Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[Dans]

There is no logical explanation for this except that he says these things to support the chancellor who for some reason doesn't want to support Ukraine the way Germany should and could.

Leaving the door open for gas supplies to eventually resume because in fact there really isn't a viable alternative that doesn't mean higher prices being the norm with potential devastating effects on German industry?

 

[frostbite]

I think the fear is the nuclear escalation where everybody loses. Obviously, in a conventional conflict, the US by itself could easily overthrow the Russian regime and US tanks could reach Moscow within a few months.

But, if there is a nuclear escalation, then one being 10x stronger doesn’t make a difference.

Of course, this is not to say that the US (and rest of NATO) should not do anything. They have played this perfectly so far, and as long as the help to Ukraine continues, Russia is fecked.

No, the West did not play it perfectly. On the contrary. There are thousands and thousands of dead Ukrainians and their country has been destroyed for no good reason.

The West should have made the Russians so scared that they will be destroyed completely, that they wouldn't even think of invading anyone. The West has more and better nuclear weapons and the Russians know this too.

Unfortunately, the Western leaders are too weak for anything like that, and Putin knows this. The Ukrainians pay the price. It is terrible to say that "the West played it perfectly".

 

[frostbite]

It has been known since ancient times that "if you want peace, prepare for war".

It was moronic from the western leaders that they said clearly and unequivocally that they will not go to war, no matter what. Even after the Russians invaded Ukraine in 2014, even after it was clear in December 2021 that they will invade again. Basically the morons that we have as "leaders" in the west, gave the green light for Putin to invade. Why? Why not warn Putin that an invasion means all out war with the West? And if we are not taking sides, what exactly are we doing?

It is a good thing that we helped Ukraine after February 24th. But again it is basically the USA who saved Ukraine. Europe has done very little. If USA wasn't helping as much, if USA happened to have Trump as president, Europe would do absolutely nothing except for a few loud farts. It is unbelievable how badly the European leaders have handled this war. Europe is richer that Russia, but the will to do the right thing is not there. Europe has been trying to do as little as possible, Europe has learned nothing from the Chamberlain-Hitler debacle. As a European, I feel ashamed! As an EU citizen, I feel partly responsible for all this suffering of the Ukrainians today. (Again: Thank you, USA. )

 

[Revan]

No, the West did not play it perfectly. On the contrary. There are thousands and thousands of dead Ukrainians and their country has been destroyed for no good reason.

The West should have made the Russians so scared that they will be destroyed completely, that they wouldn't even think of invading anyone. The West has more and better nuclear weapons and the Russians know this too.

Unfortunately, the Western leaders are too weak for anything like that, and Putin knows this. The Ukrainians pay the price. It is terrible to say that "the West played it perfectly".

The West doesn’t have more and better nuclear weapons, that’s Trump level of speaking. Russia alone has more nuclear weapons than the West (the US, the UK and Franc) combined. But that is besides the point. Even with half of those nuclear weapons, they can destroy every important city in the West (same for either of those three countries alone who can destroy every important city in Russia) and essentially kill billions of people with after effects.

It does not matter who has better nuclear weapons. Both ICBM and SLBM missiles are currently not defendable from any country. Both Russia and the US can throw a couple of thousands of them, with nuclear warheads. The US are likely gonna me significantly more precise, but at the end doesn’t matter. If they all detonate, it is game over for the civilization.

This is a good reason why there hasn’t been a war between nuclear powers, be it if the conflict was Cuba, India-Pakistan, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan (both times) and so on.

 

[nimic]

Why not warn Putin that an invasion means all out war with the West?

Because it didn't, and it wouldn't, and it shouldn't? Luckily the people who forwarded the arguments you've presented in this thread during the Cold War were overruled. There would have been a guaranteed nuclear war.

 

[Oly Francis]

The West doesn’t have more and better nuclear weapons, that’s Trump level of speaking. Russia alone has more nuclear weapons than the West (the US, the UK and Franc) combined. But that is besides the point. Even with half of those nuclear weapons, they can destroy every important city in the West (same for either of those three countries alone who can destroy every important city in Russia) and essentially kill billions of people with after effects.

