- Jul 3, 2015
- 6,019
- 7,099
Not out the realm of possibility that he pulls a “ I’m not losing this war” moment And nukes Ukraine to “ show that he’s winning”
School Me On This Russia/Ukraine Kerfuffle
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,876
- 38,501
FSB is Russia's military intelligence agency
Basically their version of the CIA, except they have separate agencies for military intelligence (FSB) and civilian intelligence (GRU). They both do assassination missions though, for example the Skripal poisoning was done by a GRU unit.The FSB official who leaked is definitely going to go through some things if they find out though. I imagine not a whole lot of people in the FSB would have the required information on a covert assassination mission.
- Jun 15, 2013
- 26,218
- 23,184
If he Nukes, I dont think anyone else would retaliate with a Nuke ..... however, I think Putin would get murdered shortly after. I wouldn't be suprised if there's heavy surveillance on his location in case they need to take him out.
- Jan 30, 2007
- 23,381
- 6,002
I thought about that too, the US must have a team inside of Moscow pinging his location.
- Jan 16, 2011
- 15,009
- 36,451
Le Pen's far-right party reaches settlement on Russian bank debt: court
The National Rally, a French far-right party led by Marine Le Pen, has reached a court settlement with a Russian firm over its outstanding debts on a loan it took out in 2014, court documents showed.
Marine Le Pen: Who's funding France's far right?
BBC Panorama investigates where Marine Le Pen's National Front gets its money.
www.bbc.com
I guess my favorite thing about this whole affair is how it has managed to throw some cold water on the far-right global movement.
- May 20, 2006
- 5,993
- 9,884
He doesn't need to nuke ukraine. If you notice, ukraine hasn't done a single thing inside the country of russia. They're not a threat like that. Puton would much rather bomb them til they submitt than have to go in and kill millions or murder a sitting president. As bad is it is for him right now, that would make it much worse, more costly in the long run. Thats the only reason for this delay. If russia went full force its over for ukraine very quickly. Russia is a superpower, I promise you they can beat a country like ukraine without nukes.
- Mar 5, 2005
- 23,989
- 15,770
They're basically the new KGB.FSB is Russia's military intelligence agency
The FSB official who leaked is definitely going to go through some things if they find out though. I imagine not a whole lot of people in the FSB would have the required information on a covert assassination mission.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,876
- 38,501
Putin was generally seen as a shrewd tactician (for what he wanted to achieve) but he really seems to have lost the plot here.
- Jul 13, 2005
- 35,415
- 27,029
Thats the main reason he was elected when he was. by the previous regime. They were looking for a young hungry well respected KGB member.
- Mar 5, 2005
- 23,989
- 15,770
I agree. If they went all out and were fully committed, they could definitely take Ukraine down. I think they were trying limit their effort as much as they could to keep costs at minimum, but now that they've realized that Ukraine is tougher than they'd expected while receiving more and more equipment from the west, they increased efforts and ramped things up.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,876
- 38,501
Putin’s gamble with Crimea in 2014 worked out pretty well for him. He successfully annexed it without much of any impact on him or his position. Then in 2016 with the attack on the US elections, I would say he successfully restored Russia’s (negative) reputation as a superpower and made people take them seriously again
Unlike those two major operations, this invasion seems more like an incompetent rushjob.
Unlike those two major operations, this invasion seems more like an incompetent rushjob.
- Jul 13, 2005
- 35,415
- 27,029
They definitely rushed this. I'm not mad at their invasion, from a strategic standpoint it was necessary eventually.
But yea it seems like zero actual planning went into this. If anything they made themselves look much "weaker" to NATO than what the world thought.
But yea it seems like zero actual planning went into this. If anything they made themselves look much "weaker" to NATO than what the world thought.
- Jan 12, 2013
- 26,876
- 38,501
It looks like Putin might invade Moldova too 
Lukashenko was discussing the battle plans for the Ukraine war but his map also shows planned attacks in Moldova…
https://thehill.com/policy/internat...in-front-of-battle-map-indicating-moldova?amp
Images have emerged of Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko standing in front of a battle map that appears to show a planned invasion of Moldova, along with Ukraine.
