Russia and Ukraine

[The Grand Nudger]

Meanwhile, in ukraine, ukraine advances along the entire front simultaneously at a pace greater in days than russia achieved over years. Russia, for it's part, is pulling it's equipment out of long term storage, getting it's drones from iran..and, apparently, buying rounds from north korea.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Given that Putin’s attempt to subjugate Ukraine was originally supposed to take three weeks

Is that what Western propaganda told you, or what the Kremlin said?

Six months in and Russia controls barely 1/5 of Ukraine. This isn’t propaganda, it’s a brute fact. When you’re failing to achieve your objectives in a war, you’re losing. When you’re losing, the other side - by keeping you from achieving those objectives - is winning.

How do you know Russia's objectives?

I also prefer to see this war end via a treaty, you and I disagree on what the terms of that treaty should be.

I think your terms are unrealistic, while mine are a bit more feasible and, yet, I still think Russia would not agree to them.
Remember that Putin needs to come out of this as the apparent winner ( in the propaganda filled nation of his). Either that or the whole Russian system gets replaced from within (or by NATO) which will not happen.

1. It’s neither. Russian troops during the assault on Kyiv were supplied for three weeks and took along their dress uniforms for the victory parade.

2. Like Nudger said - Putin has said a) Ukraine has no right to exist as a sovereign state b) he wants to reconstitute Greater Russia (Russia, Belarus, Ukraine), and c) Ukraine needs to be de-Nazified.

3. Yes, my suggested terms are unrealistic. So what?

Boru

[Rev. Rye]

I suspect that the two articles are more a "motte and bailey" type of deal.





Granted, the motte in this case isn't all that good, but given that it's less batshit crazy than the bailey, Putin's essay ended up being translated into English on the Kremlin's official website, and the bailey where Russian State Media openly advocates genocide has to be translated by a third party on Medium for us non-Russians to read it, because even Google Translate doesn't seem to want to touch it.

As for the projecting Nazism, I suspect the Cognitive Dissonance if lessened if you treat Nazism as something that only the other guy does. Stuart J. Kaufman described a list of seven rhetorical tenets of nationalism, and I swear to Jah, Russia's been using every fucking one of them, even the ones that would seem mutually exclusive.

If an area was ours for 500 years and yours for 50 years, it should belong to us – you are merely occupiers.
If an area was yours for 500 years and ours for 50 years, it should belong to us – borders must not be changed.
If an area belonged to us 500 years ago but never since then, it should belong to us – it is the cradle of our nation.
If a majority of our people live there, it must belong to us – they must enjoy the right of self-determination.
If a minority of our people live there, it must belong to us – they must be protected against your oppression.
All of the above rules apply to us, but not to you.
Our dream of greatness is historical necessity, yours is fascism.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I thought you just posted a few pages ago that you don't believe in personal attacks, and then you carry out personal attacks in this post. Why the change of heart? It doesn't bother me, but just wondering.

I apologize for getting that wrong about the you're either with us or against us thing. I unintentionally misrepresented you there, and I always admit it and apologize when I see I have done something wrong.

There's the answer to your question. When folks misrepresent my stances, I pull the gloves off. You're either not following the conversation closely, or deliberately lumping me in with others, but in either event that shit irks me.

I admit I got lazy in remembering all of what you had actually posted, and I screwed up. I'll try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Montreal or Toronto or wherever? Why do people keep bringing up my Canadianness in a negative way time after time? It doesn't bother me, and most Canadians have that Canadian nationalism in the same way and have no problem poking fun at the Yanks, but I get a very Trumpian "Go back to your country" feel when I see people framing me being Canadian as a negative or posting on a mostly American forum as a Cannuck. I have no clue what your intentions were nor am I claiming you intended it that way, but it just strikes me as a bit bizarre imo.

You should be happy, given the paucity of aid provided by Canada, was my point. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

As far as the xenophobe angle is concerned, I've lived in three countries outside of American have visited several others, and detest Trump, so yeah, no. Swing-and-a-miss as they say in baseball.

I already explained what you're asking me, and I don't know why you're pretending I didn't. Ukraine had a tentative peace deal on the table, and I think they should have given that a try, and I disagree with the UK PM telling the Ukrainians that the deal was unacceptable to the UK, seeing as I don't think the West should get to act as gods. To try to act as a god is an immoral act.

You haven't given that claim solid support.

To interfere in a peace deal is an immoral act.

... if that is what actually happened.

And I do not care in the least if me being ok with a Russia Ukraine war makes me immoral in people's eyes. That's cool. I'm also fine with school aged girls in Afghanistan not being able to go to school because of the Taliban, just like Biden was, and I don't lose a wink of sleep over my position on that. I'm fine with letting millions of people starve in North Korea. I never said I was a cuddly care bear who just wants to save everyone in the world. But us arming the Ukrainins, that act alone brings us into this morally, which is why I expressed my moral disagreement in that particular situation.

I guess I don't understand your moral qualms about aiding a people suffering an invasion. Not too sure I want to, for that matter. Both Afghanistan and DPRK are essentially domestic-policy matters that my country has no business intervening in, in my outlook; but a peaceful international order relies upon the principle of a nation's borders being respected, so your comparisons aren't really apt.

If America invaded Canada, would you frown upon other nations not aiding Canada?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Ukraine is not in NATO. They are in Russia's sphere of influence, and that sucks, but thems the rules. I didn't say we should never intervene. We have treaties and NATO for a reason.

Whether they are in Nato or not they are still an ally, They are not in Russia's sphere of influence if they don't want to be. So these rules that exist nowhere but in your head are horseshit. And treatise or not we can and should defend Ukraine and stop them from making stupid decisions. This is a stupid statement....

Even without a Ukrainian alliance -- and we have none thus far -- it still behooves us to support them, as their defense and eventual success is not only in the interest of a peaceful world, it is also in our national interest. And a nation does not have friends. It has interests. Alliances are simply a formal and legal recognition of those interests.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Stop trying to bunch me in with the America First 1940s non-interventionalists that didn't even want to intervene during WWII or wouldn't want to intervene anywhere no matter what.

They did not want to intervene in WWII, so there's that. It's in their name, which they gladly accepted at the time. Furthermore, they too argued that the absence of a treaty-alliance supported their position, much like you are here. Additionally, they held this position even as news of atrocities began circulating, much as you are holding your position here.

So I think it's a fair comparison between your position and theirs.

[The Architect Of Fate]

I thought you just posted a few pages ago that you don't believe in personal attacks, and then you carry out personal attacks in this post. Why the change of heart? It doesn't bother me, but just wondering.

I apologize for getting that wrong about the you're either with us or against us thing. I unintentionally misrepresented you there, and I always admit it and apologize when I see I have done something wrong.

There's the answer to your question. When folks misrepresent my stances, I pull the gloves off. You're either not following the conversation closely, or deliberately lumping me in with others, but in either event that shit irks me.

I admit I got lazy in remembering all of what you had actually posted, and I screwed up. I'll try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Montreal or Toronto or wherever? Why do people keep bringing up my Canadianness in a negative way time after time? It doesn't bother me, and most Canadians have that Canadian nationalism in the same way and have no problem poking fun at the Yanks, but I get a very Trumpian "Go back to your country" feel when I see people framing me being Canadian as a negative or posting on a mostly American forum as a Cannuck. I have no clue what your intentions were nor am I claiming you intended it that way, but it just strikes me as a bit bizarre imo.

You should be happy, given the paucity of aid provided by Canada, was my point. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

As far as the xenophobe angle is concerned, I've lived in three countries outside of American have visited several others, and detest Trump, so yeah, no. Swing-and-a-miss as they say in baseball.

I already explained what you're asking me, and I don't know why you're pretending I didn't. Ukraine had a tentative peace deal on the table, and I think they should have given that a try, and I disagree with the UK PM telling the Ukrainians that the deal was unacceptable to the UK, seeing as I don't think the West should get to act as gods. To try to act as a god is an immoral act.

You haven't given that claim solid support.

To interfere in a peace deal is an immoral act.

... if that is what actually happened.

And I do not care in the least if me being ok with a Russia Ukraine war makes me immoral in people's eyes. That's cool. I'm also fine with school aged girls in Afghanistan not being able to go to school because of the Taliban, just like Biden was, and I don't lose a wink of sleep over my position on that. I'm fine with letting millions of people starve in North Korea. I never said I was a cuddly care bear who just wants to save everyone in the world. But us arming the Ukrainins, that act alone brings us into this morally, which is why I expressed my moral disagreement in that particular situation.

I guess I don't understand your moral qualms about aiding a people suffering an invasion. Not too sure I want to, for that matter. Both Afghanistan and DPRK are essentially domestic-policy matters that my country has no business intervening in, in my outlook; but a peaceful international order relies upon the principle of a nation's borders being respected, so your comparisons aren't really apt.

If America invaded Canada, would you frown upon other nations not aiding Canada?

To point out that even if Johnson did interfere. That itself wouldn't be wrong or immoral if it was an honest attempt to stop Ukraine from screwing itself over when they could get a better deal from a position of strength after Russia's defeat.

[Thumpalumpacus]

lol obviously Russia was going to lie about the imminent invasion. Anyone in his position would, no? That's just smart.

That rather undercuts any trust required to sign and execute a treaty, don' you think? Again, in diplomacy, credibility is everything -- and Putin, whatever else he has done, has squandered Russia's credibility, by this very point.

[Deesse23]

Meanwhile, in ukraine, ukraine advances along the entire front simultaneously at a pace greater in days than russia achieved over years.  Russia, for it's part, is pulling it's equipment out of long term storage, getting it's drones from iran..and, apparently, buying rounds from north korea.

So much winning!

Sorry, couldnt hold that back. 


I am really amazed how people can rationalize things like what Poca is spinning here. In February it was "denazification and demilitarisation of a state that should not exist and is an inherent part of (mother) Russia)". In September people are seriously asking what Putins goals may be, or have been, before the russian army got bogged down in Donbass.

One of the first things was a spearhead to the capital of Russias victim, followed by a retreat (because Kiev could not be taken), followed months later by a CIA dude claiming that Putin expected Kiev to fall withing x days. Duh. I could have said that. Does not need a rocket scientist or CIA operative, does it? But what do we see here? People arguing the CIA has no clue and is possibly spinning propaganda. Therefore we dont know what the spearhead on Kiev was supposed to be 

Jesus F. Christ. 

Claiming that Russia is about to win right now, is like claiming Germany is about to win after the First Battle of the Marne. Its so fucking asinine.

[Thumpalumpacus]

To point out that even if Johnson did interfere. That itself wouldn't be wrong or immoral if it was an honest attempt to stop Ukraine from screwing itself over when they could get a better deal from a position of strength after Russia's defeat.

"Even if --" Well, IA needs to show that that is was BoJo actually did.

Five months ago, the Western powers were looking for an "offramp" to allow Russia to withdraw without losing face. I suspect now the shoe is on the other foot, and it's Russia looking to pull its nose out of the bear-trap without looking entirely irrelevant. But they passed that exit-ramp a while back.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has two offensives going, and the Russians must be guessing at where is the schwerpunkt is. Me, I'd separate the eastern and southern fronts, and clear the Black Sea coast while holding shoulders in the east, while pinging attempted reinforcements that are sure to be moving.