Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

shamans said:
Given the US role in this war and Ukraines position, do we really think Zelensky is making his own independent decisions here? That would be extremely naive.

The only independent decision Zelensky probably made was not listening to U.S warning of an imminent Russian attack and playing it down in January when he shouldn't have
Click to expand...
I think the "downplaying" needs a little bit of nuance because I think Ukraine was going to be fecked either way, and the downplaying was a strategy to minimize damage rather than avoid it.

First: the pre-invasion rhetoric and increasing panic was probably hurting the Ukrainian economy. I guess in that sense the Kyiv regime downplayed the threat to somewhat save their economy.

Second: if the Ukrainians had very publicly and openly started military preparations, the Russians would likely spin that and say that Ukraine started the fighting.

I remember reports coming out that Ukraine's military were disciplined in not returning fire as small-scale shelling already appeared in the days before the invasion.

And knowing how many people already sympathize with Russia (NATO expansion, defending pro-Russians, Ukrainian nazi's etc), the Russians would absolutely have loved to make Ukraine out as the aggressor.

I'm not saying Ukraine's downplaying was the smartest thing to do but I do think they were fecked either way and they tried to avoid PR damage as well as minimize economic damage.
 
harms said:
I'm not really sure why that's naive? I haven't seen any direct evidence of U.S. controlling Zelenskiy and Ukraine's politics. Zelenskiy had openly criticised U.S. and Biden personally.

U.S. is Ukraine's key ally in this conflict and it obviously has some influence over its politics. I also don't share @Raoul 's idealistic sentiment that U.S. helps out mainly to help out the struggling democracy against ruthless authoritarian regime — U.S. obviously has its own geopolitical interests as priority and at the moment they seem to coincide with Ukraine's. But the only claims of Ukraine acting as a proxy for U.S. imperialism without any agency of its own come from Putin and his propaganda and they don't look convincing at all.
Click to expand...

GlastonSpur said:
Based on advice from his military advisors (and no doubt advice from foreign military advisers too) Zelensky is deciding which weapons to press most for. He is also deciding on which international political (and other) forums to appear and what he will say in each case. And no doubt he is approving or not approving (as the case may be) recommendations about military strategy within Ukraine, again based on advice received as balanced against political and other considerations.

Do you seriously imagine that he receives a daily phone call from Biden or the Pentagon telling him what he must do every day?
Click to expand...

Let's face the facts here, without American support Ukraine would have been and will be toast. Zelensky is not a fool and he knows this. The only independent thought he is granted is within what the U.S allows him. You can call it being a puppet or controlled but to me that's basic geopolitics.

What do you think is a factor in Zelensky's "decision" on what weapon to get? It's basically what he can ask for that will be reasonable.

Biden is not calling him daily but I have no doubt US forces are in contact with Ukraine on a daily basis (if not live). You really think US is pumping billions in Ukraine to just go "have at it kid, lemme know how it goes!".
 
VorZakone said:
I think the "downplaying" needs a little bit of nuance because I think Ukraine was going to be fecked either way, and the downplaying was a strategy to minimize damage rather than avoid it.

First: the pre-invasion rhetoric and increasing panic was probably hurting the Ukrainian economy. I guess in that sense the Kyiv regime downplayed the threat to somewhat save their economy.

Second: if the Ukrainians had very publicly and openly started military preparations, the Russians would likely spin that and say that Ukraine started the fighting.

I remember reports coming out that Ukraine's military were disciplined in not returning fire as small-scale shelling already appeared in the days before the invasion.

And knowing how many people already sympathize with Russia (NATO expansion, defending pro-Russians, Ukrainian nazi's etc), the Russians would absolutely have loved to make Ukraine out as the aggressor.

I'm not saying Ukraine's downplaying was the smartest thing to do but I do think they were fecked either way and they tried to avoid PR damage as well as minimize economic damage.
Click to expand...

The second point makes no sense to me. Why would I not prepare for an imminent attack just because I'm not somehow deemed as the aggressor? So by not preparing, have they stopped any of the propaganda? Your first point is probably why Zelensky downplayed it to save the economy but it was a poor decision.

These quotes of his have aged like milk:

Speaking at a news conference in Kyiv, Zelenskyy accused Western media reporting of undermining Ukrianians’ faith in their government and stoking economic panic across the nation.


He also said that although Ukrainian officials “don’t have any misunderstandings” with President Joe Biden, “I just deeply understand what is going on in my country, just as [Biden] understands perfectly well what is going on in the United States.”

The blunt responses from the Ukrainian president come after Biden and Zelenskyy participated in a call on Thursday that media accounts have described as tense, with Zelenskyy reportedly challenging Biden’s characterizations of the Russian threat.
Officials in Kyiv and Washington have pushed back against some reports about the conversation.

U.S. officials have recently escalated their warnings about further Russian aggression toward Ukraine, and the State Department has ordered the relatives of U.S. embassy staffers in Ukraine to leave the country.
“We have said since last week that we have seen preparations and buildup at the border and that an invasion could come at any time. Our assessment has not changed since that point,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said at a news briefing on Thursday.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials have urged calm. Zelenskyy said in a televised address to the nation on Tuesday that his government was “strong enough to keep everything under control.”
Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov also sought to reassure Ukrainians in a speech to parliament: “Don’t worry, sleep well. No need to have your bags packed.”


But Zelenskyy’s news conference on Friday with members of the international media represented perhaps the Ukrainian government’s greatest distancing yet with the Biden administration and U.S. officials’ messaging.
“We do not see a bigger escalation that it has been before,” Zelenskyy said of Russia’s provocations, adding that he did not think the security situation “is more intense than it was… at the peak time in early 2021.”
In his talks with foreign leaders, Zelenskyy complained that “the image that mass media creates is that we have troops on the roads, we have mobilization, people are leaving for places. That’s not the case. We don’t need this panic.”
As for his conversation with Biden, Zelenskyy said he conveyed to his U.S. counterpart the “need to stabilize the economy” of Ukraine “because of those signals” which indicate a conflict is rapidly approaching.
“These signals were sent by even respected leaders of the respected countries. And sometimes, they’re not even using diplomatic language,” Zelenskyy said. “They’re saying, ‘Tomorrow is the war.’ This means panic in the market. Panic in the financial sector... How much does it cost to our country?”
The Ukrainian people, Zelenskyy continued, “have to be certain and sure in their army, in their president. The people should trust the government... This varied information from varied sources cannot mislead our country.”
Click to expand...

Zelensky telling common folks to stay put when he kept getting warned does not reflect well at all. Common citizens are more at risk and who knows how many lives would have been lost because of this. Just because it was done in the interest of the economy, doesn't make it right.
 
shamans said:
Let's face the facts here, without American support Ukraine would have been and will be toast. Zelensky is not a fool and he knows this. The only independent thought he is granted is within what the U.S allows him. You can call it being a puppet or controlled but to me that's basic geopolitics.

What do you think is a factor in Zelensky's "decision" on what weapon to get? It's basically what he can ask for that will be reasonable.

Biden is not calling him daily but I have no doubt US forces are in contact with Ukraine on a daily basis (if not live). You really think US is pumping billions in Ukraine to just go "have at it kid, lemme know how it goes!".
Click to expand...

I don't really know what your point is here. Listening to and working with your allies who are helping you protect yourself against an existential threat makes you a puppet?

All this "sovereignty" guff leads to such infantile discssions. Every single nation on earth makes compromises in order to be able to trade, ensure their security, or advance their regional or global policies and agendas. It's a bit like how reasonable people sometimes do nice things with and for their friends and family, and don't only act directly in their own interests. It's because collaboration leads to better outcomes than constant struggle. Clearly nations in a bad position might need to cede more "sovereignty" and make more concessions than ones in good positions. Just the nature of the game.
 
the hea said:
Click to expand...


Fair play, seems pretty ambitious. 10k trained troops every 4 months - be interesting to know how that’ll work and what their training would consist of. (Are we talking training totally green recruits or updating the current Ukrainian army?).
 
shamans said:
The second point makes no sense to me. Why would I not prepare for an imminent attack just because I'm not somehow deemed as the aggressor? So by not preparing, have they stopped any of the propaganda? Your first point is probably why Zelensky downplayed it to save the economy but it was a poor decision.

These quotes of his have aged like milk:



Zelensky telling common folks to stay put when he kept getting warned does not reflect well at all. Common citizens are more at risk and who knows how many lives would have been lost because of this. Just because it was done in the interest of the economy, doesn't make it right.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the Ukrainians were preparing for a fight, their military isn't stupid. They saw the Russian buildup too. However, I don't quite remember how much of those preparations were publicly reported. The Ukrainians kept that rather quiet, both for strategic reasons but possibly also to avoid the optics of being the potential aggressor.

As for the civilians, I tend to agree. I wonder whether the Ukrainian population will demand answers to that after the war is over.
 
Spark said:
Fair play, seems pretty ambitious. 10k trained troops every 4 months - be interesting to know how that’ll work and what their training would consist of. (Are we talking training totally green recruits or updating the current Ukrainian army?).
Click to expand...

It’s gotta be the latter, surely, and with an eye on specific pieces of equipment. I can’t see the logic of just doing basic training, which an army like Ukraine could surely manage on its own.
 
shamans said:
Let's face the facts here, without American support Ukraine would have been and will be toast. Zelensky is not a fool and he knows this. The only independent thought he is granted is within what the U.S allows him. You can call it being a puppet or controlled but to me that's basic geopolitics.

What do you think is a factor in Zelensky's "decision" on what weapon to get? It's basically what he can ask for that will be reasonable.

Biden is not calling him daily but I have no doubt US forces are in contact with Ukraine on a daily basis (if not live). You really think US is pumping billions in Ukraine to just go "have at it kid, lemme know how it goes!".
Click to expand...
By your description here, the UK was a puppet of the US from 1940 to December 6, 1941.
 
TwoSheds said:
I don't really know what your point is here. Listening to and working with your allies who are helping you protect yourself against an existential threat makes you a puppet?

All this "sovereignty" guff leads to such infantile discssions. Every single nation on earth makes compromises in order to be able to trade, ensure their security, or advance their regional or global policies and agendas. It's a bit like how reasonable people sometimes do nice things with and for their friends and family, and don't only act directly in their own interests. It's because collaboration leads to better outcomes than constant struggle. Clearly nations in a bad position might need to cede more "sovereignty" and make more concessions than ones in good positions. Just the nature of the game.
Click to expand...

My whole point was that it doesn't make you a puppet and so me saying it isn't some terrible thing
 
Carolina Red said:
By your description here, the UK was a puppet of the US from 1940 to December 6, 1941.
Click to expand...

Well I just said you (someone) can call it (perceive it) as being a puppet but to me thats basic geopolitics i.e not being a puppet meaning Zelensky is pretty much under U.S control here which isn't the worst thing given his decision of not raising alarm
 
the hea said:
Click to expand...


Yet more meaningless nuclear threats from Putin. Shortening the flight-time-to-target of a nuclear missile makes no difference. There will still be more than enough undetectable submarines with nuclear missiles that can incinerate Russia from end to end if deterrence should fail.
 
shamans said:
My whole point was that it doesn't make you a puppet and so me saying it isn't some terrible thing
Click to expand...
shamans said:
Well I just said you (someone) can call it (perceive it) as being a puppet but to me thats basic geopolitics i.e not being a puppet meaning Zelensky is pretty much under U.S control here which isn't the worst thing given his decision of not raising alarm
Click to expand...
Well, you have a very odd way of arguing that someone isn’t a puppet.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Yet more meaningless nuclear threats from Putin. Shortening the flight-time-to-target of a nuclear missile makes no difference. There will still be more than enough undetectable submarines with nuclear missiles that can incinerate Russia from end to end if deterrence should fail.
Click to expand...
They already have Iskander-M launchers in Königsberg so I don't think this makes any difference to response times and flight distances anyway. I also don't think Putin will trust Lukachenko with any nuclear warheads, they will probably just give them the launch platforms and missiles armed with conventional warheads.
 
Carolina Red said:
The issue is that you offer the description of “a puppet” and then claim “I’m not calling him a puppet”
Click to expand...

Well that's why I said it because to me that's not being a puppet. A puppet is usually following a higher powers orders against the will of their people or more deserving candidates. Something like the Afghan government up until a few years ago.
 
shamans said:
Let's face the facts here, without American support Ukraine would have been and will be toast. Zelensky is not a fool and he knows this. The only independent thought he is granted is within what the U.S allows him. You can call it being a puppet or controlled but to me that's basic geopolitics.

What do you think is a factor in Zelensky's "decision" on what weapon to get? It's basically what he can ask for that will be reasonable.

Biden is not calling him daily but I have no doubt US forces are in contact with Ukraine on a daily basis (if not live). You really think US is pumping billions in Ukraine to just go "have at it kid, lemme know how it goes!".
Click to expand...
I don’t think US cares about Ukraine, they are giving them limited help just to make sure Russia suffers heavy casualties and an already weak army with the heavy losses then is going to be even weaker and will take years to recuperate.
 
shamans said:
Well that's why I said it because to me that's not being a puppet. A puppet is usually following a higher powers orders against the will of their people or more deserving candidates. Something like the Afghan government up until a few years ago.
Click to expand...
Right, well…
Puppet government: “a government which is endowed with the outward symbols of authority but in which direction and control are exercised by another power”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/puppet government

Hence my confusion
 
Ukraine was fecked no matter what. They had no say in their future. Once the maidan coup happened and Russia got Crimea they had no say in anything. No self respecting Ukrainian can accept the loss of Crimea the way it happened.
The Russians and The Americans sacrifice Ukraine in their attempt at domination.
It's just came out in an interview by Corbyn that the military and pompeo said that he would not let him be the PM. So it's valid to say that the Americans have a very strong influence over a lot of countries.
The Ukrainians wouldn't survive a day without the American support.
 
Foxbatt said:
Ukraine was fecked no matter what. They had no say in their future. Once the maidan coup happened and Russia got Crimea they had no say in anything. No self respecting Ukrainian can accept the loss of Crimea the way it happened.
The Russians and The Americans sacrifice Ukraine in their attempt at domination.
It's just came out in an interview by Corbyn that the military and pompeo said that he would not let him be the PM. So it's valid to say that the Americans have a very strong influence over a lot of countries.
The Ukrainians wouldn't survive a day without the American support.
Click to expand...

How have the Americans sacrificed Ukraine? Its not their country in the first place and they are their main ally in this current war.
 
Foxbatt said:
The Ukrainians wouldn't survive a day without the American support.
Click to expand...

They literally survived for weeks with nothing but some helpful intel. The weapons and the money started to arrive after they survived the attack on Kyiv. Absurd statement
 
Americans and UK have done a lot for Ukraine. I am sure that Ukranians will never forget that. Also, both of these countries were doing their best to make sure that the war does not spill out of Ukranian borders. However, the more rushists attack, the more weapons will Ukraine receive. Right now missiles are fired at Kyiv from Caspian Sea. Ukraine has each and every right to make sure that this does not happen in the future. Thus, they will receive weapons that will deal with whatever put-ler is trying to kill them. There will be no peace talks unless on Ukranian terms. After everything that has happened Zelenskyy will want nothing less than Ukraine territory that includes Crimea. There will for sure be more deaths and destruction, but make no mistake put-ler is not winning this war. It is clear for everyone now that his aim is to erase Ukraine as a sovereign country and Ukranians as a nation. Not gonna happen.
 
