Another example of classic human behavior is playing out in Ukraine. Russia is massing its forces on the Ukrainian border, the US and it's NATO allies are threatening from the West. The US and it's allies are accusing Russia of warmongering, Russia counters by claiming the West is acting hostile towards it, threatening its security. Russia seems to be establishing an alliance with China. This is the same behaviour that precipitated WWI and II, we can't afford WWIII.

If praying is your bag,
Pray for peace.

If hoping is your bag,
Hope for peace.

Hoping for peace is not going to achieve anything.
The West needs to not back down as far as Putin is
concerned. Stand up to him and not tolerate his
attempts at intimidation. He needs to back off in
the Ukraine. And that should be made quite clear.
No more handling with kid-gloves. The man needs to
be told that his tactics will NOT be tolerated by
the West.

It will be difficult. But it must be done. Or tragic
results will indeed ensue. The Ukraine will only be the
beginning. Other land grabs will follow.

Putin argued in 2014 that Russians and Ukrainians are
"one people. That Kiev is the mother of Russian cities.
That Ancient Rus is our common source and we cannot live
without each other." And earlier he described the Ukraine
as being turned into "anti-Russia" by the West.

The language and memes become even less elegant as you descend
into the vomitarium of Russia state media talk shows and
troll farms.

What is even more disturbing is the more recent Russian
Foreign Minstry's depiction of countries who were occupied
by the USSR as "orphaned" by the end of the Cold War.
As if Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland and the Czech
Republic were lost urchins somehow pining for the return
of Big Daddy Moscow.

These constant references to family makes one think that
other motivations could be relevant here.

The West must be united in being strong in its stance -
and call Russia's bluff. It needs to stand up to Putin and
not allow another land grab as happened with Crimea.
Because the end result will be tragic not only for Ukraine.
The Ukraine will only be the first step in Russia's
plan to regain what it sees as its territories.

It must not be allowed to happen.

cont'd ...

The Russians want Ukraine because of its rich food
production as the Ukraine currently exports to
the West. Apparently Russian food production has
slumped. Its Russian troops on the border of the
Ukraine is to provoke the Ukrainians to attack
and then Russian can invade as a form of "self-defence."
(typically Russian tactics). The West and its allies
need to offer more trade in food resources - but not
allow Russia to get its foot into the Ukraine.

Today Ukraine, Tomorrow all the previous occupied
territories.

Hi Foxy,

Them there be fightn' words! I didn't start this thread as a call to arms, by the right over the wrong, and I don't know who that be, rather as a call to piece. As a pacifist I don't support war in any shape or form, there must be a better way. Warmongering by both sides does us no good. As the powerless I can only ask for us to pray, or hope, for peace. If there are those of goodwill, let them overcome the belligerent.

Dear Paul,

The United States Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms each stand in protection of the
individual against the capriciousness and overwhelming
power of the state. Their respective Constitutions
have guaranteed the individual certain fundamental rights
and protections. Their laws are based on the principle that
law serves the individual, not the state, and that state
political interests cannot outweigh the interests of the
individual, who must stand in law as a free man.

In contrast, V.I. Lenin made it clear that, in his political
philosophy, law has one primary goal: "A law is a political
measure, it is politics." No Soviet authority or communist
leader has abandoned this concept. It has been applied
in the territories "liberated" by the Bolsheviks during the
October revolution, in the captive nations occupied by the
Red Army during World War II, and in the lands won by
military force or "wars of liberation"
in Asia, Africa, the Far East, and the Caribbean.

We can pray and hope for peace certainly. However, those
tactics did not work previously so perhaps other tactics
need to be included as well because as we know - praying
and hoping does not work with bullies.

Hi Paul,

I've been watching the news.

Russia demands an end to Nato activity in Eastern
Europe. It wants Nato to pull out of Poland and
the Baltic States and countries like Poland.
Russia's made a list of what it wants and basically
it wants Nato's protections in these countries gone.
It's aim is to force Nato out. I seriously am not
sure if prayers and hope are going to work in this
instance.

Anyway there's more at the following link:

http://france24.com/en/europe/20211219-amidst-simmering-tensions-with-russia-lithuania-call-for-vigilance

If the US gets involved so will Australia.

Sorry. Here's the link again:

http://france24.com/en/europe/20211219-amidst-simmering-tensions-with-russia-lithuania-calls-for-vigilance

Some of us keep learning but there's no known way of teaching the stupid to be aware of their affliction !

With gullible opinions like yours Foxy WWIII is a foregone conclusion.

You act as though Russia is still a communist country.
Sure they were, but neither them, China, North Korea, Iran or any other autocratic regime has any choice to act the war they do any resist the West and its democratic ideals.

Why don't we just declare open war on these countries right now and get those hypersonic nukes in the air?

You want to know WHY they can't allow moves towards democracy in their countries?

Because the second they allow free and open press or allow people to congregate and protest things
- That's when the West will move to start a coloured revolution in their countries, and install a US puppet ruler.

What do you actually think happened in Ukraine?
The US started a coloured revolution, in the Maidan in 2014.
They backed the Neo-Nazi Svoboda and Right Sector right wing nationalists to start a coloured revolution to oust the then Pro-Russian puppet ruler Victor Yanukovych in order to install their own, Arseniy Yatsenyuk and then Petro Poroshenko.
Those Neo-Nazis nationalists are probably the grandkids of Hitlers forces from Ukraine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)
The eastern side of the country is more Russian where the western side is more Slavic.

Do you recognise the UN right of self determination?

The West screwed up their coloured revolotion, when Putin took the opportunity to move on Crimea.
But the Crimean people voted to leave Ukraine upon that coloured revolution.
First they voted to leave Ukraine, and then the voted to join Russia.
http://youtu.be/95-QItX3I5A
There's no theft of ANYTHING under the UN right of self determination.

The Donbass region currently besieged HAVE JUST AS MUCH RIGHT
- To UN right of self determination.

[Cont.]
The West agreed in 1996 that NATO would not move on Russias borders, it's a longstanding agreement, the US would have similar opposition if Russia moved back into Cuba.

Picking on 2 nuclear armed countries Russia and China, on each side of the continent will only drive them together and harden their resolve to resist the West.

They can't have a war unless they first SELL the war to gullible fools first.

I think some of you people here show an amazing amount of ignorance as to how the world actually works.

Do you want a war?

I mean seriously - IF THE WORLDS WESTERN ELITES WANTED TO REMOVE AUTOCRATIC REGIMES
- In order to create a new world where the UN and Business elites had total control of the planet
Do you not think it would take a WWIII to achieve?

The elites know this and they have already planned for this.
We're all just slowly getting pushed in that direction.

They can't have that war until idiots like you lot
(i.e the majority, it seems)
Are incensed enough to support it starting it.

You want to start a war Foxy?
Well, happy to give you your gun and your uniform and your parachute and drop you in if you want.
- But don't drag all the rest of the innocent people on the planet into it.

Australia has no, absolutely no, national interests in Eastern Europe, especially Ukraine. Therefore we will stay out.

The US has no national interests in Ukraine and therefore should stay out. That might not be true of the US leadership - after all Ukraine has been the major source of income for the Biden family for the last decade. But the people of the US have no reason to fight for Ukraine.

When the Pax Americana was a real thing, the US had a special interest in stopping naked expansionism wherever it might be. But that went out the window when Obama turned and ran over Crimea and the coup de gras was delivered with Biden's debacle in Kabul.

Putin is pushing this now because he knows that the US under its current leadership is a paper-tiger.

I still feel its unlikely he'll invade because there's every chance he'll get what he wants from the US and Germany without the need to invade.

A properly led US would be calling his bluff by telling him that NATO will not expand into Ukraine but equally will never contract out of Eastern Europe or Scandinavia. But even if Biden said that now, no one would believe him - least of all Putin. Equally they should be telling him exactly what sanctions will be implemented if Russian troops cross the boarder. Indeed they should be passing legislation to implement those sanctions in the event of invasion. But they won't.

On the other hand, not a single drop of US blood should be spilt defending Ukraine. Its true that the US has a moral obligation to Ukraine given that Clinton guaranteed their security when he convinced them to surrender their nukes. But people who believe anything Clinton says deserve what they get....well maybe not but they were fools to believe his guarantees. A nuclear armed Ukraine would be a very different proposition right now.

Armchair critic,

No, I do not want to start a war.
No normal person does.
Putin is the aggressor here. All I am suggesting
is that the West not give in to the demands of an aggressor
because innocent people will suffer. Why don't you read the
link I gave. It's quite revealing. Also there's plenty of
material on the web on the Ukraine situation and what Putin
is planning.

As for your emotive suggestion for me to take a gun and go
and fight? I've done my fair share of fighting and have
paid my dues.
Unfortunately my health problems prevent
me from doing any more.
I can barely walk. However I'm speaking out
because I don't want to see any of our
children and grand-children be forced to fight.
And this will be inevitable if we don't stand up to an aggressor.

If you think that Russia is no longer under totalitarian control
you are very wrong. Vigilance is the price of
liberty. We must remain vigilant because while it might be the
Ukraine today, it will be some other group down the road once
we allow Ukraine to be taken.

The measure of our society over history is our fidelity to our
principles. We must remind our government and our people to remain
faithful to these principles or otherwise our society, like so many
in the past, will be swept on the ash heap of history.

I suppose you also feel we should not stand up to China either?

Poor old Paul 1405 devoted commo that he is but even he can see the futility of a war over Ukraine. He cannot bring himself to see the two sides of this particular argument though lol.
Biden needs a war as it makes him so much money, Vlad will soon sort him out and all you fully compromised idiots will bang on about getting the fourth or is it fifth covid jab?
Good luck to you all you ask for trouble so do not complain when you get it!

Here's an interesting link that's worth a read:

http://americanprogress.org/article/how-the-united-states-should-respond-if-russia-invades-ukraine/

"No, I do not want to start a war."
That's good, we can agree on that then.
Because I don't want a world war either.

How is Putin the aggressor?
Tell me in your own words.
What's he planning?

Look... I want you to understand something.
Even when the West is not 'officially' at war..
The wars are still happening.

Look.
http://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list
Authoritarian countries may not be perfect, but the West acts as the aggressor.
The US wages economic war with sanctions and sends its 5th columns in to start coloured revolutions and overthrow and install its own puppet rulers; it's just what it does.
Look at Venezuela, if they could sell their oil, they wouldn't be eating dogs and cats.

What are these countries supposed to do when the west acts this way?
The West has done this stuff on most of the smaller autocratic countries, but the last on their list have nuclear weapons, RIGHT?

As for your links 'Amid Russia tensions, Lithuania advocates for more robust Western response' Lithuania's a NATO country are they not?
What should I expect them to be saying?

Quote>>“The West took the first steps of supporting the [2014] Maidan revolution in Ukraine, we therefore have no choice but to continue supporting Kiev by providing their army with equipment”, he said in an interview to FRANCE 24.<<
See that part?
OR THIS
“The West could never agree to Russia’s recent demands”

Hmmm... Invasion. Are you people mad?
Like Stalin's tanks and waves of red terror conquering western Europe?
Is that what you actually think is going to happen?
Rubbish.

Take a look at that list of countries again.
What are they supposed to do knowing THE SECOND they allow more press freedoms and democratic ideals like freedom of speech and the right to protest, what will the West do?

