Latest Ukraine/Russia Thread

[Bobby_2021]

This is depressing af. Reports taken from reddit. Perhaps reading the ground reality will give you the sufficient empathy.

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/w0ro6wHqAn

Quote

In case you didnt know: They just take random men off the street, throw them into vans and bring them to military boot camps for training and then to the front. They dont give a fuck if you are registered or what your papers are or anything. They see you, they take you. Happened to a young family I know. The man was just abducted one day and now his wife is at home alone with their newborn and no support network and noone to help her take care of the baby (they had to flee from east Ukraine to west and know nobody there). We make fun of Russia for doing this, but its exactly the same in Ukraine Im afraid.

 

Quote

Not only on reddit sadly. Here in germany there has been an ongoing debate about deporting ukrainian men of fighting age back to the war. And the people supporting this use the same Russian Bot tactics to silence opposition. At the same time they say that the ukrainian people want to defend themselves and while Im not disagreeing with that per se it seems a little fucked to me that you at the same time have to force people to fight that obviously dont want to.

And the Party that wants to do this (CDU) is likely to win the chancellorship in february.

 

[Nemra]

23 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

There is no forced conscription in Russia. 30k men are volunteering to join the Army per month based on Incentives alone.

It's mandatory.

Reuters: Putin orders conscription of 133,000 servicemen in Russia's autumn draft

Wikipedia: Conscription in Russia

Edited November 28 by Nemra

[Bobby_2021]

Clown Morgan Got put in his place. Brilliantly articulated by prof sachs.

3 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Reuters: Putin orders conscription of 133,000 servicemen in Russia's autumn draft

@Nemra You should read the article before posting it. This has nothing to do with the Special military operation.

Quote

I would like to note that conscripts will not be called up to participate in the special military operation in the new regions," Rossiyskaya Gazeta cited Tsimlyansky as saying

Realize that Russia doesn't have a manpower problem. Plenty of people are willingly joining because of the monetary benefits.

Plus they are well trained and unlikely to die in the trenches. Ukrainians are taking far more casualties in my opinion. The media sweeps it under the rag.

[Nemra]

@Bobby_2021, you said that it's not forced, which you were wrong about.

Wikipedia:

Quote

Conscription in Russia is a 12-month draft, which is mandatory for all male citizens who are between 18 and 30 years old, with a number of exceptions. Avoiding the draft is a felony under Russian criminal code and is punishable by up to 26 months of imprisonment.

 

Edited November 28 by Nemra

[PurpleTree]

2 minutes ago, Nemra said:

@Bobby_2021, you said that it's not forced, which you were wrong about.

Wikipedia:

 

No no it’s not forced. It’s special militarlily sugested. Also it’s not the poor non ethnic slavic people who sign up for this terror mission ( oops i meant peace keeping) it’s the ethnically diverse people. ☮️

 

I‘ve been a bad bad western tree, spank me papa putin.

[Bobby_2021]

You guys have a lot to learn about the context at which I speak.

Being forced into the meat grinder is not the same as mandatory military service.

Mandatory!=Forced

[Nemra]

2 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

No no it’s not forced. It’s special militarily suggested. Also it’s not the poor non ethnic slavic people who sign up for this terror mission (oops i meant peace keeping) it’s the ethnically diverse people. ☮️

I‘ve been a bad bad western tree, spank me papa putin.

Lol.

[PurpleTree]

1 hour ago, Bobby_2021 said:

You guys have a lot to learn about the context at which I speak.

Being forced into the meat grinder is not the same as mandatory military service.

Mandatory!=Forced

One country is trying to defend itself while the other is attacking though. If Ukraine stops then they will be gobbled up and Ukrainians lose their freedoms in their country. If putler stops then this war stops and Russians can go home and build their own country.

[BlueOak]

On 24/11/2024 at 11:38 AM, Bobby_2021 said:

Ukraine did NOT have nukes.

Ukraine never had nukes.

It's the nukes of the USSR stationed in Ukrainian soil that is moved back to Russia after the dissolution of the USSR.

If you are talking about the Budapest memorandum in 1994, perhaps the pertinent issue is that Ukraine promised a non aligned stance, which was violated by the west by allowing Ukraine into NATO.

Ukraine is supposed to be a non aligned state for a reason. This is exactly what Putin says too.

You have managed to condense so much misinformation in one post. 

There plenty of chances for a ceasefire that were sabotaged by the west and told Ukraine to fight on because Russian are fighting with shovels and crumbling from corruption. Well, that didn't happen.

West has openly commited to the "strategic defeat of Russia".  How can Russia engage in good faith conversations with a party that want to see itself defeated? So not going to happen.

There is nothing NATO can do to push Russia back to it's pre 2022 borders. They aren't afraid of escalation and nukes. NATO literally directly attacked Russian motherland this week.

The only way forward is Ukrainian surrender. This would be bad PR for NATO. 

There is absolutely ZERO risk of Putin attacking any Baltic state. 

The west loves to prop up boogeyman figures to justify attacks and invasion.

Remember when Iraq has weapons of mass destruction booho. Sadam hussain boooho. 

The west has given everything it can give. There is nothing more to do. Trump would be the final nail in the coffin. Even with endless support Ukraine couldn't do anything. They have a manpower problem. No amount of western support can solve this. 

Ukraine was never going to defeat Russia. This was obvious from the get go. Saying this was akin to Russian disinformation. Amd that Russia would crumble in weeks. Obviously the Trust has come to bite you. 

Ukraine had nukes, Ditto Belarus now having them. That was the purpose of the treaty to get them back. You can word it any way you like Bobby. The nukes were in Ukraine and the USA, Russia and the UK guaranteed Ukraine to get them out.

A Russia proxy government in Ukraine is not a non-aligned state. Nor is Putin pushing his influence further and futher outward to establish a Russian Empire.

The Russian ruble continues to collapse. They've wrecked their established trading relationships. They've killed off population they don't have to spare. China owns more and more of their industries. Many of their best have left the country for somewhere safe, and their actions to destroy the arts and liberal part of their population will lead to stagnation long term, as it always does, in their development. They've hastened their descent out of being a major power or even significant regional power.

The only way forward is Ukraine in NATO, or Ukraine with Nukes, or Ukraine in an Eastern Europe or EU Military Alliance. Ukranian surrender is a fantasy.

Everyone loves to prop up a boogeyman to justify attacks and invasions. You do it in every post you make.

Endless support. Not really no. The western economies have barely altered production, whereas Russia is almost in a total war scenario (they are not yet but a large % of their GDP is in support of the war). That's a bit like saying China or Iran is giving endless support, they are not. This is again your and Russian hyperbole.

Actually, if North Korea stupidly keep sending foreign fighters, lots of countries can solve the manpower issue. The door is open now.

Ukraine have done very well against Russia. But as you repeatedly fail to understand, and I have repeatedly told you, its about holding Russia in the east, nothing more.



 

Edited November 28 by BlueOak

[Hatfort]

17 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Ukraine had nukes, Ditto Belarus now having them. That was the purpose of the treaty to get them back. You can word it any way you like Bobby. The nukes were in Ukraine and the USA, Russia and the UK guaranteed Ukraine to get them out.

A Russia proxy government in Ukraine is not a non-aligned state. Nor is Putin pushing his influence further and futher outward to establish a Russian Empire.

The Russian ruble continues to collapse. They've wrecked their established trading relationships. They've killed off population they don't have to spare. China owns more and more of their industries. Many of their best have left the country for somewhere safe, and their actions to destroy the arts and liberal part of their population will lead to stagnation long term, as it always does, in their development. They've hastened their descent out of being a major power or even significant regional power.

The only way forward is Ukraine in NATO, or Ukraine with Nukes, or Ukraine in an Eastern Europe or EU Military Alliance. Ukranian surrender is a fantasy.

Everyone loves to prop up a boogeyman to justify attacks and invasions. You do it in every post you make.

Endless support. Not really no. The western economies have barely altered production, whereas Russia is almost in a total war scenario (they are not yet but a large % of their GDP is in support of the war). That's a bit like saying China or Iran is giving endless support, they are not. This is again your and Russian hyperbole.

Actually, if North Korea stupidly keep sending foreign fighters, lots of countries can solve the manpower issue. The door is open now.

Ukraine have done very well against Russia. But as you repeatedly fail to understand, and I have repeatedly told you, its about holding Russia in the east, nothing more.

You are such a propagandist, I just fact-checked some of your claims, the Ruble is not collapsing, it's quite higher than in 2021. It totally recovered from the high loss it had in the first weeks of the war when the sanctions started, and it's still doing fine. The Russian economy is fine, they changed their trade partners to Asia, and they got rid of the money escape they had been suffering from many of their oligarcs as a bonus. They sell their gas well, instead of to Europe, to other countries. It's Europe the one more affected by energy prices thanks to the US's kind actions toward the Nord Stream.

Bobby is right, Ukraine didn't have nukes, the USSR had them, they happened to be on that part of the Soviet Union. Once the USSR separated into different countries, obviously the location of such weapons had to be rethought, and it was. It was also agreed that NATO wouldn't grow to the East, which has been broken over and over, when Russia was too weak to respond. This time Russia wasn't that weak, so they said no, also because they have a bigger cultural connection to Ukraine. They tried the diplomatic ways of Minsk, but NATO was building a defacto army in front of their noses, like saying: so what are you gonna do to prevent this? Attack? Well, we got the answer, Putin wasn't bluffing. He doesn't want to escalate a war that is winning on the battlefield, but if it gets to higher levels, won't just sit and look. This is Biden's biggest loss, and now that he's done, he is dropping his last presents, but the danger of this game shouldn't be assumable. Stupid old man, he's risking a nuclear war.

North Koreans have not fought in Ukraine yet. If any country wants to send its troops to either side of the conflict, they've better be ready to face the consequences. NATO is playing in the grey areas, the long-range weapons indeed need NATO help to target Russian objectives, and that's why Russia considers that a direct NATO incursion. However, they are still winning on the battlefield, as said, week by week they take more land. Their losses are big, it's a war, but they have more than enough manpower to continue the war against a much smaller country. Ukraine is the one that has problems with that, losing many more men than Russians at this point, that's why they have no chance. Ukranian civilian men know that, they don't want to die, and they prefer to concede the Eastern territories if asked. Zelensky and Western warmongers have made the decision for them though, Zelensky whose legal term ended months ago.

[Scholar]

7 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Clown Morgan Got put in his place. Brilliantly articulated by prof sachs.

@Nemra You should read the article before posting it. This has nothing to do with the Special military operation.

Realize that Russia doesn't have a manpower problem. Plenty of people are willingly joining because of the monetary benefits.

Plus they are well trained and unlikely to die in the trenches. Ukrainians are taking far more casualties in my opinion. The media sweeps it under the rag.

You are indistinguishable from a russian bot.

[Bobby_2021]

11 hours ago, BlueOak said:

Ukraine had nukes, Ditto Belarus now having them. 

Those are Russian nukes stationed in Belarussian soil just like Russian nukes were also stationed in Ukrainian soil. 

Ukraine nor Belarus never had nukes on their own. The nukes stationed in Ukraine before 1994 had their command-and-control center in Moscow, not kyiv. These are basic facts. 

11 hours ago, BlueOak said:

A Russia proxy government in Ukraine is not a non-aligned state.

That was a democratically elected government which the west overthrew. If the people of Ukraine elect someone, the world has to acknowledge that first. Else it will lead to civil war. 

7 hours ago, Scholar said:

You are indistinguishable from a russian bot.

Truth takes the form of a Russian bot. 

[PurpleTree]

The guys who act like bots just put them on ignore imo. There’s no use in trying to understand them or anything.

[BlueOak]

12 hours ago, Hatfort said:

You are such a propagandist, I just fact-checked some of your claims, the Ruble is not collapsing, it's quite higher than in 2021. It totally recovered from the high loss it had in the first weeks of the war when the sanctions started, and it's still doing fine. The Russian economy is fine, they changed their trade partners to Asia, and they got rid of the money escape they had been suffering from many of their oligarcs as a bonus. They sell their gas well, instead of to Europe, to other countries. It's Europe the one more affected by energy prices thanks to the US's kind actions toward the Nord Stream.

