5 ms·

The Ukrainians want this war to end, too. The difference is that they want to survive as a nation, so how the war ends matters. Plus if Russia wins, its appeti

by af78 2y ago

The Ukrainians want this war to end, too. The difference is that they want to survive as a nation, so how the war ends matters. Plus if Russia wins, its appetite will only grow, and another war is just a matter of time.

moduspol 2y ago
Yep, that all sounds great. Now what's your plan for preventing Russia from winning? The plan so far has not worked.
- tim333 2y ago
  Hold the line, stop the oil tankers.
  - moduspol 2y ago
    Who stops them? Ideally we'd do this without starting WW3.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - throwawaymaths 2y ago
      ideally we can stop hitler without starting wwwii. just give him a bit more of Czechoslovakia bro, this time its enough, bro. i promise.
      - moduspol 2y ago
        If only we had spent billions for decades of fighting in Czechoslovakia. Fair point.
        throwawaymaths 2y ago
        if only france and spain had decided to be neutral in the us war of independence we wouldnt be here hearing your navel gazing opinion.
    - tim333 2y ago
      There's been quite a lot done already through sanctions eg: >Tankers carrying Russian oil stuck idling off Chinese coast after new U.S. sanctions https://meduza.io/en/news/2025/01/13/russian-oil-tankers-stuck-idling-off-chinese-coast-after-new-u-s-sanctions https://meduza.io/en/news/2025/01/13/russian-oil-tankers-stu... >UK sanctions 30 shadow tankers in largest clampdown on Russian oil trade https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/crude-oil/112524-uk-sanctions-30-shadow-tankers-in-largest-clampdown-on-russian-oil-trade https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research... I guess that may all go wrong if Trump drops all sanctions but at the moment it's making things difficult.
- throwawaymaths 2y ago
  just because it hasnt worked so far doesnt mean it won't work. the time horizon matters. is russia gonna give up in 10 years? this is a bad plan. in 1 year? maybe not so much.
  - moduspol 2y ago
    That's not a plan. That's a wish. Wars aren't won on wishes.
    - throwawaymaths 2y ago
      its not. plenty of OSINT evidence that this is inevitable. YOUR not-plan has no evidence going for it.
      - moduspol 2y ago
        It's inevitable that if Ukraine has no funding or soldiers to continue this war, then it will end. I don't think that is being questioned.
        throwawaymaths 2y ago
        why do you want the war to end? is it just a moral calculus of lives lost? how can you be sure that ukraine capitulating to russia will lead to less lives lost than one more year of war? 100,000-600,000 people died in the occupation of iraq, why do you think that a russian occupation of Ukraine will be less bloody?
        moduspol 2y ago
        I don't think it is wise or ethical to spend billions of dollars prolonging a forever-war thousands of miles away. I also don't think it's wise or rational to presume that every aggressive action necessarily means that the aggressor is Hitler or bent on world domination. Or even that opposing them by sending resources to their enemy is the most effective way to stop it.
- af78 2y ago
  It may surprise you but Russia is not winning. It has been exhausting itself for no measurable benefit, at the cost for US taxpayers of roughly a coffee per day. Up to now, Ukraine has never received the support it would need to win, just enough not to lose. Weapons deliveries been too little, too late, making the war longer and bloodier than it needs to be. In the meantime domestic production has increased to the point Ukraine covers 30% of its needs. Russia has lost other wars, it can and should lose this one.
  - moduspol 2y ago
    How many more billions do we need to send to ensure Russia loses? Any how many more years will it take? And what does "loss" even look like? Are you genuinely proposing they will simply pack up and head home from all captured territory?
    - af78 2y ago
      > How many more billions do we need to send to ensure Russia loses? Any how many more years will it take? You have to compare with how much will it cost if the war continues to grow in scale or intensity. Russia is dedicating more and more resources to its war machine. And I have no reason to think it will stop if Ukraine. In 2022 Putin already said he wanted NATO back to 1991, IOW he wants Eastern Europe defenseless. Russia's economy is just the size of Spain or Italy: not negligible, but not formidable either. Europe should do more, much more, if only for its own sake. > And what does "loss" even look like? Are you genuinely proposing they will simply pack up and head home from all captured territory? Territorial issues are somewhat secondary. What matters is that the defeat is clear and Russia's leaders discouraged from attempting to go to war again. It happened to Russia against Japan in 1905, and to the USSR in Afghanistan. It can happen again.
    - bambax 2y ago
      Nobody wants the Russians to "pack up and head home"; we want them to die on the battlefield and be left there to rot.
    - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
- nradov 2y ago
  The best plan to prevent Russia from winning would be to cut off Russia's oil revenue. Fossil fuel exports are the only way that Russia can sustain their war effort. First, other European countries need to get serious and stop buying from Russia. Second, give Ukraine enough long range missiles to wreck Russia's fossil fuel infrastructure: pipelines, tank farms, refineries, ports, etc. Russia was heavily dependent on foreign technical experts to maintain that infrastructure and has little capacity to do so on their own. This can be done with very little US funding. And sharing intelligence with Ukraine literally costs us nothing.
  - Xen9 2y ago
    If oil is cheap energy, and you cut down oil revenue, how do you prevent Russia from turning oil into cryptocurrency?
    - nradov 2y ago
      Turning oil into cryptocurrency requires electrical power plants and related infrastructure. Russia has very limited industrial capacity to build this stuff anymore. They're still heavily dependent on pre-1991 industrial infrastructure. I think most people don't realize how weak Russia really is.
      - Xen9 2y ago
        You're right. How can any state with nuke-backed right to issue ultimatums slowly get weakened like that? If Russia states limits, and convinces U.S. that they will launch if the limits are crossed, and these limits are within the threat budget of Russia, can they not make U.S. agree to things (and vice versa)?

