• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

French President: Sending Western Troops On The Ground In Ukraine Is Not Ruled Out

bartok said:
In fact, it is exactly how you say. It should be pointed out that you have never been on the side of who thought that "maybe it would be better to not investe so much over Ukraine and find compromises with Russia". It was a "pro-russian" position. But now, any retreat will be catastrophic for the West reputation. After having left tens of thousands Ukrainans die, to leave Ukraine alone - now - because WE (not they) have the "war fatigue" and we have "finished" the money, will be considered from the world for what it would be: cowardice. Now the situation is likely irreversible: if Ukraine is losing, sooner or later NATO will have to decide.
Click to expand...
Putin cannot be seen backing down to the west....and the west cannot be seen retreating from ukraine and giving up on an ally. As much as I hate to say it, things are going to get a lot worse before they start getting better.
 
Charmender said:
Anyway guys again…Macron is a specialist in keeping the feet in multiple places at once.
When it comes to the EU politicians declaration you have to put a lot of context on them because there’s a ton of moving parts and different interests, it’s not like in the US where you have a country, a president and two parties.
I am not surprised at all given the situation after all the years I have been involved in the EU politics and diplomacy.
If he loses credibility internationally by being passive in the Ukrainian thing he will lose approval, because French people believe they are the leaders in Europe (and militarily they’re indeed).
If he gets too much militarily involved he will lose approval in favor of Melenchon who is mostly supported due to his stance over Ukraine.

That’s why at the same time in less than 1 day he said:
1) The summit is not meant to discuss about military involvement in Ukraine. Netherlands PM Mark Rutte helped him here further denying that there was no intention to escalate the situation as the Slovakian (Putin’s friend) PM tried to say.
2) We cannot rule out boots on the Ukrainian ground BUT there’s no consensus. Again nothing new here because especially if you think about things which can potentially happen. Nothing is impossible in this world.
3) We are not at war with the Russians, which doesn’t need any explanation. It just contradicts what he said.

Added bonus, during this summit countries on the Russian to do list resulted to be: Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and the US.
Respectively: the most neutral country of EU together with Austria and Ireland, the biggest and closest nuclear power in Europe, a close friend in the end, another even closer friend, pacific US twin, biggest nuclear power of the world.

All of this does not make any sense, this is all intended to put pressure in the US regarding the Ukraine funding bill, as EU has reached capacity and there will never be consensus in emitting common debt to help Ukraine further, to regain prestige without jeopardizing his party at the next elections, to try to regain the interest of the normal people about Ukraine which again, as a French/Italian I can tell you is less than zero.
Click to expand...
I am again picking up my analysis about why Macron said this.
Because that’s the case…he got quickly contradicted even by Stoltenberg apart from the major NATO allies.
Without considering the fact that he even contradicted himself.

As usual it’s a good story well presented by the media to feed speculation and keep the interest high.
Nothing more.

Then if we wanna play the “I don’t see how things cannot go worse”…well cosmic pessimism does not usually result in a realistic interpretation of the reality.
 
Charmender said:
I am again picking up my analysis about why Macron said this.
Because that’s the case…he got quickly contradicted even by Stoltenberg apart from the major NATO allies.
Without considering the fact that he even contradicted himself.
Click to expand...
Everyone's focusing on the troops issue, but Macron has actually been signaling something else, which is arguably more important, and that's France's potential role in providing a nuclear umbrella for Europe.

Definitely, yes. (...) The French doctrine of nuclear deterrence covers France’s vital interest, which clearly has a European dimension that gives us a special responsibility.

In recent weeks I've been hearing rumors of secret talks on how to do away with EU's dependence on American nukes - given the fact that America has become untrustworthy. There's probably more to this than meets the eye.
 
Snowfall said:
I could be wrong but I just don’t know how the west would’ve gone from avoid WW3 at all costs to let’s start WW3.
Click to expand...
The west has never had a "avoid WW3 at all costs" mindset. However, we do seem to have lost all the ground Reagan gained with nuclear disarmament and glasnost and even slid backwards in that regard.
 
RiffRaff said:
The west has never had a "avoid WW3 at all costs" mindset. However, we do seem to have lost all the ground Reagan gained with nuclear disarmament and glasnost and even slid backwards in that regard.
Click to expand...
Fair I shouldn’t say at all costs but more so without being attacked first.
 
Few coments .As US position is weakinig globalnych sone EUROPE contries try to stop US off Shore balancing Policy.
Lets assume that France will send troops. Poland and Baltuc status will not send troops.
What type of action can exexute Russia?.direct attak against France ?
Russia Black sea navy atack will be stopę by France navy.
Lets asume that Russia will atack France .? What kind of respone we will see?
Lets assuke that Russia will atack a base in Poland. (Which is used for logistyczne support?)
 
krzepice1976 said:
What type of action can exexute Russia?.direct attak against France ?
Click to expand...
Even if France sends troops to Ukraine, I can't see Russia attacking France directly any more than France would attack Russia directly.

I think it will all be kept in the Ukraine threatre. Unless Crimea becomes threatened or Russia itself comes under significant attack by France itself or French forces.
 
Friendly Engineer said:
No way NATO troops fight in Ukraine.
Click to expand...
It's nobody's secret that NATO special ops have been operating in Ukraine since the whole thing began. Russia knows it too. So I assume by "NATO troops" you mean large-scale ground formations. And as for that - we cannot be sure without knowing what Russia's endgame is. And we obviously don't know that. I suspect even Russia doesn't know right now.

I can absolutely see NATO troops entering Ukraine should Ukrainian statehood collapse. Orban is semi-open about wanting to make a land grab in Transcarpathia where a lot of ethnic Hungarians live (his army even rehearsed it last year under a flimsy pretext). Russia is not making a fuss out of it only because Orban is in Putin's camp.
 
Socom7 said:
Yeah, that's a hard "no". Putin wants at least half of Europe, and possibly all of it - if he can have it. Remember his "compromise solution" tabled just before the invasion? It involved a withdrawal of NATO forces from all countries admitted after 1989 (essentially restoring the cold war status quo). Russia has never budged in the slightest on these demands, despite its setbacks in Ukraine.

It absolutely amazes me how people can still think this modern-day Hitler will inexplicably just stop at annexing Austria and Czechoslovakia. To be honest, this view reeks of a figleaf effort to mask what is essentially cowardice.
Click to expand...
He literally will not have the military to push into Europe if he wins Ukraine. Even Putin isn't dumb enough to invade Europe. Especially because he wouldn't be able to sell it to anyone. What's he gonna tell his troops and civilians who already have war fatigue?

There is absolutely zero chance he moves on from Ukraine and Moldova.

Great, I will have a cowardly position all I want, I do not want to be drafted to fight in a war of a country half of people couldn't point out on a map before the war. I don't want western civilians in danger. I don't want putin to get desperate and use WMDs, which by the way his people and any still friendly country to Russia will be supportive of WMD use if NATO sends troops.
 
www.rt.com

‘Catastrophic scenario’ if NATO troops deploy to Ukraine – top Russian senator

Russia could treat the potential deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine as a declaration of war, senior senator Konstantin Kosachev has said
www.rt.com www.rt.com

The potential deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine will lead to a “catastrophic scenario,” and could be interpreted as a “declaration of war” on Moscow, top Russian senator Konstantin Kosachev has said.
The Vice Speaker of Russia’s upper chamber, the Federation Council, offered his take on remarks by French President Emmanuel Macron on the possibility of sending troops in a Telegram post on Tuesday. The approach exhibited by the French leader carries a risk of the situation devolving into a “catastrophic scenario,” Kosachev warned, stating that the move would not be tolerated by the Kremlin.
 
intel-bank said:
He literally will not have the military to push into Europe if he wins Ukraine. Even Putin isn't dumb enough to invade Europe.
Click to expand...
Maybe right after peace is made with Ukraine sure. Down the road... that is where your wrong. Russia will most certainly and does pose a threat to Eastern Europe. They will pick themselves back up again, eventually.
intel-bank said:
Especially because he wouldn't be able to sell it to anyone. What's he gonna tell his troops and civilians who already have war fatigue?
Click to expand...
As if Russian citizens have a say in the matter. 🙄 Tell that to the thousands of Russian citizens since the war started that have been arrested for protesting against the war even slightly. They do as their told like dogs or are locked up or put down in a literal sence not metaphorical. Just ask Alexei Navalny.

So you see it doesn't matter what ordinary Russian citizens want. Just Putin and the remaining oligarchs that enable Putin. At least the ones he hasn't killed... yet.
 
Last edited:
DarkNoon said:
Maybe right after peace is made with Ukraine sure. Down the road... that is where your wrong. Russia will most certainly and does pose a threat to Eastern Europe. They will pick themselves back up again, eventually.

As if Russian citizens have a say in the matter. 🙄 Tell that to the thousands of Russian citizens since the war started that have been arrested for protesting against the war even slightly. They do as their told like dogs or are locked up or put down in a literal sence not metaphorical. Just ask Alexei Navalny.

So you see it doesn't matter what ordinary Russian citizens want. Just Putin and the remaining oligarchs that enable Putin. At least the ones he hasn't killed... yet.
Click to expand...
Besides speculation on nalvany the rest about government and population sounds rather familiar. America, Europe, Australia etc. I'm currently seeing discontent amongst Americans over illegal immigrants- Ukraine funds-etc over money ,housing, services and national debt . This time next year could be a doozy for America. Too many problems at home for majority to worry about anyone else. Understandable really. What a mess. GOODLUCK to America. GOODLUCK to American citizens.
 
DarkNoon said:
Maybe right after peace is made with Ukraine sure. Down the road... that is where your wrong. Russia will most certainly and does pose a threat to Eastern Europe. They will pick themselves back up again, eventually.
Click to expand...
They literally will not have the soldiers to achieve it. Putin knows it, and they aren't going to build their military enough to pose a threat for a couple decades at this point, well after Putin dies.

DarkNoon said:
As if Russian citizens have a say in the matter. 🙄 Tell that to the thousands of Russian citizens since the war started that have been arrested for protesting against the war even slightly. They do as their told like dogs or are locked up or put down in a literal sence not metaphorical. Just ask Alexei Navalny.

So you see it doesn't matter what ordinary Russian citizens want. Just Putin and the remaining oligarchs that enable Putin. At least the ones he hasn't killed... yet.
Click to expand...
The majority of Russian civilians support the war. If the vast majority didn't, chances are they would cause a lot of chaos over it. They just simply don't care enough about this war to risk themselves.
And the oligarchs do in fact matter more, and chances are they wouldn't support an invasion of Europe as its suicide.

Russia isn't going to have the resources, especially given sanctions will continue well past the war. NATO could take out Russia conventionally in a matter of weeks with fairly minimal casualties. WMD use would be the only thing that changes that, and Russia isn't going to walk themselves into nuclear war by invading Europe.

There's also the aspect that Putin wants to rebuild the Soviet Union, not destroy Europe. He would be far more likely to invade Central Asia. Of course, he wouldn't need to, pretty much all Ex-USSR nations not already in NATO would fall in line with Russia if Russia manages to take Ukraine.

And finally, if Europe did get invaded, then I would support NATO troops being involved. I do not remotely support us going into Ukraine, risking our own civilians and troops, for the small possibility that Russia invades Europe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom