Ukraine War: Poor put upon Russia… why will the world not just let it rape, kill, and steal toilets from Ukraine… in peace?

[butterweedstrover]

1 hour ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

I must say I appreciate some of butterweedstrover’s posts, not because I agree with them, but because I find them fascinating. I have a hunch they actually do offer some insight into how the Russian mind works. The idea that Russia is an empire and needs to fight and dominate in order to keep existing as a nation is certainly interesting. If the Russians themselves believe this then it would explain a lot.

Anyway - what butterweedstrover gets wrong is “Western imperialism “. The desire to protect Ukraine doesn’t have anything to do with imperialism. It has several other reasons though:

1) Preservation of a world governed by international laws rather than military power. You solve political and territorial disputes through diplomacy, not warfare. That route leads only to pain and suffering. Europe knows this very well. 

2) Defence of a democracy versus a dictatorship. The “West” (if there is such a thing) likes democracy and considers it worth defending. Ukraine, for all its corruption, nazis (that do exist even if they’re not in charge) and myriad of other problems, does have a democratically elected parliament and president. 

3) A desire to weaken Russia. Yes, this is a reason for supporting Ukraine, but not for the reason you think. It comes from fear and weariness of the Russian threat. Finland, the Baltics, Poland and the Czech Republic are among the strongest supporters of Ukraine. Guess why? Because they were all relatively recently invaded by Russia or the Soviet Union. If we can support Ukraine, they can make the world a safer place for all of us. 

Funny, people are calling me brainwashed. But it seems a majority of the cohorts here believe 'democracy' is just about the will of the people and not about western domination of internal institutions.  

Every thousand years the new power to be thinks they are fundamentally different. Egypt thought their king was god and deserved to Rule. Greece thought they were the strongest and deserved to rule. Rome thought they were civilization and deserved to rule. The Christians thought they were agents of God and would rule in his name. The British thought they were enlightened and the savages in India and Africa needed parental supervision so they should rule. And now western democracies (the US primarily) think that institutions under their global supervision exists to free people (unless of course they disagree in which case the people are brainwashed ideologs who need to be reeducated). 

So, despite people suggesting I support rape and murder (I don't, I want this war to end right now while you guys want a bloody offensive to go on for the forcible future with cluster bombs and armed Nazis) I do perhaps believe that maybe there is some brainwashing going on here, just not with me.  

Edited July 10 by butterweedstrover

[butterweedstrover]

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

 

- at the core you hate "the West" for being "weak"

I hate the west for being strong and dominating everything. I hate the west for not giving an inch and pushing their control across the entire globe with insatiable hunger under the banner of freedom, and using civilians with no desire to be killed as cannon fodder for their ideological fervency. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

, as it is in the grip of a "culture" you deride as inferior, I guess particularly in regards to democracy, personal liberty for marginalized groups and so on. The whole culture war stuff. Drag queens are turning your children gay, trans people invading toilet safe spaces and Disney is selling badly written Mary Sues. 

That is just you guys losing Russian Liberals. Actually, I don't think that stuff will last anyways so its not important.

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- at the same time you see that same west, I guess particularly the US, as an incredibly strong Empire that is very successful and constantly expanding through sinister means and that for you justifies war and regime change to prevent a country from... having economic ties with the EU. Because a sovereign country deciding that they give a better deal than Russia's Eurasian union must mean that this country is both too stupid to realize that Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Belarus are somehow better off than Poland and the Baltics despite all data telling you the contrary, but also at the same time must be manipulated by those sinister western forces. 

Every empire wants to expand for selfish reasons, but you believe yours are the first in human history to truly be different. Russia actually took from your playbook called neocolonialism. You see the USSR went bankrupt from having to subsidize weaker economies. 

The US in south America and the French in west Africa did something different during the cold war. They left the countries 'independent' and gave them loans which force restructuring, send their companies to intertwine with the economy, making the country dependent, and then use that to push 'friendly' diplomacy. 

Viola, you have a country that does and says what you want without having to fund pensions or other externalities. And the people are 'free' until they wake up one day and realize they are not.  

That's the same thing Russia tried with the EEU, but of course in the case of Ukraine your own people lied, because of this insatiable belief that Ukraine is theirs. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- which in your opinion is confirmed by the Euromaidan being some kind of CIA ploy and not just the result of Russia's desperate intervention at the end of a string of economic blackmailing as Ukraine started to slip away into the EU, with protests simply becoming far wider the more the government pushed back against it. That this thing was two democratically elected governments and two Russian invasions ago doesn't count, the dude Putin forced to walk back on his promise of EU integration fled the country, so all governments after that don't count as legitimate and that justifies invasion and regime change through Russia. Also that neither the US nor the EU really cared all that much for Ukraine counts either, because... it just doesn't. 

He didn't force anything, his offer was better. But of course funding an insurrection, arming Nazis, and commiting war crimes is not done out of concern for the autonomy of the people. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- at the same time you try to deride Ukraine's cultural and historical distinctiveness altogether in an attempt to rationalize Russia's moving war goals. Since regime change failed, Russia walked back and annexed the territories they still occupied, where you feel the need to claim that the people there are Russian or want to be Russian anyway, despite previously also stating that Russia orchestrating the separatist movements in the Donbass was "doing it by the western playbook" with a cheeky snipe at the Euromaidan. So both were coups by a third party, but somehow protests against a government breaking its promises escalating to protests against the general state of corruption were unlawful meddling, but the separatist uprisings with all the Russian gear and support were justified because those people actually truly believed in that cause of tearing their country apart, instead of being some opportunistic stooges who saw themselves at the top of whatever new order Russia would establish there as they stormed municipal buildings, murdered democratic activists and suppressed their neighbors. 

That's the thing, your western leaders aren't innocent bystanders, they are driven by extreme ideological commitment. Ukraine is an important economic and cultural partner for Russia, they had before 2014 given them many preferential deals to keep them within their orbit. 

What did the EU gain but more cheap labor, and what did the US gain but a long term opportunity to destroy the Russian state. You guys aren't driven by rationality, you are extremists who believe your job of spreading democracy is sacred. 

But you can't see how your own mindset is just a spiritually derived manifestation like those Islamic Jihadists or Israeli settlers or even Girkin himself.   

You think you're different from everyone else, but you're not. You think everyone else is crazy accept for you. Guess what, you're just as crazy and irrational as everyone else. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- you acknowledged that Putin's system is a dysfunctional kleptocracy where everyone outside Moscow and St. Petersburg lives in jarring poverty and nothing will be done to change that, but at the same time you applaud it as this last bulwark against western degeneracy, for at least they still have a strongman at the top who hits down hard on LGBTQ-rights, decriminalizes domestic violence and generally promotes a culture of hardasses where there is no place for weak pussy stuff. And that this whole thing is so fragile that... failing to invade a neighbor would mean it would all get destroyed, alongside hundred years old Russian cultural heritage that you bring up so that it doesn't only look like gloomy macho nonsense that... we in the west try to destroy at all costs, because that is our goal here and that's why we didn't do shit 2014, even expanding trade with Russia and now only give homeopathic doses of equipment to Ukraine that pretty much only turns the war around because the Russian military is doing just that badly. In any case, at the same time they need to win and defeat the degenerate west at all cost to expand their own empire or else all that precious macho culture would go down the drain. 

Putin isn't Russia. His mafia was built by western reformers in the 90s. Those same people who the west celebrated for looting Russia are the people Putin protects, they were just bribed more by someone else.

But Russia has had independent leaders in its history who weren't corrupt (yes, this includes Stalin). And the mafia won't be around forever. 

We already saw the support Prigozhin had, and he doesn't want to see Russia become a pliant liberal state. The biggest problem people from Ukraine have when thinking of Russia is their own mafia, the oligarchs. And they don't ant to emulate that system. But if we can get rid of Putin with someone more like Lukashenko, those Ukrainians angered at being kidnaped on the street while their own oligarchy buys top real-estate in Europe will look to a third answer which is neither Putin or the west. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- which is particularly odd, because while you clearly say it's all because of Putin's imperial ambitions, you still go out of the way to deride the Ukrainian government and defenders as Nazis, which is just... such a bizarre and weak argument the Russians make mostly for internal consumption. Like who cares what individual national guard units think, their attempt to make it a political movement failed utterly and even if not, hurling bombs on people usually wouldn't be treated as an adequate response to a government curtailing Russian media... in response to Russia invading and occupying your land. 

No, I find it funny how due to finding no one else in the country who wanted to go fight and die in Donbas the west and their puppet government decided to arm far right extremists to do the fighting for them. 

Really puts a stick through your morally superior BS delusions. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

- you acknowledge that the Russian army is raping and pillaging 

Oh please. Does rape happen in war? Yes. But what are they doing in occupied regions? They are offering food aid, helping with pensions, rebuilding apartments, burying bodies to keep cholera from spreading, schools, etc. 

I'm not saying their saints, but the idea that their goal is to rape and pillage is so fucking stupid and kind of racist. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

their way through Ukraine and even vaguely allude to Russian strategy involving lots of civilian casualties, but state that massacres are okay, since they aren't ordered from above, while at the same time bending backwards to make up excuses that Russian accuracy is just that dreadful and at the same time Ukraine is just accidentally shelling itself all the time. You know, I'm also of the opinion that Bucha wasn't really planned, but a result of that completely fucked up military culture Russia has, where top-down everyone abuses everyone downwards. At the same time the terror bombing in a desperate and petty attempt to break the spirit of Ukraine's civilians as well as the very much intentional establishment of FSB torture cellars and systematic murder of pro-Euromaidan civilians and journalists very much IS the Russian war strategy. As well as the relocation of people, kidnapping of children and change in schools and stuff is also a quite blatant attempt at russification. Something that... wouldn't be necessary if the people already were Russian or in favour of Russia, but oh well, gotta break some eggs to make an omelette or something and all that is justified anyway because it would expand the Russian empire and diminish the one of the west. Because Russian expansion through war and subjugation is good, while western expansion through trade deals is bad. 

