Europe Backdrop to the war in Ukraine

[Gethelred]

This is the thread for the geopolitics, history and framework around the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If you want to discuss the events of the war, head over to this thread:

Europe - War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

This is the thread for discussing the War in Ukraine. Should you want to discuss the geopolitics, the history, or an interesting tangent, head over here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/backdrop-to-the-war-in-ukraine.1302028/ If a post isn't directly concerning the events of the war or...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Sqotty from office works]

Putin has played this beautifully in political terms.
Poland last year actively kicked the living christ out of people trying to cross the border last year.
The polish government now has to aid over a million refugees, which will be a logistical and financial nightmare.
It's also less people for Russia to look after.
He has all his wheel equipment in place before the thaw and roads become impassable.
He's made it look like he's weakening by creating safe passages for people to flee, another bonus.
He knows the Americans will throw mud but never place troops on ground.
He has cashed up his treasury with gold which is smart in this situation.
He knows if they ban his oil and gas that price rises will certainly work in Russia's favour.
If you read Ukraine's history during and after ww11, the backstabbing and sides taken and double crossing between nazi,Russian and solitary political parties has been atrocious.

I'm not a Putin or Russian lover.
I'm just stating the play.
On the Ukrainian thread the truth was considered blasphemous.

 

[Malifice]

This is true in the past but not the future.

I can unequivocally tell you you're wrong, and speak from a position of authority in so doing.

The entire war in Iraq (and literally every war in the ME) the Yanks (and Brits, and us) have been involved in were about energy (oil and gas) supply, mainly to the EU.

It's the most important strategic resource. Without it, you're ****ed.

Control the oil supply, and you control the country. Lose your access to oil and energy and you cant fight a war (you lose industry and manufacturing capability, and your vehicles cant operate, soldiers cant get resupplied).

Stalingrad, Pearl Harbor, North Africa, the Wolf Packs in the Atlantic; all of it was about Oil.

How Oil Defeated The Nazis | OilPrice.com

 

[nut]

The Fins and Swedes now considering joining NATO…

 

[Sphynx]

I could also add to the above list, Venezuela. The Yanks were about to go in guns blazing, when the Russians landed troops and the Yanks backed out.

Russia–Venezuela relations - Wikipedia

Everyone seems to have forgotten about that.

The reason why?



Oil reserves in Venezuela - Wikipedia

Venezuela was also one of the few countries to vote against sanctions of Russia in the Ukraine invasion, and is supporting them prominently.

They're also chock full of Russian Arms, with the Russians providing them with heaps of military equipment, conducting joint training exercises with them, and vetoing UN resolutions to oust their President.

"Proven" oil reserves.


The suspected largest "unproven" oil reserve in the world is suspected to lay in the Australian territorial zone of Antarctica, which is estimated at 500b+ barrels of oil as well as other minerals and gas reserves.

It will be the next open economic battle ground of the next 50 years IMO especially given countries like Russia and China can attempt diagonal and horizontal drilling into the Australian zone as the territorial claims begin to near expiry.

China is already rumoured to be looking at Antarctica as the South China Sea 2.0 in terms of infrastructure build up and are already looking at a 3000m all weather runway and airport to be built there.

 

[Osho]

Was wondering when this bloke would be tapped for his opinion. Had listened to his excellent Stalin lectures. He's pretty forthright.


No, it's not Joe Pesci!

 

[Seeds]

"Proven" oil reserves.


The suspected largest "unproven" oil reserve in the world is suspected to lay in the Australian territorial zone of Antarctica, which is estimated at 500b+ barrels of oil as well as other minerals and gas reserves.

It will be the next open economic battle ground of the next 50 years IMO especially given countries like Russia and China can attempt diagonal and horizontal drilling into the Australian zone as the territorial claims begin to near expiry.

China is already rumoured to be looking at Antarctica as the South China Sea 2.0 in terms of infrastructure build up and all already looking at a 3000m all weather runway and airport to be built there.

Um people wont be digging up oil and gas going foward.

electric vehicles are going to completely take over the light duty passenger vehicle market. You wont even be able to buy petrol based internal combustion engines in a decades time.

the heavy duty transport market will take longer to move away from fossil fuels but hydrogen based off green electricity will likely dominate this market within twenty years.

