Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[Cryptmuster]

I still can’t believe how long this has been going on. Absolutely terrible that civilians are dying as a result of Russia’s actions. I’m reading reports that there are cities where the dead aren’t even being cleaned up. They’re just littering the streets. Now you’re hearing about Ukrainian soldiers shooting captive Russian soldiers in the kneecaps. It’s just a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. It’s dumbfounding how this type of conflict can exist today. Russia’s claims appear a bit paranoid and they’re coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

There were no threats to russia from Ukraine, Ukraine has never attacked any country, never in its history. We are a peaceful people and have not threatened anyone. What is happening now is an invasion based on false propaganda. Most Russians support this and this is not normal in a civilized world, such a crime cannot be left unpunished, every guilty person will answer for it.

[Branko]

I still can’t believe how long this has been going on. Absolutely terrible that civilians are dying as a result of Russia’s actions. I’m reading reports that there are cities where the dead aren’t even being cleaned up. They’re just littering the streets. Now you’re hearing about Ukrainian soldiers shooting captive Russian soldiers in the kneecaps. It’s just a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. It’s dumbfounding how this type of conflict can exist today. Russia’s claims appear a bit paranoid and they’re coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

There were no threats to russia from Ukraine, Ukraine has never attacked any country, never in its history. We are a peaceful people and have not threatened anyone. What is happening now is an invasion based on false propaganda. Most Russians support this and this is not normal in a civilized world, such a crime cannot be left unpunished, every guilty person will answer for it.

No country ever attacked another country, if you ask people of said country.

100k Poland people mass suicided, just so they could accuse Bandera

[paxmao]

...

We all agree that Albania, Hungary, Iceland etc... don't really have any say in NATO right?

They have a limited say, but an attack on any member is an attack on all. If that is not honoured, NATO would cease to exist. US and other members would take a"proportional response" as it is the standard in diplomacy and war. The choice of means and targets could vary - but certainly the nuclear response is not the first choice to respond to a non-nuclear aggression.

I meant for NATO to attack Russia, we all know it'll be only one country making that call. After bombing of Yugoslavia NATO cannot technically be called a "defensive" pact. If US declares war on Russia it'll do it under NATO no-fly zone, NATO intervention etc... Russia will have 30 nations declaring war on it and start attacking its air force. And people are willing to bet their lives that Russia won't use it's nuke arsenal under such circumstances? US used nukes on Japan for much dumber reasons.

...
Biden has already enough trouble with his popularity and chances of re-election to do that. He needs something he can sell as a successful peace and there is no way he can do so giving away Ukraine. Also, that would be a huge strategic error for the future and US analysts know that it would leave a less safe - thus more expensive - world behind.

US is the biggest unknown. Not a fan of Trump but with upcoming food shortages and gas prices, it's just too easy for a populist to win, Biden's ratings are already down and we're at the top of the hype. Think Biden is a lost cause, and that's an additional headache for EU. Consequences of their decision with Russia will be long term and painful, where any promises of support from US can flip in 2 years. Anyone seriously think that Trump will keep EU as a priority vs making America great once again, especially when China will be overtaking US?

...
Best case, well that depends for who? There are always competing interests but some ideas from top of my head:
-Russia: Ukraine surrendering (4 weeks ago or second best now), and Russia getting it back under it's sphere of influence
-US: Maximize chance of collapsing Russia by maximizing its pain via a proxy up to the last Ukrainian standing
-EU: This thing just going away ASAP, receiving natural resources to keep its heavy industries from collapsing and its population fed and warm during next winter
-Ukraine: Majority of populations just want to live "better" and don't really care about politics. Ukraine was the poorest country in EU and its GDP per capita was almost 4x lower than Russia. So financially, average Ukrainian would most likely be better off, under Russia. Freedom loving part of population are better off not coming back and staying in EU countries. Pretty much just like Cuba.
-China: Costly, long, drawn out conflict requiring huge investments from US with another Marshall Plan for Europe.
...

I think that it is very clear which side I am on: best case for Europe and Ukraine. US & China are only getting stronger with this and Putin's Tzardom, insofar as most of their population seem to be quite apathic about how they are governed, is not of my concern other than their ability to cause problems to others.

Certainly, not a war with WMD would fit a desirable solution to any party, which is the point of my post.

Again, I think that my position on this is very clear, but if I have to make it even more clear: a solution that causes a low number of civilian casualties, something the parties can live with given the damage inflicted to both sides, something that can be politically accepted for the relevant stakeholders, and, above all, a solution that does not encourage or that makes economically unfeasible any further conflict in the future.

On regards to your comments on EU, of course, ideally Europe wants this gone ASAP. While short term Germany chose to interlink with Russia, I think their leaders have gotten the message quite clear and the strategic exposure to Russia, while unchangeable short term, can and will be changed during the next five years. You cannot feed the bear no mater how nice he looks when asleep.

On your comment on Ukraine, people all over the world want to progress and "live better" in the ample sense. They know that this is not happening if they are part of the Tzardom. Also, people tend to like feeling free, even if freedom is never perfect something that, again, does not happen under a despotic foreign power's direct control.

Trades happen because they're beneficial for both parties, have you considered that maybe those cheap(er) natural resources what helped Germany become/stay where they are now? Do you think it can continue to stay competitive in global economy with it's high labor costs and now with natural resources say costing 20% more over China? Really doubt that their margins are that high. Germany already had to support economies of Greece, Portugal, Cyprus... pretty sure they didn't care and were fine with UA as it was pre 2014, and thinking WTF are you doing when US decided to hand out those freedom cookies. Don't see a good way out for them, oil/gas is a commodity, so it doesn't really matter how you shuffle it around the globe, all you're doing is making distribution less efficient. Freedom LNG from US would be at 20% premium and still won't cover their needs. Now on April 1st EU will have to start buying rubles to pay for gas while somehow trying to save face. One thing Russia has going for it is that after hitting the bottom it's hard to fall any lower, but EU still has a lot at risk and stuck between a rock and a hard place. These events can be a footnote in global history where (outside of UA) in 10yrs most won't remember it or it can end it.

I think that the first thing you need to stay competitive is having a country. If you are feeding a bear, he will bite you, so competitiveness at the cost of an existential threat is out of anyone's table. Before this war, I was already quite surprised of how close Germany was getting to Russia, but I thought they had really good reasons or leverage that I just was not in the know. Apparently, they did not.

Commodities and resources markets are usually quite "perfect" in the theoretical sense - products from Russia are no cheaper, they are just market price and easy to transport and, mid to long term, replaceable. A question we should be asking ourselves is why Putin is willing to sell to "unfriendly" countries as well. Seems that he cannot do without either? I am not sure that EU will accept paying in rubles. It may be the case of a pissing contest coming.

Just to put in context: Germany pays for the gas and funds Putin's war and then Putin send the gas to feed the industry that eventually produces the weapons that will kill the Russian young soldiers. Seems like everyone wins. Well, almost.

On regards to Germany "helping" the South Europe... Germany only helps Germany. Anything from them comes with strong strings attached.

Long term countries and markets adjust to newer circumstances and, as said, while Putin remains in power Russia is an unreliable partner, does not abide by any international law and cannot be assumed to honour commercial contracts.

I still can’t believe how long this has been going on. Absolutely terrible that civilians are dying as a result of Russia’s actions. I’m reading reports that there are cities where the dead aren’t even being cleaned up. They’re just littering the streets. Now you’re hearing about Ukrainian soldiers shooting captive Russian soldiers in the kneecaps. It’s just a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. It’s dumbfounding how this type of conflict can exist today. Russia’s claims appear a bit paranoid and they’re coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

There were no threats to russia from Ukraine, Ukraine has never attacked any country, never in its history. We are a peaceful people and have not threatened anyone. What is happening now is an invasion based on false propaganda. Most Russians support this and this is not normal in a civilized world, such a crime cannot be left unpunished, every guilty person will answer for it.

No country ever attacked another country, if you ask people of said country.

100k Poland people mass suicided, just so they could accuse Bandera

I am afraid there are many historical examples in which countries clearly understood they were the attackers. Germans will recognise that Hitler attacked Poland. I am not going to dig into Vikings, Mongols, Huns, Romans and others that were perfectly conscious of being on the offensive.

[Branko]

I am afraid there are many historical examples in which countries clearly understood they were the attackers. Germans will recognise that Hitler attacked Poland. I am not going to dig into Vikings, Mongols, Huns, Romans and others that were perfectly conscious of being on the offensive.

If Axis won WW2, you would only hear narrative about them defending...same as Americans today don't say "we did war crime by dropping
two A-bombs on civilians" but you hear "we did it to prevent loss of life by both USA soldiers and Japan civilians and soldiers"


Also, Romans were spreading democracy and culture to barbarians 

[suchmoon]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60916098

Russia has announced it will "drastically reduce" military combat operations in two key areas of Ukraine "to boost mutual trust" in peace talks.
[...]
Officials in Washington said they had already seen the Russians draw away from Kyiv, but they were still pounding the capital with air strikes and the US had little confidence that it marked any significant shift or meaningful retreat.

"mutual trust" my ass. Russian forces have been stalled there for a month with and Ukrainians started to counterattack.

[be.open]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60916098

Russia has announced it will "drastically reduce" military combat operations in two key areas of Ukraine "to boost mutual trust" in peace talks.
[...]
Officials in Washington said they had already seen the Russians draw away from Kyiv, but they were still pounding the capital with air strikes and the US had little confidence that it marked any significant shift or meaningful retreat.

"mutual trust" my ass. Russian forces have been stalled there for a month with and Ukrainians started to counterattack.

The decrease in the intensity of the operation near Chernigov and Kiev began two days ago, today it was presented as a gesture of goodwill on the part of Russia. I think everything is more prosaic - the main goal now is to clean up Mariupol and defeat the troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass. After the defeat of the Ukrainian regular army in the east, Russia will probably take a short pause to force peace negotiations, simultaneously moving to Nikolaevsk and Odessa and threatening to completely deprive Ukraine of access to the sea (even the loss of Mariupol in this regard is very painful for Ukraine). If it is possible to conclude a peace treaty, all nationalist detachments in the West of Ukraine will turn into ordinary terrorist gangs, which in fact they are. If a peace treaty is not signed on terms acceptable to Russia, the operation will continue, but in the West there will be much less loyalty and desire of Russian soldiers to save the lives of civilians. There, the main task will be to save the lives of Russian soldiers to the maximum, so artillery and aviation will work more. This is my vision of the development of the situation as the most likely scenario.

The current proposals of the Ukrainian side in the negotiations are unrealistic and even close to unacceptable for Russia. There will be no second Khasavyurt or new Minsk agreements.

[suchmoon]

The decrease in the intensity of the operation

Similar to how a sinking ship has a decrease in the intensity of floating.

[be.open]

The decrease in the intensity of the operation

Similar to how a sinking ship has a decrease in the intensity of floating.

Apparently you are in an information bubble, captivated by delusions and an abundance of fakes. Russian troops are acting primarily for reasons of expediency. Activity in the northern direction played a role in the initial phase of the operation. To storm a city of three million with a limited contingent of forces is madness. Plus, any agreement signed under pressure is legally null and void, so reducing the pressure on Kyiv is now quite reasonable. This will not help the regular army of Ukraine (or what is left of it) near the Donbass.

Ukraine's big mistake was to distribute weapons to criminals who torture prisoners. The main message of the Russian people to the Russian army now is "work, brothers".

[suchmoon]

Apparently you are in an information bubble, captivated by delusions and an abundance of fakes.

Funny coming from a Kremlin copy-pasta troll.

Russian troops are acting primarily for reasons of expediency. Activity in the northern direction played a role in the initial phase of the operation. To storm a city of three million with a limited contingent of forces is madness.

So why did they attempt to do it in such a suicidal way? Rhetorical question but if you need to meet today's quota - feel free.

[af_newbie]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60916098

Russia has announced it will "drastically reduce" military combat operations in two key areas of Ukraine "to boost mutual trust" in peace talks.
[...]
Officials in Washington said they had already seen the Russians draw away from Kyiv, but they were still pounding the capital with air strikes and the US had little confidence that it marked any significant shift or meaningful retreat.

"mutual trust" my ass. Russian forces have been stalled there for a month with and Ukrainians started to counterattack.

The decrease in the intensity of the operation near Chernigov and Kiev began two days ago, today it was presented as a gesture of goodwill on the part of Russia. I think everything is more prosaic - the main goal now is to clean up Mariupol and defeat the troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass. After the defeat of the Ukrainian regular army in the east, Russia will probably take a short pause to force peace negotiations, simultaneously moving to Nikolaevsk and Odessa and threatening to completely deprive Ukraine of access to the sea (even the loss of Mariupol in this regard is very painful for Ukraine). If it is possible to conclude a peace treaty, all nationalist detachments in the West of Ukraine will turn into ordinary terrorist gangs, which in fact they are. If a peace treaty is not signed on terms acceptable to Russia, the operation will continue, but in the West there will be much less loyalty and desire of Russian soldiers to save the lives of civilians. There, the main task will be to save the lives of Russian soldiers to the maximum, so artillery and aviation will work more. This is my vision of the development of the situation as the most likely scenario.

The current proposals of the Ukrainian side in the negotiations are unrealistic and even close to unacceptable for Russia. There will be no second Khasavyurt or new Minsk agreements.

I would be surprised Putin would cave in and accept stronger than the Article 5 security guarantees.
Ukraine knows they don't need NATO to defend themselves. They need arms.

Putin wants Ukraine territory but without anti-Russia resistance, i.e. without Ukrainians. And he wants it to be annexed to Russia.

I am afraid this war will go on until the last Ukrainian (or his children and grandchildren) are alive or until the last Russian occupier
or their supporter leaves Ukraine (Donbas/Luhansk and Crimea).

Until then, it will be an open hunting season on Russian occupiers, supporters, and collaborators.

If they reach an agreement, it will be temporary, I am afraid.

Lasting peace can only be reached when one side wins or loses.

The Mongols have been raiding Kievan Rus for hundreds of years.  This is just another attempt. Nothing new here.

[be.open]

Apparently you are in an information bubble, captivated by delusions and an abundance of fakes.

Funny coming from a Kremlin copy-pasta troll.

On this forum, allegations of copy-paste (i.e. plagiarism) are very serious and are punishable by an immediate automatic ban. Can you back up your value judgment with evidence that my content isn't unique, or are you just slandering me?

[suchmoon]

Apparently you are in an information bubble, captivated by delusions and an abundance of fakes.

Funny coming from a Kremlin copy-pasta troll.

On this forum, allegations of copy-paste (i.e. plagiarism) are very serious and are punishable by an immediate automatic ban. Can you back up your value judgment with evidence that my content isn't unique, or are you just slandering me?

Yes, moderators will be made aware of it. You don't need to worry too much though, a couple of your comrades are still not banned despite multiple reports. It looks like someone on the staff has a sweet spot for shitheads like you.

Meanwhile:

https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/14222077

In the Belgorod region, four people were injured when a shell hit a military camp

According to preliminary information, the shelling was carried out from the side of Ukraine

Sounds like Ukraine is "operating" on Russia now.

LOL Russian propaganda is making a U-turn - apparently admission of failure of their air defense would be not cool:

https://ria.ru/20220329/vzryv-1780770121.html

The explosion at the warehouse itself, according to preliminary information, occurred due to a human factor

[paxmao]

I am afraid there are many historical examples in which countries clearly understood they were the attackers. Germans will recognise that Hitler attacked Poland. I am not going to dig into Vikings, Mongols, Huns, Romans and others that were perfectly conscious of being on the offensive.

If Axis won WW2, you would only hear narrative about them defending...same as Americans today don't say "we did war crime by dropping
two A-bombs on civilians" but you hear "we did it to prevent loss of life by both USA soldiers and Japan civilians and soldiers"


Also, Romans were spreading democracy and culture to barbarians  

Romans sometimes did use subterfuges, but I think that they kind of saw themselves as a military superpower, without any particularly high reason to invade others - the moral concepts of the time were not about peace or understanding - rather the opposite - so they were absolutely fine with waging aggression. To be honest, most of the times either they invaded others or other would invade - it was a very different world in some ways, states and countries were not as established.

