country 1.3million that has a total of 2 jet trainers and 0 fighters.

Not gonna take this discussion seriously beyond this comment.

This post was edited by ownyaah on Dec 15 2022 04:23pm
Member
Posts: 77,669
Joined: Nov 30 2008
Gold: 500.00
Dec 15 2022 04:30pm
orcs still frothing at the mouth, some nonsense about global security after invading a neighbour

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-12-15-22/h_5e9f7d8567b674ea6967c79721a33d73

Any shipment of US Patriot missiles to Ukraine could "lead to unpredictable consequences" and threaten global security, the Russian Embassy in Washington said in a statement Wednesday.

The Biden administration is finalizing plans to send the advanced long-range air defense system to Ukraine to help counter Moscow's attacks, according to US officials cited in a CNN report Tuesday.

"If this is confirmed, we will witness yet another provocative step by the [Biden] administration, which can lead to unpredictable consequences," the Russian Embassy statement said.
It added that continued arms deliveries to Ukraine "will only strengthen the Zelensky regime’s sense of impunity and push it to new crimes against civilians" in four Ukrainian regions that Russia claims to have annexed.

The statement also criticized US support for Ukraine, saying: "Washington’s strategy causes enormous damage not only to the Russian-American relations, but also creates additional risks for global security."
Member
Posts: 34,225
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 319.37
Dec 15 2022 05:10pm
Quote (ownyaah @ Dec 15 2022 05:19pm)
Neither Finland or Sweden have been neutral since 1991. Especially Sweden, considering they took part in offensive NATO war in 2011 Libya as an example with 8 Gripes+tp-84. There are more examples, but don't take my word for it, Scholz straight up said this in an interview a while back.

As for the rest of what you said, most of it is naive and extremely unrealistic. Truth is, NATO did more for Ukraine than it would have done for an invaded Estonia 1000fold. You are talking about a country 1.3million that has a total of 2 jet trainers and 0 fighters.

Not gonna take this discussion seriously beyond this comment.


I don't think so. What is very unrealistic is to expect NATO to hand over multiple NATO alliance members to the Russian Federation at the exact same time that Russia's armed forces have been exposed as a paper tiger. You make concessions to strong adversaries, not very weak ones.
Member
Posts: 19,687
Joined: Apr 13 2016
Gold: 32,517.50
Dec 15 2022 05:16pm
Quote (ownyaah @ Dec 15 2022 10:19pm)
Neither Finland or Sweden have been neutral since 1991. Especially Sweden, considering they took part in offensive NATO war in 2011 Libya as an example with 8 Gripes+tp-84. There are more examples, but don't take my word for it, Scholz straight up said this in an interview a while back.

As for the rest of what you said, most of it is naive and extremely unrealistic. Truth is, NATO did more for Ukraine than it would have done for an invaded Estonia 1000fold. You are talking about a country 1.3million that has a total of 2 jet trainers and 0 fighters.

Not gonna take this discussion seriously beyond this comment.


On the contrary Estonia is in NATO and the alliance would have to put its money, and troops where its mouth is.
That is if Russia or any nation invaded Estonia. Which, they won't.
Invading a NATO country would be a resounding military defeat for Russia and curtains for vlad.

Quote (ferdia @ Dec 15 2022 09:46pm)
if it helps i would reframe my comments to: Putin believes he is trying to protect the Russia (read: USSR) sphere of influence. i am not saying he is doing that, I am saying he perceives he is doing this. i said this before and you said it was nonsense then so i really dont mind agreeing to disagree.


Possibly. I think it's more likely Putin wants Russians to believe he is acting in the interests of their security. His motives, in my opinion are ulterior.
If he does believe he is acting in Russians best interests, it is not in security but economically and geopolitical in the form of a land grab.

Quote (duffman316 @ Dec 15 2022 10:30pm)
orcs still frothing at the mouth, some nonsense about global security after invading a neighbour

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-war-news-12-15-22/h_5e9f7d8567b674ea6967c79721a33d73

Any shipment of US Patriot missiles to Ukraine could "lead to unpredictable consequences" and threaten global security, the Russian Embassy in Washington said in a statement Wednesday.

The Biden administration is finalizing plans to send the advanced long-range air defense system to Ukraine to help counter Moscow's attacks, according to US officials cited in a CNN report Tuesday.

"If this is confirmed, we will witness yet another provocative step by the [Biden] administration, which can lead to unpredictable consequences," the Russian Embassy statement said.
It added that continued arms deliveries to Ukraine "will only strengthen the Zelensky regime’s sense of impunity and push it to new crimes against civilians" in four Ukrainian regions that Russia claims to have annexed.

