"How do you assess the situation in Ukraine from the standpoint of global politics?"

"At the last G7 meeting, the West approved aid packages to Ukraine worth $24 billion for the current and upcoming years. They include a whole package of military aid that no one has ever seen. The Americans supply tanks, heavy artillery, rocket artillery, and anti-aircraft missiles to Poland. Ukraine has not received those weapons before.

"The war takes on total character, similarly to how it was in Milosevic's Yugoslavia. In this case it is the West vs. Russia. It is amazing that Germany has been promoting the image of Russia as the center of evil. Germany apparently wants to get rid of its WWII demons.

"We have been dragged into the war that the West will not let us leave. MI6 and the CIA hope that the internal situation in Russia will begin to deteriorate sharply by autumn. They currently make every effort to instigate a conspiracy against Putin.

"Therefore, they make us experience a war of attrition. Arestovich said they would fight as long as it takes, even for ten years. They realise that Ukraine may disappear, and a number of other states may appear in its place, as was the case with Yugoslavia.

"Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia — Russia needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words, Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland, Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.

"Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that is now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles closer to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to stop them. They will destroy us."

https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/

The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.

Intriguing.
Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?

ltlee1, <news:e78bd243-b8f5-4bd5-a460-0ffc0b8159f8n@googlegroups.com>

> "How do you assess the situation in Ukraine from the standpoint of global
> politics?"
>
> "At the last G7 meeting, the West approved aid packages to Ukraine worth $24
> billion for the current and upcoming years. They include a whole package of
> military aid that no one has ever seen. The Americans supply tanks, heavy
> artillery, rocket artillery, and anti-aircraft missiles to Poland. Ukraine
> has not received those weapons before.

True.

> "The war takes on total character, similarly to how it was in Milosevic's
> Yugoslavia. In this case it is the West vs. Russia. It is amazing that
> Germany has been promoting the image of Russia as the center of evil.
> Germany apparently wants to get rid of its WWII demons.
>
> "We have been dragged into the war that the West will not let us leave. MI6
> and the CIA hope that the internal situation in Russia will begin to
> deteriorate sharply by autumn. They currently make every effort to instigate
> a conspiracy against Putin.
>
> "Therefore, they make us experience a war of attrition. Arestovich said they
> would fight as long as it takes, even for ten years. They realise that
> Ukraine may disappear, and a number of other states may appear in its place,
> as was the case with Yugoslavia.

Arestovich is a TV-propagandist of the Kiev regime, who appears on their
TV every day and tells something "psychotherapeutic", intended to maintain
enthusiastic pro-war sentiment among the populace in the Kiev-controlled
territory. I.e. it's not a rational political-military analysis but a kind
of pop-show decorated to resemble an analysis. This genre does not imply
such responsibility for claims and predictions that might be expected from
a real political analyst, because it's mainly "psychotherapeutic-hypnotic".

Thus Arestovich doesn't hesitate to make claims that boldly contradict his
own claims made few days before. In the recent months, he managed to make
dozens of brave predictions that have not come true. All this means little
given that he sells not an understanding but "healing hypnosis", - and his
audience are listening to him mainly for that.

I've tried to explain this, because for a real political-military analyst,
such a reference to "Arestovich said" - as if it was something rational, -
would be a sign of self-disrespect.

So I went to look up who is this man, Sergey Gorodnikov, whom Pravda.ru
presents as Director of the Center for Global Policy Development (and whom
I never heard about before). It turned out, Gorodnikov is also not really
a political analyst. He had written several fiction books (quasi-historical
and detective novels, "science fiction"), and also few non-fiction books
where he offers some pretty extravagant and "catchy" concepts pretending to
be a politology, but in essence it's rather a kind of entertaining reading.

The website of this "Center for Global Policy Development" had been opened
in 2008 <http://www.globpolitika.narod.ru>, and the very last update on the
website dates back to 2010.

In Russia, any creative person can establish sort of think-tank, name it
something like "Academy of Global Research of Global Everything" and then
promote him- or her-self under this brandname, - there are dozens of such
organizations or "organizations", some of them may be somehow "registered",
some purely virtual.

One of the well-promoted Atlanticist narratives about Russia is that "the
Kremlin's typical tactic of disinformation" supposedly is in injecting
into the infospace multiple contradictory claims / narratives, to produce
a confusing noise intended to "conceal the truth". This misinterpretation
takes place from the basic cultist view on Russia as a tough dictatorship,
so any voices from Russia, any opinions in the Russian news media, must be
somehow linked with the Kremlin (except only those few brave ones who are
already known as staunch oppositionaries and "foes of Putin").

In real fact, in Russia, there's an abundance of folks willing to analyze
or comment on something. These analysis and commentary may be of various
quality, some of them may be relevant and wise, some may be silly. These
opinions, "versions", suggestions and predictions may appear in privately
owned media outlets (like Pravda.ru) as well as in state-controlled media
(and the fact someone claimed something on a state-controlled TV doesn't
mean it was surely approved by the Kremlin). From the foreign perspective,
some claims issued by different persons my be seen "in support to the
Kremlin" but at the same time they may be mutually contradictory. And then
the Western mass media misrationalize this situation so as if the Kremlin
injected mutually contradictory narratives deliberately, for confusion.

The underlying premise for this misrationalization is the fact the West
seeks to "deny Russia the right" to have its own intra-national discourse,
where sincere opinions of people are not necessarily "pro-Western".

Back to Kiev regime's Arestovich, one of the amusing facts of his bio was
the fact that in the mid-2000s, Arestovich was a member of the Ukrainian
branch of the Dugin's "Eurasia Movement". Arestovich made initial career
as an officer in the Ukraine's military, then in 2005 he retired with the
rank of major and turned to be a TV actor, and at the same time he became
engaged in political activism, hypnotism and occultism (the latter drove
him within the Dugin's Eurasia Movement, where he was for about 3 years).
Another amusing fact about Arestovich is that he became most popular as an
actor when he performed a female character <https://youtu.be/UOBggWPw7GY>.

> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia - Russia
> needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
> part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
> ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
> Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
> Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
>
> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
> incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that is
> now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
> that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles closer
> to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
> stop them. They will destroy us."
>
> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
>
> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
> title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
> response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
>
> Intriguing.
> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?

Let us wait and see.

On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 1:14:11 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> ltlee1, <news:e78bd243-b8f5-4bd5...@googlegroups.com>
> > "How do you assess the situation in Ukraine from the standpoint of global
> > politics?"
> >
> > "At the last G7 meeting, the West approved aid packages to Ukraine worth $24
> > billion for the current and upcoming years. They include a whole package of
> > military aid that no one has ever seen. The Americans supply tanks, heavy
> > artillery, rocket artillery, and anti-aircraft missiles to Poland. Ukraine
> > has not received those weapons before.
> True.
> > "The war takes on total character, similarly to how it was in Milosevic's
> > Yugoslavia. In this case it is the West vs. Russia. It is amazing that
> > Germany has been promoting the image of Russia as the center of evil.
> > Germany apparently wants to get rid of its WWII demons.
> >
> > "We have been dragged into the war that the West will not let us leave. MI6
> > and the CIA hope that the internal situation in Russia will begin to
> > deteriorate sharply by autumn. They currently make every effort to instigate
> > a conspiracy against Putin.
> >
> > "Therefore, they make us experience a war of attrition. Arestovich said they
> > would fight as long as it takes, even for ten years. They realise that
> > Ukraine may disappear, and a number of other states may appear in its place,
> > as was the case with Yugoslavia.
> Arestovich is a TV-propagandist of the Kiev regime, who appears on their
> TV every day and tells something "psychotherapeutic", intended to maintain
> enthusiastic pro-war sentiment among the populace in the Kiev-controlled
> territory. I.e. it's not a rational political-military analysis but a kind
> of pop-show decorated to resemble an analysis. This genre does not imply
> such responsibility for claims and predictions that might be expected from
> a real political analyst, because it's mainly "psychotherapeutic-hypnotic".
>
> Thus Arestovich doesn't hesitate to make claims that boldly contradict his
> own claims made few days before. In the recent months, he managed to make
> dozens of brave predictions that have not come true. All this means little
> given that he sells not an understanding but "healing hypnosis", - and his
> audience are listening to him mainly for that.
>
> I've tried to explain this, because for a real political-military analyst,
> such a reference to "Arestovich said" - as if it was something rational, -
> would be a sign of self-disrespect.
>
> So I went to look up who is this man, Sergey Gorodnikov, whom Pravda.ru
> presents as Director of the Center for Global Policy Development (and whom
> I never heard about before). It turned out, Gorodnikov is also not really
> a political analyst. He had written several fiction books (quasi-historical
> and detective novels, "science fiction"), and also few non-fiction books
> where he offers some pretty extravagant and "catchy" concepts pretending to
> be a politology, but in essence it's rather a kind of entertaining reading.
>
> The website of this "Center for Global Policy Development" had been opened
> in 2008 <http://www.globpolitika.narod.ru>, and the very last update on the
> website dates back to 2010.
>
> In Russia, any creative person can establish sort of think-tank, name it
> something like "Academy of Global Research of Global Everything" and then
> promote him- or her-self under this brandname, - there are dozens of such
> organizations or "organizations", some of them may be somehow "registered",
> some purely virtual.
>
> One of the well-promoted Atlanticist narratives about Russia is that "the
> Kremlin's typical tactic of disinformation" supposedly is in injecting
> into the infospace multiple contradictory claims / narratives, to produce
> a confusing noise intended to "conceal the truth". This misinterpretation
> takes place from the basic cultist view on Russia as a tough dictatorship,
> so any voices from Russia, any opinions in the Russian news media, must be
> somehow linked with the Kremlin (except only those few brave ones who are
> already known as staunch oppositionaries and "foes of Putin").
>
> In real fact, in Russia, there's an abundance of folks willing to analyze
> or comment on something. These analysis and commentary may be of various
> quality, some of them may be relevant and wise, some may be silly. These
> opinions, "versions", suggestions and predictions may appear in privately
> owned media outlets (like Pravda.ru) as well as in state-controlled media
> (and the fact someone claimed something on a state-controlled TV doesn't
> mean it was surely approved by the Kremlin). From the foreign perspective,
> some claims issued by different persons my be seen "in support to the
> Kremlin" but at the same time they may be mutually contradictory. And then
> the Western mass media misrationalize this situation so as if the Kremlin
> injected mutually contradictory narratives deliberately, for confusion.
>
> The underlying premise for this misrationalization is the fact the West
> seeks to "deny Russia the right" to have its own intra-national discourse,
> where sincere opinions of people are not necessarily "pro-Western".
>
> Back to Kiev regime's Arestovich, one of the amusing facts of his bio was
> the fact that in the mid-2000s, Arestovich was a member of the Ukrainian
> branch of the Dugin's "Eurasia Movement". Arestovich made initial career
> as an officer in the Ukraine's military, then in 2005 he retired with the
> rank of major and turned to be a TV actor, and at the same time he became
> engaged in political activism, hypnotism and occultism (the latter drove
> him within the Dugin's Eurasia Movement, where he was for about 3 years).
> Another amusing fact about Arestovich is that he became most popular as an
> actor when he performed a female character <https://youtu.be/UOBggWPw7GY>.

The article is part of the Q&A between Pravda.Ru editor-in-chief Inna Novikova
and the Director of the Center for Global Policy Development, Sergey Gorodnikov.
I know zero about both.

My assumption is that Pravda.Ru knows who Sergey Gorodnikov is. And to what
degree Russians would buy his view.

Gorodnikov cited Arestovich would fight as long as it takes, even for ten years.
Question: Does Arestovich have the final say on how long Ukraine would
fight? Of course the obvious answer is "NO".

Who in Ukraine would have no problem fighting Russia for 10 years?
Elites and leaders like Zelenskyy may have little problem. How about average
Ukrainians?

The West as a whole is surprised by the special operation. Western nations
have no problem supporting Ukraine for the short term. Are they all equally
prepared to support Ukraine over 10 years?
Again, the obvious answer is "NO".

>
> > "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia - Russia
> > needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
> > part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
> > ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
> > Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
> > Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
> >
> > "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
> > incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that is
> > now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
> > that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles closer
> > to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
> > stop them. They will destroy us."
> >
> > https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
> >
> > The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
> > title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
> > response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
> >
> > Intriguing.
> > Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> > If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?
> Let us wait and see.

Think what probability under what situation.
In general, I would say the longer the conflict, the more likely nuclear weapon
would be involved. Did Russia not waving the nuclear bomb stick from day
one?

Currently some nations such as German is suffering economically for Ukraine's
sake. Are Germans willing to sacrifice its city for Ukraine in the near future?

On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 8:18:10 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> "How do you assess the situation in Ukraine from the standpoint of global politics?"
>
> "At the last G7 meeting, the West approved aid packages to Ukraine worth $24 billion for the current and upcoming years. They include a whole package of military aid that no one has ever seen. The Americans supply tanks, heavy artillery, rocket artillery, and anti-aircraft missiles to Poland. Ukraine has not received those weapons before.
>
> "The war takes on total character, similarly to how it was in Milosevic's Yugoslavia. In this case it is the West vs. Russia. It is amazing that Germany has been promoting the image of Russia as the center of evil. Germany apparently wants to get rid of its WWII demons.
>
> "We have been dragged into the war that the West will not let us leave. MI6 and the CIA hope that the internal situation in Russia will begin to deteriorate sharply by autumn. They currently make every effort to instigate a conspiracy against Putin.
>
> "Therefore, they make us experience a war of attrition. Arestovich said they would fight as long as it takes, even for ten years. They realise that Ukraine may disappear, and a number of other states may appear in its place, as was the case with Yugoslavia.
>
> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia — Russia needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words, Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland, Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
>
> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that is now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles closer to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to stop them. They will destroy us."
>
> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
>
> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
>
> Intriguing.
> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?

It is possible to go back to its 1997 borders if those former USSR resigns from joining NATO. These CIS countries should respect Russia when they were part of the USSR Federation. If they can do that, they can still work with Russia on many economic and defense pacts.

They can, including Russia, join EU for the economic cooperation. However, there should join in a loosely economic on their own strength and pace. It should not be based on the regimental pace of EU kind of mandated economic cooperation, etc. which carries a scheduled economic performance time-line to meet in terms of progress and revenue for the EU to share out the profit benefits back to them.

Such may be difficult for the former USSR countries as they need time and pace to adjust to change in work life balance. The former USSR countries should leave NATO and be aware of required by US and its conies in not to buy or trade with China by giving excuses that China will make them poor and China's products and equipment has spywares in it.

Better stay together with Russia as Warsaw Pact countries while participating in the new unique way of being in the economic membership with EU. However, they should remember that UK had already withdrawn from EU after having loss money from contribution to their membership in EU.

ltlee1, <news:019e8f75-508c-47f0-843d-196173cacaf8n@googlegroups.com>
> On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 1:14:11 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:

> Who in Ukraine would have no problem fighting Russia for 10 years?
> Elites and leaders like Zelenskyy may have little problem. How about average
> Ukrainians?

Just in case, I find it appropariate to retell the backstory (maybe for
other readers). There was no "fighting Russia" for all the previous years
there. The fight that occurred after the 2014 coup was between the eastern
separatist militias and the Kiev regime's troops. In the Western media,
there were speculations aimed to present it in such a way that the Russian
regular army disguised as locals is fighting there, which was untrue. In
real fact, the Kremlin's support for the separatists was pretty limited,
and the Kremlin's strategic line during all these years was aimed at
reintegration of Donbas into the Ukraine within the terms of the Minsk-2
agreement. The agreement meant the Kiev regime will implement some sane
steps which would make the reintegration possible. The regime sabotaged
such steps under various pretexts, and then it became clear that their real
preparation is to take Donbas by force. Of course, it wasn't an independent
policy of the regime itself, - the Atlanticist patrons encouraged them to
sabotage the agreement. It's what led to the present "SMO".

> The West as a whole is surprised by the special operation. Western nations
> have no problem supporting Ukraine for the short term. Are they all equally
> prepared to support Ukraine over 10 years?
> Again, the obvious answer is "NO".
>
>>> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia -
>>> Russia
>>> needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
>>> part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
>>> ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
>>> Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
>>> Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
>>>
>>> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
>>> incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that
>>> is
>>> now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
>>> that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles
>>> closer
>>> to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
>>> stop them. They will destroy us."
>>>
>>> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
>>>
>>> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
>>> title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
>>> response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
>>>
>>> Intriguing.
>>> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
>>> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?
>>
>> Let us wait and see.
>
> Think what probability under what situation.
> In general, I would say the longer the conflict, the more likely nuclear
> weapon would be involved. Did Russia not waving the nuclear bomb stick
> from day one?
>
> Currently some nations such as German is suffering economically for
> Ukraine's sake. Are Germans willing to sacrifice its city for Ukraine
> in the near future?

Words are cheap, especially when weapons "talk".

I wouldn't dare to make certain predictions.

On Wednesday, July 27, 2022 at 9:00:08 AM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> ltlee1, <news:019e8f75-508c-47f0...@googlegroups.com>
> > On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 1:14:11 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>
> > Who in Ukraine would have no problem fighting Russia for 10 years?
> > Elites and leaders like Zelenskyy may have little problem. How about average
> > Ukrainians?
> Just in case, I find it appropariate to retell the backstory (maybe for
> other readers). There was no "fighting Russia" for all the previous years
> there. The fight that occurred after the 2014 coup was between the eastern
> separatist militias and the Kiev regime's troops. In the Western media,
> there were speculations aimed to present it in such a way that the Russian
> regular army disguised as locals is fighting there, which was untrue. In
> real fact, the Kremlin's support for the separatists was pretty limited,
> and the Kremlin's strategic line during all these years was aimed at
> reintegration of Donbas into the Ukraine within the terms of the Minsk-2
> agreement. The agreement meant the Kiev regime will implement some sane
> steps which would make the reintegration possible. The regime sabotaged
> such steps under various pretexts, and then it became clear that their real
> preparation is to take Donbas by force. Of course, it wasn't an independent
> policy of the regime itself, - the Atlanticist patrons encouraged them to
> sabotage the agreement. It's what led to the present "SMO".
> > The West as a whole is surprised by the special operation. Western nations
> > have no problem supporting Ukraine for the short term. Are they all equally
> > prepared to support Ukraine over 10 years?
> > Again, the obvious answer is "NO".
> >
> >>> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia -
> >>> Russia
> >>> needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
> >>> part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
> >>> ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
> >>> Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
> >>> Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
> >>>
> >>> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
> >>> incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that
> >>> is
> >>> now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
> >>> that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles
> >>> closer
> >>> to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
> >>> stop them. They will destroy us."
> >>>
> >>> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
> >>>
> >>> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
> >>> title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
> >>> response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
> >>>
> >>> Intriguing.
> >>> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> >>> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?
> >>
> >> Let us wait and see.
> >
> > Think what probability under what situation.
> > In general, I would say the longer the conflict, the more likely nuclear
> > weapon would be involved. Did Russia not waving the nuclear bomb stick
> > from day one?
> >
> > Currently some nations such as German is suffering economically for
> > Ukraine's sake. Are Germans willing to sacrifice its city for Ukraine
> > in the near future?
> Words are cheap, especially when weapons "talk".
>
> I wouldn't dare to make certain predictions.

Again, know every little about Ukraine.
Judging from some reports such as the following, I get the feeling that
Ukraine is divided nation. And the country as a whole does not appear
to be under war footing.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/08/young-ukrainians-in-kyiv-a-photo-essay

On Friday, July 29, 2022 at 10:25:58 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 27, 2022 at 9:00:08 AM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> > ltlee1, <news:019e8f75-508c-47f0...@googlegroups.com>
> > > On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 1:14:11 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> >
> > > Who in Ukraine would have no problem fighting Russia for 10 years?
> > > Elites and leaders like Zelenskyy may have little problem. How about average
> > > Ukrainians?
> > Just in case, I find it appropariate to retell the backstory (maybe for
> > other readers). There was no "fighting Russia" for all the previous years
> > there. The fight that occurred after the 2014 coup was between the eastern
> > separatist militias and the Kiev regime's troops. In the Western media,
> > there were speculations aimed to present it in such a way that the Russian
> > regular army disguised as locals is fighting there, which was untrue. In
> > real fact, the Kremlin's support for the separatists was pretty limited,
> > and the Kremlin's strategic line during all these years was aimed at
> > reintegration of Donbas into the Ukraine within the terms of the Minsk-2
> > agreement. The agreement meant the Kiev regime will implement some sane
> > steps which would make the reintegration possible. The regime sabotaged
> > such steps under various pretexts, and then it became clear that their real
> > preparation is to take Donbas by force. Of course, it wasn't an independent
> > policy of the regime itself, - the Atlanticist patrons encouraged them to
> > sabotage the agreement. It's what led to the present "SMO".
> > > The West as a whole is surprised by the special operation. Western nations
> > > have no problem supporting Ukraine for the short term. Are they all equally
> > > prepared to support Ukraine over 10 years?
> > > Again, the obvious answer is "NO".
> > >
> > >>> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia -
> > >>> Russia
> > >>> needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
> > >>> part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
> > >>> ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
> > >>> Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
> > >>> Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
> > >>>
> > >>> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
> > >>> incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that
> > >>> is
> > >>> now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
> > >>> that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles
> > >>> closer
> > >>> to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
> > >>> stop them. They will destroy us."
> > >>>
> > >>> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
> > >>>
> > >>> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
> > >>> title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
> > >>> response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
> > >>>
> > >>> Intriguing.
> > >>> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> > >>> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?
> > >>
> > >> Let us wait and see.
> > >
> > > Think what probability under what situation.
> > > In general, I would say the longer the conflict, the more likely nuclear
> > > weapon would be involved. Did Russia not waving the nuclear bomb stick
> > > from day one?
> > >
> > > Currently some nations such as German is suffering economically for
> > > Ukraine's sake. Are Germans willing to sacrifice its city for Ukraine
> > > in the near future?
> > Words are cheap, especially when weapons "talk".
> >
> > I wouldn't dare to make certain predictions.
> Again, know every little about Ukraine.

Neither does Oleg. Just a Russian troll.

> Judging from some reports such as the following, I get the feeling that
> Ukraine is divided nation. And the country as a whole does not appear
> to be under war footing.

You just admitted that you know very little about Ukraine. Now you judge.

What might you know about the glorious Putin regime?

> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jul/08/young-ukrainians-in-kyiv-a-photo-essay

