Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Idris2002]

Were your parents killed in the war? No, it was afterwards, in the peace process.

 

[andysays]

Indeed.

I wonder if it's not WW3 because we really, really don't want it to be WW3?

If I said that it's not raining because I don't want it to be raining, you'd assume I was on fucking glue...

I would say that it isn't WWIII yet, just as if a way had been found to stop Hitler when he attempted to invade the Sudetenland, we wouldn't have had WWII.

I wouldn't push the WW2 analogies too far tbh, there's far more that is different than is similar. I remember at the start of the Balkans conflict lots of people were talking up the WWI analogies, assuring us that a total global war was just around the corner.

I agree that we shouldn't push the parallels too far, but it's inevitable that to some extent we will look at what's happening now in terms of what has happened in the past.

Other non-WWII analogies are available and examining one doesn't exclude the option of using others as well.

 

[two sheds]

I don't think that can be expected to happen. And, if it does, who would be next? Moldova? The Baltic states? Poland??

And, going by the general Ukrainian attitude, a surrender would create a massive rift in that society - it could even be bloodier and nastier.

I think it's more likely that Ukraine will be battered to its knees, and the resulting insurgency will continue long afterwards.

yes fair point, and the people Putin installed would doubtless do some serious purging

 

[A380]

I reckon the united and instantaneous response from the west, strong resistance from Ukraine, and Russia's currency collapse and rapid loss of allies has probably shut up those advocating for an invasion of Taiwan.

Sadly I don't think the goal will change, but the Chinese will probably review their strategy and preparations as a result of the lessons learn't. Might be a bit longer for Taiwan, especially if Beijing takes some time to make a weakened Russia (which may or may not by then include some or all of what is now Ukraine) into a real client state.

 

[JimW]

Press here reporting a Chinese citizen has been injured by gunfire in Kyiv, might help bring home the reality to more, though outside the twatosphere by far the most common understanding is that it's ordinary people suffer most in war.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

i very rarely read peter hitchens' articles because i think he's a barking loon. and so he is, most of the time, but i find myself agreeing with much of his article here PETER HITCHENS: Why I blame the arrogant West for the Ukraine crisis. sure there are other factors, but imo the environment in which the other factors developed was largely drawn by western attitudes and actions towards russia.

Eurgh, that article is gross. The first half of it was him waffling on about how great he is for being in Russia when communism fell.

In 1939 he'd have been saying that it was the humiliation of Germany after WW1 that caused Hitler, WW2 and it's all our arrogant fault. Of course it's true that the way Germany was treated after WW1 was a factor in the rise of Hitler and WW2. I don't doubt that mistakes made in the 90s and how Russia was treated after the collapse of Communism are a factor in this but the point I was making earlier is cunts like Hitchens and all those tossers in STWC saying it's all NATO and ignoring the much larger reasons for him invading are just that, cunts. What point does it serve right now? To wag one's finger and go 'well if you hadn't had done that 30 years ago we wouldn't be here now, now you reap what you sow.' Maybe save the historical analysis until after the fact we've, hopefully, fended off nuclear annihilation.

Edit: Or maybe there should be a separate forum for Ukraine where we can do historical analysis because it is interesting and useful, right editor?

 

[existentialist]

Is it being broadcast somewhere?

I'm watching it on Sky, via YouTube.

 

[Rimbaud]

Sadly I don't think the goal will change, but the Chinese will probably review their strategy and preparations as a result of the lessons learn't. Might be a bit longer for Taiwan, especially if Beijing takes some time to make a weakened Russia (which may or may not by then include some or all of what is now Ukraine) into a real client state.

Agreed - but it is a good thing that they revert to trying to get the KMT back in power and playing the long game, and that the hawks become less prominent.

 

[extra dry]

live talks from EU and reactions.

 

[A380]

world war three would be the global war on terror. world war four, the hare's running.

Six at least (Counting the War of the Austrian Succession as the 1st and what we call the wider Napoleonic wars as the 2nd)...

 

[cupid_stunt]

I'm watching it on Sky, via YouTube.

Yeah, it's still going on, when I posted it had finished, I was referring to Zelenskiy 's part.

 

[Combustible]

It's simplistic (wrong actually...) to say that NATO, and the EU were being used by the US and western European states as an anti-Russian tool - there was a very short period when Russian accession to NATO was being talked about, but it lasted less than a year, and it tailed off because Russia wanted to be treated as the big dog in NATO east of Berlin, with a Russian veto over where US forces could go, who the eastern states could buy their gear from. It was all very 'Spheres of Influence', and Russia got very arsey and threw it's toys out of the pram when it was made clear that that wasn't how Russian membership was going to go.

Where is your evidence that Russia's joining of NATO broke down because of specific demands from the Russian side? The verbal commitments that NATO wouldn't expand eastwards were made by James Baker and Helmut Kohl back in 1990, which was a few years before Yeltsin requested joining. And it is clear that NATO never had any intention of giving Russia full NATO membership, as can be seen from files from the time.

A treaty between Russia and Nato to develop a new relationship might well be needed but the “relationship must not be based on false Russian expectations that she will, one day, become a member of the [Nato] alliance.

“We must not repeat, in the Nato context, the position the EU has got itself into in relation to Turkey – of promising the prospect of entry which it has not intention of honouring. This could be profoundly destabilising.”

You can see they were floating the possibility of (but later dismissed) associate membership for Russia, but only as a means of getting them to accept NATO enlargement, which was clearly largely aimed at opposing Russia.

 

[Dystopiary]

Can't see that much when not signed in, but is that account kind of, dodgy?

 

[Idris2002]

Jesus Christ, but academics are cunts. Russian anthropologists have issued a declaration condemning the attack on Ukraine. Some prick on a mailing list I'm subscribed to, comfortably ensconced in a London office, has used a sentence in this declaration ("No war can be justified by the search for the historical truth.") to accuse these people of saying that Putin is right, it's just his methods are wrong.

This, from somebody who has never had to stick his neck out at any time in his life. I'm fucking disgusted at this behaviour.

 

[Pickman's model]

I

Eurgh, that article is gross. The first half of it was him waffling on about how great he is for being in Russia when communism fell.

In 1939 he'd have been saying that it was the humiliation of Germany after WW1 that caused Hitler, WW2 and it's all our arrogant fault. Of course it's true that the way Germany was treated after WW1 was a factor in the rise of Hitler and WW2. I don't doubt that mistakes made in the 90s and how Russia was treated after the collapse of Communism are a factor in this but the point I was making earlier is cunts like Hitchens and all those tossers in STWC saying it's all NATO and ignoring the much larger reasons for him invading are just that, cunts. What point does it serve right now? To wag one's finger and go 'well if you hadn't had done that 30 years ago we wouldn't be here now, now you reap what you sow.' Maybe save the historical analysis until after the fact we've, hopefully, fended off nuclear annihilation.

Edit: Or maybe there should be a separate forum for Ukraine where we can do historical analysis because it is interesting and useful, right editor?

I think you'll find I've posted about quite a range of things on this thread and my posts eg the one you quote about how we ended up here in response to rather than pre-empting posts about root causes etc. So rather than telling me to 'save the historical analysis' you should think about that yourself. I don't think much of hitchens bit about I was there but I think he's on the money with his conclusions and it's to me telling you don't attempt to engage with his points

 

[gosub]

Can't see that much when not signed in, but is that account kind of, dodgy?

Probably

 

[JimW]

Idris2002 Had you heard about the wetness of water too?

 

[Idris2002]

Idris2002 Had you heard about the wetness of water too?

Bullets hurt, corpses stink, men in the front lines are so scared they wet themselves (Orwell).

 

[Idris2002]

This is the Russian anthropologists statement I alluded to above:

"
To the Government of the Russian Federation

We, a group of Russian ethnographers and anthropologists, protest against the military operation of the Russian Federation on the Ukrainian territory.
We, Russian anthropologists and ethnographers, have devoted our lives to understanding the cultural and social diversity of humankind, and conduct field research in various parts of the world studying social relations and cultural dynamics. We know first-hand how people live during and after wars and political catastrophes. Therefore, we protest when the use of complex humanitarian issues is a pretext of political manipulations and military conflicts.
No war can be justified by the search for the historical truth. War cripples humans’ souls. War causes mass loss of life and entails the loss of significant cultural values. War is a moral homicide of present and future generations. The Russian-Ukrainian war leads Russia to international isolation, the damage to its economy, culture and science. The war dooms Russia to hopelessly lagging behind the rest of the world, to a sharp worsening of living standards and, consequently, to the rise of social and ethnic tensions that may lead to internal conflicts.

