Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[Paulie97]

At it back in 2020. No wonder he Won https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MA8a2g6tTp0.

LOL, 2000 Mules.

Too bad 60+ frivolous lawsuits were laughed out the door. LOL Better luck in 2024.

P.S. Best wishes on your English language studies.

[Jojosun]

Looks like he said North Korea when he meant to say South Korea. Big deal, is hardly worth the cap key. Many of Trump's gaffes and word salads are legendary, such as "oranges of the investigation" Ha Ha. But even that isn't worth the cap key or steering us off topic in a Kyiv discussion, even though Biden had enough going on between his ears to mop the floor with Trump in two debates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUPsNgmXR7M

At it back in 2020. No wonder he Won https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MA8a2g6tTp0.

LOL, 2000 Mules.

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/05/...t-has-emerged/

Attacks of a guerrilla or resistance nature will make any occupation a dicey and dangerous affair. And, to the extent that military resources important to Russia are destroyed (ammo, fuel, railroads, etc.), that will have a direct effect on the battlefield. And even just keeping extra Russian troops tied to garrison duty is a positive for Ukraine.

[Jmsuttr]

I understand your points. I generally agree with the recent posts that you don't want to prolong this war unnecessarily. There's a tendency for us armchair generals to look at a conventional war and think we can master a victory. Beyond the carnage and destruction, it ignores all the political chaos that ensues.

It's a bit audacious to presume the Ukraine itself will emerge a healthy, functioning democracy. I'm still not sure what would happen if Putin was deposed. There are no guarantees in what follows.

However, I do not agree the United States' role is that of peace negotiator. That is probably best left to Turkey or some other nation that doesn't represent a threat to either side. Perhaps China or even India has missed their opportunity to gain respect on the world stage.

Every nation other than Russia and Ukraine is at best tangential, and at worst irrelevant.

As I see it, Ukraine's requirements for any kind of cease-fire (or more) would be, at a minimum, Russia's withdrawal to pre-invasion boundaries. I see no indication that's even close to being acceptable to Russia.

Russia apparently believes it can hold out against sanctions and attrition of military resources long enough to seize all of Luhansk, Donetsk, and a land corridor to Crimea. And, from other sources I've recently read, some in Russia believe they can reconstitute their forces enough to make another push at Kyiv.

While Ukraine's thinking, as I understand it, is that they can bend without breaking and, with Western support, continue to grind down Russia's ability to effectively wage war. And, on that front, there are things happening to encourage Ukraine. Putin has failed to call for national mobilization, perhaps fearing backlash or widespread disobedience or avoidance, and Russia has eliminated the upper age limit for military service. Those, and similar developments, indicate that Putin is having a hard time finding soldiers. And any who are recruited today will need to be trained for at least several months before achieving even minimal fighting proficiency.

So, that's a longish way of saying that neither side is anywhere close to believing they need to negotiate. When one side, or both, is sufficiently beaten up, then who the negotiator is, while important, won't be the primary issue.

Also, if I'm Ukrainian and someone tries to raise the issue of whether my country will be a healthy democracy after the war, I think I'd punch them in the mouth. That's because, in Maslow hierarchy-speak, I'm at the bottom of the pyramid, just trying to survive. Self-actualization as a democracy is a great goal, but that's a topic for another day.

I agree that there are a lot of geopolitical chips up in the air, and who knows where they'll fall. But, first things first, please help me and my family keep from being killed.

P.S. It's also important to factor in that the landscape with respect to sanctions and the battlefield is constantly changing. See my recent post about Ukraine acquiring MLRS systems from the US, and why that may have a significant impact. And the latest round of sanctions now includes Sberbank, which is the heavyweight of Russian banks. So, in boxing terms, past banking sanctions were like stiff jabs (painful but moderate damage), while this one is like a heavy body-blow with the potential for major damage.

[Jmsuttr]

So true, they should be forced to negotiate and compromise. Instead of sending weapons, we should say enough is enough. Find a solution and end this crazy war.

Russia is the aggressor and, in case you haven't noticed, there's no country that's currently able to force Russia to do anything. And any attempt at the direct application of force runs the risk of provoking the use of nukes.

So what does that leave as a realistic option? Going through the United Nations is worthless, as Russia (aided by China) is able to veto any attempt to problem solve by that toothless organization.

What else? Well, maybe the application of sanctions and other pressures by Europe, the US, and other nations. That's not force, per se, but rather an attempt to convince Russia that the present and future costs they'll incur will outweigh any benefits.

That's the only realistic path I can see, and that's what's currently being tried (as Ukraine defends itself in a struggle for survival). If you have a better solution, with a realistic chance of making a difference, please feel free to share.

BTW, if anyone thinks that peace is to be gained by forcing Ukraine only, while letting Russia do whatever it wants, I would refer them to VinDici's earlier post. Asking Ukraine to commit national suicide is a non-starter.

[Jmsuttr]

The first thing we need at when a war happens is who is benefitting! And did anyone do anything to stop it?

The US is not doing anything to stop the war for sure, who's industry is booming with this war!! Or special operation!!

