Emboldened by NATO's reluctance to stop him when he invaded Crimea, gave Putin the confidence he needed to do what he has now done, which is genocide. Does NATO actually think he will stop at Ukraine? No sane person wants war but NATO must START adhering to its principles to maintain peace in the region. Emboldened as he his by NATO's reluctance to ACT, his next targets could be the Baltic countries, all NATO members, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
I don't understand why it was OK to intervene in Bosnia but not Ukraine. Yet several NATO countries did including us. Genocide is genocide I agree but what is happening in Ukraine is far worse than anything else since WWII. I know we are all worried that it will unleash nuclear war but if their tanks can be destroyed so easily, if the 40 mile long queue of vehicles all have worn and useless tyres and, by now, also have flat batteries, why would their nuclear weapons be fit for anything other than parading in Red Square once a year. But there again, do we wish to take that chance?
I cannot think why any sane person would not feel strongly that Ukraine should be in NATO, they are canny fighters and I applaud the way they are defending their country as best they can but why on earth does Putin think the West is remotely interested in his poxy country. Why not concentrate on free trade and let the Russian people enjoy the fruits of their labour instead of everything going to the top dogs. Even Putin's daughter I believe is still living in the UK. Why?
I would say rather that NATO exists to ensure peace by providing a background threat of returned military action. The treaty states that if one member state is attacked, the others are obliged to support it with military force, if necessary. That is why Putin doesn't want a NATO-Ukraine on his western flank: NATO is a military force. Its material is not just words but troops stationed throughout Europe's NATO bloc. NATO is not a "peacekeeping force" as the UN's troops are. Each NATO country is supposed to contribute 2% of its annual budget to NATO for weapons, troops, training, etc. Germany, for the record, has up to now never met this standard but has promised each year to "do better". The bald fact is, the American taxpayer is shouldering the lion's share of Europe's defence, against such a day as this.
Today, in the TIMES (ours) another general has piped up to state that he was initially against a no-fly zone, but after watching what Putin has done, he now believes that NATO will "have to fight sooner or later". The problem is, if NATO had read the handwriting on the wall earlier, how many lives might have been saved by the conflict ending earlier?
It is true that Putin has the world's largest nuclear arsenal. But it's also true that once everyone else has any nuclear arsenal, it rather becomes a distinction without a difference. Britain, France, and Sweden all have nuclear arms. All it takes is one or two to devastate.
And, at that point, I don't think China, which values stability, is going to see Russia taking Ukraine as much of a ROI.
To me, this has always had 1939 written on it. There are times when you cannot escape the truth: to allow Putin to succeed, and then to plough further millions of taxpayer money into a ten-year insurgency in a ruined county (the bill for Afghanistan across the Pond was, I think, $3 trillion), is in my view to fail, anyway.
This man is a dangerous lunatic ready to kill millions. This is too familiar. The answer is also familiar. TC
@M.M. Yes, and also "oil dependency" which we have known for decades would sooner or later prove to trap us geopolitically. Humans, I think, are terrible at long-term thinking. We are wired to figure out only how to avoid being eaten by sabre-toothed tigers, stay warm, and feed ourselves day-to-day. Had we not pandered to the fossil fuel industry and lagged our feet in rushing to get off oil, Europe, still getting 40% of its oil from Russia, would have a much freer hand in this conflict. America has just banned Russian oil, but they only get 10% of their oil from Russia. The webs we are struggling in are, I am sorry to say, of our own making, and it is galling to remember that, and that we had fair warning. TC
NATO exists to keep the peace , can NATO not therefore stop the genocide, if NATO turns the back to whats happening in the Ukraine, where does Putin stop, thats the billion dollar question, as to me this is what this is all about, does dollars mean more than lives, yes i can understand no one wants, another world war, i grew up in the after math of WW11, what i clearly remember are the values, i carry them to this day, respect for human life. Who is going to stop Putin,without further blood shed either in The Ukraine or the world.
There is not doubt the majority of the democratic world supports Ukarine with donations flooding in, but will that half the shelling in Ukraine? Will donations of clothes free the people trapped in cities that have been reduced to rubble? Will taking in refugees stop Russian troops from advancing?
The answer in NO to all the above. The media are focusing on the humanitarian crisis which was bound to happen, but to stop the humanitarian crisis form getitng worse one must look at the bigger picture and stop the cause. Until that is addressed, the humanitarian crisis will continue until there are no civillians left to help.
Thanks for the update EL. I have hopes of an oil embargo but also fears as to how a cornered Bear will react if Russia has to shut down oil production. There is little storage for oil in Russia and if tankers won’t risk the Black Sea ports, there is nowhere for it to go- not even China- and no income for Russia.