by af78 2y ago

moduspol 2y ago

Yep, that all sounds great. Now what's your plan for preventing Russia from winning? The plan so far has not worked.

tim333 2y ago
Hold the line, stop the oil tankers.
- moduspol 2y ago
  Who stops them? Ideally we'd do this without starting WW3.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - throwawaymaths 2y ago
    ideally we can stop hitler without starting wwwii. just give him a bit more of Czechoslovakia bro, this time its enough, bro. i promise.
    - moduspol 2y ago
      If only we had spent billions for decades of fighting in Czechoslovakia. Fair point.
      - throwawaymaths 2y ago
        if only france and spain had decided to be neutral in the us war of independence we wouldnt be here hearing your navel gazing opinion.
  - tim333 2y ago
    There's been quite a lot done already through sanctions eg: >Tankers carrying Russian oil stuck idling off Chinese coast after new U.S. sanctions https://meduza.io/en/news/2025/01/13/russian-oil-tankers-stuck-idling-off-chinese-coast-after-new-u-s-sanctions https://meduza.io/en/news/2025/01/13/russian-oil-tankers-stu... >UK sanctions 30 shadow tankers in largest clampdown on Russian oil trade https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/crude-oil/112524-uk-sanctions-30-shadow-tankers-in-largest-clampdown-on-russian-oil-trade https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research... I guess that may all go wrong if Trump drops all sanctions but at the moment it's making things difficult.
throwawaymaths 2y ago
just because it hasnt worked so far doesnt mean it won't work. the time horizon matters. is russia gonna give up in 10 years? this is a bad plan. in 1 year? maybe not so much.
- moduspol 2y ago
  That's not a plan. That's a wish. Wars aren't won on wishes.
  - throwawaymaths 2y ago
    its not. plenty of OSINT evidence that this is inevitable. YOUR not-plan has no evidence going for it.
    - moduspol 2y ago
      It's inevitable that if Ukraine has no funding or soldiers to continue this war, then it will end. I don't think that is being questioned.
      - throwawaymaths 2y ago
        why do you want the war to end? is it just a moral calculus of lives lost? how can you be sure that ukraine capitulating to russia will lead to less lives lost than one more year of war? 100,000-600,000 people died in the occupation of iraq, why do you think that a russian occupation of Ukraine will be less bloody?
        moduspol 2y ago
        I don't think it is wise or ethical to spend billions of dollars prolonging a forever-war thousands of miles away. I also don't think it's wise or rational to presume that every aggressive action necessarily means that the aggressor is Hitler or bent on world domination. Or even that opposing them by sending resources to their enemy is the most effective way to stop it.
af78 2y ago
It may surprise you but Russia is not winning. It has been exhausting itself for no measurable benefit, at the cost for US taxpayers of roughly a coffee per day. Up to now, Ukraine has never received the support it would need to win, just enough not to lose. Weapons deliveries been too little, too late, making the war longer and bloodier than it needs to be. In the meantime domestic production has increased to the point Ukraine covers 30% of its needs. Russia has lost other wars, it can and should lose this one.
- moduspol 2y ago
  How many more billions do we need to send to ensure Russia loses? Any how many more years will it take? And what does "loss" even look like? Are you genuinely proposing they will simply pack up and head home from all captured territory?
  - af78 2y ago
    > How many more billions do we need to send to ensure Russia loses? Any how many more years will it take? You have to compare with how much will it cost if the war continues to grow in scale or intensity. Russia is dedicating more and more resources to its war machine. And I have no reason to think it will stop if Ukraine. In 2022 Putin already said he wanted NATO back to 1991, IOW he wants Eastern Europe defenseless. Russia's economy is just the size of Spain or Italy: not negligible, but not formidable either. Europe should do more, much more, if only for its own sake. > And what does "loss" even look like? Are you genuinely proposing they will simply pack up and head home from all captured territory? Territorial issues are somewhat secondary. What matters is that the defeat is clear and Russia's leaders discouraged from attempting to go to war again. It happened to Russia against Japan in 1905, and to the USSR in Afghanistan. It can happen again.
  - bambax 2y ago
    Nobody wants the Russians to "pack up and head home"; we want them to die on the battlefield and be left there to rot.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
nradov 2y ago
The best plan to prevent Russia from winning would be to cut off Russia's oil revenue. Fossil fuel exports are the only way that Russia can sustain their war effort. First, other European countries need to get serious and stop buying from Russia. Second, give Ukraine enough long range missiles to wreck Russia's fossil fuel infrastructure: pipelines, tank farms, refineries, ports, etc. Russia was heavily dependent on foreign technical experts to maintain that infrastructure and has little capacity to do so on their own. This can be done with very little US funding. And sharing intelligence with Ukraine literally costs us nothing.
- Xen9 2y ago
  If oil is cheap energy, and you cut down oil revenue, how do you prevent Russia from turning oil into cryptocurrency?
  - nradov 2y ago
    Turning oil into cryptocurrency requires electrical power plants and related infrastructure. Russia has very limited industrial capacity to build this stuff anymore. They're still heavily dependent on pre-1991 industrial infrastructure. I think most people don't realize how weak Russia really is.
    - Xen9 2y ago
      You're right. How can any state with nuke-backed right to issue ultimatums slowly get weakened like that? If Russia states limits, and convinces U.S. that they will launch if the limits are crossed, and these limits are within the threat budget of Russia, can they not make U.S. agree to things (and vice versa)?