6 ms·

is dumping weapons into ukraine going to stop the war? is expanding the war going to stop the war? what do you propose doing about russia invading ukraine, bes

is dumping weapons into ukraine going to stop the war? is expanding the war going to stop the war? what do you propose doing about russia invading ukraine, besides war?

MomoXenosaga 4y ago
I am confident enough that the West is still able to decimate a middling power like Russia. They have the GDP of Italy for fuck sake they're not the USSR.
- pasquinelli 4y ago
  anti-war, eh?
some_random 4y ago
Yes actually, a Ukrainian victory will in fact stop the war. Furthermore, an ending to the invasion that results in Ukrainians being ethnically cleansed and Russia in a position to pursue more invasions is not a better outcome than war (specifically the one that Russia chose and continues to choose to pursue) for quite a few very obvious reasons.
- redeeman 4y ago
  okay.. but at this point ukraine has recieved more money/material than years worth of russian military budgets. Where is the victory? Also, what is it? is russia 100% incompetent, or is it a fiendish foe? We have had to hear for a year now about how russia is so totally inept that ukranian farmers are victorious against them using nothing both farming tractors, but at the same time the west must send ungodly amounts of money and material their way, and there is no victory. Which one is it? It seems the west is willing to fight to the last ukranian. I just dont see how the west meddling here is gonna make any outcome better. So far nothing indicates I am wrong.
  - wkat4242 4y ago
    We haven't sent them that much of actual material and most of that is outdated. A lot has been promised but deliveries outfit scheduled years from now. Money is useful but you can't shoot it, and a lot of Ukrainian capital is lost because of the war. And the most important resource, soldiers, is the one thing we can't send them. And Russia can just conscript as many as they want. And it's Ukraine itself that wants their territories back, including Crimea and Donbass. Making it hard to negotiate. But also understandable, once you start giving in, you're giving Russia an incentive to do it all over again and capture now territory.
    - glogla 4y ago
      > But also understandable, once you start giving in, you're giving Russia an incentive to do it all over again and capture now territory. Not just Russia. If Russia succeeds, China is invading Taiwan next, and the whole global economy is grinding to a halt because like 80 % of world semiconductor industry is there. Saving Ukraine means saving the world.
      - wkat4242 4y ago
        I don't think these issues are linked to be honest. China has a very different strategy. More plotting and long-term scheming, less brute force like Russia. They'll sneak their way in just like they're rapidly expanding their influence in Africa, buying European ports and airports etc. Their tactics are completely different and our response must be as well. Of course long-term planning is the biggest weakness of democracies and the CCP's strength. So I doubt we'll be able to prevent it.
        JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > plotting and long-term scheming, less brute force like Russia The way Xi screwed the pooch on Hong Kong, something Beijing was without controversy entitled to, looks more like an impatient dictator than the China of decades prior.
- krageon 4y ago
  Ukraine will not win. No amount of dumping money into a country is going to help with this size difference, unless many more countries mobilise their actual military. That won't happen because then it goes from a regional conflict to a large-scale war and more countries might feel like meddling. Then there might be a world war.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    They're already, slowly, winning? And I think people have forgotten that the massive size difference didn't help America win in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Vietnam - in the long term. It's going to be a long war, though. It's effectively been running for a decade already.
    - staunton 4y ago
      The problem is that there is no reason to believe the war would stop even if Ukraine managed to push all Russian troops from their territory (with or without Crimea), which is quite unlikely in the first place. In fact, I've yet to hear a single concrete scenario for how that war could end other than with either government collapsing. I don't believe the Russian government will collapse any time soon. Assuming China will attack Taiwan in the meantime, which I think is a lot more likely than not, it seems the world is looking at a lot of war indeed, perhaps even global. Even more senseless killing while issues like the climate and global poverty will lose the little relevance they have now. The future seems really sad.
      - actionfromafar 4y ago
        At least I can't see how the current Russian administration could survive a loss in the Ukraine. On top of that, if the war drags on for years, the sanctions and general production losses are going to bite. Various far regions of Russia (Vladivostok?) may start looking for options. No need for overt rebellion, just tactically ignoring edicts from Moscow may crack the federation. The future seems sad yes, but this situation didn't appear out of nowhere. The dragon seed in Russia (and China) has been growing for decades.
    - 4y ago
_kbh_ 4y ago
> is dumping weapons into ukraine going to stop the war? is expanding the war going to stop the war? Aside from arming Ukraine for a decisive victory what do you propose the rest of the world do?.
- glogla 4y ago
  Let Russia take over, run their genocide they planned, you know, typical anti-war stuff.
- pasquinelli 4y ago
  sometimes things are out of your hands, like when russia invades ukraine. recall that i was responding to someone saying that anti-war folks are actually pro-genocide and anti-west. so, from the anti-war perspective, if what you want is peace, (which is what anti-war means), then "arming ukraine for a decisive victory" is what, exactly? it's giving ukraine weapons, or, to put it in other words: it's giving money to weapons manufacturers. if you think giving money to weapons manufacturers will lead somehow to peace, then i don't know what to tell you. you could shorten the war by aiding russia, but obviously no one wants that. that would genuinely encourage violence, like when the united states aids saudi arabia against the people of yemen. since the rest of the world can't make choices on russia's behalf, the only thing to be done, from an anti-war perspective, is to mitigate the damage russia does to ukraine, and encourage, through non-violent means, a cessation of violence. arming ukraine is the opposite of that. what else could the united states do? (or whatever country, i'll just go with the united states for the sake of brevity.) the united states could invade ukraine too, to counter russia. would that end the russia-ukraine war? no, it would just start the america-russian war. all i'm trying to convey is that anti-war people are, probably, for the most part, actually just that. conversely, if you're pro-ukraine, or anti-russia, or anti-ukraine, or pro-russia, you are, probably, for the most part, actually not anti-war. you have other priorities, which is your business, not mine. but i won't just be called pro-genocide by someone who's gotten themselves all worked up into a froth for war.
  - _kbh_ 4y ago
    So your response is to do literally nothing as a country gets rolled through and its civilians tortured and raped?. If you think that sitting back and doing nothing will somehow let Ukrainians have a better life then you do not know the realities of living under Russian rule. I find it strange that this kind of appeasement and bowing to another power to let them do what they please is so popular now just like it was in WW2. Appeasing the fascists didn’t work then and it work now, the thing that stops countries like Russia is military defeat.
landemva 4y ago
They could let the Donbas vote, as was pledged in Minsk Agreement.

is dumping weapons into ukraine going to stop the war? is expanding the war going to stop the war? what do you propose doing about russia invading ukraine, besides war?

MomoXenosaga 4y ago

I am confident enough that the West is still able to decimate a middling power like Russia. They have the GDP of Italy for fuck sake they're not the USSR.

pasquinelli 4y ago
anti-war, eh?

some_random 4y ago

Yes actually, a Ukrainian victory will in fact stop the war. Furthermore, an ending to the invasion that results in Ukrainians being ethnically cleansed and Russia in a position to pursue more invasions is not a better outcome than war (specifically the one that Russia chose and continues to choose to pursue) for quite a few very obvious reasons.

redeeman 4y ago
okay.. but at this point ukraine has recieved more money/material than years worth of russian military budgets. Where is the victory? Also, what is it? is russia 100% incompetent, or is it a fiendish foe? We have had to hear for a year now about how russia is so totally inept that ukranian farmers are victorious against them using nothing both farming tractors, but at the same time the west must send ungodly amounts of money and material their way, and there is no victory. Which one is it? It seems the west is willing to fight to the last ukranian. I just dont see how the west meddling here is gonna make any outcome better. So far nothing indicates I am wrong.
- wkat4242 4y ago
  We haven't sent them that much of actual material and most of that is outdated. A lot has been promised but deliveries outfit scheduled years from now. Money is useful but you can't shoot it, and a lot of Ukrainian capital is lost because of the war. And the most important resource, soldiers, is the one thing we can't send them. And Russia can just conscript as many as they want. And it's Ukraine itself that wants their territories back, including Crimea and Donbass. Making it hard to negotiate. But also understandable, once you start giving in, you're giving Russia an incentive to do it all over again and capture now territory.
  - glogla 4y ago
    > But also understandable, once you start giving in, you're giving Russia an incentive to do it all over again and capture now territory. Not just Russia. If Russia succeeds, China is invading Taiwan next, and the whole global economy is grinding to a halt because like 80 % of world semiconductor industry is there. Saving Ukraine means saving the world.
    - wkat4242 4y ago
      I don't think these issues are linked to be honest. China has a very different strategy. More plotting and long-term scheming, less brute force like Russia. They'll sneak their way in just like they're rapidly expanding their influence in Africa, buying European ports and airports etc. Their tactics are completely different and our response must be as well. Of course long-term planning is the biggest weakness of democracies and the CCP's strength. So I doubt we'll be able to prevent it.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > plotting and long-term scheming, less brute force like Russia The way Xi screwed the pooch on Hong Kong, something Beijing was without controversy entitled to, looks more like an impatient dictator than the China of decades prior.
krageon 4y ago
Ukraine will not win. No amount of dumping money into a country is going to help with this size difference, unless many more countries mobilise their actual military. That won't happen because then it goes from a regional conflict to a large-scale war and more countries might feel like meddling. Then there might be a world war.
- pjc50 4y ago
  They're already, slowly, winning? And I think people have forgotten that the massive size difference didn't help America win in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Vietnam - in the long term. It's going to be a long war, though. It's effectively been running for a decade already.
  - staunton 4y ago
    The problem is that there is no reason to believe the war would stop even if Ukraine managed to push all Russian troops from their territory (with or without Crimea), which is quite unlikely in the first place. In fact, I've yet to hear a single concrete scenario for how that war could end other than with either government collapsing. I don't believe the Russian government will collapse any time soon. Assuming China will attack Taiwan in the meantime, which I think is a lot more likely than not, it seems the world is looking at a lot of war indeed, perhaps even global. Even more senseless killing while issues like the climate and global poverty will lose the little relevance they have now. The future seems really sad.
    - actionfromafar 4y ago
      At least I can't see how the current Russian administration could survive a loss in the Ukraine. On top of that, if the war drags on for years, the sanctions and general production losses are going to bite. Various far regions of Russia (Vladivostok?) may start looking for options. No need for overt rebellion, just tactically ignoring edicts from Moscow may crack the federation. The future seems sad yes, but this situation didn't appear out of nowhere. The dragon seed in Russia (and China) has been growing for decades.
  - 4y ago

_kbh_ 4y ago

> is dumping weapons into ukraine going to stop the war? is expanding the war going to stop the war? Aside from arming Ukraine for a decisive victory what do you propose the rest of the world do?.

glogla 4y ago
Let Russia take over, run their genocide they planned, you know, typical anti-war stuff.
pasquinelli 4y ago
sometimes things are out of your hands, like when russia invades ukraine. recall that i was responding to someone saying that anti-war folks are actually pro-genocide and anti-west. so, from the anti-war perspective, if what you want is peace, (which is what anti-war means), then "arming ukraine for a decisive victory" is what, exactly? it's giving ukraine weapons, or, to put it in other words: it's giving money to weapons manufacturers. if you think giving money to weapons manufacturers will lead somehow to peace, then i don't know what to tell you. you could shorten the war by aiding russia, but obviously no one wants that. that would genuinely encourage violence, like when the united states aids saudi arabia against the people of yemen. since the rest of the world can't make choices on russia's behalf, the only thing to be done, from an anti-war perspective, is to mitigate the damage russia does to ukraine, and encourage, through non-violent means, a cessation of violence. arming ukraine is the opposite of that. what else could the united states do? (or whatever country, i'll just go with the united states for the sake of brevity.) the united states could invade ukraine too, to counter russia. would that end the russia-ukraine war? no, it would just start the america-russian war. all i'm trying to convey is that anti-war people are, probably, for the most part, actually just that. conversely, if you're pro-ukraine, or anti-russia, or anti-ukraine, or pro-russia, you are, probably, for the most part, actually not anti-war. you have other priorities, which is your business, not mine. but i won't just be called pro-genocide by someone who's gotten themselves all worked up into a froth for war.
- _kbh_ 4y ago
  So your response is to do literally nothing as a country gets rolled through and its civilians tortured and raped?. If you think that sitting back and doing nothing will somehow let Ukrainians have a better life then you do not know the realities of living under Russian rule. I find it strange that this kind of appeasement and bowing to another power to let them do what they please is so popular now just like it was in WW2. Appeasing the fascists didn’t work then and it work now, the thing that stops countries like Russia is military defeat.

landemva 4y ago

They could let the Donbas vote, as was pledged in Minsk Agreement.