Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[DaRude]

U.S. officials believe Kyiv will fall in 4-6 weeks, with Russia/Ukraine war lasting over a decade.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/#post-update-8de46653

With the amount of Ukrainian propaganda floating around, there is this notion that Ukraine is winning this war or even has the potential to win this war. It simply is not true. The Russian military has too many resources to throw away and the economic ramifications does not effect Putin directly. His fragile ego will put his political ambitions over his constituency. So without any input from NATO, this is prolonged losing battle for Ukraine. It seems like Russia has been targeting civilian areas over the last few days, and there are some reports that it might ramp up within the coming weeks. A 10-20 year time line sounds reasonable, and at the end Ukraine might end up being a wasteland like Afghanistan.

And after that Putin most likely will be dead and so will be his ideas of the Russian Empire.

I think what might actually result from all this, is that Russia will be broken up into smaller countries, stripped of its nuclear weapons, and
heavy sanctions will be imposed on them to pay for all the damage they have caused.  Think Germany after WWI.

The US, Japan, and China will probably exploit them for their resources.

I thought it was universally accepted that it was a bad idea and the main reason that lead to a much bigger WW2?

[1715330319]

1715330319

[1715330319]

1715330319

[Ultegra134]

~Snip~

Supposing that Putin did launch a nuclear nuke, USA and NATO wouldn't simply ignore such a situation, just because Ukraine isn't in the EU or NATO. It would be a disastrous turn, since it would launch a series of nuking from both parties, leading to thousands if not millions of deaths, while leaving an uninhabited earth.

I do get your point, the less Putin has to lose, the more dangerous he becomes, I don't think that there are any more sanctions to implement, the condition is already a mess, he has already lost, that's what makes him threatening, he doesn't have anything else to lose, so he might as well take humanity with him.

[DaRude]

U.S. officials believe Kyiv will fall in 4-6 weeks, with Russia/Ukraine war lasting over a decade.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/#post-update-8de46653

With the amount of Ukrainian propaganda floating around, there is this notion that Ukraine is winning this war or even has the potential to win this war. It simply is not true. The Russian military has too many resources to throw away and the economic ramifications does not effect Putin directly. His fragile ego will put his political ambitions over his constituency. So without any input from NATO, this is prolonged losing battle for Ukraine. It seems like Russia has been targeting civilian areas over the last few days, and there are some reports that it might ramp up within the coming weeks. A 10-20 year time line sounds reasonable, and at the end Ukraine might end up being a wasteland like Afghanistan.

Yeah my logic was the same, i thought I was in the bizarro world, everyone was talking as if Ukraine was defeating Russia, all objectivity and critical thinking was gone, blatant propaganda was rampant, only positive coverage of Ukraine, fact checking was non-existent, Russian news/propaganda was getting censored everywhere, echo chambers, and fakes were running wild ("Russian warship, go f*ck yourself" was proven to be fake but I still see people using it). Nothing made sense until i realized it was all psyops. Militarily Ukraine stands no chance, its the poorest, and most corrupt country in Europe (Russia is more corrupt). It appears, best chance Ukraine has is psyops, demoralize Russians to a point where Putin is either taken out, or people revolt and remove him from office. Now i don't say anything on social medias, but i hold this place in higher regard.

[paxmao]

U.S. officials believe Kyiv will fall in 4-6 weeks, with Russia/Ukraine war lasting over a decade.

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/russia-ukraine-news-kyiv-war-putin-invasion-talks-today/#post-update-8de46653

With the amount of Ukrainian propaganda floating around, there is this notion that Ukraine is winning this war or even has the potential to win this war. It simply is not true. The Russian military has too many resources to throw away and the economic ramifications does not effect Putin directly. His fragile ego will put his political ambitions over his constituency. So without any input from NATO, this is prolonged losing battle for Ukraine. It seems like Russia has been targeting civilian areas over the last few days, and there are some reports that it might ramp up within the coming weeks. A 10-20 year time line sounds reasonable, and at the end Ukraine might end up being a wasteland like Afghanistan.

Yeah my logic was the same, i thought I was in the bizarro world, everyone was talking as if Ukraine was defeating Russia, all objectivity and critical thinking was gone, blatant propaganda was rampant, only positive coverage of Ukraine, fact checking was non-existent, Russian news/propaganda was getting censored everywhere, echo chambers, and fakes were running wild ("Russian warship, go f*ck yourself" was proven to be fake but I still see people using it). Nothing made sense until i realized it was all psyops. Militarily Ukraine stands no chance, its the poorest, and most corrupt country in Europe (Russia is more corrupt). It appears, best chance Ukraine has is psyops, demoralize Russians to a point where Putin is either taken out, or people revolt and remove him from office. Now i don't say anything on social medias, but i hold this place in higher regard.
...

As I said on a previous post, a long ugly and costly draw, sucking Putin's foreign currency stores, showing the world that he can be if not beaten, clearly stopped by an army thought inferior (more on this below), an united West and a progressive expulsion from the richest trading countries (yeah, I know... China)... all that is up to a certain point a win for Ukraine.

An major strategic victory for Ukraine would be keeping its access to the Black Sea a large. A decisive strategic victory would be to keep the Donbas, their democratic government, their independence and Putin withdrawing the troops stating it as a "victory" of course.

The Ukrainian army is not small and is not as unprepared as it may look. Defensive positions typically require the attacker to have between 3 to 10 times more resources than the defender. Can Putin divest that amount of men, money and influence without compromising other borders?

Apart from propaganda, my strategic analysis remains: Ukraine can only be defeated as a whole if Ukrainians decide so. My take is that decision would require several years of conventional fighting and then guerrilla fighting. Costly and unpopular... not a despots dream certainly.

Edited to add: On the rhetoric that justifies the war of aggression, quoting myself in another post

- Bush war in Irak "they have weapons of mass destruction". - truth - "we want your oilfields".
- US and Spain -"they have sunken one of our ships". - truth - "We want Cuba".
- Spain "conquest" of Latin America - "we are going there to convert them to Christianism". - truth - "Me wants gold"
- The invasion of Austria by Hitler - "We need our levensraum, we are the superior race" - truth - "My army is Prussian, we need war to feel complete"
- And, in the future China taking Taiwan - "Is part of our territory, this is not a war". - truth - "we want Taiwan"
- US genocide of several Indian native tribes - "The are savages and have attacked us". - truth - "we want their land"
- Julius Caesar conquest of the Gaul - "They have raided our villages" - thruth - "I need money"

Putin's arguments are old as sand.

[suchmoon]

Forget nukes, Putin's gonna create another Chernobyl - cheaper and easier to spin propaganda around it.

Not confirmed by a reputable source other than CCTV cameras but there's chatter on twitbook etc that Russians are attacking Zaporizhia nuclear power station and there are explosions and fires.

[LTU_btc]

Forget nukes, Putin's gonna create another Chernobyl - cheaper and easier to spin propaganda around it.

Not confirmed by a reputable source other than CCTV cameras but there's chatter on twitbook etc that Russians are attacking Zaporizhia nuclear power station and there are explosions and fires.

There is live video from it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8
Fire is visible and few minutes ago I saw shooting or bombing in background. From what I read, this power plant is most powerful in Europe. Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

[suchmoon]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

[af_newbie]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

Nah, NATO will be waiting until Putin starts dropping nuclear warheads on Paris and Berlin, lol.

NATO prevented Poland from giving Ukraine 70 fighter jets today.  They are 'monitoring' the situation.

They will be monitoring like the West was monitoring the invasion of Poland in 1939.

Putin was so right about the West.  Weak men, arguing until it is too late.

Poland should enter this war, fuck NATO, the Russian army will blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

[AB de Royse777]

The purpose of the sanctions is to cripple the Russian economy, so Russia does not have the ability to continue its war effort. Wars are not won with weapons that each side had at the beginning of the war, they are won with weapons produced during the war. So if Russia is unable to continue to produce tanks, planes, and bombs, they will be unable to continue to fight the war.

Another purpose of the sanctions is to incentivize the people of Russia to overthrow/change their government. Russia is no democracy, and there are risks to speaking out/protesting, however, if these types of things happen in large enough numbers, the Russian government will be unable to suppress the protests.

I am well aware of the purpose of the sanctions.

This war did not started 9 days ago, this dirty situation in Ukraine is a long time battle. Russia wants to keep their land safe from NATO aggression. USA wants to expand NATO towards east. This war is not what it seems. It's not top secret that this war is between USA and Russia. This war is to make money from selling weapons, it is for fuels and oil.



No one wants war, it's against humanity but yet we had 35 abstention including China and India, let's not mention those who were against it. You can politically justify anything that serves your interest especially when you have super power. Politician does not care who died in battle filed or who is losing everything to live a life. It's the innocent Ukrainians who are losing their lives and it's the Russian people who is going to suffer for the decisions their leaders are making. West and NATO is harvesting the honey from this attack/invasion/war/military operation.

[DaRude]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

GOOD NEWS - The fire at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station broke out IN A TRAINING BUILDING outside the plant's perimeter, the state emergency service said in a statement
Separately, the plant's director told Ukraine 24 TV radiation security had been secured at the site.

https://twitter.com/phildstewart/status/1499566442609614850
so all good, oh wait

US activates Nuclear Incident Response team, sees no elevated radiation readings at Zaporizhzhia plant

and

IAEA puts its Incident and Emergency Centre (@IAEAIEC
) in full 24/7 response mode due to serious situation at #Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in #Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/iaeaorg/status/1499582507653681186
 

[suchmoon]

all good

In what universe shelling a nuclear power station is "all good"?

[DaRude]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

Nah, NATO will be waiting until Putin starts dropping nuclear warheads on Paris and Berlin, lol.

NATO prevented Poland from giving Ukraine 70 fighter jets today.  They are 'monitoring' the situation.

They will be monitoring like the West was monitoring the invasion of Poland in 1939.

Putin was so right about the West.  Weak men, arguing until it is too late.

Poland should enter this war, fuck NATO, the Russian army will blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

That was always blatantly obvious to any outside observer, NATO will not and legally cannot engage Russia over Ukraine, can't claim defense if you attack first outside of NATO. Once you start thinking of the events in terms of the big game of geopolitics they become quiet logical.

[DaRude]

all good

In what universe shelling a nuclear power station is "all good"?

You're really twisting my words. This was clearly not in approval of shelling a nuclear power plant, but rather that the situation is "all clear" nuclear power plant is not in danger. Russia already secured Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, so if the plan was to get some radioactive particles in the air they already had a perfect option.

[af_newbie]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

Nah, NATO will be waiting until Putin starts dropping nuclear warheads on Paris and Berlin, lol.

NATO prevented Poland from giving Ukraine 70 fighter jets today.  They are 'monitoring' the situation.

They will be monitoring like the West was monitoring the invasion of Poland in 1939.

Putin was so right about the West.  Weak men, arguing until it is too late.

Poland should enter this war, fuck NATO, the Russian army will blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

That was always blatantly obvious to any outside observer, NATO will not and legally cannot engage Russia over Ukraine, can't claim defense if you attack first outside of NATO. Once you start thinking of the events in terms of the big game of geopolitics they become quiet logical.

Did Russia invade Ukraine legally?  Yes or no?

[paxmao]

If we are talking "legal", all NATO countries are non-combatant / neutral countries. They are absolutely free to sell weapons to any of the sides. For example, Poland is absolutely in its right to sell tanks at 1$ per unit to Ukraine if they wish to do so.

...

They will be monitoring like the West was monitoring the invasion of Poland in 1939.

...

Which actually started WWII as such, is that what you mean?

I think the EU should support Ukraine with all material means (particularly adequate weapons) necessary to stop Putin's invasion on its tracks. I am in favour of peace but as the old saying says "si vis pacem parabelum" - If you want peace, prepare for war.

There was a Roman general that met with Mitridates of Pontus, and oriental despot that was threating a province of Rome. Mitridates approached on a throne carried by 40 slaves covered in gold. Sila dismounted, took off his armour and wore a simple hay hat. Walking towards Mitridates, drew a line in the sand. From his inferior position, he said "if you cross this line, you are at war with Rome" and left giving his back to Mitridates.

Mitridates, with his all army at his back never crossed that line. The fact that right behind Sila were 4 roman legions in battle formation probably had a lot to do with it.

NATO must draw the line in the sand. In my view, better in Ukraine than in Finland, Sweden or Poland.

[AB de Royse777]

Although you are in conversation with someone else but I could nor resist answering to your question.

Did Russia invade Ukraine legally?  Yes or no?

This is a very good question that you have asked.  We can draw some timeline and answer the question.

Q. Did Russia invade Ukraine legally?  Yes or no?
- No
The invasion or military operation or whatever you call it, did it start from 9 days ago?

The aim of the United States and the its European allies to peel Ukraine away from the Soviet orbit and incorporate it into the West - John Mearsheimer

Do you agree or disagree with this?

If you agree then how US is doing this?
- To make Ukraine a Western military base on Russian border.

Do you think Russia was suppose to allow this act? Yes/No?
- My answer is NO! Of-course Russia will do everything they can.

US had a few elements to use.
1. Expand NATO towards east, towards Russian border.
2. Integrate Ukraine economy into the west or in other words EU expansion
3. Promote democracy in Ukraine. US runs around the world, give everything to put their choice of democratic regimes. We all love democracy, don't we? Moscow do not like it and Beijing too.

Let's go back way before Feb 22nd 2014.
In mid 1990s former Soviet Union made it clear that they oppose NATO expansion although they were too weak to do anything about it.

NATO's declaration in 2008:

NATO welcomes Ukraine's and Georgia's Euro Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO

Putin's response:

Georgia and Ukraine becoming part of NATO is a "direct threat" to Russia

Ukraine is strategically very important for the security of Russia but the West were encouraging Ukraine to play tough against Russia. The West were encouraging the Ukrainians that they will ultimately become a part of the West because the West will ultimately defeat Putin.

Is West losing anything from this War? No! In fact, they are looking at making more money from selling weapons and since Russian will be disconnected from major part of the world, US will easily make deals with their energy resources to the EU nations. But what did Ukraine get from playing tough against a country which has huge nuclear power where they have none?

It does not matter who will win this WAR? Putin or West but one thing is very clear for sure that Ukraine is losing everything now, Ukraine is getting wrecked and will have nothing left when we will have an end of this WAR.

[paxmao]

...
NATO's declaration in 2008:

NATO welcomes Ukraine's and Georgia's Euro Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO

Putin's response:

Georgia and Ukraine becoming part of NATO is a "direct threat" to Russia

Ukraine is strategically very important for the security of Russia but the West were encouraging Ukraine to play tough against Russia.

 ...

Sorry to jump in, but since it is a forum I guess it is fine.

Wait, I am afraid we are just loosing a bit here. The fact that a country is strategically important for you does not mean you automatically get the right to rule it!

Example: Russia is strategically important for the safety of Poland. Putin is aggressive, thus Poland has the right to change Russia's regime. Sounds ridiculous does it not? Well, that is exactly Putin's argument.

If we talk Realpolitik's rather than law, then pretty much anything is justified from either side and makes no sense talking about legality. Then, the argument is "I have a bigger army and I will tell your citizens what they can and cannot do", to which the only answer is "sure, try to, we will do everything in our hand to stop you, and by the way watch your back, you may not be able to afford a stalemate".

What you cannot do is try to mix these two to justify a war of aggression.

[AB de Royse777]

Wait, I am afraid we are just loosing a bit here. The fact that a country is strategically important for you does not mean you automatically get the right to rule it!

Russia would not want to rule or better say wreck Ukraine if the West were not constantly pushing their interest in Ukraine. West should have consider not expanding NATO to the east.

Russia is strategically important for the safety of Poland. Putin is aggressive, thus Poland has the right to change Russia's regime. Sounds ridiculous does it not?

Poland don't need to do it alone. The west, EU and NATO are already trying to do it for them.

Then, the argument is "I have a bigger army and I will tell your citizens what they can and cannot do"

Why do you think all these nuclear power all around? To produce energy?

My point was not justifying the war but to point out the problems behind it. The West and Russia are having their egoistic showdown and in between Ukrainians are losing everything even at this very moment.

[paxmao]

Wait, I am afraid we are just loosing a bit here. The fact that a country is strategically important for you does not mean you automatically get the right to rule it!

Russia would not want to rule or better say wreck Ukraine if the West were not constantly pushing their interest in Ukraine. West should have consider not expanding NATO to the east.

Russia is strategically important for the safety of Poland. Putin is aggressive, thus Poland has the right to change Russia's regime. Sounds ridiculous does it not?

Poland don't need to do it alone. The west, EU and NATO are already trying to do it for them.

Then, the argument is "I have a bigger army and I will tell your citizens what they can and cannot do"

Why do you think all these nuclear power all around? To produce energy?

My point was not justifying the war but to point out the problems behind it. The West and Russia are having their egoistic showdown and in between Ukrainians are losing everything even at this very moment.

So the West is the cause of this war because the people of Ukraine would rather look west than be part of Putin's dominions? Cannot you not understand that Putin's Russia is simply unattractive as as partner?  Would you not say that his doings in Chechenia, the government actions in Russia and Belorussia are not fundamental reasons why other kids do not wanna play with him? Would you say that the empire of the oligarchs he promoted is a feature many would rather not have in their countries?

There is a old German saying: "be my friend or I'll crush your skull". Did Putin not learn to make friend when he was six?

Again, either this is about legality or it is about force. If it is about legality, Ukraine is a free country and is free to choose their partners. If it is about force, then we should reckon that diplomacy has failed and neutral countries are free to sell weapons to any of the contenders as per the rules of war. My personal take is for the West to help Ukraine reach a full stalemate on this war until it is no longer economically viable or someone decides to, instead of changing Ukraine government, reconsider who should be their own leader.

[DaRude]

Putin has no limits, but doesn't he don't understand that nuclear disaster would hit not Ukraine only, but also big part of Russia. Especially now when wind is going towards Rostov and Krasnodar.

Well, clearly he doesn't care about a few million casualties, that much is clear by now. An incident like that might be beneficial for his delusional "plan" - look, Ukrainians launched a nuclear attack against us!!!

However if the wind starts blowing towards NATO, that raises some interesting questions. Is that an attack?

Nah, NATO will be waiting until Putin starts dropping nuclear warheads on Paris and Berlin, lol.

NATO prevented Poland from giving Ukraine 70 fighter jets today.  They are 'monitoring' the situation.

They will be monitoring like the West was monitoring the invasion of Poland in 1939.

Putin was so right about the West.  Weak men, arguing until it is too late.

Poland should enter this war, fuck NATO, the Russian army will blow up the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

That was always blatantly obvious to any outside observer, NATO will not and legally cannot engage Russia over Ukraine, can't claim defense if you attack first outside of NATO. Once you start thinking of the events in terms of the big game of geopolitics they become quiet logical.

Did Russia invade Ukraine legally?  Yes or no?

I guess the short answer is NO, just like all other invasions and operations in the world. As paxmao pointed out the justifications are usually silly, made of 14 words or less for consumption of general public that has an average attention span for 15 words (made up stats).

But concept of legality comes from laws of the nation. Your haircut maybe illegal in North Korea, your bible is a threat to national security in Kuwait, adultery will get you stoned to death in Saudi Arabia, chewing gum is illegal in Singapore etc etc etc.... Then there's also the consequence for breaking those laws, is something really illegal if theres no consequence (marijuana in illegal in US on federal level). Speeding is illegal but if benefits outweigh consequence+risk it might still be logical to do it. US set the terrible precedence of being able to send army to a country without calling it invasions, there are no more wars but just "operations", and now we're just seeing other nations using the same playbook. If you're powerful enough and don't want to be sued just withdraw if they still try to sue you can freeze their assets ban them and their families and target others who assist ICC investigations.


If you stay quiet when one nation decides to give out cookies where it suits them and where they bare no direct consequences, then you cannot complain when/if China decides to give free food to every protestor of mouvement des gilets jaunes, or Russia decides to give out free vodka to BLM protestors. Sure its whataboutism and two wrongs don't make a right, thus why I agree that its not "legal". ‘For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law’

Edit: and for a total whataboutism just to hammer in the point, Did US blockade Cuba legally? Rhetorical question