Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also do not buy this slippery slope fallacy ******** that Putin will seek to expand territory, he's old, the Russian army is depleted, and NATO is so much stronger than them that the idea of them invading a NATO member is simply laughable at this point.

At this point his capabilities have been severely eroded and I don't think he set out for a wider conquest of Europe but that doesn't change the situation leading to this point, and how simply rolling over Ukraine would have seen him replaying that card until stopped by force, or mean we should now just dump Ukraine for our own conveniences.
 
Last edited:
It is kind of necessary to put something feasible as a strategy if you are saying there is some way to end this war with a positive outcome sometime soon... otherwise you are essentially just wasting your own time and everyone else's trying to claim the sky is brown when everyone can see it is blue...

The current strategy also isn't feasible though, it's just thousands of young men dying. I'd suggest Russia and Ukraine speaking to each other might be a start.
 
I am simply saying that the war is having huge consequences for Europe and the UK, so rather than pursuing this failing strategy we should pursue one that has a positive outcome.

This "failing" strategy has liberated fully a third of the territory that Russia has occupied/annexed in the original invasion and subsequent escalation. That Ukraine hasn't seen instant gains in the recent counter-offensive does mean it has failed except under completely unrealistic expectations of success.

That likely will involve Ukraine and Russia coming to a solution that they are both some what unhappy with, because the alternative is simply worse for everyone involved.

Since we're not willing to do what is necessary to fully defeat Russia, this seems likely.
 
The current strategy also isn't feasible though, it's just thousands of young men dying. I'd suggest Russia and Ukraine speaking to each other might be a start.

Which then just leads to Putin taking a ridiculous position while claiming everyone else is being unreasonable, repeat. Even assuming Ukraine went with the best intentions which is questionable but they aren't the ones who invaded here.
 
At this point his capabilities have been severely eroded and I don't think he set out for a wider conquest of Europe but that doesn't change the situation leading to this point, and how simply rolling over Ukraine would have seen him replaying that card until stopped by force, or mean we should now just dump Ukraine for our own conveniences.

Is there actually any evidence that Putin wished to invade Europe? Because we had a lot of years of him being quite friendly with Europe, visits to the UK, US, condolences during terrorist attacks, mutual respects paid to the dead in WW2, etc. To me I just do not buy this, and I've spent actually quite a lot of hours watching interviews with him from the past 20 years.
 
Last edited:
The current strategy for ending the war seems to be that we give Ukraine not enough weapons to actually win the war, but enough that they don't lose the war; so essentially there is currently not a strategy for ending the war. Ukraine evidently cannot win the war this year, it's unlikely to change next year since Russia will have most of the winter to rearm, rest, and fortify the positions they hold. So whatever we're currently doing will not end the war, that is obvious. It's not up to me or people like me to put forward a strategy to end the war because that is not my job. I am simply saying that the war is having huge consequences on Europe and the UK, so rather than pursuing this failing strategy we should pursue one that has a positive outcome. That likely will involve Ukraine and Russia coming to a solution that they are both some what unhappy with, because the alternative is simply worse for everyone involved.

I also do not buy this slippery slope fallacy ******** that Putin will seek to expand territory, he's old, the Russian army is depleted, and NATO is so much stronger than them that the idea of them invading a NATO member is simply laughable at this point.

I don't know about not enough weapons, there are limits and the balance is moving. I have always thought we were too cautious at the start, but then I suspect many thought Ukraine would not hold. Its not just weapons, its training required. Plus a good dose of global politics, MAGA loons to keep under control, actual Nazis (who seem to support Russia etc)
There seems to be a clear strategy to me, enable Ukraine to push Russia out. Seems like a valid strategy.
Ukraine can win this war, if they choose to.
Russia is clearly burning (no pun intended) through a lot of their equipment and forces. Yes they have a basic numbers advantage on both counts, but it seems pretty clear now that on both counts Ukraine is now fielding a higher quality. I posted a list a few days back of the gradual changes to whats being supplied month by month. It keeps happening. nimitz by end of 24? ;)

Its not up to you to put forwards a strategy no, its up to those supporting Ukraine, and Ukraine themselves. If they feel its working and they seem to, its not up to you or I to say the opposite.