The statement also criticized US support for Ukraine, saying: "Washington’s strategy causes enormous damage not only to the Russian-American relations, but also creates additional risks for global security."


Patriot missiles or a similar system is long overdue, in fact it is too late to spare massive suffering of civilians and logistical damage to Ukraines infrastructure.
I'm not suggesting US taxpayers are obliged to help Ukrainians, but of course we all know these are not gifts of military hardware.
It will be essentially lend lease.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Dec 15 2022 05:18pm
Member
Posts: 19,687
Joined: Apr 13 2016
Gold: 32,517.50
Dec 15 2022 05:19pm
Quote (Djunior @ Dec 15 2022 09:06pm)
NATO wanted Crimea and they're never gonna get it.

And EU is going to be the biggest loser of this conflict.

Cheap Russian gas that fueled their economy is gone and it won't come back.

So much win


Absolute dreamland if you think Russia will not be the biggest "loser" from this invasion.

Pinch yourself
Member
Posts: 23,864
Joined: Jul 15 2008
Gold: 175,091.69
Warn: 10%
Dec 15 2022 05:24pm
Quote (Prox1m1ty @ Dec 16 2022 02:19am)
Absolute dreamland if you think Russia will not be the biggest "loser" from this invasion.

Pinch yourself


This is an ongoing war so this is all speculation but most likely scenario:

Ukraine biggest loser, followed by Russia, followed by EU.

Biggest winners US + China

This post was edited by ownyaah on Dec 15 2022 05:25pm
Member
Posts: 23,864
Joined: Jul 15 2008
Gold: 175,091.69
Warn: 10%
Dec 15 2022 05:28pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Dec 16 2022 02:10am)
I don't think so. What is very unrealistic is to expect NATO to hand over multiple NATO alliance members to the Russian Federation at the exact same time that Russia's armed forces have been exposed as a paper tiger. You make concessions to strong adversaries, not very weak ones.


When the hegemony breaks, which it will because every single one has broken over 5000? years of history. We will then see movements over time some of which may be military in nature, at that point there will be a new power dynamic, and in turn a lot of agreements prove themselves to have always been toilet paper, or turn into toilet paper as direct consequence.

NATO defending 1million population countries in Baltics in an full-blown multi-millions army war is one of them. No matter what that piece of paper says, NATO partnership/membership/defense is not equal and will never be equal because that is not how power structures work, anyone who says otherwise is overtly naive.

Also you made a big mistake in your previous post, talking about Taiwan. Anyone who is active here knows I really despise speculation, but when it comes to Taiwan, the likelihood of it being part of China within the next 100 years is 99.9999%. As for NATO, Taiwan will never more than a receiver of weapons support, very much like Estonia would in a theoretical situation against a massive foe, but Estonia is much much much much less likely to be invaded in the coming 100 years, unless there is a massive in power balance. As an example, Cuba meant very little to soviets, whilst it meant everything for US - this sort of dynamic is always at play. Estonia means shit to the US in the grand scheme of things.

This post was edited by ownyaah on Dec 15 2022 05:37pm
Member
Posts: 51,625
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 47,079.00
Warn: 10%
Dec 15 2022 05:30pm
Quote (ownyaah @ Dec 15 2022 11:28pm)
When the hegemony breaks, which it will because every single one has broken over 5000? years of history. We will then see movements over time some of which may be military in nature, at that point there will be a new power dynamic, and in turn a lot of agreements prove themselves to have always been toilet paper, or turn into toilet paper as direct consequence.

NATO defending 1million population countries in Baltics in an full-blown multi-millions army war is one of them. No matter what that piece of paper says, NATO partnership/membership/defense is not equal and will never be equal because that is not how power structures work, anyone who says otherwise is overtly naive.


i think we will all be pretty old, or dead, by then :)

Member
Posts: 23,864
Joined: Jul 15 2008
Gold: 175,091.69
Warn: 10%
Dec 15 2022 05:33pm
Quote (ferdia @ Dec 16 2022 02:30am)
i think we will all be pretty old, or dead, by then :)


That is the subject of speculation, impossible to tell when. Could be tomorrow or in 500 years. There is however some things that have happened last 10 years that show us a new sort of world order taking shape. How well it shapes up, or if it even can be solidified remains to be seen. But yes, speculation speculation.
Member
Posts: 19,687
Joined: Apr 13 2016
Gold: 32,517.50
Dec 15 2022 05:44pm
Quote (ownyaah @ Dec 15 2022 11:24pm)
This is an ongoing war so this is all speculation but most likely scenario:

Ukraine biggest loser, followed by Russia, followed by EU.

Biggest winners US + China


I agree.

Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1184618471848184918504475Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll