The West still has some escalation options before we get to firing bullets. if they declare Russia a terrorist state and “encourage” the Chinese to drop their support, there’s a decent chance that there would be regime chance in Russia. In any case, we can’t give a fascist dictator of a country with a second rate army and a third rate economy carte blanche to rewrite the map of Europe just because he has nukes and plays madman theory.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
The West still has some escalation options before we get to firing bullets. if they declare Russia a terrorist state and “encourage” the Chinese to drop their support, there’s a decent chance that there would be regime chance in Russia. In any case, we can’t give a fascist dictator of a country with a second rate army and a third rate economy carte blanche to rewrite the map of Europe just because he has nukes and plays madman theory.
I agree 100% but doesn’t make it any less concerning.
It’s normal to be afraid but the fear shouldn’t rule us.
Last edited:
Not sure I follow.
I am all for it, too. It is in time of need that we should join with our friends and protect them. Yes, there is an huge element of risk. There is also an element of risk if we don't do it. If Merkel and Sarkozy had accepted Ukraine in NATO in 2008, we'd have no war, no huge gas prices, no dead Russian soldiers, no dead Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. Being a coward is a risk, too.
So esentially, appeasement failed in February, and half measures to avoid escalation ended up failing in September. What's next?
My impression is that the most spectacular victories in war come from fully commiting, and the most sensational defeats come from half assing. What will be the choice?
My impression is that the most spectacular victories in war come from fully commiting, and the most sensational defeats come from half assing. What will be the choice?
Sorry meant to say it shouldn’t rule us.
It's like going back in time the way they speak, "holy wars" for goodness sakes.
A long night in front of orcs in Lyman unless they surrender in thousands.
It’s a weird, maybe unique trait of Russian ultranationalism that they claim to be the future redeemer of a region (Europe) much more advanced than them. A coping mechanism whereby “our life is sh*t” transforms into an assumption of moral superiority through suffering.
UN is absolutely broken and pointless at this point, might as well disband it. How is Russia still having a veto right? A complete mockery.
Is it? I think it's present in more or less all conservative schools of thought?
Maybe not through suffering though, that is a Russian thing.
I can’t think of many other countries that have a sense of destiny (at least among some “intellectuals”) of redeeming a more developed neighbouring area. It’s normally the other way round - some backward region offers an opportunity for exploitation in the name of bringing civilisation.
UN is useless, don’t remember doing anything useful. The problem is in veto power of 5 countries (with the US and Russia vetoing whatever they do not like and ignoring resolutions they do not like), and without any mechanism of removing the veto power of a country.
I swear I'm a real sucker for massive catching-ups. I'm such a procrastinator sometimes.
Don't bother; China is utterly pathetic in diplomacy. They always like to use their wolf warrior diplomats to bark shit at the West, but they will never have the balls to use that same rhetoric against fellow dictatorships through that punchable face of a spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Preferably in public as well.
Think about this: China threw millions of troops to support North Korea during the Korean War with the vast majority being very motivated veterans of the Sino-Japanese War and the Chinese Civil War. Despite initial successes, they were cut down, stopped and finally pushed back by the smaller, well-equipped and (in many cases) battle-hardened U.N. coalition. Anyone with some degree of interest in the history of warfare would know that sheer numbers stopped being a factor from around that war and beyond.
The man is mad enough to bring a military, social, demographic and economical disaster that will take decades to recover upon his country. The more you read his speech, the more you think he has gone down the same route as Brig. Gen Jack D. Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. But the really sad thing about that jackass speaking today is that we are all focused on that crap when we should be following and celebrating the Ukrainian advance in encircling Lyman.
If that is not already a clear signal for Ukraine to blow that bridge up, then I don't know what that signal will be. Sending Ukraine a few of those long-range (300km+) missiles for the HIMARS should be about right to get the job done. I know some analysts who studied the question said that blowing up the bridge would make it more difficult for NATO intel to track down supplying routes for Russian forces, but I say that supplying by maritime routes would not be much of a factor because we've already seen that they just don't have the capabilities to provide a consistent and solid supply line from the sea.
Don't bother; China is utterly pathetic in diplomacy. They always like to use their wolf warrior diplomats to bark shit at the West, but they will never have the balls to use that same rhetoric against fellow dictatorships through that punchable face of a spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Preferably in public as well.
Think about this: China threw millions of troops to support North Korea during the Korean War with the vast majority being very motivated veterans of the Sino-Japanese War and the Chinese Civil War. Despite initial successes, they were cut down, stopped and finally pushed back by the smaller, well-equipped and (in many cases) battle-hardened U.N. coalition. Anyone with some degree of interest in the history of warfare would know that sheer numbers stopped being a factor from around that war and beyond.
The man is mad enough to bring a military, social, demographic and economical disaster that will take decades to recover upon his country. The more you read his speech, the more you think he has gone down the same route as Brig. Gen Jack D. Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. But the really sad thing about that jackass speaking today is that we are all focused on that crap when we should be following and celebrating the Ukrainian advance in encircling Lyman.
If that is not already a clear signal for Ukraine to blow that bridge up, then I don't know what that signal will be. Sending Ukraine a few of those long-range (300km+) missiles for the HIMARS should be about right to get the job done. I know some analysts who studied the question said that blowing up the bridge would make it more difficult for NATO intel to track down supplying routes for Russian forces, but I say that supplying by maritime routes would not be much of a factor because we've already seen that they just don't have the capabilities to provide a consistent and solid supply line from the sea.
Rich history going back to never.
Meanwhile Cuba actually played a significant part in ending apartheid South Africa.
Putin says the west wants to make Russia a "colony," "rob" it, and turn its people into a "crowd of voiceless slaves."
Putin: ''That's my job''
How long before the oligarchs try to rein in Putin? Some of them must be losing a fortune as result of his stupidity.
The oligarchs know their place.
I don't, personally. Russia has two main narratives to attack the west with, Nuclear threats and Europe freezing in the winter threats. These are not new narratives, they have always been there. The "we'll defend our make-belief Russian territory with everything we have" is just building into the nuclear narrative, like blowing up the pipelines builds into the Europe freezing narrative.
This is what they do, it works, they are very good at it. Most observers now seem to really believe Putin is going to use nukes to defend occupied Ukrainian land... You'd have to believe he is mentally unwell on a level we've never seen before, not the mention the other order givers and button pressers required to take out such an action. I don't, personally.
Putin does appear hellbent on destroying Russia, but this would be several steps too far.
The only escalation I expect in the near future will be from the Ukrainian side once winter sets in, they will be far more prepared for it. Forget the other bollocks being thrown around about Russians being winter soldiers, they are gunna suffer.
Only until they think there's more money long term in another leader though.
They don't have any real power, Putin is way too dangerous for them to cross.
Billionaires do have power to be fair (and he will know that), but whether they'd cross Putin is another question. A couple have already hinted at their problems with his decisions and are still around.
Indeed. Feels like winter could be absolutely brutal for the Russian troops. Ukraine have been smart so far with offering for Russians to surrender etc - when they are freezing their asses off with no winter gear, I can imagine a lot more of the invaders just giving up rather than freezing to death.
When will people grasp this, he is far far closer to Stalin than Yeltsin. Oligarchs that dared to utter some critique found themselves tripping over high rise windows soon after. Putin has complete control over the security (repressive) apparatus, one call and people just die of negligence or natural causes, while everyone looks the other way.
I don't think he's mad, I think he's a terrorist, with no honor, willing to do terrible things if they will turn out to his advantage. Zeihan's theory is that he sees this as an existential problem. Russia will not be able to defend the current border in 30 years because of the demographics of the country. So he wants more people under his control to draft, and he wants narrow corridors to defend. Because Russia don't believe they won't be invaded in the next 100 years.
There are lots of ways Putin could escalate without using nukes, he could destroy the Norway energy pipelines, for one.
Interesting video esp on the collateral damage assessments.
Basically, the military under-counts the damage done by a nuke attack or in his example an attack between the Paks and India would have a significant global impact beyond the sub-continent.
Basically, the military under-counts the damage done by a nuke attack or in his example an attack between the Paks and India would have a significant global impact beyond the sub-continent.
Last edited:
I hope everyone who works for CPAC has a Nice Time™. They're all fascist scum deserve nothing else.
Last edited:
It’s been deleted apparently, although the damage has already been done on Twitter. Some intern at CPAC is probably going to get a talking to tonight.
. You have the power dynamic wrong. They exist at his mercy. Not the other way around.
Or in the more grim cases, kill their families in front of them before 'suiciding' them.