What's new

Ukraine tells EU leaders: Prepare for war with Russia

They will nuke you next day after Russia's defeat. And all your weapons will not help you.
Let's be realistic. They can nuke us even today without Russia's defeat and Russia wouldn't even care about it. And why would they? It's not like we are brothers or something. Belorussians and Russians are Slavic brothers and what good has that done for the Belorussians?

Are you implying in some sense that Iran is under the nuclear umbrella of Russia? Because if so, that is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time.

I mean no disrespect, but whatever happens in the Ukraine-Russia relations cannot and will not affect us. As far as our official stance is concerned, the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. Personally, I wish the Ukrainians the best because they are the underdogs. I just hope they wouldn't be stupid enough to think that the West will support them against Russia. That would be a grave mistake.
 
This piece touches on it... It is from the EU perspective take it with a grain of salt

Putin's 'salami war' aims to destabilize democracies | Trudy Rubin

November 17, 2021

While President Joe Biden has been trying to tamp down tensions with China, Vladimir Putin has been busy perfecting a new form of warfare against the West.

The White House had hoped to put Russia on the back burner while it focused on America’s far more dangerous rivalry with Beijing. But Putin, ever eager to grab the global limelight, has amassed 80,000 troops on the Ukrainian border, threatened to limit gas for Europe, and abetted the callous misuse of refugees by Belarus as a weapon against Poland.

A nibble here, a bite there, the use of misinformation, cyberhacking, blackmail, human trafficking, proxy wars — all are part of Putin’s arsenal to attempt to destabilize Europe and America while denying any involvement. And the West has yet to figure out how to check him.

Some call it “hybrid war,” but I think of it as “salami war.” Putin is biting off bits until the sausage is half gone in an effort to destabilize democracies while forcing America and the European Union to accept his dominance over chunks of Europe.

“The White House notion of making Russia more dependable so it can work on China isn’t working out so well,” I was told by Alexander Vershbow, who served as U.S. ambassador to Moscow and deputy secretary general of NATO. “We may want to park Russia on the back burner but Putin has other ideas.”

Putin pursues his salami war in stages, taking more bites whenever NATO allies are distracted.

He doesn’t hide his desire to gobble up an independent and democratic Ukraine. Since he invaded Ukraine in 2014 and annexed Crimea, he has continued to destabilize that country to prevent it from moving closer to the European Union.

He sent Russian troops, proxies and weapons to occupy the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine in 2014, and paid no political price when those proxies shot down a civilian Malaysian airliner with Russian missiles.

NATO allies fear Putin may actually be massing those troops for another military incursion. “What Putin is really doing is testing how much solidarity there is in the West,” I was told by former National Security Council Russia expert Fiona Hill. “The big question: Does he go too far and trigger a massive response?”

Similarly, Putin is testing whether Europe will let him get away with blackmailing the continent over gas — and refugees.

Europe is overly dependent on Russian gas at a time when it is struggling with energy shortages. Both the Trump and Biden administrations had warned Germany not to endorse a second gas pipeline from Russia, known as Nord Stream 2, because it would increase dependency on Moscow. Biden mistakenly dropped his opposition months ago as a favor to Germany, but the German government promised to rethink if Russia attempted to “use energy as a weapon.”

Now Putin has baldly warned that he will increase Russian gas shipments only if Germany immediately certifies the Nord Steam 2 pipeline. Germany’s energy regulator has temporarily halted pipeline approval, but the German government hasn’t frozen the project.

“How much more explicit can Putin be about blackmail?” asks Hill. “The ball is in the European court.”

Putin’s latest weapon against Europe is human trafficking. His closest ally, President Alexander Lukashenko of next-door Belarus, has organized visas for desperate Iraqis and Afghans and had them transported to the border with Poland. This would be highly unlikely without a Kremlin green light.

The aim is to pressure Europe to drop sanctions against Belarus for rigged elections. (Lukashenko also got away with air piracy, forcing an Irish civilian airliner to land so he could kidnap a Belarusian dissident off of it.) As the man who keeps Lukashenko in power, Putin cannot separate himself from these crimes.

Putin doesn’t care. He has refused to stop the operations of Russian criminal cyber hackers, despite visits by U.S. officials with lists of the culprits.

So despite efforts by the Biden team to seek areas of accord with Moscow, after a June Putin-Biden meeting in Geneva, engagement must not preclude pushback.

“Putin is clearly testing the limits of what he can get away with,” says Vershbow. Europe and cyberspace are the testing grounds. (The Kremlin is so risk-happy that Moscow just conducted an anti-satellite missile test that endangered the International Space Station, including Russian members of the crew.)

“We should do more to push back,” says Hill. One place to start would be a decision by Biden and German Chancellor Angela Merkel to freeze Nord Stream 2 due to Putin’s blackmail. And beyond whatever the U.S. is doing in secret to push back against cyberhacking, it’s obviously time for something much more serious, backed by the U.S. and Europe in tandem.

