Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[QUOTE=Questner;2972524]In Russia no prognosis has been made for 2025, only plans. Here below in a quote a prognosis from Ukraine for 2025:

The atmosphere in which Ukraine is celebrating the new year 2025 is strikingly different from the situation in both December 2022 and December 2023...[/QUOTE]Another excellent article, thanks again. While occasionally naive (for example, Musk et al may cause the USA Government to replace support of military contractors with support of Tech companies), the writer provides an insightful and informed look into the Ukraine situation from a variety of viewpoints. To fellow board members, it's a long read, but worth it, regardless of your beliefs. I agree wholeheartedly with the concluding statement:

"It is clear that it is difficult for anyone to admit their mistakes and even more difficult to agree on anything after rivers of spilled blood. But the longer the war goes on, the more it turns into a funnel that draws Ukraine, Russia and the entire world into new dark ages, creating colossal threats for both the warring countries and for all of humanity. And to avoid the worst, the war must end as soon as possible. ".

Where did you find this Questner? I can't locate the source with Google.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2972969]Another excellent article, thanks again. While occasionally naive (for example, Musk et al may cause the USA Government to replace support of military contractors with support of Tech companies), the writer provides an insightful and informed look into the Ukraine situation from a variety of viewpoints. To fellow board members, it's a long read, but worth it, regardless of your beliefs. I agree wholeheartedly with the concluding statement:

"It is clear that it is difficult for anyone to admit their mistakes and even more difficult to agree on anything after rivers of spilled blood. But the longer the war goes on, the more it turns into a funnel that draws Ukraine, Russia and the entire world into new dark ages, creating colossal threats for both the warring countries and for all of humanity. And to avoid the worst, the war must end as soon as possible. ".

Where did you find this Questner? I can't locate the source with Google.[/QUOTE]Home made by Questner, LOL.

After coming back from my first Mongering trip to Kiev back in 2009 ,I posted in the Kiev thread my feeling that the great mongering destination won't last for a long time! I was thinking about Ukraine joining The EU when all the Beauties would then head west!

Who would have ever thought that UA beauties would leg it out to the west not as a result of joining The EU, But following The Special Operation by Putin! Some operation nearly 3 years on and counting.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2972969]Another excellent article, thanks again. While occasionally naive (for example, Musk et al may cause the USA Government to replace support of military contractors with support of Tech companies), the writer provides an insightful and informed look into the Ukraine situation from a variety of viewpoints. To fellow board members, it's a long read, but worth it, regardless of your beliefs. I agree wholeheartedly with the concluding statement:

"It is clear that it is difficult for anyone to admit their mistakes and even more difficult to agree on anything after rivers of spilled blood. But the longer the war goes on, the more it turns into a funnel that draws Ukraine, Russia and the entire world into new dark ages, creating colossal threats for both the warring countries and for all of humanity. And to avoid the worst, the war must end as soon as possible. ".

Where did you find this Questner? I can't locate the source with Google.[/QUOTE]The forum has rules that do not allow posts in any language other than English. The rules are the rules and have to be followed.

Also my every post has to pass a moderator. Again, the rules have to be followed as lack of moderation can destroy public boards. Even if the moderation is selective, I am only a guest and don't make the rules.

The reasonable way out is to provide a translation from Ukrainian or Russian with some clarifications on the terms that direct translation won't allow.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2972969]

Where did you find this Questner? I can't locate the source with Google.[/QUOTE]Why do you think that is, Tiny? Why do propacondoms NEVER use attributions? Take a wild guess.

[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2972950]For me it's about keeping Russia away from the rest of Europe. Ukraine might not regain all its territories, but it's giving Russia a bloody nose, hopefully bloody enough so that Putin doesn't get any smart ideas about the Baltics or Moldova. Eastern European countries owe the Ukrainians a lot.[/QUOTE]I'm honestly shocked that some people believe this horseshit, that Russia has territorial interests other than Eastern Ukraine. I guess it has to do will believing western mainstream media propaganda and not having any military experience. For fucks sake, use your brain. Putin, even if he didn't want to, does NOT have an army big enough to go beyond Ukraine's borders.

The Baltic states are NATO members, Einstein. Same for Poland. Putin isn't stupid enough to attack a NATO state.

Moldova is a different case no doubt with the Transnistria status resolved.

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2972942]It's about Russia losing.[/QUOTE]Well, the only party that is doomed to lose is going to be Ukraine. Get used to it.

Also, why are you even in this thread? You have ZERO understanding of this conflict, other than your hatred and fear of Russia.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973067]I'm honestly shocked that some people believe this horseshit, that Russia has territorial interests other than Eastern Ukraine. [/QUOTE]Really, so all the nonsense spewed by Medvedev or Russian TV is just some regular Ivan talking shit while getting drunk on a street in Moscow and doesn't have the OK from Putin? And the occupied parts from Georgia don't count?