 

[Sphynx]

Um people wont be digging up oil and gas going foward.

electric vehicles are going to completely take over the light duty passenger vehicle market. You wont even be able to buy petrol based internal combustion engines in a decades time.

the heavy duty transport market will take longer to move away from fossil fuels but hydrogen based off green electricity will likely dominate this market within twenty years.

Yeah, right.


Batteries and solar will not be fueling shipping lines, air freight, fighter jets, tanks, frigates and industry etc in our lifetime. Which is what my comment was about and is all that matters.

Natural Gas heats most of Europe and you think that infrastructure is going to change in just 20 years? Rofl.

 

[Seeds]

Yeah, right.


Batteries and solar will not be fueling shipping lines, air freight, fighter jets, tanks, frigates and industry etc in our lifetime. Which is what my comment was about and is all that matters.

Natural Gas heats most of Europe and you think that infrastructure is going to change in just 20 years? Rofl.

But if they are the only reasons you need oil you dont need to go find new reserves. The existing reserves already have enough. Its the passenger vehicle fleet where most of the oil goes. And that is being replaced with evs which are now already more economic then petrol cars.

plus as i said, hydrogen will eventually replace oil in ships and air freight to.

 

[yebiga]

Here is a remarkably prescient 10 minute summary posted back in 2014

 

[Zidane98]

Yeah, right.


Batteries and solar will not be fueling shipping lines, air freight, fighter jets, tanks, frigates and industry etc in our lifetime. Which is what my comment was about and is all that matters.

Natural Gas heats most of Europe and you think that infrastructure is going to change in just 20 years? Rofl.

Oil use in 20-30 years time is going to be a fraction of what it is today. By then every single new vehicle will be electric and even many older vehicles on the road will be hybrids or economical icu vehicles.

As for heavy industry I would advise you to listen to what Twiggy forest says on the matter. He is investing in Hydrogen. That will long term be the go to fuel for heavy industry.

Theres a good chance that jet engines and limited diesel engines in heavy machinery are the only ICU powered engines left by 2050.

Natural Gas raises an issue. Short term Germany could reactivate a nuclear power station and hand out electric heaters.

Long term Russia will eventually back down one feels. But EU natioms really do need to organise either an alternate gas supply or generate enough electricity on the grid to cover heating via electrical appliances.

 

[Seeds]

I can unequivocally tell you you're wrong, and speak from a position of authority in so doing.

The entire war in Iraq (and literally every war in the ME) the Yanks (and Brits, and us) have been involved in were about energy (oil and gas) supply, mainly to the EU.

It's the most important strategic resource. Without it, you're f’ed.

Control the oil supply, and you control the country. Lose your access to oil and energy and you cant fight a war (you lose industry and manufacturing capability, and your vehicles cant operate, soldiers cant get resupplied).

Stalingrad, Pearl Harbor, North Africa, the Wolf Packs in the Atlantic; all of it was about Oil.

How Oil Defeated The Nazis | OilPrice.com

im unequivocally wrong about the future and the reasoning you provide is an example from twenty years in the past that is completely redundant to my argument. Did you think before posting this response?

how does the importance of oil in the iraq war discredit the view that hydrogen and green evs will replace oil in the near future? How? and i speak on this from a position of authority. im not stating that energy is not important to war. It most certainly is. Im stating oil is not the future of energy.

 

[yebiga]

Was wondering when this bloke would be tapped for his opinion. Had listened to his excellent Stalin lectures. He's pretty forthright.


No, it's not Joe Pesci!

Thank you for that - fascinating!

The strategic polemic Stephen Kotkin here reveals is a narrative littered with irreconcilable contradictions. If this is reflective of geopolitical thought currently de rigueur at the Pentagon, elite Universities and think tanks - then, it is little wonder that, in recent times, the US has stumbled from one foreign policy disaster to another. He reiterates on a number of occasions how the West learns from its mistakes but fails to cite a single example of what that might look like in practice.

