| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 23:03 - Aug 16 with 1395 views | RadioOrwell |
wow ...that's a big ( awful ) thing to climb down from. |  | |  |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 23:36 - Aug 16 with 1380 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 21:32 - Aug 16 by factual_blue |
It's a carrot and stick scenario. You give up some space, and you get to join NATO and protect your remaining space.
The key would be what the Ukraine might be willing to give up. Maybe that what was taken in 2014? That's possibly the maximum for the Ukraine, but possibly a minimum for Russia.
The other concern for NATO and the Ukraine is what if trump's hint/threat to withdraw from NATO becomes reality in a couple of years? |
The problem with that is that Crimea is a big strategic weakness for Ukraine, and Russia will insist on the "land corridor" unless or until beaten to a position where they are froced to compromise. |  | | |
| [Redacted] on 05:43 - Aug 17 with 1334 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 23:03 - Aug 16 by RadioOrwell |
wow ...that's a big ( awful ) thing to climb down from. |
[Redacted] |  | | |
| [Redacted] on 05:47 - Aug 17 with 1324 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 23:36 - Aug 16 by redrickstuhaart |
The problem with that is that Crimea is a big strategic weakness for Ukraine, and Russia will insist on the "land corridor" unless or until beaten to a position where they are froced to compromise. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 08:33 - Aug 17 with 1246 views | redrickstuhaart |
Absolutely no chance of any better than that from a Russian perspective.
If thats their minimum then there will be no solution any time soon, and it is the Russians who are the issue.
But then we know that.
The difference between the sides is stark. One side could end the war tomorrow if they chose. The other could not, save by effectively handing over their entire nation. | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 08:58 - Aug 17 with 1207 views | chicoazul |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 12:59 - Aug 16 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I think the NATO membership will be the biggest sticking point of any ‘negotiations’. I cannot see a world in which Putin agrees to let Ukraine join - he has an irrational fear of it, and will play back badly in Russia. For Ukraine though, NATO membership is the only thing that can guarantee their future security. Without it, Putin can rebuild his shattered forces over time, and come back for another crack.
If only Vladolf were to take an unfortunate tumble from his balcony. Mind you, given Russia’s penchant for tyrannical leaders, there’s no guarantee his successor won’t be even worse… |
Why on earth would it be “irrational” to be worried about an aggressive supranational power backed by the most awesome military in human history parked on your doorstep. |  |
| |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:05 - Aug 17 with 1190 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 08:58 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
Why on earth would it be “irrational” to be worried about an aggressive supranational power backed by the most awesome military in human history parked on your doorstep. |
It’s a defensive alliance, but you know this. Why would Putin be concerned when he has the trump card of 6,000 nuclear warheads that he so frequently threatens?
Was he worried about Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya and Syria joining NATO too? | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:11 - Aug 17 with 1165 views | chicoazul |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:05 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s a defensive alliance, but you know this. Why would Putin be concerned when he has the trump card of 6,000 nuclear warheads that he so frequently threatens?
Was he worried about Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya and Syria joining NATO too? |
So why would it be irrational? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| [Redacted] on 09:16 - Aug 17 with 1153 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 08:33 - Aug 17 by redrickstuhaart |
Absolutely no chance of any better than that from a Russian perspective.
If thats their minimum then there will be no solution any time soon, and it is the Russians who are the issue.
But then we know that.
The difference between the sides is stark. One side could end the war tomorrow if they chose. The other could not, save by effectively handing over their entire nation. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:23 - Aug 17 with 1129 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:11 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
So why would it be irrational? |
6,000 nuclear warheads | | | |
| [Redacted] on 09:29 - Aug 17 with 1128 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:05 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s a defensive alliance, but you know this. Why would Putin be concerned when he has the trump card of 6,000 nuclear warheads that he so frequently threatens?