What terror bombing? If Russia wanted to terror bomb you would see real fire power. All these misfires had actual targets, which the Ukrainians put in densely packed civilian areas. You know, like Hamas.  

As for the MOD, yeah they are abusive, but that is Shoigu's fault, who is as corrupt as they come. Wagner paid their men well and treated them well. 

45 minutes ago, Toth said:

 

I must say, again, going through eight pages of all that, I'm saying something I rarely say: Who hurt you? Because all this... just reeks of an immensely insecure mind that desperately craves strength, even if perceived strength, and using it to look down on those you view as less pure and inferior. You need some serious introspection and look again where you want to stand. Because at it stands, pretty much all you write gives the impression that you are cartoonishly evil, that you would gleefully cheer for Hitler if you'd lived back in the days, and wouldn't even need much self-justification for it, because at least he'd hurt the people you despise.

Really, it's troubling that after these eight pages you decided to charge up on all the counterpoints and double down on the crazy instead of realizing that you have truly dug yourself deeper and deeper into a corner, defending the indefensible.

I don't think you're cartoonish evil Toth. But I think your sense of ideological superiority makes you believe everyone not on your side is an animal. 

Which I guess makes you no different from people for the last 6,000 years. 

Edited July 10 by butterweedstrover

[Varysblackfyre321]

59 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

The biggest mistake we make here friends is that you all assume Russian control means rape.

It definitely does.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Russia doesn't want to rape anyone, let's stop being dramatic.

I would think they wouldn’t start recruiting convicted rapists to go fight in Ukraine.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

There is no order from up high to rape woman,

Doesn’t need to be. If I get a man drunk and give him his car keys and then tell him to go to an elementary school I’m not blameless if that person it’s a kid.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

for the Romans, I am not claiming what I want, but what is. The Roman ideology usurped Christian themes, and it is the predecessor to your own beloved liberal 'democracy'. 

 

Yes we get it you hate democracy, and thus reject any care for the majority of Ukrainians want for their country.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

Russia is uniquely evil a

It is comparatively to the west.

Two things can true. The West has an interest in global hegemony—Russia is morally worse than the west.

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

The carrot is nice, making people rich so that they follow you around is nice. You can control a cow by the whip, or by feeding it grass and keeping it comfortable in its cage. But these are questions of method, not morals. And the west does hold the whip when need be.  

A mam who promises a foot massage for his wife unless she cooks him a big dinner is worse than a man who promises a foot massage for his wife for a big dinner.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

32 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I hate the west for being strong and dominating everything. I hate the west for not giving an inch and pushing their control across the entire globe with insatiable hunger under the banner of freedom, and using civilians with no desire to be killed as cannon fodder for their ideological fervency. 

That is just you guys losing Russian Liberals. Actually, I don't think that stuff will last anyways so its not important.

Every empire wants to expand for selfish reasons, but you believe yours are the first in human history to truly be different. Russia actually took from your playbook called neocolonialism. You see the USSR went bankrupt from having to subsidize weaker economies. 

The US in south America and the French in west Africa did something different during the cold war. They left the countries 'independent' and gave them loans which force restructuring, send their companies to intertwine with the economy, making the country dependent, and then use that to push 'friendly' diplomacy. 

Viola, you have a country that does and says what you want without having to fund pensions or other externalities. And the people are 'free' until they wake up one day and realize they are not.  

That's the same thing Russia tried with the EEU, but of course in the case of Ukraine your own people lied, because of this insatiable belief that Ukraine is theirs. 

He didn't force anything, his offer was better. But of course funding an insurrection, arming Nazis, and commiting war crimes is not done out of concern for the autonomy of the people. 

That's the thing, your western leaders aren't innocent bystanders, they are driven by extreme ideological commitment. Ukraine is an important economic and cultural partner for Russia, they had before 2014 given them many preferential deals to keep them within their orbit. 

What did the EU gain but more cheap labor, and what did the US gain but a long term opportunity to destroy the Russian state. You guys aren't driven by rationality, you are extremists who believe your job of spreading democracy is sacred. 

But you can't see how your own mindset is just a spiritually derived manifestation like those Islamic Jihadists or Israeli settlers or even Girkin himself.   

