How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[ZiprHead]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014.

Yeah, those green army men were just regular Ukrainian Russians.

 

[Jayjay]

Recall that after a few weeks of military action in Libya, and the US became concerned about their reserves of smart weapons. So I’m skeptical that Russia can sustain this offensive for several months without serious risk.

It doesn’t need to. This isn’t a war of conquest or extermination. This is a punitive incursion to force Ukraine to accept terms Russia has openly stated. The Ukrainians may be able to hold off further Russian advancement - there are logistical and supply issues - but can they retake what Russia gained? No. This war started eight years ago and will end as it began: Crimea and the breakway Donbas regions to Russia and no NATO. All of the death and destruction is so pointless.

I disagree. It is a war of conquest. Russia clearly wants more land than it had before the war: Additional area in Donbas region, land bridge to Crimea via Mariupol, and to secure the Crimean water supply in Kherson. Possibly also Odessa to connect Russian-occupied Transnistria and to control the entire coastline to the Black Sea. Also note that Russian soldiers have informed the personnel in the nuclear power plant they've taken that they work for Rosatom now. Clearly they intend this to be a permanent situation rather than just a temporary occupation to force Ukraine to accept their terms.

 

[Copernicus]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions. Neither side abided by the Minsk agreements; Ukraine kept shelling and the rebels shot back. But the end result of the war will still be the same. The US and the West should hasten diplomacy on both sides to bring this to a rapid conclusion. Yet, there is no leadership on that. And more die pointlessly

You have really been duped by Russian propaganda, but maybe that's from watching too much Fox News. Putin invaded in 2014, and Russian troops have been in Donbas since then. Officially, they don't acknowledge it as an occupation, but that is how things worked in both Georgia and Crimea. Standard operating procedure for Putin. The so-called rebels were not an elected government, and all locally elected officials were dismissed and replaced with those favoring secession. Russia supplied weapons to the local insurgents, but they are nothing more than puppet regimes in which everyone has already been offered Russian citizenship. See  War in Donbas:

While the initial protests were largely native expressions of discontent with the new Ukrainian government, Russia took advantage of them to launch a coordinated political and military campaign against Ukraine.[32] Russian citizens led the separatist movement in Donetsk from April until August 2014, and were supported by volunteers and materiel from Russia.[33][34][35] As the conflict escalated in May 2014, Russia employed a "hybrid approach", deploying a combination of disinformation, irregular fighters, regular Russian troops, and conventional military support to destabilize the Donbas.

Russia never abided by a single item in the Minsk agreement and never removed any of its military equipment or troops, yet they continued to claim that it was the Ukrainian side alone that refused to meet their obligations under the agreement. So, once again, you are spouting a Russian narrative.

 

[zorq]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions. Neither side abided by the Minsk agreements; Ukraine kept shelling and the rebels shot back. But the end result of the war will still be the same. The US and the West should hasten diplomacy on both sides to bring this to a rapid conclusion. Yet, there is no leadership on that. And more die pointlessly

Russia continues to drop bombs on civilian targets. They are terrorists by any definition. But here we have the resident conservatives insisting that people should not resist these terrorists. People should lie down and give in to all of their demands as soon as possible, to "save lives" of course.

Are they cowards who don't have the spine to stand against the greedy murderous? Are they fools, who happily regurgitate and distribute the propaganda of terrorists who have actively declared western democracy to be their primary enemies? Are they fools, who have refused to learn lessons from history? Fools, who can't see that trying to appease a violent terrorist may save a handful of lives in exchange for countless lives thrown into jeopardy in the future?

A common theme in conservative propaganda in the US, and the west is that liberals are weak. But look here at this defeatist contingent of conservatives who insists we should let a villian take his illegitimate prize with as little resistance as possible. Conservatives who demand negotiations with terrorists. Weak. Pathetic.

Liberals aren't weak for caring about the less fortunate. Liberals aren't weak for prefering to make decisions with their heads instead of their emotions.

 

[Trausti]

14 years ago. Wow.

 

[Trausti]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions. Neither side abided by the Minsk agreements; Ukraine kept shelling and the rebels shot back. But the end result of the war will still be the same. The US and the West should hasten diplomacy on both sides to bring this to a rapid conclusion. Yet, there is no leadership on that. And more die pointlessly

Russia continues to drop bombs on civilian targets. They are terrorists by any definition. But here we have the resident conservatives insisting that people should not resist these terrorists. People should lie down and give in to all of their demands as soon as possible, to "save lives" of course.

Are they cowards who don't have the spine to stand against the greedy murderous? Are they fools, who happily regurgitate and distribute the propaganda of terrorists who have actively declared western democracy to be their primary enemies? Are they fools, who have refused to learn lessons from history? Fools, who can't see that trying to appease a violent terrorist may save a handful of lives in exchange for countless lives thrown into jeopardy in the future?

A common theme in conservative propaganda in the US, and the west is that liberals are weak. But look here at this defeatist contingent of conservatives who insists we should let a villian take his illegitimate prize with as little resistance as possible. Conservatives who demand negotiations with terrorists. Weak. Pathetic.

Liberals aren't weak for caring about the less fortunate. Liberals aren't weak for prefering to make decisions with their heads instead of their emotions.

Anti-war is conservative propaganda. Oh, my.

 

[Copernicus]

14 years ago. Wow.

And Bill Bradley was not the only politician to confuse Gorbachev, the leader of the Soviet Union, with Yeltsin, the leader of the Russian federation. Gorbachev was not talking about Russia per se, but the Soviet Union. That government collapsed and disappeared. There was no détente between the USSR and the US anymore, it was between a lot of sovereign governments, one of which included Russia, and the US and all those European governments. So the situation changed quite drastically. The Russian government was a completely different political entity that simply inherited many Soviet roles internationally, because it had dominated all of those now independent nations that emerged from the USSR. Russia inherited (albeit not actually by informal agreements) the Soviet seat on the Security Council. It also inherited debt and assets, but not all of those nuclear weapons in Ukraine. So a deal was struck WITH RUSSIA to secure those weapons, turning many of them over to the safekeeping of Russia, in return for a commitment by the Russian government to honor the sovereignty of the Ukrainian nations--the Budapest memo in 1994. Putin reneged on that agreement exactly 20 years later, but the US, UK, and Ukraine still considered it in effect.

Note that the Republicans, which included Bill Bradley, gave nonbinding verbal assurances to the Soviet Union, not Russia, that NATO would not expand. Those verbal assurances were never formalized and had never bound the actions of subsequent US administrations. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the situation changed drastically. All of those former satellite nations in the Warsaw Pact and former captive "republics" within the Soviet Union wanted NATO membership. Why? If you need someone to tell you why, you are hopeless. But I don't think you need to be told.

NATO didn't move eastward. The Warsaw Pact and Baltic republics moved westward, as quickly as they could. They wanted NATO for military defense, and Europe for economic development. Ukraine wanted that for the same reasons, but that never happened and wasn't about to happen when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. Bradley died in 1997--before Putin came to power. He never had a chance to even address the situation in 2014, let alone 2022. Russia did not invade because of NATO. It invaded, because Putin feared seeing Ukraine slide closer and closer west, just as the former Warsaw Pact nations had. Putin is a Russian ultranationalist who believes that Ukraine belongs inside of Russia. The US, western Europe, and NATO did not entice eastern European countries to join NATO. Those countries enticed NATO and Europe to let them join. Had they not been allowed to join, Russia would not just be threatening Ukraine today. It would also be threatening to annex the Baltic republics and install puppet regimes in former Warsaw Pact nations. Russia has validated their reasons for wanting to join NATO in the first place. Instead, a Russian dictator saw a Russian-speaking nation on its border suddenly developing a healthy western-style democracy, which threatened his autocratic grip on power.

 

[zorq]

Anti-war is conservative propaganda. Oh, my.

You are confused. Conservatives seems to be pro war whenever it comes to aggressive invasion of other countries. Liberals tend to oppose it.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions. Neither side abided by the Minsk agreements; Ukraine kept shelling and the rebels shot back. But the end result of the war will still be the same. The US and the West should hasten diplomacy on both sides to bring this to a rapid conclusion. Yet, there is no leadership on that. And more die pointlessly

Russia continues to drop bombs on civilian targets. They are terrorists by any definition. But here we have the resident conservatives insisting that people should not resist these terrorists. People should lie down and give in to all of their demands as soon as possible, to "save lives" of course.

Are they cowards who don't have the spine to stand against the greedy murderous? Are they fools, who happily regurgitate and distribute the propaganda of terrorists who have actively declared western democracy to be their primary enemies? Are they fools, who have refused to learn lessons from history? Fools, who can't see that trying to appease a violent terrorist may save a handful of lives in exchange for countless lives thrown into jeopardy in the future?

A common theme in conservative propaganda in the US, and the west is that liberals are weak. But look here at this defeatist contingent of conservatives who insists we should let a villian take his illegitimate prize with as little resistance as possible. Conservatives who demand negotiations with terrorists. Weak. Pathetic.

Liberals aren't weak for caring about the less fortunate. Liberals aren't weak for prefering to make decisions with their heads instead of their emotions.

Anti-war is conservative propaganda. Oh, my.

