Latest Ukraine/Russia Thread

[Breakingthewall]

6 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

know I know when I talk to the BRICS supporters they will tell me its barely touched and the economy's fine,

The Russian economy is not fine even that 4% of growth because 8% of its GDP is dedicated to war, but it has a much greater capacity to manufacture weapons than NATO, and it also has the help of China. It also has 90% support among the population, who are willing to make sacrifices, so it seems impossible for NATO to win. By winning, I mean containing Russia in Ukraine.

[BlueOak]

24 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

The Russian economy is not fine even that 4% of growth because 8% of its GDP is dedicated to war, but it has a much greater capacity to manufacture weapons than NATO, and it also has the help of China. It also has 90% support among the population, who are willing to make sacrifices, so it seems impossible for NATO to win. By winning, I mean containing Russia in Ukraine.

Come on, design a scenario in your head that isn't a zero sum game. I've seen you do it elsewhere. Put aside your perspective and give it a shot.

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, BlueOak said:

Come on, design a scenario in your head that isn't a zero sum game. I've seen you do it elsewhere. Put aside your perspective and give it a shot.

33 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

 

Russia is aware that winning this war will position it as a major player in the world. That means advantages, a strong economy, national pride, and real power. On the other hand, if it loses, it means poverty, perhaps fragmentation, and internal war. It will do whatever it takes to win.

Ukraine is exhausted, and the feeling of having been swindled from within and without is growing stronger. The US has already made its deal; Ukraine will belong to Black Rock. In Europe, more and more analysts are talking about a proxy war, a scam. So, who will win? seems inevitable that Ukraine will collapse. A one-off drone strike will boost morale for a few weeks, and then reality will set in. Anyway they have endured a lot, maybe they will endure more, but Russia already has a lot of land and it's impossible to recover 

[Lyubov]

Same people said Ukraine won’t survive a week… Now over three years later they still parrot Kremlin crap about an eventual Ukraine collapse. Load of shit. Stop parroting kremlin talking points and think critically. The Russian population doesn’t support the war by 90%. Maybe in spirit but actually in effort there is tremendous shirking and corruption and the average person does not put 90% effort into the conflict. They look for ways to avoid taxes and hide their money. Russia cleaned up their act and aren’t just burning through their resources anymore, and they are able to sustain their efforts, but they are paying major costs for this and while Russia can’t be driven out from Ukraine the border has barley moved in 2 years… this is not some major win for Russia. Their brain is drained. Their country is not richer and their border has more NATO along it. It’s like winning a war that isolates you and makes your population poorer than before. It’s then trying to spin it. Life in Russia is not nicer nor is Russia stronger. They took land from a country in a war a fraction of their size. If USA gets a hard line dem in, they could see this war start up again. 

[BlueOak]

@Breakingthewall

That's a zero sum outcome. Am I that much more aware than you that I can put forward 15 scenarios in which we don't focus on a winner and a loser? No I am not, you are just choosing your bias. *shrug*

So let's do the zero-sum game again I guess:

Because what you are describing is not only factually incorrect, Russia as you currently know it is doomed either way due to demographics, and asian influence, now accelerated due to its overreach and reliance on the Asian sphere for trade/manpower/industrial and technological integration and support etc. Several european countries are also with the cutting of immigration and the warfare or destabalisation of the world, and the march into isolation is rising the cost of living, stagnating culture and growth or the ability to carry their aging populations. Not to mention the damage to biosphere all this burning of oil is doing for military actions.

But this is me arguing zero-sum outcomes and it leaves us, or this thread, in no better positions. I could argue for your position also and the devastation it's had on Ukraine, and damage to western or rather global trade, relations, security, and stability if I wanted a meta perspective. 

Europe can fight this a hell of a lot longer than Russia can, mostly because they have had little lost to this point. All they've done is ship over largely old arms, while Russia expends all theirs, they are untouched. Apart from what i've described earlier, but the march to the right in their populations only makes them more able to fight, not less.

It seems inevitable Ukraine will collapse to you, but then Russians or their supporters have told me that since day 2 of this war, yet here we are years later. Because no Russian or BRICS advocate I've ever spoken to that takes the bias you have has been the least bit objective or grounded, not even slightly. They just cherry pick whatever they want and then try to argue black is white to me. 

For me if you wanted the logical analysis, Ukraine is smaller but better trained and equiped than Russia, the casulaities seem comparable based on their population ratio. So while yes Ukraine could collapse, Russia wouldn't be far behind.

As for Russia needing to win to survive, this is also factually incorrect. Nobody here wants much to do with Russia, let alone cares about the country anymore, Russia will be fine with the huge amount of land they currently have. What will collapse Russia is what I have indicated, their demographics, reliance on the crutch of others, overreach and strategic blunders, and need to guard such an absurdly large border. 

Mostly Russian overreach though. They are not an empire, they are a regional power.
 

Edited Monday at 03:10 PM by BlueOak

[Breakingthewall]

@BlueOak

35 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

 

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

 

 

After these years of war, how do you see the deterioration of the US's image as a country, and of Europe as a culture? How do you see the evolution of Russia's and China's image? Don't you sense a clear trend in the air? No one trusts the US anymore, not even its European lackeys.. Seems that BRICS is a reliable partner; the West is a vampire.

There's a very large world beyond the West of well-being, and that world is leaning toward Russia and China. It's inevitable; everyone has seen the US's game. It's like a narcissist exposed. It was so obvious, but no one saw it, and suddenly everyone sees it.

[BlueOak]

20 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

@BlueOak

 

After these years of war, how do you see the deterioration of the US's image as a country, and of Europe as a culture? How do you see the evolution of Russia's and China's image? Don't you sense a clear trend in the air? No one trusts the US anymore, not even its European lackeys.. Seems that BRICS is a reliable partner; the West is a vampire.

There's a very large world beyond the West of well-being, and that world is leaning toward Russia and China. It's inevitable; everyone has seen the US's game. It's like a narcissist exposed. It was so obvious, but no one saw it, and suddenly everyone sees it.

You want my egoic response? I don't trust China or Russia's leadership, nor much of BRICS. Russia's image to my bias are you kidding? If I were to engage purely in an egoic response, I would say Putin was a dangerous man who needs eliminating tomorrow. If I were in charge of Ukraine's defense, everything that has built up I would have done at the start, I called for most of it. But you don't want my egoic response, you want a perspective that aligns with yours, or to defeat your opponents. I was trying to push us beyond that, and step out of my own bias, which is required for any lasting peace to occur that doesn't require WW3.

I see the same in BRICS as I saw in the US. Different moral framework, violence to get their way. Its not much of an upgrade.

Same old Same old. Nobody's learned much. On to the next zero sum game and world crisis, with the added bonus that everyone's further right-wing, nationalist and trigger-happy than ever.

I think i'll have to formulate 15 non zero sum outcomes or do 10 and let chat gpt do 5, see if that gets us past our own fears and insecurities. First I have work tonight but if I have some time tomorrow.

Edited Monday at 03:48 PM by BlueOak

[Lyubov]

It’s silly to remotely trust Russia / China and get behind them in any capacity or put them over the west. They most definitely aren’t leading in well-being either. People seem to forgot they are totalitarian regimes with a lower standard of living for a large amount of their citizens and little rule of law, human rights, for many years. Thing is the USA and Europe have greatly decayed and are sliding into authoritarian patterns as well. It’s a stupid pissing contents to even argue how one country is better than the other since both have issues. It’s just more stark in contrast for the west because these countries actually were much better at one point but have seriously declined. It’s a talking point and something RT pundits can spin cause for decades Russia and China were slums, and now the USA has caught up in this department so it’s much more stark. Russia and China haven’t caught up, the USA and Europe have fallen behind. There aren’t really any winners here with either one much ahead of the other. Pick your poison. All conflicts like this are going to lead to a decline in life for everyone, with some suffering worse, and others “winning” but in a worse situation than they were before the conflict. The great powers stand little to gain even if they win a war. Russia is fighting so it doesn’t politically collapse either. It is not particularly stronger from this war. 

