Ukraine Situation | Page 2 | Vital Football

Ukraine Situation

I'm really disappointed at the gutless and toothless reaction of us the Americans and our other allies in NATO and the West. We have pandered to Russia and allowed Putin do what he wants for too long. He's effectively already gotten away with poisoning and killing British citizens/residents on British soil as well as employing chemical weapons here twice - an act of terror and an act of war in my book. Add to that his attacks on other countries - taking down a passenger plane above Ukraine and killing many Dutch and other passengers as well as numerous cyber attacks. He has taken territory in Ukraine already with little resistance and now it looks like he may go further than that and take further sovereign democratic territory that's not his. The question is, where will he stop?

I keep hearing comparisons - especially from the anti-British/US/West Left, like the Stop the War coalition - with what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan and urges not to repeat that. However, without getting into an argument as to the rights and wrong of Iraq and Afghanistan, what we are/should be doing in Ukraine of not the same thing. We have been asked to support a democratic sovereign country against a potential invasion from an aggressor, so nothing like Iraq and Afghanistan.

As far as I can see, the only comparison is with Germany's actions in 1939 and our appeasement of that and refusal to nip it in the bud. If we stand back and let Putin take Ukraine, what's next? Estonia, Georgia, Finland, Poland? We will just stand back then too. And what message does this set to others - i.e. China and Taiwan? Argentina having another pop at the Falklands?

For me, we (the West) should get Ukraine signed up as a NATO member immediately and get as many troops into Ukraine to support them (and they have a not-to-be-underestimated sizable army) as soon as practical. Sadly, I think it's too late for that.
 
I agree with ST. You have to stand up to a bully, otherwise they'll progressively get worse. This is the regime that has ordered assassinations on British soil - killing a UK citizen in the process. Freeze ALL Russian assets in the UK and ban all Russian imports for starters. But I don't agree with signing up Ukraine to Nato. That would commit us to WW3, because it's a red line for Putin. Not sure that's a good idea!
 
All states are based on fantasies and myths to an extent. Nothing wrong with that in my book. We are who we are and that’s what it takes. The trick is to get consensus around the same fantasies and myths leavened by some good facts. The difficulty with supporting Ukraine is that it is more dodgy than most in these regards. Russians, Ukrainians, Poles and every possible combination of self identification. And then the place is in the grip of an economic elite who are an absolute shower. I find it hard to get enthused about a war for such a problematic place, especially when we all know who suffers as a result, but in the end it is right to use Ukraine as an opportunity to say to Mr Putin enough with your gangster ways.
Edit
Will Russia accept Ukraine’s “offer” to suspend its NATO application? Is this the formula for an acceptable way out?
 
EagerExile said:
I agree with ST. You have to stand up to a bully, otherwise they'll progressively get worse. This is the regime that has ordered assassinations on British soil - killing a UK citizen in the process. Freeze ALL Russian assets in the UK and ban all Russian imports for starters. But I don't agree with signing up Ukraine to Nato. That would commit us to WW3, because it's a red line for Putin. Not sure that's a good idea!
Click to expand...

I think it's a case of practising what you preach here. As much as I think Putin is deranged, I don't think he would want a WW3 and more than we do. We'd all lose and the Russians more so than anyone. If we don't stand up to him in the hardest possible sense, I think he'll take that as carte blanche to invade Ukraine. It may be too late as I say, so hopefully we'll learn a lesson from 1939 and be ready to front up to him, if he then advances on Georgia, Estonia or elsewhere.

Also, we need to (and again to an extent this is too late) learn to survive without resources and produce from Russia and China.
 
EagerExile said:
I agree with ST. You have to stand up to a bully, otherwise they'll progressively get worse. This is the regime that has ordered assassinations on British soil - killing a UK citizen in the process. Freeze ALL Russian assets in the UK and ban all Russian imports for starters. But I don't agree with signing up Ukraine to Nato. That would commit us to WW3, because it's a red line for Putin. Not sure that's a good idea!
Click to expand...

My understanding is that a good number of those particular horses have already bolted. To the UK`s shame, London has been a hub for money laundering by organised crime and dictators (often one and the same !) from all around the world for far too long. But, some of the belt-tightening by HMG aimed at Russian "investors" has recently been effective, forcing some of the dodgy Oligarchs to direct their roubles elswhere.

Oliver Bullough, who wrote "Moneyland: Why Thieves And Crooks Now Rule The World And How To Take It Back" has a very good insight on all this - HMG should sign him up !

Putin is a very dangerous dictator and surrounds himself with an equally dodgy criminal cohort. I agree with you that you have to stand up to a bully - but, this particular bully is no ordinary bully and some clever circumnavigation may be required in order to effectively lance the boil.

I believe that Russia will invade Ukraine.
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
My understanding is that a good number of those particular horses have already bolted. To the UK`s shame, London has been a hub for money laundering by organised crime and dictators (often one and the same !) from all around the world for far too long. But, some of the belt-tightening by HMG aimed at Russian "investors" has recently been effective, forcing some of the dodgy Oligarchs to direct their roubles elswhere.

Oliver Bullough, who wrote "Moneyland: Why Thieves And Crooks Now Rule The World And How To Take It Back" has a very good insight on all this - HMG should sign him up !

Putin is a very dangerous dictator and surrounds himself with an equally dodgy criminal cohort. I agree with you that you have to stand up to a bully - but, this particular bully is no ordinary bully and some clever circumnavigation may be required in order to effectively lance the boil.

I believe that Russia will invade Ukraine.
Click to expand...
GillsBluenose said:
I seem to remember from my history lessons that even in the second world war, the germans were not afraid to invade Russia despite being heavily outnumbered, and would probably have succeeded if Hitler did not make the error of invading in their winter, condemning a large part of his forces to freeze to death.

They have not got a great record in conventional war but the nuclear option is why we have rightly feared them in recent times, particularly during the cold war.

Add to that, as jokerman points out, China seems to be their only friend and that is only in a shared hatred of the west.

Having provided arms for Ukraine, they could make things very uncomfortable for Putin if he makes the wrong move.
Click to expand...

Lucky ukraine have so many good friends lol. The Ukraine president is not so happy as he stated that there was no additional friction to that of the last 8 years with russia.
The rhetoric is more from his 'friends' but why?

We had the dodgy dossier for iraq, the lack of any al qaida in afghanistan, the arming of terrorist groups in syria, etc. Yet we still belief what we are told when the powers that be ramp up for war or destabilisation. Nobody knows the facts except that reportedly nato have 80,000 troops near Russia's border, russia has around 150,000 troops on the belarus and ukraine borders and ukraine has 250,000 troops on russias border.

The ukranian president was asked if london should be doing more against russian oligarchs. He replied yes but also against the ukranian oligarchs who are one of the main problems against democracy and corruption.

The truth instead of rhetoric from both sides would be useful. I trust neither side.
 
Jerryattrick said:
Lucky ukraine have so many good friends lol. The Ukraine president is not so happy as he stated that there was no additional friction to that of the last 8 years with russia.
The rhetoric is more from his 'friends' but why?

We had the dodgy dossier for iraq, the lack of any al qaida in afghanistan, the arming of terrorist groups in syria, etc. Yet we still belief what we are told when the powers that be ramp up for war or destabilisation. Nobody knows the facts except that reportedly nato have 80,000 troops near Russia's border, russia has around 150,000 troops on the belarus and ukraine borders and ukraine has 250,000 troops on russias border.

The ukranian president was asked if london should be doing more against russian oligarchs. He replied yes but also against the ukranian oligarchs who are one of the main problems against democracy and corruption.

The truth instead of rhetoric from both sides would be useful. I trust neither side.
Click to expand...



We may soon find out whether or not the friendly rhetoric has any substance. I believe it does but sincerely hope that it doesn`t. It seems that the only body actually "ramping up" for war is Putin`s Russia.

Legislation has worked to a (limited) degree but, I concur about (dodgy) Ukrainian (and other) oligarchs - London still has a long way to go if it really wants to put an end to its status as the world`s biggest laundry - is the will there though ?
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
My understanding is that a good number of those particular horses have already bolted. To the UK`s shame, London has been a hub for money laundering by organised crime and dictators (often one and the same !) from all around the world for far too long. But, some of the belt-tightening by HMG aimed at Russian "investors" has recently been effective, forcing some of the dodgy Oligarchs to direct their roubles elswhere.

Oliver Bullough, who wrote "Moneyland: Why Thieves And Crooks Now Rule The World And How To Take It Back" has a very good insight on all this - HMG should sign him up !

Putin is a very dangerous dictator and surrounds himself with an equally dodgy criminal cohort. I agree with you that you have to stand up to a bully - but, this particular bully is no ordinary bully and some clever circumnavigation may be required in order to effectively lance the boil.

I believe that Russia will invade Ukraine.
Click to expand...
I think London are amateurs in the laundering and sequestering of money stakes. Switzerland is the long standing master of this craft. Nazi gold anyone? And I speak of this being part Swiss so no xenophobia on my part.

My Ukrainian friends in Dnepropetrovsk and Kiev still think he won't invade.
 
PhilK66 said:
I think London are amateurs in the laundering and sequestering of money stakes. Switzerland is the long standing master of this craft. Nazi gold anyone? And I speak of this being part Swiss so no xenophobia on my part.

My Ukrainian friends in Dnepropetrovsk and Kiev still think he won't invade.
Click to expand...


Hope your friends are right, Phil. But, don`t agree with your ranking in the World Laundry Championships - plus, adding, contributing actually, to the problem in the UK (London, specifically) is the astounding lack of (commensurate) resource devoted to investigation of money laundering - at the coal-face even, let alone around corners and behind mirrors in so far as who actually finances some of our public building i.e - hospitals, police stations (PFI`s) etc.
 
Not all of Europe would stand shoulder to shoulder if an invasion took place at least six if not seven countries are neutral when it comes to military action (bar peace keeping dutiers for UN).
Perhaps the west should persuade Ukraine to become a neutral country along the same lines as Finland, a country that borders Russia but signed a non agression pact years ago when the Soviet Union existed and still maintains similar action with it's next dour neighbour.
I understand those that believe Ukraine has the right to determine it's own path but they need to be told that being neutral (militaraly) not joining an alliance with either NATO or Russia would be better for all concerned.
I can remember years ago when the so called Iron Curtain was in place a number of countries from the Baltic to the Adriatic were occupied with Soviet forces or forces in favour of the union being a buffer zone between Russia and the West, that scenario no longer exists and Russia has Western allied countries right up to it's borders and f eels threatened.
Shalom.
 
Whitstabletangerine said:
Not all of Europe would stand shoulder to shoulder if an invasion took place at least six if not seven countries are neutral when it comes to military action (bar peace keeping dutiers for UN).
Perhaps the west should persuade Ukraine to become a neutral country along the same lines as Finland, a country that borders Russia but signed a non agression pact years ago when the Soviet Union existed and still maintains similar action with it's next dour neighbour.
I understand those that believe Ukraine has the right to determine it's own path but they need to be told that being neutral (militaraly) not joining an alliance with either NATO or Russia would be better for all concerned.
I can remember years ago when the so called Iron Curtain was in place a number of countries from the Baltic to the Adriatic were occupied with Soviet forces or forces in favour of the union being a buffer zone between Russia and the West, that scenario no longer exists and Russia has Western allied countries right up to it's borders and f eels threatened.
Shalom.
Click to expand...
I really like your suggestion of a neutral Swiss type status for Ukraine.

My girlfriend Elena, as pictured, is going through many turmoils at the moment. She is Ukrainian born with all her family in Nikolaev, not far from the Crimea, but living and working in Moscow. (I am there half the year but currently back in the UK). She has received personal commendations from Vladimir Vladimirivitch as one of the 50 examples of outstanding "Russian " beauty working at the last World Cup. But she is no fan. It is an awful situation. She knows no one in her Moscow circle who wants war.

Many thanks Whitstabletangerine for your great suggestion. It would also be a way out for Putin.
 
PhilK66 said:
I really like your suggestion of a neutral Swiss type status for Ukraine.

My girlfriend Elena, as pictured, is going through many turmoils at the moment. She is Ukrainian born with all her family in Nikolaev, not far from the Crimea, but living and working in Moscow. (I am there half the year but currently back in the UK). She has received personal commendations from Vladimir Vladimirivitch as one of the 50 examples of outstanding "Russian " beauty working at the last World Cup. But she is no fan. It is an awful situation. She knows no one in her Moscow circle who wants war.

Many thanks Whitstabletangerine for your great suggestion. It would also be a way out for Putin.
Click to expand...

Putin is so cack-handed that he has actually managed to put NATO membership on the agenda for Finland and Sweden in a way it never was before.

I think it’s one thing to choose neutrality because it suits us (Swiss, Swedes eg) but another to choose it because others want you to (Austria, Laos eg) especially when you’ve clearly declared preferences in a different direction.
 
Jerryattrick said:
Nobody knows the facts except that reportedly nato have 80,000 troops near Russia's border, russia has around 150,000 troops on the belarus and ukraine borders and ukraine has 250,000 troops on russias border.
Click to expand...

From a purely military doctrine , Russia would need to deploy at least 500k troops to stand a chance of victory. Even that figure is a conservative estimate , assuming Russian asset superiority.
 
LancsGordoRoad said:
We may soon find out whether or not the friendly rhetoric has any substance. I believe it does but sincerely hope that it doesn`t. It seems that the only body actually "ramping up" for war is Putin`s Russia.

Legislation has worked to a (limited) degree but, I concur about (dodgy) Ukrainian (and other) oligarchs - London still has a long way to go if it really wants to put an end to its status as the world`s biggest laundry - is the will there though ?
Click to expand...
From where do all these claims of "world's biggest" money laundering come ?

In the early '90s, working in the City, after new money-laundering regulations arrived, we had seminars on what to look for.
In the early says it was quite simple.
And just as the money-laundering got more sophisticated, the responses were too.

Or is it just that London provides the broadest reach of financial products - with turnover to match - so it is inevitable that amounts will be large.
But in terms of "instances" too ??