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973067]Putin, even if he didn't want to, does NOT have an army big enough to go beyond Ukraine's borders.[/QUOTE]And he learned that only when trying to occupy Kyiv. Zelensky might be a clown, but he didn't run away.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973067]The Baltic states are NATO members, Einstein. Same for Poland. Putin isn't stupid enough to attack a NATO state. Moldova is a different case no doubt with the Transnistria status resolved.[/QUOTE]Putin is prodding for a long time trying to find out with what he can get away. Murder people in UK or Germany? Is that OK? Endanger public safety due murdering somebody with polonium or nerve agents? Is that OK? Blow up ammunition depots or kill people involved in the weapons business inside Europe? Cutting undersea cables? Who is to say that the next step wouldn't be stirring up unrest in Latvia where there is significant Russian speaking population. You are making my point, your neighbours only feel safe when they are part of NATO because they know you too well from history.

Since when is Russia promising that they withdraw from Transnistria? Let's see, they signed an agreement in 1994 that they will withdraw, well it didn't happen. They signed another one in 1999, with a "firm" date of December 2002, that didn't happen either. Last time I checked it's 2025.

Things like this are why your neighbours don't trust you one kopeck.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973068]...Also, why are you even in this thread?...[/QUOTE]Primarily, to resist paid disinformation and propaganda. I support the cause of democratic liberalism. I want to see a healthy, educated world where there is no armed conflict and international disputes are resolved through legal means.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973068]...You have ZERO understanding of this conflict, other than your hatred and fear of Russia.[/QUOTE]I had great hopes for the RF after 1992. There was a temporary blossoming of freedom, liberalism and culture, which has been suppressed by Putin's dictatorship. I am an amateur historian and have always had an interest in Russian imperialism, hegemony, territorial aggrandizement and periodic failure. In my opinion, Russia is in a much, much more fragile condition than in either 1917 or 1991. I believe, and I think you know it as well, its failure is inevitable.

[QUOTE=Questner;2973006]The forum has rules that do not allow posts in any language other than English. The rules are the rules and have to be followed.

Also my every post has to pass a moderator. Again, the rules have to be followed as lack of moderation can destroy public boards. Even if the moderation is selective, I am only a guest and don't make the rules.

The reasonable way out is to provide a translation from Ukrainian or Russian with some clarifications on the terms that direct translation won't allow.[/QUOTE]Yeah right, aha. You're so slick and everyone else here is an idiot.

Moderators won't have an issue with a post that links to a URL of the original source. It's not the same as commenting in another language.

[QUOTE=BloodRed;2973067][b]I'm honestly shocked[/b] that some people believe this horseshit, that Russia has territorial interests other than Eastern Ukraine.[/QUOTE]Come on dude! Snap out of it.

You're serving a bona-fide fascist regime. Very few things can possibly shock you. Nothing, as in nothing at all, can shock you "honestly".

Here is a fact. Kyiv in three days was a real military objective. Ukraine as a state was supposed to fall under Russia's control within 75 days by military and other means. This war is all about colonialism and it's never been about his fear of the Nato expansion. Whether or not Putin's still harboring his delusions today, 3 years later, remains to be seen.

But back in 2022? Give me a fucking break. He didn't start a full-scale invasion in order to grab two lousy eastern oblasts that they had already pillaged and robbed blind in the preceding 8 years.

[QUOTE]Russian President Vladimir Putin didn't invade Ukraine in 2022 because he feared NATO. He invaded because he believed that NATO was weak, that his efforts to regain control of Ukraine by other means had failed, and that installing a pro-Russian government in Kyiv would be safe and easy. His aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russias power, eradicate Ukraines statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues.

Putin had convinced himself by the end of 2021 that Russia had the opportunity to safely launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine to accomplish two distinct goals: establish Russian control over Ukraine without facing significant Western resistance and break the unity of NATO. [/QUOTE][URL]https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/weakness-lethal-why-putin-invaded-ukraine-and-how-war-must-end[/URL]

The plan was to quickly seize Kyiv, apprehend or murder Zelensky and other government officials and install a puppet government that would be completely obedient to Kremlin's will.

[QUOTE]Vladimir Putin expected to defeat Ukraine in three days after his spies told him thousands of people would rise up to overthrow Volodymyr Zelensky.

Leaked documents show the FSB security service was feeding poor intelligence to the Russian tyrant before his invasion of Ukraine.

Putin ordered his forces to invade Ukraine a year ago in the belief he could secure a lightning victory by seizing the capital Kyiv and decapitating the leadership.

But heroic Ukrainian resistance thwarted the Russians, whose dreams of quick victory soon turned into the nightmare - with nearly 150,000 of Putins soldiers now lying dead.

