I get that war is expensive, but can’t Putin just seize whatever he wants (food, oil, war supply etc) from his home based companies and claim it’s for the greater good?
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
if he wants to accelerate his economy crashing and then flatlining for much longer than after the fall of the sovjet Union, he can
and cause civil unrest etc.
Sanctions are a non lethal way of waging war.
Yes, The Russian people will suffer, but to a much lesser degree than of bombs were dropped.
There's a far smaller chance of anyone losing their life through these sanctions than of bombs were dropped.
What would be the alternative to these sanctions? What would be a way to keep every citizen safe in both Russia and Ukraine?
Even though sanctions are in place on Russia it doesn’t include medicine and food so they will be fine. Ukraine are the ones who will be struggling soon to get supplies as I am assuming one of Putin tactics will be to control what goes into the major cities and slowly cut off their supplies.
It seems like there are a lot of people joining up for fighting the russians in Ukraines foreign legion if these posts are any indication:
The civilians from both Ukraine and Russia are the ones suffering. Do you really think Putin and his Oligarch will eat less due to the sanctions or have their internet , water, heat or power cut off? I really sympathize with the everyday Russian people and to some extend those kids that they sent to war. Everyone is suffering due to the choice of one mad dictator. It is alarming to see that in this day and age, there are no effective safety checks for one mad dictator with nukes planning to invade another country.
Kharkiv:
Twitter knows a lot about TYRES. Fascinating.
Yeah it's great news especially since Russia will definitely think "oh look at that brave civilians from Nato countries armed with Nato weapons who are definitely casual brave civilians and not trained Nato solders". This will definitely deescalate the crisis.
And before someone says to me Sweden is not a Nato member, I know that but those Foreign Legion solders comes from all Europe including Britain for which Johnson said that they will arm every man who volunteers to fight in those legions.
The more that Russia destroys, maims, injures and kills their brothers and sisters in Ukraine, the more hate they are building up and the more difficult it is going to be to maintain their control once the fighting stops.
What they are doing absolutely disgusts me and the rest of the free world.
What they are doing absolutely disgusts me and the rest of the free world.
The fighting will never stop
Wars creates extremism.
The slaughter, the atrocities, the agony the Russians are piling on the Ukrainian people will naturally create Ukrainian groups harbouring extreme hatred towards Russia and the fight continues for as long as the Russians are their.
Keep crying.
But Boris and his cronies clapped for a whole minute yesterday. What more can the man do?
Yes indeed.
And this time, the rest of the free world will want to hold Russia and Putin accountable for what he is doing.
your point being?
And what would happen then?
This is my greatest fear as well. The longer this goes the harder it will be to de-escalate. It is so frustrating, it is obvious most of the combatants and casualties are unwilling party to this but the longer this goes on, the hatred will become real and may take generations to heal. All thanks to a dictator.
nobody would give a feck if muslims were starting to aid a muslim country in the war against another muslim country that's the oppressor...can't understand why you make this about religion - it really isn't @Zlatattack
Top posts.
Yeah fair points all round, . Obviously they wouldn’t vote for it though.
But didn’t loads of muslims sign up to fight in Syria? Like whole swathes of Europeans.
Just wasn’t a country they were defending I suppose, but still very similar.
Ugh, why use a conflict like this for your own agenda? Islamophobia is a thing, yes, but what the feck does it have to do with thousands of Ukrainians being slaughtered. Don't make this about something else - be better.
Another interesting twitter thread:
With Oil Discovery in Black Sea and Shell discovery in Russian dominated Donbask region, this was inevitable.
After Crimean peninsula fell, Ukraine stopped water supply and it is now fast turning into barren land. Russia needs to occupy coastal Black sea area and canal region to safeguard its oil interests in Crimea.
Plus post 2014, Donbask has seen ethical tension. This made it easy for Russia to move in. Shell discovery in Donbask makes it even more valuable.
There is no way Russia will allow Ukraine to be NATO member as this will leave open almost 2300km border area which is not easily defendable . NATO can cut supply from Caspian sea in the event of War quite easily. Plus its ally Belarus will be completely exposed to NATO aggression.
Its actually easy to understand why Russia invaded Ukraine. Oil interest and threat to its own land. Something US has done on multiple counts. With NATO flirting with Ukraine for NATO membership, this was inevitable. If NATO doesn’t back off, this will be catastrophic as Russia wont back down and looking at their geographical issues, they are not entirely wrong. US threatened nuclear war when Cuba was putting USSR missiles and punished Cuba severely post that.
Most likely Russia will occupy coastal area near Black Sea and the two region which has declared independence. This will ensure Ukraine cant do anything in future and ensure water supply to Crimea.
