Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Specialka]

Uhu and how does that change what I said? Why should either of them agree, also why should either of them just shut up about the West's involvement in this charade?

Because at one point, one side or both will want the war to stop. I mean why the WW1 ended ? Neither both side was beaten into submission like it was for WW2.

[Mayhem]

Because at one point, one side or both will want the war to stop.

One side already wants the war to stop, that side also doesn't want to lose territory to the invaders, so why would they stop demanding Russia to leave if Russia can't/won't keep up the fight? Makes no sense. Same from Russia's POV if Ukraine isn't able to keep up because the West wants to stop the support for Ukraine why would Russia accept only taking parts if they can have all of it?

I mean why the WW1 ended ? Neither both side was beaten into submission like it was for WW2.

Pretty sure you can google what happened and why WW1 ended, you don't have to guess.

[Specialka]

One side already wants the war to stop, that side also doesn't want to lose territory to the invaders, so why would they stop demanding Russia to leave if Russia can't/won't keep up the fight? Makes no sense. Same from Russia's POV if Ukraine isn't able to keep up because the West wants to stop the support for Ukraine why would Russia accept only taking parts if they can have all of it?



Pretty sure you can google what happened and why WW1 ended, you don't have to guess.

I am not guessing, I know why WW1 ended, I was asking if you knew because it does not seem so. You do not need to beat your opponent into submission for a war to end.

[Elder Millennial]

Yes, and they can do that work and once they get there, they can send an apply to EU.

You do understand you literally cannot join the EU without having done the work? Like there's a fucking manual for it.

That's why Hungary is a such a sore spot. They did the work. Then they did a 180 and went the opposite way. Look, you can do the xenophobic and Vatnik talking points as much as you want, doesn't change the fact the Ukraine will be joining the EU.

[Specialka]

You do understand you literally cannot join the EU without having done the work? Like there's a fucking manual for it.

That's why Hungary is a such a sore spot. They did the work. Then they did a 180 and went the opposite way. Look, you can do the xenophobic and Vatnik talking points as much as you want, doesn't change the fact the Ukraine will be joining the EU.

When they will be ready to do so, which they currently are not and won't be for quite a while depending how the post war period will be handled.

[Elder Millennial]

When they will be ready to do so, which they currently are not and won't be for quite a while depending how the post war period will be handled.

And you are basing that expert opinion on what?

[diller]

You do understand you literally cannot join the EU without having done the work? Like there's a fucking manual for it.

That's why Hungary is a such a sore spot. They did the work. Then they did a 180 and went the opposite way. Look, you can do the xenophobic and Vatnik talking points as much as you want, doesn't change the fact the Ukraine will be joining the EU.

They will join eventually.

However the EU needs a clause so they can expel members that work against the union (like Hungary), as it is now there is really nothing that can be done aside from withholding some funds.

[Specialka]

And you are basing that expert opinion on what?

Because they were one of the most corrupted country before the war. Very low chances that changed with the ongoing war.

And I should check what is expected of EU applicants but also quite a good chance they do not get to pass in several other domains.

[Xarkan]

However the EU needs a clause so they can expel members that work against the union (like Hungary), as it is now there is really nothing that can be done aside from withholding some funds.

We cant even stick to punishing those countries. Money withheld are just paid out without anything changing

[diller]

We cant even stick to punishing those countries. Money withheld are just paid out without anything changing

Yes, because there are no rules for it so there isn't much that can be done, and the rules cannot be changed because Hungary would oppose, the best that can be done is make rules specifically for new members.

[Iphie]

Meanwhile Ukraine reports 1740 russians removed from play as well as 31 tanks.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/05/13/7455486/

[Mayhem]

I am not guessing, I know why WW1 ended, I was asking if you knew because it does not seem so. You do not need to beat your opponent into submission for a war to end.

No one argued that. Are you able to answer my questions or are you just happy with your knowledge that wars don't always end when one side is beaten into submission?

[Gaidax]

Interesting, if we'd take your words from the Israel vs Palestine thread, from Russia's perspective Ukraine should easily pose an existential threat to Russia if it was allowed to remain.

This simple reality makes no sense for any of the parties involved.

If the West was giving up on Ukraine, why would that also mean Russia would stop moving forward? If Russia can't advance any further why would Ukraine accept a humiliating agreement proposed by the West?

