• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NATO says it will not appease Russia with 'second class' allies as meeting looms

Tangmo said:
Alas, fact is the Great Patriotic War of the USSR is the war the Russians would have lost to Nazi Germany had the USA not provided Lend-Lease, and had the USA and UK not engaged the Germans with the D-Day Invasion of Normandy in Nazi occupied France/Europe. Indeed, the U.S. has in its own homeland its own Vichy Americans equivalence presently singing Putin's tunes that Russia alone prevailed.
Click to expand...




Stepan Banderas propaganda.
 
Tangmo said:
Your stomping down the rhetorical warpath means nothing while inferior officials of the Foreign Ministry are also making noises about Russia making war against the major powers, namely NATO led by the United States. While Ryabkov
Click to expand...
Ryabkov represented Russia at these negotiations, he is the second person in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a person who is part of Putin's inner circle and has held his post since the late 2000s.
You see, there was no Putin or Lavrov at these talks, they were represented by Ryabkov and his monologue at the press conference was naturally coordinated with Putin.

Tangmo said:
military muscle to conquer, occupy and control all of Ukraine,
Click to expand...
There was no such goal, at least not yet.
It's strange to hear about "military muscles"... after the US flight from Afghanistan.
 
Grand Mal said:
You're blindered by your indoctrination/education. The USSR defeated Germany. All your protestations about how America helped with material (minimal at best given German dominance of the Baltic) can't change history.
Click to expand...



Critically the Soviet Union had the will to fight [extremely critical], the space, and the man power. The same US aid to Chiang Kai Check would have made no difference.
 
Juin said:
Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk beg to differ. There is more to Ukraine than Stepan Banderas.

Speak for Stepan Banderas. You don't get to speak for Crimea and Donbass
Click to expand...

The armed conflict in Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Donbass has resulted in the Russian caused minimum of 3,393 civilian deaths and more than 7,000 casualties since 2014, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights October 2021 report.

21st century conflict no matter the "low intensity" of it in military terms, ie, conflict well short of total war, is defined increasingly as urban warfare. That is, few if any large forces moving in the fields and across the countryside engaging in large scale battles involving infantry, armor, artillery, air power, as a prelude to forcing the surrender of cities in order for the civilian populated urban centers to save themselves. Indeed, insurgent warfare operates increasingly in the cities to both fight and as their base of recruitment, supply, sustainment.

Putin, Russian forces and the Russian population besides practice a war policy of taking no prisoners which only aggravates atrocities that are committed as, well, policy. While urban warfare has always been characterized as having a hell of its own, more people today live in cities and, as noted, cities are commonly where insurgent forces dwell and operate. This includes "little green men" who boldly ignore borders at will and that kill in the name of ethnicity, nationalism, religion and so on.

Putin's standard answer to the complexities of urban warfare is heavy artillery....

grozny%2B%25281%2529.jpg

Most of what you see is the result of the Second Chechen War. The Russians in laying siege to Grozny employed massed heavy artillery, aerial bombardment, concentrated rocket and missile fire, big-bore direct gun fire from tanks and tube anti-tank artillery. The Russian were also not hesitant to use all manner of fuel-air-explosives and thermobaric bombs. Putin the man without a soul cracked the egg with the proverbial sledgehammer. We see the results.

All of this is despite no public clamor in the cities mentioned to be reincorporated into Russia The Motherwhatever.
 
Tangmo said:
Indeed when Putin and his General Staff know they don't have the military muscle to conquer, occupy and control all of Ukraine, any talk from 'em about a war against the major powers that are checking them is blowhard nonsense.
Click to expand...



Russia had already controlled Ukraine for centuries. Ukraine has been controlled before and can still be controlled. It's same like the noise about partisan warfare by Stepan Banderas Ukrainians. Stepan Banderas partisans in WWII were unable to evict Stalin from Ukraine. And their present day manifestation are no equivalent of Afghan Mujahideen
 
Tangmo said:
The armed conflict in Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Donbass has resulted in the Russian caused minimum of 3,393 civilian deaths and more than 7,000 casualties since 2014, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights October 2021 report.
Click to expand...



Is that too high a price to pay for the liberation of Crimea?



