https://archive.li/Z0m5m

The Russian commander of the “Vostok” Battalion fighting in southern Ukraine said on Thursday that Ukraine will not be defeated and suggested that Russia freeze the war along current frontlines.

Alexander Khodakovsky made the candid concession yesterday on his Telegram channel after Russian forces, including his own troops, were devastatingly defeated by Ukrainian marines earlier this week at Urozhaine in the Zaporizhzhia-Donetsk regional border area.

“Can we bring down Ukraine militarily? Now and in the near future, no,” Khodakovsky, a former official of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic, said yesterday.

“When I talk to myself about our destiny in this war, I mean that we will not crawl forward, like the [Ukrainians], turning everything into [destroyed] Bakhmuts in our path. And, I do not foresee the easy occupation of cities,” he said.

  • purahna@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    this thread is wild

    can we remember, everyone:

    1. discussion on who is winning has no bearing on discussion of who is in the right, and vice versa

    2. Russia, Ukraine, and NATO can all be evil and wrong for separate and true reasons

    3. criticizing NATO does not amount to supporting Putin

    4. criticizing Putin does not amount to supporting NATO

  • shiteyes2 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Lol I read the whole thread. Yeah somebody is definitely winning this mess shall we interview the pile of bodies on the east side or the west side hmm I don’t know

  • Tester@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think many people are forgetting that the larger army, vastly outnumbering Ukrainian resources in numbers, has not won a victory since the beginning of the invasion. And only presents a problem because the 2 countries cannot reliably use air power to overcome 1st WW trench warfare. Russia has defenses, but no ability to move forward. They are just trying to hold on to what they took in those first few months and are very slowly failing at that. If Ukraine can keep going, supported by the West, Russia will lose. I do not think Russia will use nukes – any use of a nuke is basically on Russia’s own land – according to them – and will affect them as much as Ukraine. But the question of ending the war is an interesting one. Do we see Russia continuing the war if they lose most of their ill-gotten territorial gains? What happens to those insecure areas? Are people going to rebuild, i.e. invest scarce resources in unstable areas? Or will they just become dead zones, DMZ borders?

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      And only presents a problem because the 2 countries cannot reliably use air power to overcome 1st WW trench warfare

      The US has just approved the transfer of F-16s to Ukraine. So that might change soon. IIRC, Ukraine has had a shortage of airplanes to use. Russia has been very reluctant to use the airplanes that they have because they keep getting shot down, and they simply can’t replace them at the speed necessary (especially since their economy has crashed, and China is the only country that can supply them with the circuitry that they need).

      A bigger problem is that Russia has air defenses and air bases inside Russia. NATO in general has been very reluctant to transfer offensive weapons to Ukraine that would make it possible to strike those–entirely legitimate–targets inside of Russia, because that would be an escalation. But to have air superiority, you need to ensure that those SAM batteries, RADAR installations, and forward air bases are not in the picture. So to break the stalemate, Ukraine has to be able to make strikes against Russia, in Russian territory. That’s potentially very dangerous.

      If it’s allowed to grind on, Russia wins eventually, because they have a population many times the size of Ukraine, and can keep throwing bodies at them. So Ukraine needs to win air superiority, which means striking targets inside of Russia.

    • tuga [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      has not won a victory since the beginning of the invasion

      Gotta have a highly specific definition of “victory” to say something like this

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think many people are forgetting that the larger army, vastly outnumbering Ukrainian resources in numbers, has spent the past 9 months creating multilayered defences that the Ukrainian army has been banging their head against for the past 10 weeks. Ukraine no longer has a functioning military industry of its own or even an economy to speak of. It’s entirely dependent on the west at this point.

      NATO scrounged up all they had for this offensive, and US even ran out of shells to give having to resort to cluster munitions. NATO also trained Ukrainian soldiers. Now all of this is being lost without any actual progress being made. Ukraine hasn’t even managed to reach the first defence line being mired in the security zone.

      What we will see is that once the offensive burns itself out, Russia will start an offensive of their own against a depleted and demoralized Ukrainian army. The west will not be able to send more ammunition and equipment because it doesn’t exist, and Ukraine will have lost majority of their trained and motivated soldiers who can’t be replaced.

      Even western sources are now admitting that Ukraine is suffering far higher losses than Russia, and that this is primarily an artillery battle where Russia vastly outnumbers Ukrainian artillery. 80% of casualties were being caused by Russian artillery.

      • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I do not think there is much evidence that the Ukrainian army is seriously demoralised or unable to make weaponry.

        Also source on the bit that Ukraine has suffered far higher losses than Russia? From what I’ve seen UK + US intelligence agencies are saying both sides have heavy losses but Russia has had higher ones overall (that is, since the start in 2022). Ukraine has probably suffered higher losses in the counteroffensive because modern warfare is defender-sided, but since February 2022? Hmm.

      • bazookabill@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        What we will see is that once the offensive burns itself out, Russia will start an offensive of their own against a depleted and demoralized Ukrainian army.

        In your dreams. Like your failed predictions of freezing Europeans running out of Russan gas and whatnot, lol, we gonna make this reality check later on, just to remind you.

      • Tester@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes, artillery is at the core of Russian military doctrine. But this only means the rest of its technology is not being used. Where is air superiority? Non-existent. Russia is afraid to put aircraft in Ukrainian sights. Where are the huge tank battles? Non-existent because the Western technology makes Swiss cheese out of even their heaviest armor. I am amazed that someone can still believe in the Russian military when despite overwhelming numbers, Russia has not been able to defend itself against its neighbor, 1/5th its size and certainly less prepared for war. You think it’s a sign of victory that Russia is now using WW2 era tanks they are pulling out of storage? If anything, that shows exactly who is running out of materiel to run the war. And NATO has plenty of munitions. I think you are confusing production and capacity. Are the production of artillery and war machines too low? Yes, and NATO is addressing those issues. However, NATO has huge reserves of munitions sitting in warehouses that it hasn’t even tapped yet. Most of the donations to Ukraine have not even been of NATO’s best stock. It just happened to be a way of clearing old munitions. In some cases, both the US and Germany were going to destroy or mothball equipment only to reroute it to Ukraine. NATO is not running out of stock, it is simply getting rid of old inventory and ramping up production on new munitions. This takes time, but they are not running out. Unlike Russia… What will Russia do next? Having their Cossacks go back to fighting on horseback when the WW2 tanks run out of parts?

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Where is air superiority? Non-existent.

          Did you somehow miss all the videos of Russian aviation taking out tanks on daily basis, or the fact that Russia does massive air strike campaigns against entire Ukraine weekly for many months now? Meanwhile, Ukraine has no air force to speak of, and at this point doesn’t even have much of air defence. What you’re saying is demonstrably false.

          Where are the huge tank battles?

          There aren’t huge tank battles because Russia is letting Ukraine blow up all their tanks in minefields and hunts them down with lancets. The battles we’ve seen so far are Ukrainian columns following a single mine clearing vehicle that gets taken out by a helicopter or artillery. Then the column ends up being stuck because it’s in a minefield, and the rest of the vehicles are systematically destroyed. These were the first two weeks of the offensive after which Ukraine abandoned the fabled NATO tactics and went back to sending penny packets of troops to get ground down by artillery.

          I am amazed that someone can still believe in the Russian military when despite overwhelming numbers, Russia has not been able to defend itself against its neighbor, 1/5th its size and certainly less prepared for war.

          That’s because you have absolutely no clue regarding the subject you’re opining on. Here’s what an actual expert has to say https://www.russiamatters.org/analysis/whats-ahead-war-ukraine

          You think it’s a sign of victory that Russia is now using WW2 era tanks they are pulling out of storage?

          What this actually shows is that Russia doesn’t even feel the need to pull out its modern equipment, they’re clearing out their old inventory the exact same way NATO is.

          NATO is not running out of stock, it is simply getting rid of old inventory and ramping up production on new munitions.

          Biden literally admitted that US ran out of high explosive shells to send. This is also admitted by mainstream media. Meanwhile, this is what the "dramatic increase in production actually looks like:

          Army Secretary Christine Wormuth separately told reporters that the U.S. will go from making 14,000 155mm shells each month to 20,000 by the spring and 40,000 by 2025.

          That’s what Russia uses on daily basis, and Russia produces over a million shells a year

          You really should spend a bit of time educating yourself instead of spreading misinformation here.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t think this person is worth arguing with. That last comment of theirs was such a comprehensively silly thing to say. “Where are the huge tank battles?” serious? This isn’t a movie. They’re chewing up the UA army with artillery. Assuming they’re not using tanks for indirect fire what would they use them for? It’s not like they need to g find the Ukrainians, they’re walking light infantry right in to prepared defenses.

            It’s also really funny that people think there’s much of a difference between a tank from 1945 and a tank from 2015 if they both die to one hit from an ATGM or modern kinetic penetrator. They’re both equally defended against machine guns, splinter, and maybe even auto cannons up to a certain point.

          • bazookabill@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            Did you somehow miss all the videos of Russian aviation taking out tanks on daily basis

            These videos obviously exists from both sides, but neither side has aerial supremacy, if you know what that means.

            and Russia produces over a million shells a year

            Rheinmetall alone offers to produce up to 600,000 artillery rounds for Ukraine annually, and that’s just one company.

