Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Not sure how, but apparently Navalny has tweeted. I wonder how many he reaches who need to be reached though?

 
Ukraine had 4000 of them.
Ukraine had 1 / 3 of them when they voted for independence. It was not a mistake otherwise a war might inflicted a lot sooner and no west country (including US) would recognize them without destroying those warheads. It would have faced severe sanctions and isolated as a country.
 
Ukraine had 1 / 3 of them when they voted for independence. It was not a mistake otherwise a war might inflicted a lot sooner and no west country (including US) would recognize them without destroying those warheads. It would have faced severe sanctions and isolated as a country.
Also they absolutely did not have the resources to maintain them. It is very expensive.
 
So instead of capitulating to Vladimir Putin by rewarding his invasion with concessions he wanted before he invaded, a likelier scenario is he will eventually gain control of larger cities, attempt to emplace a puppet leader, fight a violent insurgency, with sanctions that will annihilate him from within, to where he will quickly realize that whatever gains he made in Ukraine will be meaningless if he can’t hold onto power in Russia.
His A game is probably divide Ukraine into two, take control over the East (the axis from Kyiv through Uman to Odessa) and sit on the negotiation table. He can't viably hold the whole of Ukraine for too long as it would be very costly both in terms of military and economical resources as you mentioned.
 
His A game is probably divide Ukraine into two, take control over the East (the axis from Kyiv through Uman to Odessa) and sit on the negotiation table. He can't viably hold the whole of Ukraine for too long as it would be very costly both in terms of military and economical resources as you mentioned.
Unfortunately I think this is a viable and realistic outcome. Kyiv being almost like Berlin in the 80s.

Meanwhile Russian economy will go down the drain. Even if sanctions stopped now it'd take years to recover and the reluctance towards anything Russian will continue for a long time.
 
Not sure if posted already, as this thread moves fast, but an article on the mystery of why russia hasnt used its air power in this conflict. Going against doctrine of war since 1938.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022...-mobilised-its-vast-air-power-against-ukraine

That's an interesting question that's getting asked more and more. I think the Russians know the US is watching every inch of Ukrainian airspace and they don't want to show what their air force is/isn't capable of. They also don't want to indiscriminately bomb Ukraine and risk Nato getting involved, there are only so many legitimate targets you can find without ground forces directing you.
 
As far as I know, no, with the current weapons, there will likely be a billion or two dying from radiation but people in shelters will survive. As will those in the Southern Hemisphere. Most of the radiation will be gone in 2 weeks (to non lethal degree).

Who says the southern hemisphere will be spared from attacks, though? Australia, the American bases in the pacific ocean, are all obvious targets. That's before we even consider if other countries in South America, Africa and/or Asia will get involved some way or some how.

Also, radiation in the air is one thing, but the ensuing ice age as well as crops and drinking water severly polluted all over the world, is a different aspect that will have lethal consequences for years, if not decades.
 
Why isn't the blatant racism by Ukrainian forces at the border discussed more?

Doesn't fit the narrative that they're the good guys so we ignore it?

Probably because whilst it is important, and unacceptable, it’s not as important as what’s going on in the war zone? That’s not ignoring it.

Women and children being murdered with missiles and other war crimes being reported. Putin threatening a world war.

It’s not hard to understand why.
 
Russia has said for years that it wont allow Ukraine to become a Nato country. Thats the whole reason for the war. If it remained a neutral state then this war would not have happened. On one hand its a democracy and they should damn well be able to choose if they want to be Nato or not. On the other hand if they just let it be and remained a neutral state they wouldn't have been flattened by Russia. They are damned if they do and damned if they dont. They cant and will not back down now. The endgame is Russia neutralizes Ukraine. They make it impossible for it to become Nato and at the same time sets up president that any of the other countries cant as well - Latvia, Estonia, Finland and yes even Belarus (they could elect a West leaning politician in the future). They have already achieved this objective no matter what happens in Ukraine. I cannot see any of those countries joining Nato. If they do they risk the same treatment as Ukraine. Maybe Finland would get away with it.

