Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[kenny g]

Also note the book I mentioned earlier:

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

Oh how I hope this is a massive cyber attack from the west, Russia has been getting away with that sort of shit for too long, it's got to be our turn.

www.urban75.net

I dont like to focus on that shitty chessboard and empires exclusively because otherwise it just becomes a story of large powers and individual humans lives and circumstances are lost from the picture, and I'll be no willing apologist for states and regimes of any stripe. But there isnt much point denying the large geopolitical games that have been played in Ukraine for long over a decade, and their implications and the raising of the stakes. And of course the way such things are reported on in the west, which is usually well in tune with the standard US rhetoric we heard again from Biden today, staking claim to concepts like democracy and freedom and rejecting competing empires right to be empires and to make use of brute force, invasion and other forms of hard power, whilst reserving the right to justify and make use of such power ourselves.

Likewise it does a disservice to people and to the struggle against regimes and dictators to characterise the 'colour revolutions' including the one Ukraine had in the same terms as the likes of Russia do, to imply that they are only the result of external meddling and propaganda by the likes of the USA. But to entirely dismiss those aspects also does a disservice to the truth. Somehow we have to find ways to acknowledge and discuss all of these aspects without falling into some traditional traps of crude anti-imperialism or the mindset and propaganda of the powers and ideological landscape we've lived under in our own countries in our lifetimes. And of course moments like this where war and death are underway can pose additional challenges in getting beyond the crudest of propaganda storylines and polarised simplifications.

I agree somewhat with the sentiment but it reads like lib dem style equivocation. What is happening is grotesque. There is no justification. My heart reaches out to all those in London who are touched personally by this shot storm.

 

[weltweit]

Perfectly possible to condemn the invasion whilst explaining the wider context and contributory agencies that have led to this appalling situation where many working class lives are being sacrificed. Although that wouldn’t suit the pro NATO brigade on here

I wouldn't necessarily describe myself as pro NATO, but if it is the only construct between all of us and world war three I am in favour.

 

[Raheem]

So why did the US refuse to take the offer off the table?
We're going round in circles.

I suppose because it would have made no difference except to make them look foolish.

 

[Ax^]

So why did the US refuse to take the offer off the table?
We're going round in circles.

I'm just confused with the idea that countries of the old iron block joined nato to avoid being invaded again by Russia
but supposedly that is provocation for Russia

Putin even said "if the Ukraine joined Nato then we would have to start WW3 to invade the country"

appeasing a would be despot is not really how the world should going after the last 100 years of history

 

[The39thStep]

I wouldn't necessarily describe myself as pro NATO, but if it is the only construct between all of us and world war three I am in favour.

Seeing as your posts have asked if NATO are going to stand up and be counted and you wouldn’t want NATO weakened then I can fully understand why you aren’t pro NATO .

 

[Ax^]

what is the alternative The39thStep ?

curious?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I'm just confused with the idea that countries of the old iron block joined nato to avoid being invaded again by Russia
but supposedly that is provocation for Russia

Ukraine is arguably historically part of Russia. It isn't historically part of NATO. Or the other Baltic states.

 

[agricola]

Ukraine is arguably historically part of Russia.

Strictly speaking, Russia is historically part of Ukraine (or at least historically Kiev ruled over what is now Moscow and its surroundings).

 

[Ax^]

Ukraine is arguably historically part of Russia. It isn't historically part of NATO. Or the other Baltic states.

Mongolia could proclaim ownership of the Ukraine how far are we going back

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Good point.

that was to Agricola.

 

[Raheem]

Ukraine is arguably historically part of Russia. It isn't historically part of NATO. Or the other Baltic states.

And so...

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Mongolia could proclaim ownership of the Ukraine how far are we going back

Read Agricola's post.

 

[Ax^]

so putins got it the wrong way around and should be not be invading

or should turkey invade under Khazars historical idieology

 

[Magnus McGinty]

And so...

And so the cold war, Western encroachment, provocations etc...

 

[Raheem]

And so the cold war, Western encroachment, provocations etc...

That's not even a sentence, Magnus.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

That's not even a sentence, Magnus.

It's a summary of points I've made that you've presumably been reading. I'm gonna bow out for the night. Some want to discuss geo-politics whilst others see it as some playground spat.

 

[Ax^]

he is just going in circles, i've been trying to find out what his point is for the last 30 minutes

good luck.. appears non of the states that used to be under the iron curtain should of had self determination as it was provocation toward russia

shrugs

 

[Magnus McGinty]

he is just going in circles, i've been trying to find out what his point is for the last 30 minutes

It's because you're stupid. Sorry but I can't even discuss this with you. It's like talking to a child.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I think this should be discussed in the context of the cold war rather than anything prior tbh.

I dont know what to make of your post-WW2 sense of history in Europe. Take events of 1968 for example:

Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I expect for you the key difference is the sense you have of the 'unprovoked' nature of things on this occasion, and your failure to understand Putins rationale. I dont think I currently know the whole story on that, but for a start whats happening now can easily be filed under 'unfinished business'.

In terms of justifications for invasion where no credible military provocation is available, we've already seen examples of that this century such as the invasion of Iraq. If a world power decides to mount such an invasion then they will do so even if the pretext is flimsy and does not stand up to proper scrutiny, even if everyone really knows that the emperor has no clothes on.

I dont agree with claiming that there can only be one ending as well, that it can only end badly for Putin and/or Russia. There are scenarios where it ends badly and scenarios where it doesnt. And predicting these things isnt easy. Take the invasion of Czechoslovakia that I linked to, which was eventually seen as both an event which managed to end up contributing to a form of peace with the USA in the 1970s, but also fractured some global communist solidarity and propaganda in ways that may have contributed heavily to the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union. And if making comparisons to that and what could go wrong for Russia this time, some of those things are things that Russia doesnt have in the first place this time, so arent theirs to lose in this conflict.

In some ways its surprising that its taken Putin this long to go this far with the agenda. He's always been painted as someone with these agendas on his mind, claims that history ended when the Soviet Union collapsed were laughable, and it never seemed likely that Russia would be content with only limited ambitions for all eternity. With the benefit of hindsight I am not surprised that Ukraine and Belarus turned out to be beyond the limit of what they would take on the chin, and now there is bloody pushback.

The Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia and Hungary - and Afghanistan were not a declaration of war on another state and (like its occupation of the crimea) a response to political upheaval within those countries - they were also cold bloodedly rational in terms of cold war real politick/sphere of influences type shit. Similar to the US in its backing of coups in Chile and Indonesia and its intervention in Vietnam. They were within the expectations of what the super powers could and would do. And they were more controllable wrt to their repercussions.

Iraq was already an ostracised totalitarian regime and the invasion did not up the ante so significantly between the worlds biggest military powers - it also made more sense in terms of US power projection/control of strategic resources and costs/benefits. Regime change in Iraq had been a goal pursued by the US and co since the invasion of Kuwait. Also Iraqis - whilst not wanting an invasion - were not mad keen on defending the regime either. Saddam Hussien was widely hated. Having said that - it was certainly hugely destructive, destabilised the region and broke the precedent of what was permissible/possible in the post cold war era. The argument that the world would be better off without a genocidal cunt in charge of Iraq was not unreasonable - the argument was weather the cost of achieving that was too great (and was made in obvious bad faith by the US/uk). Ukraine is a democracy - not paradsie on earth and rife with corruption- but not a place where political opponents get fed into meat grinders on the whim of its leader or where unfaoured ethnic minorities get bombed with nerve agents.

Urkaine is (was ) a fully independent, democratic, state with close ties to the rest of Europe- with a significant military of its own. Its off the scale of anything seen in Europe since 1945. The shock here is also that this hasn't been a gradual escalation of a crises - this is a war totally of Putin's choosing - there was no domestic pressure or sudden crises pushing Russia to intervene. The fucker has been wanting to do this for years and has suddenly decided (cos getting old/ more bat shit?) to go for it - maybe judging that post covid and disunited rivals meant this was the right time.

Its not that those other examples weren't horrible events with clear similarities and serious repercussions - but this feels way beyond how major military powers have behaved in the post WW2 world - i.e a full on war of conquest by one advanced, industrialised state on another.

 

[The39thStep]

what is the alternative The39thStep ?

curious?

I’m not , unlike some others on here , a person who has an answer to everything tbh . However in my view I’m against membership of NATO .

 

[brogdale]

These fuckers are heroes

St Petersburg...too many to arrest:

 

[Ax^]

It's because you're stupid. Sorry but I can't even discuss this with you. It's like talking to a child.

no its because you not saying anything but it was provocation from nato and the west without any explanation

ya daft cockwomble

 

[Ax^]

I’m not , unlike some others on here , a person who has an answer to everything tbh . However in my view I’m against membership of NATO .

who can answer everything i'm just interested in what would be an viable alternative to aggression from one headcase in a situation like this
my own country is not in nato unlike a founding member like portugal

 

[eatmorecheese]

St Petersburg...too many to arrest:

View attachment 311732

That makes me emotional. Diamonds.

 

[Raheem]

St Petersburg...too many to arrest:

View attachment 311732

Suppose it's too early to dream of this all ending with Putin's neck in an actual noose hanging from an actual lamppost.

 

[elbows]

I'm not intending to wank on endlessly about the geopolitics like I've done in a few posts today, but before I stop I will just highlight the spectacle of this John Simpson article published earlier today. It features an awkward contradiction because he wants to acknowledge certain geopolitical aspects whilst still indulging in the framing that makes it all personal, all about one man, Putin.

Ukraine invasion: Is this a new Cold War, asks John Simpson

Vladimir Putin might turn Russia back to the days of the USSR, our world affairs editor writes.

www.bbc.co.uk

With hindsight, and there's starting to be a lot of that, some politicians and academics are saying that Nato should perhaps have changed its whole approach after the Berlin Wall came down - it should have avoided humiliating Moscow by taking its old satellites in Eastern Europe on board, and lining them up in a way that seemed to Putin's Russia to be confrontational.

Its not really just about Putins Russia then is it, its about Russia. The stuff mentioned in that paragraph is more about not creating circumstances that allowed the likes of Putin to dominate the scene and be bitter about these things in the first place. And I'd suggest that if Putin didnt exist, someone else could have filled a similar role, if the aforementioned hindsight is correct. Because its about Russia the nation and the circumstances it found itself in after losing, and the advantages the victors made of those circumstances. But in most of the rest of the article its still all about the Putin.

As for whether hindsight from decades later was really required, I was still a bit on the young side when the Berlin Wall came down, but I do have teenage and young adult memories of BBC etc coverage of Russia in the years that followed. And how the extent of the humiliation, collapse, economic woe etc didnt seem like a terribly good idea, it did sort of smell like setting the scene for distant future trouble. Chuck in the ideological triumphalism, the harsh realities of the marketplace, and the laughable shit about 'the end of history' at the time and yeah, I dont think the consequences decades later are some shocking unpredictable anomaly. They sound more like lessons from history we were already supposed to have learnt long before the Soviet Union collapsed. Especially when later on Ukraine flashed on and off the Western medias radar in sync with our blocs interests in seeing Russian influence diminished there, excitable talk of democracy and change at key moments of opportunity, but then back off the radar for all intents and purposes when it didnt come to full fruition.

 

[weltweit]

I wonder how many of our submarines are at sea?

 

[nogojones]

You'd imagine Man United would be particularly safety conscious regarding airlines

 

[Supine]

Twatter reports all 11 labour mp’s have withdrawn their support to the STW letter.

 

[Ax^]

I wonder how many of our submarines are at sea?

6 on active duty