Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

War in Ukraine

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by PITBOSS, Jan 21, 2022.

  1. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    clueless or intentionally lying to parrot putin talking points

    Trump's Special Envoy Grenell claims nuclear weapons in Ukraine after USSR collapse belonged to Russia

    US President Donald Trump's presidential Envoy for Special Missions Richard Grenell has stated that the nuclear weapons that remained on Ukrainian territory after the collapse of the USSR belonged to Russia and claimed this to be an "uncomfortable fact".

    Quote from Grenell: "Let's be clear about the Budapest Memorandum: the nukes were Russia's and were leftovers. Ukraine gave the nukes back to Russia. They weren't Ukraine's. This is an uncomfortable fact."

    Steven Pifer, former US ambassador to Ukraine and nuclear weapons expert, responded by stating that Grenell is "flat wrong".

    Quote from Pifer: "I helped negotiate Budapest Memorandum. Grenell is flat wrong. Nuclear warheads in Ukraine were ex-Soviet, not Russian. Warheads in storage were in sole Ukrainian custody. ICBMs [intercontinental ballistic missiles] and bombers were eliminated in Ukraine except small number sent to Russia for debt relief."
     
  2. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,260
    1,777
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    It is quite revealing that Grenell views Russia and the Soviet Union as one and the same.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. vegasfox

    vegasfox GC Hall of Fame

    3,087
    254
    133
    Feb 4, 2024
    How the war ends: "Istanbul Plus"

    Russia keeps Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts and Crimea.

    Odessa will remain part of Ukraine but become autonomous/federated. The Russian language will be protected.

    Ukraine will be demilitarized and somewhat denazified.

    Zelensky will not abide by this and will step down. The White House is thinking of replacing him with Yulia Timoshenko, but she will probably find the terms of the deal unacceptable politically as well.

    Kiev and central Ukraine will gradually drift into the Russian sphere of influence and Western Ukraine will eventually secede. Or perhaps less likely, the nazi-esque Banderistas will stage a coup in Kiev and eventually try to restart the war.

    Trump doesn't want to accept this deal right away because politically it will be spun as a capitulation. So negotiations will be extended. The reality is that if this deal is not taken Russia will annex Odessa at a minimum and probably other areas as well.

    Some of Putin's critics in Russia will accuse him of abandoning Russians in Odessa.

    Eventually the US will lift the sanctions on Russia. Seized Russian assets will be returned.

    chemgator will claim that Trump snatched defeat from the jaws of a victory that was just 12-18 months away, costing America trillions of dollars.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    • Like Like x 1
  5. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    9,565
    2,230
    1,483
    May 31, 2007
    Fresno, CA
    Excellent news. Hope it’s true.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    9,565
    2,230
    1,483
    May 31, 2007
    Fresno, CA
    Grenell is right in a sense and wrong in a sense. So is Pifer. The weapons absolutely belonged to Russia, and it was right (not the same thing as smart as it turns out) that Ukraine returned them. As Pifer states, the weapons were Soviet, not Russian, but that means nothing in this case. Russia is internationally recognized as the successor state to the Soviet Union, which is why Russia retains the Soviet Union’s permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Now that being said, possession is nine-tenths the law, and Ukraine had physical custody of the weapons once the Soviet Union collapsed. As a practical matter, Ukraine could not have used the weapons, first because they did not have the codes and, second, because the minimum range of these weapons (designed to hit North America) meant that if Russia had tried to invade Ukraine could only hit the Russian Far East with them. Ukraine would have had to deconstruct the weapons and repurpose the fissionable material. Given that practically all of the scientists and engineers with the expertise to do so were Russian (by design), I don’t know how practical that would have been. Further, let’s remember that the rest of the world did not particularly want a nuclear-armed Ukraine in the early 1990s. So the two countries, under international supervision, negotiated a fair deal. Russia would receive its weapons, to which it had a right. And Ukraine would receive a guarantee of its international borders, to which it also had a right. If what Grenell means is that the whole agreement was null and void because Ukraine had no right to ask for something in return for the weapons, then he’s wrong as can be. It’s also fair to point out that in the early 90s Russia never asserted sovereign claims over Crimea and the Donbas. They publicly recognized these territories as being part of Ukraine.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    none of which offsets the fact that the West and Russia both lied to Ukraine and Ukraine has suffered due to the deceitful actions of those who guaranteed Ukranian borders and security. Ukraine had operational control of the weapons. They sacrificed that security in exchange for empty promises. Now DT and his man crush wants them to accept empty promises again. Would you settle for another pinky promise?
     
