Russia and Ukraine

[The Grand Nudger]

That's why it said that it do not need a CIA operative, Ukrainian news, or Kremlin propaganda to evaluate the past push to Kiev. It is an established fact, and given the context in which it happened it's pretty safe to say, that not everything happened as planned.

Did it? Who knows?
Maybe their idea was to divert Ukrainian troops aways from Donbas while Russia took it over. The established fact is that Russia currently controls Donbas and doesn't seem to be having much difficulty in keeping it.

They already had the separatist regions.  Recall, that was part of their early round of bullshit explanations for the invasion - that they had to protect these people and help them with their interest in self determination. They're now subject to forced conscription between 16 and 65 to be used as recon by fire elements for russian arty.  Currently, units are being pulled from the donbas to stop the front wide ukrainian counteroffensive. It's unclear that russia will be able to keep it. The ill-equipped separatist units aren't known for their valor or competence, and the only marginally better equipped russians aren't known for having their backs.

- but all of this is a doomed argument.  Putin said this territory...every square inch of ukraine... is his, that's why he did it.  We can dispense with any other explanation.  They wanted territory, they thought they could easily acquire it, they did not.  Further...they are losing territory they already had...and this is why they rattle the nuclear sabre, and hope to freeze the conflict, and this is why helpful idiots are dispatched to suggest the world abandon ukraine, and ukraine give russia what it has completely failed to take by force.     

They're not playing 3d chess. They just fucked up. Militaries fuck up.

Yes, he invaded. That's why I support maintaining the sanctions that the western world put in place.

Sanctions are great, but sanctions alone are just putting a price tag on wars of territorial expansion.  So..lets say a nation eyes some piece of real estate, does the math, and figures it's worth more than the sanctions?  We were entertaining that possibility earlier weren't we? Just go to the economy next door. Hey, is some chunk of wherever you're from worth the sanctions - whichever chunk we'll be giving russia in our negotiated peace in ukraine? Asking for a friend with alot of guns that isn't russia.

[Deesse23]

That's why it said that it do not need a CIA operative, Ukrainian news, or Kremlin propaganda to evaluate the past push to Kiev. It is an established fact, and given the context in which it happened it's pretty safe to say, that not everything happened as planned.

Did it? Who knows?

Thats exactly what i was talking about. If someone can convince you that the abortion of the main thrust towards the capital of the country you just invaded is not a plan going south, then i bet you can be easily convinced of even more absurd stuff.

[Pat Mustard]

What’s intriguing about this conflict is that Ukraine doesn’t have to win the battles to win the war - the longer it goes on, the worse it’s going to get for Russia.

... for everyone.

Regarding specious comments made about the peace proposals: why in the world would Ukraine agree to cede territory to end the war?

Precisely.... to end the war.

Russia didn’t stop at Crimea, what makes anyone think they’ll stop at the Donbas? Or eastern Ukraine? Or Poland? Or the Baltic states?

That would have to be agreed at the same time and any failure by Russia to abide by that deal, would result in some greater action by NATO. Hopefully, other large nations would also commit to keeping Russia in check.

 Putin has made it very clear that he feels Ukraine has no right to exist as a sovereign state.

That is probably propaganda to keep their morale up and instill fear in Ukrainian forces, don't you think?

It always makes more sense to give the bully a broken nose that to keep giving him your lunch money.

What if the bully then breaks your bones?



I think that, if we are to ever see this war to end, some concessions must be given on both sides.
Russia claims to want their Russian speaking peoples in Donbas and Crimea to not be under the yoke of a western leaning government, along with wanting a buffer nation between it and NATO. Belarus is one and Ukraine should be the other.
From my point of view, this war is the wrong way to accomplipshing either of these goals, but what do I know?

- Concerning the Russian speaking people, simply giving them a Russian passport, housing and jobs in present day (ahem, 2021) Russia would have been far far cheaper in both currency and human life.
- Concerning the buffer to NATO, Russia would just need to be a friendly nation towards Ukraine... and the Oligarch-based society should have appealed to the Ukrainian Oligarchy, but maybe the greater market of the EU appealed more to them... I don't know. Either way, the Russian way of doing things was clearly steering Ukraine away from them, hinting that they were doing things the wrong way. And so, like children, Putin&co. resort to violence.


To end the war, Russia would give Ukraine some peace; Ukraine would give Russia some land.
The western world could ease back on some sanctions, but I think they should mostly be kept - it's that bloody nose you talked about.
Yes, Europe will suffer a bit with the lack of gas for a while, but that will provide a good incentive to invest in renewables/nuclear and further independence from the very geographically localized fossil fuels and the dodgy regimes that control them around the world (yes, this includes the US).
China and India would rub their hands in glee as they get cheaper oil and gas from Russia that they can't sell to Europe... but that's going to happen even if the war goes on indefinitely.

Here's a better idea; to achieve peace, Russia can cede all land up to the Volga between a lattitude just south of Saratov and a lattitude parallel to the Volga Delta and also pay reparations sufficient to repair all damages caused by the invasions since 2008 to the end of hostilities.

[Pat Mustard]

Leaves one wondering which spins are true and which ideals are realistic, doesn't it?
I gave up following the news on this because, on the one hand, the terrain seems to be mostly static; on the other hand, all I get from the media is "the UK says this", "The CIA says that", "according to Ukrainian sources", etc. oh, and "russian state media made this outrageous comment". Who is being truthful here?

That's why it said that it do not need a CIA operative, Ukrainian news, or Kremlin propaganda to evaluate the past push to Kiev. It is an established fact, and given the context in which it happened it's pretty safe to say, that not everything happened as planned.

IMHO you get into the trap of "there is s lot of disinformation out there. We do not know many things, therefore we do not know anything"

Much like the stereotypical Christian apologetic " science does not know everything, therefore it knows nothing"

No offense, but IMHO you are playing into Putin's cards. He is the one who would like to have everyone confused, because he needs to cover the simple and basic fact that he invaded another nation.

Outside of a few myths made early, like the Ghost of Kyiv, when everybody in Ukraine was scrambling to post a defence, Ukrainian sources have been either accurate or as close to accurate as they could given necessarily incomplete information. Ukraine often restricts information to ensure operations aren't compromised but doesn't deliberately mislead. You can't come close to saying that about Russia.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Hey fun fact the United States has a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_M...Assurances

The memoranda, signed in Patria Hall at the Budapest Convention Center with US Ambassador Donald M. Blinken amongst others in attendance,[2] prohibited the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, "except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.[3][4]

Russia broke the treaty therefore i believe it's up to the UK and America to make them follow it

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Hey fun fact the United States has a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine 

https://www.whsv.com/2022/02/25/does-us-...t-ukraine/

That’s not what that article says at all.

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

Hey fun fact the United States has a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine 

https://www.whsv.com/2022/02/25/does-us-...t-ukraine/

That’s not what that article says at all.

Boru

Whoops, wrong article...

[Angrboda]

Breaking news: Putin stamps his iddie widdle feet. More at 11.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Leaves one wondering which spins are true and which ideals are realistic, doesn't it?
I gave up following the news on this because, on the one hand, the terrain seems to be mostly static; on the other hand, all I get from the media is "the UK says this", "The CIA says that", "according to Ukrainian sources", etc. oh, and "russian state media made this outrageous comment". Who is being truthful here?

Well, we can winnow it down a bit. Since Putin has repeatedly expressed his support of the dictum, ‘Never tell the truth when a lie will do’, I think we can safe rule him out as one of the truth tellers.

A reasonably useful method for determining the truth of a statement is to see how well it matches with known facts. For example, Ukrainian numbers of Russian soldiers killed is much closer to the actual number than what the Russian media reports (we have a fairly good estimate of the correct number based on troop/equipment replacements, etc).

Boru

Here’s a recent example of this metric:

A leaked letter from the Russian Ministry of Finance (confirmed) says that as of 28 August, 361.4 billion rubles have been paid to the families of Russian soldiers killed in Ukraine - not MIA, not wounded, just killed. The standard payment per family is 7.4 million rubles. This works out to 48 759 dead Russians.

Ukraine claims to have killed 50 000 Russians. Putin says Russia has lost ‘nothing’.

Who seems closer to the truth?

Boru

[Irreligious Atheist]

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?

We are "aiding" people by using them as cannon fodder to advance our own goals. Like I posted before, if the goal is to weaken Russia at any cost of human life to the Ukrainians, then you can make a solid and logical case for doing that, but I believe that is a neo-con argument. I just disagree with the "at any human cost" part, and I think it's especially easy for us to act like we should be the ones that get the final say in Ukraine making a peace deal, because we're not the ones dying in the war and dealing with this on a daily basis.

And as far as the people going on about me being Canadian, there have been several posters who have told me to leave and go post on a Canadian forum, so that's what first made me get Trumpian vibes from some people and the "go back to your country" vibe. I'm aware there aren't many Trump or George Bush Jr fans on here, which is why it just strikes me as odd when people are using their arguments (not directed at you).

I would not frown upon other nations not intervening if Canada was invaded, because messing with the US army is probably not a good idea on their part and I would not recommend it. Helping us with food or medical supplies? Sure. That's awesome.