What's new

Russia-Ukraine War - News and Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
West-European citizen dont care about Easten Europan.
They care enough to admit them into EU and and have no border with them and have a single currency together, because they realise that having an iron curtain in Europe is very destructive.

Average western european see everyone in balkan countries and East-Europe as ex-sovjet commie countries with so much corruption and backward culture. Why do you think there is so much racist attitude against those immigrants from balkan, baltic states and East Europe in western europe countries?
I dont know about this. There is nationalism in every country, but I cant say I have never received any bad treatment in any western european country. I also have friends and relatives all over Europe and they dont share that view. This obviously does not change the fact that western europe is more developed than post communist Europe. And its people tend to be a little more polite and cultured.
I live in the Netherlands and i can tell you average dutch hate the war, rejected Ukraine as EU member in 2016 referendum and oppose sending war materials to Ukraine. Dutch prime minister with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz oppose sanctioning the oil and gas from Russia. Why is that? It is because these western european countries refuse to eat local grass unlike what you claimed
The Dutch might care a lot less because they know they will be last country to fall to the Russian empire. But ask Germans in Leipzig if they want to be a part of a Russian puppet state? or if they want to be in a free democratic Germany? No, I assure you they wil fight to the end and the fight is on now. There are volunteers from all over Europe risking their lives to save Ukraine.

Russians have tried this strategy of division, to try and divide Europe so they can have their way. Its not going to work, you can see that in the actions of the EU governments and the people.

Europe is united like never before. This was unimaginable 12 days ago.
 
.
I am pro western because I live in the west, and my future kind of depends on the west being successful. Not at the expense of others, but in a fair way.

I am naturally mind boggled at the Russian invasion and its failure is necessary for my family and I in Europe and Australia to succeed and prosper. This is why I am glued to these events,

And if you live in the west I suggest you try being a bit more pro western also.

@retaxis he is actually one of the sane and realistic pro western posters. Look at how delusional others are like @F22Raptor and he is Indonesian lolz.

You being a bosnian should know it were the eastern countries that came to ur help when everyone abandoned u. In turn, u ppl should have turned east and established strong relations but instead u joined NATO and want to join EU.
 
.
They care enough to admit them into EU and and have no border with them and have a single currency together, because they realise that having an iron curtain in Europe is very destructive.


I dont know about this. There is nationalism in every country, but I cant say I have never received any bad treatment in any western european country. I also have friends and relatives all over Europe and they dont share that view. This obviously does not change the fact that western europe is more developed than post communist Europe. And its people tend to be a little more polite and cultured.

The Dutch might care a lot less because they know they will be last country to fall to the Russian empire. But ask Germans in Leipzig if they want to be a part of a Russian puppet state? or if they want to be in a free democratic Germany? No, I assure you they wil fight to the end and the fight is on now. There are volunteers from all over Europe risking their lives to save Ukraine.

Russians have tried this strategy of division, to try and divide Europe so they can have their way. Its not going to work, you can see that in the actions of the EU governments and the people.

Europe is united like never before. This was unimaginable 12 days ago.

Sure...If you believe in your fairy tale. I am going to teach you a lesson in EU history. EU was a economic cooperation between West-european countries to advance their common economy which they believe will lead to common prosperity. The organisation founded in 1957 which is now known as the European Union, originally had six members: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. After the fall of the Sovjet Union, there was some sense to include eastern europe into the EU for common prosperity. The idea was: ''making money and not wars''.

The problem with this line of thinking was that the Western European countries were/are more advance whether economy, technology,social, political system etc than their Eastern Europe counter parts. It would be impossible to make backwards countries like Eastern European countries to be advance as Western Europe in short terms. So there need to be put more money in education, technology, social, justice system etc by Western EU members to Eastern EU members. Decades of experience has shown that until now East-Europe is a failed story whether in politic or economic sense.
Political failure because Eastern Europe always followed USA orders instead of consulting with Western Europe counterparts. Anyone remember when USA defence secretary Rumsfeld try to divide the EU by claiming Old Europe=Western Europe didnt matter? And what did Eastern Europe did? Nothing at all, and smiling bcause they think they will be the new EU power backed by USA. Foolish folks. See Iraq war

Anger at Rumsfeld attack on 'old Europe'​

Transatlantic row as Berlin and Paris hit back at US defence chief


John Hooper in Berlin and Ian Black in Brussels
Fri 24 Jan 2003 02.06 GMT


Transatlantic differences over Iraq turned bitterly personal yesterday as political leaders in France and Germany hit back at the US defence secretary's dismissal of their cherished alliance as representing "old Europe".
So heated was the response to Donald Rumsfeld's remarks, particularly and all the more surprisingly on the right, that the French president, Jacques Chirac, appealed for calm.

Nato's secretary-general, George Robertson, also tried to play down the rift, insisting that there was no row within the military alliance over providing logistical and other support for US-led action against Iraq. He said Washington's European allies were divided only over timing of action.
But Germany's foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, confirmed that Berlin was working on a plan aimed at slowing the drift to war. The German representative on the UN security council is to call for a further report from the weapons inspectors to be delivered in mid-February.
"We want them to continue working," Mr Fischer said after he and his French counterpart, Dominique de Villepin, had appeared before a joint session of their countries' parliamentary foreign affairs committees. "If they are to continue working, then they must also report."
Shortly afterwards, he set off on a visit to Turkey, Egypt and Jordan in search of a peaceful solution to the crisis.
In responding to a reporter's question about French and German qualms, Mr Rumsfeld hinted on Wednesday that Washington would turn to Nato's new members in eastern Europe for support.
"You're thinking of Europe as Germany and France. I don't," he said. "I think that's old Europe. If you look at the entire Nato Europe today, the centre of gravity is shifting to the east and there are a lot of new members."
Mr Chirac's spokeswoman, Catherine Colonna, said the president, who was visiting Berlin to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Franco-German friendship treaty, wanted to see the debate over Mr Rumsfeld's remarks "take place with seriousness and calmness". But back in Paris, the tone was one of spluttering outrage.
"If you knew what I felt like telling Mr. Rumsfeld ... " the ecology minister, Roselyne Bachelot, told a radio interviewer, before resorting to a well-known regional expression for a four-letter word. Her cabinet colleague, the finance minister, Francis Mer, said he was "profoundly vexed".
Even the reaction of the government's official spokesman, Jean-François Copé, was distinctly sardonic. Mr Rumsfeld would do well to listen to "old Europe", he said.
"When one is an old continent, a continent with an old historic, cultural and economic tradition, one can sometimes inherit a certain wisdom, and wisdom can be a good adviser," he said.
Germany's centre-left government, which has had troubled relations with the US since last summer when the chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, ruled out German involvement in a war, made no official comment. The general secretary of the chancellor's Social Democratic party was critical, but restrained. "Rumsfeld does not understand Europe," said Olaf Scholz. "It is good to heed Europe."
By far the strongest response came from the arch-conservative Bavarian Christian Social Union. Its spokesman on European affairs, Bernd Posselt, accused Mr Rumsfeld of "neo-colonialism". He added: "The US has to learn that the European Union is a partner and not a protectorate."
Washington last week formally asked its allies to help defend Turkey and provide Awac radar planes and ships to patrol the Mediterranean. But on Wednesday, Nato ambassadors postponed a decision on military planning after objections from Germany, France and other states worried about a slide towards war.
"We have not yet achieved a consensus on proposals that have been put forward," Lord Robertson admitted. "There is a disagreement on timing by a small number of nations, but there is no disagreement on substance. This is not some sort of bust-up."
But diplomats in Brussels said last night that Germany was unlikely to approve the same wish-list as long as the arms inspections were continuing.
"We knew the Germans had a problem, but we were surprised that the French joined them," said one alliance official. Washington also wants to use Nato planning facilities and equipment and has suggested it could play a role in postwar humanitarian operations in Iraq, as it has done in Afghanistan.
The EU divisions are likely to resurface when foreign ministers meet in Brussels next Monday, hours before Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector, presents his long-awaited report to the UN security council.


Economic failure: No progression at all, even China which start more or less at the same, has progressed leap and bound.
Had Western Europe realised how different and challenging East Europe was in the 20th century, there would be no direct EU members for East European countries like Bulgaria,Romania, Hungaria, Poland etc. Membership will only be allowed based on EU criteria which some countries in balkan still struggle to fulfill. Even then it is still the matter of voting, which Western European countries still hold the weight unlike their Eastern European counterpart.

To avoid being played out by USA, France proposed to make the EU smaller to their origin members because France like Western Europe see East-Europe, Balkan, Baltic states as backward corrupt beggar countries that have nothing substantial to offers. Take a look at recent proposal to make Ukraine direct member of EU. Here in the Netherlands, you will find nobody who want Ukraine being member of EU because of the moneypit story and corruption etc.

Some EU Nations Balk at Push to Advance Ukraine’s Membership Bid​

  • Nine nations have asked EU to grant Ukraine candidate status
  • Germany among those looking to buy time before taking decision
Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks in Kyiv on March 3.

Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks in Kyiv on March 3.
Photographer: Sergei Supinksky/AFP/Getty Images
By
Alberto Nardelli,
Natalia Drozdiak, and
John Follain
7 maart 2022 14:06 CET

Listen to this article​


3:06

Share this article​


Follow the authors
@albertonardelli
+ Get alerts for
@nat_droz
+ Get alerts for
@JohnFollain
+ Get alerts for

In this article​

538604Z
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
Private Company

TWTR
TWITTER INC
32.68
USD
+0.26+0.80%


Several western European Union countries are pushing back against calls for the bloc to grant Ukraine so-called candidate status this week, a first step on the long road to EU membership, according to several diplomats.
Germany, the Netherlands and others first want the EU’s executive arm to deliver its opinion on Ukraine’s readiness for the membership process before taking a political decision, said the diplomats, describing private discussions taking place ahead of a summit in France this week. Those countries want to focus on delivering practical support to Ukraine and ending the war rather than embarking on a process that could take at least a decade, one of the diplomats said.

Countries in favor of the proposal argue that it would be symbolically important for EU leaders to put their weight behind Ukraine’s bid, even if the actual membership process itself remains long and complicated.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy formally applied to join the EU at the end of last month and nine member states from central and eastern Europe, led by Poland and the three Baltic nations, have publicly called on the bloc to grant Ukraine candidate status and start the accession process.
EU leaders are due to discuss Ukraine’s request when they meet over two days near Paris starting Thursday.

EU Club​


The European Union began with six members and now has 27



Source: European Commission, Bloomberg

Note: The U.K. joined in 1973 and left in 2020

The leaders could decide to back Ukraine’s candidate status and start the long process of negotiating full membership, they could buy time by punting the issue to the European Commission, or they could find a compromise position, such as recognizing that Ukraine has a long-term relationship with the EU without formally backing its candidate status.

“There is still a long path ahead. We have to end this war. And we should talk about the next steps,” Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said last week to the European Parliament. “But nobody can doubt that a people that stands up so bravely for our European values belongs in our European family.”



Leaders at the summit may ask the commission to provide an opinion on Ukraine’s candidacy faster than usual, in a show of political support for Kyiv, EU diplomats said. The process usually lasts between 15 and 18 months.

