feck off
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
feck off
There were likely many more factors at play for why Putin invaded Ukraine, but perhaps he took inspiration from Azerbaijan indeed.
There’s a difference between the two cases though, in that Azerbaijan are technically recovering territory that is internationally recognized as theirs, whereas Russia has been annexing the internationally recognized territory of a neighboring state. So in that sense the ‘norm’ established by Azerbaijan works against Moscow’s aims here.
I think there's a few more factors he needs to address to draw parallels, but yes of course one reason Putin went for it is because he thought he could, because Ukraine had no defensive backers. That's fairly standard I think for any invasion.
Well I think in the long run the massive international resistance to accepting Russia’s annexation of these territories will endure, while concurrently the Azerbaijani victory will be widely recognized (assuming there’s no subsequent mass ethnic cleansing of the Karabakh Armenians). And if Putin believed that sheer force and facts on the ground could change that, then it’s another miscalculation on his part.
Fingers crossed for the worst for the Russians.
From an american geopolitical perspective isn't it better that this drags on for as long as possible, to drain russian resources? If they see it like that in geopolitical terms it makes sense they arm the ukranians little by little instead of going all in for a quicker victory.
"Ukranians are dying everyday" is an emotional argument for the common joe, but american military/political big heads probably don't give a shit about that.
From what I read this war is hurting europe economically but not so much america.
"Ukranians are dying everyday" is an emotional argument for the common joe, but american military/political big heads probably don't give a shit about that.
From what I read this war is hurting europe economically but not so much america.
That’s what is believed to have been the policy during the Soviet-Afghan war in the 80s.
Notice the oil price?
If Russia wins what was the point of the last two years and billions of dollars of weapons given?
There's no way of the US administration backing down now due to that.
The war will continue until a side wins or the global economy collapses so much that it outweighs the escalation of commitment keeping it going. Then they'll be peace talks and a deal.
My guess is the latter.
A good thread.
I think the biggest mistake people think is that the Russians will be defeated easily. I think every thing in this war after the first few months showed that it is not the case. Equipping UKR doesn't necessarily mean that either at least in the short term.
The other problem that the Biden faces that people forget is that the U.S as a whole doesn't give much feck about the geopolitics or UKR other than lip services for a few months.
The point is that even with fully equipped UKR force, the success in short tem is doubtful. Without the full support from the U.S congress for a few years, there is little Biden can do even if he wants to equip the UKR with whatever they want.
Whilst some may have certainly thought that at differing points, we're coming from a starting point of almost certain defeat for Ukraine. Every day since has steadily shifted the needle more toward a Russian defeat.
The current short term news cycle is focusing on the atacms decision ...which I'm not sure is even a decision, its just a stance that hasn't changed since day one. While at the same time we've got ABRAMS being delivered right now, F-16's imminent and probably another whopping aid package announced today while Zelensky is in the US.
Arms supply to Ukraine is still consistently increasing and shows no sign of slowing down, despite what controversy some media try to create on the topic. Oh, and don't forget Ukraine's own home grown long range capability, which is now seemingly taking out key Russian targets at will.
I don't know if Biden/US's choices are the best, worst or something in between, but we're on the right path.
Last edited:
Russia's army is impossible to outflank so you have to go 'straight up the middle,' a US veteran training Ukrainian forces says
https://www.businessinsider.com/rus...-attack-head-on-us-veteran-ukraine-2023-9?amp
https://www.businessinsider.com/rus...-attack-head-on-us-veteran-ukraine-2023-9?amp
I voiced that out exactly at the beginning of the war and I was even insulted on how I dared to suggest that.
Nevertheless, these are the cards dealt and is in the best interest of US that Russia loses, if Ukraine loses or wins is not that relevant as they both might lose at the same time. But US generosity is not because of the freedom of the world but its own interest (as any other country) because it had been shown that they could give all type of weapons faster. If Ukraine had access to all the weapons that they have and had been promised in the first 6 months of war all at once, the situation would be much more different and it seems that the delay was a bunch of excuses, and not only US, Europe as well took even longer to ramp up from helmets to leopards and storm shadows
When I agree that the RU troops are not what many people including themselves thought they were, when I said it was not easy to defeat, I meant that their country is not your typical one. Most would stop the war at this point. Putin is mad and they are in the defensive positions now which will add some advantage to them.
I didn't mean that they were invisible. It is just most people did have expectations that they would collapse quickly.
I agree with most of your post. I am just concerned with the U.S congress support for UKR next year and more. And all these things may not have much to do with the U.S willing to use UKR lives long term for some geopolitics. Biden probably just can't speed it up even if he wanted to.
Yes, and there was a lot of wishful thinking that similar pushes to that of Kharkiv/Kherson would continue, before Russian dug in a littered every field with mines.
Trump is most certainly a concern. I'm hoping measures are being taken elsewhere to mitigate that risk.
Infrastructure targeting, a sign for the winter?
12 tweets in a row. A new thread record ? 
I for one thank @VorZakone for the daily info on the war and the supporting efforts behind it, and hope for more positive news from the battlefront.
IMO the ATACMS issue is a little bit of posturing before the Biden-Zelenski summit, and after that they will be released in a big announcement. Hopefully we'll see what's what soon.
IMO the ATACMS issue is a little bit of posturing before the Biden-Zelenski summit, and after that they will be released in a big announcement. Hopefully we'll see what's what soon.
Well back to what I said..
Poland says it will stop arming Ukraine. How did we get here – and what does it mean for the war?
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/21/europe/poland-ukraine-weapons-grain-explainer-intl/index.html
I don't know if the headline is just dramatic or if there is actually any substance to it as the article seemed to suggest.
Cheers.
"But the country's president later said the comments had been misinterpreted in the "worst possible way".
Andrzej Duda said it was only new Polish weapons that would not be sent."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66873495
I hope they eased the tension between them with the grain things. The comments coming from both sides were a bit spicy. Zelensky almost called them out by their names on the U.N speech. Can't blame him doing what he can to help his country though. Just hope he finds the balance and does not burn too many bridges on the process.