Omnibus Russia Ukraine crisis
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Ah the old name calling thing when you know nothing of the conflict and history, here is a pretty good video to explain the conflict for beginners
Actually I found this and it makes a lot of sense that Russia is using the 1990 agreement over German reunification as a pretext against NATO, giving him an argument to ignore the 1994 agreement,
Admittedly yes.
Huh? Oh, you mean Beau? Dude, stop, you're looking like a fucking idiot if you think that's ALL I was 'doing' at the time... JFC.
LOLOL!
Who the FUCK said I'm an expert? Only you are claiming that I am that, but no, I'm not.
I've bypassed your continual screed of posts until now because honestly I follow shit elsewhere, I don't need to see repeats here. And usually the shit you post that comes in article form is absolute BS/Right Wing Conspiracy that does not interest me in the least.
So... here's assurance:
a positive declaration intended to give confidence; a promise.
And here's a guarantee:
a formal promise or assurance (typically in writing) that certain conditions will be fulfilled, especially that a product will be repaired or replaced if not of a specified quality and durability.
provide a formal assurance or promise, especially that certain conditions shall be fulfilled relating to a product, service, or transaction.
So the difference? Not much to nothing. Except that assurance is the promise of fulfilling something, where a guarantee is a more formal act that something SHALL be fulfilled.
Legalese, but there IS a huge difference between the promise of something vs. someone actually doing something.
Okay, that's all true? And?
Stop. Full stop.
That right there is the entire point.
The Ukraine got screwed from the get go because, legally, the powers at the time decided that what they were offering weren't going to BE exactly 'legally binding' guarantees. They were 'assurances' that "oh no, none of this will happen but if it does..."
Anyway, carry on.
Well shit, more assurance vs. guarantee issues...
So... it wasn't a guarantee after all, just an 'assurance'...
No shit.
Really, the only thing all this proved is that A), the agreement was an ASSURANCE, not a GUARANTEE.
B) Russia violated the agreement regardless.
C) the "West" in 2014 tried to deal with it but Russia didn't show.
IMO, it should have been resolved in 2014, NOT 8 years later with this edging towards a wider world war.
Originally, I pointed out the 'assurance vs guarantee' to your post because it was wrong, also, by using the wrong wording the implication was that Biden et al (aka the West) absolutely HAD to step up to do something more than just sanctions.
On a moral level, I absolutely agree that they do, and by now it SHOULD be more involved.
However.
By the Agreement being an "assurance", that leaves the West wiggle room to not do overt fighting/campaigns with a nuclear power and escalating it TO a full blown world war.
This isn't Afghanistan or the Middle East or some other country WITHOUT nuclear threats involved. This situation is entirely different and needs to be handled different.
Your original question was: "Where is he on the security guarantee of 1994 Flossy?"
I just pointed out the fact that there was no guarantee, only an 'assurance' and so far, under that assurance, sadly ALL the "West" is doing exactly as they promised.
Anyway, back to the Russia Ukraine kerfuffle. There are three basic scenarios that could play out: a ceasefire and perhaps someday a peace deal; a protracted and bloody fight that could see Russia occupying part of Ukraine; or a wider war with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The last scenario is the least likely, albeit the one that’s received considerable attention in NATO countries. Zelenskyy has asked repeatedly for a no-fly zone, which would require western military intervention over Ukraine’s skies. While lawmakers and pundits have echoed this call, the U.S. and other nations have refused, arguing it could provoke a war with Russia.
Alexander Lanoszka, a University of Waterloo political scientist who has studied Russian warfare, says a fight with the West is a lose-lose proposition for Russia, even with its nuclear arsenal that could wreak horrific devastation around the world. (Nuclear war is another, albeit unlikely, possible outcome of the conflict.)
“Fighting NATO is absolutely certain death for Russia,” said Lanoszka.
So far, the member states of NATO, including Canada, have steadfastly refused to become involved militarily. While western nations have sent a steady supply of weapons to Ukraine, its primary actions thus far have been sanctions that put Russia at risk of economic collapse.
The remaining scenarios are confounded by a number of other factors:
What does Russia do next? Both sides in Ukraine have reasons to keep fighting and reasons to seek peace — National Post
'There are signs this conflict might end sooner rather than later. But I still think that it's going to draw out as we start seeing Russian military become increasingly a spent force'apple.news
William Courtney, an adjunct senior fellow with the RAND Corporation, a non-partisan, non-profit American think tank, and former diplomat in Eastern Europe, said there is the risk of regime change within Russia because of military frustration, the effects of economic sanctions or perhaps popular protests and government infighting.
With Western weapons arriving, the effect of sanctions taking grip and the risk of war crimes charges against the Russian leadership, the callous calculus is that continuing the fight might be beneficial.
The rest of the article is that the link above
Pretty much sums things up. Russia got FUCKED by doing this against Ukraine, they made HUGE mistakes all over the board and it's biting them in the ass, hard.
The only way they could go against NATO now IS if they used the nuclear weapons they had; otherwise they are outmatched, clearly outgunned and just outclassed.
I think the fact no one is taking advantage of the situation to go against Russia is a fucking blessing. Doing that would push it into a wider World War, IMO, just by virtue that Russia would be cornered in that situation. And whoever it was, wouldn't even have to be a NATO nation. Honestly, I'm only a little shocked Chechnya hasn't started up, though I think that's only cause they're so pounded into the dirt they can't. Other places though? Maybe the one positive thanks to a 'modern era' where land grabbing from flailing powerful countries ISN'T a thing.
If that was all Putin's excuse and his speech was about, you'd have a valid point.
It's not.
It's a good video but it's central focus on one part-reason doesn't help understand the situation at all.
ETA: the comments under the video are definitely interesting reading and calling out the video for missing parts of, well, everything.
Ukraine supplies lots of food worldwide.. there is going to be a huge hit to the global supply chain for food.. and once again prices going up..
Yes they do that's why the were known as the bread basket of Europe and many, many wars were fought over it, and claimed the most blood spilt by any nation in Europe.
Ukraine's History Is Filled with War, Blood and Death - 19FortyFive
Only a prolonged war will effect planting season which generally begins in early April to mid May
Have you considered ESL?
As nouns the difference between assurance and guarantee
is that assurance is the act of assuring; a declaration tending to inspire full confidence; that which is designed to give confidence while guarantee is anything that assures a certain outcome.As a verb guarantee is
to assure that something will get done right.
They grow winter red Fyfe. Sunflower is their spring crop. We are banking heavy on sunflower this year. Spring wheat is too finicky.