The situation in that city is beyond description. The international community should really pay attention
https://mobile.twitter.com/christogrozev/status/150421396163...
https://mobile.twitter.com/christogrozev/status/150421396163...
I don't think Ukraine would benefit from Russia and NATO coming to blows.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/12/uk-troops-se...
They are not in Ukraine participating in combat in the current conflict.
> There is basically no escalation from Russia. [...]. It is just convenient (Biden's domestic issues/Nordstream 2/other unknown reasons) to claim imminent invasion and the media is incentivised to fuel that narrative since it seems to have captured the attention of the populace at large (perhaps based on the Russophobia that is prevalent in mainstream media).
Maybe it's time to be extra aware of your own biases against Russia, NATO, mainstream media...
I have examined my bias against mainstream media and still find them completely warranted, thank you.
The NATO-US acting from Ukraine possibly attempting to foment "color" revolutions in Russia, NATO missiles on Ukraine soil, an increasingly belligerent leader in Ukraine renewing the push to join NATO and NATO-US arming and training Ukraine troops. These seem to be more likely factors in the invasion.
Given that the "West" has been frothing around the mouth for his ouster (he did once ask to join NATO btw), one could conclude that "He who goes first wins" was a viable strategy for him.
You can replace "enforce a no-fly zone" with "declare actual war on Russia". A no-fly zone either involves striking targets in Russia and Belarus, or hands the initiative to Russia if/when an air war starts. It is a very bad idea, to put it mildly.
If NATO told Ukraine from the onset they will never join NATO steps 2 and 3 would not have happened. Which means step 6 would not have happened. [edit - a typo in the numbers in events sequence. Sorry about that]
Look, if I murder my neighbor because they’re friends with the other neighbor I hate, I’m the bad guy.
Russia does not get to tell other countries they aren’t permitted to ally with each other.
Logically, no - they don’t. In the real world, it does not work that way. Hence, the US has the Monroe Doctrine. It’s also the reason why US has invaded Latin American countries and many other ones. “Might is right” is an unfair unfortunate realty in international military situations.
It goes back way earlier than that. Russia has repeatedly expressed in no uncertain terms that Ukraine is the single one red line that they will never accept joining NATO. A very insightful article on FP on the topic:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/19/ukraine-russia-nato-cri...
Please see my earlier comments for why this but-NATO! argument is the opium toked by demagogues and their acolytes.
It would be not too different than Idlib, which hasn't led to massive war, with the exception the government will have invited these troops.
Good thing we didn't have this attitude during the Cold War. We can help, and we should not going to listen to a non-ultimatum which hasn't been even given.
There's a reason there were endless proxy wars, guerrilla trainings, and secret arms supplying back then. Neither side would risk a direct conflict with the other, so they did all that instead.
You'll notice that's the exact same toolbox they're drawing on now. They didn't invent this shit for putin.
I'd step out on a limb and say maybe the best move is to let the aggressors take whatever they want, nobody really knows.
Apparently I'm not the only one thinking this:
If Putin wants to commit suicide by being dumb, we can't stop him, but he should know an attack would end up badly (for the Russians). We can see they have difficulty with merely the regular Ukrainian army.
And Ukraine had an army better than any EU country other than Turkey and Russia had not been waging a total war (thus the forces hiding in cities are not being burned with tactical nukes/thermobaric munitions). Russia is not Syria, it has air force and navy, great anti-air and anti-ship capabilities, military intelligence of all kinds (and nukes, of course). What is going to ensure the Western victory, angry twits? As far as I know, Twitter is banned in Russia already. More sanctions? These seem to hurt the West more than Russia at the moment and Russia has not even started turning off oil, coal and gas.
Source? Because on the face of it, that sounds actually crazy. Russia has been reduced to economic rubble already. By summer, they won't be able to run their farms that operate foreign equipment, their planes can't fly anywhere but even if they could that's a moot point because very soon they won't be able to maintain them, tens of thousands of Russians are fleeing the country every day(and I can only imagine a lot of them are the best and brightest and also people with means to actually escape). It looks like the best they can hope for is for China to buy them out and that they can become a slightly better equipped North Korea 2 - a chinese vassal state.
>>Russia has not even started turning off oil, coal and gas.
I'll give them one thing - Russia has been better at sanctioning themselves than "the west" could ever hope for. Just today they announced a 10 year ban on any foreign company that doesn't return by 1st of May, in addition to the legislation that is getting rid of copyright as well as patent protection for foreign companies in the country. Why would anyone do any business with them long term.
So yeah, I absolutely expect them to destroy whatever sliver of economy they still have and actually turn off the gas. I can't wait actually.
Sure, this is what Obama said in 2014. Since then Russia modernized its military: deployed the new MBT, 5th gen fighter, hypersonic missiles among many things (and actually used the latter in combat just recently) and waged two successful military campaigns (Syria and Ukraine). What did the Western military do in the same time? Managed to screw up the retreat from Afghanistan and the West-backed forces in Syria lost/defected. Any successes of the Western military might I had missed?
And the WH Press Secretary had been telling us that the inflation the US is suffering is caused by Putin so I am guessing it's the effect of the sanctions since I doubt very much Putin is in control of the US economy just yet (that's assuming WH is not blatantly lying and there is some link between Putin and inflation).
Maybe you missed it, but the sanctions imposed on Russia in the last two weeks are nothing like we've ever seen. The position Obama was in 2014 is not even comparable. Also, has he really actually said that? I find that hard to believe.
And like I said, current economic sanctions are worse than anything we've ever used against a developed country in terms of economic punishment. So whatever image you have of Russia in 2014 - now is worse.
>>I just hope it does not push my gas prices over 20 $/gal.
I don't see how it would.
> I don't see how it would.
Figures. As I said further up thread, many people seem to be applying their ignorance to analyze a complex geopolitical situation.
And I looked up the transcript of the State of The Union address you mentioned and he does indeed say that. Thanks.
Probably far worse, though actual measurements will take time; also, if the sanctions are maintained equally well, given how much more comprehensive they are, it will be much harder for Russia’s economy to reconfigure and bounce back as it did post-2015.
I am sure the sanctions will hit hard people who still have ties with the West e.g. people working for the Western companies or doing business with Western companies but I don't see how this can affect Russia's military capability. Some "model" not getting paid from Instagram/OnlyFans is not going to slow down military production and deployment.
[0] Here's one piece of analysis after, and referring to, the description: https://www.cnbc.com/2015/01/21/obamas-remarks-on-russias-ec...
So you want to send boots on the ground in ukraine. Presumably you also think doing so isn't escalatory. However, you also think if some of them get killed, it's putin that's escalating? That almost sounds like "if you get hit it's your own fault"[1] logic.
"cant risk WW3 over Ukraine"
"cant risk WW3 over Poland"
"cant risk WW3 over Latvia"
"cant risk WW3 over Estonia"
etc, etc ...
1914 saw large imperialist empires on both sides. There were no real "good guys" in that war, as both sides were looking to either keep and consolidate power over colonial empires (the Entente) or break up the colonial empires to get some for themselves (the Germans and Austrians).
1939 saw an ambitious despot attack democracies to brutally subjugate them. That is also what we are seeing now.
My point here isn't that russia will be proven right in the future. Its that war always sounds like a good solution, or even the only solution to avoid something worse. But we have to avoid getting into that same cycle over and over again, Especially when we are in a nuclear world.
By the way, the comparison with 1939 Germany is completely spurious imo. Germany did not attack Poland because it was a democracy, had already purged it's own Jewish population, had started gassing the disabled and mentally ill, had already eaten 2 medium-sized countries in a year, was in an offensive pact with italy, openly planned to engage in ethnic cleansing...
If you think that is comparable to the current situation then all nuance has been lost and all wars are comparable to ww2. That ww2 was morally unambiguous makes it very convenient to use and project ourselves as the equivalent of the allies in 1939 and call for military action while the opposite is true for the first war. But the comparison is still baseless beyond the war rhetoric
We may be a week or two from "culmination point" when the strength of the Ukrainian forces exceeds that of the Russian ones.
And then those other countries are NATO and attacking them would be quite a different kettle of fish. Those truck convoys probably would have been smoking ruins within a day if NATO air forces had had a go.
My country is next on the list together with other Baltic nations. This current inaction is identical to start of WW2 with everyone paranoid about their own nose and "unnecessary escalation". We have maybe 2-3 weeks to sent troops into UKR before its too late. If we dont help Ukraine its a sign NATO wont intervene beyond sending arms and "stay strong" prayers when our time comes. Another Yalta is on the table, after all why should we risk Nuclear war if Putin gives us a word he will stop at German border, right? :(
I'm starting to feel that our sense of morality is not well adapted to a world where a despot can end civilization with the push of a button.