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

[Harry Bosch]

One thing Putin has accomplished is that Ukranians will hate and despise Russia for many decades with a white hot fury. I forsee a long term de-Russiafication taking place in Ukraine. The realization that they cannot tolerate culturally Russian citizens that Russia can use as an excuse to annex or subjugate Ukraine. The desire to exit the Russian sphere of influence will be very strong in Ukraine.

I think that Ukraine will hate and despise Russia for generations. I’ll never forget being stationed in Germany in the early 1980’s. We travelled all over Europe in rented German cars. We’d get constant dirty looks, the middle finger and etc from people assuming we were German guys on vacation. Then they’d see we were Americans, and they’d apologize. Europeans were resentful of German aggression a generation later.

 

[SLD]

I appreciate Jayiay’s cautious interpretation of these things - and at the same time, I am hoping so much for success for Ukraine that I feel good when I read them, too. Even though I’m subsequently reminded to not be unrealistically optimistic.

No need to be cautious. 100% of the western coverage are utter lies.
Well, some of them which hint that Ukraine might be in deep shit are 99% lies.
It's actually amazing how in the same article they can say "Ukraine is winning!" but if you read carefully you come to completely opposite conclusion.

I suspect some of the media monkeys are seeing the end and preparing for it.

So, getting your ass handed to you around Kiev, getting your flagship Blown out of the water, getting kicked out of Kharkiv, and pushed out of Kherson, is Russia winning? Seriously, how does it feel to get your ass kicked by the cunt?

You're still bitching about March 2022, after 150K dead ukrainian soldiers.
You are not winning.

Kharkiv happened in September, and Kherson was in November. Can you name a single major victory by Russian forces since, say, April?

seriously, what does this mean by winning? You’ve been getting your ass handed to you by some you refer to as a clown and a cunt. If I were a Russian, I’d be ashamed of my armed forces. They suck. At least the Germans can brag that they initially conquered most all of Europe before the Allies finally got their shit together.

 

[SLD]

Pootey isn't going to risk turning the Kremlin into a sheet of glass.

I wish I were so confident.

How do you think WWII would have ended if Hitler had nukes?
Tom

I think that would have depended on whether his opponents also had nukes.
Do you think he'd have gone setting them off willy nilly if he was subject to reciprocal treatment?

Right before he committed suicide? Yes. I'm confident he would have done it.
Tom

I might agree, if Hitler had had a nuclear arsenal capable of ending civilization as we know it. Pootey has that on paper (most of them might not work at all), but I don't believe he has the inclination (he is obviously concerned with his legacy - or what's left of it), nor that his minions would carry out any such instruction knowing that they'd be among the first to be vaporized. In any event, it IS going to come to calling his bluff one way or another.

Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons for fear of allied reprisals.

It’s possible that Putin wouldn’t Either, even if he were threatened with invasion. But not a risk I’d like to take.

 

[lpetrich]

Why Zelensky, the anti-showman, is such an effective politician. - "It’s his performance of the mundane that makes his politics so effective."

The best part of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s address to Congress on Wednesday was not, in my opinion, the speech (good) or the response (also good) or even the near-sweatsuit he donned for the occasion (very effective). It was instead a series of small incidents that took place when he presented the Ukrainian flag to Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Zelensky had explained the flag’s significance—it was taken from a battle in Bakhmut—with propriety and pomp, just before the handoff. But then efficiency overtook him. He removed the flag from a folder and shook it out like laundry. He checked, looking behind and in front of it to ensure it faced the right way, then handed a crumpled middle bit of it up to Pelosi. She accepted it as he sort of tiptoed higher to shake her hand and deliver a cheek kiss. When Pelosi presented the American flag to him in return, practical considerations once again trumped ceremony: The U.S. flag was folded into a big glass presentation case (triangular, cumbersome), so Zelensky reached for it. “I can hold,” he said, reaching out to relieve her as if it were a bag of groceries.

A few folks chuckled at this; that sprinkle of amateurish goodwill elevated the moment above the rote choreography that characterizes so much of our political theater. The solemn exchange of symbols seemed warmer and more human than it would have if all had gone off without a hitch. Sometimes a gesture, because it is not smooth, seems more genuine.

This is Zelensky’s gift. If there’s such a thing as political sprezzatura—the art of seeming unstudied, natural, spontaneous—he has mastered it.

