Russia v Ukraine - How This Is Going To End

[vlad]

Why don't you just answer the question Haw-Haw if you say the beeb is shite why do you post links from it? I can't be anymore clearer.

[Fanta]

18 minutes ago, vlad said:

Why don't you just answer the question Haw-Haw if you say the beeb is shite why do you post links from it? I can't be anymore clearer.

Sigh… answered already. Because you and crew never question the BBC. 

[Fester]

7 hours ago, snapdragon said:

IMO, Ukraine has lost the conflict.

All the nonsense promoted by the MSM about Russia losing is now being shown to be just that; nonsense.

Have a job to find the conflict on the BBC web site*. It was top of the pops for a couple of months but it's now difficult to find anything. Monkey-pox has taken over as the main item. But partying at number 10 is prominent too.

I think it will all be settled soon. Russia will control all the sea-shore. They have no ambition, or indeed reason, to move on Kiev, although the threat of that will stay in the west's minds.

Let's hope the US and the UK have learn a lesson. Don't provoke a nuclear power. Or as some might say; don't bite off more than you can chew.

* UK section

Well, you're the nonsense expert - keep it up.  

[Fester]

7 hours ago, Fanta said:

Hungary and Italy are calling for a ceasefire and peace talks. The US Defense Secretary called for a ceasefire 2 weeks ago. The Donbas region is Ukraine’s strongest defensive area and if that falls then Zelenskyy will have to make the decision to either actively engage in peace talks or keep losing ground, men and equipment every day.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-cracks-widen-over-ukraine-italy-hungary-urge-truce-2022-05-25/ 

In the meantime, the best the BBC can do to promote the fake news that Ukraine is winning is to recycle a 2-3 week old Sky News article about 137 dead Russian soldiers on a refrigerated train. 
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61571855

Still keeping up-to-date with the out of date stuff?

[Rookiescot]

6 hours ago, Fanta said:

It was an unconditional surrender at Mariupol.  Any other term is a euphemism at best, deception at worst. Zelenskky’s appeal to “influential people” and  negotiations yielded absolutely nothing except a Red Cross head count.

Except you always claimed Zelensky was stopping them from surrendering. You also used to claim the civilians with them were being held there against their will. Until they walked out.

When it comes to the illegal war in the Ukraine I think we can safely dismiss your opinion. 

[Rookiescot]

3 hours ago, Fanta said:

Sigh… answered already. Because you and crew never question the BBC. 

You quote the BBC when they post something you agree with. If its something that does not fit your agenda then you dismiss it.

[Marble-eye]

5 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Except you always claimed Zelensky was stopping them from surrendering. You also used to claim the civilians with them were being held there against their will. Until they walked out.

When it comes to the illegal war in the Ukraine I think we can safely dismiss your opinion. 

He also claimed in the early days that the war would be over in less than a month, I have him down more as a Mystic Meg than a Mother Shipton.

[Fanta]

Will the war even last for the next 9 months or peace beforehand?  

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/26/nato-general-putin-has-8-9-months-to-win-the-war

 

[Chatogaster]

9 hours ago, oldschooler said:

It’s a pretty clear Good vs. Evil struggle isn’t it ? Democracy vs. Gangsterism “ ideology” is not a difficult choice for any rational mind with a working moral compass.

 

Why state/question something obvious? For me, it's indeed a very clear and not difficult choice, and that's why I support the West/NATO in this match - as I already said.

However, I'm not interested in what I think is right (I already know that), but in what will be right in retrospect (e.g. in what in - let's say - 500 years from now almost all - and hopefully wiser - people will agree upon). 

There have been all too many cases in history where the Good tried to wipe out the Evil (take witch trials as a random example), so it's only prudent to constantly question/re-evaluate one's own motives. So far, my self-questioning hasn't caused a change of opinion (and I don't expect it will), but that doesn't mean I'll be complacent.

(perhaps I should have posted my contribution in Thaiger's philosophical channel as this thread - as relevant as it is - is more near-sighted).
 

 

[Smithydog]

 

Members,

Inferences made in old posts can add up and make it seem like a member has actually said a statement, when in fact they have not actually said the words. The more contentious, emotionally charged and length of the debate, the more likely this becomes.

