Foolish NATO generals want war, not peace

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

SomeDisciple

Well-known member
Jul 4, 2021
2,376
1,082
113
#23
Here in english
On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians - Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians
I went ahead and read the actual essay referenced by the Wiki on the ICC database.

I don't see him saying anything about a Russian imperium: what he did say was that true Ukrainian sovereignty would depend on partnership with Russia. He does say something about Ukraine, Belarus and Russia being this sort of "triune-nation" but I'm pretty sure he's talking about the 3 ethno-nationalities intermixing across borders: he's not talking about a super-state, like the USSR, or an imperial Russia.


 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,778
943
113
62
#24
I went ahead and read the actual essay referenced by the Wiki on the ICC database.

I don't see him saying anything about a Russian imperium: what he did say was that true Ukrainian sovereignty would depend on partnership with Russia. He does say something about Ukraine, Belarus and Russia being this sort of "triune-nation" but I'm pretty sure he's talking about the 3 ethno-nationalities intermixing across borders: he's not talking about a super-state, like the USSR, or an imperial Russia.


Thats between the lines. What he startet on 24th Feb. was the beginning. HIs imperialstate is russia, bela rus and ucraine.
His goal is since 1990's that russia becomes the former border back.
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,778
943
113
62
#25
I went ahead and read the actual essay referenced by the Wiki on the ICC database.

I don't see him saying anything about a Russian imperium: what he did say was that true Ukrainian sovereignty would depend on partnership with Russia. He does say something about Ukraine, Belarus and Russia being this sort of "triune-nation" but I'm pretty sure he's talking about the 3 ethno-nationalities intermixing across borders: he's not talking about a super-state, like the USSR, or an imperial Russia.


https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...ew-ukraine-essay-reflects-imperial-ambitions/
 

SomeDisciple

Well-known member
Jul 4, 2021
2,376
1,082
113
#27
Have a look at what the Atlantic council has to say about American populists-

As 2024 approaches, and with it a perfect storm of elections worldwide, the challenge will arise in democracies to hold onto their support for Ukraine without allowing the narrative of the war to be hijacked by extreme populists who want to cut or end support to the country.

See what's important to them?
1) The narrative
2) Money to Ukraine

The reality is, this war has always been about a political narrative, and money- which is why we want the war to END.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#28
So it is important to show him that he can not do what he want.
Well the time to have done that was in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. After that why did Ukraine not work with Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland (all on the western border of Russia) and make a defense alliance for themselves?

It is now too late to show Russia anything. And here is the reason why NATO will fail to stop Russia militarily: China will step right into the conflict. since China has a mutual agreement with Russia. "China and Russia currently enjoy the best relations they have had since the late 1950s. Although they have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic moves, and build up an alliance against the United States."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Russia_relations
But they have also said that there are no limits to their alliance.

At the same time China did present a comprehensive peace proposal for Ukraine.
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202302/t20230224_11030713.html
Within that proposal, here is what they said: "Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard."

So how did NATO respond? "The proposals however cut little ice with NATO.
"China doesn't have much credibility because they have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine," NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Tallinn."
But neither does NATO, since NATO did not condemn the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan by the USA.

At the very least, the NATO Secretary General should have met with Xi Jinping to determine exactly what could be negotiated on both sides. But no. Biden, Blinken, NATO, etc simply dismissed this peace plan because it did not originate with them. Now NATO wants to talk about nuclear conflict, and that is really irresponsible.
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,778
943
113
62
#29
Well the time to have done that was in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. After that why did Ukraine not work with Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland (all on the western border of Russia) and make a defense alliance for themselves?

It is now too late to show Russia anything. And here is the reason why NATO will fail to stop Russia militarily: China will step right into the conflict. since China has a mutual agreement with Russia. "China and Russia currently enjoy the best relations they have had since the late 1950s. Although they have no formal alliance, the two countries do have an informal agreement to coordinate diplomatic and economic moves, and build up an alliance against the United States."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Russia_relations
But they have also said that there are no limits to their alliance.

At the same time China did present a comprehensive peace proposal for Ukraine.
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202302/t20230224_11030713.html
Within that proposal, here is what they said: "Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard."

So how did NATO respond? "The proposals however cut little ice with NATO.
"China doesn't have much credibility because they have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine," NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Tallinn."
But neither does NATO, since NATO did not condemn the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan by the USA.

At the very least, the NATO Secretary General should have met with Xi Jinping to determine exactly what could be negotiated on both sides. But no. Biden, Blinken, NATO, etc simply dismissed this peace plan because it did not originate with them. Now NATO wants to talk about nuclear conflict, and that is really irresponsible.
What for an peaceplan. Russia would only accept an peaceplan which says the now occupied land from ucraine, belongs to me. And even then you cant trust him, that he will not start again to make his dream become true. Its with China the same. You cant trust autocratic leaders.
Be have to consider that the time of the antichrist and his ruling time will come.
And everything what we see now on conflicts will leads in this time. We cant stop or change this.
 

