Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[HTG]

Bad source? It's the video?

Don’t act dumb. You know what the issue is. You shared Russian propaganda without giving it any context whatsoever. That’s not cool. Someone kindly gave you an opportunity to set this little mistake right. A reasonable person would just say „my bad, next time I’ll be more careful“. Instead you must create this drama, so you can be right. Tiresome.

 

[VorZakone]

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

Don’t act dumb. You know what the issue is. You shared Russian propaganda without giving it any context whatsoever. That’s not cool. Someone kindly gave you an opportunity to set this little mistake right. A reasonable person would just say „my bad, next time I’ll be more careful“. Instead you must create this drama, so you can be right. Tiresome.

I'm not, I didn't realise Don Salmon was a Russian asset.

 

[foolsgold]

Sounds a bleak situation, Ukraines western supporters don't seem to be ramping up the delivery on ammunition to match Russian production.

Ultimately if one side is firing 5 times are many shells than the other over the longer term, it's hard to overcome. Without a massive uptick in western support I don't see any route to the 1991 borders, a Russian victory of some type seems pretty inevitable to me now.

 

[Raoul]

Sounds a bleak situation, Ukraines western supporters don't seem to be ramping up the delivery on ammunition to match Russian production.

Ultimately if one side is firing 5 times are many shells than the other over the longer term, it's hard to overcome. Without a massive uptick in western support I don't see any route to the 1991 borders, a Russian victory of some type seems pretty inevitable to me now.

There’s no such thing as a Russian victory at this point since their initial attempt to takeover the country has failed miserably. Also, they‘ve been consistently shooting exponentially more rounds at Ukraine than the Ukrainians have toward the Russian side, and yet have nothing to show for themselves beyond a frozen conflict and some largely rural territory in the south.

 

[Morty_]

There’s no such thing as a Russian victory at this point since their initial attempt to takeover the country has failed miserably. Also, they‘ve been consistently shooting exponentially more rounds at Ukraine than the Ukrainians have toward the Russian side, and yet have nothing to show for themselves beyond a frozen conflict and some largely rural territory in the south.

Is there not? What is victory, what is defeat?

No, they may never reach Kyiv, Russian army, big as it is, is poorly trained and poorly equipped however, Ukraine is not getting anywhere either, and it seems, NATO is happy with just keeping Russia where they are, more or less.

The west is slowly, but surely, abandoning Ukraine, they are not in this for the long haul, Putin took a gamble and will probably win somewhat.

NATO don't care, they got Finland, Poland, Romania, to check them, now, the real test will be, down the line, if NATO has it in them to actually defend an actual member, Russia don't view Poland, Romania, the baltics, anymore "real countries" than they did Ukraine, they are just another part that "got away".

They are just pushing the problem down the line, hoping it will go away, but they are mistaken.

 

[Raoul]

Is there not? What is victory, what is defeat?

No, they may never reach Kyiv, Russian army, big as it is, is poorly trained and poorly equipped however, Ukraine is not getting anywhere either, and it seems, NATO is happy with just keeping Russia where they are, more or less.

The west is slowly, but surely, abandoning Ukraine, they are not in this for the long haul, Putin took a gamble and will probably win somewhat.

NATO don't care, they got Finland, Poland, Romania, to check them, now, the real test will be, down the line, if NATO has it in them to actually defend an actual member, Russia don't view Poland, Romania, the baltics, anymore "real countries" than they did Ukraine, they are just another part that "got away".

They are just pushing the problem down the line, hoping it will go away, but they are mistaken.

The US and Europe have 300billion in frozen Russian assets they can use to continue funding for another 5 years.

 

[Morty_]

The US and Europe have 300billion in frozen Russian assets they can use to continue funding for another 5 years.

Well, better start using them then, considering Ukraine is getting absolutely dominated in regards to artillery shells, as of late...

 

[Beans]

Is there not? What is victory, what is defeat?

No, they may never reach Kyiv, Russian army, big as it is, is poorly trained and poorly equipped however, Ukraine is not getting anywhere either, and it seems, NATO is happy with just keeping Russia where they are, more or less.

The west is slowly, but surely, abandoning Ukraine, they are not in this for the long haul, Putin took a gamble and will probably win somewhat.

