International [NATO News] Putin: lifting Ukraine missile restrictions would "put NATO at war with Russia"

[Snowblindlove]

"Russia is going to steamroll Ukraine in 24 hours"
"3 days and they almost have the capital surrounded"
"the convoy is just waiting for the order to attack "
"The Kiev offensive was obviously a feint, it's all about the east"
"The ship was lost due to a fire and then a storm, its bad luck, these things happen"
"Russia isn't interested in the enitre east, they don't need Kharkiv"

And now we have arrived at what is hopefully the final stage:


I guess it's one way of coping.

No serious people ever said this. What you are repeating is sensationalist news

It honestly just sounds like you don't pay attention to the world and that you've let this conflict completely override your logical faculties. India's been accelerating its detachment from the West at least since the West did to Iran what they're currently trying to do to Russia. Prior to that, the was far less active divergence - the separation you're talking about was just a natural consequence of their growing influence and desire for Great Power status.
The West's also been going out of its way for a few years at least (but more like, since Obama) to get India on-side in the effort to build partnerships against China. I mean, the QUAD pretty much only exists because the West has been trying to pull India closer. So, let's not pretend that the West isn't invested in India's alignment.

With its sanctions war against Russia, the Global North (the Western powers) has low-key declared war on the Global South (while making Russia a de facto member of the latter). No offense, but if you think that pushing India into a position where they're becoming more closely aligned with the camp China's in isn't "losing India" then you're just not paying attention. There is already plenty of motivation in both India and China to repair their relations - and there the West goes, giving them even more motivation. Because if nations actually did what the West tried to pressure them into doing (sanctioning Russia) then many of those nations would have collapsed. Asking nations to collapse themselves for its own benefit kinda tells us exactly what the West is; and it's a lot worse than anything the West pretends Russia it.
Both the Indian far right and the Indian far left have latched onto the sanctions war against Russia to drive anti-Western (predominantly anti-American) sentiment in the public.

You're also judging intelligent leaders by the standards set by Western leadership. I mean, come on. America's run by a mental invalid, Germany's run by a weak fool, and Finland's run by a child. These represent some of the worst leaders the West has ever seen.
Why on Earth would either India or China support Russia in anything remotely comparable to the West's "support" for Ukraine?
The West's support for Ukraine is destroying Ukraine. And everyone recognises that the West is at least partially responsible for the crisis in Ukraine that's necessitated that support. And neither India nor China thinks of themselves as having unlimited resources, and neither's deluded themselves into thinking that they're invincible. Those are both problems that West has.

Pumping foreign weapons into a warzone is not only more irresponsible than either India or China have shown themselves to be in recent history, but it's also not as useful as the Western powers like to advertise.
Firstly, most of India's weapons were bought from Russia - asking for them back would make Russia look pretty bad. For China's part, their weapons are not compatible with Russian systems, and they'd require additional training - even if they were being sent, they wouldn't be sent to the frontlines. Secondly, and tying into the first, the Ukrainians have already complained about the quality and reliability of many of the Western weapons sent to them, and the heavier Western weapons that are now being sent require the Ukrainians to be trained. Third, Westerners should start paying attention to the world and the national interests of other nations - if you guys did that, this Ukraine conflict would not have started, and you'd also understand that both China and India have anti-secessionist policies that, on top of their relations with the West, would keep them from open and unfettered support for Russia. Fourth, the West is busily draining its own military stocks so that the Ukrainians can burn through them against the Russians - India can't afford to behave so recklessly, and (unlike the West) China is probably thinking about Taiwan. Finally, Ukraine is desperate for help, Russia is not.
This is a silly comparison and a silly expectation.

If you think that India and China's support for Russia doesn't amount to much then, again, you're deluding yourself. India and China are working at circumventing sanctions to continue trading with Russia - which is a part of the reason that Russia's mostly been able to shrug off the impact of the West's economic war - which is already starting to hurt the West. Meanwhile, the West's support for Ukraine has put Ukraine in ridiculous debt, and hasn't actually done much to stop the annihilation of Ukraine itself - so far, it's just dragging it out, and there are parts of what was Ukraine that have already been plugged into Russia's economy and are never coming back. On top of that, these daffy sanctions have compelled India to take a closer look at Russia and China's "basket of currencies" idea as the basis for a secondary global financial system. The fact that you think that military support for Ukraine is worth more than economic support for Russia, growing interest in drawing away from the Western economic sphere of influence, and the achievement of Russia and China's overall grand strategy, is pretty crazy.
India, Africa, etc already pissed the West off by not condemning Russia. Americans were pulling their goddamn hair out, trying to bully us all into toeing the line.