Bobby is right, Ukraine didn't have nukes, the USSR had them, they happened to be on that part of the Soviet Union. Once the USSR separated into different countries, obviously the location of such weapons had to be rethought, and it was. It was also agreed that NATO wouldn't grow to the East, which has been broken over and over, when Russia was too weak to respond. This time Russia wasn't that weak, so they said no, also because they have a bigger cultural connection to Ukraine. They tried the diplomatic ways of Minsk, but NATO was building a defacto army in front of their noses, like saying: so what are you gonna do to prevent this? Attack? Well, we got the answer, Putin wasn't bluffing. He doesn't want to escalate a war that is winning on the battlefield, but if it gets to higher levels, won't just sit and look. This is Biden's biggest loss, and now that he's done, he is dropping his last presents, but the danger of this game shouldn't be assumable. Stupid old man, he's risking a nuclear war.

North Koreans have not fought in Ukraine yet. If any country wants to send its troops to either side of the conflict, they've better be ready to face the consequences. NATO is playing in the grey areas, the long-range weapons indeed need NATO help to target Russian objectives, and that's why Russia considers that a direct NATO incursion. However, they are still winning on the battlefield, as said, week by week they take more land. Their losses are big, it's a war, but they have more than enough manpower to continue the war against a much smaller country. Ukraine is the one that has problems with that, losing many more men than Russians at this point, that's why they have no chance. Ukranian civilian men know that, they don't want to die, and they prefer to concede the Eastern territories if asked. Zelensky and Western warmongers have made the decision for them though, Zelensky whose legal term ended months ago.

The ruble has been continually collapsing for years now.

https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/interest-rate

It is propped up by soaring interest rates. Check your own facts before insulting my credibility next time. The fact you think someone can double its military budget and not take an economic hit is mind-boggling, where do they get this money out of thin air? Its set for 6.3% in 2025. What they did do is effectively delay the inevitable with their cash reserves and former Soviet military stockpiles.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-braces-more-tax-rises-fund-ukraine-war-2024-10-31/

The Russian economy is not doing fine at all. 20+% interest rates is not 'fine' in a country which already has relatively low wages and a declining population. Next you'll be telling me Europe is somehow in its golden years by that standard and the hardships everyone around the globe faces don't exist. Even without the war spending and Putin burning their reserves, most economies are barely in recovery or still in an economic winter.

Again the location of the nukes is what led to the treaty. They were in Ukraine hence Ukraine was guaranteed by Russia, the UK and the USA. When the USSR dissolved, they were no longer in the USSR because it didn't exist.

The fact you paint Russia as a victim when its on its 9th war into former USSR territory and continually pushes its sphere of influence outward, like everyone does, meddling in everyone around it labels you as the biggest propagandist in this thread. Here'll i'll mirror this.

Poor old NATO a defensive treaty, just couldn't help but accept the weak and defenseless countries Russia was threatening, and Putin just kept pushing his luck. He kept trying to interfere in their country's political processes; he kept invading his neighbors over and over again. NATO is a victim, because it just had to secure its borders further outward in this zero-sum game you describe. So therefor I can label Russia the bad guy forever. Russia is the second biggest arms dealer on the planet, it propped up some of the worst men on planet earth in positions of power (from my moral valueset), and now it seeks to undermine the world order with rampant imperialism. Now it has threatened food, energy and nuclear war repeatedly, and its leader is a fascist tyrant.

We can do this cyclic moralising all day to no avail whatsoever. Its just justification for our own feelings.

Russia invaded; like all invasions into Europe it will be fought back against and that is what is happening. NATO expanded, BRICS rose up and Expanded. You might not like the reality but that's it. Until You and I, and everyone in this thread stop looking for victims to make ourselves feel better, it'll continue.

North Koreans are involved right now. However, you want to propagandise (to use your reasoning) their presence. Any country has the justification to do the same. It was an idiotic strategic blunder.

The fact is Ukraine is holding Russia in the east, and its taken some Russian land. This will always be a fight, even if it was an occupation. People don't take over land without force and violence, it's not a Disney movie. Russia better be prepared to face the consequences also, it isn't, nobody is. It isn't a massively smaller country in terms of population; its merely a smaller one with more motivation to fight than Russians have to invade. Better training and equipment make up the difference in the population sizes. 

