Diplomats say Putin’s brutalisation of Ukraine has brought back darkest memories of occupation under Stalin
Nato must be ready for Russia launching an “existential” war against the Baltic states “masked by a blizzard of disinformation”, ambassadors from the three countries have warned.
Writing exclusively for The Sunday Telegraph, the top diplomats to the UK from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania said that Russia could “pivot quickly” from Ukraine to invade the Baltic.
And they said that Vladimir Putin’s brutalisation of Ukraine is evoking the three countries’ “darkest memories” of occupation under Stalin.
The Estonian ambassador Viljar Lubi, the Latvian ambassador Ivita Burmistre, and Lithuania’s charge d’affaire Lina Zigmantaite, wrote the joint article to mark Friday’s 20 year anniversary of their countries acceding to Nato.
Turns out we should have been helping Ukraine against Putin’s fascistic colonialism instead of supporting an entirely separate set of fascists commit genocide in Palestine.
Removed by mod
I feel like you have it completely backwards.
Democrats have always been “the big tent” party, which is part of their weakness, as their voters have a wide range of “demands” that are often, if not always, contradictory. You have to remember that this is a party that has to appeal to religiously conservative black people, while also appealing to upper middle secularists. They are trying to appeal to both conservative religious muslims, and at the same time the powerful voting Jewish bloc.
It’s not an easy tightrope to walk, but it’s not regularly “ignoring demands of the party” it’s “which of these two competing demands of our party can we ignore that will hurt us less?” They basically try to appeal to the voter, but that’s impossible because they are trying to please too many disparate groups at the same time.
Republicans have the advantage of having to appeal to a smaller group and set of beliefs, and then just get everyone else to fall in line behind it (although that is being tested now with MAGA delusionalists vs the traditional conservatives). Republicans have been pushing this fear of different people (immigrants, different religions)and liberal elites for decades now (as you note in another post, via things like right wing media). . . it’s just that they lost control of it when someone (Trump) rose up and fully embodied the id they had been fostering. . .and now they are just following the playbook where they have to get everyone to fall in in line behind that.
US republicans are doing the opposite, they’re telling their voters what to believe
I’ll be real, that situation seems pretty fucked, but I have no idea about US politics really, I’m from Wales.
That being said, our main political parties are essentially in this same state by the looks of things.
Removed by mod
The Democratic party is the only one actually implementing positive changes, and half the things they do gets neutered by Republican politicians and judges. Infrastructure bills, student loan forgiveness, etc, are you not paying attention?
Republicans only fight for laws that hurt people.
I can’t argue with your logic here, and neither can I fault your conclusion. All that being the case, though, what can US voters do in this case?
Not vote? Vote 3rd party? Do you guys even have more than 2 parties over there? Seems like you have even more of a duopoly than we do over here in the UK.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I don’t think this is exactly right. For the longest time Republicans were the same way, dangling a carrot of doing something to get votes but never actually doing it. I think Donald Trump has emboldened a lot of people to run for office that don’t understand that you don’t actually give the base what they want cause it makes you deeply unpopular with everyone else.
Removed by mod
What they’re saying is crazy bullshit fed to them by a propaganda machine
Trump abandoned like 2/3 of his campaign points and hyped up the ones that mattered to him personally.
I generally agree with you, I think the one part I disagree on is the why Republicans go along with this. Sure some of it is because of the purity testing kind of stuff but a lot of it is just because the Republicans for the longest time have paid lip service to these issues but never done anything about them. Like with abortion for example. But then you have someone like Donald Trump come in who is just like, well why don’t we do all these crazy things. And that is what emboldened more people like him, with no experience in politics and no understanding that you can’t actually give the base the way out there stuff without alienating the general public, to run for election and start winning in very red areas. So it’s less of a pressure on the party from the outside to start following this new MAGA movement (although that does exist too) and more of an internal transformation of the party under Trump.
Thanks, trumptards.
Removed by mod
Is Russia really in any position to be trying to wage war on multiple new fronts? Poland just implied Russia is going to attack Europe. With what? Dry Russian wit and empty vodka bottles?
Russia still has a lot of men and has already transitioned into a war-time economy. All Europe has done is have Baltics and Poland (and probably also Finland) go through potential invasion strategies, the rest of Europe doesn’t even believe in the possibility of war. The only way circumstances could be better is if Trump gets elected because that old fuck will make sure to hamper US support. Other than that if you’re going to invade you couldn’t want better conditions.
I’m not saying it will happen. I’m going to say the invasion would the stupid and hardly beneficial for Russia and the logical thing would be to not invade. But I will add that I said the exact same thing about the invasion of Ukraine and we know how that went. I wouldn’t put it beyond the realm of possibilities.
Removed by mod
He’s counting on NATO continuing to take the “let’s just sanction him” approach. He’s essentially hoping they’re bluffing while he tries to get the gang back together. (USSR)
Removed by mod
The idea in the previous comment is that Putin thinks NATO is bluffing about doing that, about responding in kind.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Just commenting so I can come back here when Russia invades another country
Why multiple fronts? The current conflict may be frozen under “right” circumstances, Putin will have several years to resupply. It doesn’t matter if Ukrainian allies have more economical and technological power than Russia if people in places like Germany cry that Currywurst now costs 1 EUR more than 2 years ago, and just want this to be over.
Interesting that you chose Germany specifically, which is one of the largest contributors, both total and relative to GDP.
That being said, everybody needs to step up their game, including Germany. Just send the Tauruses, Olaf.
If I remember right, most polls show people are against sending weapons. This might be why Scholz is cautious about sending Tauruses. The Baltic states have warned for years that Russia is a threat, even before Ukraine was invaded in 2022. But others didn’t listen to them then, and many still don’t take them seriously. The truth is, Russia is doing better than Ukraine’s allies because people think the conflict won’t reach them, and they prefer not to support politicians who would sacrifice short-term benefits for long-term security.
I’m not disputing your main point, I just think it’s interesting that you chose Germany as an example, which, as I wrote, is one of the top contributors, even adjusted for GDP.
And I explained why.
In that case, I fail to follow your explanation. What’s more important: Words/sentiments, or actions? For example, Macron talks the talk, but fails to walk the walk, as evidenced by France’s sub-par contributions.
In my opinion, the outcome is what matters. But also: Sign off the Tauruses, Olaf!
I think most people are missing the strategy of modern Russian warfare. Is Russian going to roll tanks and soldiers into the Baltics this year? Probably not.
Russia is using more of an asymmetrical approach to warfare with a ramp up. On the low end is the disinformation campaign. (News and religion: there are a lot of Orthodox in Latvia) Economic “Little Green men” Conventional warfare Nukes or the threat of nukes
I’m the Baltics they are in the disinformation and economic section of the ramp up and are worried about escalation.
Also note Russia goes up and down that ramp escalating and descalating as they did in Ukraine.
Yeah kinda, that’s how Russia has historically won wars and handled surplus population. Sort of why its so fucking big.
It muddies the water around, supporting the various states, and the public image of that.
The same thing for the Palestine genocide ongoing now, the US has a second war to supply.
This is where the drive to withdraw from NATO comes from. Because if you withdraw before your puppet master would trigger article 5 you have no problem.
The US withdrawing from NATO would make NATO pretty much meaningless, since most other NATO members are part of the EU, which has its own military alliances. Notable exception being the UK.
I don’t know if that is true. For the short term … most definitely. But in the end a lot of countries still benefit from the mutual defense clause. NATO would have to reinvent itself for sure, but it is not an unsurmountable problem. It might cause the UK and Canada to withdraw too meaning it will be the defacto European military.
In the Long run the US would lose so much in their power position towards China. Because if Beijing can just keep trading with the EU and make money there, the US will have a much harder time doing their powerplay. China will annex Taiwan and noone will be able to prevent it.
The EU also has a mutual defense clause.
That and many others in Europe. Unfortunately none that Ukraine was a part of.
Which is why Ukraine needs quick accession to the EU.
The UK is not going to leave the European security architecture, no chance in hell: It would contradict a good millennium of UK foreign policy, they’d rather leave the Commonwealth than have France and Germany, much less the rest of the mainland, united without them.
It’s the US which is the odd one out in the Anglosphere.
I think you are probably right. But after the own goal that was brexit… I’m not convinced of anything that has to do with these kind of things.
Removed by mod
Wut? Is he going to invade using a pivot table?
He is Vlooking for trouble
Removed by mod
- Sweden doesn’t have a land border with Russia
- You’re probably thinking of the Finnish border. Here’s the thing, Finland has spent its entire history preparing for Russian invasions.
If im being really nice maybe theyre talking about a strike from the bit of Prussia the Russians own over to Gotland and then using that foothold to attack into mainland Sweden. But im pretty sure the Swedes fortified Gotland specifically for that issue so IDFK.
Removed by mod
This dude is going by pre-20th century European borders lol
I know it’s a meme we don’t exist, but we actually do. We’ve also got the biggest and arguably most accurate artillery in Europe.
Homeland defence willingness against a superior enemy is at 83%, one of the highest rates in Europe.
And seeing what we managed in WWII against Russia without allies or gear (now we have both), when the Soviets were well armed, it’s understandable Putin would be a bit apprehensive about opening up a new front on the Finnish border.
Rage bait.
Such fear porn. It’s amazing that now Sweden and Finland have become NATO members that they are subject to even more scare tactics! I think it’s ridiculous. Nobody is shelling Russians from Finland or Sweden for the last 7 years. Granted, joining AMericATO is a big mistake but mainly because you are submitting your national defence to US rent seeking instead of developing a European arms framework.
Let’s play “Spot the russian bot” i’ll begin ⬆️
Sweden and Finland aren’t the Baltics nor are they the ones claiming the Baltics could be next
There is a European arms framework, that is developed to be compatible with NATO and thus US stuff. Nordic fighter jets which have been exported to many countries can carry US missiles. All the while, the US is phasing out the M16/M4 in the USMC for a German licence built rifle. They have been using German small arms for a bunch of stuff for a while.
Also, it’s not NATO who’s saying the Russians want to attack neighbouring states, it’s Russia who is saying that, who has been saying that, who has actually been attacking neighbouring states. Finland and the Baltics have been invaded in the past by the Russians as well, and Putin is open about wanting to reconquer them.
Check out the function of nato after the Cold War. Also check the new American economic tent seeking ambition if you want to see how Europe fits into the economic picture.
Yeah, the country I grew up in joined NATO after the Cold War, and it is viewed there as a universally good choice. It had us join the West, which has led to a big jump in living standards, civil rights, international relations, and not the least, I don’t have to worry that Russian tanks will shoot up my granny’s house.
What is it that you see as bad in former Warsaw Pact countries joining NATO? Are you implying that they were forced to or that they want to leave now, or that somehow it is bad for them?
