Ukraine Conflict - Alle Dinge unterliegen Interpretation je nachdem, was Interpretation zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt herrscht, ist eine Funktion der Macht und nicht die Wahrheit

[Malcador]

11 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

(To take another look at this)

But then, not really. To take your country as an example: Canada is not currently engaged in cooking up a story according to which, for instance, the country was inflitrated by a group of ruthless murderers who entered Catholic schools and shamelessly killed quite a lot of children in them. And from specific ethnic backgrounds as well. Canada is doing something altogether different, and good for them, too. I wonder if you'd disagree.

The selfishness argument can be applied to this, too, of course, but it can be applied to absolutely everything. If there's someone dying on my doorstep and I help him, it can always be argued that I only have a selfish interest: to make myself feel better. This can never be avoided. I would argue, however, that "common sense", that most uncommon thing, can generally distinguish between selfish and unselfish acts.

**** off, with "wonder if you'd disagree." on the residential schools.  And you haven't seen the government dodge its involvement in the residential schools - their tenacity with going after the Church for their complicity is to cover their own.  Canada's more or less glossed over that for years as well, wasn't covered in schools until fairly recently.  

Not that Russia's "right" in any given instance, but the approach is pretty bog standard for nations (or managers).

 

9 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

My sense is that the sporting line is taken because Russia has historically placed a lot of importance on sports. Putin also, as a person, has placed a lot of importance on it, too. This may be one reason behind these bans. But I don't know.

Charitable if you think it's that deep.  At best, I guess they feel people will act like morons towards the players due to being triggered by anything Russian. 

Related - https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/61172686

She aimed too low, should have said they need to make a donation to Ukraine as well as denouncing Russia

 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Malcador

[xzar_monty]

6 minutes ago, Malcador said:

**** off, with "wonder if you'd disagree." on the residential schools.  And you haven't seen the government dodge its involvement in the residential schools - their tenacity with going after the Church for their complicity is to cover their own.  Canada's more or less glossed over that for years as well, wasn't covered in schools until fairly recently.  

Not that Russia's "right" in any given instance, but the approach is pretty bog standard for nations (or managers).

There is still an important difference that I think you continue to ignore. I may be wrong, of course.

I can easily believe that Canada has glossed over that for quite some time -- after all, I can think of similar instances in my own country. But Canada is not denying it now, because of the overwhelming evidence, and this is the important difference. With Russia, there appears to be no point at which there is readiness to acknowledge that yes, we did this, and it was not ok. There is not even an acknowledgment that the country has attacked Ukraine.

[Elerond]

43 minutes ago, pmp10 said:

Azovstal to be blockaded instead of stormed
Makes sense given the supposed number of civilians in there, but I doubt that means end of bombardment.

A hostage situation might develop over this.
Ukraine has already offered prisoners in exchange.  

I think it is more because Russian's realized that it is death trap that Ukraine has build since 2014. They have dig there several kilometres worth of underground tunnels with defensive positions to make it very difficult to storm. So Russians leadership probably realized that by blockading and bombardment they can free their troops to other battlefronts and avoid losing troops unnecessary for little gain.  

[Malcador]

2 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

There is still an important difference that I think you continue to ignore. I may be wrong, of course.

I can easily believe that Canada has glossed over that for quite some time -- after all, I can think of similar instances in my own country. But Canada is not denying it now, because of the overwhelming evidence, and this is the important difference. With Russia, there appears to be no point at which there is readiness to acknowledge that yes, we did this, and it was not ok. There is not even an acknowledgment that the country has attacked Ukraine.

Yes, as I wrote, the approach is standard. Not quite sure why you're taking that as defense of Russia, but that's how this thread goes.

[kanisatha]

8 hours ago, Lexx said:

I'm actually surprised that the remnants in the steel factory still have (or had) food and water left after so much time. The way I understood it, there must be at least ~1k people. Try getting rations for so many people if you are surrounded.

I read it's 300 defenders still left.

[xzar_monty]

7 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Yes, as I wrote, the approach is standard. Not quite sure why you're taking that as defense of Russia, but that's how this thread goes.

