Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Canpinter]

Why doesn't Ukraine honestly just directly siege Moscow at this point? With all the small incursions into Russia and attacks on Crimea despite Russia's red line warnings, it's becoming increasingly apparent they're not going to use nukes.

Because army's can't teleport?

[Kallisto]

That's not how any of this works. Stop trying to make this seem like a video game that's been emulated because it isn't; Ukraine is attempting to regain their territory not invade russia's.

You're replying to a person who a page earlier was crying because Moscow was attacked.

Before that he cried that Ukraine was defending itself.

Before that cried Russia was attacking.

Before that crying that Zelensky said Putin might die soon.

[YUPPIE]

I guess his 4d chess point is that he wants Ukraine to invade Russia so he and other Russia supporters retroactively get the moral justification and high ground for invading Ukraine in the first place.

Russia started it though. No one will believe their bullshit moral high ground excuse.

[Vampiregenesis]

The only winner in this war is the US, they took out their adversary without even lifting a finger, Ukraine and Russia will get annihilated, however Ukraine much more since Russia is self reliant and has nukes. If the west doesn't step up their help and make Ukraine overpowered, I can't see them pulling a win but I don't think that's what the west want because an easy Ukraine victory might make it harder for the west to maintain control, they want Ukraine to bleed just as much as Russia. Also the longer the war goes by, the more damage they cause to Russia.

so what is the wisest move for Ukrainians to do?

They fight a war where they don't have a definite advantage and it can go either way and they are stuck to fight there without that advantage for a long time, they are also completely dependent on the west. Basically Ukraine is stuck into a loop, it was a foolish idea to try to join NATO and they didn't handle the situation on donbas properly, they underestimated the resolve of the people there. If I was an Ukrainian, I would hate the west just as much as Putin, this hypocrisy can't be tolerated. But the west has always been the same, they initially supported the soviet union on ww2 then dismantled it, then they did the same to sadam, in Ukraine's case the situation is even worse for the beneficial party here.

If Ukrainians were anglosaxons or was the UK that was attacked be certain that the F-16 would be given en masse from the start, no matter the nuke threats. The west see in Ukraine a convenient tool, not a part of itself.

[Forogil]

They fight a war where they don't have a definite advantage and it can go either way and they are stuck to fight there without that advantage, they are also completely dependent on the west. Basically Ukraine is stuck into a loop, it was a foolish idea to try to join NATO and they didn't handle the situation on donbas properly, they underestimated the resolve of the people there. If I was an Ukrainian, I would hate the west just as much as Putin, this hypocrisy can't be tolerated. But the west has always been the same, they initially supported the soviet union on ww2 then dismantled it, then they did the same to sadam, in Ukraine's case the situation is even worse for the beneficial party here.

Just to be clear:
Ukraine isn't foolish to want to join NATO, and the war didn't start because of such a desire. Ukraine know that joining NATO will take be difficult and take time, but it's the best way to get proper guarantees against further agression by Russia. The only problem is that Ukraine didn't jump on the chance as quickly as the baltic states.

And at the start of WWII the west did not support the Soviet Union, since it (=the Soviet Union) was in sort of coalition with Nazi Germany.

And the west supported Saddam during the Iraq-Iran war since he was fighting the pariah state Iran, that is currently supplying military equipment to Russia. (However, most of Saddam's military came from Soviet-Russia; for helicopters they now seem to be switching to western ones, since it's getting hard to find spare parts for Soviet-style helicopters due to the war in Ukraine. That Russia is no longer seen as a dependent provider of military equipment is likely damaging Russia's reputation globally.)

[Vampiregenesis]

Just to be clear:
Ukraine isn't foolish to want to join NATO, and the war didn't start because of such a desire. Ukraine know that joining NATO will take be difficult and take time, but it's the best way to get proper guarantees against further agression by Russia. The only problem is that Ukraine didn't jump on the chance as quickly as the baltic states.

And at the start of WWII the west did not support the Soviet Union, since it was in sort of coalition with Nazi Germany.

And the west supported Saddam during the Iraq-Iran war since he was fighting the pariah state Iran, that is currently supplying military equipment to Russia. (However, most of Saddam's military came from Soviet-Russia; for helicopters they now seem to be switching to western ones, since it's getting hard to find spare parts for Soviet-style helicopters due to the war in Ukraine. That Russia is no longer seen as a dependent provider of military equipment is likely damaging Russia's reputation globally.)

I'm pretty sure the US contributed significantly in the Soviet Union win against nazi Germany, they supported Stalin, I think even the soviets themselves admitted that?

What's the point of joining an organization when that organization doesn't even want you in because it will drag them into a war they don't like? Russia didn't seem willing to attack Ukraine, if the later one dropped all Nato aspirations and respected the treaties they signed for donbas. I mean Putin is the bad guy here, however they could easily avoid this war if they wanted. The Russians made it clear that they will attack if those two conditions were not met, yet the Ukrainians pushed for it.

If the US or UK interests are not threatened, Nato will never go to war.

[Gorsameth]

I'm pretty sure the US contributed significantly in the Soviet Union win against nazi Germany, they supported Stalin, I think even the soviets themselves admitted that?

What's the point of joining an organization when that organization doesn't even want you in because it will drag them into a war they don't like? Russia didn't seem willing to attack Ukraine, if the later one dropped all Nato aspirations and respected the treaties they signed for donbas. I mean Putin is the bad guy here, however they could easily avoid this war if they wanted. The Russians made it clear that they will attack if those two conditions were not met, yet the Ukrainians pushed for it.

If the US or UK interests are not threatened, Nato will never go to war.

Russia didn't seem willing to attack? Ehm Crimea called, they would like their freedom back.

The only way to avoid a war with Russia when you border Russia is to live under the aegis of a major power (US/NATO or China) or as a vassal state of Russia.

Any attempt at all to move out of the influence of Russia, even if its not to NATO but just actual independence, is unacceptable to Putin's Russia.

Following the Maidan revolution there was no way that Ukraine was ever joining NATO this century, but they committed the cardinal sin of rejecting Russian puppet rule. From that moment on a Russian invasion was basically inevitable.

[Forogil]

I'm pretty sure the US contributed significantly in the Soviet Union win against nazi Germany, they supported Stalin, I think even the soviets themselves admitted that?

Yes, after Germany backstabbed their ally Soviet in 1941 - but obviously the "west" didn't contribute to Soviet-Russia at the first two years of WWII when Soviet-Russia was in sort of coalition with Nazi-Germany.

Russian's sort of try to gloss over that fact; while Poland, Finland, and the baltic states remember that Soviet-Russia attacked them during WWII.

What's the point of joining an organization when that organization doesn't even want you in because it will drag them into a war? Russia didn't seem willing to attack Ukraine, if the later one dropped all Nato aspirations and respected the treaties they signed for donbas.

BULLSHIT! And Russia certainly didn't respect treaties with Ukraine - including the one where the guaranteed Ukraine's security (for Ukraine to give up its nukes).

Putin had a lot more conditions than NATO and Donbas, including the idea that major power should have sphere's of influence - the same idea of dividing Europe as seen in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact between Soviet-Russia and Nazi-Germany.

[Vampiregenesis]

Russia didn't seem willing to attack? Ehm Crimea called, they would like their freedom back.

The only way to avoid a war with Russia when you border Russia is to live under the aegis of a major power (US/NATO or China) or as a vassal state of Russia.

Any attempt at all to move out of the influence of Russia, even if its not to NATO but just actual independence, is unacceptable to Putin's Russia.

Following the Maidan revolution there was no way that Ukraine was ever joining NATO this century, but they committed the cardinal sin of rejecting Russian puppet rule. From that moment on a Russian invasion was basically inevitable.

in that case, why didn't Russia start an all out invasion on 2014 or a bit later? even themselves admitted that their mistake was that they didn't start this invasion earlier which means they still had doubts about the path Ukraine will take. Ukraine leaving Russia's influence was not the reason for this invasion because Ukraine was already on that path during Poroshenko. Hell, Russia waited even when it was clear that Ukraine is heavily arming itself and builds fortifications.

[Jastall]

I'm pretty sure the US contributed significantly in the Soviet Union win against nazi Germany, they supported Stalin, I think even the soviets themselves admitted that?

What's the point of joining an organization when that organization doesn't even want you in because it will drag them into a war they don't like? Russia didn't seem willing to attack Ukraine, if the later one dropped all Nato aspirations and respected the treaties they signed for donbas. I mean Putin is the bad guy here, however they could easily avoid this war if they wanted. The Russians made it clear that they will attack if those two conditions were not met, yet the Ukrainians pushed for it.

If the US or UK interests are not threatened, Nato will never go to war.

The US sent lend-lease after Barbarossa when the Nazis broke their pact with the USSR and invaded it. Beforehand the Soviets were quite happy to let them run roughshod over Europe and used the situation to stage a few invasions of their own while everyone else was distracted.


The Crimean annexation of 2014 would have been considered an attack on any country in most scenarios. If German troops just walked into Kaliningrad and said it was theirs now, Russia would rightfully consider it an act of war. If Britain waltzed into Hong Kong and said it used to be theirs and thus is now theirs again, China would rightfully go ballistic. If Russia walked into Alaska and said it should be theirs, America would respond in full force. If Italy decided Corsica would look nice painted green instead of blue, France would have a few choice words on the matter. So on and so forth.

Obviously those are purely fictional scenarios due to many factors, nukes only one among them. But it's basically what happened in Ukraine where a significant part of their territory was seized by Russia- in clear violation of preceding treaties and any principle regarding international law you can think of. The current invasion is just the latest step of a conflict that began in 2014. And I don't think any independent nation should have accepted its sovereignty being violated as brazenly as Russia violated Ukraine's. The difference is 1) they didn't have the tools and support to retaliate in 2014 and 2) Russia forced an escalation up to 11 in 2022.

Also, had Ukraine actually joined NATO (which would have been close to impossible after 2014, and still is, this entire argument is a smokescreen), Russia would most definitely never have touched them, same reason they don't even think of touching Poland or the Baltics, or intercept Western weapon shipments. The risk of dire escalation if they do so is far, far too great.

[Forogil]

in that case, why didn't Russia start an all out invasion on 2014 or a bit later?

Did they have an army ready to invade at that time?

Even today Russia is unwilling to actually mobilise for their invasion of Ukraine, that they still don't seem to be able to call a war.

even themselves admitted that their mistake was that they didn't start this invasion earlier which means they still had doubts about the path Ukraine will take. Ukraine leaving Russia's influence was not the reason for this invasion because Ukraine was already on that path during Poroshenko. Hell, Russia waited even when it was clear that Ukraine is heavily arming itself and builds fortifications.

Ukraine leaving Russia's sphere of influence was the reason for the invasion, and is the reason for continuing it. Because if Ukraine leaves that sphere of influence it ceases to exist and then Russia cannot even convince itself that it is a great power.

As for Russia making suboptimal choices - yes, that has happened.

[Gabriel]

I'm pretty sure the US contributed significantly in the Soviet Union win against nazi Germany, they supported Stalin, I think even the soviets themselves admitted that?

What's the point of joining an organization when that organization doesn't even want you in because it will drag them into a war they don't like? Russia didn't seem willing to attack Ukraine, if the later one dropped all Nato aspirations and respected the treaties they signed for donbas. I mean Putin is the bad guy here, however they could easily avoid this war if they wanted. The Russians made it clear that they will attack if those two conditions were not met, yet the Ukrainians pushed for it.

If the US or UK interests are not threatened, Nato will never go to war.

A rookie mistake. Never believe anything the Russian government says.

They wanted to invade and annex Ukraine since at least 2014.

[Vampiregenesis]

The US sent lend-lease after Barbarossa when the Nazis broke their pact with the USSR and invaded it. Beforehand the Soviets were quite happy to let them run roughshod over Europe and used the situation to stage a few invasions of their own while everyone else was distracted.


The Crimean annexation of 2014 would have been considered an attack on any country in most scenarios. If German troops just walked into Kaliningrad and said it was theirs now, Russia would rightfully consider it an act of war. If Britain waltzed into Hong Kong and said it used to be theirs and thus is now theirs again, China would rightfully go ballistic. If Russia walked into Alaska and said it should be theirs, America would respond in full force. If Italy decided Corsica would look nice painted green instead of blue, France would have a few choice words on the matter. So on and so forth.

Obviously those are purely fictional scenarios due to many factors, nukes only one among them. But it's basically what happened in Ukraine where a significant part of their territory was seized by Russia- in clear violation of preceding treaties and any principle regarding international law you can think of. The current invasion is just the latest step of a conflict that began in 2014. And I don't think any independent nation should have accepted its sovereignty being violated as brazenly as Russia violated Ukraine's. The difference is 1) they didn't have the tools and support to retaliate in 2014 and 2) Russia forced an escalation up to 11 in 2022.

Also, had Ukraine actually joined NATO (which would have been close to impossible after 2014, and still is, this entire argument is a smokescreen), Russia would most definitely never have touched them, same reason they don't even think of touching Poland or the Baltics, or intercept Western weapon shipments. The risk of dire escalation if they do so is far, far too great.

Yes, the annexation of Crimea was illegal and act of war, (although the Soviets gave it to Ukraine, not sure what happened there), however does it matter? did that justify going into a catastrophic war that you can't win for sure? The Russians didn't seem to plan to push their luck further than this.

Ukrainians should have remained cautious and simply not provoke further until the timing is better for them to act, I mean it was the only thing they could do just like the Finnish did, Lol... the Finnish were at the same situation as Ukraine and they joined Nato instantly because Russians were distracted with Ukraine. I think everyone can see the hypocrisy here.

I wonder if Ukraine surrendered the occupied lands to Russia and exited the war, would NATO accept it instantly just like it did with Finland?

I mean the army of Ukraine is strong and they have showed tremendous self sacrifice and faith to the west, if they can accept countries like sweden and finland, why they refuse Ukraine?

Because NATO is the US personal army.

[Gabriel]

in that case, why didn't Russia start an all out invasion on 2014 or a bit later? even themselves admitted that their mistake was that they didn't start this invasion earlier which means they still had doubts about the path Ukraine will take. Ukraine leaving Russia's influence was not the reason for this invasion because Ukraine was already on that path during Poroshenko. Hell, Russia waited even when it was clear that Ukraine is heavily arming itself and builds fortifications.

Because the Russian military is a piece of shit and they couldn't just start an all out invasion at the drop of a hat. It took them years to move the necessary equipment and men to the Ukrainian border before they dared to pull the trigger.

[Saradain]

Yes, the annexation of Crimea was illegal and act of war, (although the Soviets gave it to Ukraine, not sure what happened there), however does it matter? did that justify going into a catastrophic war that you can't win for sure? The Russians didn't seem to plan to push their luck further than this.

Ukrainians should have remained cautious and simply not provoke further until the timing is better for them to act, I mean it was the only thing they could do just like the Finnish did, Lol... the Finnish were at the same situation as Ukraine and they joined Nato instantly because Russians were distracted with Ukraine. I think everyone can see the hypocrisy here.

I wonder if Ukraine surrendered the occupied lands to Russia and exited the war, would NATO accept it instantly just like it did with Finland?

Why Ukraine should cease making sovereign decisions of their country because Russia demands so?

But we've seen that line of posting here before, victim blaming and the whole "Don't make me hit you!" argument.

[Iphie]

If Ukrainians were anglosaxons or was the UK that was attacked be certain that the F-16 would be given en masse from the start, no matter the nuke threats. The west see in Ukraine a convenient tool, not a part of itself.

No shit sherlock that would have triggered Art. 5. (well not for mere anglo-saxons but since those are mostly found in Britain, the US and Canada...)

[Vampiregenesis]

Why Ukraine should cease making sovereign decisions of their country because Russia demands so?

But we've seen that line of posting here before, victim blaming and the whole "Don't make me hit you!" argument.

Because of Logic, so that they don't get themselves trapped into the loop they are now which is unclear how it will end up, god knows how much more destruction this will cause and if Ukraine will end up victorious with all its lands. I believe the next year will be interesting and I personally believe this will escalate into something much bigger.

I mean well, Russia could still invade but we don't know for sure, they could at least try to "pacify" it, Russia has always been an unstable state and time could benefit Ukraine more than Russia.

[Jastall]

Yes, the annexation of Crimea was illegal and act of war, (although the Soviets gave it to Ukraine, not sure what happened there), however does it matter? did that justify going into a catastrophic war that you can't win for sure? The Russians didn't seem to plan to push their luck further than this.

Ukrainians should have remained cautious and simply not provoke further until the timing is better for them to act, I mean it was the only thing they could do just like the Finnish did, Lol... the Finnish were at the same situation as Ukraine and they joined Nato instantly because Russians were distracted with Ukraine. I think everyone can see the hypocrisy here.

I wonder if Ukraine surrendered the occupied lands to Russia and exited the war, would NATO accept it instantly just like it did with Finland?

I mean the army of Ukraine is strong and they have showed tremendous self sacrifice and faith to the west, if they can accept countries like sweden and finland, why they refuse Ukraine?

Because NATO is the US personal army.

The Ukrainians didn't "go" into any war. They had it thrust upon them by a neighbor that desires to expand its influence over its old colonial empire. Ukrainian provocations -assuming they exist because what they did was very tame compared to what most countries would have done after having a piece of territory outright seized- has exactly nothing to do with this next phase of the invasion. Putin didn't suddenly decide to invade because of Ukrainian Nazis or whatever the excuse du jour is. He invaded because he wants influence over countries at his borders, the resources of southeastern Ukraine, and above all uncontested access to the naval base in Sevastopol. Short of either deciding to become a Russian pawn or simply not existing, there's little Ukraine could have done to dissuade him.

NATO would have refused, and still refuses, Ukraine because it's a defensive pact that doesn't allow countries in an active conflict, which the Donbass had been since 2014.

[Vampiregenesis]

The Ukrainians didn't "go" into any war. They had it thrust upon them by a neighbor that desires to expand its influence over its old colonial empire. Ukrainian provocations -assuming they exist because what they did was very tame compared to what most countries would have done after having a piece of territory outright seized- has exactly nothing to do with this next phase of the invasion. Putin didn't suddenly decide to invade because of Ukrainian Nazis or whatever the excuse du jour is. He invaded because he wants influence over countries at his borders, the resources of southeastern Ukraine, and above all uncontested access to the naval base in Sevastopol. Short of either deciding to become a Russian pawn or simply not existing, there's little Ukraine could have done to dissuade him.

NATO would have refused, and still refuses, Ukraine because it's a defensive pact that doesn't allow countries in an active conflict, which the Donbass had been since 2014.

The conflict ended with the treaty of minsk, why didn't Ukraine join nato then?

[Forogil]

Yes, the annexation of Crimea was illegal and act of war, (although the Soviets gave it to Ukraine, not sure what happened there), however does it matter?

Crimea was one of the republics of the Soviet Union at the start (well, after the messy civil war; if you want to view present-day Russian day troops in a favorable light you can read Beevor's book on that civil war).

During WWII it was occupied by Germany, and afterwards became a part of the Russian republic inside the Soviet Union (its independence was lost due to alleged issues with Crimean tatars). Then Crimea was given to Ukraine in 1954, and then it was messy during the fall of the Soviet Union, but it ended up as part of Ukraine - but with a Russian naval base; and was then occupied by Russia.

did that justify going into a catastrophic war that you can't win for sure? The Russians didn't seem to plan to push their luck further than this.

At that time.
As for going to war - it depends, but now that it is clear that Russia's idea is to keep taking piece after piece of Ukraine then it is clearly existential for Ukraine.

Ukrainians should have remained cautious and simply not provoke further until the timing is better for them to act, I mean it was the only thing they could do just like the Finnish did, Lol... the Finnish were at the same situation as Ukraine and they joined Nato instantly because Russians were distracted with Ukraine. I think everyone can see the hypocrisy here.

There is no hypocrisy - but the natural reaction against a bully-nation, Russia.

And Finland was actually later than the other countries that were invaded by Soviet-Russia at the start of WWII (Poland and the baltic states).