Exactly, there was an opportunity and it was missed. I guess where we diverge is that I think Russia was clumsily backed into a corner. Nothing excuses what has happened since but the West is not innocent in this disaster.
The gen on tanks to be supplied to Ukraine
What is not so clear is that the US Abram tanks need months and months of training because they are technically different. Unless US combatants come with.
Indicates this war in Ukraine is digging in for a long run.
I would distinguish a country protecting its security from a country invading another. I think it’s as straightforward as that: defence vs. aggression.
3 Likes
True and to the point.
It sounds to me like unless there’s a grown-up in the kremlin who will actually meaningfully negotiate, recognise there have been unacceptable Russian incursions and withdraw, that escalation is the only possibility. Claims of provocation is the language of the bully in the playground, using excuses to hurt those they see as vulnerable and an opportunity to kill and steal. It is not credible to believe the idea that those in the Kremlin were trembling in fear of a ‘NATO’ invasion, although there’s no doubt both the west and the east try to take lumps out of each other when opportunity arises. It is almost certain that all of the major players on the world stage try to manipulate each other & the other nations, both friend and foe, overtly and covertly to their own ends - this is the ‘grown-up’ world of politics.
It seems to me there is a strong likelihood that the recent conservative governments and Brexit are both results of the Kremlins activities to break up a strong Europe. The pain and stress some of you have apparently suffered may have started with your ‘friend’ that you appear to support.
I cannot agree with those who undermine the idea of reversing the Russian program of expansion, and see them as working with with the Russians and against potential future peace. Every bit of sympathy and encouragement for Moscow, every bit of blaming western incompetence will mean more men and women will die uselessly - I think it’s as black and white as that.
Put the borders back and then we can have inquiries about incompetence and stupidity.
3 Likes
If only 
What programme of expansion? Where is the evidence of a long ( or even medium) term and sustained programme of expansion?
No, that’s a self inflicted wound. On the other hand, Russia has been interfering in Western elections. But can any sensible person assume the West (read US) hasn’t been trying, albeit less successfully, to do the same?
Edit: the Americans are interfering in their own elections, let alone abroad 
Exactly, whatever the so-called provocation, short of actual invasion of Russian territory, there was no justification for the outrageous invasion of Ukraine.
On the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine’s independence was recognised throughout the world as far as I know and even surely by Russia itself. Otherwise they would have blocked their membership of the United Nations.
Thankfully, the West and the Americans in particular, have learned the lessons of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan (and don’t forget the Russians were there before them) and there has been no repeat of those involvements. But collectively NATO, and others, have done the very least possible to support the oppressed Ukrainian people.
2 Likes
Invasion of Crimea, invasion of Ukraine, Salisbury, elections in the UK and elsewhere, …
Here’s a link to a House of Commons report: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2018-0159/
1 Like
At the moment it appears that any country with a western facing border has been worried about Russian expansion for some time.
Do you trust Putin?
Was that a typo Jane? Did you mean an eastern facing border, I think it is sometime since Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and Italy worried about France. 
But point taken. 
What evidence do you have for that David? I wish it was true but I’d bet my bottom dollar it’s not.
Porridge I don’t accept that for two reasons. Firstly I accept that Crimea was a military imperative because a major Russian naval base could have fallen into NATO hands and the ethnicity of the Donbas region is unclear. Secondly, Sailisbury was extraterritorial execution, just like our “friends” the Saudis and Israel practice (or indeed the US in the case of Bin Laden). The only difference is we admit Putin is a dangerous madman, not so much Mohammed bin Salman or whoever runs Mossad. The hypocrisy is astounding.
We better not let Sweden and Finland in to NATO as they are close to the massive Russian naval base at Kaliningrad the home of the baltic fleet and Russia might feel threatened and invade them, O wait it has Poland and Lithuania next door to it on either side and I don’t see them bothering about NATO there.
2 Likes
Close but no cigar 
Big difference between a base being close to or actually in a NATO country n’est-ce pas? Anyway, I think Turkey will be the stumbling block for Sweden.
Some folk are obviously content to swallow western propaganda and not take a more nuanced and balanced view of the disaster we’re in and I’m obviously casting my pearls upon the swine 
I’ve no doubt that when the history of this is written that the West’s failure to address Russia’s real or perceive security concerns will be seen an a contributory cause. But nobody’s going to read that so it’ll be Groundhog Day when US foreign policy gets us in the do do again.
This popped into my mailbox. Worth a read
The only threat being part of NATO represents is that the previously Russian held states can’t be easily re-occupied now. It’s not a problem if you don’t plan to invade.
