Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Slant]

Germany's response to the Russian invasion hasn't been perfect, but they know a thing or two about the power of nationalistic symbolism so it's great to see them nip this in the bud and it sends a pretty strong message about it to the rest of the world too.

The response has been appropriate at the time. Hindsight is 20/20. Expecting a two-time world war starter and loser to jump into a fight with one of the main adversaries of those two world wars because of "feels" is more than just optimistic.

This won't change for many generations, German pragmatism (aka, Realpolitik) is going to rule our decisions. And most of us are quite happy about it. It is ideological bullshit that got us into those two world wars, after all.

[Shrouded]

The response has been appropriate for the time being. Hindsight is 20/20. Expecting a two-time world war starter and loser to jump into a fight with one of the main adversaries of those two world wars because of "feels" is more than just optimistic.

This won't change for many generations, German pragmatism (aka, Realpolitik) is going to rule our decisions. And most of us are quite happy about it. It is ideological bullshit that got us into those two world wars, after all.

Yeah, I agree with all of that, and things have absolutely changed since their initial hesitations. It's weird to think that this madness has gone on for a month - it feels both shorter and much, much longer than that at the same time.

[Breccia]

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov goes on live TV, but this is Russia and probably also at gunpoint, says the Ukrainians are negotiating in bad faith.

Real quote:

Just meeting and having a ‘what you think and what I think’ sort of exchange would simply be counterproductive now.

The main thing now is to stop indulging the Ukrainians, who only want to create the pretense of negotiations, the pretense of a solution. Their ability to imitate the process is well known to us, this time they will not be able to get away with it this way

Translation:

My boss Putin has already broken multiple cease-fires and cannot handle anything other than a victory -- a daunting task with troops that don't want to be there, tanks that don't want to move, and commanders who keep getting shot. Regardless, the Ukrainians keep asking for things like "please stop murdering civilians en masse and just go away" and Putin won't accept either. I'm starting to wonder if he bathes in child's blood at this point.

But my job is to convince people that Ukraine is somehow the bad guy for doing something other than unconditionally surrendering or dying. I know I agreed to this post before mass murdering children was involved, but it's too late to back out now or I'll be found in a pool of food poisoning. Someone please help. I have a family.

[XDurionX]

G7 won't pay for gas in roubles btw. I'd love to see Shalker ignore this.

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2052061/business-economy

[Pann]

It suspected that the peace delegation were poisoned early this month.

https://twitter.com/bellingcat/statu...67529156632580

Obviously this was just a coincidence and they had a dodgy kebab or something.

[Cerilis]

It suspected that the peace delegation were poisoned early this month.

https://twitter.com/bellingcat/statu...67529156632580

Obviously this was just a coincidence and they had a dodgy kebab or something.

According to the thread they only had water and chocolate.

And a fourth delegation member that had the same didnt have any sympthoms.

Hrm...

[snebb]

According to the thread they only had water and chocolate.

And a fourth delegation member that had the same didnt have any sympthoms.

Hrm...

You don't have to consume something to be poisoned, fyi.

[Cerilis]

You don't have to consume something to be poisoned, fyi.

I know, that was what I was suggesting.

[Breccia]

It suspected that the peace delegation were poisoned early this month.

I would like to believe that, if it's proven Russia poisoned members of a legitimate peace talk to end a war Russia started, that would be considered the use of biological weapons on civilians during a war. I'd also like to believe that'd get them kicked out of the UN. The hurdles against that are massive.

A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

The UN could consider changing the rules so that you can't veto a vote to expel yourself. Again, long shot at best, but if the UN allowed members who poisoned peace meetings to end a war they started, in which they're openly committing war crimes...why have a UN?

[Rasulis]

China's Sinopec Bows Out Of Russian Petchem, Gas Projects

Sinopec reportedly paused the talks when it realized that one of Sibur's minority shareholders and board members, Gennady Timchenko, had been sanctioned by the EU and Britain due to his ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Timchenko was also on Novatek's board until Monday, when he resigned.

China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has recently met with Sinopec, CNPC, and CNOOC—its three energy giants—to review its ties to Russia. Reuters sources have suggested that those companies have been told to tread carefully in its dealings with Russia and to not make any rash moves in buying Russian assets.

BTW, the world should be thanking China's zero covid policy right now. Every time they put a city under lockdown, the price of crude went down.

[Specialka]

I would like to believe that, if it's proven Russia poisoned members of a legitimate peace talk to end a war Russia started, that would be considered the use of biological weapons on civilians during a war. I'd also like to believe that'd get them kicked out of the UN. The hurdles against that are massive.



The UN could consider changing the rules so that you can't veto a vote to expel yourself. Again, long shot at best, but if the UN allowed members who poisoned peace meetings to end a war they started, in which they're openly committing war crimes...why have a UN?

In before the West gets accused by Russia of doing it with the purpose of getting Russia blamed.

[Finlandia WOAT]

It's called Realism.

Even if it isn't popular in Western politics it still has adherents among diplomats and scholars of various countries. Like Russia.

Why would any war of conquest need "thumbs up"? They pretty much never were outside of allies of conquerors.

Everyone would prefer not to suffer invasion - or even not to initiate one, if they could reach their goals through other means. That modern world cannot prevent it is testament to it's fragility.

Of course the Kremlin likes Realism. Realism holds that "great powers" can do whatever they want and be morally justified because "that's just the way it is". It's how you end up with the Mearsheimer's of the world saying this catastrophe is the West's fault for daring to maintain relations with Ukraine.

[Iphie]

I would like to believe that, if it's proven Russia poisoned members of a legitimate peace talk to end a war Russia started, that would be considered the use of biological weapons on civilians during a war. I'd also like to believe that'd get them kicked out of the UN. The hurdles against that are massive.



The UN could consider changing the rules so that you can't veto a vote to expel yourself. Again, long shot at best, but if the UN allowed members who poisoned peace meetings to end a war they started, in which they're openly committing war crimes...why have a UN?

According to the Tweets it's hard to figure out what it was though, so it could have been plain food poisoning, unlikely I know, but since no one died and it's very hard to find out what it was I think this will be the end of that. (or even a third party trying to destabilize the whole process.)

As for the Veto, I've long though that there should be limits to that.

[Gorsameth]

I would like to believe that, if it's proven Russia poisoned members of a legitimate peace talk to end a war Russia started, that would be considered the use of biological weapons on civilians during a war. I'd also like to believe that'd get them kicked out of the UN. The hurdles against that are massive.



The UN could consider changing the rules so that you can't veto a vote to expel yourself. Again, long shot at best, but if the UN allowed members who poisoned peace meetings to end a war they started, in which they're openly committing war crimes...why have a UN?

Kicking from the UN is not happening. The entire point of the UN security council is for nuclear powers to tell each other "No, I won't let you do this".

[Specialka]

According to the Tweets it's hard to figure out what it was though, so it could have been plain food poisoning, unlikely I know, but since no one died and it's very hard to find out what it was I think this will be the end of that. (or even a third party trying to destabilize the whole process.)

As for the Veto, I've long though that there should be limits to that.

It could also be a way of delaying the negociations. Do not forget, the longer those last, the more leverage Russia has due to more destruction and killing they can wrought.

[Iphie]

It could also be a way of delaying the negociations. Do not forget, the longer those last, the more leverage Russia has due to more destruction and killing they can wrought.

Also true, the fact though that the Ukrainians continued with the negotiations after this incident does seem to indicate that they aren't letting it get in the way of peace talks.

[Breccia]

it's hard to figure out what it was though

Agreed, "proven" is a key issue here.

I am going to confidently handwave any false flag attacks. Ukraine has no reason to do this, Russia is already committing war crimes in public and are clearly the baddies.

- - - Updated - - -

Kicking from the UN is not happening.

There are limits. If, hypothetically, Germany kills the entire UN delegation, they would be kicked. Then it's "we already know you're a prostitute, now we're negotiating the price" terms. To me, poisoning a peace talks to end an unprovoked war in which you're committing war crimes would be enough. Even the US has the good sense to just not hold peace talks if they don't want the war to end.

[Iphie]

I am going to confidently handwave any false flag attacks. Ukraine has no reason to do this, Russia is already committing war crimes in public and are clearly the baddies.

Yeah, I know that scenario is pretty unrealistic. The only reason I added it is because the circumstances would be ideal, that said, if it was deliberate I'm looking in one direction only.

I wonder though, was this just a warning or a delaying tactic? Because dead negotiators is bad optics.

[Easo]

The talks likely won't take place today, but tomorrow.

Supposedly Irpin (suburb northwest of Kyiv) has been retaken, but no proof so far. It borders with Hostomel airport and Bucha, so basically one big battlefield.

Making Z illegal is going to get dumb because probably fuck context. We renamed "Z-Towers" just now https://www.la.lv/norobezojoties-no-...aina-nosaukumu

So Shalcker lasted 3 days. I wonder if the record will be broken after ~3 weeks when he comes back.

Yeah, people are still developing new ones, but that doesn't change the fact that nations are NOW starting to rethink their strategic value due to Russia's effectiveness with them and how cheaply they are being countered here. Them rethinking it NOW, doesn't magically have them go back in time to cancel construction or research in them nor does it make them just cancel them at the drop of a dime without further consideration. But they are being seen now less as an aggression tool and more as an occupation tool for after the area is already under control. So no, the fact they didn't retroactively cancel research on them doesn't answer anything and if they did, that would ask more questions of how they managed to time travel to do it.

Ukraine is damaged, but they haven't lost. Honestly, they appear to be winning this handily considering what they were supposedly up against.

I have heard the "People are rethinking NOW" at least couple of times before yet every time it turned out to be the same. Tell me why are nations not checking Ukraine's effectivness with using them, but only Russia's? Tanks have no direct replacements.
The problem, as usual, is using them correctly - and no matter what something will always be destroyed, be it tank, APC, IFV or just an infantry squad.

Yes, they havent lost, but they are loosing. The one difference between Russia and Ukraine is that Russia can replace any vehicle lost - Ukraine cannot. Especially now, after main factories have gone up in smoke - all of them Soviet legacy, irreplaceable, especially the legendary Malyshev factory - and West is not sending any replacements for the heavy equipment.

I'm not the one claiming to know facts about the situation that I can't possibly know. I'm certainly not the one that multiple times in this thread has claimed to know specific details of how terrible the Ukraine position is, while attacking other posters for claiming to know what bad things are happening to Russia.

I'm just going to point out your hypocrisy, in case anyone else misses it. I don't think they have, by the way, which is why I used the word "laughable" in my last post. Your attempts to paint yourself as an intelligent watcher of this war with no bias is pathetic.

But keep them coming. I'll carry out holding your posts up to the light. Maybe you'll even recognise what you're doing at some point. But I doubt it.

So you have nothing but emotions. Thank you for being at least that much clear.

Speaking of tanks, with Russia having lost at least 300 in just a month, a comparison to US losses needs to be made.

In 20 years of fighting the US lost just 23. Of those 9 were to friendly fire and just 1 led to the lose of all crew.

Yeah, I am gonna need a source for that. I am quite sure a good number blew up on IED's. Permanently.
Unless you mean in actual war...?
Lost armor has 42 with photo evidence, half of them in the invasion, rest afterwards - and I am talking only about USA operated Abrams, not the Iraqi ones (not like the difference matters in case of mines, but 68 nonetheless).

Also how fricking long are Brits gonna send that Starstreak? It was announced what, almost two weeks ago?

What, you're telling me Operation Deserters Storm wasn't perfect?

Would be incredible if it was, buuuuut.... Tactical mistakes were made, Americans got into enough ambushes (I don't remember any involving multiple tanks though) - but that was before the smartphone age. Then again - of course it was not comparable to the initial week of this war...

I'd like to ask those guys now, a month later how great of an idea that was.

Considering Ukraine tried to retake the airfield multiple times, blew up the Mriya, then managed to capture it for about 2 days before loosing it again and have not regained since then (about 3 weeks by now?) - probably not the worst thing for Russia. Did Russia gain much from the capture itself? No, it is unusable for landing in troops, but they did tie down Ukrainian forces.

[Slant]

Making Z illegal is going to get dumb because probably fuck context. We renamed "Z-Towers" just now https://www.la.lv/norobezojoties-no-...aina-nosaukumu

It's not. Because unlike people like you, who think they are clever and have found loopholes where there are none, the guys calling the shots actually know what they're talking about. Nobody is banning the letter Z in general. Only someone like you would come up with that nonsense. What they're banning is the symbolic use of the Z as shown by the Russians to rally protests or organise something in Germany with.

You ought to refrain from commenting if you have nothing worthwhile to say or - as in this case - have no fucking clue what the legal procedures are and what's actually being discussed.