The HIMARS are clearly pissing the Russians off. Now they are just launching airstrikes at random all over the country the hope of hitting something Western :lol:
 
Gehrman said:
How have the Americans sacrificed Ukraine? Its not their country in the first place and they are their main ally in this current war.
Click to expand...

This war would not have happened without the Americans in the first place. Long before Crimea got taken over by The Russians. Any idiot would know that just like the Americans refused to accept missiles in Cuba the Russians won't accept it on their borders. Or have you forgotten Victoria Nuland and the Maidan?
 
Foxbatt said:
This war would not have happened without the Americans in the first place. Long before Crimea got taken over by The Russians. Any idiot would know that just like the Americans refused to accept missiles in Cuba the Russians won't accept it on their borders. Or have you forgotten Victoria Nuland and the Maidan?
Click to expand...

It’s not that we’ve forgotten, it’s just that we have a very different view of reality from the one formed in your head.

Maidan was not about nuclear missiles in Ukraine or NATO. None of those were subject matter at the time and neither are they now. It was about Ukraine’s customs union with Europe and a presidency that was negotiating it for years only to back out on the 11th hour after a trip to Moscow and pressure from Putin. It was about Russia not letting Ukraine decide their own economic and political future. Ukraine was never a military threat for Russia. But carry on.
 
Last edited:
MadMike said:
It’s not that we’ve forgotten, it’s just that we have a very different view of reality from the one formed in your head.

Maidan was not about nuclear missiles in Ukraine or NATO. None of those were subject matter at the time and neither are they now. It was about Ukraine’s customs union with Europe and a presidency that was negotiating it for years only to back out on the 11th hour after a trip to Moscow and pressure from Putin. It was about Russia not letting Ukraine decide their own economic and political future. Ukraine was never a military threat for Russia. But carry on.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Also Nato is a defensive alliance anyway. Some people just want to blame the US for everything. How dare the Ukraine people want democracy and join the EU.
 
Last edited:
MadMike said:
It’s not that we’ve forgotten, it’s just that we have a very different view of reality from the one formed in your head.

Maidan was not about nuclear missiles in Ukraine or NATO. None of those were subject matter at the time and neither are they now. It was about Ukraine’s customs union with Europe and a presidency that was negotiating it for years only to back out on the 11th hour after a trip to Moscow and pressure from Putin. It was about Russia not letting Ukraine decide their own economic and political future. Ukraine was never a military threat for Russia. But carry on.
Click to expand...
Spot bloody on.
 
Foxbatt said:
This war would not have happened without the Americans in the first place. Long before Crimea got taken over by The Russians. Any idiot would know that just like the Americans refused to accept missiles in Cuba the Russians won't accept it on their borders. Or have you forgotten Victoria Nuland and the Maidan?
Click to expand...
You're right there. Putin would have waved his nuclear weapons and Ukraine would have had little option but to allow his tanks over the border. There would not have been a war to speak of, and no Ukraine either.
 
I'm not really sure if people are aware several nato countries already border Russia and NATO could easily lop nukes from Poland. Or from simply the US with modern tech.
 
Gehrman said:
I'm not really sure if people are aware several nato countries already border Russia and NATO could easily lop nukes from Poland. Or from simply the US with modern tech.
Click to expand...

I thought we had moved beyond whole “the US provoked Russia into being aggressors by surrounding the country with missiles”. It’s such a dumb argument based purely on Russian propaganda.

Any self respecting nuclear power has a 24/7 submarine based deterrent (e.g. Trident). No one knows where the subs are at any one time and it means that effectively anywhere is within range. Land based missiles are secondary and Russia obviously knows this, they just need excuses to justify their land grabs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.