EPT***
Here's a perspective most people don't know about:
Ukraine Crisis - Page 391
| Forum Index > Closed |
There is a new policy in effect in this thread. Anyone not complying will be moderated. New policy, please read before posting: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=21393711 | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
*** Here's a perspective most people don't know about: | ||
|
Roman666
Poland1440 Posts
On April 02 2014 22:01 Ghanburighan wrote: https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/451337795450445824 I really do not know what to think about it, it seems the guy lost it, perhaps due to some nervous breakdown. He basically invited Russia to intervene and now wants to negotiate with Russia the return of Crimea to Ukraine. I just... | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5080 Posts
| ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On April 03 2014 01:48 DeepElemBlues wrote: Only a Russian could convince Europe that it still needs effective armed forces, as an American I say thank you Vladimir I like my country's allies as strong as possible including militarily. Buuuuuut armies are expensiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiive | ||
|
Influ
Germany780 Posts
On April 03 2014 01:48 DeepElemBlues wrote: Only a Russian could convince Europe that it still needs effective armed forces, as an American I say thank you Vladimir I like my country's allies as strong as possible including militarily. Sorry to disappoint you but most europeans know that there is no reason to prepare for a military conflict between NATO and Russia in europe because it just won't happen and even if it happens it would mean that europe stops existing. You might understand that we are not that interrested in this kind of war. War is a way of making politics for USA but it is not for the EU and it never will be. People can hate EU for a lot of reasons but to never have war between european neighbours again (which essentially includes Russia) this is the reason EU was found. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
People can hate EU for a lot of reasons but to never have war between european neighbours again (which essentially includes Russia) this is the reason EU was found. Turned out that it doesn't work, so i agree that arming up, or better, lifting the standard in the armies is quite important. The EU can't always close their eyes everytime russia goes ham now. | ||
|
Influ
Germany780 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:31 m4ini wrote: Turned out that it doesn't work, so i agree that arming up, or better, lifting the standard in the armies is quite important. The EU can't always close their eyes everytime russia goes ham now. to do what? make war with russia? | ||
|
Roman666
Poland1440 Posts
Nope, to scare Russia off. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:31 m4ini wrote: The EU can't always close their eyes everytime russia goes ham now. We did about as much as the US in this conflict and they actually have an army, even with big european armies it would have just been the same, the problem wasn't the fact that the armies are small, the "problem" was that we didn't want to go to war a small conflict like this and Putin obviously knew that. Same answer, with big armies we wouldn't have gone to war for crimea either. | ||
|
Roman666
Poland1440 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:39 SilentchiLL wrote: We did about as much as the US in this conflict and they actually have an army, even with big european armies it would have just been the same, the problem wasn't the fact that the armies are small, the "problem" was that we didn't want to go to war a small conflict like this and Putin obviously knew that. Same answer, with big armies we wouldn't have gone to war for crimea either. Ah, nobody wants to go to war with Russia. Even Russia doesn't want to go to war. I started to wonder, what would happen if Ukraine would fought back on Crimea, I wonder if Russia would not back down then. | ||
|
PaleMan
Russian Federation1953 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:41 Roman666 wrote: Ah, nobody wants to go to war with Russia. Even Russia doesn't want to go to war. I started to wonder, what would happen if Ukraine would fought back on Crimea, I wonder if Russia would not back down then. Ukraine couldn't fight back for example: from 44 aircrafts in Crimea's air force base only 2 were able to take off | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
On April 03 2014 01:48 DeepElemBlues wrote: Only a Russian could convince Europe that it still needs effective armed forces, as an American I say thank you Vladimir I like my country's allies as strong as possible including militarily. i wanted to say this but you said it better than me it piss me off to see that our president is cutting our budget, i hope he will reconsider again the thing | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
We did about as much as the US in this conflict and they actually have an army, even with big european armies it would have just been the same, the problem wasn't the fact that the armies are small, the "problem" was that we didn't want to go to war a small conflict like this and Putin obviously knew that. Who cares what the US does in this conflict, it's not theirs? It started because we tried to reel them into the EU, not into the NATO. Yes, the americans have an army, most of which is on the wrong continent. A army of EU forces, matching russias forces in size/capabilities, would be an entirely different thing. Solely because they actually are present, which US forces can't be without a logistical masterpiece - which, to be frank, i don't think they would be able to pull off. Neither in terms of moneys or support in the population. Russia doesn't want war, because that would be the end of their country as they know it. They can't afford a war. That's why allied forces in Ukraine would've been a good idea. | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
It's even more important to push for stronger political integration and cooperation on defense. That might have the added benefit to providing protection against so-called friends (in the area of cyber-warfare for example) as well as enemies. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:41 Roman666 wrote: Ah, nobody wants to go to war with Russia. Even Russia doesn't want to go to war. I started to wonder, what would happen if Ukraine would fought back on Crimea, I wonder if Russia would not back down then. Ukraine couldn't fight back against Russia, theoretically the US and Europe could have, but Crimea just isn't important enough to justify the expenses. It's a cold world, but that's the way it is, we just don't care enough. | ||
|
Influ
Germany780 Posts
this thinking is soooooooooooooooo wrong I don't even know where to start or where to end. What happened on the crimea is exactly the result of what you are suggesting. Russia fears the growing influence of the NATO and secures their base for their black sea fleet. Which_is_retarded_! What do people suggest to do against this? Scare Russia even more! I don't get how humanity after thousends of years of war still try to fight stupidity with even more stupidity and expect to get a good result from it. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Ukraine couldn't fight back against Russia, theoretically the US and Europe could have, but Crimea just isn't important enough to justify the expenses. This is btw extremely wrong. Ukraine (and with that obviously their well-being, border integrity especially) could be the next footstep for the NATO. Not judging if good or bad, but the fact that it could be, makes the ukraine extremely important to at least the US right now. There's a reason why Lavrov demanded that ukraine isn't allowed into the NATO, before talks even can start. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22705 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:41 Roman666 wrote: Ah, nobody wants to go to war with Russia. Even Russia doesn't want to go to war. I started to wonder, what would happen if Ukraine would fought back on Crimea, I wonder if Russia would not back down then. Russia was fully willing to go to war with the Ukraine. They were actively trying to provoke that war. It would give them more legitimacy to take what they want. The EU on the other hand is a very different beast and while Russia might be able to win a war between it and the EU it isnt worth it for them to do so. My Question is still What would Russia have done if the EU reacted to the first signs of aggression and requests from support from the Ukraine and moved even a token force of troops into the region. Imo it would have given Russia pause and forced actual talks without the loss of Crimea, tho the referendum would probably happen but without the presence of Russian or EU troops casting doubt on it. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
What happened on the crimea is exactly the result of what you are suggesting. Russia fears the growing influence of the NATO and secures their base for their black sea fleet. Which_is_retarded_! That's wouldn't explain why the baltics are concerned, or all the other ex-soviet states. It's a geopolitical game, putin wants the USSR back (what did he call it, biggest tragedy or smth that it imploded?), sorry, Eurasian Union. Every EU-friendly country will hurt this idea, it's not solely because of the black sea fleet. | ||
|
SilentchiLL
Germany1405 Posts
On April 03 2014 02:47 m4ini wrote: Who cares what the US does in this conflict, it's not theirs? It started because we tried to reel them into the EU, not into the NATO. Yes, the americans have an army, most of which is on the wrong continent. A army of EU forces, matching russias forces in size/capabilities, would be an entirely different thing. Solely because they actually are present, which US forces can't be without a logistical masterpiece - which, to be frank, i don't think they would be able to pull off. Neither in terms of moneys or support in the population. Russia doesn't want war, because that would be the end of their country as they know it. They can't afford a war. That's why allied forces in Ukraine would've been a good idea. It's not seen as our conflict either, if Merkel would have propagated a war over Crimea the people here and her own party would have told her that she's insane, same goes for every other bigger country in western europe. And as I said the US and the EU do have the forces necessary, it would just be way too expensive. And for the bolded part... Russia got a lot of shit for sending their troops to Crimea, what would it say about the NATO if they immediately send their troops into countries which think about joining, especially if siding with the west instead of Russia isn't undisputed in that particular country? That aside, it's also not how we operate On April 03 2014 02:51 m4ini wrote: This is btw extremely wrong. Ukraine (and with that obviously their well-being, border integrity especially) could be the next footstep for the NATO. Not judging if good or bad, but the fact that it could be, makes the ukraine extremely important to at least the US right now. There's a reason why Lavrov demanded that ukraine isn't allowed into the NATO, before talks even can start. I never said that the Ukraine wouldn't be important at all, read my posts properly before you reply. Yes, the Ukraine does have the potential to be important, however even that wouldn't justify the massive expenses necessary for military action to keep Crimea in the Ukraine. | ||
| ||