He knows that he needs all the help he can get, I'm sure, especially from deep-pocketed nations with big military-industrial complexes.

 

[Jayjay]

"Anti-showman"? Please. If Zelensky is something, he is a showman. A very good one. That's why he's running circles around pretty much every other world leader right now.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Why Zelensky, the anti-showman, is such an effective politician.

It's a good lesson. When you're sick of politicians. When you decidedly want someone in office who is not a politician, go with a comedian, not a clown.

 

[lpetrich]

Zelenskyy visit exposes a GOP rift — between actual fascists and everyone else | Salon.com - "Too many Republicans still refuse to stand up for Ukraine — and for democracy — against their MAGA brethren" - by Amanda Marcotte

About VZ's speech:

It was also persuasive on the brass tacks arguments. Military aid to Ukraine is "not charity," he argued, but "an investment in global security and democracy."

As Fred Kaplan at Slate argued, the speech "was a resounding success" that circumvented Republicans who previously had made noises about cutting aid to Ukraine. The Senate approved $44.9 billion in military, humanitarian and economic aid to Ukraine on Thursday afternoon, as part of a $1.7 trillion government spending bill that passed 68-29, and is expected to pass the House as well.

It passed the House also.

Zelenskyy's argument that Ukraine's victory is necessary to protect global democracy is hard to argue against. Especially in recent years, Putin has not hidden his contempt for Western-style democracy or desire to see it collapse around the globe. Even with all the caveats and nuances one could possibly inject into this, the "bad guys" and "good guys" are crystal clear in this scenario.

Like World War II, where Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were very obvious villains.

Except, that is, to some Republicans in Congress and a number right-wing pundits. That world is not just anti-Zelenskyy, but imbued with such vicious sentiments that even the most jaded political watchers were shocked. This isn't just about arguments over whether aid to Ukraine is being well spent, or about whether Ukraine is strategically crucial to U.S. interests. This was about full-on vitriol, to the point where even Republicans who are open to cutting aid to Ukraine were made uncomfortable.

I'm still baffled by this hostility, because it is the opposite of the side their predecessors took a half-century ago. If they were like those predecessors, they would make a big issue about how they want to keep Ukraine from becoming a "captive nation" again. Not only is it a complete flip, it is an unacknowledged flip. They aren't even bothered by Vladimir Putin's history as a KGB agent.

Right after Zelenskyy's speech to Congress, Tucker Carlson of Fox News described him as a "Ukrainian strip club manager" and falsely said that Ukraine had been the aggressor, portraying Putin as the victim of a Ukrainian plot to "topple the Russian government." He also echoed the antisemitic talking points the Russian government has deployed against Zelenskyy, who is Jewish, by accusing him of waging "ongoing war against Christianity."

Would his predecessors have taken the side of the Soviet Union when it invaded Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, or Afghanistan in 1979?

Jesse Watters of Fox News also rolled out the Russia-as-victim line, saying that Zelenskyy was "charming, but he's a killer" motivated by "vengeance."

Turning Points USA founder Charlie Kirk called Zelenskyy an "uppity foreigner" and an "international welfare queen." Over the weekend, his group had a conference where the keynote speaker on Sunday, defeated Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, bragged that she was "a proud election-denying deplorable." Donald Trump Jr., unoriginal thinker to the end, also used the "international welfare queen" slur.

 

[lpetrich]

Most Republicans applauded VZ.

But a few notable Republican members made a big show out of spurning Zelenskyy, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who called him the "shadow president," eyebrow-raising talk from a woman who has repeatedly dabbled in antisemitic conspiracy theories. Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Lauren Boebert of Colorado made a big show both of refusing a security screening and of staring at their phones instead of listening to Zelenskyy's speech. Sen Josh Hawley of Missouri, like Greene, refused even to show up.

Amanda Marcotte then speculated about why that might be.

It's not surprising that the Republicans who opposed Zelenskyy happen to be among the biggest apologists for the Jan. 6 insurrection and the Trump movement's other assaults on democracy. Whatever hand-waving excuses are being employed, it's obvious that their loathing for Ukraine and its president is ideological, rooted in the same distaste for democracy that led Putin to invade in the first place. That also helps explain why they don't seem worried about taking an unpopular stand against an embattled nation the whole world has embraced. Opposing democracy, after all, is about the desire to enact and enforce your political will, regardless of public opinion.

AM then noted some Republicans' odd embrace of fiscal conservatism about Ukraine.

