Ukraine - Nato - US crisis

by mikeflood 55 Replies latest social current

  • waton

    not to worry about a wt's armageddon, babylon tG has to be attacked finished first, billions of Muslims "christians" , Buddhists, Hindus. The anointed raptured, ruptured.

  • smiddy3

    The USA wasn`t going to tolerate a potential armed threat from a foreign power on their doorstep ,the Cuban missile crises.

    And Russia doesn`t want the same thing happening on their doorstep.

    Isn`t it all happening because Ukraine was about to join NATO ?

    Or is that just too simplistic a reason.

  • Diogenesister

    Should I move to New Zealand?


    Chipping Norton.

  • TonusOH

    Ukraine joining NATO would have left Russia pretty vulnerable because of the terrain. I think Putin has wanted to annex it completely for a long time in order to avoid being in a very weak military position. If anything shows how vital that region is, it's the extent to which NATO has helped Ukraine, once they realized that the Russian army was in rough shape and could be substantially weakened, if not outright defeated.

    As for how long it goes, I think it will last a couple of years. Putin cannot lose this war or it is the end of him. Zelensky is in a similar spot, since he has made it clear that he will not negotiate any terms that do not include Russia returning any land they are holding. NATO would be in a pretty nasty spot if Russia takes enough territory or wins outright. I don't see a negotiated settlement until there is no more will to fight, which will likely only happen once one or both armies are ground into dust.

  • Rivergang

    Hi Smiddy,

    I don't think that the current situation in the Ukraine can be compared to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 60 years ago.

    The issue then was not about a communist country on America's doorstep; rather it was about the installation of Soviet intermediate range nuclear missiles on that island. By contrast, an agreement was reached in the late 1980s (negotiated between Mikhail Gorbachev and George Bush) to completely withdraw all intermediate-range nuclear missiles from Europe. Furthermore, that was accomplished by the early 1990s.

    Even if the Ukraine were to join NATO, it would not mean the installation of nuclear missiles in that country.

    (Anyway, NATO already has three members - Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia - who share common borders with Russia. Are nuclear missiles installed in those countries?).

    As a casus belli, I think this one is something of a red herring.

  • TD

    Or is that just too simplistic a reason.

    People seem to prefer YouTube videos over boring, old print, so here is a rather depressing summary by a U.S. geopolitical analyst:

Share this