Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Valmy]

So to use the ISIS example - are we involved in the conflict? If we're also fighting ISIS or can impose a no fly zone then I think it's justifiable. We know there will be civilian casualties, but we are also taking some risk with our own forces and can provide support in the actual use of weapons we're supplying or take measures to protect civilians - for example a no fly zone to stop them from flattening a city.

If we're not fighting, do we think they've got a chance of success? If we think there's a realistic chance that this insurgency will be able to win its independence/overthrow the regime or whatever - then I think it's justifiable.

If we're not willing to get involved ourselves, and we don't think they've really got a chance then I'm not convinced the "benefits" (can't think of the right word) outweigh the cost of massive civilian casualties. I'm particularly wary of adding "it'll keep them in a quagmire" as a benefit to weigh against attacks on civilians - I'm not convinced by that - we know it's futile, we're not directly involved but we'll let a town be flattened to keep them busy doesn't sit right with me.

The UK didn't look likely to win in 1940 and we weren't fighting so maybe that Lend Lease thing was a big fucking mistake.

Anyway we cannot fight the Russians. We just can't. We cannot risk a great power war in the 21st century. Now can Ukraine beat the Russians? I don't see why not with the right gear. And getting Russia bogged down there is worthwhile. Every day they spend in the Ukraine is time they are not attacking Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Moldova, etc...

If we let Russia roll over Ukraine and then they are flattening towns in Moldova or the Baltics would that sit well with you? We don't know yet if everybody can just surrender to Russia and eventually Russia will be satisfied and peace will break out. Best to make invading ones neighbors as unpleasant and counter-productive as possible. Best to demoralize the Russians and make it painful and hold out carrots if they back down.

And generally I am just for giving weapons to anybody defending themselves from foreign invasion.

[The Brain]

Peace can never be the top priority of responsible government.

[Sheilbh]

The UK didn't look likely to win in 1940 and we weren't fighting so maybe that Lend Lease thing was a big fucking mistake.

The UK was a state that was still holding on. We should be sending everything we can to the Ukrainian state to support it because it's probably the best deterrent available and I think it's the right thing to do.

I'm talking about if there's an invasion and Russia's occupying (more) Ukrainian territory whether we should be arming partisans and insurgents. Largely because I've seen people talking about it and I think pretty glibly.

Anyway we cannot fight the Russians. We just can't. We cannot risk a great power war in the 21st century. Now can Ukraine beat the Russians? I don't see why not with the right gear. And getting Russia bogged down there is worthwhile. Every day they spend in the Ukraine is time they are not attacking Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, Moldova, etc...

We can and should fight back if they attack Poland, the Baltic States or, in my view, Finland (as it's an essential flank to NATO).

We should give Moldova or Ukraine as much support as we can.

[Solmyr]

This speech feels like a rather angry ramble, much less calculated and deliberate than he usually presents himself. Not sure if that's a good or bad sign. Or just an act? Who knows anymore. Maybe he doesn't either.

Certainly lends credence to the theory that he has gone bonkers and is living in his own fantasy reality.

[Valmy]

I think they will just barrel bomb the population into submission and rule a graveyard - again Syria or Grozny. And I am a little unsure on the calculation of putting Ukrainians civilians who non-combatants through really apocalyptic bombing etc for the purpose or reducing the chance of escalation elsewhere. Grozny looked like this once Putin was finished (and based on Chechnya - the model would be bomb the population into submission and then bring the warlord/partisan leaders into the regime structures):

That is ultimately a choice for Ukraine to make. I mean if Ukraine wanted to surrender to Russia they could have at any point in the last few decades and nobody could have done much about it.

[Sheilbh]

That is ultimately a choice for Ukraine to make. I mean if Ukraine wanted to surrender to Russia they could have at any point in the last few decades and nobody could have done much about it.

Again we should do absolutely everything we can including arming Ukraine - it's the best deterrent and it's the right thing to do.

I am talking about the possibility of arming insurgents after an invasion. If there's an invasion I'm not sure about arming individual people or groups.

[Solmyr]

What I get from this is that this Peskov fellow absolutely has no fucking idea what's going on.

That has been the case pretty much on any subject.

[Solmyr]

I think they will just barrel bomb the population into submission and rule a graveyard - again Syria or Grozny. And I am a little unsure on the calculation of putting Ukrainians civilians who non-combatants through really apocalyptic bombing etc for the purpose or reducing the chance of escalation elsewhere. Grozny looked like this once Putin was finished (and based on Chechnya - the model would be bomb the population into submission and then bring the warlord/partisan leaders into the regime structures):

It's a bit more different (unfortunately partly due to racist attitudes, but still) bombing some Caucasus rebels or a Middle Eastern shithole than it is a European capital. The latter may not go well even among Russians themselves.

[Sheilbh]

That has been the case pretty much on any subject.

It seems like Putin's clarified/mad up his name now:

Andrew Roth
@Andrew__Roth
Crucial moment as Putin says Russia recognizes its client states' territorial claims in Donetsk and Luhansk. That includes claims on cities like Mariupol. But expects that direct negotiations, which have never taken place, will solve the problem. Clearly raises chance of war.

[Syt]

mad up his name

You ok there, Sheilbh?

[Josquius]

That has been the case pretty much on any subject.

It seems like Putin's clarified/mad up his name now:

Andrew Roth
@Andrew__Roth
Crucial moment as Putin says Russia recognizes its client states' territorial claims in Donetsk and Luhansk. That includes claims on cities like Mariupol. But expects that direct negotiations, which have never taken place, will solve the problem. Clearly raises chance of war.

Flicking onto Russia today the line was indeed that Russia wanted a peaceful solution but the west wasn't willing to negotiate.
Not sure how they're going to work that one. "Ok lets talk"- then what?

[Sheilbh]

mad up his name

You ok there, Sheilbh?

[The Minsky Moment]

Two thoughts:

1) A bit surprised at the weakness of the propaganda effort.  It really shouldn't be that hard in that confused neighborhood to foment some fig leaf excuse for intervention, especially for a well-trained ex-KGB operative, but the effort has been completely mailed in.  Either Putin and his coterie aren't the geniuses they've been made out to be (and make themselves out to be) or for some reason there is time urgency at play.

2) This could be the beginning of the end of Russia's position in the Pacific region.  If Western sanctions are imposed, Russia will have to lean hard on Chinese support.  They can and will get it, but likely at the price of selling off chunks of Siberian-Pacific resources to Chinese interests. 

[Berkut]

Two thoughts:

1) A bit surprised at the weakness of the propaganda effort.  It really shouldn't be that hard in that confused neighborhood to foment some fig leaf excuse for intervention, especially for a well-trained ex-KGB operative, but the effort has been completely mailed in.  Either Putin and his coterie aren't the geniuses they've been made out to be (and make themselves out to be) or for some reason there is time urgency at play.

2) This could be the beginning of the end of Russia's position in the Pacific region.  If Western sanctions are imposed, Russia will have to lean hard on Chinese support.  They can and will get it, but likely at the price of selling off chunks of Siberian-Pacific resources to Chinese interests. 

The West should start playing our own propaganda game.

I think casting a Russian-Chinese alliance as the modern Axis would be a good start. And not terribly inaccurate either.

[Malthus]

Two thoughts:

1) A bit surprised at the weakness of the propaganda effort.  It really shouldn't be that hard in that confused neighborhood to foment some fig leaf excuse for intervention, especially for a well-trained ex-KGB operative, but the effort has been completely mailed in.  Either Putin and his coterie aren't the geniuses they've been made out to be (and make themselves out to be) or for some reason there is time urgency at play.

2) This could be the beginning of the end of Russia's position in the Pacific region.  If Western sanctions are imposed, Russia will have to lean hard on Chinese support.  They can and will get it, but likely at the price of selling off chunks of Siberian-Pacific resources to Chinese interests.

I get the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the US/Western campaign of constantly publishing Russian intentions has seriously discombobulated the Russian propaganda strategy.

Even the usual useful idiots in the West are having trouble parroting Putin's various lies this time around. It is just a weak effort, perhaps because it has been constantly wrong-footed.