Opinion International Geopolitics

[Papa G]

Understand he did say "casualties" were 5 to 1 but then goes onto say deaths were 150,000 to 350,000. That's closer to 2:1 rather than 5:1.
Red Army deaths compared to Werhmacht deaths in WW2 were around 2:1. These guys just are creating an untrue narrative.

 

[RonSon]

Zelensky now claiming that Russian Soldier deaths are 4.5 to 1 Ukrainian soldier deaths.

Where?

 

[TazD]

Understand he did say "casualties" were 5 to 1 but then goes onto say deaths were 150,000 to 350,000. That's closer to 2:1 rather than 5:1.
Red Army deaths compared to Werhmacht deaths in WW2 were around 2:1. These guys just are creating an untrue narrative.

Casualties typically includes wounded.

 

[TazD]

Where?

He doesn't know the difference between deaths and casualties.

 

[Papa G]

Casualties typically includes wounded.

Understand that. Hence I made the differentiaion..

 

[Festerz]

I have feck all idea what is happening in the Ukraine/Russia conflict as does anyone here.

So I'll just do the same as everyone else and post my baseless prejudices supported by some media reporting that happens to support them.

Yep, that explosion killing a key Russian General was a moral victory for Ukraine over Russia that will mightily piss off Putin and the Kremlin and maybe make a few other generals a bit nervous, but it doesn't change a thing on the war front with Ukraine now steadily losing ground across the expanding 700km frontline.

The New York Times is reporting that Russian forces, augmented with fighters from North Korea, have launched a
counteroffensive aiming at pushing the Ukrainians out of their foothold in Russia’s Kursk region, where they have occupied a significant patch of land since the summer.

My gut feeling was that this conflict between Russia and Ukraine was always going to be one-sided given the imbalance in force numbers. That's what Russia invaded after all. The only surprising thing is how tenacious the Ukraine fighters have been and how long it has taken Russia to drive home their numerical advantage. Their courage under Zelensky will be the subject of award winning books and movies still to be written or filmed.

But I reckon the time has come when Russia has got the upper hand, aided by the fact that Western powers have grown tired of it all and their leaders facing their own political battles at home.

A treaty is coming. It could not come soon enough I think. The pressure is on the lame duck US President Biden to make it happen in coming weeks before Trump is inaugurated - but that time has passed as well. How well the US protects Ukraine in those treaty negotiations under Trump will be a lesson for all US allies about how he can be trusted -especially for Australia now that we've signed over (some might say forfeited) our strategic defence interests in our part of the world to the US under AUKUS.

 

[wannabejack]

.....

A treaty is coming. It could not come soon enough I think. The pressure is on the lame duck US President Biden to make it happen in coming weeks before Trump is inaugurated - but that time has passed as well. How well the US protects Ukraine in those treaty negotiations under Trump will be a lesson for all US allies about how he can be trusted -especially for Australia now that we've signed over (some might say forfeited) our strategic defence interests in our part of the world to the US under AUKUS.

Treaties with russia do not work!
This Russian "tradition" of breaking agreements extends beyond Ukraine and the current Russian government. Its origins date back to ancient times.
Ukraine's main hope (only hope?) is for NATO membership. Sweden and Finland both joined in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Sweden was a neutral country for over 200 years
Any agreement, ceasefire or treaty can easily be broken in the future by any of the countries involved. A ceasefire or treaty would provide russia with an opportunity to regroup and rebuild its military-industrial base.

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4443781-history-shows-that-no-ceasefire-or-treaty-with-russia-can-be-trusted/

 

[OneGreatClub]

I have feck all idea what is happening in the Ukraine/Russia conflict as does anyone here.

So I'll just do the same as everyone else and post my baseless prejudices supported by some media reporting that happens to support them.

Yep, that explosion killing a key Russian General was a moral victory for Ukraine over Russia that will mightily piss off Putin and the Kremlin and maybe make a few other generals a bit nervous, but it doesn't change a thing on the war front with Ukraine now steadily losing ground across the expanding 700km frontline.

