In the unlikely scenario of Ukraine taking over Crimea and threatening to take over Sevastopol, there are high chances of that happening.RoyG wrote:Nobody is going nuclear.
But Ukraine is not taking Crimea so the thing is moot
In the unlikely scenario of Ukraine taking over Crimea and threatening to take over Sevastopol, there are high chances of that happening.RoyG wrote:Nobody is going nuclear.
Riiight ... and 15 months ago people were saying, with great confidence, "nobody is going to invade Ukraine. Russia is weak and incompetent".RoyG wrote:Nobody is going nuclear.
You are talking about a country that sacrificed more than a million of its soldiers against foreign invasions . I would repeat never corner a bear , for that is exactly what Russia behaves like. Just fyi there is a huge swathe of radioactive zone bordering Belarus and Poland even now as an aftermath of the Chernobyl., a few tactical nukes would just enlarge that zone permanently. , unfortunate as it is.Cyrano wrote:C'mon guys, Russia will not use nukes on Ukraine soil or on its new territories or Crimea. These are some of the most fertile lands in the world with black soil running several feet deep. Nuke fallout will ruin them forever. Radioactive particles will get blown around by prevailing winds for hundreds of kms and can go into Belarus or Russia itself. Plus Putin will not want to nuke his slav brothers and commit a historical blunder.
Even on the Polish borders, what's the need for nukes?!
Why are Ukrainians shelling Russian-occupied nuclear reactor facility? Are they the epitome of responsible behaviour? I think not.Cyrano wrote:C'mon guys, Russia will not use nukes on Ukraine soil or on its new territories or Crimea. These are some of the most fertile lands in the world with black soil running several feet deep. Nuke fallout will ruin them forever. Radioactive particles will get blown around by prevailing winds for hundreds of kms and can go into Belarus or Russia itself. Plus Putin will not want to nuke his slav brothers and commit a historical blunder.
Even on the Polish borders, what's the need for nukes?!
Who said anything about Russia using nukes on Ukraine or Crimea? I spoke (hypothesized) about Russian reaction to a NATO (i.e. American) military attack on Russia proper -- whether it's Crimea, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Smolensk, Vladivostok or wherever. Why in hell would Russia not think of using nukes? Or I should say, why would they rule it out? Their country is being invaded, bombed out of existence, and they should worry about radioactive dust in Poland? !!Cyrano wrote:C'mon guys, Russia will not use nukes on Ukraine soil or on its new territories or Crimea.
For that Russia has a published doctrine, as do other nuclear powers. Why discuss that in this context?Roop wrote:Who said anything about Russia using nukes on Ukraine or Crimea? I spoke (hypothesized) about Russian reaction to a NATO (i.e. American) military attack on Russia proper -- whether it's Crimea, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Smolensk, Vladivostok or wherever. Why in hell would Russia not think of using nukes? Or I should say, why would they rule it out? Their country is being invaded, bombed out of existence, and they should worry about radioactive dust in Poland? !!Cyrano wrote:C'mon guys, Russia will not use nukes on Ukraine soil or on its new territories or Crimea.
Yes and no. It's not usual to insure a business against risk of war etc. However, most business contracts have exclusions to liability for non performance due to causes beyond anyone's control like natural disasters, hand of God, wars, civil wars, conflicts etc.Pratyush wrote:War and war like activities are a general exclusion in any insurance contract.
Thanks!Cyrano wrote:Avid wrote: Try this posted in West Asia thread:
Some sensible French analysts are saying that there is also strong Russian support behind the scenes which helped this positive turn of events. If true, it indicates a great deal of maturity and long term view displayed by the Russians, which is quite admirable in the current scheme of things.Avid wrote:Best to read the original WSJ article -- which is more comprehensive as well as less speculative in describing what really transpired.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-iran ... s-69fb9aef
The long-term view is that the coming years will likely see a world that is: 1) US/West; 2) China; and 3) Remainder countries that want to be left out of their fights -- aligning and disengaging issue by issue.Cyrano wrote:Some sensible French analysts are saying that there is also strong Russian support behind the scenes which helped this positive turn of events. If true, it indicates a great deal of maturity and long term view displayed by the Russians, which is quite admirable in the current scheme of things.Avid wrote:Best to read the original WSJ article -- which is more comprehensive as well as less speculative in describing what really transpired.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-iran ... s-69fb9aef
I worry Indians are too naive and easily duped. We *must* develop a MILITARIZED MINDSET to navigate this decade.
Not a take on geopolitics, just some thoughts
For years before Galwan incident, several people assessed China based on their actions, not on their words. They were right. We now unambiguously recognize the imminent Chinese threat to India.
China's actions as well as rhetoric indisputably prove we're correct in this assessment.
The inability of China to comprehend that India can be trusted not to be a US lackey, is a problem of their mental make up , stemming from their state propaganda and societal experiences. Too bad. Perhaps they need to learn the hard way that India is a pole of its own. This is an unfortunate situation, but China has the capacity to remedy it, if it chooses. Clearly, they currently lack incentives to modify their stance on the boundary question.
Regarding the US, one musn't expect rational behavior from the DC establishment in its moment of implosion and decline, when it is visibly turning on its citizens and its closest allies. It's finances are dire, with the entire edifice of the Western financial system being called into question. The Pentagon is leaking national security secrets. Old allies are walking away, making it a particularly precarious moment in the middle east. Domestic politics is in turmoil that many have likened to something before a civil war. With nothing going their way, their lashing out will be dangerous.
We're not currently in the cross hairs, but it doesn't mean the US hegemony is willing to accept an India that is not *eventually* in their camp. It doesn't mean their awesome worldwide mechanism to sow chaos in order to get their way will never be pressed into service against us. It has been, and is even currently being used at threshold levels that are within our comfort zone. When the US turns on us, it will be very nasty, and even more hurtful than the Chinese enmity, simply because the people to people relations are so well established. You're free to believe this can never happen, but it has happened in the past.
Hence, a militarized mindset is essential, so that we are able to interrogate everything and negotiate everything from a position where our own security is the paramount concern. Needless to say, our own actions and initiatives must be rooted in Dharma, in the will to raise humanity to a step above the current nihilistic and barbarous hatreds that lead towards disaster.
I assume Russia already has special forces (Spetsnaz-type people) operating behind the lines in western Ukraine. Maybe even in countries like Poland / Romania / Moldova.Tanaji wrote:Nato now seems to be saying we have boots on the ground, what are you going to do about it? At some point though there is going to be a huge miscalculation and the bear will strike back.
after Macron pulls a rift in EU, Polish PM rushes to WH stresses there is no unity in Europe on cheen and Baltics remain servants forever https://www.politico.eu/article/poland- ... yndicationIndraD wrote:after Macron's chumma chaati in Cheen, EU President follows the suit:
European Council president Charles Michel : "European leaders are becoming increasingly favorable toward French President Emmanuel Macron's push for 'strategic autonomy' away from the United States" https://www.politico.eu/article/europe- ... es-michel/