Edited Monday at 04:16 PM by Lyubov

[Breakingthewall]

54 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

You want my egoic response? I don't trust China or Russia's leadership,

It's not you who have to trust, it's Africa, indonesia, irán, south America, india, Vietnam, Philippines, and those people who are many thousands of millions. And lets see Germany, Romania, and others who are tired of scams. You could stay with your ideas about so dangerous is Putin and so noble are US, it's your right. 

China and Russia do not propose leadership, they propose commercial collaboration without the need to lick the boots of the master by allowing military bases and obeying arms spending quotas, and allowing predation of natural resources. US showed that act as a vampire without a drop of honor, let's see how act the others.

Edited Monday at 04:42 PM by Breakingthewall

[BlueOak]

20 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

It's not you who have to trust, it's Africa, indonesia, irán, south America, india, Vietnam, Philippines, and those people who are many thousands of millions. And lets see Germany, Romania, and others who are tired of scams. You could stay with your ideas about so dangerous is Putin and so noble are US, it's your right. 

China and Russia do not propose leadership, they propose commercial collaboration without the need to lick the boots of the master by allowing military bases and obeying arms spending quotas, and allowing predation of natural resources. US showed that act as a vampire without a drop of honor, let's see how act the others.

Nowhere my response did I say the US were noble, in fact I spent a multitude of posts trying to reduce the polarity between these two groups to allow them to coexist in some form. Which is what I spend most of my time doing in this forum. But you have the black and white, good and bad mentality, which is the root cause of the world's problems. 

As for seeing how they act?

Terrible. Abysmal so far. The way Russia has conducted itself is nothing short of inhuman. But war is inhuman, it reduces good men to monsters. China stealing everything that isn't nailed down, genociding populations and starting border disputes with half the planet. India and Pakistan having wars, South Africa can't even run their power grid.

But look at the others, they are bad too. Look at all the horrible things they did. Yes. If we must reason from a good and bad perspective, we'll be stuck there forever. The world deserves better than that, and on this forum most of all.

 

[Breakingthewall]

31 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

The way Russia has conducted itself is nothing short of inhuman

In Ukraine, there was a coup d'état, and the elected pro-Russian president was ousted and replaced with an anti-Russian one. In Ukraine, 35% of the population is Russian, or have the Russian language as native language, which is why the president was pro-Russian because they had voted for him. However, some people disagreed with this and violently ousted him, they could wait some months and voting against him, but they preferred to do a coup d'etat because it's more effective.

After this, the Russian regions wanted to separate, and a civil war began. Then Zelensky arrived with promises of peace and friendship with Russia, but once in power, they explained to him that no, that the plan was different, such as banning Russian language in schools and ministries in the Russian regions, or banning the Russian Orthodox Church (this after the war). All of this was encouraged by the US to put pressure on Russia. When Ukraine was about to join NATO and acquire atomic weapons, Russia attacked because it didn't want enemies on its border with atomic weapons. This is absolutely incomprehensible to you, but understandable to others. 

Edited Tuesday at 01:52 PM by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

21 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Thing is the USA and Europe have greatly decayed and are sliding into authoritarian patterns as well

No, the problem is that the US is increasingly behaving like a profit-seeking company, not like a state that defends its values. It pretends to defend its values, but they're really everything for me and nothing for you. Then things happen, like intentionally ruining Germany to enrich itself, and then we're overstepping limits that shouldn't be crossed. Then other forces appear at play, seemingly less evolved but offering the credibility of transparency and a given word.

Edited Tuesday at 02:03 PM by Breakingthewall

[PurpleTree]

48 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Nowhere my response did I say the US were noble, in fact I spent a multitude of posts trying to reduce the polarity between these two groups to allow them to coexist in some form. Which is what I spend most of my time doing in this forum. But you have the black and white, good and bad mentality, which is the root cause of the world's problems. 

As for seeing how they act?

Terrible. Abysmal so far. The way Russia has conducted itself is nothing short of inhuman. But war is inhuman, it reduces good men to monsters. China stealing everything that isn't nailed down, genociding populations and starting border disputes with half the planet. India and Pakistan having wars, South Africa can't even run their power grid.

But look at the others, they are bad too. Look at all the horrible things they did. Yes. If we must reason from a good and bad perspective, we'll be stuck there forever. The world deserves better than that, and on this forum most of all.