Therefore, we demand:
(1) To immediately cease the military operation on the Ukrainian territory;
(2) To immediately withdraw troops from the Ukrainian territory;
(3) To start direct negotiations on the ways and timing of the de-escalation of the conflict with the Ukrainian government on an equal footing and without any preconditions.

We emphasize that this appeal is a voluntary position of a group of ethnographers and anthropologists, who care about the future of Russia."

 

[Idris2002]

Civil war in Russia can't be ruled out as a result of this farrago.

 

[frogwoman]

Civil war in Russia can't be ruled out as a result of this farrago.

A friend of mine there said she thinks that might happen

 

[spitfire]

Can't see that much when not signed in, but is that account kind of, dodgy?

I've had a look, it is rabidly pro Russian and promoting Russian talking points, Azov, saying so called "civilian" targets full of soldiers and arms. Restraint of Russian forces etc.

 

[elbows]

Where is your evidence that Russia's joining of NATO broke down because of specific demands from the Russian side? The verbal commitments that NATO wouldn't expand eastwards were made by James Baker and Helmut Kohl back in 1990, which was a few years before Yeltsin requested joining. And it is clear that NATO never had any intention of giving Russia full NATO membership, as can be seen from files from the time.



You can see they were floating the possibility of (but later dismissed) associate membership for Russia, but only as a means of getting them to accept NATO enlargement, which was clearly largely aimed at opposing Russia.

We can also move on to looking at the issue of European security institutions later on.

The long testimony I mentioned last night ( Ukraine and the Russian invasion, Feb 2022 ) includes too many security references for me to quote them all now, but here is one. Its better to interpret it in the context of the full piece though.

Putin has been quite explicit that successive Russian threats to deploy new nuclear weapons systems, or undermine the current international order are a gambit to get the U.S. to the negotiating table. Russia has long sought a commitment from the U.S., NATO and the Europe Union that it will have a clearly defined role in post-Cold War European security institutions and decision-making power whenever developments or events run counter to its interests. Russian officials have expressed frustration about the slow response from the United States to Moscow’s repeated requests to engage since 2008, when then President Dmitry Medvedev made a proposal for a new European security order in Berlin.

I have not looked for details of the 2008 proposal yet.

 

[A380]

I’m

Civil war in Russia can't be ruled out as a result of this farrago.

They’ve always ended well in the past…

 

[Dystopiary]

Probably

I've had a look, it is rabidly pro Russian and promoting Russian talking points, Azov, saying so called "civilian" targets full of soldiers and arms. Restraint of Russian forces etc.

Jeez
gosub I know I'm a noob, but surely it's not good to signal boost or link to that kind of thing.

 

[MickiQ]

A question whirling about my head - if NATO were to intervene in Ukraine, it would be World War 3: but has WW3 actually started already?

Is this, historical analogies not being perfect, the Sudentenland, the Anschluss, or whatever other example you might wish to use, none of which wouldn't be described as being part of WW2..?

Assuming we're not all dead by then we can revisit that question about 2030 or so.

 

[gosub]

I've had a look, it is rabidly pro Russian and promoting Russian talking points, Azov, saying so called "civilian" targets full of soldiers and arms. Restraint of Russian forces etc.

'On message' from a Russian point of view though with some lag from what I can tell

 

[Sprocket.]

A mate rang last night and was quite concerned about the Ukrainian invasion.
He said “well it might be all over by Christmas!”
He followed that by adding “I meant civilisation “

 

[Pickman's model]

I've had a look, it is rabidly pro Russian and promoting Russian talking points, Azov, saying so called "civilian" targets full of soldiers and arms. Restraint of Russian forces etc.

tbh the anti-war protesters are pro-russian and the people you're on about are by contrast pro-putin

 

[Pickman's model]

A mate rang last night and was quite concerned about the Ukrainian invasion.
He said “well it might be all over by Christmas!”
He followed that by adding “I meant civilisation “

no, that's going to hit the buffers round 2040