Russia and Ukraine

[Ravenshire]

Ukraine is almost entirely dependent on aid from the US and Europe. Trump has made it clear that he doesn't intend to continue that forever, and Europe doesn't have the capacity to equip a long war. Though Zelensky may not choose to surrender, he may simply have to give up.

It's almost as if you've never heard of insurgencies. What Putin -- and you -- don't seem to understand is that even if Russia "wins" militarily on the field, they are going to have to engage an insurgency that hates Russia, is technologically adept, and has a northwestern border for surreptitious resupply that Russia won't be able to interdict easily ... especially given their demonstrated ineptitude.

How do you know what Ukrainians think? There are a lot of them still alive, and no doubt their opinions vary.

It's called reading and listening. If you read and listened to more than Moscow's shills, you'd see that I'm being fair. Of course opinions vary, but my understanding is that a solid majority of Ukrainian civilians, and a large majority of Ukrainian armed forces, are against [f]Trump's peace plan[/i] Putin's diktat.

Remember that many of them speak Russian as a native language and feel closer culturally to Russia than to Kiev. (Zelensky's career, back when he was prancing around on TV in high heels, was largely conducted in Russian.)

Quantify "many".

There are also a large number of widows and orphans now, and it is very possible that they would be happy to have peace, no matter who "cooked up" the plan.

Oh, sure, it's "possible". Hidden in your weasel-word here is the admission that you do not know, even as you demand I show how I know.

Of course there are always the proud macho men who would rather have their entire army killed rather than compromise and lose territory. But you know most people just want a quiet life. 

Let me get this straight, wanting to live life your own way is now the purview of "macho men" and no one else?

As for killing the entire Ukrainian Army, I doubt the Russians could manage such a feat. Their conscript army is laughably trained and so poorly equipped that they're running out of 60-tanks to refurbish. Russia fights on at China's sufferance.

According to Roman Kostenko, a Ukrainian military commander and politician currently serving as a People's Deputy of Ukraine, over 121,000 men between the ages of 18 and 22 have fled Ukraine since August. That's when Zelensky lifted the ban on people of that age leaving the country. And of course if that many have fled, there are almost certainly many more who would go if they had the cash or a safe place to go to.

It's plain logic is not your strong suit, given such an idiotic non-sequitur. It could equally be that the majority in favor of fleeing have already done so and that the remainder are devoted to fighting to the bitter end.

So it looks as though a very large percentage of soon-to-be military age men are not interested in continuing to die for their country's borders. It seems likely to me that they would also welcome a peace plan.

Actually, it looks as though this is opinion masquerading as "fact".

There are now several hundred thousand Ukrainian men living abroad, and I'm sure many of them would eventually like to go home again, but they won't return as long as there's a good chance they'll be Shanghaied off the street and forced to go and get killed by a drone. 

And if they don't want to defend Ukraine, that's fine, let them stay in their refuge. What they have to do with domestic Ukrainian opinion, which since you've apparently forgotten is what I was talking about, needs to be shown.

Of course it's difficult to know what the majority of Ukrainians think about this. We would know if Ukraine had a free and fair election, but former president Zelensky has refused to call for elections, despite the fact that his term expired months ago. There is no provision in the Ukrainian constitution for a president who simply wants to hold on to power.

Here you go parroting Putin talking points again. An honest commentator would know, and admit, that the Ukrainian constitution specifically forbids elections during a war.

He has banned opposition parties and shut down any media outlet that was critical of his government. So Ukrainians have no independent voice now. Zelensky is giving televised pep-talks filmed in front of a green screen to try and persuade Ukrainians to keep fighting. But he's looking a little desperate. 

All media suffers once bullets start flying. Somehow this is only a problem when it happens in Ukraine.

It's likely that Zelensky and his European masters are afraid that if elections were held he would lose. Remember he ran on a platform promising peace, and that's what people voted for. So if someone ran against him, saying that he was willing to negotiate a peace settlement, there's a good chance that the peace candidate would get widespread support. But those who want the war to continue won't risk that. This is one of the reasons Putin is hesitant to negotiate a deal -- the Ukrainians he'd be negotiating with have no constitutional authority. 

"If" elections were held is irrelevant. Until Russia ceases its war of aggression, any such election would be illegal, and admit it -- if he won such an illegal election, Putin fanbois such as yourself would be screaming to high heaven about Zelenskyy's illegitimacy. Only in that case you'd (finally!) be right.

But Zelensky's days are probably numbered. NABU, the Ukrainian anti-corruption agency, is trained by Americans and there is strong US influence in its ranks. The fact that they have got rid of Andriy Yermak –  Zelensky’s fixer, enforcer, gatekeeper, and indispensable ally -- looks like more than cleaning house. (Everybody knows that Ukraine has been among the most corrupt countries in the world for years.) It looks like a slap at Zelensky's power, and a warning that if the US wants him out there are ways they can manage that. Three of his top government officials have already fled to asylum in Israel. (Rats, sinking ship.) Funny they would go to Israel, that beacon of justice and fair play.