But even coming up with an opinion would be a fraught undertaking amid an invasion, as it involves the commission sending a lengthy list of questions to the government, and dispatching fact-finding missions to the country.
Read More: NATO Faces Reality of Emboldened Russia on Its Doorstep

A diplomat from one of the countries opposed to making Ukraine a candidate said their government was wary of offering false expectations and Kyiv isn’t ready to begin the formal accession process. Some countries in western Europe are concerned about further expansion after long-running disputes over the rule of law with newer members such as Hungary and Poland, as well as how other long-standing candidates in the Balkans would view a preferential approach for Ukraine.
Gaining EU membership is an arduous process requiring dozens of criteria to be met -- from the rule of law to judicial reforms -- and can take more than a decade. Croatia was the last country to join the bloc and its application lasted 10 years before it was formally accepted in 2013. Starting the process requires the unanimous approval of all EU member states, the European Commission and the European Parliament.




I am dealing with facts, numbers and not wishes.
 
Last edited:
.
Can you show us an official source where it says that an average Russian earns less that an average Indian? Or is just some made up stuff from you?

That would be interesting to see.
Can't find the IMF report I read some days ago.

But here are what Wikipedia show under "Average Gross Salary"


Which show similar figure, go dispute their source if you want.
 
.
You being a bosnian should know it were the eastern countries that came to ur help when everyone abandoned u. In turn, u ppl should have turned east and established strong relations but instead u joined NATO and want to join EU.
NATO gave us a "no fly zone" at the start of the bosnain war. Your anti tank missiles saved thousands of lives, but No fly zone was absolutely essential. What ukranians would give for a no fly zone.

Of course we wil join EU and NATO. EU is about trade and our trading partners are Germany, Italy, Austria, Croatia and Serbia. We aren't going to join ASEAN. we can't.

And NATO, well, seeing what is happening, if you were a Bosnian wouldn't you want to Jon NATO now? or you want to be like Ukraine?
 
.
it's funny how people get excited when something is going on in Eastern Europe.
btw the started of this thread was Turkish .
Turkey is a neighbor of both countries by sea. Responsible for the execution of the Montreux convention. The 'officially' (no longer practically) eastern flank of NATO. Russia and Turkey are among the most important trade partners of each other, and Ukraine is also Turkey's solution partner in critical areas. There are thousands of Turkish businesses in Ukraine. Ukraine is the homeland of about 2 million people living in Turkey, and even now, about half a million descendants live in Ukraine. Do you think these are valid reasons for an ordinary Turkish citizen to follow this issue closely?

Hundreds of messages have been written, but I have not seen any such implication in any of them. Why exactly might it bother you that this thread was opened by a Turk?
 
.
Ukraine is suggesting the Syrian stalemate model with the exact same 3 state actors playing the guaraantors.. The same treepeat..

This was suggested by Zelenskyy himself as NATO membership won't be possible for the next 15 years hence bringing in the same Syrian actors that has agreed on 3 part partition. Namely America, Turkey and Russia. I assume Russia will hold onto the eastern parts from Odessa to Luhansk main while US and Turkish armed forces joint will ethablish a secure state for the Ukrainians on the western side of Ukraine and there shall be no doubt of another russian invasion this time they are under guraantee.

But this will not be 3 part partition but rather 2 part partition. A Russian zone and Turkish-American Zone. All 3 work as guraantors basically.

Alternative to NATO proposed by Zelensky's party​

The Servant of the People Party is proposing to sign a new security agreement for Ukraine with the United States, Turkey and Russia instead of NATO membership.​


With ongoing negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, Zelensky's Servant of the People Party has proposed a new security agreement as an alternative to the country joining NATO. The party believes that in such an agreement, the guarantors may be the United States, Turkey, and neighboring countries – even including Russia.


By signing such an agreement, Russia will allegedly have legal obligations to recognize Ukrainian statehood and refrain from threatening the Ukrainian people and government.


The party acknowledges that such an agreement may seem absurd given the current situation, but insists that the new treaty will set out specific steps taken by other guarantor states against the violating party.



"The alliance is not ready to accept Ukraine for at least the next 15 years, and it clearly says so. We do not even have support in a completely just war from the alliance - only from individual states." A party spokesperson said.