Tell me, Does international law grant the people of Crimea and Donetsk a right to secede?

[Cont.]
Re: Your second link.
It's a long article, I haven't read it yet.
But note, that it's written by Max Bergmann for Centre for American Progress.
http://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/center-for-american-progress-cap/
Also note in the info on that link John Podesta and George Soros / Open Society Foundation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/10/john-podesta-biden-eu-summit/
"John Podesta is the chair of the Center for American Progress. He served as counselor to President Barack Obama and as White House chief of staff to President Bill Clinton. Max Bergmann is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. He served as a senior adviser in the State Department from 2011-2017."

They serve the Clintons.
Before you go reading things you should also pay attention to who's writing it, as it may have some slant on the content, based on what the objectives are.

Putin, is the pin up boy of the far right, they see him as some modern day Hitler. Vlad is never off the phone to a couple of OLO want-a-be fascist filling them in with the true facts, please give us a break.

JB, if wanting peace in the world makes me a Communist in your eyes, then I'm a Communist. BTW Communists are like Bunyips, they never actually existed, unlike fascists, Hitler and Mussolini were real.

Hi Foxy,

I agree the path of peace has rearly, if ever, been followed in the past. Unfortunatly in the beginning the path to war is much easier to go down, than the path to peace. I hear and agree with what you say about Russia, but I'm they have their side of the argument as well, as do all sides in wars. I hope in this case diplomacy prevails and peace is the outcome.

Foxy being a little philosophical here.

I'm 68, I can still remember the school yard fights. Boys with bloody noses, black eyes and torn shirts. I can recall those things clearly, but for the life of me I can't recall what started the fights or what the fights were about. The Americans fought a long war in Vietnam, by the end of it no one really knew what it was all about. Looking back it's so easy to see how that war, and all wars, could have easily been avoided if those of goodwill had prevailed, and not the hawks of war.

Talk about illusions of grandeur! As if it's going to make any difference what a couple of people here think about the goings on between two superpowers having a pissing contest over a country that means sweet FA to Australia. Let NATO earn its keep - which it doesn’t, as Donald Trump rightly pointed out. Australia has no skin in the European game, having been rejected by that lefty woke continent years ago.

It's important to remember the lesson of liberal reforms of Alexander II and his appeasement of the Russian peasants. If we appease the Russian's in the Ukraine... OTOH there are many enemies.

More important to us is that yesterday's Essential Poll shows a Coalition recovery with the two parties now neck and neck. Anger towards Morrison has cooled. That’s a little hard to believe; maybe it's rather Albo's wittering that shows he has learnt nothing from the last election. Maybe it's just down to the fact that the average Australian's thinking is all over the place like a mad woman's poop. Whatever. They certainly don't care about Ukraine.

Dear Paul,

Ok let's take a lot at the current situation.

Russian forces are massed along Ukrainian borders
threatening to invade and wanting NATO forces out.
NATO forces are there protecting the areas from
ínvasion.

A Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a disaster
for the Ukraine, for Russia, and potentially for
the rules-based international system that the world
has sought to construct since 1945.

Avoiding war is critical, and all sides should engage
diplomatically, to head off conflict.
However, a Russian military invasion of Ukraine is not
a foregone conclusion. While such an action would be a
step with other risky provocations taken by Russian
President Vladimir Putin, it would be an incredibly
bold, rash and potentially ruinous one.

But should Putin decide to launch another
invasion of Ukraine,
the United States must lead a robust response.
A Russian decision to resort to force must be seen in
time as a strategic defeat - a self-defeating step that
would prove ruinous economically and geopolitically
for the Kremlin.

The stakes could not be higher. The Kremlin's dismemberment
of democratic Ukraine would be an unspeakable tragedy for
the Ukrainian people and would represent a huge setback
for democracy world-wide.

More broadly, a Russian invasion of Ukraine would pose a
significant threat to the post 1945 world order.

In the past half century, the world has seen a dramatic
decline in inter-state conflict. A Russian invasion of
Ukraine will thus have global implications. Moreover,
if an invasion were seen as successful and of relatively
low cost to Russia it could normalize inter-state
conflict prompting a return to the "might makes right"
geopolitics of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

China might feel emboldened to do the same to Taiwan
and it could entice other states to deploy force
against less powerful neighbours or rivals.

I have taken all these arguments from the
"Americanprogress.org" link I cited earlier. The article
explained how the United States should respond if
Russia invades Ukraine. I thought their argumentss
were valid and made sense.

I can see Russia's point.

NATO is a totally toothless tiger, unless the US do all the work, but they are good at talking. While they would lose any shooting war, they have been winning the talking war. They have progressively enveloped all the old Russian satellite states, leaderless since the collapse of the USSR. Like the US during the Cuban crisis, Russia must feel hedged in by recently "NATOed" states.

Time now for NATO to back off, & stop the encirclement of the old enemy. The west could be very soon wishing for Russia as an ally against Chinese aggression.

It really is ridiculous for toothless Europe to rattle sabers at Russia, when most European countries would be made unlivable if Russia simply turned the gas tap off.

Thanks Hasbeen,
Finally some sense.

NO
YOU'RE WRONG
So
Just sit there
In Your wrongness
AND BE WRONG!

I say let the Ucraine nation go to the poll and decide if they join Russia - no need of a forced take over by murdering the discenters

Ukraine gained it independence in 1991 following
the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

If Russia had really changed. If the "cold war"
was really over. That is, of there were no continuing
conflicts between capitalism and socialism for the
lands and peoples of Eastern Europe there would be
no need to maintain military expenditures and no
need to protect themselves against Russia's parasitic
greed and might. There would be little need for NATO,
much less NATO expansion.

Don't forget that NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization)
was the capstone of a policy led and funded by the
United States to contain/encircle Soviet and communist
power in Eastern Europe. NATO did not make any promises
not to expand in Eastern Europe their promise in 1990
dealt only with Germany. Gorbachev has confirmed this.

NATO has an "open-door" policy regarding other nations.
Who are doing everything they can to protect themselves
against Russian might. They can't be blamed for that.

As John Boyd Orr stated:

" The real evil of the Russian communist state is not
communism. It's the secret police and the concentration
camps." Which still exist to this day. As Putin a
former KGB apparachik well knows.

Russia wants/needs something Ukraine has that disappeared when the USSR broke up. It is my understanding that Crimea was occupied because the Russian navy had to have ice-free ports. Whatever Putin is, he is no idiot. Hopefully, something will be sorted out between Russia and Ukraine without bloodshed. In the meantime, the rest of the world should mind its own business. Like it or not, some Russians were not keen to give up their empire. The big problem for the West is China, not Russia.

As stated earlier - a Russian invasion of Ukraine
will have very serious global implications.
Especially if an invasion was seen as successful
and of relatively low cost to Russia it could normalize
inter-state conflicts prompting a return to the
"might makes right" geopolitics of the 19th and early
20th centuries.

China is already watching things closely and Russia's
success might make China feel emboldened to do the
same to Taiwan - and who knows who next?

It could have a domino effect and entice other states to
display force against less powerful neighbours or rivals.

The stakes could not be higher. The Kremlin's dismemberment
of democratic Ukraine would be an unspeakable tragedy for
the Ukrainian people and it would represent a huge setback
for democracy world-wide.

"NO
YOU'RE WRONG
So
Just sit there
In Your wrongness
AND BE WRONG!"

What the hell is that all about?
Who's wrong Foxy?
Who was that directed at?

Why don't we all just listen to what Putin himself said today?
This is in Russian, so you'll have to click the 'CC' button to get the captions.

You all think this is about Russia invading Ukraine.
But it's not, you people are idiots.
This is about Ukraine trying to take back Crimea.
Why do you think Russia have their troops there?

LISTEN TO WHAT PUTIN SAYS.
Did you ever think of actually doing that Foxy?
http://youtu.be/QXCKRTqB4-o

No, because you think you know better than everyone.
When all you're doing is lending your ear to the EXACT PEOPLE who start the wars.

How many of you will listen to what Putin says?
And will our media report it to you as he asks?

YOU ALL KNOW BETTER THAN PUTIN HIMSELF, OBVIOUSLY.

Russia is much more likely to come to a negotiated settlement reasonably satisfactory to all, if dummies stop digging at them with bayonets. Putin can't afford to appear to crumble in to the west. The west has been pushing him very hard, while being totally dependent on Russia for the gas which is all keeping a few million Europeans alive in a cold winter, since their green energy policy has gone tits up.

They had better be very careful or he just might turn as nasty as they have made him out to be, & let a few million die of cold.

Someone, or a whole bunch of saner folk have finally sat on the idiot Boris Johnson, & his insane net zero by 2050 ratbaggery, for there to be announced that permission to bore baby bore in the North Sea gas & oil fields has been granted to the British oil companies.

The only thing that got the UK out of it's disastrous economic mess after WW11 was North Sea oil & gas, with out that they were a banana republic in the making, without the right climate to be successful at even that. It might prop them up again, if only they can gain the guts to stamp out ridiculous green blob influence. It is drawing a long bow to save them from their own stupidity, but they have come through disastrous situations before. Good luck to the normal folk of Great Britain.

Lots of foot stamping there from the usual suspects which can be summarised by this sentence from Foxy...."But should Putin decide to launch another invasion of Ukraine, the United States must lead a robust response."

Exactly what this 'robust' response would look like is left unsaid. By obviously, according to these people, the US should do 'sumfing'.

What? Boots on the ground? More US blood spilt on foreign wars?

US aerial support for the Ukrainian army?

Sanctions? What sanctions? Cut off Russian exports?
The problem with the sanctions option is that, given the weakness of the current US leadership, no one believes they'll do anything that really mattered and that they'd backtrack asap.

The world has looked at Biden debacle in Kabul and seen weakness. They've looked at the dropping of Iranian sanctions and seen people who can't stay the coarse. They've looked at Biden's lifting of sanctions on the Nordstream 2 and seen an administration that can be bought.

Putin knows he's faced by a paper-tiger led by an incompetent administration.

He may not go into Ukraine. But if he doesn't it won't be because of a robust US response. It'll be because the US and Germany give him what he wants without him needing to fight.

Paul wrote: "BTW Communists are like Bunyips, they never actually existed...."

Man, what a fool.

Further evidence?. Paul also opined..."The Americans fought a long war in Vietnam, by the end of it no one really knew what it was all about."

Well that is probably true of all those with the abysmal historic understanding of Paul.

mhaze, are you some kind of retro from 1960's. "Man" add to that cool dude, far out, etc are they still part of your vocab. Here's one for you, what a TOOL.

By the 1970's millions of Americans and Australians, were asking what is Vietnam all about, why are we there, why are our young men dying in a bloody useless war.

I assume you were gung-ho at the time of Vietnam, or you're too young to know anything about it. Where do you fit in?

To Armchair Critic- I remember all the stuff on Crimea when the MH370 and Euromaiden was going on- talking about Green vs Brown (Western Allied vs Russian Allied) Ukraine was going on. Lithuania isn't far from Ukraine.

Seems like the West wants to build a new Berlin Wall on Russia's doorstep.
All this talk of Putin annexing Russia is going to push the West, NATO and Ukraine to try to retake it;
- And then well have a World War the West vs Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.

- That's a hard pass for me -

I'm sure certain people in certain elite circles would relish the opportunity.
- But you can all keep your WW3 thank you very much.

Paul wrote: " millions of Americans and Australians, were asking what is Vietnam all about, "

But previous you'd said no one knew.

I agree there were/are lots of low information people such as yourself who don't know what it was about. But there were plenty of others who weren't so naive.

mhaze, where were you at the time of the Vietnam War, a twinkle in the Old Mans eye I suspect. You might consider yourself the
Fountain of Knowledge on the Forum, but so many show you up to be a dill on most subjects.

Pray tell what was Vietnam all about, in your opinion.

Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, is concerned about the signals some Western leaders are sending about a Russian invasion of his country. ‘We don't need this panic,’ he said at a press conference in Kiev.

I suspect that the Ukraine's Zelensky doesn't want people shining a light on his business because they'll realize that there's something rotten going on. At least many understand that his predecessor left under suspicious circumstances.

From what I got with Armchair Critics discussions on the Ukraine previously this isn't even a fight between the US and Russia it's a fight between the Democrat Party and it's far left agenda (Hillary Clinton and far left members of the US intelligence establishment- CIA and others- Jeff Bezos, etc) and Putin's agenda (Putin being an ex-Intelligence Chief). We'll probably never know what is really happening here- but you can get some insight if you know who the players are.

It's quite clear what's happening .

The Russian military has been amassing troops near
the country's border with Ukraine, sparking a
diplomatic crisis and heightening US and European fears
that Moscow is preparing for an imminent invasion of its
neighbours.

Russia seized Crimea in 2014. A clue to Mr Putin's thinking
came in a lengthy piece last year when he called Russians
and Ukrainians "One nation."

If Russia's only aim is to force NATO away from the area -
it should not have started to amass its troops
there in the first place. Nato's 30 members have turned down
flat any attempt to tie their hands for the future and let
Russia do what it wants. That's how previous occupations
occurred there in the first place and started the cold war.
It appears that history may be about to be repeated.

Russia has denied it is planning to invade (then why the
troops?) but it is continuing to amass more troops. Actions
speak louder than words.

It is also vehemently opposed to Ukraine's efforts to join
NATO. Gee I wonder why? Plus Moscow also wants guarantees
that the US led alliance will stop its expansion into
former Soviet occupied territories. Again - I wonder Why?
Seriously though Washington and NATO have rejected the
demands as long as Russian military continue amassing
near the borders of these countries.

NATO is considering a longer term military posture in
Eastern Europe to strengthen its defences which will be
welcomed by the very concerned countries.

Putin claims that the West promised in 1990 that NATO will
expand "not an inch to the east." But did so anyway. That
claim is not true. It was before the collapse of the
Soviet Union so the promise made to Soviet President
Gorbachev only referred to East Germany in the context
of a reunited Germany. Mr Gorbachev later said that
"the topic of NATO expansion was never discussed at the
time."

As the old placards used to say - "Ruskie Go Home!"
If the Russians would do just that - this crisis
could be settled.

Would Australia listen to China if China demanded
that American troops and military leave our shores
and waters while China continued to amass their
military around our door-step?

Would our government comply if China insisted that Australia
break its ties with the US and its allies?

Or would it let China do whatever it wants?

The same applies to Russia.

Nobody wants a war but giving in to bullies is not an
option.

Chinese warship have been circling Australia
for the past few years. It's a fact well-recorded.
Where would we be without the US and our allies?
So why blame Eastern Europe for being concerned
about Russia's hungry eyes and actions?

This is the article that Foxy lifted (sans attribution) her most recent posts.... http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

The bits she left out are probably revealing.

Its all very well to say that Russia should be stopped from absorbing all or part of Ukraine. Its quite another to not offer any suggestions as to how that might be achieved if the Russians decide on military action. Just demanding that someone do 'sumfing' doesn't really help.

Personally I don't think Putin sees a need to absorb Ukraine through his military. Given the weakness of the western leadership, Putin believes he can get what he wants without firing a shot. But he will if needs be because he is much more committed to neutralising the Ukrainian threat than the west is committed to defending the rights of a beleaguered nation.

Meanwhile Xi sits on the sidelines evaluating what all this means vis a vis Taiwan.

__________________________________________________________________

Paul,

"where were you at the time of the Vietnam War,"

In Australia. Not quite old enough to be drafted but old enough to ponder the reason for the draft.

"You might consider yourself the Fountain of Knowledge on the Forum.."
Only in comparison to some. No names mind you.

"so many show you up to be a dill on most subjects"
More of your fantasies Paul?

"Pray tell what was Vietnam all about, in your opinion."
Like all wars there are many causes and aims. But primarily it had three causes:

* the thirst for power of the Communist leadership and their Chinese/Russian sponsors
* the desire of the US to stop yet another non-communist and potentially democratic country from being absorbed by that failed ideology.
* the desire to halt the outward expansion of communism in south-East Asia and elsewhere.

Pretty much the same reasons as caused the Korean conflict.

All were proxy wars for the much larger contest between democracy and totalitarianism.

Putin has long viewed Ukraine simply as an
extension of his own nation. However to many Ukrainians
Mr Putin's appeal to a shared history is little but
a hollow attempt to appropriate the country's own
heritage and justify territorial ambitions.

"They stole our past," said Alyona Getmanchuk, director
of the New Europe Center, a pro-Western think tank in
Kiev, "Now they're trying to steal our future."

In 2014 Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea
and fomented a still-running separatist war in the country's
east. Mr Putin has sought ever since to prevent Ukraine's drift
toward the West and has voiced growing anger that the US
is training with and helping arm Ukrainian soldiers.

We shall have to wait and see how far Mr Putin is prepared
to go with his bluffs. Hopefully he will not be allowed to succeed.

mhaze,

Your reasons are straight out of the Yankee Imperialist play book, a cut and paste job. So you were playing in the sand pit at the time of the Vietnam War. Glad you can think for yourself. As I said, Fountain of Knowledge equals dill. You just have to Google harder, or stick to koalas, another subject you know nothing about.
Steele might be along shortly to show you up for the umpteenth time.

Hi Paul,

Do you actually read what mhaze posts?

He's a bloke who
supported Trump, Cardinal Pell, Christian Porter,
Israel, and now Putin? No surprises there. The list goes on.
He's not got anything right yet.
No wonder people like Steele, Nathan, and
others, find him entertaining. He's good for a laugh.
And CM will send him kudos. Can't ask for more.

mhaze,

If democratic elections had been held in Vietnam early on Ho Chi Minh and his Nationalists would have rompted in. The Yanks knew that, so they denied the Vietnamese the right to self determination. An illegitimate Yankee backed puppet regime was installed in the South. The Soviets and China had no interest in propagating the war to any great extent, committing nothing more than advisers and materials. Unlike the Yanks who poured in half a million men at a time, and billions in materials. The dirty American War cost millions of lives. Finally the Yanks skipped out of Vietnam with their tails between their legs.

Now now children, let's try to be adults here.

Paul first. You said "by the end of it no one really knew what it was all about" and now you're telling me what it was all about. Logic takes a holiday? We might not agree on what Vietnam was about but, it seems, we now agree that you were wrong to say no one knew what it was about.

Paul also..."koalas, another subject you know nothing about."

Yet when I pointed out koalas were so rare that it was ten years before the the European settlers saw their first, Paul went off and proved that the first koala was sighted in 1798. It seems it was beyond poor old Paul's maths skills to calculate that 1798 was ten years after 1788.

Foxy seems rather miffed that I pointed out she'd lifted whole paragraphs from a BBC article and pretend they were her own. She does this very regularly and I only point it out occasionally. It seems she's just desperate to appear erudite and learned by copying erudite and learned wording.

Hilariously Foxy thinks I was wrong when I opined Pell was innocent. Seems she's forgotten he was found....ahem, innocent. And now that I won't buy into to her anti-Putin tantrum, she thinks that means I'm pro-Putin. No middle ground in Foxy-land.

Even funnier that the girl who fell more than anyone in the group for RussiaGate thinks I never get anything right.

Sadly they are both hoping for the return of SR to bolster their self-esteem. Would it be crass to point out that SR has quietly withdrawn after I found him out in making a series of errors on WuFlu statistics?

mhaze,

You poor man, grabbing at straws again.
Tsk. Tsk. Cardinal Pell was not exonerated.
He got off on a legal technicality. And you
certainly have not been right yet - on this
forum. But you can keep trying - although
I don't like your chances. But hey - miracles
do happen.

"And you
certainly have not been right yet"

Was I right about you lifting whole paragraphs from a BBC article and passing it off as your own?

mhaze,

I make notes from a great deal of sources and it's
not intentional. I research a lot. Most of the time
I do try to be consistent and either give links or
acknowledge where the information came from. But I
am only human and do make mistakes.

However, that's
the difference between us. I don't go around nit-picking
people's posts or how much they may have quoted from
someone else. To me that's a sign that you don't have
any other way to win an argument so you resort to
using these pathetic tactics and attempts at personal
slurs.

Sad really. What would you do if you didn't have me to pick on?
Although I imagine you'd find someone else to try to bully.
You must be a joy to live with. Or perhaps your family tends
to ignore you and you come on here to vent your spleen.
Makes sense.

cont'd ...

BTW: If someone lifts from many articles it's called
research!

So that's a yes....I was right.

"If someone lifts from many articles it's called
research!"

No....its called plagiarism.

Now I'll let you change what is obviously a very embarrassing subject for you....

I wrote: " And now that I won't buy into to her anti-Putin tantrum, she thinks that means I'm pro-Putin. No middle ground in Foxy-land."

Any middle ground in Foxy-land?

Hi Foxy,

The far right 'Useful Idiot' must have been shocked when his pin-up boy Putin was playing footsies with the CCP's Xi Jinping last week. He must have had nightmares of Hitler and Stalin in 1939.

mhaze,

I may be wrong but it's highly unlikely.

As for any middle-ground?

I'm not good with limitations (my star-sign is - Leo).
Therefore a middle-ground is not my forte - especially
as far as Putin is concerned.

Dear Paul,

There's certain people's posts on this forum that I simply
scroll past most of the time. mhaze, here is trying to
save both his faces. He thinks Steele has left because
of him. (delusions of adequacy). Anyhoo - I'm glad that
people like yourself, Steele, Banjo Paterson, David F.
to name just a few are still posting. Thanks for raising this
topic of the Ukraine on this forum. It's been a real
eye-opener.

"I'm not good with limitations "

Yes Foxy that's the problem in a nutshell. This attitude that anyone who doesn't agree with you is definitionally wrong. The idea that since I don't buy into your warmongering over Putin, then I must be pro-Putin. Its childish and demonstrably wrong.

The shame of it is that I know or suspect you can do better.

mhaze,

Of course there's middle-ground with the ones we
love, or admire, and respect in spite of all
our many and vast differences. Life is never white
or black, all or nothing.

Finally. So I can take that as confirmation that you now recognise that its possible to not be as vehemently anti-Putin as you without being pro-Putin?

I have to say I find it more than a little interesting that no one here is prepared to address the point that all of Putin's moves are as a result of the perceived weakness in Washington and Berlin.