Has someone put an actual (and credible) figure on Russian money-laundering ?
(And is it all "money-laundering" anyway ?)

Or is it just (uncheckable) journalistic exaggeration - because (some) people want to believe it ?:unsure:

None of which is to deny Russian Govt. trouble-making.:wagging:
 
Whitstabletangerine said:
I understand those that believe Ukraine has the right to determine it's own path but they need to be told that being neutral (militaraly) not joining an alliance with either NATO or Russia would be better for all concerned.
Click to expand...

I heard an interview (translated of course) with the Ukrainian president, who said that they wanted to join the EU and NATO. Who are we to tell them that they can't pursue that line and must be and remain neutral? It's their democratic right to pursue those course and we should not stand in their way - stopping them and imposing military neutrality on them make us almost as bad (well not anywhere near as bad, but still pretty bad) as the Russians.

Whitstabletangerine said:
I can remember years ago when the so called Iron Curtain was in place a number of countries from the Baltic to the Adriatic were occupied with Soviet forces or forces in favour of the union being a buffer zone between Russia and the West, that scenario no longer exists and Russia has Western allied countries right up to it's borders and f eels threatened.
Shalom.
Click to expand...
The situation is very different and a false comparison. Those countries were for all intents and purposes occupied by the Soviets and forced to be in the Warsaw Pact. The same countries - Poland, the Czechs etc. - have democratic sovereign governments who applied to join NATO and were rightly accepted. That's democracy and is probably precisely what Putin doesn't like. If Ukraine democratically want to join NATO and the West, then that's their choice and we should support them.

The whole "Western/NATO troops on Russia" borders is not a valid argument as those troops haven't invaded any of those countries, they have been invited, and they are not amassing on Russia's borders to attack Russia. They are there to assist their allies defence against a potential Russian attack.
 
Tarian said:
From where do all these claims of "world's biggest" money laundering come ?

In the early '90s, working in the City, after new money-laundering regulations arrived, we had seminars on what to look for.
In the early says it was quite simple.
And just as the money-laundering got more sophisticated, the responses were too.

Or is it just that London provides the broadest reach of financial products - with turnover to match - so it is inevitable that amounts will be large.
But in terms of "instances" too ??

Has someone put an actual (and credible) figure on Russian money-laundering ?
(And is it all "money-laundering" anyway ?)

Or is it just (uncheckable) journalistic exaggeration - because (some) people want to believe it ?:unsure:

None of which is to deny Russian Govt. trouble-making.:wagging:
Click to expand...


I can understand why Government politicians would prefer that claims of mega-money laundering might simply be journalistic exaggeration.

Politically, it no doubt suits some to turn a blind eye to the tsunami of "dirty money" flowing into the UK. Financially, to some in the international money industry, it probably also suits to turn a blind eye to questionable millions and billions pulling in to London`s financial lay-bys on a daily basis.

Putting an actual figure on Russian money-laundering is obviously not a simple task as there is nowhere near enough resource put into tackling it to achieve definitive stats. But, to get a measure, one only has to visit the National Crime Agency`s many analyses of the issue.

And it`s not just Russia. The world is a small place when it come s to international organised crime. Banks and financial institutions have obligations to notify unexplained cash and wealth but there is insufficient investigative resource to effectively follow-up the reports - at County, Regional, National and International level.

It`s been like it for years, at all levels of financial acquisitive criminal wealth. Whether it`s individual or organised fraud relating to state allowances, Tax Evasion etc (which runs into Billions - I recall being amazed at the tiny number of HM Customs & Excise investigators dedicated to organised Carousel Fraud - I often worked with them, the resource was an embarrassment and the criminal proceeds ran into billions !). Domestically, one just has to look at the recent criminal mass exploitation of Pandemic related grants to see how non water-tight the state is - a recent example and slightly digressive, but, it underlines a culture of insecurity when it comes to UK PLC.

Fact is, money laundering investigation is undertaken chiefly and mainly by State funded organisations and HMG doesn`t fund them adequately. Instead, HMG depletes the resource then depletes it some more. Speaking recently about trying to tackle illicit Russian money flowing into London, the Director General of the NCA aired concerns that it could be outspent by the other side

HMG is great at coming up with new legislation to tackle new and/or growing problems, so that they can say the problem is being addressed; but they "conveniently" omit to dedicate new or growing investigative and enforcement assets - in fact, they continually reduce the assets whilst increasing the latitude of legislation - the political solution: change the law, tell enforcement bodies to get on with and when they (inevitably) fail - blame enforcement bodies, find a scapegoat and sack him/her, on to some more legislation.......

Don`t want to go there now, but, just for a moment, think PFI - think international, do we always, know where the money really comes from (originates) to build nice new shiny Police stations and hospitals ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.