  8. uftaipan

    uftaipan GC Hall of Fame

    9,565
    2,230
    1,483
    May 31, 2007
    Fresno, CA
    Russia certainly lied to Ukraine, I agree. I’m not sure I agree that the West lied to Ukraine as there was no concrete security guarantee associated with it. More or less, the West agreed to support Ukraine’s claims, and it has. It is the degree of that support where we see divergence between states. I also have to challenge that Ukraine had “operational control” of the weapons. They certainly had physical custody, but operational control means that they could use them, which was never the case for the reasons I stated earlier.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    this would be great victory if true, just taking out the base was large. amazing that Russia didn't have this place better defended.

    Putin loses his missile stock for two months and then agress to stop targeting energy structures since he has nothing to target them with??

    Strike on Engels airbase: Russia loses 96 cruise missiles

    Due to a strike by Ukraine's Defense Forces on the Engels airfield, 96 Russian missiles were destroyed. The attack took place on the night of March 20, the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine reports.

    "According to updated information, as a result of the strike by Ukraine’s Defense Forces on the Engels-2 airfield of the Russian Aerospace Forces on March 20, 2025, the enemy lost 96 air-launched cruise missiles, including due to secondary detonation," the statement says.

    The General Staff clarified that this number of missiles had been designated for three missile strikes on Ukrainian territories planned for March and April of this year.

    Furthermore, strikes on Russian aviation fuel storage sites led to the destruction of significant reserves, negatively impacting the enemy's ability to sustain combat operations.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. chemgator

    chemgator GC Hall of Fame

    14,600
    2,079
    1,318
    Apr 3, 2007
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    this is kind of big

    I suspect this has been happening all along but now it is public for Putin to pout about

    will this prompt a rage tweet tonight

    Britain and France sending military teams to Ukraine to 'deter' Putin

    British and French military teams will be deployed to Ukraine in ‘coming days’, Emmanuel Macron has confirmed.

    The delegation from the UK and France will be sent to work with Ukrainian armed forces as part of a ‘reassurance force’, even if the idea is not backed by all European allies.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,260
    1,777
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    If Russians and attack and kill French/British - that will force Trump to pick a side - Europe or Putin. My guess is he picks Putin.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  13. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    35,138
    12,503
    3,693
    Aug 26, 2008
    I don't know

    Britain/France may be playing at risk and willing ot take their lumps if they happen. no idea. interested in other opinions though
     
  14. chemgator

    chemgator GC Hall of Fame

    14,600
    2,079
    1,318
    Apr 3, 2007
    This is bigger than big. It's humongous. It's gigantic. It's enormous. It's . . . . .



    Don't look now, but Ukraine is invading Russia . . . again. Ukraine has started a third front in Belgorod. This attack is smaller than the Kursk invasion, involving only about 500 troops. That's probably not enough to hold even half of Belgorod, even if the Russian troops are drunk.

    Ukraine is quietly invading Russia again

     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2025 at 10:35 PM
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. slayerxing

    slayerxing GC Hall of Fame

    5,391
    925
    2,078
    Aug 14, 2007
    There is still no guarantee I have seen that France and UK will definitely send troops. The French and British do NOT have enough manpower to make much of a dent here.
    What the Brits do have is sufficient air and maritime assets - they just need more help from the rest of Europe regarding manpower. I've read that the French could only commit as much as 20,000 troops outside of France and that they would only have enough ammunition to actually fight for a few weeks. Worse - their air force could only maintain operations against a peer opponent for a matter of days. Lots of stuff out there about their issues, but I'm not sure how credible it is.
    I just don't see that these two countries could accomplish much without support from the rest of Europe. And even then, I'm not sure how much collectively of a dent that would put into the sheer size of what Russia is doing.
    I guess anything would help at this point though.
     
  16. chemgator

    chemgator GC Hall of Fame

    14,600
    2,079
    1,318
    Apr 3, 2007
    Ukraine's F-16 pilots are having trouble shooting down Russian aircraft, because the Russian pilots are terrified of the American plane and run away at top speed.

    Ukrainian F-16 pilot says Russia's battlefield actions show its troops think NATO jets are higher quality and fear them

     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. vegasfox

    vegasfox GC Hall of Fame

    3,087
    254
    133
    Feb 4, 2024
    Once again (because some of you need to hear it): How the US and NATO dragged Ukraine into war
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  18. duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    18,500
    1,307
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022
    I hope so.
     
  19. duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    18,500
    1,307
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022
    Americans are a people who rail against media then ask “How high ?” when instructed to jump.

    Prediction: Russia keeps its new oblasts and Crimea, Zelensky deposed, Ukraine permanently denied and Trump can still spin the war as … plucky Ukrainians, with generous help from the U.S., bravely thwarting Russia from rolling through Europe.
     
  20. duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    18,500
    1,307
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022