Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[hellhunter]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Jotun]

That wouldn't stop Putin though. The only thing that will stop him is trouble inside Russia through an uprising or coup and/or the US getting militarily involved. His calculus so far has been "I can do what I want because I have nukes and you wouldn't dare attempt to stop me". The US needs to do the same to him by taking some sort of provocative military action that ignores Putin and seeks to protect Ukrainians. Put the pressure on Putin to respond to that at at time when he's losing the war in Ukraine and in danger of crushing pressure back home.

I don't know. If the US takes a provocative action, Putin just might be able to turn it from a unpopular aggressive war against a brotherly nation to a popular defensive war against US. Him claiming: "See, I was right all the time, this is all orchestrated by USA to destroy us".

I wouldn't be surprised that that's one of the reasons the US doesn't want to get more involved. Perhaps, they see their passive involvement (as opposed to active) as the best way to take Putin down.

 

[2cents]

Israelis denying the earlier “surrender” reports:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[711]

It's a matter of waiting for the perfect moment until the Russians trap themselves in a vulnerable area where they can be picked off by surrounding Ukrainians. That is how the French lost the Indochina War at Dien Bien Phu.

The French were outnumbered 5 to 1 and more at Dien Bien Phu, and had no idea of the artillery the Viet Minh possessed. Although they were arrogant and stupid so I suppose there is a comparison there.

 

[Sir Matt]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[TMDaines]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[GlastonSpur]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

In the long run, Russia will never be able to hold onto newly occupied territory. Their military and economy will emerge much weakened from this war. Their days of being able to commit large numbers of troops to quell uprisings in Kazakhstan, or elsewhere, will be long gone.

Essentially, a policy based mainly on the oppression of freedom is doomed to eventually fail.

 

[calodo2003]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What’s this about?

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

What’s this about?

Looks like the Russian Joe Rogan podcast featuring the Chechen Jordan Petersen.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I agree, sacrificing Ukraine shouldn't be an option.

It won't be an option. Putin won't be able to win this war.

 

[TMDaines]

Maybe. Maybe not. I don't think western leaders like Putin much right now and would prefer for him to go down. Only way is if he completely loses in Ukraine. So if sanctions keep piling up, with hostile population in controlled area, after enough time, I can see Russian front completely and utterly collapsing. Even now, based on certain estimates about the rate of their loses suggest they might be spent soon. Of course those estimates could be too optimistic. But how long the Russians can keep going before they collapse.

Of course the scenario in the tweet is also quite likely. If there is one thing I don't trust politicians is to support the right side when it gets tough. But that's a cynical take and I'm really trying to be optimist here, that eventually Ukraine will prevail.

My fear going back about 10 days now, once we saw the underwhelming Russian army, was that Russia didn’t need to advance too much and that they would have the option of turtling and just occupying more lands. I presume the West would keep the sanctions up if this was the case though. Settling for Ukraine ending up in such a rump form would be a dire outcome.

 

[sebsheep]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

That's a whole lot of shelf.

 

[TMDaines]

What’s this about?

No idea, no info given other than it being a lament of the current state of Russian TV.

 

[TMDaines]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Raoul]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Why was this posted with a translation or context ?

 

[Jotun]

My fear going back about 10 days now, once we saw the underwhelming Russian army, was that Russia didn’t need to advance too much and that they would have the option of turtling and just occupying more lands. I presume the West would keep the sanctions up if this was the case though. Settling for Ukraine ending up in such a rump form would be a dire outcome.

Yeah, but these will be hostile lands they will be occupying. How long will they be able to keep it up? As long as the west keeps the sanctions, I'm convinced in conventual war, Ukraine will win and eventually liberate everything but Crimea. Presuming the Ukrainians want to fight that long. Such a war, might take months or years. We (the west) must not allow Putin to gain anything from this war. Or at least support Ukrainians for as long as they want it and even longer.

 

[calodo2003]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[moses]

Yeah, but these will be hostile lands they will be occupying. How long will they be able to keep it up? As long as the west keeps the sanctions, I'm convinced in conventual war, Ukraine will win and eventually liberate everything but Crimea. Presuming the Ukrainians want to fight that long. Such a war, might take months or years. We (the west) must not allow Putin to gain anything from this war. Or at least support Ukrainians for as long as they want it and even longer.

This seems the most realistic 'win', but the west will need to keep the support up in every way possible, and at best it will take generations for Ukraine to recover in any way. As usual it's just so fecking sad and unjust.

 

[Raoul]

I don't know. If the US takes a provocative action, Putin just might be able to turn it from a unpopular aggressive war against a brotherly nation to a popular defensive war against US. Him claiming: "See, I was right all the time, this is all orchestrated by USA to destroy us".

I wouldn't be surprised that that's one of the reasons the US doesn't want to get more involved. Perhaps, they see their passive involvement (as opposed to active) as the best way to take Putin down.