It does not matter who has better nuclear weapons. Both ICBM and SLBM missiles are currently not defendable from any country. Both Russia and the US can throw a couple of thousands of them, with nuclear warheads. The US are likely gonna me significantly more precise, but at the end doesn’t matter. If they all detonate, it is game over for the civilization.

This is a good reason why there hasn’t been a war between nuclear powers, be it if the conflict was Cuba, India-Pakistan, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan (both times) and so on.

Yeah, it's like saying "NATO is far more powerful because the could destroy Russia 10 times when Russia can only destroy most european cities 5 times!". Doesn't matter, we'd be all f*cked.

 

[Bosnian_fan]

I think main point he was making, or he should have made, is that Europe needs to grow a spine. It was very telling to me reading from several sources that it was US and British generals joining Ukrainian ones to plan counteroffensive. EU contributed nothing, it comes either as a lack of trust or lack of qualified cadre. In political and military sense, EU needs to become a factor, or euroscepticism will grow.

 

[RedDevilQuebecois]

This looks like a good opportunity to set up the Kaliningrad People’s Republic as a buffer zone, followed by a referendum to see if they want to join NATO.

The big question of self-governance will have to be asked at some point over there, considering that the region has a much deeper European history than the rest of Russia. Unless the union between an enclave and the country's mainland is very solid, history often shows that the enclave/colony will eventually seek independence if the mainland is not doing well.

 

[Oly Francis]

I think main point he was making, or he should have made, is that Europe needs to grow a spine. It was very telling to me reading from several sources that it was US and British generals joining Ukrainian ones to plan counteroffensive. EU contributed nothing, it comes either as a lack of trust or lack of qualified cadre. In political and military sense, EU needs to become a factor, or euroscepticism will grow.

You cant say EU contributed nothing when a lot of families in Europe are struggling because their energy Bill double or tripled. Nothing comparable to what ukrainians are experiencing obviously, Im not comparing, but it's also an war on the russian economy and everybody is paying a price (which im happy to pay personnally).

 

[neverdie]

I think main point he was making, or he should have made, is that Europe needs to grow a spine. It was very telling to me reading from several sources that it was US and British generals joining Ukrainian ones to plan counteroffensive. EU contributed nothing, it comes either as a lack of trust or lack of qualified cadre. In political and military sense, EU needs to become a factor, or euroscepticism will grow.

i think it is becoming a factor. increased spending and the german move to disregard unanimous consent within the union on certain foreign policy matters. that hints at an increasingly militarized union. but part of them growing a spine, though it will be a long way down the line, also implies keeping their distance from an exclusively nato oriented command. the more self-reliant the eu becomes militarily, the less likely it is to follow orders so easily. in an unintended way, you might see the death of nato quicker with the militarization of europe.

on the ukraine thing. the eu has landborders and direct energy reliance with russia. the americans and british don't. they were always going to play it differently even though they are contributing quite a lot in terms of money and guns despite what people say.

 

[Cheimoon]

You cant say EU contributed nothing when a lot of families in Europe are struggling because their energy Bill double or tripled. Nothing comparable to what ukrainians are experiencing obviously, Im not comparing, but it's also an war on the russian economy and everybody is paying a price (which im happy to pay personnally).

That's a good point actually. It doesn't have the same short-term impact, but those economic sanctions are quite valuable - and that's something the US (or Canada) don't really notice at all. In fact, they'll probably benefit from it if anything (as oil and gas producers themselves).

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

That's a good point actually. It doesn't have the same short-term impact, but those economic sanctions are quite valuable - and that's something the US (or Canada) don't really notice at all. In fact, they'll probably benefit from it if anything (as oil and gas producers themselves).

To be fair our gas (petrol) prices skewed upwards for quite a while after the conflict started. We definitely noticed that. Settled down a bit now but still pretty high.

Also to be fair, that may have just been oil company greed/opportunism but when prices shot up rapidly it seemed to align to events in Ukraine.

 

[the hea]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

That makes it five MARS II/M270 launchers in total donated from Germany.

 

[frostbite]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

That makes it five MARS II/M270 launchers in total donated from Germany.

