Russia's actions will be influenced by the US and NATO's actions; we know this to be true because, as I previously noted in this thread, after it was announced in 2008 that Ukraine would one day join NATO, the then US ambassador to Moscow William Burns warned that this could provoke Russia to intervene militarily. His warning went unheeded and what he predicted, happened
https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2022/02/27/us-nato-expansion-ukraine-russia-intervene/
Russia was eyeing invasion as soon as Ukraine moved away from being a puppet satellite state, that's why Ukraine was looking for military alliances. Russia pushed Ukraine towards NATO, just like it had previously done with much of Eastern Europe and like it has now down with Finland and Sweden. It wasn't that his warning went unheeded, it's that there was no way to avoid aggression, just the possibility of securing membership and allies before it could develop into the fundamentally inept invasion that we've seen.
They would want a legally binding guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO before they would hand Crimea back.
Who gives a shit what Russia wants?
Also they would demand that the people of Crimea decide whether they want to be part of Ukraine again.
Is that the people they've shipped in to Crimea, or what's left of the people who were there when they illegally annexed the territory? Who would get to oversee this 'vote'?
See my last post. NATO provoked Russia. It would therefore have to work out how to regain Russia's trust.
Russia doesn't need provocation, this is the third foreign territory it has invaded in the last 15 years (and the second time for one of them). NATO's EXISTENCE is considered a provocation by Russian media which is just looking for post hoc rationalisations of its imperialism.
No-one needs Russia's trust, they need to trust that Russia is afraid of provoking a first world military and so have appropriate alliances in places to deter aggression.
Russia perceives encirclement.
No 'Russia' perceives domestic discontent and military weakness, and tries to counter both with a jingoistic war to secure a buffer zone at a more territorially defensive area.
Thing is, the West will not give Ukraine what it needs.
It has been so far. Sure as hell Russia won't give Ukraine what it needs.
Read about how Zedekiah turned to Egypt at the time of the Babylonian invasion.
I think Aragorn's convincing of Theoden to take the Rohirrim to Gondor is more applicable - and a much better book.
The West needs to repent of it's perverted values, then there will be peace.
Oh, it's a righteous invasion to suppress perversion... fuck off you knobstacle.
There is confusion as to whether Russia would invade a NATO ally; Biden says (to justify continuing to send weapons to Ukraine) they will, if they are allowed to win in Ukraine. Yet Jeremy says they won't invade Ukraine if it joins NATO.
Well apparently, if you feel threatened by a foreign territory, you're absolutely fine with an invasion, so NATO should just pre-emptively invade Russia, right?
Any provision of such missiles would only provoke Russia into a bigger response that would weaken Ukraine more.
How, exactly? Russia is barely supporting the clusterfuck of an invasion that it has mounted at the moment, and can't afford to buy any better munitions than what North Korea is giving away - how do you think they're going to step this up?
The only way to defeat Russia would be by using stealth fighters and bombers which would require Western pilots.
Or by securing further commitment, say from the other BRIC nations on applying the economic sanctions - not easy, in the current climate.
That would risk nuclear war which the West would lose.
Which everyone would lose.
The only way to achieve peace is to agree to Russia's terms and trust that it will not invade further territories.
Or to support Ukraine which has been doing adequately with outdated gear and minimal training on new equipment - that training is becoming more influential and will allow Ukraine to even better utilise the equipment currently available as well as future provision of potentially more modern firepower.
Although its Western border is technically already encircled, Crimea seems to be a doorway that it will not allow to be closed, thus Russia will not give it up. William Burns predicted this in 2008.
They don't have to 'give it up' they can be unceremoniously kicked back through it.
O.