NATO don't care, they got Finland, Poland, Romania, to check them, now, the real test will be, down the line, if NATO has it in them to actually defend an actual member, Russia don't view Poland, Romania, the baltics, anymore "real countries" than they did Ukraine, they are just another part that "got away".

They are just pushing the problem down the line, hoping it will go away, but they are mistaken.

I think the powers that be are happy to see a stalemate that destroys the Russian war machine. But I do think they will increase support if Russia start to make progress.

If Russia retreats they might start attacking someone like Georgia we can't supply, I'm not sure the military leaders want that.

 

[foolsgold]

Is there not? What is victory, what is defeat?

No, they may never reach Kyiv, Russian army, big as it is, is poorly trained and poorly equipped however, Ukraine is not getting anywhere either, and it seems, NATO is happy with just keeping Russia where they are, more or less.

The west is slowly, but surely, abandoning Ukraine, they are not in this for the long haul, Putin took a gamble and will probably win somewhat.

NATO don't care, they got Finland, Poland, Romania, to check them, now, the real test will be, down the line, if NATO has it in them to actually defend an actual member, Russia don't view Poland, Romania, the baltics, anymore "real countries" than they did Ukraine, they are just another part that "got away".

They are just pushing the problem down the line, hoping it will go away, but they are mistaken.

This is also my reading of the situation, all the talk about supporting Ukraine as long as required isn't being backed up with action. The Ukrainian economy is wrecked and their ability to sustain the fight without western support is questionable at best. Western leaders will force Ukraine into a peace deal by cutting off support, and it will almost certainly include territorial concessions after sham referendums in the East and southern areas of Ukraine. It's not been what Putin wanted but he's been prepared to throw hundreds of thousands of lives into the grinder in order to wear down his foes.

I think the west should commit to an Ukrainian victory and supply them with the weapons to do it, but I don't see any political will for this, leaving the only real alternative as some form of Russian victory.

 

[TwoSheds]

I really don't get how there isn't any serious noise about taking the confiscated Russian assets and giving them to Ukraine. It seems such an obvious step at this point, regardless of any precedent it might set.

 

[4bars]

I really don't get how there isn't any serious noise about taking the confiscated Russian assets and giving them to Ukraine. It seems such an obvious step at this point, regardless of any precedent it might set.

Because all this assets are from people that rubbed shoulders with any rich and powerful personality of US, europe and any other country. They are friends and they share interests.

Once the conflict will be over, they will unfreeze most of the assets but a few that maybe had been defenestrated or scapegoats

 

[TwoSheds]

Because all this assets are from people that rubbed shoulders with any rich and powerful personality of US, europe and any other country. They are friends and they share interests.

Once the conflict will be over, they will unfreeze most of the assets but a few that maybe had been defenestrated or scapegoats

Even if all they did was give away the assets of the already defenstrated that must be worth something. Utterly bonkers that there is no serious groundswell for it.

 

[maniak]

Because all this assets are from people that rubbed shoulders with any rich and powerful personality of US, europe and any other country. They are friends and they share interests.

Once the conflict will be over, they will unfreeze most of the assets but a few that maybe had been defenestrated or scapegoats

I think it's more systemic than about individual people. We keep learning at each crisis that it's much more important to protect the financial sector and the idea you're money is safe, than actually protect people.

 

[Gehrman]

I really don't get how there isn't any serious noise about taking the confiscated Russian assets and giving them to Ukraine. It seems such an obvious step at this point, regardless of any precedent it might set.

Isnt it because despite it being an ethical thing to do its probably against international law and framework we've built our capalist societies around. And yeah im aware Russia is violating international law on a daily basis.

 

[TwoSheds]

Isnt it because despite it being an ethical thing to do its probably against international law and framework we've built our capalist societies around. And yeah im aware Russia is violating international law on a daily basis.

I don't believe it's an insurmountable problem, they just need to put the appropriate effort in, pass the acts of Parliament or whatever. The problem is they don't want to open the can of worms in case anyone should want to do it to other "allies'" ill gotten gains. The newspapers should be making a fuss though. It will be the new Post Office scandal at some point but not when Ukraine actually need it to be i.e. now.

Odd that the Ukrainians themselves are not calling for it more vociferously.

 

[Gehrman]

I don't believe it's an insurmountable problem, they just need to put the appropriate effort in, pass the acts of Parliament or whatever. The problem is they don't want to open the can of worms in case anyone should want to do it to other "allies'" ill gotten gains. The newspapers should be making a fuss though. It will be the new Post Office scandal at some point but not when Ukraine actually need it to be i.e. now.

Odd that the Ukrainians themselves are not calling for it more vociferously.

Well i do think think setting a precedent could cause issues. Lets say China start using that as leverage over Taiwan or conflicting issues with the west in general. I think the powers that be dont want to open that can of worms.

 

[VorZakone]

Well i do think think setting a precedent could cause issues. Lets China start using that as leverage over Taiwan or conflicting issues with the west in general. I think the powers that be dont want to open that can of worms.

Also, I think it's quite clear the West isn't interested in completely crushing Russia. Those freezed assets can come in handy as leverage during negotiations. Once you remove that leverage, it'll obviously hurt Russia financially but it also may "unleash" them a bit more to become a lot more aggressive.

Anyway, there's a lot more at play here.

 

[VorZakone]

Corbyn again being disingenous in the sense that it's not at all perfectly clear that it happened the way he describes it.

 

[Real Name]

Love that stuff. Its not Russia or Putin but NATO and West who are at fault for the war. Not only that, they pressured Zelenski not to accept the peace deal Russians so generously offered.

They attacked, occupied, pillaged, killed, burned, destroyed and then were so kind to offer a peace deal to Zelenski only for NATO and West to pressure him not to take it. Bastards!

 

[TwoSheds]

Well i do think think setting a precedent could cause issues. Lets say China start using that as leverage over Taiwan or conflicting issues with the west in general. I think the powers that be dont want to open that can of worms.

We owe the Chinese money though, not the other way round.

 

[Gehrman]

We owe the Chinese money though, not the other way round.

Good point

 

[4bars]

Even if all they did was give away the assets of the already defenstrated that must be worth something. Utterly bonkers that there is no serious groundswell for it.

I think they will make sure that will be minimal

 

[4bars]

I think it's more systemic than about individual people. We keep learning at each crisis that it's much more important to protect the financial sector and the idea you're money is safe, than actually protect people.

You are right in US an EU but in russia the system is the oligarchy. And as the financial system influence parties, russians oligarchs do the same as seen in the donations to the tory party or sure something is going on in US and their elections

 

[maniak]

You are right in US an EU but in russia the system is the oligarchy. And as the financial system influence parties, russians oligarchs do the same as seen in the donations to the tory party or sure something is going on in US and their elections

That surely happens, but we have this mindset of "you don't mess with someone's money, this is free market baby" so ingrained in us as a society, that just taking someone's money is almost a sin.

 

[VorZakone]

Got ourselves a nice clusterfeck of an investigation going on here.

Nord Stream Probe Hampered by Resistance From Poland

In one instance, Polish prosecutors told their European counterparts that no explosives were found on the Andromeda, although no forensic investigation had taken place. Yet the Polish internal security service told European investigators that the border guard officers who had checked the crew never boarded the boat, contradicting the prosecutor’s claim.

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-probe-faces-resistance-from-poland-962aa5f9

 

[HTG]

Got ourselves a nice clusterfeck of an investigation going on here.

Nord Stream Probe Hampered by Resistance From Poland


https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-probe-faces-resistance-from-poland-962aa5f9

At this point I’m quite sure it’s been Ukraine with Polish support. Which I’m honestly fine with. The whole pipeline was just a shameful act of corruption, greed and a masterstroke of Russian intelligence. A monument to Germany‘s naivety.

 

[4bars]

That surely happens, but we have this mindset of "you don't mess with someone's money, this is free market baby" so ingrained in us as a society, that just taking someone's money is almost a sin.

You are 100% on that. Didnt think on this angle. Would be like open a pandora box for all shady money

 

[Beans]

That surely happens, but we have this mindset of "you don't mess with someone's money, this is free market baby" so ingrained in us as a society, that just taking someone's money is almost a sin.

