Jump to content

Ukraine 14 - Back to the Mud


Maithanet
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Have they pushed the center of Kharkiv out of artillery range yet?

It's too close to the border for that, they can shell it from within Russia.

I'm guessing this was either an attempt to gain some breathing room and secure their flank for future operations towards east, or simply an attack of opportunity after sensing that local Russian forces were weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, SpaceChampion said:

 

Yeah, a similar thought went through my head lately as well. I think there are some legitimately terrified of escalation and really just want the war to stop with all means, even if this means throwing Ukraine under the bus. But with those who argue with the same arguments even though they seem much more rational about it, I keep wondering how much they are trying to rationalize their own cowardice. They, too, want the war to stop at all costs, but they go about it saying "I'm not saying this because I'm a coward, but because I have principles, unlike you guys!" They want to do nothing and feel morally superior about it. Maybe some genuinely think they see a way that doesn't involve weapons and deaths and anyone else has gone crazy advocating for war, from their POV that is, but I wonder how much of that is just the end result of rationalizing away their stance of complete risk avoidance.

The odd thing is that I myself see myself as something of a pacifist, which is why I'm doubly irritated that their version of pacifism somehow denies the right to self-defense in a war that may target another country, but is actually intended at us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Toth said:

Yeah, a similar thought went through my head lately as well. I think there are some legitimately terrified of escalation and really just want the war to stop with all means, even if this means throwing Ukraine under the bus. But with those who argue with the same arguments even though they seem much more rational about it, I keep wondering how much they are trying to rationalize their own cowardice. They, too, want the war to stop at all costs, but they go about it saying "I'm not saying this because I'm a coward, but because I have principles, unlike you guys!" They want to do nothing and feel morally superior about it. Maybe some genuinely think they see a way that doesn't involve weapons and deaths and anyone else has gone crazy advocating for war, from their POV that is, but I wonder how much of that is just the end result of rationalizing away their stance of complete risk avoidance.

The odd thing is that I myself see myself as something of a pacifist, which is why I'm doubly irritated that their version of pacifism somehow denies the right to self-defense in a war that may target another country, but is actually intended at us.

Not everyone's motives are pure.

An example: The Guardian recently published an opinion piece with a title "Further arming Ukraine will only destroy it. The west must act to end this war now". OK, I disagree with this, but it's a free society and people are entitled to different opinions, right?

Then, when you Google the author of that article (Angus Roxburgh), you find that he literally worked as a PR for the Russian government, and that he published a fawning book about Putin titled "The Strongman". Huh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Toth said:

Yeah, a similar thought went through my head lately as well. I think there are some legitimately terrified of escalation and really just want the war to stop with all means, even if this means throwing Ukraine under the bus. But with those who argue with the same arguments even though they seem much more rational about it, I keep wondering how much they are trying to rationalize their own cowardice. They, too, want the war to stop at all costs, but they go about it saying "I'm not saying this because I'm a coward, but because I have principles, unlike you guys!" They want to do nothing and feel morally superior about it. Maybe some genuinely think they see a way that doesn't involve weapons and deaths and anyone else has gone crazy advocating for war, from their POV that is, but I wonder how much of that is just the end result of rationalizing away their stance of complete risk avoidance.

The odd thing is that I myself see myself as something of a pacifist, which is why I'm doubly irritated that their version of pacifism somehow denies the right to self-defense in a war that may target another country, but is actually intended at us.

If they argued Ghandi’s position that they should refuse ro fight and refuse to comply with invaders demands they’d have more credibility.  They, appear, to argue in favor of capitulation and hoping real hard the Russians are nicer than they seem…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WaPo article about elite reaction within Russia to the Ukraine invasion.

Quote

Even as opinion polls report overwhelming public support for the military campaign, amid pervasive state propaganda and new laws outlawing criticism of the war, cracks are starting to show. The dividing lines among factions of the Russian economic elite are becoming more marked, and some of the tycoons — especially those who made their fortunes before President Vladimir Putin came to power — have begun, tentatively, to speak.

 

For many, the most immediate focus has been their own woes. Sweeping sanctions imposed by the West have brought down a new iron curtain on the Russian economy, freezing tens of billions of dollars of many of the tycoons’ assets along the way.

 

“In one day, they destroyed what was built over many years. It’s a catastrophe,” said one businessman who was summoned along with many of the country’s other richest men to meet Putin on the day of the invasion.

Obviously most of the people who will go on the record are those that have already fled the country. There were a few less harsh statements from people actually on the record, which is interesting.  The article's main thrust is that the oligarchs who came to power/wealth under Yeltsin are not happy about this.  They want open markets so they can continue getting rich, and see Putin as destroying that.  So they are willing to criticize Putin and the war (at least off the record). 

The oligarchs who came to power under Putin know that they owe everything to him, and their loyalty remains strong.  But overall goods scarcity and economic impacts are still just showing up in most cases.  The next few months are widely expected to be much harder than the last two as reserves of imported materials run out.  At that point, who knows where the war and public sentiment will go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anything will happen with Transnistria/Moldova. It would be out of character. Missiles during UN visit was very in character though. So something like that towards more European targets seems more likely.

1 hour ago, Toth said:

I think there are some legitimately terrified of escalation and really just want the war to stop with all means, even if this means throwing Ukraine under the bus.

...

I wonder how much of that is just the end result of rationalizing away their stance of complete risk avoidance.

I think it is mostly blinding self-importance, because even genuine fear prompts more rational attempts to really resolve the situation, and the simplest step towards rationality would be a reminder that throwing someone next to you to the zombies will only make one more zombie. And the very basics of risk avoidance is that the biggest risk often enough is to do nothing.

Edited by a free shadow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of all people, Lavrov has been engaging in some rhetoric-cooling talk, saying that Russia does not consider itself at war with NATO and Russia is eager to avoid a nuclear confrontation. He also says that Russia is willing to resume peace talks, but Ukraine has been changing its position inconsistently.

Interestingly - and maybe in direct response to that - Zelensky has said he is fully prepared to talk to Putin directly at any time, despite everything.

Lavrov's also said something odd though: "Moldovans should worry about their future, they're being dragged into NATO."

Dress rehearsals for the Victory Day parade in Moscow have been taking place though, and several of Russia's ICBMS have pride in place in the parade.

1 hour ago, a free shadow said:

I don't think anything will happen with Transnistria/Moldova. It would be out of character. Missiles during UN visit was very in character though. So something like that towards more European targets seems more likely.

Yup, this is why reopening embassies in Kyiv might be premature. The Russians can always target them but accuse the Ukrainians of a false flag attack etc. It would be a significant move though. In fact, it might be that Russia is planning not to attack them, then might bomb one by accident.

Edited by Werthead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

With all these ultra right types that worship Putin "like a prayer", one wonders why they never lusted after Iraq's OG Saddam? There's barely a bit of difference in these manly studs.

I guess inconsistency is one of the rights calling cards.

You forget the element of racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

If they argued Ghandi’s position that they should refuse ro fight and refuse to comply with invaders demands they’d have more credibility.  They, appear, to argue in favor of capitulation and hoping real hard the Russians are nicer than they seem…

They’re complete scum.  That’s all that has to be said 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gorn said:

Then, when you Google the author of that article (Angus Roxburgh), you find that he literally worked as a PR for the Russian government, and that he published a fawning book about Putin titled "The Strongman". Huh.

Fascists love pacifists…on their enemies side.

The anti-war movements during ww2 were invested with American nazis trying to dissuade their countrymen from helping the countries Nazi germany was invading. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Maithanet said:

“In one day, they destroyed what was built over many years

That is what They do.  Always have, always will.  That's quick and easy.  Building is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m seeing more and more people claiming Russia will declare war on Ukraine on 5/9 and call for a General Mobilization:

1) Isn’t that an admission things are going very poorly in Ukraine?

2) How will the Russian people react to being lied to for two and a half months?

3) How will the Russian people react to a call for general mobilization?

4) How will China and India react to such a move if that is the road Russia walks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I’m seeing more and more people claiming Russia will declare war on Ukraine on 5/9 and call for a General Mobilization:

1) Isn’t that an admission things are going very poorly in Ukraine?

2) How will the Russian people react to being lied to for two and a half months?

3) How will the Russian people react to a call for general mobilization?

4) How will China and India react to such a move if that is the road Russia walks?

1) Yes. 

2 and 3) Who knows, but a mix of apathy, continued support and covert sabotage (appearing the latter is already happening). Two big factors are that a) Draft-dodging is a lot easier in Russia (as long as you have bribe money) and b) The main support for Putin and the war comes from older people who won't be drafted.

4) Again, unclear, but I imagine they'll increase the tone against it, but not making any drastic moves until Putin's fall is inevitable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...