Lukashenko, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was reportedly addressing his security council Tuesday while standing in front of a battle map of Ukraine.
The map appeared to show troop movement plans and infrastructure targets in Ukraine, as well as targets in Moldova's breakaway region of Transnistria.
Some of the Russian lines of attack in the map have already taken place, while others are yet to occur, including an incursion into Moldova - a former Soviet country and Ukraine's neighbor to the south - from the port city of Odessa.
Russia has already used Belarus as a location from which to send its troops quickly across the border into Ukraine, after insisting the large number of forces assembled there were for joint military drills.
Reports have emerged this week that Belarus is preparing to send troops into Ukraine in support of the Russian invasion.
The country's close ties to Moscow in the attack prompted the U.S. State Department to suspend operations Monday at its embassy in Belarus.
The European Union also announced plans on Monday to impose new sanctions on Belarus over its role in the war, including measures against exports, oligarchs and banks in the country.
Belarussian state-run Belta news agency reported that Lukashenko said none of the country's military units had yet moved into Ukraine, but could mobilize in two to three days if needed, as reported by the Daily Express.
The Pentagon, meanwhile, has said it had not yet seen signs of Belarussian troops in Ukraine.
Lukashenko was discussing the battle plans for the Ukraine war but his map also shows planned attacks in Moldova…
https://thehill.com/policy/internat...in-front-of-battle-map-indicating-moldova?amp
Belarus president stands in front of battle map indicating Moldova invasion plans
Images have emerged of Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko standing in front of a battle map that appears to show a planned invasion of Moldova, along with Ukraine.
Lukashenko, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was reportedly addressing his security council Tuesday while standing in front of a battle map of Ukraine.
The map appeared to show troop movement plans and infrastructure targets in Ukraine, as well as targets in Moldova's breakaway region of Transnistria.
Some of the Russian lines of attack in the map have already taken place, while others are yet to occur, including an incursion into Moldova - a former Soviet country and Ukraine's neighbor to the south - from the port city of Odessa.
Russia has already used Belarus as a location from which to send its troops quickly across the border into Ukraine, after insisting the large number of forces assembled there were for joint military drills.
Reports have emerged this week that Belarus is preparing to send troops into Ukraine in support of the Russian invasion.
The country's close ties to Moscow in the attack prompted the U.S. State Department to suspend operations Monday at its embassy in Belarus.
The European Union also announced plans on Monday to impose new sanctions on Belarus over its role in the war, including measures against exports, oligarchs and banks in the country.
Belarussian state-run Belta news agency reported that Lukashenko said none of the country's military units had yet moved into Ukraine, but could mobilize in two to three days if needed, as reported by the Daily Express.
The Pentagon, meanwhile, has said it had not yet seen signs of Belarussian troops in Ukraine.
- May 20, 2006
- 5,993
- 9,884
Puton wants buffer countries, that is his "security concern". He doesnt want to be surrounded by NATO/western backed govts, aka US military bases with nuclear capabilities. ( https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-u-s-nuclear-weapons-in-europe ) That is why finland remains nuetral and a non-nato country. That is why france and germany opposed/blocked the ukraine and georgia from joining nato when they applied is 2008. ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-georgia-entry-one-day-idUSL0179714620080403 ) Half of the the russian navy is in the sea of azov/black sea. They want control of the perimeter. You can call it paranoid, strategic, whatever you want. But thats what all this is about.
- Jan 16, 2011
- 15,009
- 36,451
It looks exactly like it does because they didn't tell their troops they were actually going to war.
Then, there's Putin himself shifting through justifications for the invasion, from liberating Donbass to eliminating the tyrant Zelenskyy, to "this is a peacekeeping mission."
He didn't have a motive. Ukrainians didn't bite when he tried to bait them into attacking the troops at border.
I don't even see the strategic necessity of the invasion; other countries already placed Russia back inside the bad actor box after Crimea, the assassinations on western soil, the election meddling, the cyber attacks, the bombing of that plane, and so many other hostile actions. An invasion was always going to be the straw that broke the camel's back.
At the end, nations of the eastern bloc that were skeptical of Russia were right. What Russia needs is to do is abandon the idea being an empire.
- Jan 16, 2011
- 15,009
- 36,451
And Washington didn't want Ukraine to join in the 90s.
Puton wants buffer countries, that is his "security concern". He doesnt want to be surrounded by NATO/western backed govts, aka US military bases with nuclear capabilities. ( https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-u-s-nuclear-weapons-in-europe ) That is why finland remains nuetral and a non-nato country. That is why france and germany opposed/blocked the ukraine and georgia from joining nato when they applied is 2008. ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-georgia-entry-one-day-idUSL0179714620080403 ) Half of the the russian navy is in the sea of azov/black sea. They want control of the perimeter. You can call it paranoid, strategic, whatever you want. But thats what all this is about.
But things change.
I just frown at the idea that any nation gets to use force to interfere in the choices of a people that is not theirs.
- May 20, 2006
- 5,993
- 9,884
I agree 100%. The issue is the US has zero credibility when condemning these things cause thats exactly what we do all over the world, nowhere near our borders.
- Jan 30, 2007
- 23,381
- 6,002
Welp.
- May 19, 2004
- 10,646
- 9,739
It's interesting how people forget the absolute mess that the US and their allies created in Libya circa '11-'12. The explosion in human trafficking along with the 'migrant flood' to the EU are just some of the issues.
Last edited:
- Aug 22, 2012
- 8,764
- 7,551
Sounds like paradise compared to people being gassed and used as human shields......
- Aug 22, 2012
- 8,764
- 7,551
While I agree on your overall point, lets keep it buck. We have never set out to conquer any country though. Influence,? Yes pillage? of course...but this is beyond the pale.
- May 19, 2004
- 10,646
- 9,739
You're wilding out if you think zero planning went into this - don't believe everything you hear on the Western media. With the fall of the Soviet Union in '91, Ukraine was the one loss that hurt them the most as they lost a strategic military advantage and a significant portion of their military too.
Ukraine is a fairly large country and Russia has to defend its borders also, they are not going to deploy all their resources.
NATO dropped the ball heavily on this, they were cautioned 10+ years ago to limit their expansionism especially with Turkey being a member of NATO. Try to imagine Ukraine also being a NATO member and there's a massive security threat to Russia.
I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again, no superpower will allow another superpower or 'collective' to deploy bases and/or missiles close to their own territory. The losers in this are the Ukrainian people and I hope that for their sake, their leadership agrees to a ceasefire and negotiations with Russia.
Last edited:
- Jun 6, 2006
- 4,787
- 660
I’d laugh if I thought you weren’t serious. I’ve been avoiding your propaganda but you are either completely lost or just a shill.
…Ukrainians agree to a cease fire and negotiate? As if they are the ones shelling innocent civilians. There is no negotiating with these war criminals. Any negotiations Putin agrees to are cover for troop movement and continued advancement. Your are acting like Ukraine has paid kill squads after Putin as well. Based on what I’ve read from your posts i have no intent for continued discussion with you; but I’m not gonna stand by and stay quiet while you spew your nonsense.
Last edited:
John Wick
formerly jayzonmytoes
- Oct 5, 2006
- 7,270
- 3,056
Reason why their last president Viktor Yanukovych agreed to remain neutral on NATO membership. Its a sensitive issue.
This is one of those NIMBY situations.
But current president reversed course.
Been alot of back and forth problems that lead to Russia taking their steps to prevent this. Promises have been broken on both sides
What sense does it make for Ukraine to become an opposing country to russia where not only do they share boarders they share history.
Peace is what we need not choosing sides.
Last edited:
- May 19, 2004
- 10,646
- 9,739
Agreed with you 10000% my man.
Similar threads