Trouble is, Putin is operating without any restrictions which will allow him to do whatever he wants in Ukraine, and if that's allowed, there's nothing that will disincentivize him from going beyond Ukraine. There has to therefore be a strong line of demarcation that will result in NATO taking action before he completely decimates Ukraine and its population with chemical weapons, thermobarics, false flags involving some sort of WMD, or just general incompetence that results in a nuclear reactor spewing radiation across Europe. Biden and NATO are playing this a bit too safe at the moment, which is actually incentivizing Putin to be more brutal within Ukraine, because he suspects those watching him don't have the courage to stop him.

 

[Beans]

It won't be an option. Putin won't be able to win this war.

But can he not level every city in Ukraine?

 

[calodo2003]

But can he not level every city in Ukraine?

Conventionally? No.

 

[moses]

Conventionally? No.

He's such a terrifying character and the insane structure of Russia makes him even moreso.

 

[Beans]

Trouble is, Putin is operating without any restrictions which will allow him to do whatever he wants in Ukraine, and if that's allowed, there's nothing that will disincentivize him from going beyond Ukraine. There has to therefore be a strong line of demarcation that will result in NATO taking action before he completely decimates Ukraine and its population with chemical weapons, thermobarics, false flags involving some sort of WMD, or just general incompetence that results in a nuclear reactor spewing radiation across Europe. Biden and NATO are playing this a bit too safe at the moment, which is actually incentivizing Putin to be more brutal within Ukraine, because he suspects those watching him don't have the courage to stop him.

I think he expects political paralysis when it comes to actually using soldiers, unless a NATO country is invaded. I think Putin will happily take Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova and add them to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Syria where he's propping up dictators. I don't know what up in Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Armenia but they'll all be Putin's in time unless the West decides he needs to be stopped. Easier to fight him in Europe, logistically speaking.

 

[Oly Francis]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I don't really like the "you will be next" narrative that some Ukranians are pushing. I understand why they do it, they're desperate but i'm not sure it's the right angle. It's not a total war, that's the very reason why they get limited help or why Putin, despite the fact that Russian seems to commit several war crimes on the ground, has not used (or at least consistently) his most lethal non-nuclear weapons.

I understand they want to drag NATO into this asap to protect their country but it's not going to happen yet unless Russia does something really stupid.

 

[moses]

Essentially, a policy based mainly on the oppression of freedom is doomed to eventually fail.

Eventually takes a very long time sometimes.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Trouble is, Putin is operating without any restrictions which will allow him to do whatever he wants in Ukraine, and if that's allowed, there's nothing that will disincentivize him from going beyond Ukraine. There has to therefore be a strong line of demarcation that will result in NATO taking action before he completely decimates Ukraine and its population with chemical weapons, thermobarics, false flags involving some sort of WMD, or just general incompetence that results in a nuclear reactor spewing radiation across Europe. Biden and NATO are playing this a bit too safe at the moment, which is actually incentivizing Putin to be more brutal within Ukraine, because he suspects those watching him don't have the courage to stop him.

The disincentive is (a) he won't even be able to conquer Ukraine; (b) his military forces will soon be hugely weakened; (c) unrest inside Russia is rising; (d) NATO forces are far superior to Russia and would utterly destroy any Russian attempt to invade a NATO or EU country; (e) mutual assured destruction should such invasion escalate to nuclear exchange.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Eventually takes a very long time sometimes.

True. But the universe has no shortage of time.

 

[Redlambs]

Trouble is, Putin is operating without any restrictions which will allow him to do whatever he wants in Ukraine, and if that's allowed, there's nothing that will disincentivize him from going beyond Ukraine. There has to therefore be a strong line of demarcation that will result in NATO taking action before he completely decimates Ukraine and its population with chemical weapons, thermobarics, false flags involving some sort of WMD, or just general incompetence that results in a nuclear reactor spewing radiation across Europe. Biden and NATO are playing this a bit too safe at the moment, which is actually incentivizing Putin to be more brutal within Ukraine, because he suspects those watching him don't have the courage to stop him.

Where to though?

Genuine question btw, who do you think is next?

 

[Raoul]

The disincentive is (a) he won't even be able to conquer Ukraine; (b) his military forces will soon be hugely weakened; (c) unrest inside Russia is rising; (d) NATO forces are far superior to Russia and would utterly destroy any Russian attempt to invade a NATO or EU country; (e) mutual assured destruction should such invasion escalate to nuclear exchange.

If Putin used a tactical nuke in Kharkov and Kiev tomorrow, what should NATO's reaction be ?

 

[Raoul]

Where to though?

Genuine question btw, who do you think is next?

Probably eastern Europe, but could be anywhere. The main point is that each time we didn't think he would do something, he did it.

 

[ooeat0meoo]

Trouble is, Putin is operating without any restrictions which will allow him to do whatever he wants in Ukraine, and if that's allowed, there's nothing that will disincentivize him from going beyond Ukraine. There has to therefore be a strong line of demarcation that will result in NATO taking action before he completely decimates Ukraine and its population with chemical weapons, thermobarics, false flags involving some sort of WMD, or just general incompetence that results in a nuclear reactor spewing radiation across Europe. Biden and NATO are playing this a bit too safe at the moment, which is actually incentivizing Putin to be more brutal within Ukraine, because he suspects those watching him don't have the courage to stop him.

The trouble is that the US political system is too convoluted and back stabby to allow this to happen without the R's claiming Biden caused WWIII. Thus paving the way for an increasing wave of Trumpians to win in the mid-terms and quite possibly Donald to regain the WH in 2024

 

[Raoul]

The trouble is that the US political system is too convoluted and back stabby to allow this to happen without the R's claiming Biden caused WWIII. Thus paving the way for an increasing wave of Trumpians to win in the mid-terms and quite possibly Donald to regain the WH in 2024

Yes, that's another problem for Biden. Although if Putin uses a chemical weapon I suspect there will be rare bipartisanship in the response.

 

[Redlambs]

Anywhere. The main point is that each time we didn't think he would do something, he did it.

Yeah, that's the standard line.

But I'm more interested in where you think he could go next. We know any Nato country is off limits, so what's the next target? What both fits his ideology and still stays clear of WW3?

Also, if I may question further (and in good faith, I don't have an axe to grind with you), what is it you propose Nato do right now to stop him? I ask because all I keep seeing is "more intervention" and "getting involved" but I honestly have no idea what that means.

 

[TMDaines]

Yeah, but these will be hostile lands they will be occupying. How long will they be able to keep it up? As long as the west keeps the sanctions, I'm convinced in conventual war, Ukraine will win and eventually liberate everything but Crimea. Presuming the Ukrainians want to fight that long. Such a war, might take months or years. We (the west) must not allow Putin to gain anything from this war. Or at least support Ukrainians for as long as they want it and even longer.

They have kept a large chunk of Donbas for eight years, including the two big cities. Don’t think it is beyond them to use all of their nefarious tricks to hold another coastal sliver. Plenty of Rosgvardiya will be shipped in, troublemakers will disappear, pliant civilians will be encouraged to relocate there etc.

 

[Frosty]

Where to though?

Genuine question btw, who do you think is next?

I would say Moldova given the Russian interference there to date.

 

[VorZakone]

Yeah, that's the standard line.

But I'm more interested in where you think he could go next. We know any Nato country is off limits, so what's the next target? What both fits his ideology and still stays clear of WW3?

Also, if I may question further (and in good faith, I don't have an axe to grind with you), what is it you propose Nato do right now to stop him? I ask because all I keep seeing is "more intervention" and "getting involved" but I honestly have no idea what that means.

I don't quite buy the notion that Putin wants to invade more countries but if he did, it's probably Georgia or Moldova next. Might have a grudge against Kazakhstan too as they rejected his request to send troops.

As for more intervention, I suspect harsher sanctions on Russian gas/oil industry.

 

[Raoul]

Yeah, that's the standard line.

But I'm more interested in where you think he could go next. We know any Nato country is off limits, so what's the next target? What both fits his ideology and still stays clear of WW3?

Also, if I may question further (and in good faith, I don't have an axe to grind with you), what is it you propose Nato do right now to stop him? I ask because all I keep seeing is "more intervention" and "getting involved" but I honestly have no idea what that means.

He would focus on any NATO country that was previously in the Soviet Union or the Soviet sphere. The Baltics would be leading contenders, as would any European nations seeking to join NATO (Finland/Sweden would be in the crosshairs for some form of meddling or intervention).

 

[TMDaines]

I wonder if the plain, white paper might just evolve to be the protest of choice in Russia?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Frosty]

Also, if I may question further (and in good faith, I don't have an axe to grind with you), what is it you propose Nato do right now to stop him? I ask because all I keep seeing is "more intervention" and "getting involved" but I honestly have no idea what that means.

NATO the organisation probably nothing. I'd expect the main countries to do a lot to separate China from Russia. If that happens then Putin's regime cannot possibly be propped up.

 

[Redlambs]

He would focus on any NATO country that was previously in the Soviet Union or the Soviet sphere. The Baltics would be leading contenders, as would any European nations seeking to join NATO (Finland/Sweden would be in the crosshairs for some form of meddling or intervention).

So you honestly think he'll start a war with NATO? And still the question remains, what is the next step to stop that?

NATO the organisation probably nothing. I'd expect the main countries to do a lot to separate China from Russia. If that happens then Putin's regime cannot possibly be propped up.

Is there a solid idea of how that happens? Seems like China are only distancing themselves now they realise the Russians have got themselves into bother, not because they have suddenly changed their vision for expansion.


I guess what I'm getting at is I just don't see a path for Nato or even individual countries like Poland/Germany to do anything other than continue to supply Ukraine and sanctions and I certainly don't think China will allow themselves to be manipulated into distancing, they'll only do what suits them. So I just don't really get what these vague suggestions of doing more really means?