Whether it is the reason or not, it is certainly the pretext used. Ukraine should not be in NATO and its wish to join is understandable but unwise.
That is unfortunately the way of the world for many countries. Ukraine - a victim of geography - was always destined to be a vassal state of some description if it did not declare neutrality.
I think there's a good chance this conflict will lead Russia into becoming a vassal state to China, given how badly it's going so far and how China can exploit their weakness quite easily.
www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk
Hopefully soon and good riddance.I think there's a good chance this conflict will lead Russia into becoming a vassal state to China, given how badly it's going so far and how China can exploit their weakness quite easily.
Meanwhile, while it's the Daily Star, they're clamining US and UK spies think he has terminal bowel cancer and thus his invasion is a last ditch attempt to leave a twisted legacy:
Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines
All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper
View attachment 111093
I would bet money on that not being the case. Ukraine will not join NATO and will not join the EU.
Finland, Poland etc.
Exactly the kind of thinking which has proved so unhelpful in the past. Poking the bear. Naturally, as a far away country we have no fear of Russian invasion, just the odd polonium event. I’m cautious of random Brits who advocate irritating what, in foreign policy terms, is a mental patient (Russia!) knowing that whatever consequences there are won’t be visited on us first.
"Poking the bear".
Russia does not have to be an enemy. As @brad465 points out Russia is quickly falling under Chinese influence. China is extremely anti-war, compared to Russia and will exert increasingly moderating influences upon whoever is the next Russian president.
Of course, we should stop laundering the filthy money of kleptocrats. Russia is bled dry by corruption. And the regime is disgraceful. But Russia itself does not need to be an enemy of the west. It has no ideological quarrel with us any more as it did once under communism. It does, however, use an aggressive form of statecraft which we should all condemn. Nonetheless, I am not sure NATO has a great deal of moral authority on how to handle the invasion of sovereign countries.
Interestingly I've seen some people think that Putin's demise, and/or him being bogged down in a long guerrilla war in Ukraine after regime change, would lead to a number of other parts of Russia trying to gain independence (that admittingly I'd never heard of until recent days), because their army will be much weaker and unable to keep order in the unstable regions of Russia, which hasn't been a problem for a while.
The worst outcome for Putin is Ukraine turns into Vietnam on his doorstep. And that is the outcome we should be aiming towards. Attritional warfare and a steady stream of body bags going back to Moscow. This is exactly why British assistance to Ukraine is not in the form of troops or Typhoons but hard anti tank weaponry and urban warfare training. And quite right too.
That’s a question of morality. No, states shouldn’t dictate the policies of other sovereign nations.
Your idea of containment is to expand the no-Russia Club to encroach on Russia’s own borders further than they are already. If you think this is going to moderate Russia’s behaviour you are wrong. That is not how Russia behaves whether we like or approve of it or not.
What do you mean by that exactly and how will that be achieved?
Our sanctions and actions have been noted by Putin, who is now threatening strong retaliatory measures:
Cyberattacks incoming.Our sanctions and actions have been noted by Putin, who is now threatening strong retaliatory measures:
Russia says it 'will not forget' Britain's support for Ukraine in direct threat
The Russian foreign ministry promised that London faces 'retaliatory measures' after the government, with other countries in the West, levelled sanctions at the aggressorwww.mirror.co.uk
What we are doing is clearly being viewed as an escalation by Russia. As above, “quite right” that we are doing them, and I’m glad they are moaning as it proves they are having an effect. But given how they are viewed, I find the line between this, and active conflict, to be a hazy one at best.
You’d have thought we’d have seen quite a few already with the current war but it appears the Russians don’t seem to have the capability we fear, in that respect.
So not expanding NATO then?
Our sanctions and actions have been noted by Putin, who is now threatening strong retaliatory measures:
Russia says it 'will not forget' Britain's support for Ukraine in direct threat
The Russian foreign ministry promised that London faces 'retaliatory measures' after the government, with other countries in the West, levelled sanctions at the aggressor
What we are doing is clearly being viewed as an escalation by Russia. As above, “quite right” that we are doing them, and I’m glad they are moaning as it proves they are having an effect. But given how they are viewed, I find the line between this, and active conflict, to be a hazy one at best.
Praying that one of the measures is Putin banning Russians from funding the Tories
I agree. However one reading of “proportionately tough retaliatory measures” in response to our “cooperation with ultra-nationalist forces in Ukraine” is for them to start arming terrorists in the U.K.
I could make a comment about "buyer's remorse" and note the Russian contributions to the Conservative Party, but that might lead you to link the two.
Putin dislikes Britain. We live in his head rent free in the same way Putin lives in many of our heads rent free.