"As it is impossible to join NATO in the coming years, we cannot use only the lines of the Constitution [expressing our desire to join NATO on our] course to the alliance, to defend our country," he said. "The course is politics – but not weapons, not planes, not state protection."

496155


In addition, the party gave assurance that in no case will Ukraine cede its claim to Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk nor agree to any ultimatums on its sovereignty and territorial integrity.


"We hear Russia's demand to recognize the so-called "DNR" and "LNR", [Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics, and] to recognize the occupation of Crimea." The party claimed. "It is clear that we will not do that. But we need to decide how the lives of people in these territories will be regulated within our integral state."

 
Last edited:
.
NATO gave us a "no fly zone" at the start of the bosnain war. Your anti tank missiles saved thousands of lives, but No fly zone was absolutely essential. What ukranians would give for a no fly zone.

Of course we wil join EU and NATO. EU is about trade and our trading partners are Germany, Italy, Austria, Croatia and Serbia. We aren't going to join ASEAN. we can't.

And NATO, well, seeing what is happening, if you were a Bosnian wouldn't you want to Jon NATO now? or you want to be like Ukraine?

You guys are putting all ur eggs in one basket now. They provided a no fly zone because they knew it wont stop the serbs from butchering u. You are free to choose what u want but be prepared to be betrayed by the west and this time, no help may arrive from east.
 
.
You guys are putting all ur eggs in one basket now. They provided a no fly zone because they knew it wont stop the serbs from butchering u. You are free to choose what u want but be prepared to be betrayed by the west and this time, no help may arrive from east.
A lot of Muslim bosniaks I encountered are nice. While those who believe in their white European superiority are aholes.
 
.
Things is, Russia has ALREADY been surrounded by 3 sides by NATO (Latvia and Estonia in the West, Alaska in the East and Turkey in the South). And about to be all 4 if and when Finland joining, which is very likely (as last poll a week ago show 58% of Finnish support) Invading and Occupying Ukraine does not change this fact.

NATO is not an equal organisation, which mean other than the people who actually do support NATO in a meaningful manner (ie US, UK and France) everyone else is a liability, which mean the more the country signed up, the more liability because people are not about to fight themselves and asking for other to fight for them, that is the reason why people join NATO. Ie the more people join, the more people US, UK and France needed to protect.

As for Black sea, Turkey, not Ukraine hold the cards there, because it sat on the exit of Black Seas, if you cannot transit from Black Sea into the Med, then it is useless because without Turkey (which was in NATO) okay, Black Seas is just an inland lake.

So first u say the west gains nothing and now say russia is encircled. The east is too far away and the south is Turkey which wont fight for NATO against Russia, even NATO knows this. Turkey will also not block the passage for russia as now the black sea is practically half russian and half Turkish. This only leaves the west and north, Ukraine is already taken care of and the Russians will focus and defend the north and north west.
Its funny how westerners were bad-mouthing Turkey until very recently, u think turks will forget? They will forget the attempted coup and economic war? Along with US support to kurds?
 
.
Ukraine is suggesting the Syrian stalemate model with the exact same 3 state actors playing the guaraantors.. The same treepeat..

This was suggested by Zelenskyy himself as NATO membership won't be possible for the next 15 years hence bringing in the same Syrian actors that has agreed on 3 part partition. Namely America, Turkey and Russia. I assume Russia will hold onto the eastern parts from Odessa to Luhansk main while US and Turkish armed forces joint will ethablish a secure state for the Ukrainians on the western side of Ukraine and there shall be no doubt of another russian invasion this time they are under guraantee.

But this will not be 3 part partition but rather 2 part partition. A Russian zone and Turkish-American Zone. All 3 work as guraantors basically.

Alternative to NATO proposed by Zelensky's party​

The Servant of the People Party is proposing to sign a new security agreement for Ukraine with the United States, Turkey and Russia instead of NATO membership.​


With ongoing negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, Zelensky's Servant of the People Party has proposed a new security agreement as an alternative to the country joining NATO. The party believes that in such an agreement, the guarantors may be the United States, Turkey, and neighboring countries – even including Russia.