As for the Nazi Germany, the narrative at the time, uncensored by the winners, was effectively conquering the lebensraum on the basis of being a superior race. I think they had a clear idea of what they were doing.

...
Yes, moderators will be made aware of it. You don't need to worry too much though, a couple of your comrades are still not banned despite multiple reports. It looks like someone on the staff has a sweet spot for shitheads like you.
...

I would not worry too much, they really suck at propaganda. That stuff probably works back at home where other views cannot be given and the obvious fakes and misinformation go unchallenged, but here... Please, do not report them, I actually think they are doing a favour to the other side.

Apparently you are in an information bubble, captivated by delusions and an abundance of fakes.

Funny coming from a Kremlin copy-pasta troll.

On this forum, allegations of copy-paste (i.e. plagiarism) are very serious and are punishable by an immediate automatic ban. Can you back up your value judgment with evidence that my content isn't unique, or are you just slandering me?

Some of it has to be unique and made (up) by you certainly. The old Russian propaganda machine cannot have fallen so low as to be producing such a low quality stuff.

[suchmoon]

Some of it has to be unique and made (up) by you certainly. The old Russian propaganda machine cannot have fallen so low as to be producing such a low quality stuff.

Great article on this topic: https://www.fontanka.ru/2022/03/21/70522490/

(it's in Russian, but google translation works reasonably well)

[be.open]

Some of it has to be unique and made (up) by you certainly. The old Russian propaganda machine cannot have fallen so low as to be producing such a low quality stuff.

Great article on this topic: https://www.fontanka.ru/2022/03/21/70522490/

(it's in Russian, but google translation works reasonably well)

According to this article, the fighters of the invisible front cybertroops are working on a two-by-two schedule. If I text every day, can I get two sets of food stamps?

I'm disappointed that you haven't provided proof that my content isn't unique. You have fallen rather low in my eyes with such empty slander. It is interesting that a person who wears a commercial signature and receives payment for each message accuses the interlocutor of some kind of bias without evidence, this is a shame.

Some of it has to be unique and made (up) by you certainly. The old Russian propaganda machine cannot have fallen so low as to be producing such a low quality stuff.

I express my personal opinion on the topic of the conversation, I always formulate it in a unique way and I do it for free. I am an anarchist politically and have never voted for Putin in elections (I don't go to elections or I come to spoil the ballot, thus voting against everyone). My political preferences have not changed since the beginning of the special operation in Ukraine, although I began to sympathize more with Putin for the decisiveness of his actions. Also, I do not hate Ukrainians, although I dislike the ideology of the Nazis, their modus vivendi and modus operandi.

[suchmoon]

According to this article, the fighters of the invisible front cybertroops are working on a two-by-two schedule. If I text every day, can I get two sets of food stamps?

Makes sense that you focus on the payment part, and not on the fact that Putin's propaganda that you're so obsessively spreading is being spread via organized troll farms using fake accounts on social media. I mean it's not like there ever was much doubt about it, but a first-hand report like that is quite damning. Also it links the troll farm to a known Kremlin-adjacent oligarch and possibly even to Ukraine's pro-Russian ex-"president". Not news to you I take it?

I'm disappointed that you haven't provided proof that my content isn't unique.

Don't be, I will provide proof as I usually do - if you get banned and decide to appeal.

You have fallen rather low in my eyes with such empty slander and I have lost interest in further conversation with you.

I'm very sad now but also very happy that I was higher than "rather low" in your eyes. As they say in Putinland - cкaтepтью вaм дopoгa, тoвapищ.

It is interesting that a person who wears a commercial signature and receives payment for each message accuses the interlocutor of some kind of bias without evidence, this is a shame.

My signature doesn't pay for posts in P&S, and for most other posts that I make.

Also no one ever says "interlocutor" so whatever translation software they make you use - it's shit. Sanctions must be working.

I express my personal opinion on the topic of the conversation, I always formulate it in a unique way and I do it for free. I am an anarchist politically and have never voted for Putin in elections (I don't go to elections or I come to spoil the ballot, thus voting against everyone). My political preferences have not changed since the beginning of the special operation in Ukraine, although I began to sympathize more with Putin for the decisiveness of his actions. Also, I do not hate Ukrainians, although I dislike the ideology of the Nazis, their modus vivendi and modus operandi.

Obligatory "I don't usually support Putin but I support Putin" weaseling. Check.

[DaRude]

...they’re [Russia] coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

Yeah pretty much. Only Iraq didn't share a land boarder with US (wasn't even on a same continent), had different religion, didn't have 30% of population with English as their native language, didn't have regions where majority of population were Americans, and then official Russian attache didn't come out with their RuskiBear cookies during a coup where American leaning leader was removed, after which ultimately laws weren't passed that banned English books (when 60% of them were in English), English folklore heroes , and didn't de-Americanize Iraq toponymy implied also the removal from railways and airports of any information board written in English, and didn't put in language quotas against English etc etc etc... You know totally non discriminatory laws squeezing out English that people didn't know they needed before. But of course, coincidences, semantics, and they took Crimea.

So even without all that how did it turn out for Iraq? Non friendly regime changed, brought ISIS to the world, kept Saudis as a regional powerhouse, wiped out it's OPEC competitor, ensuring sale of weapons for billions of dollars to Saudis for decades, all while suffering no consequences or long term condemnations. Only 103,160–113,728 civilian died but now US gets to use that money and petrodollar on soft power, to offer preferential treatments and cookies to regimes it wants changed. That sweet soft power ensures US control of the media, so its population can be triggered and start condemning others nations that attempt to do even a small portion of the damage that US did. Pretty amazing gig, benefits of being on the top, until you go too far and someones cost of reputation becomes less than the benefits of doing same thing (oh and they have a hypersonic nuke so you can't really just bomb them into submission). Or are you an exception and made posts condemning all other more brutal conflicts that were beneficial to US?

...
I think that the first thing you need to stay competitive is having a country. If you are feeding a bear, he will bite you, so competitiveness at the cost of an existential threat is out of anyone's table. Before this war, I was already quite surprised of how close Germany was getting to Russia, but I thought they had really good reasons or leverage that I just was not in the know. Apparently, they did not.

Commodities and resources markets are usually quite "perfect" in the theoretical sense - products from Russia are no cheaper, they are just market price and easy to transport and, mid to long term, replaceable. A question we should be asking ourselves is why Putin is willing to sell to "unfriendly" countries as well. Seems that he cannot do without either? I am not sure that EU will accept paying in rubles. It may be the case of a pissing contest coming.

Just to put in context: Germany pays for the gas and funds Putin's war and then Putin send the gas to feed the industry that eventually produces the weapons that will kill the Russian young soldiers. Seems like everyone wins. Well, almost.

On regards to Germany "helping" the South Europe... Germany only helps Germany. Anything from them comes with strong strings attached.

Long term countries and markets adjust to newer circumstances and, as said, while Putin remains in power Russia is an unreliable partner, does not abide by any international law and cannot be assumed to honour commercial contracts.

Don't believe anyone thinks that Germany is under any existential threat, in fact it was doing pretty good pre 2014 coup and still sitting pretty good. Countries do what's most beneficial for them, a bit less so when they're in a pact. Doubt Germany thinks that US is doing them a lot of favors now, and after Brexit there's a huge pressure from UK & US on EU to sabotage its industrial complex. US & UK don't depend on Russian gas so what do they care.
“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests” - Henry Kissinger
What options does EU have, they are a declining energy importer, and will be even more so now. US won't redirect much of its output from lucrative contracts from South and Latin America (that just opens a door for Russia to come in). Doesn't make much sense to invest and increase deliveries into declining market for middle east either, to just loose their share in growing markets (India, China) to Russia. There's a reason why EU didn't sanction oil/gas.

But products from Russia are cheaper, if EU was able to obtain cheaper gas/oil surely they would've already done that. Can't do much about geography. There was a complex balance that seemed to work enough for both sides, when one sides decided to take something, it has to give up something somewhere else. Can't only have wins in international trades. What will really boggle your mind is who's transferring Russian gas to EU receiving payments from Russia for it.

[ariinv]

It was a mistake , when they were USSR and much bigger and integrated they could not beat Afghanistan that had  few handmade rifles , they just will make a bloody wound that humanity never forget 
 

[KingScorpio]

I still can’t believe how long this has been going on. Absolutely terrible that civilians are dying as a result of Russia’s actions. I’m reading reports that there are cities where the dead aren’t even being cleaned up. They’re just littering the streets. Now you’re hearing about Ukrainian soldiers shooting captive Russian soldiers in the kneecaps. It’s just a lose-lose situation for everyone involved. It’s dumbfounding how this type of conflict can exist today. Russia’s claims appear a bit paranoid and they’re coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

There were no threats to russia from Ukraine, Ukraine has never attacked any country, never in its history. We are a peaceful people and have not threatened anyone. What is happening now is an invasion based on false propaganda. Most Russians support this and this is not normal in a civilized world, such a crime cannot be left unpunished, every guilty person will answer for it.

there where threats, the threats where executed through human rights mobs, that onesidedly promoted the founding of new lingual states in russia

...they’re [Russia] coming off a bit like the United States as we invaded Iraq for imaginary weapons.

Yeah pretty much. Only Iraq didn't share a land boarder with US (wasn't even on a same continent), had different religion, didn't have 30% of population with English as their native language, didn't have regions where majority of population were Americans, and then official Russian attache didn't come out with their RuskiBear cookies during a coup where American leaning leader was removed, after which ultimately laws weren't passed that banned English books (when 60% of them were in English), English folklore heroes , and didn't de-Americanize Iraq toponymy implied also the removal from railways and airports of any information board written in English, and didn't put in language quotas against English etc etc etc... You know totally non discriminatory laws squeezing out English that people didn't know they needed before. But of course, coincidences, semantics, and they took Crimea.

So even without all that how did it turn out for Iraq? Non friendly regime changed, brought ISIS to the world, kept Saudis as a regional powerhouse, wiped out it's OPEC competitor, ensuring sale of weapons for billions of dollars to Saudis for decades, all while suffering no consequences or long term condemnations. Only 103,160–113,728 civilian died but now US gets to use that money and petrodollar on soft power, to offer preferential treatments and cookies to regimes it wants changed. That sweet soft power ensures US control of the media, so its population can be triggered and start condemning others nations that attempt to do even a small portion of the damage that US did. Pretty amazing gig, benefits of being on the top, until you go too far and someones cost of reputation becomes less than the benefits of doing same thing (oh and they have a hypersonic nuke so you can't really just bomb them into submission). Or are you an exception and made posts condemning all other more brutal conflicts that were beneficial to US?

...
I think that the first thing you need to stay competitive is having a country. If you are feeding a bear, he will bite you, so competitiveness at the cost of an existential threat is out of anyone's table. Before this war, I was already quite surprised of how close Germany was getting to Russia, but I thought they had really good reasons or leverage that I just was not in the know. Apparently, they did not.

Commodities and resources markets are usually quite "perfect" in the theoretical sense - products from Russia are no cheaper, they are just market price and easy to transport and, mid to long term, replaceable. A question we should be asking ourselves is why Putin is willing to sell to "unfriendly" countries as well. Seems that he cannot do without either? I am not sure that EU will accept paying in rubles. It may be the case of a pissing contest coming.

Just to put in context: Germany pays for the gas and funds Putin's war and then Putin send the gas to feed the industry that eventually produces the weapons that will kill the Russian young soldiers. Seems like everyone wins. Well, almost.

On regards to Germany "helping" the South Europe... Germany only helps Germany. Anything from them comes with strong strings attached.

Long term countries and markets adjust to newer circumstances and, as said, while Putin remains in power Russia is an unreliable partner, does not abide by any international law and cannot be assumed to honour commercial contracts.

Don't believe anyone thinks that Germany is under any existential threat, in fact it was doing pretty good pre 2014 coup and still sitting pretty good. Countries do what's most beneficial for them, a bit less so when they're in a pact. Doubt Germany thinks that US is doing them a lot of favors now, and after Brexit there's a huge pressure from UK & US on EU to sabotage its industrial complex. US & UK don't depend on Russian gas so what do they care.
“America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests” - Henry Kissinger
What options does EU have, they are a declining energy importer, and will be even more so now. US won't redirect much of its output from lucrative contracts from South and Latin America (that just opens a door for Russia to come in). Doesn't make much sense to invest and increase deliveries into declining market for middle east either, to just loose their share in growing markets (India, China) to Russia. There's a reason why EU didn't sanction oil/gas.

But products from Russia are cheaper, if EU was able to obtain cheaper gas/oil surely they would've already done that. Can't do much about geography. There was a complex balance that seemed to work enough for both sides, when one sides decided to take something, it has to give up something somewhere else. Can't only have wins in international trades. What will really boggle your mind is who's transferring Russian gas to EU receiving payments from Russia for it.

The EU is run by a bunch of Transatlantic Woke Tards, they have no idea what they are doing and will let anyone except russia do damage as much as they want in the EU

[DaRude]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60916098

Russia has announced it will "drastically reduce" military combat operations in two key areas of Ukraine "to boost mutual trust" in peace talks.
[...]
Officials in Washington said they had already seen the Russians draw away from Kyiv, but they were still pounding the capital with air strikes and the US had little confidence that it marked any significant shift or meaningful retreat.

"mutual trust" my ass. Russian forces have been stalled there for a month with and Ukrainians started to counterattack.

The decrease in the intensity of the operation near Chernigov and Kiev began two days ago, today it was presented as a gesture of goodwill on the part of Russia. I think everything is more prosaic - the main goal now is to clean up Mariupol and defeat the troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass. After the defeat of the Ukrainian regular army in the east, Russia will probably take a short pause to force peace negotiations, simultaneously moving to Nikolaevsk and Odessa and threatening to completely deprive Ukraine of access to the sea (even the loss of Mariupol in this regard is very painful for Ukraine). If it is possible to conclude a peace treaty, all nationalist detachments in the West of Ukraine will turn into ordinary terrorist gangs, which in fact they are. If a peace treaty is not signed on terms acceptable to Russia, the operation will continue, but in the West there will be much less loyalty and desire of Russian soldiers to save the lives of civilians. There, the main task will be to save the lives of Russian soldiers to the maximum, so artillery and aviation will work more. This is my vision of the development of the situation as the most likely scenario.

The current proposals of the Ukrainian side in the negotiations are unrealistic and even close to unacceptable for Russia. There will be no second Khasavyurt or new Minsk agreements.

I would be surprised Putin would cave in and accept stronger than the Article 5 security guarantees.
Ukraine knows they don't need NATO to defend themselves. They need arms.

Putin wants Ukraine territory but without anti-Russia resistance, i.e. without Ukrainians. And he wants it to be annexed to Russia.

I am afraid this war will go on until the last Ukrainian (or his children and grandchildren) are alive or until the last Russian occupier
or their supporter leaves Ukraine (Donbas/Luhansk and Crimea).

Until then, it will be an open hunting season on Russian occupiers, supporters, and collaborators.

If they reach an agreement, it will be temporary, I am afraid.

Lasting peace can only be reached when one side wins or loses.

The Mongols have been raiding Kievan Rus for hundreds of years.  This is just another attempt. Nothing new here.

Seems like Russia is doing divide and conquer. No way it can take Kyiv with <200k troops much less west Ukraine. Looks like now they're just taking out UA mech units and going after fuel reserves. Then they can concentrate on everything east of Dnieper river one at a time, without worrying about reinforcements coming in from the west. It's not how you start a war, but how you adapt to it. As far as duration of the war, Ukraine's GDP is $3,700k per capita (2020). Think everyone knows how Ukraine managed to supply their military from 0 to like 101 in under 8yrs, seen UA fighters with $40k thermal scopes, and overall better personal equipment than RU. Wars are expensive, people don't live on positive tweets, and tanks don't run on flag avatars. Once great powers come to agreement, funding and war will stop, people will move on with their lives, not much use to hold grudges and holdouts/partisans after that.

Edit:

...
The EU is run by a bunch of Transatlantic Woke Tards, they have no idea what they are doing and will let anyone except russia do damage as much as they want in the EU

It might be inevitable, it's in human nature to become complacent. Old leaders get challenged by new blood in endless cycles https://youtu.be/xguam0TKMw8