Whilst, once or twice Stephen acknowledges US policy failings and concedes the barely that Russia and China might pose some threat, he papers over the matter with classic US triumphant exceptionalism. To be fair to him, the American/Western values he is espousing are real enough and precious - it's just that from our neglect they have passed into history.

Perhaps, Kotkin is right - the west is so powerful that it need only remind itself of its potency to achieve its destiny. On the other hand, its not only more interesting, but at least plausible to posit the possibility that Russia has not made this move hastily but that it has been planning and preparing for something just like this together with China and others ever since March 2014 and the Ukrainian Maiden revolution. Russia's sudden intrusion into the Syrian Civil War back in 2015 - provided its military with invaluable experience of managing military operations on foreign soil involving civilians and extremists. Similarly, since annexing Crimea, the Russian economy has had 8 years to re-orientate its economy to manage trade sanctions.

It may well be that such a plan- it real - is destined to prove delusional for Putin - but it could prove foolhardy believe it does not exist. The current sanctions against Russia are not universal - even in the Western World. Over half the world's population is not supporting them. As Stephen details, petrol, gas and other commodities are currently outside European sanctions. Perhaps, more importantly, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey - all Russian neighbours - will significantly mitigate sanctions. The move to remove several Russian banks from the Swift system and the subsequent announcements by Visa and Mastercard have already been countered by the Kremlin with replacement services involving China.

 

[Seeds]

Thank you for that - fascinating!

The strategic polemic Stephen Kotkin here reveals is a narrative littered with irreconcilable contradictions. If this is reflective of geopolitical thought currently de rigueur at the Pentagon, elite Universities and think tanks - then, it is little wonder that, in recent times, the US has stumbled from one foreign policy disaster to another. He reiterates on a number of occasions how the West learns from its mistakes but fails to cite a single example of what that might look like in practice.

Whilst, once or twice Stephen acknowledges US policy failings and concedes the barely that Russia and China might pose some threat, he papers over the matter with classic US triumphant exceptionalism. To be fair to him, the American/Western values he is espousing are real enough and precious - it's just that from our neglect they have passed into history.

Perhaps, Kotkin is right - the west is so powerful that it need only remind itself of its potency to achieve its destiny. On the other hand, its not only more interesting, but at least plausible to posit the possibility that Russia has not made this move hastily but that it has been planning and preparing for something just like this together with China and others ever since March 2014 and the Ukrainian Maiden revolution. Russia's sudden intrusion into the Syrian Civil War back in 2015 - provided its military with invaluable experience of managing military operations on foreign soil involving civilians and extremists. Similarly, since annexing Crimea, the Russian economy has had 8 years to re-orientate its economy to manage trade sanctions.

It may well be that such a plan- it real - is destined to prove delusional for Putin - but it could prove foolhardy believe it does not exist. The current sanctions against Russia are not universal - even in the Western World. Over half the world's population is not supporting them. As Stephen details, petrol, gas and other commodities are currently outside European sanctions. Perhaps, more importantly, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey - all Russian neighbours - will significantly mitigate sanctions. The move to remove several Russian banks from the Swift system and the subsequent announcements by Visa and Mastercard have already been countered by the Kremlin with replacement services involving China.

The biggest problem for russia was the loss of all its foreign currency reserves (mostly western bonds) it had been accumlating for a decade through trade surpluses which was to help buffer the rouble from collapse. Most likely cos they knew they would need this buffer when they started war mongering. No one expected the west just wouldnt honour their debts to russia including putin otherwise he would of cashed out before the war. China and india cant help with this. They arent just going to hand over 10 years of lost wealth to russia. This is putting russia on the brink of financial collapse. They need money to fund their war too.

 

[Osho]

Thank you for that - fascinating!

The strategic polemic Stephen Kotkin here reveals is a narrative littered with irreconcilable contradictions. If this is reflective of geopolitical thought currently de rigueur at the Pentagon, elite Universities and think tanks - then, it is little wonder that, in recent times, the US has stumbled from one foreign policy disaster to another. He reiterates on a number of occasions how the West learns from its mistakes but fails to cite a single example of what that might look like in practice.

