100K+ troops in front of the border are actual real war not some abstract permanent war. Easy to understand even for the West.

I have come across this video of the Chicago University professor, John Meersheimer, giving a lecture to the SOAS about American policy and the spread of liberal hegemony. I would very much appreciate the views of other posters on this thread.

His basic argument is that American liberal democracy does not suit every country - something which I believe to be true. It works in the United States, the United Kingdom, Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and some others because it has had time to develop the necessary institutions and public understanding. But in Russia, China, the Middle East, most of Africa, SE Asia and Latin America, to varying degrees this concept, just won't work. And the idea of imposing it by force is naive.

He is also very forthright on why Russia is not willing to accept NATO on its borders. Is he correct in this?

I await the counter arguments with much interest.

Seems to that Ukraine, a European nation, has the right to make up it own mind.

American liberal democracy no longer suits America; something the countries in question are quite eager to point out, with an ever stronger case.

Lecture from a little over six years ago. On the money?

BBC is reporting the possibility of a trilateral security agreement / alliance between UK, Poland and Ukraine is on the cards. Can only find it in ukrainian so you will have to translate it

https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/featur...mpaign=KARANGA

One of the better Bojo decisions.

Less Hair, Is it? And if so, why?

To help smaller nations withstand violent threats by bigger ones. Ukraine has had parts separated already.

Less Hair,

I understand your motives - BUT - in 1914, Britain went to war to protect Belgian neutrality and to prevent the Franco/Belgian coastline from falling into German hands. I know it was a lot more complicated than that but bear with me. Equally, in 1939, Britain and France declared war on Germany because they had made a treaty with Poland to protect it in the event of German invasion.

My point is that, if we are to protect Ukraine, it would be far better to do so as part of NATO than on the basis of an agreement (treaty/alliance?) between only Britain, Poland and Ukraine. Might this not be a bit of Boris grandstanding rather than solidarity with our major allies?

I would hate to see Britain dragged into a conflict over an agreement with Ukraine and Poland and without the support of NATO.

Well that’s worded interestingly.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60188690

note it’s “very unlikely” NOT will not.

Putin will be very happy to hear that Liz Truss has confirmed what Ben Wallace suggested to the Spectator a few weeks back, ie that the UK would in all probability not fight. Whether the UK would or wouldn't, our latest expert in foreign policy has just informed the Russians that they can pretty much take the UK off the table as a factor in their 'Do we, or don't we?' decision. This is either a deliberate foreign policy move which seems to be at odds with all the other UK Govt rhetoric, or it's completely inept political signalling that risks adding to the prospects of a Russian invasion.

I wonder whether FCDO has had to re-establish the team it allegedly set up during the incumbency of a a certain scruffy blonde-haired chap - I'm told it's task was poop-scooping and clearing up other messes on the world stage after unwise, inappropriate or ignorant pronouncements.

I thought that was well established to the point of being an accepted fact for some time.

The whole world has been left in no doubt that if Russia marches into Ukraine then it will only be the Ukrainians directly opposing them.

What happens thereafter - well sanctions and presumably increased military spending in the west.

Russia has benefitted from the reduced military spending post 1990. If it marches into Ukraine then it has to ask itself whether it feels that it really wants to deal with a reinvigorated NATO and greater EU militarisation.

This plus all European Nations vigorously looking for different Energy sources in Short to Medium future. The first one forcing Russia to further increase Defence spending and the latter reducing the means to do that.
I have really difficulties seeing a good outcome of this mess for Russia in the medium Term. Gambled to high?

I've just read what we're sending militarily to the region. I think we'll need to send more if we expect even to make a token contribution.

FB

More than that, it would be madness, totally unrealistic and very dangerous posturing. Dog Dilyn probably dreamed it in its basket.

A very wise British pre 1914 analysis was of the question: "what are the military for?" The answers [from memory] were a short list, and included [without naming names] fighting Germany.
A similar question today would not include a non- NATO military alliance with two obvious victims. The nation to worry is Germany. 20 years of infrastructure negligence, a token military [broomsticks, ADAC choppers and not allowed out at night] and the threadbare comfort blanket of having Ukraine and Poland between them and the Bear. Additionally, a recent history of hacking off USA, GB and France regarding Nordstream 2.

The good news is ceasefire is holding , the bad news is you might soon be able to buy some of those weapons supplied to the Ukraine on the underground market from the same arms dealers that moved some of the weapons through Beirut and Pakistan that helped defeat NATOs attempts to help Afghanistan .

on the plus side we may once again start hearing the jet sound of freedom more often :E
/endOf sarcasm


on a more serious note; Pravda claims that the US has provided Ukraine with chemical weapons but the use of those in Donbass to claim that the Russians did it went bad,

"According to some reports, botulinum toxin has already been used in the Balakleya region to poison the upper reaches of the Seversky Donets . The Seversky Donets supplies water to the DPR.
It turns out that some command was received, but then it caused horror among the performers, intermediate authorities, the army, since they decided to immediately neutralize it with formaldehyde. If formaldehyde is poured out in large volumes within an hour, the toxin will die. It is hardly possible to invent a video and the fact that containers with chemicals have arrived in the area of ​​​​Avdiivka and Krasny Liman"

Читайте больше на https://www.pravda.ru/world/1672499-donbass/
link is in russian but one may use a translator.

Anything can be faked, Superman does not fly in reality you know, even the cheapest of films can dress folks up in Uniforms while pouring items into a river.

To counter that

https://spravdi.gov.ua/en/on-chemica...isinformation/