Russia vs Ukraine gets closer to nuclear?

[Shadow Wolf]

Russia vs Ukraine seems to get closer to nuclear

In response to Ukraine's first use of the US-supplied weapon, Moscow on Thursday used its new Oreshnik experimental hypersonic missile, which Putin hinted was capable of carrying a nuclear payload.

He warned Russia could continue using the weapon depending on "the actions of the United States and its satellites" and said Moscow had the right to hit military facilities in countries that allow Ukraine to use their weapons against Russia

It's called a bluff. His military is trashed so he basically can't because he can't even beat Ukraine, let alone adding others actively fighting them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Whoever breaks a promise is totally responsible for whatever happens next. You can't blame Putin for the situation we are in now

Yes, Putin lied, caused problems, invaded and now.he's got many convinced his very corrupt *** is the honest one over this.

 

[Stevicus]

Clinton started to say boo, and now Putin needs to say boo in return

Below link proves in 56 sec. that America, Clinton, is the real cause of the Ukraine war.

NATO promised Russia to not move 1 inch eastward.

Clinton broke their agreement. I totally blame Clinton, America for this

Whoever breaks a promise is totally responsible for whatever happens next. You can't blame Putin for the situation we are in now

I do hope Biden, the democrats, don't mess it up again. I do hope that Trump can solve it with Putin, but only if Ukraine stays out of NATO.
Putin needs NATO to keep a huge distance from Russian borders. NATO has no right to move eastward

Regardless of whether any promise was made, the situation in 1990 was that they had been in a standoff which lasted nearly half a century. In order to end it, one or both sides would have to stand down and back off, which is what the Soviet Union did, but the U.S. and NATO did not.

What I found interesting at the time was that the US decision to not withdraw from or disband NATO pretty much revealed that the entire basis and pretext for the previous 45 years of Cold War were totally bogus and fraudulent.

Having grown up during that time, all we ever heard was about how evil and insidious the "godless communists" were. We never had any grudge with the "Russians" as a nation or people, but the focus was solely on the ideology itself and those perceived to be its adherents, whether in the US, Russia, Cuba, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Bolivia, Vietnam, China, Korea, or anywhere else in the world. Those who were non-communist or anti-communist were deemed "good," even when they weren't (such as the Shah, Marcos, Somoza, etc.).

Moreover, in the years that followed, the US relationship with China grew closer and friendlier, even in the wake of the brutal Tiananmen Square massacre. It seemed that the US government's perceptions shifted, as they still maintained friendly relations and closer trade ties with China, which was and still is communist (and it's only been recently that the government seems to indicate some regret over its past actions). But in contrast, we still gave the cold shoulder to a decidedly anti-communist Russia which, for a time, was willing and open towards better relations with the West.

If nothing else, at least it proved that "communism," ideologically, was never really the big issue that Western leaders said it was.

For a time, the US was in a rather fortunate position, geopolitically. The Soviet Union had been neutralized, and China seemed friendly and open to US business. The main pretext for the US policies of containment and global interventionism were no longer present, so that would presumably reduce whatever role the US thought it was playing as the world's policeman or the defender of the "free world," a term which only had relevance during the Cold War, which had just ended. But instead, our government's aggressive interventionist policies only increased, as no one could or would stand in our way.

I think we squandered an opportunity, and in the process, we have found ourselves in another kind of Cold War. Last time, we were able to play off the two communist superpowers against each other, but now, I don't think we'll get that lucky. We could have avoided, not by appeasement towards Russia or China, but by being nicer and more benevolent around the rest of the world. We've made a lot of enemies around this world, and they've been warming up to Russia and China.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Regardless of whether any promise was made, the situation in 1990 was that they had been in a standoff which lasted nearly half a century. In order to end it, one or both sides would have to stand down and back off, which is what the Soviet Union did, but the U.S. and NATO did not.

Again. The USSR did not "stand down". It collapsed in on itself. It's satellites states revolted and declared independence. The empire came crashing down and fell apart. It broke from the inside out. This didn't happen out of the "goodness of their heart". Stop pretending otherwise.

What I found interesting at the time was that the US decision to not withdraw from or disband NATO pretty much revealed that the entire basis and pretext for the previous 45 years of Cold War were totally bogus and fraudulent.

More revisionist history.
Providing security measures against soviet expansionism was only part of the reason for why NATO was born.
It was also a security measure to prevent future wars in Europe by potential rise of other militaristic nations like Nazi Germany.
As well as to provide a platform for European political development and integration.

Having grown up during that time, all we ever heard was about how evil and insidious the "godless communists" were. We never had any grudge with the "Russians" as a nation or people, but the focus was solely on the ideology itself and those perceived to be its adherents, whether in the US, Russia, Cuba, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Bolivia, Vietnam, China, Korea, or anywhere else in the world. Those who were non-communist or anti-communist were deemed "good," even when they weren't (such as the Shah, Marcos, Somoza, etc.).

So what? The soviets indeed were the enemy (and for good reason). None of this has anything to do with the many reasons for NATO's raison d'être.

For a time, the US was in a rather fortunate position, geopolitically. The Soviet Union had been neutralized, and China seemed friendly and open to US business. The main pretext for the US policies of containment and global interventionism were no longer present, so that would presumably reduce whatever role the US thought it was playing as the world's policeman or the defender of the "free world," a term which only had relevance during the Cold War,

For real?
So present day Russia and China (to name just two), in your opinion, are all about living in a "Free world"?

But instead, our government's aggressive interventionist policies only increased, as no one could or would stand in our way.

Note please how you are now only talking about the US, while your post was supposed to be about NATO.

I think we squandered an opportunity, and in the process, we have found ourselves in another kind of Cold War.

We were well underway to building economic relations with Russia. They were, for example, the biggest supplier of energy of Europe - which is kind of an enormous big deal. When the entire continent literally depends on energy supplies from Russia, it's kind of hard to maintain the idea that said continent was of "ill will". It's Russia's actions, and Russia's action alone, that put an end to this. Russia blew those bridges, nobody else.

Last time, we were able to play off the two communist superpowers against each other, but now, I don't think we'll get that lucky.

If you think that China is in full support of Russia - think again.
China, for example, hasn't recognized the sham referendums of Donbass. They haven't recognized the annexation.
There's a reason why Russia needs to turn to North Korea, of all places, for military help. A move that China, btw, doesn't like either.

China seems to be careful to try and stay as neutral as possible in this whole mess, but they sure as hell aren't supporting Russia in their expansionism.
And the last thing China would want to see is Russia going to war with NATO. Not that that is going to happen off course, Putin is a thug, but he's not crazy nor suicidal...

We could have avoided, not by appeasement towards Russia or China, but by being nicer and more benevolent around the rest of the world. We've made a lot of enemies around this world, and they've been warming up to Russia and China.

Is that why only North Korea has recognized the sham referendums and the subsequent annexation as legit?

But again.... when it comes to "being nice" towards Russia... again: Russia was the biggest supplier of energy in Europe. I'ld say that's pretty nice.
MANY in Europe didn't like that at all, because they knew the Kremlin is in essence composed of a bunch of thugs who will not shy away at all to weaponize its trade relations - and they turned out more then correct.

 

[BrightShadow]

Russia vs Ukraine seems to get closer to nuclear

In response to Ukraine's first use of the US-supplied weapon, Moscow on Thursday used its new Oreshnik experimental hypersonic missile, which Putin hinted was capable of carrying a nuclear payload.

He warned Russia could continue using the weapon depending on "the actions of the United States and its satellites" and said Moscow had the right to hit military facilities in countries that allow Ukraine to use their weapons against Russia

Good thing Trump won.
Russia will probably wait and see what Trump can do before going all out.

So we have almost two months to keep the war-mongers in check.


If Biden's intent was to leave a bigger mess for Trump - then he should be ashamed of himself.
But it may not be a Biden decision - per se.
Leave the old man alone. It is not him.


There was definitely a plan behind bringing in the N. Koreans. But I am sure the plan is on hold until Trump does his bidding.

Are the N. Korean soldiers a force with death-wish? I mean their family members could be hostages back in their motherland. Right?
4 nuclear Plants with 15 reactors and Ukraine is stupidly playing with fire!
Go Figure! How dumb can you be?

Can you blame Russia if N. Korean soldiers make a mistake or intentionally do something unorthodox? Russia can claim they did it on their own and did not receive a green light from Moscow,

It is a worrisome situation. A spark can start a fire. A fire big enough to end things for the worst.
Biden should have pushed for a solution rather than arming Ukraine. If Biden can still think right - he should never have allowed the use of long range weaponry.


Hang tight Ukraine.
Take a loss rather than be a lost cause.
And certainly don't make your surroundings uninhabitable.
That would be a shame. Money in bank won't mean a thing!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Hang tight Ukraine.
Take a loss rather than be a lost cause.
And certainly don't make your surroundings uninhabitable.
That would be a shame. Money in bank won't mean a thing!

You understand them taking a loss means living under a dictator?
I don't blame them. I too would rather fight and die than lay down and accept living under dictator scum.

 

[Father Heathen]

Just some facts to keep things in perspective:

War crimes in the Russian invasion of Ukraine - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Human rights in Russia - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Why are some so eager to crawl on their bellies to lick the innocent blood off of Putin's boots?

 

[InChrist]

You understand them taking a loss means living under a dictator?
I don't blame them. I too would rather fight and die than lay down and accept living under dictator scum.

I don’t know that the Ukrainian people are as enthusiastic about this proxy war as some others are…

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard; and his wife is Ukrainian. Well worth a listen. The News Variable Show of Whatfinger News, with Mal Antoni hosting... All cont

rumble.com

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don’t know that the Ukrainian people are as enthusiastic about this proxy war as some others are…

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard; and his wife is Ukrainian. Well worth a listen. The News Variable Show of Whatfinger News, with Mal Antoni hosting... All cont

rumble.com

It's not a proxy war. This is Putin invading to take what he wants.

 

[Stevicus]

Again. The USSR did not "stand down". It collapsed in on itself. It's satellites states revolted and declared independence. The empire came crashing down and fell apart. It broke from the inside out. This didn't happen out of the "goodness of their heart".

Do you have any evidentiary support for these wild claims? You sound like one of those right-wingers who believe that Reagan "won" the Cold War, when nothing could be further from the truth.

Stop pretending otherwise.

Don't you tell me what to do.

More revisionist history.
Providing security measures against soviet expansionism was only part of the reason for why NATO was born.

Soviet what?

It was also a security measure to prevent future wars in Europe by potential rise of other militaristic nations like Nazi Germany.
As well as to provide a platform for European political development and integration.

If it makes you feel better to believe that, go for it. Maybe you should join the John Birch Society.

So what? The soviets indeed were the enemy (and for good reason). None of this has anything to do with the many reasons for NATO's raison d'être.

We made them into an enemy. Our survival did not depend on doing that.

For real?
So present day Russia and China (to name just two), in your opinion, are all about living in a "Free world"?

Well, if nations like Saudi Arabia or Iran when it was under the Shah are considered part of the "free world" just because they are/were anti-communist, then it kind of cheapens the word "free," don't you think? Russia is no longer communist, and China...who knows what they are now?

Note please how you are now only talking about the US, while your post was supposed to be about NATO.

The U.S. is NATO. Without the U.S., NATO would collapse. And without NATO, the U.S. would be hobbled in pursuing its aggressive interventionist agenda.

We were well underway to building economic relations with Russia. They were, for example, the biggest supplier of energy of Europe - which is kind of an enormous big deal. When the entire continent literally depends on energy supplies from Russia, it's kind of hard to maintain the idea that said continent was of "ill will". It's Russia's actions, and Russia's action alone, that put an end to this. Russia blew those bridges, nobody else.

Yes, yes, blame Russia for everything.

If you think that China is in full support of Russia - think again.
China, for example, hasn't recognized the sham referendums of Donbass. They haven't recognized the annexation.
There's a reason why Russia needs to turn to North Korea, of all places, for military help. A move that China, btw, doesn't like either.

China seems to be careful to try and stay as neutral as possible in this whole mess, but they sure as hell aren't supporting Russia in their expansionism.
And the last thing China would want to see is Russia going to war with NATO. Not that that is going to happen off course, Putin is a thug, but he's not crazy nor suicidal...

China is patient and can afford to bide its time. They may be playing it careful at this point (as we would be better off doing ourselves). But they're also not jumping on the "hate Russia" bandwagon that some people have eagerly boarded.

Xi Jinping Holds Meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin_Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China

www.mfa.gov.cn

China opposes US sanctions on firms over alleged ties to Russia's war efforts

China has expressed its opposition to the latest U.S. sanctions on Chinese companies over their alleged ties to Russia’s war in Ukraine, saying it would adopt necessary measures to safeguard the rights and interests of the country’s businesses.

apnews.com

Russia’s ‘economic isolation’ seen benefiting China amid fresh US sanctions

While trade between China and Russia may be affected in the short term, Beijing’s leveraging power in future negotiations is getting stronger, analysts say.

www.scmp.com

Is that why only North Korea has recognized the sham referendums and the subsequent annexation as legit?

Relevance?

But again.... when it comes to "being nice" towards Russia... again: Russia was the biggest supplier of energy in Europe. I'ld say that's pretty nice.
MANY in Europe didn't like that at all, because they knew the Kremlin is in essence composed of a bunch of thugs who will not shy away at all to weaponize its trade relations - and they turned out more then correct.

So, they were "being nice" by buying energy? That's an interesting perspective. Based on that idea, was the U.S. "being nice" to China by relocating manufacturing facilities in that country? Maybe they were, although I think they were looking to save money on cheap labor (and no tariffs). Still, China has not exactly been all that nice lately, have they? Whatever strategy the US/Western leadership may have been using, it seems to have not worked as planned.

And even now, the Western governments are employing an incorrect strategy which could come back to bite us in the backside. Yet, just like our leaders, you seem oblivious to the consequences of the stance you are taking here.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Since NATO is a voluntary organisation, Russia can swivel.

I don't know what you mean..
Would the US accept Mexico making an alliance with Russia, and installing
a missile base on its territory pointing at US?

 

[muhammad_isa]

It's called a bluff..

Do "maniacs" make bluffs? I wouldn't count on it.

..but Putin is no maniac or thug .. that is just careless rhetoric.
He is the head of a major nuclear nation .. and has an 80% overall satisfaction rating from
the Russian population.

..which so many westerners despise.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Putin lied..

Very likely .. but he is far from alone.

 

[Stevicus]

I don't know what you mean..
Would the US accept Mexico making an alliance with Russia, and installing
a missile base on its territory pointing at US?

Not bloody likely.

But then again, who knows what might happen?

China megaport paves way into Latin America as wary US looks on

A new China-backed megaport in Peru may create whole new trade routes that will bypass North America entirely.

www.bbc.com

As seasoned observers see it, Washington is now paying the price for years of indifference towards its neighbours and their needs.

"The US has been absent from Latin America for so long, and China has moved in so rapidly, that things have really reconfigured in the past decade," says Monica de Bolle, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

"You have got the backyard of America engaging directly with China," she tells the BBC. "That's going to be problematic."

I've been saying this for years.

Even if that prospect never materialises, there is a strong perception that the US is losing ground in Latin America as China forges ahead with its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Outgoing US President Joe Biden was among the leaders at the Apec summit, on his first and last visit to South America during his four-year term. Media commentators remarked that he cut a diminished figure next to China's Xi.

Prof Álvaro Méndez, director of the Global South Unit at the London School of Economics, points out that while the US was taking Latin America for granted, Xi was visiting the region regularly and cultivating good relations.

"The bar has been set so low by the US that China only has to be a little bit better to get through the door," he says.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Again. The USSR did not "stand down". It collapsed in on itself. It's satellites states revolted and declared independence. The empire came crashing down and fell apart..

..and you will presumably not be happy until Russia is defeated further, and are
even prepared to risk a nuclear exchange.
Wow .. Ukraine must have a lot of booty .. or maybe people are scared of losing their privileges.
Yeah .. that will be it .. they tried to kill Jesus and Muhammad .. same old story.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You understand them taking a loss means living under a dictator?

Well, I guess it depends on whether you AGREE with the "dictator's" policies.
Clearly, you don't.

There are many nations in the world, whose people believe they are being ruled by dictators..
..some installed by Russia, but most installed by the US.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I don’t know that the Ukrainian people are as enthusiastic about this proxy war as some others are…

They were .. when the billions of dollars were flowing in .. but right now, the majority
(according to a gallop poll) are NOT in favour of continuing a war against Russia.

