This is not something easy to answer but the short answer is not bend over backwards like trump did.
Unless Russia gets close to Kiev, no one is doing anything besides 'sanctions'.This is not something easy to answer but the short answer is not bend over backwards like trump did.
Ukraine would have gone on that path after Euromaiden, but Russia invaded because they know NATO is never gonna accept a country which is in an active war with them. Ukraine joining NATO and even the EU is simply impossible as long as Russia continues their occupation, Russia knows that and is such will continue the occupation. That's also why they've been in Moldova for about 3 decades and partitioned Georgia in 2008.As someone who's pretty ignorant on modern Ukrainian geopolitics, can someone explain to me like I'm five years old why the hell Ukraine doesn't join NATO? It's obvious why Russia doesn't want them too, but at least on the surface it seems like doing so would be a net positive overall, especially since it would mean having the official backing of the major EU powers and the US. Unless there's something I'm completely missing.
This sort of language is pretty alarming, clearly gearing up the population for something.
This sort of language is pretty alarming, clearly gearing up the population for something.
This sort of language is pretty alarming, clearly gearing up the population for something.
They breach US airspace too and just get told to leave. That's normal probing, nobody opens fire in those situations.They keep breaching European airspace as well all the time. But considering we need them for gas and vaccines nothing will happen. If only we could cut one of their main income sources by switching to nuclear.
Putin needs a distraction before his people lose their shit over his opposition.
Yeah that aint happening. Prepare for some minor sanctions and strongly worded letters™NATO needs to ready some brigades of quick reaction forces. They'll only act if they think there wont be opposition.
The United States is considering sending warships into the Black Sea in the next few weeks in a show of support for Ukraine amid Russia's increased military presence on Ukraine's eastern border, a US defense official told CNN Thursday.
The US Navy routinely operates in the Black Sea, but a deployment of warships now would send a specific message to Moscow that the US is closely watching, the official said.
Although the US does not see the amassing of Russian forces as posturing for an offensive action, the official told CNN that "if something changes we will be ready to respond." Their current assessment is that the Russians are conducting training and exercises and intelligence has not indicated military orders for further action, the official said, but noted that they are well-aware that could change at any time.
The United States has informed Turkey that two of its warships will pass through Turkish straits to be deployed in the Black Sea until May 4, Ankara said on Friday, as Russia has bulked up its military forces on Ukraine's eastern border.
Doesn't matter, Turkey can't stop such warships entering the Black Sea.hopefully the upcoming recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the WH doesn't complicate things w/r/t Turkey.
I don't think so. You really think any of the nato countries have any appetite for a war with Russia?NATO needs to ready some brigades of quick reaction forces. They'll only act if they think there wont be opposition.
Apparently those in the know think the real reason for the build up is that Crimea is going to run out of water. They do not have proper access to enough clean water and Putin will try to push through to the dam on the Dnipro at Nova Kakhovka to gain access to the river. West needs to pre-empt....means Magnitsky sanctions against Putin's oligarch's who own his wealth.
A broader Novorossiya strategy is in the bin for the moment, Putin knows it would be far too costly, the Ukrainians would wreck his shit with a guerilla war once he breaks through into predominantly non-primary Russian speaking areas.
Apparently those in the know think the real reason for the build up is that Crimea is going to run out of water. They do not have proper access to enough clean water and Putin will try to push through to the dam on the Dnipro at Nova Kakhovka to gain access to the river. West needs to pre-empt....means Magnitsky sanctions against Putin's oligarch's who own his wealth.
Yup. Crimea relies on the Dnieper river for its water supply through a canal which was build between 1961 and 1975. When Russia invaded the peninsula Ukraine gave Russia the finger by damming the canal, cutting Crimea off from its water supply. Since then Crimea has been cut off and its water reserves have slowly been depleting. If a Russian invasion happens reopening the canal will 100% be their main objective.I remember reading an article last year about the water situation there being dire. I take it that's partially a legacy of Crimea being administratively part of Ukraine for decades?
I guess it explains why they spent so much getting a bridge up quickly. Although that's not going to solve all the infrastructure issues.
No one knows what Putin has planned. Could be a distraction from internal pressure, could be a build up for a invasion.Um, shit. So there's a legit chance there could be more conflict?
Well, Russia already had military bases on Crimea and used relatively little force (mostly spec ops to occupy key positions afaik) to occupy it, so no. It was different for the war in Donbass (Eastern Ukraine) later.There was a massive buildup when they invaded Crimea in the first place?
Look like quite a lot of notice to give to the other world leader time to react.
Not saying that it's not a possibility just wondering why.
Even a surprise lightning-swift attack takes a lot of preparation. The faster you want to go, the bigger a hassle it is. Even if they were entirely unopposed and had free supplies stationed throughout the area, the traffic management alone would give planners nightmares. Oh shit, someone took a wrong turn and now three battalions are backed up and and tanks can't get to the bridge they were meant to cross and the nearby alternatives can't be freed up or the AA won't be in place and, and, andThere was a massive buildup when they invaded Crimea in the first place?
Look like quite a lot of notice to give to the other world leader time to react.
Not saying that it's not a possibility just wondering why.
The fact that Ukraine cut the water to the peninsula tells me that Ukraine sees Crimea as part of Russia. It's virtually impossible to reconcile with people after you cut the water on them. It's a very clear signal that you want to kill them all.
I realize that it was Russia's responsibility to provide the infrastructure but it could be explained by incompetence but what Ukraine did can't be explained by anything other than contempt for the Crimeans.hopefully they realise if they (Russia) want to occupy Crimea, they need to bring basic infrastructure and if not turn their anger towards Russia.
Russia was able to build a giant bridge to Crimea in no time, I am sure they could have managed to create an alternative water supply as well.I realize that it was Russia's responsibility to provide the infrastructure but it could be explained by incompetence but what Ukraine did can't be explained by anything other than contempt for the Crimeans.
Lol. Sure Russia shouldn't have stolen Ukrainian land, but why didn't Ukraine help them out after? Come the fuck on.I realize that it was Russia's responsibility to provide the infrastructure but it could be explained by incompetence but what Ukraine did can't be explained by anything other than contempt for the Crimeans.
Cutting off infrastructure to invaders and the land they take isn't unusual.I realize that it was Russia's responsibility to provide the infrastructure but it could be explained by incompetence but what Ukraine did can't be explained by anything other than contempt for the Crimeans.