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.
And if you give concessions to Putin him/his successor will be more emboldened to take the rest of Ukraine. Or Moldova. Or Estonia. Or Latvia.
What you cede to them to “keep peace” then?
This is the same logic that sees weird, embittered people in the UK vote Tory despite saying how terrible they are because "they're all the same politicians". Well we'll never get to find out will we Norman if you always vote for the same ones?
Ukraine, a democratic state, wante to resist an invasion. They have asked for our help against a dictatorial regime that is bent on genocide, the deliberate targeting of civilians and the use of chemical weapons.
If we are not prepared to create a No Fly Zone then the least Western democracies can do is to give that democracy the tools and equipment it needs to resist being destroyed.
I honestly don't even think this should be a point of disagreement between European socialists and conversatives. It transcends partisan politics.
If we are not prepared to create a No Fly Zone then the least Western democracies can do is to give that democracy the tools and equipment it needs to resist being destroyed.
I honestly don't even think this should be a point of disagreement between European socialists and conversatives. It transcends partisan politics.
I'm betting he's one of those old professors who doesn't even use email.
When all you have is a hammer [blaming the US], everything looks like a nail.... It's quite astounding how blind he is to the fact that both Ukraine and Russia have agency in this war. It's especially an issue with people who are focused on theory since they get so far up their own asses that they can't see anything else.
Exactly. There’s no guarantee a peace deal will stop innocent folks being killed. A peace deal that results in Russian control of Ukrainian territory could actually lead to the exact opposite due to ethnic cleansing / genocide by the Russians.
We don't know if it will lead to a new dictator. We are not the ones who will decide that, the Russians will decide (I mean *some* Russians, not all of them).
But even if we assume it leads to a new dictator, the new guy will stop the war and blame everything on Putin. That's what usually happens. However, Putin cannot stop the war and blame someone else. The only way Putin will stop is if he wins. (And then he will probably move many Ukrainians to Siberia, replacing them with other Russians, that's what past history predicts. )
Last edited:
A regime change could lead to many things, but what it absolutely won't lead to is a person with as much control as Putin, at least not for many years. And that will tend to produce more favourable results for Ukraine and the rest of the world (and Russia).
I for one am shocked that a Western country pushing Russia for peace hasn't achieved anything.
If he used the opportunity to expose Putin to a nerve agent it will start to make a lot more sense.
Never going to work. Have you not seen the tables Putin sits at!?
A true rocket surgeon here…
I truly hate that bitch
Whatever the outcome in this war I'm 100% sure that peace-keeping forces will be a part of of any peace agreement. I can't see the Ukraine signing any peace deal without it.
Despicable creature.
As for Lou Dobbs, I swear that CNN holds no regrets for booting him years ago.
Seems to be a small use, if true, testing the waters.
That’s still not really a guarantee of anything I mentioned. History is full of massacres happening despite peacekeepers being in place.
What makes you think sanctions are doing nothing? And particularly will do nothing in the medium//long term?
The US aren't stopping peace talks but they certainly won't be pushing for a peace deal that is unacceptable to Ukraine. Why would they?
Putin and his regime are a severe danger to the world and regime change is essential no matter how long it takes. If the leader changes to someone as bad or worse then that isn't regime change and the sanctions can remain.
And you still haven't answered what you think should be conceeded by Ukraine in peace talks.
Last edited:
No idea what has to be done but when the peace comes it has to be controlled somehow. Sadly I don't see this war end in a 'total' victory for Ukraine and the Russians leaving completely.
It will have to be more than just keepers of the peace (whatever that means). It will need to be a large, credible military force, well equipped and well-trained, with a clear mandate to defend Ukraine against future Russian invasion by all means necessary if needed.
On the flip side, they will also need to have to mandate to stop any Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory (unless the Russians have invaded Ukraine again) ... except we all know there won't be any such attacks.
Come on we all know he doesn’t have any constructive suggestions
He posted here to blame the US, not actually talk about what’s best for Ukraine.
Usually those peace-keeping forces will come from a nation or nations that both countries agree to. Attacking them would be the same as declaring war on the country they are from. If it comes to peace and they agree on peace-keeping forces I don't see them being attacked by either side (Russians).
Except the Russians could simply ignore them and attack only Ukrainian forces and cities. This is why a lightly-armed, small peace-keeping force won't be enough. And it needs to have a mandate to engage either side militarily, regardless of whether or not it has itself been attacked, if the peace is broken.
Pretty much this.
Yep.Come on we all know he doesn’t have any constructive suggestions
He posted here to blame the US, not actually talk about what’s best for Ukraine.
That reminds me of why Operation Deliberate Force worked. That radical change of approach forced Bosnian Serbs back to the negotiation table whereas the UN peacekeeping force alone was not enough to do such for 3 years.
Last edited:
I don't know mate. I don't see a huge peace-keeping army being deployed but who knows.
My guess is that if the Russians manage to control an area, any area they will declare victory to save face. The Ukranians might be so fecking tired of this war and the misery it brings that they are willing to make some kind of peace. If they do agree to peace I see the Ukranians demanding some kind of control in the annexed region, to prevent the shit we have already seen. I don't know any more than you but this is a scenario I see happening.
How stupid can you be to have voted for her?
I’m telling ya. Russia invaded Europe’s version of the “rural south”…
All that’s missing is a yeehaw
All that’s missing is a yeehaw
I think the whole peace-keeping thing as I've defined it is moot anyway. This is because I don't see Putin agreeing to a military force that includes, for example, British troops (Britain having been proposed by Zelenskyy as one of the peace-guarantor nations) that have a mandate to fight against Russian troops if needed.
IMO Putin will only agree to some toothless force with fuzzy mandate that would collapse in 5 minutes if push comes to shove. He won't want to see hard-nosed, well-trained and well-equipped soldiers - soldiers who will actually fight if it comes it - adding to Ukraine's security.
So unfortunately I see a long-drawn out conflict, with no peace deal unless and until either (a) the Russians are driven back to their pre-February 24th positions; or (b) Putin is removed from power and new leader voluntarily withdraws the Russian troops.
This is so badass.
Ever been to North Georgia?