Whilst, once or twice Stephen acknowledges US policy failings and concedes the barely that Russia and China might pose some threat, he papers over the matter with classic US triumphant exceptionalism. To be fair to him, the American/Western values he is espousing are real enough and precious - it's just that from our neglect they have passed into history.

Perhaps, Kotkin is right - the west is so powerful that it need only remind itself of its potency to achieve its destiny. On the other hand, its not only more interesting, but at least plausible to posit the possibility that Russia has not made this move hastily but that it has been planning and preparing for something just like this together with China and others ever since March 2014 and the Ukrainian Maiden revolution. Russia's sudden intrusion into the Syrian Civil War back in 2015 - provided its military with invaluable experience of managing military operations on foreign soil involving civilians and extremists. Similarly, since annexing Crimea, the Russian economy has had 8 years to re-orientate its economy to manage trade sanctions.

It may well be that such a plan- it real - is destined to prove delusional for Putin - but it could prove foolhardy believe it does not exist. The current sanctions against Russia are not universal - even in the Western World. Over half the world's population is not supporting them. As Stephen details, petrol, gas and other commodities are currently outside European sanctions. Perhaps, more importantly, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey - all Russian neighbours - will significantly mitigate sanctions. The move to remove several Russian banks from the Swift system and the subsequent announcements by Visa and Mastercard have already been countered by the Kremlin with replacement services involving China.

I don't feel I know enough to formulate a worthwhile opinion. I do question though his Pinkeresque optimism about western values. Clearly many western societies are great places for many. Free medical free education free elections etc, yep, that's how I grew up. Can't complain. But the murderous western hypocricies are also pretty glaring. And continuing. So I can't buy the narrative. I think he has idealistic Platonic images in mind.

My ears pricked up when he mentioned places like Vietnam being within the western sphere. I have close ties to that country and that comment gladdened me. It was 1945 and Bac Ho's independence speech that he held up the USA as a model. Despite his efforts they were not really that willing to support newly independent countries as earlier Presidents had committed to as old empires crumbled. They weren't willing to walk the walk. But if Vietnam can be liberalised, wow, their potential could be more fully realised.

 

[Zidane98]

"Proven" oil reserves.


The suspected largest "unproven" oil reserve in the world is suspected to lay in the Australian territorial zone of Antarctica, which is estimated at 500b+ barrels of oil as well as other minerals and gas reserves.

It will be the next open economic battle ground of the next 50 years IMO especially given countries like Russia and China can attempt diagonal and horizontal drilling into the Australian zone as the territorial claims begin to near expiry.

China is already rumoured to be looking at Antarctica as the South China Sea 2.0 in terms of infrastructure build up and are already looking at a 3000m all weather runway and airport to be built there.

Antarctica is unavailable for any resources until 2048 minimum.

And it is very likely the Antarctic treaty will be extended. Assuming it isnt oil wont be worth much by 2048.

 

[yebiga]

The biggest problem for russia was the loss of all its foreign currency reserves (mostly western bonds) it had been accumlating for a decade through trade surpluses which was to help buffer the rouble from collapse. Most likely cos they knew they would need this buffer when they started war mongering. No one expected the west just wouldnt honour their debts to russia including putin otherwise he would of cashed out before the war. China and india cant help with this. They arent just going to hand over 10 years of lost wealth to russia. This is putting russia on the brink of financial collapse. They need money to fund their war too.

I think we are going to discover that deploying financial and economic sanctions against the most resource rich country in the world is not an effective or smart move.. There is no logical way this can hurt Russia. Someone will always buy those resources, even if its at a discount - and given the inflationary impact of these sanctions - the bottom line is that Russia earns more than it has until now.

Moreover, the higher cost of energy and food its going hurt the entire global economy.

As for the reserve debts to Russia, there are two sides to that - there is also the debt owed by Russia, which the Kremlin has already announced that all foreign debt can only be paid to the Russian central bank to be kept in trust.

I think the West - and lets face it, we are talking about the US - have a losing hand with only won winning scenario - Russia ousts Putin and his replacement is not another hardliner but someone friendly to the west. This is a long shot - and, in short, a bad hand.

In every other imaginable scenario - the result is the inevitable break up of NATO.

Neither the Europeans nor the US have an appetite for direct confrontation with Russia. In Poker terms, Russia is all in - the Europeans and US - not so much.

If NATO is not prepared to war directly with Russia - all the cards are in Russia's hands. Any attempt at creating chaos with insurgencies - a la Syria is going to be much more limited and manageable. Russia will either come up with a negotiated settlement with the Ukraine or if that is not possible - annex a sizeable portion of the country - Novorossiya - which they believe is reasonably homogenous. This would leave behind a rump Ukraine - filled with disaffected mercenaries and extremist nationalists - for Poland and NATO to deal with. All these scenarios are a dagger in the heart of NATO, leading to years of internal recriminations.

 

[Jello_B]

I think we are going to discover that deploying financial and economic sanctions against the most resource rich country in the world are not effective. There is no logical way this can hurt them. Someone will always buy those resources, even if its at a discount - given the inflationary impact of these sanctions - the bottom line is that Russia earns more than it has until now.

Moreover, the higher cost of energy and food its going hurt the entire global economy.

As for the reserve debts to Russia, there are two sides to that - there is also the debt owed by Russia, which the Kremlin has already announced that all foreign debt can only be paid to the Russian central bank to be kept in trust.

I think the West - and lets face it, we are talking about the US - have a losing hand with only won winning scenario - Russia ousts Putin and his replacement is not another hardliner but someone friendly to the west. This is a long shot - and, in short, a bad hand.

In every other imaginable scenario - the result is the inevitable break up of NATO.

Neither the Europeans nor the US have an appetite for direct confrontation with Russia. In Poker terms, Russia is all in - the Europeans and US - not so much.

If NATO is not prepared to war directly with Russia - all the cards are in Russia's hands. Any attempt at creating chaos with insurgencies - a la Syria is going to be much more limited and manageable. Russia will either come up with a negotiated settlement with the Ukraine or if that is not possible - annex a sizeable portion of the country - Novorossiya - which they believe is reasonably homogenous. This would leave behind a rump Ukraine - filled with disaffected mercenaries and extremist nationalists - for Poland and NATO to deal with. All these scenarios are a dagger in the heart of NATO, leading to years of internal recriminations.

NATO aren’t breaking up over this, if anything they will strengthen.

 

[Osho]

I think we are going to discover that deploying financial and economic sanctions against the most resource rich country in the world is not an effective or smart move.. There is no logical way this can hurt Russia. Someone will always buy those resources, even if its at a discount - and given the inflationary impact of these sanctions - the bottom line is that Russia earns more than it has until now.

Moreover, the higher cost of energy and food its going hurt the entire global economy.

As for the reserve debts to Russia, there are two sides to that - there is also the debt owed by Russia, which the Kremlin has already announced that all foreign debt can only be paid to the Russian central bank to be kept in trust.

I think the West - and lets face it, we are talking about the US - have a losing hand with only won winning scenario - Russia ousts Putin and his replacement is not another hardliner but someone friendly to the west. This is a long shot - and, in short, a bad hand.

In every other imaginable scenario - the result is the inevitable break up of NATO.

Neither the Europeans nor the US have an appetite for direct confrontation with Russia. In Poker terms, Russia is all in - the Europeans and US - not so much.

If NATO is not prepared to war directly with Russia - all the cards are in Russia's hands. Any attempt at creating chaos with insurgencies - a la Syria is going to be much more limited and manageable. Russia will either come up with a negotiated settlement with the Ukraine or if that is not possible - annex a sizeable portion of the country - Novorossiya - which they believe is reasonably homogenous. This would leave behind a rump Ukraine - filled with disaffected mercenaries and extremist nationalists - for Poland and NATO to deal with. All these scenarios are a dagger in the heart of NATO, leading to years of internal recriminations.

I am interested in this take, not least because I have also heard a similar one here amongst Party members, though it is decidedly a minority view in the west. Who are well known proponents of your view that I may look into?

