Russia invasion of Ukraine

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

Russia backed itself into a corner. Russia could declare a cease fire and withdraw from Ukraine tomorrow. And leverage their energy resources (and all those Ukrainian civillians they kidnapped) to try to get some of the sanctions removed and return to *some* semblance of the pre-war status quo.

What's preventing this is all the Kremlin hawks, full of dreams of reestablishing the Russian Empire, refusing to acknowledge that they could lose the war, and they've probably already lost it conventionally speaking.

You also have to remember that Russia's reason to start the war (although dumb reasons by all accounts) were not unprovoked. Honestly I don't care who is to blame at this point, but what I find completely unsettling is the fact that western nations display no signs in attempting to de-escalate this conflict with a NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER. Even if the chances of nuclear war have only increased by 2% that's still way too high!

Meanwhile, all I hear from both sides is attempts to paint the opposite side as evil so that support for the war continues in one way or another. This is utter insanity. We are playing a VERY dangerous game here, and if Ukraine joins NATO in coming days then get ready for World War 3.

[Key Board]

If they didn't want arms proliferation into Ukraine maybe they shouldn't have invaded Crimea, because that's when the so called arms proliferation accelerated

If they didn't want NATO at their borders maybe they shouldn't have invaded Ukraine again

I think the door for de-escalation closed when Russia staged a voting referendum and initiated mobilization. WHAT ARE RUSSIA and UKRAINE going to talk about now?

But you're right about one thing. The staged voting is so Russia can utilize nukes for retaliation. because now those annexed territories count as Russian soil.


//

[Nachtwandler]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

You also have to remember that Russia's reason to start the war (although dumb reasons by all accounts) were not unprovoked. Honestly I don't care who is to blame at this point, but what I find completely unsettling is the fact that western nations display no signs in attempting to de-escalate this conflict with a NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER. Even if the chances of nuclear war have only increased by 2% that's still way too high!

Meanwhile, all I hear from both sides is attempts to paint the opposite side as evil so that support for the war continues in one way or another. This is utter insanity. We are playing a VERY dangerous game here, and if Ukraine joins NATO in coming days then get ready for World War 3.

It is not even funny. We gave no points to provoke anyone. In fact, the current goverment was pretty lax regarding relationships with Russia and the West, trying to keep themselves neutral. If the Russia did not decide to attack, it would have been the same stale passive conflict that was last 8 years with ukrainian goverment changing every 4-5 years with no real change to policies. And majority of Eastern part of the country being moderatelly pro-Russian. You know, in my homecity most people were fine giving pro-Russian separatists on Donbass their autonomy as long as it stopped any further escalation. But now all of them just want Russia to collapse after all they have done.

People are cynical and everyone pursues their own interests. But we do not want to suffer just because someone fears energy or food crisis here. We did not start this.

The more territories are given up to Putin, the more he will desire to take. Or have you forgotten the mistakes made by League of Nations before WWII? They thought giving Hitler what he wants will bring peace. People should remember history and learn from it.

[MeoTwister5]

Give a sociopath an inch and he'll ask for a mile, your house and your wife. Appeasing Putin merely gives all other people like him the go signal to do what he does.

[Guardian Enzo]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

Give a sociopath an inch and he'll ask for a mile, your house and your wife. Appeasing Putin merely gives all other people like him the go signal to do what he does.

90% of what Garry Kasparov says is neocon bullshit, but he understands Putin and how he thinks on a molecular level, and he makes this point over and over. We keep trying to appease Putin and he keeps taking that as a signal that he can keep grabbing more and getting what he wants. It doesn't fucking work.

[Sugetsu]

You guys can justify the reasons for continued war as much as you want, but this time we are playing a serious game that could threaten civilization as we know it, and this is not hyperbole. I personally could care less about borders and nations. They are an outdated concept that is conducive to conflict. I find it maddening that people tend fall into this destructive group mentality frenzy in which they find reasons to fight one another but lose perspective of the big picture. The big picture here is that BOTH SIDES HAVE F'ING NUKES!.Wars between nuclear armed nations are therefore extremely dangerous, and not a smart thing to do!

You can't compare the pre-nuclear world to now. If Mexico were a nuclear power when the US decided to take Texas and California away then the US would have never invaded in the first place. Russia wants to mantein the existence of buffer nations to keep Western powers at bay.

As far as i am aware, this conflict began due to 2 factors.
1) NATO and its slow encroachment into neutral nations that border Russia. Geopolitical experts were warning western leaders for more than 2 decades that NATO should have either included Russia or dissolve entirely as its sole existence was centered around fighting against the USSR, preserving this organization after USSR's dissolution could only make Russia feel marginalized and stigmatized. Independent reporting claims that the US was playing a direct role in supporting the current Ukrainian president and his aspirations of joining Ukraine to NATO by sending mixed signals in the months prior to the conflict.

2) the construction of the Russian Gas pipeline that would was assured to increase Europe's reliance on Russian energy supply, but the project was halted due to multiple roadblocks. This is why the recent pipeline sabotage is such a huge deal.

If I were in charge of Ukraine as its president I would call Putin's bluff by declaring unequivocally during a press conference that Ukraine will never be part of NATO and will remain a neutral territory. After all, this is what Putin says he cannot let happen under any circumstance because that would be the equivalent of stablishing Russian presence in Mexico or Canada for the US. As far as i am aware this declaration has never been officially made.

[Ithekro]

The European Union is adding members via diplomacy and economic advantages.

Russia is engaging in 19th century Imperialism to reclaim its lost Empire.

21st century Europe is not having Imperialism like Russia's back again.

Eastern Europe has firsthand experience with Russian Imperialism, and they are the ones who invited NATO into their countries.

Ukraine did not pull for NATO, but did move closer to the EU around 2013-14 due to Russia's economic capabilities waining compared to the European Union.

This year Russia invaded a sovereign country with the goal of annexation and cultural genocide.

Now, with that invasion failing, Russia grasps the pieces it has and annexes them to make them "Russian soil" than uses that as a shield to threaten nuclear retaliation.

That is unacceptable.

In light of Russia's nuclear and other threats to their countries, Finland and Sweden have decided to join NATO. Switzerland has even rejected its usual neutrality due to Russia's actions.

Ukraine has made it clear that they intend to join NATO and the EU following the war, completely because of Russia's hostile Imperialist grab for their country and their blatant attempt at cultural genocide.

Russia claims to be "de-nazifying" but have failed to look into the mirror to see the Nazi of old staring back at them under the shade of Czarist Russian ambitions. Russia's playbook has been almost classic 1930s Nazi Germany right up until Europe woke up and said "no! not again".

[MeoTwister5]

Also claiming to be afraid that Putin will gladly push his nuclear button when push comes to shove while believing that Zelensky should call his bluff on it is just bizarre. Either he's bluffing or he isn't. Pick a side.

This weirdly absurd centrist stance of "everybody's at fault" and spreading blame is the reason why no one gets held accountable for their actions as a head of state. The moment you're willing to reduce culpability by spreading it around as people get bombed in their shelters just to appease a sociopath out of fear he'd push his big red button, then you've already lost. Madmen thrive on fear.

The moment you do this, Putin's already won. Nobody wants war, but no one wants Putin either. Every second more he gets treated with kid gloves is a second more he is allowed to consolidate his base further.

[Sheba]

I would like to know what is the red line for "neutrals". The entirety of Ukraine taken by Putin? The Baltic states? Poland? It must be hard to undo 2 decades of memes about Putin once he have shown his real color: a aging Stalin wannabe living in the delusion he can restore the Empire under the name of "Sphere of Influence".

His speech is him trying to divide the opposition while cashing in the resentment of Asians and Africans toward Europe over the latter's colonial past. All while downplaying the role Russia played in China's Century of Humiliation, and how horrible they were toward the East Europe countries they occupied in Tsarist era.

[Yu Ominae]

There is now word that Lyman's retaken.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

You also have to remember that Russia's reason to start the war (although dumb reasons by all accounts) were not unprovoked. Honestly I don't care who is to blame at this point, but what I find completely unsettling is the fact that western nations display no signs in attempting to de-escalate this conflict with a NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER. Even if the chances of nuclear war have only increased by 2% that's still way too high!