Tangmo said:
21st century conflict no matter the "low intensity" of it in military terms, ie, conflict well short of total war, is defined increasingly as urban warfare. That is, few if any large forces moving in the fields and across the countryside engaging in large scale battles involving infantry, armor, artillery, air power, as a prelude to forcing the surrender of cities in order for the civilian populated urban centers to save themselves. Indeed, insurgent warfare operates increasingly in the cities to both fight and as their base of recruitment, supply, sustainment.

Putin, Russian forces and the Russian population besides practice a war policy of taking no prisoners which only aggravates atrocities that are committed as, well, policy. While urban warfare has always been characterized as having a hell of its own, more people today live in cities and, as noted, cities are commonly where insurgent forces dwell and operate. This includes "little green men" who boldly ignore borders at will and that kill in the name of ethnicity, nationalism, religion and so on.

Putin's standard answer to the complexities of urban warfare is heavy artillery....
Click to expand...



And exactly how does the Azov battalion operate?
 
Tangmo said:
Putin, Russian forces and the Russian population besides practice a war policy of taking no prisoners which only aggravates atrocities that are committed as, well, policy.
Click to expand...
What a fantastic lie... I do not know if you are on your own or are most likely relaying this lie... but just the same, the peculiarity of this war is that they take prisoners very much, both sides record interviews and post them online.
It is very funny to me to read this from you, a person who has not been to Ukraine and Donbass, writes in front of me, in front of a person who was there... these fabulous stories.
 
Juin said:
It's astounding how many times the mantra is repeated that Putin is the first to forcefully changed borders since WWII. I suppose Serbians don't count. There is one set of rules for Nato, and another set for Russia
Click to expand...
NATO opposes genocide, a form of which was being practiced in Kosovo, hence the moral supranational NATO intervention against Serbia.

Russia not so much.

Russia hardly at all in fact
 
Tangmo said:
NATO opposes genocide, a form of which was being practiced in Kosovo, hence the moral supranational NATO intervention against Serbia.

Russia not so much.

Russia hardly at all in fact
Click to expand...



Were borders changed through use of force? That is the question. If borders were changed through use of force then it is a lie the claim that Putin is the first to use force to change borders in Europe since WWII
 
I make a motion for NATO to help those local economies better promote their general welfare to help improve their local standard of living.
 
Fabiusbile said:
Ryabkov represented Russia at these negotiations, he is the second person in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, a person who is part of Putin's inner circle and has held his post since the late 2000s.
You see, there was no Putin or Lavrov at these talks, they were represented by Ryabkov and his monologue at the press conference was naturally coordinated with Putin.


There was no such goal, at least not yet.
It's strange to hear about "military muscles"... after the US flight from Afghanistan.
Click to expand...
Putin, Lavrov, Medevdev didn't need to be at the Geneva talks about Ukraine to make the statements about war against the West that you made in your near hysterical post in scrolling. As president, foreign minister, prime minister any one or the other of 'em could have made the statements you made while he is wiping his arse on the toilet commode for that matter.

The point is the statements you made about a Russian declaration of war against NATO led by the United States are not being said by the highest officials of Russian foreign and military policy, who are, again, Putin, Lavrov, Medvedev. For any such statements as you made in your post to be credible and taken seriously we'd need some senior officials in the parliament sounding off besides, to include parties other than the ruling Mother Russia party. In short, Ryabkov holds a subcabinet position which means he's not the official to be listening to in any Russian drivel about declaring war against NATO which you carried on about nonsensically in your post in scrolling.

As to your second vacuous point, of course Kremlin is not angling to enter all of Ukraine to conquer it, occupy it and control it. I've said this more than once at this thread alone. I've said Russia does not have the military capacity or capability to do this, Ukraine being the largest country of Europe-Eurasia and given the fierce and widespread armed resistance to a Russian takeover would be certain -- guaranteed in fact -- it would be well supported, constant, continuing; nasty. I've noted Putin needs his limited number of available troops to also reinforce Belarus at its border with Poland/NATO, and to flank the Suwalki Gap & Corridor that connects the Baltics to Europe and NATO via Poland.

So I must say I'm growing weary of making posts you just don't get and fail to respond to directly or accurately. I'm still at it only because you're clearly backing down and off from your strident and bold post in scrolling that Your Beloved Land of Russia will declare war against the NATO led USA unless the West gets out of the way of Your Beloved Dictator Polonium Putin and his authoritarian goals and purposes against the democracies of Europe and NATO itself.
 
Juin said:
Were borders changed through use of force? That is the question. If borders were changed through use of force then it is a lie the claim that Putin is the first to use force to change borders in Europe since WWII
Click to expand...
The simplicity and desperation of your shameless Russian bias, claims and assertion are transparent I'm afraid.

The six republics of the highly unstable Yugoslavia were separating long before the NATO intervention in 1999.

Indeed by back in 1991 Slovenia followed by Croatia had voted for independence and broke away from Yugoslavia. Borders were being redefined already to include disputes over the new borders and their legitimacy.

In 1992 a referendum on independence was approved in Bosnia with. 99.7% voting yes -- Independence was declared post haste. As Bosnian Serb political leadership boycotted the independence, the Serbian forces attacked Bosnia leading to four years of brutal ethnic cleansing, genocide, and crimes against humanity, all up until 1995 when the Dayton Agreement was signed.

By January 1992, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ceased to exist, having dissolved into its constituent states with new borders springing up and being contested.

Further, the varied reasons for the country’s breakup ranged from the cultural and religious divisions between the ethnic groups making up Yugoslavia, to the memories of WWII atrocities committed by all sides, to centrifugal nationalist forces. Indeed, by mid-1989 Kosovo had been reintegrated into Serbia and the Montenegro leadership was replaced by cronies of the barbarian wrecker of borders and peoples, Slobodan Milosevic.

Moreover elections in Slovenia and Croatia in 1990 led to Slovenia becoming the first to declare sovereignty by issuing a parliamentary declaration that Slovenian law took precedence over Yugoslav law. Croatia followed in May, and in August, the Yugoslav republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina also declared itself sovereign. Slovenia and Croatia began a concerted effort to transform Yugoslavia from a federal state to a confederation.

In 2008, Kosovo declared independence and was recognized by the UN, USA and most European states, despite Russian objections.

We see you guyz are stil objecting while raising wild and false accusations that go beyond distortions.
 
Juin said:
Russia had already controlled Ukraine for centuries. Ukraine has been controlled before and can still be controlled. It's same like the noise about partisan warfare by Stepan Banderas Ukrainians. Stepan Banderas partisans in WWII were unable to evict Stalin from Ukraine. And their present day manifestation are no equivalent of Afghan Mujahideen
Click to expand...
Putin is set on restoring his Beloved Soviet Russian Empire in the Russian West.

He's gone from being an aggrieved KGB to a sorehead leader of Russia to an obsessive compulsive about it.

NATO isn't going to have it in the least bit.
 
Juin said:
Is that too high a price to pay for the liberation of Crimea?

And exactly how does the Azov battalion operate?
Click to expand...
Wrong Word.

Hungary 1956, Prague Spring 1968, Afghanistan 1980-89 and so on.

You might be more careful given that glass house you live in. Indeed Azov would still be small potatoes except for Polonium Putin and Putin's Neo Imperial Russia.
 
Fabiusbile said:
What a fantastic lie... I do not know if you are on your own or are most likely relaying this lie... but just the same, the peculiarity of this war is that they take prisoners very much, both sides record interviews and post them online.
It is very funny to me to read this from you, a person who has not been to Ukraine and Donbass, writes in front of me, in front of a person who was there... these fabulous stories.
Click to expand...
You have indicated you are Russian.

Enough said thx.

This is our guide through your darkness.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL We bombed the Germans into the stone age and the Russians capitalized on that. Without our help the Russians would have lost.
Click to expand...
Tangmo said:
Stalin and Khruschev each said after WW2 that without the U.S. Lend Lease program "we would have lost the war."

In all, the United States shipped $50 billion ($608 billion in 2020 money) worth of materiel under the program, including $11.3 billion to the Soviet Union. In addition, much of the $31 billion worth of aid sent to the UK was also passed on to the Soviet Union via convoys through the Barents Sea to Murmansk.

Most visibly, the United States provided the Soviet Union with more than 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles, and 13,000 battle tanks. Given the Red Army lost 83% of its tanks, the Lend-Lease tanks from the USA were critical.

However, the real significance of Lend-Lease for the Soviet war effort was that it covered the "sensitive points" of Soviet production -- gasoline, explosives, aluminum, nonferrous metals, radio communications, and so on, according to historian Boris Sokolov. "In a hypothetical battle one-on-one between the U.S.S.R and Germany, without the help of Lend-Lease and without the diversion of significant forces of the Luftwaffe and the German Navy and the diversion of more than one-quarter of its land forces in the fight against Britain and the United States, Stalin could hardly have beaten Hitler," Sokolov wrote.


'We Would Have Lost':
Did U.S. Lend-Lease Aid Tip The Balance In Soviet Fight Against Nazi Germany?

From the depths of the Cold War to the present day, many Soviet and Russian politicians have ignored or downplayed the impact of American assistance to the Soviets, as well as the impact of the entire U.S.-British war against the Nazis.

AA47C66E-935B-44B9-9EB1-DED1987766E3_w650_r0_s.jpg



"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. "The most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."

Nikita Khrushchev offered the same opinion.

"If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war," he wrote in his memoirs. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."

www.rferl.org

'We Would Have Lost': Did U.S. Lend-Lease Aid Tip The Balance In Soviet Fight Against Nazi Germany?

Ever since the Cold War, many Soviet and Russian politicians and academics have downplayed the role that U.S.-provided weapons and supplies played in the Red Army's ultimately victorious campaign against Hitler's Germany. But there is substantial evidence that the huge influx of materiel made an...
www.rferl.org www.rferl.org

Alas, fact is the Great Patriotic War of the USSR is the war the Russians would have lost to Nazi Germany had the USA not provided Lend-Lease, and had the USA and UK not engaged the Germans with the D-Day Invasion of Normandy in Nazi occupied France/Europe. Indeed, the U.S. has in its own homeland its own Vichy Americans equivalence presently singing Putin's tunes that Russia alone prevailed.
Click to expand...

The Russians had already fought the Nazis to a standstill prior to D-Day and were turning them back along the battle line.

Concurrent with D Day was Operation Bagration where the Russians devastated the entire German Eastern Front leading to nearly half a million casualties plus anther third of a million trapped.

Lend lease helped. Especially in rolling stock and rails. Weapons, not so much. We gave them our rejected airframes, etc.
 
Grand Mal said:
You're blindered by your indoctrination/education. The USSR defeated Germany. All your protestations about how America helped with material (minimal at best given German dominance of the Baltic) can't change history.
Click to expand...
The SSSR defeated Germany with massive assistance from the west. If it was an isolated war between the two countries with no industrial support, no credit, no food support, etc the SSSR would’ve likely collapsed and a provisional Russian government formed to sue for peace.

The Allied shipping to the Soviet Union wasn’t coming through the baltic, it was coming from the North Sea and the Far East. Through Murmansk and Vladivostok and from British possessions in the Middle East by way of Iran into Azerbaijan.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The SSSR defeated Germany with massive assistance from the west. If it was an isolated war between the two countries with no industrial support, no credit, no food support, etc the SSSR would’ve likely collapsed and a provisional Russian government formed to sue for peace.

The Allied shipping to the Soviet Union wasn’t coming through the baltic, it was coming from the North Sea and the Far East. Through Murmansk and Vladivostok and from British possessions in the Middle East by way of Iran into Azerbaijan.
Click to expand...
If Germany hadn't declared war on America the US would not have sent a single troop to Europe and the results would still be the same. And all that lend-lease was paid back. Likewise all the material support sent to Britain- it was paid back too.
But I get it, you were taught in school that the US rescued Europe. Twice. By your what was it, 9 months? involvement in WW1 the US also rescued Europe in 1918.
 
Tangmo said:
You have indicated you are Russian.

Enough said thx.

This is our guide through your darkness.
Click to expand...


Fabiusbile is a Russian! What a crime. You are a joke. Let me tell you something: it is perfectly fine to be Russian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom