Russia/Ukraine

Millbrook said:
France and Germany I would think.
Click to expand...
True, but the French invasion was over 200 years ago, is that really relevant to today's situation?

Germany was 'Nazi' Germany, not exactly what most people would refer to as 'the west'

In which case I'm still not sure how Putin's thinking can be 'framed by these very painful invasions', given the myriad of other significant socio-political events that have happened in more recent times
 
red_harrington said:
True, but the French invasion was over 200 years ago, is that really relevant to today's situation?

Germany was 'Nazi' Germany, not exactly what most people would refer to as 'the west'

In which case I'm still not sure how Putin's thinking can be 'framed by these very painful invasions', given the myriad of other significant socio-political events that have happened in more recent times
Click to expand...

It's not. It's framed by "Empire" or "Soviet" notions of greatness. Sphere's of influence (for economic benefit) .... in this regard no different from the United States (middle east oil) or the uk of old (empire = resources). What is slightly different is that they are an autocracy where the power and wealth are super-concentrated in very few hands.... an mob/gang. They don't actually need to worry about democratic checks and balances.... or losing power in 4 years time. They have oil and gas, which everyone wants (for now) ... but they are always looking for more (which is why they destabilise regimes in Africa and move Wagner in).
 
All Posters who haven't, need to read Tim Marshalls book Prisoners of Geography - Chapter 1 - The book is endorsed by a former head of M16.

In 1941-45 The Soviet Union was invaded not just by Germany, but their allies too sent troops - Romania, Hungary, Austria, Spain, Italy, Slovak, Croatia etc. After the invasion some of the population of the Baltic States and Ukraine also joined the Germans. To modern Russians there are all part of the West and more importantly attacked from the Westerly direction where there are no natural barriers of defence e.g. mountain ranges, seas etc. 20 million losses in WW2 left a long shadow, to put into context we say WW1 was devastating but British and Commonwealth loses were about 1 million. Operation Barborossa was the largest invasion ever in World History. See link at the bottom

In WW1 Germany and the Austrian Hungary forces attacked again from the West and made progress into Tsarist Russia. In 1918 Germany occupied all of Ukraine (borders today) and stole as much food as they could. At the time Germany was blockaded in by the Royal Navy and its population was close to starving.

When WW1 finished Czechoslovakia sent a large army into Russia to try and overthrow the Bolsheviks. They were also joined by some British, French, USA and Japanese. They did come all different directions, but they was a concerted effort to try and kill the Bolshevik baby at birth. At one point it was touch and go whether the Reds would win the Russian Civil War. Read Antony Beevor - Russian Civil War - its a hell of a book.

One of grandfathers complained in his book that he was about to be sent to Russia in 1919, after fighting 2 years in frontline trenches in France and nearly losing his leg. He said others should go as he had done his bit. British War memorials often say 1914-1919 because of the Russian campaign.

That's 3 invasions in 27 years.

en.wikipedia.org

Operation Barbarossa - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
BoroMart said:
More than I knew on the subject, but the key point is, it was nowt to do with the EU
Click to expand...
Haha I should know more tbf as I worked on it when it came into service, although forgot quite a lot since then. Doesn't stop people offering me jobs on it still like 😆
 
Redwurzel said:
One of grandfathers complained in his book that he was about to be sent to Russia in 1919, after fighting 2 years in frontline trenches in France and nearly losing his leg. He said others should go as he had done his bit. British War memorials often say 1914-1919 because of the Russian campaign.
Click to expand...

I think the memorials and medals sometimes state 1914-1919 because although the fighting in WW1 ended with the armistice in November 1918, the official end of the War was in June 1919 when the Treaty of Versailles was signed.
 
Last edited:
Th main point I was trying the make is that there were British and Allies armed forces fighting the Red Army in 1919 in modern day Russia. According to Wikipedia a solder from Ormesby was killed in North Russia in September 1919 and probably the last fighting casualty of WW1 for British forces (see below). His name should be on the war memorial in the graveyard at St Cuthbert's Church. This is a spooky as my grandad lived in Ormesby in the 1930s and he wrote about been asked to go to Russia, he didn't go in the end, possibly because of his significant war wounds. Maybe the dead guy was known to him.

I would dispute the fact in the article that they Allies were not invaders. If they were there just to encourage the Bolsheviks to keep fighting Germans as the writer suggests, the British forces would have gone home in November 1918, when the Germans did.

The biggest Western invasion by a mile was of course 1941, mainly Germans, but many other countries were keen to send divisions such as the Spanish Blue Division, Italian 8th Army (destroyed at Stalingrad). The Romanians had approximately 152,000 troops at Stalingrad and the Hungarians had over 147,000 casualties there too. Hence the fear in Russia by all its leaders since of an attack from its exposed Western border along hard to defend flat plains, in the words of Tim Marshall. It doesn't give a Putin an excuse to invade Ukraine as he had done, but explains to some extent why he wants a buffer area and why many Russians still fear a Western style alliance such as NATO.

en.wikipedia.org

Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Redwurzel said:
Th main point I was trying the make is that there were British and Allies armed forces fighting the Red Army in 1919 in modern day Russia. According to Wikipedia a solder from Ormesby was killed in North Russia in September 1919 and probably the last fighting casualty of WW1 for British forces (see below). His name should be on the war memorial in the graveyard at St Cuthbert's Church. This is a spooky as my grandad lived in Ormesby in the 1930s and he wrote about been asked to go to Russia, he didn't go in the end, possibly because of his significant war wounds. Maybe the dead guy was known to him.

I would dispute the fact in the article that they Allies were not invaders. If they were there just to encourage the Bolsheviks to keep fighting Germans as the writer suggests, the British forces would have gone home in November 1918, when the Germans did.

The biggest Western invasion by a mile was of course 1941, mainly Germans, but many other countries were keen to send divisions such as the Spanish Blue Division, Italian 8th Army (destroyed at Stalingrad). The Romanians had approximately 152,000 troops at Stalingrad and the Hungarians had over 147,000 casualties there too. Hence the fear in Russia by all its leaders since of an attack from its exposed Western border along hard to defend flat plains, in the words of Tim Marshall. It doesn't give a Putin an excuse to invade Ukraine as he had done, but explains to some extent why he wants a buffer area and why many Russians still fear a Western style alliance such as NATO.

en.wikipedia.org

Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
I was involved in the care of a couple of members of the "White Army" in care of the elderly as a Nurse in Bethnal Green, in 1980s.
East Enders born and bred and as hard as nails.
Fascinating listening to their take on it.
 
search.app

Zelensky walks back earlier comments on Ukraine's possible plan to obtain nuclear weapons

"We never spoke about...that we are preparing to create nuclear weapons or something like this," President Volodymyr Zelensky said.
search.app search.app

Zelensky seeking to contextualise earlier rhetoric.

Whilst I can understand their frustrations we do not need sensationalist statements which can create further problems.

As stated in the article by the new head of NATO I think Ukraine will be admitted but the time has to be right.
 
Mwelolo said:
search.app

Zelensky walks back earlier comments on Ukraine's possible plan to obtain nuclear weapons

"We never spoke about...that we are preparing to create nuclear weapons or something like this," President Volodymyr Zelensky said.
search.app search.app

Zelensky seeking to contextualise earlier rhetoric.

Whilst I can understand their frustrations we do not need sensationalist statements which can create further problems.

As stated in the article by the new head of NATO I think Ukraine will be admitted but the time has to be right.
Click to expand...
I think that NATO membership for Ukraine might get vetoed by a couple of members. Hungary and Turkey perhaps.
 
BoroMart said:
Not so sure personally
Click to expand...
Turkey can be placated by being allowed back in to the US's latest nex gen military planes project (F30/40 something) which they where excluded from for purchasing a Russian air defence system (that they have mothballed now). Hungary have shown they capitulate when EU funds are threatened. NATO has the leverage it needs for a smoothish Ukrainian entry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top