 

You‘ll never get through to those guys. They’re captured by an ideology. It’s like talking to a nutty Christian or Muslim. It’s a mind virus ☺️ Waste of time and energy 

[Lyubov]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

No, the problem is that the US is increasingly behaving like a profit-seeking company, not like a state that defends its values. It pretends to defend its values, but they're really everything for me and nothing for you. Then things happen, like intentionally ruining Germany to enrich itself, and then we're overstepping limits that shouldn't be crossed. Then other forces appear at play, seemingly less evolved but offering the credibility of transparency and a given word.

I don't see a difference in how you describe the USA as a profit seeking company vs defending it's values. The USA has always played big table bully and looked to maximize itself over other countries. I believe it has worked in good faith before to maximize gains through partnerships but it has always been in competition with other States that have different values and in a sense has always been quite selfish and maximizing, this is how states operate as they compete with one another. They have a narrative about spreading American values but that has always been flawed and not perfect. Russia and China say the same things as they look to dominate their neighbors, they aren't exactly different. I am with you on seeing through the guise the USA uses to justify it's actions but I'm not sure why you flipped to their opposition. Russia and China do the same thing and I wouldn't describe them as more honest. 

[Breakingthewall]

29 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

don't see a difference in how you describe the USA as a profit seeking company vs defending it's values.

Just because it's a lie. Unless you consider "values" to destroy the Nord Stream to sell its gas to Germany and force it into recession, and to provoke a war in Ukraine to force all of Europe to buy its weapons.

How many wars has China started? The US starts wars for business and pretends it's doing so for democratic values. Its game is always lying, and being its ally is being its lackey and potentially betrayed at any moment, as Kissinger said. 

[BlueOak]

8 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

In Ukraine, there was a coup d'état, and the elected pro-Russian president was ousted and replaced with an anti-Russian one. In Ukraine, 35% of the population is Russian, or have the Russian language as native language, which is why the president was pro-Russian because they had voted for him. However, some people disagreed with this and violently ousted him, they could wait some months and voting against him, but they preferred to do a coup d'etat because it's more effective.

After this, the Russian regions wanted to separate, and a civil war began. Then Zelensky arrived with promises of peace and friendship with Russia, but once in power, they explained to him that no, that the plan was different, such as banning Russian language in schools and ministries in the Russian regions, or banning the Russian Orthodox Church (this after the war). All of this was encouraged by the US to put pressure on Russia. When Ukraine was about to join NATO and acquire atomic weapons, Russia attacked because it didn't want enemies on its border with atomic weapons. This is absolutely incomprehensible to you, but understandable to others. 

More zero sum, here i'll do the bad good too!

In Ukraine, the Russian proxy government subdued protests, beating students and arresting people. Because this is what Russia does to protest, thinking this was Russia, they were ill-equipped to handle Ukraine. And frankly had the intelligence or ability to govern of a sparrow.  This enraged the population, causing the increasingly dumb Russia proxy regime to start executing protestors, so much so riots started, where even the Ukranian church was involved. The regime was so tone deaf, even the opposition, that it was removed. 

After this, Russian forces stirred up trouble through their militias, causing a lot of violence. The Russians wanted control back, so they sent more manpower and weapons. After exchanges of fire, Putin used the violence as an excuse for war.

Now to debunk this mess:

• The Russian language has been taught all through Ukraine and was not banned. What you're saying above is simply a provable lie, its the second language in Ukraine, more hated now obviously. I wouldn't be surprised if now it was banned, because Russians use it as an excuse to invade countries. - I would encourage nobody outside Russia to teach Russian or Chinese.
• While I understand you consider 35% of Ukrainians Russian, they are Ukrainian and that's what they consider themselves.
• After the war started, the Russian church was banned because it was a state tool of war and propaganda. Orthodoxy is alive and well in Ukraine.  Again a lie on your part. I would have banned the church to, its war, and they are working for Russian interests. They don't get a free pass because they call themselves men of god.
• Ukraine was never going to get Nukes. I and others and have called for this for years now, but they don't have them because too many western powers don't want them to have them. This is not likely to change even now, much as I wish it would.
• Russia turned down Ukranian offers of neutrality early on. I can link this again, but we'll just go around in circles. If you are trying to say that Russia is a peaceful partner in this, or even vaguely wants peace, after targeting the civilian population of Ukraine for years now, and repeatedly refusing to negotiate their terms, then again, you are simply lying.
• Ukraine will never and would never get in NATO, because nobody wanted war with Russia - at least in times past, now they are more ambivalent to it after seeing how Russia and BRICS strategy unfolds. They should be in NATO, it'd end this quick one way or the other, but they have repeatedly been turned down

