Comments by "Tim Trewyn" (@timtrewyn453) on "Are Russian gains in Ukraine worth the costs so far?" video.

Insightful. Well said.
6
@js70371 I look forward to the day when Eastern Ukraine folks get to vote with their feet. Some will stay. Some will leave, if they are allowed to leave. Will you let them leave?
4
@js70371 Can their pension be deposited in the international bank of their choice?
4
@RenegadeElite101 Well said.
1
I know seven Russian speaking Ukrainians. They want nothing to do with Russian jurisdiction. Given what has happened, any Ukrainian who sincerely prefers Russian jurisdiction is misinformed.
1
@hausser0815 But Putin goes to NK for ammo? Sounds like Russian ammo got depleted.
1
Noooo. China and India get cheap Russian oil. Big win for them.
1
The advent of drone warfare has made a Black Sea Fleet of surface ships in the classical sense almost obsolete. Missile submarines in the Black Sea can still be effective, but in time naval drones in the air, on the surface, and underwater will increasingly threaten manned submarines. The Black Sea is not a vast place for a surface ship to hide in. Larger task forces with heavy anti-drone systems may have a chance, but the financial asymmetry of expensive ships vs. cheap drones works against that kind of approach. You can believe whatever you want to about who blew up the Nova Kakhovka dam. It's destroyed. Its supply of fresh water to Crimea is cut off. Russia is not conducting its war in any serious manner to take the territory necessary to restore the dam and the water supply. Russia's loss of control of the most strategic aspects of the Kherson Oblast is a clear indication of the inadequacy of the Russian military. Desalination plants may be practical for providing fresh water to a civilian population in Crimea, but they are not practical for agriculture or industries that require large amounts of fresh water. What the world sees now is that Russia and China engaged in trade with the West with the purpose of increasing their military power for territorial expansion and the autocratic consolidation of political power by Putin and Xi, lifelong rulers. The West has witnessed the seizure of Hong Kong, the oppression of the Uighurs, and the invasion of Ukraine. The West is now engaged in "de-risking" its economic relationships with China and Russia. Whatever sense of infallibility that golden era of trade created in Russia and China is likely to be moderated in the future.
1
@tanernone3033 Somewhat fair points you make.
1
The notion of expansion is a Russian projection of its own intentions upon others. Russia is not interested in sincerely understanding its neighbors. It wants to control them. Russia is a psychopathic dictatorship in which winning is the only thing.
1
@MS-ii1sv They have parliamentary elections, so Russia has a chance to buy influence every election. So yes, they do have referendums on a regular basis.
1
@MS-ii1sv In English the two are often used synonymously.
1
@MS-ii1sv My point is the people of Finland have the repeated opportunity change their leadership based on how that leadership performs on issues. People in Russia vote or not based on how much risk they want to take. A vote for Putin is a vote for no risk.
1
If you are right, then Russian victory is just around the corner . . . or the next corner . . . or the next corner.
1
The dear leader's ship came in. "It's ok, Vlad, you don't have to over kowtow, just send the items on my wish list."
1
Superb.
1
For months I've been waiting for Russia to just bring this to an end. It's always just around the corner with them. This war is figuratively the biggest polygon I have ever dealt with.
1
@OscarDirlwood Ukraine is a rich land. That's part of why Russia wants it. Ukraine can recover with Western help and investment. I have met Ukrainians. They are hard working, innovative people.
1
@MrChickennugget360 Insightful. Russia puts out all kinds of hyperbolic positive language about China because they see it as a far more serious threat than Europe. Russia looks at Europe at something to take to increase its own power in hopes of off-setting Chinese influence. Xi is smiling in Putin's face.
1
Netherlands politics is about limiting Islamic immigration and influence. What's "pro-Russian" about that? Looks like Russia is trying to export Muslims to Finland.
1
It's always just around the corner for Russia. It was that way months ago. Still is.
