Ukraine - Russia Conflict
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
Unfortunately there will be no deal. The moment Russia invaded on Feb 24th the status quo was thrown out the window Ukraine is going to take Crimea and US has Ukraine's back on that. Europe may want Ukraine to forget Crimea but that's not going to be up to them. And yes you are right that is where the likelihood some type of nuke device may be used but it won't be used in Crimea to stop Ukraine forces with so many Russians there.
Russian forces are in deep trouble and don't have the manpower to defend Crimea from a Ukraine all out offensive once they cross the Derp river.
Russian classical forces seems in trouble indeed. But the nuclear one remain strong, and US, GB or France will never use their own nuc deterrence for Crimea (or Ukraine).
The crimea question will be a world war 3 case. Forget Crimea ! It's now a russian ground.
It's just my small opinion.
Crimea was never a part of Ukraine. Even before bolshvik revolution, Crimea was always part of Tzars Russiam Empire. It was attached to Ukraine in 1954 during Stalin's time for better administrative control. The land bridge connecting Crimea with Mainland Russia was not built in those days so it could be accessed either thru sea of Azov or thru Ukraine. Once Ukraine decided to separate from USSR/Russia. It was natural for Russia to take back what was its territory always. Please show me one historical document prior to 1954, which shows Crimea to be a part of Ukraine. The problem is that media narrative in West is so biased that they do not mind making a fool of their own people.
What is this document about?What do you make of this historical document from 1991?
Sure, Sevastopol and Crimea had the lowest scores, but they were still an absolute majority.
I think it's a vote of leaving the USSR.
Kaliningrad was never a part of Russia historically. So why should they keep Kaliningrad and get Crimea back, since they both changed hands at close to the same time? Russia negotiated to keep Kaliningrad instead, because it was more important to have a northern port that was ice-free all year round.
How come Russia suddenly wanted Crimea back in 2014 anyway? I thought Ukraine was a democracy before 2013??
Last edited:
One of the biggest mistakes, in hind sight seems to be that Russia decided to declare it as a special military operation. Thereby restricting its own forces and that allowed Nato+EU to provide full support to Ukraine. Had it been declared as a WAR on Ukraine, by now complete Ukraine would have been over run by Russia and any nation which provided anykind of support to Ukraine too would have automatically become an enemy and fit to be attacked and destroyed by Russian forces.
I still think that this kid glove approach is not going to work as long as Ukraine continues to get support from NATO+EU and Russia does not mobilise. Using contract soldiers will not work for them.
They need to now declare a WAR on Ukraine and teach a lesson to all those pidly countries who have been smarting and helping Ukraine.
I still think that this kid glove approach is not going to work as long as Ukraine continues to get support from NATO+EU and Russia does not mobilise. Using contract soldiers will not work for them.
They need to now declare a WAR on Ukraine and teach a lesson to all those pidly countries who have been smarting and helping Ukraine.
Probably they won't use nukes against Russian territory but they could certainly take out the Russian navy with conventional weapons very quickly. And then it would have no use for Sevastopol.
I also think the political consequences of Russia using a nuke internationally would move it from heavily sanctioned to completely blacklisted. They would likely be kicked out of the UN for a start and any road access to Kaliningrad would be permanently removed for all items.
You're missing the point. History changed the ownership of these places at around the same time, so why should Russia get to keep what's favourable to it and take back what isn't?
I mean JFC, Crimea only belonged to Russia from 1783 to 1954 anyway. India belonged to Britain for longer and changed hands around the same time. When you examine the facts, Crimea was actually Greek in culture for about 2000 years before Mongols, Ottomans and Russians even became a factor. Greece is part of the EU, and Crimea is internationally recognised as part of Ukraine, so really it should be returned to the EU when Ukraine joins. Saying that Crimea belongs to Russia is like saying that India belongs to Britain and ignoring the thousands of years of India culture prior to that.
Do you even know what is happening in rest of the world? I am sure even that has been blacked out by your media. BRICS is emerging as a very strong counter to NATO controlled UNO. Over 153 countries are willing to join an alternate UNO which does not have Europe, USA, UK and Canada in it. AND its being stitched together at a very fast pace. The countries of this alliance will be free to trade in their mutual currencies or thru a common reserve currency which is being readied up for roll out in next 18 months. EU created Euro so that it can become a reserve currency and EU too coud print any amount of Euros Just like USD. All this is coming to an end and soon you will see Saudi Arabia dumping USD and joining BRICS followed by most of ME Asia.
Buddy, Kalinningrad was never part of Ukraine, Infact Ukraine as a nation was built by Russian Communists/Bolshiviks. have a look at the map attached and please show me where do you see Ukraine in it till 1918.
What you see of Eastern Ukraine was actually a part of Russia even before WW1. Please get your facts correct first and study the history of this area first. What is now being called as Novo Rossiya is that actual territory which belonged to Tzars Russia and was made a part of Ukraine to carve out a new nation within USSR after WW2.
One of the biggest mistakes was simply starting a war. Russia could have negotiated for continued use and access to Sevastopol in 2013 and avoided flushing its economic progress down the toilet and decimating its military and tens of thousands of others in an illegal conflict.
You are absolutely day-dreaming with the rest of it. Russia can't even handle Ukraine with some fairly modest Western support and weapons, what do you think will happen if they attack NATO? Either they get decimated conventionally really, really quickly, or they get completely melted due to MAD. There is no good outcome for them if they attack a NATO country.
Declaring a war will certainly push the front line, but it won't stop NATO support, and it will see a lot more of their forces decimated. They are barely ahead of China now on Globalfirepower Index as it is. A full war will certainly push them into 3rd place and have negative economic effects as regards reduced economic output. And this is assuming that the declaration is successful. People are happy to tolerate Putin when it doesn't involve them being forced to die in a war, and the consequences of not putting up with him are greater than the consequences of doing so. Remove that privilege and things could turn very ugly, since the consequences of trying to remove Putin would become roughly equal to the consequences of going to fight in Ukraine.
Go for it if you want to place all your trust in Russia and China as a democracy. Let us know how it goes. It will barely even be an organisation, more of a free-for-all jungle rules thing.
You're still missing the point as regards Kaliningrad. Doesn't matter whether it originally belonged to Ukraine, fact is, it didn't originally belong to Russia for thousands of years prior to 1945. So why don't Russia give that back? And Crimea is bloody Greek originally anyway.
Oh, we're going down this 'the entire world belonged to India/Hindus ages back' mythology thing again. Not even going to touch this, it's just complete b0ll0x.
This would suggest considerable movement if the location is correct.
Yeah, they negotiated in the early '90s by annexing places in Georgia and Moldova. Ukraine gave them access to Sevastopol all that time too.
My friend, you do not even know how the world is changing. Blinken was publicly rebuked by the FM of South Africa in the joint presser wherein She said that Europe's problems cant be a problem for rest of the world and they must stop lecturing others to follow them. It is available on youtube go and watch it as to how humiliating it was for Blinken. The world is changing rapidly due to this war and the world will be very different if WW3 breaks out. You might find China, India and other 153 countries supporting Russia against 57 countries. Plus how of these 57 will actually be part of the war mongers will be seen only when the WW3 actually breaks out.
One unsolicited advice I have for you. Please build a nuke bunker with sufficient stock of food and medicines and water as Russians have openly stated that first nuke fired by them will be on London.
Do you know when did Ukraine came into existance and how? USSR was formed in 1922 after Bolsheviks had toppled most governments in the former USSR and all of them joined in a Union. After that in 1922, Russian territories were reorganised and that is how Ukraine was created. NIkita Khruschev was an Ukraininan and was made the leader of Russian Communist party in 1938. he succeded Stalin in 1953-54.
Odessa is a city created and established by Katherine the Great and she was a Russian.
regarding Kaliningrad, I want to ask you, which date in the history of mankind can be taken as the fianl date for limiting the territorial limits of any nation? The while world was reshaped after WW2 when nations all across the world got reorganised and colonial system vanished. Can we look at the world as final after the end of WW2 to decide about the boundaries of a nation?
Qouting Greeks for Crimea is fine for you which was some 2000 yrs back but I quoting Pagan worship in Russia till 989AD is bullshit for you.