[Gfactor]

Just a thought, as many have said before not an expert either, but really shouldn't a supposedly selfless and peacekeeping organization like NATO start dialogue with Russia by probably starting removal of one of their bases in Romania or Eastern Europe and ask Russia to return back from Ukraine?

Why is it only about sending more troops and not reducing as Russia rightfully or wrongfully takes offence to the presence of troops and missiles at its doors?

Is it too simple and straightforward that no one thought about it?

[Poitive]

Originally Posted by Samurai

...You have to judge from the results, do Japanese/Germans feel bitter about post WW-II treatment of them. Not really. They integrated into the western side almost wholeheartedly...

Not suggesting any right or wrong, but sharing an anecdote for a tiny bit of context - the little I recollect of a longish conversation with a German biker on one of my trips, several years ago. He was furious at the Americans. Why? For the restrictions Germany had on it's military as a result of WW2 etc. Said that they effectively were reduced to be dependent on other countries for their own defence. He also said that there was a sliver lining to the cloud; that they ended up spending money which would otherwise have gone into defence towards development and industrialisation of the country, which brought other rewards. Though only a sample size of one, his angst and dent to sense of pride could be felt.

While looking this up, besides what @thanixravindran already mentioned, came across some interesting bits shared below, which really go well beyond the immediate aftermath of WW2:

Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (Approx 1990)

Germany undertook to reduce its ]armed forces to no more than 370,000 personnel, no more than 345,000 of whom were to be in the Army and the Air Force.

The German government subsequently recognized the Russian Federation's claim to be the successor state of the Soviet Union, including the right to maintain troops in Germany until the end of 1994.

This further led me to read up:
Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe

The original Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) was negotiated and concluded during the last years of the Cold War and established comprehensive limits on key categories of conventional military equipment in Europe (from the Atlantic to the Urals) and mandated the destruction of excess weaponry. The treaty proposed equal limits for the two "groups of states-parties", the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Warsaw Pact. In 2007, Russia "suspended" its participation in the treaty, and on 10 March 2015, citing NATO's de facto breach of the Treaty, Russia formally announced it was "completely" halting its participation in it as of the next day.

Russia suspending participation in a treaty limiting armed forces could well have been a preparation for the events we now see unfolding.

Europe has a complicated history.

[avishar]

Although I really feed bad for these kids who are in this situation, I must say that these guys should have been a bit more proactive.

Let me also add that Indian embassy communications should have been more forceful and imparted in a way that they are cognizant of the upcoming dangers. They should have done more, communication-wise and coordination-wise. Not to mention the side angle of PR going on.

Because we are Indians. We usually are unwilling to take a financial loss so easily. We will try to save our lives, but we will also try to save our worldly possessions in the same fervour. Because things cost money and what we own has come at great cost. So understandable. Weak communications will not make anyone leave stuff and high-tail it back to India, there is a lot at stake. That education, which these kids have invested a lot of money and years in. Precious possessions, etc.

BUT, survival instincts should have kicked in much before.

Countries don't issue advisories just like that. An advisory, even one which says the situation is developing and be cautious, should be treated with a lot of importance. Especially for us Indians, since we enjoy fantastic diplomatic relationships with almost every country, if the Indian embassy is issuing advisories for Indians in a country, you better pay attention.

Second, why where 1000+ students still hanging around in Kharkhiv still the end of February? Kharkhiv is like 30 km from the Russian border where the Russians have been amassing for months. Do these people read the news? The non-stop warnings about invasion?

Lugging around luggage and hoping that trains are arranged 5 days into a war. Man, do these people not fear ianything. Studying near a vunerable border of a foreign land and not being at their alert-est.

There is no embassy in the world who can help once war starts. Worst still, once war starts, human rights, citizenships rights are grey area. We atleast have good relations with the Russians. What if people were to end up as POWs. That would be an even bigger mess.

Unless you put the fear of God into them, they won't move.

[SnS_12]

Just trying to understand why Russia invaded Ukraine now? If was not that it was going to sign its papers to join NATO tomorrow and Russia had to react immediately to stop it at any cost.

On the other hand all this happened at a time when Russia was since 2014, decreasing its holding of US$. It has accumulated gold and non-American currencies, especially the Euro and gold in its forex reserves had surpassed the country’s US$ holdings for the first time ever.

So could Putin be planning to bring the country onto some sort of “gold standard” to try to shore up its economy post the latest sanctions?