As for sanctions, they clearly haven’t changed Putin’s or Lukashenko’s behavior. More serious sanctions that affect the wealth of Putin and his cronies might change the Russian president’s mindset.

It’s time for the White House — and NATO — to counter the Russian leader’s tactics before he presumes he can again invade Ukraine. “What starts in Ukraine doesn’t stay in Ukraine,” says Vershbow. “You can’t just think about de-escalation when Putin is escalating.
 
Let's be realistic. They can nuke us even today without Russia's defeat and Russia wouldn't even care about it. And why would they? It's not like we are brothers or something. Belorussians and Russians are Slavic brothers and what good has that done for the Belorussians?

Are you implying in some sense that Iran is under the nuclear umbrella of Russia? Because if so, that is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time.

I mean no disrespect, but whatever happens in the Ukraine-Russia relations cannot and will not affect us. As far as our official stance is concerned, the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. Personally, I wish the Ukrainians the best because they are the underdogs. I just hope they wouldn't be stupid enough to think that the West will support them against Russia. That would be a grave mistake.
They can not nuke you now because it can trigger full scale WW3. And there is only Russia in this world have enough nukes to annihilate the West.
Belorussians has the lowest gas price in Europe. Belorussia was not destroyed by color "revolution". I wish Ukraine was not, but it is too late.
 
Let's be realistic. They can nuke us even today without Russia's defeat and Russia wouldn't even care about it. And why would they? It's not like we are brothers or something. Belorussians and Russians are Slavic brothers and what good has that done for the Belorussians?

Are you implying in some sense that Iran is under the nuclear umbrella of Russia? Because if so, that is the funniest thing I have heard in a long time.

I mean no disrespect, but whatever happens in the Ukraine-Russia relations cannot and will not affect us. As far as our official stance is concerned, the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. Personally, I wish the Ukrainians the best because they are the underdogs. I just hope they wouldn't be stupid enough to think that the West will support them against Russia. That would be a grave mistake.

Your assessments are generally correct but the reality is that without the presence of Russia or China, all NATO efforts will be focused on Iran. So while you are correct that Russia will not sacrifice its interests on behalf of Iran, you are incorrect to think that whether Russia survives or falls has no impact on Iran.
 
Your assessments are generally correct but the reality is that without the presence of Russia or China, all NATO efforts will be focused on Iran. So while you are correct that Russia will not sacrifice its interests on behalf of Iran, you are incorrect to think that whether Russia survives or falls has no impact on Iran.

A Russo-Chinese alliance with Iran could prove to be a death sentence for both countries in the long term. Currently there is some sort of balancing act and neutrality but this could shift the neutralities and handing the west everything they needed.
 
A Russo-Chinese alliance with Iran could prove to be a death sentence for both countries in the long term. Currently there is some sort of balancing act and neutrality but this could shift the neutralities and handing the west everything they needed.

You know that Russia and China are in effect allied to each other but have not declared a formal alliance right? This is done for a reason. To allow flexibility and minimize pitfalls. This is a sophisticated strategy formulated to maneuver in a complex world where both China and Russia have overlapping relationships with countries that may be hostile or friendly to either or both. This way they do not inherit the enmities of the other.

China and Russia have a cooperative relationship with Iran and will come to Iran's aid in many instances in order to help it withstand the pressure of the West, at the same time, neither China nor Russia have any interest in creating unnecessary enemies.

China especially has a strong interest in maintaining positive ties with all of the powers of the Middle East so it will always work to reduce local tensions rather than ratcheting tensions.
 
They can not nuke you now because it can trigger full scale WW3. And there is only Russia in this world have enough nukes to annihilate the West.
Belorussians has the lowest gas price in Europe. Belorussia was not destroyed by color "revolution". I wish Ukraine was not, but it is too late.
Again, let's be realistic. Nobody can predict how or when the World War III will start. The chance of it starting over Iran is not significant. In fact, future conflicts over China's territorial integrity can be a stronger trigger for WW3.

Meanwhile, if Tehran gets nuked, Russia will not retaliate for sure. Why would Russians want to die for us? Any nuclear response by Russia will ensure the destruction of large population centers in Russia by the US, the UK and France.

It was the unfortunate stupidity of the Ukrainians that got them involved in this civil war mess that now they are in a worse situation than Belarus, not Russia's brotherly support for Belarus.

Your assessments are generally correct but the reality is that without the presence of Russia or China, all NATO efforts will be focused on Iran. So while you are correct that Russia will not sacrifice its interests on behalf of Iran, you are incorrect to think that whether Russia survives or falls has no impact on Iran.
I never said that the fall of Russia would not have an impact on us. We are not discussing the fall of Russia as a country, which is impossible. Why would Russia fall? Even African countries are not falling. That's just unimaginable, even in a long distance future.
But if Russia gets defeated in Ukraine (again, I strongly believe that nothing will happen there because Russia knows her own weaknesses and Europe knows well that they're not militarily strong enough to take on Russia), it won't affect us negatively. In fact, when Russia starts to actually feel the military threat of NATO, it will value its military alliances more and it will stop swinging like a pendulum each time it sees an opportunity. So, in some sense, it can be good for us.
 
China especially has a strong interest in maintaining positive ties with all of the powers of the Middle East so it will always work to reduce local tensions rather than ratcheting tensions.

I know there is no formal military allaince between China and Russia but it doesn't concern the MENA area but there has to be limit to coming to aid to any element from the ME region Because chosing side gets you branded in such area China enjoys neutrality and the same goes to Russia. If the neutrality were to shift you will not see EU deploying to Ukraine but you will be seeing much more numerous elements deploying.

We have our own intersts to guard hence if seen an element from the outside overly aligning with someone in ME could be viewed as someone who wants to break the status-quo of the area and that will meet with common hostility from the get go
 
I know there is no formal military allaince between China and Russia but there has to be limit to coming to aid to. Because chosing side gets you branded in such area China enjoys neutrality and the same goes to Russia. If the neutrality were to shift you will not see EU deploying to Ukraine but you will be seeing much more numerous elements deploying.

We have our own intersts to guard in the ME hence if seen an element from the outside overly aligning with someone could be viewed someone who wants to break the status-quo of the area and that will meet with common hostility from the get go

True. Global relations are a very sensitive balance.
 
Again, let's be realistic. Nobody can predict how or when the World War III will start. The chance of it starting over Iran is not significant. In fact, future conflicts over China's territorial integrity can be a stronger trigger for WW3.

Meanwhile, if Tehran gets nuked, Russia will not retaliate for sure. Why would Russians want to die for us? Any nuclear response by Russia will ensure the destruction of large population centers in Russia by the US, the UK and France.

It was the unfortunate stupidity of the Ukrainians that got them involved in this civil war mess that now they are in a worse situation than Belarus, not Russia's brotherly support for Belarus.
The point is they can not risk to nuke Iran, because Iran is close to Russia and Russia needs independent Iran. Because if Iran falls - USA will get access to Caspian sea. Next day after being nuked Iran will sign defence pact with Russia - and the whole action make no sense for the West.
Actually Russia's support did a lot in Belorussia. And if Yanukovich had guts as Lukashenko does, he would accept Russian support in 2014 and there will be nor civil war here.
 
The point is they can not risk to nuke Iran, because Iran is close to Russia and Russia needs independent Iran. Because if Iran falls - USA will get access to Caspian sea.
Actually Russia's support did a lot in Belorussia. And if Yanukovich had guts as Lukashenko does, he would accept Russian support in 2014 and there will be nor civil war here.

Russia can't shield Iran if things were to go south which I doubt they will do but Russia can't protect Iran nor give it any guraantees if it were to come to it. I am not saying Iran is facing any dengerous because it is not currently but Russia is not it's guaraantor
 
Russia can't shield Iran if things were to go south which I doubt they will do but Russia can't protect Iran nor give it any guraantees if it were to come to it. I am not saying Iran is facing any dengerous because it is not currently but Russia is not it's guaraantor
Why? Iran can ask to join CSTO and enjoy Russian nuclear shield.
 
Why? Iran can ask to join CSTO and enjoy Russian nuclear shield.

I don't think Russia even wants to do that nor will ever do that. Why get in the line like that is the question here? It can't even phsycally protect them what is Russia like 144m and declining it just can't shield them against large Coalition it could lead to Russia's own demise and further isolation. It is already cornered on it's border from all angles adding to another major front area could be way to much and out of it's scope
 
I don't think Russia even wants to do that nor will ever do that. Why get in the line like that is the question here? It can't even phsycally protect them what is Russia like 144m and declining it just can't shield them against large Coalition it could lead to Russia's own demise and further isolation
Most of the developed countries are declining in population. How it can influence Russia's nuclear arsenal? It is have been modernized all the time even in 90's. Russia's nuclear arsenal is in much better condition than that of the US. So there is no problem to protect Iran.
 
Most of the developed countries are declining in population. How it can influence Russia's nuclear arsenal? It is have been modernized all the time even in 90's. Russia's nuclear arsenal is in much better than that of the US. So there isno problem to protect Iran.

You put to much trust on Nukes thinking it would be your last hail-mary but you are completely mistaken here and you could be defeated rather easily you will hit multiple areas but you will get hit back and eventually you will have to engage in conventional battles and you could be attacked not only from your western border, but South, east, and behind you including north after firing couple of nukes it will become the beginning of the end as incursions will come from all directions that is the mistake of putting to much trust on nukes as if it will safe you..

Alliance is the key not just big stockpile yes it will give you the chance of being able to hit areas but it will not be the deciding factor but these who can back it up with formidble coalitions will own the day
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom