Originally Posted by MontyB

I would be inclined to think that they were low readiness formations so closer to 3000 than 12000, but either way still thousands.

If the dictator of Kazakhstan is unpopular, 3000 or 12000 Russian soldiers will not help him to survive .

As usual the media are trying to make money from the events by creating an artificial war hysteria : when the Soviets invaded in December 1979 Afghanistan, no one in Europe was talking about economic sanctions against the USSR.The Biden of those days ( Carter ) stopped the export of grain to the USSR,the US farmers lost a lot of money,Carter lost the election, the Argentine generals and US ally Canada hurried to sell grain and the new president, Reagan, stopped the sanctions .
The journalists and politicians who demand to exclude Russia from Swift are as usual unaware of the potential catastrophic consequences this can have for the world economy .
And when Obama and his satellites attacked Libya and Syria, no one in Russia was talking about sanctions against the US .
WHY should our population suffer because Putin invaded a country only few people in Europe can show on a map ?
We did nothing in 1979, why should we hurt ourselves today ?

Originally Posted by lljadw

If the dictator of Kazakhstan is unpopular, 3000 or 12000 Russian soldiers will not help him to survive .

How many Russian troops do you need to shoot unarmed civilians?

Originally Posted by lljadw

As usual the media are trying to make money from the events by creating an artificial war hysteria : when the Soviets invaded in December 1979 Afghanistan, no one in Europe was talking about economic sanctions against the USSR.The Biden of those days ( Carter ) stopped the export of grain to the USSR,the US farmers lost a lot of money,Carter lost the election, the Argentine generals and US ally Canada hurried to sell grain and the new president, Reagan, stopped the sanctions .
The journalists and politicians who demand to exclude Russia from Swift are as usual unaware of the potential catastrophic consequences this can have for the world economy .
And when Obama and his satellites attacked Libya and Syria, no one in Russia was talking about sanctions against the US .
WHY should our population suffer because Putin invaded a country only few people in Europe can show on a map ?
We did nothing in 1979, why should we hurt ourselves today ?

I think you will find we live in a very different world to that of the last millennium I could argue the reasons why appeasement doesn't work but I would have assumed that someone flying the flag of any European country would already have known the pitfalls of appeasement.

The west clearly agreed with your "why should we hurt ourselves" strategy when Hitler marched into the Rhineland, it still agreed when it signed over Sudatenland but it realized that it was a failing strategy when he took over the rest of Czechoslovakia and a few months later the world was at war because he wanted Poland, well we did nothing about Putin's invasion of Georgia, we did as much when he marched into Crimea and now he wants the rest of the Ukraine, next stop Poland?
Geographically ironic isn't it.

Don't get me wrong I believe that we should do all in our power to avoid war but there comes a time when war is unavoidable short of surrender and I think we are fast approaching that time.

Originally Posted by MontyB

How many Russian troops do you need to shoot unarmed civilians?




I think you will find we live in a very different world to that of the last millennium I could argue the reasons why appeasement doesn't work but I would have assumed that someone flying the flag of any European country would already have known the pitfalls of appeasement.

The west clearly agreed with your "why should we hurt ourselves" strategy when Hitler marched into the Rhineland, it still agreed when it signed over Sudatenland but it realized that it was a failing strategy when he took over the rest of Czechoslovakia and a few months later the world was at war because he wanted Poland, well we did nothing about Putin's invasion of Georgia, we did as much when he marched into Crimea and now he wants the rest of the Ukraine, next stop Poland?
Geographically ironic isn't it.

Don't get me wrong I believe that we should do all in our power to avoid war but there comes a time when war is unavoidable short of surrender and I think we are fast approaching that time.

1 France did nothing when Hitler marched into the Rhineland,because
a there was nothing that it could do
b the remilitarisation of the Rhineland was no threat to France .
Britain did nothing because
a Britain had not the power to do something
b because it was not Britain's business
c because it was not a threat to Britain .
2 The Sudetenland : following the principles of self-determination of Versailles, its inhabitants had the right to secede from CZ.And this secession was not a threat for Britain and France .
3 The West did not realize that appeasement was failing when Hitler took over Bohemia and Moravia, they knew already in October 1938 that he would do it and they did not care about it : they won in WW1 without the Czechs, thus why would they need the Czechs 20 year later ?
4 Poland :
a the world was not at war when Hitler invaded Poland, but France and Britain were at war .
And the reasons why B + F declared war,were and are very ,very questionable, as the disappearance of Poland was not threatening British and French interests : in 1914 Poland did not exist and this was very good for France as because of this Germany and Russia had a common border .
Before 1914 no one would have declared war because Germany invaded Poland .
The Wilsonian reasons for the declaration of war on Germany were suicidal,hypocritical and stupid .
When Iraq invaded Iran , no one declared war on Iraq. Thus: why declare war on Germany in 1939 ?
These reasons were suicidal,because on 8 May 1945 the USSR had taken the place of Germany and the British and French Empire were gone .
Chamberlain was not PM of Poland and Britain had no obligations to Poland .
It is the same for Ukraine. Thus, why not remaining neutral ?
Today's Poland will not be attacked as it is a member of NATO and as Russia is to weak .
And, about the complaint that we did nothing when Putin occupied Crimea ( as reaction on the CIA lead coup of Euromaidan ) : why should we have done something and what could we do ?
Don't forget that Crimea was a part of Russia till the Kremlin gave it,without asking what its inhabitants wanted, to Ukraine in 1954 .
The truth is that Ukraine is better off without Crimea with its strong Russian population .
What Obama and his allies refused and still refuse to admit is that multiculturalism is a mortal danger,thus that an ethnically monocultural Ukraine is better than an Ukraine with a strong hostile minority .

Originally Posted by MontyB

How many Russian troops do you need to shoot unarmed civilians?

If they are unarmed,there is no need for 12000 or 3000 Russians .
If they are armed, 12000 or 3000 Russians will not suffice .
In WW 2 the Germans had in the occupied countries one soldier for 100 unarmed citizens .
If there are 3000 Russians in Kazakhstan,this means 1 soldier for 1000 square km .

Originally Posted by lljadw

If they are unarmed,there is no need for 12000 or 3000 Russians .
If they are armed, 12000 or 3000 Russians will not suffice .
In WW 2 the Germans had in the occupied countries one soldier for 100 unarmed citizens .
If there are 3000 Russians in Kazakhstan,this means 1 soldier for 1000 square km .

I will be honest I think we are starting to go around in circles here, how about we agree to disagree and we will find out who is right over the next few years.

I don't disagree with your Crimean argument and as a single action it would not bother me but when you add the Donbas provocations, the Georgian invasion and now the Ukrainian invasion I think the Crimea was just another step in a pattern of Russian aggression.

Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

The West should exclude Russia from the international Banking system swift. But Germany, Hungary, and Italy don't want that.

I heard Russia has agreed upon a meeting in Minsk to negotiate the neutrality of Ukraine after the Ukrainian president offered to discuss a ceasefire. That can be interpreted as the Ukrainians are inflicting a higher amount of casualties than what the Russians have anticipated or the Ukrainian defense has reached its breaking point.

So what is the Swedish take on the strange warnings to Sweden and Finland about joining NATO?

Having been to Finland I am not sure it would be a good move to upset them as experience tells me they are all crazy but have no interest in NATO, however, it is hard to know what is going through Swedish minds as the last war they took part in was 208 years ago so I am assuming they haven't suddenly become militarist.

Originally Posted by MontyB

So what is the Swedish take on the strange warnings to Sweden and Finland about joining NATO?

Having been to Finland I am not sure it would be a good move to upset them as experience tells me they are all crazy but have no interest in NATO, however, it is hard to know what is going through Swedish minds as the last war they took part in was 208 years ago so I am assuming they haven't suddenly become militarist.

I can't say anything about how the Finns react to it, but according the polls; more Finns want to join NATO, it is the same here in Sweden. We have an election to our parliament later this year. It will be an election about this, I guess. A war in Europe changes everything.

Sweden has a very close military cooperation with Finland and bilateral defense treaties with the US and the UK.

Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

I can't say anything about how the Finns react to it, but according the polls; more Finns want to join NATO, it is the same here in Sweden. We have an election to our parliament later this year. It will be an election about this, I guess. A war in Europe changes everything.

Sweden has a very close military cooperation with Finland and bilateral defense treaties with the US and the UK.

The Finns have remained relatively quiet on this matter which given their position and Putin's current random actions is probably the safest thing to do.

I was surprised to read that both Lithuania and Sweden are now sending military equipment to Ukraine, that seems pretty ballsy for Lithuania given its size and location and Sweden seems to be dropping any pretence of neutrality on this as well.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/...-arms-ukraine/

So I guess given Germany and the EU's moves today are we going to see this escalate into something bigger as both sides seem determined to ratchet up the pressure.

And I am not sure what to make of a Ukrainian Foreign Legion, real or publicity stunt?
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/803351.html

And now a silly little ***hypothetical*** primarily because I love irony, what would happen if say Poland moved troops into western Ukraine as "peacekeepers" or to set up a "safe haven" for Ukrainian civilians?

Originally Posted by MontyB

And now a silly little ***hypothetical*** primarily because I love irony, what would happen if say Poland moved troops into western Ukraine as "peacekeepers" or to set up a "safe haven" for Ukrainian civilians?

Given the past of both countries, I doubt that this would be a wise decision :

1920 : Russians, Poles and Ukrainians killed each other by tens of thousands and joined each other to kill the Jews
1944 was a rehearsal of 1920 :OUN and UPA killed 100000 Poles ( at least ) and the Poles killed 20000 Ukrainians ( at least ) .
The Jews had already disappeared .
There are still people in Poland who want to annex the Western part of Ukraine and there are a lot of Ukrainians who want to kill/expel the Russians living in East Ukraine .