          • whataboutshutup@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            What this actually shows is that Russia doesn’t even feel the need to pull out its modern equipment, they’re clearing out their old inventory the exact same way NATO is.

            Why? Do they enjoy dragging this conflict for more than a year? Is there some reason to why they don’t use some sci-fi orbital blaster?

            If you lived there, Ukraine or Russia, doesn’t matter, and have served, you’d knew how deeply you are wrong. Bet you didn’t, and I did. Post-soviet army culture is what makes me suspect they don’t have anything breathtaking you think they have in worthy quantities.

            Opposing western propaganda is one thing. Not taking a moment to understand you are high on russian one is another. Just take a glance at this quote of yours and say it’s not copium.

          • rusticus@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            lol get out of here with your Russian propaganda. No one believes you. Go back to lemmy.grad or hexbear. Lmao.

            It’s a proxy war dude. No one wins until one side exhausts their resources. And it’s the west v Russia. Yes, Russia whose GDP is about the same as the Uk. lol.

            Edit: Hi hexbear/lemmy.grad shills! So bizarre to get significantly more upvotes than the brigaded comments from dear comrades.

    • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m pretty sure once Ukraine has thrown away enough lives trying to get to the first line of defense, Russia is going to use their mobilized army to roll up the coast line all the way up to Transnistria.

    • Annakah69 [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ukraine will run out of material before they reach the Azov sea. You can calculate this yourself based on the verified losses and land gained. In addition manpower isn’t infinite for Ukraine.

      • Tester@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        You are mentioning 2 different resources: 1. Materiel, 2. Manpower. After an initial bumpy start where Ukraine did indeed lose a few valuable pieces of equipment, you cannot point to any significant loses in the last month – except on the Russian side. And Russia does not have extensive resources thanks to the international sanctions. Russia is now moving troops from one point of attack to another, meaning they no longer have reserves to apply. They have already gone through the prison population, and the lasty conscription drive caused many people to move abroad. They are now conscripting people who have the least motivation to fight and giving them little training. These are death sentences. Meanehile, Ukraine continues to be supported by Western financials and technology. You are perhaps expecting a “blowout” scenario like in Kherkov last year. But placing a greater value on life, Ukraine has been going slow and carefully to minimize losses on thier side. The exact thing you see as a weakness is actually resource protection.

    • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Ukraine can keep going, supported by the West, Russia will lose.

      You have a whole entire counteroffensive that shows the exact opposite.

      Also

      has not won a victory since the beginning of the invasion.

      Have you taken a look at a map of the current situation? That’s just straight up bullshit

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      Russia has defenses, but no ability to move forward.

      You don’t play RTS games, do you? The fun thing about a strong defensive line is that you can kill a whole lot of their guys for every one of your guys that they kill, and if you have enough guys they’re going to run out long before you do.

      What happens to those insecure areas?

      The Nazis probably genocide the Russian speaking Ukrainians that live there, either by driving them out using terror, or just killing them all. Probably a combination of both.

  • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    RT was banned first day of the war due to links to the kremlin and propaganda. Wouldn’t want people influenced by propaganda, of course! This is the west! We’re free thinkers! Now let me see how the war is going in the non-biased Kyiv Post.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Why do posters from Hexbear defend Russia so much? They’re not communist. If anything, they’re right wing.

      Putin has a government allied with Russian business oligarchs and the support of the Russian Orthodox Church. He promotes the military as heroes. He cultivates a cult of personality. He personally controls billions of dollars. That’s textbook Fascism.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because you have the reading comprehension of a grade schooler and are apparently incapable of handling such complexities as “Just because they’re winning doesn’t mean we support them” and “everybody in this conflict is an asshole except the non-Nazis soldiers being slaughtered so defense contractors can put in new pools in Arlington”.

        This isn’t some law of attraction thing. Admitting that Ukraine is at best stalemated isn’t going to cause them to magically lose.

        • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          There’s a lot of layers to this. Among them the problem that yanks and other westerners with an exceptionalist world outlook have been convinced that only the good guys win, and that to win means to be the good guy no matter how abhorrent they are. So to accept that Russia is winning or, at least, that Ukraine can’t win, means accepting that Russia is in fact the good guy. Which is clearly nonsense, but then neither you nor I are making the claim.

        • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I swear someone could claim like “Russia is controlled by an army of demons” and if someone from Hexbear was like “actually that is not true you should stick to the realm of fact in your criticisms of Russia” posters you’d still get like “WHY ARE YOU DEFENDING RUSSIA? DONT YOU KNOW RUSSIA ISNT COMMUNIST”.

        • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          If it was only that it wouldn’t be an issue, but many comments here are pushing Putin’s propaganda by trying to legitimate manipulated referendums and cherry-picking colateral damages of Ukrainian self-defense or Ukrainian extremists to try to inverse the burden of guilt. I don’t know if they actually support Putin or if they are just blinded by their hate of the West, but the end result is that they do help carry Putin’s propaganda and its fascist oligarc dictatorship.

      • notceps [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Because I truly believe that war is horrible the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in this war is a human tragedy, working people all over the world have to deal with the fallout of this war with rising energy costs and higher foodprices which certainly also caused the deaths of people, meanwhile this war is used in many western countries to push extreme austerity which will lessen the quality of life at best.

        This war and all wars are a human tragedy, and at the start of it I certainly wasn’t in Russias corner and I’m still not but I have lost all sympathy for Ukraine and the West because not only have there been many off ramps for Ukraine to end this conflict but western politicians have contributed to this misery. They’ve contributed to the deaths of so many lives. People like Boris Johnson that sabotaged the peace talks, Biden that keeps on sending more and more weapon over there so more and more people can die. I’ve since stopped looking at how much money they’ve given but around spring it was 100bn USD which would’ve been enough to combat world hunger for 3 years. Ukranian officials like yes Zelensky who is a clown that personally doesn’t suffer from this and uses it to push his own persona and does a cool photoshoot in his sick operator outfit.

        Ukraine has not approached the negotiating table in any serious manner because they insist on demanding everything back including Crimea, which just won’t happen especially not in this position, so the ukranian leadership is happy to get some money from the west so they order people like you and me to walk into artillery fire or into landmines not for any reason because there haven’t been any real gains but just because that’s how the money is flowing in.

        Ukraine totally could negotiate a peace it would be incredibly easy because Putin seems eager to want to negotiate but what Ukraine wants isn’t a restoration of the border situation before the war they want Crimea as well, they are not serious about peace and everyone knows it, Ukraine will never surrender and so the only thing that can stop this senseless war is when the endless amount of money flowing into Ukraine stops or when the people of Ukraine have had enough of their bloodthirsty corrupt leadership and overthrow them.

        Edit: Also sorry but quite a few people from other instances literally say fascist shit that reminds me of rhetoric that was used during the conflicts in Yugoslavia and we all know how that turned out, calling russian ethnicities in Ukraine ‘occupiers’ is surely not going to lead to violence towards that group.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          because not only have there been many off ramps for Ukraine to end this conflict

          How many of those involve not giving in to the aggressor?

          Is this one of these “pacifism is when I kick you and you don’t defend yourself” bits?

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            Ukraine has lost. They are not getting their separatist regions back.

            Their choices are to keep fighting, which will not change this outcome, or negotiate an end to the war so they can stop dying and start rebuilding. Their negotiating position will only weaken as the war continues absent some one-in-a-million stroke of luck.

            This isn’t “I kick you and you don’t defend yourself.” It’s “I kick you, you defend yourself, lose, and choose to either walk away or keep getting beaten up.” And that’s not even digging into the actual causes of the war, which are nowhere near as clear cut as Russia one day waking up and deciding to attack out of the blue.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Ukraine has lost. They are not getting their separatist regions back.

              [citation needed].

              In any case Ukrainians disagree with you and keep on fighting. Heck even if Russia occupied all of Ukraine they’d keep on fighting. It’s not in your hands whether they fight or not, and their motive is just, so why not help them? Because you’re a defeatist? Come on.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You know what would be even more senseless than dying in a trench? Dying in an FSB torture cellar while your family gets raped.

              • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                11 months ago

                In any case Ukrainians disagree with you and keep on fighting

                Yeah, that’s why they’ve been kidnapping people to the front lines, because the Ukranian people want to fight so much. That’s why they conscripted prison inmates and forbid any man undder 60 from leaving when the war broke out, right. Because of all that popular will to fight.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  There’s been plenty of court cases and firings over improperly handled conscriptions. Prison inmates IIRC weren’t conscripted but given a choice. Plenty of Ukrainians – also men – returned from other European countries to fight, left countries where they had a free welfare ride and working permits. Plenty of women fight in the army. It surely must be terrible over there /s.

                  Meanwhile Russia is force-conscripting pretty much any man they can get their hands on and sending them, without equipment, into meat grinders. Have a look at Storm Z units.

              • Ukraine has lost. They are not getting their separatist regions back.

                [citation needed].

                Points at the utter failure of the joke of a counteroffensive to even breach Russia’s first line of defense after months of hype about retaking Crimea

                In any case Ukrainians disagree with you and keep on fighting.

                You mean the ones forced to fight because they were kidnapped off the street and will be shot if they try to leave? Or the fascists that are in charge?

                Heck even if Russia occupied all of Ukraine they’d keep on fighting.

                Part of the reason why Russia does not want to occupy all of Ukraine.

                It’s not in your hands whether they fight or not,

                Nor yours, but it is in the hands of NATO leadership who have stymied peace negotiations at every opportunity.

                and their motive is just

                [citation needed]

                so why not help them?

                Why would we want to help people get forced into a meat grinder?

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              It does: It dissuades the aggressor.

              Germanic tribes, and this continues over to Ukraine culturally (because Rus), had the battle cry “better dead than slave”. A village would fight down to the last woman, elderly, and child. Because even if the aggressor overcame them they’d be left with nothing but their own losses. Thus, they wouldn’t even try.

              If Russia is allowed to get away with this, Taiwan will be next. A gazillion of small-scale empires in unstable regions all around the world will say “well, seeing that noone cares our time to get away with it”.

              Millions if not billions of people more will be dead.

              • Sinonatrix [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                21
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I’m sorry but this is definitely shit you only say when you’re very far from the action. Would you want your grandpa drafted and sent into a minefield to “dissuade the aggressor”? Grandma and the children too apparently, better dead than governed by another neighboring authoritarian shithole?

                I think I’d rather just flee with my family to a country right next door that has a nuclear deterrent and NATO membership. Literally why would “they need to all fight to the death instead” be your first thought? I can’t imagine it coming from a position where you think Ukrainians are as human as you are.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  People back then couldn’t flee like that. You’re taking it all well too literally.

                  And yes I have Ukrainian refugee neighbours. Soldiers knowing their families are safe with friends isn’t exactly bad for morale, either.

              • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                ·
                11 months ago

                If Russia is allowed to get away with this, Taiwan will be next. A gazillion of small-scale empires in unstable regions all around the world will say “well, seeing that noone cares our time to get away with it”. Millions if not billions of people more will be dead.

                Holy shit mate, stop watching Marvel movies and get some perspective; this isn’t the first time one nation has invaded another. The world didn’t end when America invaded Iraq.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The Iraq war was wrong for a multitude of reasons, and many countries (including mine) wanted to do nothing to do with it, but one thing sets it apart very clearly from the current situation:

                  Iraq wasn’t a war of conquest. Russia’s war against Ukraine is. The US hasn’t waged a war of conquest IIRC since Hawaii, it’s always been foreign meddling instead but never out-right imposition of rule and they’ve gotten less and less bad at how they’re doing it over time. I mean compare the Iraqi or Afghani government during occupation with the likes of Batista.

                  Then, and this (as well as that Marvel reference I couldn’t give less of a fuck) makes me think you’re American: It’s the first war by a major power in Europe since WWII. We thought we had that shit behind us, that Yugoslavia was a regrettable exceptions caused by small-minded autocrats exploiting ethnic tensions for their own benefit. But, nope, actual full-scale war has come back to Europe because unlike the rest of Europe Russia hasn’t gotten the memo that imperialism is soooo 18hundreds. As a yank you wouldn’t understand.

              • Ram_The_Manparts [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                11 months ago

                Germanic tribes, and this continues over to Ukraine culturally (because Rus), had the battle cry “better dead than slave”. A village would fight down to the last woman, elderly, and child.

                So when are you going to Ukraine to sign up for the frontline?

                You’re definitely gonna do that right?

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  I’ll have to inform you that I’m a conscious objector (spent my time in catastrophe relief) and by now too old.

                  But yes there’s plenty of German reservists in Ukraine. Also what does that have to do with anything I said, I was glossing Ukrainian sentiment. Did you merely wanted to be right on the internet (in your own mind).

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            11 months ago

            How many of those involve not giving in to the aggressor?

            How can it be hammered in to your skull that this is not a story book where good guys win by virtue of their righteousness?

            This is geopolitics. An empire wants to conquer an outlying resource rich region it has not been able to bring under it’s control. It has provoked a small outlying nation to act as a proxy to weaken it’s enemy. Ukraine isn’t making decisions. They’re just ammunition in someone else’s war and the best thing for them would be to mutiny against Kiev and end the slaughter. Status quo antebellum is not on the menu.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Ah, the old myth about the poor disenfranchised Russian minority. Who, pray tell, might have an interest in propagating such narratives? A neighbouring belligerent empire, perhaps?

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Certainly not the vast, vast, majority of Ukrainians. Even among the Ukrainian far-right that’s a tiny minority.

          • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            If the Kiev coup regime was concerned about aggression, they could have simply not done eight years of ethnic cleansing in the Donbas and ignored a ceasefire🤷‍♂️

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Are there any OSCE election monitor results you want to back up your “coup regieme” claim?

              Also, the breakaway Russian puppet states were the ones to break the ceasefires.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Must’ve been a colossal failure, what with Svoboda having exactly one seat in the Rada.

          • notceps [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Minsk I a treaty they’ve signed that was about greater autonomy for the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts like them being allowed to speak russian a treaty that was very quickly broken.

            Minsk II a treaty that did the same thing which again was broken.

            and these are the off ramps before the war during the war you had the peace talks when the russian army was outside of Kiev whose content is dubious because so far only the russians said what it was about

            and more importantly every peace talk after that Ukraines position was a restoration of the 2014 borders aka they want Crimea back which sorry is just not reasonable, hell for a lot of those peace talks russia wasn’t even invited it was a bunch of countries like Germany, UK and Ukraine but not you know the country currently participating in this war.

            This is one of those bits where I say that a country isn’t about some piece of land but the people in it which guess what the ukrainian government is feeding into gigantic blender.

            I DON’T CARE ABOUT SOME IMAGINARY LINES.

            If Cuba decided to ‘restore its borders’ aka if it attacked the US base on Guantanamo Bay and sacrificed hundreds of thousands of Cubans throwing them against the US army blender I would call for the Cuban people to rise up against its government because it doesn’t care about its people and I hope you would too, if Mexico decided to take back California I’d have that same stance. It’s called being anti-war, something I’m sure you’ll now quote how “actually your stance isn’t anti-war my which calls for sending billions of military equipment is actually anti-war”

            My guess is that you don’t know what war is like or have never interacted with anyone that had to flee a war, you really have two options here you can go outside and talk to any ukrainian woman that fled because of the war, tell them to their face that they are giving in to the aggressor when they say how angry they are at the ukrainian government because they don’t know where their husband or their two brothers are. You know what I’ll make it easier for you find any person in real life that has had to flee a conflict and how they feel about ‘giving in to the aggressor’. Or if you feel you don’t need to do that go join up the ukranian army do your part to fight the aggressor I mean it’s only war right, you’ve seen some TikToks with war footage and some phonk music accompaning it, war is absolutely poggers I’m sure you’d have a blast fighting some russian orks.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Minsk I a treaty they’ve signed that was about greater autonomy for the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts like them being allowed to speak russian a treaty that was very quickly broken.

              Minsk II a treaty that did the same thing which again was broken.

              …broken by the separatists. Also Russian was never outlawed.

              Ukraines position was a restoration of the 2014 borders aka they want Crimea back which sorry is just not reasonable,

              It’s unreasonable to not give in to a conqueror? It’s that “Pacifism is when I kick you and you don’t defend yourself” thing, again.

              I DON’T CARE ABOUT SOME IMAGINARY LINES.

              You may not. The people living in those areas (fled or not) do, though. They do care whether there’s rule of law, whether they have a say in how things are run, whether there’s a criminal installed at the top of things by the occupying force. After Ukraine got its independence many Tatars returned to Crimea that should tell you something.

              Ukrainians, no matter the ethnicity, don’t want to be ruled by Moscow. It’s as simple as that. Before the war, some still had hopes that good relations with Moscow are possible, but not any more. Do you want to be ruled by Moscow? See neighbours disappear in torture cellars?

              • notceps [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                damn I was so sure this ukrainian woman I was talking to really wanted the war to end but she must not be a true blooded ukrainian women amiright? Again you are just some edgy person that doesn’t get out enough and you channel that into playing up how much of a big powerful person you are by yelling “WAR WAR WAR NO ME WANT BLOOD WAR NOW BOMBS MINES BLOOD SKULLS WAR” it is good to see though that you will not go outside so there’s that you don’t seem like a pleasant person to be around.

                Also this isn’t a creative exercise you aren’t supposed to just make up lies lol

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Everyone wants the war to end. By the way of Russia losing it because Russia being allowed to win means even more war in the future: Peace on the agressor’s terms is not peace, and thus cannot be the goal of any pacifist.

      • Flaps [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Nowhere do I voice support for Russia. It’s that any nuance with regard to the Ukraine conflict is seen as ‘defending russia’, which you’ve just proven, again.

        Edit: nvm, you’re that asshole that used the Sartre quote about anti-semitism to justify your anti-communism. You don’t want to learn. Almost as if you’re a bot

      • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Pointing out blatant untruths, being anti-war and wanting accurate reporting rather that copium meant to inspire more people to thrown themselves to a pointless death is checks notes russian propaganda?
        You would’ve supported the invasion of Iraq

        • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          So if you’re anti-war, why do you support Russia who started the war and has shown they are adamantly pro-war?

          • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            We believe the war was started by a quagmire of situations going back as far as 1991, including things like the 2014 NATO-backed coup of Ukraine and the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. This war wasn’t some random unprovoked territory grab dictated by Putin, it’s the resolution of western interference in the region for decades. Ukraine had been shelling Donbas and Luhansk for years. NATO brought this war upon themselves, basically. Instigating and prodding at the situation for years.

            Also, Russia and Ukraine, near the start of the war, floated the possibility of a ceasefire and NATO pressured them out of it. The USA saw the possibility of a proxy war and started drooling.

            We don’t support Russia so much as we see them as one unfortunate reality fighting another unfortunate reality. The war’s true culprit is capitalism, and as a leftist the only conclusion you should reach is wars like this are senseless and they should immediately stop. And the only way I see this war to stop is if Ukraine immediately surrenders and loses territory, otherwise we’d just be back in 2014 all over again and the situation would repeat. I can vaguely see how that could be construed as pro-Russia, but it’s more that I believe diplomacy with Russia is strained, Russia is volatile, and nothing is gained from open warfare with them. Everyone needs to stop fighting, whatever that takes, because the only winners in wars like this are wealthy capitalists, the rest of us lose.

            • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              You say “NATO brought this on themselves” like they weren’t joyous at the prospect of a Russian invasion of Ukraine but I think this isn’t true. The west has worked closely to recreate the Ukrainian Army from the ground up since 2014 (when it was useless) because they knew this was a possibility. This war-launched idiotically by Putin-has benefitted the west alone. Not Russia, and obviously not Ukraine.

              -Ukraine is now irrevocably tied to the west and will be for the foreseeable future. Before this, western intelligence agencies were worried Zelensky was too pro-Russian. Not anymore.

              -Eastern Ukrainians who speak Russian in their mother tongue are now anti-Russian for the most part.

              -Lots of juicy money for western MICs.

              -The bulk of the Russian Army is tied down in Ukraine and so cannot be used elsewhere-massive limiting of Russia’s strategic manoeuvrability.

              -Russian economy damaged (not as much as they thought it would, but it’s still damaged) and large-scale brain drain of well-educated Russians who oppose the war who have now fled to Georgia and will seek to move to the west most likely. Also Russians living in the west who are more likely to be liberal will be much less likely to come home.

              -Strong consolidation and reification of Ukrainian national identity, meaning far less likely for Ukraine to see Russia as a ‘kin state/brotherly nation’ akin to Azerbaijan/Turkey.

              -Exposes and emphasises the fragmentation and factionalism within the Russian state and security apparatus, (see: Wagner).

              -Kills lots of Russians whose families may eventually turn against the state once this war drags on and nothing good comes from it.

              What I mean to say is that NATO isn’t suffering at all-at least, the Americans and Brits aren’t. They’re overjoyed! You can’t “bring something on yourself” forlornly if you’re openly working for it, then it’s just a success! I mean I don’t think they necessarily worked only for the invasion but basically just various means to bring Ukraine into the western fold, of which this was just one (probably not the ideal) option of many.

              It was not a ‘rational’ or sensible reaction to NATO encroachment. I mean realistically with nuclear weapons the idea that a land invasion of Russia could happen is ludicrous, but even removing that factor there were countless other mechanisms at Putin’s disposal to achieve his strategic aims. This invasion was a terrible choice and it only happened because (A) the Russian leadership is full of yes-men who are unable to criticise Putin, (B) because the Russian leadership has become increasingly isolated from the realities on the ground in the last few years and so VASTLY misunderstood how the war would go. They thought it would be like Georgia (though the Georgia War was a mess from a Russian perspective they won anyway because of the vastly unbalanced correlation of forces).

              Yes, this is a sensible and thoughtless war, but I think expecting Ukrainians to just give up against an aggressor is fruitless. They will not do it as long as they believe they can win (see Zartman’s concept of a mutually hurting stalemate), which both sides currently believe they can. Plus if it’s a frozen conflict and more or less even, why would Ukraine ‘surrender’? Yes, I think the eventual only possible end to this war will be a surrender of some territory (more likely is simply a frozen conflict), but I don’t believe it is politically viable atm and so it is pointless to support it. If Zelensky agreed to surrender territory he’d risk being overthrown and probably killed by the far-right and ultra-nationalist sections of the army/state. The morally best situation would be a return to the status quo ante bellum and a referendum in the east and in Crimea monitored by international IGO/NGO bodies not tied to any particular state, but that wont happen.

              The balance of forces is even enough that one side admitting defeat is implausible until the mutual damage from the war is much higher and both sides come to realise it is unwinnable (this is a subjective understanding even if there are objective measures of ‘mutually hurting stalemate’.

              edit: formatting

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              including things like the 2014 NATO-backed coup of Ukraine

              AAAAaaaa

              What you just said should be a bannable offence. President reneged on his election promises, people demonstrated, president sent out goons (both criminal and police) to deal with them, more people demonstrated, president passed laws (without having the votes) to make the country authoritarians, more people demonstrated even more, NATO countries “backed” protestors by sending… politicians. Who talked and negotiated, recommending compromises, the protesters were having none of that. After a while Yanukovich fled to his masters in Russia and, being AWOL, got removed from office.

              None of that was a coup, which involves toppling of the government by government insiders. It wasn’t really a revolution either because nothing fundamental about the state changed, though yes Berkut got dismantled over the egregious police violence they committed, but that’s reform, not revolution.

              Then, there have been multiple completely democratic elections since then. So all in all, big picture glossing over details: President didn’t want to keep his election promises, people were opposed and wanted a different president, then they had themselves exactly those elections. Call it a special electoral operation I’m not even using that term tongue in cheek. In more mature democracies where presidents don’t take orders from foreign governments it would’ve taken the form of “presidents wants something, people are vehemently opposed, president resigns, new elections”.

              • Dr_Gabriel_Aby [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I wonder how American would act if Chinese leaders showed up at protests for Black Lives Matters protests, or Russian leaders showed up for Jan 6th protests?

                Victoria Nuland showed up to the protests, and she has multiple emails that basically call it a coup.

                https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957.amp

                Also 2 weeks later was the Maidan Sniper incident that has overwhelmingly evidence of a false flag operated by the Ukrainian far right.

                I know it’s hard to see that the world isnt Disney level “good vs evil”. It’s actually a little more complicated

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I wonder how American would act if Chinese leaders showed up at protests for Black Lives Matters protests, or Russian leaders showed up for Jan 6th protests?

                  Well Russia did stoke a ton of that culture war bullshit in the US. On both and all sides, of course, they don’t care who comes out on top all they want is the US being dysfunctional (well, more dysfunctional than usual). The more controversy the better.

                  What makes you think they didn’t do the same in Ukraine? Just that unlike Yanks, Ukrainians actually understand how Russians operate.

                  Victoria Nuland showed up to the protests, and she has multiple emails that basically call it a coup.

                  Foreign diplomat is abroad doing diplomacy. Curious. Coincidence? I think not.

                  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957.amp

                  Coup? Where? All I see is American arrogance. Americans also still believe that they started Libya and that it had something to do with Hillary.

                  Also 2 weeks later was the Maidan Sniper incident that has overwhelmingly evidence of a false flag operated by the Ukrainian far right.

                  You mean Berkut gave Right Sector rifles, then Right Sector shot protestors (including their own people), then Right Sector gave those rifles back to Berkut so the bullets in demonstrators could be matched to Berkut rifles? Overwhelming evidence like that?

                  Hey but at least you didn’t claim Azov was involved who didn’t even exist yet.

                  I know it’s hard to see that the world isnt Disney level “good vs evil”. It’s actually a little more complicated

                  Indeed.

            • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              I’m sorry no. Every time someone tries to say “oh well Russia was just pressured by NATO” that’s all they leave it at.

              How?

              No really, explain. Explain how the only option for Russia was to invade their neighboring country and steal land. What negative effects would Russia be feeling right now if they hadn’t invaded Ukraine?

              “Well NATO was pushing up against their borders”

              So fucking what?! Just because your country is so shitty that your neighbors choose to ally with someone else is not an excuse to invade them!

              • Dr_Gabriel_Aby [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Have you ever heard of the Cuban Missile Crisis? Why did America freak out that Cuba was going to get missiles from the Soviet Union? What did the Soviet Union choose to do to stop the crisis? Could it be that it is entirely normal for a nation to not want an adversary’s missiles on their border? Has there been multiple examples of conflicts stemming from this issue all over the globe? Have you ever asked yourself a question about how conflicts start, and if other nations have ever behaved similarly?

              • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Russia has no excuse and neither does NATO. The best case scenario is both countries lay down their arms and have socialists take power. Unfortunately we don’t live in that kind of situation, so the only thing I can advocate is both NATO and Russia cease fighting. Ukraine shouldn’t ally with NATO because NATO shouldn’t exist.

                What negative effects would Russia be feeling? I don’t know, personally I thought Russia entering the war was a bad call and a strategic mistake. I can see the reason why it happened while still saying it’s an open act of aggression. Russia probably could have negotiated with Ukraine about Donbas/Luhansk through better oil deals or something, no idea. Possibly could have tried straight up purchasing the land that Russian separatists occupied?

                But Russia probably had reason to distrust diplomacy with Ukraine ever since 2014. For context, I believe that 2014 happened specifically because Ukraine’s previous government was becoming too close to Russia and it made NATO nervous. I could easily ask, what negative effects would Ukraine be feeling if they hadn’t had a western backed coup? Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych floated membership in the Eurasian Economic Union, which set off protests that were capitalized upon by western nations. Would it had been so negative had Ukraine entered a formal economic alliance with some former Soviet states? Who knows now.

