Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Omega21]

You guys do realize that many Ukrainians, including women and children, are acting calmer than you are while they are huddled up in their bomb shelters with missiles flying overhead?

The same is true for the demoralized Russian 19-year-olds who are being forced to march in as cannon fodder.

Calm your tits

[Person Man]

Some good news:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-defiant-soldiers-of-snake-island-are-actually-alive-and-well-says-ukraines-navy/ar-AAUr6i8?li=BBnb7Kz

Again. Kings.

[Cassius]

You guys do realize that many Ukrainians, including women and children, are acting calmer than you are while they are huddled up in their bomb shelters with missiles flying overhead?

The same is true for the demoralized Russian 19-year-olds who are being forced to march in as cannon fodder.

Calm your tits

Things like this are always an opportunity for a certain type of person to show off how much they care about their 'values' by living vicariously through a conflict far, far away. It was exactly the same with the Afghanistan debacle seven months ago.

[Middle-aged Europe]

That exchange here has certainly become too tl/dr for me.

[WMS]

You guys do realize that many Ukrainians, including women and children, are acting calmer than you are while they are huddled up in their bomb shelters with missiles flying overhead?

The same is true for the demoralized Russian 19-year-olds who are being forced to march in as cannon fodder.

Calm your tits

Things like this are always an opportunity for a certain type of person to show off how much they care about their 'values' by living vicariously through a conflict far, far away. It was exactly the same with the Afghanistan debacle seven months ago.

My, the arrogance and condescension coming from a Russia hack. No wonder you hold ‘values’ in contempt when you don’t have any.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Just breaking on BBC News' liveblog:

Russian convoy 'stretches up to 40 miles'

Satellite imagery company Maxar Technology says that earlier reports indicating the column of Russian armour advancing on Kyiv is 17 miles (27km) long are inaccurate.

The convoy actually stretches about 40 miles, according to Maxar.

The company added that new images also show ground troops and attack helicopters in southern Belarus, less than 20 miles from the Ukraine border.

[Red Velvet]

Bolsonaro is not on Russia's side. He just refuses to take Ukraine's side.
Maduro on the other hand...

‘Neutral’ and ‘On Russia’s side’ is quite a fine distinction these days.

Only because the Western narrative decided to force places that aren’t involved with this to pick a side.

Brazil has long been a neutral country, that’s our main diplomatic approach since the 90s. We don’t want enemies. Bolsonaro adopting neutral stance, against these harsh sanctions against Russia, is something that even a leftist government would support because it’s close to a consensus approach:

https://www.twitter.com/BrazilBrian/status/1498370398496477191
At least on this some level of long-term consistency is maintained although they messed on the UN vote. Follows neutrality position and helps to not isolate Russia even more. Literally the first thing this government does in almost 4 years that isn’t completely dumb and a reason of shame. This isn’t our conflict and it’s wrong to take any side, stay friends with both US and Russia in order to find a middle ground solution.

Especially when there’s the risk of nuclear conflict, it’s scary how some people here want to escalate things so aggressively when them and their countries are not even involved on this.

Well then, under your logic Brazil should follow the same stance if the U.S. invaded, say, Cuba?

I somehow doubt that would be the case, tankie.

Neither USA or RUSSIA or CHINA. Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina are Latin American neighbors and therefore ARE our problem. Other places far away are not.

If everyone who doesn’t side with your cause is a “tankie” you will find not much sympathy here, as the mainstream forces here on both right and left support neutrality.

If you don’t respect or sympathize with the Latin American background and perspective, there’s not much reason for people to try to look through the Eastern European one either.

The Ukrainian cause is valid, but there’s a whole context behind it that relates to each place differently. And that’s okay.

You won’t find this “shame rhetoric forcing into submission to what I want” to work that much here within our diplomacy or with me. I favor respectful debates.

I’m exposing the hypocrisy of your position. I specifically chose Cuba because it is closer to the U.S. than Brazil and thus by the standards you set Brazil should be neutral because Cuba is more a neighbor of the U.S. than of Brazil. If you really oppose countries invading other countries to annex them de jure or de facto, then you should react the same way to identical scenarios, should you not?

But of course you won’t, because your stance isn’t about either morality or legality. It’s about anti-Westernism and especially anti-Americanism above all other considerations. You can try to cloak that in rubric about ‘the Latin American viewpoint’ all you want, but those are just window dressing to cover your less-than-scrupulous neutrality.

I call you and those like you tankies because that’s what you are.
https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/1496871285917470720?s=21
You are known in part by the company you keep. You actually going to ‘both sides’ this? Have you checked what the various human rights organizations of the world are saying?

If you want a respectful debate, try not defending a morally vacuous and hypocritical position.

It’s not hypocritical at all, it’s having an uniform moral ruler and not being submissive towards white supremacy rule that treats some places as more relevant than others. When they are not.

Brazil didn’t try to isolate USA when it invaded non-white countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and so it won’t do the same against Russia. Consistency check.

Brazil doesn’t approve of Ukraine invasion just as it doesn’t approve of wars done by western countries on the Middle East or Asia, which are normalized as acceptable by your media. Consistency check.

Your proposal to leave a neutral position when something that is not of our concern but ONLY when it happens against an European/Western territory but not doing the same when those places are the aggressors and invaders. THAT would be a big contradiction.

Ukraine is a sovereign country just like Iraq, Palestine, Yemen are. And it deserves to have that respected. But to have an uniform moral ruler in the geopolitical context would mean either picking a fight with EVERYONE or NOBODY.

To pick a fight with everyone would be stupid as hell, so we don’t antagonize US, Russia or anyone for stuff that isn’t related to us. That’s why the “fight nobody” neutral stance is embraced all across ideological boards.

It must be distressing to hear we don’t consider you or anyone as “the big hero” in the geopolitical stage, but that’s just a self-congratulatory delusion you chose to feed yourself on. There are no saints anywhere and US absolutely has no bigger moral ruler than the one that Brazil, a peaceful country, has.

Ah, there’s that “whataboutism” I was waiting for! Seriously, it’s like you’re determined to check every tankie box on a form. And mentioning “white supremacy” too! Got to get that in there somehow I guess. Wait, so opposing Russia’s invasion is ‘white supremacy’ now? That’s wild.

Oh, you think it was wrong for the U.S. to go into Afghanistan?! God damn you hate the U.S. no matter what, don’t you? Thanks for providing evidence of your guiding principle! And you actually think racism was why the U.S. went into both Afghanistan and Iraq? We could’ve filled those needs much closer to home. There were motives both divine and devilish behind the U.S.’ actions - well, the revealed hidden documents suggest there wasn’t a plan of any stripe involved because that would require having enough competence to organize one - but in neither case was annexation a thing. But this is what you want, isn’t it, to deflect from your lack of consistency by changing the topic?

You do realize Iran is the primary force behind Yemen’s descent into civil war? They backed the Houthis and the former tyrant who had been overthrown by a popular uprising’s return to power. The Saudis and the rest became involved after that.

And just earlier today I read in the Brazilian election thread that support for condemning Russia is also “embraced all across ideological boards”. Funny how you didn’t mention that.

And there’s your last paragraph where you just couldn’t help yourself from an anti-American rant! Thanks for confirming again that your guiding principle is anti-Americanism above everything else. Your position can be argued for from a realpolitik position, but has no basis in morality, legality, or consistency.

It’s been amazing watching the true colors of the tankies worldwide get revealed.

You simply cannot stop thinking of Brazilian policy being guided by principles instead because you don’t understand how the world is so much more than this US-Russia logic you clearly believe in.

This may come across as news, but not everything is about the US. I didn’t even relate Yemen to US in my post for example, but you automatically related to it for example.

That’s because you cannot see other countries existence outside from a US perspective only. It’s quite sad, but not surprising. Shows how you don’t respect other places independence of positions when they’re not automatically aligned with what US is for.

Latin America for you must be the pure simplicity of:

Alligned with US position = zzzzzz, who are these people again?

Neutral or Non-alligned with US position = OMG why they HATE us so much and try to be contrarians? Anti-American sentiment!!!

Move on, we just don’t take this BS around here seriously. But feel free to stay comfortable in your own bubble.

Your strawman is so badly constructed I’m amazed you have the gall to put it up. And you telling me to move to move on is hysterical given you haven’t refuted any, much less all, of my arguments, your position isn’t anywhere near the predominant one in this thread, this board, or this forum. You’re the one that’s in a bubble, tankie.

Of course it isn’t, never thought it was, this board is mostly Americans. It’s closer to your bubble than mine.

You on the other hand needs to bring this as a reasoning that “backs you up” because you don’t know how to properly refute what I said. It’s really two weights, two measures logic.

I don’t need to lose time writing long-ass posts refuting fairytales, you in your conscience already knows what I’m saying is right, behind all this silly pride facade.

Have a good night.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

As exhilarating as the above debate has been, can ya'll stop stretching this page with the giant wall of quotes?

[Middle-aged Europe]

https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCWorld/status/1498432598313422853

[WMS]

Of course it isn’t, never thought it was, this board is mostly Americans. It’s closer to your bubble than mine.

You on the other hand needs to bring this as a reasoning that “backs you up” because you don’t know how to properly refute what I said. It’s really two weights, two measures logic.

I don’t need to lose time writing long-ass posts refuting fairytales, you in your conscience already knows what I’m saying is right, behind all this silly pride facade.

Have a good night.

Wrong on every count. To the ignore list with you.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Bolsonaro is not on Russia's side. He just refuses to take Ukraine's side.
Maduro on the other hand...

‘Neutral’ and ‘On Russia’s side’ is quite a fine distinction these days.

Only because the Western narrative decided to force places that aren’t involved with this to pick a side.

Brazil has long been a neutral country, that’s our main diplomatic approach since the 90s. We don’t want enemies. Bolsonaro adopting neutral stance, against these harsh sanctions against Russia, is something that even a leftist government would support because it’s close to a consensus approach:

https://www.twitter.com/BrazilBrian/status/1498370398496477191
At least on this some level of long-term consistency is maintained although they messed on the UN vote. Follows neutrality position and helps to not isolate Russia even more. Literally the first thing this government does in almost 4 years that isn’t completely dumb and a reason of shame. This isn’t our conflict and it’s wrong to take any side, stay friends with both US and Russia in order to find a middle ground solution.

Especially when there’s the risk of nuclear conflict, it’s scary how some people here want to escalate things so aggressively when them and their countries are not even involved on this.

Well then, under your logic Brazil should follow the same stance if the U.S. invaded, say, Cuba?

I somehow doubt that would be the case, tankie.

Neither USA or RUSSIA or CHINA. Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina are Latin American neighbors and therefore ARE our problem. Other places far away are not.

If everyone who doesn’t side with your cause is a “tankie” you will find not much sympathy here, as the mainstream forces here on both right and left support neutrality.

If you don’t respect or sympathize with the Latin American background and perspective, there’s not much reason for people to try to look through the Eastern European one either.

The Ukrainian cause is valid, but there’s a whole context behind it that relates to each place differently. And that’s okay.

You won’t find this “shame rhetoric forcing into submission to what I want” to work that much here within our diplomacy or with me. I favor respectful debates.

I’m exposing the hypocrisy of your position. I specifically chose Cuba because it is closer to the U.S. than Brazil and thus by the standards you set Brazil should be neutral because Cuba is more a neighbor of the U.S. than of Brazil. If you really oppose countries invading other countries to annex them de jure or de facto, then you should react the same way to identical scenarios, should you not?

But of course you won’t, because your stance isn’t about either morality or legality. It’s about anti-Westernism and especially anti-Americanism above all other considerations. You can try to cloak that in rubric about ‘the Latin American viewpoint’ all you want, but those are just window dressing to cover your less-than-scrupulous neutrality.

I call you and those like you tankies because that’s what you are.
https://twitter.com/kasparov63/status/1496871285917470720?s=21
You are known in part by the company you keep. You actually going to ‘both sides’ this? Have you checked what the various human rights organizations of the world are saying?

If you want a respectful debate, try not defending a morally vacuous and hypocritical position.

It’s not hypocritical at all, it’s having an uniform moral ruler and not being submissive towards white supremacy rule that treats some places as more relevant than others. When they are not.

Brazil didn’t try to isolate USA when it invaded non-white countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and so it won’t do the same against Russia. Consistency check.

Brazil doesn’t approve of Ukraine invasion just as it doesn’t approve of wars done by western countries on the Middle East or Asia, which are normalized as acceptable by your media. Consistency check.

Your proposal to leave a neutral position when something that is not of our concern but ONLY when it happens against an European/Western territory but not doing the same when those places are the aggressors and invaders. THAT would be a big contradiction.

Ukraine is a sovereign country just like Iraq, Palestine, Yemen are. And it deserves to have that respected. But to have an uniform moral ruler in the geopolitical context would mean either picking a fight with EVERYONE or NOBODY.

To pick a fight with everyone would be stupid as hell, so we don’t antagonize US, Russia or anyone for stuff that isn’t related to us. That’s why the “fight nobody” neutral stance is embraced all across ideological boards.

It must be distressing to hear we don’t consider you or anyone as “the big hero” in the geopolitical stage, but that’s just a self-congratulatory delusion you chose to feed yourself on. There are no saints anywhere and US absolutely has no bigger moral ruler than the one that Brazil, a peaceful country, has.

Ah, there’s that “whataboutism” I was waiting for! Seriously, it’s like you’re determined to check every tankie box on a form. And mentioning “white supremacy” too! Got to get that in there somehow I guess. Wait, so opposing Russia’s invasion is ‘white supremacy’ now? That’s wild.

Oh, you think it was wrong for the U.S. to go into Afghanistan?! God damn you hate the U.S. no matter what, don’t you? Thanks for providing evidence of your guiding principle! And you actually think racism was why the U.S. went into both Afghanistan and Iraq? We could’ve filled those needs much closer to home. There were motives both divine and devilish behind the U.S.’ actions - well, the revealed hidden documents suggest there wasn’t a plan of any stripe involved because that would require having enough competence to organize one - but in neither case was annexation a thing. But this is what you want, isn’t it, to deflect from your lack of consistency by changing the topic?

You do realize Iran is the primary force behind Yemen’s descent into civil war? They backed the Houthis and the former tyrant who had been overthrown by a popular uprising’s return to power. The Saudis and the rest became involved after that.

And just earlier today I read in the Brazilian election thread that support for condemning Russia is also “embraced all across ideological boards”. Funny how you didn’t mention that.

And there’s your last paragraph where you just couldn’t help yourself from an anti-American rant! Thanks for confirming again that your guiding principle is anti-Americanism above everything else. Your position can be argued for from a realpolitik position, but has no basis in morality, legality, or consistency.

It’s been amazing watching the true colors of the tankies worldwide get revealed.

You simply cannot stop thinking of Brazilian policy being guided by principles instead because you don’t understand how the world is so much more than this US-Russia logic you clearly believe in.

This may come across as news, but not everything is about the US. I didn’t even relate Yemen to US in my post for example, but you automatically related to it. The condescension towards Americans is precisely of opinions like you’re pushing, which implicitly are disrespectful to Brazil as a sovereign independent country.

That’s because you cannot see other countries existence outside from a US perspective only. It’s quite sad, but not surprising. Shows how you don’t respect other places independence of positions when they’re not automatically aligned with what US is for.

Latin America for you must be the pure simplicity of:

Alligned with US position = zzzzzz, who are these people again?

Neutral or Non-alligned with US position = OMG why they HATE us so much and try to be contrarians? Anti-American sentiment!!!

Move on, we just don’t take this BS around here seriously. But feel free to stay comfortable in your own bubble.

You literally compared US intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq for the sake of what aboutism. The former is absurd and the later, while an unjust invasion wasn’t a war of territorial conquest and both were pariah stare dictatorships not flawed democracies. And then you tried a weak backup with hur dur racism.

The original qualification for joining the UN was declaring war on the Axis and we have only one real rule of conduct, no wars of conquest.
If your position is that you don’t want to give a damn about anything that happens outside of the Lusophone/Hispanophone world, just say that and don’t act like that gives you a moral high ground.

LMAO, how not to be condescending to that type of thinking? So you can invade countries for regime change? What the hell is Putin trying to do when he goes crazy trying to take Zelensky out to put a pro-Russian government?

US thinking says it’s entitled to invade countries which they see as “authoritarian”. Can’t you see that’s the same argument of Putin when he acts he can invade Ukraine because of “neonazi” presence?

It’s all different imperialism justifications to create a false sense of moral reasoning so that useful morons can be pushed to believe you’re spreading freedom and keep believing in these idiotic hero vs villain fairytales that stimulate national pride.

There are no heroes anywhere, wake up. We’re adults here, at least I hope so. All there is are different countries looking out for their interests. Your fairytales got lost in XX century and the Bush wars were the beginning of their burial.

You’re off on your whataboutism again. Afghanistan was a direct response to an attack on our soil and Iraq was unjust, and for the record I was saying that before the damn invasion, but knocking over a tinpot dictator is not the same as invading your neighbor to take some territory and shot the neighbors. Neutrality on this means looking at one nation saying ‘you are an imaginary country and rightfully ours, the bombing starts now’ and the other saying ‘stop’ and deciding they both have a point. It’s morally bankrupt.

Part of being an adult is shaking the pseudo-sophisticated cynicism that says both sides are the same and recognizing that the world might not have heroes but does emphatically have villains that collectively must be confronted. When your alleged principles leave you with less backbone than freaking Swiss bankers, you might not actually have any.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Can you guys PLEASE cut down the long quote string if you continue the conversation?  Thank you.

[Storr]

Kharkiv Kupyansk has surrendered per Washington Post:

"Northeastern Ukrainian city surrenders under threat of bombardment, mayor says

By Isabelle Khurshudyan3:02 p.m.

KHARKIV, Ukraine — At 7:30 a.m. Sunday, the commander of the Russian battalion offered the mayor of the northeastern Ukrainian town an ultimatum: Surrender or face a bombardment.

In a video message posted on the Kupyansk City Council’s Facebook page, Mayor Gennady Matsegora said he chose to surrender and that the town is now under Russian control.

Kupyansk, which has a population of about 28,000, is about 70 miles southeast of Kharkiv, where a Russian advance on the city was rebuffed Sunday afternoon, according to the governor.

Matsegora said the Russians assured him that schools, hospitals and grocery stores would be open Monday. He claimed that Ukrainian military agencies had left the town to fend for itself.

“We must come together and get back to normal life,” Matsegora said in the video. “You can come out of the basements and the bunkers.” "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/27/russia-ukraine-war-kyiv-news/#link-IWSSPIKQJRE4VIXYS7ZOATEJNY

Poor man just doing what he has to do in order to protect his citizens. Gun to the head scenario.

Hope those like him do not get labeled "traitors" or "collaborators".

Aaaaandddd... Called it...

<tweet snip>

Yep.
https://twitter.com/ignis_fatum/status/1498451134691909632?s=20&t=wh7Y2cZvbm...

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I don't blame Bulgaria for not sending their MiG-29s. It is several years off from receiving its replacement F-16s. I believe their claim if they gave their planes to Ukraine, there wouldn't be enough aircraft and parts left to defend Bulgaria. https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1498440837830782978?s=20&t=XhOHu322KlD...

I apologise for writing my analysis in a definitive tone earlier - the source I was relying upon has walked back a bit from his claims about Poland and they're not in the Politico piece regarding the Bulgarian refusal.

https://twitter.com/vonderburchard/status/1498452624059871236

I did find earlier pieces in which Slovak officials denied they would send planes, but this latest Politico piece says they (like Poland) refused to comment when asked.

The situation is fluid and lots of Ukranian sources are lying (because they are claiming they will get the full complement they asked for, including the Bulgarian planes that are - as of now - not coming). Still, I wouldn't be surprised if Ukranian pilots had been allowed to go to Poland while negotiations over the planes were still going on, and I will provide updates on this whenever I find them. It seems like the quickest win for Ukraine relative to SAM/Bayraktar procurement.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I don't blame Bulgaria for not sending their MiG-29s. It is several years off from receiving its replacement F-16s. I believe their claim if they gave their planes to Ukraine, there wouldn't be enough aircraft and parts left to defend Bulgaria. https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1498440837830782978?s=20&t=XhOHu322KlD...

I apologise for writing my analysis in a definitive tone earlier - the source I was relying upon has walked back a bit from his claims about Poland and they're not in the Politico piece regarding the Bulgarian refusal.

https://twitter.com/vonderburchard/status/1498452624059871236
I did find earlier pieces in which Slovak officials denied they would send planes, but this latest Politico piece says they (like Poland) refused to comment when asked.

The situation is fluid and lots of Ukranian sources are lying (because they are claiming they will get the full complement they asked for, including the Bulgarian planes that are - as of now - not coming). Still, I wouldn't be surprised if Ukranian pilots had been allowed to go to Poland while negotiations over the planes were still going on, and I will provide updates on this whenever I find them. It seems like the quickest win for Ukraine relative to SAM/Bayraktar procurement.

The US is decommissioning F-16s anyway. We should send those over as a backstop while the Migs go to Ukraine. UAAF gets more planes and Bulgaria gets upgraded equipment.

[Storr]

I can't help but get satisfaction from the irony:

https://twitter.com/LucasFoxNews/status/1498448895772442632?s=20&t=GegZfSf_h...

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1498419741106397185?s=20&t=uvCMy75UXrWzl3E7zA...

The timeline of this seems optimistic, at best. The likely outcome - likely enough to fuel the Russian leadership's paranoia, anyway - is that Finland joins NATO if the process is left uninterrupted. Unfortunately for Finland, that process involves a debate on having a vote in Parliament, the actual vote in Parliament, a referendum and then an application to NATO, something that tends to take months or years to process (although it could plausibly be fast-tracked). They will have a target on their back throughout this process.

[Yoda]

I don't blame Bulgaria for not sending their MiG-29s. It is several years off from receiving its replacement F-16s. I believe their claim if they gave their planes to Ukraine, there wouldn't be enough aircraft and parts left to defend Bulgaria. https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1498440837830782978?s=20&t=XhOHu322KlD...

Thank God this turned out to be true. That 17-mile-long convoy needs to be hit hard NOW.

[Yoda]

The genuine question I have for everyone is how far can Russia go before you will support intervention on the ground? Can they level Kyiv and Kharkiv? Can they use chemical weapons? Can they start intentionally killing Ukrainians to replace them with Russians like the Germans wanted with Poland? Can they use a nuke? Where is the red line, because what I am getting from a lot of people here and Biden is that there really isn’t a red line.

I would have sent "peace keeper" troops in Ukraine a long time ago.

I'd have sent "peace keeper" F-22's and artillery.

[Ferguson97]

I feel like we don't mention how stupid the "actually Russia has legitimate concerns about NATO expansion" talking point is.

[Storr]

There are now five tweets in the thread, the latest being BIIIIG GUN that uhh...looks to have simply driven off the road into a ditch??

https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1497950055222943748?s=20&t=iuM8nUirccv...

https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1498457112095166465?s=20&t=iuM8nUirccv...

[KaiserDave]

https://mobile.twitter.com/paulmcleary/status/1498437405610852353?cxt=HHwWgoC--b...

[vitoNova]

Absolutely remarkable tales of bravery and grit, from the Ace Ghost of Kyiv to the Snake Island Sailors, and now

https://twitter.com/FarRightFruit/status/1497394335263772677

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Absolutely remarkable tales of bravery and grit, from the Ace Ghost of Kyiv to the Snake Island Sailors, and now

https://twitter.com/FarRightFruit/status/1497394335263772677

I think we're getting trolled here.

[Yoda]

I feel like we don't mention how stupid the "actually Russia has legitimate concerns about NATO expansion" talking point is.

I feel like we do, but the Tulsi Gabbards and Tucker Carlson's of the world just keep repeating the talking point as if it hasn't been debunked.