I'm not, and I never did.

[xzar_monty]

9 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

I read it's 300 defenders still left.

Has to be 300. Thermopylae!

[kanisatha]

20 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

...

 

More details are available on this, that across southern Ukraine where Russia still occupies Ukrainian territory, people are being coerced or conned by the Russians into giving up their personal information, giving up their Ukrainian IDs and passports, and signing documents supporting the Russian installed "government" and calling for a secessionist referendum. Well, these areas are not part of the Donbass, so how does Russia justify annexing these regions? Russia's game here is entirely a sham. This is just a blatant land-grab. There are no principles, or even national/security interests involved. It's just an 18th or 19th or early-20th centurey style land-grad, based purely on the notion that stronger countries can take whatever they want from their weaker neighbors.

[Malcador]

6 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

I'm not, and I never did.

Then no need to keep belabouring the point on Russian statements being lies, then.

[xzar_monty]

12 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

It's just an 18th or 19th or early-20th centurey style land-grad, based purely on the notion that stronger countries can take whatever they want from their weaker neighbors.

Also, and unfortunately, a post-1945 style land-grab, based purely on the notion that a nuclear power cannot be stopped. (As we've established, this is the point the whole conflict hinges on. Without this, and only this, Russia would have been put down already.)

[rjshae]

10 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Also, and unfortunately, a post-1945 style land-grab, based purely on the notion that a nuclear power cannot be stopped. (As we've established, this is the point the whole conflict hinges on. Without this, and only this, Russia would have been put down already.)

I don't see much benefit in grabbing this region as a bulwark against NATO. Speculatively it does provide some agricultural land, natural resources, and direct access to the Crimea. Perhaps Putin also views this aggrandizement as a potential jumping off point for further incursions? A step by step takeover.

Are Ukraine's vast natural resources a real reason behind Russia's invasion?

[Mamoulian War]

1 hour ago, pmp10 said:

Azovstal to be blockaded instead of stormed
Makes sense given the supposed number of civilians in there, but I doubt that means end of bombardment.

A hostage situation might develop over this.
Ukraine has already offered prisoners in exchange.  

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

I think it is more because Russian's realized that it is death trap that Ukraine has build since 2014. They have dig there several kilometres worth of underground tunnels with defensive positions to make it very difficult to storm. So Russians leadership probably realized that by blockading and bombardment they can free their troops to other battlefronts and avoid losing troops unnecessary for little gain.  

This is correct. Putin in his today's speech after stopping the assault has said, he is doing it to save Russian soldiers lives, he does not give a single **** about the children there. He specifically said, that the Russian soldier should not allow a single fly out of Azovstal. The interesting thing is, that right after that statement, Polk Azov already released video of destroyed Russian Tank, and they released a statement, that after this announcement in matter of two hours they destroyed 3 tanks, 2 BMPs, and something, which my limited knowledge of Ukrainian spoken language was not able to decipher.

41 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

More details are available on this, that across southern Ukraine where Russia still occupies Ukrainian territory, people are being coerced or conned by the Russians into giving up their personal information, giving up their Ukrainian IDs and passports, and signing documents supporting the Russian installed "government" and calling for a secessionist referendum. Well, these areas are not part of the Donbass, so how does Russia justify annexing these regions? Russia's game here is entirely a sham. This is just a blatant land-grab. There are no principles, or even national/security interests involved. It's just an 18th or 19th or early-20th centurey style land-grad, based purely on the notion that stronger countries can take whatever they want from their weaker neighbors.

And this is the response from Ukrainian partizans: the approx translation is: "For occupants and collaborators: We are close, we are already working in Kherson, death awaits for all of you. Kherson is Ukraine. (this has been posted very soon after someone killed pro-russian blogger in Kherson)

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

My sense is that the sporting line is taken because Russia has historically placed a lot of importance on sports. Putin also, as a person, has placed a lot of importance on it, too. This may be one reason behind these bans. But I don't know.