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:26 PM by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

Instead of Good Bad. Let's do this:

• NATO didn't treat the threat of Russian war seriously. They pushed and pushed and pushed. Then were caught with their pants down.
• Russia lost control of the border state and did what it could to get control back.
   
• Ukraine have been westernising because of influence from the west, and enjoying things like a better quality of life, they wanted to maintain it but also took on some of the naivety of the countries further west, who have been free of direct war or threat for almost a century. They were pushing to have more democracy. Corruption was still pretty high, meaning both NATO and Russia could buy and bribe people to do or say what they wanted, and probably did.

 

• Russia is unable to govern Ukraine because Russia cannot change or adapt to the global reality; all it can do is try to remake the world in its image. So what do they do instead? Destroy what they cannot control. It's weak and it's desperate. 
• NATO fearing Russia, because that's what Russians project fear, and wanting to paint themselves as the good guys, have been constantly taking in states to the east for mutual protection and saving those countries from Russia. Because western countries have a hero complex, or did through the 80's and 90s, it started to burn out when news and eventually social media showed the horrible realities of acting the hero in war, often in real time.

These can be argued objectively and with plenty of examples.

Do you see how this second post levels things out? Humanises both parties and tries to bring in 2-3 perspectives rather than one? Its far better than me just reciting how Russia is bad and Ukraine is good, give it a try, go on

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:46 PM by BlueOak

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

The Russian language has been taught all through Ukraine and was not banned. What you're saying above is simply a provable lie

 

1. 2012: Kivalov-Kolesnichenko Law (pre-Maidan)

This law allowed regional languages (like Russian) to be used in courts, education, and administration if at least 10% of the local population spoke them.

It effectively granted co-official status to Russian in many areas of Ukraine.

2. 2014: Repeal vote

After President Yanukovych was ousted, Ukraine’s parliament voted to repeal the 2012 language law.

However, the acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov, did not sign the repeal into law, so it never took effect.

Still, the vote alone caused alarm in Russian-speaking regions, especially in Crimea and Donbas, fueling fears of repression.

3. 2019: New language law

A new law declared Ukrainian as the only official state language.

It required Ukrainian to be used in government, education, media, and public services.

Russian was not banned, but its use in public and official life was heavily restricted.

🔥 Perception vs. reality

Ukrainian nationalists saw these changes as strengthening national identity and sovereignty.

Many Russian speakers perceived them as an attack on their culture and rights.

 

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

the Russian proxy government

You mean the elected government in democratic elections. In your opinion they were so bad and useless. Then you should vote against them. About the executions, it's almost proved that were Ukrainian forces . Why the government would do that? It plays against them. There is an investigation , you could check it. 

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

After the war started, the Russian church was banned because it was a state tool of war and propaganda. Orthodoxy is alive and well in Ukraine.  Again a lie on your part. I would have banned the church to, its war, and they are working for Russian interests. They don't get a free pass because they call themselves men of god.

Yes sure, those popes were dangerous spies

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

Ukraine was never going to get Nukes.

Yes sure, same than never would belong NATO as their promised. Turkey have 20 nukes from nato , why Ukraine wouldn't have?

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

Russia is unable to govern Ukraine because Russia cannot change or adapt to the global reality; all it can do is try to remake the world in its image. So what do they do instead? Destroy what they cannot control. It's weak and it's desperate. 

You didn't understand. Ukraine has an elected government, then violently they expulsed them . They had a pro Russian government because the majority of the people voted them. But some nationalist didn't like because they want a pure Ukraine . Those guys like pure things, you know? Then the impure people got scared.