I can hardly make myself watch the news and witness the people whose lives are in ruins in the Ukraine but when I do, I am uplifted by their amazing bravery and unwillingness to concede an inch of the Ukraine to Russia. I should think that they find it galling that peace talks are required when all that is necessary is that Putin leaves alone what isn’t his and makes reparation for the damage he has caused.
We have blue skies and spring blossom on the trees today. I am looking at it all with new eyes and such gratitude, but also with sense of shame that we are not doing more to stop the blue skies and peace being stolen from the Ukrainian people.
Excellent update, thank you. It is important to remember NATO's role: why it was formed and why countries decided to join (or not). They have a distinct position here and it is easy to suppose they can simply step in when/wherever they think best. They do all need to be on board with any final decision, and the big Q is always going to be the US, since the remaining countries are geographically, and many politically, aligned, whereas the US is distant on both those counts. And of course, that means it also has its own agenda. Bottom line: NATO isn't going to budge without the US's explicit approval. Many Americans simply don't see why the US should get involved in a conflict not of their own making, or, more precisely, their government might be implicated but they feel they are not. There are upcoming elections which will have a huge impact on the US's next moves, and that needs to be figured into the equation.
Watching this unfold has been wrenching to say the least. Although I am American, I do live in Europe, and this is going on right on our doorstep, as it were. I was born just after WWII, and I really thought we had learned from the last two conflicts not to go there again: grand, vibrant cities reduced to rubble, with millions of now homeless, innocent victims, trudging through the devastation, trying desperately to find shelter, clinging to all they have left in one small suitcase. I hadn't reckoned on another megalomaniac in our midst who either never learned from or simply ignored the past.
Just a note on your new moniker EL: brought a smile (in the midst of all this tragedy). When I was young and starting to get books as presents, my dad gave me a stack of small, stick-on labels to put in the front of each book: Ex Libris, a lovely woodcut of a tree, and my name. I still have many of those books!
Thank you to EL for your persistent work in bringing to our attention unadulterated facts. Like so many millions around the world, I fear we are on the brink of World War 3. From the pictures I have seen coming out of Ukraine, I see genocide which is a crime that can take place in war as well as in peace. Under Article 5, the UN Security Council may take "measures" necessary to restore and maintain "international" peace and security. I await President Zelinsky's comments when he speaks to MP's in the House of Commons tomorrow (Tuesday) in London. I share EL's
prayer that my merciful God watch over the Ukrainian people.
Putin reminds me of a school yard bully, telling the much smaller child he is thrashing that if he stays down with his face in the dirt and doesn't fight back, then he will leave him alone. The problem is the bully will return to the smaller child and thrash him again, usually encouraged by the bully's supporters, while the crowd gathers round to watch but stay back for fear of being next. The only way to stop a bully is for a bigger, stronger bully to wade in to defend the smaller child. I find myself wondering if NATO doesn't want to step up out of fear of China stepping in to help Putin.
I too fear highly weaponized China stepping in to help friend Putin. China, a country which western countries have helped build up over the years. I mean, when was the last time you bought anything which wasn't made in China? (I hope I won't be banned for getting too political. EL - Please "delete" if you wish!)
MM My view may be naive but although I am suspicious of China, abhor its abuses of human rights , and its threats towards the type of lives people of Hong Kong and Taiwan have enjoyed hitherto, I do not believe China will take up arms and support Russia. China is after world domination in its own way, economically, by trade with most countries and the acquisition of resources in places rich in natural resources and cheap labour such as Africa and other third world states. The turmoil Russia has plunged the world into has interfered with China’s progress in its aims and could potentially destabilise it’s own acquiescent and repressed people. My feeling is that China is losing patience with Russia’s behaviour because it threatens China’s own world wide interests. I hope I am right because the alternative is too terrible to think about.
Well said. While I agree China is not likely, at this point, to take up arms with Russia, it's highly likely they will bankroll Russia, if they're not already doing so.
Jo I’m afraid I disagree. Only my opinion I don’t think China will help Russia financially for the reasons I set out before. Furthermore if Putin were to succeed in his avowed intention of recreating the USSR it would be a threat to China both economically and on a competing power basis. It is in China’s interests strategically for Russia to be weaker than China .We will just have to wait and watch as events unfold.
Emboldened by NATO's reluctance to stop him when he invaded Crimea, gave Putin the confidence he needed to do what he has now done, which is genocide. Does NATO actually think he will stop at Ukraine? No sane person wants war but NATO must START adhering to its principles to maintain peace in the region. Emboldened as he his by NATO's reluctance to ACT, his next targets could be the Baltic countries, all NATO members, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
I don't understand why it was OK to intervene in Bosnia but not Ukraine. Yet several NATO countries did including us. Genocide is genocide I agree but what is happening in Ukraine is far worse than anything else since WWII. I know we are all worried that it will unleash nuclear war but if their tanks can be destroyed so easily, if the 40 mile long queue of vehicles all have worn and useless tyres and, by now, also have flat batteries, why would their nuclear weapons be fit for anything other than parading in Red Square once a year. But there again, do we wish to take that chance?
I cannot think why any sane person would not feel strongly that Ukraine should be in NATO, they are canny fighters and I applaud the way they are defending their country as best they can but why on earth does Putin think the West is remotely interested in his poxy country. Why not concentrate on free trade and let the Russian people enjoy the fruits of their labour instead of everything going to the top dogs. Even Putin's daughter I believe is still living in the UK. Why?
While the whole world claims to be standing UP for Ukraine, the Ukrainian people need world leaders to stand WITH Ukraine in stopping the genocide.
President Zelensky has today echoed Churchill, "We will NEVER surrender". NATO please note!!!!
I would say rather that NATO exists to ensure peace by providing a background threat of returned military action. The treaty states that if one member state is attacked, the others are obliged to support it with military force, if necessary. That is why Putin doesn't want a NATO-Ukraine on his western flank: NATO is a military force. Its material is not just words but troops stationed throughout Europe's NATO bloc. NATO is not a "peacekeeping force" as the UN's troops are. Each NATO country is supposed to contribute 2% of its annual budget to NATO for weapons, troops, training, etc. Germany, for the record, has up to now never met this standard but has promised each year to "do better". The bald fact is, the American taxpayer is shouldering the lion's share of Europe's defence, against such a day as this.
Today, in the TIMES (ours) another general has piped up to state that he was initially against a no-fly zone, but after watching what Putin has done, he now believes that NATO will "have to fight sooner or later". The problem is, if NATO had read the handwriting on the wall earlier, how many lives might have been saved by the conflict ending earlier?
It is true that Putin has the world's largest nuclear arsenal. But it's also true that once everyone else has any nuclear arsenal, it rather becomes a distinction without a difference. Britain, France, and Sweden all have nuclear arms. All it takes is one or two to devastate.
And, at that point, I don't think China, which values stability, is going to see Russia taking Ukraine as much of a ROI.
To me, this has always had 1939 written on it. There are times when you cannot escape the truth: to allow Putin to succeed, and then to plough further millions of taxpayer money into a ten-year insurgency in a ruined county (the bill for Afghanistan across the Pond was, I think, $3 trillion), is in my view to fail, anyway.
This man is a dangerous lunatic ready to kill millions. This is too familiar. The answer is also familiar. TC
It IS 1939 all over again, this time the only difference is "nuclear".
@M.M. Yes, and also "oil dependency" which we have known for decades would sooner or later prove to trap us geopolitically. Humans, I think, are terrible at long-term thinking. We are wired to figure out only how to avoid being eaten by sabre-toothed tigers, stay warm, and feed ourselves day-to-day. Had we not pandered to the fossil fuel industry and lagged our feet in rushing to get off oil, Europe, still getting 40% of its oil from Russia, would have a much freer hand in this conflict. America has just banned Russian oil, but they only get 10% of their oil from Russia. The webs we are struggling in are, I am sorry to say, of our own making, and it is galling to remember that, and that we had fair warning. TC
NATO exists to keep the peace , can NATO not therefore stop the genocide, if NATO turns the back to whats happening in the Ukraine, where does Putin stop, thats the billion dollar question, as to me this is what this is all about, does dollars mean more than lives, yes i can understand no one wants, another world war, i grew up in the after math of WW11, what i clearly remember are the values, i carry them to this day, respect for human life. Who is going to stop Putin,without further blood shed either in The Ukraine or the world.
Exactly, NATO exists to KEEP the peace; there is NO PEACE IN GENOCIDE. Have world leaders not studied what led up to World War 2?
There is not doubt the majority of the democratic world supports Ukarine with donations flooding in, but will that half the shelling in Ukraine? Will donations of clothes free the people trapped in cities that have been reduced to rubble? Will taking in refugees stop Russian troops from advancing?
The answer in NO to all the above. The media are focusing on the humanitarian crisis which was bound to happen, but to stop the humanitarian crisis form getitng worse one must look at the bigger picture and stop the cause. Until that is addressed, the humanitarian crisis will continue until there are no civillians left to help.