Russia and China, plus the other Eurasian states in their sphere of influence are all accumulating gold and the indications are they see it as central to replacing the US$ for cross border trade. The European Commission also plans to promote the Euro as the world’s exchange and reserve currency and compete against the US$. Already, 20.5% of the world’s reserves are held in Euros.

In the current situation it is already in Russia’s interest to cast itself off from inflating western currencies and to base their economy on sound money, which can be Gold (it keeps it intrinsic value better than anything else). Further the biggest push for Russia to do so is that countries that are indebted and provide substantial welfare for its citizens would be most threatened by any return to gold convertibility and will be a “weapon of mass financial destruction"

[deathwalkr]

With due apologies to Narayan Sir, why does NATO want bases all across Europe anyway? Objective is solely to stifle Russia?

[barefeetdriver]

NWO soundoff: Anyone thinks there's a mergers and acquisitions going on with countries? Wherein a larger country acquires a smaller country or takes over a less profitable country and then shuts it down?

I mean Iraq, Syria, Libya, Burma, Yemen just to name a few seem to have been permanently "acquired and shut down"... and their populace "acqui-hired".

I mean this whole thing makes no sense. And Ukraine's totally inline with this imo. A sort of weaker nation whose populace gets stolen overnight and redistributed over a few stronger nations. Consolidating "human" assets for some purported greater good... smaller distribution network... smaller carbon footprint... returning the land to nature...? It all seems beyond evil.

[volkman10]

Another student's sad plight in Ukraine: "It doesn't matter if you send a charter (plane) after death"


An Indian who sustained multiple bullet injuries in war-torn Ukraine on Friday said that he received no support from the Indian Embassy in Ukraine

No support from the Indian Embassy yet. I have been trying to get in touch with them, every day they say we will do something but no help yet,"

Link

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by avishar

Countries don't issue advisories just like that. An advisory, even one which says the situation is developing and be cautious, should be treated with a lot of importance. Especially for us Indians, since we enjoy fantastic diplomatic relationships with almost every country, if the Indian embassy is issuing advisories for Indians in a country, you better pay attention.

Do you know this for a fact? I don't know about Indian embassy, but the US consulate in India keeps sending me security and travel advisory/alert all the time. I get it because my son is an US citizen. It is almost between 10-20 every year. Any time there is some unrest or protest rally in some part of India, they send an email saying...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUfS_2UGftg

[BoneCollector]

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

A sad day for aviation.

The AN225 has suffered irreparable damage and is totally written off.





Link

A tribute : https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/a...ntonov-an-225/

[ajay0612]

Originally Posted by SnS_12

Well then that is what Russia is doing and also India by not voting against them in the UN for their attack on Ukraine.

Generations have changed since then. We live in a different world full of democracies. Anyway, supporting a criminal just because he is a friend contributes in making him a bigger one.

So why can’t the West just accept India’s Neutral stand now? Or is it because a European country is under attack now???

These 3 countries were ruled by ruthless dictator regimes. All such regimes are corrupt, dangerous to humanity. Russia, China, North Korea, Iran are similar ones. Watching a crime and abstaining from efforts to stop it is not neutral but being partner in crime. It is not going to remain so for long without consequences.

For this I present you The Monroe Doctrine in which Monroe asserted that the New World and the Old World were to remain distinctly separate spheres of influence,and thus further efforts by European powers to control or influence sovereign states in the region would be viewed as a threat to U.S. security.

Is it too much for Russia to demand the same from the West to practise what they preach to the world?

Monroe doctrine is part of history, no longer relevant and is dead.

If Russia didn’t show the strength then its people would have to live their lives under US missile threat for life. And if the world feels its injustice on Ukraine then what is stopping the West from entering the war directly as it was their creation wasn’t it or the theory is still that it was based on a threat which was not actual in nature? The West attacks country at the drop of a hat to deliver Justice don’t they?

NATO is there in Europe since more than 70 years. Russia has never been threatened by any of NATO members.

Zelensky in the end just got played by the West and should have realised and still can its only his people and his country who are taking the direct brunt of this misadventure with Russia. As far as America goes its good business as many countries will open their wallets to buy American arms (largest arms exporter) and business will thrive who will enter Ukraine to rebuild it a cost which will be paid by Ukraine citizens..

Both Russia and America have thrived on arms sale. Zelensky is a democratically elected leader of a harmless country. There is no justification whatsoever to attack Ukraine.
All criminals have a justification for their crimes. That is why the cases drag on for years and powerful criminals go scot free in most cases. There are murders, loot and rapes going on in Ukraine, it happens in all wars. Russia IS the invader, Ukraine is the sufferer for none of its fault. Russia must be stopped, else we all will pay for it.

I would suggest googling for ‘Yes, He Would’: Fiona Hill on Putin and Nukes' to understand more about Putin.

[arbardhan]

Originally Posted by deathwalkr

With due apologies to Narayan Sir, why does NATO want bases all across Europe anyway? Objective is solely to stifle Russia?

"Monroe Doctrine" - US considers itself as the protector of Western hemisphere - They would do anything to coax , topple or destroy countries that are adversarial to them especially in the Western hemisphere.

Hence they get really itchy if say Cuba or Venezuela get ambitious. It changed when ICBMs came in. Now having missiles very close to your opponent's borders are useful as they reach population centers faster.

Hence the eastward expansion - which is a violation of treaties NATO had signed though. Russia knows this - so they will go to WAR if they feel threatened.

IMHO - NATO article 5 would not be honored if Eastern European members get attacked - Europe still is extremely racist and they wont spill their blood for "lesser" people.

[m8002?]

I am still in shock that people are justifying this act by Russia and on top of that asking India to support Russia in this time of "need".

Firstly, we acknowledge that Russia stood by us during liberation of Bangladesh. The key word is "liberation". That doesnt mean that we stand by and support Russia attacking another country. There was no request to Russia from a large number of Ukrainians to "liberate" them.

Secondly, Russia's justification for war is that NATO has reached its doors through Ukraine and they want to prevent it. So what do they do? They attack Ukraine and go to the border of NATO? How does occupying Ukraine and sharing borders with Poland and other NATO countries help?

[Amrik Singh]

Originally Posted by m8002?

They attack Ukraine and go to the border of NATO? How does occupying Ukraine and sharing borders with Poland and other NATO countries help?

Russia does not want the territory of Ukraine. It wants to install a Government favourable to Russia and maintain the distance from NATO borders. This is what it has been forcing Ukraine to do now.

[SnS_12]

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Generations have changed since then. We live in a different world full of democracies. Anyway, supporting a criminal just because he is a friend contributes in making him a bigger one.

Good point. So care explaining where are these democracies in the current situation? Unless you believe they consider Ukraine the criminal and Russia a friend as neither have been defended or supported by the 21st Century democracies and suddenly don’t feel like delivering justice by military means.

Originally Posted by ajay0612

These 3 countries were ruled by ruthless dictator regimes. All such regimes are corrupt, dangerous to humanity. Russia, China, North Korea, Iran are similar ones. Watching a crime and abstaining from efforts to stop it is not neutral but being partner in crime. It is not going to remain so for long without consequences.

So even if the point of countries been ruled by ruthless dictator regimes is agreed to what justifies the killing of innocent civilians? Or the life of only civilians in western countries matter now?

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Monroe doctrine is part of history, no longer relevant and is dead.

Hahaha. Trying taking a container of nuclear warheads and make a trip to Mexico, Cuba and say that to uncle Sam.

Originally Posted by ajay0612

NATO is there in Europe since more than 70 years. Russia has never been threatened by any of NATO members.

So if China places its nukes on Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh we should stay cool and allow it? Why NATO can’t offer guaranteed assurance with their expansion that they won’t place nukes on countries bordering Russia? Will they agree if Russia places its nukes on countries bordering NATO members?

Originally Posted by ajay0612

Both Russia and America have thrived on arms sale. Zelensky is a democratically elected leader of a harmless country. There is no justification whatsoever to attack Ukraine.
All criminals have a justification for their crimes. That is why the cases drag on for years and powerful criminals go scot free in most cases. There are murders, loot and rapes going on in Ukraine, it happens in all wars. Russia IS the invader, Ukraine is the sufferer for none of its fault. Russia must be stopped, else we all will pay for it.

Why target the bullet when you can catch the person who shot the bullet.

[m8002?]

Originally Posted by Amrik Singh

Russia does not want the territory of Ukraine. It wants to install a Government favourable to Russia and maintain the distance from NATO borders. This is what it has been forcing Ukraine to do now.

That is fine. But how is attacking that country a justification? What about the loss of life and property there? They could have orchestrated a military coup, funded some revolution or propped up a counter candidate.