You think you're different from everyone else, but you're not. You think everyone else is crazy accept for you. Guess what, you're just as crazy and irrational as everyone else. 

Putin isn't Russia. His mafia was built by western reformers in the 90s. Those same people who the west celebrated for looting Russia are the people Putin protects, they were just bribed more by someone else.

But Russia has had independent leaders in its history who weren't corrupt (yes, this includes Stalin). And the mafia won't be around forever. 

We already saw the support Prigozhin had, and he doesn't want to see Russia become a pliant liberal state. The biggest problem people from Ukraine have when thinking of Russia is their own mafia, the oligarchs. And they don't ant to emulate that system. But if we can get rid of Putin with someone more like Lukashenko, those Ukrainians angered at being kidnaped on the street while their own oligarchy buys top real-estate in Europe will look to a third answer which is neither Putin or the west. 

No, I find it funny how due to finding no one else in the country who wanted to go fight and die in Donbas the west and their puppet government decided to arm far right extremists to do the fighting for them. 

Really puts a stick through your morally superior BS delusions. 

Oh please. Does rape happen in war? Yes. But what are they doing in occupied regions? They are offering food aid, helping with pensions, rebuilding apartments, burying bodies to keep cholera from spreading, schools, etc. 

I'm not saying their saints, but the idea that their goal is to rape and pillage is so fucking stupid and kind of racist. 

What terror bombing? If Russia wanted to terror bomb you would see real fire power. All these misfires had actual targets, which the Ukrainians put in densely packed civilian areas. You know, like Hamas.  

As for the MOD, yeah they are abusive, but that is Shoigu's fault, who is as corrupt as they come. Wagner paid their men well and treated them well. 

I don't think you're cartoonish evil Toth. But I think your sense of ideological superiority makes you believe everyone not on your side is an animal. 

Which I guess makes you no different from people for the last 6,000 years. 

“Russia Good… y’all eyes work bad”

 

(and a little Young Earth Creationism Horseshit sprinkled on at the end just for flavor)

[Varysblackfyre321]

44 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

hate the west for being strong and dominating everything. I hate the west for not giving an inch and pushing their control across the entire globe with insatiable hunger under the banner of freedom, and using civilians with no desire to be killed as cannon fodder for their ideological fervenc

It’s honestly impossible for you to even humor the idea the majority of Ukrainians could honestly just want to fight off Russia’s advances.

44 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yes. But what are they doing in occupied regions?

Raping, murdering political dissidents, running things even more ineffectively than they do back home.

Don’t feel entirely comfortable with this comparison but you know act like orcs.

44 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I'm not saying their saints, but the idea that their goal is to rape and pillage is so fucking stupid and kind of racist. 

No they’re goal is to subjugate Ukraine—the means which they accomplish this goal include a lot rape and pillaging or at least it’s allowance.

Please spare me your cries about racism and far right extremism as you howl about liberal democracy ruining everything and just generalize Ukrainians as just little Russians.

 

Edited July 10 by Varysblackfyre321

[Toth]

54 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

I hate the west for being strong and dominating everything. I hate the west for not giving an inch and pushing their control across the entire globe with insatiable hunger under the banner of freedom, and using civilians with no desire to be killed as cannon fodder for their ideological fervency. 

So if Russia were to succeed to dominate everything, you would hate it too just to still be a dissenting edgelord?

Like... I have no idea what to say to such intense hatred for a concept that in this form exists only in your head. Yes, the US has been doing dodgy things in order to keep their hegemony, but it's the 2020s for goodness sake, it's neither the time of rampant CIA involvement against anything remotely red or the time of Freedom Fries, shaming countries for not being up to military adventurism. You are in favor of military intervention to keep a country in one's sphere or conquering parts of it when that fails, against the sovereignty of a country to decide based on what its people want.

You can in all honesty stand there and type that trade and democracy is a great evil that justifies murdering hundred-thousands of people to prevent it? Yes, I'm morally grandstanding here, but what the fuck is wrong with you? You claim you want the war to end (but only but having Russia win of course) is quite a hollow statement of humanity when you at the same time argue in support of invading in the first place.

54 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

That is just you guys losing Russian Liberals. Actually, I don't think that stuff will last anyways so its not important.

Wait... you are Russian, are you? Is this some kind of patriotic self-justifying meltdown here?

54 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

No, I find it funny how due to finding no one else in the country who wanted to go fight and die in Donbas the west and their puppet government decided to arm far right extremists to do the fighting for them. 

Really puts a stick through your morally superior BS delusions. 