Yes war, always has had and always will have consequences. Welcome to the real world. If you appease and allow dictators to function expect them to do dictator things every so often.

Its only failing in some peoples minds, in others its working. The end result remains unknown until its known.

You talk positive outcome, but thats very much in the eyes of the beholder.

The only parties who realistically can choose to end this are Ukraine and Russia. I am quite happy to give Putin Leeds if he GTFO from Ukraine though. I bet you would disagree with that solution, no?

There is plenty of europe not in NATO, plus other areas that if they were to fall under full Russian influence would be far worse than the situation right now.

But then I said Putin wouldnt Ukraine as he was old around 18 months ago. He did. Age has no direct consequence when they are not fighting at the front themselves. In fact based on much we have seen in the last 20 years, the old are utterly irrational at times (see Brexit for example)
As many have said, its just as possible someone worse than Putin follows. He does not hold unique views in regards Russia and its global position.
 
This "failing" strategy has liberated fully a third of the territory that Russia has occupied/annexed in the original invasion and subsequent escalation. That Ukraine hasn't seen instant gains in the recent counter-offensive does mean it has failed except under completely unrealistic expectations of success.

Since the initial invasion, realistically their stated goal following the failed attack on Kyiv (whether that was a decoy or not I don't know) was to occupy Crimea and the other areas of Eastern Ukraine which they're pretty much holding onto except the odd km here and there which can change in weeks or months.
 
Last edited:
Since the initial invasion, realistically their stated goal following the failed attack on Kyiv (whether that was a decoy or not I don't know) was to occupy Crimea and the other areas of Eastern Ukraine which they're pretty much holding into except the odd km here and there which can change in weeks or months.

They're not even holding the regions they claim are Russia.
 
Is there actually any evidence that Putin wished to invade Europe? Because we had a lot of years of him being quite friendly with Europe, visits to the UK, US, condolences during terrorist attacks, mutual respects paid to the dead in WW2, etc. To me I just do not buy this, and I've spent actually quite a lot of hours watching interviews with him from the past 20 years.

Have you missed a couple of geography lessons in regards where Russia has been active over the last 30 years?
 
Is there actually any evidence that Putin wished to invade Europe? Because we had a lot of years of him being quite friendly with Europe, visits to the UK, US, condolences during terrorist attacks, mutual respects paid to the dead in WW2, etc. To me I just do not buy this, and I've spent actually quite a lot of hours watching interviews with him from the past 20 years.

I'm not personally claiming he wished to invade [most of] Europe - but he has many times expressed a desire to reverse the last 30-40 years or so taking [back] large amounts of eastern Europe and if the West simply rolled over his mentality isn't one to stop - he'd keep taking advantage of it until stopped. If Ukraine had simply folded I fully believe he would have been nibbling at Poland before long testing NATO resolve and other places like Moldova before that while putting pressure on the likes of Hungary to become like Belarus is to Russia under threat of force.
 
Last edited:
So you would withdraw that support, basically hand over Ukraine to Putin to allow him to murder, rape etc his way across 40M people?
Cheap move, answering yes makes me personally responsible for the horrors you describe. Yet these are hypothetical horrors
There are real deaths, hundreds daily, happening. So yes, I would withdraw in a heartbeat.
Unfortunately not my decision. As I said, it will all be based in money. As long as Ukraine is a suitable cover to make [military] coroporations money and make us all poor, it will go on.
 
Cheap move, answering yes makes me personally responsible for the horrors you describe. Yet these are hypothetical horrors
There are real deaths, hundreds daily, happening. So yes, I would withdraw in a heartbeat.
Unfortunately not my decision. As I said, it will all be based in money. As long as Ukraine is a suitable cover to make [military] coroporations money and make us all poor, it will go on.

Problem is you aren't looking at the bigger picture, a desire to end suffering now will likely just grow a bigger problem that at some point has to be tackled in the future even if you write that off as "hypothetical", even assuming it doesn't directly lead to massive oppression of the Ukrainian people in the intermediate term.

Same problem with COVID - a reluctance to get to grips with it sooner rather than later meant we dragged out a costly, inefficient and in some cases ineffective response often over-reacting to the real problems it presented because we didn't want to go to the costs of dealing with it earlier and doing the high quality studies, etc. which would have allowed us to understand it earlier.
 
Last edited:
Cheap move, answering yes makes me personally responsible for the horrors you describe. Yet these are hypothetical horrors
There are real deaths, hundreds daily, happening. So yes, I would withdraw in a heartbeat.
Unfortunately not my decision. As I said, it will all be based in money. As long as Ukraine is a suitable cover to make [military] coroporations money and make us all poor, it will go on.

Cheap move?

No. Bringing the reality of your suggestion to the forefront.

Its easy to take hard decisions if you ignore the reality of what you are proposing.

How hypothetical they are depends on how much you look into what Russia has done and continues to do to the civilian population of Ukraine.
 
Cheap move?

No. Bringing the reality of your suggestion to the forefront.

Its easy to take hard decisions if you ignore the reality of what you are proposing.

How hypothetical they are depends on how much you look into what Russia has done and continues to do to the civilian population of Ukraine.

Problem is you are arguing with someone who is convinced Putin is a person of integrity based on selectively seeing the bits where Putin says what they want to hear/believe and somehow disassociating the rest.

So like Roar they really believe certain outcomes are possible most of the rest of us are under no delusions about.
 
Last edited:
The current strategy for ending the war seems to be that we give Ukraine not enough weapons to actually win the war, but enough that they don't lose the war; so essentially there is currently not a strategy for ending the war. Ukraine evidently cannot win the war this year, it's unlikely to change next year since Russia will have most of the winter to rearm, rest, and fortify the positions they hold. So whatever we're currently doing will not end the war, that is obvious. It's not up to me or people like me to put forward a strategy to end the war because that is not my job. I am simply saying that the war is having huge consequences for Europe and the UK, so rather than pursuing this failing strategy we should pursue one that has a positive outcome. That likely will involve Ukraine and Russia coming to a solution that they are both some what unhappy with, because the alternative is simply worse for everyone involved.

I also do not buy this slippery slope fallacy ******** that Putin will seek to expand territory, he's old, the Russian army is depleted, and NATO is so much stronger than them that the idea of them invading a NATO member is simply laughable at this point.

So you'd throw Ukraine and Moldova under the bus, Putin can have them and do with them as he pleases and the West are toothless to stop him. He builds up the military again and then decides he wants a land bridge to Kaliningrad and so starts with his little green men in Lithuania, claims they are ethnic Russians in that area, that they are being made to speak Lithuanian rather than Russian. If he made that move would you fully support NATO crushing Russian troops and their launching points across the border? Or would you still be saying you don't want to escalate and risk Putin throwing nukes at us? You are viewing this with a weak Western mentality, Putin respects power and if he smalls weakness he acts.
 
Problem is you are arguing with someone who is convinced Putin is a person of integrity based on selectively seeing the bits where Putin says what they want to hear/believe and somehow disassociating the rest.

So like Roar they really believe certain outcomes are possible most of the rest of us are under no delusions about.

I know, but you can at least call them out, even if they cannot be reasoned out of it, at least anyone else reading can hopefully see why alternate views exist.
 
I know, but you can at least call them out, even if they cannot be reasoned out of it, at least anyone else reading can hopefully see why alternate views exist.

Complete aside but I see it in the JSO thread as well - some people who are about climate change, etc. think of them as part of "their tribe" because JSO sometimes throw some stuff about the environment/climate about and only see the bits they want to see/hear and automatically in the first instance assume anything else is slander or someone else at fault, etc. somehow completely disassociating the negative bits.
 
I also do not buy this slippery slope fallacy ******** that Putin will seek to expand territory, he's old, the Russian army is depleted, and NATO is so much stronger than them that the idea of them invading a NATO member is simply laughable at this point.
You do realise Putins play book is to promise the world then wait it out a few years and then when rearmed and restocked he goes all in again.

Putin Tells you one thing then ignores it when the time is right. If you think Putin is capable of keeping a promise then your as deluded as him.

He may fear NATO but he wont try and take any NATO territory, he will just keep chipping away at Ukraine, if hes not stopped in this current conflict then any peace deals made will be broken when the time is right again.

And no he will never allow a peace deal that would allow any hopes of Ukraine joining NATO. He needs stopped now, there is no peace deal that would ever get what both parties want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom