6 ms·

So do countries, if we're looking at a long enough time scale. There is no end in sight for the war in Ukraine and when the end comes it's likely to be messy. I

by rurp 3y ago

So do countries, if we're looking at a long enough time scale. There is no end in sight for the war in Ukraine and when the end comes it's likely to be messy. It might be more of a pause than a true end, and one or both sides will likely be pretty unhappy with the outcome. It could be many years before Russia and the west go back to a comfortable economic relationship.

ecommerceguy 3y ago
[flagged]
- kergonath 3y ago
  Talking to people actually living in the place could give you a clue. Putin is a neocon, sure, but no bureaucrat started this war and Ukraine is very unlikely to just fold and submit if the US stop their support. Liberals have also nothing to do with Russian aggression.
  - whimsicalism 3y ago
    This war will likely end with Ukraine losing some amount of land - it is just a matter of if they ever accept this or whether they want a Korea style frozen conflict.
    - kergonath 3y ago
      You say it like it’s their choice. Moldova never asked for Transnistria. It’s fairly SOP for Russia to take bites from its neighbours, let’s stop blaming the victims. Whatever Russia ends up doing, they are preparing for themselves a second Chechnya at the very least.
      - whimsicalism 3y ago
        Of course it is not just their choice. Russia has indicated their willingness to accept current holdings (for now, you are right there are no guarantees). Ukraine could and should get better than just that, but this notion of taking back Crimea is a pipe dream and I don’t support continued funding until that goal is realized.
        twixfel 3y ago
        If you want to be extremely cynical and seek to strictly extend and project the USA's power as harshly and effectively as possible, the war in Ukraine was God's gift to the USA. They get to basically take out Russia (China's key geopolitical ally) without losing a single American life, for a tiny fraction of the amount they're used to spending on wars. And yet it's American nationalists themselves who want it all to stop, to throw all of its European allies under the bus and burn the alliance with the rest of the Western world to the ground. An amazing and almost impressive act of self harm. It's not so much "America first" with you lot, it's "America alone".
        whimsicalism 3y ago
        You are assuming I am some Trump American-first Republican. I think you are severely misjudging the politics of Ukraine support in the US, which has collapsed in the last few months. Perhaps I am opposed to harsh projections of American power in an increasingly multipolar world? The global playing field is leveling, I think that is precisely the wrong time to be making even bitterer enemies.
        twixfel 3y ago
        Yes I am assuming that very much, but it does not matter that much, either you're America first or you agree with their foreign policy anyway on Ukraine. I understand that Ukraine support has been politicised even when it should not be. This says much more about the utterly dysfunctional state of American politics and the decline of American society whereby you're seriously entertaining reelecting Trump next year. It does not say much at all about Ukraine. If it were not Ukraine, it would simply be something else equally irrelevant to domestic American politics but equally politicised. >Perhaps I am opposed to harsh projections of American power in an increasingly multipolar world? I don't know, are you? Put another way the USA is helping support a free and independent country against an imperial genocidal conqueror. Isn't that what the USA is kind of supposed to do? Otherwise what exactly does it stand for? Or another way: In forcing "détente" on Europe, are you happy to trade good relations with most of Europe, your oldest allies, for maybe better relations with Russia, your enemy who hates you and seeks your destruction? Really? Sounds like a shit and moronic deal to me. >The global playing field is leveling, I think that is precisely the wrong time to be making even bitterer enemies. It's too late lad. Russia hates you even more than they hate your mother country, my homeland, the UK. In fact Russia hates you more than any other country on the planet. They utterly despise you and Anglo-American cultural hegemony. In for a penny, in for a pound and all that. They've been working to undermine the USA since well before the war started. There is no going back any time soon. Instead you advocate surrender to the same people who wish to destroy you. Weak.
    - para_parolu 3y ago
      That happens in 2014 when Ukraine lost Crimea. They accepted it and lived on. There is zero safety guarantees for them.
      - jcranmer 3y ago
        Ukraine has been fighting Russia for nearly a decade, with active if low-level warfare in the Donbass region the entire time. I wouldn't exactly call that "accept[ing] it and liv[ing] on."
        The_Colonel 3y ago
        From about 2017 the war was very low-level, limited to some artillery duels. And those duels weren't entirely Ukrainian choice, if Russia shoots at you, you can't just ignore it.
        Log_out_ 3y ago
        Remember when the local "insurrection" to kijev marched into the theater in kherson because they thought it the regional governments office. For all their propaganda multitudes fines online, they are just lethal clowns on the ground, unable to innovate, because bound by puppeteer strings. Ukraine will win. Moscovia will fall apart once again. Empires die and vanish all the time.
      - somenameforme 3y ago
        Not quite! The immediate history here plays a huge role in where we're at today. In the 2014 the US backed a [coup, revolution, insurrection - whatever you want to call it] in Ukraine that saw their democratically elected pro-Russian President overthrown. Numerous Ukrainian territories that also leaned pro-Russia refused to recognize the new government and declared their independence, the Donbas region and Crimea among them. For the 8 years from 2014 to 2022 Ukraine was intermittently attacking and shelling these breakaway territories (excepting Crimea, which had become part of Russia) which were (and are) largely populated with ethnic Russians, and Russia was "secretly" protecting them. This led to a series of treaties, The Minsk Accords [1], to try to arrange peace between Russia and Ukraine, and give the breakaway territories some sort of special status while remaining under Ukraine. These treaties were always violated. And while this was happening Ukraine was increasingly fortifying and arming itself, as well as seeking to join NATO - which NATO was, sincerely or not, indulging. This all really set the stage for where we are today. It also sets the stage for where we're going tomorrow, because the inability to maintain any sort of a peace over these regions is going to make obtaining a 'minimally unfavorable' settlement for Ukraine, over this war, much more difficult. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
    - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
      The war will not end there. Just pause. It will not "end" until Russia has installed a subservient client regime in Ukraine like it has in Belorussia. If you doubt this, I encourage you to look at actual opinions within Russia itself. Interviews with Russians (the 1420 channel on Youtube for example), Russian media, Russian politicians. Their objection is far more than "there's Russian speakers being persecuted by Ukraine." Their national chauvinism leaves them unable to tolerate actually-sovereign nation states on their borders, especially one with an intertwined cultural-linguistic-political history like Ukraine. "Split Ukraine into two and give the far western half to Poland and absorb the rest into Russia" is a commonly held "solution".
      - The_Colonel 3y ago
        Those same people on 1420 will tell you that Poland and UK need to be denazified. It's just propaganda working, you can't mistake it for real strategic goals.
        cmrdporcupine 3y ago
        Absolutely, it's not scientific at all, but it shows the strong presence of a chauvinistic compliant population. FWIW I think you could find similar nonsense on the streets of many (but not all) American cities. It's the kind of hubris that comes from being a huge country that is its own centre of gravity and a political leadership that runs around saying it's the "best country in the world" and stuff like that. That's how it looks from up here in Canada, anyways. Anyways, you don't have to look at 1420, just the public pronouncements of Putin himself
        whimsicalism 3y ago
        I love how you all create these little side threads where you imagine people's views and then argue against them rather than taking the actually stated views of people in this thread at face value.
        The_Colonel 3y ago
        Putin says a lot of things. No, he's not laying out his grand strategy in front of you, he's saying what is politically useful at the moment. You can't really know the Russia's strategic thinking from public proclamations. You need to read between the lines, and even then it's mostly guesswork.
  - ecommerceguy 3y ago
    >>no bureaucrat started this war 2 bureaucrats that have incessantly called for war quickly come to mind, Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nuland.
    - kergonath 3y ago
      What? You haven’t been paying attention. These people had no power to start anything. Also, last time I checked, it was Russia who invaded, not the US, which are not a party in this war.
- evolextra 3y ago
  [dead]
- jcranmer 3y ago
  > Prove me wrong. Neoconservatives are not, and indeed have not held power in the US for the better part of a decade. Indeed not even back when Russia invaded Crimea if memory serves me correctly. Of course, there's a decent probability that you've redefined "neoconservative" to mean "people whose politics I don't like" as opposed to any definition that's actually useful for an analysis of foreign policy, and concomitantly that you are so myopically focused on one specific component of foreign policy that you would refuse to admit any evidence that might actually prove you wrong.
  - ecommerceguy 3y ago
    You are correct, I do not side with warmongers, of which Clinton, Obama, Biden, Bush, Cheney et al are solidly in favor of. War. You proved nothing.
- saintfire 3y ago
  No comment on your politics but saying "Prove me wrong" is basically just saying "Argue with me". You can rarely prove a prediction or opinion wrong, especially if they're this vague. Only time can, sometimes.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
khzw8yyy 3y ago
Maybe the problem is the shortness of sight rather than the lack of an end? Rest assured, if the powers that be decide that "Russia is good now" they will convince you of the same within 6 months.
- The_Colonel 3y ago
  My grandparents carried some anti-German sentiments 70 years after the war ended. Maybe you are able to switch your opinions that quickly, most people can't.
  - khzw8yyy 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - The_Colonel 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - khzw8yyy 3y ago
        [flagged]
BlueTemplar 3y ago
Well, could go many ways. Depends who is going to "succeed" to Putin (which isn't getting any younger) and especially how.

by rurp 3y ago

ecommerceguy 3y ago

[flagged]

kergonath 3y ago
Talking to people actually living in the place could give you a clue. Putin is a neocon, sure, but no bureaucrat started this war and Ukraine is very unlikely to just fold and submit if the US stop their support. Liberals have also nothing to do with Russian aggression.
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  This war will likely end with Ukraine losing some amount of land - it is just a matter of if they ever accept this or whether they want a Korea style frozen conflict.
  - kergonath 3y ago
    You say it like it’s their choice. Moldova never asked for Transnistria. It’s fairly SOP for Russia to take bites from its neighbours, let’s stop blaming the victims. Whatever Russia ends up doing, they are preparing for themselves a second Chechnya at the very least.
    - whimsicalism 3y ago
      Of course it is not just their choice. Russia has indicated their willingness to accept current holdings (for now, you are right there are no guarantees). Ukraine could and should get better than just that, but this notion of taking back Crimea is a pipe dream and I don’t support continued funding until that goal is realized.
      - twixfel 3y ago
        If you want to be extremely cynical and seek to strictly extend and project the USA's power as harshly and effectively as possible, the war in Ukraine was God's gift to the USA. They get to basically take out Russia (China's key geopolitical ally) without losing a single American life, for a tiny fraction of the amount they're used to spending on wars. And yet it's American nationalists themselves who want it all to stop, to throw all of its European allies under the bus and burn the alliance with the rest of the Western world to the ground. An amazing and almost impressive act of self harm. It's not so much "America first" with you lot, it's "America alone".
        whimsicalism 3y ago
        You are assuming I am some Trump American-first Republican. I think you are severely misjudging the politics of Ukraine support in the US, which has collapsed in the last few months. Perhaps I am opposed to harsh projections of American power in an increasingly multipolar world? The global playing field is leveling, I think that is precisely the wrong time to be making even bitterer enemies.
        twixfel 3y ago
        Yes I am assuming that very much, but it does not matter that much, either you're America first or you agree with their foreign policy anyway on Ukraine. I understand that Ukraine support has been politicised even when it should not be. This says much more about the utterly dysfunctional state of American politics and the decline of American society whereby you're seriously entertaining reelecting Trump next year. It does not say much at all about Ukraine. If it were not Ukraine, it would simply be something else equally irrelevant to domestic American politics but equally politicised. >Perhaps I am opposed to harsh projections of American power in an increasingly multipolar world? I don't know, are you? Put another way the USA is helping support a free and independent country against an imperial genocidal conqueror. Isn't that what the USA is kind of supposed to do? Otherwise what exactly does it stand for? Or another way: In forcing "détente" on Europe, are you happy to trade good relations with most of Europe, your oldest allies, for maybe better relations with Russia, your enemy who hates you and seeks your destruction? Really? Sounds like a shit and moronic deal to me. >The global playing field is leveling, I think that is precisely the wrong time to be making even bitterer enemies. It's too late lad. Russia hates you even more than they hate your mother country, my homeland, the UK. In fact Russia hates you more than any other country on the planet. They utterly despise you and Anglo-American cultural hegemony. In for a penny, in for a pound and all that. They've been working to undermine the USA since well before the war started. There is no going back any time soon. Instead you advocate surrender to the same people who wish to destroy you. Weak.
  - para_parolu 3y ago
    That happens in 2014 when Ukraine lost Crimea. They accepted it and lived on. There is zero safety guarantees for them.
    - jcranmer 3y ago
      Ukraine has been fighting Russia for nearly a decade, with active if low-level warfare in the Donbass region the entire time. I wouldn't exactly call that "accept[ing] it and liv[ing] on."
      - The_Colonel 3y ago
        From about 2017 the war was very low-level, limited to some artillery duels. And those duels weren't entirely Ukrainian choice, if Russia shoots at you, you can't just ignore it.
      - Log_out_ 3y ago
        Remember when the local "insurrection" to kijev marched into the theater in kherson because they thought it the regional governments office. For all their propaganda multitudes fines online, they are just lethal clowns on the ground, unable to innovate, because bound by puppeteer strings. Ukraine will win. Moscovia will fall apart once again. Empires die and vanish all the time.
    - somenameforme 3y ago
      Not quite! The immediate history here plays a huge role in where we're at today. In the 2014 the US backed a [coup, revolution, insurrection - whatever you want to call it] in Ukraine that saw their democratically elected pro-Russian President overthrown. Numerous Ukrainian territories that also leaned pro-Russia refused to recognize the new government and declared their independence, the Donbas region and Crimea among them. For the 8 years from 2014 to 2022 Ukraine was intermittently attacking and shelling these breakaway territories (excepting Crimea, which had become part of Russia) which were (and are) largely populated with ethnic Russians, and Russia was "secretly" protecting them. This led to a series of treaties, The Minsk Accords [1], to try to arrange peace between Russia and Ukraine, and give the breakaway territories some sort of special status while remaining under Ukraine. These treaties were always violated. And while this was happening Ukraine was increasingly fortifying and arming itself, as well as seeking to join NATO - which NATO was, sincerely or not, indulging. This all really set the stage for where we are today. It also sets the stage for where we're going tomorrow, because the inability to maintain any sort of a peace over these regions is going to make obtaining a 'minimally unfavorable' settlement for Ukraine, over this war, much more difficult. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
  - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
    The war will not end there. Just pause. It will not "end" until Russia has installed a subservient client regime in Ukraine like it has in Belorussia. If you doubt this, I encourage you to look at actual opinions within Russia itself. Interviews with Russians (the 1420 channel on Youtube for example), Russian media, Russian politicians. Their objection is far more than "there's Russian speakers being persecuted by Ukraine." Their national chauvinism leaves them unable to tolerate actually-sovereign nation states on their borders, especially one with an intertwined cultural-linguistic-political history like Ukraine. "Split Ukraine into two and give the far western half to Poland and absorb the rest into Russia" is a commonly held "solution".
    - The_Colonel 3y ago
      Those same people on 1420 will tell you that Poland and UK need to be denazified. It's just propaganda working, you can't mistake it for real strategic goals.
      - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
        Absolutely, it's not scientific at all, but it shows the strong presence of a chauvinistic compliant population. FWIW I think you could find similar nonsense on the streets of many (but not all) American cities. It's the kind of hubris that comes from being a huge country that is its own centre of gravity and a political leadership that runs around saying it's the "best country in the world" and stuff like that. That's how it looks from up here in Canada, anyways. Anyways, you don't have to look at 1420, just the public pronouncements of Putin himself
        whimsicalism 3y ago
        I love how you all create these little side threads where you imagine people's views and then argue against them rather than taking the actually stated views of people in this thread at face value.
        The_Colonel 3y ago
        Putin says a lot of things. No, he's not laying out his grand strategy in front of you, he's saying what is politically useful at the moment. You can't really know the Russia's strategic thinking from public proclamations. You need to read between the lines, and even then it's mostly guesswork.
- ecommerceguy 3y ago
  >>no bureaucrat started this war 2 bureaucrats that have incessantly called for war quickly come to mind, Jake Sullivan and Victoria Nuland.
  - kergonath 3y ago
    What? You haven’t been paying attention. These people had no power to start anything. Also, last time I checked, it was Russia who invaded, not the US, which are not a party in this war.
evolextra 3y ago
[dead]
jcranmer 3y ago
> Prove me wrong. Neoconservatives are not, and indeed have not held power in the US for the better part of a decade. Indeed not even back when Russia invaded Crimea if memory serves me correctly. Of course, there's a decent probability that you've redefined "neoconservative" to mean "people whose politics I don't like" as opposed to any definition that's actually useful for an analysis of foreign policy, and concomitantly that you are so myopically focused on one specific component of foreign policy that you would refuse to admit any evidence that might actually prove you wrong.
- ecommerceguy 3y ago
  You are correct, I do not side with warmongers, of which Clinton, Obama, Biden, Bush, Cheney et al are solidly in favor of. War. You proved nothing.
saintfire 3y ago
No comment on your politics but saying "Prove me wrong" is basically just saying "Argue with me". You can rarely prove a prediction or opinion wrong, especially if they're this vague. Only time can, sometimes.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

khzw8yyy 3y ago

Maybe the problem is the shortness of sight rather than the lack of an end? Rest assured, if the powers that be decide that "Russia is good now" they will convince you of the same within 6 months.

The_Colonel 3y ago
My grandparents carried some anti-German sentiments 70 years after the war ended. Maybe you are able to switch your opinions that quickly, most people can't.
- khzw8yyy 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - The_Colonel 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - khzw8yyy 3y ago
      [flagged]

BlueTemplar 3y ago

Well, could go many ways. Depends who is going to "succeed" to Putin (which isn't getting any younger) and especially how.