Russia-Ukraine

[yaxomoxay]

I might be missing something, but what is the information suggests that the war is inevitable?

190,000 troops
Heated rhetoric
Ambassador expelled
Cities evacuation
No demands met
US President saying that Russian President has decided.

Yep, nothing suggests it.

 

[User.45]

190,000 troops
Heated rhetoric
Ambassador expelled
Cities evacuation
No demands met
US President saying that Russian President has decided.

Thanks, the way you dropped that "Told ya" yesterday I thought the invasion has already started. Points 1-5 definitely don't meet my criteria for "inevitable". #6 is a closer one, but US president also said it's not inevitable. To me this still looks like a long game of Chicken. Putin's demands had been ridiculous, so why would anybody even expect those being met?

Yep, nothing suggests it.

Didn't you dislike sarcasm?


-----
Russian propaganda is in full swing. r/Wallstreebets made Reddit front page with a post explaining how Eastern Europeans think Putin had already won the grandstand because the Stockmarket is screwed., LOL. It was such an illogical post it was comical to someone like me who grew up in the former SU around the fall of the Iron Curtain. Even the few Putin sympathizers prefer to adore him from a good distance.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Thanks, the way you dropped that "Told ya" yesterday I thought the invasion has already started.

It’s a possibility that it has already started. And I hope to be wrong on this one trust me.

Points 1-5 definitely don't meet my criteria for "inevitable".

Literally? No. Nothing is inevitable until it actually happens. A meteor might strike and kill all of us, hence no war. But by common sense, and as a judgment call, and looking at the political chessboard I see this war as inevitable.

#6 is a closer one, but US president also said it's not inevitable. To me this still looks like a long game of Chicken. Putin's demands had been ridiculous, so why would anybody even expect those being met?

And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?

Didn't you dislike sarcasm?

Yes. Guilty as charged.

Russian propaganda is in full swing.

On this, we agree.

 

[SuperMatt]

And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?

In my opinion, the most ridiculous demand is that Ukraine promise never to join NATO (or that NATO promises never to let them in). By international law, as a sovereign state, Ukraine has the right to join NATO or any other alliance as they see fit.

Now, if they were negotiating with NATO to say “we don’t want certain weapons systems within X miles of our borders” then you’ve got something. And I believe a diplomatic resolution could include security guarantees such as that.

But I believe Putin (and some other powerful people in Russia) view Ukraine as “their” territory. So the sanctions (or the Ukrainian military response) will have to be quite severe to deter them.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Interesting article from Foreign Affairs. I don’t necessarily espouse some of the most pessimistic points, but it’s certainly food for thought

What If Russia Wins?

A Kremlin-controlled Ukraine would transform Europe.

www.foreignaffairs.com

 

[yaxomoxay]

In my opinion, the most ridiculous demand is that Ukraine promise never to join NATO (or that NATO promises never to let them in). By international law, as a sovereign state, Ukraine has the right to join NATO or any other alliance as they see fit.

Now, if they were negotiating with NATO to say “we don’t want certain weapons systems within X miles of our borders” then you’ve got something. And I believe a diplomatic resolution could include security guarantees such as that.

But I believe Putin (and some other powerful people in Russia) view Ukraine as “their” territory. So the sanctions (or the Ukrainian military response) will have to be quite severe to deter them.

I agree. That’s why I asked “why”. When someone with strength demands something clearly unreasonable it basically means only one thing: they want to hurt someone.

 

[User.45]

It’s a possibility that it has already started. And I hope to be wrong on this one trust me.

using your analogy, that meteor could also be on its way already.

Literally? No. Nothing is inevitable until it actually happens. A meteor might strike and kill all of us, hence no war. But by common sense, and as a judgment call, and looking at the political chessboard I see this war as inevitable.

preparation to war ≠ unavoidable
high likelihood of war ≠ unavoidable

It's just me, but I prefer to avoid using dramatic words to predict things that if fail to happen, immediately crumble my credibility. But that's just me.

And in your opinion, why were they ridiculous?

Because fulfilling demands that enable an invasion to prevent that very invasion is, well, illogical. Unless the demands were specifically made to remain unmet.

Yes. Guilty as charged.

Takes us back to statements and credibility.

 

[yaxomoxay]

using your analogy, that meteor could also be on its way already.

It probably is. At times I hope it is.

preparation to war ≠ unavoidable
high likelihood of war ≠ unavoidable

It's just me, but I prefer to avoid using dramatic words to predict things that if fail to happen, immediately crumble my credibility. But that's just me.

1) I am quite confident it will happen.
2) are we going back to the discussion of the “obviously what I say is my opinion”?

Because fulfilling demands that enable an invasion to prevent that very invasion is, well, illogical. Unless the demands were specifically made to remain unmet.

Precisely.

Takes us back to statements and credibility.

If they were just statements, I’d say you’re right. Here we have a serious diplomatic escalation with a huge military buildup and apparently most troops in attack position. Hence their credibility on the diplomatic side is almost at 0, but the credibility on the military threat is very high.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

As far as I’ve had discussions nearly a decade ago with a friend from there who belongs to the russian minority, no there aren’t.

This articles seems to back that up.

Debunking the myth of a divided Ukraine

Russia's attempts to promote the false narrative of an artificial and divided Ukraine are a central element of the Kremlin's ongoing campaign of imperial aggression against the country.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

Let it not be said that my views can't be changed or more informed. However, I still await word from the final authority, Joe Rogan.

So what's with the reports of the recent shelling in the east? Completely fabricated or Putin's puppets are more driven than Trump supporters?

 

[User.45]

This articles seems to back that up.

Debunking the myth of a divided Ukraine

Russia's attempts to promote the false narrative of an artificial and divided Ukraine are a central element of the Kremlin's ongoing campaign of imperial aggression against the country.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

Let it not be said that my views can't be changed or more informed. However, I still await word from the final authority, Joe Rogan.

So what's with the reports of the recent shelling in the east? Completely fabricated or Putin's puppets are more driven than Trump supporters?

Something I have a very thorough first-hand experience with is how the russian trollfarms work in eastern Europe. You need to understand that historically a lot of these countries have overlapping/confluent ethnic maps that were often ignored when the borders were established. In 2007 a neonazi website with suspiciously pro-Putin content popped up. The content is considered illegal where I'm from, so they tried to take it down. It quickly became evident that the servers are in Russia, and just checked, still running. Russia runs neonazi websites in the former SU nations that carry the exact same propaganda against the people few miles down these cross-pollinated borders. There's only so far these techniques go however. They can efficiently reduce hatred toward Putin, and stoke some mild proPutin sentiment. What it's insufficient for is to trigger a civil war, or convince people that Russia creeping toward their borders is a good thing.

 

[User.45]

It probably is. At times I hope it is.

1) I am quite confident it will happen.
2) are we going back to the discussion of the “obviously what I say is my opinion”?

Precisely.


If they were just statements, I’d say you’re right. Here we have a serious diplomatic escalation with a huge military buildup and apparently most troops in attack position. Hence their credibility on the diplomatic side is almost at 0, but the credibility on the military threat is very high.

Fair enough.

 

[Zoidberg]

I’m struggling to see what the point is of the government issuing daily new Russia invasion fanfiction. We get it. There are troops meandering around the border. And then not. And then again. They could attack any minute. There might be a false flag operation. WE GET IT. Now how about you shut your pie hole and take care of strategy behind the scenes. WTF do you expect me to do about it? If there is an attack absolutely nobody is going to go “Why didn’t you warn me sooner!? I could have prevented this!” Quit attempting to shell game our attention away from our internal issues.

Every time Putin has done something sketchy, he has used the same roadmap (either a false flag or a covert operation that would elicit a reaction in their target, which they then use as an excuse to attack).

You get it (although calling it fan fiction makes me question that, because it is all well documented and you can see it by yourself without going through the US press releases). But many people don't. And every time the Russians have used those methods, they were successful.

Even Russia needs to give some justification for their invasion, no matter how blatantly fabricated it is. By broadcasting Putin's plans out loud, the Western countries are preemptively defusing the false flag or provocation excuses. We also have no idea what kind of other actions they are taking behind the scenes, it would be naive to think all they do is this. At the very least it buys Ukraine some time to improve their defence, send them more weapons, etc.

Bear in mind the most likely direct response from the West will be sanctions, and those can only legitimately be brought on if Russia is unequivocally in the wrong. Remember, there are many political forces in the west that are overtly pro-Putin and will gladly use any excuse they can to look the other way and side with Russia:
Le Pen's FN in France (and Zemmour's spin-off).
Whatever Farage's party is called now
Salvini's Lega Nord in Italy
Abascal's Vox in Spain
Orban in Hungary
Kurz in Austria
Part of the Republican and Democratic parties
And the list goes on...

Some of these parties are in power, some of them have a significant weight in their respective parliaments. All of them –and their media– will readily spread Russia's narrative and need to be preemptively shown what's going on to ensure that they have no choice but to back heavy sanctions.

If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes Putin change his mind and not invade -> win
If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes the sanctions more swift and effective -> better than nothing

The alternative is not saying anything and letting Putin play his usual game, allowing him to stay one step ahead of the West, which will make it harder to convince some politicians to get on board with sanctions, thus making it easier for Russia to invade as the response as a whole will be weaker. If the US and the other Western countries broadcast every single attempt at provoking Ukraine (ie shelling a kindergarten) it becomes much harder for the Western pro-Russian parties to look the other way.

 

[User.45]

Every time Putin has done something sketchy, he has used the same roadmap (either a false flag or a covert operation that would elicit a reaction in their target, which they then use as an excuse to attack).

You get it (although calling it fan fiction makes me question that, because it is all well documented and you can see it by yourself without going through the US press releases). But many people don't. And every time the Russians have used those methods, they were successful.

Even Russia needs to give some justification for their invasion, no matter how blatantly fabricated it is. By broadcasting Putin's plans out loud, the Western countries are preemptively defusing the false flag or provocation excuses. We also have no idea what kind of other actions they are taking behind the scenes, it would be naive to think all they do is this. At the very least it buys Ukraine some time to improve their defence, send them more weapons, etc.

Bear in mind the most likely direct response from the West will be sanctions, and those can only legitimately be brought on if Russia is unequivocally in the wrong. Remember, there are many political forces in the west that are overtly pro-Putin and will gladly use any excuse they can to look the other way and side with Russia:
Le Pen's FN in France (and Zemmour's spin-off).
Whatever Farage's party is called now
Salvini's Lega Nord in Italy
Abascal's Vox in Spain
Orban in Hungary
Kurz in Austria
Part of the Republican and Democratic parties
And the list goes on...

Some of these parties are in power, some of them have a significant weight in their respective parliaments. All of them –and their media– will readily spread Russia's narrative and need to be preemptively shown what's going on to ensure that they have no choice but to back heavy sanctions.

If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes Putin change his mind and not invade -> win
If announcing exactly how Russia will invade Ukraine makes the sanctions more swift and effective -> better than nothing

The alternative is not saying anything and letting Putin play his usual game, allowing him to stay one step ahead of the West, which will make it harder to convince some politicians to get on board with sanctions, thus making it easier for Russia to invade as the response as a whole will be weaker. If the US and the other Western countries broadcast every single attempt at provoking Ukraine (ie shelling a kindergarten) it becomes much harder for the Western pro-Russian parties to do anything about it.

I think Hungary is an outlier in this list because they were the only country who experienced the Soviet Union directly. I have zero doubt that Orban is Putin's pawn, but selling this war as justified or the idea of Russia becoming Hungary's new neighbor would be an extremely tall order even for him. His voter base fully socialized in the communism and while Orban had brilliantly balanced the nostalgia from communism with concurrent anticommunist rhetoric (for those who don't know, his #1 political opponent, the Socialist Party is a direct successor of the Socialist People's Party). In fact, he invented nothing, just gradually reimplemented the methodology of soft control used in the late days of the SU. This is why he doesn't need to use virtually any violence, because it was so thoroughly beta tested in the previous system. One key factor in his propaganda is leaving out the Russian occupation part of the story and harping on the breach of the nation's sovereignty by the West. His voters might be old, extremely misinformed and cynical, but they still remember the Soviet tanks.

 

[Thomas Veil]

God bless metadata.

