Comments by "Andy Monaghan" (@229andymon) on "" video.

@self.construction.day1 Please explain how Ukraine’s stability will impact UK.
5
@terraincognita3749 Ukrainian refugees have been welcomed by UK so far. There are plenty places they could go. As for Russia “deciding to go further” the Russian reason for invading Ukraine were specific to Ukraine, to wit to stop a NATO advance into territory they deem too close to Moscow. None of the other places you mention fit that bill. The one action does not determine a next.
5
@jacobevans2659 According to UN stats, Ukraine was world’s 11th largest grain producer in 2022. Dwarfed by such as China, Russia, USA and India. Ukraine production not that much bigger than UK, actually. Currently I expect hardly exporting much at all. I’m not convinced that will impact us much.
3
@ I could do that, but you need to explain why you’re making a direct link between 2 events divided by history. You are presumably inferring Russia will use Ukraine as a platform to do as Germany did in 1939. You need to explain why.
3
@inigo_bpc Apart from presumably giving you some kind of self satisfaction, what have you achieved with that remark? Nothing. I’m certainly not impressed, definitely not convinced and I doubt anyone else is either. So, here’s what I suggest instead. You give me an example of a “lie” you reckon I have blindly accepted and I’ll give you an honest response. Better, no?
3
@inigo_bpc OK, still highly subjective, but a little less petty and insulting. We’re making progress. Firstly. I am indeed accepting NATO expansion as a Russian reason for the invasion - because that has logic. Would you be happy with NATO on the doorsteps of Moscow if you were Russian? I wouldn’t. What Russia *was* happy (enough) with was a Ukraine not in NATO. As opposed to this imaginative notion you have of a Putin “Tsardom” intent on recreating an Imperial Russian past that you have zero evidence for, only your own prejudices and paranoia. In case you’re wondering incidentally, I have no liking for Putin on a personal level, but… I also believe he’s popular with the majority of Russians. You may wish to wonder why. I wouldn’t say the mistreatment of the Russians in the Donbas was a principle reason for the invasion, I reckon it was a contributing one. However, citing the destruction there doesn’t prove whether they were right or wrong in that regard. Britain bombed France during WW2, that happens in war. Getting on to your banner waving final peon for “the West”, perhaps you didn’t notice who the next occupant of the White House will be? Soon to be President Trump has made his views crystal clear on the Ukraine issue and I really doubt there’s champagne corks popping in Kyiv today. Do you?
3
@inigo_bpc OK, fair enough, I didn’t answer all your imaginings, including the Scandinavian NATO one. Let me do that now. Russia probably guessed that would or certainly could happen is my take, but to compare the 2 threats to Russia is to overlook geography and demographics (and common sense). Firstly, there’s no border between Sweden and Russia, but there is one between Russia and Finland. A very long one and one which would make a NATO invasion from that direction difficult to the point of complete insignificance. Think logistics, think vulnerability, think a whole host of reasons why we’re never going to see hordes of NATO troops freezing their assets off in barren Finnish wildernesses. You apparently believe the Russians to be stupid, but that mistake has been made before. The real threat to Russia lies to its West, as anyone could see if they looked at a map and if they were still confused they could look at a history book and see where Russia has traditionally been invaded from when the West comes calling. I ignored your point because it’s not a point.
3
@inigo_bpc I reckon I’ll leave the swivel-eyed invective to you. I can’t hold a candle to you as far at that’s concerned. I suggest you calm down.
3
@Gurbeable No wrong. But expecting the past to repeat itself and acting accordingly is also wrong. There's 85 years between 1939 and 2024. Do you think in 1939 they should've let the US Civil War, the Opium Wars or the Crimean War directly influence their decisions?
2
@inigo_bpc No, I reckon they went for a hammer blow with the target of taking Kviv quickly and collapsing the Ukrainian govt thereby forcing a settlement. Due to; a poorly conceived plan and initial execution, plus unanticipated fierce Ukrainian resistance and material support from NATO, Russia has found itself in a war of attrition. Which it is now winning, having much improved their tactics and weaponry, albeit slowly and at great cost to both nations. As for what we should now make of what we in the West consider to be the real “threat” from Russia, I think it gives us huge food for thought. If, as you say, Russia is struggling to beat poor little Ukraine, what do we have to fear from it?
