Ukraine counter offensive

[IT Minion]

I know. But Russia thinks it is. And has the legal claim to prove it.

I don't give a ****.

Russia isn't going to nuke anything for missile strikes on Crimea. So strike away.

 

[Odds]

I don't give a ****.

Russia isn't going to nuke anything for missile strikes on Crimea. So strike away.

Probably not, although my point about Chinese involvement remains relevant: if the UK supplies Ukraine with long range weapons to strike territory Russia regards as sovereign then what's to stop them from receiving weapons from Cina?

 

[denso13]

to strike territory Russia regards as sovereign

Russia regard Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions as theirs, similar to Crimea, but they are attacked on an almost daily basis. Ukraine have taken some of the regions back but Russia/China have done nothing about it.

 

[Odds]

Russia regard Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions as theirs, similar to Crimea, but they are attacked on an almost daily basis. Ukraine have taken some of the regions back but Russia/China have done nothing about it.

Not for the lack of trying on Russia's part.
This piecemeal supply for Ukraine isn't helping them make the kind of assault necessary to force Russian troops back to their own borders, though. All it does is maintain their position with a few minimal gains in areas where Russian forces are weak or pulling back to strengthen the line in other sectors. This strategy simply ends up killing more soldiers and civilians.
A better diplomatic attempt should be made in the meantime to acknowledge the realtime position of both armies. The intermediaries of Turkey and China have a vested interest in keeping the conflict burning a while longer in order for them to make political and financial gains.

 

[denso13]

if the UK supplies Ukraine with long range weapons to strike territory Russia regards as sovereign then what's to stop them from receiving weapons from Cina?

I think there is still a fundamental difference between supporting an illegal invasion and supporting a nation trying to repel an invasion.

 

[Odds]

I think there is still a fundamental difference between supporting an illegal invasion and supporting a nation trying to repel an invasion.

There is...but that depends on your perspective, yes?

 

[denso13]

There is...but that depends on your perspective, yes?

Of course, however delusional that may be.

 

[wobs]

I know. But Russia thinks it is. And has the legal claim to prove it.

No it really doesn't.

 

[Odds]

Of course, however delusional that may be.

I see a familiar, well trodden path before us, so perhaps it's time for tea.

 

[Vinty]

Crimea only became part of Ukraine for administration purposes in 1954.
As 75% of the population are ethnic Russian, why would Ukraine want it anyway.

 

[cwhaley]

Crimea only became part of Ukraine for administration purposes in 1954.
As 75% of the population are ethnic Russian, why would Ukraine want it anyway.

Without wanting to be shot down as a "pro-Putin, pro-Russia" person, people ignore - or are ignorant of -the ethnics and history of these areas.

While I do not support Putin's actions, and I think he has to lose this war to set a precedent, the idea of Ukrainian national identity isn't very well-founded. Historically, Ukrainians were loyal to whoever ensured they had a good harvest! "Russia and the Russians" is a good book.

 

[denso13]

Crimea only became part of Ukraine for administration purposes in 1954.

That's irrelevant, even if true. Russia has formally recognised Ukraine's borders, which included Crimea, in recent times.

 

[Vinty]

That's irrelevant, even if true. Russia has formally recognised Ukraine's borders, which included Crimea, in recent times.

Thats true, but what is point of fighting over a technicality.
Crimea, ethnically or territorially (except from 1954, which was for administration purposes) has never been Ukranian.
Why don't we find out if the people of Crimea want to be "liberated" by the Ukranian government.

 

[Vinty]

I think there is still a fundamental difference between supporting an illegal invasion

Define an illegal invasion.?

 

[securespark]

I'm not at all convinced nuclear will be unleashed. If it is, there will be retaliations and that will be the end of it all.

There must be some sane people high up in Putin's crowd who would veto it.