What's also odd is that you think that Russia and the West are in any way equivalent in terms of the destruction they cause for the rest of the world. There is no real comparison here. Even in their attempt at hurting Russia, all the West's really done is extend the global famine and hardship that's resulted from Russia's attack on Ukraine. Even Japanese outlets have pointed this out. How are the Europeans so backwards that they can't see the blatantly obvious? It's ridiculous that you guys don't realise how much damage you've done to everyone in your attempt at hurting Russia. Or, alternately, that you don't realise that having done that damage to everyone will have medium- to long-term consequences.
And, as I've said before, Western nations - specifically the European ones - don't really have enough of value to absorb many consequences of that scale. Without Russia, they're pretty fucked.

And this daft conflict would never have happened in the first place, if the Western powers didn't think it was a good idea to dick around with and taunt a nuclear power.

The world isn't a Star Wars movie, and "losing India" doesn't mean that India joins some grand anti-Western alliance.
You're sitting around expecting, what? That Africa, India, etc, would declare open war against powerful militaries that most of us are not equipped to take on? Are you even listening to yourself?
The logic that, India, China and Africa must behave with as much petty, selfish stupidity as the West, or they're clearly not sympathetic toward Russia, is a very strange standard to set. It's also nonsense.

"This situation has little to no meaning for the Chinese or Indian man" is again you showing your Western bias - the Chinese and Indian people are far more politically aware and engaged than people of the West (other than a few exceptions like Greece). Again, read Chinese and Indian news outlets - there's a wide range of opinions on the matter. They don't all agree with me by a long shot, but they certainly offer broader perspectives than you're tossing around.

The actual military aspect of this conflict is probably the least important, other than for optics. Western citizens don't entirely seem to have come to understand that yet, and so you guys reduce all strategic considerations to the military situation on the ground - and even the interpretation of that seems to be based almost entirely on Ukrainian propaganda.
Losing India to the Russian/Chinese dream of usurping the dollar is a pretty big deal, and neither Sweden nor Finland offer anywhere near as much influence or importance - not to mention that they're already align with Western interests.
Sweden and Finalnd joining NATO is weak shit - damn near meaningless. And maybe you should all be asking yourselves why such a big deal is being made over such a relative non-event.
That's not really the behaviour of people who believe they're winning.

Save these threads and posts. They will be fun to bump

Also EU agrees to gas for rubles but claims it isnt because they pay in euros to Gazprom Bank which is then converted to rubles...

Which is what Putin said to begin with

 

[Videer]

lol putin the grand unifier

STOCKHOLM (AP) — Finland’s Parliament has overwhelmingly endorsed a bid from the Nordic country’s government to join NATO.

Lawmakers at the 200-seat Eduskunta legislature voted 188-8 Tuesday to approve Finland seeking membership in the 30-member Western military alliance.

The vote was seen a formality as Finnish President Sauli Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin announced the intention on Sunday, and lawmakers’ approval wasn’t necessarily required. However, both Niniisto and Marin stressed that it was important for the Parliament to weigh in on the NATO bid, described by the Finnish head of state as “historic.”

https://apnews.com/article/middle-e...&utm_medium=AP_Europe&utm_campaign=SocialFlow

 

[Rod1]

No serious people ever said this. What you are repeating is sensationalist news


Save these threads and posts. They will be fun to bump

Also EU agrees to gas for rubles but claims it isnt because they pay in euros to Gazprom Bank which is then converted to rubles...

Which is what Putin said to begin with

Its a pretty big difference because the Ruble doesn't has a real value right now, that way you aren't being forced to buy the Kremlin's ridiculous exchange rate.

 

[Rod1]

No offense, but if you think that pushing India into a position where they're becoming more closely aligned with the camp China's in isn't "losing India" then you're just not paying attention. T

So you think India is angry at the West because of Russia so it will "align" with the country that literally killed a dozen of its soldiers 2 years ago? the country that is propping up India's number 1 enemy? the country that claims that parts of India belong to them?

Yeah, man you are delusional, nobody is aligning with China over anything, specially not India who has some serious beef with both China and Pakistan.

 

[Octavian]

Which is what Putin said to begin with

They'll move away in time nonetheless. The ship has sailed on European countries being beholden to Russian gas.

 

[Octavian]

So you think India is angry at the West because of Russia so it will "align" with the country that literally killed a dozen of its soldiers 2 years ago? the country that is propping up India's number 1 enemy? the country that claims that parts of India belong to them?

Yeah, man you are delusional, nobody is aligning with China over anything, specially not India who has some serious beef with both China and Pakistan.

Dude's post is filled with fantasy land conclusions that are purely conjecture. Sorta reeks of anger towards the US as if the US is this horrendously evil nation. Last I checked, it's Russia that invaded a neighboring sovereign nation with a very popularly elected democratic leadership. Yet, it's the US and the West that's being reckless by declaring defacto war on the southern hemisphere... I mean - it's just pure nonsense.