All of us have the right to change our opinions and positions on subjects based on new information. This isn't a campaign debate where people try and catch others out in "gotcha" moments! 

Please respect the right of all to express an opinion providing posting it meets the Forum Guidelines.

Thanks

Moderator

 

[Rookiescot]

2 hours ago, Fanta said:

Will the war even last for the next 9 months or peace beforehand?  

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/26/nato-general-putin-has-8-9-months-to-win-the-war

Nonsense. You need about a 2 or 3 weeks, maximum, to learn to operate a new piece of kit like artillery.

You will not be an expert on it but you will be able to use it and maintain it. 

[oldschooler]

3 hours ago, Chatogaster said:

Why state/question something obvious? For me, it's indeed a very clear and not difficult choice, and that's why I support the West/NATO in this match - as I already said.

However, I'm not interested in what I think is right (I already know that), but in what will be right in retrospect (e.g. in what in - let's say - 500 years from now almost all - and hopefully wiser - people will agree upon). 

There have been all too many cases in history where the Good tried to wipe out the Evil (take witch trials as a random example), so it's only prudent to constantly question/re-evaluate one's own motives. So far, my self-questioning hasn't caused a change of opinion (and I don't expect it will), but that doesn't mean I'll be complacent.

(perhaps I should have posted my contribution in Thaiger's philosophical channel as this thread - as relevant as it is - is more near-sighted).
 

You said it was “impossible …. to make an objective decision” ( as to which side is right) when the reverse is clearly true here and yes you end up getting it right despite it seeming oddly somewhat difficult for you.

Witches not a good example as that was Evil masquerading as Good (Church) punishing Church-Fabricated Evil (Witches) to promote their wicked trade of religion. 

It’s one thing to importantly understand the viewpoint & motivation of Evil (Putin / Hitler/ Mao) and quite another to either accept it or give it equal weight to the reasoning & motivations for Good.

[Fanta]

 

I don’t think you call this blackmail. Extortion seems to be the correct word for this. Maybe, in the long run, the confiscation of assets will be deemed illegal because the justification for these confiscations is based on the actions of a third party which is clearly beyond the oligarchs control. Perhaps this idea acknowledges that fact. Just to be clear I don’t care what they do to any oligarch, just calling a spade a spade.

West considering offering buyout from sanctions to Russian oligarchs

Allied Western nations are considering whether to allow Russian oligarchs to buy their way out of sanctions and use the money to rebuild Ukraine, The Associated Press has reported, citing unidentified officials familiar with the matter.

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/sports-news/2022/05/west-mulls-having-russian-oligarchs-buy-way-out-of-sanctions/?readmore=1 

 

[oldschooler]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

I don’t think you call this blackmail. Extortion seems to be the correct word for this. Maybe, in the long run, the confiscation of assets will be deemed illegal because the justification for these confiscations is based on the actions of a third party which is clearly beyond the oligarchs control. Perhaps this idea acknowledges that fact. Just to be clear I don’t care what they do to any oligarch, just calling a spade a spade.

West considering offering buyout from sanctions to Russian oligarchs

Allied Western nations are considering whether to allow Russian oligarchs to buy their way out of sanctions and use the money to rebuild Ukraine, The Associated Press has reported, citing unidentified officials familiar with the matter.

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/sports-news/2022/05/west-mulls-having-russian-oligarchs-buy-way-out-of-sanctions/?readmore=1 

No Moral or Crime Question Here.

Oligarch Wealth ALL Stolen. Illegal in fact & certainly by Western Standards.

Oligarchs an integral part of Russian Gangster Kleptocracy Regime. No Separation from Putin. 

These payments would hopefully be additional to ALL their non- recoverable assets already seized outside Russia.

First Target should be Putins $200 Billion. 

[Fanta]

6 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

No Moral or Crime Question Here.

Moral - no question. 
Criminal - many questions. An allegation of crime needs to be proven before punishment is handed out. Asset seizures can be preemptive however the justification for seizing these assets has primarily been the oligarch’s alleged support for the Putin regime. It is not a crime to support one’s own government nor is it a crime to make money from politics connections however dodgy the government is or the deals may be. Enforcing these confiscations in an international court will be quite tricky. The exiled oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky had $100 million returned to him by a Dublin court in 2016. He is far and away from the nice guy oppressed oligarch he was portrayed to be by the Western media. 

[oldschooler]

6 hours ago, Fanta said:

Moral - no question. 
Criminal - many questions. An allegation of crime needs to be proven before punishment is handed out. Asset seizures can be preemptive however the justification for seizing these assets has primarily been the oligarch’s alleged support for the Putin regime. It is not a crime to support one’s own government nor is it a crime to make money from politics connections however dodgy the government is or the deals may be. Enforcing these confiscations in an international court will be quite tricky. The exiled oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky had $100 million returned to him by a Dublin court in 2016. He is far and away from the nice guy oppressed oligarch he was portrayed to be by the Western media. 

Single Thievery Technique by which assorted rubber duck type market traders went from high rise poverty to billionaire oligarch by stealing state assets for a song, is well - documented.

Involves forced “loans” converted to majority preference shares. So $1 million borrowed and “loaned” gets the Putin - chosen nominated oligarch a $1 Billion state Mineral business. Clear Theft easily proven in all cases. 

[Fanta]

5 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

Clear Theft easily proven in all cases. 

In a kangaroo court perhaps but in the real world it can take years of back and forth court cases to achieve an outcome. Proving the alleged financial crimes and enforcing the punishments is the problem, same as war crimes. America & crew might be the self appointed world’s policemen but their jurisdiction stops at certain borders. Confiscating the assets of oligarchs might be good for global brownie points but keeping them is a very different story. Hence the suggestion that oligarchs can buy their way out of it. Settlements without admitting guilt are common in court cases simply because it resolves a matter that would otherwise drag on for years which is in no-one’s best interests. This is all politics anyway as any financial settlement paid by the oligarchs would be a drop in the buckets of money needed for Ukraine. 

[oldschooler]

2 minutes ago, Fanta said:

In a kangaroo court perhaps but in the real world it can take years of back and forth court cases to achieve an outcome. Proving the alleged financial crimes and enforcing the punishments is the problem, same as war crimes. America & crew might be the self appointed world’s policemen but their jurisdiction stops at certain borders. Confiscating the assets of oligarchs might be good for global brownie points but keeping them is a very different story. Hence the suggestion that oligarchs can buy their way out of it. Settlements without admitting guilt are common in court cases simply because it resolves a matter that would otherwise drag on for years which is in no-one’s best interests. This is all politics anyway as any financial settlement paid by the oligarchs would be a drop in the buckets of money needed for Ukraine. 

No real obstacle here. Once the clear wealth source illegality is shown ; demand & confiscate the lot. Or just detach all Russia from SWIFT & Dollar Banking. $1Trillion available from this bucket starting with all of Putins $200 billion. 

[Fanta]

17 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

No real obstacle here. Once the clear wealth source illegality is shown ; demand & confiscate the lot. Or just detach all Russia from SWIFT & Dollar Banking. $1Trillion available from this bucket starting with all of Putins $200 billion. 

Good luck with getting some like minded world leaders to even agree to try that. They can’t stop huffing the gas and gorging on their Wheaty-Bix long enough to grow a big enough pair to step out of their comfort zone to even try to slay the supposed dragon. Despite Western media portrayals to the contrary Russia is not alone.
Donbas is nearly done and we will see. It looks like Russia will annex nearly all the south and east of Ukraine. Hopefully it stops there. 

[EdwardV]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

Donbas is nearly done and we will see. It looks like Russia will annex nearly all the south and east of Ukraine. Hopefully it stops there.

Hope yes but that’s about it. Little reason to believe Putin will or even can stop at just Donbas. Doesn’t he still need to take the Luhansk region too? Or does he already have that? Regardless I don’t see him stopping. It’s too little for so much cost. Never mind I don’t think Ukraine can agree to a peace deal at this point. Keeping in mind many countries like Germany, US, UK and the entire eastern portion of NATO agree with Ukraine. At this point it would be rewarding Putin for invading Ukraine. 

[Fanta]

27 minutes ago, EdwardV said:

Hope yes but that’s about it. Little reason to believe Putin will or even can stop at just Donbas. Doesn’t he still need to take the Luhansk region too? Or does he already have that? Regardless I don’t see him stopping. It’s too little for so much cost. Never mind I don’t think Ukraine can agree to a peace deal at this point. Keeping in mind many countries like Germany, US, UK and the entire eastern portion of NATO agree with Ukraine. At this point it would be rewarding Putin for invading Ukraine. 

A week ago the Luhansk mayor was the region was 90% under Russian control and with Liyum falling today it’s 95%. The UAF will need to pull back from the Severodonetsk area or they will likely be encircled - Mariupol the sequel.
https://liveuamap.com/

Peace with the inevitable loss of territory will be a bitter pill for Zelenskyy to swallow and a hard sell to the world. imo, peace is a smart thing to do - time to train & rebuild forces, get better weapons, have a breather then go back out and kick some butt. A ceasefire might be enough to slow the Russians but I doubt it would be long enough to help Ukraine reverse the Russian progress to date.

[Rookiescot]

2 hours ago, Fanta said:

In a kangaroo court perhaps but in the real world it can take years of back and forth court cases to achieve an outcome. Proving the alleged financial crimes and enforcing the punishments is the problem, same as war crimes. America & crew might be the self appointed world’s policemen but their jurisdiction stops at certain borders. Confiscating the assets of oligarchs might be good for global brownie points but keeping them is a very different story. Hence the suggestion that oligarchs can buy their way out of it. Settlements without admitting guilt are common in court cases simply because it resolves a matter that would otherwise drag on for years which is in no-one’s best interests. This is all politics anyway as any financial settlement paid by the oligarchs would be a drop in the buckets of money needed for Ukraine. 

Excellent. So following this logic all we need to do is go to a court and demand Russia leaves the Ukraines sovereign territory?

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

Donbas is nearly done and we will see. It looks like Russia will annex nearly all the south and east of Ukraine. Hopefully it stops there.

Russia might want to stop there but the Ukrainians will not.

You keep trying to insinuate there is only one party that matters in all of this. Russia's wants and desires are all that matters. Czar Putin has got himself embroiled in a war which he thought would be over with in a matter of hours. The death toll for Russian forces now far exceeds the loses in the whole 9 years of its war in Afghanistan. 

Russia cannot sustain this. 

[EdwardV]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

peace is a smart thing to do - time to train & rebuild forces, get better weapons, have a breather then go back out and kick some butt.

A breather helps Russia more than Ukraine, hence why Zelenskyy has ruled it out. He’s probably right too. Ukraine still hasn’t deployed much of their mobilization forces as they are still training. While Russia has been forced to deploy T-62 tanks and raise their age limit for volunteers. Ukraine isn’t in a position of strength, but they will at least have a chance when more western artillery arrives. Give it a month and see before third party nations try and convince them to basically surrender. A hard sell to say the least. 

[oldschooler]

12 hours ago, EdwardV said:

A breather helps Russia more than Ukraine, hence why Zelenskyy has ruled it out. He’s probably right too. Ukraine still hasn’t deployed much of their mobilization forces as they are still training. While Russia has been forced to deploy T-62 tanks and raise their age limit for volunteers. Ukraine isn’t in a position of strength, but they will at least have a chance when more western artillery arrives. Give it a month and see before third party nations try and convince them to basically surrender. A hard sell to say the least. 

Reviewing just now all the extensive credible BBC Online Ukraine Reports, my conclusions are  :-

Russia will inevitably take all Donbass.

Ukraine Army will have to withdraw after inflicting maximum urban losses on Russian army to avoid being surrounded & trapped in their present pocket… avoiding another Mariupol.

Heavy Artillery promised by West will not arrive in time to save Donbass. 

Putin will annexe Donbass into Russia ensuring his “ victory” & political survival. 

War then drags on indefinitely as Western aid & sanctions continue and new trained troops & heavy western guns enter the conflict.

Russia & Ukraine Generationally Broken Militarily, Socially & Economically. Ukraine shattered Physically. Reparations from Russia ?