6 ms·

Russia is throwing everything already, we've even seen T-55 taken out of what could be called museums. You should see some pictures from the front, it is Verdun

Russia is throwing everything already, we've even seen T-55 taken out of what could be called museums. You should see some pictures from the front, it is Verdun all over again. This is a total war that has to conclude.

trollski 4y ago
[dead]
danbruc 4y ago
I have admittedly not followed the developments in the last weeks and months in too much detail, but I would still say this is for the most part a war between two armies. But Russia could turn against the country, target every power and water plant, hospital, fuel storage, industrial plant, dam, port, ... They could go non-conventional, they could go nuclear. And how should it conclude? Who should give up what?
- H8crilA 4y ago
  They already do all those things except nukes. I cannot emphasise this enough, they already do everything that they can. Conclusion is return to at least Feb2022 borders, preferably 1991 borders. We have the international law for a reason, everyone agreed to this law (including the USSR) after WW2.
  - danbruc 4y ago
    Okay, let's not argue about the extend of the war, I am still not convinced that it could not get a lot worse, but if it already is as bad as it can get, that would - in a certain way - be a good thing as it can not get any worse, at least besides lasting longer. This leaves the question, is your proposed end acceptable for Putin? In essence your are saying, if I do not misunderstand you, undo the last year, at the very least. What makes you believe that Putin would judge the situation differently this time, i.e. that this situation does not warrant the invasion of Ukraine?
    - jcranmer 4y ago
      The reality of the situation is that Russia does not have the military capability to achieve its political aims. This has been clear to every observer since about March. Yet Russia has not attempted to moderate its political aims to reflect its actual military capabilities, and I think it is unwise for Ukraine or anybody else to humor Russia by considering these unrealistic aims as a viable starting position for negotiations. Sadly, given the delusions of Putin, this means having to prolong the war in Ukraine. Delivering yet more decisive defeats of the Russian military is likely to be the only thing that can shock him into realizing that what he wants is unachievable and he has to adjust his aims to reality.
      - danbruc 4y ago
        [...] Russia does not have the military capability to achieve its political aims. What do you think this political aims are?
        H8crilA 4y ago
        In Ukraine it was specifically a change to the political regime, which didn't work. Don't know what the current aim is, could be simply a suppression of Ukraine through continuous damage so that it slowly becomes another Syria over the next decade. There's also damaging "the evil West" in whatever way is possible, mostly by subverting the democratic processes. They did help with a few political movements (help, not necessarily start), we have evidence for that on both sides of the Atlantic. This goal probably didn't change.
        rainworld 4y ago
        In Ukraine it was specifically a change to the political regime, which didn't work. You’re so anxious to proclaim this over, when the main course hasn’t even begun. And, having read the Zalushny interview, you should know full well that what they need amounts to yet another army, their third in this conflict pretty much. And there’s no indication that they will get it.
  - justsomehnguy 4y ago
    >We have the international law for a reason, everyone agreed to this law (including the USSR) after WW2. You can start with 'totally not a blockade': > By using the term "quarantine", rather than "blockade" (an act of war by legal definition), the United States was able to avoid the implications of a state of war.
    - danbruc 4y ago
      Also international laws or laws in general are not worth the paper they are written on unless you have the power and will to enforce them.
    - mannerheim 4y ago
      A blockade is the use of force to prevent other nations from trading with somebody. It has never been an act of war to stop your own citizens from trading with somebody.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

trollski 4y ago

[dead]

danbruc 4y ago

I have admittedly not followed the developments in the last weeks and months in too much detail, but I would still say this is for the most part a war between two armies. But Russia could turn against the country, target every power and water plant, hospital, fuel storage, industrial plant, dam, port, ... They could go non-conventional, they could go nuclear. And how should it conclude? Who should give up what?

H8crilA 4y ago
They already do all those things except nukes. I cannot emphasise this enough, they already do everything that they can. Conclusion is return to at least Feb2022 borders, preferably 1991 borders. We have the international law for a reason, everyone agreed to this law (including the USSR) after WW2.
- danbruc 4y ago
  Okay, let's not argue about the extend of the war, I am still not convinced that it could not get a lot worse, but if it already is as bad as it can get, that would - in a certain way - be a good thing as it can not get any worse, at least besides lasting longer. This leaves the question, is your proposed end acceptable for Putin? In essence your are saying, if I do not misunderstand you, undo the last year, at the very least. What makes you believe that Putin would judge the situation differently this time, i.e. that this situation does not warrant the invasion of Ukraine?
  - jcranmer 4y ago
    The reality of the situation is that Russia does not have the military capability to achieve its political aims. This has been clear to every observer since about March. Yet Russia has not attempted to moderate its political aims to reflect its actual military capabilities, and I think it is unwise for Ukraine or anybody else to humor Russia by considering these unrealistic aims as a viable starting position for negotiations. Sadly, given the delusions of Putin, this means having to prolong the war in Ukraine. Delivering yet more decisive defeats of the Russian military is likely to be the only thing that can shock him into realizing that what he wants is unachievable and he has to adjust his aims to reality.
    - danbruc 4y ago
      [...] Russia does not have the military capability to achieve its political aims. What do you think this political aims are?
      - H8crilA 4y ago
        In Ukraine it was specifically a change to the political regime, which didn't work. Don't know what the current aim is, could be simply a suppression of Ukraine through continuous damage so that it slowly becomes another Syria over the next decade. There's also damaging "the evil West" in whatever way is possible, mostly by subverting the democratic processes. They did help with a few political movements (help, not necessarily start), we have evidence for that on both sides of the Atlantic. This goal probably didn't change.
        rainworld 4y ago
        In Ukraine it was specifically a change to the political regime, which didn't work. You’re so anxious to proclaim this over, when the main course hasn’t even begun. And, having read the Zalushny interview, you should know full well that what they need amounts to yet another army, their third in this conflict pretty much. And there’s no indication that they will get it.
- justsomehnguy 4y ago
  >We have the international law for a reason, everyone agreed to this law (including the USSR) after WW2. You can start with 'totally not a blockade': > By using the term "quarantine", rather than "blockade" (an act of war by legal definition), the United States was able to avoid the implications of a state of war.
  - danbruc 4y ago
    Also international laws or laws in general are not worth the paper they are written on unless you have the power and will to enforce them.
  - mannerheim 4y ago
    A blockade is the use of force to prevent other nations from trading with somebody. It has never been an act of war to stop your own citizens from trading with somebody.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]