You aren't anti war. Your post copies word per word the propaganda that Putin puts out. Word for word.

 

[laughing dog]

Recall that after a few weeks of military action in Libya, and the US became concerned about their reserves of smart weapons. So I’m skeptical that Russia can sustain this offensive for several months without serious risk.

It doesn’t need to. This isn’t a war of conquest or extermination. This is a punitive incursion to force Ukraine to accept terms Russia has openly stated. The Ukrainians may be able to hold off further Russian advancement - there are logistical and supply issues - but can they retake what Russia gained? No. This war started eight years ago and will end as it began: Crimea and the breakway Donbas regions to Russia and no NATO. All of the death and destruction is so pointless.

Fascinating how TDS makes one so knowledgeable about Russian intent and strategy while being completely clueless about the facts on the ground.

 

[Elixir]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions.

You aren't anti war. Your post copies word per word the propaganda that Putin puts out. Word for word.

QFT.
Even as it is stunning that a presumed American would side with the commie dictator, It is kinda perplexing that the qball doesn't think anyone would recognize his Putin-parroting as such. Must think nobody is paying any attention whatsoever to what Pootey says, and quoting him virtually verbatim would make the qball sound smart.

Anti-war is conservative propaganda. Oh, my.

You are confused. Conservatives seems to be pro war whenever it comes to aggressive invasion of other countries.

Did you forget? The Pootey Party Line is that Ukraine is not another country, it's just a part of Russia full of Russians held at gunpoint and being forced by the Nazis to decry poor Pootey. But his Special Rescue Operation will set them free and they will thank their liberators!
Trump and his suckers shall rejoice!

 

[steve_bank]

It was pretty clear when Putin said Ukraine does not exist as a country and was 'just a territory', meaning open for conquest. He tore up the agreement guaranteeing the integrity of Ukraine in exchange for giving up nukes.

For Putin it is economic Russian Federation vs EU and USA. The conflict started when Ukraine decoded to align with the west and EU. Putin sanctioned Ukraine on natural gas.

Crimea was always Russian.
Ukraine was always Russian.
Ukraine wants to be under Russia. Everybody wants to be under Russia.

A dictator's delusions of grandeur supported by conquest. An ancient narrative.

When China found resources in Tibet it declared Tibet was always part of China citing some shaky history. Nobody cares about Tibet. China says Taiwan is part of China and did make a claim to Okinawa. Chinese leaders want to regain its ancient sense of empire and grandeur.

China says it will invade Taiwan if it formally declares independence from China.

Hussein invaded Kuwait saying historically it was part of Persia.

And Israel declares a right to colonize the West Bank because Jews were there 2000 years ago. Like Tibet in the end nobody really cares about Palestinians.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Putin didn’t invade the Donbas in 2014. Those were breakaway ethnically Russian regions. Neither side abided by the Minsk agreements; Ukraine kept shelling and the rebels shot back. But the end result of the war will still be the same. The US and the West should hasten diplomacy on both sides to bring this to a rapid conclusion. Yet, there is no leadership on that. And more die pointlessly

Russia continues to drop bombs on civilian targets. They are terrorists by any definition. But here we have the resident conservatives insisting that people should not resist these terrorists. People should lie down and give in to all of their demands as soon as possible, to "save lives" of course.

Are they cowards who don't have the spine to stand against the greedy murderous? Are they fools, who happily regurgitate and distribute the propaganda of terrorists who have actively declared western democracy to be their primary enemies? Are they fools, who have refused to learn lessons from history? Fools, who can't see that trying to appease a violent terrorist may save a handful of lives in exchange for countless lives thrown into jeopardy in the future?

A common theme in conservative propaganda in the US, and the west is that liberals are weak. But look here at this defeatist contingent of conservatives who insists we should let a villian take his illegitimate prize with as little resistance as possible. Conservatives who demand negotiations with terrorists. Weak. Pathetic.

Liberals aren't weak for caring about the less fortunate. Liberals aren't weak for prefering to make decisions with their heads instead of their emotions.

Anti-war is conservative propaganda. Oh, my.

Standard trausti conservative response, aka no response because they know they've been owned.

 

[Trausti]

Neocons gonna be mad.

Ukraine and Russia explore neutrality plan in peace talks

Ukraine and Russia have made significant progress on a tentative peace plan including a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declares neutrality and accepts limits on its armed forces, according to five people briefed on the talks.

 

[ZiprHead]

NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein

NUKEMAP is a website for visualizing the effects of nuclear detonations.

nuclearsecrecy.com

Neat little website. See what it's like to destroy your home town.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Neocons gonna be mad.

