I am posting this here because I respect people in this part of the forum, not because it is just about the military. If I post it somewhere else I would get replies from leftwing plonkers or rightwing reactionaries and I can't bothered. So I am interest in geo-politics and have a good enough understanding of it I think. Geo-politics is all about power, power is the manipulation of others in this case other nations or states or groups of people using your means to limit their choice and increase your own choice. Often people try and make geo-politics out to be something weird bring together different fields and very hard to understand. I on the otherhand think geo-politics is very simple, but 190 plus nations and thousands of different groups make it hard to follow. So when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008 that was really aimed geo-politically at the US and Ukraine. When Russia look Crimea that was really aimed at Turkey and the US. Neither hurt the Russian elite in the polls either. Strangly enough the EU's attempt to get Ukraine to join the European trade zone or whatever it is called was not aimed at hurting Russia in Ukraine, rather it was aimed at Germany forcing it to move away from Russia and back to the EU where it can be limited. Everybody see's the possible Russian-German alliance and everybody fears it, who fears it the most Poland and France. The US involvement is rather limited in all this and British not at all. It just shows me that geo-politics is very hard to follow and the news misses everything. So I hope we can talking about geo-politics in more detail than I have in other parts of this forum and on other British forums.
"Power" is too generic. As often as not, the trends follow resources--acquiring more or preventing someone else from denying you yours--be that money, land, water, food, etc. It just wraps itself up in different arguments depending on what pretext works with the masses.
I have covered power and what I mean by it in the opening statement. Also you are right if we are talking about land power I think. However the last three Pax powers Spain, Britain and US have all been naval powers. They didn't need all the resources and they don't want to stop other powers from getting them, in the case of Britain and US they want people getting their resources cheap to be dependent on their protection and their economic currency. This is what I call positive manipulation. The most obvious case of what you are saying is the Russian Empire, it took territory just to stop others from taking it or to increase its resources. Infact Britain and America did the same thing. America taking territory from France, Spain, Mexico and Britain at first to secure itself and in apart to stop others from taking it. Britain did the same in Africa taking territory just to stop the Germans and French from doing so. So while I do think you have a good point, it isn't the whole picture.
I think in the case of the US we want to be able to get other people's resourced cheap to maintain out high standard of living. I don't think people being protected by us is part of the math at all.
Nice Somebody needs to sort out his "facts". Nope. It was a powerplay between US and Russia, EU was merely playing it's little puddle role. It was too much fun watching "free world media" silent support&cheering assosiation agreement, back then Yanukovich was perfectly fine, and agressive rants, calling him an "autocrat" and even as bad as "dictator", when he dropped that course.
Of course it is. Free trade is the basis of US power as is the US dollar reserve currency. You don't need aircraft carriers, attack submarines and so on to protect trade from attack by non-state actors. You need them for protection against other states so nobody wants to threaten world trade. The Peace or Pax Americana. As for you need for resources cheap, if you really wanted resources cheap you would just take them. As the British did and the Spanish. The American Empire so to speak doesn't do that. If my country Britain ever really tryed to reassert itself even in partnership with the US Pax, the US would move against Britain because it threatens US geo-political strategy.
Yes I know. So Russia didn't invade Georgia? Crimea hasn't been take by Russia? What facts do I need to sort out? No the US involvement was limited in the coup against Yanukovich. That was down to the EU or as I said rather Poland and France fearing a German-Russian alliance. Aswell as the Ukrainians seeing a once in a generation choice to limit Russian influence in their country. Sure what is happening now and what happened earlier in the year isn't bad for the US, however did the US instigate it, no. However the Russians believed the US did so they took the action needed to hurt the US. However they miss read what was happening and have done for Poland and France what they wanted, Russia and Putin have forced Germany to move its position away for Russia. The Russians have played their geo-political tools poorly, who puts on energy manipulation in the spring and summer? I mean who does this? People in the west think Putin is a geo-political genius and wonderkid, creaming Obama's crumpt. However putin has failed and not helped Russia geo-politically. I still think this bad position will be turned around when Autum and Winter comes in Ukraine and the Russian manipulation will be at its strongest however it will be close between Ukraine being able to holdout against Russia or Russia being able to holdout against the west.