What are you even arguing for? You are aware that in those 8 years it wasn't just Azov fighting, are you? And that the Russian media picked them as the boogieman because they had to focus damn hard on the Nazi part in order to pull under the carpet the fact that it's Russian speaking Ukrainians who were resisting becoming the next Moldova, South Ossetia, Abkhasia or Chechnya. And that when Russia invaded "for real", Ukraine got so swamped with volunteers they had to send them away because they couldn't possibly train and equip them all. Meanwhile what is Russia doing with Wagner's penal legion, Storm-Z and mobilizing the dregs of its most backwater Federation subjects? Doesn't look like the people in Moscow and St. Petersburg are too keen to die in the trenches for some old spy's imperial delusions...

But anyway, this is utterly pointless. You live in your own world, marinating in your hatred and seeing only what you want to see. Grand ambitions for western dominations, bah. As if western democracies were able to see past each election cycle. Sure, there is a mindset of competition to a certain degree, but this here is about preserving stability not liking countries getting invaded for wanting to be your allies.. That in reaction to countries still trying to play with a 19th century playbook instead of a 21th century one. That is what's at stake for us. Extremism, bah. So the democratic voter is at the same time a brainwashed pathetic sheep and a jingoistic extremist munching on Freedom Fries? Then I have to ask what a proper Russian citizen is like...

Edited July 10 by Toth

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, butterweedstrover said:

I'm not saying their saints, but the idea that their goal is to rape and pillage is so fucking stupid and kind of racist. 

Let’s get this straight.  As long as “rape” isn’t an explicit goal it’s just fine if an army engages in rape and does nothing to the troops who are engaging in rape?

[Spockydog]

Amazed that people are still engaging with this bullshit.

 

 

 

[butterweedstrover]

18 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Amazed that people are still engaging with this bullshit.

 

 

 

Yeah, the idea that western imperialism is predicated on altruistic desires to spread ‘freedom’ and that Russia want to rape and kill its own blood and kin rather than win them over is kind of BS. 
 

I guess it comes from the fact that they don’t get if countries don’t eat the carrot, liberal ‘democracies’ are going to pull out the whip. Every time. 
 

They hate Russia because unlike everyone else, Russia can fight back.

[Varysblackfyre321]

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yeah, the idea that western imperialism is predicated on altruistic desires to spread ‘freedom’ and that Russia want to rape and kill its own blood and kin rather than win them over is kind of BS. 

The West can be flawed—and Russia can still be worse than the “west”

It is.

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

guess it comes from the fact that they don’t get if countries don’t eat the carrot, liberal ‘democracies’ are going to pull out the whip. Every time. 

not true—if they did Ukraine would’ve gotten a lot more support early on and the consequences for Russia’s aggression would have been much more sever(as would be just).

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

They hate Russia because unlike everyone else, Russia can fight back.

Nope.

Edited July 10 by Varysblackfyre321

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

6 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

rather than win them over is kind of BS. 

By “win them over” you mean rape, kill, and kidnap Ukrainians until they see themselves as Russians… not Ukrainians?

[mormont]

31 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Yeah, the idea that western imperialism is predicated on altruistic desires to spread ‘freedom’ and that Russia want to rape and kill its own blood and kin rather than win them over is kind of BS.

I guess it comes from the fact that they don’t get if countries don’t eat the carrot, liberal ‘democracies’ are going to pull out the whip. Every time.

Western countries and Russia have both been playing the influence game in Ukraine for a long time. Countries have a legitimate interest in what happens in other countries and they'll try to affect that with money, diplomacy, and offers of help.

Russia, as is well documented, added corruption and blackmail to that pot. Some would have it that the West did the same. But I'm absolutely sure of this: only one side marched an army up to the Ukraine border, promised that they would not invade, and then marched over the border and started shooting people, looting, and attempting to annex territory. Twice in a decade.

And if your country's survival depends on doing those things to another sovereign country, then your country's survival can go to hell in a handbasket for all I care.

37 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

They hate Russia because unlike everyone else, Russia can fight back.

The evidence is that Russia's armed forces would not last five days if they had to 'fight back'. There are two things saving Russia from having to 'fight back':

1. Nuclear weapons

2. A complete lack of interest from the West in actually invading Russia.

[Werthead]

13 hours ago, butterweedstrover said:

Ukraine is a dependency, they don’t make decisions for themselves, only what their masters allow.

Wholly incorrect.

Ukraine is a sovereign country that makes decisions in its own and best interests. In the past it has, on several occasions, made the judgement to forge a close relationship with Russia. It has also made decisions to move away from Russia. If Russia had behaved in a collegial and cooperative fashion with Ukraine, that close relationship would have continued.

Indeed, if Russia had not removed the majority of the Russian-sympathetic voting population from Ukraine in 2014, then Ukraine would have almost certainly returned to a Russian-leaning government in the next election and the 2013 revolution would have sputtered out as much as the 2004 one did. Putin's brilliant political acumen instead changed Ukraine's course towards the west.

Quote

It’s those same masters who have been integrating Ukraine into NATO. NATO is not binary, western powers have been infecting the Ukrainian military apparatus for eight years and no effort by the west was made to slow it down.

NATO is not an imperialist spreading force. Countries can only join NATO if they want to, and cooperate with NATO if they want to. They can also only join NATO if they are not engaged in a military contact with other countries. Ukraine joining NATO much this side of 2050 was always fantastical as long as Ukraine's corruption index remained high  and as long as it appeared that Russia was not a military threat to the rest of Europe. Two of these are no longer issues and the third seems to be improving.

Quote

And Russia realized the Minsk agreement was bunk, just like Merkel said.

The Minsk agreements were not well-defined. The first one was signed whilst fighting for the Donetsk Airport continued to rage, and the DPR representatives said they had no interest in implementing it whilst the airport remained in Ukrainian hands. The DPR leader then said they would continued to fight until all the territory they had claimed in July 2014 was seized (he later tried a vague walkback under Kremlin pressure, unconvincingly).

Minsk II failed almost immediately because Zakharchenko said he would not honour it and, erroneously, the agreement did not apply to areas where DPR forces were conducting offensive operations. He only fell in line after Kremlin pressure and after Ukraine withdrew from Debaltseve.

Ukraine then implemented most of the key measures in Minsk II, including voting for special status for the Donbas region (which it renewed in 2019), but fighting along the contact line continued. The DPR/LPR governments were responsible for many violations, including proclaiming that they wanted to break away from Ukraine and join Russia (in violation of Minsk I and II). The extent of Ukrainian violations is unclear, although it is notable that Azov seems to have been responsible for most of these at a time when it was still under strong far right influence from commanders with political ambitions (which soonafter collapsed).

It is clear that the protocols were a bodge job since the LPR and DPR governments had no intention of fulfilling them, and Russia was at least minded to continue supporting the LPR and DPR on the grounds that a continuing "grey zone" war would prevent Ukraine from joining NATO (a situation Russia had previously successfully achieved in Moldova and Georgia).

Quote

The Ukraine project was something that existed since the 90s. Keep pretending the US were neutral actors in 2014. 

The Ukraine project of Ukraine wanting to be an independent state is something that has existed since the late 18th Century, actually. The concept of Ukrainian statehood was codified in 1848 (when they also adopted the current flag) and the first independent Ukrainian state came into existence in 1917. Although Russia subsequently overran Ukraine, it de facto acknowledged the existent of a separate Ukrainian polity and identity by making Ukraine a fellow but separate founding member of the USSR, and later expanding its borders.

Quote

Today is different than two years ago. If Russia withdrew now Ukraine will be a member of Ukraine tomorrow, more heavily armed than ever. 

If there is a peace deal tomorrow that requires Ukraine to declare neutrality and not join NATO, then it will not (arguably it now doesn't need to).

Why Ukraine would agree to that from its current positive position is unclear, though.

Quote

You create this government and then use it as an excuse to pursue the most extreme policy ends. “Well the Ukrainians want it so we have to destroy Russia and arrest all their political leaders.”

The 2014 government was certainly created by the discontent of the populist uprising riding an anti-Russian wave. However, the 2019 government was brought in on a platform of more engagement and discussion with Russia and easing the tensions. The Russian-speaking Zelenskyy even won over part of the pro-Russian voting bloc on this basis.

Of course, but 2019 it is probable that Putin had already decided to put the question of military force on the table and was actively considering it (and made the final decision in late 2020 or early 2021, during the pandemic) so any such overtures were doomed to, at the least, being stonewalled whilst he considered his options.

While I am heartened by your faith in Ukraine's military efficacy, I'm also not sure if we are going to be seeing Ukrainian tanks in Red Square any time soon, with Putin being bundled into a police car muttering, "I could have gotten away with it if it wasn't for your meddling HIMARS."

Quote

Zelensky’s main worry is western demands, not his own people. Actually the people in the country he is most worried about are the far right militias.

Zelenskyy's main worry is absolutely his own people. Any act of cowardice or treachery before them and he could look forward to being unceremoniously kicked out of power, at the very least.

Quote

Trump isn’t the establishment, and his ideas were immediately shot down. 

Trump, and the brand of Trumpism he imposed on the Republican Party, absolutely was the establishment and his views, "edgy" in 2016, are now mainstream in the American Right, many of whom want an immediate end to all engagement with Ukraine, a rapprochement with Russia and a return to American isolationism.

Quote

Victim blaming.

Is this the first time that anybody in human history has ever called Vladimir Putin a "victim?" Almost certainly so.

Quote

I distinctly remember this, but no Russia doesn’t randomly invade neighbors with no reason.

100% agreed. Russia invades its neighbours in the interests of neo-imperialism, resource theft, intimidation, to show it's still politically relevant and even just to annoy the west, whilst showing partners like China and India that it's still the big bad boy on the block.

Quote

Ah, here it is, the lie. That Russia can exist as a pliant liberal rump state. Russian culture comes from its destiny as the third Rome, a Russian state with no political independence will be a backwater. 

The history of Russia is not as being the third Rome, but as a state constantly and continuously trying to exist at a level far above that which its economy, population density and geographic location really allows. And to be fair, for most its history, it's actually done a pretty good job of that, taking every advantage of everything that came it way in a manner that's quite impressive. It just made a mess of it post-1991 by allowing corruption to run rampant across the country and squander the strengths it should have gained by modern technology and transport links to its titanic natural resources and a dispersed population. If it had exploited those correctly it may well now be a power richer and more significant than Germany or France, the greatest power in Europe in fact as well as in claim. But it chose to piss those advantages away, and its current course of military aggrandisement is a result of that failure.

Quote

There is a reason Moscow is a landlocked city far from the borderlands, to protect itself, without an empire it will be abandoned and decay into nothing.

Or, rather than face political extinction, apparently, they could just move the capital back to St. Petersburg and if Moscow sinks into the swamp, so be it.

Landlocked capital cities far from the borderlands are also pretty common: Mexico City, Brasilia, Islamabad, Ulaanbaatar and Khartoum immediately come to mind, and Mexico City is one of the most densely populated cities on Earth. Also Moscow isn't that landlocked, it is linked to the sea via canals, has large airports servicing it and massive highways leading to which you can drive up surprisingly quickly from the Black Sea coast (as the recent Wagner episode of Top Gear aptly demonstrated), let alone the closer Baltic.

[polishgenius]

Russia is just bitter because they have this pan-Slavic imperialist instinct going on but if you ask most Slavs I've met we feel brotherhood for all of each other except Russia, on account of... well, the imperialist instinct. 

Also: Russia is desperate coz it's broken itself and needs to continue to manufacture outside enemies to distract the people within, and it's now come across a war where that hasn't worked and it's just exacerbated the problem within.

 

Those two things explain why butterweed is so mad and sad about all this.

 

[butterweedstrover]

44 minutes ago, mormont said:

Western countries and Russia have both been playing the influence game in Ukraine for a long time. Countries have a legitimate interest in what happens in other countries and they'll try to affect that with money, diplomacy, and offers of help. 
 

The west has no interests in Ukraine other than to destroy Russia. For Russia Ukraine is their closest ally and an important economic and cultural partner. 
 

Tell me again who is the idealistic expansionists obsessed with Ukraine?

44 minutes ago, mormont said:

Russia, as is well documented, added corruption and blackmail to that pot. Some would have it that the West did the same. But I'm absolutely sure of this: only one side marched an army up to the Ukraine border, promised that they would not invade, and then marched over the border and started shooting people, looting, and attempting to annex territory. Twice in a decade. 
 

If you know anything about Ukraine, it’s that Russian people and Russian soldiers have always been there for centuries. Now western armed proxies and mercenaries, they are new comers.

44 minutes ago, mormont said:

And if your country's survival depends on doing those things to another sovereign country, then your country's survival can go to hell in a handbasket for all I care. 
 

Western ideology requires expansionism. Give up on the sacred goal of democracy and you have nothing

44 minutes ago, mormont said:

The evidence is that Russia's armed forces would not last five days if they had to 'fight back'. There are two things saving Russia from having to 'fight back':

1. Nuclear weapons

2. A complete lack of interest from the West in actually invading Russia.

Russia would lose on western territory. 

And the West will lose in Russian territory. Try it, see what happened to Napoleon and Hitler. Russia is not Iraq or Serbia or Libya that the west can just destroy military, and that is why they hate them. 
 

Russia can be an independent geopolitical unity that doesn’t serve western multinationals and still compete for influence. Russia is a victim with a gun, and unlike the other homeless people they don’t line up for western crumbs.

[butterweedstrover]

38 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Russia is just bitter because they have this pan-Slavic imperialist instinct going on but if you ask most Slavs I've met we feel brotherhood for all of each other except Russia, on account of... well, the imperialist instinct. 

Also: Russia is desperate coz it's broken itself and needs to continue to manufacture outside enemies to distract the people within, and it's now come across a war where that hasn't worked and it's just exacerbated the problem within.

 

Those two things explain why butterweed is so mad and sad about all this.

 

Learn the difference between eastern and western slavs. Ukraine-Belarus-Russia are literally the same people, zero difference. 
 

Do a DNA test, they are all the same with different regional vocabulary.

[Spockydog]

38 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Russia is just bitter because they have this pan-Slavic imperialist instinct going on but if you ask most Slavs I've met we feel brotherhood for all of each other except Russia, on account of... well, the imperialist instinct. 

I've noticed a similar effect amongst my Irish and Welsh brethren and sistren... Funny that.

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 minutes ago, butterweedstrover said:

Learn the difference between eastern and western slavs. Ukraine-Belarus-Russia are literally the same people, zero difference. 
 

Do a DNA test, they are all the same with different regional vocabulary.

You keep saying this.  What does DNA have to do with cultural distinctions?  Are Icelanders really Norwegian because they share similar genomes?  Should Norway have the right to invade and incorporate Iceland?

(Am I really a German-Irish person and not an American… because of my DNA?)

[butterweedstrover]

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Wholly incorrect.

Ukraine is a sovereign country that makes decisions in its own and best interests. In the past it has, on several occasions, made the judgement to forge a close relationship with Russia. It has also made decisions to move away from Russia. If Russia had behaved in a collegial and cooperative fashion with Ukraine, that close relationship would have continued. 
 

A sovereign country wholly dependent on others for economic, military, and diplomatic cover is in no way independent.

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Indeed, if Russia had not removed the majority of the Russian-sympathetic voting population from Ukraine in 2014, then Ukraine would have almost certainly returned to a Russian-leaning government in the next election and the 2013 revolution would have sputtered out as much as the 2004 one did. Putin's brilliant political acumen instead changed Ukraine's course towards the west.

NATO is not an imperialist spreading force. Countries can only join NATO if they want to, and cooperate with NATO if they want to. They can also only join NATO if they are not engaged in a military contact with other countries. Ukraine joining NATO much this side of 2050 was always fantastical as long as Ukraine's corruption index remained high  and as long as it appeared that Russia was not a military threat to the rest of Europe. Two of these are no longer issues and the third seems to be improving. 
 

It’s not imperialist, until it is. 

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The Minsk agreements were not well-defined. The first one was signed whilst fighting for the Donetsk Airport continued to rage, and the DPR representatives said they had no interest in implementing it whilst the airport remained in Ukrainian hands. The DPR leader then said they would continued to fight until all the territory they had claimed in July 2014 was seized (he later tried a vague walkback under Kremlin pressure, unconvincingly).

Minsk II failed almost immediately because Zakharchenko said he would not honour it and, erroneously, the agreement did not apply to areas where DPR forces were conducting offensive operations. He only fell in line after Kremlin pressure and after Ukraine withdrew from Debaltseve. 
 

Nice try, but Merkel herself admitted it was a lie and Ukraine openly denied the agreement had legitimacy. Their Nazi Allie’s broke the ceasefire and the moment Poroshenko tried to move forward with integrating the agreement the Nazis killed three police officers and got off scot free.

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

.

Trump, and the brand of Trumpism he imposed on the Republican Party, absolutely was the establishment and his views, "edgy" in 2016, are now mainstream in the American Right, many of whom want an immediate end to all engagement with Ukraine, a rapprochement with Russia and a return to American isolationism. 
 

That’s because you don’t understand American politics. Trump said stuff then when in office armed Ukraine to the teeth, demanded the stop of Nord Stream, and pushed members to spend more money. 
 

Mainstream? BS, every Republican that matters wants to fuel this war and NATO. America leaving NATO would be like Russia leaving the USSR.

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Is this the first time that anybody in human history has ever called Vladimir Putin a "victim?" Almost certainly so. 
 

Russia, not Putin.

43 minutes ago, Werthead said:

100% agreed. Russia invades its neighbours in the interests of neo-imperialism, resource theft, intimidation, to show it's still politically relevant and even just to annoy the west, whilst showing partners like China and India that it's still the big bad boy on the block.

The history of Russia is not as being the third Rome, but as a state constantly and continuously trying to exist at a level far above that which its economy, population density and geographic location really allows. And to be fair, for most its history, it's actually done a pretty good job of that, taking every advantage of everything that came it way in a manner that's quite impressive. It just made a mess of it post-1991 by allowing corruption to run rampant across the country and squander the strengths it should have gained by modern technology and transport links to its titanic natural resources and a dispersed population. If it had exploited those correctly it may well now be a power richer and more significant than Germany or France, the greatest power in Europe in fact as well as in claim. But it chose to piss those advantages away, and its current course of military aggrandisement is a result of that failure.

Or, rather than face political extinction, apparently, they could just move the capital back to St. Petersburg and if Moscow sinks into the swamp, so be it.

Landlocked capital cities far from the borderlands are also pretty common: Mexico City, Brasilia, Islamabad, Ulaanbaatar and Khartoum immediately come to mind, and Mexico City is one of the most densely populated cities on Earth. Also Moscow isn't that landlocked, it is linked to the sea via canals, has large airports servicing it and massive highways leading to which you can drive up surprisingly quickly from the Black Sea coast (as the recent Wagner episode of Top Gear aptly demonstrated), let alone the closer Baltic.

Moscow, without Russia, is nothing. 

[polishgenius]

Russia isn't a victim either, kid. Never has been.