Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

High payouts and pensions for families of dead soldiers will encourage women to produce children to fuel the war, and through their death they can climb the social ladder in a stagnant economy.



https://t.me/stalin_gulag/2036
 
JPRouve said:
A coincidence that the french president is running in the french presidental elections which are organized every 5 years around the same period?
Click to expand...
Yes, should have held the elections last year or next year to dissipate the doubts.
 
Halftrack said:
It's cool how you, and people like you, keep taking away agency from the Ukrainian people. It's not like they're massively in favor of joining NATO and the EU, and massively opposed to the idea of being a Russian puppet state.

Nah, they're just a pawn in a game between Russia and the West, and aren't allowed to make the choices they think best benefit them. Might as well just have given up the idea of being a sovereign nation, seeing as how the only thing they're apparently allowed to do is slowly being ground down by Russia. Because this was coming, Putin's been coveting Ukraine for years, and he was always going to move to bring them into the Russian sphere of influence.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that Nato members are not sovereign states? The false equivalencies in this thread never cease to amaze me.
 
Pintu said:
Just saw this on my Twitter feed. Is this real? Could Putin get anymore isolated than when the US’s enemies are calling him out publicly?



i went to his profile and this was yesterday.
Click to expand...


Wow, that's a change of tune.

He been hacked?
 
I fear for Ukraine. First signs of slowing media coverage are visible where I live, it's not as prominent on the front page anymore. The Ukrainians are losing the momentum. Any positive breakthrough for Ukraine will have to come from the sanctions hitting Russia hard. Because Russia doesn't look like they'll quit.
 
VorZakone said:
I fear for Ukraine. First signs of slowing media coverage are visible where I live, it's not as prominent on the front page anymore. The Ukrainians are losing the momentum. Any positive breakthrough for Ukraine will have to come from the sanctions hitting Russia hard. Because Russia doesn't look like they'll quit.
Click to expand...
My thinking too. This is gonna get worse before it gets better, and is going to end with catastrophic consequences for Ukraine. As Obama said, Ukraine is more important for Russia than it is for us.

However, if they valiantly fight, there is hope that Ukraine will continue to exist and probably become again sovereign after a regime change in Moscow. If not, their name will be forgotten as has been for many parts of Russia.
 
do.ob said:
Are you suggesting that Nato members are not sovereign states? The false equivalencies in this thread never cease to amaze me.
Click to expand...
Left out a couple of words somehow, so I could see how you'd think that. Hopefully it reads as it was intended to now.
 
VorZakone said:
I fear for Ukraine. First signs of slowing media coverage are visible where I live, it's not as prominent on the front page anymore. The Ukrainians are losing the momentum. Any positive breakthrough for Ukraine will have to come from the sanctions hitting Russia hard. Because Russia doesn't look like they'll quit.
Click to expand...

Coverage in the US has also slowed down a bit in recent days (although its back with a vengeance today). One of the problems media outlets are going to run into is keeping their correspondents in very dangerous areas due to the indiscriminate nature of Russian bombings in civilian areas. I can't imagine news organizations justifying the risk of putting their correspondents in that much danger.
 
TMDaines said:
Click to expand...

A lot of words to try and argue that the nuclear threat has no meaningful line to draw on either side. But of course it has. Pure sophistry.

To try and argue that Putin would ignore the threat of NATO if they don't intervene in Ukraine is just naive. As is imagining that Putin would ignore NATO overtly joining the war in Ukraine. Yet Kasparov openly steps into both obvious blunders.

And no, while war is terrible this is not (yet) genocide. I guess Kasparov can't really sense proportions very well.
 
B20 said:
A lot of words to try and argue that the nuclear threat has no meaningful line to draw on either side. But of course it has. Pure sophistry.

To try and argue that Putin would ignore the threat of NATO if they don't intervene in Ukraine is just naive. As is imagining that Putin would ignore NATO overtly joining the war in Ukraine. Yet Kasparov openly steps into both obvious blunders.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I didn't find him convincing. I think Putin considered this a one time golden opportunity to 'catch' Ukraine as it still wasn't in the NATO. An extremely brazen move, and we'll have to wait out the sanctions, but I don't see him attacking the Baltics.
 
Fuuuuck me. How can anyone be so dumb to publicly say this? The Athletic’s journalist refused to report it at first as he was so disgusted with it.

 
TMDaines said:
Fuuuuck me. How can anyone be so dumb to publicly say this? The Athletic’s journalist refused to report it at first as he was so disgusted with it.

Click to expand...


She is just getting a preemptive defense in when everyone starts asking why the Saudis are allowed to run Newcastle but Russians are not.
 
