Putin

[TheDemonLord]

Your consensus? You've decided to agree with yourself? Interesting.

Only way to get an accurate response :P

Putin has previously been aloof and calculating. His recent speeches have been emotional, that's new. It's likely that he saw what he interpreted as weakness, but he got that wrong. He has united Europe.

It's hard to say how this will end and it's difficult to get good info, but so far Putin has got it wrong at every level. A new experience for him. He may get very nasty.

Currently the two biggest weaknesses are the UK and to a lesser extent the USA. The current British government is owned by oligarchs, they are doing their best not to do anything that will upset their Russian donors. Similarly some Repunblican senators have been beneficiaries of Russian largesse, at least they are not the party in power. Now.

Ah yes, the Party in Power.

The party and president that some might say allowed this to happen.

On the united Europe part, I can definitely see that what has happened has Galvanized parts of Europe. I've seen some interesting things regarding Firearms law in Europe - suddenly countries are getting awfully Second Amendment-esque.

The two biggest factors for me would be Biden being in the hot seat (but clearly not in charge) and the absolute failure in Afghanistan. Add in the increasing emphasis on Woke nonsense (remember, as Ex-KGB, Putin will be well aware of the use of Marxism and Marxist ideals to destabilize a country), He sees his biggest Adversary (The US) as not being a serious threat anymore.

[TheDemonLord]

When the Soviet Union fell apart and the Warsaw pact dissolved, detailed first-strike plans were revealed by more than one country. The same has never been found from NATO.

NATO moving closer to Russia (what international law?) can easily be seen instead as more nations wanting protection from Russia.

Many (not all) people in Sweden and Finland must now be thinking that's a good idea.

The Swedes and the Finns though have always been armed to the Teeth but never aligned with others - almost to a point of pride - they don't start anything, nor join in - but are well equipped to finish something.

[mashman]

When the Soviet Union fell apart and the Warsaw pact dissolved, detailed first-strike plans were revealed by more than one country. The same has never been found from NATO.

NATO moving closer to Russia (what international law?) can easily be seen instead as more nations wanting protection from Russia.

Many (not all) people in Sweden and Finland must now be thinking that's a good idea.

Same international law that has allowed the u.s. to do what they want in countries that they have no business being in, like the Ukraine... and yet they were pretty heavily linked with a coup relatively recently which has pissed off at least 2 old states enough to give Russia a call for recognition and a liddle protection during that transition. What's good for the goose............... i.e. they're both as bad as each other, with murca being slightly more visible over the last half century when it comes to freeing the people of other nations whether they like it or not in return for resources and access to infrastructure etc..., yet the fear of reds under the bed sees all that forgiven. Sure, 2 wrongs don't make a right, but the U.S. should have known better. They chose not to, repeatedly, decade after decade.

[husaberg]

Same international law that has allowed the u.s. to do what they want in countries that they have no business being in, like the Ukraine... and yet they were pretty heavily linked with a coup relatively recently which has pissed off at least 2 old states enough to give Russia a call for recognition and a liddle protection during that transition. What's good for the goose............... i.e. they're both as bad as each other, with murca being slightly more visible over the last half century when it comes to freeing the people of other nations whether they like it or not in return for resources and access to infrastructure etc..., yet the fear of reds under the bed sees all that forgiven. Sure, 2 wrongs don't make a right, but the U.S. should have known better. They chose not to, repeatedly, decade after decade.

So your lack of commentation for Putins actions are due to your whataboutism about someone else ,that you did likely condemn..... interesting.......

[Viking01]

The Swedes and the Finns though have always been armed to the Teeth but never aligned with others - almost to a point of pride - they don't start anything, nor join in - but are well equipped to finish something.

Not aligned with others ?

Sweden
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52535.htm

Finland
https://yle.fi/news/3-12313641

[R650R]

If you like Russian vodka get to bottle store now. Owner said distributors are pulling stock away. He pissed himself laughing when I said they will prob reliable and say made in India. No one will buy it then he laughs....
I wonder if Jacinda will still collect taxes and GST from Russian hookers working in NZ?????
I thought Synlair Dairy were Russian owned but a google says Chinese now????

[TheDemonLord]

Not aligned with others ?

Sweden
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52535.htm

Finland
https://yle.fi/news/3-12313641

From your link, Sir:

NATO fully respects Sweden's longstanding policy of military non-alignment.

Oof

[Viking01]

From your link, Sir:

Oof

Yes, I read the articles and duly noted that comment. But I prefer to judge them by their actions.

Cheers, Viking

[ Edit ]

https://www-globalpolitics-se.transl..._x_tr_pto=wapp

[husaberg]

Majority of Finns support Nato membership, poll shows https://www.ft.com
2 days ago — A poll for Finland's state broadcaster Yle showed 53 per cent of Finns supported joining Nato

Well it was only 1939 when Russia last invaded them and they have the longest border with Russia

[TheDemonLord]

Yes, I read the articles and duly noted that comment. But I prefer to judge them by their actions.

Cheers, Viking

See, having met a few Swedes - They'll hang out with you, drink a beer with you, but won't invite you to their house.

(I really wish I could find the clip of Steve Hughes talking about this - it's hilarious)

So yeah, they'll do Military exercises, but won't want to join your club

[Viking01]

See, having met a few Swedes - They'll hang out with you, drink a beer with you, but won't invite you to their house.

(I really wish I could find the clip of Steve Hughes talking about this - it's hilarious)

So yeah, they'll do Military exercises, but won't want to join your club

Morning.

Yes, there is a certain degree of truth to your first comment. I did smile.

But it's the same for all four of the Scandinavian countries.

People working in Denmark have also said how hard it is to "make friends" with Danes (and get invited into the "inner circle"). Think there is a certain degree of reserve involved, and some simply take their time to assess you first.

But it is apparently not that uncommon.

The same has been said of both Americans (USA) and Russians. And with friends in both camps, I can attest to that view in some small way. What started out as "business contacts" took quite a while to develop a personal rapport, and then plenty of informal contact before we became "friends".

As for both countries (Sweden and Finland) joining NATO in the near future, my money would be on that occurring. With a general right-ward (neo-liberal) trend across Scandinavia the past 20 years, the current Russian action in Ukraine is probably the event that would justify NATO membership. First, just have to make sure that the populations of the respective countries are sufficiently afraid.

My 2c worth.

[pete376403]

See, having met a few Swedes - They'll hang out with you, drink a beer with you, but won't invite you to their house.

(I really wish I could find the clip of Steve Hughes talking about this - it's hilarious)

So yeah, they'll do Military exercises, but won't want to join your club

Did they ever do exercises with the Russians (just to maintain neutrality and balance)? So if a push ever came to a shove, it's fair to say they would side with NATO.

Since the 1940s, no one has ever tried to invade Russia itself, but Russia has had plenty of goes at other countries. And as soon as they have had the chance, plenty of countries have dumped their "alliance" with Russia, Must be something about that place that people dont like

[TheDemonLord]

Did they ever do exercises with the Russians (just to maintain neutrality and balance)?

I don't think so, definitely during the Cold War the Swedish view was that Russia would be the Aggressor, There's also been a few instances of Sweden suspecting that there's been Russian Submarine shenanigans going in in Territorial waters.

So if a push ever came to a shove, it's fair to say they would side with NATO.

Since the 1940s, no one has ever tried to invade Russia itself, but Russia has had plenty of goes at other countries. And as soon as they have had the chance, plenty of countries have dumped their "alliance" with Russia, Must be something about that place that people dont like

I personally think the issue of Russia is that the Memories of the Soviet Union and how non-consensual it was are still fresh in a lot of places minds. Most places that aren't effective Theocracies seem to want Freedom...

[Viking01]

Did they ever do exercises with the Russians (just to maintain neutrality and balance)? So if a push ever came to a shove, it's fair to say they would side with NATO.

Since the 1940s, no one has ever tried to invade Russia itself, but Russia has had plenty of goes at other countries. And as soon as they have had the chance, plenty of countries have dumped their "alliance" with Russia, Must be something about that place that people dont like

Morning.

Military Exercises
If you are going to engage in military exercises with other countries, suppose that you have to precede this by already having cordial political and social relations. Trade relations might also be helpful.

And in conducting military exercises, you will get exposure to the military equipment, training and tactics of the "other side" (which involves a higher degree of trust). Even more so if you share a common border.

Russia
WW2 for the Russians was probably traumatic enough. So the desire to fight in defence of their homeland is probably fairly strongly ingrained, even now after several generations.

With the development of modern missile systems, the concept of a "border" is obviously not restricted to one's own immediate physical border (hence the mention of "buffer zones" and "red lines").

So the current Ukrainian conflict (from a Russian - Putin - perspective) is likely largely about securing its borders, and removal of a "military and political pressure point" on one of its immediate borders. [ Discussions with Romania and Poland might feature in the future. ]

You mentioned that Russia has "had plenty of goes at other countries". I'd be interested in some of the instances that you had in mind. And whether they occurred during the Cold War period (up to 1989) , or post Cold War. Timing and context is important.

Economic Systems
The "capitalism vs socialism" battle (likely responsible for much of the post WW2 conflict around the world) did not cease with the end of the Cold War. Not in Europe, or elsewhere in the world (e.g. South America; Russia; China).

The US gained huge economic advantage (as well as leverage) through Bretton Woods at the end of WW2. And with its degree of control over banks and banking systems - plus the USD as the primary reserve currency, it still continues to do so.

But that power is slowly waning over time. Largely through the actions of both China and Russia.

NATO
NATO should be seen as an organisation (not a country), an organisation having a military focus, and largely US controlled.

As I've said earlier, the military aspect of a relationship within Europe (NATO membership)has frequently front-footed any social or trade relationships between individual countries.

And by establishing military alliances, you can often "force open" - or "close the door" - to both social and trade interactions between countries.

Trade Blocs
Currently, ranking of economic worth of trade blocs would place China in first position, the US in second, and Europe in third. Restricting trade between Russia and Europe will help reduce both blocs as an economic threat to the US.

Gaining control over Russian resources (a worthwhile prize in itself) can be achieved militarily or economically. And if you can't achieve the former, the latter is perfectly acceptable. US actions undertaken to achieve this goal (during the 1990's - Yeltsin era) ended up being frustrated by the arrival or Putin on the Russian political scene in 2000. That didn't mean that those US ambitions went away.

But the real prize is in securing control over China. Requiring the breaking of any Russian-Chinese political relationship, and any mutual supply and support relationship along the way.

The last time I looked, the US - China trade war was still bubbling away quietly in the background. Except that US (and media) focus was currently being directed on Taiwan.

My 2c worth. And No, you don't have to agree with me.

[pete376403]

Some snipping. Not that I don't agree with you, just wanted to reply to one point.

Morning.

You mentioned that Russia has "had plenty of goes at other countries". I'd be interested in some of the instances that you had in mind. And whether they occurred during the Cold War period (up to 1989) , or post Cold War. Timing and context is important.

My 2c worth. And No, you don't have to agree with me.

Was referring to any time after WWII. So; Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Romania and Yugoslavia.

Most have got out from under the thumb as soon as they could.

But looking at this further, there were the ones after WWI: Finland, Russian Poland, Estonia, Livonia, Courland (now part of Latvia), Lithuania, Ukraine, and Bessarabia.

https://factsanddetails.com/russia/