Meanwhile, all I hear from both sides is attempts to paint the opposite side as evil so that support for the war continues in one way or another. This is utter insanity. We are playing a VERY dangerous game here, and if Ukraine joins NATO in coming days then get ready for World War 3.

Russia might have had some vaguely understandable geopolitical motivations for starting the war (some nominal concern over the NATO block, dreams of Russian Empire, etc). But the problem is that right now *continuing* the war is a very irrational move for Russia as a whole. Curbing further NATO expansion has failed. Being able to bring Ukraine into Russia as an intact and docile territory has failed. Russia getting a "win" in Ukraine doesn't actually get them anything. Continuing the war is irrational for Russia as a geopolitical entity.

Russia continuing the war at this point is almost entirely based on preserving the reputation of Putin and revisionist hawks in the Kremlin. When they saber rattle nukes it's not because Russia itself is in danger of being nuked or invaded if they lose the war. It's that those men (who fancy themselves 'ard men) fear losing power if they are blamed for losing the war...which ya know, they are at fault of given all their fuckups.

So again, what does de-escalation mean when Russia itself is under no immediate military threat from NATO? That Ukraine has to give up it's entirely rational and reasonable to desire to liberate its land and millions of its people that Russia has just annexed? So Putin and his other hardliners can turn to their people and say "see? I'm not a fuck up. Nuclear black mail works!"

Cause I should note. The west already left Ukraine out to dry somewhat in the name of not provoking nuclear war with Russia by making clear we'd not conduct a direct military intervention, even when we thought Ukraine would get conquered in a week. In that sense the increased threat of nuclear war does not come from NATO, but from Russia's own catastrophic political and military failures. How far should Ukraine compromise their own country away to compensate for the failures of Russia's military and political leaders?

[Sugetsu]

Western war propaganda is being disseminated by the same people that lied us into war with Iraq. This is why i am skeptical of all the reasons to justify their continuation of this conflict, but now it is different because the adversary in this case is a nuclear armed super power. This is why I completely opposed to this super risky war.

The people calling the shots know quite well that they can't never let a good crisis go to waste. All signs point a new Afghanistan but in this case, it is a proxy war. They will exploit the Ukrainian people by having them fight till the last Ukrainian. And if the war ends without a nuclear holocaust, Ukraine will be left dry as husk and its people left to suffer in silence. (See Afghanistan) Like any other war in the last 3 decades, there will be no "aid package" too large help the people of Ukraine., while cries about inflation, rate hikes and all the economic woes of citizens of western nations are ignored.

Putin didn't start this war unprovoked. For what reason? Of this i am not sure, but i am inclined to believe that is due to NATO encroachment. There is ample documentation to support this theory. Is Putin a victim? Absolutely not, he knows damn well what is doing, and he is also aware of not letting a good crisis go to waste. Regardless of the outcome of this war he already lost the moral ground. He is VERY wrong in his actions and his image has been damaged beyond repair.

Originally Posted by Sheba

I would like to know what is the red line for "neutrals". The entirety of Ukraine taken by Putin? The Baltic states? Poland?

Let him keep the zones that he already captured and engage in peace negotiations. All evidence seems to point out that he invaded Ukraine because provocative actions by NATO when it comes to Ukraine. After all, the country is of key strategic importance as a buffer state to ward against NATO.

If NATO encroachment is not the reason while he invaded, then we can call his bluff by declaring that Ukraine will never be part of nato. (I very much doubt that there ever was inclination to declare Ukraine neutral, as this doesn't help maintain forever wars) If he continues to attack then he will lose political capital at home and abroad with countries that still support Russia, because he would have then shown that he is just being an imperialist.

[Nachtwandler]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Western war propaganda is being disseminated by the same people that lied us into war with Iraq. This is why i am skeptical of all the reasons to justify their continuation of this conflict, but now it is different because the adversary in this case is a nuclear armed super power. This is why I completely opposed to this super risky war.

The people calling the shots know quite well that they can't never let a good crisis go to waste. All signs point a new Afghanistan but in this case, it is a proxy war. They will exploit the Ukrainian people by having them fight till the last Ukrainian. And if the war ends without a nuclear holocaust, Ukraine will be left dry as husk and its people left to suffer in silence. (See Afghanistan) Like any other war in the last 3 decades, there will be no "aid package" too large help the people of Ukraine., while cries about inflation, rate hikes and all the economic woes of citizens of western nations are ignored.

