"Some of you may be willing to die, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" but unironically
Edit: The user has since apologised https://hexbear.net/comment/3848285
"Some of you may be willing to die, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make" but unironically
Edit: The user has since apologised https://hexbear.net/comment/3848285
If you take a step back from your regularly scheduled CNNBBCMSNB propaganda and actually look at the facts of the situation, then you'd see that yes it is in fact senseless. You'd also see that Putin isn't actually claiming the entirety of Ukraine - The Russian government is claiming the region's that had been shelled by Ukraine since 2014 in breach of the Minsk II treaty. Russia has since added additional demands as Ukraines bargaining position has weakened during the war. It has weakened because Ukraine is losing, and it is continuing to lose.
It is senseless because Ukraine can't win. Right now the long-propagandised glorious Ukrainian counteroffensive can't even break the first of the three defensive lines. Thousands have died, thousands more are dying, and they are no step closer to accomplishing the goals of the counteroffensive. Even in a far off fantasy land where some of the goals would be accomplished, they'd come after thousands more dead Ukrainians. And for what? Russia has hundreds of thousands in reserve, a wealth of equipment stockpiled. There are no significant gains to be made, and every day as more Ukrainians die, their bargaining position gets worse.
Me thinking they should bargain from as strong a position as possible is somehow less supportive of Ukraine than yours that posits they should all just throw themselves to their deaths, and then let Russia pick the corpse of the country as it wants.
Since we're being Serious(tm) let's drop the idealism which permeates liberal discussion of this war. Let's instead be realistic.
Ukraine should negotiate for a peace immediately, with as good terms as it can get, and take it. That peace will probably involve ceding the autonomous regions, maybe also the major cities that were captured in the latest russian offensive as well. It will also include the decoupling of the azov-battalion and other Neo-nazi related officials and institutions from Ukraine and probably a promise of no NATO membership.
That's what I would imagine the current peace treaty would result in. Do I think it's "fair" or "moral" or whatever? No not really, but it's not gonna get any better, and at least thousands can go home and be with their families instead of bleeding to death after stepping on a mine.
Is this a Chamberlain impression? You think Russia is going to stop? Putin is an imperialist megalomaniac who wants fealty and submission.
If Ukraine signs on the dotted line, Putin will take it as explicit approval of his imperialist expansion on behalf of the entire West. There might be months to a year of tenuous peace then he'll march onward until his puppet is sitting in Kyiv and Ukranians are speaking Russian.
Ahahaha yes of course appeasement is when you acknowledge that either they can get a decent treaty now, or unconditionally surrender after their entire able bodied population has died.
Why do you think Russia would want to annex the entirety of Ukraine? Because Putin is evil? Because they're just horrible villains over there, for our GI Joe heroes to fight the good fight against?
Be real. Be realistic. Putin is a leader of a country with many factions. He's not so e irrational James Bond Saturday Morning BreakFast Cereal Cobra Commander, doing stuff because he hates the world or whatever, if he were he wouldn't have been stable enough to hold power for this long. If he were Prigozhin would actually have had support for his coup.
What would Russia gain from occupying the entirety of Ukraine? Massive unrest, constant resistance, territorial issues en masse. What base do you have to assume that the Russian government would want this?
It's funny how appeasement is the word liberals drool over. It is their ONLY historical anecdote and used to defend opposing any movement towards peace, ag Korea. The reality is Chamberlain's big crime was no the act of appeasement, it was knowingly stringing along the French and Soviets only to bail officially when there was no means of changing plans for the USSR and Czechoslovakia.
Beyond that the comparison also doesn't work because peace talks had occurred multiple times without excluding relevant parties. Minsk was a thing that happened.
Yeah it's kinda wild how it's just the same tired shit year after year. They know one book, one failure of a western leader, and one fallacy in discussions
It's just really useful. We want to do something. Remember the time we didn't do something?
You are still operating on the assumption that Russia can somehow win this war? Despite its best soldiers and equipment already being spent while the Ukies bathe in the latest NATO gear? Sure, they may be having trouble with their counteroffensive, but that don't mean that the Russians can mount one of their own. The best case scenario for Russia is a ceasefire and a North/South Korea situation, with a backwards, authoritarian North (Russia) and a prosperous, democratic South (Ukraine).
Democracy is when you have streets named after literal fascists leading to the sites of the Holocaust.
Also that equipment is not winning Ukraine any territory back. That's like saying the Soviets couldn't win WW2 in late 1944 because Germany was developing a jet fighter at that time.
The assumption? Russia is winning, where are you getting your news from, reddit?
:doubt: I thought the narrative was that Russia had thrown poorly equipped penal battalions at the Ukrainians, and it is only just now that we're seeing a change in their troops and equipment? Now it apparently reversed? They started off with well-equpped and trained soldiers?
Ah yes the wunderwaffe. The leopards that are getting owned by unique technology like "landmines" will surely turn the war in Ukraines favour. Do you play a lot of HOI IV? You must, because it seems you have a completely wrong understanding of how equipping works. Do you think you just click the "upgrade" button? They're not trained to use the myriad of different equipment they're receiving, and even when they can use it, they're trained with NATO doctrine, which laughably assumes constant air superiority. Of course the equipment is better than russias, because uhh... Because russias is worse! The T-72s have no chance against the leopard! The F16s are coming any day now, and the will definitely own the Russian jets!
That's putting it mildly.
Not constantly attacking doesn't mean you're somehow the losing side. Russia controls the territory it wants to claim and then some. It is in a war of attrition against Ukraine and NATO equipment, and you have far less casualties on the defensive. Why would Russia abandon a strong position, when Ukraine is throwing itself into the meatgrinder?
Remind me, how was the South doing when the DMZ was designated?
Yeah, it's so stupid to believe this, I mean, look at who's doing all the conscriptions. Oh. Fuck. Uh, okay, look who has doesn't have a functional air force and is chronically short on ammunition, as admitted by the actual president of the actual United States (who, I hope you agree, is not a puppet of Putin). Hm. Well, look at all the territory that Russia still has in Ukraine! They must be just down a few villages by now considering that Russia is completely out of missiles, is fighting with shovels, is out of artillery, has no ammo, their soldiers are completely demoralized and also all dead! Fuck. Shit.
Look, if Russia's army is so awful, so utterly and completely imcompetent, so out of ammunition, so demoralized, and Ukraine still can't make a sizable dent in their defences after two months, then holy shit, Ukraine's army must be fucking terrible. Like, holy shit it must be bad.
The people having lost are the people being dead, the families separated and people traumatized. Like in all wars. The victims are mostly the working class.
That said, there are plenty of ways to spin winning and losing for both Ukraine and Russia. Of course for NATO this war war somewhat good, but there can be a couple of things be found that are bad, will not focus on that though.
Having secured the Krim, having secured a Krim land bridge, having ensured a close alignment of Donbas and Luhansk, having secured control over the Sea of Azov and in addition relevant parts of the North Western section of the Black Sea (and with that ensured access to gas and other resources while denying it to Ukraine), having the river as border in the South between the occupied territories and Ukraine, with mined and defended territory near Donetsk Oblast reduced the open flank of Russia (and its Krim) somewhat. This means millions of people who are effectively living on territory controlled by Russia. This also means a propaganda victory for Putin and thus support from some circles of nationalist society in Russia (for which the education in military basics adds something, too).
Hard to call all those things failures. That said during a war of attrition and position war is slow till it isn't anymore. I am not on the side of Russia, but I can see how stuff could be spun.
deleted by creator
It's honestly really insulting how you just completely ignore entire paragraphs someone spent time writing for you after saying you were interested and willing to learn.
I am uneducated on this topic and also arguing in bad faith
deleted by creator
Whoa
Gotta admit I respect the honesty
props for being willing to admit this. it takes guts. now do the reading and educate yourself
we already knew that from the username
deleted by creator
Remind me, where were Russian forces marching in February last year? It was some city... A capital even. Started with a K.
deleted by creator
I think it had more do to with 10,000 dead Russian soldiers
Yea it's deffinitly that and not the fact they had taken the territory they stated from the start they were trying to take.
also didn't it come out later that african states had gotten russia and ukraine to get peace agreements in place so russia withdrew to the single eastern front?
Yes the stunning military victory knows as "retreat from Kyiv"
As you say this I imagine you standing on an aircraft carrier with a big banner behind reading "mission accomplished"
That's fucking hilarious because Kyiv not falling in a week has been touted as a Ukrainian victory even though it was them who set that goal and them literally declaring victory while the russians actually accomplished all their stated goals.
Since your such a military genius it's weird how the concept of cutting supply lines to the territories you're trying to take is an unfamiliar concept. Obviously they weren't trying to stop supplies to the actual contested regions they were just yoloing a mission to a capital they never claimed as a goal for no apparent reason.
Removed by mod
Russia: currently holding all the territory they said they wanted to take before the invasion and for the last decade
Ukraine: conscripting people to throw at russian defenses resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and retaking zero ground, complaining that the counter offensive is failing because Russia is cheating by using anti tank mines to stop tanks
If this is copium it's some good shit
Comrade the SMO objectives are demilitarization which a grinding war of attrition will yield by the depletion of military supplies as well as the casualties wrought upon the Ukrainians. Russia holds the territory that voted to join the Russian Federation so they have succeed in that objective, the objectives of denazifying the Ukrainian military is achieved by the aforementioned demilitarization so what exactly are you getting at?
There are many informed sources discussing the pros and cons of the pivot from a maneuver based doctrine into a attrition based one however we cannot judge this until the SMO is over, but at this juncture I can state that the Ukranian counter-offensive is a failure, this is supported by many western sources.
This is not some Civilization 6 based war where controlling a capitol is the objective, we have seen the utter devastation sustained by the NATO forces by engaging in Russian lines with the tactics they trained on, other posts touch on the fact that once Ukranians abandon such training and resort to Soviet doctrine there is the success of taking small villages however trench/artillary based warfare does not favor Ukraine and it is in their best interest to negotiate a second cease fire, but the Boris Johnson simalcrum that is the military industrial complex will not permit this.
Why are you so afraid to engage with the arguments presented to you?
Damn this is like, triple-distilled Kremlin Copium Reserve right here. Putin is an entirely rational actor? Lmfao! Is that why he picked a fight with a country a quarter the size of his and got a black eye? Is that why he flip-flopped in the Budapest memorandum? Is that why he blew up Priggy and pals for everyone to see?
Also, what kinda American provocations are you talking about? Was it the billions in IMF money Russia got in the 90s? That was provocative for sure. Or is it when they sent a spy to infiltrate your ruling party? Oh wait, Butina was Russian, it was the other way around, nevermind.
deleted by creator
There is a Citations Needed episode about exactly this
Oh, how am I just now finding out this podcast exists? Thank you sir.
Schroedinger's Russia: simultaneously on the brink of defeat and collapse, but also this close to taking over all of Europe if we dont send $80 billion more dollars to some nazis right now.