I think that any civil war will be as a result of the power vacuum rather than NATO's influence directly. There's a lot at stake for the various factions jockying for position. Including their lives.
The end?
- Thread starter borolad259
- Start date
I think that any civil war will be as a result of the power vacuum rather than NATO's influence directly. There's a lot at stake for the various factions jockying for position. Including their lives.
Muttley
Well-known member
I listened to a very interesting podcast about the history of Ukraine and its historical relationship with Russia. (History Extra - "Historical Echoes of the Ukraine War")
Russia/Putin's greatest mistake was to believe that the Ukraine that they snatched Crimea from in 2014 was the same Ukraine that they would invade in 2022. It was not. Ukraine had made a conscious decision to move away from Russian influence towards the rest of Europe and the elections of first Poroshenko and subsequently Zelenskyy should have told the Russians that the mood of the Ukrainians had changed. The annexation of Crimea and the low level insurgency war in the east of the country funded and instigated by Putin had hardened their attitude towards Russia.
Putin believed that there would be little resistance as his tanks rolled in and his "Special Military Operation" would be largely welcomed. What happened was a complete surprise. We won't know for a few years how this came to happen. Was it a result of his personal delusions or bad advice? I guess we'll find out later. As for the response of the West and NATO, it wouldn't have entered his calculations as he believed that by the time we could do anything Ukraine would be in his hands and puppet government installed ala Belarus.
At this point the best we can hope for is that either someone in Russia sees sense and tells their troops to stand down or that the Russian Army collapses and legs it. As the guy in the podcast points out, what we are seeing here is one of the wars of the "Fall of the Russian Empire" the collapse was delayed by the creation of the USSR but it is inevitable now. As we realised post WW2, once the myth of power is gone you are better to just give up gracefully. We fought some grubby nasty little wars as the sun finally set on empire before we realised (probably with the failure of Suez). The Russians seemed doomed to do the same.
Quicksilvera
Well-known member
Thanks for posting I will be checking Spotify for that one.
BoroMart
Well-known member
Good points.
I think it's also worth re-iterating that hardening of views to Russia has now solidified. Ukrainians for the next 5 generations at least will detest Russia and want zero alignment with them. Every Ukrainian has been impacted through family loss, injuries, loss of earnings, loss of home, or 'just' the emotional stress of what has been done to their country.
There is no way back for Russia from this. That means that even if somehow Russia 'won' this war, and took all or huge chunks of Ukraine, it would be absolutely ungovernable for a puppet regime and would see daily insurgency. Belfast in the 70s and 80s would be a walk in the park compared to a ukraine governed by a russian puppet.
If Russia does disintegrate it will be a natural resource bonanza for the West.
Being brutally honest here, we need it. One of the reasons it's become a must win war for both sides (let's call it West vs Russia).
If all goes well it will be the most successful piece of strategy by the let's say clandestine arm of the states in at least a decade.
The Russian regime is obviously at fault for the invasion but to ignore the complexities of the geopolitics of the situation is to be blindly ignorant.
For me NATO invading/securing territory would be a terrible sign of things to come so let's hope things go well and well quickly to hopefully stop that from becoming the primary option.
Being brutally honest here, we need it. One of the reasons it's become a must win war for both sides (let's call it West vs Russia).
If all goes well it will be the most successful piece of strategy by the let's say clandestine arm of the states in at least a decade.
The Russian regime is obviously at fault for the invasion but to ignore the complexities of the geopolitics of the situation is to be blindly ignorant.
For me NATO invading/securing territory would be a terrible sign of things to come so let's hope things go well and well quickly to hopefully stop that from becoming the primary option.
It will be a natural resource bonanza for China.
Last edited:
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
Looking at your 4th paragraph, I’m interested to know what you believe the response of the West ought to have been. Also, did you discern any oblique encouragement from the West for Russia to start this war? Genuine questions (i.e. I’m not tacitly criticising your perspective).
Druss_The_Legend
Well-known member
I think it is more that over the past 20 years he has surrounded himself with yes men and told on a daily basis that any idea he has or anything he wants is the right decision. Anybody who hasn't agreed with him has accidentally fell from windows, been put in prison, exiled or consumed something toxic combined with his natural paranoia he doesn't trust many people if any hence the long tables and self isolation, alongside his ageing and reported health issues this has led to a situation where he wants to leave a legacy and bring back the former glories of Russia, but had nobody to tell him it was a bad idea, I think he believed that the Russian army was the strongest in the world and didn't know the level of corruption going on under him, If he is still in charge I think he will be only told good news and how well things are going.
To sum it up I think he has lost touch with reality in a sense and has an almost 'God like, look how wonderful and powerful I am' attitude.
There has been numerous examples of this throughout history where people have got just too powerful and although they probably set out with good intentions and to be a fair leader, the prolonged lack of exposure to any type of criticism turns them into a tyrant. A few examples just off the top of my head are Caligula, Henry VIII and Napoleon(obviously many more) and alongside the historical records of these things the same basic principles apply to a large portion of fiction series in the fantasy genre.