 

[yebiga]

I am interested in this take, not least because I have also heard a similar one here amongst Party members, though it is decidedly a minority view in the west. Who are well known proponents of your view that I may look into?

There was a USA Col. McGregor espousing much the same views to Tucker Carlson a few days ago.
There is the Zerohedge site which pulls articles from different sources with similar views - also the site: Strategic Culture - who appear to be unusually opposed to this.
But in reality - whilst not popular - I expect it is largely the consensus view amongst geo-political students but many dare not challenge the war-game being played out right now.

You may wish to watch this brief video where realpolitiks is revealed

 

[Seeds]

I think we are going to discover that deploying financial and economic sanctions against the most resource rich country in the world is not an effective or smart move.. There is no logical way this can hurt Russia. Someone will always buy those resources, even if its at a discount - and given the inflationary impact of these sanctions - the bottom line is that Russia earns more than it has until now.

Moreover, the higher cost of energy and food its going hurt the entire global economy.

As for the reserve debts to Russia, there are two sides to that - there is also the debt owed by Russia, which the Kremlin has already announced that all foreign debt can only be paid to the Russian central bank to be kept in trust.

I think the West - and lets face it, we are talking about the US - have a losing hand with only won winning scenario - Russia ousts Putin and his replacement is not another hardliner but someone friendly to the west. This is a long shot - and, in short, a bad hand.

In every other imaginable scenario - the result is the inevitable break up of NATO.

Neither the Europeans nor the US have an appetite for direct confrontation with Russia. In Poker terms, Russia is all in - the Europeans and US - not so much.

If NATO is not prepared to war directly with Russia - all the cards are in Russia's hands. Any attempt at creating chaos with insurgencies - a la Syria is going to be much more limited and manageable. Russia will either come up with a negotiated settlement with the Ukraine or if that is not possible - annex a sizeable portion of the country - Novorossiya - which they believe is reasonably homogenous. This would leave behind a rump Ukraine - filled with disaffected mercenaries and extremist nationalists - for Poland and NATO to deal with. All these scenarios are a dagger in the heart of NATO, leading to years of internal recriminations.

Your assumptions dont match reality. Any oil russia is currently selling is at a massive discount to the market value. We are talking 50-80 percent below value cos its viewed as tainted.

the sulphur content of russian oil is also problematic for india and china to use. They too will buy russian oil at a large discount because they cant easily use it.

and there is the gas problem. Russia cant just redirect the pipelines from europe to china. It will take years and billions of dollars to do so To cover for the lost sales to europe.

and you have also ignored the foreign asset problem. how do they solve that? Once investors start fleeing a country then other investors flee to because they dont want their money being devalued by a currency collapse. It becomes a self fulfilling cycle regardless of how much resources you have. Look at venzuela. They are resource intense. But their economy collpsed cos foreign investors wanted out (Or were kicked out). Indian and chinese investors are just as likely to leave as western out of self interest.

the domestic economy also will struggle to function with a 20 percent interest rate. Who is going to borrow and invest If they are paying back 20 percent? Construction will collapse.

putins war was reliant on two things.

The war being over quickly and ukrainians embracing their liberators which would minimise the costs of occupation.

russia having an ability to sell its foreign reserves to protect the rouble in light of the certain sanctions.

both these two aspects have gone horribly wrong for him.

putins already lost. we are now just waiting to see how many ukrainians he will butcher first before he comes to terms with this.

 

[Seeds]

I am interested in this take, not least because I have also heard a similar one here amongst Party members, though it is decidedly a minority view in the west. Who are well known proponents of your view that I may look into?

Im interested in this take cos its something i want to beleive in and i dont care if it has any semblence of fact. It feels right in my bones. I want to believe.


and thus this is how the cult of yebiga started.