The initial attempt to take Kyiv has been blamed on cataclysmic intelligence failures about the capabilities of the Ukrainians and their willingness to fight back.

But the extent to which Putins spies bungled is revealed by emails from within the FSB, which have been shared with The Sun.

They come from a source known as Wind of Change and were sent to Russian human rights activist Vladimir Osechkin, the founder of Gulagu, which highlights abuses in the countrys prisons.

The emails are believed to originally be the work of one FSB officer but its thought several now contribute to the emails.

In an email written about a fortnight after the invasion, as Russias dead began to mount, the source reveals how the FSB spies had been reporting that before the invasion, Ukrainians were ready to rise up.

We issued reports that at minimum about 2,000 trained civilians in every major city in Ukraine were ready to overthrow Zelensky, a leaked email reads.

And that at least 5,000 civilians were prepared to come out with flags against Zelensky on the beck-and-call of Russia.

Wind of Change then goes on to explain that the FSB thought that once Zelensky had been toppled, the Ukrainians would then fight among themselves to win Putins favour.

[b]Do you want a laugh?, says the source.

We were expected to be the arbitrators for crowning Ukrainian politicians who were supposed to start tearing each other apart competing for the right to be called aligned with Russia.[/b]

The source mentioned several times that three days was the timetable given to Putin for the capture of Kyiv.

What if it doesnt work? This question was left unanswered when they planned to take Kiev in three days, said Wind of Change in one reference.

The Russian leaders views are shaped by his ideological blind spot towards Ukraine so it would take a brave FSB officer to go out on a limb.

He is absolutely convinced that Ukraine is not a real country and Ukrainians not a real people and therefore cant bring him to accept that theyre willing to die with such determination for this non-country.

Whos going to be the one who actually says Vladimir Vladimirovich thats not actually the way things are.

In the hours and days after the war began, the chilling sight of helicopters swarming towards Kyiv gave way to harrowing images of charred armoured columns ambushed by Ukrainians.

The initial attempt to seize Hostomel airport and use it to pour in reinforcements ended in humiliation when the elite Russian paratroopers given the task were obliterated.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/putin-thought-he-could-take-ukraine-in-three-days-leaked-emails-reveal/news-story/bf4de32af600b8b653069cdc34c174c8[/URL]

[URL]https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21449691/putin-ukraine-3-days-docs/[/URL]

[URL]https://www.gulagu.net[/URL]

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2973127]Primarily, to resist paid disinformation and propaganda. I support the cause of democratic liberalism. I want to see a healthy, educated world [b]where there is no armed conflict[/b] and international disputes are resolved through legal means.[/QUOTE]Then why don't you favor Ukraine and Russia entering into peace negotiations and an armistice ASAP?

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2973127]I had great hopes for the RF after 1992. There was a temporary blossoming of freedom, liberalism and culture, which has been suppressed by Putin's dictatorship. I am an amateur historian and have always had an interest in Russian imperialism, hegemony, territorial aggrandizement and periodic failure. In my opinion, Russia is in a much, much more fragile condition than in either 1917 or 1991. I believe, and I think you know it as well, its failure is inevitable.[/QUOTE]This is a worthwhile read for any amateur historian holding the views you do about Russia. Please don't overlook the documents at the end if you take a look.

[URL]https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973203]Then why don't you favor Ukraine and Russia entering into peace negotiations and an armistice ASAP?...[/QUOTE]I am in favor of peace. Negotiations over the prosecution of war crimes and reparations should begin immediately after Russia withdraws behind sovereign borders.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973203]Then why don't you favor Ukraine and Russia entering into peace negotiations and an armistice ASAP?

This is a worthwhile read for any amateur historian holding the views you do about Russia. Please don't overlook the documents at the end if you take a look.

[URL]https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early[/URL][/QUOTE]I really want to see how Ukrainian security can be guaranteed in any peace negotiation. Assuming a deal territories against peace, which foreign troops will be allowed by both Russia and Ukraine to guarantee the demarcation line?

I don't think anybody is against peace and for war. I think some people when they say they are for peace, they mean that they are for Ukrainian capitulation. During the last negotiations Russia was asking for a severe limitation in Ukrainian Army size and what weapons they would be allowed, which would guarantee that Ukraine could not defend itself anymore. Security guarantees would depend on a Russian veto. There was a treaty, more than 30 years ago Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons for security and territorial guarantees, Russia signed that treaty. What good is that piece of paper now?

Ukraine was neutral in 2014 and there were no talks of the government then that they are asking to join NATO. Then Putin invaded Crimeea. I find it strange that people keep saying "but in 1990 during negotiations some people said NATO would not expand". Maybe, but in the end it was never in any treaty, whatever was in the treaties then was what was accepted by the Soviet leadership at the time. Should Poland, Romania, the Baltic countries be kicked out of NATO because Putin wants that now?

At the same time people ignore when actual signed treaties were violated by Russia. Can we please hold everybody to the same standard?

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2973227]I am in favor of peace. Negotiations over the prosecution of war crimes and reparations should begin immediately after Russia withdraws behind sovereign borders.[/QUOTE]That's a recipe for endless war, "prosecution of war crimes" in particular.

[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2973241]I really want to see how Ukrainian security can be guaranteed in any peace negotiation. Assuming a deal territories against peace, which foreign troops will be allowed by both Russia and Ukraine to guarantee the demarcation line?

I don't think anybody is against peace and for war. I think some people when they say they are for peace, they mean that they are for Ukrainian capitulation. During the last negotiations Russia was asking for a severe limitation in Ukrainian Army size and what weapons they would be allowed, which would guarantee that Ukraine could not defend itself anymore. Security guarantees would depend on a Russian veto. There was a treaty, more than 30 years ago Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons for security and territorial guarantees, Russia signed that treaty. What good is that piece of paper now?

Ukraine was neutral in 2014 and there were no talks of the government then that they are asking to join NATO. Then Putin invaded Crimeea. I find it strange that people keep saying "but in 1990 during negotiations some people said NATO would not expand". Maybe, but in the end it was never in any treaty, whatever was in the treaties then was what was accepted by the Soviet leadership at the time. Should Poland, Romania, the Baltic countries be kicked out of NATO because Putin wants that now?

At the same time people ignore when actual signed treaties were violated by Russia. Can we please hold everybody to the same standard?[/QUOTE]Ukraine's position has been that it must ultimately regain all its territory including Crimea, although its backed off that somewhat. You've outlined Russia's position above. But to what extent are these just opening positions that neither side expects to fully achieve? The two sides were close in April, 2022. They should sit at the same table and hammer something out.

Ukraine and the West have to be realistic. Russia has a lot more manpower and military capability than Ukraine in addition to a huge nuclear arsenal. It's not going to lose this war.

You could level the same accusations at the USA that you're leveling at Russia. The Mexican-American war is a good analogy although admittedly something that occurred long ago. The USA added territory claimed by Mexico (Texas) where a large % of the population wanted to be annexed by the United States, and then war broke out which resulted in Mexico ceding a large part of the country to the USA. Iraq is not as good a comparison, although Russia at least is, mistakenly or not, protecting its interest in the near abroad, instead of pursuing democracy and imaginary weapons of mass destruction in a country 11,000 kilometers away. If the 20th century had turned out differently and Canada or Mexico were looking at joining the Warsaw Pact, the USA wouldn't just sit still. And the USA hasn't been one to let a piece of paper (i.e. treaty) dictate its conduct either.

I wish great powers conducted foreign policy as sensibly as yours (Switzerland) has through the centuries. But that's not the world we live in. And the primary goal now should be to stop the bloodshed IMO.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973648]That's a recipe for endless war, "prosecution of war crimes" in particular.

Ukraine's position has been that it must ultimately regain all its territory including Crimea, although its backed off that somewhat. You've outlined Russia's position above. But to what extent are these just opening positions that neither side expects to fully achieve? The two sides were close in April, 2022. They should sit at the same table and hammer something out.[/QUOTE]You keep repeating the same propacondoms' lies about some mythical agreement that had been hammered and would've been signed if mischievous Boris Johnson didn't torpedo it at the last moment.

That's a phantasy. There was no agreement ready to sign. It's an FSB construct for useful idiots in the West, and it's upsetting that you believe this nonsense.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973648]Ukraine and the West have to be realistic. Russia has a lot more manpower and military capability than Ukraine in addition to a huge nuclear arsenal. It's not going to lose this war.[/QUOTE]You don't know Russian history very well. Russia has managed to lose wars it started in way more favorable conditions. It's one thing to capture a village or town, but it's an entirely different proposition to [B]hold on to it[/B]. One way or another, sooner or later, Ukraine will regain its territories.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2973648]You could level the same accusations at the USA that you're leveling at Russia. The Mexican-American war is a good analogy although admittedly something that occurred long ago. The USA added territory claimed by Mexico (Texas) where a large % of the population wanted to be annexed by the United States, and then war broke out which resulted in Mexico ceding a large part of the country to the USA. [/QUOTE]My goodness, please tell me you DO understand how removed the US is right now from the Manifest Destiny. Please tell me you don't fall for this yet another Russian narrative that we're not better than them. It's 2025, not 19th century when everyone and their mother were in a mad dash to conquer new colonies; we haven't been "that guy" for a long, long time; yet Russia and its imperial aspirations are exactly the same today as they were 200 years ago.

Sane nations do not conquer foreign lands anymore. Russia is the biggest anachronism in the history of mankind, and it will fail -- hard.