That sounds like the deal the allies forced Czechoslovakia to agree to with Germany about the Sudetenland back in 1938.
-
Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!
Ukraine
- Thread starter WeatherNC
- Start date
- Status
Cindy131
Member
Why should Ukraine just hand over land because a country wants it? Russia wanted all of Ukraine. One could see that from Russia attack forces at the start of the war. Russia was determined for the invasion/war but did not take factor in the Ukrainians heart to defend their land or the supplies.
severestorm
Member
Ukraine and Russia confirm the partial withdraw, I trust their consensus over the US.
Cindy131
Member
After what the Russians did to the Ukraine I would not be surprised and I can understand why. At this point, I could care less if they kill them or even eat them. Comes down to the basic point, Russian invaded and killed a lot of innocent people. I am sure the numbers that Russia killed will be staggering and could take a very long time to even get an estimate.
Russia did not want all of Ukraine. It wants the eastern zones and it wants Ukraine to decline NATO membership in perpetuity. If it wanted all of Ukraine, it could have taken it. It could raze Kyiv to the ground if it so desired.
severestorm
Member
“The moment we stop fighting for each other, that's the moment we lose our humanity.”
— Adrian Helmsley, 2012
Cindy131
Member
No country should have to keep giving up pieces of their country to Russia just because Russia wants it. I think Russia was being careful to try avoid getting other countries involved in the war so they kept to their land forces which was not able to do the job. And thankfully they were not able to bring a lot of their naval ships due to the blockade. Russia was walking a tightrope to try and avoid a world war.
It's the 'ol "set everyone up for the worse, then when we get what we want it will be fine and considered the new normal" strategy.
Twitter and news chatter from "sources" stating Russia not withdrawing but redeploying, who really knows. I'm surprised we haven't had a report that troops were moving out of Kyiv because the city was the potential target of a nuclear missile.
I agree that Russia did not/does not want to start a world war. But it's funny how much of the Twittershere indicates that the other way round...that Russia doesn't really care.
We like to have it both ways. Russia is a big bad enemy, a force to be reckoned with. But they can't even conquer little old Ukraine.
Russia is trying to start WWIII by getting ready to use chemical weapons or destroy a nuclear plant or getting ready to launch nukes or imminently going to cyber attack the west. But they don't.
Russia wants to capture all of Ukraine. See, they're moving forces all around the big cities. But they just sit there for days.
Russia wanted the eastern districts and wanted Ukraine to not join NATO. And they're going to get them...unfortunately paid for by a great loss of life and the destruction of the global economy.
RC, I gotta disagree on this. I don't understand why only the eastern regions of Ukraine are worth going to all this trouble of a large scale invasion, at least strategically. It doesn't give them more Black Sea access that I can see. All those regions give is a buffer zone. Maybe I am missing something, but why would Russia risk the massive worldwide PR hit of being the aggressor and possibility of economic sanctions over just those eastern regions?
Shaggy
Member
This gives them.a buffer zone is correct. Same way as they used Crimea as a launching point for this war they will use these newly stolen blocks for the next one. They just weren't expecting an ass whooping so they will regroup and we will do this again before putin dies.
They've disputed that region in the past. And they've been pretty adamant about Ukraine not joining NATO.
Cindy131
Member
I think it all comes down to Putin wanting to bring the old USSR days. He considered that the glory days and he wants his name in their history books as a great leader and unifier of the new USSR.
I’m arguing that it makes a lot more sense to me that Russia’s goal was more than just the two disputed provinces, and that instead it was either all or at least a significant part of Ukraine. Before they were recognized, the reason for invasion centered on those two disputed provinces. After recognition, Putin changed his language and started arguing that Ukraine itself was illegitimate and had little history of statehood as a nation. I can’t think of a good reason for Putin to say that unless he was thinking more than just Donbas. Given that, it would make sense if Donbas was used as justification for a wider conflict.
The NATO justification makes more sense to me as a reason to invade most of Ukraine—not just Donbas, but I’m open to hearing other theories.
I also want to point out--I'm not arguing justification here, even though I clearly think Russia is in the wrong for invading a sovereign nation. That's beside the point. My point is about what Putin was trying to accomplish when the invasion started weeks ago. I simply feel he wanted more of Ukraine than just those eastern regions, and I think that both where the invasion has happened and Russia's statements justifying it have supported that.