 

[yebiga]

Your assumptions dont match reality. Any oil russia is currently selling is at a massive discount to the market value. We are talking 50-80 percent below value cos its viewed as tainted.

the sulphur content of russian oil is also problematic for india and china to use. They too will buy russian oil at a large discount because they cant easily use it.

and there is the gas problem. Russia cant just redirect the pipelines from europe to china. It will take years and billions of dollars to do so To cover for the lost sales to europe.

and you have also ignored the foreign asset problem. how do they solve that? Once investors start fleeing a country then other investors flee to because they dont want their money being devalued by a currency collapse. It becomes a self fulfilling cycle regardless of how much resources you have. Look at venzuela. They are resource intense. But their economy collpsed cos foreign investors wanted out (Or were kicked out). Indian and chinese investors are just as likely to leave as western out of self interest.

the domestic economy also will struggle to function with a 20 percent interest rate. Who is going to borrow and invest If they are paying back 20 percent? Construction will collapse.

putins war was reliant on two things.

The war being over quickly and ukrainians embracing their liberators which would minimise the costs of occupation.

russia having an ability to sell its foreign reserves to protect the rouble in light of the certain sanctions.

both these two aspects have gone horribly wrong for him.

putins already lost.

You could be right their economy will suffer but so will the rest of the world. 40% of Europe's food comes from either Russia, Ukraine or Belorus. Forget the Petrol and Gas industry - the Russian sphere is an Agricultural powerhouse - the global shortage of fertilisers may be more of an issue than Energy.

Either way, if it comes to suffering - the Russians have proven repeatedly that they will out-suffer the Europeans. Their economy was a basket case for the entire 1990s due to their own mismanagement and allowing foreign multinationals to rape their economy. So, the current crop of Russians will adapt. And on this occasion they have not only the history of knowing how to cope but they know that the world will be suffering with them.

But rather than predicting the demise of Russia - which is of course remotely possible - what exactly is the objective of NATO now that Russia has shown its hand? How do you think that the German and French populace will respond to another 6 million refugees and runaway inflation?

At least one way to look at this is that the USA has been bullying Russia for the last 30 years. Last week, Russia stood up for itself. The US response has not been to send troops and squash Russia - instead the US is indignant - crying and sulking with outrage. The Europeans - just like the Ukrainians are watching and weighing this all very carefully. What is the purpose and value of this alliance?

It will take a few years to play-out - but NATO is done.

 

[Marcel Proust]

NATO members Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland (Kaliningrad) all have land borders with Russia, as does Norway.

Yet as you can see. Ukraine is around the guts of Russia.

Ukraine being nato is a lot different to Norway

 

[yebiga]

This will be the growing sentiment in the Euro-Zone

 

[Zidane98]

You could be right their economy will suffer but so will the rest of the world. 40% of Europe's food comes from either Russia, Ukraine or Belorus. Forget the Petrol and Gas industry - the Russian sphere is an Agricultural powerhouse - the global shortage of fertilisers may be more of an issue than Energy.

Either way, if it comes to suffering - the Russians have proven repeatedly that they will out-suffer the Europeans. Their economy was a basket case for the entire 1990s due to their own mismanagement and allowing foreign multinationals to rape their economy. So, the current crop of Russians will adapt. And on this occasion they have not only the history of knowing how to cope but they know that the world will be suffering with them.

But rather than predicting the demise of Russia - which is of course remotely possible - what exactly is the objective of NATO now that Russia has shown its hand? How do you think that the German and French populace will respond to another 6 million refugees and runaway inflation?

At least one way to look at this is that the USA has been bullying Russia for the last 30 years. Last week, Russia stood up for itself. The US response has not been to send troops and squash Russia - instead the US is indignant - crying and sulking with outrage. The Europeans - just like the Ukrainians are watching and weighing this all very carefully. What is the purpose and value of this alliance?

It will take a few years to play-out - but NATO is done.

There's some absolutely bizarre logic at work here.



Firstly, the suffering is purely down to Putin. It's pretty clear that the people of Russia don't support the war. His Oligarch friends do not support the war. There's even Duma members speaking out about it although I would like to confirm they haven't been poisoned by novichock yet.


How long do you think Putin can continue a war that has no justification, is deeply unpopular and destoys Russia's economy? Good luck selling that to the people of Russia long term and the Duma. Russia is not North Korea where Putin has absolute carte blanche to do as he pleases.

And why you include USA in this is anyone's guess. Ukraine for a long time has been leaning towards a european relationship. The attack on them by Putin just further validates that stance if anything.