2
@inigo_bpc Where do you get the notion ordinary Russians *don’t* fear NATO and it’s expansion into Ukraine.
2
I can think of a few. A stronger Europe with its own foreign policy, UK possibly reversing the disaster that is Brexit , no more illegal US wars we prop up and justify, the end of the Ukraine war, less chance US will drag us into a war with China, and, hopefully, fewer junk food companies selling us unhealthy rubbish. Should America becoming more isolated necessarily scare us?
1
@terraincognita3749 Russia occupied Crimea because a Crimea in NATO would be unacceptable to them, especially given it is home to the Russian Black Sea fleet. For another reason, the Crimeans are Russian and never asked to be annexed to Ukraine in the 1950s by a pro Ukrainian Soviet Union leader. I suspect it annexed the 4 other regions as a buffer zone, because the ethnic Russian inhabitants said they were being mistreated and also I suspect to punish Ukraine and leave any future state weaker. Georgia made the exact same mistake as Ukraine wrt NATO membership and got the same response. You failed to note Russian troops left Georgie afterward and it was not annexed. As for the Moldova interference, who knows. Do you think the West doesn't get up to stuff like that?
1
@Dave-g9g We already had a trade deal with US, and a good one, before Brexit.
1
@inigo_bpc Actually, I analyse what I can see happening through trying to find as much objective material as I can find and reach my own conclusions. You should try it.
1
@inigo_bpc You are a case study in highly subjective. You don’t think this little nugget a little subjective perhaps? “Putin is a bitter, irredentist autocrat that fantasises about being the next Peter the Great, yadayada…” I can see bitterness and fantasy, but a bit closer to this exchange than you think. Russia is winning this war, and you can’t handle that. Your views are both extreme and based almost entirely on opinion. The are approaching fact free and therefore can’t be “disproved”, not that I have any inclination to try. I don’t even believe Russia has any intention of occupying the whole of Ukraine once they force them to the negotiating table, which they surely will, especially now that Trump is back (a fact you appear to have missed). Your “Russian Imperial dream” fantasy is in your head.
1
@inigo_bpc Trump winning is a non sequitur ? Are you for real? He’s said he’ll stop US aid to them, I reckon that’s about as sequitur as it gets. Plus the tiny fact that NATO is a US Xmas tree with little Euro bells on. Without US aid Ukraine falls. With US aid Ukraine falls. But, have no fear, the Russians won’t be marching up your street anytime soon.
1
@inigo_bpc “Ukraine is forced to accept a brutal Trump reality that it hoped would never happen”. CNN today. Non sequitur…. Yeah, sure…
1
@ Good point. I checked and there is indeed a small dip in those numbers that might reflect the war. However, it’s too small to invalidate my original point, albeit I would expect in 2023 and 2024 the numbers would be smaller again. Ukraine has always been a relatively small player in the global grain market.
1
@inigo_bpc It’s completely immaterial what I think about NATO expansion, I would’ve thought that obvious. It’s what the Russians think that matter, and, guess what, *they* aren’t prepared to accept it. Like to try that again?
1
@inigo_bpc I’m not sure what the Russians thought, you’re obviously privy to knowledge the rest of us aren’t. What my take is, is that they tried a hammer blow to begin with, with the target of perhaps taking Kyiv quickly and collapsing the UKR govt thereby forcing a settlement. Due to a fairly inept and unimpressive initial Russian campaign combined with a fierce UKR resistance, fuelled by western support they didn’t anticipate they’ve now been forced into a war of attrition. Which they’re now winning, albeit slowly and at great cost to both nations. Should the Russian progress in this make NATO fear Russia more or less? I’d say given the hysteria about the “Russian threat” before, it’ll give it a wonderful chance to reassess that. Wouldn’t you? I see you’re a tad calmer.
1
@inigo_bpc Well, that is exactly what ordinary Russians think, according to a study done last year by that well known Kremlin mouthpiece the Chicago council on global affairs. They found that a majority of Russians; fear countries that are in NATO, fear Ukraine joining NATO and that preventing Ukraine joining NATO is a “top benefit” of Russian military action. While they don’t fear an immanent attack by NATO, they do fear one in the longer term. Did you think ordinary Russians read the Daily Express like you?
1
No one mentioned the fact that he has consistently eschewed US involvement in “Forever wars”…?
1
@ He was and will be the US President. What would stop him?
1