What did we see?

Europe was not investing in military or weapons!!

Now, US has got multimillions $$ contacts for military equipment's from European countries.

Gas contacts for US companies, to mention few!.

I'm sure there are plenty of ways to look at the situation, including views from 10,000 feet that focus on which players (countries and companies) might benefit from, or be taking advantage of, the conflict.

But it's hard for me to concern myself with such issues while Ukrainians are being killed, captured, tortured, and their cities reduced to uninhabitable rubble.

When confronted with that in-your-face reality, there are only a very few questions at the top level of priority:

Q: Who bears primary responsibility for the conflict?

A: Russia.

Q: Who is the only party with the ability to unilaterally bring an end to the conflict?

A: Russia.

Q: How can the conflict be stopped?

A: By Russia deciding to stop, either by their own independent decision, or as a response to external and (or) internal pressures.

While other questions and issues may be valid and worth exploring, they must necessarily take a back seat to the primary issues listed above. I'm certainly open to debating which countries might secretly, or not so secretly, be hoping for Ukraine to fail (Serbia, Hungary, Germany, etc.), or which countries are giving Ukraine their full support (Poland, Baltics, etc.), or which countries (USA, France, Italy, etc.) might be slow-walking assistance because they see upsides to a protracted conflict.

I have no illusions about the fact that there are plenty of bad actors who could, and should, be named and shamed. But Job #1 is ending the war, full stop. And that will only happen if Russia has a change of mind (unlikely), or if a combination of battlefield defeats, attrition, and pressures from within and without, cause them to have that change of mind.

[WyattEarp]

Even now, US is not talking about negotiations to end the war, instead of how to prolong the war!!

Lefts fight till the end of who??

Why will they stop a war, as they know the business opportunity is their hands!!

There is no good in the world anymore, we can only choose the better evil!

I understand your points. I generally agree with the recent posts that you don't want to prolong this war unnecessarily. There's a tendency for us armchair generals to look at a conventional war and think we can master a victory. Beyond the carnage and destruction, it ignores all the political chaos that ensues.

It's a bit audacious to presume the Ukraine itself will emerge a healthy, functioning democracy. I'm still not sure what would happen if Putin was deposed. There are no guarantees in what follows.

However, I do not agree the United States' role is that of peace negotiator. That is probably best left to Turkey or some other nation that doesn't represent a threat to either side. Perhaps China or even India has missed their opportunity to gain respect on the world stage.

[DramaFree11]

The first thing we need at when a war happens is who is benefitting! And did anyone do anything to stop it?

The US is not doing anything to stop the war for sure, who's industry is booming with this war!! Or special operation!!

What did we see??

Europe was not investing in military or weapons!!

Now, US has got multimillions $$ contacts for military equipment's from European countries.

Gas contacts for US companies, to mention few!

Who has lost?? The people of Ukraine.

Even the US knew there is a war coming, they asked their citizens to leave Ukraine, but didn't do anything to stop it!

Even now, US is not talking about negotiations to end the war, instead of how to prolong the war!!

Lefts fight till the end of who?

So true, they should be forced to negotiate and compromise. Instead of sending weapons, we should say enough is enough. Find a solution and end this crazy war.

[Mike963]

The first thing we need at when a war happens is who is benefitting! And did anyone do anything to stop it?

The US is not doing anything to stop the war for sure, who's industry is booming with this war!! Or special operation!!

What did we see??

Europe was not investing in military or weapons!!

Now, US has got multimillions $$ contacts for military equipment's from European countries.

Gas contacts for US companies, to mention few!

Who has lost?? The people of Ukraine.

Even the US knew there is a war coming, they asked their citizens to leave Ukraine, but didn't do anything to stop it!

Even now, US is not talking about negotiations to end the war, instead of how to prolong the war!!

Lefts fight till the end of who??

Why will they stop a war, as they know the business opportunity is their hands!!

There is no good in the world anymore, we can only choose the better evil!

If your neighbor, with whom you've had strained relations for years, breaks down your fence, comes into your house, and starts shooting, who bears primary responsibility for that situation?

If, in response to being attacked, you barricade yourself in a room, get your own gun, and return fire to defend yourself, is that somehow blameworthy? Also, in the event people are killed in the cross-fire, is there any sense in pointing the finger at both, or should it be pointed squarely in the face of the instigator?

I've never been one to defend Ukraine against allegations that they've stirred up shit against Russia in past years. And, considering the fact that they've been fighting each other (directly and via proxies) since 2014, it doesn't surprise me that there's bad blood and lots of antagonism..

[Paulie97]

Nobody is winning, this is total mess. The longer this craziness continues, the world economy will tank, this is almost worst scenario, minus a Nuclear War.

You've been singing this same simplistic song over and over since the war begin but it's likely to last another year or longer. Russia is too invested to back down. Ukraine wants them off their land and are willing to fight. The West will continue to arm them. There's wide bi-partisan support for the same in Congress, with only 11 Republican senators voting against the latest aid package. So keep whining but it's not going to change anything.

[VinDici]

If Russia stops fighting there will be no war, if Ukraine stops fighting there will be no Ukraine.

[Jmsuttr]

Nobody is winning, this is total mess. The longer this craziness continues, the world economy will tank, this is almost worst scenario, minus a Nuclear War.

If your neighbor, with whom you've had strained relations for years, breaks down your fence, comes into your house, and starts shooting, who bears primary responsibility for that situation?

If, in response to being attacked, you barricade yourself in a room, get your own gun, and return fire to defend yourself, is that somehow blameworthy? Also, in the event people are killed in the cross-fire, is there any sense in pointing the finger at both, or should it be pointed squarely in the face of the instigator?

I've never been one to defend Ukraine against allegations that they've stirred up shit against Russia in past years. And, considering the fact that they've been fighting each other (directly and via proxies) since 2014, it doesn't surprise me that there's bad blood and lots of antagonism.

But Russia is the bigger and stronger country, and they made a conscious decision to invade, thinking they could swallow Ukraine and bully the West into inaction by virtue of nuclear threats. They were wrong.

Now the bully's nose has been bloodied. They can turn around and go home or double-down on their aggression. It's entirely up to Russia, no one else.

[DramaFree11]

It's possible to look at a chessboard and, from the positions of the pieces and how much material each side has lost, extrapolate various endgame scenarios. Making an observation that most, or even all, of those scenarios aren't favorable to one side is not the same as making a prediction.

Let me again state my position, as clearly as I can:

Scenario 1:

If Russia leaves Ukraine, either to the Feb 24th boundaries or further, that will be seen as a clear defeat by just about everyone, whether inside Russia or not.

Scenario 2:.

Nobody is winning, this is total mess. The longer this craziness continues, the world economy will tank, this is almost worst scenario, minus a Nuclear War.

[Jmsuttr]

This first piece is a detailed look at Russia's military performance:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...8.2022.2078044

One good feature of this analysis is that it discusses the implications of the current conflict for the future military balance of power in Europe. And it also raises the question of whether Western analysts, having overestimated Russia's capabilities, might be making similar errors with respect to their assessment of NATO and other Western forces.

And this one examines a weapons system that Ukraine may get in the near future, and why it may be a game-changer:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...006301184.html

Whether or not Ukraine will receive the weapons systems described is yet to be seen. But the author argues that at least one of the MLRS systems will be delivered. There's also a companion piece with a lot of background technical info about various MLRS systems. It's best suited for military geeks but, if you want to take a look, here's the link:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...975910912.html

[Jmsuttr]

Well, first, there is the contradiction. No one knows what is going to happen but there is no way Russia "wins". IMO even if Putin negotiates peace, he is going to declare victory.

It's possible to look at a chessboard and, from the positions of the pieces and how much material each side has lost, extrapolate various endgame scenarios. Making an observation that most, or even all, of those scenarios aren't favorable to one side is not the same as making a prediction.

Let me again state my position, as clearly as I can:

Scenario 1:

If Russia leaves Ukraine, either to the Feb 24th boundaries or further, that will be seen as a clear defeat by just about everyone, whether inside Russia or not.

Scenario 2:

If Russia conquers all, or part of Ukraine, then they'll need to occupy it. However, post-2022 occupation is likely to be different, and much more difficult, than it was in 2014. The regions that Putin believed were pro-Russian have resisted strongly and it's highly likely that an occupational force would need to deal with insurgencies and local hostility. Ukraine would continue to be viewed as a victim by many and sanctions would continue to be imposed by many. Compared to pre-invasion Russia, the post-invasion situation would be more isolated and with numerous countries minimizing or eliminating the ties and relationships they once had.

I have no doubt that Putin would call #2 a victory, and might even be able to sell that to the Russian people. But calling it a "win" doesn't make it so, and an objective definition of victory generally means that you've gained more than you've lost. Putin's scorched-earth tactics have essentially leveled entire cities, like Mariupol. If he ends up holding territory that he's ruined, populated by people who will have a blood-feud mentality for generations, and has simultaneously turned most of the world against him, it's hard to see how that can objectively be characterized as a win. But I'm not disputing the fact that Putin will declare victory, no matter what.

What real victory would have looked like can be discerned from what we've learned about the Russian mindset, and objectives, at the beginning of the war. From everything I've seen and read, Russia believed there was a significant proportion of the Ukrainian people who would welcome them as liberators and would have no problem if a pro-Russia government was installed. Had Putin's army marched into Kyiv, removed Zelensky, installed new leadership, controlled the media, and had that new reality been readily accepted by significant numbers of Ukrainians, that would absolutely have been worthy of being declared a true win. But that didn't happen.

To sum up, since the true and unequivocal victory didn't happen, every remaining scenario is some version of failure. And success vs failure can be judged by objective measures, irrespective of what one side or the other says. Monty Python's Black Knight can claim that he's only suffered a scratch, but the reality is evident.

Again, if you see any realistic endgame scenario which lends itself to being objectively classified as a true Russian win, I'm all ears.