Was he worried about Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya and Syria joining NATO too? |
[Redacted] | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:56 - Aug 17 with 1102 views | chicoazul |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:23 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
6,000 nuclear warheads |
What would happen if he used one? Not so irrational a fear now all of a sudden. There is nothing irrational about Russia fearing NATO, an organisation created to defend the west from what Russia was over 30 years ago but isn’t anymore. | |
| |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 10:26 - Aug 17 with 1058 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 09:56 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
What would happen if he used one? Not so irrational a fear now all of a sudden. There is nothing irrational about Russia fearing NATO, an organisation created to defend the west from what Russia was over 30 years ago but isn’t anymore. |
“from what Russia was over 30 years ago but isn’t anymore”
Indeed, as Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, and Syria show it is even more aggressive now. | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:22 - Aug 17 with 1019 views | chicoazul |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 10:26 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
“from what Russia was over 30 years ago but isn’t anymore”
Indeed, as Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, and Syria show it is even more aggressive now. |
Truly deranged to think Russia is *more* aggressive now than when Stalin was the boss. | |
| |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:40 - Aug 17 with 1003 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:22 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
Truly deranged to think Russia is *more* aggressive now than when Stalin was the boss. |
Sorry to break it to you, but that wasn’t 30 years ago. | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:46 - Aug 17 with 992 views | chicoazul |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:40 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Sorry to break it to you, but that wasn’t 30 years ago. |
NATO was formed when Stalin was in power. | |
| |
| [Redacted] on 12:09 - Aug 17 with 961 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 10:26 - Aug 17 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
“from what Russia was over 30 years ago but isn’t anymore”
Indeed, as Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, and Syria show it is even more aggressive now. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| [Redacted] on 12:19 - Aug 17 with 945 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 11:22 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
Truly deranged to think Russia is *more* aggressive now than when Stalin was the boss. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 12:27 - Aug 17 with 925 views | chicoazul |
Yes! Fantastic show even if it is a bit of a slog… | |
| |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 12:29 - Aug 17 with 919 views | wilsondavid |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 13:12 - Aug 16 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Maybe the Ukrainians are happy to drag Russia into a quagmire like Afghanistan. The Russians left there empty handed when the number of body bags retuning home became unacceptable.
I’m just speculating here, but the Ukrainians should be able to decide their own destiny, and hopefully with support from the West as long as they want it. |
Will this war stop anytime soon? | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 12:39 - Aug 17 with 912 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s a very good series. A little harrowing! | | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 17:19 - Aug 17 with 833 views | Kievthegreat |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 08:58 - Aug 17 by chicoazul |
Why on earth would it be “irrational” to be worried about an aggressive supranational power backed by the most awesome military in human history parked on your doorstep. |
Russia's opposition to Ukraine (and others) joining NATO is entirely rational when it limits their ability to use military force (or the threat of it) to control those countries, a tool that they view as essential for control of it's perceived sphere of influence.
Russia's issue isn't that NATO threatens Russian land. It's that it threatens it's ability to control and influence countries it views should be under their control, either directly or indirectly. |  | | |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 17:34 - Aug 17 with 832 views | AndrewRatcliffITFC |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 14:24 - Aug 16 by blueasfook |
I honestly don't think Ukraine would ever gain NATO membership. Too much risk of a flashpoint and a wider war. NATO isnt going to up its chances of being drawn into a war with Russia by making Ukraine a member. It's just too risky. |
You're probably right but it does beg the question why did Nato confirm at the pivotal Nato conference of 2008 that Ukraine and Georgia would both be joining Nato. The Russians were at the conference and explicitly stated this would have consequences for the region. | | | |
| [Redacted] on 18:28 - Aug 17 with 786 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 17:34 - Aug 17 by AndrewRatcliffITFC |
You're probably right but it does beg the question why did Nato confirm at the pivotal Nato conference of 2008 that Ukraine and Georgia would both be joining Nato. The Russians were at the conference and explicitly stated this would have consequences for the region. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| [Redacted] on 18:41 - Aug 17 with 757 views | victorywilhappen |
| Ukraine/ Nato/ Surrender/ Compromise.....? on 17:19 - Aug 17 by Kievthegreat |
Russia's opposition to Ukraine (and others) joining NATO is entirely rational when it limits their ability to use military force (or the threat of it) to control those countries, a tool that they view as essential for control of it's perceived sphere of influence.
Russia's issue isn't that NATO threatens Russian land. It's that it threatens it's ability to control and influence countries it views should be under their control, either directly or indirectly. |
[Redacted] | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