Putin didn't start this war unprovoked. For what reason? Of this i am not sure, but i am inclined to believe that is due to NATO encroachment. There is ample documentation to support this theory. Is Putin a victim? Absolutely not, he knows damn well what is doing, and he is also aware of not letting a good crisis go to waste. Regardless of the outcome of this war he already lost the moral ground. He is VERY wrong in his actions and his image has been damaged beyond repair.



Let him keep the zones that he already captured and engage in peace negotiations. All evidence seems to point out that he invaded Ukraine because provocative actions by NATO when it comes to Ukraine. After all, the country is of key strategic importance as a buffer state to ward against NATO.

If NATO encroachment is not the reason while he invaded, then we can call his bluff by declaring that Ukraine will never be part of nato. (I very much doubt that there ever was inclination to declare Ukraine neutral, as this doesn't help maintain forever wars) If he continues to attack then he will lose political capital at home and abroad with countries that still support Russia, because he would have then shown that he is just being an imperialist.

I won't try to guess here if you are a Putin agent, a coward or just dumb. I'll just repeat:

1. We already gave up some territories in 2014. Have it resolved the conflict? No. It got postponed but only escalated the matter. "Give a wolf one ship and he'll crave for the whole herd".

2. You're literarly ask the world to repeat the same mistake they already done with Hitler. Giving up more territories will just convince him he can get more later with no repercussions. It will not de-escalate the conflict anyway. Stop putting nukes as an argument.

3. Ukraine have not signed for being a martyr here. You literarly ask us to give up our territories and forgive all of the warcrimes done just so some other countries could get their gas/wheat, etc. This is a victim-blaming as its finest. You can blame NATO or US as much as you want here but it has nothing to do with Ukraine suffering for their presumed mistakes. Stop pointing the fingers.

4. So to are saying if Russia attacked your home country for no reason you'll gladly give up 20% of the territory just not to escalate? Just because they are presumed superpower.

[GDB]

Putin didn't start this war unprovoked. For what reason? Of this i am not sure, but i am inclined to believe that is due to NATO encroachment.

So you're absolutely positive he was provoked, but you don't know how. And we're the ones eating up propaganda?

NATO encroachment is just the global reason he gave. Ironically, if he had done nothing NATO was on its way to irrelevance, meaning there wasn't actually any encroachment. He literally gave NATO new life.

while cries about inflation, rate hikes and all the economic woes of citizens of western nations are ignored.

Imagine complaining about both inflation and rate hikes.

[MeoTwister5]

God forbid your new Iphone ends up more expensive because someone decided to invade another country for the flimsiest of reasons.

[Sheba]

Putinists loves to bring up supposed agreements between USA and then dismantled USSR to NOT expand NATO with ex Varsaw Pact countries. I looked everywhere and couldnt find any. And it makrs sense: they lost, they had no power to negotiate anything.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Western war propaganda is being disseminated by the same people that lied us into war with Iraq. This is why i am skeptical of all the reasons to justify their continuation of this conflict, but now it is different because the adversary in this case is a nuclear armed super power. This is why I completely opposed to this super risky war.

Next you'll be telling us Putin didn't invade Ukraine.

The people calling the shots know quite well that they can't never let a good crisis go to waste. All signs point a new Afghanistan but in this case, it is a proxy war. They will exploit the Ukrainian people by having them fight till the last Ukrainian. And if the war ends without a nuclear holocaust, Ukraine will be left dry as husk and its people left to suffer in silence. (See Afghanistan) Like any other war in the last 3 decades, there will be no "aid package" too large help the people of Ukraine., while cries about inflation, rate hikes and all the economic woes of citizens of western nations are ignored.

Putin didn't start this war unprovoked. For what reason? Of this i am not sure,

Well, that inclines to confidence in the rest of what you have to say.

but i am inclined to believe that is due to NATO encroachment. There is ample documentation to support this theory.

That kind of reasoning rests on the assumption that Ukraine isn't a sovereign state but a vassal of Russia.

Is Putin a victim? Absolutely not, he knows damn well what is doing, and he is also aware of not letting a good crisis go to waste. Regardless of the outcome of this war he already lost the moral ground. He is VERY wrong in his actions and his image has been damaged beyond repair.



Let him keep the zones that he already captured

How noble of you to give away bits of Ukraine and reward military conquest.

and engage in peace negotiations. All evidence seems to point out that he invaded Ukraine because provocative actions by NATO when it comes to Ukraine.

All evidence is that he did it because he thought he could get away with it.

After all, the country is of key strategic importance as a buffer state to ward against NATO.

If NATO encroachment is not the reason while he invaded, then we can call his bluff by declaring that Ukraine will never be part of nato. (I very much doubt that there ever was inclination to declare Ukraine neutral, as this doesn't help maintain forever wars) If he continues to attack then he will lose political capital at home and abroad with countries that still support Russia, because he would have then shown that he is just being an imperialist.

Everyone knows he's just an imperialist. What kind of idiot thinks otherwise? We just react differently to it.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Western war propaganda is being disseminated by the same people that lied us into war with Iraq. This is why i am skeptical of all the reasons to justify their continuation of this conflict, but now it is different because the adversary in this case is a nuclear armed super power. This is why I completely opposed to this super risky war.

The people calling the shots know quite well that they can't never let a good crisis go to waste. All signs point a new Afghanistan but in this case, it is a proxy war. They will exploit the Ukrainian people by having them fight till the last Ukrainian. And if the war ends without a nuclear holocaust, Ukraine will be left dry as husk and its people left to suffer in silence. (See Afghanistan) Like any other war in the last 3 decades, there will be no "aid package" too large help the people of Ukraine., while cries about inflation, rate hikes and all the economic woes of citizens of western nations are ignored.

Putin didn't start this war unprovoked. For what reason? Of this i am not sure, but i am inclined to believe that is due to NATO encroachment. There is ample documentation to support this theory. Is Putin a victim? Absolutely not, he knows damn well what is doing, and he is also aware of not letting a good crisis go to waste. Regardless of the outcome of this war he already lost the moral ground. He is VERY wrong in his actions and his image has been damaged beyond repair.



Let him keep the zones that he already captured and engage in peace negotiations. All evidence seems to point out that he invaded Ukraine because provocative actions by NATO when it comes to Ukraine. After all, the country is of key strategic importance as a buffer state to ward against NATO.

If NATO encroachment is not the reason while he invaded, then we can call his bluff by declaring that Ukraine will never be part of nato. (I very much doubt that there ever was inclination to declare Ukraine neutral, as this doesn't help maintain forever wars) If he continues to attack then he will lose political capital at home and abroad with countries that still support Russia, because he would have then shown that he is just being an imperialist.

I got to ask you a frank question Sugetsu. How exactly do you propose that the war be discontinued or to let Putin keep the zones he has already captured...if the Ukrainians have their own agency to want to keep fighting? What if they don't agree that their country should be partitioned for the sake of not provoking Putin? To have millions of their people put under the thrall of a man you acknowledge to be an incompetent tyrant?

You can't just say "stop sending aid", cause a huge array of nations see it in their immediate interest to send aid, especially former states that were in the Soviet Union/Warsaw pact. And Ukraine has already received enough military aid (and looted kit from the Russians...) that a few nations stopping aid or demanding the Ukrainians stop...isn't likely to make them stop their currently successful attempts to liberate their territory in the short to medium term.

So risking nuclear war by allowing Ukraine to continue to fight is unacceptable, and there's a strong possibility Ukraine won't immediately stop fighting even if the west trys to "deescalate" by pulling direct military aid. So what should the west do? Compel Ukraine to stop fighting with military force? Or hope that if cut off from aid from long enough, Putin will be able to eventually drown them in waves of these new cannon fodder conscripts*?


*Fight to the last Ukraine has become really weird now that Putin has ordered mass press-ganged conscription of Russians to be used as cannon fodder, while Ukraine has so many people volunteering for their army that Zelensky canceled conscription for fall.

