Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

I know this is something that has been happening for humanity’s entire written history and more but… I still fail to comprehend how someone can be personally killing 7-10 people a day during a war and then at the end of it simply letting it slide off him and integrating back into society. I just can’t.

I think if I killed 1 person I’d have PTSD. Killing 10 sounds crazy, it’d be life altering. I can’t even imagine killing 10 a day and then being able to sleep again.

PS. It’s easier for a leader to give a command and feel disconnected from the result if he’s not doing it himself or observing the result with his eyes. Gunning someone down yourself feels very personal.
I guess if you are a sniper, you are quite far removed from those you are killing.

There’s also a massive difference between defending your own country, or joining a army defending their country who the whole world sees as morally just, and invading another country unprovoked, for dubious reasons, or acting simply as a mercenary killing for cash.
 
These aren't necessarily desirable outcomes for a number of Russians though. Significant parts of Russian society, especially in the east, are strongly nationalist, distrustful of the western world and broadly supportive of an isolationist and a strongly anti western government.

Putin is a product of this, not the cause.

Never underestimate his popularity.
It wasn’t really the case in the 90’s or even in the early 00’s. The idea of the West as an existential enemy was resurrected by Putin in mid 00’s and his propaganda kept pushing this agenda for almost 2 decades now, gradually increasing the level of hostility.
 
I wonder what would happen if Finland joined NATO. I wouldn't have thought an invasion of Finland is possible but now I don't consider anything impossible.
 
I wonder what would happen if Finland joined NATO. I wouldn't have thought an invasion of Finland is possible but now I don't consider anything impossible.
If Finland joined Nato? Nothing would happen. Otherwise who knows?
 
I mean what would do people think Russias immediate response be as they've already spoken of military consequences.

The Russian military has no chance of doing anything meaningful for the next 10 years after this. They already aren't at a very good technical level and it's going to get worse with the sanctions.

The only danger the Western countries has is complacency. If they pretend all this never happened in the next few years and allow Russia to be rich again, you can be sure the Kremlin will soon spend 50% of their GDP on their military, and then there will be trouble in the future.
 
Last edited:
The rare cross-party vote called on the International Criminal Court at The Hague to probe Putin's decision to invade Ukraine.
Maybe it's time the US senate ratified the Rome statute themselves. It's a bit bizarre to "call on the ICC to probe Putin's decision to invade Ukraine" when the US doesn't recognise the court in their own country, and neither does Russia.
 
I mean what would do people think Russias immediate response be as they've already spoken of military consequences.

Suck it up, most probably. Russia won't be able to do anything for some time after this.
 
I know this is something that has been happening for humanity’s entire written history and more but… I still fail to comprehend how someone can be personally killing 7-10 people a day during a war and then at the end of it simply letting it slide off him and integrating back into society. I just can’t.

I think if I killed 1 person I’d have PTSD. Killing 10 sounds crazy, it’d be life altering. I can’t even imagine killing 10 a day and then being able to sleep again.

PS. It’s easier for a leader to give a command and feel disconnected from the result if he’s not doing it himself or observing the result with his eyes. Gunning someone down yourself feels very personal.
Who says he doesn’t have PTSD?

The reason Chris Kyle kept going back on more tours in Iraq was because of the difficulties in rejoining society, and that’s from a guy whose book opens with a story that includes the line “I can stand before God with a clear conscience about doing my job”.
 
I wonder what would happen if Finland joined NATO. I wouldn't have thought an invasion of Finland is possible but now I don't consider anything impossible.

Their president was on Newsnight yesterday and confidently said he doesn't think Russia would invade if they were to join NATO. A former PM said he expects Finland to join in a matter of months.
 
What the hell is this nonsense? They are really getting to ridiculous levels in their propaganda, I don't like it at all.

It's stupid to begin with but even more so now. People are literally treating this like a game and these are characters and upgrades
 
What the hell is this nonsense? They are really getting to ridiculous levels in their propaganda, I don't like it at all.

That has been posted all over for the last two weeks. I've seen it a few times on various tweets. It's probably rubbish.
 
Who says he doesn’t have PTSD?

The reason Chris Kyle kept going back on more tours in Iraq was because of the difficulties in rejoining society, and that’s from a guy whose book opens with a story that includes the line “I can stand before God with a clear conscience about doing my job”.

Snipers in general suffer more than most from it because of the way they fight. I think they must all get it to some degree.
 
Last edited:
I know this is something that has been happening for humanity’s entire written history and more but… I still fail to comprehend how someone can be personally killing 7-10 people a day during a war and then at the end of it simply letting it slide off him and integrating back into society. I just can’t.

I think if I killed 1 person I’d have PTSD. Killing 10 sounds crazy, it’d be life altering. I can’t even imagine killing 10 a day and then being able to sleep again.

PS. It’s easier for a leader to give a command and feel disconnected from the result if he’s not doing it himself or observing the result with his eyes. Gunning someone down yourself feels very personal.

Killing 7-10 a day on a regular basis from miles away might be much easier to endure than killing 1 or 2 when you're close.
Besides, he might very well suffer from traumatic mental illnesses - most soldiers who have experienced combat seem to show signs of such mental issues, even if combat only lasted for a relatively short time. I doubt people's mind would ever forget these situations truely, even if the worst can be cured to a certain degree.
 
Surely this "neutral status" ruse is a formal get off designed to allow the Russians out of a quagmire and the Ukranians to have the killing stop. In spirit and attitude, Ukraine will be filled with hate toward Russia for many generations to come, and the country festooned with statues to the heroes of the resistance and museums telling the truth. In practice, they'll be as neutral as that ref was last night.
 
I used to work with an old Vietnam vet whose job was as a sniper, protecting LZs. He would literally lie in undergrowth for days staring into a jungle. I couldn’t imagine what type of focus you’d need, it would surely send you crazy
 
I understand that. At the same time, the referendum made reference to the Declaration of Independence issued in August which explicitly stated that “The territory of Ukraine is indivisible and inviolable.” Clearly there were some misgivings about this prospect in the eastern oblasts and especially Crimea, given the relatively lower turnout and percentages returned in favor compared with the rest of the country (though not enough to come anywhere near to actually swaying the result). So would it not be fair to explain the relatively greater hesitancy expressed in these regions as a consequence of greater pro-Russian sentiment (whatever that means)?

I guess I’m looking for two things:

1. Reliable data on the actual extent of explicitly separatist sentiment in the eastern regions throughout the last thirty years. Perhaps such data doesn’t exist, so we’re left with the maps above as our only vague guide to the question.

2. A greater interrogation of what exactly it means or has meant to be “pro-Russian” in this context. It seems to me that “pro-Russian” can potentially mean quite different things to different people at various times over the last thirty years.

That’s an interesting line of thought, and I can think of similar cases among minorities elsewhere who have found themselves somewhat ‘stranded’ in post-colonial nationalist states continuing to harbor positive sentiment for the old metropole.
Found it. This was a good primer on the history of Donbas that was written back in 2015 by Hiroaki Kuromiya, who is one of the leading academics on the region even prior to the wars in the last ten years: https://www.historians.in.ua/index....-donbas-how-to-understand-its-past-and-future
 
Is it fair to say that at this point it’s highly unlikely that Russia manages to occupy whole of Ukraine (e.g., west of Kyiv)?
 
If that is a real offer, Ukraine shall take it.

I think it's pretty clear to me that Ukraine don't want Neutrality as that simply makes them weak and exposed to Russia invading them again in the future when they yet again break their 'promises' and make up a reason to invade again.

Yes, it would stop the war right now, but it just opens then up to further conflict. It's a difficult situation for Ukraine ultimately because Russias word means jack fecking shit.
 
Is it fair to say that at this point it’s highly unlikely that Russia manages to occupy whole of Ukraine (e.g., west of Kyiv)?
Yes. There advances stalled as soon as they reached the limit of their logistics lines (about 140km) and they haven't had any significant gains after that. At the current rate they might even struggle to keep their positions.
 
If that is a real offer, Ukraine shall take it.

1.Every Russian attempt at appearing amenable to negotiate is almost certainly misdirection to create the illusion of pragmatism.

2. Putin’s idea of neutrality is little more than Ukrainians not seeking collective security so he is then free to foment trouble and subvert Ukrainian society from within. The entire idea behind Ukraine joining NATO is because he has been mercilessly bullying them for most of the past 20 years.
 
I think it's pretty clear to me that Ukraine don't want Neutrality as that simply makes them weak and exposed to Russia invading them again in the future when they yet again break their 'promises' and make up a reason to invade again.

Yes, it would stop the war right now, but it just opens then up to further conflict. It's a difficult situation for Ukraine ultimately because Russias word means jack fecking shit.

I think they should take it too. End the war, let things settle down then join Nato anyway. It's not as if Russia has ever kept any of its promises. Once they withdraw it will be quite some time before Russia can rebuild it's forces to the required standard for another invasion attempt.

If not Nato then the EU which will soon be a formidable alliance of its own thanks to Russia.
 

This sounds made up. Sweden & Finland are not neutral. Both have very close relationships with NATO and are fully committed to the EU's defense pact. And we've both been sending weapons to Ukraine. Actually, if the Putin regime survives this, I'd expect both countries to join NATO soon.

Austria and Ireland are pretending to be neutral. But still, as members of EU they are somewhat bound by the defense clause(they don't have any opt-out of the common policies). And by extension, they are NATO- partners, given the very close EU-NATO cooperation. The only neutral state in Europe is Switzerland. And it probably isn't a viable situation for Ukraine (or Moldova) to be that kind of neutral if the Putin regime keeps its power.
 
I think it's pretty clear to me that Ukraine don't want Neutrality as that simply makes them weak and exposed to Russia invading them again in the future when they yet again break their 'promises' and make up a reason to invade again.

Yes, it would stop the war right now, but it just opens then up to further conflict. It's a difficult situation for Ukraine ultimately because Russias word means jack fecking shit.

That might depend on what Russia means by "neutrality". If they mean no membership of NATO, Ukraine might accept that. If they mean not joining the EU, then I highly doubt Ukraine would accept that.

And if Ukraine joins the EU, then they would be free invite into their country any number of EU member-country troops and allow the establishment of permanent EU military bases inside Ukraine. That would be sufficient guarantee for Ukraine of no later repeat of a Russian invasion.

But if Russia says you can join the EU, but no EU troops allowed, then again that would likely be a non-starter for Ukraine - they are certainly not going to rely any Russian promises ever again.
 
Snipers in general suffer more than most from it because of the way they fight. I think they must all get it to some degree.
Yes. I've personally known 2 of them. One who fought in Vietnam and another who fought in the War on Terror. The one who fought in Vietnam has a few chapters about him in the book 13 Cent Killers and worked with my mom at the post office (of all places). The other's son wrestles for me. I've had the opportunity to talk to both of them about their time as a sniper and the one thing they both really emphasize is that as a sniper, you can see the face of the person you're about to kill... and that takes a toll on you. Unless you're in hand to hand combat, most of the time you'll never see the face of the guy you're killing. It takes some serious internal fortitude to do that job.
I guess if you are a sniper, you are quite far removed from those you are killing.
It's actually the opposite. The scope makes a big difference (see above).
 
Yes. There advances stalled as soon as they reached the limit of their logistics lines (about 140km) and they haven't had any significant gains after that. At the current rate they might even struggle to keep their positions.

It looks like they've given up on occupying the "useless" big cities or overthrowing Zelensky's government. It is all about taking the black sea coast and securing a victory in the Donbas region, maybe the Russian-speaking cities near the Donbas. But the resistance is much stronger than what they expected. Not only the military resistance. The civilian disobedience in Kherson is impressive. And it is very likely to spread to any cities they might manage to control (Kharkiv, Mariupol..)