Yep. Georgia has violantly invaded one of it's breakaway republics, South Ossetia, while permanently attacking Russian peacekeepers, stationed there under UN mandate. It is an act of war under current international law. No reasons to call a legitimate defence an "invasion". Actually, if you check US administration during that time period, you'll see that they were cheerleading for that assosiation agreement more than EU itself did. EU was pretty meh on the subject, Ukraine is dirt poor, compared to the EU. Their GDP per capita is lower than Chinese, twice lower than Romanian. Nevertheless they demanded basically free trade for EU goods, while giving little to no quotas for Ukranian goods. A demand, which was obviously rejected. We both know who holds power in EU. And it is not France, nor it is Poland. Nice propaganda job they have done on you, I see. There wasn't any referendum on that and , according to sociological polls, population was divided equaly on signing assosiation agreement/joining CU. Perhaps yes, perhaps no, shall see in 30 years. One fact is clear - they were cheerleading those events. That view of France and Poland being those ebil minds behind everything is just silly. In Fact we have pretty good relations with France. It wasn't there in the first place. Merkel is and was ani-Russian. Yeah, sure, I swear I will think about it, when I'll visit Russian Crimea next summer. Propaganda brainwashed much, sweatheart? There were no energy manipulation. Yet. If I were Putin, I would embargo EU. Preferably at autumn. Watching panic on stock markets, skyrocketing oil and gas price would be spectacular, also will help a lot in weakening US. Will come at a price, of course. But I am not him, so wee shall see how that will be played out. Cri-me-a river. We've just got a strategic penisualla with 2 million people, yet that is somehow a "loss". Last time the west "victory" was declared in Ukraine in 2004. And look at where it got you. Ukraine will go bankrupt pretty soon, perhaps it won't even hold till winter. The newly appointed retardedboxer Mayour of Kiev has already said that there will be no hot water in the city till October and we are not even trying. The prices on heating and electricity nearly tripled, social support and welfare were cut dramatically, the only reason there is no Maidan 3.0 is that they are constantly brainwashed by oligarh-controlled media. But there is a lot of discontent in internet already.
Russia pushed beyond the breakaway Republics into Georgian territory to weaken the Georgians and send a message to Ukraine. We all know it was geo-political for the Russians. I do understand your points, however they are not the geo-political reasons why any country does anything, protection of foreign civilians, nobody cares about civilians unless it fits their geo-political interests. Yeah the US supported it to weaken Russia. However the EU supported it to and sent a number of high ranking people to Ukraine before the then president signed the agreement with Russia. I also agree with you the Russian deal was the better for Ukraine. However for the Russians they didn't realise that the Ukranian elite wanted to be more independent of Russian influence so the Ukranian elite used the agreement with Russia to bring down the Ukranian president and his pro-Russian faction in Ukraine. Sure opion was divided however opinion in Kiev and the Catholic Ukranian speaking part of Ukraine was opposed to Russian influence. So they gained at Russia's expense. In terms of internal EU economy and politics the Germans dominate, however the domination doesn't extend to foreign policy. Where France and Poland have real influence and Germany doesn't have the same domination and can be manipulated by other members of the EU. Democracy doesn't mean anything without the government to enforce what the democratic vote is. In this case the Ukranian government and state decided they would act, even if it was against overall public opion. The Russians do this, Britain does this, the US does this. We know what the US did know in gerenal, however we will not get the detail until the US give it to us, either we another wikileaks of freedom of information request. I don't think the new information would change what we generally know now that this US supported the Ukranian government to hurt Russian influence. Russia isn't the issue for France, Germany is the issue for France. You will have good relations with France, but your relationship with Germany is a threat to France. So France and Poland moved to create problems in the Russian-German relationship. It has worked. Geo-politics comes down to vast interests of countries, individual politicians don't really matter. The Germans and Russians were creating a vast web of interests to link them together in at the very least a tactical alliance. The French and Polish want to limit and break these interests, they have used one of the few levers they had over Germany. Oh, that's a good one. 1-0 to you summering in Crimea. Yes there is energy and economic manipulation on the part of the Russians against Ukraine. You have called in Ukranian debt and curtained the supply somewhat just to make the Ukrainians understand what the pain will be like when winter comes. The Ukranians are banking of handing Russia a major military defeat in the East against the anti-Kiev groups and gained domination their again. Hoping that the EU or US or someone will help them through the winter or even that the weather will not be as bad as it normally is. My guess is Russian manipulation will break Ukraine some time last in this year if the Ukranians can't regain domination of the east. If they can they could survive. When I say Ukranians I mean the anti-Russia faction. If Russia would be screwed, all you need to do is hit Ukraine, why hit Europe as a whole. Yes you gained something, however you also just lost over 1 million pro-Russian votes in the Ukraine elections, this will hurt you in the short term to manipulation Ukraine. Yes a strategic position, but not against Ukraine, a strategic position against Turkey in the Black Sea, if you wanted to hurt Ukraine you would have taken Odessa, but you couldn't. In 2004 Russia was much less able to manipulation than it is now. I think you are correct, Ukraine without serious help will go bankrupt. The new Kiev Mayor my be a great boxer, I have watched many of his fights. However it will not help him sort out the economy or create more energy in Ukraine. The main reason there isn't a maidan 3.0 is it isn't cold yet. Weather plays a massive part in geo-politics in this part of the world, politics in general.
Of course. The offensive capabilities and spirit of Georgian army must be destroyed. Also it is unclear what was the message for Ukraine. Somewhat true. From my POV it looked like EU was pushed by someone for all those talks. They didn't make an attractive offer so it looked like they are not really interested in result, more like they are interested in the process itself. True, Yanukovich was too much of a (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) to deal with those protests, inspired by insatisfactory life standards and carefully guided by media. In the end, one oligarchic clan was replaced by the other under the slogan of "fighting tieves and oligarhs". Doublespeak and doublethink in action. Doubt that, country is going down now. Lawless, state being a puppet for oligarhs, private armies&warlords, rise of neo-nazism, troubled economy. It looks more and more like European Somalia with every day. Of course, in general it is against our interests. We have a failed state and a hot spot near our border now. From the other hand it is against European interests too. The only one who profits is sitting on the other side of the ocean. But the game is not over yet. I doubt that is how it works. Those who control resources flow (money in this case), control the situation. As I said, we have rather good relations with France, while Poland is nothing. It's economy is, in fact, owned by the Germans. While poles, of course, love to live in imaginarium of their "glory". Areed. Sorry, but that is idiotic. On the logical level it is just like invasion of Iraq 2003. "War with terrorism" in fact being a war against those who opposed terrorism. Fighing the wrong side. On the reality level it is unclear in which way Germany is a threat for France. Certanly not the military one. Except Merkel remained as anti-Russian as she was, while Poland is nothing. So what is this mysterious "web of interests" between Russia and Germany you are talking about? What are these interests? In fact, Germany is a possible rival. Nope, we have just called back the discount for stationing of our fleet in Sevastopol (not an issue to talk about with Ukraine since it is Russian now) and a discount, which Yanukovich goverment recieved with those supposed-to-be a 15 bn$ backup plan. Since the anti-Russian coup happened there was no reason to give it to them. Cause and effect, nothing more. Yeah, taking into account they are not controlled by Russia in the first place, and they are already screwed in winning hearts and minds in those regions. Also, you are too optimistic on that one. The only reasons they are "winning" are constant zerg-rush. On strategical level it is just one screw-up against another. Two days ago a group of ukranian troops (400+) fled to Russia, because glorious Manshteins in Ukranian HQ send them to cut of rebels from Russia and instead they themselves were cut of Ukraine. After that they were left there to die without any backup. A few days ago ukr media was all about "we have incircled Lugansk!!111" and instead the grop to the south of the city were incircled and now they are negotiating surrender. Of course, the militia can't possibly win a war conventional style, but they can win it inflicting moral. There are a lot of discontent in the internet about how media is lying about the casualties. When media is reporting "thousands terrorist killed, our glorious army suffered no casualties", soldiers on the ground report trucks of bodies going home. There is a significant influx of refugees from Ukraine, Male, 18-50 y.o., running away from 3-rd wave of mobilisation. If the rebels manage to hold long enough, failing economy of ukraine and public stunt against the war will gain them a victory. Or option two - give them direct fire support! Because Europe decided to take part in a sanction game. The thing is that we are not North Korea or Kuba, we sure as hell can play this game too. Shall see what Putin's actions will be like. I trust his vison, although I a more of a hard-liner myself, as you might have noticed. Already a non-factor. West have just supported anti-constitutional coup and Kievan junta, it is pretty clear "the world community", as the west likes call itself, will support any counting of votes, as long as they are in west favour. So it doesn't matter anymore, have to play dirty. The question is if it will be played politically, economically or just by physical elimination of the new Ukranian elite. Oh, if I were Kolomoisky, I would pick up my tea very carefully. A strategic position agains everybody and everything in the Black sea and on it's borders. From militay POV, controlling Crimea is key for controlling the region. A penisualla, which is almost an island, hard to capture, easy to defend. My guess is that it is matter of time, weather or not. I doubt propaganda mashine will succeed whitewashing everything, while the citizens will feel this everything on their wallets. But, who knows?
The message for the Ukraine was that Russia has the military capabilities to defeat the Georgian military which is better then the Ukranian military albeit smaller. Also that Russia will act to limit the US sphere moving further into the former Soviet Union, using military force if needed. Georgia has been a great victory for Russia, it also means countries now respect Russian power more than they did in the region. Not it is just true. I don't know a politician that cares about foreign civilians otherwise they would bomb them, but everybody does. Yes the EU was pushed by Poland and France, aswell as it own interests. The US wasn't opposed to it either, however the US wasn't pushing for it. Putin and the Russian elite thought as you do that the Americans were behind it because you fear the Americans and you think the Americans fear you. Yes they couldn't made a better offer without full German support, which wasn't forthcoming because the Germans knew what was happening and didn't want to support it. I did say Germany's influence of EU foreign policy was more limited than internal EU policy, however the Germans limit things they don't want and in some cases stop them from happening. I don't think the Germans expected the attempted agreement to lead to a coup, otherwise they wouldn't have supported it. The only people who would have wanted this would be Poland and the US. This current phase is pushed by Poland and the US, the earlier phase which caused this to happen was pushed by France, Poland and the EU for their own interests. Yes I agree. However Yanukovich isn't a very bright person it seems to me. He shouldn't have given the anti-Russian faction anything to work with or the US/EU by attack protesters or the mob, he should have just waited until spring, then move in. Instead he gave his enemies what they needed even though more police officers were shot than the mob, the pictures of dead civilians was what the Ukranian faction needed aswell as the media. Ukraine's issue is that it is cut in two by a river, its east is geo-graphically part of Russia and its west is cut off from the rest of Europe by forest and mountains. It has good farmland, but no great. It has nutural minerals, but it has to use the profits from it to build infrastructure and improve farm production. It has a good port at Odessa, but again it isn't great and can't be linked with Kiev and other cities. In many ways Ukranie has the same problems as Russia, just it is much smaller than Russia. You can't compared it to Somalia, the South of which has nothing going for it. Ukraine has some adventages, South Somalia has nothing. North Somalia on the other hand, is better. I say all this so I can make it clear that Ukraine can improve and has things going for it, if it only have a stable and less corrupt elite and civil service, and if only it could accept that the Russians will have a great deal of influence and there is little they can do about it. I love the Winter is coming photo. Control in geo-political terms is a nice idea, but it doesn't exist. What countries have is economic, military, cultural and political manipulation. Germany is in a strong economic, political and cultural position, however it needs the EU to sustain this position. If Germany goes around just telling France and more importantly Poland what to do in their foreign policy, they will make problems for Germany and the British will support them, as will the Americans. So Germany must give France and Poland, and other EU countries things they want to gain their support for things Germany needs. Germany doesn't really have any interest in Ukraine and likely just did it as something the French and Polish wanted, but once it realise it was a trap to harm their relations with Russia the Germans have curtailed their involvement. However it was just terrible as the Russians though it was an American attack and over reacted. I had a Polish and Latvian work for me and they spoke to each of other is Russian. Now I am British and I don't like it, so I fired the Polish person because he was a big head and didn't do what I told him. I am sure we feel the same way about Poland. The German threat to France is economic they has destroyed French exports and technology by being in the EU, they French know the Germans can't act on they massive adventage so long as they keep Germany in the EU and away from an independent option, that independent option would be an alliance with Russia. Poland has the fastest growing economy in the EU and is have massive wealth transfer from other EU country and technology transfer from being in NATO with the US. They look weaker now, but they are in reality on the way up. Germany needs energy and Russia has energy, Russia needs infrastructure developement and Germany can help with that. They are very well suited to each other their needs match. A pantnership could easily form in the Baltic and Central Europe. Germany is a rival of Russia, but only then to two meet and want to curtail their interest for the sake of the other. Currently though they are apart in geo-graphic terms seperated by Poland and the Baltic states, they can real have a good relationship as they did before a time in the mid to late 1800's and before the German invasion in WW2. Yeah so you are trying to use energy and money to manipulate Ukraine to an extent. Good information on the fighting and I thank you for it. So the Ukraine forces being in some cases allowed to advance and are then being trapped in large numbers which will sap their moral. Plus the Russians can also just sent over a few guided missiles if needed. So the military operation isn't going as well as expected for Ukraine. I did have my doubts about its sudden advance. I understand that, but are the sanctions hurting you or not? If they aren't hurting Russia, then why counter? I am also a hard-liner when that airliner was just shot down and 6 British people where killed I wanted to send some attack submarines to the Black Sea and start lobbing Tomahawks and targets in Ukraine. It makes a difference, in the sense that it just increases the political domination of the anti-Russian parties in Ukraine. This isn't something Russia wants. Yeah they have already tryed to blow his car up and are killing Ukranian politicians and religious leads all over the place. It would have someone taste it before I drink it, if I was him. Yeah, but Turkey is your only threat in the Black Sea, your new worried about Bulgaria or Romania are you? We know the Russia has serious cards yet to play in Ukraine, but we can't be sure when Putin will play them, or how long they will take to work. However we can be sure the cards will work because they have worked before and nothing has changed for Ukraine. .
