• Bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The sadistic clown gets more and more pathetic…

    No negotiations until we get Crimea back.

    Ok we won’t get Crimea. But no negotiatians until we get back to 2022 borders.

    Ok we won’t get back to 2022 borders. But no negotiations until someone makes Putin negotiate with me (???).


    Turning Ukrainians into slaves who cannot leave the country are kidnapped off the streets and sent to die the most horrible deaths in the meatgrinder? Yes that’s totally legal and absolutely moral, why are you even asking?

    Making peace with Russia by admitting you lost the war to save hundreds of thousands of lives? That’s like the most illegal and horrible thing ever.

  • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Well Ukraine got worn out over last 2 years with spotty western support and weird restrictions on weapons usage.

    This is where the west wanted Ukraine. So here we are.

    Russia is weakened so west and US got what they wanted it so now we are ready to do a deal.

    Nobody will ever give up nukes after this and many countries are going to be getting their nukes in order as that is the only way to properly secure sovereignty and territorial integrity.

    Coupled with Israel behavior undermining “rules” based international order, this is the brave new world we got.

    Cheers.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      In what way is Russia weakened?

      Last I checked, mainstream western sources report that Russian economy is booming. For example, the World Bank just reclassified Russia as a high income country https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/world-bank-country-classifications-by-income-level-for-2024-2025

      The IMF forecasts that Russian economy is set to grow faster than all the western economies https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/17/russia-forecast-to-grow-faster-than-advanced-economies-in-2024-imf.html

      Russian oil and gas revenues soared 41% in first half of the year, as the data shows https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russian-oil-gas-revenue-soars-41-first-half-data-shows-2024-07-03/

      Russian military is stronger today than at the start of the war https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/ukraine-krieg-nato-oberbefehlshaber-und-generalinspekteur-ueber-folgen-und-perspektiven-a-9cb8d225-8bd8-454d-830d-009c9f46dfc9#selection-791.0-791.81

      The number of Russian troops is constantly increasing https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/12/17/ukraine-s-top-general-to-le-monde-the-number-of-russian-troops-is-constantly-increasing_6736188_4.html

      Russian MIC is outproducing the west. For example, Russia is able to produce 3x as many artillery shells as all of the west combined https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html

    • Grapho@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The restrictions aren’t “weird”. These are weapons that need satellite guidance from NATO satellites and stockpiled at NATO bases.

      If they started being fired en masse, Russia would need to disable those satellites, and the US only instigated this war to weaken Russia and prevent it from arming anti imperialist resistance groups in the middle east. It’s not interested in actually fighting, because fighting an organized army is much harder, much costlier, and carries more risk than invading Asian countries with peasant militias.

      • Hawke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        US only instigated this war to weaken Russia

        Well, that’s certainly a perspective.

        Really unclear how the US forced Russia to invade, you’ll have to explain that part I think.

        • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The war exists only because Russia’s conditions for peace are not accepted. No NATO (or missile bases) in Ukraine. There was a very patient peace agenda by Russia, signed by the west and Ukraine btw, before SMO.

          • Hawke@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The war exists because Russia invaded. You can’t have a “peace agenda” or “conditions for peace” until someone started a war in the first place, and that was Russia.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is where the west wanted Ukraine. So here we are.

      Russia is weakened so west and US got what they wanted it so now we are ready to do a deal.

      What the West wanted ideally was the balkanization and re-neocolonialization of Russia. https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/04/17/the-west-is-preparing-for-russias-disintegration/

      The “weakening” of Russia is what they considered “second prize,” but they didn’t even get that, because Russia is now stronger. The sanctions have backfired. Russia has severed its ties with the “garden” and strengthened its ties to the “jungle.”

      • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Unlikely. If the west was pushing to destroy Russia they would have provided Ukraine with adequate arms to do so. They deliberately created a drawn out long conflict. Whether Russia has been weakened as they hoped is debateable. It does not yet appear so.

        • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          They wanted to destroy Russia economically, not militarily, you know, the usual “bog them in forever war and sanction them to death because we control the world finance systems” and it had a good chance of success, but they miscalculated since Russia relations with China and global south in general proven to be much more robust. It was also first time after 1991 so many countries just told US “no” when they demanded another country be destroyed economically. As result BRICS managed to build their own alternative for US controlled finance system, which is pretty ad hoc by now, but it already works and is being strenghtened.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          People planning this stuff aren’t idiots and they knew that there was no scenario that Ukraine could defeat Russia militarily no matter what weapons they provided. For example, back in 2016, Obama declared Ukraine to be not a core American interest and that he is reluctant to intervene in the country, because Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there.

          I don’t think their goal was to create a drawn out conflict however. The idea was to use Ukraine as fodder and then break Russia economically. Western planners fundamentally misunderstood the nature of Russian economy, and thought that it would collapse after they froze Russian foreign assets and put sanctions on. Not only did that not happen, but major countries like China and India snubbed the west and continued trade with Russia. That’s where the whole hare brained scheme started to come apart, but the time this became obvious the west was already too invested to pull back.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The Americs really pushing Zelensky to not accept the ceasefire in 2022 is what mostly made me think they did not plan for victory. There were no new plans afterwards and it has been meat grinder ever since.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              It’s bewildering to me that they didn’t have a backup plan. Like they just banked everything on Russian economy collapsing, and when that didn’t happen they just kept doubling down instead of adjusting the strategy.

              • Grapho@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Realistically, what other plan could they have? They’ve used the same playbook since Vietnam and sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but since it always funnels a shit ton of money to the pentagon and its contractors pumps the value of the dollar nobody gives a shit, it was a success by the only metric they care about.

        • lorty@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Their industry has been slowly decaying over the years and can’t adequately supply Ukraine in a long, drawn out conflict without jeopardizing their own defense. The amount of equipment Ukraine received at the first few months of the conflict was staggering, but most of it was from stockpiles built over years. Russia ramped up their industry a lot during the war and is outproducing the west, so it’s no wonder they are winning.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Not really. Only recently have they started sending modern long range missiles and semi modern fighter jets to Ukraine. Those were available since the start.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Things like missiles and fighter jets aren’t instrumental in this conflict. If they were, then Russia would’ve won a long time ago because they’ve always had a massive superiority in both. This is primarily a war of attrition with 80% of casualties coming from artillery battles. The problem the west has is that it’s simply not capable of producing things like artillery shells at the rate they’re consumed.

              • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                True but that is because both sides are mostly doing the field battle thing like they did in the 1700 instead of trying to blow up all civilian infrastructure of the other party America style. Which Ukraine cannot do much because they would get nuked. And Russia so far has not done much either.

                The entire war there is just very weird. There is no way for Ukraine to win besides getting nukes or somehow destroying all Russian oil without getting nuked. And both are basically impossible.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  It’s worth noting that Russia has largely dismantled Ukrainian power grid at this point. However, it very much looks like Russia is focusing on destroying the army itself first and foremost. I agree that it is absolutely illogical for the west to prolong the war at this point as it’s becoming clear that Russia has won, and that the economic blow back for the west is worse than it is for Russia. The west is falling for the sunk cost fallacy here.

        • Grapho@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The west has to balance providing adequate arms and not getting bombed/invaded themselves. They only do invasions on enemies they think can’t defend themselves.

          They thought the sanctions would do to Russia what it did to Libya, Venezuela, Iraq, and many others, and that they’d only need to drag this one out to win it on the economic rather than the military front. That obviously hasn’t worked, so rather than broker the peace talks a majority of Ukrainians want, they’re escalating because they don’t know how to do diplomacy, they only know how to do extortion. They’re talking about “negotiating from strength” ffs.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            If Russia was ever truly pushed to the brink Russia could always nuke Ukraine. There is no real way to win against nukes besides giving Ukraine their nukes back because America did not hold up their end of the nuclear deal.

  • LePoisson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    You understand that just posting a bunch of bullshit links with bad takes doesn’t make it true.

  • wieson@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s not necessary to reclaim every kilometre with fighting. If Russia is brought to it’s knees financially, the peace can still be achieved.

    Just look at ww1. For its entirety, the front was in France and Belgium and Germany held french territory. They still lost. And the Atlantic blockade and sanctions were a big part of that.