Current Affairs Ukraine

[Wolf8312]

I think it depends on what you constitute as a victory. Is it now likely that the entire of Ukraine will be invaded? I'd say no, which is a victory in itself.

Does depend if a full occupation of Ukraine was indeed Russia's goal and intention though. I know the collective west/MSM likes this idea, but its also a very convenient way of convincing their audience see Russia has lost, even if they have actually not! And remember Russia never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started.

FWIW many ex-US army analysts I've listened to claim the Russians never had any intention of taking over the entire country or storming places like Kiev (Russia itself also never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started) but that the main focal point was the Donbas region were they now apparently have the bulk of the Ukrainian army surrounded in a cauldron. Rather than getting bogged down in messy battles for every house (which would favor the defending Ukrainians) they are instead just heating up the cauldron, while surrounding these cities/armies and cutting off their supplies.
That's not to say the Ukrainian army is not fighting fiercely and winning many battles, but after all if Russia was really losing so terribly would Zelensky be dashing around and begging for (WW3 inducing) all these no fly zones?

These analysts also point to the fact Russia never had anywhere near enough troops to achieve a full occupation of the country and that unlike in the Iraq invasion where the US aims were regime change (and they destroyed the infrastructure of the government/army) and decapitation of the central government, Russia's behaviour doesn't point to it wishing to destroy the government itself (only the Neo Nazi Azov battalions/divisions) as it is in active negotiations with the Ukrainian government precisely to avoid an Iraq type situation (total chaos) which would only lead to destabilization of a region that is on its own border.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, but I don't think turning Ukraine into a Stalingrad type situation and proxy war against Russia, is really helping the Ukrainian people and for the sake of world peace we should be seeking deescalation and diplomacy not pouring petrol onto the bonfire which is what our own leaders are doing.

It is also not as black and white a situation as the western media are trying to make out. The Ukrainian government is not some shining beacon of peace loving democracy but one of the most corrupt in the world. The Azov elements within that government/army are indeed real (videos all over the net of them torturing POW's and civillians alike) and they were were indeed brought to power in a CIA sponsored coup back in 2014 (go and watch these thugs in the Ukrainian parliment).
Yes many Ukrainians and Ukrainian regions do indeed hate the Russians but many regions in Ukraine are Russian and have suffered terribly under the Ukrainian regime, and actually wanted/supported Russian intervention.

Ukraine is unfortunately trapped between a rock and a hard place, but this lord of the rings narrative where suddenly we (after Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.) are suddenly the peace loving good guys is ridiculous and US/NATO's role in this debacle should not be white washed and glossed over.

Anyway I better get out of here before I get bogged down in a pointless unwinnable battle myself!

 

[PhilM]

Does depend if a full occupation of Ukraine was indeed Russia's goal and intention though. I know the collective west/MSM likes this idea, but its also a very convenient way of convincing their audience see Russia has lost, even if they have actually not! And remember Russia never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started.

FWIW many ex-US army analysts I've listened to claim the Russians never had any intention of taking over the entire country or storming places like Kiev (Russia itself also never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started) but that the main focal point was the Donbas region were they now apparently have the bulk of the Ukrainian army surrounded in a cauldron. Rather than getting bogged down in messy battles for every house (which would favor the defending Ukrainians) they are instead just heating up the cauldron, while surrounding these cities/armies and cutting off their supplies.
That's not to say the Ukrainian army is not fighting fiercely and winning many battles, but after all if Russia was really losing so terribly would Zelensky be dashing around and begging for (WW3 inducing) all these no fly zones?

These analysts also point to the fact Russia never had anywhere near enough troops to achieve a full occupation of the country and that unlike in the Iraq invasion where the US aims were regime change (and they destroyed the infrastructure of the government/army) and decapitation of the central government, Russia's behaviour doesn't point to it wishing to destroy the government itself (only the Neo Nazi Azov battalions/divisions) as it is in active negotiations with the Ukrainian government precisely to avoid an Iraq type situation (total chaos) which would only lead to destabilization of a region that is on its own border.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, but I don't think turning Ukraine into a Stalingrad type situation and proxy war against Russia, is really helping the Ukrainian people and for the sake of world peace we should be seeking deescalation and diplomacy not pouring petrol onto the bonfire which is what our own leaders are doing.

It is also not as black and white a situation as the western media are trying to make out. The Ukrainian government is not some shining beacon of peace loving democracy but one of the most corrupt in the world. The Azov elements within that government/army are indeed real (videos all over the net of them torturing POW's and civillians alike) and they were were indeed brought to power in a CIA sponsored coup back in 2014 (go and watch these thugs in the Ukrainian parliment).
Yes many Ukrainians and Ukrainian regions do indeed hate the Russians but many regions in Ukraine are Russian and have suffered terribly under the Ukrainian regime, and actually wanted/supported Russian intervention.

Ukraine is unfortunately trapped between a rock and a hard place, but this lord of the rings narrative where suddenly we (after Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.) are suddenly the peace loving good guys is ridiculous and US/NATO's role in this debacle should not be white washed and glossed over.

Anyway I better get out of here before I get bogged down in a pointless unwinnable battle myself!

I like your euphemisms for 'heating up the cauldron' to replace attacking civilians with indiscriminate artillery, raping, pillaging and murdering the population.

Plus, if you think they drove towards Kyiv and dropped their VDV at Hostomel, losing thousands of troops and lots of equipment, for little reason well that's great.

Take your Russian propaganda book with you; while Ukraine isn't perfect, it was Russia who invaded a sovereign, democratic nation and incited a war.

It's not black and white, but it's not the drivel you're spouting.

 

[devogue]

Does depend if a full occupation of Ukraine was indeed Russia's goal and intention though. I know the collective west/MSM likes this idea, but its also a very convenient way of convincing their audience see Russia has lost, even if they have actually not! And remember Russia never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started.

FWIW many ex-US army analysts I've listened to claim the Russians never had any intention of taking over the entire country or storming places like Kiev (Russia itself also never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started) but that the main focal point was the Donbas region were they now apparently have the bulk of the Ukrainian army surrounded in a cauldron. Rather than getting bogged down in messy battles for every house (which would favor the defending Ukrainians) they are instead just heating up the cauldron, while surrounding these cities/armies and cutting off their supplies.
That's not to say the Ukrainian army is not fighting fiercely and winning many battles, but after all if Russia was really losing so terribly would Zelensky be dashing around and begging for (WW3 inducing) all these no fly zones?

These analysts also point to the fact Russia never had anywhere near enough troops to achieve a full occupation of the country and that unlike in the Iraq invasion where the US aims were regime change (and they destroyed the infrastructure of the government/army) and decapitation of the central government, Russia's behaviour doesn't point to it wishing to destroy the government itself (only the Neo Nazi Azov battalions/divisions) as it is in active negotiations with the Ukrainian government precisely to avoid an Iraq type situation (total chaos) which would only lead to destabilization of a region that is on its own border.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, but I don't think turning Ukraine into a Stalingrad type situation and proxy war against Russia, is really helping the Ukrainian people and for the sake of world peace we should be seeking deescalation and diplomacy not pouring petrol onto the bonfire which is what our own leaders are doing.

It is also not as black and white a situation as the western media are trying to make out. The Ukrainian government is not some shining beacon of peace loving democracy but one of the most corrupt in the world. The Azov elements within that government/army are indeed real (videos all over the net of them torturing POW's and civillians alike) and they were were indeed brought to power in a CIA sponsored coup back in 2014 (go and watch these thugs in the Ukrainian parliment).
Yes many Ukrainians and Ukrainian regions do indeed hate the Russians but many regions in Ukraine are Russian and have suffered terribly under the Ukrainian regime, and actually wanted/supported Russian intervention.

Ukraine is unfortunately trapped between a rock and a hard place, but this lord of the rings narrative where suddenly we (after Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.) are suddenly the peace loving good guys is ridiculous and US/NATO's role in this debacle should not be white washed and glossed over.

Anyway I better get out of here before I get bogged down in a pointless unwinnable battle myself!

They wanted to 'denazify' and 'demilitarise' Ukraine which says to me that they wanted to regime change.

 

[tsubaki]

TBF there is an urgent need to find out what Russia actually wants out of this now in these peace talks.

If it is just the Donbas and an acceptance that Crimea is Russian now (plus the other things that the Ukrainians seem to have accepted) then that is something much different to a total takeover and Russification of the country and it needs a different response from the rest of the world. The first (which is what they've claimed) is something that the rest of the world (Western and others) could live with provided there were effective guarantees that it would remain as that - here truly multinational forces could be deployed rather than just NATO.

The latter on the other hand demands a global response, via the UN rather than the same Western bloc that we have seen so far.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

Does depend if a full occupation of Ukraine was indeed Russia's goal and intention though. I know the collective west/MSM likes this idea, but its also a very convenient way of convincing their audience see Russia has lost, even if they have actually not! And remember Russia never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started.

FWIW many ex-US army analysts I've listened to claim the Russians never had any intention of taking over the entire country or storming places like Kiev (Russia itself also never stated that occupying the whole country was one of their military objectives when this conflict started) but that the main focal point was the Donbas region were they now apparently have the bulk of the Ukrainian army surrounded in a cauldron. Rather than getting bogged down in messy battles for every house (which would favor the defending Ukrainians) they are instead just heating up the cauldron, while surrounding these cities/armies and cutting off their supplies.
That's not to say the Ukrainian army is not fighting fiercely and winning many battles, but after all if Russia was really losing so terribly would Zelensky be dashing around and begging for (WW3 inducing) all these no fly zones?

These analysts also point to the fact Russia never had anywhere near enough troops to achieve a full occupation of the country and that unlike in the Iraq invasion where the US aims were regime change (and they destroyed the infrastructure of the government/army) and decapitation of the central government, Russia's behaviour doesn't point to it wishing to destroy the government itself (only the Neo Nazi Azov battalions/divisions) as it is in active negotiations with the Ukrainian government precisely to avoid an Iraq type situation (total chaos) which would only lead to destabilization of a region that is on its own border.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see, but I don't think turning Ukraine into a Stalingrad type situation and proxy war against Russia, is really helping the Ukrainian people and for the sake of world peace we should be seeking deescalation and diplomacy not pouring petrol onto the bonfire which is what our own leaders are doing.

It is also not as black and white a situation as the western media are trying to make out. The Ukrainian government is not some shining beacon of peace loving democracy but one of the most corrupt in the world. The Azov elements within that government/army are indeed real (videos all over the net of them torturing POW's and civillians alike) and they were were indeed brought to power in a CIA sponsored coup back in 2014 (go and watch these thugs in the Ukrainian parliment).
Yes many Ukrainians and Ukrainian regions do indeed hate the Russians but many regions in Ukraine are Russian and have suffered terribly under the Ukrainian regime, and actually wanted/supported Russian intervention.

Ukraine is unfortunately trapped between a rock and a hard place, but this lord of the rings narrative where suddenly we (after Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc.) are suddenly the peace loving good guys is ridiculous and US/NATO's role in this debacle should not be white washed and glossed over.

Anyway I better get out of here before I get bogged down in a pointless unwinnable battle myself!

Their aims were simple

1. Pin Ukranian forces in the East (Donbas) whilst encircling them via capture of Kharkiv and Mariupol and forcing their surrender.

2. Capture Kherson and complete encirclement of Ukranian troops in the SE.

3. Push N and W from Crimea to capture Odessa along with Naval assaults to consolidate the entire South coast of Ukraine.

4. Sweep south, capture Kyiv and invoke regime change forcing Ukraine to surrender.

To date they have only managed to capture Kherson and even now the Ukes are counter-attacking.

UK defence intelligence estimates that Ukraine has rendered 70-75% of the deployed Russian BTG’s as combat ineffective.

In summary they’ve had a shocker.

 

[Walken]

Russians are bad enough to share a beach on holiday with never mind rampaging through your country with weapons.

As soon as they invaded I said they'd be raping people, it was an absolute certainty.

I hope the West never lifts sanctions with Russia or trusts them again.

There is a different generation coming through and if you look through the history of russian literature there have also been humanitarian voices within the nation. Sometimes its hard to see under such brutal leadership, the beach holiday line is 100 percent though!

 

[PeregrineT]

TBF there is an urgent need to find out what Russia actually wants out of this now in these peace talks.

If it is just the Donbas and an acceptance that Crimea is Russian now (plus the other things that the Ukrainians seem to have accepted) then that is something much different to a total takeover and Russification of the country and it needs a different response from the rest of the world. The first (which is what they've claimed) is something that the rest of the world (Western and others) could live with provided there were effective guarantees that it would remain as that - here truly multinational forces could be deployed rather than just NATO.

The latter on the other hand demands a global response, via the UN rather than the same Western bloc that we have seen so far.

The rest of the world can no longer live with Russia in its current state, no matter what reduced demands they have of Ukraine. Thats is non-negotiable as long as the world isnt ready to end in nuclear winter in 6-7 years due to their failure to show any kind of backbone to a country that has now clearly shown it has, and wants, no place on this planet.

 

[PhilM]

There is a different generation coming through and if you look through the history of russian literature there have also been humanitarian voices within the nation. Sometimes its hard to see under such brutal leadership, the beach holiday line is 100 percent though!

We’re going to Turkey in a few months, which typically has a fair few Russians. A positive of this war is hopefully they’re stuck in Russia.

 

[stipe]

The rest of the world can no longer live with Russia in its current state, no matter what reduced demands they have of Ukraine. Thats is non-negotiable as long as the world isnt ready to end in nuclear winter in 6-7 years due to their failure to show any kind of backbone to a country that has now clearly shown it has, and wants, no place on this planet.

There is no rest of the world, no matter how many times people repeat that. Only like 36-37 countries sanctioned Russia, meaning America plus Europe, Canada, Australia.

I bet majority of the "rest" of the world cheering for Russia, simply because of the hate of America and Europe. China, Russia, Middle East, African and South American states......

They don't give a [Poor language removed] for a European war in a same way people on this continent don't give a [Poor language removed] for wars in Africa and Middle East, and thats the real truth. How many Europeans and Americans even know about current war in Ethiopia for example?

 

[tsubaki]

The rest of the world can no longer live with Russia in its current state, no matter what reduced demands they have of Ukraine. Thats is non-negotiable as long as the world isnt ready to end in nuclear winter in 6-7 years due to their failure to show any kind of backbone to a country that has now clearly shown it has, and wants, no place on this planet.

I disagree; in attacking another country Russia has behaved like many other countries have (including the US) in the recent past. We absolutely should stand up to them but we should do it intelligently, not over or under reacting nor failing to recognise when we don’t have global support.

 

[CharliePotato]

There is no rest of the world, no matter how many times people repeat that. Only like 36-37 countries sanctioned Russia, meaning America plus Europe, Canada, Australia.

I bet majority of the "rest" of the world cheering for Russia, simply because of the hate of America and Europe. China, Russia, Middle East, African and South American states......

They don't give a [Poor language removed] for a European war in a same way people on this continent don't give a [Poor language removed] for wars in Africa and Middle East, and thats the real truth. How many Europeans and Americans even know about current war in Ethiopia for example?

Spot on.

 

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I disagree; in attacking another country Russia has behaved like many other countries have (including the US) in the recent past. We absolutely should stand up to them but we should do it intelligently, not over or under reacting nor failing to recognise when we don’t have global support.

I don't think whatabouttery is helpful or accurate, the equivalent would be for the US to suddenly invade Mexico.

Bottom line, thousands of Ukrainian people are currently being raped and murdered by invading Russians who's actions are being legitimised by their government.

There is an absolute stench of appeasement from people who want to just let Russia have what they want in the hope they will go away quietly or from those who are so "right on" that they would rather talk about other countries histories as an excuse to air their grudges rather than criticise a modern day Nazi state.

 

[tsubaki]

I don't think whatabouttery is helpful or accurate, the equivalent would be for the US to suddenly invade Mexico.

Bottom line, thousands of Ukrainian people are currently being raped and murdered by invading Russians who's actions are being legitimised by their government.

There is an absolute stench of appeasement from people who want to just let Russia have what they want in the hope they will go away quietly or from those who are so "right on" that they would rather talk about other countries histories as an excuse to air their grudges rather than criticise a modern day Nazi state.

It isn't whataboutery, it is the primary reason why most of the world is no more arsed by this than we were about a load of other wars or horrors.

As for "just let Russia have what they want", that isn't what it is at all and calling it "appeasement" is absolute bollocks - these peace talks are urgently needed and should be supported. If it turns out they (the Russians) aren't serious about them and are going to do something unimaginable then that needs to be the point at which the world, via the SC, gets involved.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

There is no rest of the world, no matter how many times people repeat that. Only like 36-37 countries sanctioned Russia, meaning America plus Europe, Canada, Australia.

I bet majority of the "rest" of the world cheering for Russia, simply because of the hate of America and Europe. China, Russia, Middle East, African and South American states......

They don't give a [Poor language removed] for a European war in a same way people on this continent don't give a [Poor language removed] for wars in Africa and Middle East, and thats the real truth. How many Europeans and Americans even know about current war in Ethiopia for example?

I’d say Western governments are very aware of the war in Ethiopia. This can be seen by the amount of aid money provided.

I take your point however that the average Joe in the street maybe not so aware of the war or the daily war crimes that are committed.

However if you take a view on it people in Europe, North America have no connection to Ethiopia, Yemen or places like Myanmar.

The Ukranian conflict is on our doorstep, it’s given prime-time news coverage. We have a refugee situation tge line of which Europe hasn’t experienced itself since WWII. it’s affected oil and gas prices making life harder for people and for the first time since the early 80’s we have the spectre of nuclear war looming over us, so yes people of “western nations” are more engaged with the Ukranian conflict rather than say Ethiopia.

 

[devogue]

It isn't whataboutery, it is the primary reason why most of the world is no more arsed by this than we were about a load of other wars or horrors.

As for "just let Russia have what they want", that isn't what it is at all and calling it "appeasement" is absolute bollocks - these peace talks are urgently needed and should be supported. If it turns out they (the Russians) aren't serious about them and are going to do something unimaginable then that needs to be the point at which the world, via the SC, gets involved.

I think its already been established that they aren't serious about them lol