Stepping back, I think Russia, Putin and his advisors are playing a long and careful game that’s been planned and is dynamically updated as time goes on. The re-acquisition of Crimea was a key part, as was the agitation and subsequent gaining of control in Donbas region.
Russia has been at work destabilising American politics, and particularly undermining belief in democracy there. I would be reasonably confident that Trump was ‘his man’ there, supported with Russian funding through his businesses, buoyed up through Russian manipulation of social media. The withdrawal of America from the world stage was intended to leave a power vacuum that could be exploited. This was also intended to work with the breakup or severe weakening of the European union. Yes, brexit was self-inflicted, but have you noticed how much money and involvement the Russians have had with the Tory party, and how much Russian money has flowed through London in various ways over the last couple of decades? Money brings control, or at least an ability to guide and direct through persuasion and suggestion. Fortunately for us the EU hasn’t yet fallen apart.
Lukashenko is at present an effective Russian puppet, but if the people of Belarus are able to effectively reject him and the idea of his Russian masters then they will find themselves directly controlled from Russia.
My expectation is that if Russia can obtain a successful outcome in Ukraine in the way you have been suggesting then Transnistria will become a focal point for Russia to suggest its Russian speaking peoples are being oppressed and will seek to establish a direct land connection back to the mother country. I would then expect to find some Serbians calling for closer ties with Russia and help against the Islamic Bosnian forces.
It’s not hard to see a plan. Too many things seem to have happened for it to be coincidence. At the moment the wheels have come off quite badly, but if enough people start saying the same things that you have then Putins plan could well continue to succeed and Russia will continue expansion. If Ukraine can recover their territory and Russia is fully defeated AND we can prevent a nuclear war then Putin will likely be ejected and another strong man will take over.
3 Likes
I remember a long time ago, early in my career and before I joined a major IT industry player, I used to avidly read IT industry newsletters. The two leading ones, if I remember well, were the Garner Group and the Yankee Group. Subscriptions to these organisations were expensive but I’d manage to get my employers to sign off on them so that I could be better informed and provide better advice up the line. Both organisations’ analysts provided hard to find insight into the strategies of the major IT companies and I hoovered it all up.
It was only when I did join one of the big players I discovered they had barely any strategy at all Each division was doing its own thing and there was little coordination. Yet, I’d been wasting my time reading the expensive Gartner and Yankee group bullshit explaining the intricacies of the deep and broad overarching non-existant strategies of the firm I’d just joined. Ever since I’ve had little confidence or belief of the “long and careful game”. There are IMO too many variables, speed bumps and upsets for any long term plan to really work. Just look at what’s hit the poor old UK since the Brexit vote. Little of it predictable.
Russia may well have a screw the West agenda, damage democracy in the US and try and cause the EU to split, but I doubt there’s a master plan, just an overall direction. But when was that direction adopted and what was the catalyst for its adoption? After the West’s relief and euphoria on the collapse of the Soviet Union when did it all start to go wrong?
Now, I would suggest that it is (well, was now I suppose) in the West’s interest to counter that by building bridges, having many areas of cooperation and mutual dependency etc. etc, so that Russia was inside the tent, so to speak, rather than the lonely little petunia in the NATO onion patch. I just think we have screwed up since '89.
Sorry for rambling
2 Likes
Building bridges is great, and Putin was given a massive amount of indulgence for a lot of his terrible behaviour. But at this stage - because of that behaviour - it’s too late for him. He has chosen his path, and it’s one of violence, repression and tyranny. He seems to be motivated (at least from domw reports) by a weird religious fervour, and reliigon and power are never good together.
I too have had the ‘pleasure’ of working for similar large businesses and still do so today, though this one is distinctly more coordinated than many I’ve known.
You could be completely correct, and it’s all just reactive opportunism, but it would be in keeping characteristically for a socialist dictatorship to have a long term plan - one of the advantages of not needing to be concerned about the outcome of elections is that the originator can see their plan through.
So if we look at China, they very clearly have a plan, demonstrated through their belt and road program, the occupation of the south China sea, their announcements that they plan to re-take Taiwan so that a political ‘acceptance’ can be generated in the west. Why would Putin not do this too - Russian planning has been lousy at times, but it’s a part of their culture.
1 Like
Nope, I have said all along the West should have done a lot more to reign in Putin decisively when they had the chance and letting him get away with his conquest’s was only going to go one way, but your pearls of wisdom that it’s mostly NATO and the Europe/US fault he invaded are lost on this swine, but thanks for casting them anyway
If even the smallest part of this report is true, it is heartbreaking
Not even one child should suffer this fate
2 Likes