Russia won't occupy Ukraine. That would mean governing a deeply hostile population in Kyiv and the West. I don't think they'll take or lose much more territory than they currently hold. Ukraine will join the EU and in about 20 years relations with Russia will be normalised . I don't think Ukraine will join NATO though, likely that'll be a condition for the cessation of hostilities.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Russia won't occupy Ukraine. That would mean governing a deeply hostile population in Kyiv and the West. I don't think they'll take or lose much more territory than they currently hold. Ukraine will join the EU and in about 20 years relations with Russia will be normalised . I don't think Ukraine will join NATO though, likely that'll be a condition for the cessation of hostilities.
Soldato
It is a valid position based on your opinions. However, continuation of the war comes down to Ukraine's opinions and predictions. They may believe they can get their land back, or that Russia is not a reliable negotiator, or that Russia will keep pushing for all Ukraine, or that Russia will try for more later. They may even prefer to die trying to defend their lands than be erased or subjugated, regardless of the odds. If you allow Russia to keep what they have, the UN is proven dead and you create open season for all expansionist regimes.
It's one of those points where it is fully justified to make the "Putin is literally Hitler" comparison. Both proved to be completely untrustworthy and willing to abuse and renege on agreements whenever it suited them. If Putin signs up to any sort of peace deal it will only be for strategic reasons and ultimately not worth the paper it is written on, unless there are effective deterrents in place to stop Russia having another go when it suits them.
Hundreds of thousands.
Possibly, I was just referring to Putins direct political assignations over the years. The “Little Rat” AKA KGB/Stasi Putin along with President Putin will have a much higher body count.
Associate
You gotta get off that crack pipe mate.
Ukrainians will see Russia as a mortal hated enemy for 2-3 lifetimes when this is through one way or the other.
Russians are gonna Russian, always the same for 300 years.
Fool me once with Stalin fine. After Putin if I was Ukrainian with Russian family, I would disown them and be done with it.
Just to add explanation to this comment.
The reason Putin (a KGB/FSB officer) often gets mentioned alongside the Stasi (East German secret police, upgraded Gestapo) is because while working for the KGB he was stationed in East Germany and was the official liaison between the KGB and the Stasi.
Soldato
I agree that Ukraine regaining all lost territory is an unrealistic scenario at the monent - unless Russia could be forced to recognise a new threat from a different direction.
I don't think Russia can maintain their current operational tempo indefinitely - if Russia could see a new threat on the ground somewhere along their vast borders they would be very hard pressed to respond without pulling a significant amount of men and equipment out of Ukraine.
What baffles me slightly is why do China look south to Taiwan - rather than looking north to Siberia... theres a move that would give them the space and resources they need, and it would be more achievable than crossing the Taiwan straight (though it would come with the threat of nuclear retaliation I suppose)
I don't think Russia can maintain their current operational tempo indefinitely - if Russia could see a new threat on the ground somewhere along their vast borders they would be very hard pressed to respond without pulling a significant amount of men and equipment out of Ukraine.
What baffles me slightly is why do China look south to Taiwan - rather than looking north to Siberia... theres a move that would give them the space and resources they need, and it would be more achievable than crossing the Taiwan straight (though it would come with the threat of nuclear retaliation I suppose)
Partly this, partly on the global stage Russia is one of their closest partners which helps add clout for the other.
Because after watching the US leave Ukraine to the wolves taking Taiwan looks less daunting.
Basically, there was a big USSR backed civil war in China, the communist PRC (People's Republic of China) overthrew the non-communist ROC (Republic Of China) and took over all of China except the islands of Hong Kong (on lease to the UK) and Taiwan. Because this was a Communist coup/revolution it wasn't recognised by the west who continued to consider the ROC as the "real" China, despite being limited in territory to the isle of Taiwan. Over the decades as it became apparent this situation was here to stay more and more governments continued to recognise the PRC as "China" and started to recognise the ROC as "Taiwan" at best or at worst as a breakaway separatist part of China. Eventually the UN seat of "China" was transferred from the ROC to the PRC, then eventually the UK's lease of Hong Kong expired and to avoid any political (or potentially military) issues we transferred HK to the PRC, de-facto recognising them not the ROC as the "real" China.
This is why the PRC are more concerned with "retaking" Taiwan than they are with invading Russia, they don't consider it as expansion they consider it as finally ending their civil war and brining the separatist region back into the fold.
Of course if they ever manage to take Taiwan you can bet they will instantly start eyeing up Russian territory that was once Chinese.
Maybe they still don't see it that way - the invasion kicked off with the notion they'd mostly be warmly welcomed by the majority of the population once a "bad" minority had been dealt with, even now I'm not sure the reality has really percolated through to those at the top.
Beyond that depends on Putin's intentions, they may assume they can keep the population in check through brutal suppression and conscripting abled bodied males into forced labour and/or the military. The occupation of various countries by the USSR took that form with 10s or even 100s of thousands killed to try and maintain order, Putin isn't against resorting to those kind of measures.
Soldato
Says man who got a nice big fat Starlink contract from DOD. Notice he's been silent on what they are used for since then, he's got his $ and that is all he ever cared about.
Oh and Tucker has likely delivered a blow job and rim job special for Vlad.
Oh and Tucker has likely delivered a blow job and rim job special for Vlad.
Last edited:
This is slightly flawed - it assumes the same strategy & tactica each time.
Rather than artil, I see russian focusing on uprising and attacks from a distance repeatedly. I don’t thing putin would threaten suitcase style of nuclear detonation because it would simply lock him into a faster downward spiral.
He’s more likely to target developing nations that have resources. Only issue his arms will need to ne ome competitive- that will take 5-10 years.
He may bankroll iran but I can’t help think it makes china uncomfortable to be part of a BRICS partnership that is a buzzword for war, corruption, economic chaos and destruction of their trade relationships.
At the risk of sounding like a Musk bummer, prior to the DOD taking direct control over Starlink in Ukraine the US gov were still calling the shots on it. Those clickbait stories the other year about how he refused to turn it on for an attack on Crimea (or in worse cases the clickbait stories about how he turned it off to prevent the attack) were actually found to be referencing a case where the US gov had told him to disable Crimea coverage and neither he nor Ukraine could get a hold of anyone to greenlight enabling it before the attack failed (Ukraine were unaware the US gov had had it disabled before launching the attack).
I think the main reason he's shut up about it is because somebody else has taken the reigns instead of just calling the shots, so people (in Russia and the west) will stop blaming him over how it's used.
I wonder if that's included in the interview, maybe that's why it's paywalled haha.
Last edited:
Soldato
What happened to that team that was always attacking Belgorod the breakaway Russian group for Ukraine?
Just seen/read this rather good takedown of Tucker's "interview"
"It's good to hear the story from both sides"
In this case, the other side is a genocidal warmonger who even killed hundreds of his own people to justify a war in Chechnya. Putin can provide his perspective at the Hague.
"Tucker is a journalist, let him do his job"
Tucker is a propagandist who is also extremely biased: In 2019, he said that "We should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine"
"The US is not at war with Russia"
Then why does the Kremlin call it a NATO proxy war?
"Zelenskyy banned opposing media"
Ukraine banned Medvedchuk's - a personal friend of Putin's - TV channels that spread pro-Kremlin propaganda. He also banned Serhiy Liovochkin's website that was even worse than Medvedchuk's channels.
Also, Russia invaded Ukraine.
"I want to hear what his [Putin's] interests are from his own mouth"
They're not a secret, you can read them from his 2021 revisionist and genocidal essay "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians"
"I've always wanted to see a Putin interview because it never happens"
Putin has been interviewed many times. For example, by Larry King in 2000, Barbara Walters in 2001, his lapdog Oliver Stone in 2015-2017, Megyn Kelly and @ArminWolfin 2018, and Keir Simmons in 2021
In all of them, Putin evades the difficult questions, rewrites history to fit the Kremlin's narrative, and instead blames the West for everything. Wolf was one of the few who actually challenged him, see the interview with English captions below.
Finally, there is absolutely no media freedom in Russia and their World Press Freedom Index is one of the worst in the whole world.
In this case, the other side is a genocidal warmonger who even killed hundreds of his own people to justify a war in Chechnya. Putin can provide his perspective at the Hague.
"Tucker is a journalist, let him do his job"
Tucker is a propagandist who is also extremely biased: In 2019, he said that "We should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine"
"The US is not at war with Russia"
Then why does the Kremlin call it a NATO proxy war?
"Zelenskyy banned opposing media"
Ukraine banned Medvedchuk's - a personal friend of Putin's - TV channels that spread pro-Kremlin propaganda. He also banned Serhiy Liovochkin's website that was even worse than Medvedchuk's channels.
Also, Russia invaded Ukraine.
"I want to hear what his [Putin's] interests are from his own mouth"
They're not a secret, you can read them from his 2021 revisionist and genocidal essay "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians"
"I've always wanted to see a Putin interview because it never happens"
Putin has been interviewed many times. For example, by Larry King in 2000, Barbara Walters in 2001, his lapdog Oliver Stone in 2015-2017, Megyn Kelly and @ArminWolfin 2018, and Keir Simmons in 2021
In all of them, Putin evades the difficult questions, rewrites history to fit the Kremlin's narrative, and instead blames the West for everything. Wolf was one of the few who actually challenged him, see the interview with English captions below.
Finally, there is absolutely no media freedom in Russia and their World Press Freedom Index is one of the worst in the whole world.
Last edited:
Still carrying out sporadic sabotage missions into Russia but nothing like previous action.
Soldato
Havnt seen anything on them for ages used to do big attacks but it all gone quiet.
That would make some of his very best work.
- Status