maomao
普費斯
Sorry to come back to this but 'unilaterally invaded' is a pointless tautology surely? Has an invasion ever happened by agreement of both parties?
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24
- Thread starter kebabking
- Start date
It’s cropping up here because it’s a highly emotive subject and motivation matters to the reality of good/bad faith.
And it actually does crop up everywhere — we’ve seen numerous references in the last few pages to “why is urban always like this?” Well, that’s why.
Last edited:
That’s the important part of my statement, to you? Whether “unilaterally invaded” is tautologous or not?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Tayto's by lunchtimeI bet it'll be all KAYTO's fault by then
What do you view as the substantive content, and what are you going to do about the fact that other people might have a different view about where the substantive part lies? I think my responses to you have been pretty bloody substantive, to be honest. Far more so than you’ve given me in return.
maomao
普費斯
Only relatively.
Then you have neatly proved my point about good and bad faith.
Really? By expecting me to jump through some hoops of your understanding regarding an ambiguous question you haven’t pointed to. Ok.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
The issue is that your argument and questioning (and those of a few others here) boil down to wanting to blame NATO for the crisis when that is very demonstrably not the case. There has long been a section of U75 who will take the side of any enemy of America or the west, and traditionally they’ve received some support on these boards with the majority of posters highly critical of US/western foreign military policy. Here though there’s a very large consensus. Most see the causes of the conflict as pretty black and white so the motivations of those who don’t come into question. We’ve even had a poster here suggesting that the yanks blew-up the Nordstream pipelines.
“My enemy’s enemy …” has always been a stupid proposition, but when it starts to encroach on conspiracy theory nonsense, people really lose patience.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Tbh there are a number of causes to how we got here and nato expansion is one of them. But i don't believe it ought to assume the significance as THE cause. There are long term causes and there are short term causes, there are major causes and minor causes. And ignoring any sort of nuance or complexity simply to say the west dunnit seems to me a very facile position
But you’re projecting a position onto me. I don’t support any state but certainly not a gangster one led by murdering scum.
It could therefore be argued that any support for Ukraine could be ‘my enemy’s enemy’ by the same token.
ska invita
back on the other side
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
No. You’re being asked why you’re taking the line that you are and why, after detailed explanation of other’s positions, you don’t lay out yours clearly.
No it couldn’t.
maomao
普費斯
Not really a serviceable analogy as even those who blame NATO aren't blaming Ukraine themselves. In fact you seem to be suggesting that violent crime is purely the result of bad actors and has no social context.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
Oh, you poor misunderstood victim.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
So why didn't Putin / Russia (right now I can't see any clear difference) start negotiations years ago around spheres of influence, NATO expansion, "buffer states", neighbours joining the EU, etc etc all the stuff we're saying "contributed" to this war? I mean, explicitly and publicly and in full view like a statesperson. Why solve the problem by military means? Was there really no other way for him to address these "concerns"?
Why does Ukraine have to negotiate now, not to lose bits of itself, when Russia wouldn't negotiate before to maintain its sphere of influence / check NATO expansion? Why has Putin's state been murdering dissidents, threatening neighbours and promoting conspiracism for years?
There's a massive double standard here, where Russia is being treated as if it's a nation without agency, so weak it had no choice but to lash out. While other states have to give up bits, Russia gets to just take them. Fine, if we want to live with that, personally it's unlikely to affect me me me, but why would anyone argue that this state is behaving in any way legitimately? If the USA did the same in Mexico, or if/when China did/does the same in Taiwan or Kashmir, I can't imagine the same defence springing up from the UK left. Not at all.
Why does Ukraine have to negotiate now, not to lose bits of itself, when Russia wouldn't negotiate before to maintain its sphere of influence / check NATO expansion? Why has Putin's state been murdering dissidents, threatening neighbours and promoting conspiracism for years?
There's a massive double standard here, where Russia is being treated as if it's a nation without agency, so weak it had no choice but to lash out. While other states have to give up bits, Russia gets to just take them. Fine, if we want to live with that, personally it's unlikely to affect me me me, but why would anyone argue that this state is behaving in any way legitimately? If the USA did the same in Mexico, or if/when China did/does the same in Taiwan or Kashmir, I can't imagine the same defence springing up from the UK left. Not at all.
Actually, I’m asking what is the purpose of the questions:
Magnus is the one who seems to think he can have the debate in a contextual vacuum. If you want to talk context then please let’s start by framing the entire context, including the purpose of the discourse, why now is the time to have that discourse and what the impact of those narratives of discourse are likely to be.
UnderOpenSky
baseline neural therapy
Sounds like the Russians are digging in. Wondering if they hope they can hold these lines over winter. Some of them are 60km behind the current front line. A question to those that know more then me (kebabking?) How effectively could you hold such fixed lines if your opponent has drones, western intelligence and very accurate missle systems. I'm assuming anything they dig can't withstand a hit from something delivered by HIMARS?
www.independent.co.uk
Ukraine: Putin claims he ‘shares pain’ of troops’ mothers - live
President meets women ahead of Russia’s Mother’s Day
www.independent.co.uk
Kevbad the Bad
Amiable Bowel Syndrome
The first demo I ever went on by myself (with my friend Alex) was against American involvement in the Vietnam war. I wasn't pro the Communist regime in Hanoi, just against America's murderous policy. Like most people on the demo. Nobody was asking for negotiations to start, though that might have been a good thing. Nobody was telling the Russians or Chinese to stop arming the Vietnamese, because this might draw the war to a close. No, the message was straightforward. Yanks out!
Why should things be different today?
Why should things be different today?
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Sounds like the Russians are digging in. Wondering if they hope they can hold these lines over winter. Some of them are 60km behind the current front line. A question to those that know more then me (kebabking?) How effectively could you hold such fixed lines if your opponent has drones, western intelligence and very accurate missle systems. I'm assuming anything they dig can't withstand a hit from something delivered by HIMARS?
Ukraine: Putin claims he ‘shares pain’ of troops’ mothers - live
President meets women ahead of Russia’s Mother’s Day
I've been wondering why the Russians haven't started bombing the bejaysus out of Kherson because "fuck you that's why", surely it is now in range of the RU artillery?Or are they in disarray/regrouping/scared off too far because of counter battery fire/HIMARS?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Because for some it's more about who did it than what was done. It's a cretinous mindset, thankfully only more common on these boards than in reality.
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
FIrst of all, Russia lacks things like airburst fuzes (things that make shells burst before they hit something), which is essential for attacking dug-in positions: impact projectiles will tend to burst up and outwards, so anyone in a trench is going to be in the shadow of the land, and will need an almost-direct hit to be significantly affected. It is quite possible that they are basing their defensive approach on the assumption that the Ukrainians also don't have airburst capability.Sounds like the Russians are digging in. Wondering if they hope they can hold these lines over winter. Some of them are 60km behind the current front line. A question to those that know more then me (kebabking?) How effectively could you hold such fixed lines if your opponent has drones, western intelligence and very accurate missle systems. I'm assuming anything they dig can't withstand a hit from something delivered by HIMARS?
Ukraine: Putin claims he ‘shares pain’ of troops’ mothers - live
President meets women ahead of Russia’s Mother’s Day
Secondly, Russian military doctrine appears to rely on sheer mass - there is plenty of evidence that they seem to operate on the basis (particularly in attack) that is, essentially, "human wave" - send in soldiers, expect them to be slaughtered, have the following wave go in, and just keep supplying men until you overcome. In WWII, that was used to the extent that subsequent waves would be expected to pick up the weapons of their dead comrades and carry on.
Thirdly, it is quite likely that the command hierarchy is oblivious of the practicalities of the situation - casualty reports are not passed up the chain, and no opportunity arises for the senior command to adapt (if they even could/were willing to) their approach to what is happening on the battlefield (see also "secondly" above).
Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly, they really don't have many other options. They are unlikely to have significant opportunities for manoeuvre warfare there, and they may well be simply regarding the lines along the Dnipro as a defensive block to prevent Ukraine advancing while they concentrate their main effort in (eg) the Donbas area, where we have already seen a significant upturn in activity since the Kherson retreat. Their role in Kherson oblast is probably likely to be little more than "stand and die", in the expectation that Ukraine will not want to expend the cost in personnel and materiel that assaulting those defensive lines, but which obliges Ukraine to maintain a force in that area anyway. They probably consider this to be a Cunning Plan.
ETA: 4a - they will be very focused, too, on trying to stop Ukraine cutting off, and ultimately attacking, Crimea. That may well be the overriding priority.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Were you for or against the Russians arming the Vietnamese?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
but not, i note, against australian or thai involvement in the vietnam war
Kevbad the Bad
Amiable Bowel Syndrome
Back then I never thought about it
Kevbad the Bad
Amiable Bowel Syndrome
Well I was only 15 at the time and I wasn't involved in organising the demo. But just to clarify, had the demo been against us, Aussie and Thai involvement I would still have attended.
Kevbad the Bad
Amiable Bowel Syndrome
In fact, had I been on the organising committee I would have insisted that New Zealand, South Korea and the Philippines were also castigated for their involvement.
I have, and now I can’t because I got sanctioned for it.
Similar threads