That's good news! Wikipedia says:

"Some 1,300 M270 systems have been manufactured in the United States and in Western Europe, along with more than 700,000 rockets."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M270_Multiple_Launch_Rocket_System

If we could lend 10% of those to Ukraine (that is 130) only for the duration of this war, they could certainly win this war, don't you think? We have only provided a dozen or so, and they still have a huge impact.



And this shows how powerful the West is! Just the 10% of our rocket systems would destroy the Russian army! And the Western military forces are not based on rocket systems! They are based on the Air Force, and we have not provided even a single modern airplane to Ukraine!...

That's why I am saying that it is the Russians that should be afraid of the West, not the other way around, even with nuclear arms. I don't know how many million dollars Russians have paid to spread disinformation and doubt and propaganda in the West, but they have certainly done a good job. Many people in the West seem to be scared, while the Russians are bullying us! Amazing! (And pathetic!)

 

[frostbite]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/l...083f878e70e0e0#block-632347528f083f878e70e0e0

Von der Leyen: 'absolutely vital' for EU member states to support Ukraine with military equipment

In a quiet rebuke to Germany, Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, addressed European Union member states who were not fulfilling their commitments to equip Ukraine.

“To all member states: it’s absolutely vital and necessary to support Ukraine with the military equipment they need to defend themselves. They have proven that they are able to do that if they are well equipped,” she said. “This is the general recommendation to all member states.”

When Russian forces first invaded Ukraine, the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, shocked the world in announcing a historic 180-degree policy turn on defence spending and exporting lethal weapons. He committed to sending missiles and anti-tank weapons to help Ukraine defend itself against Russian aggression – but six months later, many of those much-needed weapons have yet to arrive.

In recent days, Ukraine upped its calls for more air defence and overall weapons deliveries, after a dramatically successful counter-offensive that has resulted in the recapturing of the Kharkiv region – but also retaliatory targeted attacks on the country’s infrastructure and repeated Russian shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

 

[Cheimoon]

To be fair our gas (petrol) prices skewed upwards for quite a while after the conflict started. We definitely noticed that. Settled down a bit now but still pretty high.

Also to be fair, that may have just been oil company greed/opportunism but when prices shot up rapidly it seemed to align to events in Ukraine.

Yeah, true, although various things seemed to factor into that. Like, all prices went up because global supply chains were disrupted, and that's not because of this invasion; and markets being shocked by the invasion would have happened with or without the sanctions.

But yes, one way or another, there was definitely some effect there.

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[VorZakone]

Ben Hodges is former US Army.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Bosnian_fan]

Ben Hodges is former US Army.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is what I'm speaking of. Unfair to blame it on whole of Europe though, I accept my mistake there, but Germany and France as EU leaders are ridiculous.

Anyway, any substance in reports that Georgia is moving its troops to South Ossetian border? We've already seen Azerbaijan attacking Armenia, obviously well aware that Russia are incapable of acting, and we've also seen China visiting Kazahkstan and warning Putin against meddling in Kazakhstan's internal affairs. Russia has obviously lost much more than it could gain even by somehow turning this war into their favor, which seems less and less likely by the day. It things continue like this and Belarussians bring down Lukashenko for example, it could be a matter of time before internal unrest starts building and some of those republics within Russia try themselves separating from the country.

 

[stefan92]

This is what I'm speaking of. Unfair to blame it on whole of Europe though, I accept my mistake there, but Germany and France as EU leaders are ridiculous.

Anyway, any substance in reports that Georgia is moving its troops to South Ossetian border? We've already seen Azerbaijan attacking Armenia, obviously well aware that Russia are incapable of acting, and we've also seen China visiting Kazahkstan and warning Putin against meddling in Kazakhstan's internal affairs. Russia has obviously lost much more than it could gain even by somehow turning this war into their favor, which seems less and less likely by the day. It things continue like this and Belarussians bring down Lukashenko for example, it could be a matter of time before internal unrest starts building and some of those republics within Russia try themselves separating from the country.

Kazakhstan already announced that they are going to suspend their CSTO membership (the Russian-led NATO equivalent), so Russia has lost a partner there.

Armenia looks like they might be going to invoke the support article of the CSTO amidst the attacks from Azerbaijan and it's doubtful that there will be a substantial response if that happens, so CSTO is basically dead now.

