The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[swerve]

Correct, but consider the position that was taken. The country itself gets to decide? Clearly there's more to it than that.

I don't think that's necessarily true. Finland faced similar issues during the Cold War but they didn't end up a Soviet vassal state, and it wasn't their military power that prevented it. WWII analogies are popular but I don't think they fit here, the situation is just too different. In general I think that Ukraine needs security guarantees from the west and economic development. If they get both, and they're credible, they can maintain a small domestic military. If they don't, a large military will still face ultimate defeat. And of course the cost of continuing fighting is making future defense more difficult. A Ukraine with 35mln population and a decent amount of western investment could become quite strong. A Ukraine with 15mln population, and crumbling infrastructure could be easy pickings. The best defense to Russian expansionism is a firm, economically successful, and politically stable Ukraine. An impoverished, smaller Ukraine militarized with western aid, but economically in poor shape is a recipe for a continuation war.

Finland first proved itself a very hard nut to crack. Stalin settled for relatively small changes to borders, much less than Putin achieved in 2014, let alone what he's trying for now, & Finnish neutrality. He imposed limits on some categories of weapons for Finland, but not on numbers of troops (Finland adopted something like the Swiss model of national defence: a nation in arms, but without offensive capability), & let the Finns choose their own governments.

Putin seems unwilling to make peace on anything like those terms.

 

[KipPotapych]

Here's one, Putin is internationally recognized as a war criminal by the ICC.

Wrong. I made a more extensive on the subject previously. Shortly:

- The defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof lies with the Prosecutor.
- Pre-Trial judges issue warrants of arrest and ensure there is enough evidence before a case can go to trial.
- Before a case is committed to trial (during the Pre-Trial phase), the defendant is referred to as a suspect. Once the case is committed to trial, since at that point the charges have been confirmed, the defendant is referred to as the accused.

How the Court works

The crimes The Court's founding treaty, called the Rome Statute, grants the ICC jurisdiction over four main crimes.

www.icc-cpi.int

Like I said, there is a more extensive post by me on the subject somewhere, but I have no idea how to find it (don’t remember any keywords to search for and those I tried did not provide a result).

So “internationally recognized” is rubbish. He is merely a suspect, not even accused, and most definitely not “recognized as a war criminal”. The actual investigation has never taken place yet. In other words, so far there is enough evidence to launch an investigation that cannot happen until certain procedures take place, which likely, as you say, never will. Same goes for Benjamin, who is welcomed to visit, use the airspace of, etc the countries that are signatories and allegedly follow international law.

 

[rsemmes]

recognized as a war criminal by the ICC

And what is that exactly (apart from that it has been pointed out to you that you are wrong about it) when Bush has not been "internationally recognized as a war criminal by the ICC" for the criminal and illegal invasion of Iraq? International hypocrisy?

It seems that it's simply different opinions about how "some countries follow international law and order closer that others". I think it is hypocrisy to pretend that it is always the country that I don't like the one that is further away.

 

[rsemmes]

Czechoslovakia 38

Repeating that one is always interesting, is Poland going to play Poland again? Taking Lvov instead of Teschen, with the placet of the western democracies?

 

[rsemmes]

Why would China throw RU a free line of credit ? The relationship between CH and RU is coin-operated.

Trying to go back to the actual fighting...

You mean now? What if in ten years time China decides that it in its best interest to keep Russia "in the fight"? NATO has been supporting Ukraine for those ten years and Ukraine has been able to find men to fight for ten more years.

Russia will collapse... All right. How many more hits can Ukraine take? How many more billions is NATO providing in how many years? That Ukrainian general was talking of 9 months, not 9 years. Is the end of the world going to happen in those 6-9 months?

Edit.
Why has NATO extended a line of credit to Ukraine? Who said anything about free?

 

[Vanquish]

Wrong. I made a more extensive on the subject previously. Shortly:

- The defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof lies with the Prosecutor.
- Pre-Trial judges issue warrants of arrest and ensure there is enough evidence before a case can go to trial.
- Before a case is committed to trial (during the Pre-Trial phase), the defendant is referred to as a suspect. Once the case is committed to trial, since at that point the charges have been confirmed, the defendant is referred to as the accused.

How the Court works

The crimes The Court's founding treaty, called the Rome Statute, grants the ICC jurisdiction over four main crimes.

www.icc-cpi.int

Like I said, there is a more extensive post by me on the subject somewhere, but I have no idea how to find it (don’t remember any keywords to search for and those I tried did not provide a result).

So “internationally recognized” is rubbish. He is merely a suspect, not even accused, and most definitely not “recognized as a war criminal”. The actual investigation has never taken place yet. In other words, so far there is enough evidence to launch an investigation that cannot happen until certain procedures take place, which likely, as you say, never will. Same goes for Benjamin, who is welcomed to visit, use the airspace of, etc the countries that are signatories and allegedly follow international law.

President Putin is the subject of an active arrest warrant issued by the ICC. As the ICC doesn't have it's own police force it is up to member countries to arrest Putin so he can face the charges. This of course goes back to a red line which we all know no one country is likely to cross.

 

[Vanquish]

And what is that exactly (apart from that it has been pointed out to you that you are wrong about it) when Bush has not been "internationally recognized as a war criminal by the ICC" for the criminal and illegal invasion of Iraq? International hypocrisy?

It seems that it's simply different opinions about how "some countries follow international law and order closer that others". I think it is hypocrisy to pretend that it is always the country that I don't like the one that is further away.

Goes back to my other post. Maybe we should have a ranking system for which countries are most likely to follow international conventions.

 

[John Fedup]

Goes back to my other post. Maybe we should have a ranking system for which countries are most likely to follow international conventions.

Perhaps a ranking system on which countries will look after their own interests no matter what would be more interesting and relevant.

 

[KipPotapych]

President Putin is the subject of an active arrest warrant issued by the ICC. As the ICC doesn't have it's own police force it is up to member countries to arrest Putin so he can face the charges. This of course goes back to a red line which we all know no one country is likely to cross.

And I wrote exactly what it means. Link for further reading provided. Another post has more info, if you can find it. You statement was 100% wrong, which I pointed out. But good luck either way.