The Wests endgame is to demonize Russia. This will make it so all these countries dont lean towards Russia like Belarus has. Russia could even be influencing countries like Czech, Poland etc and trying to elect pro Russian governments. Its the game that has been played since the second world war. Also they have legitimate reasons to fk up the Russian economy and turn the world against them.

They already are NATO. Finland looks like it's about to be as well, so is Sweden. NATO is about to become another word for Europe, as only couple of countries won't be in it. They have literally accomplished the opposite.
Belarus tried 2 years ago to elect western politician, had riots due to rigged elections and massive crackdowns, with Russia eventually coming in and sorting it out.
 
His A game is probably divide Ukraine into two, take control over the East (the axis from Kyiv through Uman to Odessa) and sit on the negotiation table. He can't viably hold the whole of Ukraine for too long as it would be very costly both in terms of military and economical resources as you mentioned.

If his position is Novorossiya (Kharkiv to Odessa) but not the rest of the country then he will still run into the same problem. Kharkiv and Odessa are the #2 and 3 size cities and would spawn massive insurgencies.
 
Who says the southern hemisphere will be spared from attacks, though? Australia, the American bases in the pacific ocean, are all obvious targets. That's before we even consider if other countries in South America, Africa and/or Asia will get involved some way or some how.

Also, radiation in the air is one thing, but the ensuing ice age as well as crops and drinking water severly polluted all over the world, is a different aspect that will have lethal consequences for years, if not decades.
I don't think some random cities in South America will get targeted, would seem very spiteful as there's nothing of great military value to any of the NATO powers there.
 
I don't think some random cities in South America will get targeted, would seem very spiteful as there's nothing of great military value to any of the NATO powers there.

I don't think random cities will be targeted either, hence the "getting involved"-part of my post.
 
I don't think some random cities in South America will get targeted, would seem very spiteful as there's nothing of great military value to any of the NATO powers there.

By the stage nukes are getting traded, any South American country with military ties to Russia will be nuked by NATO. Likewise the other way around.
 
Probably because whilst it is important, and unacceptable, it’s not as important as what’s going on in the war zone? That’s not ignoring it.

Women and children being murdered with missiles and other war crimes being reported. Putin threatening a world war.

It’s not hard to understand why.
That’s some blue sky thinking. What do you think will happen to the foreign national men women and children if they’re not allowed to leave the country?
 
If his position is Novorossiya (Kharkiv to Odessa) but not the rest of the country then he will still run into the same problem. Kharkiv and Odessa are the #2 and 3 size cities and would spawn massive insurgencies.
No doubt they will and the west would probably send arms and munitions to those regions to fuel guerilla wars. Putin however will try to stamp on it. It's pure conjuncture on my part, but it's obvious that he wants to control the whole sea and Ukraine's biggest cities on the west - including Kharkiv and Odessa.

I doubt he will try to capture the whole of Ukraine, as that would leave no room for negotiations with the west and NATO.
 
That’s some blue sky thinking. What do you think will happen to the foreign national men women and children if they’re not allowed to leave the country?

He asked why it’s not being discussed more and I explained why?

Not sure how that’s blue sky thinking. It’s just how it is currently?
 
Personally, I think the real question is this: if the West knew that NATO membership talks would make Russia invade Ukraine, should we have advocated for Ukraine neutrality for Ukraine's own good will? We can talk about sovereignty all we want but the fact is Ukraine is now in a war with Russia and people are dying.

In other words, should we have disappointed Ukraine by saying "we're sorry but we won't be discussing NATO membership, not now and not in the future, period.".
It really wouldn't have mattered. The guy just wants the old empire back, most likely feels aggrieved. The amount of excuses for this war he/his ambassadors have come out with is just ridiculous. None of them are the 'reason' for it. We all know the real reason because it's staring at us in the face. Problem is because of our liberal ways we tend to question what we could have done better, why it may have been our fault, what we did wrong?

Do you think Putin is wondering "I wonder why these countries want to join into Nato? What are we doing wrong on our side?" Nah. He'd rather just roll through with his army.
 
Surely if the war spreads to UK/US, it would be fair, from a security perspective, to put all Russian nationals within that country into a camp. Do you really want a load of nationals from a country you're at war with wandering around freely?
Good lord. Maybe get them badges too? It's so easy to see how the world just makes the same mistakes over and over.
 
Who says the southern hemisphere will be spared from attacks, though? Australia, the American bases in the pacific ocean, are all obvious targets. That's before we even consider if other countries in South America, Africa and/or Asia will get involved some way or some how.

Also, radiation in the air is one thing, but the ensuing ice age as well as crops and drinking water severly polluted all over the world, is a different aspect that will have lethal consequences for years, if not decades.

Please say would, not will :nervous:
 
No doubt they will and the west would probably send arms and munitions to those regions to fuel guerilla wars. Putin however will try to stamp on it. It's pure conjuncture on my part, but it's obvious that he wants to control the whole sea and Ukraine's biggest cities on the west - including Kharkiv and Odessa.

I doubt he will try to capture the whole of Ukraine, as that would leave no room for negotiations with the west and NATO.
yes ... being pragmatic as well the river does form a somewhat clear line north to south... that said keeping control of a population as large as ukraines is going to be difficult.... i would suspect that as part of any settlement there would be an allowance that people had a period of time to move either west / east of the river

the coast presents a very difficult logistical route to hold as i would presume they would just want a strip of coast line in order to claim any oil and gas reserves off shore... logically it may be easier to not take the land but demand the rights in part of a settlement
 
If there's ever a time to not get involved in international affairs, it's when nukes are being lobbed :p

They're already involved, though. Not necessarily in the conflict directly, but through other ties/affiliations. Venezuela and Cuba with Russia. Brazil to some extent as of late with Bolsonaro. French Guyana with NATO by default. In Asia you have South Korea and Japan with heavy American military ties. Taiwan. China. North Korea. Israel. Iran. All of Sovjetistan. American bases in the pacific. Australia. New Zealand. Ecuador.

To think a nuclear outcome will just stay in Europe and North America is very naive at best.
 
Last edited:
Nuclear weapons programs and civilian nuclear energy are kind of 2 different beasts. Modern gen 3-4 civilian nuclear energy plants are incredibly safe.

So were the old ones tbf. Chenobyl took monumental mismanagement for it to happen, and Fukushima a natural disaster.
 
Surely if the war spreads to UK/US, it would be fair, from a security perspective, to put all Russian nationals within that country into a camp. Do you really want a load of nationals from a country you're at war with wandering around freely?

I mean, it's absolutely rational to have a closer look at some individuals in that case, but you're talking about...camps? For people of a certain nationality?

This thread has gone south for quite a while imo, but there's new levels of low hit every day by the minute it seems
 
Listen to Putin when he announced the invasion. That is not the reasoning he gave.
He claimed his goal was to protect people subjected to bullying and genocide and aim for the "demilitarisation and de-Nazification" of Ukraine. Thats just his crazy way of saying he wants Nato out if Ukraine. There is a lot of talk and a lot of reasons. But what I said still stands. Dont make out Im spreading Russian propaganda when its a fact.
And in fact Ukraine does or at least had far right extremist problems - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary-idUSKBN1GV2TY
 
Probably threatening to start world war if sanctions are not lifted.
Exactly. And that is what I said yesterday. He threatened to use nukes if he does not take over a country the sovereignity of which he does not recognize. And it worked. Now he is playing the nukes card again to lift sanction, because his own position in Russia will get really shaky.
 
Not sure how, but apparently Navalny has tweeted. I wonder how many he reaches who need to be reached though?


His English-language translation unfortunately missed out time of 19:00 for weekday protests.
 
Exactly. And that is what I said yesterday. He threatened to use nukes if he does not take over a country the sovereignity of which he does not recognize. And it worked. Now he is playing the nukes card again to lift sanction, because his own position in Russia will get really shaky.
It’s comedy, we have only said that yesterday that this would happen. It has taken only one day to prove us correct. :lol: We have to respond swiftly now by defending Ukraine.
 
Surely if the war spreads to UK/US, it would be fair, from a security perspective, to put all Russian nationals within that country into a camp. Do you really want a load of nationals from a country you're at war with wandering around freely?

Blimey i know we had someone saying it's fair game to remove aid to innocents yesterday but even then i didn't expect we'd have people supporting internment camps for civilians.

Quite scary.