Russia; will they make a big move in Eastern Europe?

[Neuwland]

In fact, Russia is the nation with the highest risk of warmongering in Europe. And even if Putin doesn't use tanks, he can still provoke a lot of damage simply cutting off the gas supply to Western Europe shall they ever intervene. Of course revenues will fall, but I suppose he can quickly compensate that selling gas to China instead.

On the other hand, NATO probably won't be able to fight a real war to help Eastern Europe, unless if you consider some trillion-dollar debt issuance during this thing. That taken into account, yes, Russia may reintegrate Eastern Europe without pass by a WW3.

Not with Trump no, NATO can't do shit to defend itself with the Kremlin's rentboy in power.

[Swindenland]

Baltic and Visegrád Group countries should form a single military and increase their defence budgets. At the same time, we should start making our relations with Russia warmer. In fact, Russia's a great country, but it's not very compatible with the EU because:
-Putin
-Mostly mindless populace (don't get me wrong, people in Poland and other eastern european countries are also stupid, but slightly less)
-Too much power and wealth vested in the hands of few.

[New Axiom]

Did you forget that the Crimea wanted to become part of Russia?

[Neuwland]

Did you forget that the Crimea wanted to become part of Russia?

Like how Americans wanted Trump in power.

It seems whatever Russia touches the people want it.

Even if the Crimeans wanted it, it doesn't matter, the greater good is always better no matter how much people hate it.

[Carena]

The combined forces of Germany, France, the UK, and the rest of NATO (other than the US) would be more than enough to counter the Russian army should they try invading NATO nations such as the Baltic's.

[Neuwland]

The combined forces of Germany, France, the UK, and the rest of NATO (other than the US) would be more than enough to counter the Russian army should they try invading NATO nations such as the Baltic's.

Exclude Turkey too they betrayed NATO

[The of Japan]

The combined forces of Germany, France, the UK, and the rest of NATO (other than the US) would be more than enough to counter the Russian army should they try invading NATO nations such as the Baltic's.

Exclude Turkey too they betrayed NATO

Both are still part of NATO

[Neuwland]

Exclude Turkey too they betrayed NATO

Both are still part of NATO

Turkey decided to back stab NATO so they should be treated as such. They went from being on the Front line of our defense against Russia by magnificently shooting down their jets and tormenting their soldiers to being Putin's dogs.

[Collectivist Germania]

Did you forget that the Crimea wanted to become part of Russia?

Like how Americans wanted Trump in power.

It seems whatever Russia touches the people want it.

Even if the Crimeans wanted it, it doesn't matter, the greater good is always better no matter how much people hate it.

Except the greater good did happen because Crimea is the rightful clay of Russia.

[Neuwland]

Like how Americans wanted Trump in power.

It seems whatever Russia touches the people want it.

Even if the Crimeans wanted it, it doesn't matter, the greater good is always better no matter how much people hate it.

Except the greater good did happen because Crimea is the rightful clay of Russia.

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

[Collectivist Germania]

Except the greater good did happen because Crimea is the rightful clay of Russia.

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

"Reclamation" is the proper word. If you do a little bit of history research, you'll find that Ukraine unlawfully took Crimea from Russia after the 1991 collapse. What's a bankrupt country going to do, write an angry letter?
I don't believe it's expansion because honestly, Russia could flatten a divided Ukraine like a steamroller - not that I would advocate it. Most if not all Ukrainian troops in Crimea didn't even fight the Russians because they were that outclassed, if that gives some perspective.

[Kubra]

Putin is probably planning nothing more than is already happening.
The conflicts of today are an outgrowth of the border problems created by the fall of the USSR and the permeation of Russian populations outside its traditional borders. In previous era's, up to the end of the war (when it was the worst) these disputes between de jure and de facto turf usually meant mutual population transfer bordering on genocide. I mean, the Russians did that on multiple occasions.

So we're in an era where that doesn't fly, but there's still turf here and there with Russian populations big enough that Russia could bank on support for annexation. So they do.

That said, it lasts only so long as there are places close to the border with a lot of ethnic russians. Crimea was the big one, Ukraine is the next big one. Everyone else is either untouchable or doesn't have any good Russian populations, or both. Chances are Putin will just want to settle these conflicts and then normalize relations, rather than escalate.

