All of them do nasty things but only Russia (and from what you have mentioned maybe India too) gets away with a good image, as if they never did any harm in those territories, apparently.

Their propaganda machine must be better.....

Here you go:


China and Russia to establish independent financial systems


https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/china...ystems.730965/

They have been making announcements like this for years, it is easy to talk about but hard to implement.

Who in their right minds would entrust billions to be handled by those countries? Who do you go to if they decided to keep the money?

At least the US has a decent judicial system that would eventually resolve such issues.

Who would trust? Why anybody with a gun to their Head, or any Country „encouraged“ to use such a method.

How surprising. The propaganda machine is fully on.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/...e-chief-a75892

Actually American shitstirrers, trying to get a Tonkin incident is something I do believe.

I don't. What interest would the US have provoking a Russian "peace keeping" intervention, especially now? This is an effort of preparing the Russian population for war (wanted to write voters, but reconsidered).

The American Neocons are rather intoxicated in their arrogance over being the best of the best in the whole wide world. They are incapable of seeing any other viewpoint other than their own, very narrow, Weltanschauung.
Now couple that with the inertia of NATO encroachment on Russian or former Sowiet republics and you get what we have now, a reinvented Russia telling the hawks in Washinton that the buck stops here and those same hawks telling the Kremlin to go pound sand.
There will never be a Ukraine in Nato without a fight and I fear that the Americans are setting themselves up for either an embarrassing step backwards or a war with Russia.

Or we will see the wet dream of nationalistic militaries in American and Russia, a new cold war.

__________________
Back in Bavaria, god´s own belly button.

So to make sure I understand you: In your view, is Ukraine a sovereign country, in the sense of the Budapest Memorandum?

A toughy that´s for sure. I do understand that Ukraine is a sovereign country, the Budapest memorandum ist, or was the only reason they gave up the nukes stationed in Ukraine. But on the other hand it´s a moot point, Realpolitik has shown that Russia won´t give up the Black sea, something that would happen if Ukraine were to join Nato and you can´t tell me that it would be calming to the Kremlin to have a US... sorry Nato naval base on the Krim.
I don´t get it; was it not during the Reykjavik summet that suggested Nato would not expand into former Warsaw pact countries, I know that there are different opinions on this, but for the Russians it seems to have been a big deal.
And what was the first thing Nato did in the nineties?
Of course expand, and just at a time where the UdSSR imploded. It sort of left a bad taste in the Kremlin.

__________________
Back in Bavaria, god´s own belly button.

Russia claimed last week that it had honoured its 1994 Budapest security guarantee for Ukraine. Yet it occupies Crimea and de facto the Donbass.

Putin is a thug.

Guess what, countries are allowed to choose their own destiny. It is weird to read some people think Russia still has some veto rights in these regards.

Yes, I also heard of Realpolitik. I think many people don't want to buy into this fatalism and hierarchical, anachronistic way of establishing alliances and foreign politics.

A thug with a vision to make Ru great again (at least as influence zones)....and people believe in his rhetoric. That is actually what saddens me more than any other stuff, that there is little opposition and critical thinking over there. I can see it in the younger generation I have talked to in the past years. Disappointing.

Tell that to the nationalists, republicans and rightwing politicians, of which there is a growing amount. And nationalists don´t care about peaceful solutions, or as Rick says: "Ok when did fascism become default?" I would say, "about now!"
I would not call Putin a thug, he is a very shrewd politician and technocrat and can run rings around the cream of "The West" politicians and
I don´t think that it´s really about Ukraine by it´s self, I would say Putin would be happy if the US accepted the situation in Donbas, let Kiev know Nato won´t be coming and halted Nato expansion.
Now we both know that is not going to happen and escalations are spiraling. so prepare for war.

This won´t be a nice war, and I believe that Putin will go nuclear if Russian troops are attacked on Ukraine territory by Nato forces.

__________________
Back in Bavaria, god´s own belly button.

Not a nice war ...

And you know how ridiculous it sounds when you say "Russian troops attacked on Ukraine territory", right?

Yes, I totally agree with you on this one...

I agree on this one too, obviously he is not a thug in that sense, but a very able politician who surrounded himself with absolute masters in propaganda, tried and partially succeeded to push pan-slavism across ex-soviet and former communist countries, gave people a sense of pride and unity against imaginary enemies....if you ask a common guy, even younger, in today Russia he is convinced that certain countries are full of nazis ready to kill any Russian out there.
What a surprise they have when they actually visit those countries. Anyway, we could talk a lot about Putin and his court theorists, the man is fu**king brilliant in his own way, in his own universe. We get to oppose a very capable political apparatus with our very naive and manipulable Western politicians.

Well, NATO troops wont fight Russians on Russian Territory, But Imagine joint NATO and Ukraine troops fighting Russisns on Ukraine Territory. How do you think that will pan out?

Warsaw pact countries? The Warsaw pact only lasted 36 years and those countries have been independent for the 30 years since, they also have a long history of independence before the pact. It is time for Russia to put behind its brief foray into colonialism.

Ukraine was never a Warsaw pact country, it was a founder member of the USSR in 1922 and later declared itself an independent country in 1991.

The north coast of the Black Sea within the borders of Russia extends for nearly 300 km southeast of Kerch Strait, the entrance to the Sea of Azov, so there is no question of Russia having to give up the Black Sea if Ukraine were to join Nato.
Edit: Anyway most of the Black Sea coastline already belongs to NATO members so not much change if Ukraine joins.

If Russia was really interested in the Black Sea they would have not so badly neglected their Black Sea ports for so long.
In recent years, Russian regional officials have been forced to declare the infrastructure of the ports at Novorossiisk, Anapa, Sochi, and elsewhere dangerous to shipping and imposed restrictions on usage.

Russia's real interest in Ukraine is because their Black Sea ports have been so well maintained.

NATO won't fight for anything except (hoepfully) its own members. I don't disagree with you on your analysis, but on the narrative that Russia somehow is playing defense here.

Russia Sees it as their Territory and as their Right to send as many troops as they See fit. Ukraine disagrees and will attack. Therefore Putin will Play the Self- Defense Card, now Imagine the propaganda win for Putin if NATO were to attack Russian troops on their „Own“ aka. Former Ukraine Soil.

Correct. Russia does not acknowledge Ukraine's independence and sovereignty. Although claiming the are in compliance with the Budapest Memorandum. And the Minsk Protocols. And the UN Charter.