BBO Discussion Forums: Ukraine - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 8 Pages +
  • « First
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Ukraine

#141 User is offline   johnu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,592
  • Joined: 2008-September-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-May-22, 15:41

In a strategic strike against the US, Russia has permanently banned 963 Americans from entering Russia.

Among those banned were noted dissidents Rob Reiner and Morgan Freeman. In addition to Biden and Harris, many other administration officials and members of Congress were banned. To show the US that they were deadly serious, Russia also banned John McCain, Harry Reid, and Orrin Hatch, among other deceased Americans. In the case of McCain, Reid, Hatch and other deceased on the banned list, the ban is retroactive to the day before their deaths.

Latest list of Americans banned by Russia includes dead lawmakers

Russia bans 963 Americans from the country including Biden, Harris, Zuckerberg. But not Trump.

Of course, Manchurian President Trump is still welcome to enter Russia.
0

#142 User is offline   blindsey 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 2022-February-13

Posted 2022-May-22, 17:01

View Postjohnu, on 2022-May-22, 15:41, said:

To show the US that they were deadly serious, Russia also banned John McCain, Harry Reid, and Orrin Hatch, among other deceased Americans.


Presumably Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon are still welcome.
0

#143 User is offline   y66 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,491
  • Joined: 2006-February-24

Posted 2022-May-31, 06:41

This is the edited transcript of a discussion between Henry Kissinger, former US secretary of state and national security adviser, and Edward Luce, Financial Times US national editor, which took place on May 7 in Washington.

Quote

Financial Times: Earlier this year, we commemorated the 50th anniversary of the Nixon visit to China, the Shanghai communique. You, of course, were the organiser, the orchestrator of this Sino-US agreement. And it was a major shift in the cold war: you split China from Russia. It feels like we’ve gone 180 degrees. And now Russia and China are back in a very tight relationship. My opening question to you is: are we in a new cold war with China?

Henry Kissinger: At the time we opened to China, Russia was the principal enemy — but our relations with China were about as bad as they could be. Our view in opening to China was that it was unwise, when you have two enemies, to treat them exactly alike.

What produced the opening were tensions that developed autonomously between Russia and China. [Former Soviet Union head of state Leonid] Brezhnev could not conceive that China and the United States could get together. But Mao, despite all his ideological hostility, was ready to begin conversations.

In principle, the [Sino-Russian] alliance is against vested interests, it’s now established. But it does not look to me as if it is an intrinsically permanent relationship.

FT: I take it that it would be in America’s geopolitical interest to encourage more distance between Russia and China. Is this wrong?

HK: The geopolitical situation globally will undergo significant changes after the Ukraine war is over. And it is not natural for China and Russia to have identical interests on all foreseeable problems. I don’t think we can generate possible disagreements but I think circumstances will. After the Ukraine war, Russia will have to reassess its relationship to Europe at a minimum and its general attitude towards Nato. I think it is unwise to take an adversarial position to two adversaries in a way that drives them together, and once we take aboard this principle in our relationships with Europe and in our internal discussions, I think history will provide opportunities in which we can apply the differential approach.

That doesn’t mean that either of them will become intimate friends of the west, it only means that on specific issues as they arise we leave open the option of having a different approach. In the period ahead of us, we should not lump Russia and China together as an integral element.

FT: The Biden administration is framing its grand geopolitical challenge as being democracy versus autocracy. I’m picking up an implicit hint that it's the wrong framing?

HK: We have to be conscious of the differences of ideology and of interpretation that exists. We should use this consciousness to apply it in our own analysis of the importance of issues as they arise, rather than make it the principal issue of confrontation, unless we are prepared to make regime change the principal goal of our policy. I think given the evolution of technology, and the enormous destructiveness of weapons that now exist, [seeking regime change] may be imposed on us by the hostility of others, but we should avoid generating it with our own attitudes.