You might want that reality above to be different but it isn't, that's why the war Russians keep telling me will be over in 3 days, in 3 months, in 3 years, isn't over. I told everyone it'd be a decade of violence, and I stand by it, 10-20 years of unrest on the occupied territories. The death ratios compared to the population sizes are comparable. 

[BlueOak]

Oh and BTW all Russian Ruble Trading has ceased till 2025 as it entered a period of hyperinflation, so they can only barter now.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/russian-rouble-down-by-one-quarter-since-early-august-2024-11-27/

https://www.youtube.com/live/sY-PX9pVK_Y?si=xj8CeZf9RpRchtL1&t=1171

Everything is fine? All great over there I am sure.

[BlueOak]

3 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Those are Russian nukes stationed in Belarussian soil just like Russian nukes were also stationed in Ukrainian soil. 

Ukraine nor Belarus never had nukes on their own. The nukes stationed in Ukraine before 1994 had their command-and-control center in Moscow, not kyiv. These are basic facts. 

That was a democratically elected government which the west overthrew. If the people of Ukraine elect someone, the world has to acknowledge that first. Else it will lead to civil war. 

Truth takes the form of a Russian bot. 

Russia is not the USSR. Just like Ukraine is not the USSR, despite how badly old men want to recreate that scenario. The world is different to what is was in that era. Hence the nukes did not belong to Russia, and why they had to be negotiated for.

Democracy in a Russian proxy government? Come on Bobby.
 

[Bobby_2021]

1 hour ago, BlueOak said:

Russia is not the USSR. Just like Ukraine is not the USSR, despite how badly old men want to recreate that scenario. The world is different to what is was in that era. Hence the nukes did not belong to Russia, and why they had to be negotiated for.

Democracy in a Russian proxy government? Come on Bobby.
 

https://history.state.gov/countries/soviet-union#:~:text=Litvinov on the same day,successor state of the USSR.

The United States OFFICIALLY recognises Russia as the successor of the USSR. 

This is an official US government website. Not some clickbait news report.

So yeah it's still Russian nukes at the end of the day.

[zazen]

@Bobby_2021 @Hatfort Westerners are trapped in the slick narratives of their establishment media. The mainstream narrative acts like history always begins with the latest sensationalized headline and the most vivid display of a transgression. Russia invades Ukraine? Evil. Hamas attacks on October 7th? Evil. Two things can be true at the same time - that an obvious act of aggression is wrong, and that provoking someone into it is also wrong.

They never pause to ask what led up to these events because they’ve been conditioned to ignore the endless drip of provocations - the thousands of smaller, less newsworthy transgressions that came before. It’s like watching a dam finally burst and blaming the water for being there. The key word here is provocation, just like in Israels situation its occupation - both words bring about allergic reactions to those who've bought the main stream narrative - because they know it unearths the context their narrative bubbles shield them from. Provoked is such a key term that Scot Horton just named his latest booked using the term - https://www.amazon.com/Provoked-Washington-Started-Catastrophe-Ukraine/dp/1733647376 - already a best seller in the war and peace category.

By isolating one dramatic event and erasing the chain of provocations, the narrative gets flipped. Suddenly, the villain is the one who responds explosively, while the instigator quietly chipping away for decades gets to play the victim. This is the sneakiness of plausible deniability: you can’t connect the dots if you refuse to admit the dots exist. The context gets buried, and the propaganda machine churns on. Jeffrey Sachs does a great job at providing the context.

When the media omits context and misinforms the public for establishment interests - it  leaves the media itself scrambling when challenged by alternative media - and the people unprepared for outcomes that fall outside the constructed narratives fed to them - such as Trump's electoral victories. Blind side galore. The people are made to wear blinkers and gas lit that they're wearing glasses that help them see situations clearly.

To protect the bubble of comfort the mainstream has massaged them into so well - they label those critical of it Russian bots or Putin apologists - just like how they tried to discredit Trump with the Russia hoax or tarnish Tulsi Gabbard by calling her a Russian asset. It rings as hollow as Zionists calling someone a anti-semite for criticizing Israel's actions.