No idea what the response should have been, the one area I would for sure have diverged would have been the peace treaty that was on the table ready to be signed by both parties back in April 2022 (was it?) last year until specifically Boris and the States said 'thats not happening', this is well documented and reported on. It would have saved many lives, buildings, infrastructure.
In terms of your 2nd point there's plenty of history to look up and plenty of perspectives given all the way back to 92 but I don't want to derail the thread suffice to say the states are far from a white knight here, as always war is a racket.
I will reiterate Russia invading is a war of aggression and should be treated as such.
Scrote
Well-known member
That's a very one-sided view of what happened though. The neutral view is that Ukraine/Russia agreed terms and then (a) Ukraine got evidence of the war crimes in Bucah* and (b) Russia reneged on the agreed terms on territory and wanted a further expansion of borders.
The interventions from the West were more to give assurance to Ukraine that they wouldn't be left to fend for themselves. Russia using that as an excuse to blame someone else for the talks breaking down is just standard operating procedure.
*in or around that area - not sure of exact dates
If you’re talking about Minsk agreement then it was largely a Russian sham and they would still likely have invaded at some point anyway if they felt their political sway was wavering.
No one thinks the US or the west is whiter than white, but Russia is currently on a destructive path that would have made war somewhere inevitable, there’s a reason countries look to the EU and NATO for protection and don’t want to form alliances with their former (and current) oppressor.
No not the Minsk agreement (that's 2014). I don't want to derail the thread someone asked me a couple of questions and I responded, let's leave it at that.
Scrote
Well-known member
I'm assuming he means the peace talks in February 2022 after the invasion had begun.
Russia were talking about a DMZ in regards to NATO with Ukraine basically having to accept that they would be a sovereign country in name only.
Amongst other things the intervention from the West was what Ukraine was looking for whilst Russia was just stalling hoping to complete their SMO objectives.
Had Russia been competent then we'd be in a very different place. But they weren't so it's not really worth pondering unless you accept the Russian narrative that the war is a defensive operation against NATO. Which is ridiculous for any number of reasons.
No worries
Rofesleg
Well-known member
Makes me think of Zelenskyy pointing out to Putin a couple of scruffy blokes asleep on a bench:
"See those drunken slobs over there? Asleep on the bench all covered in mud & sh1t? That's your army that is. They are your elite troops. You think they are the best in the world you do.
And see that kiddie's toy truck? With the missing wheel and broken roof? That's your favourite tank that is"
Last edited:
Muttley
Well-known member
That is well worth reading. Perhaps, you only need read his final point
If Ukraine was, for example, to surrender The Donbas, it would merely be a pause before Russia came back for more. Or perhaps a land corridor to Kaliningrad through Poland, just that bit...
As was detailed in the podcast I quoted, 2023 Ukraine is not 1991Ukraine nor even 2014 Ukraine and most of the change has been because of the behaviour of the Russian "government". The empire if falling apart, they need to realise that they are (like the UK) a second or third rate power. They have a very important role to play in the world but they no longer have the ability to frighten and bully. They are busted.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
I‘m struggling to believe how the Russian elite could think any civilian population would welcome an aggressive invading army from a neighbouring country. The way Russia invaded involving missiles, shelling and tanks rolling through the Ukraine countryside was designed to provoke a response from ‘the west’ and to hell with the normal Ukrainian citizen. Putin has turned millions of Ukrainians into refugees, single parents and orphans. The infrastructure has been destroyed.
He has also severely damaged European and other economies by putting fuel prices through the roof and setting off high inflation and interest rates. Our own government is (partly) in serious trouble because of it, his timing was impeccable on the back of the Covid lockdown.
He is a very experienced leader of a huge country, I think he knew exactly what he was doing, he will have known how the US would respond and it would not surprise me if he has deliberately tried to provoke WW3. The frightening thing is that he might yet succeed.
Anyone who has interacted and has an insight into how he is feeling has stated he has been shocked at the response he has got from this, in both the western response and the Ukrainian one .
I imagine he expected the response to be like crimea and he would be welcomed there. I mean historically the Bolshevik’s stream rolled through Ukraine in forming the ussr and he was relatively unopposed in crimea and stirring **** in the Donbas .
Despite thinking himself a master strategist he has obviously bit off more than he can chew doing this and I think he doesn’t really know what to do to save face in this and keep his power in tact, so he’s decided to double down
There is no reason to start ww3 from the offset, what has Putin got to gain ? Russia burning in nuclear destruction (because if they use nukes on us , we will on them ). He’s an evil **** but I can’t see him firing them because he will essentially subject his children to nuclear hurt too . Nobody wins at all . Why enter something that will inevitably lead to a draw at best and making the rest of your existence absolutely unbearable?
The only people I actually envisage would be batshit mental enough to use nukes are islamists myself