 

[Beans]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/l...083f878e70e0e0#block-632347528f083f878e70e0e0

Von der Leyen: 'absolutely vital' for EU member states to support Ukraine with military equipment

In a quiet rebuke to Germany, Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, addressed European Union member states who were not fulfilling their commitments to equip Ukraine.

“To all member states: it’s absolutely vital and necessary to support Ukraine with the military equipment they need to defend themselves. They have proven that they are able to do that if they are well equipped,” she said. “This is the general recommendation to all member states.”

When Russian forces first invaded Ukraine, the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, shocked the world in announcing a historic 180-degree policy turn on defence spending and exporting lethal weapons. He committed to sending missiles and anti-tank weapons to help Ukraine defend itself against Russian aggression – but six months later, many of those much-needed weapons have yet to arrive.

In recent days, Ukraine upped its calls for more air defence and overall weapons deliveries, after a dramatically successful counter-offensive that has resulted in the recapturing of the Kharkiv region – but also retaliatory targeted attacks on the country’s infrastructure and repeated Russian shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

If I were Ukrainian, I'd be very upset with Germany over that promise, there's no excuse for why those weapons haven't arrived.

Russia isn't sending energy, if Germany can't get some concessions out of Russia for not sending weapons, they might as well send them. As Russia feels their impact on the field, then they'll be motivated to offer energy in exchange for Germany not providing more weapons, if that's what they're after.

 

[stefan92]

If I were Ukrainian, I'd be very upset with Germany over that promise, there's no excuse for why those weapons haven't arrived.

Actually what was promised then and mentioned in the article has been delivered. Ukraine got thousands of MANPADs (Stinger and Strela) and anti-tank weapons like Panzerfaust etc.

The problem is the massive delay or refusal to even promise heavy systems. This very slowly changes, but still there would be more possible. At least today it was announced that Ukraine will get 50 Dingo MRAPs and 2 more M270 MLRS. Which is something and will be useful, but still isn't a MBT or IFV that Ukraine wishes to get and which could just be delivered by the industry if the chancellor did approve them, so far he refuses to do that.

 

[Beans]

Actually what was promised then and mentioned in the article has been delivered. Ukraine got thousands of MANPADs (Stinger and Strela) and anti-tank weapons like Panzerfaust etc.

The problem is the massive delay or refusal to even promise heavy systems. This very slowly changes, but still there would be more possible. At least today it was announced that Ukraine will get 50 Dingo MRAPs and 2 more M270 MLRS. Which is something and will be useful, but still isn't a MBT or IFV that Ukraine wishes to get and which could just be delivered by the industry if the chancellor did approve them, so far he refuses to do that.

That's good to hear, thanks.

Would you say he's refusing to deliver those more advanced system in an attempt to sweeten Russia in the hopes they will decide to supply energy in the future, or is there something else at play?

 

[stefan92]

That's good to hear, thanks.

Would you say he's refusing to deliver those more advanced system in an attempt to sweeten Russia in the hopes they will decide to supply energy in the future, or is there something else at play?

I honestly have no idea, as we are not any longer talking about advanced or unadvanced technologies.

Ukraine already got the Panzerhaubitze 2000, which is the current equipment of the German artillery and one of the most advanced artillery systems in the world. Yet Scholz doesn't approve the delivery of Marder IFVs from storage (the Bundeswehr replaced them with the Boxer some years ago, so the Marder is far from being an advanced system).

Similarly confusing the months long discussion if Ukraine should get Gepard SPAAG (same as the Marder a phased out system in storage, meanwhile they got them and apparently were very happy with their performance in the current Kharkiv offensive), but it was quickly approved to deliver Iris-T SLM air defense systems as soon as possible (which will be end of the year and will mean that Ukraine is the first country to use that, even ahead of Germany).

In the early days of the war the situation looked much clearer as you could simply say that because of some pacifistic ideas Germany said that only "defensive weapons" would be delivered - like those anti-air/anti-tank missiles. This distinction was always stupid, but you could see some logic and understand that "ok that's stupid, but I see what they are doing there". But now? No IFVs, but MRAPs, which essentially are used for the same tasks, just are smaller systems? Mobile artillery and SPAAG to support operations, but no MBTs? It truly doesn't make sense (we would still have some old Leopard 1 MBTs lying around, even if we wouldn't deliver the currently used Leopard 2)

 

[Beans]

I honestly have no idea, as we are not any longer talking about advanced or unadvanced technologies.