You guys talk about US influence in Ukraine and Georgia. Do you really think Hussein Obama even knows where Ukraine and Georgia (not the one with Atlanta) are? Do you think Old Bossy knew? Do you think John Kerry knows? Don't ascribe purpose to that which can be explained by simple incompetence. Putin is doing what autocrats do. He is trying to take advantage of an opportunity. The US is dazed, confused and uncaring at the top, and the EU is hopelessly weak (Viz: Libya), so there is nothing to stop Putin. This is particularly true if he can cut a side deal with the Germans. In a few years - as Chinese yuan flow in for Russian gas - Putin will become even more contemptuous of European "soft power."
US influence is their without the US even trying to put it there. The Russians think it is all a great plan by the Americans given your past history they fear you and they believe that you still fear them. This is wrong, but it is what the Russians think which is more important than what is really happening. I am sure Obama knows where Ukraine and Georgia are, he can read names on a Map. There is without doubt very limited US economic and military aid in Ukraine, which is supporting Ukraine right now. However it is limited as the US doesn't want to force the Russians into a place where they strike out against the US in the Middle East or Afghanistan. The Americans realise that Putin isn't someone to be messed with unless they want problems in other places. I do understand you want Obama to do more, however he is constained by domestic politics, lack of funds and military assets for what is after all Ukraine, not a very important country and it wouldn't change Russian power if it kept it in it's sphere. Basically the US has bigger fish to fry, it is making the Russians sweat though and work hard for their victory with minimal effort on the US part. This is also just reinforcing Russian fear of the US. No. Putin is but one man, anyone else in the Russian elite would be doing the same thing or worse. Georgia was Russia taking advantage of US weakness in the region to put down a yard stick, this far and no further can the American sphere be forces upon us. Ukraine is just the Russians having the more capable tools, but the US making it harder for the Russians to use them the way Russia would like. The US isn't dazed or confused, it knows what it is doing. It just isn't making a big deal out of it. While every single Russian move is clear with direct intent to manipulate the Ukranians. Russia is in a terrible position. The EU and US doesn't really need to do anything but wait and cause some problems for the Russia's. The Germans are an issue ofcourse they can't be allowed to limit already limited US and EU actions against Russia. However there isn't a side deal to be cut, Russia and Germany have interests they will seek to protect, what the EU must do is limit these interests to things that the EU can afford not to go up against. So energy the German's have it from Russia independent of the EU. German doesn't need to EU to export to Russia, but it does need the EU for arms sales, infrastructure building in Russia, banking, services and foreign policy. In this way German is curtailed in its efforts to seek an option outside the EU with Russia. The Chinese got a very good deal, they got more energy than they wanted at a 70% of the price the Russians wanted. However the Chinese are paying for alot of the infrastructure building and they will have less insentive in central Asian energy now, so it helps the Russians aswell. Putin will protect the Russian buffer at all costs, it doesn't matter what the Europeans or Americans do.
You didn't think Germany wouldn't like to have Pomerania and Silesia back? Koenigsberg/Kaliningrad is probably a bridge too far for a deal.
Depends how it gets these territories. Germany doesn't want to be overt about anything it does geo-politically, it likes to fly under the radar. So would Germany like these territories ofcourse, they are historically German territories moreso than territory they have in the west. However is it possible for Germany to get them, not without a partnership with Russia, and leaving the EU and NATO, which the Germans can't do currently, they aren't strong enough to do so and the Russian-German partnership is just starting to form. Later this decade or in the 2020's if things go the way they look a German-Russian partnership is possible. However as soon as it forms the UK and US will plough as much as they can into Poland, which will already be looking to form an alliance with other medium and smaller central European countries. France, Italy, Denmark and Low Countries will also be getting heavy US and British support. So even if this German-Russian partnership does form it will not be obvious what it means. What countries want in geo-politically terms mean nothing, the question first to ask is what is impossible for a country to do, then you have what is possible, from those possibilities you then see what you think is likely given the trends in that country and the countries around it. So the Germans can want all they like, but it doesn't mean they will move in that direction or that it is even possible for them to do so. I am British we lost some territory called the British Empire. I would love Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Belize, Guyana, Malta, Oman, Sri lanka and Singapore back, however it is impossible. So I move on to a diffferent strategy to increase my countries power.
Taxcutter says: "Possible" is the important word. Unless there is a reversal of defense policy, neither the US nor the UK currently have the capability of doing anything when the T-90s roll into Poland. The US Army and Marine Corps are shedding combat experience as we palaver. Field and company grade officers who have 'seen the elephant" are being RIF-ed out of the service. Basically laid off. Same with senior non-coms (E7 and up) US ground forces will get dumb again real fast. What could the UK send to Poland? Maybe 2-3 battalions? The UK has been down that road before. They sent a small but very professional army to France in 1914 and by the end of the Battle of the Marne it was shot to pieces - totally unable to do anything but hold its own trenches until Kitchener's New Armies showed up in 1916. Then the British bleeding began in earnest. One hopes somebody learned something. "Trip wire" forces only work when MAD is in order. MAD is not in order today. Neither the US nor the UK is gonna grow mushrooms over Poland, Ukraine, the Baltic States, or Finland in 2014.
Yes and so what if the UK and US can't stop the Russian's rolling into Poland if the Polish can stop them. Poland will get massive technology transfer for the UK and US, it will get military and economic aid from UK and US, it will become the best army and air force in Europe, able to with its central European allies defeat the Russian's. The problem comes if Germany then hits Poland and their central European alliance from behind and cuts them apart. The US and UK will have to take the pressure off the CEA, this is where the smaller British force comes in from Denmark and a much larger American, Dutch and French force comes in from the west. The Germans will have no option but to turn and fight the much large American, French and Dutch force, while the British run around blowing stuff up and causing problems, not really fighting at all. I understand what you are saying and there could be a cap inbetween the Polish improvement and US-UK losing capabilities which the Russians and Germans could strike, but then the question is would the Germans and Russians be able to do so. The further question is what difference does it make if Poland isn't their? As the UK and US will still just support Sweden, Denmark, Low Countries, France and support Turkey in the Balkans along with Romania. So German and Russia taking Poland doesn't really get them anywhere and if they tryed to take Denmark the US and UK could use their naval power to limit any action. The US is cutting however are the Germans and Russians increasing? No they aren't really even improving all that much. The US army and marines have budget problems, but it doesn't mean the Germans and Russians will not worry about them any less. US problem isn't that people are being laid-off, the problem is that the training and operations budget is being cut for increased procurement and R&D, in the UK we spend 40% plus of our defence budget of procurement, we can't go on like this without increasing defence spending or cutting procurement. I would guess you are having the same issues? Maybe you could explain it to me further if I am wrong. By 2020 the UK will not have any troops in Europe anymore, we couldn't send anything to Poland. However currently we have two brigades in Germany, 20,000 troops. Plus the 50,000 the US currently has. Yes we also send a small army in the War of Spanish Succession, with our conintental allies mainly the Dutch, John Churchilll creamed the French and Bavarian forces. We tryed the same thing in the Napoleonic wars in Northern Germany and I went terrible. We tryed the same in WW1 it went well at first but we couldn't sustain the operation. In WW2 the BEF wasn't good enough training or equipped. Then in 1916 Kitchener was killed in Scotland by a submarine. What can be learned from WW1, nothing. All wars are different, one thing is clear for Britain that it must keep Holland independent of Germany and France to control the river networks into Germany and stop them gaining Dutch ports. So the defensive line must be pushed in the Low Countries. I agree the UK and US will have to maintain an active and highly capable army and marines, unless they are willing to start using WMD's against Russian and Germany ground forces.
I disagree with that. One of the US foreign policy goals both during the cold war and the post cold war era has been to have NATO and non NATO Western allies shore up their militaries, and increase their military spending. A more assertive Britain would mesh nicely with US geo-political strategy.
I don't think Putin's any kind of geo-political genius, but he does have a clear idea of what he perceives as his country's interests and knows how to seize an opportunity when it presents itself. Long term, he may be totally wrong about what Russia's real interests are, but short term he looks like he is getting what he wants.
Yes if Britain improved its capabilities while in NATO and EU the US would support it. However Britain under the treaty protection of the US through NATO and EU has no reason to improve its defence capabilities. If Britain left the EU and NATO then started improving and setting up its own independent sphere of influence in the North Sea, Norwegian sea, Irish sea and English Channel to such an extent that Britain with its sphere would defeat Russia in a war and can stop US ships from operating their, the US would have problems with it. I know it is stupid, but thats the way it works. If Britain is reassertive the US stops it and if Britain is part of the US alliance it will just use the US for its protection. What I hope for is a more even British-American partnership where Britain doesn't go where the US doesn't want it to go, but everywhere else Britain is an independent power. Rather like after WW1 when British was the major power, but the US still was independent in the Caribbean and Northern Pacific, everywhere else was British. Something like that with the role reversed.
Yes Putin and indeed the Russian elite in general have clears ideas about their interest. They aren't as limited by democratic politics or any idea about economic freedom. A Russian leader can be more effective than an American leader because of this. However power comes from people, it doesn't come from the leader, all the leader can do it used what he is given or can take from the people. I believe Russian strategy to expand its borders and create buffers and two industrial centres thousands of miles apart has failed them. Putin still has that same problem, he needs to link his country, but it costs to much to do so, in the end it sucks up Russian resources to defend its massive border. Russia is strong, but very limited and could break apart if it can no longer afford to be strong. We saw this in the mid 1990's.
Got any proof for that? You are trying to sell Poland and France are two top dogs of the EU. Sorry, not buying. Yeah....sure...forget about those numerous statements of US officials about how good and profitable it will be. Not pushing for it at all. No, we don't. For both. Yep. It smells like Startfor. It has the best soils in the world. Called "chernozem". Not so much for climate. Lolwut? It is linked to them perfectly fine. I bring in Somalia as a failed governance example. When Ukraine left the USSR it was top 10 word's economy, had a lot of high-tech industries and overall had one of the best, if not the best, prospects for growth. Due to shameful performance of it's elite it is now the second poorest country in Europe. Too bad Amrecans didn't knew it in 90-th. Works both ways. EU needs Germany the same way with the tiny difference that, unlike Germany, it consists of dosens of countries with sometimes different interests. So, as I said, Germany always will be the top dog of EU until it controls it's economy. Not the absolute power, of course, but still. In wich way they will "make problems"? Don't know about France, but west of Poland was bought by Germans years ago. They are not in the same league. I am looking forward for the evidence of ebil French masterminds behind everuthing. No, seriously, if you have it - give it a go. Until then it is just talk. Oh, wow, now that was racist. Actually couldn't care less about Polanball. Polanball is deeply xenofobic and has overblown self-esteem and that is why it gets it's ass kicked since 17-th century by all neibours. Pfff, big deal, leave EU then. It is not like they will send an army to punish. So you are saying that their economy suffers in EU because of Germany, so they need to stop Germany by keeping Germany in EU? Not exactly the smartest plan, if you ask me. Yeah, but 1,6% growth is not skyrocketing. Also, the Startfor guy you like to read misses the fact they have 1,32 fertility. Not very impressive either, taking into account 1,59 on average in Yurop. Oh nice, so do China. And Japan. And we ourselves, for that matter. Building infrastructure is not rocket science. Well if "not-helping de-facto your enemy"="using energy to manipulate" then yes, we do. Yep, although rebellion is losing ground indeed. They can't go offensive without heavy equipment. Personally? No. But they surely will effect our economy. Not reacting to them might give US and it's minions an impression they are succeed with them and encourage them to continue that type of politics now and further in the future. The only way to deal with a bullier is kicking (*)(*)(*)(*) out of him. When a prohibition for some food imports from sanctions-supporting countries were signed media suddenly discovered that these sanctions can backfire and several thousands may lose their jobs because of that. So yeah, retaliation will be useful. Dude, that wasn't some fluffy fredom-loving leftists coming into power. One oligarhic clan have just recently violently kicked out a democratically elected president, while democracy-loving West was cheering for it aside. The share of votes doesn't matter anymore. If propaganda won't do it's job, then "It doesn't matter how they vote, it only matters who counts". It will be anti-Russian one way or the other. Regarding current ukranian leadership. After the successful coup, some people remained to live on Maidan to "ensure new goverment following it's promices". Apparently, new goverment no longer needs that: [video=youtube;EztH9_FgEc0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EztH9_FgEc0[/video] That is today's events. And you know what, unlike that tyrannical monster Yanukovich, that democratycally elected Poroshenko decided to send some armor to the city. Just in case. There are also reports on some of those private armies moving to the city. There is a low probability of new Tiananmen. They are all NATO members, consequently they are all a potential threat.
NATO does provide kind of a catch 22 for alliance members, since the European member states, which were shattered by World War 2 and took years to rebuild, sloughed off their defense capabilities because the US, which was basically undamaged during the war and had about half the productive capability of the entire world after World War 2; leaving it uniquely capable to provide a defensive umbrella for all of Western Europe. Of course once Europe recovered it still didn't want to rebuild it's defensive capability because the US was already covering it so... And that applied to Britain too. As the former Great Power, it was totally exhausted and didn't want those responsibilities anymore, and divested itself of empire.That's still the case today. There would have to be some sort of massive upheaval in world affairs for Britain to make the financial and foreign policy commitment to rebuild their military to do what you suggest. Maybe if NATO crumbled that might happen.
I don't have any proof, and I doubt I will find any. However I just thought it through, the EU trys to get Ukraine to sign an economic agreement, the Russians counter with a much better offer. Surely the EU would then make an improved offer or leave the talks. Instead the EU didn't make an improved offer, but just left its offer standing. This is the first phase of the crisis, I then ask myself why this happened. I know the EU doesn't do anything without German backing, I also know that German power is more limited in foreign policy. I know the Germans don't want another poor member state to join and that the Germans want good relations with Russia. So this leads me to think the Germans were being manipulated by other EU members, I then ask which EU members could do this. I can think of only two with the strategic interest to do so Poland and France. So you can believe it or not, but that is my thinking. After the protests started the Germans tryed to get a settlement in Ukraine, but by this time it was somewhat out of their hands as the Americans started cheerleading and the anti-Russian faction in Ukraine took over. I am not saying France and Poland are the two top dog in the EU, however Poland is bordering Ukraine and fears Russia, it is also a growing power. France with Poland could manipulate Germany into backing something limited, then the situation in Ukraine changes. I also look at these new Russian sanctions and find that the two countries most affacted are France and Poland, with the affect on Germany being limited. I am sure I am correct. The US started psuhing for it when the Russia deal was accepted. They didn't do anything major until that point. Are you sure your government doesn't fear American power? Unless fear isn't the right word. No these are just my own thoughts on the geography of Ukraine, it didn't get it from Stratfor. So the farmland isn't great in Ukraine because the climate isn't good for much of year, so its farmland is good but not great. Part of Britain have great farmland because the British have improved the soil, have better crops, can export along rivers and canals, and have less need of manpower because of technology. Ukraine doesn't have all this. Odessa and Kiev aren't linked by a river to make moving goods between them cheap and easy. You make a good point about Ukraine and Somalia and their corrupt elite. The Americans have never being realists, it is part of their culture. They just expect to be able to do anything they want to anyone they want, because they have control. It doesn't work like that. I agree the EU needs Germany, however some member state of the EU are starting to be limited by Germany and feel real anger towards Germany because of their issues. However if they leave the EU Germany will free of the limits put on it through the EU. So they can't leave, unless the vast majority of them do. Problems like removing support for EU regulations on the banking system, which Germany wants. The British would like it if EU countries started to turn against Germany. The Germans have to walk a thin line to get what they want. Even though Germany has a huge stake in many large French companies and has massive investment in western Poland, it isn't something Germany can really use within the EU because of EU laws. You see how Germany is contained, it benefits from the EU, but can't use its new power the way it would like without losing the benefits. I think the Polish were the masterminds, not the French. The French just supported it to weaken the Germans. yeah that is what I am saying, the Polish think they are awesome because they were the most powerful country in Europe 500 years ago. They are bigheads. Well sectors of the French and every other economy suffer in the EU with Germany. However it is better than allowing the Germans to do whatever they want, like build an army or have more radical politics. It makes sense if you are in Europe and you fear another war. Also the French thought that they could manipulate an EU foreign policy and army, which they could have the greatest say in, while the Germans get the economic benefits. 1.6% is huge compared to the rest of the EU, Poland also has less debt, a more competitive labour market and smaller welfare than any other EU country. So even if its population drops, it will get rich. Germany on the otherhand, needs the population growth to supports it debt, labour market and welfare spending. Building infrastructure is very costly, as is getting the machines to do the work quicker and cheaper, which Russia gets from Germany. The Germans are simply better and cheaper than Russian companies in many area's. We agree then Russia is using energy to manipulate Ukraine. Ok thanks for clearing that up. Ukraine forces are strategically gaining, but tactically losing forces as they do. No putting sanctions on the EU would mean Russia doesn't lose further economically than it will. Putting sanctions on will gain Russia political points domestically and make the European worry about what the Russian could do if they put further sanctions on Russia. So its a hard one, but I think Putin may have picked the right cause of action here. Yes, we have heard nothing about Kiev here for weeks. I am not shocked that the new leader of Ukraine will be taking action against people, he can't do anything else right now. I do find it very annoying that this always happens after coup support by the west. Look at Egypt. Fair enough, they are members of NATO. However Turkey is the only one with a half capable navy.
Yeah, it works for the US when there is a major threat, but when it is removed the Europeans no longer see the point and would rather spend the money of welfare programs or foreign aid. If Britain left NATO would with be forced to limit its area of operations without US support. Britain could only really operate in the in South Atlantic, Caribbean, Mediterranean and waters around Britain. If the EU and NATO were gone, Britain would be a in a much stronger position.