On Wednesday, July 27, 2022 at 9:00:08 AM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> ltlee1, <news:019e8f75-508c-47f0...@googlegroups.com>
> > On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 1:14:11 PM UTC-4, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>
> > Who in Ukraine would have no problem fighting Russia for 10 years?
> > Elites and leaders like Zelenskyy may have little problem. How about average
> > Ukrainians?
> Just in case, I find it appropariate to retell the backstory (maybe for
> other readers). There was no "fighting Russia" for all the previous years
> there. The fight that occurred after the 2014 coup was between the eastern
> separatist militias and the Kiev regime's troops. In the Western media,
> there were speculations aimed to present it in such a way that the Russian
> regular army disguised as locals is fighting there, which was untrue. In
> real fact, the Kremlin's support for the separatists was pretty limited,
> and the Kremlin's strategic line during all these years was aimed at
> reintegration of Donbas into the Ukraine within the terms of the Minsk-2
> agreement. The agreement meant the Kiev regime will implement some sane
> steps which would make the reintegration possible. The regime sabotaged
> such steps under various pretexts, and then it became clear that their real
> preparation is to take Donbas by force. Of course, it wasn't an independent
> policy of the regime itself, - the Atlanticist patrons encouraged them to
> sabotage the agreement. It's what led to the present "SMO".
> > The West as a whole is surprised by the special operation. Western nations
> > have no problem supporting Ukraine for the short term. Are they all equally
> > prepared to support Ukraine over 10 years?
> > Again, the obvious answer is "NO".
> >
> >>> "Yet, Russia does not want Ukraine to turn into another Yugoslavia -
> >>> Russia
> >>> needs to have control over this space. We must not let the West seize any
> >>> part of today's Ukraine, not even Galicia. Putin put forward a clear
> >>> ultimatum: NATO should go back to its borders before 1997. In other words,
> >>> Russia needs to have not only Ukraine under its control, but also Poland,
> >>> Slovenia, Romania and Hungary.
> >>>
> >>> "Russia wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders, when the alliance
> >>> incorporated Germany. Otherwise, we will not survive World War Three that
> >>> is
> >>> now brewing. The West is very tempted to strike a nuclear blow on Russia
> >>> that we would not be able to respond to. If they bring their missiles
> >>> closer
> >>> to our borders from all sides, then we will not have enough air defense to
> >>> stop them. They will destroy us."
> >>>
> >>> https://english.pravda.ru/world/153214-west_ukraine_yugoslavia/
> >>>
> >>> The West will not let Russia do away with Ukraine crisis quickly per the
> >>> title while Russia is at present the stronger side of the conflict. In
> >>> response, Russia says it wants NATO to go back to its 1997 borders.
> >>>
> >>> Intriguing.
> >>> Is it possible for NATO to go back to its 1997 borders?
> >>> If Russia deteriorate, would it make Putin THE MAD MAN?
> >>
> >> Let us wait and see.
> >
> > Think what probability under what situation.
> > In general, I would say the longer the conflict, the more likely nuclear
> > weapon would be involved. Did Russia not waving the nuclear bomb stick
> > from day one?
> >
> > Currently some nations such as German is suffering economically for
> > Ukraine's sake. Are Germans willing to sacrifice its city for Ukraine
> > in the near future?
> Words are cheap, especially when weapons "talk".
>
> I wouldn't dare to make certain predictions.

Some in the US think Putin is likely to use nuclear weapon.

"Why Putin Would Use Nuclear Weapons
Russia thinks it has nuclear superiority over the West and NATO and we should beg him for arms control –
that’s why he keeps making nuclear threats over the Ukraine war: We live in interesting times. In support
of the most blatant aggression since World War II, we have heard since November 2021 Russian high-level
nuclear war threats every week or two. Indeed, the probability of Russian use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine
is under active debate. In July 2022, President Vladimir Putin threatened to continue the war until the last
Ukrainian man was standing and his Deputy Dmitri Medvedev suggested that “punishing” Russia over war
crimes “potentially poses a threat to the existence of humanity.” Since 2007, nuclear threats have been
commonplace among high-level Russian officials but the current ones are clearly more extreme. Then-
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has noted that Putin has personally made nuclear threats 35
or more times.
....
Conclusion
Putin’s nuclear strategy and weapons development represent a profoundly serious threat to the U.S.
and its allies. As demonstrated by Ukraine, Putin has shown increasing willingness to take risks. Recently,
President Putin compared himself and his war against Ukraine to Peter the Great. He is no Peter the Great,
but he has some of his worst characteristics.
Former Russian President Medvedev has just said that the U.S. should “beg” for nuclear arms control with
Russia. What he means is that Russia has achieved nuclear superiority and the Putin regime thinks this
gives it leverage against the U.S. and its allies.
....
Dr. Mark B. Schneider is a Senior Analyst with the National Institute for Public Policy. Before his retirement
from the Department of Defense Senior Executive Service, Dr. Schneider served as Principal Director for
Forces Policy, Principal Director for Strategic Defense, Space and Verification Policy, Director for Strategic
Arms Control Policy and Representative of the Secretary of Defense to the Nuclear Arms Control
Implementation Commissions. He also served in the senior Foreign Service as a Member of the State
Department Policy Planning Staff. "

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/07/why-putin-would-use-nuclear-weapons/