 

[TheGreatA]

It honestly just sounds like you don't pay attention to the world and that you've let this conflict completely override your logical faculties. India's been accelerating its detachment from the West at least since the West did to Iran what they're currently trying to do to Russia. Prior to that, the was far less active divergence - the separation you're talking about was just a natural consequence of their growing influence and desire for Great Power status.
The West's also been going out of its way for a few years at least (but more like, since Obama) to get India on-side in the effort to build partnerships against China. I mean, the QUAD pretty much only exists because the West has been trying to pull India closer. So, let's not pretend that the West isn't invested in India's alignment.

With its sanctions war against Russia, the Global North (the Western powers) has low-key declared war on the Global South (while making Russia a de facto member of the latter). No offense, but if you think that pushing India into a position where they're becoming more closely aligned with the camp China's in isn't "losing India" then you're just not paying attention. There is already plenty of motivation in both India and China to repair their relations - and there the West goes, giving them even more motivation. Because if nations actually did what the West tried to pressure them into doing (sanctioning Russia) then many of those nations would have collapsed. Asking nations to collapse themselves for its own benefit kinda tells us exactly what the West is; and it's a lot worse than anything the West pretends Russia it.
Both the Indian far right and the Indian far left have latched onto the sanctions war against Russia to drive anti-Western (predominantly anti-American) sentiment in the public.

You're also judging intelligent leaders by the standards set by Western leadership. I mean, come on. America's run by a mental invalid, Germany's run by a weak fool, and Finland's run by a child. These represent some of the worst leaders the West has ever seen.
Why on Earth would either India or China support Russia in anything remotely comparable to the West's "support" for Ukraine?
The West's support for Ukraine is destroying Ukraine. And everyone recognises that the West is at least partially responsible for the crisis in Ukraine that's necessitated that support. And neither India nor China thinks of themselves as having unlimited resources, and neither's deluded themselves into thinking that they're invincible. Those are both problems that West has.

Pumping foreign weapons into a warzone is not only more irresponsible than either India or China have shown themselves to be in recent history, but it's also not as useful as the Western powers like to advertise.
Firstly, most of India's weapons were bought from Russia - asking for them back would make Russia look pretty bad. For China's part, their weapons are not compatible with Russian systems, and they'd require additional training - even if they were being sent, they wouldn't be sent to the frontlines. Secondly, and tying into the first, the Ukrainians have already complained about the quality and reliability of many of the Western weapons sent to them, and the heavier Western weapons that are now being sent require the Ukrainians to be trained. Third, Westerners should start paying attention to the world and the national interests of other nations - if you guys did that, this Ukraine conflict would not have started, and you'd also understand that both China and India have anti-secessionist policies that, on top of their relations with the West, would keep them from open and unfettered support for Russia. Fourth, the West is busily draining its own military stocks so that the Ukrainians can burn through them against the Russians - India can't afford to behave so recklessly, and (unlike the West) China is probably thinking about Taiwan. Finally, Ukraine is desperate for help, Russia is not.
This is a silly comparison and a silly expectation.

If you think that India and China's support for Russia doesn't amount to much then, again, you're deluding yourself. India and China are working at circumventing sanctions to continue trading with Russia - which is a part of the reason that Russia's mostly been able to shrug off the impact of the West's economic war - which is already starting to hurt the West. Meanwhile, the West's support for Ukraine has put Ukraine in ridiculous debt, and hasn't actually done much to stop the annihilation of Ukraine itself - so far, it's just dragging it out, and there are parts of what was Ukraine that have already been plugged into Russia's economy and are never coming back. On top of that, these daffy sanctions have compelled India to take a closer look at Russia and China's "basket of currencies" idea as the basis for a secondary global financial system. The fact that you think that military support for Ukraine is worth more than economic support for Russia, growing interest in drawing away from the Western economic sphere of influence, and the achievement of Russia and China's overall grand strategy, is pretty crazy.
India, Africa, etc already pissed the West off by not condemning Russia. Americans were pulling their goddamn hair out, trying to bully us all into toeing the line.

What's also odd is that you think that Russia and the West are in any way equivalent in terms of the destruction they cause for the rest of the world. There is no real comparison here. Even in their attempt at hurting Russia, all the West's really done is extend the global famine and hardship that's resulted from Russia's attack on Ukraine. Even Japanese outlets have pointed this out. How are the Europeans so backwards that they can't see the blatantly obvious? It's ridiculous that you guys don't realise how much damage you've done to everyone in your attempt at hurting Russia. Or, alternately, that you don't realise that having done that damage to everyone will have medium- to long-term consequences.
And, as I've said before, Western nations - specifically the European ones - don't really have enough of value to absorb many consequences of that scale. Without Russia, they're pretty fucked.

And this daft conflict would never have happened in the first place, if the Western powers didn't think it was a good idea to dick around with and taunt a nuclear power.