The New York Times is reporting that Russian forces, augmented with fighters from North Korea, have launched a
counteroffensive aiming at pushing the Ukrainians out of their foothold in Russia’s Kursk region, where they have occupied a significant patch of land since the summer.

My gut feeling was that this conflict between Russia and Ukraine was always going to be one-sided given the imbalance in force numbers. That's what Russia invaded after all. The only surprising thing is how tenacious the Ukraine fighters have been and how long it has taken Russia to drive home their numerical advantage. Their courage under Zelensky will be the subject of award winning books and movies still to be written or filmed.

But I reckon the time has come when Russia has got the upper hand, aided by the fact that Western powers have grown tired of it all and their leaders facing their own political battles at home.

A treaty is coming. It could not come soon enough I think. The pressure is on the lame duck US President Biden to make it happen in coming weeks before Trump is inaugurated - but that time has passed as well. How well the US protects Ukraine in those treaty negotiations under Trump will be a lesson for all US allies about how he can be trusted -especially for Australia now that we've signed over (some might say forfeited) our strategic defence interests in our part of the world to the US under AUKUS.

Putin never respects Treaties. If he did he would not have invaded.

 

[snozulu]

Putin never respects Treaties. If he did he would not have invaded.

The only ways i see it possibly ending is if Putins so called friends turn against him, the people stand against him and force a revolution or he stirs up NATO borders and they send troops in. I think the most likely is the Russian people will stand up against him as they're getting sick of their sons being mobilized and forced to die on the front lines. He started conscripting ethnic minorities in Russia to start with but now due to so many casualties he is desperate and mobilizing Russians from Moscow and other more densely populated areas and untrained NK troops. I still think this is a couple of years away from happening still. I also think China will act on Taiwan in the next 5 years and North and South Koreas will conflict. Oh and lets not forget the middle east conflicts which are constantly happening.

 

[Festerz]

Treaties with russia do not work!

The vast majority of conflicts between nations are ended with some form of treaty or negotiated terms of settlement. Even in the most heinous and long running conflicts of world history, including WWII via the Paris Peace Treaties. A treaty is, after all, just a negotiated and agreed terms of settlement.

How do you imagine this conflict will end if not via a negotiated settlement of terms?

Because my thinking is that it is not the treaty but its terms and enforcement that matter.

But interested to hear how you imagine this conflict will end if not for a negotiated settlement. What other alternatives are you thinking of here?

 

[Festerz]

Putin never respects Treaties. If he did he would not have invaded.

Well that's not true is it?

Reckon NATO (treaty is the "T" in NATO of course) had a major impact on curtailing Soviet aggression during the Cold War and is cited as a major factor in Putin's invasion of Ukraine (specifically to pre-empt possible NATO membership being afforded to Ukraine).

Also pretty certain NATO membership restrictions and future protections provided for Ukraine will be a key factor in peace negotiations going forward.

IMHO the possibility of NATO protections and triggers (including the use of nuclear weapons) being extended to Ukraine are the key underlying factor in Putin's invasion of Ukraine - at least on face value. Removing that possibility is without doubt the focus of conditions he will seek to end the conflict.

 

[OneGreatClub]

 

[OneGreatClub]

 

[wannabejack]

Well that's not true is it?

Reckon NATO (treaty is the "T" in NATO of course) had a major impact on curtailing Soviet aggression during the Cold War and is cited as a major factor in Putin's invasion of Ukraine (specifically to pre-empt possible NATO membership being afforded to Ukraine).

Also pretty certain NATO membership restrictions and future protections provided for Ukraine will be a key factor in peace negotiations going forward.

IMHO the possibility of NATO protections and triggers (including the use of nuclear weapons) being extended to Ukraine are the key underlying factor in Putin's invasion of Ukraine - at least on face value. Removing that possibility is without doubt the focus of conditions he will seek to end the conflict.