Ukraine already got the Panzerhaubitze 2000, which is the current equipment of the German artillery and one of the most advanced artillery systems in the world. Yet Scholz doesn't approve the delivery of Marder IFVs from storage (the Bundeswehr replaced them with the Boxer some years ago, so the Marder is far from being an advanced system).

Similarly confusing the months long discussion if Ukraine should get Gepard SPAAG (same as the Marder a phased out system in storage, meanwhile they got them and apparently were very happy with their performance in the current Kharkiv offensive), but it was quickly approved to deliver Iris-T SLM air defense systems as soon as possible (which will be end of the year and will mean that Ukraine is the first country to use that, even ahead of Germany).

In the early days of the war the situation looked much clearer as you could simply say that because of some pacifistic ideas Germany said that only "defensive weapons" would be delivered - like those anti-air/anti-tank missiles. This distinction was always stupid, but you could see some logic and understand that "ok that's stupid, but I see what they are doing there". But now? No IFVs, but MRAPs, which essentially are used for the same tasks, just are smaller systems? Mobile artillery and SPAAG to support operations, but no MBTs? It truly doesn't make sense (we would still have some old Leopard 1 MBTs lying around, even if we wouldn't deliver the currently used Leopard 2)

I understand the early caution, everyone started small to see how Russia responded.

But it doesn’t seem Russia is eager escalate, going after energy plants is the only thing that comes to mind. They were already torturing civilians and leveling cities, if they aren’t going to use WMDs I’m not sure what they can do beyond mobilization.

They’re getting shells from North Korea and bringing out museum piece tanks, how much more functioning equipment could they have?

At this point it might be best to try the Chinese method of “salami slicing”, taking a bit of territory back at a time so that any one offensive isn’t enough to drive Russia to feel the need for drastic action.

As angry as Ukrainians must be, it seems most of them have family or friends in Russia. If they push Russia out of Ukraine they would be great guarantees of Russia’s border, imho. Surely better than anyone from NATO having forces on that border.

 

[frostbite]

If I were Ukrainian, I'd be very upset with Germany over that promise, there's no excuse for why those weapons haven't arrived.

Russia isn't sending energy, if Germany can't get some concessions out of Russia for not sending weapons, they might as well send them. As Russia feels their impact on the field, then they'll be motivated to offer energy in exchange for Germany not providing more weapons, if that's what they're after.

If you were Ukrainian, and if you got upset with Germany, you'd be told that it is not helpful to be upset because this may anger Germans and then they will not help you.

I read this response in various posts here a few months ago. Apparently, Ukrainians should only say "thank you" to Germany, they are not allowed to be upset.

 

[frostbite]

I honestly have no idea, as we are not any longer talking about advanced or unadvanced technologies.

Ukraine already got the Panzerhaubitze 2000, which is the current equipment of the German artillery and one of the most advanced artillery systems in the world. Yet Scholz doesn't approve the delivery of Marder IFVs from storage (the Bundeswehr replaced them with the Boxer some years ago, so the Marder is far from being an advanced system).

Similarly confusing the months long discussion if Ukraine should get Gepard SPAAG (same as the Marder a phased out system in storage, meanwhile they got them and apparently were very happy with their performance in the current Kharkiv offensive), but it was quickly approved to deliver Iris-T SLM air defense systems as soon as possible (which will be end of the year and will mean that Ukraine is the first country to use that, even ahead of Germany).