I have seen few Russian ex-athletes, who run away from Russia, to support this banning of Russian athletes, with the reasoning behind being, that the Russian athletes were always tools of Russian propaganda. Just think about the crazy big scandal of web of state controlled doping few years ago. Up until now, Russian have been denying, that this is truth, as much as they are still denying they shot down the civil plane over Donbas.

 

[ShadySands]

5 hours ago, 213374U said:

I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

Just that I agree that we should be very skeptical of reports of the "Russian position" on things especially when the reports are so contradictory but also that I found the post funny because my own Russian family members actually do hold a lot of very contradictory beliefs* on the war in Ukraine, such as it both being and not being a war. Also, that I'm trying not to apply my experience with them to anyone beyond them who has not explicitly stated their stance(s)

 

*Who hasn't been guilty of this at some point though I do think it's especially sad because I have family on both sides of this conflict, though only the ones in Ukraine are in danger

Edited April 21, 2022 by ShadySands

[xzar_monty]

2 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

I have seen few Russian ex-athletes, who run away from Russia, to support this banning of Russian athletes, with the reasoning behind being, that the Russian athletes were always tools of Russian propaganda. Just think about the crazy big scandal of web of state controlled doping few years ago.

Hey, good point! This reinforces my idea of sports being important for Russia in general and Putin in particular, and so this ban does have some sense.

The disappointingly mild reaction to Russia's state-controlled doping may have been one of the reasons why Putin regarded the west as weak and not likely to put up much of a fuss if he attacks Ukraine. And to anyone about to whatabout, yes I know Russia is not the only country with doping problems.

[xzar_monty]

2 minutes ago, ShadySands said:

my own Russian family members actually do hold a lot of very contradictory beliefs* on the war in Ukraine, such as it both being and not being a war.

It would be extremely interesting to hear more about this, especially in two specific ways:

1) How these contradictory viewpoints come up -- like, how close to each other, in what ways, and so on, and

2) How is this contradiction addressed, if at all. Like, is there a sense of "I'm confused about this", or a sense of "There is no contradiction", or what.

[Mamoulian War]

Today has been very fruitful for the Ukrainian air defense:
3 aircraft (1 Su-25, 2 unspecified models of Su), 2 helicopters (1 KA-52, 1 Mi-8), 1 Orlan-10

[Malcador]

16 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

The disappointingly mild reaction to Russia's state-controlled doping

What would have you preferred ?

[Mamoulian War]

Even though the town of Kreminna was taken by Russian occupants, the Ukrainians wiped out whole unit/group/BTG? (impossible to find out from the article) led by one of the top Lugansk Peoples Republic commander Lieutenant Colonel Kishchik (probably Kadyrovite), including himself, before retreating from Kreminna. The guy became "famous and high regarded commander" after the events of 2014 occupation of Donbas.

Google translate of the news in Slovak language:
https://www-trend-sk.translate.goog/spravy/ukrajina-zahynul-jeden-velitelov-luhanskych-separatistov-cecenec-misa?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Day after this, Ukrainian intelligence service GUR, reported that Russia started Purge in the top ranks of LPR, due to not doing enough to defeat Ukraine. (this might or might not be connected to the above mentioned killing of the top commander and his entire unit/group/BTG?)

Edited April 21, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[kanisatha]

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

Also, and unfortunately, a post-1945 style land-grab, based purely on the notion that a nuclear power cannot be stopped. (As we've established, this is the point the whole conflict hinges on. Without this, and only this, Russia would have been put down already.)

Correct. And this is something the West will soon need to get a grip on, because even relatively minor states like North Korea and Iran will soon begin to try and use the possession of nukes as leverage to demand and take what they want and "deterrence" against retaliation for their bad behavior. Like anyone else, I have no wish to see nukes getting used by any state, but at the same time it bothers me like crazy that our Western leaders and governments are so very sensitive to the prospect of Russia escalating to using nukes that they end up tip-toeing around Putin and his criminal behavior. Too damn sensitive, imo.