The world isn't a Star Wars movie, and "losing India" doesn't mean that India joins some grand anti-Western alliance.
You're sitting around expecting, what? That Africa, India, etc, would declare open war against powerful militaries that most of us are not equipped to take on? Are you even listening to yourself?
The logic that, India, China and Africa must behave with as much petty, selfish stupidity as the West, or they're clearly not sympathetic toward Russia, is a very strange standard to set. It's also nonsense.

"This situation has little to no meaning for the Chinese or Indian man" is again you showing your Western bias - the Chinese and Indian people are far more politically aware and engaged than people of the West (other than a few exceptions like Greece). Again, read Chinese and Indian news outlets - there's a wide range of opinions on the matter. They don't all agree with me by a long shot, but they certainly offer broader perspectives than you're tossing around.

The actual military aspect of this conflict is probably the least important, other than for optics. Western citizens don't entirely seem to have come to understand that yet, and so you guys reduce all strategic considerations to the military situation on the ground - and even the interpretation of that seems to be based almost entirely on Ukrainian propaganda.
Losing India to the Russian/Chinese dream of usurping the dollar is a pretty big deal, and neither Sweden nor Finland offer anywhere near as much influence or importance - not to mention that they're already align with Western interests.
Sweden and Finalnd joining NATO is weak shit - damn near meaningless. And maybe you should all be asking yourselves why such a big deal is being made over such a relative non-event.
That's not really the behaviour of people who believe they're winning.

It just feels like you're grasping for straws in order to make it seem like the West is "losing", and trying to frame Sweden and Finland joining NATO as some sort of exchange where the West loses the East, by taking in two countries that according to you are meaningless. Honestly the first sentence of your post is something you yourself should reflect upon, because you've been a pretty pragmatic, logical guy in the past, but now you're sounding like someone who's heavily emotionally invested, and unable to let go of a narrative that just doesn't reflect reality, that being the idea that Russia is in any way winning anything in this conflict. Ukrainian propaganda or not, the truth is that by merely invading they already fucked themselves. I stated prior to the invasion, that Russia invading would be the biggest geo-political mistake in Europe since WW2, and it has turned out to be exactly that. But as I've said, Russia has also made preparations for such a scenario so they are capable of taking the hit, in the form of sanctions, loss of equipment and loss of lives. It's just not in any way, shape or form, a good thing for them. This is Russia's Vietnam, Russia's Iraq, except it hits a lot closer than either of those conflicts did for the American, considering how closely related the Ukrainian and Russian populations have been throughout history.

It's pretty funny actually that I've been simultaneously called a Russian bot, and then a guy who has been brainwashed by Western propaganda in two separate threads on the very same forum. It just shows, again, how emotional people are about this thing, people who for the most part reside on an entirely different continent, whereas I actually neighbour Russia and could become physically involved if the situation escalates. Even so, I think I've looked at the situation pretty objectively and have acknowledged on numerous occasions that NATO expansion is not something that I'm in favour of, by any means. As someone who has gone through the Finnish military, and who is still enlisted in the event of war, the idea of being militarily allied with countries that have launched invasions and to this day are harbouring hopes of conquering more territory, that's just not something that I'm comfortable with at all.

But even with that being said, there is no way of framing this event as anything but a huge L for Russia from the beginning. And that's not just because of some Nordic countries joining NATO, which I do agree is largely inconsequential. It's more so the fact that they themselves have lost a moral high ground, a story book narrative that Russia has been telling its citizens and allies, that Russia has "never invaded" another nation (as if). That narrative has now crumbled to a heap in front of everyone's eyes, and they're seeing for themselves exactly what sort of a country Russia truly is. Given even a sliver of the power that a country like the United States possesses, only a fool would think they'd be any better, it's almost a guarantee that they would be a lot worse, based on the facts of how they behave as a regional power (utterly incapable of sound diplomacy, devoid of "soft power", relying on military boasts and threats to get their way). Nobody wants to see them gain more influence, certainly not anyone in Russia's vicinity, not until they learn a better way of utilizing that influence.

It's hard to see Russia as anything but the West's useful boogeyman at this point, willing to come to do its bidding whenever some of its institutions, such as NATO, have lost credibility and purpose. Putin restored all of that credibility in the span of just a few months. That's all on him, it sure as hell wasn't Joe Biden or anyone else.

 

[12ga.]

EU was racist wrt Turkey for years on joining EU. Plus they support Kurdish terrorists. Don't think it's a ploy to get things but for real. As a secondary consideration is massive Muslims Russia has which probably made phone calls to Erdogan.

 

[12ga.]

So? Turkey isn't stupid, what would they do? cause an existential crisis in NATO and risk getting kicked out?

How do you kick someone out? There is no method for that not to mention Turkey is 100x more valuable than Finland or Sweden to alliance.

 

[SandisLL]

How do you kick someone out? There is no method for that not to mention Turkey is 100x more valuable than Finland or Sweden to alliance.

Sorry, please go to the hell with your Turkey and turkish nazists demands.

 

[Limbo Pete]

It honestly just sounds like you don't pay attention to the world and that you've let this conflict completely override your logical faculties. India's been accelerating its detachment from the West at least since the West did to Iran what they're currently trying to do to Russia. Prior to that, the was far less active divergence - the separation you're talking about was just a natural consequence of their growing influence and desire for Great Power status.
The West's also been going out of its way for a few years at least (but more like, since Obama) to get India on-side in the effort to build partnerships against China. I mean, the QUAD pretty much only exists because the West has been trying to pull India closer. So, let's not pretend that the West isn't invested in India's alignment.

With its sanctions war against Russia, the Global North (the Western powers) has low-key declared war on the Global South (while making Russia a de facto member of the latter). No offense, but if you think that pushing India into a position where they're becoming more closely aligned with the camp China's in isn't "losing India" then you're just not paying attention. There is already plenty of motivation in both India and China to repair their relations - and there the West goes, giving them even more motivation. Because if nations actually did what the West tried to pressure them into doing (sanctioning Russia) then many of those nations would have collapsed. Asking nations to collapse themselves for its own benefit kinda tells us exactly what the West is; and it's a lot worse than anything the West pretends Russia it.
Both the Indian far right and the Indian far left have latched onto the sanctions war against Russia to drive anti-Western (predominantly anti-American) sentiment in the public.

You're also judging intelligent leaders by the standards set by Western leadership. I mean, come on. America's run by a mental invalid, Germany's run by a weak fool, and Finland's run by a child. These represent some of the worst leaders the West has ever seen.
Why on Earth would either India or China support Russia in anything remotely comparable to the West's "support" for Ukraine?
The West's support for Ukraine is destroying Ukraine. And everyone recognises that the West is at least partially responsible for the crisis in Ukraine that's necessitated that support. And neither India nor China thinks of themselves as having unlimited resources, and neither's deluded themselves into thinking that they're invincible. Those are both problems that West has.

Pumping foreign weapons into a warzone is not only more irresponsible than either India or China have shown themselves to be in recent history, but it's also not as useful as the Western powers like to advertise.
Firstly, most of India's weapons were bought from Russia - asking for them back would make Russia look pretty bad. For China's part, their weapons are not compatible with Russian systems, and they'd require additional training - even if they were being sent, they wouldn't be sent to the frontlines. Secondly, and tying into the first, the Ukrainians have already complained about the quality and reliability of many of the Western weapons sent to them, and the heavier Western weapons that are now being sent require the Ukrainians to be trained. Third, Westerners should start paying attention to the world and the national interests of other nations - if you guys did that, this Ukraine conflict would not have started, and you'd also understand that both China and India have anti-secessionist policies that, on top of their relations with the West, would keep them from open and unfettered support for Russia. Fourth, the West is busily draining its own military stocks so that the Ukrainians can burn through them against the Russians - India can't afford to behave so recklessly, and (unlike the West) China is probably thinking about Taiwan. Finally, Ukraine is desperate for help, Russia is not.
This is a silly comparison and a silly expectation.

If you think that India and China's support for Russia doesn't amount to much then, again, you're deluding yourself. India and China are working at circumventing sanctions to continue trading with Russia - which is a part of the reason that Russia's mostly been able to shrug off the impact of the West's economic war - which is already starting to hurt the West. Meanwhile, the West's support for Ukraine has put Ukraine in ridiculous debt, and hasn't actually done much to stop the annihilation of Ukraine itself - so far, it's just dragging it out, and there are parts of what was Ukraine that have already been plugged into Russia's economy and are never coming back. On top of that, these daffy sanctions have compelled India to take a closer look at Russia and China's "basket of currencies" idea as the basis for a secondary global financial system. The fact that you think that military support for Ukraine is worth more than economic support for Russia, growing interest in drawing away from the Western economic sphere of influence, and the achievement of Russia and China's overall grand strategy, is pretty crazy.
India, Africa, etc already pissed the West off by not condemning Russia. Americans were pulling their goddamn hair out, trying to bully us all into toeing the line.

What's also odd is that you think that Russia and the West are in any way equivalent in terms of the destruction they cause for the rest of the world. There is no real comparison here. Even in their attempt at hurting Russia, all the West's really done is extend the global famine and hardship that's resulted from Russia's attack on Ukraine. Even Japanese outlets have pointed this out. How are the Europeans so backwards that they can't see the blatantly obvious? It's ridiculous that you guys don't realise how much damage you've done to everyone in your attempt at hurting Russia. Or, alternately, that you don't realise that having done that damage to everyone will have medium- to long-term consequences.
And, as I've said before, Western nations - specifically the European ones - don't really have enough of value to absorb many consequences of that scale. Without Russia, they're pretty fucked.

And this daft conflict would never have happened in the first place, if the Western powers didn't think it was a good idea to dick around with and taunt a nuclear power.

The world isn't a Star Wars movie, and "losing India" doesn't mean that India joins some grand anti-Western alliance.
You're sitting around expecting, what? That Africa, India, etc, would declare open war against powerful militaries that most of us are not equipped to take on? Are you even listening to yourself?
The logic that, India, China and Africa must behave with as much petty, selfish stupidity as the West, or they're clearly not sympathetic toward Russia, is a very strange standard to set. It's also nonsense.

"This situation has little to no meaning for the Chinese or Indian man" is again you showing your Western bias - the Chinese and Indian people are far more politically aware and engaged than people of the West (other than a few exceptions like Greece). Again, read Chinese and Indian news outlets - there's a wide range of opinions on the matter. They don't all agree with me by a long shot, but they certainly offer broader perspectives than you're tossing around.

The actual military aspect of this conflict is probably the least important, other than for optics. Western citizens don't entirely seem to have come to understand that yet, and so you guys reduce all strategic considerations to the military situation on the ground - and even the interpretation of that seems to be based almost entirely on Ukrainian propaganda.
Losing India to the Russian/Chinese dream of usurping the dollar is a pretty big deal, and neither Sweden nor Finland offer anywhere near as much influence or importance - not to mention that they're already align with Western interests.
Sweden and Finalnd joining NATO is weak shit - damn near meaningless. And maybe you should all be asking yourselves why such a big deal is being made over such a relative non-event.
That's not really the behaviour of people who believe they're winning.

 

[SandisLL]

Finland will survive real Global Depression better than Turkey or India or ...China or South Africa.

 

[SandisLL]

+ weak shit is to read this prince texts here.
He is thinking that he does knows what stuff Finland is, not alone europe.

 

[Snowblindlove]

They'll move away in time nonetheless. The ship has sailed on European countries being beholden to Russian gas.

I expect that as well for most minus pro Russian states like Hungary and Bulgaria. However the reality is for the time being and likely the next year at least to 2 they will pay euros to convert those euros to rubles to Russia just like Russia wanted. They will also pay a higher price due to market conditions etc.

Also I dont know why people speak of the EU as if all they do has consensus or works efficiently.

It just feels like you're grasping for straws in order to make it seem like the West is "losing", and trying to frame Sweden and Finland joining NATO as some sort of exchange where the West loses the East, by taking in two countries that according to you are meaningless. Honestly the first sentence of your post is something you yourself should reflect upon, because you've been a pretty pragmatic, logical guy in the past, but now you're sounding like someone who's heavily emotionally invested, and unable to let go of a narrative that just doesn't reflect reality, that being the idea that Russia is in any way winning anything in this conflict. Ukrainian propaganda or not, the truth is that by merely invading they already fucked themselves. I stated prior to the invasion, that Russia invading would be the biggest geo-political mistake in Europe since WW2, and it has turned out to be exactly that. But as I've said, Russia has also made preparations for such a scenario so they are capable of taking the hit, in the form of sanctions, loss of equipment and loss of lives. It's just not in any way, shape or form, a good thing for them. This is Russia's Vietnam, Russia's Iraq, except it hits a lot closer than either of those conflicts did for the American, considering how closely related the Ukrainian and Russian populations have been throughout history.

It's pretty funny actually that I've been simultaneously called a Russian bot, and then a guy who has been brainwashed by Western propaganda in two separate threads on the very same forum. It just shows, again, how emotional people are about this thing, people who for the most part reside on an entirely different continent, whereas I actually neighbour Russia and could become physically involved if the situation escalates. Even so, I think I've looked at the situation pretty objectively and have acknowledged on numerous occasions that NATO expansion is not something that I'm in favour of, by any means. As someone who has gone through the Finnish military, and who is still enlisted in the event of war, the idea of being militarily allied with countries that have launched invasions and to this day are harbouring hopes of conquering more territory, that's just not something that I'm comfortable with at all.

But even with that being said, there is no way of framing this event as anything but a huge L for Russia from the beginning. And that's not just because of some Nordic countries joining NATO, which I do agree is largely inconsequential. It's more so the fact that they themselves have lost a moral high ground, a story book narrative that Russia has been telling its citizens and allies, that Russia has "never invaded" another nation (as if). That narrative has now crumbled to a heap in front of everyone's eyes, and they're seeing for themselves exactly what sort of a country Russia truly is. Given even a sliver of the power that a country like the United States possesses, only a fool would think they'd be any better, it's almost a guarantee that they would be a lot worse, based on the facts of how they behave as a regional power (utterly incapable of sound diplomacy, devoid of "soft power", relying on military boasts and threats to get their way). Nobody wants to see them gain more influence, certainly not anyone in Russia's vicinity, not until they learn a better way of utilizing that influence.

It's hard to see Russia as anything but the West's useful boogeyman at this point, willing to come to do its bidding whenever some of its institutions, such as NATO, have lost credibility and purpose. Putin restored all of that credibility in the span of just a few months. That's all on him, it sure as hell wasn't Joe Biden or anyone else.

Man they are. I follow Indian politics for years and speak some Hindi the climate in India is anti western as is the middle east and islamic nations. Ffs the UAE new president just praised Russia signed new deals and said its his 2nd home. The oppisition and recently outsted pakistani leader is pro russian. And China

 

[Snowblindlove]

How do you kick someone out? There is no method for that not to mention Turkey is 100x more valuable than Finland or Sweden to alliance.

Turkey is a terrible ally to the joke that is Nato but you make a point. There isnt really a way to remove them it seems

 

[Arkain2K]

As expected, Putin went from threatening Finland and Sweden with nukes just last week to "it's fine, they're not a threat to Russia" after his empty bluff is called this week.<Lmaoo>

Putin says Sweden and Finland joining NATO is fine after all.
"As for the expansion of NATO, including through new members of the alliance which are Finland, Sweden — Russia has no problems with these states”
By Tristan Bove | May 16, 2022

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) summit at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia May 16, 2022.
​

Russian president Vladimir Putin once said that any more countries on Russia’s doorstep joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) constituted a threat to Russia, and would provoke “military and political consequences.”

In fact, Putin warned last year that NATO expanding its military infrastructure eastward into Ukraine would be a “red line” for Russia and perceived as a direct threat.

But three months into a Ukraine invasion that’s not going according to plan, and after two other countries close to Russia announced that they are joining NATO, Putin appears to be softening his tone, and resigning himself to the fact that NATO’s eastward expansion is happening anyway.

On Sunday, Finland—which shares an 800-mile border with Russia and was part of the Russian Empire for over a century—said it had applied to join NATO to ensure that its own national security would not be threatened by Russia in the future. On Monday, Sweden followed suit after a meeting amongst ruling party officials over the weekend, who voted to end the country’s 200-year neutrality policy.

“The issue at hand is whether military nonalignment will keep serving us well?” Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said on Sunday. “We’re facing a fundamentally changed security environment in Europe.”

For months, Russian officials have warned against the two countries taking this decisive step, but now that it has actually happened, Putin appears to be doing his best to diminish the significance of the act.

"As for the expansion of NATO, including through new members of the alliance which are Finland, Sweden — Russia has no problems with these states,” Putin said Monday at a summit of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, a military alliance composed of several post-Soviet states.

Putin plays down the threat

For months, Russian officials have been saying that should Finland and Sweden join NATO, Russia would receive it as a threat, and respond by building up its military capabilities in the Baltic Sea. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev even suggested in April that nuclear weapons and hypersonic missiles could be deployed. Just last week, Putin warned that Finland joining NATO would be a “mistake,” and suggested that Russia would interpret it as an act of aggression.

But Putin signaled on Monday that Finland and Sweden’s decision to join NATO is one of relative unimportance, and does not constitute a danger to Russia.

"Expansion at the expense of these countries does not pose a direct threat to Russia,” he said.

Putin also called NATO’s geographic expansion “artificial,” suggesting that the alliance’s spread is more symbolic in nature than anything else, despite having previously repeatedly requested assurances that NATO would not expand into Ukraine, something that Putin claims justified the invasion.

Should Finland’s membership be approved, it would double the length of NATO’s border with Russia.

Finland and Sweden joining NATO marks a historic shift in their foreign policy stances, as both countries are reversing their long-standing military neutrality policies in what is widely considered an admonishment to Russia and publicly for the West.

Putin’s apparent reversal on the importance of Sweden and Finland joining NATO was a surprise to many Russia watchers, but the Russian president is suggesting that he will react more aggressively should either country become a military threat to Russia.

Putin signaled on Monday that Russia might step up its military presence in the Baltics if the alliance decides to set up military bases or station weapons in Finland or Sweden, although did not indicate whether he would be willing to authorize sending nuclear weapons or heavy-duty missiles to the region.

“The expansion of military infrastructure into this territory will certainly cause our response. We will see what it will be based on the threats that will be created for us," Putin said.

Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson has said that NATO military bases and nuclear weapons are not welcome in the country, and that it does not intend to militarize to counter Russia.

But even if Putin is playing down the threat, and Nordic countries want to keep militarization out of it, joining NATO will inevitably create more “military tension” in the region, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said recently.

https://fortune.com/2022/05/16/sweden-finland-join-nato-putin-no-threat-russia/
-----

Sorry to disappoint the handful of "sky is falling" folks with pea-sized brains in the WR, no one in Russia are actually interested in being humiliated by the Finns again after being bogged down by little Ukraine, much less in a position to randomly declare World War III against the collective might of NATO for absolutely no good reasons whatsoever, which incidentally is now relevance and strong again after decades of neglect, all thanks to how Putin treat his neighbors.

 

[Rational Poster]

I guess we're back peddling from Vladivostok to Lisbon, eh?

