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

[xzar_monty]

28 minutes ago, bugarup said:

Yeah, well I do try to regularly come up with creative names for that puffy decomposing bloatfish, but sometimes I just don't think that short rodent-faced melting waxdoll is worth the effort. 

Ha. I am just now working on something written by a major international star, and it's fascinating to note, once again, how even towards the very end, various names and unnice descriptions get removed from or modified in the manuscript. To avoid potential legal trouble, of course.

Having done this for decades, some of it must have rubbed on me. Just in case you wonder why I avoid unpleasantries, you waffling twát.

Edited May 4, 2022 by xzar_monty

[213374U]

2 hours ago, Chilloutman said:

No, because we are in NATO. And exact reason why they can't even cross Dniepr CURRENTLY is NATO. If they mobilize its different story. Russian military is joke, it doesn't mean that 10 million 'russian' soldiers are not scary. I really don't see contradiction in it

NATO is preventing Russian advances in Donbas how exactly? With strongly worded condemnations? NATO isn't a belligerent. There are no NATO units involved in the fighting and Russia's offensive seems to have run out of steam way before Ukraine started to get heavy weapons from the west.

Again -- Russia isn't the Soviet Union. They did away with mass conscription a long time ago. They do not have the infrastructure to mobilize, train and equip ten million men any longer. They could perhaps over the course of the next few years, if the conflict isn't resolved and Russia keeps getting more and more isolated, seek to rebuild that capability. But that's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, don't you think?

 

 

1 hour ago, bugarup said:

Even if we ignore the fact russia shat on those agreements in the first place when it chose to attack, implementing them in full is giving demented dictator of a fascist country what he wants (and stupidly hoping he'll stop there).

Ah yes, Russia shat on those agreements, but not the guarantors or Ukraine when they decided to crush resistance in Donbas militarily instead of going ahead with the implementation. Yes, everything and anything is Russia's fault. And let's not forget that they are mad and/or stupid.

 

1 hour ago, bugarup said:

Nothing is shifting here, because russian army is militarily semi-joke that not only America can face down, but only America and maybe Brits seem to be willing to face down. There is difference. 

Quite likely that it would not. Quite likely that it would be some deep concerns and perhaps even condemnation of actions, but those losers in their insignificant countries east of East Germany (that belong to russia's influence sphere anyway thus should know their place and accept it) cannot really matter more than precious status quo with aside of cheap gas, right? 

So you're saying that if Russia attacked an EU member, the EU would not mobilize a military response. It's an interesting theory, but let's see some evidence.

Keep in mind that "they would only because NATO exists" is a bad argument because it cannot be falsified. So try something else.

 

1 hour ago, bugarup said:

 Just like this war that putler wages against Ukraine! 

Sigh. Again, if Putler had wanted to conquer Ukrainian lands, he could have done it in 2014 when the Ukrainian military was in tatters, and whole units were defecting to separatists. Trying to do it now after 8 years of preparations and fortifications makes no sense.

Let me guess... Russians are mad and/or stupid. 20 GOTO 10.

[Chilloutman]

5 minutes ago, 213374U said:

NATO is preventing Russian advances in Donbas how exactly? With strongly worded condemnations? NATO isn't a belligerent. There are no NATO units involved in the fighting and Russia's offensive seems to have run out of steam way before Ukraine started to get heavy weapons from the west.

Sigh. Again, if Putler had wanted to conquer Ukrainian lands, he could have done it in 2014 when the Ukrainian military was in tatters, and whole units were defecting to separatists. Trying to do it now after 8 years of preparations and fortifications makes no sense.

Let me guess... Russians are mad and/or stupid. 20 GOTO 10.

You answer yourself your own question - NATO is supplying military equipment to Ukraine and was training their military since 2014. The fact that Russia's offensive run out of steam is because Ukraine army was well trained in past 8 years - if it was in state as in 2014 Russians would be in Kiev by now.

 

As to other response - not that he didn't tried right? Or was troops north of Kiev on vacation only?

 

Yes they are mad and stupid

[213374U]

Just now, Chilloutman said:

You answer yourself your own question - NATO is supplying military equipment to Ukraine and was training their military since 2014. The fact that Russia's offensive run out of steam is because Ukraine army was well trained in past 8 years - if it was in state as in 2014 Russians would be in Kiev by now.

You keep moving the goalposts -- stop it.

You said that the reason Russia can't cross the Dniepr is NATO. It isn't -- NATO is a military organization, and it's not a participant in the conflict. it's the countries that conform it that have been sending supplies, but they aren't obligated by NATO to do so and it's not a NATO initiative. The US training isn't contingent on NATO because they have a long history of training foreign militaries. So again: how is NATO stopping Russian advances in Ukraine?

And no, despite what you may have heard, Russians have been fairly careful not to touch Kiev itself. Their military goals have been clearly to inflict as much damage as possible to Ukraine's military to force them to accept terms.

[Chilloutman]

now you are just playing with words. It was multiple times stated that NATO is coordinating their military equipment support to Ukraine - that they are not obligated to it changes very little. And yes US training might not be (I am not even sure) NATO supported but again it changes little as US ARE part of NATO

 

and yes Russia can bomb/nuke Ukraine from existence (reference to your link) - I didn't disputed that - I am saying they were unable to conquer it

[xzar_monty]

Apparently Russia is breaching foreign airspace again up in the north, this time in Finland. They've done it in Sweden, too, very recently. Lovely folks.

I wonder about the justifications for this, Sweden and Finland being such belligerents, historically. But clearly there will be some, and clearly they will be believed by some.

Edited May 4, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Mamoulian War]

8 hours ago, 213374U said:

The biggest obstacle to a Nordic or European defense alliance that has European interests and security in mind is... the US. Never going to happen so long as NATO exists.

 

Yeah, but it's a really awesome parallel. Let's actually stop for a moment and consider what could happen if Putin is removed via internal coup or a civil war*. Last time that happend, by all accounts, you got people in power who were even bigger butchers than the incumbent by quite a bit. Do people really think that a Putin ouster is going to end with Mr. 4% support taking over so that we can all go sing kumbaya in the Red Square? Look at the political landscape in Russia and realize that Putin is actually the moderate guy there. Is the endgame a rehash of the Western 1918 expeditions into Russia (but guys I'm sure this time it'll pan out) to put cool guy Navalny in the Kremlin or what? How do people imagine this playing out in their heads?

 

*civil war in a country with the largest nuclear stockpile is a truly terrifying prospect and I'd argue that anyone should consider the status quo better than that possibility, but here we are.

To play a massive cynic, well, a civil war in a country with 6000 nukes would solve a lot, if no one decided to intervene...

[Mamoulian War]

5 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Not really alluding to anyone, except nebulous 'people' in general. And to be fair to people in general, rather a lot of them wouldn't even have been born in 1999.

Thing is though, Putin's Russia has been so stable, relatively speaking, that people in general do forget how unstable it was under Yeltsin. Apart from the bankruptcy in 1998 he also had 5 Prime Ministers in 4 years from 1996-99, as opposed to 6 (including of course a certain VV Putin for 4 years) in the next 22 after he'd gone. He'd got rid of the VP, he was beholden to a load of oligarchs whose power makes the current crop look like children, he didn't have a succession plan, he didn't bother building a Party at all, and he really was a few vodka shots away from a drug/alcoholic coma for pretty much his entire time in office. We only knew who his successor was for sure on 1 Jan 2000, since after his resignation he literally couldn't fire Putin any more.

Allegedly, the reason Putin was picked so far as Yeltsin was concerned was extremely simple; he promised not to go after him once he'd left office so his family could keep all the money he stole and he could die in peace. He'd never have got the same from Zyuganov or Zhirinovsky who outright hated him and may well have formally brought back the death penalty just for him. And his approval ratings and those of his political friends were subterranean- 2%- so there was no point any of them standing.

If Putin dies Mishustin takes over temporarily, that is known. It's also very strongly suspected that he won't be the successor but just interim. There will be a successor who stands in the election after that, and one who has already been decided on. But there's literally no point in saying publicly that it's say, Medvedev, (who it likely isn't either) because all it does is 'reassure' westerners and make him a target immediately.

Really though, most of the 'concern' from the diplomatic/ media side of the west is, basically, concern trolling. "Russia is so unstable, I wish we knew who Putin's successor is [and as above we actually do, at least in the interim] so maybe it wouldn't be quite as bad, but we don't, so you can see how unstable Russia is" sort of thing.

yeah, let's glorify, how Russia is stable under Putin, and completely forget how he is destabilizing whole Eastern Europe with his hybrid war since 2014, with half of the neonazi and nationalist parties in these countries being on his payroll... His goal being to completely undermine EU and slowly cause it to dissolve with the use of useful idiots like Orban, who was probably promised Zakarpathia Ukraine, to stay on Putin's leash... If he would not be such a moron and waited few more years, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia would make as much mess in the EU as UK did since start of Brexit rally... Before the War, Putin's approval here was over 60% (mostly due to well executed hybrid war)... nowadays, it is around 20%...

[bugarup]

6 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Ah yes, Russia shat on those agreements, but not the guarantors or Ukraine when they decided to crush resistance in Donbas militarily instead of going ahead with the implementation. Yes, everything and anything is Russia's fault. And let's not forget that they are mad and/or stupid.

Ah yes, now I see - evil meanie Ukraine did not want to hand its territory with totally absolutely honest to god natural insurgencies that were totally absolutely honest to god not orchestrated by Russia up to sending their military officers to stir up **** there (also see: Girkin, Igor) over to Russia after it already occupied Ukrainian Crimea and therefore this war is entirely Ukraine's own fault, because how could the most peaceful and innocent goodest neighbour Russia not to interfere on behalf of those poor annexed oppressed regions, it being the shining beacon of selflessness and noble intentions, truly the caring oldest brother of us ungrateful faux-nations!  See, I can do passive-aggressive comical exaggeration too!

Quote

So you're saying that if Russia attacked an EU member, the EU would not mobilize a military response. It's an interesting theory, but let's see some evidence.

Lets not, because it'll require Russia attacking an EU member.

53 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Sigh. Again, if Putler had wanted to conquer Ukrainian lands, he could have done it in 2014 when the Ukrainian military was in tatters, and whole units were defecting to separatists. Trying to do it now after 8 years of preparations and fortifications makes no sense.

Yes! It makes no sense, I agree! But he did it! 

38 minutes ago, 213374U said:

And no, despite what you may have heard, Russians have been fairly careful not to touch Kiev itself. Their military goals have been clearly to inflict as much damage as possible to Ukraine's military to force them to accept terms.

Nice article. Too bad it did not age that well, because since then Bucha has been discovered among other things. Civilian executions, raping and looting doesn't quite fit the "we'll just denazify here a little and be out real quick" plan, don't you think? 

[Gorth]

24 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

I wonder about the justifications for this, Sweden and Finland being such belligerents, historically. But clearly there will be some, and clearly they will be believed by some.

Might have something to do with Putin's "or else!" threats, if Finland and Sweden thinks about joining Nato?

[xzar_monty]

4 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Might have something to do with Putin's "or else!" threats, if Finland and Sweden thinks about joining Nato?

Absolutely, that's what it is.

But should you ask Lavrov about it, for instance, there would surely be different justifications, possibly related to the nazis in Sweden or something (I suppose you've seen the campaign going on in Russia). That's what I was referring to (although, admittedly, possibly not clearly enough).

What they're enganged in here is criminal, once again. Here, too. But they are likely going to try to justify it in a completely different way, and there will be some who accept that different way.

[BruceVC]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/eu-proposes-banning-russian-oil-065832312.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

More Russian banks are going to be cutoff from SWIFT and further moves to end EU dependency on Russian energy

Great news, the sooner the Russian economy collapses the quicker Putins War will end 

[Mamoulian War]

4 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Might have something to do with Putin's "or else!" threats, if Finland and Sweden thinks about joining Nato?

Yes, I agree, it is just another powerplay of Putin to scare them, well I sometimes hope, that some of the EU countries would get the same balls as Turkey did, when Russia repeatedly after a lot of warnings have been ignored. Erdogan shot down one or few of their planes and since then Russia stopped barking on them...

[xzar_monty]

16 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

His goal being to completely undermine EU and slowly cause it to dissolve with the use of useful idiots like Orban, who was probably promised Zakarpathia Ukraine, to stay on Putin's leash...

We're not going to know it, but it would be extremely interesting to know how much various people have already been given and what they have also been promised. Mind you, I'm not saying anything about Orban.

But here's a good definite example: this guy Kirill. The pope's words won't carry weight in Russia, I'm sure, but it's still nice to see him come across this blunt. Kirill has KGB history going back to 1972, when he used a different name. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/04/europe/pope-francis-patriarch-kirill-ukraine-invasion-intl/index.html

[Mamoulian War]

7 hours ago, pmp10 said:

You likely mean the polish president. The line was that no territorial loss of Ukraine will be recognised.

That position (and the UK one) is just diplomatic grandstanding. Everyone understands that Ukraine has little prospect of winning back land lost this war, to say nothing of Crimea or DNR/LPR.

They are slowly winning back some land lost, in last few days, though. Most notably around the Kharkiv region, where they got back a loads of land, which was occupied since February 24th. (Land north of Chuhuiv and west of Siverskyi Donec river, up to town of Staryi Saltiv - advance of almost 40km in a single day during Ukrainian counter-offensive).

 

EDIT: And besides that, there are some incidents of spontaneous combustion all around Russia on places critical to military research and supply, which might turn the wages even a little bit more on the side of Ukraine .

 

Edited May 4, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Malcador]

Is there any proof of Ukraine's accusation against Orban? Or was that just slinging crap at him for not being on the team 100%

15 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Yes, I agree, it is just another powerplay of Putin to scare them, well I sometimes hope, that some of the EU countries would get the same balls as Turkey did, when Russia repeatedly after a lot of warnings have been ignored. Erdogan shot down one or few of their planes and since then Russia stopped barking on them

I really recall Turkey backing down more than Russia after that downing of one plane.

[Azdeus]

15 hours ago, Gorth said:

Just you wait… Kofod has a secret pact with Lavrov regarding the partition of Sweden.

 

Scania will come home again

Not even Pruttin is crazy enough to want Scania

[Mamoulian War]

24 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Is there any proof of Ukraine's accusation against Orban? Or was that just slinging crap at him for not being on the team 100%

 

No direct proof, but here is a google translate of russian Konsomolskaya Pravda from March 1st, where they are talking how this might/will end up. Orban and the people around him were always very vocal about the cancellation of Treaty of Trianon, and from the experience, of how Hungary tried meddling into the affairs of they neighbours in recent past, including Slovakia (one of the most notable one is handing out Hungarian passports to people in neighbouring countries, very similar to what Russia is doing in Ukraine), I consider this information plausible, but it should still be taken with a pretty big grain of salt, because my subjective view on this matter might be a little bit skewed and not objective from personal experience of Slovak politics.

 

https://www-kp-ru.translate.goog/daily/27371.3/4552402/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Edited May 4, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Chilloutman]

I am just waiting for Lavrov to call Chinese nazis, I am sure he REALLY want to xD

[kanisatha]

8 hours ago, Chilloutman said:

Well define 'European interest' because we in East REALLY don't trust frog eaters to help us against Russia as they demonstrated time and time again. Only one willing is US. Germans and French would sacrifice us in blink of eye until there is russian tank division 100km from France they will do nothing

Would love to be able to give a dozen 'hearts' for this post.

[kanisatha]

4 hours ago, bugarup said:

Yeah, well I do try to regularly come up with creative names for that puffy decomposing bloatfish, but sometimes I just don't think that short rodent-faced melting waxdoll is worth the effort. 

I personally like Palputin.

[Malcador]

26 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

No direct proof, but here is a google translate of russian Konsomolskaya Pravda from March 1st, where they are talking how this might/will end up. Orban and the people around him were always very vocal about the cancellation of Treaty of Trianon, and from the experience, of how Hungary tried meddling into the affairs of they neighbours in recent past, including Slovakia (one of the most notable one is handing out Hungarian passports to people in neighbouring countries, very similar to what Russia is doing in Ukraine), I consider this information plausible, but it should still be taken with a pretty big grain of salt, because my subjective view on this matter might be a little bit skewed and not objective from personal experience of Slovak politics.

 

https://www-kp-ru.translate.goog/daily/27371.3/4552402/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Sounds like proof of some Russian hoping, more than anything.

[kanisatha]

54 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

They are slowly winning back some land lost, in last few days, though. Most notably around the Kharkiv region, where they got back a loads of land, which was occupied since February 24th. (Land north of Chuhuiv and west of Siverskyi Donec river, up to town of Staryi Saltiv - advance of almost 40km in a single day during Ukrainian counter-offensive).

 

EDIT: And besides that, there are some incidents of spontaneous combustion all around Russia on places critical to military research and supply, which might turn the wages even a little bit more on the side of Ukraine .

 

Here's a good summary analysis on where things currently stand in the Donbas and overall for Russia's military efforts:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-donbas-offensive-faltering-analysis/31832683.html

[BruceVC]

13 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

Here's a good summary analysis on where things currently stand in the Donbas and overall for Russia's military efforts:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-donbas-offensive-faltering-analysis/31832683.html

Great read. I wonder if the Donbas campaign will succeed and even if it does how are the Ruskies going to maintain control?

[pmp10]

1 hour ago, Mamoulian War said:

They are slowly winning back some land lost, in last few days, though. Most notably around the Kharkiv region, where they got back a loads of land, which was occupied since February 24th. (Land north of Chuhuiv and west of Siverskyi Donec river, up to town of Staryi Saltiv - advance of almost 40km in a single day during Ukrainian counter-offensive).

That's great but Russian offensive there was stopped over a month ago.
I really don't think much value is put in Kharkiv at this point, except maybe as a opportunity for cheap terror strikes*. 

Whereas Russians were just recently making gains around Kherson, politically far more important target.

* - Still ongoing strikes, Ukrainian gains have not been enough to push Russian artillery far enough from even the city center. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by pmp10