Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[LD0506]

Everything is impossible until it happens.

 

The biggest mistakes have been made by experts.

[DCSaints_fan]

12 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

Don't feel like debating this right now as I can easily understand why you, and probably lots of others feels like this about your country.

But seeing this from the outside could certainly looks like this.

The best example is the war in Irak with Bush. You lost a huge part of credibility on the international front due to this. Sadly.

I can kinda see where you're going with this.  But its not like the US tried to annex Iraq, or completely destroy it as nation, like what Putin has already done and is attempting to do with Ukraine.  And the 2003 invasion can thought of as a continuation of the 1991 where Saddam was the aggressor.

Edited February 25, 2022 by DCSaints_fan

[megared]

45 minutes ago, tshile said:

It almost sounds like simply stationing troops on the Ukraine border with Russia and Belarus would have been enough to stop this whole thing. It sounds like Russia is completely incapable of confronting us. And it sounds like Putin us at least somewhat aware of that. But it was a huge risk and I understand why we wouldn’t do it. 

 

Disagree.  Most of NATO is reliant on Russian oil & gas.  Which is why they're still waffling on how hard of sanctions they're willing to levy...and why they consider removing Russian banks from SWIFT as the nuclear option.  Russia would stop deliveries and many economies would suffer.  They were never going to stick a coalition of troops in Russia's backyard, and there's a low likelihood they can substantively sanction Russia without hurting themselves.  

[megared]

1 minute ago, DCSaints_fan said:

I can kinda see where you're going with this.  But its not like the US tried to annex Iraq, or completely destroy it as nation, like what Putin has already done and is attempting to do with Ukraine.  And the 2003 invasion can thought of as a continuation of the 1991 where Saddam was the aggressor.

 

It was a 'regime change':  and we've had plenty of them (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya).  Seems like Putin's end game is a non-alignment treaty, possibly a regime change as well.  

[Fergasun]

I am not sure if this is an appropriate analogy, but it seems right to me.  

 

In America we have been dealing with some portion of "anti-vaxxers" amid the COVID crisis.  I don't know the true numbers, but it's something like 25% of the American populace (maybe more, maybe less).  No matter how much scientific evidence was shown fhat getting the vaccine was inherently a better choice for them individually, they refused and vocally refused.  

 

It strikes me that Russia (and China, North Korea and Iran) -- maybe not Russians themselves... but the government in countries are the anti-vaxxers to what we call western or liberal democracy.  Inherently, to us in America and the West, the type of Government --- Big G government that is successful is the type our founding fathers instituted and this has been demonstrated for 250 or so years now.  We take it for granted.  It's hard to imagine that countries are 250 years behind the American Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights and thinking of enshrining that all men are created equal and inherently have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and that a pluralistic, representative democracy with consent of the governed, limited powers and republicanism of this democracy at the state, local and federal level is the way to ensure the best path forward.  Versus a top-down authoritarian regime that limits and punishes freedom of thought.  

 

They don't have that in Russian (or China, or North Korea) at the moment.  And maybe having that type of democracy in Ukraine is truly what scares those who are in control of the Russian government.  Maybe using the vaccine as example isn't exactly on point. 

 

And another thing I think of is -- compared to the American revolution -- there's 250 years of military technology advancement that make it much probably easier for "controlling powers" (whether a king with colonies or a controlling authoritarian group of people) to ensure that the American or French revolutions never happen... because they have a lot to lose.  

 

[PeterMP]

2 minutes ago, megared said:

 

It was a 'regime change':  and we've had plenty of them (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya).  Seems like Putin's end game is a non-alignment treaty, possibly a regime change as well.  

 

That isn't the way he's talked in the last 48 hours.  He's been talking about Ukraine being part of Russia and the Ukrainians and Russians being the same people.

[FrFan]

34 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Russia says it is ready to talk about peace according to CNBC… but then I looked on RT and they said the were open to holding peace talks in Belarus. Eh…

Putin calls on Ukrainian military to seize power to better negotiate with Russia

[Wildbunny]

9 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

They don't have that in Russian (or China, or North Korea) at the moment.  And maybe having that type of democracy in Ukraine is truly what scares those who are in control of the Russian government.  Maybe using the vaccine as example isn't exactly on point. 

Try to imagine what China would look like if there was freedom of speech and thought there.

 

Somehow, US are an anomaly. because that's 330M of people ruled by democracy. Countries that huge are usually runs by dictators, because that's how you deal with numbers.

 

Think about it and your analogy:

China is 1.5 billion.

25% of anti-vaxxers.

 

Now imagine them protesting, even a small part of them in Beijing.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

34 minutes ago, kfrankie said:

 

Assuming that 1000 people have been arrested for public protest (i.e. anyone that is seen protesting) I think that evidences a fairly substantial "dissent" among the population. Those people have to realize that when they get placed in the paddy-wagon, they're not going to the local jail to wait for their roommate the post the 100 ruble bail, and to ultimately get slapped with a 150 ruble fine and 10 hours of community service, all the while basking in the glory of being "brave enough" to get arrested. 

 

No..... their asses are going to disappear.  And not because those 1000 represent some sort of real threat, but because their associates, friends, family, etc. that chose not to publicly display their dissent are also watching.

 

In any event, with the amount of propaganda coming from Putin's regime, its going to be a long haul to convince Russia's citizens that its time for a change.

Still...there is always some dissent, some apathy, and some support when things like this happen. Countries are full of individuals, not mindless drones. Very few wars are universally supported or opposed. That's all I really meant. Capturing some protests (or even capturing evidence that Russians agree) seems almost pointless. The populace isn't a monolithic entity. 

[PleaseBlitz]

Apologies if this has already been posted.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/25/europe/ukraine-russia-snake-island-attack-intl-hnk-ml/index.html

 

Quote

A Ukrainian soldier on a tiny island in the Black Sea didn’t hold back when threatened with bombing by a Russian warship as Moscow continued its assault on Ukrainian territory.

 

According to a purported audio exchange, as the Russians approached Snake Island, also known as Zmiinyi Island, the Russian officer says: “This is a military warship. This is a Russian military warship. I suggest you lay down your weapons and surrender to avoid bloodshed and needless casualties. Otherwise, you will be bombed.”

 

A Ukrainian soldier responds: “Russian warship, go f*** yourself.”

 

 

[megared]

37 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

That isn't the way he's talked in the last 48 hours.  He's been talking about Ukraine being part of Russia and the Ukrainians and Russians being the same people.

 

He doesn't want Ukraine to be in NATO, and wants guarantees it won't happen.  Doubt he'll get NATO restored to the 1990 membership level, but he has a legitimate concern about NATO's eastward expansion backing him into a corner.  

 

Seem to recall a similar situation when another superpower didn't like the idea of a neighboring country pointing missiles at them...just have to hope Ukraine is his endgame.  

[Dan T.]

50 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

Don't feel like debating this right now as I can easily understand why you, and probably lots of others feels like this about your country.

But seeing this from the outside could certainly looks like this.

The best example is the war in Irak with Bush. You lost a huge part of credibility on the international front due to this. Sadly.

 

Here's the difference Bunny.  Bush and his administration are long out of office.  Because the U.S. holds free and fair elections to let the people speak. And the people elected them out of office.  The people of Russia don't have that option. Vladimir Putin poisons or jails his political opponents.

 

I understand your point of view and understand past missteps of the U.S.  We're holding on to democracy here, even though sometimes it feels like it's slipping away. Nonetheless, whataboutism in this thread when talking about Russia and any non-autocratic nation sounds hollow.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

3 minutes ago, megared said:

 

He doesn't want Ukraine to be in NATO, and wants guarantees it won't happen.  Doubt he'll get NATO restored to the 1990 membership level, but he has a legitimate concern about NATO's eastward expansion backing him into a corner.  

 

Seem to recall a similar situation when another superpower didn't like the idea of a neighboring country pointing missiles at them...just have to hope Ukraine is his endgame.  

Why does he have legitimate concerns? NATO wasn’t threatening Russia and the military units that make up nato are a shell of what they were looking n 1990

[PokerPacker]

Putin's only concern about NATO is that it's harder for him to bully and/or annex countries that are a part of it.  It's not like NATO's been going around invading parts of Russia.  Or other sovereign nations, for that matter.  NATO's expansion comes in the form of nations choosing to join, not conquest.

Edited February 25, 2022 by PokerPacker

[tshile]

1 hour ago, Wildbunny said:

The best example is the war in Irak with Bush. You lost a huge part of credibility on the international front due to this. Sadly.

I don’t want to derail this any further either but this makes me think we’re talking about two different things. 
 

why we went into iraq? Sure. Right there with you.

 

but how we went into iraq? What our military plan was? How well we executed it? That’s what I’m talking about. As far as I can tell we executed the invasion and takeover of iraq excellently - it took a week to render the 4th largest standing army useless and it cost us extremely little in terms of equipment and lives. 
 

how we managed it after that, and why we even went there in the first place… “national building” “hearts and minds” “mission accomplished” … yeah not talking about that aspect. Just the military planning and execution once it was decided we were starting the war, that’s all I was talking about. 

1 hour ago, megared said:

 

Disagree.  Most of NATO is reliant on Russian oil & gas.  Which is why they're still waffling on how hard of sanctions they're willing to levy...and why they consider removing Russian banks from SWIFT as the nuclear option.  Russia would stop deliveries and many economies would suffer.  They were never going to stick a coalition of troops in Russia's backyard, and there's a low likelihood they can substantively sanction Russia without hurting themselves.  

Ok but the problem becomes one of a global trade war

 

as opposed to an actual war where Ukraine disappears from the map, lots of lives are lost, and who knows what Russia does to the people Ukraine that they think are against the kremlin once they have control…

 

gas and wheat and corn being more expensive is not even in the same league if the consequences of an actual war breaking out. 

[megared]

1 minute ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Why does he have legitimate concerns? NATO wasn’t threatening Russia and the military units that make up nato are a shell of what they were looking n 1990

 

Russia has had longstanding grievances with the expansion of NATO.  He said Ukraine in NATO is a red line for him.  Also since he relies on neighboring countries (like Ukraine) to transit oil & gas, doubt he wants western powers interfering with his ability to manipulate supply/prices.    

 

[Mr. Sinister]

Any Russian patriots worked up the nerve to kill this guy yet?

[tshile]

7 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Russia has had longstanding grievances with the expansion of NATO.  He said Ukraine in NATO is a red line for him.  Also since he relies on neighboring countries (like Ukraine) to transit oil & gas, doubt he wants western powers interfering with his ability to manipulate supply/prices.    

 

This is one aspect that doesn’t get enough play. 
 

im not condoning Putin’s actions. Surely not. 
 

But NATO has spent decades antagonizing them and fighting a pseudo ideology war by working toward a expanding democracy to russias borders. Bringing in new nato members along the way, which brings with it building nato bases closer to Russia 

 

It’s like we spent decades poking someone with a stick; someone that was incapable of doing anything about it; and now they’ve turned to the side and decked someone smaller than them out of frustration 

 

doesn’t excuse their actions. But you can’t ignore we spent decades poking them with a stick and that it has significantly contributed to what’s going on now. 
 

(kind of like how you can’t ignore that the middle East’s hatred for us, has its roots in us ****ing around in the Middle East for 60+ years)

[Dan T.]

Interesting piece on the legitimacy of Russia even being a member of the UN Security Council, (an issue raised most recently by Ukraine's UN Ambassador his dramatic speech given even as the first explosions echoed in Kyiv.)

 

There was never a formal process to admit Russia into the U.N. after the USSR's demise, and the Security Council seat was granted via a decision from the UN's legal counsel with no action requested from the General Assembly. That edict could be revoked, and the U.S. could demand a vote in the General Assembly on Russia's Security Council membership. Would such a maneuver save Kyiv? No, but Moscow must be besieged on all fronts if there is any hope of rescuing Ukrainians from a Russian occupation. The worst crisis in post-war Europe demands nothing less than concerted, dramatic action aimed at Moscow's total isolation, and the time to start is now.

 

Kick Russia off the U.N. Security Council! (theweek.com)

[NickyJ]

Not going to post the link here, but there's an Instagram video by a Ukranian woman after a Russian soldier tried to stop other Russian soldiers from shooting at her and her mother. The mother died, and he was killed by friendly fire. That and the video of the tank driving over a civilian's car on the road.... It's just insane.

[PeterMP]

37 minutes ago, megared said:

 

He doesn't want Ukraine to be in NATO, and wants guarantees it won't happen.  Doubt he'll get NATO restored to the 1990 membership level, but he has a legitimate concern about NATO's eastward expansion backing him into a corner.  

 

Seem to recall a similar situation when another superpower didn't like the idea of a neighboring country pointing missiles at them...just have to hope Ukraine is his endgame.  

 

With NATO expansion, there hasn't come a move of NATO missiles.  I'm seeing this several places.  

 

We agreed to remove our missiles from Turkey for the Soviet Union not putting them in Cuba (most likely).

 

And we haven't moved them since.

 

Further, the US has never invaded Russia and when Russia has been invaded the two times in the last century we've actually come to their assistance. 

 

That Russia has some historical grievance against US led aggression is a joke.

 

11 minutes ago, tshile said:

It’s like we spent decades poking someone with a stick;

 

Supporting the ability of people to determine their government is not poking anybody with a stick.  It is supporting a basic human right as put forth in our Declaration of Independence.  If Russia and Putin doesn't like it, that's their problem.  The US should not back down and should not apologize for supporting basic human rights (and should do more of it and not less).

Edited February 25, 2022 by PeterMP

[Dan T.]

 

[PeterMP]

The Ukrainians (and other Eastern Europeans) don't want to be ruled by a Russian puppet government and would rather align with the US and the west than with Russia.  

 

That's Russia's fault and problem.  Not ours.

[tshile]

13 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

Supporting the ability of people to determine their government is not poking anybody with a stick.  It is supporting a basic human right as put forth in our Declaration of Independence.  If Russia and Putin doesn't like it, that's their problem.  The US should not back down and should not apologize for supporting basic human rights (and should do more of it and not less).

Sure. I agree with that. 
 

but I think it’s naive to think it all is based on some policy directive of supporting basic human rights. We say this shtick every time we do things yet we can find numerous human rights issues over the last 60 years where we didn’t do a single thing about, and every time we did something and proclaimed human rights there was always an obvious underlying motive there. 
 

i think it’s naive to think that poking Russia (or communism in general) with a stick whenever the opportunity presented itself, hasn’t been a core tenant of our government for the last 60 years. 
 

And I think it’s naive to think Russia can’t or hasn’t been able to figure that out. 

[Riggo-toni]

Ukraine was once the breadbasket of Eastern Europe...then Stalin slaughtered millions of them.  What I think concerned Putin more than NATO was that a western leaning democracy might develop a strong economy that would make Russia's petrol state economy look bad in comparison should another dip in oil prices occur.  Also, Putin knows that leaders who have expanded Russian borders like Peter or Catherine are glorified in Russian history.