I agree that the corruption investigation has to go on. I like that it seems to be following the evidence without regard to rank or title. If it goes up to Z himself, get rid of him. But if corrupt leaders were a valid reason to be invaded, every nation on earth would be at risk.

Anyway, borders aren't made by God, and Ukraine's have been particularly fluid over the years. The lines that Zelensky is sending people to die for were established in 1991. A large part of Eastern Ukraine is already known in the vernacular as Novorussia. And we know that using force to change borders is a possibility -- NATO did it in Kosovo.  

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:...orders.svg

Don't look now, but you've just supported the idea that "might makes right". Have you always been amoral? You point to NATO's actions as if I supported them. I didn't.

So this fantasy that Zelensky's government is going to win back all the lost territory by military means is just ridiculous. At this point the choices are to cut their losses and make a deal, or to lose a lot more land -- and a lot more people. It would be nice if the people of Ukraine had a voice in this, but no one is giving them that.

... or they can fight until the Russians tire of throwing away blood and treasure, or, more likely, someone in Moscow realizes that the harm Russia is doing to itself is irreparable.

Pearls before swine, Thump.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Pearls before swine, Thump.

I know, I know ... <sigh>

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Pearls before swine, Thump.

I know, I know ... <sigh>

It’s almost as if Bel gets his views about geopolitics from James Bond films.

Boru

[Thumpalumpacus]

I know, I know ... <sigh>

It’s almost as if Bel gets his views about geopolitics from James Bond films.

Boru

That would probably still be more rooted in reality. The idea that a defeated Ukraine will quickly forget Bucha and other atrocities and not keep fighting is silly -- especially when you consider the backdrop of the Holodomor. The Russians have a loooooooooong history of inflicting themselves upon the Ukrainians and the Ukrainians have memories just as long.

[Belacqua]

A couple of misconceptions I could clear up:

First, I do not support Russia's actions, and I don't think that Putin is wonderful.

This is the type of assumption that people make a lot -- if I say that one side is bad, they assume I'm supporting the other side. As when I said that Kamala Harris was a weak candidate and couldn't win, some people thought I was supporting Trump. But it's possible for both sides to be bad. If I am against cholera, this doesn't mean that I like typhus.

Second, I have never been a Christian and when I tell you what I have read about Ukraine this has nothing to do with religion.

And I am not a Republican. The only political party in the world today that I find respectable is the Reiwa Shinsengumi, led by Yamamoto Taro.

[Fake Messiah]

First, I do not support Russia's actions, and I don't think that Putin is wonderful.

So you don't support Russia but you keep justifying their war, like when you keep blaming Ukraine for the war (eg. that they brought the war to themselves for supposedly getting "westernized"), you are comparing the Russian situation of the war in Ukraine to that when Napoleon invaded Russia, you keep speaking about Putin as the only sane person in the conflict, and so on. So cut the crap.

[Paleophyte]

I know, I know ... <sigh>

It’s almost as if Bel gets his views about geopolitics from James Bond films.

No, they'd have been better written if they were.

[Paleophyte]

A couple of misconceptions I could clear up:

A couple of misconceptions I should clear up: You support Putin. You may not have the little red MAGA cap, but that just means that you're bad at cosplay.

[The Grand Nudger]

Western aid has done alot of good, for sure, and the worst thing that can be said in this case is that it didn't do more when it mattered most. Repelling the initial invasion, when russia still had it's best troops and best put together kit - for russian values of both things, was not a western effort. The reflexive control campaign had fewer red line sized holes in it then.

[Thumpalumpacus]

A couple of misconceptions I could clear up:

First, I do not support Russia's actions, and I don't think that Putin is wonderful.

This is the type of assumption that people make a lot -- if I say that one side is bad, they assume I'm supporting the other side. As when I said that Kamala Harris was a weak candidate and couldn't win, some people thought I was supporting Trump. But it's possible for both sides to be bad. If I am against cholera, this doesn't mean that I like typhus.

Second, I have never been a Christian and when I tell you what I have read about Ukraine this has nothing to do with religion.

And I am not a Republican. The only political party in the world today that I find respectable is the Reiwa Shinsengumi, led by Yamamoto Taro.

I notice you didn't argue my point that you're historically illiterate.

Secondly, even if you don't like Putin as well ( a self-serving and yet doubtful claim, imo), the fact that you don't critique his actions, (which are worse by far than any of your complaints about Zelenskyy, puts you in the position of carrying water for Putin in this discussion. It undermines any attempt you make at any appearance of objectivity. It's like the use of negative space in the visual arts.

I sure wouldn't want to be seen in that light myself.