One article said there's no law to allow it, and it seems they're reluctant to open Pandora's box. You'd think they'd make a law, and bring charges against Russia or the individuals in question, to validate the decision.

 

[Beans]

You are 100% on that. Didnt think on this angle. Would be like open a pandora box for all shady money

Last person to mess with shady money was the journalist who published the Panama Papers. She died in a car bomb, which is still considered an effective refutation of her allegations.

 

[4bars]

Last person to mess with shady money was the journalist who published the Panama Papers. She died in a car bomb, which is still considered an effective refutation of her allegations.

And a warning for any other journalist. World sucks

 

[foolsgold]

Because all this assets are from people that rubbed shoulders with any rich and powerful personality of US, europe and any other country. They are friends and they share interests.

Once the conflict will be over, they will unfreeze most of the assets but a few that maybe had been defenestrated or scapegoats

Also, there's also a lot (less than $300bn but still a lot) of western assets in Russia that would immediately be confiscated in retaliation, I imagine the people who own these are pushing back on taking the Russian assets in the west.

 

[DT12]

Two things to add on the question of asset seizure that haven't been mentioned yet:

Firstly, the legal issue is in fact incredibly complex, as acknowledged by Janet Yellen (the "international law" the West claims to be defending becomes a little less sacrosanct if one side can simply rewrite those laws when convenient). This conversation started with someone saying they had no idea why the West doesn't just seize the assets no matter the consequences or precedent, but it's nowhere near as simple as that. Economic reprisals during war are the prerogative of injured states, not of third countries. Ukraine exercised this right by seizing around $880 million in Russian assets within its borders in May 2022. But Ukraine's allies are not at war with Russia (hence the crux of the illegality). The West can't have it both ways, they can't claim wartime powers while still insisting they're not at war with Russia.

Also, there's the question of how that 300 billion is to be distributed. When Biden had Zelenskiy visit the US at the end of December to publicly beg for more money, the Biden Admin produced charts and graphs (they literally produced charts and graphs, it was comical) to show each senator how much their individual states were profiting from the Ukraine war. It was part of their strategy of temporarily shifting the narrative from "Ukraine is defending global democracy" to "The Ukraine war is a great job сreation scheme for America". 35 states in total were shown to be making a net profit out of the war through weapons contracts. But Europe does not and will never have anything close to America's capacity for supplying Ukraine with the weapons it needs, and neither does Japan or South Korea (ironically due to America forbidding it - yay sovereignty). When it comes to military - as opposed to economic - assistance, Ukraine can do nothing more useful with those 300 billion dollars than send it back over to Washington. "We need to seize Russian assets and give them to Ukraine" is a loosely defensible position, at least morally. The more accurate "The US should compel France and Belgium to hand Russian money over to American military contractors" is less so.

Don't get me wrong, there will be an announcement on February 24th that the West is going to send the profits on Russian assets to Ukraine. Biden has already channeled David Brent again by saying Ukraine needs another "morale boost" on the 2nd anniversary of the war. And some of the assets will eventually be seized and used for 'reconstruction', there's a legal path to that from what I've read. But the notion that 300 billion dollars are going to be "sent to Ukraine" is a non-starter. The problems it will create far outweigh the problems it will solve, and besides which (really the only point that matters...), it is economically unnecessary. US and EU aid to Ukraine has so far amounted to way more than $100 billion per year. This sum is sustainable for the transatlantic economy, if they're serious about supporting Ukraine long-term (they're not but that's another issue).

So to close out my first point, I'm 99% sure the West will go with the far less risky approach of funding Ukraine with the several billion euros in annual profits accruing from Russian assets. This will redirect income streams rather than touching the principal, making international legal ramifications a lot milder. It also avoids the problematic optics of US senators taking money of the Russian people (that's what the frozen central bank reserves essentially are) held in Europe and re-distributing it to their pals at Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. This new policy will be announced on February 24th, with a huge amount of fanfare. It will change nothing at all about the outcome of the war or its aftermath, but hey, just like those EU membership talks in lieu of new money or weapons...morale-boost I guess.

The 2nd issue to mention has already been touched on above: future negotiations. Despite Raoul's claim a couple of pages ago that Russia has taken no significant territory, Russia currently controls trillions of dollars of Ukrainian assets. At one point it was estimated at 12.4 trillion...

https://markets.businessinsider.com...gy-metals-oil-gas-coal-deposits-secdev-2022-8

...and is now reckoned to be 'down to' around 8 trillion following the autumn 2022 counteroffensives in Kharviv and Kherson. If the lines were frozen now, Ukraine would permanently lose around 40% of its wealth.That's a non-functioning country. No country can survive such a loss and still support a population of around 40 million people (assuming the 10 million who have either left or now find themselves in Russian-controlled territory return). Ukraine needs constant Western help just to pay salaries to their civil servants, never mind the military. That can't continue forever. Prior to the war Ukraine was already the 2nd poorest country in Europe after Moldova. Try running Europe's largest country again with 40% less wealth and resources. 300 billion won't even come close to footing the bill for reconstruction (already estimated at well over a trillion dollars), let alone get the economy back on its feet. I strongly encourage people to stop posting garbage Twitter accounts in this thread like The Institute for the Study of War (a delusional propaganda "think tank" run by Robert Kagan, Victoria Nuland's husband) and the UK's DoD, and follow instead the accounts of Zelenskiy's own circle (Yermak, Podolyak...). They consistently speak about the existential necessity of taking back their land due to the economic value of it. If Russia keeps what it currently has, Ukraine cannot function as an independent state. They directly state this over and over again when people suggest 'giving' Russia territories in return for peace, but nobody is listening to them. If Russia DID actually control worthless land, as Raoul suggests, they'd have happily signed a 'peace deal' already. But it's not worthless. It's the lifeblood of the Ukrainian economy and they need it back in order to survive.

Hence - future negotiations. Putin wants back into the global financial system. That's America's primary leverage (acknowledged by Yellen in the same speech about the difficulty of seizing Russian money). Legalising the theft of Russian assets massively complicates that. "Once in a generation intellect" Jake Sullivan (even by the subterranean standards of the Biden Admin, a jaw-droppingly stupid individual) has begun to prattle on about a potential future economic "sharing" of the 4 regions Russia has annexed, but all of this entirely misses the point - made repeatedly by Zelenskiy's people - that Ukraine cannot allow itself to lose what Russia has taken to any degree. They're not saying "send us more weapons" because they love fighting, they're saying it because taking back their land is the only way Ukraine survives as a viable state. Giving Russia the territories it currently controls is a slow economic death for Ukraine. I am seemingly the only person in this thread who thinks Putin is a very rational actor who WILL negotiate in good faith with a competent West. He has a 23 year record of hundreds of thousands of deals with non-Western countries which have not been broken, at some point the West may want to take a look at itself for its role in this shitshow (spoiler alert, it won't). There are, I believe, things the West can still do to ensure Ukraine gets out of this with a not-terrible deal (they're never going to get a good deal now). The problem is that 22 months into the war, there is still nobody offering real leadership on Ukraine's behalf, they're still just spewing out empty "morale-boosting" nonsense.

As I wrote in a previous post, Ukraine has no good options now. It is going to lose the war and Russia will achieve the 4 objectives set out at the start (occupation of Ukraine never being one of them). The standard of Western "leaders" is the lowest I've ever known it and Ukraine is unfortunate to be in this mess during the weakest era in living memory of American and European 'leadership'. Mike Johnson gave an interview yesterday and reiterated that he's not going to approve more Ukraine funding until Biden provides (I quote) "a clear endgame in Ukraine. A clear strategy. A clear statement of what our goals there are". That's problematic, because there is no endgame, there is no strategy, and they have no idea what their goals are (for the record, more funding will be approved, probably in February. This brinkmanship over the border is just political theatre). The ONLY way Ukraine could ever 'win' this war was by militarily defeating Russia. Zelenskiy has said this a thousand times, to his credit he has zero tolerance for all this meaningless Western bullshit about how "Putin has already lost because Ukraine is still a free state!". The West decided not to let Ukrainian victory happen when they had the chance. Now it's my firm belief and bedrock conviction that Ukraine will just be the latest American project to be led down the garden path and then tossed aside when it becomes inconvenient. The Kurds and Afghans can commiserate.

 

[Raoul]

The 2nd issue to mention has already been touched on above: future negotiations. Despite Raoul's claim a couple of pages ago that Russia has taken no significant territory, Russia currently controls trillions of dollars of Ukrainian assets. At one point it was estimated at 12.4 trillion...

https://markets.businessinsider.com...gy-metals-oil-gas-coal-deposits-secdev-2022-8

Much of which was already controlled by Putin after 2014 - certainly the Donestk, Lughansk areas. As for the oil and gas reserves - there's limited infrastructure for Putin to leverage any of it for himself.

 

[Suedesi]

Putin didn't attempt a full blown invasion? Do you mean Kyiv was a "feint"? What were those troops coming in from Belarus supposed to do?

I'm not sure how one could attempt a full-scale invasion of Ukraine using 190,000 troops against Ukraine's 700,000. It seems Moscow aimed to instigate a coup, establish a puppet government, consolidate control over Crimea, secure concessions in the eastern regions, and then conclude their "special operation". Clearly, they grossly miscalculated, failing to anticipate the fierce resistance that significantly thwarted their efforts.

 

[Suedesi]

Peter Zeihan semes to think that Putin would move on the likes of Poland and Romania to block the potential invasion routes from outside into their heartlands if they win the war in the Ukraine. When that happens, NATO will have to involve (obviously) and the Russians will use nuclear weapons pretty quickly because their forces can't match the NATO's. So the goal for "The West' is to keep the Russians inside the Ukraine.

I would think that that is pretty much how most people think anyway at least at this point.

Peter Zeihan's analysis is highly questionable. For example he has been predicting the collapse of China as a political entity within one to two decades and as an economic entity within a decade, consistently since 2010. Additionally, he has claimed that China has not made significant technological advancements in the last 15 years, despite notable progress in areas such as renewables, electric vehicles, 5G, smartphones, semiconductors, and drones. I mean this guy's living under a rock.... but is very confident and eloquent which are the only prerequisites to gain clicks and followers.

 

[The United]

Peter Zeihan's analysis is highly questionable. For example he has been predicting the collapse of China as a political entity within one to two decades and as an economic entity within a decade, consistently since 2010. Additionally, he has claimed that China has not made significant technological advancements in the last 15 years, despite notable progress in areas such as renewables, electric vehicles, 5G, smartphones, semiconductors, and drones. I mean this guy's living under a rock.... but is very confident and eloquent which are the only prerequisites to gain clicks and followers.

But yeah, it doesn't mean he can't say what he thinks of the UKR situation or he is wrong about that.

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

How can Russia be winning if the initial goal was to denazify Ukraine by removing the evil jew Nazi leader Zelenskyj, he is still very much there. Or if it was because of a red line for more border next to Nato, they fecked up by pushing Finland into the embrace of it.

Now if it's about land grabbing, which i assume it is in the end, Yeah they have some kind of victory, hard to see Ukraine getting it back in current situation without a massive increase in arms support from it's allies. Hopefully sanctions will be upheld against Russia until the territory is given back, even if they agree to freeze the conflict.

 

[VorZakone]

I'm not sure how one could attempt a full-scale invasion of Ukraine using 190,000 troops against Ukraine's 700,000. It seems Moscow aimed to instigate a coup, establish a puppet government, consolidate control over Crimea, secure concessions in the eastern regions, and then conclude their "special operation". Clearly, they grossly miscalculated, failing to anticipate the fierce resistance that significantly thwarted their efforts.

They came in from the north, south and east while bombing the country and they were on their way to Kyiv. Sounds like a full scale invasion to me. It seems that they thought there would be little resistance but that doesn't change what happened: it was an invasion from multiple sides.

 

[unchanged_lineup]

Don’t act dumb. You know what the issue is. You shared Russian propaganda without giving it any context whatsoever. That’s not cool. Someone kindly gave you an opportunity to set this little mistake right. A reasonable person would just say „my bad, next time I’ll be more careful“. Instead you must create this drama, so you can be right. Tiresome.

Just this guy's standard MO all across the caf. It's sad.