Russia begins Invasion of Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
InverseAgonist said:
So anyone who isn't pro-war is pro-Russian?

Is that really what it's come down to? I mean, this is insane. The world really has gone crazy when this binary, you're either with us or against us mentality is so prevalent; it's a horrible indicator. I'm old enough to remember when W Bush pulled this shit in Iraq and it was bullshit then and it's still bullshit today.

When you grow up I hope you become more wise, worldly and take a more nuanced view. The world is grey. Embrace the diversity of opinion, there is much to learn.
Click to expand...

But apparently not old enough to avoid posting false equivalencies

I really don't understand Neo-Chamberlains. That kind of naive thinking is why Europe is in this mess in the first place. Nobody here is pro-war, we're pro-Ukraine defending itself from a despicable lunatic despot.
 
NoLootBoxDev said:


that is true stephen colbert GIF by Obama




Schitts Creek Good Job GIF by CBC
Click to expand...

The most bizarre part about Russians fleeing to Georgia is that they are fleeing to a country they also at least tacitly supported invading.

The only reason they can is because the Georgian government are so pro-Russia.
 
Those lines of cars leaving Russia are crazy. Kazakhstan and Georgia both reported Wednesday morning that over 150,000 people came through.

Russia is fucked. This is how putin dies. He's sending 1st year ncos and officers to the front lines with people who haven't been trained at all. Now that Ukraine has long range himars I have no idea how Russia can make any ground.

After these young officers get obliterated their military is going to collapse.
 
jonnyp said:
But apparently not old enough to avoid posting false equivalencies

I really don't understand Neo-Chamberlains. That kind of naive thinking is why Europe is in this mess in the first place. Nobody here is pro-war, we're pro-Ukraine defending itself from a despicable lunatic despot.
Click to expand...

I think we need to articulate what's being stated because this isn't what's being proposed by me. "Pro-War" is fighting beyond the limits of 2022 (2014 Minsk II) boundaries, which is what he promotes -- he literally is "pro-war" as he wants war to achieve a means beyond that which existed in 2022. I support the Henry Kissinger position, which I linked and I'd wager you didn't read, that want the Ukrainians to fight and regain everything they had at the outbreak of open hostilities and then stop the fighting ASAP at the boundaries as they existed. At this point, with the killing stopped, we engage diplomacy to settle the issue of Crimea and repayments and such. It is an end game that's achievable and reaches a status quo solution to a problem of killing, mass displacement, hunger in the 3rd world, soaring energy prices and the chance of low-probability, high-impact events occurring that could harm a large fraction of the humans alive. Fighting a proxy war with a nuclear armed opponent is hard to model.

You call me a "neo-Chamberlain" which is cute, but Europe is in this mess for reasons that have nothing to due with "neo-Chamberlains" or even Vladamir Putin. Remember it was the western powers and Bill Clinton who negotiated the Budapest Memorandum with Yeltsin. It was the Green Parties of Europe who made themselves so reliant on Russia. NATO expansionism should be mentioned. There are many causes and things aren't so simple, although you will paint them into single variable equations that are easy to paint people with broad brushes like "neo-Chamberlains".
 
Rentahamster said:
Perhaps it is your understanding of what the term "pro-war" entails that is lacking nuance and diversity. Is an entity fighting for their mere survival against annexation "pro-war" because they are fighting back? Does "pro-war" mean "anti-self defense"?

If you're old enough to remember the shit that W pulled in Iraq, you should be old enough to remember that the "anti-war" position was for America to GTFO out Iraq. The anti-war position for Russia is for them to GTFO of Ukraine.

The "anti-war" position for the Iraq war was NOT "Make fake peace and then annex parts of Iraq for America to exploit and oppress to only further grow its military-industrial complex".
If your "anti-war" position for the Russia-Ukraine war is for Russia to make fake peace with Ukraine and then annex parts of Ukraine for Russia to exploit and oppress while draining it of natural resources to further grow Russia's military-industrial complex, then you really need to rethink just how "anti-war" your position truly is in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...

I articulated this in my reply to JonnyP above.

Fighting beyond what existed in 2022 is not "mere survival". They were surviving just fine in 2020 and without the threat to global security that open hot warfare entails with a nuclear armed state.

"Self-defense" has been achieved. Ukraine, through amazing courage and bravery and support thwarted the Russian armored advance on Kiev that was threatening. They have been pushed back dramatically and counter-offenses have been launched. We are basically entering a phase of prolonged stalemate while both sides rearm. There is a tempo and cadence in conflict and now is a time for diplomacy and IR to act and turn this off.

I don't even know where to go with your statements on Ukraine as they are bizarre as I can't find a post from you before 2022 complaining about Russia "exploit[ing] and oppress[ing] while draining it of it's natural resources to further grow Russia's military-industrial complex". Could you please link me to your pre-2022 post saying as much and I'll apologize?

As far as Iraq, your comments are totally off base. I believe "nuance" is needed indeed and a true parallel would be comparing the "anti-war position" of anti-aggression by the US by it's citizens in 2004 or the brave Russians who have dared stand up against Putin in 2022. In our context, "anti-war" is literally anti-war beyond the 2022 boundaries (2014 Minsk II) and I have articulated this ad nauseum and posted links to the position by Henry Kissinger who does a great job of articulating it and Fareed Zakarea. But, you likely can't be bothered to read when it's easier to fire off a hot take response that'll get some likes.
 
Last edited:
InverseAgonist said:
Fighting beyond what existed in 2022 is not "mere survival". They were surviving just fine in 2020 and without the threat to global security that open hot warfare entails with a nuclear armed state.

"Self-defense" has been achieved. Ukraine, through amazing courage and bravery and support thwarted the Russian armored advance on Kiev that was threatening. They have been pushed back dramatically and counter-offenses have been launched. We are basically entering a phase of prolonged stalemate while both sides rearm. There is a tempo and cadence in conflict and now is a time for diplomacy and IR to act and turn this off.
Click to expand...
Is Russia still actively launching attacks on Ukrainians in Ukrainian territory? Yes or no?

If yes, then self defense has not been achieved, and Ukrainians still need to fight to push back the imperialist invaders. If no, then congratulations, Russia stopped being assholes to Ukraine. As of this post, the answer is still yes.

InverseAgonist said:
I don't even know where to go with your statements on Ukraine as they are bizarre as I can't find a post from you before 2022 complaining about Russia "exploit[ing] and oppress[ing] while draining it of it's natural resources to further grow Russia's military-industrial complex". Could you please link me to your pre-2022 post saying as much and I'll apologize?
Click to expand...
What is the relevance of this statement? I'm making an analogy to the Iraq war to show you that your comparison is flawed.

InverseAgonist said:
As far as Iraq, your comments are totally off base. I believe "nuance" is needed indeed and a true parallel would be comparing the "anti-war position" of anti-aggression by the US by it's citizens in 2004 or the brave Russians who have dared stand up against Putin in 2022. In our context, "anti-war" is literally anti-war beyond the 2022 boundaries (2014 Minsk II) and I have articulated this ad nauseum and posted links to the position by Henry Kissinger who does a great job of articulating it and Fareed Zakarea. But, you likely can't be bothered to read when it's easier to fire off a hot take response that'll get some likes.
Click to expand...
And I have also posted why your Minsk II idea is not feasible in the previous post which you didn't reply to.
 
4th leak in the pipes found, I think talking another few years will clear this mess right up 🤣

I can give Russia some more suggestions, but they probably are already busy , taking out internet backbones and gas transport pipes near France .

Basically if they do this , I can't do my work.
 
Last edited:
InverseAgonist said:
Fighting beyond what existed in 2022 is not "mere survival". They were surviving just fine in 2020 and without the threat to global security that open hot warfare entails with a nuclear armed state.
Click to expand...
You consider crimea being invaded and annexed, and parts of easten Ukraine being under russian control pre Feb2022 as Ukraine "surviving just fine"
Interesting take
 
Interesting. putler will be use nuclear weapon? I think these guy are mad and will use it.
P. S i think these guy rewatch films about war and take seriously every story line.
 
Last edited:
Fenix34 said:
Interesting. putler will be use nuclear weapon? I think these guy are mad and will use it.
P. S i think these guy rewatch films about war and take seriously every story line.
Click to expand...

I don't think he'll use a nuke. More likely to use chemical weapons if anything.
 
winjer said:
What is your country. Most of EU already has it's winter reserves close to 100%.
Click to expand...
Around 98% and rising - they really did at least one good thing with storing it this uear.
Will it be enough? Hopefully. But it's not the availability we are most adraid of, it's the price which is high. I'll receive my yearly invoice in the coming days and new invoices for the coming year, so we'll see.
 
InverseAgonist said:
NATO expansionism should be mentioned. There are many causes and things aren't so simple, although you will paint them into single variable equations that are easy to paint people with broad brushes like "neo-Chamberlains".
Click to expand...

I love how all of you slip up, eventually.

It's just weird how none of you realise we have you pegged long before you do.
 
Last edited:
Bitmap Frogs said:
You worked hard to keep the charade, but then oops "NATO expansionism"…

NATO is a defensive pact and qualifying it as "expansionist" is a hallmark of russian propaganda. Russia is not worried about NATO, so much so they just removed almost all troops from NATO borders.
Click to expand...
well,old cold war doctrine sees europe as a zero sum game, you are either under russia inflyuence, or under usa influence...nato expansionism has little to do with the nato treaty itself and all to do with spheres of influence by the us and it's allies.

the only reason ukraine has been aided so heavely it's because it's a proxy war between two spheres of influence
still doesn't change that it was the right thing to do because regardless of the political chess game,ukraine and it's people deserve to keep their sovereignty
 
Majukun said:
well,old cold war doctrine sees europe as a zero sum game, you are either under russia inflyuence, or under usa influence...nato expansionism has little to do with the nato treaty itself and all to do with spheres of influence by the us and it's allies.

the only reason ukraine has been aided so heavely it's because it's a proxy war between two spheres of influence
still doesn't change that it was the right thing to do because regardless of the political chess game,ukraine and it's people deserve to keep their sovereignty
Click to expand...
Well, protecting democracies is fundamentally in the 'West's' interests anyway.

It's a rare case if the right thing and the logical thing being perfectly aligned.
 
Majukun said:
well,old cold war doctrine sees europe as a zero sum game, you are either under russia inflyuence, or under usa influence...nato expansionism has little to do with the nato treaty itself and all to do with spheres of influence by the us and it's allies.
Click to expand...

Every country that joins NATO does so because it wants to. It's a voluntary organisation, created to provide stability and security. It's a bulwark against the kind of aggressive imperialism of countries like Russia and China.

The NATO expansionism credo is absolute bullshit, designed to draw a false equivalence between it, and the depredations of the corrupt Russian state.
 
FunkMiller said:
Every country that joins NATO does so because it wants to. It's a voluntary organisation, created to provide stability and security. It's a bulwark against the kind of aggressive imperialism of countries like Russia and China.

The NATO expansionism credo is absolute bullshit, designed to draw a false equivalence between it, and the depredations of the corrupt Russian state.
Click to expand...

Also consider that countries can freely leave NATO. Something that France did one time, for example.
Any country trying to leave the USSR got extreme violent reprisals from Russia.
 
Last edited:
Majukun said:
well,old cold war doctrine sees europe as a zero sum game, you are either under russia inflyuence, or under usa influence...nato expansionism has little to do with the nato treaty itself and all to do with spheres of influence by the us and it's allies.

the only reason ukraine has been aided so heavely it's because it's a proxy war between two spheres of influence
still doesn't change that it was the right thing to do because regardless of the political chess game,ukraine and it's people deserve to keep their sovereignty
Click to expand...

i understand what you mean, but I don't think it's about spheres of influence but rather location.

No one gives a damn if bumfuckistan goes through war, but Ukraine is an European country, it has borders with the European Union.
 
FunkMiller said:
Every country that joins NATO does so because it wants to. It's a voluntary organisation, created to provide stability and security. It's a bulwark against the kind of aggressive imperialism of countries like Russia and China.

The NATO expansionism credo is absolute bullshit, designed to draw a false equivalence between it, and the depredations of the corrupt Russian state.
Click to expand...
russia ok but what makes china a promoter of aggressive imperialism?
last change on china borders dates 2012 when they "diplomatically" (under quotation since i have no idea what were the conditions,claims and whatevs)set their borders with tajikistan and philippines,since then they are focused on economy supremacy, not unlike the US.

the main thing that separates the nato expansionism "bullshit" and russia is that russia failed at expanding their influence through non aggressive means (since the euromaidan of 2014(?) ),which is why putin went for the aggressive approach (which of course it's something to condemn and the equivalent of ragequitting the diplomatical tabletop game)

the nato "expansionism" is like you said non aggressive,but it's very much real, just uses money and prosperity as an incentive instead of fear and violence,which is awesome but doesn't make it non real.

and that's without considering the euromaidan and how much of that was legitimate (know very little of how ukraine is run, but seems pretty much an executive power vs legislative one issue), how much of that was actually aided by the nato side (or at least that's the russian version),or how much was just the decision of the ukranian people (which given the unrest and separatist factions on the east, didn't have at the time an united front on the matter anyway, although war probably has changed things A LOT i assume.
 
The real reason NATO is increasing the number of members is simply because of Russian aggression in Europe.
If Russia was a normal nation, that respected it's neighboring countries and it's people, no one would care about joining NATO.
But since Russia is constantly attacking and/or threatening it's neighbors, the only solution is to join NATO to protect themselves.
 
winjer said:
The real reason NATO is increasing the number of members is simply because of Russian aggression in Europe.
If Russia was a normal nation, that respected it's neighboring countries and it's people, no one would care about joining NATO.
But since Russia is constantly attacking and/or threatening it's neighbors, the only solution is to join NATO to protect themselves.
Click to expand...
oh i agree, putin's strategy backfired tenfold
 
Fenix34 said:
Click to expand...

I could swear I've told you to post context before.

Don't just post a video unless it is very clear what is happening (and even then, at least supplement it with at least a sentence). This is especially so for something that is not in English, as let's be real, that's the only common language we all have here (and yes, I know there are closed captions - that's still an extra step that some may not bother to take).
 
Majukun said:
russia ok but what makes china a promoter of aggressive imperialism?
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right?

Because I don't know if you've noticed, but China have been laying claim to territory that isn't there's for a long time.

The only reason Winnie The Pooh hasn't tried to take Taiwan is because he's seen the clusterfuck Putin has made of Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
FunkMiller said:
You're kidding, right?

Because I don't know if you've noticed, but China have been laying claim to territory that isn't there's for a long time.
Click to expand...

I'm a bit surprised that China hasn't started making demands that Russia returns parts of Manchuria.
I guess China is only boisterous against countries that don't have a nuclear arsenal.
 
tomorrow 15:00 kremlin time starts a circus show of "officially" annexing the territories that are currently being fertilized by russian corpses 🤡
 
Majukun said:
the nato "expansionism" is like you said non aggressive,but it's very much real, just uses money and prosperity as an incentive instead of fear and violence,which is awesome but doesn't make it non real.
Click to expand...
What money and prosperity? Why didn't countries like Finland and Sweden want this money before, but are now suddenly interested in it?
 
poppabk said:
What money and prosperity? Why didn't countries like Finland and Sweden want this money before, but are now suddenly interested in it?
Click to expand...

Because Russia is threatening and/or attacking it's neighbors.
The only way that Sweden and Finland can continue to have democracy, freedom and prosperity, is to avoid being invaded by Russia.
 
Last edited:
poppabk said:
What money and prosperity? Why didn't countries like Finland and Sweden want this money before, but are now suddenly interested in it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, money and prosperity don't really factor that much when you're talking about countries with some of the highest living standards on the planet.

They join for the security. They're not being bribed to do it.
 
Welp, I guess Putin wants his own Lebensborn program, to replace combat casualties and the 1.6 million that definitely didn't die from Covid, since only 300.000 did.

 
niilokin said:
tomorrow 15:00 kremlin time starts a circus show of "officially" annexing the territories that are currently being fertilized by russian corpses 🤡
Click to expand...

You'd have to imagine that Ukraine are probably looking to stage an offensive soon after this has been decreed. Psychology is a large part of warfare, and responding to Putin's pathetic little display with force would be the best way to make him shrink even more in the eyes of the world and his people.

I'm pretty convinced they're gearing up for another offensive on the scale of the Kharkiv one, probably to take Kherson. 🤞🤞🤞
 
Majukun said:
...and that's without considering the euromaidan and how much of that was legitimate (know very little of how ukraine is run, but seems pretty much an executive power vs legislative one issue), how much of that was actually aided by the nato side (or at least that's the russian version),or how much was just the decision of the ukranian people (which given the unrest and separatist factions on the east, didn't have at the time an united front on the matter anyway, although war probably has changed things A LOT i assume.
Click to expand...
You know, every revolution is "illegitimate".

In 1770s 13 British colonies on the east coast of north america were illegally trying to avoid taxes and become independent. Followed by a revolution, where they got big help from the other British rivals, mainly from the French joined later by the Spanish and the Dutch.

Heck even the 1917 Russian revolution was illegitimate, which again got a little help from the German empire.

And the list with examples could be so-so long, but I choose only these two "big" rivals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

American YouTuber Sabbatical falsely imprisoned in Russia
30
2K
Mr Reasonable replied
Russia fines Google $20.5 decillion dollars
Business 
40
3K
Soodanim replied
  • Locked
Ukraine is fielding machine-gun turrets remotely controlled by the Steam Deck
33
2K
Puscifer replied
Venezuela Invasion of Guiana: Watch Thread
Drama Event 
48
6K
Fenix34 replied
Honda and Nissan to reportedly begin merger talks
2
77
4K
BennyBlanco replied
Top Bottom