By signing such an agreement, Russia will allegedly have legal obligations to recognize Ukrainian statehood and refrain from threatening the Ukrainian people and government.


The party acknowledges that such an agreement may seem absurd given the current situation, but insists that the new treaty will set out specific steps taken by other guarantor states against the violating party.



"The alliance is not ready to accept Ukraine for at least the next 15 years, and it clearly says so. We do not even have support in a completely just war from the alliance - only from individual states." A party spokesperson said.


"As it is impossible to join NATO in the coming years, we cannot use only the lines of the Constitution [expressing our desire to join NATO on our] course to the alliance, to defend our country," he said. "The course is politics – but not weapons, not planes, not state protection."

496155


In addition, the party gave assurance that in no case will Ukraine cede its claim to Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk nor agree to any ultimatums on its sovereignty and territorial integrity.


"We hear Russia's demand to recognize the so-called "DNR" and "LNR", [Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics, and] to recognize the occupation of Crimea." The party claimed. "It is clear that we will not do that. But we need to decide how the lives of people in these territories will be regulated within our integral state."


Russia is even desparately going for Odessa and honestly if anyone of you think that Russia will ever vacate cities like Odessa and everything all the way to Luhansk to Ukraine then you are being naive.

What can now be saved is the western portion of the country with a solid guaraante where guraantors will directly deploy on the ground each around 5000-10000 forces along the friction line and the newly deconfliction lines that will be ethablished as borders between Russian held areas and Ukrainian held areas.

Ukraine will be able to safely rebuild on the western side without ever doubting again a Russian invasion again as there are guaraantors on the ground now and Russia is bound by the deal also
 
. .
So first u say the west gains nothing and now say russia is encircled. The east is too far away and the south is Turkey which wont fight for NATO against Russia, even NATO knows this. Turkey will also not block the passage for russia as now the black sea is practically half russian and half Turkish. This only leaves the west and north, Ukraine is already taken care of and the Russians will focus and defend the north and north west.
Its funny how westerners were bad-mouthing Turkey until very recently, u think turks will forget? They will forget the attempted coup and economic war? Along with US support to kurds?
Turkey CANNOT not fight for NATO, this is "Absurd" and "Naive" to think otherwise, if Turkey are not capable or willing to perform their duty as NATO member, they would have either withdraw or been kick out of NATO. It's like saying US will not fight for NATO because Latvia is too small..........They can't do that...

And Turkey ALREADY Blocking black seas now, they had invoked the Montreux Convention on the 28th February.

So there is no official IMF report and you made it up?
First of all I didn't say that was an official IMF report, I said that was an IMF figure, I read an article that quote that.

As for whether or not I made it up, well, unless I also made up those Wikipedia Entry, otherwise someone somewhere have appraise the exact same data.

So it depend on what you are trying to say

"Were there IMF report?" or "Were the figure accurate?"

If it is the first one, I read that a few days ago, and I can no longer find the article that quote the IMF of that value. I read thousand of article every week, I cannot backtrack every article I have read on any given day.

If it is the second one, then check the Wikipedia and the Source.
 
Last edited:
.
Turkey CANNOT not fight for NATO, this is "Absurd" and "Naive" to think otherwise, if Turkey are not capable or willing to perform their duty as NATO member, they would have either withdraw or been kick out of NATO. It's like saying US will not fight for NATO because Latvia is too small..........They can't do that...

And Turkey ALREADY Blocking black seas now, they had invoked the Montreux Convention on the 28th February.

Turkey will retain NATO membership for as long as possible and if it comes to a critical juncture, the Turks may well leave NATO. Turkey is already on the way to self reliance in defence and enhancing relations with China. They may even obtain nukes from Pakistan. I know this seems absurd to u because its not in ur manual, this is real politik.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ich
. .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom