Russian invasion of Ukraine

[PhaelixWW]

I am simply stating if the goal was total genocide they are doing a very bad job at it.

Who said the goal was "total genocide"?

"Wiping out Ukraine" does not mean the same thing as "total genocide". And genocide is not automatically "total".

[Draco-Onis]

Who said the goal was "total genocide"?

"Wiping out Ukraine" does not mean the same thing as "total genocide". And genocide is not automatically "total".

It's clear the goal was conquest which they thought would be an easy task. If Russia had just taken the the "independent" territories the international community would have probably just given them a slap on the wrist they bungled everything.

[Jastall]

I actually do wonder why Russia is not employing chemical/biological weapons yet. Probably because they think there is no coming back from that, but I have a feeling they may yet reconsider because they can't handle these losses for much longer.

Russian leadership is corrupt, self-serving, ambitious and ruthless, but what they should not be is entirely stupid. They know that once that threshold is crossed, their failed invasion could turn into an extremely dangerous situation- for them. Economic turmoil will mostly affect the lower classes of Russia, at least so long as things don't become so dire the leadership is deposed. Painting a target on their back forevermore by dropping WMDs changes the game. A conventional invasion alone already had the (likely unforeseen) consequences of doubling their border with NATO and more sanctions than they bargained for. It is impossible to calculate the political and military fallout of chemical weapons and the like. Not when the war is so hugely publicized.

Plus, to what end? They want to capture the country, not turn it to slag. Using chemical or biological weapons on a location and population you plan to conquer seems quite counter-productive to me, considering how unpredictable those weapons can be deployed en masse.

There's still a change they use it, tho. I didn't think they'd be foolish enough to invade Ukraine wholesale and was proven wrong. So perhaps there are enough totally stupid people in charge to actually do that kind of thing.

[Mihalik]

Plus, to what end? They want to capture the country, not turn it to slag.

13 million Ukrainians have already left the eastern part of the country. Some are abroad, some are internally displaced to the west. That's about a 25% of the total population and about half the population of the east.

All the population centers that they have managed to take since February with the exception of Kherson have been totally leveled by conventional artillery and indiscriminate bombing.

Kherson is sorta mostly in one piece as they took that early on. It's not undamaged. But it's mostly OK.

Mariupol and Melitopol have been completely leveled.

Kharkiv's outskirts have been demolished.

Industrial and agricultural equipment has been stripped, looted and carried off to Russia. Farmers' grain stocks, including seed have been shipped off the Crimea.

If their intention is the capture the region and draw some sort of economic benefit from it....they are doing a spectacularly shit job at it.

The work force has been killed or displaced, housing and infrastructure destroyed, agricultural and industrial capacity levelled or looted.

[Logwyn]

I actually do wonder why Russia is not employing chemical/biological weapons yet. Probably because they think there is no coming back from that, but I have a feeling they may yet reconsider because they can't handle these losses for much longer.

Because you will get neutral countries like India not staying neutral and other countires on the fence swing from the Russian side.

[Specialka]

Because you will get neutral countries like India not staying neutral and other countires on the fence swing from the Russian side.

India is not that neutral. They are mostly on the russian side, as is roughly half the globe as they hate the westerners.

- - - Updated - - -

Ah yeah, the bad America again at fault

Ah yes, forgot USA were angels

- - - Updated - - -

Or we just don't buy Russia's propaganda about how their unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation under the bullshit guise of a "special operation" is somehow America's fault in any way whatsoever.

That's called realpolitik. USA, at some point, wanted this war.

[Kaleredar]

India is not that neutral. They are mostly on the russian side, as is roughly half the globe as they hate the westerners.

India is on Russia's "side" in that they need military equipment, fuel, and food that they aren't as able to easily replace as other countries. And the military equipment isn't to deter "the west," it's to deter China and Pakistan.

They don't give a flying fuck about Russia or NATO or "tampering western interests."

Ah yes, forgot USA were angels


That's called realpolitik. USA, at some point, wanted this war.

I'm sorry did the USA tell Russia to invade Ukraine?

Russia is to blame for this entire affair. Full stop.

The US didn't make it happen. The US is supporting Ukraine because it's in the US' interests, Just like how it's in the EU's interests, to see a hostile foreign nation who has invested heavily in international political subterfuge, interference and violent expansionist tendencies run by an autocratic dictator smacked down.

And even if you view that self-interest cynically, the US' and EU's interests at this moment happen to be working to save innocent lives, punish insolent invaders, and help a country maintain its own sovereignty. So their interests currently align with what is "right." Russia chose to invade in a deluded attempt to rebuild the USSR. Ukraine chose to fight for their freedom, and it's a fight worth supporting.

Whataboutism isn't going to help you here. This is Russia's war, Russia's war crimes, Russia's collapsed economy, Russia's dead soldiers and Russia's ongoing train wreck.

[Specialka]

India is on Russia's "side" in that they need military equipment, fuel, and food that they aren't as able to easily replace as other countries. And the military equipment isn't to deter "the west," it's to deter China and Pakistan.

They don't give a flying fuck about Russia or NATO or "tampering western interests."



I'm sorry did the USA tell Russia to invade Ukraine?

Russia is to blame for this entire affair. Full stop.

The US didn't make it happen. The US is supporting Ukraine because it's in the US' interests, Just like how it's in the EU's interests, to see a hostile foreign nation who has invested heavily in international political subterfuge, interference and violent expansionist tendencies run by an autocratic dictator smacked down.

And even if you view that self-interest cynically, the US' and EU's interests at this moment happen to be working to save innocent lives, punish insolent invaders, and help a country maintain its own sovereignty. So their interests currently align with what is "right." Russia chose to invade in a deluded attempt to rebuild the USSR. Ukraine chose to fight for their freedom, and it's a fight worth supporting.

Whataboutism isn't going to help you here. This is Russia's war, Russia's war crimes, Russia's collapsed economy, Russia's dead soldiers and Russia's ongoing train wreck.

India is not the best kind of allies for sure. They are an "interested ally" because they need something from Russia. But if they had to choose, not sure they would be on our side.

And USA did not force Russia to invade as they did not force Japan to attack them at Pearl Harbor. Yes, they supported Ukraine because it was in their interest for Russia to attack so they could humiliate Russia and sanction the hell out of them. But in the end, the war is not happening near them and they fanned the flame alright.

Not talking about how Russia is doing their war. It clearly need to be some trials out of this, due to warcrimes and such obviously.

[Kaleredar]

India is not the best kind of allies for sure. They are an "interested ally" because they need something from Russia. But if they had to choose, not sure they would be on our side.

The last thing India wants is to be dragged into a war. They would not side with Russia.

And USA did not force Russia to invade as they did not force Japan to attack them at Pearl Harbor. Yes, they supported Ukraine because it was in their interest for Russia to attack so they could humiliate Russia and sanction the hell out of them. But in the end, the war is not happening near them and they fanned the flame alright.

Not talking about how Russia is doing their war. They clearly need to be some trials out of this, due to warcrimes and such obviously.

Countries don't "support" other countries in the hopes that yet other countries invade that country they're supporting so that they can then punish the invading country. The US has supported Ukraine for years, beyond the scope of any singular presidency (and certainly beyond the scope of Trump, who was trying to villify them in support of Russia.) Ukraine is a useful regional ally to tempering Russia's expansionist fantasies. That Russia built up and (poorly) executed an invasion was entirely on Russia and Putin's delusions of grandeur.

[Specialka]

The last thing India wants is to be dragged into a war. They would not side with Russia.



Countries don't "support" other countries in the hopes that yet other countries invade that country they're supporting so that they can then punish the invading country. The US has supported Ukraine for years, beyond the scope of any singular presidency (and certainly beyond the scope of Trump, who was trying to villify them in support of Russia.) Ukraine is a useful regional ally to tempering Russia's expansionist fantasies. That Russia built up and (poorly) executed an invasion was entirely on Russia and Putin's delusions of grandeur.

They won't get dragged in a war. They will however continue to support Russia by buying stuff and such. That is how you support an ally sanctionned by another party. They also will continue to stay neutral in the UN and such.

For the second part, I guess: "welcome to realpolitik and how the world works".

[MCMLXXXII]

They support Russia because they hate the west changed into they support Russia because they need stuff. Interesting.

[DarkTZeratul]

For the second part, I guess: "welcome to realpolitik and how the world works".

You still haven't explained how "the US allied with Ukraine out of self-interest" translates at all to "the US is responsible for Russia attacking Ukraine."

[Kaleredar]

For the second part, I guess: "welcome to realpolitik and how the world works".

No.

The US didn't support the allies in the hopes that Japan would bomb them so they had a reason to enter WW2.

Germany didn't hope that France and Britain would impose crushing reparations so that they could reform themselves under a fascist leadership structure and then try and invade the rest of Europe.

The collective Jewish people didn't hope that the Nazis would perpetrate the holocaust so that they could seek reparations later and form Israel.

And the US didn't pump support into Ukraine hoping that it would be just too tantalizing not to invade so that they could impose sanctions on Russia.

These are countries acting on their own volition, and then other countries responding to those actions. Full stop.

You seem to assume that a lot more planning exists in some 5-dimensional game of international strategy chess. It does not. The US has ping-ponged from a president against Russia to a president very pro-Russia back to a very anti-Russia president in the span of seven years. Clearly, whatever Russia was doing was not very well planned out. The EU was ill-prepared in the short term to launch sanctions against Russia. So no, this was not the culmination of decades of work by the CIA or FBI or NATO or whomever to cajole Russia, a country perfectly capable of directing itself, into shooting itself in the foot. This was not planned by anyone but Russia, and it was poorly planned at that. Simply put, Russia didn't need any help to shoot themselves in the foot.

The world is far more chaotic, and people far less competent, than you want to think. Frankly, this is the same kind of thinking that buds conspiracy theories. That nothing can truly be random or senseless, and that some person or group of people, somewhere, must be responsible for it all, even if they aren't acting with our best interests in mind... because otherwise the world is just chaos. Sorry to say, but chaos it is. There is no international cabal writing the future of the world; no grand, overarching plots that take every possible future reality into account. Just groups reacting to external stimuli.

[Mamut]

Ah yes, forgot USA were angels


That's called realpolitik. USA, at some point, wanted this war.

I never said they are angels. But I just heard too many of this silly bullshiit when everytime something bad is happening in the world there always someone with that "Oh, it's AGAIN USA!".

And to be clear I'm from EU.

[Corvus]

The cope is strong in the copeviet union. Russian state tv is boasting they have stopped a Ukrainian breakthrough into the Belgorad region of Russia.

https://mobile.twitter.com/nexta_tv/...e4z1rafJg&s=19

I know alcohol poisoning is strong in Russia, but shouldn't they have enough brain cells left to realise that perhaps claiming they stopped Ukraine invading Russian land is a sign things aren't going well?

[Forogil]

That's not true because people keep talking about nukes but from Napalm to biological weapons they could wipe out the entire populace without having to risk this many soldiers and equipment. The US killed more people with Napalm in Japan than with the atomic bomb, I would take atomic bomb death over napalm any day of the week.

What all this discussion about bombing Ukraine is missing is that Russia still doesn't even have air superiority over Ukraine, so it's also a matter of lacking the ability to actually do that bombing (apart from lacking tracking and equipment).

For comparison the US helped the allies achieved air supremacy during WWII before D-day, which turned the early bombings into the massive ones causing firestorm over Dresden.

And Ukraine have working air warnings and bomb shelters, and houses that don't easily catch fire so napalm wouldn't be as effective as over Japan.

And using WMDs (biological weapons, chemical weapons, etc) would give other countries further reasons to intervene, I'm not confident that Russia is willing to cross that bridge.

[Iphie]

The cope is strong in the copeviet union. Russian state tv is boasting they have stopped a Ukrainian breakthrough into the Belgorad region of Russia.

https://mobile.twitter.com/nexta_tv/...e4z1rafJg&s=19

I know alcohol poisoning is strong in Russia, but shouldn't they have enough brain cells left to realise that perhaps claiming they stopped Ukraine invading Russian land is a sign things aren't going well?

It's for internal consumption: "Poor russia is being invaded by Evil Ukraine after they only went there to do a peace mission to protect the innocent russians in the Donbass from the Evil Ukranians."

[PhaelixWW]

It's for internal consumption: "Poor russia is being invaded by Evil Ukraine after they only went there to do a peace mission to protect the innocent russians in the Donbass from the Evil Ukranians."

Fascism Rule #8: "The enemy is both weak and strong."

[Specialka]

They support Russia because they hate the west changed into they support Russia because they need stuff. Interesting.

"The hate the west" is more for a big chunk of Asia and most of Africa rather than India.

- - - Updated - - -

No.

The US didn't support the allies in the hopes that Japan would bomb them so they had a reason to enter WW2.

Germany didn't hope that France and Britain would impose crushing reparations so that they could reform themselves under a fascist leadership structure and then try and invade the rest of Europe.

The collective Jewish people didn't hope that the Nazis would perpetrate the holocaust so that they could seek reparations later and form Israel.

And the US didn't pump support into Ukraine hoping that it would be just too tantalizing not to invade so that they could impose sanctions on Russia.

These are countries acting on their own volition, and then other countries responding to those actions. Full stop.

You seem to assume that a lot more planning exists in some 5-dimensional game of international strategy chess. It does not. The US has ping-ponged from a president against Russia to a president very pro-Russia back to a very anti-Russia president in the span of seven years. Clearly, whatever Russia was doing was not very well planned out. The EU was ill-prepared in the short term to launch sanctions against Russia. So no, this was not the culmination of decades of work by the CIA or FBI or NATO or whomever to cajole Russia, a country perfectly capable of directing itself, into shooting itself in the foot. This was not planned by anyone but Russia, and it was poorly planned at that. Simply put, Russia didn't need any help to shoot themselves in the foot.

The world is far more chaotic, and people far less competent, than you want to think. Frankly, this is the same kind of thinking that buds conspiracy theories. That nothing can truly be random or senseless, and that some person or group of people, somewhere, must be responsible for it all, even if they aren't acting with our best interests in mind... because otherwise the world is just chaos. Sorry to say, but chaos it is. There is no international cabal writing the future of the world; no grand, overarching plots that take every possible future reality into account. Just groups reacting to external stimuli.

USA backed the Imperial Japan in a corner economically speaking forcing them to attack the USA to break the "economic blockade". But you can try to rewrite history if you want.

USA fanned the flame of the conflict by using warmongering speech when they saw that Russia would go to war if pushed come to shove. Russia is still the one that initiated it but USA are far from innocent in it.

[Huehuecoyotl]

That's called realpolitik. USA, at some point, wanted this war.

So what you're saying is that the Russians are SO stupid, they went ahead and started a war that the US was trying to stoke. And they did this knowing full well that going to war was the US intention? Or did they not realise something so "obvious" that you've managed to work it out?

Just trying to figure out whether you are calling the Russians ignorant or stupid.