In the early days of the war the situation looked much clearer as you could simply say that because of some pacifistic ideas Germany said that only "defensive weapons" would be delivered - like those anti-air/anti-tank missiles. This distinction was always stupid, but you could see some logic and understand that "ok that's stupid, but I see what they are doing there". But now? No IFVs, but MRAPs, which essentially are used for the same tasks, just are smaller systems? Mobile artillery and SPAAG to support operations, but no MBTs? It truly doesn't make sense (we would still have some old Leopard 1 MBTs lying around, even if we wouldn't deliver the currently used Leopard 2)

Here are two related articles:

https://mezha.media/en/2022/09/14/r...he-german-government-again-does-not-allow-it/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...al-multiple-rocket-launchers-kyiv-2022-09-15/

And another one from DW:

https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-why-germany-must-send-tanks-to-ukraine-and-fast/a-63117612

 

[Beans]

If you were Ukrainian, and if you got upset with Germany, you'd be told that it is not helpful to be upset because this may anger Germans and then they will not help you.

I read this response in various posts here a few months ago. Apparently, Ukrainians should only say "thank you" to Germany, they are not allowed to be upset.

That sounds very German. "Please disconnect your emotions and reboot conversation."

 

[stefan92]

That sounds very German. "Please disconnect your emotions and reboot conversation."

Except that isn't what happened and what happened in this thread, it's just rhat frostbite hates Germans.

The big diplomatic issue at the time was that the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany Andriy Melnyk was acting and talking like Germany wasn't a souvereign state and essentially ordered Germany to do this or send that. He was truly unbearable and on top of that is a Banderista, so essentially a Nazi and therefore a PR disaster for Ukraine in Germany.

In the meantime he got replaced and that's why we don't have this kind if discussion any more.

 

[Beans]

Except that isn't what happened and what happened in this thread, it's just rhat frostbite hates Germans.

The big diplomatic issue at the time was that the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany Andriy Melnyk was acting and talking like Germany wasn't a souvereign state and essentially ordered Germany to do this or send that. He was truly unbearable and on top of that is a Banderista, so essentially a Nazi and therefore a PR disaster for Ukraine in Germany.

In the meantime he got replaced and that's why we don't have this kind if discussion any more.

I can't believe Germany would let something small like that keep them from doing what was right. I mean I have no idea who any country has as ambassador to the US, but there's nothing any of them could say that's embarrassing enough to get the US to stop sending arms to Ukraine. Doesn't seem a proportional response.

Surely if Germany said, "We're happy to give you everything but this guy is embarrassing us can you get rid of him please?" you'd think Ukraine would have been happy to. I mean, they got rid of him one way or the other.

Obviously I'm on the outside looking in, but there was much talk about business ties between Germany and Russia. These high gas prices are going to made some industries in Germany unprofitable, I expect those industries pressed hard for peace talks.

After all, everyone was fine with doing essentially nothing in 2014, so it's not hard to imagine.

 

[stefan92]

I can't believe Germany would let something small like that keep them from doing what was right. I mean I have no idea who any country has as ambassador to the US, but there's nothing any of them could say that's embarrassing enough to get the US to stop sending arms to Ukraine. Doesn't seem a proportional response.

Surely if Germany said, "We're happy to give you everything but this guy is embarrassing us can you get rid of him please?" you'd think Ukraine would have been happy to. I mean, they got rid of him one way or the other.

Obviously I'm on the outside looking in, but there was much talk about business ties between Germany and Russia. These high gas prices are going to made some industries in Germany unprofitable, I expect those industries pressed hard for peace talks.

After all, everyone was fine with doing essentially nothing in 2014, so it's not hard to imagine.

True, I don't think that was the reason for what our government did or not. It just wasn't helpful to get the public opinion on Ukraine's side as he perfectly matches the "denazification" reasoning Putin gave for the war. Ukraine (up to the president) acting quite confrontational towards Germany, and while understandable it just wasn't smart.

 

[Abizzz]

I can't believe Germany would let something small like that keep them from doing what was right. I mean I have no idea who any country has as ambassador to the US, but there's nothing any of them could say that's embarrassing enough to get the US to stop sending arms to Ukraine. Doesn't seem a proportional response.

Surely if Germany said, "We're happy to give you everything but this guy is embarrassing us can you get rid of him please?" you'd think Ukraine would have been happy to. I mean, they got rid of him one way or the other.

Obviously I'm on the outside looking in, but there was much talk about business ties between Germany and Russia. These high gas prices are going to made some industries in Germany unprofitable, I expect those industries pressed hard for peace talks.

After all, everyone was fine with doing essentially nothing in 2014, so it's not hard to imagine.