Maybe its not easy for European and American audience to understand but NATO is seen as hostile by non NATO members. With entire Indian subcontinent, China abstaining, it shows how little trust is there with western powers when countries can’t openly condemn blatant invasion.
After Crimean peninsula fell, Ukraine stopped water supply and it is now fast turning into barren land. Russia needs to occupy coastal Black sea area and canal region to safeguard its oil interests in Crimea.
Plus post 2014, Donbask has seen ethical tension. This made it easy for Russia to move in. Shell discovery in Donbask makes it even more valuable.
There is no way Russia will allow Ukraine to be NATO member as this will leave open almost 2300km border area which is not easily defendable . NATO can cut supply from Caspian sea in the event of War quite easily. Plus its ally Belarus will be completely exposed to NATO aggression.
Its actually easy to understand why Russia invaded Ukraine. Oil interest and threat to its own land. Something US has done on multiple counts. With NATO flirting with Ukraine for NATO membership, this was inevitable. If NATO doesn’t back off, this will be catastrophic as Russia wont back down and looking at their geographical issues, they are not entirely wrong. US threatened nuclear war when Cuba was putting USSR missiles and punished Cuba severely post that.
Most likely Russia will occupy coastal area near Black Sea and the two region which has declared independence. This will ensure Ukraine cant do anything in future and ensure water supply to Crimea.
Maybe its not easy for European and American audience to understand but NATO is seen as hostile by non NATO members. With entire Indian subcontinent, China abstaining, it shows how little trust is there with western powers when countries can’t openly condemn blatant invasion.
Spinning this with a religious angle, christ
I’m not a Muslim but my wife is and it’s difficult even with that personal relationship to comprehend how hard that can be for her. She’s broke down in the past few days due to this war because of how it is being perceived in the UK, not just by the government but in the workplace and social space too. There is a genuine fear that if you are a Muslim who comes out supporting a Muslim nation in a war or in the case of Israel/Palestine etc. that you will be labelled as a terrorist and it has happened. She, along with everyone else at her work has been offered support or someone to chat to due to the Ukraine/Russia conflict, but weren’t offered it for other conflicts. I don’t think it can be ignored that countries in Europe such as the UK are treating this differently to other wars and conflicts. I can’t really say I understand because I don’t being a white non-Muslim compared to her as a non-white Muslim but I can and have noticed similar hypocrisies. I imagine it can be linked to people feeling that this is much ‘closer’ to home but yeah. Obviously the situations of Ukraine/Russia, Israel/Palestine are more nuanced than a direct comparison but I feel for her and others in the same boat, as too for the people of Ukraine etc.
It was actually illegal for them to do so in the UK.
To be fair, these countries are extremely outnumbered by the number who voted yes on the resolution so you can't say that all non-NATO members are seeing it the same way when it comes to this particular war. When the only people who voted no are North Korea, Belarus, Eritrea, and Assad's Syria are voting against it, that's not the group one would in any way want to be seen to be similar to.
It's understandable why Indians see NATO in a negative light but countries that are successful shed the victim/loser mentality and look forward to advocate for their values. Countries can't afford to be stuck airing grievances from the past in such a fast-changing world. At the end of the day, the Russians won't stop China from annexing more Indian land, this is just a fact. Russian weapons are going to be surpassed by Chinese weapons in the long run, so relying so much on the former for military support is a bad idea.
When it comes to Ukraine, this is a case of democracy vs. autocracy and if the latter is unopposed, this will embolden other autocracies to initiate military actions to achieve political objectives. As the world's "largest democracy", India will at some point have to learn how to advocate for these values, even if the current reticence to call out Russia is understandable due to the economic and military factors. Then again, for all the talk about American democracy being in danger, India is in a much worse position when it comes to potentially losing its democracy so it may not have to worry about advocating for this system in the future anyways.
Last edited:
People hate to talk about it but there is a real racial element to this conflict and people can't just chalk it up to Russian disinformation. Especially when you now have heard many stories of discrimination against non-Ukrainians (of a darker skin color) not being given a chance to board trains/buses/cross borders etc. Furthermore, it's clear that the fact this is happening to a European country makes it far likelier for the stronger Western countries to provide aid (although the Ukrainians are still held in a lower regard by some Europeans). Ultimately though, the visible signs of racism in Ukraine are a cancer that Zelensky will have to cut out, if it is allowed to metastasize it can undo a lot of the goodwill towards the country in the long run.
I have no idea about the situation in the UK, but as far as I know the german situation, only people who supported terrorist groups had troubles coming back again.
Mariupol without electricity and water, according to the region's governor.
Because they were off joining terrorist organisations or unrecognised entities. Going to fight for Ukraine - whilst moronic if you’re remotely untrained - is a different thing entirely.