The only hit on word "existential" for me in said thread was in regards to mandatory conscription, so you practically plug in your headcanon and then somehow reverse it too on top of it.

Here's how it works.

Russia is the one who attacked Ukraine, not the other way around.
For Ukraine, Russia is an obvious existential threat. Not the other way around.

Now with that bit out of the way.


I explained my logic clearly. For all parties involved there are merits in temporary or even semi-temporary settlement.

For Russia - it's an out and with results on the ground they can sell at home.
For the West - it's a way to keep Ukraine afloat and Russia at bay, while not spending any more resources that are better reserved for the upcoming Taiwan and troubles at home.
For Ukraine - the few years of reprieve can help rebuild their strength, especially human personnel.

Neither of 3 sides may be perfectly happy about it, Ukraine least of all, but don't tell me it doesn't make any sense, given the situation. And the additional point is while Ukraine may like it least of all, it needs it most of all.

[NED funded]

One side already wants the war to stop, that side also doesn't want to lose territory to the invaders, so why would they stop demanding Russia to leave if Russia can't/won't keep up the fight? Makes no sense. Same from Russia's POV if Ukraine isn't able to keep up because the West wants to stop the support for Ukraine why would Russia accept only taking parts if they can have all of it?



Pretty sure you can google what happened and why WW1 ended, you don't have to guess.

Isnt it the opposite? Ukraine is the side that has to fight to make Russia's new holdings untenable. If it was for Russia they could settle this and peace out with the new territories they acquired and Putin would get this with victory. Right now Ukraine has to fight in order to get a better deal, crack Russia and make the war unsustainable for them b4 it becomes unsustainable for Ukraine. Its a war of attrition.

- - - Updated - - -

A lot of the people arguing that Ukraine should seek a ceasefire are weird, Ukraine should hold this out for as long as they can, make Russia suffer and get the better deal out of whatever settlement agreement this war ends on. The more Ukraine can inflict damage on Russia the better the end deal is. Their drone attacks on refineries are a good start, they should keep at it.

- - - Updated - - -

The only hit on word "existential" for me in said thread was in regards to mandatory conscription, so you practically plug in your headcanon and then somehow reverse it too on top of it.

Here's how it works.

Russia is the one who attacked Ukraine, not the other way around.
For Ukraine, Russia is an obvious existential threat. Not the other way around.

Now with that bit out of the way.


I explained my logic clearly. For all parties involved there are merits in temporary or even semi-temporary settlement.

For Russia - it's an out and with results on the ground they can sell at home.
For the West - it's a way to keep Ukraine afloat and Russia at bay, while not spending any more resources that are better reserved for the upcoming Taiwan and troubles at home.
For Ukraine - the few years of reprieve can help rebuild their strength, especially human personnel.

Neither of 3 sides may be perfectly happy about it, Ukraine least of all, but don't tell me it doesn't make any sense, given the situation. And the additional point is while Ukraine may like it least of all, it needs it most of all.

It doesn't make sense bc its not considering both sides of the situation. Russia is a much larger country with better weapons manufacturing capacity than Ukraine. Giving Russia time to recover only makes the gap between Russia and Ukraine larger. Right now Ukraine is able to hold its ground due to years of corruption and incompetence in the Russian military, if you give Russia time they will be able to sort these kinks out. They are sorting them now at great cost which is what you want.

[Elder Millennial]

Because they were one of the most corrupted country before the war. Very low chances that changed with the ongoing war.

And I should check what is expected of EU applicants but also quite a good chance they do not get to pass in several other domains.

Again, nobody said they don't have to do what everyone else has to do to join.

I remind you, that you said "You are against them joining because they are a corrupt country." That's a Vatnik talking point. As in assuming that they made no reforms, will make no reforms, are unable to change etc. You are essentially saying they belong in the "Ruski mir" and that they cannot escape the cultural legacy of the USSR. That's horsehit.

[Mayhem]

The only hit on word "existential" for me in said thread was in regards to mandatory conscription, so you practically plug in your headcanon and then somehow reverse it too on top of it.

Here's how it works.

Russia is the one who attacked Ukraine, not the other way around.
For Ukraine, Russia is an obvious existential threat. Not the other way around.

Now with that bit out of the way.

Stay inconsistent.

I explained my logic clearly. For all parties involved there are merits in temporary or even semi-temporary settlement.

For Russia - it's an out and with results on the ground they can sell at home.

Are we really pretending Russia has to show something instead of simply lying? Putin's opponents randomly die, but he has to sell something at home because why?

For the West - it's a way to keep Ukraine afloat and Russia at bay, while not spending any more resources that are better reserved for the upcoming Taiwan and troubles at home.

How does it keep Russia at bay? Russia could just take the time, restock and attack again as it obviously has absofuckinglutely no consequences to invade Ukraine.

For Ukraine - the few years of reprieve can help rebuild their strength, especially human personnel.

You seriously believe Russia would wait years to attack again? Why?

Neither of 3 sides may be perfectly happy about it, Ukraine least of all, but don't tell me it doesn't make any sense, given the situation. And the additional point is while Ukraine may like it least of all, it needs it most of all.

It makes zero sense unless you plan to help Russia, then it makes all the sense.

[Elder Millennial]

I explained my logic clearly. For all parties involved there are merits in temporary or even semi-temporary settlement.

For Russia - it's an out and with results on the ground they can sell at home.
For the West - it's a way to keep Ukraine afloat and Russia at bay, while not spending any more resources that are better reserved for the upcoming Taiwan and troubles at home.
For Ukraine - the few years of reprieve can help rebuild their strength, especially human personnel.

Neither of 3 sides may be perfectly happy about it, Ukraine least of all, but don't tell me it doesn't make any sense, given the situation. And the additional point is while Ukraine may like it least of all, it needs it most of all.

Complete drivel. Ukraine has absolutely nothing to gain from a temporary break or a frozen conflict. A frozen conflict for Ukraine means no NATO or EU membership, no security guarantees and essentially guarantees that the war will resume again once it suits the Russians.

The West also has nothing to gain from a ceasefire. The war in Ukraine has been the trigger for re-armament that has been endlessly postponed for decades and decades despite the Russian AND Chinese threats. It also allowed western powers to clear inventory of old shit, get new stuff, see what works and doesn't work, and to get ammunition production online again. It has become clear that we don't just need gear and stockpiles, but the capacity to quickly make enough ammo to fight a modern war. The demand in the Ukraine war allows ammunition manufacturers to scale up production.

We also have not a single fucking thing to gain politically. It would weaken alliances, suggest we aren't willing to be "in it until you win it" and that if the cost is high enough we are willing to accept a stalemate. It would tell China that it can in fact take Taiwan and if the cost is too high for us, we will negotiate over it.

Every single one of your takes on this, is essentially EXACTLY what the Kremlin and Beijing want.

[Gaidax]

It doesn't make sense bc its not considering both sides of the situation. Russia is a much larger country with better weapons manufacturing capacity than Ukraine. Giving Russia time to recover only makes the gap between Russia and Ukraine larger. Right now Ukraine is able to hold its ground due to years of corruption and incompetence in the Russian military, if you give Russia time they will be able to sort these kinks out. They are sorting them now at great cost which is what you want.

Ukraine's no.1 problem right now is people.

All you say is valid, but in this race to the bottom Ukraine is at a disadvantage in the most important thing of all - personnel and they will need to stop that bleeding before they bleed out. As I said, Ukraine will like it the least, but it probably needs it the most at the moment.

That said, it's not even going to be Ukraine's decision - the West will cut a deal with Russia on that one and Ukraine will have little choice but to comply once that happens. Tag this post and revert to me in lets say 2 years from now, if that.

- - - Updated - - -

Stay inconsistent.

I am consistent. You making claims that do not check out is not a me problem.

[Specialka]

Again, nobody said they don't have to do what everyone else has to do to join.

I remind you, that you said "You are against them joining because they are a corrupt country." That's a Vatnik talking point. As in assuming that they made no reforms, will make no reforms, are unable to change etc. You are essentially saying they belong in the "Ruski mir" and that they cannot escape the cultural legacy of the USSR. That's horsehit.

What I am saying than fighting corruption is very difficult and I do not believe they can make it through that fight.

[DarkTZeratul]

That said, it's not even going to be Ukraine's decision - the West will cut a deal with Russia on that one and Ukraine will have little choice but to comply once that happens. Tag this post and revert to me in lets say 2 years from now, if that.

You're falling back on the bullshit that this is a proxy war between Russia and the west with more Ukraine caught in the middle. It's not, despite Russia's best efforts to portray it as such.