Ukraine possible outcomes query

shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

What do we think is an acceptable resolution to the Ukraine situation?

  • 1- Russia defeats Ukraine military and deposes President Zelenskyy (dead or alive).

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 2- Ukraine defeats Russian military and drives them out of the Ukraine

    Votes: 9 81.8%

  • 3-Russia stops short of removing President Zelenskyy but is allowed to keep territory gains.

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • 4-International sentiment grows stronger to support Ukraine with offensive weapons

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • 5-International sentiment fades and Russia wins a war of attrition as the world fiddles.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    11
living sounds said:
Fundamentally, eastern European countries joining NATO would have never posed an actual military thread to Russia. They want to compete by innovating in the marketplace. NATO is only a thread to a Russian aggressor. But Russia went in the wrong direction with Putin
Click to expand...
What's the connection between nato and "innovating in the marketplace"?
Against whom nato is in Eastern Europe? What is "right direction" for Russia? And last question: where are you from, easten Europe, Russia, you are speaking so confidently about kgb mentality, are you familiar with kgb officers? Just to note, here's no kgb in Russia for 30 years. Perhaps west should stop thinking about Russia as if cold war never ended?
 
living sounds said:
Everyone knows that in a democracy simple declarations only last until the next election and government.
Click to expand...

If the promises are made by several presidents and several ministers of foreign affairs (Biden, Baker, Bush, just to name a few) most people will take them seriously.

I know, some years have gone by, but what's a paranoid mind like Putin's to think?

living sounds said:
Fundamentally, eastern European countries joining NATO would have never posed an actual military thread to Russia. They want to compete by innovating in the marketplace. NATO is only a thread to a Russian aggressor. But Russia went in the wrong direction with Putin or probably already during his predecessor's term. He made the country dependent on the extraction industry for his own enrichment. They could have invested in building up a modern economy with a high tech sector, but a distrustful zero-sum mentality prevailed.
Click to expand...

So it's all Putin's fault anyway?

I see a dictator who's afraid. Afraid of what the West could do and afraid of what his FSB brethren will do if he doesn't act.

living sounds said:
Putin and probably most of today's elites are authoritarians, they aim for control, so yes, that's KGB mentality. And they imagine themselves to be a global power, an empire. They are very far from that. The sooner they learn to live with reality, like many other countries had to, the better.
Click to expand...

I agree Russia could go in a much more positive direction. But I also know it isn't as simple as it may seem. I think Gorbatchev got removed because he was too moderate. The FSB still represents a lot of power and they're not speaking to anyone. Maybe not even to Putin. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes, as he's the vile dictator now and if he can't show results in Ukraine, he'll be removed. By any means. And those means aren't democratic at all. Do you see anyone capable of taking out the old FSB?
 
ungifted said:
Perhaps west should stop thinking about Russia as if cold war never ended?
Click to expand...
I have studied the history of Russia quite well. I had teachers in high school who known it very very well. They were all Priests, in those days there was communism in Russia and the Church was very obstructed there, but they had a detached and not a political vision. We have delved a lot into the history of Russia. I have many books on Russian (and also American) literature. I was able to deepen the history of Russia and America and I can say that several people who do not know the history of Russia well tend to think that cold war never ended.
Now they think to the Ukraine war as a soccer or basket game not to an historical event.
They just cheer, they don't delve into the story but they just watch the "game" as fans.

The problem is that people know the russian comunism and not the Russian people.
 
Last edited:
I would add that in a similar way this vision is common regarding the US. People tends to think to US as associated to the turbo-capitalism, but in US the industry world is made often of many little and mid companies, and, their owners/presidents often don't think to the turbo-capitalism model for their companies.
Furthermore, it is forgotten that the Americans have fought with many efforts for workers' rights and this struggle has consequently also benefited other countries.
 
cyrano said:
Lyndon Larouche
Click to expand...
Damn, dude, you're referencing Lyndon Larouche? I haven't thought about that wacko since college--and that was a long time ago. He's still alive?? (I want to say he was one of the people propagating the "mosquitos transmit AIDS" nonsense in the 1980s, so forgive me if I don't bother to click through to see what he has to say.)
 
I don't know him. He just seemed to have a well informed summary.

Besides, the jury is still out on what mosquito's transmit. One recent survey in the Tsjech republic showed 11% of mosquitos infected with Borellia (Lyme's disease), but no follow-up research about transmission to humans, AFAIK.

I've known about toxoplasmosis for decades, but learned just recently that research in Holland showed it to be sexually transmitted. That surprised me, as the parasite (Toxoplasma gondii) is located in your brain.

It has been stated for many years animal diseases can't transfer to plants and vice versa. We now know that's not true. The same goes for hormones. Plant hormones do affect your organs.

So maybe, he's not such a wacko?

There is at least one documented case known to medical science of a tropical fever (don't remember which one, exactly) that's listed as only transmitted through a very specific kind of parasite in Africa infecting a US doctor's spouse after him returning infected during a mission in Africa. The precise infection vector is still unknown, but the only ones I can think of, are mosquitos, or sexual transmission. The latter includes saliva besides other bodily fluids, of course.

We've also learned a lot about fluid dynamics as a transmission medium for Corona (and other viral diseases), but a lot is still unknown. That's the center of the controversy. Some things are clear, other things not so.
 
living sounds said:
Like I wrote, I do not understand the question. Who is "we" in this context? And are we to state the outcome we want or the one we expect?
Click to expand...
I tried to write clearly, but perhaps not clearly enough. "What do we think is an acceptable resolution to the Ukraine situation? Does repeating what I wrote help?

The we in this context is "we forum members" who are able to read this and vote.

JR
 
OK, I still don't understand "acceptable" in this context. If it happens, I will have to accept it. It's not as if I personally get a say in it.

Do you mean: What can/should the West/NATO accept and what should be a red line that, once crossed, would lead us (the West, NATO) to confront Russia directly militarily?
 
Last edited:
I don't feel any of the answers is "acceptable". Besides, answer 4 doesn't seem like a resolution. It's just a step. And answer 5 seems incomprehensible.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top