                The new president, Porochenko, was much harsher on Russian separatists in the east than his predecessors, which started the Donbas war in earnest. That’s the moment above any I can point to that started all of this. Maybe if Yanumovych had remained president there could have been a more peaceful solution to Donbas. Who knows now

                Yeah but this is all speculation and we live in reality. The reality is the war should cease immediately, for the benefit of people in Ukraine, Russia, and all refugees from the region. Only way I see that realistically happening is if NATO disengages and Ukraine loses territory.

                Maybe once fighting finishes something new and better can get negotiated, but I’m not holding my breath that neoliberal countries like this know how to resolve long standing conflicts.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  Ukraine shouldn’t ally with NATO because NATO shouldn’t exist.

                  Maidan wasn’t about NATO. Support for NATO membership of Ukraine only sky-rocketed once Russia invaded (after 2014, that is), and by now is overwhelming.

                  Maidan was about EU membership. Should the EU also not exist in your mind? And yes btw the EU is also a defensive alliance (it’s a gazillion of things). Russia’s invasion wouldn’t have happened had Ukraine been a member. Hence why Russia’s stooge Yanukovich was ordered to stop EU accession: Because then Russia wouldn’t be able to invade, any more. Ukraine would be as safe as the Baltics and Finland have been all this time.

                  Oh and btw after the 2004 NATO enlargement (including the Baltics) Putin said that he saw no threat to Russia from that, and also that every country was free to choose their alliance.

              • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                You may notice that they form concentrated barrages along lines of advance, such as one might make if one were about to launch a maneuvering assault, upon two territories recognized just earlier that week as sovereign states by Russia, and with which it signed defensive pacts.

                • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Are you suggesting there was even the remotest possibility that Ukraine was going to invade Russia? Cuz I’ve heard some dumbass takes, but my God.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Everything you say about Russia is true, but that doesn’t change the fact that this is a proxy war where US is trying to weaken Russia. You can just be against a senseless war that’s killing hundreds of thousands of people and destroying lives of millions more. Anybody who is even minimally engaging with reality can see that this war will only end one way. What the west is doing is prolonging it without changing the outcome. People of Ukraine are being cynically thrown into a meat grinder so that US can score a win in a geopolitical chess game with Russia.

        • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I fully agree w/ you about NATO’s obviously non-altruistic motivations for fuelling the war but I think the Ukrainian position itself has to be considered in the whole conflagration. Without that, we cannot really analyse when and how the war might end. For Ukrainians it’s not the case they’re being forced or deceived into fighting, it is a war of national survival! It is a war against an aggressor seeking to at the very least oppress Ukrainian national identity if not destroy it entirely as a political and social force. Even without western support the Ukrainians would have fought and Russia wouldn’t have won straight away (because they already had a fair few weapons and the west had spent 8 years already reforming and rebuilding the army from 2014 onwards). The thing to remember is that urban combat is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT for the attacker. To put it into context, a city the size of Kyiv has not been taken by an enemy against a committed defender since WW2! Taking a city the size of Kyiv or bigger, no battle lasting longer than 8 days (one of the battles for Seoul) has been won by the attacker. Consider the defences being set up for the capital-vast networks of local militia, booby traps and tank traps, every building and every basement being turned into a place for fighting. Russia would have to take this huge city street by street, building by building. This is an incredibly difficult feat. While Russia would obviously be doing a lot better without western arming, the war would still be going on and would be no less bloody. Even Mariupol and especially Bakhmut have been extremely difficult for both sides, Kyiv would be a whole new level, especially since it’s the capital.

          Then after that there’d still be the whole western half of the country where troops can, at the border, slip into Poland/Romania when needed. There are so many big cities in Ukraine that if they were committed to defending it, taking over the whole country would be insanely difficult. As I say, a committed defender has not lost an urban battle in a city the size of Kyiv since, like, the Battle of Berlin in WW2. It would require a total societal commitment to the war in Russia which Russians are not willing to tolerate. The current Russian Army is not up to the task!

          Let’s imagine, though, that the end of western support did bring about an impulse for peace within the current leadership. What do you think happens if Zelensky signs a peace deal that gives up land? He, a Russian-speaking Jew who used to be on Russian TV and regularly went to the country. He would be deemed a Russian traitorous Jew and would be overthrown and possibly killed by the nationalist and far-right elements within the Ukrainian Army who have gathered disproportionate strength relative to the actual support for fascist politics in the country since 2014 because of Russia’s (yes, and NATO’s) actions. Then the war would continue anyway, but likely with far less restraint against Russian-speaking citizens and Russian soldiers.

          So at the minute there honestly is NO ROUTE TO PEACE because of the internal dynamics in Ukrainian politics both because the population believes the war is winnable and is committed at all costs to fight for their survival against the aggressor, and because there are spoilers within the Ukrainian state + army that have enough power to effectively ‘veto’ it. It is impossible to conceive of peace until there is a mutually hurting stalemate between the two sides in which neither believe they can win and in which both are deeply hurting in the status quo such that the value of continuing war is no longer high enough to justify the suffering. We are not there yet, so whether or not the west arms them is quite beside the point. Indeed, if anything it’d bolster Russia and make them less likely to make concessions for peace. Not that I’m supporting this that or the other arming of far-right militias (I believe any armaments should explicitly exclude Azov and such), but I do not believe the logic of bringing about peace held by many of my fellow Hexbears is correct.

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            For Ukrainians it’s not the case they’re being forced or deceived into fighting, it is a war of national survival! It is a war against an aggressor seeking to at the very least oppress Ukrainian national identity if not destroy it entirely as a political and social force.

            Russia is not interested in conquering Ukraine. They’re interested in goals like keeping Ukraine out of NATO, maintaining access to the Black Sea, and not having ethnic Russians who don’t wish to be a part of Ukraine killed on their borders.

            • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I disagree with this. No, I don’t think Russia wants to ‘annex’ all of Ukraine per se, I think the original goal was to invade, quickly topple the government, then set up a puppet state which would be subservient to Russian interests. This would perhaps be combined with an annexation of much of the east. It was set to be a more successful version of Georgia 2008 (which from an operational level was a bit of a screw-up, but Georgia was weak enough that it went well enough anyhow).

              Ukraine had signalled its willingness to stay out of NATO before the invasion started. Access to the Black sea was definitely an issue but not the primary war goal, hence why Russia initially directed its most intense attack towards Kyiv (it was not a feint, Russia dedicated a huge amount of manpower here and made an earnest attempt to sweep through the capital here). I think it’s pretty obvious the Russian government doesn’t care at all about ethnic Russians/Russian speakers as this war has made life a hell of a lot worse for most of them. Plus the accusation of ‘genocide’ against the Donbass was vastly exaggerated and a clearly cooked up justification.

            • diablexical@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              What would you call the annexed regions if not conquered? “Liberated”? Get a grip

              • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                11 months ago

                I would call them annexed. The people in them do not want to remain part of Ukraine, they’re fine with being part of Russia, and that’s the touchstone here.

                Russia is not interested in conquering the whole of Ukraine, because most of the people in the western part do want to remain Ukrainian, not Russian.

                • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Do you actually think the referendums were legitimate? In Crimea there likely was a majority who wanted to join Russia but even then the results were way higher than in previous polling. Plus Kherson and Kharkiv areas were and are not pro-Russian since the invasion and the referendums there were clearly falsified.

                  It’s not a simple ethnic conflict and the majority of Russian speakers in Ukraine do not want to secede to Russia and do not support the invasion. It is harder to tell in the Donbass because of a lack of data but it is still true that Russia orchestrated the removal of independent-minded leaders for puppets from 2014-2018 or so.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            The reality is that Ukraine lost its sovereignty when the legitimate and democratically elected government was overthrown in a coup. That’s when the war started between the regime in western Ukraine backed by the west and the east. Western media actually reported on this as well

            I agree that at this point Ukraine is basically fucked. There was a possibility to make a deal back in March last year, but US and UK decided to sabotage it. Now, Russia will likely go all the way and there’s not going to be an Ukraine left when this war ends.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Ahh, the rare sane hexbear user I still have hopes for you lot you’re definitely not as bad as lemmygrad.

            However, let me add something:

            It is impossible to conceive of peace until there is a mutually hurting stalemate between the two sides in which neither believe they can win

            You leave out the scenario of Russians getting kicked out of the country. Which is going to lead to Putin being sent to his Dacha, and if not and he somehow clings on Ukraine having all its territory opens NATO membership which means that the Russian general staff is going to shit bricks and rather putsch than attack.

            What do you think happens if Zelensky signs a peace deal that gives up land? He, a Russian-speaking Jew who used to be on Russian TV and regularly went to the country. He would be deemed a Russian traitorous Jew and would be overthrown and possibly killed by the nationalist and far-right elements within the Ukrainian Army

            He a) wouldn’t do that and b) since when is Ukraine antisemitic you’re confusing it with… pretty much all other countries in that area and c) you don’t need to invoke far-right fucks (who are a tiny minority btw) the rest of the country would, well, send him to a Dacha.

            And ever if: At that point we’d be in the situation many predicted in the first days of the invasion: Fall of the government, but Ukrainians then fighting a partisan war. And Ukraine right now is just in way too good a position to switch to that.


            All in all, the way forward to quick peace is clear: Help Ukraine win this thing. It’s both the best option from a direct humanitarian POV by cutting the war short, as well as the best option for wider humanity and the future: Not allowing states intending to conquer to get away with such behaviour. Discouraging wars of aggression is important by itself and one of the reasons why Ukrainians fight so hard, they see the universalism in their own national struggle it just all aligns so well.

                • Dr_Gabriel_Aby [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  you are welcome. Since you are asking for more people to die than less people to die, and you say it’s for peace. I’ve decided simplifying your long ass post for everyone.

            • SeborrheicDermatitis [any]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              You leave out the scenario of Russians getting kicked out of the country. Which is going to lead to Putin being sent to his Dacha, and if not and he somehow clings on Ukraine having all its territory opens NATO membership which means that the Russian general staff is going to shit bricks and rather putsch than attack.

              This is unviable. The best weaponry available to Ukraine was shattered against the Russian frontline-they can barely even take a few villages, let alone Melitopol, and let alone Crimea and the rest of the country! There is no indication that Ukraine has the strength to launch successful counterattacks. In Kherson and Kharkhiv Russia retreated for tactical reasons as their positions were undefendable-this is not the case w/ the current frontlines. It is utopian thinking.

              He a) wouldn’t do that and b) since when is Ukraine antisemitic you’re confusing it with… pretty much all other countries in that area and c) you don’t need to invoke far-right fucks (who are a tiny minority btw) the rest of the country would, well, send him to a Dacha.

              No, I don’t thjink he would.

              “Ukraine” isn’t a ‘real’/reified entity, what I am saying is that the far-right has disproportionate strength in the Ukrainian army (and, to an extent, the state intelligence apparatus) because of the power vaccuum created by the 2014 invasion and the collapse of the pre-existing Ukrainian Army, then in 2022 because it was the best organised forces in the areas seeing the most intense fighting. While Nazis do NOT have much support among the population, the state still has a strong strategic-structural liability to these far-right groups…largely thanks to the actions of Russia!

              And ever if: At that point we’d be in the situation many predicted in the first days of the invasion: Fall of the government, but Ukrainians then fighting a partisan war. And Ukraine right now is just in way too good a position to switch to that.

              Yes, I agree, which is why I don’t think Zelensky will sign a peace. It is unviable.

              All in all, the way forward to quick peace is clear: Help Ukraine win this thing. It’s both the best option from a direct humanitarian POV by cutting the war short, as well as the best option for wider humanity and the future: Not allowing states intending to conquer to get away with such behaviour. Discouraging wars of aggression is important by itself and one of the reasons why Ukrainians fight so hard, they see the universalism in their own national struggle it just all aligns so well.

              I do not see how Ukraine can win this-even with western weaponry they have failed in their counteroffensive. What else do they need? Western boots on the ground is certainly not possible.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                The best weaponry available to Ukraine was shattered against the Russian frontline-they can barely even take a few villages,

                Ukraine send like two and a half Leos out to see if a frontal assault would work, and it didn’t, so they didn’t do it again. The vast majority of western systems are still intact and in any case: If things like MBTs and APVs don’t get destroyed you’re not using them. Things get shot at in wars and it’s no secret that a direct artillery hit will kill any tank.

                Meanwhile, though, Ukraine is inflicting heavy attrition on Russian artillery, as well as choppers. Don’t let the lines on maps confuse you there’s a lot happening that isn’t visible there.

                what I am saying is that the far-right has disproportionate strength in the Ukrainian army

                That would mean that all those people who joined since 2014, 2022 are far-right? Which would mean that the whole of Ukraine is far-right. Which makes no sense when you look at the election results with Svoboda having one seat in the Rada.

                then in 2022 because it was the best organised forces in the areas seeing the most intense fighting.

                Ukraine built its army from 2014, recruiting ordinary people, training them according to NATO doctrine (giving status and independence to NCOs, mission command, such stuff), with NATO help, we sent like a gazillion of instructors. Many many Nazis left Azov after they were integrated into the National Guard, and the whole thing was actively depoliticised.

                Are there still Nazis in Azov? Almost certainly. But the days of them dominating and openly running around with SS runes on their helmets are definitely over. Just as a side note btw Azov is and always was Russian-speaking, Ukrainian nationalism gets complicated.

                I do not see how Ukraine can win this-even with western weaponry they have failed in their counteroffensive.

                No. Ukrainian generals have been very clear about this from the beginning: The offensive is going to drag on for a very long time due to the lack of materiel to do anything big. Conditions have improved somewhat with Stormshadow and Taurus is bound to come soon but Ukraine has no weapons with which it could just obliterate Russian artillery en masse which would then allow them to bring in slow and vulnerable materiel to clear minefields etc. to enable them to break through the line with heavy armour. They, as already said, have to slowly grind down Russian artillery where they can.

                The other way would be actual air superiority. Dunno if those F16s will suffice to switch to full NATO strategy but it’s certainly going to give the Russian side quite some trouble.

                Speaking of NATO strategy that’s probably the reason this impression exists: Yeah if Ukraine had a fully equipped NATO army they’d disable the whole Russian rear from the air, then parachute in armour to attack the Russian lines from the rear and the whole thing would be over in no time. The kind of not war but beating you saw on TV so many times. Like Operation Desert Storm. But Ukraine doesn’t have a fully equipped NATO army, it’s a Soviet-style army half-way switching to NATO doctrine drip-fed some NATO surplus.

                Oh another tidbit: Russia mobilised all its reserves to the front, quite some while ago. Ukraine didn’t they’re rotating troops in and out. Which is why you see renewed conscription drives in Russia, which then poses the question on what kind of equipment they’re supposed to be equipped with, not to speak of the additional instability doing that causes.

      • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        We don’t. However America is worse. So it is nice to neoliberal infighting. Bonus, America losing is better overall for world peace.

  • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    If you want to know what the smartest guy in the US military thinks, read this

    (Assuming, of course, that you don't consider the Marine Corps Gazette to be Russian propaganda)


    Ukraine is on its fourth army, which has been badly mauled in a counterattack lasting two months with gains measured in single digit miles and casualties in the tens of thousands.


    This is who they were sending to the front in APRIL LAST YEAR

    Old men and boys


    But at least Russia's out of missiles!

  • SomeDude@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Yeah, even Putin knows this. But now it’s about making Ukraine bleed as much as possible for the insolence of resisting russia. The cruelty is the point.

  • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    It is a proxy war against America. You don’t win those. You just set yourself up a good position and dig in. America gets bored and leaves and then you can pick over what is left of what was destroyed. So you don’t win, you just wait for America to forfeit.

        • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Wait a minute… Who invaded Ukraine in 2014, and again in 2021? Who illegally annexed sovereign territory? America is not blameless, but in this war they are just the arms dealer

          • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            29
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            The USA has been training Ukraine military and irregulars for years. They organized a volunteer force to go fight there. They sent their politicians to support the right-wing coup. What the fuck are you talking about they are just arms dealers? They are providing recon and military intelligence, they are mobilizing their satellites and aerial assets, they are doing political work to get other nations to provide support and they are putting constraints on peace deals. They are not a fucking arms dealer.

          • UnicodeHamSic [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            if you are right and they are just an arms dealer they are still the bad guys. You understand arm’s dealers are bad people right?

            • UFO@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              No. That’s a reductionist take.

              “Can we have some weapons to defend ourselves?”

              "No! That’d make us evil. You should just die. "

              Oh a hexbear. … You lot only have overly simplistic takes.

              • InappropriateEmote [comrade/them, undecided]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                25
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                11 months ago

                Oh a hexbear. … You lot only have overly simplistic takes.

                When we respond to blatant ignorance with carefully chosen wording, backing up our position with citations and links, and calmly explaining the nuance of complex geopolitical realities, we get accused of “always throwing walls of text at people.” When we answer that same ignorance with short and pithy responses, we “only have simplistic takes.”

                parenti-hands

                There’s no winning with you simple-minded dronies, but I guess there never is when one side can just make shit up that fits their vibes-based outlook on the world.

              • CascadeOfLight [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                You should just die

                Yes, rip bozos

                My eternal grief for the hundreds of thousands of innocent Ukrainians pressed into the meatgrinder by their Nazi overlords, eternal death to the genocidal Kiev regime and their campaign of extermination against their own country’s citizens of Russian descent for eight years

                CW: literally, unfathomably vile

                The Ukrainian fascist soldiers are offering you cans of ‘Separatist Baby Meat’!

                • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You realize the people in those photos are Russian citizens and connected to Wagner PMC, right? Identify each of them for us and prove you know what the hell you’re posting. Anyone can post a picture of a Nazi flag and say “See? SEE!??”

            • DauntingFlamingo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Ahhh let’s talk about those! The one in Russia last month was pretty cool. Sending Wagner to Belarus to mess with Poland, only for Poland to send 10,000 troops and see Wagner get shipped out of Belarus was pretty funny. Russia keeps trying the same playbook, and now it’s being met with equal force, so they’re pissed. Same reason the EU border states just expelled thousands of Russian citizens.

              They keep trying to stage coups using Russian citizens. The coup in Ukraine in 2014 was preceded by a border buildup of “special operation forces.” It also noteworthy how Russia has changed the lingo and now calls it “War in Ukraine.”

        • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          America is a plutocracy which accepts queerness in its federal law. Your gotcha went too broad.

            • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Mate. Respect for Marriage Act 2022 is a federal law protecting same sex marriages. It’s there. It’s fact. Bwaha etc.

              • h3doublehockeysticks [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                The Respect For Marriage act of 2022 requires ONLY that states recognize existing same sex marriages. If Obergefell was overturned tomorrow, zombie laws kick in over a good chunk of the country banning same sex marriage. And Roberts as well as Thomas both opposed Obergefell.

                And that’s not evne getting into the fact that you’re sitll only talking about a single piece of legislation which ONLY requires that states recognize such marriages, it does absolutely nothing besides that. Which means that it is not only inadequate in what it does to protect queer marriage, but also that it’s a very minor piece of legislation in the grand scheme of queer discrimination.

                • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  That’s not the point. I feel I’ve already answered your argument in other comments. If you don’t agree, please let me know why and I’ll happily address it.

                • crapwittyname@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  You are incapable. That is because the comment is factually correct. US Federal law has protections for queerness. The cited law proves it. What point are you trying to make exactly?

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Russia does not have the resources for that. A reminder this isn’t a proxy war for them, even though it is for the West. Russia is there in person conventionally and is somehow losing to a minor Western ally.

      The Ukrainians aren’t going to run out of stuff within the next year for sure, and maybe not ever because even if the US gets bored Europe is highly invested. Russia has negligible productive capacity of it’s own, and is bound to have serious problems eventually, unless they convince China to help and China has so far been uninterested. They could theoretically win by population attrition, I guess, but nobody’s really talking about that yet. And, to do anything, they need political stability, after already having one mostly-failed coup.

      • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        is somehow losing to the minor Western allies

        How are you defining “losing” here? They’re occupying the separatist parts of Ukraine and can do so indefinitely.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Their original objective was to topple the government in Kiev, and they’ve gotten fairly continuously further from that. Saying they’re winning has “Mission Accomplished!” energy at this point.

          They’re occupying Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea if that’s what you mean, although it’s in question if they can do that or anything else including exist indefinitely.

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Their original objective was to topple the government in Kiev

            According to who? If you read the article from U.S. military analysts posted elsewhere in this thread, not even they think that was the point of the early war thrust towards Kiev.

            Interesting you mention “Mission Accomplished” – would you say the U.S. and its media did a good job of accurately informing the public about the War on Terror? Would you say they had good intentions?

            • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              What did they decide the Kiev thing was about? Was it a botched attempt at a decapitation strike to prevent basically everything else that happened?

              • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                It’s very much worth a read. The broad strokes are:

                • There’s a notable difference between the attack towards Kiev and the attack in the separatist regions (it also talks about attacks in southern Ukraine outside the separatist regions, but I think it says they’re basically similar to the Kiev attack).
                • The attack in the separatist regions were to hold territory with an amenable population. So you have a lot of troops, tons of artillery, and they dug in elaborate fortifications that they will actually stay and defend.
                • The attack towards Kiev was an opportunistic raid to divert troops from the main thrust of the attack in thr separatist regions. The article talks about similar raids the Russian Empire did in the Napoleonic Wars, the Union calvalry did in the U.S. Civil War, pretty sure it mentions a Soviet one in WWII, etc. It involved much less artillery because it wasn’t intended to hold ground and they wanted to avoid unnecessarily antagonizing civilians they didn’t want to govern anyway.
                • On that last point, the article also talks about how Russian missile strikes have largely avoided the most damaging civilian targets. It gives an example of striking an electrical substation that converts electricity into a type usable by trains instead of striking electrical infrastructure that is more general purpose (and would shut down broader civilian electricity, too).

                The Kiev attack’s goal appears to have been “disrupt, divert, and if you see opportunities, take them.” I bet if the Ukrainian government had shown signs of folding or if the defense of Kiev had been weaker they would have pushed for more, but that didn’t happen, the separatist regions were taken successfully, and the Russian Kiev column had no more reason to be there.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              According to who? If you read the article from U.S. military analysts posted elsewhere in this thread, not even they think that was the point of the early war thrust towards Kiev.

              All I see is a chain of threads that go mostly nowhere. No, a wargame from 2002 is not relevant.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Well, there war goals were to protect Donbass, kill a shitload of Nazis, and de-militarize Ukraine. Plans change but it still looks like they’re doing what they set out to do.

            • yata@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              It is funny how you critical thinkers uncritically regurgitate Putin propaganda without any hesitation.

                • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  “Kill nearly every young man in Ukraine” is their main path to victory, but Russia has only about 4x the population of Ukraine, so they’ll have to mind their casualty ratios pretty well. And avoid any more coups.

      • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        Pentagon said last year in a press briefing that Russia could keep up this war for 40 years at current rate. You sure USA and Europe can last even one year? Russia also has allies in China and India, in case West thought for even one moment about uniting.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Russia also has allies in China and India

          Press X to doubt.

          Pentagon said last year in a press briefing that Russia could keep up this war for 40 years at current rate.

          Could you link that? It goes against everything I’ve read and I can’t find it myself.

          • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Press X to doubt.

            India ramping up trade in oil and gas with Russia while refusing to even offer the most milquetoast condemnation of Russia’s invasion on the world stage haven’t clued you in?

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Call me when they do more than not get involved.

              India and China are fair-weather friends to Russia. India is also an increasingly close fair-weather friend of the West. Both the West and India see themselves as adversaries with China.

                • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  So you think the neutral action would be an embargo, then? Buying gas at a heavy discount doesn’t seem very political to me, or to the Western leaders for that matter.

          • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            11 months ago

            Russia also has allies in China and India

            Press X to doubt.

            I do not think you are capable of learning anything, if you seriously say things that are opposite of reality.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nobody who has even a modicum of understanding of geopolitics doubts this. India and Russia have a very strong relationship that goes back to the days of USSR which was one of the biggest forces that helped liberate India from western colonization. Meanwhile, Russia losing the war would be an utter disaster for China. US is very openly trying to surround China militarily, and Russia acts as a shield in the west. The worst possible outcome for China would be the west managing to destabilize Russia and put a pro western government in power. If there was even the slightest chance that Russia could lose this conflict then China would step in.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              I disagree. The Cold War is ancient history and China’s probably just as happy carving up Russia as living beside it.

              • DPRK_Chopra [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                21
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Honestly it’s amazing to me coming out of the hexbear bubble for the last three years how uninformed westerners actually are about geopolitics. There no reason at all to belive this besides you want it to be true.

                • yata@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I don’t think I have ever seen such a clear cut example of projection as your comment.

                • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  For example, Joe Biden was literally born when the battle of Stalingrad of World War 2 was occurring. Biden’s literally old enough to have lived in the same era as the generation that lived during the American Civil War were dying out.

                  Anyone that was born in the 70s, for a brief time, lived on the same earth at the same time as the last living emancipated American slaves still drew their breath.

                  “Ancient history” is closer to us who are alive than we can truly perceive and comprehend. The past’s heavy hands rest on our shoulders, burdening the present with the acts performed hitherto each passing minute.

                  A quote:

                  ‘Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.’

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                22
                arrow-down
                12
                ·
                11 months ago

                US literally says it wants to prevent China from developing and has surrounded it with military bases, but whatever you say buddy. The brains of Chinese leaders aren’t as smooth as yours.

                • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  More territory is good, if the opportunity would present itself this would make China stronger. They also don’t want another Xinjiang they have to genocide, though, so I imagine they wouldn’t actually annex much. Maybe just take back the old Qing cities and puppet the rest.

                • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  OP gave me their vibes, and I responded with my vibes. Actual facts about the future of geopolitics are hard to come by (until they happen).

            • yata@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Nobody who has even a modicum of understanding of geopolitics doubts this. India and Russia have a very strong relationship that goes back to the days of USSR which was one of the biggest forces that helped liberate India from western colonization.

              Only if you believe your own propaganda, because none of that occurred at all.

        • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, not at all; that’s a myth started by Nazi propagandists to explain why they were losing to the Soviets, and it was picked up by USA propagandists during the cold war.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Nah. That was basically Cold War propaganda, partly spread by ex-Nazis covering their asses after losing to “subhumans”. Russia fought the same way every country did in it’s recent wars.

          Man I miss AskHistorians.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Oh, and Ukraine is also populous. It has a quarter of Russia’s population, about, so human wave wouldn’t win anyway.

    • BigNote@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not just the US though. The European powers are far more firmly committed. It’s not at all clear that the rest of NATO will simply walk away if/when the US does. Especially the former Soviet nations; this is not a fucking game to them. The loss of US support would be huge, but I don’t see a universe in which the Europeans just roll over for Putin once the US loses interest.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The European powers are far more firmly committed.

        So firmly committed that america had to blow up one of germany’s pipelines? Are you having a fucking laugh?

        Everyone I speak to, you know, normal people, thinks this is a fucking stupid distraction from domestic politics and the consistently declining standard of living we are seeing. America has ended european prosperity with this shit and it won’t recover for 50 years. You think people here haven’t noticed that?