FT: You have probably more experience than any person alive of how to manage a stand-off between two nuclear-armed superpowers. But today’s nuclear language, which is coming thick and fast from [Russian president Vladimir] Putin, from people around him, where do you put that in terms of the threat we are facing today?

HK: We are now [faced] with technologies where the rapidity of exchange, the subtlety of the inventions, can produce levels of catastrophe that were not even imaginable. And the strange aspect of the present situation is that the weapons are multiplying on both sides and their sophistication is increasing every year.

But there’s almost no discussion internationally about what would happen if the weapons actually became used. My appeal in general, on whatever side you are, is to understand that we are now living in a totally new era, and we have gotten away with neglecting that aspect. But as technology spreads around the world, as it does inherently, diplomacy and war will need a different content and that will be a challenge.

FT: You’ve met Putin 20 to 25 times. The Russian military nuclear doctrine is they will respond with nuclear weapons if they feel that the regime is under existential threat. Where do you think Putin’s red line is in this situation?

HK: I have met Putin as a student of international affairs about once a year for a period of maybe 15 years for purely academic strategic discussions. I thought his basic convictions were a kind of mystic faith in Russian history . . . and that he felt offended, in that sense, not by anything we did particularly at first, but by this huge gap that opened up with Europe and the east. He was offended and threatened because Russia was threatened by the absorption of this whole area into Nato. This does not excuse and I would not have predicted an attack of the magnitude of taking over a recognised country.

I think he miscalculated the situation he faced internationally and he obviously miscalculated Russia’s capabilities to sustain such a major enterprise — and when the time for settlement comes all need to take that into consideration, that we are not going back to the previous relationship but to a position for Russia that will be different because of this — and not because we demand it but because they produced it.

FT: Do you think Putin’s getting good information and if he isn’t what further miscalculations should we be preparing for?

HK: In all these crises, one has to try to understand what the inner red line is for the opposite number . . . The obvious question is how long will this escalation continue and how much scope is there for further escalation? Or has he reached the limit of his capability, and he has to decide at what point escalating the war will strain his society to a point that will limit its fitness to conduct international policy as a great power in the future.

I have no judgment when he comes to that point. When that point is reached will he escalate by moving into a category of weapons that in 70 years of their existence have never been used? If that line is crossed, that will be an extraordinarily significant event. Because we have not gone through globally what the next dividing lines would be. One thing we could not do in my opinion is just accept it.

FT: You’ve met [Chinese president] Xi Jinping many times and his predecessors — you know China well. What lessons is China drawing from this?

HK: I would suspect that any Chinese leader now would be reflecting on how to avoid getting into the situation in which Putin got himself into, and how to be in a position where in any crisis that might arise, they would not have a major part of the world turned against them.

If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
0

#144 User is offline   pilowsky 

  • pilowsky
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,039
  • Joined: 2019-October-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 2022-September-10, 05:24

Encouraging Reuters reporting on Ukraine progress.
non est deus ex machina; även maskiner behöver lite kärlek.
0

#145 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,291
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2022-September-11, 06:57

View Postpilowsky, on 2022-September-10, 05:24, said:



Yeap

I think that things might start to become interesting.

The Russian military has been looking very weak throughout this conflict.
Yes, they can kill civilians and shell cities.

They haven't been able to inflict significant damage on the Ukrainian military.
Conversely, the Ukrainian have shown themselves to be very resourceful.

Can't help but wonder what will happen if / when the Ukrainians are in a position to consider taking back the Crimea.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#146 User is offline   Winstonm 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 16,899
  • Joined: 2005-January-08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Interests:Art, music

Posted 2022-September-11, 07:43

View Posthrothgar, on 2022-September-11, 06:57, said:

Yeap

I think that things might start to become interesting.

The Russian military has been looking very weak throughout this conflict.
Yes, they can kill civilians and shell cities.

They haven't been able to inflict significant damage on the Ukrainian military.
Conversely, the Ukrainian have shown themselves to be very resourceful.

Can't help but wonder what will happen if / when the Ukrainians are in a position to consider taking back the Crimea.


I wonder what the back-office Kremlin Putin gossip is saying when they whisper.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky
0

#147 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,500
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-September-11, 16:39

View Posthrothgar, on 2022-September-11, 06:57, said:

Yeap

I think that things might start to become interesting.

The Russian military has been looking very weak throughout this conflict.
Yes, they can kill civilians and shell cities.

They haven't been able to inflict significant damage on the Ukrainian military.
Conversely, the Ukrainian have shown themselves to be very resourceful.

Can't help but wonder what will happen if / when the Ukrainians are in a position to consider taking back the Crimea.


I agree to a large extent. But it's just not true that the Russian military hasn't been able to inflict significant damage to the Ukrainian military. At some point back in May/June, Ukrainian government officials were acknowledging losing 50-100 soldiers a day as KIA, due to be outgunned by Russian artillery. Ukraine has lost >250 tanks (that we know of), and close to 600 armoured/infantry vehicles. This war might look different without either HIMARS, or the massive support from Poland (230+ tanks), or even the support from Germany (top-grade artillery and anti-aircraft gun tanks).

And the rout in Kharkiv Oblast was possible only because Russia had thinned its defensive position in the area, and had ignored the signs of a Ukrainian offensive. Ukraine broke through, causing Russia to run away. With its withdrawal from there, the front becomes shorter, and Russia won't make the same mistake twice. They'll also have to withdraw from Kherson at some point, but I don't think we should expect a rout to continue.

Meanwhile, I wonder whether Crimea is the line where going for full mobilisation is the less costly option for Putin than not going for it. So I am not sure I look forward to finding out what will happen if Ukraine sets foot on Crimea :unsure:
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#148 User is offline   Chas_P 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 1,494
  • Joined: 2008-September-03
  • Location:Gainesville, GA USA

Posted 2022-September-11, 18:03

View Postjohnu, on 2022-May-22, 15:41, said:


Of course, Manchurian President Trump is still welcome to enter Russia.

Meanwhile, back in the states...............

#149 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,500
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-September-11, 18:04

View PostWinstonm, on 2022-September-11, 07:43, said:

I wonder what the back-office Kremlin Putin gossip is saying when they whisper.

Wondering who'll lose out in the blame game?
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#150 User is offline   johnu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,592
  • Joined: 2008-September-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-September-11, 19:17

View PostWinstonm, on 2022-September-11, 07:43, said:

I wonder what the back-office Kremlin Putin gossip is saying when they whisper.


I expect many more Putin critics to commit crimes against the state and be sent to prison in Siberia, accidentally jump out of hospital rooms, get killed in random fender benders, unfortunately get into cars that had bombs installed, unluckily touch Novichok, or just have plain bad karma in getting radioactive poisoning from polonium. Russian critics of Putin should never go gambling in casinos because their luck is about to turn deadly bad.
0

#151 User is offline   johnu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,592
  • Joined: 2008-September-10
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2022-September-14, 15:47

View Postjohnu, on 2022-September-11, 19:17, said:

I predict that the next Russian oligarch/executive will be reported to have died a patriotic death in Ukraine after volunteering to be an infantryman in the Russian army.

That prediction hasn't come true, yet. But with Putin calling up 300,000 new troops will it be that long to wait? In the meantime,

A Kremlin ally died falling down the stairs, report says — the latest in a series of unexplained deaths among prominent Russians

Quote

Local media said Anatoly Gerashchenko, 72, died falling down several flights of stairs.
It's the latest in a string of accidental or untimely deaths of top Russian figures.

At this point, it's not clear whether Gerashchenko fell down 2 or more flights of steps one flight at a time, or one flight of steps twice, or as many times as necessary for the fall to be fatal.
0

  • 8 Pages +
  • « First
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users