Most Republican politicians didn't act like jerks while Zelenskyy was speaking, but they're making noises about how he needs "accountability" and "scrutiny" if he wants more money. Or, in the case of the presumptive House speaker, Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California, they say that Ukraine doesn't deserve a "blank check," which, of course, it has never been offered. Those objections may sound reasonable at first, but they fall apart if you actually devote some thought to them. Since when have any Republicans supported constraints on military spending? Every single GOP member who suddenly wants to talk about fiscal responsibility wanted to continue the pointless, expensive and unwinnable war in Afghanistan.

As she notes, why Ukraine and not anywhere else?

 

[Tigers!]

How long before Zelenskyy needs to face the electorate again? Can he stay on as president of Ukraine? Would a successor continue fighting or come to some "treaty" with Putin?

 

[Jayjay]

How long before Zelenskyy needs to face the electorate again?

2024.

Can he stay on as president of Ukraine? Would a successor continue fighting or come to some "treaty" with Putin?

Ukraine has a two-term limit for presidents, and Zelensky is on his first term now, so he can run again. But if the war is still a stalemate at that time, I'm guessing a large portion of Ukrainians are going to be sick and tired of it and would vote for whoever promises to cut a deal. That candidate could also be Zelensky.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Ukraine has a two-term limit for presidents, and Zelensky is on his first term now, so he can run again. But if the war is still a stalemate at that time, I'm guessing a large portion of Ukrainians are going to be sick and tired of it and would vote for whoever promises to cut a deal. That candidate could also be Zelensky.

If polls can be believed Zelensky would win reelection easily as Ukrainians support him in his war efforts. He may dud after the fighting is over like Churchill did but he is presently very popular.

 

[Harry Bosch]

How long before Zelenskyy needs to face the electorate again?

2024.

Can he stay on as president of Ukraine? Would a successor continue fighting or come to some "treaty" with Putin?

Ukraine has a two-term limit for presidents, and Zelensky is on his first term now, so he can run again. But if the war is still a stalemate at that time, I'm guessing a large portion of Ukrainians are going to be sick and tired of it and would vote for whoever promises to cut a deal. That candidate could also be Zelensky.

I'm sure that Ukrainians are tired of the war. But they seem to be very motivated. The problem with "cutting a deal" is that how could they trust Russia to fulfill any deal?

 

[Harry Bosch]

Necessary for what? Your side has lost Ukraine. They will be part of NATO someday.

Necessary for regime change, unconditional surrender, full occupation, etc.
Ukraine will never be part of NATO, maybe Western Ukraine when it's occupied by Poland, but Ukraine will never be part of NATO. NATO dissolution is more likely.

It's important to note that while Putler asks for "peace negotiations", he tells the Russian people that peace with Ukraine will require Ukraine to unconditionally surrender, allow full Russian occupation, and Ukraine regime change for Russian puppet. This is obviously something that Ukrainians will not accept.

 

[Jayjay]

How long before Zelenskyy needs to face the electorate again?

2024.

Can he stay on as president of Ukraine? Would a successor continue fighting or come to some "treaty" with Putin?

Ukraine has a two-term limit for presidents, and Zelensky is on his first term now, so he can run again. But if the war is still a stalemate at that time, I'm guessing a large portion of Ukrainians are going to be sick and tired of it and would vote for whoever promises to cut a deal. That candidate could also be Zelensky.

I'm sure that Ukrainians are tired of the war. But they seem to be very motivated. The problem with "cutting a deal" is that how could they trust Russia to fulfill any deal?

A lot can happen in a year. I think 2023 is going to be a stalemate, and if Ukraine doesn't get tired of the war, its western allies will.

But I could be wrong and maybe Ukraine can make a breakthrough.

Or maybe Russia will get the upper hand and force Ukraine into an interim peace somehow.

 

[Harry Bosch]

How long before Zelenskyy needs to face the electorate again?

2024.

Can he stay on as president of Ukraine? Would a successor continue fighting or come to some "treaty" with Putin?

Ukraine has a two-term limit for presidents, and Zelensky is on his first term now, so he can run again. But if the war is still a stalemate at that time, I'm guessing a large portion of Ukrainians are going to be sick and tired of it and would vote for whoever promises to cut a deal. That candidate could also be Zelensky.

I'm sure that Ukrainians are tired of the war. But they seem to be very motivated. The problem with "cutting a deal" is that how could they trust Russia to fulfill any deal?

A lot can happen in a year. I think 2023 is going to be a stalemate, and if Ukraine doesn't get tired of the war, its western allies will.

But I could be wrong and maybe Ukraine can make a breakthrough.

Or maybe Russia will get the upper hand and force Ukraine into an interim peace somehow.

I'm sure that Ukraine is very tired over the war (to say the least). And I know that the west would love for it to be over. I predict that wall street will gain 1,000 points on the day when the war is declared over. But what choice does Ukraine have? No country in its right mind would ever consent to allowing the Russian army to fully occupy its country. We've already seen what Russia will do. The Russians will loot, kill, and rape the country. No country would voluntarily allow this just to avoid a stalemate.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm sure that Ukraine is very tired over the war (to say the least). And I know that the west would love for it to be over. I predict that wall street will gain 1,000 points on the day when the war is declared over. But what choice does Ukraine have? No country in its right mind would ever consent to allowing the Russian army to fully occupy its country. We've already seen what Russia will do. The Russians will loot, kill, and rape the country. No country would voluntarily allow this just to avoid a stalemate

That is so spot on. Regardless any assurances to the contrary Ukraine can be assured that Pootang and his emasculated lackeys will continue in their terror. Ukraine has absolutely no choice but to continue to resist, no matter what, so long as the Putinistas are across the border. For Ukraine, Russian occupation is presently worse than death.

 

[Thomas II]

I'm sure that Ukraine is very tired over the war (to say the least). And I know that the west would love for it to be over. I predict that wall street will gain 1,000 points on the day when the war is declared over. But what choice does Ukraine have? No country in its right mind would ever consent to allowing the Russian army to fully occupy its country. We've already seen what Russia will do. The Russians will loot, kill, and rape the country. No country would voluntarily allow this just to avoid a stalemate

That is so spot on. Regardless any assurances to the contrary Ukraine can be assured that Pootang and his emasculated lackeys will continue in their terror. Ukraine has absolutely no choice but to continue to resist, no matter what, so long as the Putinistas are across the border. For Ukraine, Russian occupation is presently worse than death.

 

[Copernicus]

Apparently, a HIMARS strike on a Russian ammunition dump in occupied Donetsk killed and wounded hundreds of Russian soldiers, mostly conscripts. The Russian press is blaming this on the stupidity of locating a barracks near an ammunition dump that was known to be within range of Ukrainian missiles. More Russian families lose their sons to satisfy Putin's lust for conquest.

Anger in Russia as scores of troops killed in one of war's deadliest strikes​

 

[TV and credit cards]

.

Apparently, a HIMARS strike on a Russian ammunition dump in occupied Donetsk killed and wounded hundreds of Russian soldiers, mostly conscripts. The Russian press is blaming this on the stupidity of locating a barracks near an ammunition dump that was known to be within range of Ukrainian missiles. More Russian families lose their sons to satisfy Putin's lust for conquest.

Anger in Russia as scores of troops killed in one of war's deadliest strikes​

Sergei Mironov, a legislator and former chairman of the Senate, Russia's upper house, demanded criminal liability for the officials who had "allowed the concentration of military personnel in an unprotected building" and "all the higher authorities who did not provide the proper level of security".

And replace them with who(m)? The reason this happened in the first place is Russia is scraping the bottom of the barrel for leadership.
It's a shame this had to happen. It's a shame they had to be there in the first place. But, them's the breaks.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm sure that Ukraine is very tired over the war (to say the least). And I know that the west would love for it to be over. I predict that wall street will gain 1,000 points on the day when the war is declared over. But what choice does Ukraine have? No country in its right mind would ever consent to allowing the Russian army to fully occupy its country. We've already seen what Russia will do. The Russians will loot, kill, and rape the country. No country would voluntarily allow this just to avoid a stalemate

That is so spot on. Regardless any assurances to the contrary Ukraine can be assured that Pootang and his emasculated lackeys will continue in their terror. Ukraine has absolutely no choice but to continue to resist, no matter what, so long as the Putinistas are across the border. For Ukraine, Russian occupation is presently worse than death.

Never realized I was channeling John McCain when it came to understanding Pootang's imperialist ambitions and his penchant for exploiting weakness among his adversaries. No surprise really as this is and has always been KGB 101. McCain as a fellow veteran obviously understood this aspect of the situation perfectly.