HealthAndHappiness

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2022
10,605
4,523
113
Almost Heaven West Virginia
#30
What's even more scary is that if NATO goes to war with Russia, China will not simply stand by.
"The increasingly close relationship between China and Russia has been decades in the making, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has tightened their embrace. Both countries made a clear strategic choice to prioritize relations with each other, given what they perceive as a common threat from the U.S.-led West."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/1...cs-sco-economy-military-war-ukraine-putin-xi/

NATO is not capable of taking on both Russia and China, and yet these foolish generals have ignored this hard reality.
I'm no 4 Star Admiral like Rachel Levine, but it seems like Chiner would have a motive to claim Taiwan and other Asian wealthy nations.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
37,484
6,926
113
#31
I'm no 4 Star Admiral like Rachel Levine, but it seems like Chiner would have a motive to claim Taiwan and other Asian wealthy nations.
China will have to take out the US first before they can seize control of Taiwan.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,440
3,219
113
#33
As I stated above "NATO is not capable of taking on both Russia and China, and yet these foolish generals have ignored this hard reality." As far as China and Russia are concerned, NATO is to blame for the war in Ukraine:

"In an April 2022 press conference, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian offered a concise overview of the government’s messaging: The Russia-Ukraine conflict, to a large extent, is the result of Western arrogance and successive mistakes over the last 30-plus years and NATO’s eastward expansion is the root cause of the ongoing conflict … As the world’s people can see, instead of bringing about peace, NATO’s expansion has led to seriously damaged mutual trust and regional turmoil and tensions to the extent that the situation is spiraling out of control.3"

"Putin had repeatedly asserted prior to the war that NATO and its military infrastructure were creeping closer to Russia's borders by accepting new members from eastern Europe, and that the alliance was now preparing to bring Ukraine into its orbit too. Putin publicly said that represented an existential threat to Russia, forcing him to react."
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-...eace-deal-recommended-by-his-aide-2022-09-14/

At the very least one of the Western leaders should have tried to sit down with Putin and discuss peace. But the West wanted a proxy war with Russia.
A global proxy war: Ukraine is now the center of our Eurasian competition with Russia and China
https://thehill.com/opinion/interna...r-eurasian-competition-with-russia-and-china/
Putin is a serial liar along with his fellow dictator Xi. What is the point of negotiating with someone who lies continually and who has no intention of sticking to any deal? It's not so long ago that Mr Trump was pushing for Europeans to spend more on defence. Russia's folly has backfired. Europe has woken from its sleep and upgrading its military.

"Putin asserted............" Oh please. It's like North Korea saying that they are a democracy.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,440
3,219
113
#34
China will have to take out the US first before they can seize control of Taiwan.
That may well be the case. Taiwan makes chips that are far in advance of China's offerings. I'm reasonably sure that America does not want to cede control of that industry to China. Self interest is the most powerful motivator.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
37,484
6,926
113
#35
That may well be the case. Taiwan makes chips that are far in advance of China's offerings. I'm reasonably sure that America does not want to cede control of that industry to China. Self interest is the most powerful motivator.
Taiwan has been very strategic at making themselves essential to the West, also it is pointless to take Taiwan by force since the destruction of those chip factories and death of their engineers would set them back five or ten years. Just look at the Chinese Tofu dregs projects, they can't possibly replicate what Taiwan has done.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#36
Putin is a serial liar along with his fellow dictator Xi.
So is Joe Biden. However a serious negotiator like Trump could negotiate something which would penalize Russia if they violated a signed peace treaty. Maybe a threat to bomb the Kremlin (or worse).

Then again, if Putin was guaranteed the removal of all sanctions by the USA, he could be persuaded to stop his attacks immediately. Recovering Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk may not be possible, and the Slovakian Prime Minister has said so (but not is so many words). But Ukraine would be guaranteed peace with a solid and carefully crafted treaty. And the possibility of membership in NATO would be cancelled.

Slovak PM: Ukraine must give up territory to end Russian invasion
https://www.politico.eu/article/slo...-territory-russia-moscow-invasion-nato-entry/
 

Susanna

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2023
1,623
532
113
48
Galveston and Houston
#37
There’s no negotiating with Putin. To him it’s a sign of weakness. NATO can’t give him one inch. If so he’ll have a mile by the end of the day.

People talking about peace treaties with Russia brings the mind to Chamberlain. Peace in our time. Dictators don’t negotiate, unless they are playing some scheme, they wouldn’t be dictators in the first place if negotiations were part of their modus.
 

Susanna

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2023
1,623
532
113
48
Galveston and Houston
#38
Trump is said to be an expert in the art of the deal, but I don’t think he really understands, neither does any of us, the ideological and grandiose nature of Putin. Bottom line: Any deal with will only last until he feels strong enough to break his promise.
 

wolfwint

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2014
3,778
943
113
62
#39
So is Joe Biden. However a serious negotiator like Trump could negotiate something which would penalize Russia if they violated a signed peace treaty. Maybe a threat to bomb the Kremlin (or worse).

Then again, if Putin was guaranteed the removal of all sanctions by the USA, he could be persuaded to stop his attacks immediately. Recovering Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk may not be possible, and the Slovakian Prime Minister has said so (but not is so many words). But Ukraine would be guaranteed peace with a solid and carefully crafted treaty. And the possibility of membership in NATO would be cancelled.

Slovak PM: Ukraine must give up territory to end Russian invasion
https://www.politico.eu/article/slo...-territory-russia-moscow-invasion-nato-entry/
I suppose Trump is not better than Putin. Both love their ego very much.
If Putin would invade Alaska, because it former belongs to russia. Would the American nation accept it? I suppose not.
But you find it ok, that the ucraine have to accept that russia steal their territory?
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
37,484
6,926
113
#40
I suppose Trump is not better than Putin. Both love their ego very much.
If Putin would invade Alaska, because it former belongs to russia. Would the American nation accept it? I suppose not.
But you find it ok, that the ucraine have to accept that russia steal their territory?
That is a very bad analogy, the US is more populous and richer and more powerful than Russia. Also we have very few Russians living in any state that might prefer Russia.

A much better example would be Texas. At one point it belonged to Mexico but had quite a few Americans living there, and then the US invaded and took over despite Mexico's big army because the people living in Texas wanted to be part of the US and not Mexico.