Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[NYDem]

I can't imagine being stupid enough to believe that Ukraine would invade Donetsk when there are 190,000 Russian troops right across the border. Ukraine carried out no major offensives for 8 years, but they choose to attack at the one time when there are hundreds of thousands of troops on the border? Yeah, ok.

[NYDem]

This is horrifying, I'm so scared. We must now all support the Ukrainian Army and people in their fight for freedom.

Spare us the pearl clutching. Why are you scared? You're not in Ukraine. This war will not touch the USA. Gas prices will go up a bit, that's all. You're really that upset that the grand American ploy to surround and contain Russia has failed?

Again, it's amazing that on a forum that is so politically aware, the vast majority drink the Kool-Aid and accept the Western "freedom and democracy" propaganda as the inalienable truth.

Holy sh**t, delete your account. You provide absolutely no value whatsoever to this forum. Honest to god you are so annoying, especially at a time like this.

[NYDem]

The USA, or any country for that matter, should not go to war on the behalf of Ukraine.

Congrats, you are the exact type of person that the comic is mocking.

I oppose imperialism. And I’m proud of it.

 You don't have a clue what imperialism means, and are proud of it.

Physically Imposing our will on another country is imperialism. When we send our troops over to support Ukraine because it’s our benefit, against the Russian people, that is imperialism.

You're an idiot.

[NYDem]

Hasn't been mentioned so far here, but Snake Island in the Black Sea was attacked by 2 Russian naval vessels who demanded the surrender of the Ukrainian garrison. They refused to, and the subsequent bombardment has apparently destroyed the buildings on the island. I imagine the Ukrainian Navy is in no state to resupply them right now, so it's a matter of time until Russia occupies it.

[NYDem]

Anyone wishing for a war of annihilation for the sake of “winning” is a psychopath, regardless of which side they want destroyed.

Being contrarian all of the time is the laziest intellectual position imaginable. Just stop.

[NYDem]

Anyone wishing for a war of annihilation for the sake of “winning” is a psychopath, regardless of which side they want destroyed.

Being contrarian all of the time is the laziest intellectual position imaginable. Just stop.

We have people like Forumlurker who literally want to send Russia back to the Stone Age and kill whoever they view as an enemy. Opposing this isn’t being a “contrarian,” it’s standing up for what’s right. What Russia is pulling right now is evil without a doubt, and Ukraine should have international support, but fantasizes about destruction aren’t right.

Forumlurker is a lunatic who speaks only for himself.

That doesn’t change the fact that you’re being ridiculous. Wanting Russia to lose an unjustified war of aggression is not wrong. Winning a war requires defeating the opposing forces. Wanting that is not wrong. There is nothing wrong at all with hoping that that occurs in this case. Does that mean that we should hope for war crimes or “annihilating Russia”? No. But unless you were specifically talking about Forumlurker nobody was saying that.

[NYDem]

Surrendering Russian troops? Thousands of protesters on the streets of Moscow? Angry oligarchs and businessmen as the Russian economy plunges?

Did Putin really f--k up and go too far this time?

Can't rule out a coup!

So much is unconfirmed, but I want to believe.

[NYDem]

A thought I had at work: forget sanctions, how about a full embargo on trade with Russia?                  I know Europe won't entertain this idea in the slightest. But when it comes to the US, Russia's imports from the US are around 5% of total imports. Meanwhile the US has less than 1% of its imports come from the motherland. An American embargo on Russia would be easy for the US to weather, not so much for Russia.

The US could theoretically get by without much struggle as a whole. However our allies won't be happy depending on how it happens. Along with that Joe Biden can not handle 4 dollar + gas .

4 dollar+ gas would definitely be harmful for the President (not that that would matter in an ideal world), but a total embargo on Russia would wreck their economy. It's one of the only "peaceful" options that could legitimately swing a longer war in Ukraine's favor. If that were to happen then it would give Biden a victory. The gamble could pay off.



Who am I kidding, even if that happens and Russia is decisively defeated people would hate the gas prices too much.

[NYDem]

Also, a sidenote: It took us from November 7 last year to February 24 to get to 100 pages. Anyone want to wager how long it'll take us until we've reached 200?

Sunday morning, 8:00 AM.

[NYDem]

Russia is repositioning Intercontential Ballistic Missiles near Moscow
https://twitter.com/AuroraIntel/status/1497306128111353856

Genuine question: Why would you need to move ICBMs to use them? "Inter-continental" is in the name.

[NYDem]

Russia is NOT the same threat as Nazi Germany or even the USSR, and people desperate for action need to stop pretending otherwise.

It's true that there is a certain type of bored, NEET westerner who is hoping for action for action's own sake simply in order to bring excitement to their otherwise dreary life.

However, it's unquestionable that Putin's playbook has shifted from his old approach of nibbling around the edges of his neighbors, to outright conquest. It's very likely that his 2 years of COVID isolation either made him insane, obsessed with his place in the history books, or both.

Conquest was status quo for millennia, so people need to stop acting like breaking a relatively recent norm is definitely the end of mankind, or even a major event in the grand scheme of things.

Give me a break. There are a lot of things that were the status quo for millennia that we don't do anymore, that would be ""major events"" if they resumed.

For millennia all over the world slavery was accepted and normal. Legal slavery was only fully stamped out in this past century. It is a recent norm. Per your logic, people shouldn't act like it were a big deal if the United States brought back slavery, and our doing so would not be a "major event".

For millennia in parts of the world, homosexuality was punishable by death. Per your idiotic logic, people would have no right to act like it was a big deal or a major event if the UK reimplemented the death penalty for homosexuality tomorrow.

For millennia there was no such thing as electoral democracy in any recognizable sense. Per your logic, it wouldn't be a big deal or a major event if Joe Biden crowned himself Emperor of the United States tomorrow.

For millennia nobody saw a problem with massacring the inhabitants of captured cities and raping and ransoming the survivors. It was the status quo. I suppose if Russia starts doing that too, you'll be the first one to let us know that it isn't exceptional historically and that it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

[NYDem]

Russia is NOT the same threat as Nazi Germany or even the USSR, and people desperate for action need to stop pretending otherwise.

It's true that there is a certain type of bored, NEET westerner who is hoping for action for action's own sake simply in order to bring excitement to their otherwise dreary life.

However, it's unquestionable that Putin's playbook has shifted from his old approach of nibbling around the edges of his neighbors, to outright conquest. It's very likely that his 2 years of COVID isolation either made him insane, obsessed with his place in the history books, or both.

Conquest was status quo for millennia, so people need to stop acting like breaking a relatively recent norm is definitely the end of mankind, or even a major event in the grand scheme of things.

Give me a break. There are a lot of things that were the status quo for millennia that we don't do anymore, that would be ""major events"" if they resumed.

For millennia all over the world slavery was accepted and normal. Legal slavery was only fully stamped out in this past century. It is a recent norm. Per your logic, people shouldn't act like it were a big deal if the United States brought back slavery, and our doing so would not be a "major event".

For millennia in parts of the world, homosexuality was punishable by death. Per your idiotic logic, people would have no right to act like it was a big deal or a major event if the UK reimplemented the death penalty for homosexuality tomorrow.

For millennia there was no such thing as electoral democracy in any recognizable sense. Per your logic, it wouldn't be a big deal or a major event if Joe Biden crowned himself Emperor of the United States tomorrow.

For millennia nobody saw a problem with massacring the inhabitants of captured cities and raping and ransoming the survivors. It was the status quo. I suppose if Russia starts doing that too, you'll be the first one to let us know that it isn't exceptional historically and that it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Russia invading Ukraine definitely is a “big deal.” Just no where near as consequential as WW2 or the Cold War, and people need to stop pretending otherwise and blowing things out of proportion.

Cool, not what you said though.

Also nobody is saying that this is as big a deal as WWII. If that was the point you were trying to make, you were arguing against no-one.

[NYDem]

Russia is NOT the same threat as Nazi Germany or even the USSR, and people desperate for action need to stop pretending otherwise.

It's true that there is a certain type of bored, NEET westerner who is hoping for action for action's own sake simply in order to bring excitement to their otherwise dreary life.

However, it's unquestionable that Putin's playbook has shifted from his old approach of nibbling around the edges of his neighbors, to outright conquest. It's very likely that his 2 years of COVID isolation either made him insane, obsessed with his place in the history books, or both.

Conquest was status quo for millennia, so people need to stop acting like breaking a relatively recent norm is definitely the end of mankind, or even a major event in the grand scheme of things.

Give me a break. There are a lot of things that were the status quo for millennia that we don't do anymore, that would be ""major events"" if they resumed.

For millennia all over the world slavery was accepted and normal. Legal slavery was only fully stamped out in this past century. It is a recent norm. Per your logic, people shouldn't act like it were a big deal if the United States brought back slavery, and our doing so would not be a "major event".

For millennia in parts of the world, homosexuality was punishable by death. Per your idiotic logic, people would have no right to act like it was a big deal or a major event if the UK reimplemented the death penalty for homosexuality tomorrow.

For millennia there was no such thing as electoral democracy in any recognizable sense. Per your logic, it wouldn't be a big deal or a major event if Joe Biden crowned himself Emperor of the United States tomorrow.

For millennia nobody saw a problem with massacring the inhabitants of captured cities and raping and ransoming the survivors. It was the status quo. I suppose if Russia starts doing that too, you'll be the first one to let us know that it isn't exceptional historically and that it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Russia invading Ukraine definitely is a “big deal.” Just no where near as consequential as WW2 or the Cold War, and people need to stop pretending otherwise and blowing things out of proportion.

Cool, not what you said though.

Also nobody is saying that this is as big a deal as WWII. If that was the point you were trying to make, you were arguing against no-one.

Forumlurker et al. are claiming this could be not just the start of WW3, but literally a cataclysmic tier event. WW3 is trending on many social media sites, and people are starting to believe the hype.

Okay, to clarify: Nobody except for obvious trolls or people with actual severe anxiety thinks that this is as big a deal as WW2. WW3 is trending on social media sites because people are making memes, not because it is a realistic outcome of all this.

Also, you've made a hell of a retreat from "This isn't a major event" to "This isn't literally the end of the world".

If past indications are anything to go off of though, attempting to continue this discussion won't go anywhere productive. I'll leave it at this and probably delete my posts for being overly argumentative in the morning.

[NYDem]

Again, this makes no sense. I'm not Russian. I'm basically watching a football game here. I may have picked a side to support but I have no skin in the game. For some reason the vast majority of the forum, minus a few Ukrainians, thinks they do even though they are in the same situation as me.

In human cultures, the loss of life is generally considered lamentable. Hope this helps!

Yet wearing a mask is an intolerable burden to slow down COVID? While the effect of the sanctions will have a far greater impact on daily life, particularly in Europe where energy costs could surge?

Maybe, just maybe, they should get the f**k out of Ukraine if they want those sanctions lifted.

You misread my post. Westerners will feel the effects of their own sanctions, particularly in Europe with energy prices. They seem to be willing to accept this disruption and cost on their daily lives, even though they have no skin in the game. But they refuse to accept the minimal disruption and cost of wearing masks to slow down COVID, even though there's no doubt they have skin in that game. There's a huge logical contradiction here.

Whine about COVID somewhere else. Nobody cares.

[NYDem]

Also, it's clear that China got it right when it decided to ring-fence its internet, bar Western internet and social media companies that wouldn't meet its requirements, which turned out to be all of them, and develop domestic alternatives. Facebook and Twitter are turning out to be huge national security nightmares for Russia as they are clearly intervening on behalf of the Ukrainians and banning them now could cause backlash as there may not be an alternative (maybe Telegram?) and Russians are used to using them. China would not face this issue at all. Yes it's annoying to use the internet in China particularly to browse foreign websites but national security is more important than my convenience.

You are a pathetic excuse of a human who is desirous of oppression, we know this.

Preferring authoritarianism to libertarianism is a valid position to take.

No, actually.

Not everyone has the same values as you, Dule.

True, some people have values that are just wrong by any reasonable standard. Their beliefs are not "valid" though, if the word valid is to have any meaning.

[NYDem]

I'm aware that the situation is fluid and that China is adjusting its stance moving towards being more accommodating towards the West. Yesterday it was announced that China will work with the SEC to establish standards for Chinese firms to list in the US (disclaimer, I hold MCHI which went up 20% on this news), and while this has nothing to do with the war, this is a signal on China's attitude on it since with China the level of cooperation with the West is tightly correlated on everything. If you read my posts carefully I'm not expressing pro-Russian views but rather views opposing Western hegemony and bullying behavior; unlike the actual Russians here that got banned, I never made any comment on how Ukrainians don't deserve their own country, that they're a bunch of Nazis, defending Russia's conduct in the war, etc.

If our leaders judge that the right thing to do is to beat a retreat, back away from Russia, and repair relations with the West, then I'll suck it up and adjust my views since they know better than me. Sometimes one just has to accept an L. Up until last week or so the official stance of the Foreign Ministry was quite bellicose and anti-Western so I'm not the only one that has to make an adjustment. We'll see how the Biden-Xi call goes, if Biden really wants to encourage Xi down this path then he will retreat a bit on some of his other anti-China stances, or he can push Xi back towards Putin by not doing so.

Are you capable of having a single original thought? Are you incapable of admitting any disagreement with the CCP? This is insanity.

[NYDem]

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1504892608660840450
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1504892944867856385

Seems like pretty standard stuff. It doesn't seem like the White House is signaling a major shift in Beijing's position, at least not based on this.

Beijing's position is a lameass "war is bad, but we won't say aloud that Russia is bad too" that probably won't change for quite a while.

Clearly Joe did not have any intention of bargaining to get China to move in his favor but instead tried to browbeat Xi into submission with "freedom and democracy" rhetoric and threatening sanctions. Thus the result is what we see, the Chinese position remains unchanged, we're keeping the option open to supply Russia, and the Americans are disappointed.

A lack of change in Beijing's position is not actually as disappointing to us dastardly foreign devils as you seem to think, since a day or two ago Blinken was implying that the concern was that China might start very overtly aiding Russia's increasingly incoherent war aims (whatever the hell those are), which is not currently happening. Sure, Blinken is an idiot, but he's also the Secretary of State and presumably had somebody's permission to stoke fears (or hopes, if one enjoys unprovoked mass slaughter as much as you keep claiming not to) of that.

the humanitarian and Ukrainian view,

Mask off. Not a clown but the whole circus. Saying the quiet part out loud. Whatever else people are saying these days about this sort of remark.

And we still might start, if the Americans provoke us further. It's clear we refused to rule it out. We're certainly not going to be deterred by American threats, if anything, threats make us more likely to supply Russia.

The coverage of the humanitarian aspect in Western media is heavily slanted in Ukraine's favor, just like every other aspect. Yes, there are civilians dying, and that's a tragedy. But it's a freaking land war between armies of hundreds of thousands, this is to be expected. There's a lot of coverage of Mariupol as some kind of atrocity, but apparently the media is  forgetting that this is how sieges have worked for the entirety of history? I'm pretty sure WW2 generals would fall out of their chairs laughing if you tried discussing with them about "humanitarian corridors." CNN, NYT, etc cover breathlessly bombed apartment buildings, but they overlook the fact that the latest count of civilian deaths is about 1.5K (edit, 850 per UN count from CNN just now) , and this is a minuscule number in comparison to the 15K or so dead combatants. Clearly an effort is being made to minimize civilian casualties, otherwise we would see WW2 strategies of level bombers destroying whole city blocks with napalm and heavy artillery brought up in large numbers to reduce surrounded cities. Not nearly this much effort was spent by CNN/NYT/etc to cover civilian deaths when the Americans invaded Afghanistan and particularly Iraq.

Ratio + L + cope + seethe

[NYDem]

You get low effort responses because that’s all you deserve. You are, by your own admission, a shill with no capacity for thought beyond parroting the CCP party line. What could possibly be gained through “high effort” discussion with you?

[NYDem]

On the eve of 1 month of Ukrainian resistance, some fine aged takes from the forum's favorite tankie:

Ukraine is the one that first sued for peace. Macron said yesterday that Zelensky asked him to ask Putin to stop the fighting and Zelensky recorded a public message today saying the same. They will surely give up a lot if this results in an armistice and peace terms. Turns out the "Ukrainians are holding up well" idea was overly optimistic and a mistaken impression given by a few anecdotal Twitter reports.

And after that message from the Kremlin, back to the studio.

You can call it a message from the Kremlin, from Zhongnanhai, whatever. It's the clear reality and the truth at this point. Kiev is under siege, 1.5 days into the offensive, and Zelensky sued for peace publicly. Asking for an armistice with enemy troops on your land is not an action to take when winning, Finland still lost territory from the Winter War despite performing much better than expectations. I get that you're cheerleading for a side here but reality doesn't care about that.

I'm aware of the geography and that Kiev is highly vulnerable to an attack from Belarus. However this should have also been obvious to the Ukrainian military who could have been preparing defenses in depth between the border and Kiev, which they either didn't do or did a very poor job. Whether it's impressive or not, Zelensky is now under threat himself and that's what probably forced him to ask for an armistice. It's definitely not at all comparable to the Winter War, which saw the Finns repel multiple Soviet attacks and keep the Soviets off their land for 3 months and had a 5-1 casualty ratio. I think there has been a moving of goalposts by the West where the Russians are expected to win instantly and anything short of that is a disappointment, despite the situation on the ground where Ukraine will likely still lose within a week.

Reading this thread is like stepping in a parallel universe where Ukraine is winning the war, except IRL Kiev might be taken tonight, 2 days after the war started. I understand you're all cheerleading for one side, but you should at least read some of the Tweets you're posting and realize that they actually reveal what dire straits Ukraine is in, like the post about the TV program showing how to make Molotov cocktails and the video of Zelensky on the street in Kiev vowing to fight to the end and saying how we may not see him again.

Ukraine may well lose this war, but these takes will always be terrible. They read like Putin's own fantasies: capturing Kyiv in 2 days and winning the war in 1 week.

[NYDem]

If Kherson City was being contested we would have visual evidence. I believe they are still out in the surrounding areas of Kherson Oblast.

[NYDem]

Slavutych has also fallen today, which makes Chernihiv completely isolated. Ukrainian counterattacks east of Kyiv and Kherson have been more successful however. Trostyanets (near Sumy) was recaptured by Ukrainians.

Where are you getting the Trostyanets info from?

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1507740906333614085?s=20&t=ZdYLD2i...

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1507738221249241090?s=20&t=ZdYLD2i...

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1507740061034504194?s=20&t=nvIwmB4SKlTNL...

Nice to see actual evidence of a Ukrainian counter-attack.

[NYDem]

The Ukrainian victory at Trostyanets is probably their most encouraging success of the entire war to this point. They unquestionably recaptured a city in an important area, destroying a lot of Russian equipment in the process.

[NYDem]

Mariupol is going to fall, that much has been certain for a couple of weeks now. Ukraine isn't in a position to relieve them now and their forces would be better used in other areas. Assuming the next few weeks of the war go well for them and they repel additional Russian assaults on the Donbass, then you might see a Ukrainian attempt to recapture the area.

[NYDem]

The Ukrainians have retaken a number of towns West and Northwest of Kyiv today. The Russians are pulling back from their salient, and they are being attacked on their way out. A lot of damaged and captured equipment today.

One gain of some importance is the Hostomel airport, which the Russians abandoned.

[NYDem]

Zelensky just sacked two of his Senior national security officials...

Wonder what the backstory was here?

He announced he had sacked two senior members of the Ukrainian national security service on the grounds they were “traitors”.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60949706

Purely speculation here, but I wonder if it has something to do with the lead-up to the invasion when there seemed to be a lot of confusion high up in Ukraine's leadership about whether or not there would even be an invasion.

One of the Generals fired is Serhiy Oleksandrovych Kryvoruchko, the former head of the SBU in Kherson Oblast. Maybe he was found to be somehow cooperating with the Russians, which occupy nearly all of Kherson Oblast?

My conspiratorial thought is that this could be an attempt to direct blame for the Kherson region being occupied as quickly as it was, away from Zelensky and the rest of the current government.

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3445232-zelensky-says-two-generals-who-turned-out-to-be-traitors-stripped-of-their-rank.html

People forget about this given how well it performed after the war started, but the Ukrainian Government really dropped the ball in preparation, particularly in the south. I think if Ukraine loses this war it's going to be a direct result of the fact that their southern front collapsed so quickly. There was a good article about this that was posted earlier in this thread. The best the troops could do was avoid being totally encircled and regroup in Kherson city. IIRC they captured the bridge over the Dniepr on day 1.