• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Putin & Russia

braineclipse said:
Using the same words about both sides setting up a false equivalency or at least getting closer to one is part of the narrative Putin wants and spreads.

One should be careful when one's opinions seems to match Putin's narrative, even if it's just in words and not an underlying agreement.

As with most wars it's also an information war, war of public opinion.

Been some back and forth on Brexit and the impact or lack of one on this invasion. I don't think it's a real factor. But people in the west using words like empire and conquering about the EU is to me a direct example of the kind of division Putin wants to amplify.

He benefits from a weakening of the EU. That's a geopolitical goal he has. For reasons that should be obvious. That's not in itself a reason to be pro the EU. But it is a reason to be careful and accurate in one's words and descriptions.
Click to expand...
Putin has managed to turn the EU from a body that uses soft power into one that uses hard power for the first time. He has in effect birthed a new global power on his own doorstep. Even at this point, I don't think it is premature to say that every strategic goal he has pursued may be reversed as a result of this invasion. He has managed to strengthen NATO and maybe increase its membership, unite all liberal world democracies in a common cause, invigorate the EU, and potentially trigger the demise of his own presidency.
 
braineclipse said:
To rebuild it from the ground up? Or to do without such an organisation?

The UN is impotent in many ways. I'd much rather have an organisation like that than not. I think the world would be worse off without it.

Getting a functional UN with the power to successfully intervene directly in a situation like this is to me a wish for what cannot be.

Fixing the underlying issues behind what we're currently seeing is one of humanity's greatest challenges. One that will take multiple lifetimes, if it's even at all possible. An organisation like the UN is part of that solution.

We're seeing an almost unified "western" response. Historically speaking unheard of. We're seeing historical long term enemies as rock solid allies. We're seeing coordination and cooperation at a level once only possible through empire. Organisations like the UN and the EU have helped make that possible to the point where it may look inevitable. It never was inevitable.
Click to expand...
Rebuilding it properly would have been my choice.

A UN where any country without a democracy holds a veto is preposterous.
 
Rorschach said:
It is a historic shift. I don't think some people are appreciating how big a deal it really is. Having one of the biggest armies in Europe is obviously very a complicated topic considering their history, but now their military budget will actually leapfrog Russia's.
Click to expand...
Whether or not Gazbank is included in the financial restrictions will tell us how far they've really moved.
 
braineclipse said:
The EU isn't a military organisation.

Last I heard the contribution from individual EU countries hasn't been broomsticks at all. I doubt the Russian soldiers on the ground will experience is as such.

Would the sanctions and overall response have been better, quicker, more effective without the EU and the financial cooperation it brings?

Having the EU is a real benefit right now, as it usually is imo. Not enough of a benefit to stop Putin so far at least, but that's setting a very high bar. One a Europe without EU would also fail to clear.

Talks of accelerating Ukrainian membership into the EU. Good.
Click to expand...
In response to this particular point, yes.

The EU is only as fast as its slowest link. Germany's reluctance to act slowed down the EU response when individual countries were going faster and further.
 
scaramanga said:
In response to this particular point, yes.

The EU is only as fast as its slowest link. Germany's reluctance to act slowed down the EU response when individual countries were going faster and further.
Click to expand...
Initially for sure but now the pace is relentless. Parallels with the vaccine rollout in some ways. The EU acting as a bloc has other advantages. For example, it gives political cover to smaller countries that would not poke the bear if left to their own devices.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
Rebuilding it properly would have been my choice.

A UN where any country without a democracy holds a veto is preposterous.
Click to expand...

Preposterous, but also the only way to have a global cooperative organisation like that in the world we live in. Harsh to judge the UN on what they cannot currently be.

Since perfect isn't at all possible I would rather have an organisation like the UN that works with what we have. The alternative would be a SM - some nations. We have that in other forms.

I get that you bleeding heart liberal types would want an organisation where everyone could just get along and play by the rules
 
braineclipse said:
To rebuild it from the ground up? Or to do without such an organisation?

The UN is impotent in many ways. I'd much rather have an organisation like that than not. I think the world would be worse off without it.

Getting a functional UN with the power to successfully intervene directly in a situation like this is to me a wish for what cannot be.

Fixing the underlying issues behind what we're currently seeing is one of humanity's greatest challenges. One that will take multiple lifetimes, if it's even at all possible. An organisation like the UN is part of that solution.

We're seeing an almost unified "western" response. Historically speaking unheard of. We're seeing historical long term enemies as rock solid allies. We're seeing coordination and cooperation at a level once only possible through empire. Organisations like the UN and the EU have helped make that possible to the point where it may look inevitable. It never was inevitable.
Click to expand...

the first thing that should happen is the removing of the veto from the five permanent members.
 
Lilbaz said:
Ok so fifa have said russia can still qualify. But their opponents refuse to play them. So that will mean they forfeit? Russia would qualify.

All international teams need to refuse to play in fifa competitions.
Click to expand...

The fa has now come out and said england won't play russia.

Seriously what are fifa thinking? Oh they can play at a neutral venue. What neutral venue? What country is going to say, ok you can play at our ground?
 
richie_spur said:
Belarus appears to have so far escaped any rebuke and/or sanctions which, given their role in enabling the invasion of Ukraine, seems a bit strange.

It would send a message that being on 'the wrong side' is not a great idea...
Click to expand...
I think the EU are imposing the same or similar sanction on Belarus now, according to reports yesterday. If not they should.

edit: Belarus will now host Russian nukes after a not rigged at all constitutional referendum there yesterday. They are all in now.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
This just outlines why Russia won't split up. It does nothing to dispel the notion that it would be better decentralised. If Russia could act as a unifier of distinct localised areas, providing an economic framework for ex-soviet sates and regional Russian states to trade and collaborate, it may have prospered. Initially, I think there was a Commonwealth of Independent States for this, but you need to give these new nations time, and with the West welcoming states into the WTO, NATO etc any organic evolution of such a Russian led collaboration was lost.
Click to expand...

Russia's a perfectly viable nation state. It just needs a bit of experience with democracy and a civil society. Other than a few years under Yeltsin, they've never really had that.

The Stans are basket cases and the Caucuses are problematic (mostly due to Russia meddling), but the European end of the Soviet Bloc have done pretty well with 30 years of embracing liberal democracy.
 
Rorschach said:
Initially for sure but now the pace is relentless. Parallels with the vaccine rollout in some ways. The EU acting as a bloc has other advantages. For example, it gives political cover to smaller countries that would not poke the bear if left to their own devices.
Click to expand...
As does NATO without the need for assimilation.
 
scaramanga said:
As does NATO without the need for assimilation.
Click to expand...
Different MO's really. NATO can only glare angrily at the bear. Anything more would trigger some very bad stuff. The EU can wield the power of the biggest market on the planet and hit them in the wallet, as the Russian economy can testify to this morning. Single nations acting alone would not achieve anything close to the same results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back