The debacle in Kabul changed everything. The surrender to Iran confirmed it. The approval of Nord Stream 2 was cherry on the cake. Xi sits and watches and ponders his next move. Biden sits and watches and ponders his next bowel movement.

mhaze,

If you are not pro-Putin why are you defending his actions?

Where have I defended Putin's actions?

Exact quotes please.

NB: analysing and seeking to understand his actions isn't the same as defending them. Indeed its a prerequisite to defending against them.

If it weren't for Putin we'd already be fighting WW3 !

Foxy,

If you can't find quotes showing me to be pro-Putin (and we both know you can't) perhaps an acknowledgement that what you said was a tad hyperbolic.

mhaze,

What will it achieve if I tell you to go back to
page 8 and re-read your posts?

You are free to continue with your claimed "analysis"
of Putin. I am no longer interested in what
you have to say and I don't want to stoop to personal
insults and slurs.

Talk to those who have the "wisdom" to see things your way.

Have a nice day.

If it weren't for Putin we'd already be fighting WW3 "individual".

I think you are right Individual, Putin is a good business man, not an ideologue, who knows war is not good business for most. He will only fight if he is left no option. Her's making too much money winning the peace.

Hasbeen,

So you think Putin is a "good businessman?"
And that it's because of him that we won't have WWIII.

It's because of him that we're on the brink of WWIII.

" In a country where over 20 million people can barely
make ends meet, the luxurious lifestyle of the
president is a brazen and cynical challenge from a
high-handed potentate." said Nemstov, a longtime
and vocal critic of Putin.

He was assassinated in 2015.

You seemingly misunderstand Foxy.

Nowhere did I say he was a nice man, I said he was a good business man. Neither did I say the 2 were compatible. I don't know if he is any worse for his population than Biden, who has made life much worse for the lowest paid American, through ideology, his or his minders, & the same could be said for Boris.

Putin inherited a total cot case caused by communism/socialism, & has made some extremely wealthy, but has also improved the life of the bottom end, just look at vodka sales, where as bidden took over & thriving economy & is progressively destroying it.

Putin is making himself & many Russians rich, & most better off with his gas industry, where as Boris & other Europeans are beholden to him for heating & cooking, while refusing to harvest their own gas.

Stupidity is alive & well in the UK & Europe, less so in Russia. Europe can't go to war with Russia, at least until summer when they won't require heat or electricity just to stay alive.

Hasbeen,

The Guardian has done some great articles on
Putin. Too long to go into here. However all in all
Putin is painted as "an unscrupulous and resourceful
operator, ready to deploy any weapon, break any rule,
and subvert any system to consolidate his power,
wealth, and international prestige."

He's appointed his own men into positions of power.
He has their full support.

There's a great book - "Putin's People: How the KGB
took back Russia and then took on the West," by
Catherine Belton which has received rave reviews and
apparently is "a fearless account of the emergence of
the Putin regime. It sheds a light on the current
threats posed by Russian money and influence."

It might be useful to get a hold of a copy.

I have just opened a book bought well before the current Russia/Ukraine business; and on the introductory page, Ukraine is mentioned. The author writes that Putin says that he is a religious man, and a great supporter of the Russian Orthodox Church. If this is so, the author suggests that in his nightly prayers he might ask God why he didn’t put mountains in Ukraine.

Had there been mountains in Ukraine, the great expanse of flat land that is called the North European Plain would not be such encouraging territory from which to "attack Russia repeatedly" - since 2014.

How does this fit the big bad Russian narrative?

It's all to do with keeping up appearances.
Which is something our own politicians are
so good at - until they're caught out that is.
The difference being in Russia if you're a
whistle-blower - you end up being either
assassinated or you disappear.

Now a little further into this book, it seems to me that the goings on, which we can never understand from MSM reports, were inevitable. Ukraine wishes to join NATO. Imagine Putin's thoughts on having a possible NATO base next door. Article 5 of the NATO requires it to go to the aid of a fellow member under attack. Imagine the relief of Western European politicians that Ukraine is not such a member.

Another complication is that Russia is obliged by law to 'protect' the 8.5 million ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

Then there is Joe Biden who, in speech, has confused Ukraine with Afghanistan. What a mess!

Russia has felt the need to use aggression as defence, thanks to its huge, flat geography, since the time of Ivan the Terrible in the 16th Century. Not a lot seems to have changed. How lucky we are in Oz.

The Ukraine people remember the invasion of the Russian KGB going door to door breaking down doors, arresting, and murdering in the 1940s. Putin a former KGB member does not hold much affection in Ukraine.

KGB going door to door breaking down doors, arresting, and murdering in the 1940s.
Josephus,
A lot has changed over the 80 years since. The descendants of the then bad are now the very ones who make every effort to never let happen what their forebears did. The real problem we have these days is the fact that the Baby boomers & their children have had it so good that they're blind & oblivious to the dangers their unproven & unworkable ideals are leading this society towards.
Just look at the domestic situation. The insipid masses are stuffing up anything they can get their hands on & then blame Governments for their own stupidity.
They literally are their own worst enemies !

"Pray tell what was Vietnam all about, in your opinion."

If the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a false flag, which it likely was

Then I'd say 50% was about stopping the spread of communism;
The other 50% was capitalising on the golden triangle with Air America.
+ Plus they also got to test out warfare on civilians with The Phoenix Program, and left a whole lot of men behind because they didn't pay the reparations to the Viet Cong

You're a mad woman Foxy.
- And I hate to say it, but as dumb as a box of rocks' as well.

Leo hey, ignorant arrogant know it all, just like my father I guess.

You're a muppet, a silly little stooge.

How is it that Putin is the aggressor when it's NATO that's encroaching on Russia, and Ukraine that wishes to take back Crimea (which seceded from Ukraine and joined Russia DEMOCRATICALLY)

With a build-up of NATO forces and the West sending arms to Ukraine isn't it only reasonable he would have the troops there?
And FYI they've been there for years.

Why does Nordstream have to be stopped?
Thats between Russia and Germany.
Would you rather Putin sold the gas to China, or do you just want to keep the foot on their throat?

Youse are all so dumb you all think this is about Russia invading the Ukraine.
But it's not, it's about NATO encroaching on Russia.
You're being SOLD a war, and you'll get one if you keep being so ignorantly complicit.
They need the support of dumbasses like you lot if they are to get their war.
The war that starts WW3 first needs your support.

Go beat your wardrums Foxy, I wish you could be parachuted in to the front line.

It's like the 1930's Europe when one lot tries to reclaim what was theirs initially & then money-power hungry outsider opportunists exploit the situation by starting a conflict.
All the while running propaganda to stir the rest into making it a world war !

True to form.

As demanded by Uncle Sam, Morrison has expressed his total outrage with Russia. The fool stopped short of committing Australia's "last man, and last shilling" to the protection of our great sovereign allie Ukraine. That will come later.

Armchair Critic,

You unfortunately don't have a clue about Crimea, the
Ukraine, or Putin.

But that's allright. You're not the only clueless one.
Unfortunately you have never experienced a totalitarian
regime or what life would be like under one. I speak
from the experiences of my family. And today - "Ruskie
Go Home!" still applies.
ask any Ukrainian or any of their neighbours.

You want to parachute me into the front lines?

Really?

Well aren't you a charmer! A mental midget with an IQ of
a fence post - but you're not my problem.
So you can blow your comments out of your arse - and
bugger off! You stupid ignorant dim-wit!

cont'd ...

Armchair Critic,

Or as my gran would say:

"Don't take any notice of him - he's a
'durak' , a 'slaboumnyy!

Mentally deficient! A moron!

Individual,

Re 'like the 1930s' - I saw a discussion suggesting that back then, if the poobahs had read Hitler's 'Mein Kampf', which clearly spelt out his ideas, WW2 could have been avoided. A new book spelling out China's intenions is now available, and that too will go unread by our gormless "betters".

I don't think that Ukraine will be a flashpoint. It's not in the EU, it's not in NATO, and its mores and rationale are no better than Russia's. I doubt very much that the US will commit; they more concerned about another Cold War with Putin. And, Russia can turn off gas to so many European countries that they have to be very careful.

Hi Foxy,

I can see where you are coming from, Putin is a despot, and not to be trusted. Our far right brigade see Putin as a despot alright, but he's their despot, and that's important from their way of thinking. As I said, they must have fallen over with shock, when Putin started playing footsy with Xi of China. How can it be they ask, we'll Putin and Xi are two peas in the same pod.

In this I'm not pro Russia, or pro America, I'm pro PEACE. Too many losers in war.

Dear Paul,

We're all pro peace. As are the European countries that make
up NATO. Putin started this incident with the amassing of
Russian troops around the Ukraine. It was only after Putin
did this that NATO sent its troops to the borders to send
a message to Putin that they will not allow him to invade
the Ukraine as he did with Crimea. NATO is only there to
protect the Ukraine from invasion as well as the other former
occupied territories by Russia.

Russia cannot be allowed to do as it pleases in the region.
It will send the wrong message to China.

Standing up to tyrants is the only way to maintain peace.
Or else we shall all end up on the ash heap of history.

Hi Paul,

The following link is a must read:

http://vox.com/22917832/vladimir=putin-ukraine-military-invasion

Why do you fill your mind with the opinions of others but not listen to that which is CLEARLY STATED?

http://youtu.be/W2Cugn8JZfk

Baaaa Baaaaaa

'Cause its madness for sheep to talk peace with
a wolf!

cont'd ...

BTW: I don't watch the Ewe Tube.

I'm trying to Ram the point here!

Dear Paul,

I watched Q & A last night. They discussed the situation
in the Ukraine. Amongst other things. Greg Sheridan was
very critical of Putin. I've now found an analysis of
the Ukraine situation given by Stan Grant. It's worth a
read:

http://abc.net.au/2022-02-15/putin-russian-power-ukraine-border-world-war-unimaginable/100830264

sorry. Here's the link again:

http://abc.net.au/news/2022-02-15/putin-russian-power-ukraine-border-world-war-unimaginable/100830264

Thanks Foxy,

Good analysis by Stan Grant. Putin is not to be trusted, but he is a product of the West and we have to manage him carefully, if we want to avoid an all out war.

Dear Paul,

So much depends on what Putin's going to do next.
And how the West will react.

OMG you never listen to anything do you Foxy?
- Except the stuff that reinforces you flawed opinions and beliefs anyway
And your brain become more entrenched in those flawed beliefs

Did I or did I not mention UN right to self-determination a few weeks back?

BREAKING! Putin: Russia To Decide TODAY Whether To Recognise Donetsk & Lugansk As Independent States
http://youtu.be/5Y_qHzl_vOg

I support Donetsk and Luhansk as independent States.
Putin doesn't have to steal anything or invade anyone.
But that doesn't change the issue of a NATO Ukraine and the issue of the US placing weapons on Russia's border.

You're too much of a bloody muppet to see that it's the West that's the aggressor.

All this talk of a war, puts money into NATO coffers and helps justify their existence, with every western country offering the weapons to arm and embolden Ukraine to start a war themselves.

Must be pretty hard on them having a chunk of their country sliced off legally under UN provisions after a botched western overthrow.

Maybe they will have some more sliced off soon too.

Armchair Critic,

This is the kind of pedantic nonsense
up with which I will not put!