Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong in a celeb becoming a politician. Trump is a symptom of a broken political system because of all the other shit associated with him, not because he used to be on the US version of The Apprentice. I don't know much about Zelensky, but nothing I've heard about him so far would indicate he's anything like Trump apart from the celeb thing.
The main difference is that I think Trump would struggle with the graceful dancing thing
 
So, is he now officially cancelled, for being a former actor and owning property in London?

It's important to know these things so I can avoid lauding him inappropriately and getting cancelled myself.
 
It's a bit weird that a popular celebrity leveraging his fame to launch a new career in politics seems to be a cause for celebration in the case of Zelensky, rather than a symptom of a totally broken political system.
been goin on forever though, hasn't it?

even spartacos changed into politics when he started to feel the weight of all those years in the arena - and many consider him the voice of paddington brown.
 
Yeah, I disagree with elbows. It’s very clearly not going the way the Russians expected (see tons of dead Russian armour and troops for little gain after 4 days, no air superiority, a swiftness and decisiveness of international reaction that they clearly weren’t expecting, a full-on run on Russian banks, and now pre-written press releases which, if true, point loudly to the fact that this is a fuck-up). That’s not to say they may not get their shit together in the coming days but Putin threatening nuclear war can’t possibly be where they wanted to be 4 days after the invasion.

Mostly what I'm pointing out is that its a bad idea to make poorly informed judgements about what the Russians expected. Do we have brilliant sources for what the Russians expected, or do we have a concerted, unified messaging campaign to consistently claim that Russias objectives are not being met in the opening days of the war? I've repeatedly pointed out that one well placed Russian said they were told to expect the main campaign to last two weeks, and I've simply used that as a starting point for when I will allow myself to make more assumptions about how badly things are going for Russia.

The 'press release' was not a press release, it was a typical propaganda piece and we've already been through the details of what it actually said, how that twitter feed mischaracterised it, that it was written in a way that perfectly well allowed for it to be published before Kyiv and the government had fallen.

I also say the things I say because I dont find much value in threads like these if everyone is just going to parrot what we hear from the mainstream, where there has been an impressively consistent but narrow narrative about war progress so far. That doesnt mean I see any point in being contrarian for the sake of it, thats shitty and useless too, I'm just putting the questioning of the propaganda that everyone is well aware exists into practice. To what extent does that propaganda stand up to scrutiny? Its doing a reasonable job of retaining an air of credibility to it so far, but I do not intend to hype up the possibilities when even those official and mainstream lines have a built in get out clause - expectations are still being managed in such pieces via lines like 'the Ukrainians have put up a good fight so far but Russia still has numbers and various forms of superiority on its side'.

Its the same with Putin - I have not claimed that there are strong indicators that this invasion will not come to be seen as a giant mistake, a major miscalculation. But it is too early to tell, especially since unfortunately Ukraine has been seen as a major prize for decades when it comes to geopolitical games. If Russia 'wins Ukraine back' then its a win for them and a loss for the west, but of course it isnt that simple because events during the ugly tug of war over Ukraine could be used to ensure Russia suffers losses in other ways that end up leaving it weaker overall. It will probably take years for some of those aspects to play out in full, and the conflict has only been going on for a matter of days.
 
Last edited:
been goin on forever though, hasn't it?

even spartacos changed into politics when he started to feel the weight of all those years in the arena - and many consider him the voice of paddington brown.
I'd say the current version of it typified by Trump & Zelensky is a bit different tbh.

Got to wonder how the dems would have done against Trump if they'd run Martin Sheen instead of Clinton...
 
whatever typically dodgey money bollocks Zelensky has done - right now he has judged that, as leader of Urkraine, his job is to stay in the capital, set an example and lead the defence of his people - despite the very high probability that it ends with his death or - at best - a prolonged incarceration at Vladimir's pleasure - (with the possibility of slow death by poisoning).
Saddam Hussein did a runner as soon as the Americans invaded.
Whislt Boris "churchill" johnson couldn't even being himself not have regular piss ups whilst the rest of us were unable to see dying relative.
 
Well, they're negotiating. Let's hope they can agree a ceasefire today. With any luck a deal would see the worst of the sanctions paused, to the extent that they can, as well. The prospect of Russia being completely ruined is not a very welcome one.
What good is a ceasefire when hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers are just outside your capitol poised to attack? It's like having an agreement with a cobra that's coilled on the other side of the room. I imagine a ceasefire postpones the inevitable but does give the Ukrainians time to get more weapons from donating countries. The Russians are mind-bogglingly stupid on the battlefield but I think even they will figure that out.
 
Yeah, I don't see what a ceasefire gives Russia - they have all they need, or could realistically mobilise, on Ukraine's doorstep right now - the Far East Military Discrict has been emptied to a degree not seen since 1941, there's very little left that could be put on a train from Siberia.

Capitulation, certainly, but a ceasefire in place, burning diesel and eating rations while every day the Ukrainians get more tooled up - I'm not sure what that gives Russia.
 
I do wonder, without any evidence or sources whatsoever (so fits right in on the internet...) if Putin and his planners had an assumption that Zelenskyy and his cabinet were working to the same bug out plans as they have (Seen with Ukraine's own Yanukovych) i.e once the Russian army crossed the border, leave by private jet or helicopters with a couple of pallets of 500 Euro and $100 bills for pastures new.
 
I have absolutely no idea where the dodgy senator would have got this from or if it’s totally made up. But IF if it’s based on real info on what Russia was expecting that would explain a bit. He posted it yesterday.

View attachment 312221
You have to think some expectation of a swift, decisive victory followed by withdrawal before the world had chance to respond was behind the decision to invade. At least that scenario makes sense and it does follow the recent pattern further east.

Because if anybody thought they wouldn't meet any of those objectives in the first 72 hours and would instead be suing for peace they'd have to be utterly demented to give it a go.
 
I don't see what there is that the Ukrainians might be willing to concede at these talks today that would made the war stop.

Thats certainly a big reason why the press are not speaking of these talks as though there is a strong chance of them achieving something meaningful. The Ukrainian government has indicated that they dont think they will achieve much, but that they are going along with them so as not to be seen as being a barrier to peace breaking out.

That said, I dont presume to know what deals can sometimes end up being struck at such talks, and if nothing is achieved the first few times then they may still set the scene for progress later on. Any channel of communication is a start, and sometimes surprising stuff emerges.
 
Thats certainly a big reason why the press are not speaking of these talks as though there is a strong chance of them achieving something meaningful. The Ukrainian government has indicated that they dont think they will achieve much, but that they are going along with them so as not to be seen as being a barrier to peace breaking out.

That said, I dont presume to know what deals can sometimes end up being struck at such talks, and if nothing is achieved the first few times then they may still set the scene for progress later on. Any channel of communication is a start, and sometimes surprising stuff emerges.
Can't see Putin caving in on Crimea at mo
 
I don't see what there is that the Ukrainians might be willing to concede at these talks today that would made the war stop.

It's in part a bit of theatre though. If there are talks they kind of have to go, at the very least to show willing, or to work out what the other side might be pushed to do in certain scenarios. Or maybe just to lay it out that there's nothing they will give and face down the other side.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom