Ukraine War: Wagner’s fading thrust

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

16 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I wasn't aware that starving people was a good method for clearing trenches, but perhaps it was back in the early 1800s.

I was referring to the use of cluster munitions by Ukraine.  Not using starvation as a weapon.  My apologies for misinterpreting your post.

[Fez]

Doesn't this mean Erdogan is directly breaking a promise he made with Russia? It was my understanding that those soldiers were going to stay in Turkey for the duration of hostilities. I'm surprised he'd make sure an overt move.

 

[Derfel Cadarn]

 

[Werthead]

It's an ugly reasoning but also a valid one: NATO members and allies have been ramping up artillery shell production, but it's still well short of what is needed to sustain an offensive. They need something like 2 million shells produced per year and global production for sale to Ukraine is below half that.

However, the cluster munitions are available in massive quantities. By themselves, they could sustain Ukraine's artillery supply for well over a year, until which time that NATO+allied production exceeds 2 million (which is anticipated next year).

Ukraine is also in the fairly unique position of arguing to be allowed to bombard their own territory with cluster munitions, record each shot and clean up afterwards, which is a different situation to Russia just spreading cluster munitions (with a much higher failure rate) over large areas and then just forgetting about them.

[Zorral]

19 hours ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

I get that they are dangerous for years later and that is horrible. I also think that that's Ukraine's call to largely make.

 

16 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

It's the weakest and lamest of excuses to use the enemy's immoral choices as justification for your own immoral choice. 

These are the eternal conundrums for reasonable human beings.  This is where there is truly an understandable 'both sidesism'.  But that doesn't mean one can decide easily or maybe even at all, unless one adheres 100% to an extremely specific moral code, which again, is very difficult to do in the cases of war, torture, and famine.  We say the obvious, that war is cruel, yet that doesn't help us.

Or maybe I'm just speaking about myself.  But I do know I'm 100% in support of Ukraine throwing Russia out its country and bringing it so far to its knees that it will STOP. But, maybe even particularly as these thing hasten the horrors of our climate catastrophe, I'm also aware that all over the globe this is going on, and people making these decisions. Or having to, and others suffering for them, and far in to the future -- though again, with climate catastrophe there isn't a far into the future, only near future of nasty, brutish and short.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

57 minutes ago, Zorral said:

 

These are the eternal conundrums for reasonable human beings.  This is where there is truly an understandable 'both sidesism'.  But that doesn't mean one can decide easily or maybe even at all, unless one adheres 100% to an extremely specific moral code, which again, is very difficult to do in the cases of war, torture, and famine.  We say the obvious, that war is cruel, yet that doesn't help us.

Or maybe I'm just speaking about myself.  But I do know I'm 100% in support of Ukraine throwing Russia out its country and bringing it so far to its knees that it will STOP. But, maybe even particularly as these thing hasten the horrors of our climate catastrophe, I'm also aware that all over the globe this is going on, and people making these decisions. Or having to, and others suffering for them, and far in to the future -- though again, with climate catastrophe there isn't a far into the future, only near future of nasty, brutish and short.

Agreed 100%

[butterweedstrover]

4 hours ago, Zorral said:

 

These are the eternal conundrums for reasonable human beings.  This is where there is truly an understandable 'both sidesism'.  But that doesn't mean one can decide easily or maybe even at all, unless one adheres 100% to an extremely specific moral code, which again, is very difficult to do in the cases of war, torture, and famine.  We say the obvious, that war is cruel, yet that doesn't help us.

Or maybe I'm just speaking about myself.  But I do know I'm 100% in support of Ukraine throwing Russia out its country and bringing it so far to its knees that it will STOP. But, maybe even particularly as these thing hasten the horrors of our climate catastrophe, I'm also aware that all over the globe this is going on, and people making these decisions. Or having to, and others suffering for them, and far in to the future -- though again, with climate catastrophe there isn't a far into the future, only near future of nasty, brutish and short.

I hope Russia doesn’t give up fighting against western imperialism, because the second it does the concept of Russia as a state is over. 
 

The invasion happened after ever other avenue to keep Ukraine from falling under western influence failed. Neutrality was impossible to achieve, the Minsk agreement was considered illegitimate, and Ukrainian nationalists strengthened their hold over the population. 

Maybe in retrospect the war hurt Russian influence by strengthening western entanglement, but hindsight is 20/20 and I would have made the same mistake as Putin. 
 

The deal made initially for Russia to remove its troops in favor of certain guarantees (source: former Israeli prime minister) was scuttled by that same western intervention. 
 

Some liberals in Russia whom I am friends with tend to think the country should join the EU or even NATO, but that is impossible. The moment Russia becomes a territory of the ‘collective’ west is the moment its need for military or political strength fades and the country has nothing holding itself together. 

Russia is eastern Rome, and the second it can no longer fight or has no reason to fight, imperialism ends, and with imperialism so goes Russia. I love the country and hope western aims in this regard fail. 

The government in Moscow knows it’s fighting for its survival because the goals of the west (and you), the demilitarization of Russia, the prosecution of its political establishment, and the removal of its Black Sea fleet means its destruction. 

Most of the framing makes it seem like Russia can give up peacefully, but it can’t. Saying you don’t want to kill the Elephant, just remove its tusk is the same thing. If you remove the tusks, you assure the Elephant’s doom. 

National sovereignty has nothing to do with it, otherwise Kosovo and Taiwan wouldn’t be a political issue. Ukrainians are in the end of the day Russian people, not as in the political unit which is Russia but the people of Rus. Genetically they are all the same, and what is happening right now is brother killing brother. 
 

Vlad is too concerned by protecting his own mafia in the Kremlin and Zelensky has very little autonomy to end this war when Budanov and Western goons are pushing for the total destruction of Russia, but I don’t think Ukrainians want to be massacred in this offensive to help western imperialism. 
 

The people being dragged off the streets of Odessa aren’t fighting to protect their homes, no more as would they be if they were to march on Donetsk city or Sevastopol. But the killing is too profitable for people like you who want to see your political ideals realized by Ukrainian blood.

[maarsen]

36 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I hope Russia doesn’t give up fighting against western imperialism, because the second it does the concept of Russia as a state is over. 
 

The invasion happened after ever other avenue to keep Ukraine from falling under western influence failed. Neutrality was impossible to achieve, the Minsk agreement was considered illegitimate, and Ukrainian nationalists strengthened their hold over the population. 

Maybe in retrospect the war hurt Russian influence by strengthening western entanglement, but hindsight is 20/20 and I would have made the same mistake as Putin. 
 

The deal made initially for Russia to remove its troops in favor of certain guarantees (source: former Israeli prime minister) was scuttled by that same western intervention. 
 

Some liberals in Russia whom I am friends with tend to think the country should join the EU or even NATO, but that is impossible. The moment Russia becomes a territory of the ‘collective’ west is the moment its need for military or political strength fades and the country has nothing holding itself together. 

Russia is eastern Rome, and the second it can no longer fight or has no reason to fight, imperialism ends, and with imperialism so goes Russia. I love the country and hope western aims in this regard fail. 

The government in Moscow knows it’s fighting for its survival because the goals of the west (and you), the demilitarization of Russia, the prosecution of its political establishment, and the removal of its Black Sea fleet means its destruction. 

Most of the framing makes it seem like Russia can give up peacefully, but it can’t. Saying you don’t want to kill the Elephant, just remove its tusk is the same thing. If you remove the tusks, you assure the Elephant’s doom. 

National sovereignty has nothing to do with it, otherwise Kosovo and Taiwan wouldn’t be a political issue. Ukrainians are in the end of the day Russian people, not as in the political unit which is Russia but the people of Rus. Genetically they are all the same, and what is happening right now is brother killing brother. 
 

Vlad is too concerned by protecting his own mafia in the Kremlin and Zelensky has very little autonomy to end this war when Budanov and Western goons are pushing for the total destruction of Russia, but I don’t think Ukrainians want to be massacred in this offensive to help western imperialism. 
 

The people being dragged off the streets of Odessa aren’t fighting to protect their homes, no more as would they be if they were to march on Donetsk city or Sevastopol. But the killing is too profitable for people like you who want to see your political ideals realized by Ukrainian blood.

Are you delusional? Asking for a friend.

[Arakasi]

Ookay I think I’ll just put my Michael Jackson face on and eat some popcorn here.

[butterweedstrover]

26 minutes ago, maarsen said:

Are you delusional? Asking for a friend.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing like this, I did it before and there is no point. We probably have very different gaps of knowledge and perspective as well as upbringings and as it happens you're not asking for a friend. 

But I do have a question. Much of the typical enemies your (our) governments point us towards, Iran, Cuba, etc. is led by an appreciation for said country's culture and people. The goal is regime change in those cases, not the destruction of their society. 

Russia isn't an ethnic state like Iran nor a colonial nation like Cuba, its a multi-ethnic empire held together by force and oppression. But that history has forged a specific culture within Russia, one of resilience, depression, and I think artistic flourishes. 

So while everyone is hating on Russia, is there anything about Russian culture you find beautiful? Swan Lake, The Ballet, Dostoyevsky, Russian nesting dolls perhaps? 

Is there anything about them that makes it worthy of preservation. I love Russia and don't want to see it destroyed. And politically I think it has its place in the world as a counterbalance to Western imperialism, they keep each other in check. 

Or is your aim the dissolution of Russia? Do you think that would make the world a better place. Better is subjective and I think our definition of better is different. If you think better means the end of struggling or conflict, then you might be right. The break up of Russia might turn its territory into a collection of small and passive liberal societies (minus Chechnya), who knows. So by your own standards that might, if everything goes right, be a noble cause. 

 

PS. Anyways dude, I'm tired and don't want to get into a big personal fight. If you can't avoid going there lets just not do this. In the end of the day nothing I nor you say will change the trajectory of this war so there is very little at stake here. I get if you don't want to be nice, but if so lets just not do this. It's Saturday btw. My girlfriend and I split up and I wasted a lot of money at this strip club yesterday so I guess I don't have the energy to argue at the moment. 

Also, if you live or are visiting NYC any time soon, the met Opera is having a ballet performance for Swan Lake, highly recommend. I mean their productions are going down in quality but they still have some good stuff, regardless of your appreciation of Russia or lack thereof. Actual their version is a bit more westernized anyways, but it was fun. Tickets can from 200 USD to about 800 USD but don't just jump for the Balcony because its the cheapest. These aren't the days of the Globe Theatre were the poor would be nearest the stage, nowadays it hard to hear let alone see much from up there. Or maybe my eyesight is getting worse.  

edit1: In retrospect, my implication in the last line of my previous post was unfair. I guess I was just a little startled by the phrasing of their desire for Russia to "just stop." It wasn't their intention but that has a lot deeper meaning even outside the context of this war said user probably wasn't aware of. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by butterweedstrover

[SeanF]

This was an entirely avoidable war, for Russia.

[butterweedstrover]

2 minutes ago, SeanF said:

This was an entirely avoidable war, for Russia.

I'm not sure, well it depends on how far back you look. The mafia (Oligarchs) in charge of the Kremlin intermix national interest with their own housing property in Europe so there was a lot of paradoxical thinking.  

Putin wanted, for his minions, good relations with EU. But he also wanted Ukraine to stay out of their orbit. Hard to want one thing for your country and another for a different country. 

But in the end of the day, the trajectory that Ukraine went down for 8 years was unacceptable for Russia. Ukraine isn't Estonia or Finland, and yet despite the ties that bind (culturally) they couldn't even get the nationalists to reopen the dam to Crimea. So in that sense Russian soft power failed. 

It's too late to back at now, they have to see this to the end or lose everything. 

[JGP]

If there’s a break up of any sort in the future, it would be entirely self inflicted. 

That said, being an artist, I think there’s loads of beauty to appreciate from Russian culture and fervently hope that continues.

It’s the *Russia State I despise [amongst many others] not it’s people, and hey, some of those forcibly included might opt to remain if [preferably natural] regime change happens.

Canadian here btw [in case you start firing off about Iran and Cuba again, or the imperial tendencies of the US] one who would never deny Canada is a colonial enterprise that has its own *work to do as well.

 

*Russian, done so because an edit this late shouldn't be ninja'd 

*work is doing a lot of work here-- crimes to answer for would've been accurate, and germane to the discussion

Edited July 8, 2023 by JGP

[ThinkerX]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

I hope Russia doesn’t give up fighting against western imperialism, because the second it does the concept of Russia as a state is over. 
 

The invasion happened after ever other avenue to keep Ukraine from falling under western influence failed. Neutrality was impossible to achieve, the Minsk agreement was considered illegitimate, and Ukrainian nationalists strengthened their hold over the population. 

Maybe in retrospect the war hurt Russian influence by strengthening western entanglement, but hindsight is 20/20 and I would have made the same mistake as Putin. 
 

The deal made initially for Russia to remove its troops in favor of certain guarantees (source: former Israeli prime minister) was scuttled by that same western intervention. 
 

Some liberals in Russia whom I am friends with tend to think the country should join the EU or even NATO, but that is impossible. The moment Russia becomes a territory of the ‘collective’ west is the moment its need for military or political strength fades and the country has nothing holding itself together. 

Russia is eastern Rome, and the second it can no longer fight or has no reason to fight, imperialism ends, and with imperialism so goes Russia. I love the country and hope western aims in this regard fail. 

The government in Moscow knows it’s fighting for its survival because the goals of the west (and you), the demilitarization of Russia, the prosecution of its political establishment, and the removal of its Black Sea fleet means its destruction. 

Most of the framing makes it seem like Russia can give up peacefully, but it can’t. Saying you don’t want to kill the Elephant, just remove its tusk is the same thing. If you remove the tusks, you assure the Elephant’s doom. 

National sovereignty has nothing to do with it, otherwise Kosovo and Taiwan wouldn’t be a political issue. Ukrainians are in the end of the day Russian people, not as in the political unit which is Russia but the people of Rus. Genetically they are all the same, and what is happening right now is brother killing brother. 
 

Vlad is too concerned by protecting his own mafia in the Kremlin and Zelensky has very little autonomy to end this war when Budanov and Western goons are pushing for the total destruction of Russia, but I don’t think Ukrainians want to be massacred in this offensive to help western imperialism. 
 

The people being dragged off the streets of Odessa aren’t fighting to protect their homes, no more as would they be if they were to march on Donetsk city or Sevastopol. But the killing is too profitable for people like you who want to see your political ideals realized by Ukrainian blood.

Is a utterly corrupt nation that requires massive internal repression and external enemies to exist legitimate in any meaningful sense of the term? 

[Padraig]

29 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Ukraine isn't Estonia or Finland, and yet despite the ties that bind (culturally) they couldn't even get the nationalists to reopen the dam to Crimea. So in that sense Russian soft power failed.

Soft power doesn't normally involve illegally occupying land in another country and engaging in a low-key war for 8 years,  But sure, nobody changes their minds in these discussions.

[butterweedstrover]

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

If there’s a break up of any sort in the future, it would be entirely self inflicted.  

The blame game is kind of dumb. Yeah in retrospect the Oligarchs are handling this poorly. But if Western action is made with the distinct intent or at least the aim to achieve something which will result in the dissolution of Russia, then the result is the same anyways. 

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

That said, being an artist, I think there’s loads of beauty to appreciate from Russian culture and fervently hope that continues.

It’s the Russia State I despise [amongst many others] not it’s people, and hey, some of those forcibly included might opt to remain if [preferably natural] regime change happens. 

I think or disagreement here is that the Russian state and the Russian culture are intertwined like no other country (or few others). The things you hate about Russia, it's militaristic outlook, its internal oppression, its imperialistic expansion is what makes Russia a country. 

Explaining the entire history of place is hard, but to be as brief as possible: Rus is a term for Eastern Slavs, a term Catherine the Great made sound European by combing Rus and Prussia. 

Russia, given its name, is not aiming to be the duchy of Moscow, but ruler of all Russian people. Now who are these eastern Slavs? Well they are like the Franks, the Saxons, etc. people who were Christianized and made to continue the legacy of the Roman empire. 

BUT, unlike them they weren't baptized by the Latin Church, but by the Byzantine (eastern Roman) church, or in other words the Greek world. These people spread the Orthodox fate, all of whom fell under domination of Muslim or Western states. 

The Serbs came under Austria and Turk domination, Greeks were controlled by Turk, British, and American powers. It's a tale of poverty and loss, except for one country: Russia. 

Rus are the descendants of Kievan Rus and make up three modern states: Belarus-Russia-Ukraine (boarder lands). Moscow laid claims to the title, and its desire for power existed in its desire to compete with the west. If it wasn't so large or totalitarian it would have been swallowed up by one western power or another. It remained independent at the sacrifice of its people's well being. 

Lots happened, Mongol influence, etc. but this area (all three countries really) didn't have the capitalist mindset or market economy. They had large peasant population that engaged in limited trade or ingenuity, so their economies fell behind. To compete Russia used raw numbers just to stay in the competition. This also led to a military doctrine of high civilian causalities.  

Their game plan when Napoleon invaded was to burn down their entire capital. No western country has a culture or mindset similar to them, none would ever do something like that. 

So Russian art comes from its existence as an imperial state struggling against a more powerful foe. They don't win, but they can stand toe to toe at times, and more importantly retain geopolitical independence. They do that by trying to hold together an empire, because the only thing that can confront an empire is another empire. 

 

That art you love, comes from the Russian sense of imperial destiny. They believe their goal is to uphold eastern church against the west. They find pride in struggle and pain and misery this has caused while many western intellects look in scorn because submitting to the west (joining NATO, the EU, etc.) would alleviate that pain, but it would also be the end of the Russian state. 

Russian literature, ballet, and art was created to help its people cope with its improbably circumstances. None of the Russian greats like Pushkin, Tolstoy, etc. advocated for the end of the Russian empire, far from it. But their literary significance comes from the innate contradiction of fighting always. 

Some people tend to think, like you most likely, that they why to fight pain is to change the circumstances. The eastern outlook is about not changing the circumstance but finding meaning through which the will to survive continues. 

Ukrainians in this respect are much closer to their Russian brothers in that respect. 

Now there are a breed of people called Russian liberals who want to emulate the west. But their beliefs are impossible because they want the country to remain while also being an equal partnership with Europe. That is not how it works, if Russia is not independent from European powers, it will be controlled by them, and then it would cease to exist.  

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

Canadian here btw

That is just another country under the western umbrella. Just cause your government doesn't dictate the terms doesn't mean we don't know whose side you're on. 

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

[in case you start firing off about Iran and Cuba again

Iranian culture is promoted in the fight against the Iranian regime for example. While Russian culture is either demoted or made to be "Ukrainian" or something as if the people of Rus were fundamentally different and don't have a shared culture.  

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

, or the imperial tendencies of the US] one who would never deny Canada is a colonial enterprise that has its own work to do as well.

I don't know what you mean here. 

[JGP]

1 minute ago, butterweedstrover said:

The blame game is kind of dumb

Yeah, it started out well I think but you can totally miss me with this shit

[butterweedstrover]

Just now, Padraig said:

Soft power doesn't normally involve illegally occupying land in another country and engaging in a low-key war for 8 years,  But sure, nobody changes their minds in these discussions.

Is Kosovo illegally occupied because NATO (US) armed forces are stationed there. 

Crimea always had Russian troops for hundreds of years, it was handed over to the Ukraine SSR due to logistical reasons. After 2014, the goal wasn't to take land, but try to use Donbas and its population to influence the government. But the Minsk agreement didn't work. 

Anyways, imperial powers can use a hybrid of soft and strong power to get their way. All great strategists use their whole tool kit. 

[butterweedstrover]

23 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Is a utterly corrupt nation that requires massive internal repression and external enemies to exist legitimate in any meaningful sense of the term? 

By that standard no state is legitimate. I also don't think Russia is hopelessly corrupt. I mean it is now, but that isn't its destiny to always be. It's just more likely due to its disadvantaged economy. Being geopolitically independent requires sacrifices, and economic sacrifices lead to higher likelihood of corruption. But there are still ways to fight. 

First goal is removing the corrupt Oligarchs who came to power thank to Western Neoliberal reforms. Putin protects them for now, but after he's gone who knows. The war has been a wake up call for much of the Russian elite. 

A state whose cultural and military influence can counterbalance western imperialism I think is important. As for internal repression, liberal democracies will act the same way, they just have different tactics outside of violence.  

[butterweedstrover]

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

Yeah, it started out well I think but you can totally miss me with this shit

I meant: if your side is actively pursuing ends that will lead to the destruction of Russia I can protest these actions even if Russian rule makers share blame in the outcome.