Russia-Ukraine War Politics Thread Mk. 2

[Bacle]

This is a matter of pride to both Putin and the russian people.

No one is turning on him.

Maybe you should watch that Inside Russia video I posted; Putin is only surviving because he keeps escalating things at home, and because he's made the security services loyal to him. When he was 're-elected' after Medvedev's term, a lot of people in Russia began to dislike him for shitting on the Constitution they wrote that was supposed to actually give them democracy, not just oligarchs taking turns controlling the nation.

Also, if no one in Russia was going against Putin, where do the Russian volunteer units fighting for Ukraine come from? Where do the saboteurs who keep fucking things up inside Russia come from?

There is discontent within Russia, particularly with people who used to enjoy visiting the west for vacations, and playing off that greed and discontent is how Putin will end up removed/dead.

Some Russian's want to be able to vacation in Miami again sometime in their lives, more than continue the war, and are highly placed enough Putin cannot off them easily without backlash that would weaken him further. It's just a matter of when Putin is removed/killed, not if.

Edit: Also, if Russia was confident they were going to be able to keep Crimea in the long run, why are they continuing to shift their naval assets of out of the port of Sevastopol? Could it be the very valuable naval base the attempted to annex Crimea over is rather vulnerable to UA munitions, and thus is now rather worthless for staging warships out of.



Edit 2: You also forget the UK is already escorting UA grain shipments with the RAF and willing to face off with Russia directly, and yet no nukes have flown.

Russian fighter jet fired missile near UK plane over Black Sea

UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace said a Russian SU-27 plane released a missile in the vicinity of an unarmed RAF RC-135 aircraft patrolling in international airspace over the Black Sea.

nypost.com

 

[mrttao]

Ukrainian supporters seem to exist in this weird middle ground.

Where Russia is simultaneously a bumbling buffoon of a nation that the Brave Ukrainian Nation will crush any day now, yet also this titanic monstrosity of evil that is going to roll over eastern Europe with its all conquering, slavering, Slavic hordes.

It’s one or the other gents. Please pick one.

If I’m to take it seriously as a threat, and thus support more funding to the Ukrainians, you can’t keep telling me that it’s a rotting edifice that one good kick would send tumbling down.

And if it is that incompetent, then it is not a threat to the Eastern European NATO members. If it can’t even roll over Ukraine, a nation so hilariously corrupt that it gives Russia a run for its money, what chance does it realistically have against Poland or Finland?

I do not doubt the Russians desire to do so. But I highly doubt their ability to.

It is quite simply double think on their part

 

[Captain X]

Ukraine isn't going to kick them out

They will if we continue to give them the weapons and training they need to do so.

and that's the end of Putin's expansion into Europe

How wonderfully foolish to believe that this would happen when you reward him. All you'd be doing is giving him time to build the Russian military up to try again later. Appeasement didn't work with Hitler and it won't work with Putin.

And yeah, it's effectively ours to give.

How wonderfully arrogant.

 

[LordsFire]

This will end with nukes or Russia getting something in peace talks.

Endlessly repeating this will not make it true.

I'd like to believe that the opposite is true, but I'm a lot more realistic than you apparently are. It's extremely unlikely that Russia will actually go neutral over getting kicked out of Ukraine, but I acknowledge people can be that irrational, and it might actually happen anyways.

This does not change the fact that losing in Ukraine is unlikely, and certainly not guaranteed, to result in nuclear escalation.

Ukrainian supporters seem to exist in this weird middle ground.

Where Russia is simultaneously a bumbling buffoon of a nation that the Brave Ukrainian Nation will crush any day now, yet also this titanic monstrosity of evil that is going to roll over eastern Europe with its all conquering, slavering, Slavic hordes.

It’s one or the other gents. Please pick one.

Stop making a false dichotomy.

The issue isn't that it's one or the other, the issue is that the Russians are stupid enough to pick fights that they either can't win, or win without suffering horrific losses (their best case in Ukraine now.)

If they think NATO are cowards, they're a lot more likely to attack a NATO member state directly. Even if they lack the conventional military power to succeed, they might try it anyways.

And if they do try it, and end up in an open war with NATO at large, then the odds of nuclear escalation are much higher than they are because of the war in Ukraine.

Between that danger, and the fact that there would be American 'boots on the ground' getting shot at and potentially killed, yes I would like to see Russia soundly defeated in Ukraine with full backing of NATO, to demonstrate to the Russians that our resolve is not weak, and that they can't beat us even indirectly, trying directly has zero chance of success.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

Where Russia is simultaneously a bumbling buffoon of a nation that the Brave Ukrainian Nation will crush any day now, yet also this titanic monstrosity of evil that is going to roll over eastern Europe with its all conquering, slavering, Slavic hordes.

This is simply a matter of Russian historical behaviors being ingrained into the psyche of Eastern Europe. USSR then Russia have always been dominant in those areas and completely unhesitant to exert that influence even to the death of millions (Holodomir anyone?). There's your titanic evil that is intent on conquering Eastern Europe.

It is also true that the Russian military in this 'special operation' has really had its head up it's butt.

Both of these things are true at the same time. The reason all that matters is that Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe are scared silly that Russia will be given the time and resources to get their act together.

 

[Bacle]

Lithuania is opening up a new path for UA grain exports towards the Baltics/Baltic Sea.

 

[Abhorsen]

They will if we continue to give them the weapons and training they need to do so.

No, they won't. They haven't made progress recently. They haven't lost progress recently. It's at a money pit standstill. And I don't care about Russia in a moneypit war anymore. They aren't our chief adversary, that's China.

How wonderfully foolish to believe that this would happen when you reward him. All you'd be doing is giving him time to build the Russian military up to try again later. Appeasement didn't work with Hitler and it won't work with Putin.

... This isn't appeasement. We've contained Russia with NATO. Finland joining finished northern expansion, Ukraine losing some territory but joining NATO means they can't go West. They'd be completely cordoned off. Then just fund Moldovia to kill off what's left over.

How wonderfully arrogant.

It's called Realpolitik. It's true, whether or not you or Ukraine or common decency likes it. Denying reality because of morality is dumb. I know this well as a libertarian. My NAP adherence in no way stops other people from aggressing on me, so I don't advocate for a full AnCap reality.

 

[DarthOne]

It is quite simply double think on their part

I even called it as such on this very thread.

 

[Bacle]

No, they won't. They haven't made progress recently. They haven't lost progress recently. It's at a money pit standstill. And I don't care about Russia in a moneypit war anymore. They aren't our chief adversary, that's China.

Yes they have, just not in the sizes that make good or flashy media headline, and have been doing deep strikes on logistics hubs, SAM sites, Russian ships (including knocking off that Kilo sub), and are winning the counterbattery battle so long as shells and barrels hold up. It is not a flashy Hollywood battle or some US combined arms mass thrust like Desert Storm, this is trench, drone, and artillery warfare that is something new and old at the same time.

Ukraine knows they have to deal with Russian logistics if they want to have a chance of victory, and that's where the real strategic game is being played.

Also, the EU has said they are with Ukraine until victory regardless of what the US does, so the US populace doesn't have the veto power over Ukraine you think you have.

The UK is already escorting grain convoy's with the RAF, they aren't afraid of Russia posturing over nukes.

... This isn't appeasement. We've contained Russia with NATO. Finland joining finished northern expansion, Ukraine losing some territory but joining NATO means they can't go West. They'd be completely cordoned off. Then just fund Moldovia to kill off what's left over.

What you don't seem to get is that being in NATO won't protect Ukraine if Russia is able to bite off a chunk of land and keep it, because Russia won't take the lesson you think they will from a peace deal that let's them keep anything and let's Ukraine into NATO; it will be seen as weakness by the west to be exploited in the future at an opportune time.

It will just cause Russia to pause long enough to rearms, and then they will do this again, wagering that NATO won't be unified in defense of Ukraine this time, just like the security guarantee given to Ukraine when they gave up their Soviet nukes.

That only increases the chances of nuclear war in the long run, because Russia not being forced to accept defeat will make them think they can get away with it again in the future, don't you get that?

Look at Hungry and Orban, or the Greek shipping magnates, for people who are happy to undermine NATO in favor of Russia for business reasons because they make a lot of money working with Russia.

It's called Realpolitik. It's true, whether or not you or Ukraine or common decency likes it. Denying reality because of morality is dumb. I know this well as a libertarian. My NAP adherence in no way stops other people from aggressing on me, so I don't advocate for a full AnCap reality.

Yes, Ukraine should have the 'common decency' to die at Moscow's whims rather than try to become a truly independent people free of Moscow's whims.

What's that line from Sisko about the Federation betraying the Maquis to the Cardassians: "It's easy to be a saint in paradise."

 

[AmosTrask]

... Wow, who's believing Russian posturing now? I don't believe Russia on a lot of things they say, this is yet another thing I don't believe they believe. After Ukraine, if they got all of it, they'd go after Moldova. If they don't get all of Ukraine, they'll go after Ukraine again if Ukraine isn't in NATO.

They are never going to go after Poland or the Baltics cause NATO and Russia's poor showing in Ukraine.

Again, the US should go for simple contain strategy on Russia: give them Crimea, maybe the Donbass etc regions, and Ukraine goes into NATO. Or let Russia completely conquer Ukraine if Ukraine doesn't go back to an actual democracy and deal with its corruption. Ukraine isn't US business, and I don't care about defending awfully led governments.

Honestly, invite both Russia and Ukraine in as a partial NATO member for all I care, with an understanding that Article Five applies between those two countries attacking each other, as long as Russia stops supporting the Norks, or at least deports North Korean refugees to South Korea..

It's called Realpolitik. It's true, whether or not you or Ukraine or common decency likes it. Denying reality because of morality is dumb. I know this well as a libertarian. My NAP adherence in no way stops other people from aggressing on me, so I don't advocate for a full AnCap reality.

I'm going to assume you've forgotten where appeasement leads then. You're sounding more and more like Neville Chamberlain and Quisling.

 

[Zachowon]

Russia will try again.
They havnt launched nukes even if we crossed thier red lines what...10, 20 times now?
Belgorad has had Ukrainian supporting Russian go in and cause havok etc etc

 

[AmosTrask]

Russia will try again.
They havnt launched nukes even if we crossed thier red lines what...10, 20 times now?
Belgorad has had Ukrainian supporting Russian go in and cause havok etc etc

28 times last I counted. But it's been two months so probably more now. Stormshadow and equivalent cruise missiles were the last line they declared.

 

[Abhorsen]

I'm going to assume you've forgotten where appeasement leads then. You're sounding more and more like Neville Chamberlain and Quisling.

... Appeasement? Hmmm, it's almost like I already addressed that. Come back when you have an actual point.

... This isn't appeasement. We've contained Russia with NATO. Finland joining finished northern expansion, Ukraine losing some territory but joining NATO means they can't go West. They'd be completely cordoned off. Then just fund Moldovia to kill off what's left over.

Yes, Ukraine should have the 'common decency' to die at Moscow's whims rather than try to become a truly independent people free of Moscow's whims.

What's that line from Sisko about the Federation betraying the Maquis to the Cardassians: "It's easy to be a saint in paradise."

You are literally describing yourself here with the Sisko quote: advocating for perfection in an imperfect world. If you bothered to actually address other people's arguments instead of a strawman of them, you might have realized that my plan results in an actually independent Ukraine.

 

[AmosTrask]

Appeasement? Hmmm, it's almost like I already addressed that. Come back when you have an actual point.

Since you missed the point, and the reference to history I implied I'll state it openly. That is literally the same statement Chamberlain expressed and published at home when Hitler annexed Sudetenland and guaranteed no more expansion in exchange for the Entente not intervening? Neville even convinced France not to invade through pressure and trade concessions. Do you remember what happened next señor?

Peace in Our Time
Hun Threat Contained
Nazis Stopped

First the Rearmament, then the Rhineland militarization, Austria and Sudetenland. Some of us remember this playbook mijo and we don't like seeing history repeat itself.

This was part of the American education system the US military exported to the Philippines in the 80s. You should've received the same history classes or better in America itself.

 

[Zachowon]

Giving Lans to your adversary to basically go "Stop it and we gove you this"
Is a victory for them.

 

[Bacle]

... Appeasement? Hmmm, it's almost like I already addressed that. Come back when you have an actual point.


You are literally describing yourself here with the Sisko quote: advocating for perfection in an imperfect world. If you bothered to actually address other people's arguments instead of a strawman of them, you might have realized that my plan results in an actually independent Ukraine.

No, you miss the point of the analogy; it's about the 'imperfect' solution presented by the Federation being 'give up your land to stop a war with the Cardassians' so that the 'paradise' of Earth would not be under threat.

It's the same thing here; you want Ukraine to give up land to 'protect' other nations in the west, the 'paradise' that you don't want to risk by helping Ukraine.

 

[Bacle]

A great way to help fund Ukraine that doesn't 'take' a cent from any taxpayer; frozen Russian funds getting transferred to Ukraine.

 

[DarthOne]

A great way to help fund Ukraine that doesn't 'take' a cent from any taxpayer; frozen Russian funds getting transferred to Ukraine.

Or we could split it and use half of towards fixing our own county.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Or we could split it and use half of towards fixing our own county.

Already got a 3.5 trillion budget for that yo.

 

[Largo]

No, they won't. They haven't made progress recently. They haven't lost progress recently. It's at a money pit standstill. And I don't care about Russia in a moneypit war anymore. They aren't our chief adversary, that's China.

Why?

What, precisely, makes China a threat and Russia not a threat?