 

[Limbo Pete]

I guess we're back peddling from Vladivostok to Lisbon, eh?

May have had eyes too big for their stomach
Just maybe
Maaaaaaaaaybe

 

[SandisLL]

Best threat russia already get.
Yeah, they might claim how " europe will die without our export production " etc.
They proved that they aren't trustable commodities seller and induced real hate ( they are calling this " rusofobia " ) by filling EU with refugees, blackmail with energy supplies, threating with nukes and blocking export from Ukraine....

EU had officially considered them as partner ....now as threat. Even urged countries to increase defense and spendings.
NATO official guideline was to consider them as partner...
Now this most likely will be changed.

For long term investors there are other countries where to invest. Countries with proven during decades investments security and safe business environment.

Russia just didn't get what happened. Ofc effect they will feel later.....

More than this: NATO and so called western block is far larger than just US and EU.

 

[Bald1]

It just feels like you're grasping for straws in order to make it seem like the West is "losing", and trying to frame Sweden and Finland joining NATO as some sort of exchange where the West loses the East, by taking in two countries that according to you are meaningless. Honestly the first sentence of your post is something you yourself should reflect upon, because you've been a pretty pragmatic, logical guy in the past, but now you're sounding like someone who's heavily emotionally invested, and unable to let go of a narrative that just doesn't reflect reality, that being the idea that Russia is in any way winning anything in this conflict. Ukrainian propaganda or not, the truth is that by merely invading they already fucked themselves. I stated prior to the invasion, that Russia invading would be the biggest geo-political mistake in Europe since WW2, and it has turned out to be exactly that. But as I've said, Russia has also made preparations for such a scenario so they are capable of taking the hit, in the form of sanctions, loss of equipment and loss of lives. It's just not in any way, shape or form, a good thing for them. This is Russia's Vietnam, Russia's Iraq, except it hits a lot closer than either of those conflicts did for the American, considering how closely related the Ukrainian and Russian populations have been throughout history.

It's pretty funny actually that I've been simultaneously called a Russian bot, and then a guy who has been brainwashed by Western propaganda in two separate threads on the very same forum. It just shows, again, how emotional people are about this thing, people who for the most part reside on an entirely different continent, whereas I actually neighbour Russia and could become physically involved if the situation escalates. Even so, I think I've looked at the situation pretty objectively and have acknowledged on numerous occasions that NATO expansion is not something that I'm in favour of, by any means. As someone who has gone through the Finnish military, and who is still enlisted in the event of war, the idea of being militarily allied with countries that have launched invasions and to this day are harbouring hopes of conquering more territory, that's just not something that I'm comfortable with at all.

But even with that being said, there is no way of framing this event as anything but a huge L for Russia from the beginning. And that's not just because of some Nordic countries joining NATO, which I do agree is largely inconsequential. It's more so the fact that they themselves have lost a moral high ground, a story book narrative that Russia has been telling its citizens and allies, that Russia has "never invaded" another nation (as if). That narrative has now crumbled to a heap in front of everyone's eyes, and they're seeing for themselves exactly what sort of a country Russia truly is. Given even a sliver of the power that a country like the United States possesses, only a fool would think they'd be any better, it's almost a guarantee that they would be a lot worse, based on the facts of how they behave as a regional power (utterly incapable of sound diplomacy, devoid of "soft power", relying on military boasts and threats to get their way). Nobody wants to see them gain more influence, certainly not anyone in Russia's vicinity, not until they learn a better way of utilizing that influence.

It's hard to see Russia as anything but the West's useful boogeyman at this point, willing to come to do its bidding whenever some of its institutions, such as NATO, have lost credibility and purpose. Putin restored all of that credibility in the span of just a few months. That's all on him, it sure as hell wasn't Joe Biden or anyone else.

Excellent post.

And while I'm generally in agreement with @PrinceOfPain, we're miles apart on this topic. And the following seems to be at the center of our unvoiced disagreement:

"Given even a sliver of the power that a country like the United States possesses, only a fool would think they'd be any better, it's almost a guarantee that they would be a lot worse, based on the facts of how they behave as a regional power (utterly incapable of sound diplomacy, devoid of "soft power", relying on military boasts and threats to get their way."

And that sentence gets to the heart of so much that's going on nowadays in the west. No, the "west" isn't some altruistic innocent entity. But let's not pretend that if some other power rose to prominence after WW2 humanity would be better off. Even now, regional powers operate more aggressively and with less reciprocity than the US. This self flagellation coming from within is absolutely idiotic and myopic, while the blame game coming from outside seems to be motivated by anything from jealousy to illogical hate.

Only a fool trusts those with power and it takes an even bigger fool to trust those with power over them. But at least there's a semblance of accountability (this is deteriorating at an alarming pace) as well as checks and balances in the places we call the west. No such things exist in many countries. Russia being a prime example as well as the only relevant one in this case.