Funny the Russian Federation doesn't appear to be the stronger one by an overwhelming margin in any major capacity.
Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
- Thread starter ParadiseLost
- Start date
the longer this conflict goes on for, the more bitter the combatants and the local populace is going to get. the savagery will only intensify. just like every other war
in any case, talking about it is a waste of time
Maybe this could have been avoided if Ukraine adopted Finland's fig leaf neutrality instead of shouting loudly about joining NATO without first securing a "Notarized Written Guarantees" in triplicate from USA. I'm seriously flabbergasted about the sheer fatuity the Ukrainian government decision of not having insurances or leverage before repudiating the Minsk II agreements.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
Actually, to my understanding, Ukraine chose (2). Then Russia replied, "We are deleting (2), it's just (1) or (3)." Then Ukraine's leader at the time chose (1), but Ukraine's people disagreed, resulting in (3). Cue Russian surprised Pikachu face.
But I'm interested in your assertion that Ukraine "is" in Russia's sphere of influence. It's obviously very close to Russia and Russia has interests there. But it seems that you mean more than this. It seems that you mean Ukraine occupies a naturally subordinate position that it can't do anything about. It seems that reality disagrees with that. So by the standard I think you're trying to apply, instead of Ukraine giving up on its sovereignty without a fight, Russia should have given up on its delusion that it could deny Ukraine its sovereignty by force without the same fight.
Always best to dream big!
In one's imagination, there literally are no limits! Always best to dream big!
The russians can win this but its not going to be a cake walk and after the conventional war you get the unconvetional one. Will the Russians win this war? I think there is a solid chance they will dispite all the help the west gives it. The unconventional war afterwards I don't know.
The point of this war is to make this russias' last war and that means that nato has to turn this into a dumpster fire. The Ukraians will suffer the most of course but the idea is its better to fight this war there then on nato soil. Its a shitty situation all round and pretty much every one is some flavor of asshole.
paulobrito
Well-known member
To be fair all of the P5 have done all kinds of shitty things/excuses to justify they wars. One of the 'privileges' of being one of the P5.
AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
They didn't need to swear allegiance to Russia. All they had to do was keep away from NATO.
paulobrito
Well-known member
The situation in the area is stable until you know who executed one of their trademarks coups to install a regime hostile to Russia. Just ask Nuland. 'Fuck the EU' indeed.
Megadeath
Well-known member
That assertion gets bandied around a lot. So far, the only "evidence" I've seen for it is some diplomat talking about how they would rather someone who likes their country end up in power, and wondering what they can do to help make that happen. It's far from some sort of smoking gun.
Given the actions of the Ukrainian people in fighting and fleeing Russian occupation, is it really so hard to believe that the anti-russian leader was in fact installed by the will of the people?
On the other hand, if the US can reach out their hands and without even firing a shot, while hiding in the shadows, cause mass civil unrest and demonstrations, topple a government and install their own, whilst on the other hand Russia have spent 8 years trying to "fix" it their way, ultimately culminating in 2 months of largely unsuccessful fighting, well I think it's obvious who's "sphere of influence" they rightly belong in.
The only pro-russia argument seems to be "Russia really really wanted it you guys! If Ukraine just bent over and took it up the arse like Russia wanted, Russia never would have had to try and rape them."
paulobrito
Well-known member
Well, just look at the Maidan 'incident', the start of the Syrian civil war, and the tentative of coup in Byelorussia.
They are equal - some 'unknow snipers' fired at the security forces and demonstrators, causing the unrest, while well-prepared forces used that. I wonder who uses that playbook on adversaries? Oh, wait...
They are equal - some 'unknow snipers' fired at the security forces and demonstrators, causing the unrest, while well-prepared forces used that. I wonder who uses that playbook on adversaries? Oh, wait...
AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
oddly enough, the only neighbours Russia has attacked are those who played footsie with NATO. America has its monroe doctrine, Russia has something similar with its near abroad.
Of course its bullshit meant for his serfs, who are under information control, and also are pretty damn poor, and Poland expects a different kind of salt from the east.
Its not these expansionistic fuck's border territory, its a sovereign country now, that's the whole point of this war.
As Zach said, it was Polish territory in middle ages for quite some time too, why don't you see Poland invading it, over exactly the same thing?
Belarus is a puppet state on a long and winded way to being annexed into Russian Federation, and an apt comparison for one of the options Russia would accept having in Ukraine.
Neither Russia nor any other country in the history of the world is entitled to have a border wall of allies and/or puppet states, and its certainly not a widely recognized cassus belli for countries to invade their border states to make it so.
If you want to use "the strong do as they will" logic straight from Melian Dialogue on the Ukraine-Russia situation, perhaps Ukraine is in the EU-US-NATO sphere of influence now and Russia just has to deal with it as the weaker country.
Why did Russia attack countries before NATO existed, and why were the same countries included on the list?
Ironically Maidan was triggered because Russia launched a trade war against Ukraine because Yanukovych wanted to sign a popular EU association agreement and Russia decided to rein him in. So no, the NATO story is bullshit for naive westerners who are pacifists, isolationists or both so they eat it up because it agrees with their childish vision of the world.
Last edited:
Megadeath
Well-known member
Lol. So, your definitive evidence is that lots of incidents involve some sharp shooter, and then the opposition seems well prepared? Except, you don't even have the balls to make such a stupid argument. You just insinuate, try and muddy the waters, and then throw up your hands and say "Well, everyone is bad, every country attempts to influence things to their own ends. That's all Russia is doing, don't be a hypocrite."
Except even if America was responsible for inciting things or pushing them to a higher level, it's indisputable that a huge majority of Ukrainians are opposed to Russian rule. If it took America to help give them the push to force the issue (Which, again, there's NO evidence of.) that's not the same as sending hundreds of thousands of soldiers to murder anyone who tries to stop russia taking their land.
Bullshit. Oddly enough, Russia goes and kills anyone who makes noise about not wanting their country to be conquered or puppeted by Russia.
AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
Examples of this since the fall of the Soviet Union?
bintananth
behind a desk
Russia doesn't want allies. They want puppets who will ask "How high?" when Russia says "Jump."
Independent countries, quite rightfully, do not want to be puppet states and would greatly prefer it if foreigners don't interfere with their domestic affairs.
Ukraine have deep historical ties - but with Poland,not Moscov.And we do not try invade Ukraine to retake,let say,polish city Lwów.
And,in this scenario,USA would begave like kgbstan if:
1.They claimed that Canada is not real nation
2.Invade and get stopped by canadians with russians MANPADS and AT missiles.
3.Could not capture one canadian city after 2 months of fighting.
4.rape,murder cyvilians,and steal washmachines..
If you belive that kgbstan have right to murder,remember - they could do the same to you,too.
Putin blown up 311 russians in 1999 to have pretext to invade Czeczenya.
Then he genocided 200.000 people there,loosing 20.000 sodiers.
Now he is loosing 20.000 soldiers during 2 months,and could not capture Marjupol.
Of course,he would use soviet tactic and blame others for his crimes.
Just like soviets blamet german genociders for Katyń.
AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
How would america respond to mexico and canada becoming military allies with China with the possibility of basing chinese troops, planes, ships and missiles in mexico and canada?
Megadeath
Well-known member
Chechnya, Georgia, every single domestic political opponent, several journalists....
Megadeath
Well-known member
Severe disquiet, economic carrot and stick to push them their own way. But, what they'd really do is be such a good, productive and strong friend and neighbour that it's basically unthinkable. Russia are apparently incapable of being a decent enough neighbour to entice friendship so they must be such a bully they can enforce compliance. Like many bullies, they lose all they hoped for when faced with determined resistance.