 

[stvdv]

Just some facts to keep things in perspective:

I agree: honesty and perspective is important:
1) Clinton (USA, NATO) was very wrong go back on USA promise
2) Putin might have started the war even if NATO kept promise
3) USA have invaded other countries too, and killed many many
4) NATO should have stopped USA (Clinton)
5) My country (Holland) is guilty too, allowing US do this

Why are some so eager to crawl on their bellies to lick the innocent blood off of Putin's boots?

This is not about liking/disliking Putin

This is about USA not keeping their promise

The moment USA (Clinton) admit their fault in 1994, talks with Putin will be possible. This narcissistic behavior, not keeping your promise, will get you in big trouble with a man like Putin, or like Xi. Such persons will not forget unjustice done to them

IF you play with fire (dishonor your given word)
THEN don't complain when getting burned

Note: I don't condone Putin's killing, but the fact is, that the USA didn't keep it's promise made in 1990, broken already in 1994. First the USA must admit they were wrong to Putin and publicly, then, when Putin continues killing, I am ready to point fingers at Putin

 

[stvdv]

I don’t know that the Ukrainian people are as enthusiastic about this proxy war as some others are…

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard

Steven Kuhn explains the Ukraine proxy war better than anyone I’ve heard; and his wife is Ukrainian. Well worth a listen. The News Variable Show of Whatfinger News, with Mal Antoni hosting... All cont

rumble.com

Thank you for sharing
This man explains it perfectly
I have heard it many times, only this makes sense
Mainstream media makes no sense at all
I haven't trusted mainstream media since 1986
But nowadays I see them brainwasing people 24/7

 

[Stevicus]

I agree: honesty and perspective is important:
1) Clinton (USA, NATO) was very wrong go back on USA promise
2) Putin might have started the war even if NATO kept promise
3) USA have invaded other countries too, and killed many many

This is not about liking/disliking Putin

This is about USA not keeping their promise

The moment USA (Clinton) admit their fault in 1994, talks with Putin will be possible. This narcissistic behavior, not keeping your promise, will get you in big trouble with a man like Putin, or like Xi. Such persons will not forget unjustice done to them

IF you play with fire (dishonor your given word)
THEN don't complain when getting burned

Note: I don't condone Putin's killing, but the fact is, that the USA didn't keep it's promise made in 1990, broken already in 1994. First the USA must admit they were wrong to Putin and publicly, then, when Putin continues killing, I am ready to point fingers at Putin

I try to look at the entire geopolitical picture as a whole, as well as the historical background which led us to this situation.

I reject the false choices being offered where one is either compelled to give an unconditional blank check of support to Ukraine or else be branded as some kind of "commie subversive." It's an old tactic, and it's pretty transparent. The war hawks used the same tactic all during the Cold War, especially during Vietnam anti-war protests and the Civil Rights movement, which they opposed because they thought they were communists. "Those who are not with us are against us."

The real underlying flaw here seems to be rooted in American exceptionalism, in which we slowly and incrementally took on this role as Captain America, defender of freedom and so-called "leader of the free world." WW2 was the main game changer, since there has been an underlying sense of regret over not being better prepared and not getting involved sooner in the war against the Axis Powers.

The great lie behind it was that there never was any "free world." Basically, what constituted the "free world" were the parts of the world where the West already had hegemony and economic control and wanted to keep it - even as their hold on it was slipping away because the people in multiple nations across continents wanted their freedom from the "free world." The West has already held the upper hand, just as we did against Germany and Japan (who managed to catch us with our pants down, but they were still doomed from the beginning). We have held the upper hand over much of the world for quite some time, but we've had to deal with a lot of pushback over the past century or more.

The geopolitical reality is, Russia and China have always been the underdogs. That doesn't mean they're weak, nor does it mean they can't become much stronger. It also doesn't mean that their governments are good or benevolent, so no one would argue that either. We can still bargain with them from a position of strength, but we should focus on our own strategic position as a whole, not just obsess over "defending Ukraine at all costs" or trying to humiliate Russia and drive them into the ground, which would only leave us with an inconsolably angry wounded animal.

It feels like the world is locked on some course towards self-destruction. The leaders of the world are going insane.