VorZakone said:
Agreed, I didn't find him convincing. I think Putin considered this a one time golden opportunity to 'catch' Ukraine as it still wasn't in the NATO. An extremely brazen move, and we'll have to wait out the sanctions, but I don't see him attacking the Baltics.
Click to expand...

The one thing I don’t get - why didn’t he invade 18 months ago when his mate was in the White House? If the US was on the sidelines, I doubt Europe would have felt emboldened to take such decisive action.
 
"Why should I suffer misfortune just because I amassed a fortune from allying with extremely evil people? I don't think that's particularly fair."
 
VorZakone said:
Agreed, I didn't find him convincing. I think Putin considered this a one time golden opportunity to 'catch' Ukraine as it still wasn't in the NATO. An extremely brazen move, and we'll have to wait out the sanctions, but I don't see him attacking the Baltics.
Click to expand...
Not with over half his army currently in Ukraine. Any further escalations from Russia will either come in Ukraine itself, or hybrid operations.
 
MoskvaRed said:
The one thing I don’t get - why didn’t he invade 18 months ago when his mate was in the White House? If the US was on the sidelines, I doubt Europe would have felt emboldened to take such decisive action.
Click to expand...
That's the big sliding doors moment in all this. We're very lucky trump is not in the white house right now.
 
TMDaines said:
Fuuuuck me. How can anyone be so dumb to publicly say this? The Athletic’s journalist refused to report it at first as he was so disgusted with it.

Click to expand...


Poor Roman, innocently making his fortune in the notoriously civilised aluminium wars of the 90s. Although I’d still take him any day of the week over Staveley’s boss,
 
More needs to be done for Ukraine. This can not be allowed to go on :(

 
Last edited:
TMDaines said:
Fuuuuck me. How can anyone be so dumb to publicly say this? The Athletic’s journalist refused to report it at first as he was so disgusted with it.

Click to expand...


It's a good point but as I personally complained on two seperate occasions about Mr. Glendenning's use of racist language when he wrote for The Guardian he can eat a bowl of dicks.
 
MoskvaRed said:
The one thing I don’t get - why didn’t he invade 18 months ago when his mate was in the White House? If the US was on the sidelines, I doubt Europe would have felt emboldened to take such decisive action.
Click to expand...
There's probably many things the public doesn't know. Maybe Putin felt it wasn't the right moment yet. Maybe he wanted to wait out the pandemic.
 
VorZakone said:
Agreed, I didn't find him convincing. I think Putin considered this a one time golden opportunity to 'catch' Ukraine as it still wasn't in the NATO. An extremely brazen move, and we'll have to wait out the sanctions, but I don't see him attacking the Baltics.
Click to expand...

He won't do anything more than illegally overfly borders of NATO countries no matter what happens in Ukraine.

If the US goes to war with Russia, one outcome is certain to me (and post nuclear collapse of society is not a given in my mind. I reckon any nuclear war will be highly tactical, precise and exceedingly brief before one side surrenders).

Russia will be conquered and broken into smaller states to ensure that it will never resurface. And the US will remain to oversee their development for a lot longer than the seven years they occupied Japan.
 
MoskvaRed said:
The one thing I don’t get - why didn’t he invade 18 months ago when his mate was in the White House? If the US was on the sidelines, I doubt Europe would have felt emboldened to take such decisive action.
Click to expand...

Probably because the presence of a NATO hostile US President was enough to help stall the spread of democracy.

Also, the price of oil was very low during much of Trump's term, which would've resulted in far less oil revenue for the Russian state.
 
VorZakone said:
There's probably many things the public doesn't know. Maybe Putin felt it wasn't the right moment yet. Maybe he wanted to wait out the pandemic.
Click to expand...
It just seems like miscalculation. Unless he determined that trump is so volatile he didn't want to force his hand on such a dilemma.
 
I assume the cease fire is beneficial to both to restock, resupply and importantly get civilians out
 
Eurotrash said:
The whole thing summarizes my feelings exactly. The longer we wait to take action, the higher the price will be.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand this way of thinking. How can the price be higher than nuclear Holocaust?

My thinking is this, the lines are draw on what can be done and what escalates nuclear war. Invading NATO countries = NATO war vs Russia. NATO attacking Russia outside of NATO countries = Russia war vs NATO. Arming other countries, cyberattacks etc get threats but does not escalate the situation to war. So do the sanctions.

It seems to me that the actors kind of know this. Which is why we haven’t had a nuclear war so far despite that NATO bordered Warsaw Pact members and now Russia, and despite that both countries armed the opponents of other countries. We saw this happening since the fifties, just that this is the first time it is happening near home.
 
And not only will Putin bring back Ukraine under Russian influence, he'll also have fueled another humanitarian refugee crisis. As a result of more refugees coming in, we might witness an even bigger increase in right-wing populism in the West.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.