[Sugetsu]

I find it funny to read all the strong responses to my comments, it is as if you are all incapable of critical thought. You have fallen into the typical US vs THEM mentality, which is depressing, now I have become a pro-Russian bot lol... You can ignore my response below entirely but I still don't want you to take one thing for granted and that is the low probability of nuclear war. Even if the chances of nukes going off have only increased by 1% that is still way to high, because all it takes for civilization to end is just one nuke going off. There are no do overs or learning from history that can help us if just one nuclear weapon explodes. Therefore, diplomacy is the only way out of this dangerous slippery slope and nothing else.

Originally Posted by GDB

So you're absolutely positive he was provoked, but you don't know how. And we're the ones eating up propaganda?

NATO encroachment is just the global reason he gave. Ironically, if he had done nothing NATO was on its way to irrelevance, meaning there wasn't actually any encroachment. He literally gave NATO new life.

This is one many articles I could find about this subject with a simple google search: ukraine-war-follows-decades-of-warnings-that-nato-expansion-into-eastern-europe-could-provoke-russia

From the Article:

Among others, Biden’s CIA director, William J. Burns, has been warning about the provocative effect of NATO expansion on Russia since 1995. That’s when Burns, then a political officer in the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, reported to Washington that “hostility to early NATO expansion is almost universally felt across the domestic political spectrum here.”

In June 1997, 50 prominent foreign policy experts signed an open letter to Clinton, saying, “We believe that the current U.S. led effort to expand NATO … is a policy error of historic proportions” that would “unsettle European stability.”

In 2008, Burns, then the American ambassador to Moscow, wrote to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice: “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin). In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”

It might be not be definite proof that this is the reason why the invasion happened but it can't be disproven either. As I said before, the only way to call this bluff is to declare Ukraine a neutral nation and refuse its affiliation with NATO.

Originally Posted by Nachtwandler

I won't try to guess here if you are a Putin agent, a coward or just dumb. I'll just repeat:

1. We already gave up some territories in 2014. Have it resolved the conflict? No. It got postponed but only escalated the matter. "Give a wolf one ship and he'll crave for the whole herd".
2. You're literarly ask the world to repeat the same mistake they already done with Hitler. Giving up more territories will just convince him he can get more later with no repercussions. It will not de-escalate the conflict anyway. Stop putting nukes as an argument.

3. Ukraine have not signed for being a martyr here. You literarly ask us to give up our territories and forgive all of the warcrimes done just do some other countries could get their gas/wheat, etc. This is a victim-bkaming as its finest. You can blame NATO or US as much as you want here but it has nothing Todo with Ukraine suffering for their presumed mistakes. Stop pointing the fingers.

4. So to are saying if Russia attacked your home country for no reason you'll gladly give up 20% of the territory just not to escalate? Just because they are presumed superpower.

I am sorry for the situation you find yourself in, truly am. But your country is no position to win this war, you are far too technologically outmatched. Furthermore, any continuation of this conflict will only make matters worse for your economy, your population, your culture & your sovereignty, and you will still lose territory regardless. Ukraine is just a proxy battleground for two nuclear armed powers to duke it out (US & Russia), and it is all at the expense of the Ukrainian population. The industrial military complex gets to make record profits in a protracted war and Putin gets to protect/expand his political interests. Your only way out is through diplomatic means.

Regarding your Points 1 & 2 From the article above:

There are different outcomes to the current crisis depending on whether you see its cause as Russian imperialism or NATO expansionism.

If you think the war in Ukraine is the work of a determined imperialist, any actions short of defeating the Russians will look like 1938 Munich-style appeasement and Joe Biden becomes the reviled Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister who acceded to Hitler’s demands for territory in Czechoslovakia only to find himself deceived as the Nazis steadily marched to war.

If, however, you believe that Russia has legitimate concerns about NATO expansion, then the door is open to discussion, negotiation, compromise and concessions.

I obviously fall in the later category.

On points 3 & 4:

The world has drastically changed after US and Russia acquired nuclear weapons and the ability to target any country in the world remotely. This situation creates a tense stale mate that lends itself to abuse of power by both countries: Russia justified invading Afghanistan, Georgia, Ukraine, Chechnya claiming geopolitical/national interests, while the US meddled in the affairs of Latin America, the middle east, Europe and Asia in the pretext of defending freedom and democracy abroad. In both cases the countries that were invaded were left worse for wear but Russia and the US got much of what they wanted. Both nations have committed heinous war crimes throughout history but no one has in either side has ever been prosecuted. It is a horrible state of affairs but no one dares to step up and challenge them because both countries literally posses the ability to end civilization as we know it.