1
That's a bargaining position. Remember the Soviet Union deferred on infrastructure development to focus on matching or exceeding the West in military power. That was fine as long as oil prices were good. Look up the history of oil prices in the 80s. They dropped and the Soviet Union was ended. For a time the world enjoyed the end of the cold war and economies improved. The American budget finally ran a surplus. The Chinese and Russian economies improved. Then the US wasted power on Iraq and Afghanistan. Then China and Russia decided to be imperial again, and the world is again at an increasing level of war. Russia needs to consider that as climate change becomes more apparent to more people, the sale of oil and gas will have to go down just to save this planet's ecosphere. Russia's long-term planning appears to be about restoring a large military. It's the same mistake the Soviets made. This tendency seems to be a part of Russian leadership DNA. It is obsessed with winning the next thing. Ukraine is going to try to get Crimea back, and it might be able to do it. It is also in Ukraine's interest to shorten its border with Russia in eastern Ukraine because it will be easier to defend from Russia in the future. That might be what Russia wins in this conflict: large amounts of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts and a stable border with Ukraine. That border is likely to look like the DMZ between North and South Korea. There probably will not be "NATO" forces in Ukraine. Per the Budapest Memorandum, there probably will be rotations of British and American forces in Ukraine. Polish and other forces from selected European countries are likely to rotate in and out as well. Ukraine will not be defendable without them. No other options . . . maybe. That's part of a bargaining position for Ukraine. The parties need to look at the Budapest Memorandum. If Russia is not going to respect Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, then, in order to prevent the next Russian invasion of Ukraine, Ukraine (like North Korea) will need to have nuclear weapons. The Budapest Memorandum was a great deal in the service of reducing Russian paranoia. Ukraine did not later build a nuclear arsenal, but Russia busted the deal with its disrespect of the Ukrainian border. The only excuse for ending that respect would have been Ukraine building a nuclear arsenal. Now Russia, because of its disrespect, deserves to face a Ukrainian nuclear arsenal. That's a bargaining position. I'll bet you don't like it. I don't like yours either. Have some more moderate ideas?
1
@TouringWolf42 It's Soviet policy all over again, and if the price per barrel drops as economies gradually transition away from fossil fuels, then it's a Soviet style breakup all over again.
1
Dude, didn't anyone tell you that Western ballistic missile submarines are always on Russia's doorstep? Are you stuck in some kind of "Hey, we get 30 minutes notice, man!" mentality? Nobody has 30 minutes, dude. The end has been on your doorstep for decades.
1
@utrukkurtu7293 A Russian pensioner who moved out of Russia and had their account subject to Russian jurisdiction could have their account frozen by Russia. Any government might freeze an account. My question is: does a Russian pensioner have any latitude to evaluate the comparative risk of their government pension deposit being frozen by a particular government? Would Russia send a pension payment to a Swiss bank account? Most people trust the Swiss not to freeze their account. Similarly with the Cayman Islands. It is not necessarily easy for the Russian government to claw back a pension payment once it is in the hands of a bank of another jurisdiction. Perhaps you are suggesting that a pensioner should immediately convert a pension payment into something no government can seize. What would that be, treasure in heaven?
1
@utrukkurtu7293 Western countries have not distributed seized Russian bank assets because there has been no due process to find particular accounts liable for claims. This is likely to be a matter of any negotiation. In other words, Ukraine and the West may seek conditions for the return of these assets to Russian control. Western banks have the very concern you mention. They do not wish to deter future deposits. It's just the way a banker would think. Western banks have a lot of political clout.
1
@utrukkurtu7293 There is a distinction between freezing assets and seizing them. The assets are frozen, and subject to due process. You underestimate the power of Western banks. Look up the phrase "too big to fail."
1
@a.brekkan4965 I have grown very accustomed to Russian claims of innocence. Russian leadership is accustomed to exercising a high degree of control over the Russian population. Other populations have different degrees of freedom and control. Some of the other populations disagree with Russian policies and take action. Russia can react to that, but it cannot control it. It cannot easily impose its way of leadership outside its recognized boundaries. International trade should be a two-way street. The West would change its conduct if Russia withdrew from Ukraine, but Russia is not going to choose to do that. Therefore, Russia is at war. Don't be surprised when foreigners don't have the same fear of the Russian government that Russians have.
1