Edited November 29 by zazen

[BlueOak]

@zazen

So instead you've picked a date that suits your moral compass better? Therefore you can moralize the current invasion is justified.

See Afghanistan, Iraq - September the 11th etc etc.

You are doing exactly what you claim I and others do, when I repeatedly in my replies say this is pointless. 

If we were to take your logic back to its source it would end up pointing you at human behavior when organized into the collective called country, especially among certain expansionist cultures/communities.

[zazen]

@BlueOak I haven't justified their actions, just attempted to understand them and what can possibly lead to them. As a Westerner myself, I must confront what my own corner of the planet does, as that's the only possible chance at changing outcomes I have - via the ballot box rather than the bullet. At least that's what sold to us, that we're in a Democracy.. but even then, we don't get to vote on national security or challenges to corporate domination, or are lied to about being able to.

Just look at the recent government petition ballooning up to nearly 3 million signatures for a call for a general election in the UK - after only a few months of Labour being in power. The people were lied to and Starmer went against his campaign promises. Europe is economically struggling and we are expected to fight a war for elites that are despised and getting us into this mess with their warmongering rhetoric - https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700143

The hysteria about Russia’s  imperialism is misguided. Historically, Russia isn’t the imperialist boogeyman it’s made out to be. They expanded centuries ago, just as every major power did when borders were drawn with swords and daggers. But using today’s moral standards to vilify actions that were universal in a time of conquest is unfair. By that logic, Britain, France, Spain, and the United States would also be guilty of imperialist sins that dwarf anything Russia has done. Yet we don't hear calls to roll back the US empire with it's 800 bases. Because such criticisms are selectively applied to fit the current narrative of Western hegemony.

Russia is aging rapidly with a shrinking population. Their demographics are so poor they’ve been handing out incentives to encourage people to have children. That doesn't sound like a country gearing up to expand its borders for empire. Empires expand when they’re young, dynamic, and have surplus manpower. That’s the historical record. From Rome to the British Empire to the Mongols, expansion has always been fueled by youthful demographics. No empire in history has gone on a conquering spree with a population.

Russia is already the largest country on Earth. Its borders stretch across 11 time zones, from the Baltic to the Pacific. What would they gain by expanding into areas they’d have to station men in (which they have less of) manage, and maintain? Empire building isn’t just about taking land - it’s about holding it. That requires boots on the ground, manpower at checkpoints, and resources to fund it all - which as you've pointed out they have less of with a collapsing economy. With their declining population and weakening economy Russia doesn’t have the bodies or the appetite for such a burden. They have neither the demographics nor the need.

They do have an abundance of resources and a lucrative trading relationship with Asia. Why risk all that for a dream of territorial conquest? Russia is far more focused on securing its existing borders and protecting its sphere of influence within its neighborhood. Influence is different from intervention and imperialism which is what the West largely engage in.

sWestern pundits moralize about Russia’s historical expansions while conveniently ignoring their own nations colonial rampages. The British Empire didn’t just expand - it plundered, enslaved, and subjugated. The United States annexed half of Mexico and toppled governments from Guatemala to Iraq. Yet somehow, only Russia’s actions are put under the microscope.

The context today is that we live in a world of nation states with largely settled borders. Expanding territory today isn’t just taboo - it’s counterproductive. Russia knows this. They’re not marching westward in some Tsarist fantasy. They’re protecting their interests in regions like Crimea and Donbass, areas tied to their security and identity. These are defensive, not imperialist, actions - driven by NATO’s provocations, not a desire for global domination.

If anything, the real question isn’t why Russia is acting as it does - it’s why the West refuses to see the obvious. A shrinking, aging country with no demographic fuel for expansion, already sitting on more resources than it can use, has no logical reason to embark on imperialist conquests. The caricature of Russia as a marauding empire is a propaganda tool, designed to justify the endless militarization of NATO and deflect attention from Western failures.

Russia has no need to expand. They’re not the ones projecting military power across the globe - they’re securing their own backyard. And while Western powers cry imperialism, they might want to take a look in the mirror. If Russia’s actions are imperialist, then what are the United State's actions?