[kanisatha]

54 minutes ago, rjshae said:

I don't see much benefit in grabbing this region as a bulwark against NATO. Speculatively it does provide some agricultural land, natural resources, and direct access to the Crimea. Perhaps Putin also views this aggrandizement as a potential jumping off point for further incursions? A step by step takeover.

Are Ukraine's vast natural resources a real reason behind Russia's invasion?

All of this, yes. But also just the attitude and mentality of: (a) I can do this and get away with it, and nobody can stop me; and (b) I get to do nasty things to someone "inferior" to me that I don't like, and put them in their place.

[Malcador]

5 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

But also just the attitude and mentality of: (a) I can do this and get away with it, and nobody can stop me;

Heh.

 

Things are looking pretty bright for them.  New weapons in from the US as well, maybe I can stop hearing all this panic mongering in the media now.

[xzar_monty]

6 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

All of this, yes. But also just the attitude and mentality of: (a) I can do this and get away with it, and nobody can stop me; and (b) I get to do nasty things to someone "inferior" to me that I don't like, and put them in their place.

As I take it that this field is something of a speciality for you, how would you see Putin / Russia backing down from this in the event that Ukraine's defences really hold up well and possibly turn into attack? I'm not saying attack in the sense of seizing Russian territory, but in the sense of driving the Russians back and demolishing the forces inside Ukraine (which of course is not a given but certainly a possibility).

The way I see it (as a complete layman in military strategy) is that Putin is in something of a bind. Both your (a) and (b) seem to characterize his mentality fairly well, but then this means that if he's facing defeat, it would also mean an intolerable loss of face. How can this bind be resolved? He does not seem to have the kind of personality that resolves a conundrum like this the same way a very famous German did in 1945.

[kanisatha]

4 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Heh.

 

Things are looking pretty bright for them.  New weapons in from the US as well, maybe I can stop hearing all this panic mongering in the media now.

Yeah, you know, just yesterday I saw a news story in which a senior security official in the Biden Administration was quoted as saying that US policy is now to ensure that Russia "does not win" in Ukraine, effectively a denial strategy against Russia. I hope this is true, because then I would finally have something to cheer about.

[pmp10]

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

I think it is more because Russian's realized that it is death trap that Ukraine has build since 2014. They have dig there several kilometres worth of underground tunnels with defensive positions to make it very difficult to storm. So Russians leadership probably realized that by blockading and bombardment they can free their troops to other battlefronts and avoid losing troops unnecessary for little gain.  

Sure, but the city didn't have to be stormed either.
Troops attacking Mariupol could have been used at Mykolaiv where a city cannot be easily bypassed.
So since it looks like a political objective it is a bit odd to delay complete capture. 

And another interesting development:
It seems that another arms package was just approved by Biden.
72 howitzers is actually quite the step-up.
If supplies continue being streamed like this Ukraine might retake some small bits of lost ground. 

[kanisatha]

10 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

As I take it that this field is something of a speciality for you, how would you see Putin / Russia backing down from this in the event that Ukraine's defences really hold up well and possibly turn into attack? I'm not saying attack in the sense of seizing Russian territory, but in the sense of driving the Russians back and demolishing the forces inside Ukraine (which of course is not a given but certainly a possibility).

The way I see it (as a complete layman in military strategy) is that Putin is in something of a bind. Both your (a) and (b) seem to characterize his mentality fairly well, but then this means that if he's facing defeat, it would also mean an intolerable loss of face. How can this bind be resolved? He does not seem to have the kind of personality that resolves a conundrum like this the same way a very famous German did in 1945.

This is the million dollar question. And I fear my own answer to it. You may have noticed in recent days an uptick in references by Ukrainian officials including Zelenskiy re. Putin's plans for the use of nukes in Ukraine. Well, that, I fear, will be Putin's endgame here. He will seize as much Ukrainian territory as he can, not only in the Donbass but also in southern Ukraine, and then once his forces no longer can successfully operate on offence and/or Ukrainian forces are shifting to offence, he will demand a ceasefire that effectively cedes all that occupied territory to Russia and threaten to use nukes against Ukraine if Ukraine refuses to accept his fait accompli.

Edited April 21, 2022 by kanisatha