Ukraine Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4,651
#4,651
Reports that an indefinite ceasefire agreement has been signed in Minsk. It will be interesting to see what Russian demands end up being.

And I guess Kiev finally learned its lesson: you don't just up and defeat discriminated against grassroots protesters just any day of the week!
 
#4,652
#4,652
I'll be honest, if this is indeed finally the end of the road (and I'm not so sure it is), Russia handled this like a gem. Just about damn near a flawless acquisition of new territory. I mean textbook. Really was a thing of beauty. I'd like to personally thank Mr. Putin for just letting me watch.
 
#4,653
#4,653
volprof said:
I'll be honest, if this is indeed finally the end of the road (and I'm not so sure it is), Russia handled this like a gem. Just about damn near a flawless acquisition of new territory. I mean textbook. Really was a thing of beauty. I'd like to personally thank Mr. Putin for just letting me watch.
Click to expand...

Obama_Putin_Chess.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,655
#4,655
Velo Vol said:
Russia isn't signing the agreement.
Click to expand...

Why would they? They're not at war with Ukraine. Those are grassroots protesters.

But what's your point? You think Russia is going to keep pushing the invasion forward while talking about the need for peace, all the civilian casualties, blah blah blah, like they have pretty much the entire crisis?
 
#4,657
#4,657
I don't know, I haven't seen what's in the agreement.

It's interesting that they are even making one now, given the flux of the conflict.
 
#4,658
#4,658
Velo Vol said:
I don't know, I haven't seen what's in the agreement.

It's interesting that they are even making one now, given the flux of the conflict.
Click to expand...

Russian artillery has been raining down on the outposts around Mariupol the last couple of days, including today, while the Russian govt. is talking about the need for everyone involved to sign a ceasefire agreement. It's like they've been saying one thing and doing the other the entire conflict.

What they've done though is ensure that the "rebels" have the most bargaining power possible when they go to the table, enough bargaining power to ensure decentralization of Ukraine (at minimum) and possibly secession (at maximum).

Ukraine knows they can't win a war with Russia, which is what this has always been and becomes even more with each day. I wonder now if they will just concede the war and even be willing to cede the Donbass as long as Russia doesn't persist in going any further.
 
#4,660
#4,660
volprof said:
Russian artillery has been raining down on the outposts around Mariupol the last couple of days, including today, while the Russian govt. is talking about the need for everyone involved to sign a ceasefire agreement. It's like they've been saying one thing and doing the other the entire conflict.

What they've done though is ensure that the "rebels" have the most bargaining power possible when they go to the table, enough bargaining power to ensure decentralization of Ukraine (at minimum) and possibly secession (at maximum).

Ukraine knows they can't win a war with Russia, which is what this has always been and becomes even more with each day. I wonder now if they will just concede the war and even be willing to cede the Donbass as long as Russia doesn't persist in going any further.
Click to expand...

You cede Donbas, they want Mariupol, you give Mariupol, and they they take Odessa. If Kiev does that they will eventually give it's entire territory to the Russians.
 
#4,663
#4,663
Burhead said:
Source?
Click to expand...

His mouth.

I was listening live to his closing remarks on BBC America this morning. I could have misheard him due to his Danish accent, but I'm pretty positive that's what he said. He didn't say they were going to be members but that they were currently in the process of taking the necessary steps.

And he said something about partnerships with those two nations, Moldova, and Jordan, but I know partnerships doesn't mean alliance membership. I'm pretty sure, however, that's what he said regarding Montenegro and Georgia.
 
#4,664
#4,664
volprof said:
What they've done though is ensure that the "rebels" have the most bargaining power possible when they go to the table, enough bargaining power to ensure decentralization of Ukraine (at minimum) and possibly secession (at maximum).
Click to expand...

Serious question. What's wrong with decentralization? I ask because I wish our country would decentralize.
 
#4,665
#4,665
volprof said:
His mouth.

I was listening live to his closing remarks on BBC America this morning. I could have misheard him due to his Danish accent, but I'm pretty positive that's what he said. He didn't say they were going to be members but that they were currently in the process of taking the necessary steps.

And he said something about partnerships with those two nations, Moldova, and Jordan, but I know partnerships doesn't mean alliance membership. I'm pretty sure, however, that's what he said regarding Montenegro and Georgia.
Click to expand...

Very interesting. If Georgia could eventually become a full member that gives hope to Ukraine due to the history of both countries fighting wars with Russia. I wouldn't be surprised to see Moldova try and join in the future as well due to the eventual Russian interference in their own country.
 
#4,667
#4,667
Not to mention Putin's gamble in the Ukraine will eventually backfire in the future because it will drive Sweden and Finland into the arms of NATO as well.
 
#4,668
#4,668
Burhead said:
Very interesting. If Georgia could eventually become a full member that gives hope to Ukraine due to the history of both countries fighting wars with Russia. I wouldn't be surprised to see Moldova try and join in the future as well due to the eventual Russian interference in their own country.
Click to expand...

Eh, I'm not too big on expanding NATO anymore, particularly further into the "Russian sphere." Yes, it's their sovereign right as nations, but I just don't think it's a good idea.
 
#4,669
#4,669
red butler said:
Serious question. What's wrong with decentralization? I ask because I wish our country would decentralize.
Click to expand...

The issue of decentralization (or states' rights v. federalism in our American context) has always seemed to me a pecker measuring contest between each side about who should have full authority to be the official oppressor of the people.
 
#4,670
#4,670
volprof said:
The issue of decentralization (or states' rights v. federalism in our American context) has always seemed to me a pecker measuring contest between each side about who should have full authority to be the official oppressor of the people.
Click to expand...

Good point, but I do believe the less central the power the more influence the people can have on their government. And it has the advantage of - if I don't like how one state is being run, I can move.
 
#4,671
#4,671
red butler said:
Good point, but I do believe the less central the power the more influence the people can have on their government.
Click to expand...

This is most often true, but, then again, one could ask if the people having more control over their govt. is always necessarily a good thing.
 
#4,672
#4,672
Honestly, I think our system is pretty damn good as it is written; however, the balance of power has swung too much in favor of the government (particularly the federal) here over the last two administrations. Needs to swing back now a bit more towards the people.
 
#4,673
#4,673
Burhead said:
Not to mention Putin's gamble in the Ukraine will eventually backfire in the future because it will drive Sweden and Finland into the arms of NATO as well.
Click to expand...

He's won the land-grab bid; of that, there can be no doubt.

But, like you said, if countering NATO was one of the primary objectives, seems like all he's done is give it a renewed sense of purpose and possibly even motivate to expand further. Unless he's actually willing to do what that article I linked yesterday suggested he might be willing to do in order to dismember NATO, then I just don't see how he wins this particular part of the crisis.

I suppose the verdict is still out on the economic impact, but it doesn't appear Russia is going to win that one either, although Europe will obviously suffer somewhat.
 
#4,675
#4,675
volprof said:
He's won the land-grab bid; of that, there can be no doubt.

But, like you said, if countering NATO was one of the primary objectives, seems like all he's done is give it a renewed sense of purpose and possibly even motivate to expand further. Unless he's actually willing to do what that article I linked yesterday suggested he might be willing to do in order to dismember NATO, then I just don't see how he wins this particular part of the crisis.

I suppose the verdict is still out on the economic impact, but it doesn't appear Russia is going to win that one either, although Europe will obviously suffer somewhat.
Click to expand...
I disagree on the economic impact. Russia has signed trade deals that will make ties closer with China, the BRICS are in the process of setting up a competitor to the World Bank, and they are feverishly working toward an alternative to the SWIFT system. The other thing this conflict exposed is that Western Europe is pretty dependent on Russian trade as well as gas.
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top