@EL - I completely agree - we've been here before. We waited too long then. We've waited too long now. TC
Thanks for the update EL. I have hopes of an oil embargo but also fears as to how a cornered Bear will react if Russia has to shut down oil production. There is little storage for oil in Russia and if tankers won’t risk the Black Sea ports, there is nowhere for it to go- not even China- and no income for Russia.
I can hardly make myself watch the news and witness the people whose lives are in ruins in the Ukraine but when I do, I am uplifted by their amazing bravery and unwillingness to concede an inch of the Ukraine to Russia. I should think that they find it galling that peace talks are required when all that is necessary is that Putin leaves alone what isn’t his and makes reparation for the damage he has caused.
We have blue skies and spring blossom on the trees today. I am looking at it all with new eyes and such gratitude, but also with sense of shame that we are not doing more to stop the blue skies and peace being stolen from the Ukrainian people.
Great words JLiz
Excellent update, thank you. It is important to remember NATO's role: why it was formed and why countries decided to join (or not). They have a distinct position here and it is easy to suppose they can simply step in when/wherever they think best. They do all need to be on board with any final decision, and the big Q is always going to be the US, since the remaining countries are geographically, and many politically, aligned, whereas the US is distant on both those counts. And of course, that means it also has its own agenda. Bottom line: NATO isn't going to budge without the US's explicit approval. Many Americans simply don't see why the US should get involved in a conflict not of their own making, or, more precisely, their government might be implicated but they feel they are not. There are upcoming elections which will have a huge impact on the US's next moves, and that needs to be figured into the equation.
Watching this unfold has been wrenching to say the least. Although I am American, I do live in Europe, and this is going on right on our doorstep, as it were. I was born just after WWII, and I really thought we had learned from the last two conflicts not to go there again: grand, vibrant cities reduced to rubble, with millions of now homeless, innocent victims, trudging through the devastation, trying desperately to find shelter, clinging to all they have left in one small suitcase. I hadn't reckoned on another megalomaniac in our midst who either never learned from or simply ignored the past.
Just a note on your new moniker EL: brought a smile (in the midst of all this tragedy). When I was young and starting to get books as presents, my dad gave me a stack of small, stick-on labels to put in the front of each book: Ex Libris, a lovely woodcut of a tree, and my name. I still have many of those books!
Thank you to EL for your persistent work in bringing to our attention unadulterated facts. Like so many millions around the world, I fear we are on the brink of World War 3. From the pictures I have seen coming out of Ukraine, I see genocide which is a crime that can take place in war as well as in peace. Under Article 5, the UN Security Council may take "measures" necessary to restore and maintain "international" peace and security. I await President Zelinsky's comments when he speaks to MP's in the House of Commons tomorrow (Tuesday) in London. I share EL's
prayer that my merciful God watch over the Ukrainian people.
Putin reminds me of a school yard bully, telling the much smaller child he is thrashing that if he stays down with his face in the dirt and doesn't fight back, then he will leave him alone. The problem is the bully will return to the smaller child and thrash him again, usually encouraged by the bully's supporters, while the crowd gathers round to watch but stay back for fear of being next. The only way to stop a bully is for a bigger, stronger bully to wade in to defend the smaller child. I find myself wondering if NATO doesn't want to step up out of fear of China stepping in to help Putin.
I too fear highly weaponized China stepping in to help friend Putin. China, a country which western countries have helped build up over the years. I mean, when was the last time you bought anything which wasn't made in China? (I hope I won't be banned for getting too political. EL - Please "delete" if you wish!)
MM My view may be naive but although I am suspicious of China, abhor its abuses of human rights , and its threats towards the type of lives people of Hong Kong and Taiwan have enjoyed hitherto, I do not believe China will take up arms and support Russia. China is after world domination in its own way, economically, by trade with most countries and the acquisition of resources in places rich in natural resources and cheap labour such as Africa and other third world states. The turmoil Russia has plunged the world into has interfered with China’s progress in its aims and could potentially destabilise it’s own acquiescent and repressed people. My feeling is that China is losing patience with Russia’s behaviour because it threatens China’s own world wide interests. I hope I am right because the alternative is too terrible to think about.
Well said. While I agree China is not likely, at this point, to take up arms with Russia, it's highly likely they will bankroll Russia, if they're not already doing so.
Jo I’m afraid I disagree. Only my opinion I don’t think China will help Russia financially for the reasons I set out before. Furthermore if Putin were to succeed in his avowed intention of recreating the USSR it would be a threat to China both economically and on a competing power basis. It is in China’s interests strategically for Russia to be weaker than China .We will just have to wait and watch as events unfold.
Your comment is not naive; and there IS wisdom in thinking China is after world domination, in its own way.
🙂 Thank you MM