Watch the dubious videos that Russia may use to justify invasion | CNN

CNN's Nick Paton Walsh reports on misinformation used by pro-Russian separatist groups in Ukraine, as the Russian military amasses near the border.

www.cnn.com

The Russkies tried to urge the population to defend against an “attack” that reportedly happened on Friday. Problem: metadata showed the video of the “attack” had actually been assembled two days earlier. That’s some prescience there.

Other problem: was I right to post the story here, or should I have done it in the “What movie are you watching?” thread?

 

[Thomas Veil]

On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order.

Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine

The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Scepticalscribe]

On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order.

Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine

The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

www.nbcnews.com

He still needs some pretext (some even vaguely credible pretext, unless he is so surrounded by sycophants as to think that the risible stuff offered to date in Russia suffices), some pretence at pretext, in order to launch an invasion.

While I have long deplored the practice of "Godwinisation" of threads, on this occasion, I will content myself with the observation, that, even in September 1939, the Germans (who excelled at the dark arts of propaganda, and who had mastered the dissemination of what passed for "fake" news at that time) still felt it necessary to try to give the impression (instantly and rightly derided and dismissed) that they were not the aggressors (you may recall that there was a "fake" invasion of Germany, carried out by individuals attired in Polish Army uniform) when they invaded Poland.

 

[lizkat]

On the more serious side…NBC is reporting that Putin has given the “go” order.

Biden agrees ‘in principle’ to meet Putin if Russia does not invade Ukraine

The final decision hinges on the outcome of talks between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

www.nbcnews.com

Yah the visual media love prospect of an invasion to fill up those 24/7 blocks of airtime that need eyeballs to get ad revenue rolling.

Sorry to be so cynical but I tend to dislike the TV medium most intensely during whatever is seen as the possible run-up to an imminent invasion of any country by any other country. At least some of the newspapers of record are still presenting more detail on prospects for diplomacy and averting official conflict. The problem in the Ukraine situation though is that the eastern provinces have had Russian backed insurgency operating for years now, so "official conflict" is a blurry concept and one that Putin can use to his advantage.

He still needs some pretext (some even vaguely credible pretext, unless he is so surrounded by sycophants as to think that the risible stuff offered to date in Russia suffices), some pretence at pretext, in order to launch an invasion.

While I have long deplored the practice of "Godwinisation" of threads, on this occasion, I will content myself with the observation, that, even in September 1939, the Germans (who excelled at the dark arts of propaganda, and who had mastered the dissemination of what passed for "fake" news at that time) still felt it necessary to try to give the impression (instantly and rightly derided and dismissed) that they were not the aggressors (you may recall that there was a "fake" invasion of Germany, carried out by individuals attired in Polish Army uniform) when they invaded Poland.

Yep. Putin has had a long time to ponder how to put this together and make it look like the West was who merited an "offisde" call at the start of broader conflict (past the insurgence in Donbas etc) so that "his side" can be seen as purely defensive. He's been talking about the "incursions" --i.e. alliance making, NATO membership-- of the west upon other border states of Russia for the whole time that he's been atop the Russian government. And he's made a point of building up and supporting the military after the low state it had come to when he was first elected. So presumably he figures the Russian people are behind him if he strikes out from Belarus soon over whatever pretext he later offers up.

It's a dicey situation. The cable TV news media drumbeats don't help. Those guys are so easily led by nose at times like this.

 

[Deleted member 215]

The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.

There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.

 

[Cmaier]

The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.

There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.

You can say something is going to happen but you hope it won’t. Nothing contradictory about that.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

The talk of "imminent invasion" that has been going on since January is beginning to get a bit tiresome. I also think that will be reflected in the coverage. The longer we go without an invasion, the less "imminence" is going to be mentioned. Doesn't mean it won't still happen and catch the public off guard, though. A recent headline I saw struck me as particularly comical: "Biden says Putin will invade, but still hopes diplomacy can prevent it". So, which is it? He will invade or diplomacy can prevent it? Those two can't really co-occur.

There's a part of me that still thinks this is all going to blow over like the threat of war with Iran did...but...we'll see.

I heard Russia trolled Western media by asking them to provide all Russia's invasion dates for the next year so that their diplomats can plan their vacations.