        • sibe@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          America has ended european prosperity

          USA invaded Ukraine? That’s news to me

            • yata@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Ah, the completely made up thing. Yes, that makes perfect sense in your imaginary world.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            11 months ago

            The US assisted in the 2014 fascist coup that led to the fascist transitionary government, the deployment of all the fascist militias to attacking the donbas, and the 8 year long civil war that led to Russia eventually invading.

            Your mindset on this shit is that it began in 2022 which is false, the US has been stoking it since 8 years earlier. If you want we could go even further back though, Operation Aerodynamic was the US operation to fund, arm and support fascists in Ukraine in order to destabilise the soviet union. Absolutely none of this would be happening today without the US’ historic support of fascists.

            • s0ykaf [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              the US has been stoking it since 8 years earlier

              way more than that

              america knew what they were doing in late 2000s when they started the ukraine into nato bullshit; a lot of important people, including some ghouls, said russia would see it as an existential threat. i mean, fuck, angela merkel was saying that back then

              • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                That’s the same Angela Merkel that admitted the Minsk agreements weren’t done in good faith, rather, they were just done to create time to build the Ukranian military.

              • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                From a far enough perspective this conflict goes back to like Napoleon. When was the first time a European power decided that they could definitely take control of Russia before winter?

                • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Napoleon at first wanted to divide Europe with Russia, he did also think attacking it is bad idea. Several diplomatic fuckups and certain serial traitor* activity later it came to blows.

                  *Talleyrand. Biographers place quite a big role in sabotaging France and Russia agreement on him. It seems correct looking as how the European politics 200 years later are still largely based on the ones he took very active part in establishing. Also his life was wild, he served all French governments from Louis XVI to Charles X and betrayed every single one of them except Jacobins who didn’t trusted him and kicked him out of France.

            • sibe@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              So USA took Crimea not Russia because their puppet president was overthrown in 2014?

              • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Crimean independence goes as far back as the 1991 Soviet collapse. Acting like it is only a 2014 thing is also nonsense.


                On Jan. 20, 1991, voters were asked whether they wanted the re-establishment of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. 94.3 percent or 1,343,825 of the 1,441,019 voters who cast ballots voted yes. (81.5% turnout)


                In 1994 voters were asked whether they were in favour of greater autonomy within Ukraine, whether residents should have dual Russian and Ukrainian citizenship, and whether presidential decrees should have the status of laws. All three proposals were approved. The worst of them being 77% saying Yes.


                In 2014 they conducted a referendum asked voters whether they wanted to rejoin Russia as a federal subject, or if they wanted to restore the 1992 Crimean constitution and Crimea’s status as a part of Ukraine. It had 89% voter turnout and 97% said yes.


                If liberals care so much about democracy, and what people actually want, liberals should also care about the fact it is clearly something Crimeans wanted. The “taking of Crimea” was a referendum vote, and very little else. The way liberals always talk of it as an invasion is incorrect, in particular because Russia already ran the port, and already ran the military checkpoints into and out of the region. They were already there.

            • yata@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Your mindset on this shit is that it began in 2022 which is false,

              No, that is a complete strawman of your own fabrication.

        • 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          People like Merkel didn’t exactly think about long-term prosperity, given their climate policies. Energy shocks would’ve been, I assume, much stronger if they only started to happen in the 30s. The economic consequences (energy inflation, supply chain crisis) were not considered, although people have warned. Some acted (I think fennoscandic countries implemented effective heating regimes in the early 10s already for example), but many didn’t learn from the 1970s energy shock caused by energy dependency on incompatible political systems and Russia’s disorganisation of representation in the 2000s. Sanctions/disentanglement would’ve been necessary in the 2000s when Russia became centered around Putin.

          SOL is high enough to defend against fascism. Don’t fall for the propaganda of imperialists.

          This war is so bad already, but it could be much worse (even with MAD).

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            11 months ago

            People like Merkel didn’t exactly think about long-term prosperity, given their climate policies.

            I think that’s mostly ideological. War is something that exists within the Liberal world view, but obstacles to unlimited growth of profits don’t. They can reckon with geopolitical conflicts but global warming does the same thing to them that trying to unlock your dad’s memories does if you’re a bene gesserit.

            • 5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Climate change isn’t mitigated just by disorienting from economic growth since status quo is so bad already. Growth politics are insufficient - not building another refinery isn’t enough to combat the fossil north. Many economies, including Germany’s vehicle industry, need to be completely restructured and there it is just remotely interesting for climate change mitigation whether there’s differential (non-fossil) growth.

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            This is nonsense from an american perpsective.

            The reality here is that america is not a friend of europe. Those european leaders were pursuing what was best for europe, and america saw that as moving away from it.

            Thus america set out to destabilise europe with exactly the same mindset it used in the middle east, and it has succeeded. As a result of blowing up pipelines and starting wars it has forced europe into vassalisation by way of creating energy dependence on it instead of itself or anyone else.

            You act like what’s best for america is best for europeans because you think everyone in the world is your vassal to be directed. You need to piss off and focus on yourselves and stop intefering with everyone else in the world. Everywhere the US pokes its nose into ends up worse off than it did before.

            And the EU even recognises this, it understands it has been vassalised now and is working on resolving it.

            They’ve completely fucked us over. And if you speak to anyone on the street here, taxi drivers, etc, you’d hear the same thing over and over again, Americans aren’t viewed as our friends anymore, they did this shit to us and a lot of people know it.

      • jabjoe@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The US being unreliable is what will cause a full on EU army. Putin is on the EU’s doorstep and former Soviet are in the EU. The EU can’t ignore Putin’s aggression.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I wish them all the best. Watching Europe absolutely eat shit and collapse trying to fight would be hilarious.

          Notably - America will 100% hang them out to dry rather than committing significant forces.

          Also, you know, the really painfully obvious thing - The only people who want Russia to attack Europe are the Baltics and some of the more unhinged right wing factions in Poland.

          • jabjoe@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The EU basically have to do it if the US is going off into isolationism. Russia is a far away problem to the US, but not the EU.

            If the first iteration of an EU army wasn’t great, in anything serious, the UK’s army would join forces with it.

            Russia has shown itself willing to invade, but also not a fearsome force. So if it tries another former Soviet block country, it will be made to fail. With or without the US.

          • yata@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Also, you know, the really painfully obvious thing - The only people who want Russia to attack Europe are the Baltics and some of the more unhinged right wing factions in Poland.

            Pretty funny how you completely ignore all of the Russian Putin controlled talking heads who have threatened attacking Europe and the Batlics on a daily basis since Russia invaded Ukraine.

            But “painfully obvious things” is definitely something you understand all about, huh?

      • Sinonatrix [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I have to imagine direct intervention would’ve happened already if it was going to. Why let the Ukrainians get shoved into a meat grinder first? If you’re America: it’s good business and sells more guns. If you’re actually reliant on the buffer zone then it’s really not a game, as you say.

        • peeonyou@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          if all the US / EU weapon stockpiles get wiped out then the US makes a mint resupplying everyone for the next war, which will be with China using Taiwan as the proxy

        • yata@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I have to imagine direct intervention would’ve happened already if it was going to.

          Apparently you are completely unaware of the existence of nuclear weapons.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I guess then it becomes a scramble for anyone on their borders not already in NATO to get their applications in before they launch their next “special operation”.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Georgia, Aserbaijan. Then don’t forget the east, that is, the -stans and Mongolia. China and Japan are safe and who even wants NK.

          The stans traditionally looked towards China for protection (also see Silk Road initiative) but they’re making moves to make themselves more palatable to the west. Mongolia is the odd one out they’re actually a proper democracy, and very much NATO-aligned though they (just like Japan) don’t qualify because geography. They’ll continue being a buffer state between Russia and China as long as they’re west-aligned neither will suspect them to be in bed with the other.

    • MJBrune@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I mean they have kept it for the last 9 years. They had it before the war and everyone was fine with it until Russia invaded more. I don’t see how Russia doesn’t keep Crimea. It’s something they considered Russian territory before the current war. They’ve pledged to use nukes if Ukraine counter attacks on their soil. My logic says they will use nukes to keep Crimea.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They’ve pledged to use nukes if Ukraine counter attacks on their soil.

        They have already ‘annexed’ oblasts they do not completely control so that threat is pretty hollow.

          • SeaJ@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            While I agree that it is Ukraine’s, Russia does not since they have gone through their legal process of annexation. They are currently fighting in what Russia legally considers their soil.

      • Michal@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Nobody is fine with Crimea - except Russia, but they want more. Crimea was the price to pay for peace, but peace was broken by Russia, so Russia does not get to keep it.

          • Michal@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Jumping to defend and being fine with are two different things. Let’s not forget Russia is a “nuclear power”.

            • MJBrune@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              That didn’t stop them from supporting Ukraine in 2022, yet they didn’t in 2014.

        • MJBrune@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Russia considers Crimea its soil. So it’s hard to say but Crimea is very important to Russia.

            • MJBrune@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Sure but the judgement is there to determine if Russia will use nukes to keep the land. Clearly, with Ukraine, they won’t. With Crimea, I think they would since that’s a key point in the oil exportation.

                • MJBrune@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It hasn’t been since 2014 though. It’s been firmly in Russian control since before 2022. Russia is not looking to lose any land before it started it’s 2022 invasion.