this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
223 points (93.7% liked)
World News
31475 readers
1056 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Where is the off ramp here? Despite billions and constant propaganda Russia is not going to lose this war on the battlefield.
How much money and how many people are we going to just send to their deaths just because prolonging the conflict weakens an adversary to US.
It’s really sad :(
We were in Iraq for 20 years despite it being so unpopular and illegal
The off ramp is whenever the defense contractors start losing money and it's not profitable anymore
Lol so never. They have a vested interest in keeping this a stalemate as long as possible. My tinfoil hat theory is the only reason Ukraine is barred from using weapons in Russia is that the US military industrial complex would love to see this drawn out for as long as possible. Every aid package is a boon to their stock price.
Russia will lose any day now. Their army has been routed and they're constantly fleeing the lines. Hundreds of thousands of Russians are dead or zero-summed while Ukraine has no casualties. Ukraine is marching towards Moscow and this war will end with ~~Putin~~ Putler shooting himself in the head! Slava Ukraini!
Inb4 anyone calls me a tankie for supporting Biden sending tanks to Ukraine.
(Sorry. I can't resist the urge to post Simpsons references)
Ya know there's a country called Ukraine that's involved in this, right? They are people defending their country and they're going to do that with or without US support. And Ukraine will win in the end. Russia doesn't have enough to successfully occupy Ukraine against an organized resistance which is where things could go without military aid from the west.
While a resistance would ultimately be successful, it would take a decade or more. And it's likely a Russian occupation of Ukraine would involve genocide. Do you want that?
Sending military aid isn't about trying to change the outcome of the war. Russia's defeat is inevitable. The military aid is about helping Ukraine defeat Russia sooner, without the need for a prolonged resistance campaign, and that reduces the loss of life.
When you say that Ukraine will defeat Russia do you mean Ukraine will occupy the Donbass and impose a government on them that those people don't want?
You do know that there's a region called Donbass that is involved in this right? And they've been fighting for their lives since 2014. Why don't you care about those people?
It seems unlikely that the people of Donbass do want to be a part of Russia now that they've had a taste of occupation.
Being conscripted, given third rate equipment or no equipment at all and being send to die is not generally an endearing act.
This is what Ukraine's coup government has been doing for over a year at this point.
They spent 8 years being shelled by Ukraine prior to that
You don't get to instigate a rebellion using your own intelligence and military assets, and then invade your neighbor and claim that you never did, that's just bullshit.
This entire conflict was instigated by Russia.
It's very hard to invent a movement in another country. Were they backed by Russia from the outset? Obviously, but they had real reasons to be upset with what the new administration was doing. This is a little like dismissing the people who disagree with you as bots, it lets you avoid needing to consider that some people might have good reason for opposing your favored side.
Yes, absolutely it was. There have been many books and publications featuring interviews and even video footage of Russian soldiers from the outset of the war. Here's an interview:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/07/i-was-a-pro-russian-separatist-fighter-in-ukraine/374411/
And Russia seized crimea right afterwards. Coincidence? Nope.
And let's not forget how they"separatists" somehow were operating Russian military air defense systems.
Igor Girkin was found responsible for shooting down MH17 by a Dutch cour.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63637625
... But he was a Russian commander who controlled the so-called Donetsk People's Republic armed forces.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/07/21/russia-arrests-igor-girkin-ex-security-officer-who-led-operations-ukraine/
Russia used their guys to instigate a rebellion. If you think all rebellions are free from outside influences, you are sorely mistaken and shows complete naivete regarding the current conflict.
I just said they were Russian backed from the outset, but that does not mean Russia invented the sentiment wholecloth.
Good thing they have you to tell them their opinion, oh white saviour.
We're not sending anyone to their death. Ukrainian soldiers are doing the fighting, not American ones.
If Russia doesn't lose on the battlefield, Putin will invade Poland next, and then one of the following happens:
Putin is Hitler with nukes. He's trying to start World War 3. We're trying to stop him before the conflict spirals out of control. If we fail, everybody dies.
We're not supporting Ukraine out of the goodness of our hearts. We're doing it to save our own asses.
That's assuming the EU won't respond, or for that matter Poland being incapable of pushing back Russia all by itself. There's about exactly one single reason why the Poles aren't parading on the Red Square right now: Because they're in NATO, which acts as a leash. Baltics pretty much have the same attitude but are smaller so they'd simply follow Poland. Finland would get pulled into it because of their own attitude and Estonia, and with them, without fail, Sweden. At which point Germany would have a hard time holding back and then it's guaranteed that the French will be in the fray, and that's presuming they wouldn't have been as soon as Poland lets loose because principle.
Now the US in its usual exceptionalism might be blissfully unaware of those dynamics, and the Kremlin because the FSB reports what the Kremlin wants to hear, but it's true nontheless. But in the end once the EU is involved the US will be, too, because the US can't countenance Europe doing something militarily without joining in. Reluctantly and in a limited fashion, probably, just as they're reluctant now. Germany has pretty much stopped trying to bully the US into providing more things because we've reached the limits of what the US will do (that is, Germany could pressure the US to deliver Abrams by tying Leos to the US also delivering tanks, but providing Taurus cruise missiles won't be tied to ATACMS because apparently that's a US red line).
Since the EU doesn't have a standing army, they cannot respond. Without NATO, Putin can drive straight to the Atlantic and there's not a goddamn thing Europeans can do about it.
NATO doesn't have a standing army. Like the EU, it has member states. EU joint Command and Control is rather lacking but if you think that means that the EU won't respond even though it is a defensive alliance you're delirious.
Them and what army? The only countries on Earth with enough firepower to stop Putin without launching any nukes are the US and China, and China is on Putin's side.
I assume this is some kind of joke.
Last I heard, Finland and Sweden had been taken over by Nazis, and Germany was in the middle of being taken over by Nazis. I'd expect them to welcome Putin's invasion with open arms. France is too busy fighting itself to fight anyone else.
At which point we're back to square one. The reason we're having this discussion is because, in the opinion of @[email protected], it is “very sad” that the US isn't going to sit back and let Putin start World War 3.
...include Ukraine being drip-fed western surplus. France alone would roll over Russia, the Poles aren't as strong but they're fucking nuts determined because history.
Then you don't know any Poles. You know it's one of those Eastern European countries where the first line of the national anthem goes "Our country isn't lost yet", referring to centuries upon centuries of Russian imperialism. As the joke goes:
Two Polish veterans meet at a bar. Asks one: "Wawrek, if tomorrow both the Germans and the Russians invade, who do we shoot at first?", replies the other: "Oh that's an easy one. The Germans: Business before pleasure".
That sure isn't how it went last time Poland got invaded. Their country was lost until the Allies liberated them. Same with France.
Determination does not equal manpower or firepower. If it did, there wouldn't be any Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine right now; they'd have been defeated already. That's why we're sending Ukraine war supplies.
The polish army isn't using cavalry any more. And France has nukes this time around and just for the record: France's half-surrender was the strategically optimal move in their position.
If anyone launches nukes, our whole species dies. We're trying to prevent that outcome.
Mask off moment. Ukrainians aren't even people to you. Most of them are conscripts forced to be on the front line.
Oddly enough the US makes it back in many ways as it's being fulfilled by US military contractors. So it's not as much of a loss financially as it seems. It's also geopolitically a good cause as bolstering support in Europe has netted a ton of contracts Russia was fulfilling for gas and coal. Ukraine is also a US ally and likely future member of both the EU and NATO, so it makes sense to support them when invaded for absolutely no rhyme or reason by pretty much the most consistent adversary of the US throughout modern history. But I'm sure whatever you said makes sense too.
I agree it has helped the us economy. Wow we are the real heroes here.. Europe now turns to us for gas/energy … military contracts getting filled… ohh who cares about the actual Ukrainians dying at least they are not US citizens ..
Honestly disgusting
So you'd just abandon them to Russian imperialism? Yeah that's historically gone fucking great for Ukrainians. I can't possibly imagine why they'd be against that.
Ukraine was fighting the invasion before the West started sending them guns anyway. Ukraine is choosing to fight whether it has support or not.
You want to abandon the people in Ukraine to fuckers with SS Totenkopf patches on their uniform? Yeah that's historically gone fucking great for Ukrainians. I can't possibly imagine why they'd be against.
There are tons of Russian Nazis, don't kid yourself.
https://theconversation.com/putins-fascists-the-russian-states-long-history-of-cultivating-homegrown-neo-nazis-178535
I'm sorry, who is actually running Ukraine? Is it the Azov lot and their like?
One of the two sides of this war has warmongering ultranationalists in government. It's not Ukraine.
Zelenskiy just a couple of weeks ago did a photo op with Azov fighters. The Ukrainian government gives money and arms and propaganda support to Neo-Nazis. No other government does that. Even Russian Neo-Nazis are fighting for Ukraine. Yes the Ukrainian government is ethnonationalist.
Zelenskiy:
Such a brave push back on the Nazis. He has a point. Naming every street and bridge after Bandera is going to be confusing, I'm sure the Nazis will agree.
If your proposed plan for dealing with the likes of Azov is "let Putin's Russia win" then you do not actually have a problem with the far right being in power in Ukraine, you just have a preference in your flavour of far right. Frankly if I were in Zelenskiy's position and a fascist told me he wanted to go die to defend democracy from other fascists, I'm not about to discourage him, I'm gonna chalk it up as a win-win
Are you reframing the arming and promoting of SS worshipping white supremacists as some sort of clever antifascist tactic? Seriously anybody helping with resurrection of the genocidal Nazi ideology in Ukraine needs to be tried at Nuremberg. Russian conservative brainworms are far from "master race must cleanse the land of untermenschen" type shit, of course that's better. How is this even a debate?
Putin's regime is also far right, so you're just arguing about shades of fascism here.
However, only Ukraine is a democracy. Russia is not.
No, I'm saying that the Zelenskiy has got to pick priorities and the invading army committing war crimes all over the country is the one he put at the top. Which of the two countries is waging an offensive war to annex territory? Which one of the two has the imperialist mob boss in power? Which one of the two has clung to its colonial empire? You don't give a fuck about opposing fascism, you've just seen the West supporting something and decided that you're going to do the opposite of that
You think the Ukrainian army is not committing war crimes? First ethical army ever. You wouldn't expect these guys with the SS Totenkopf patches to be this standup, but here we are, clean as a Wehrmacht. Oh wait! They shelled civilians regularly since 2014. Maybe they should have stopped like they agreed to and this whole thing could have been avoided? Nah it's all Putin's fault.
Zelenskiy isn't really the boss now is he?
And on the colonialism: Look at all that Soviet infrastructure in Ukraine. Pretty good, pretty similar to how it looks in Russia, right? Living standards, education level, life expectancy, all that stuff was pretty similar between Russia and Ukraine in 1989. Now look at West Africa. Does that look like France to you?
Evil Soviet colonialists, bringing infrastructure and healthcare and factories and public pools!
Maybe both sides should have respected the Minsk agreements, but neither did. Both were followed by a failure for either side to reach a full ceasefire and then a major offensive by the DPR.
At no point have I said Ukraine is acting flawlessly here. But you're still comparing a flawed democracy with some fascists living in it to an invading militaristic empire with a centuries-long track record of imperialism openly asserting claims on the grounds of blood and soil. Not to mention that it seems to function specifically for the benefit of the unfathomably wealthy man who has literally had the constitution changed to specifically get around term limits just for himself and his buddy.
I can't wait to hear your explanation of how Zelenskiy is an imperialist and Putin isn't. Is it because he's being mean to poor little Russia by not giving them all the things Putin wanted for his birthday?
Oh Canada and Australia have good infrastructure, pretty similar to the UK, I guess they weren't colonies either then? Or are swimming pools actually a fucking ridiculous metric to use? But besides that, I was referring to Siberia. You know, where Russians colonised their way to one of the largest empires in all of history and most of it is still part of Russia.
Who's doing the blood and soil thing? Is it the people flying the literal blood and soil flag? Nah couldn't be!
Flawed democracy my ass, Zelenskiy is doing the opposite of what he promised and was elected for, has criminalized the opposition and consolidated the media. The Nazis have complete freedom to operate and state backing.
Zelenskiy is an imperialist because he is sacrificing (more like throwing away) Ukrainian lives for the benefit and under the direction of the US empire. He's a collaborator.
Russia (all the former socialist countries really) actually were colonized in the 90s. Those countries are being exploited by western capitalists and controlled through western capitalist media and NGOs, and therefore do not have sovereignty or democracy. There's some pushback (like Orban), but the only country that actually managed to free itself from the imperial domination was Russia (they fucked Russia too hard and it flipped). The empire then baited Russia into a war to weaken them. They activated their old pals the Ukrainian Nazi shits they worked with during the cold war and by attacking ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers in Ukraine they made it impossible for the Russian leadership to ignore this situation.
Oh, okay, so to be clear, according to you:
Invading another country to take its land and people = not imperialism (as long as America doesn't like it)
Fighting back against that invasion = imperialism
You aren't worth engaging with. You're just unbelievably horny for the right wing authoritarian country with a big army because it once painted itself red.
Yes, Russia is not primarily motivated by gaining resources, they're motivated by self-preservation and public pressure to stop the ethnostate Nazis next door from doing ethnic cleansing and having the civil war spill over. Whatever land the Russians take isn't going to be worth their losses for a really long time. That doesn't obviously mean they're unhappy if they capture anything of value, but it's pretty clear they were trying to avoid this situation.
That civil war in Ukraine was potentially going spill over, plus a hostile military force (and/or NATO troops) there is great lever to threaten Russia into submission. They could use any instability inside Russia (fueled by them) as a pretext to move weapons or troops into Russia proper. Just the threat of that could cause Russia to cave.
The US and EU look at eastern Europe as a great opportunity to exploit and plunder, and were trying to increase their grip on the region. In the case of Ukraine, they supported pro-western libs and Nazis to install thoroughly pro-western regime that would allow them to loot and plunder and station troops there.
You could argue that this became so big and generated so much blowback, that the US empire is now also looking at this as an existential problem (not existential for the US state really, but for the empire), but it didn't start out this way. They were just in the usual "crush resistance, expand influence, loot resources" mode, but they could just as easily have chosen to just wait and see and back off for now, without this causing any existential problem for them.
Why won't Russia stop the war?
Why did Vladimir Putin claim that Ukraine isn't a country?
Why does Russia purchase Iranian suicide drones, and launch drone and cruise missile attacks on Ukrainian cities every week?
Why do Russians want to kill all Ukrainians when they were considered brothers 2 years ago?