Melenyk took a Trumpish approach to public relations in Germany. He attempted to guilt/shame/insult the german population into doing whatever he thought was best, instead of laying out the reasons why it would make sense to do x,y or z.

However that was only a small factor. A much bigger factor is that 1/4 of the country essentially grew up under Russian rule (at least the people of an age to be politicians now), and for the other 3/4 that talking to Russia had worked for the longest time, including in reuniting germany without war or mayhem, which was especially noteworthy considering the absolute abyss that had brought about the seperation in the first place. People seriously understimate the effect all that still has on current german politics and population. Modern Germany isn't and never has been in a leading role in the "west" like the UK or the US have been. No matter how much Merkel fans like to potray it as such. It's not a kind of seperate entity like France either, it's been having to navigate the crossroads between east and west for the past 80 years to carve out it's spot in the world.
Add to that some thoroughly uninspiring leaders and a population tired of being told they have to pay for everyone and their momma in Europe and you begin to see some of the reasons behind this recent cowardice.

 

[stevoc]

I think main point he was making, or he should have made, is that Europe needs to grow a spine. It was very telling to me reading from several sources that it was US and British generals joining Ukrainian ones to plan counteroffensive. EU contributed nothing, it comes either as a lack of trust or lack of qualified cadre. In political and military sense, EU needs to become a factor, or euroscepticism will grow.

Bear in mind when the war broke out the former British PM was in a very tough spot domestically with a series of scandals involving himself and his party with pressure on him to resign. So the invasion came at a very convenient time for Boris to distract the public from his and his party's behaviour by throwing his support behind Ukraine.

Would the same level of support that Ukraine have had from the UK been forthcoming if the war had broke out when Boris and the Tories were in a much more comfortable position?

I have my doubts personally.

 

[TwoSheds]

What's the difference between a graveyard and a mass grave then? The picture I saw in Izyum of the "mass grave" seemed relatively respectful considering the press around it. Individually buried, wooden cross on each grave, supposedly most of them are thought to either be fallen Ukrainian soldiers, bombing victims or those who didn't receive adequate medical care (presumably not that uncommon in a warzone). I had assumed when I read the headline that they were victims of torture or something.

Is there some offence here that's been committed that I don't understand? Does it go against the Geneva convention or something?

 

[Dans]

What's the difference between a graveyard and a mass grave then? The picture I saw in Izyum of the "mass grave" seemed relatively respectful considering the press around it. Individually buried, wooden cross on each grave, supposedly most of them are thought to either be fallen Ukrainian soldiers, bombing victims or those who didn't receive adequate medical care (presumably not that uncommon in a warzone). I had assumed when I read the headline that they were victims of torture or something.

Is there some offence here that's been committed that I don't understand? Does it go against the Geneva convention or something?

That seems to be what they are trying now to understand, but I agree that a mass grave would not be likely to have individual crosses, suggesting individual graves. Seems more likely that the locals were burying their dead, the numbers obviously being far higher than normal thanks to the Russian invasion and occupation. But a mass grave where 100s are killed and then dumped in a big hole is not what this appears to be based on the photos I saw.

 

[Dans]

Although now I read the following:

"A larger grave bore a marker saying it contained the bodies of 17 Ukrainian soldiers."

 

[Dans]

Leaving the door open for gas supplies to eventually resume because in fact there really isn't a viable alternative that doesn't mean higher prices being the norm with potential devastating effects on German industry?

Just read an article about how a fairly large brewery in Bavaria will run out of CO2 in 3 weeks.........no beer, no Germany. C02 manufacture requires gas.

 

[Abizzz]

Just read an article about how a fairly large brewery in Bavaria will run out of CO2 in 3 weeks.........no beer, no Germany. C02 manufacture requires gas.

Isn't the CO2 in beer a result of the brewing process!?

 

[Cloud7]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Nice people, aren’t they? OrcTV

 

[Dans]

Isn't the CO2 in beer a result of the brewing process!?

" We need carbon dioxide in the filling process, among other things. Bottles or kegs are charged with CO2, which prevents oxygen from getting into the beer. Large amounts of CO2 are required in a brewery because of this process. Extra carbonic acid is only added to drinks such as soda or mineral water. "