The point has to be made yet again....because misinformation leads to people not knowing what was actually happening.

When Russia invaded Ukraine it's military was significantly smaller than it is now.

If Russia had been intending to take over eastern Europe as the impression is often made then why hadn't Russia been building up that capacity ready to do it.

We really have to get into conjecture and stretching to justify the positions taken. Because the actual facts on the ground don't support them.

If someone wants to work out Russia's intentions it isn't that hard to do.....You look at what it was spending its money on.....After the peace failure negotiation of March/April 21 Russia clearly changed course on its plans in Ukraine.

Silvertop has a different view on what Russia intends and he of course could be right. However as I have said many times, personally I'm of the view that Russia intends to take those four regions and negotiate a neutral Ukraine that can't be used to threaten it....whether people want to argue about Nato's intent is besides the point.

In my view those are the minimal terms that Russia will accept as the Putin regime views them as existential.

So essentially long term it comes down to a matter of how much money does Europe want to spend on this.

Despite what the propaganda is I suggest that the proof is in the eating. Nato don't actually believe that they are under threat of attack.....as....if they did then defence spending would be at war economy levels.

As in life, it's not what people say, it's what people do that reveals the truth of a matter.

Essentially Ukraine can't win this war and never could without it enlarging into a wider war (which they tried to argue for). Unless Nato were going to officially go to war with Russia this was all just about using Ukraine to give Putin a bloody nose, but he was always going to win the fight on points....problem is that destroys Ukraine in the process.

So it's all about how the war ends. A lot of people aren't going to like the reality, but in truth I bet they prefer their welfare and pensions more than going to a war economy for Ukraine.

Sure, I expect landlords with two income streams and regular holidays could afford it.....people already on the breadline will think differently.

The people who pushed this war has been utterly disastrous both economically and for the losses Ukraine has.....hundreds of thousands of young men which it needed. Johnson and Biden will have to answer for that missed opportunity and we all know that all we will hear are lies.....because there will be a negotiation and it's going to be on significantly worse terms.

If they refuse to negotiate then eventually Russia will take Ukraine. Personally I'd view that as nothing short of cutting their nose off to spite their face....but I suppose when you're an elite who never faces a consequence you can afford that.

In other news, it looks like Ukraine are losing their foothold on the east bank of the Dnipro river as I'm hearing that Russian flags are appearing in the village.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jan 2024 2.25am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

There is a joke in Russia that goes something like this. The future is certain. Only the past is unpredictable.

Putin is doing what Russian leaders and great thinkers have done for donkeys' years. Use a largely mythologized view of Russian history to shape their future. He's nothing new.

As to how that translates into current policy, what he says to justify his actions and inspire his people does not necessarily translate into what he actually intends to do.

He may consider the fall of the Soviet Union to be a catastrophe, but he has shown no desire to rebuild it. He is no true Red. Had they won the revolution, he would be a White. His restoration of the Orthodox church and constant referencing of Tsarist history is proof of that.

Also, any thoughts of rebuilding the Russian empire c1917 is something he may imply in morale raising speeches, but he is not an idiot. He knows he cannot regain Finland or part of Poland or central Asia. Poland would be particularly problematic after NATO blows his country to bits. There will be no Russian tanks grinding down the Royal Route in Warsaw or the Baltic states. Poland and Lithuania may want us to say there is such a risk in order to encourage funding for Ukraine, but that has more to do with then wanting a friendly neighbour than any genuine risk to their sovereignty.

And that, as I said above, is what I think are the twin aims of Putin. Restore the Motherland of ancient Rus in which he believes Belarus and Ukraine are integral parts (perhaps the way we see Wales etc.). And ensure that its borders are occupied by friends loyal to Russia and not the West. This would include Georgia to the south and the central Asian republics. He would rather that was achieved through influential control and non military means (Belarus by example) but will resort to violence if all other avenues are exhausted, as with Georgia and now Ukraine.

However, Russian aggression has almost always been what they see to be a defensive strategy as opposed to, say, imperial expansion. I don't see this as any different and, for once, Putin can lean on accurate Russian history to provide a basis for that battle plan.

Which is a huge disappointment given their superb track record in international affairs!

Indeed, a country run by interests not entirely aligned with their own.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I'm hearing that Russians are now fighting inside the city of Avdiivka on two sides. Unless the Ukrainians can force them out before they reinforce that city is on a timer.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I don't think I've said that Russia were fighting inside Avdiivka before. Sure, Ukraine took back territory in the north, they have been approaching it for some time but obviously trench warfare, fighting in woods and fields are different from the actual urban warfare required to take a city.

As for a DMZ, well one is very likely, in my view, once this war is negotiated. We will see.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Jan 2024 4.51pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)