Last edited:
Downeastnc
Member
It wasn't, Putin totally thought Ukraine would fold and there would be millions of people waving little soviet flags welcoming them....or at the least the people would not care about being under Russian control......which is very short sighted in light of 2014.....Putin wanted regime change most of all then it would not matter about the eastern regions.....he want to reinstate a puppet most likely Viktor Yanukovych. Now he will try to save face by working a deal to get what he already kind of had. Even in the Donbas the majority want to stay part of Ukraine....
You really don't think he could have taken Ukraine if he wanted to?
GeorgiaGirl
Member
I believe that Putin wanted to overthrow the Ukrainian government, but for a number of reasons, that didn't go as planned.
One reason being that Russia wasn't able to easily take the Hostomel airport. If they take it on the first day, I think the intel that Ukraine was going to fall quickly would've been correct. But they didn't easily take it (even when they've had control of the airport, it hasn't been usable in the way they would've wanted it to be to conduct the mission they wanted to conduct on Kyiv) and that's where their plans went haywire.
And here we are now.
One reason being that Russia wasn't able to easily take the Hostomel airport. If they take it on the first day, I think the intel that Ukraine was going to fall quickly would've been correct. But they didn't easily take it (even when they've had control of the airport, it hasn't been usable in the way they would've wanted it to be to conduct the mission they wanted to conduct on Kyiv) and that's where their plans went haywire.
And here we are now.
severestorm
Member
Downeastnc
Member
At this point I really don't, I know what he did not want to do and that is get his ass kicked on the world stage....which is what he got. So I guess he could have sent the entire Russian army into Ukraine and eventually took Kyiv, but the Russian army is in terrible shape, outside of a few elite units ( and even they have performed just ok ) the Russian army has looked like a bunch of clowns. Their doctrine of micro managed leadership with little in the way of flexibility on the platoon level has shown the entire world how to kick Russia's ass on the field. Their equipment obviously has lacked maintenance, their troops are poorly motivated and have ---- moral, large amounts of their ammo is defective, it seems the only thing there ammo and weapons are accurate enough for is destroying cities......
So even if Putin had came big they would not have been able to take and control the country IMO....I doubt he could have held half of it.
He was also fighting an army with extensive knowledge of old Soviet tactics. A lot of those senior Ukrainian guys were old red army or at least trained by them. Makes it tough when the batter knows the pitches.
Sandbar
Member
I have felt all along its access to black sea via Odessa but he not gonna get it. I agree about eastern Ukraine being nothing but a buffer that he doesn't need. Ukraine called his bluff and every day they make his military look incompetent and weak to the rest of the world
Downeastnc
Member
This is a excellent point, they have Putin's playbook. Its also the fact the Russia army is more bark than bite, and probably has always been that way.....they just have always valued quantity over quality and while that might work when the other side has small numbers or weak equipment it does not help against a well armed, well lead group of highly motivated fighters.....I mean at this point the Ukrainian army actually has more hardware than it started with lol....
eyeroll emoji
Clearly not. Not without destroying it in the process. If all they really wanted was those eastern regions they could have probably had that pretty easy and with less loss of life. Your argument is that, instead of just take the regions they want, they decided to destroy their own economy and waste tons of material and life first. For no reason.
Your argument is that Russia is weak and stupid. If that's the case, why have we been worrying about them for the last 60 years? Lol
Downeastnc
Member
Well thats kinda what the last month has shown us.....we probably shouldn't have, only the fact they can destroy the world a few dozen times over makes them dangerous.....assuming more than half their nukes even work which I think is a legit question at this point.
Last edited:
They probably don't. Heck, they probably don't have nukes. We've been had for more than half a century!
NCSNOW
Member
If their target success rate is anything like what weve seen the past month, DC might be safest place to be. Thats
[ weaponry ] as suprising as how unorganized, motivated their military has been.
Even if they don’t, which I think is quite possible given their shoddy maintenance, they’ve still got plenty enough to make them an existential threat to the rest of the world.
Cindy131
Member
Found this youtube video. It is about a week old. Interesting if true.
Sandbar
Member
Yes....At this point its a moral issue. You can knock all the buildings down that you want but foot soldiers are the men who have to take and HOLD a city, province, etc.
Storm5
Member
Please remember to stay on topic . This thread is about the Ukraine / Russian war and that's all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
severestorm
Member
HSVweather
Member
- Status