The vast majority of conflicts between nations are ended with some form of treaty or negotiated terms of settlement. Even in the most heinous and long running conflicts of world history, including WWII via the Paris Peace Treaties. A treaty is, after all, just a negotiated and agreed terms of settlement.

How do you imagine this conflict will end if not via a negotiated settlement of terms?

Because my thinking is that it is not the treaty but its terms and enforcement that matter.

But interested to hear how you imagine this conflict will end if not for a negotiated settlement. What other alternatives are you thinking of here?

Putin only respects strength. The reason russia hasn’t invaded any of the former states that were under USSR (russia) control is because of the military capability of NATO.
When we are talking about russia not respecting treaties we’re talking about agreements, treaties that involve russia as a signatory.

I didn’t mean that a “treaty” wouldn’t happen. History shows that it is easily broken by russia and Ukraine need more that a piece of paper with Putin’s signature on it.
Ukraine has already signed a piece of paper in 1994 called “The Budapest Memorandum”.
"The Budapest Memorandum, signed by Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and the United Kingdom in December 1994, committed the signatories to respect Ukraine's post-Soviet borders, while Ukraine pledged to transfer its massive stockpile of Soviet-era nuclear weapons to Russia for decommissioning."

NATO membership may be the only solution. “NATO protections” may work in the short term but not long term. Any of the NATO countries can veto any “protections” for Ukraine. (Hungary’s prime minister is a big fan of Putin). There is no point in another “Budapest Memorandum”.

There should be no restrictions to Ukraine joining NATO. There has never been any agreement between NATO and russia for NATO not to expand. NATO has never been a threat to russia. It’s been russia threatening NATO. NATO only started spending more on defence since russia invaded Ukraine.

 

[Andre]

Putin only respects strength. The reason russia hasn’t invaded any of the former states that were under USSR (russia) control is because of the military capability of NATO.
When we are talking about russia not respecting treaties we’re talking about agreements, treaties that involve russia as a signatory.

I didn’t mean that a “treaty” wouldn’t happen. History shows that it is easily broken by russia and Ukraine need more that a piece of paper with Putin’s signature on it.
Ukraine has already signed a piece of paper in 1994 called “The Budapest Memorandum”.
"The Budapest Memorandum, signed by Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and the United Kingdom in December 1994, committed the signatories to respect Ukraine's post-Soviet borders, while Ukraine pledged to transfer its massive stockpile of Soviet-era nuclear weapons to Russia for decommissioning."

NATO membership may be the only solution. “NATO protections” may work in the short term but not long term. Any of the NATO countries can veto any “protections” for Ukraine. (Hungary’s prime minister is a big fan of Putin). There is no point in another “Budapest Memorandum”.

There should be no restrictions to Ukraine joining NATO. There has never been any agreement between NATO and russia for NATO not to expand. NATO has never been a threat to russia. It’s been russia threatening NATO. NATO only started spending more on defence since russia invaded Ukraine.

If not NATO membership straight away, then at a minimum NATO troops along the border of Russia and Belarus. Anything else is just a delay until Russia attacks again. Everyone knows this, which is why Russia's 'non-negotiables' are no NATO membership for Ukraine and no NATO troops in Ukraine.

 

[raptalia]

If not NATO membership straight away, then at a minimum NATO troops along the border of Russia and Belarus. Anything else is just a delay until Russia attacks again. Everyone knows this, which is why Russia's 'non-negotiables' are no NATO membership for Ukraine and no NATO troops in Ukraine.

I agree that Putin is playing games and any peace treaty will only last as long as he wants it to. Probably the only way to stop Putin is to make Russian losses that high that he will think twice before having another go. That worked with the Soviets in Afghanistan so maybe it might work in the Ukraine.

NATO is in a bind they will not admit Ukraine into NATO for fear that what is a localised conflict between Russia and Ukraine could escalate into open warfare between Russia and NATO. I do not think the NATO Members want to call Putin's bluff and risk escalation. It is a similar stand off to that which occurred when the US and NATO imposed limitations on the use of missiles by the Ukraine. Putin would probably back down but then again he may not and that is a risk NATO cannot take.

Of course the wild card in NATO's strategy is Donald Trump. Last time around Trump threatened to pull the US out of NATO unless the others started paying their way so on that basis NATO is not a 'must have' alliance in Trump's eyes. No one knows what Trump's relationship with Putin is really like and what he will do to get 'peace within 24 hours' of assuming office.

I had to chuckle at Putin's latest demands. He says he will only negotiate with the US and Ukraine if an election is held in the Ukraine. Putin probably figures he has a chance to influence a Ukrainian election just as he has done in Moldovia and Georgia.

In a month's time Trump assumes office so the next few weeks will be very interesting.

 

[raptalia]

This news gives us some hope that this time around it won't be like last time.

We should also wonder who is going to be running the US Trump of Elon Musk ?

Trump-backed spending deal fails as government shutdown fast approaches

The president-elect had pressured Congress to tie up loose ends before he takes office on January 20, but members of the Republican Party's right flank refused to support the package.

www.abc.net.au

Well done to the Republicans who defied Trump and Musk.

 

[OneGreatClub]

My sister is a pathological liar. We have had to live with her lies and destruction our whole lives. Putin is the same. Not a word to be trusted. We live in a very unstable world.

 

[OneGreatClub]

All over the bloody world

 

[OneGreatClub]

 

[raptalia]

When asked whether reports that Asma al-Assad had filed for divorce were true, Kremlin spokesman Dimitri Peskov said: "They do not correspond to reality." The same could be said of everything the Russian President tells us.

Kremlin rejects divorce claims about Asma al-Assad

Russia denies Turkish media reports suggesting the British-born wife of former Syrian president Basher al-Assad has filed for a divorce.

www.abc.net.au

 

[OneGreatClub]

Merry Christmas from Putin who attends church mass while attempting mass destruction of his ‘neighbour’.

 

[OneGreatClub]

 

[raptalia]

Looks like the Russians are at it again. A bird strike yeah, the Russians would say that wouldn't they? Lying bastards.

Sources claim Azerbaijan Airlines flight downed by Russian air defence system

An Azerbaijan Airlines flight that crashed in Kazakhstan was downed by a Russian air defence system, four sources in Azerbaijan with knowledge of the investigation say.

www.abc.net.au

FOOTNOTE: The BBC are reporting that the official Russian report left out the fact that survivors reported hearing explosions immediately before the aircraft when into a dive.

 

[Festerz]

Looks like the Russians are at it again. A bird strike yeah, the Russians would say that wouldn't they? Lying bastards.

Two Azerbaijanis briefed on a government inquiry said that Azerbaijani officials now believe that a Russian Pantsir-S defense system damaged the plane. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation was ongoing. Caliber, a news outlet in Azerbaijan that is close to the government, also reported that the country’s investigators believe a Russian Pantsir system was responsible.

The FlightRadar24 data shows the plane seems to have had a major loss of flight controls over the vertical stabilisers resulting in large up and down oscillations for the last minutes of its flight.





Reports saying that the pilots request for an emergency landing at Grozny were rejected by Russian authorities and it was directed to head out over the Caspian Sea eventually crashing in Aktau Kazakhstan. Why would Russian authorities want a crippled plane to head out over the sea away from land I wonder.




In any case, by crashing on land, it is now possible for authorities to do a relatively fast detailed investigation of the wreckage to determine the cause.



The area around Grozny has been the scene of aerial battles in recent weeks involving drones, usually launched by Ukraine, and Russian air defenses. Osprey Flight Solutions, an aviation security company, said in a note to its clients on Wednesday that the Azerbaijan Airlines plane had likely been struck by Russian air defenses “during an incident of misidentification.”