[NeoLiberia]

Georgia fought Russia in 2008 because Saakashvili wanted to subjugate South Ossetia, you know, the region where most of the fighting took place.

Georgia escalated the conflict because the South Ossetian militias continued to shell Georgian villages despite the ceasefire and non-action on the part of Georgian forces. If you look at who was preparing for war at the time, it was certainly Russia, not Georgia.

[Shofercia]

Did you forget that the Crimea wanted to become part of Russia?

Like how Americans wanted Trump in power.

It seems whatever Russia touches the people want it.

Even if the Crimeans wanted it, it doesn't matter, the greater good is always better no matter how much people hate it.

Correct, the Americans living in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, which were the three crucial swing states, wanted Trump in Power. You're finally getting it, good job.

And what greater good? The concentration of money in the hands of the Oligarchs?

The combined forces of Germany, France, the UK, and the rest of NATO (other than the US) would be more than enough to counter the Russian army should they try invading NATO nations such as the Baltic's.

Exclude Turkey too they betrayed NATO

How?

Both are still part of NATO

Turkey decided to back stab NATO so they should be treated as such. They went from being on the Front line of our defense against Russia by magnificently shooting down their jets and tormenting their soldiers to being Putin's dogs.

So Turkey backstabbed NATO by not starting a nuclear apocalypse?

Georgia fought Russia in 2008 because Saakashvili wanted to subjugate South Ossetia, you know, the region where most of the fighting took place.

Georgia escalated the conflict because the South Ossetian militias continued to shell Georgian villages despite the ceasefire and non-action on the part of Georgian forces. If you look at who was preparing for war at the time, it was certainly Russia, not Georgia.

But remember guys, when a country's massively increasing military expenditure after a failed attack in 2004, they're not really preparing for war, they're just preparing for an ice cream party according to Neoliberia. Let's recap:

1. The regions of Adjaria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia were semi-independent after the collapse of the USSR
2. Georgia back in the 1990s, started a war with Abkhazia and later, South Ossetia, and lost, badly
3. Shevardnadze froze the conflict; part of the deal included Russian Peacekeeping Bases
4. Saakashvili, back in 2003, overthrew Shevardnadze, partly due to a nationalist platform of reclaiming Abkhazia and South Ossetia
5. In 2004, after Saakashvili's fiery rhetoric, there was the biggest engagement seen in South Ossetia, since the 1990s
6. Saakashvili massively increased military expenditure
7. On August 7th, on the eve of the Chinese Olympics, Saakashvili invades South Ossetia

Newland's conclusion: It's all Rusha faultz!

Considering how important the relationship with China is to Russia, why the fuck would the Russians start a war on the eve of the Chinese Olympics?

[NeoLiberia]

(Image)

But remember guys, when a country's massively increasing military expenditure after a failed attack in 2004, they're not really preparing for war, they're just preparing for an ice cream party according to Neoliberia. Let's recap:

1. The regions of Adjaria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia were semi-independent after the collapse of the USSR
2. Georgia back in the 1990s, started a war with Abkhazia and later, South Ossetia, and lost, badly
3. Shevardnadze froze the conflict; part of the deal included Russian Peacekeeping Bases
4. Saakashvili, back in 2003, overthrew Shevardnadze, partly due to a nationalist platform of reclaiming Abkhazia and South Ossetia
5. In 2004, after Saakashvili's fiery rhetoric, there was the biggest engagement seen in South Ossetia, since the 1990s
6. Saakashvili massively increased military expenditure
7. On August 7th, on the eve of the Chinese Olympics, Saakashvili invades South Ossetia

Newland's conclusion: It's all Rusha faultz!

Considering how important the relationship with China is to Russia, why the fuck would the Russians start a war on the eve of the Chinese Olympics?

The only thing Putin apologists can bring up is that budget. Being on the border with Russia requires you have an adequate military. Saakashvili thought he could turn Georgia into a "Caucasian Israel" that clearly didn't work but lets actually move on to the substance.

Now your timeline is mostly accurate, though I'd like to point to a few clear misrepresentations. You say Saakashvili was brought to power with a fiery nationalist platform. Well:

Georgia is home not only for all Georgians, but also for all ethnic minorities, residing in Georgia. Every citizen, who considers Georgia as its homeland, be they Russian, Abkhasian, Osetian, Azerbaijanian, Armenian, Jewish, Greek, Ukrainian, Kurd - is our greatest wealth and treasure.

Very nationalist.

Russia rehearsed an invasion of South Ossetia (Kavkaz 2008) just a few days before the war broke out, and left an army on high alert and on the border. Suspicious much? They also sent railway troops into Abkhazia (without permission) to repair infrastructure which became important for the coming invasion, and didn't turn up to a scheduled meeting between the three sides in Tskhinvali. All of this is in the Tagliavini Report for you to look at if you wish.

As for China I don't get the relevance. Russia's relationship with China was not damaged by the war. But apparently they came to an understanding on the matter earlier, as Putin himself said (now it is in Russian but google translate is a thing).

So, he shared the information that when I was in China, then met with the leadership of the country and said that he is well aware of China's problems with Taiwan and other such kind of problems and therefore immediately wants to withdraw from the Chinese leadership's burden of thinking about recognition of independence Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

(from the Kommersant article)

[Pergamon Politeia]

since i doubt russian govt's regime to rest in secure terrain, yes it will need that at some point. nevertheless, the middle-east sack and Sirian genocide attemp in particoular, will serve at will so long. so about an european invasion attempt, it may follow then, but there s time to exploit the other campaign before.

[Roskian Federation]

Another slight problem for the Russian army

[New Axiom]

Except the greater good did happen because Crimea is the rightful clay of Russia.

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

It's not expansion. Reclaiming something that's yours isn't expansion. Notice how Russia isn't expanding into the Middle East? Or into parts of Asia? Yeah.

[Costa Fierro]

Prediction: Russia may or may not take up a chunk or all of Ukraine. What's anyone going to do about it? Nothing. Not even Ukrainians will do much about it, considering how little loyalty they have to Poroshenko and company.

I don't think Russia would feasibly seize all of Ukraine, or even the chunk of it with the Russian speakers. For the most part Ukraine doesn't really have that much going for it from a strategic point of view and it'd risk an insurgency from Ukrainian nationalists that would result in a long, bitter and protracted conflict that I don't see Russia winning, even with its experience in dealing with Islamists in Chechnya/Dagestan. The Donestk/Luhanks republics don't have that much in the way of strategic value that Crimea does. If it did, Moscow would have made moves to seize it already.

Russia would benefit more from shit-stirring rather than doing anything overtly imperialistic. Destabilizing the rest of Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltics would be more beneficial for Russia because it can then extract concessions from the West in return for making the pesky Russian nationalists go away (although the short term loss would be a loss of prestige among Russians outside of Russia itself). And because Russia is literally running out of money, we can definitely make the prediction that Russia will make some move into getting what it wants.

[Seraven]

Except the greater good did happen because Crimea is the rightful clay of Russia.

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

You just don't understand world politics.

[Internationalist Bastard]

A while ago I'd have said no, but with big countries retreating deeper into their shells, who knows

[Ethel mermania]

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

It's not expansion. Reclaiming something that's yours isn't expansion. Notice how Russia isn't expanding into the Middle East? Or into parts of Asia? Yeah.

crimera belongs to the tatars. maybe the russians should give it back.

[Socialist Nordia]

It's not expansion. Reclaiming something that's yours isn't expansion. Notice how Russia isn't expanding into the Middle East? Or into parts of Asia? Yeah.

crimera belongs to the tatars. maybe the russians should give it back.

The Khanate of the Crimea ought to be a thing again

[Ethel mermania]

crimera belongs to the tatars. maybe the russians should give it back.

The Khanate of the Crimea ought to be a thing again

we need more khan's

[Internationalist Bastard]

Sure why not you're right 100% Russian expansion is always the answer.

"Reclamation" is the proper word. If you do a little bit of history research, you'll find that Ukraine unlawfully took Crimea from Russia after the 1991 collapse. What's a bankrupt country going to do, write an angry letter?
I don't believe it's expansion because honestly, Russia could flatten a divided Ukraine like a steamroller - not that I would advocate it. Most if not all Ukrainian troops in Crimea didn't even fight the Russians because they were that outclassed, if that gives some perspective.

Well they're smart I'll give 'em that, but a poor military isn't a justification to piss on them