Ukraine and Russia explore neutrality plan in peace talks

Ukraine and Russia have made significant progress on a tentative peace plan including a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declares neutrality and accepts limits on its armed forces, according to five people briefed on the talks.

Wait until the part about Russia not willing to pay for damages and loss to life. And any other number of stalling tactics. Russia is currently murdering Ukrainians as they negotiate for peace, from their invasion of Ukraine.

On the other hand, if Russia is pulling closer towards a "peace" deal, Xi might have called Putin and told him he is on his own, which would likely be keystone lost for Russia "winning" Ukraine.

 

[ZiprHead]

War in Ukraine: Camera drone captures killing of civilian

According to a ZDF Frontal investigation, a camera drone observed the killing of a civilian by Russian soldiers near Kiev.

www.zdf.de

Drone video shows Russian soldiers killing a civilian.

 

[Jayjay]

Neocons gonna be mad.

Ukraine and Russia explore neutrality plan in peace talks

Ukraine and Russia have made significant progress on a tentative peace plan including a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declares neutrality and accepts limits on its armed forces, according to five people briefed on the talks.

According to Zelensky's adviser, the leaked 15-point plan was only the Russian proposal:



Either Russia is scared and is willing to compromise, or this is just a delaying tactic while they try to get their shit together, nobody knows.

 

[Elixir]

Either Russia is scared and is willing to compromise, or this is just a delaying tactic while they try to get their shit together, nobody knows.

Probably both. Delay while pretending to negotiate. If the delay pans out, laugh at the fools who tried to negotiate with you. If the delay leaves you in the same or a worse situation, cry about how you tried to negotiate.

 

[ZiprHead]

Russia's state TV hit by stream of resignations

Marina Ovsyannikova's protest highlighted a growing number of journalists leaving their jobs at Kremlin-run TV channels.

www.bbc.com

Russia's state-run channels are required to toe the Kremlin line, so who has quit in response to the war?
Hours after Marina Ovsyannikova's on-screen protest, three resignations came to light.
Channel One colleague Zhanna Agalakova quit her job as Europe correspondent while two journalists have left rival NTV. Lilia Gildeyeva had worked for the channel as a presenter since 2006 and Vadim Glusker had been at NTV for almost 30 years.

Rumours abound that journalists have also headed for the door at All-Russia state TV group VGTRK.

Journalist Roman Super said people were quitting its Vesti news stable en masse, although that has not been confirmed. However, renowned TV host Sergey Brilev quashed reports that he had resigned, pointing out he has been on a business trip for more than a week.

Maria Baronova is the highest-profile resignation at RT, formerly known as Russia Today. Former chief editor at RT, she told the BBC's Steve Rosenberg this month Mr Putin had already destroyed Russia's reputation and that the economy was dead too.

A number of other RT journalists have also resigned, including non-Russian journalists working for its language services.

Former London correspondent Shadia Edwards-Dashti announced her resignation on the day Russia invaded Ukraine without giving a reason. Moscow-based journalist Jonny Tickle quit on the same day "in light of recent events".

French RT presenter Frédéric Taddeï said he was leaving his show because France was "in open conflict" with Russia and he could not continue to host his programme Forbidden to Forbid "out of loyalty to my country".

Days later, the EU said it was banning all of RT's various outlets as well as those of fellow Kremlin outlet Sputnik for their "campaign of disinformation, information manipulation and distortion of facts". Russia's German-based state news agency Ruptly has also endured a spate of resignations, according to Reuters news agency.

Russia's non-Kremlin media have come under repeated attack for years, so many journalists who have worked under constant threat of losing their livelihoods at independent outlets will be unimpressed by the current crop of resignations. Some have been hit with the Soviet-era label of foreign agent.

Dozhd (TV Rain), which was forced off mainstream TV in 2014, has had to halt its online broadcasts because of the Ukraine invasion and a number of its journalists have fled Russia for their safety.

Radio Ekho Moskvy has also been taken of the air amid Russia's new legislation on so-called false information. BBC Russian is among a number of Western outlets that have been banned, while journalists working for Latvia-based Meduza were forced out of Russia.

It is not just journalists who have disappeared from state TV.

One of Russia's biggest talk show hosts, Ivan Urgant, has taken a break from his prime-time Evening Urgant show on Russia's second biggest channel, Channel One, the same station as Marina Ovsyannikova.

He reacted to the war by posting a black square on his Instagram account with the simple message: "Fear and pain. No War." He has since told his followers not to panic, and that he's taken a holiday and will be back soon.

Russia's number one celebrity couple Alla Pugacheva and Maxim Galkin are among a number of other showbiz figures who have also gone on holiday. Galkin said on Instagram: "There can be no justification for war! No War!"