Originally Posted by Roger Rambo

I got to ask you a frank question Sugetsu. How exactly do you propose that the war be discontinued or to let Putin keep the zones he has already captured...if the Ukrainians have their own agency to want to keep fighting? What if they don't agree that their country should be partitioned for the sake of not provoking Putin? To have millions of their people put under the thrall of a man you acknowledge to be an incompetent tyrant?

There is no positive outcome that can be had if the war continues to rage on. The elites will continue to do just fine, regardless of the side that they are in but the world at large will suffer at an ever increasing rate. The only permanent fix is to denuclearize these nations and change their corrupt political systems from within. As you might have guessed it, both of these solutions are utterly impossible at the moment. The only pragmatic approach is a diplomatic solution.

My final warning against this war (even though it will most likely be dismissed outright) is this: The current political and economical systems throughout the world directly encourage sociopathic behavior, this is why most of the people rich and powerful throughout all civilized nations are sociopaths. One of the hall mark traits of sociopathy is extreme self-centeredness at the expense of others. Don't think for a second that the sociopaths in charge are incapable of pushing the red button even when their lively hoods are in danger. Nothing is stopping Putin from ordering a nuclear strike by employing hypersonic missiles and then run to the safety of a nuclear bunker. You can rest assured that all the elites already have access to nuclear shelters if push comes to shove.

[Roger Rambo]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

I am sorry for the situation you find yourself in, truly am. But your country is no position to win this war, you are far too technologically outmatched.

Russia technologically outmatches Ukraine so much that they weren't able to keep Ukraine from pulling off a mechanized offensive right on their border? Their technology superiority is so great that Ukraine still has an airforce?

Spoiler for Not including Lyman:

I should also note Sugetsu. US technological superiority didn't really amount to much against the Taliban in the long run due to our fuckups in how we setup the the Afghan government. And it's probably worth remembering Ukraine isn't Afghanistan. Ukraine was one of *the* military industrial hubs of the Soviet Union. In the late cold war, this was where their most advanced tanks were built. It's where they built their *aircraft carriers*. The idea Ukraine is some totally primitive backwater compared to Russia that had no potential power for modern conventional warfare is a bit of a meme that even the Russians bought into too deeply.

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

There is no positive outcome that can be had if the war continues to rage on. The elites will continue to do just fine, regardless of the side that they are in but the world at large will suffer at an ever increasing rate. The only permanent fix is to denuclearize these nations and change their corrupt political systems from within. As you might have guessed it, both of these solutions are utterly impossible at the moment. The only pragmatic approach is a diplomatic solution.

My final warning against this war (even though it will most likely be dismissed outright) is this: The current political and economical systems throughout the world directly encourage sociopathic behavior, this is why most of the people rich and powerful throughout all civilized nations are sociopaths. One of the hall mark traits of sociopathy is extreme self-centeredness at the expense of others. Don't think for a second that the sociopaths in charge are incapable of pushing the red button even when their lively hoods are in danger. Nothing is stopping Putin from ordering a nuclear strike by employing hypersonic missiles and then run to the safety of a nuclear bunker. You can rest assured that all the elites already have access to nuclear shelters if push comes to shove.

Okay. But I didn't ask your opinion about the general issues of various nations elites or corrupt political systems or the question of reforming those political systems as a long term solution. I asked how you propose to get Ukraine to stop fighting over the annexed Ukrainian territory to avoid a nuclear war, if they don't want to stop fighting? Cause you're skirting around the issue that NATO would at this point need to take some pretty extreme measures to get the Ukrainians to stop fighting at this point.

Also. I think nuclear proliferation is going to be pretty much dead if you set the standard that nuclear powers can annex whatever territory they like. Even territory they have no hope of taking or holding conventionally, because acquiescing to the desires of a nuclear power to avoid nuclear war trumps all other concerns. If nukes are the only thing that matter as far as national security, everyone will want to have nukes.