Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 374. (Read 73192 times)

Nope, this things isn't based on my mentality or something else. It was said by Putin. They recognize Donbass and Luhansk border line which is written in their constitution. And in constitution it's not front line. They are using border line which is made by Ukraine long time ago, way before all conflicts and it's whole teritorry of Donbass and Luhansk.
How they are going to take control of it, it's open question. Putin mentioned negotation.

All because your expectations are based on your nationalist mentality, and on far-right statements about an ideal society. If your foggy mind would see the difference between expectation and reality, you would understand that the current lines of demarcation and the historical administrative-territorial division used in the USSR, which was later used in Ukraine, are two different things. Therefore, claiming or trying to seize that part of the Donetsk region that is under the control of Ukraine is tantamount to full-scale military operations.

No matter what anyone says, there is only one scenario in which Russia dares to make this move, but the first step should be made by the EU and not Russia. A scenario in which the EU and the US at this very second will introduce the maximum possible package of sanctions, something like a sanction against North Korea. In the meantime, the EU and the US act with caution by introducing phased sanctions against Russia, Ukrainians have nothing to fear.

I am leading to the fact that the multi-stage system of sanctions is precisely designed so that one of the parties would have leverage in the future, in case the situation worsens even more. Therefore, if the EU would hypothetically take radical measures today, it would lose its leverage, and Russia, knowing that the situation would not worsen, would go for a confrontation or annexation of Donbass, Transnistria and all the territories where its troops are currently located.

Well technically Lithuania announced indpendence in 1990, while Iceland and other more than 40 countries recognized our indpendence in 1991.
But I doubt that these things can be compared. Lithuania were independent country before Soviet occupation. While Donbass and Luhansk basically has no history, it's not separate nation. It's just a region filled with Russian and Ukrainian nationality people.

It's good point. Fact that big part of population there is pro-Russian people is one of main problems for Ukraine and why they can't do much. And this is why I think that Russia won't go more far into West because there is much more pro-Ukrainian nationalist.

As I understand, Russia recognize whole Donbass and Luhanks as independent state. But actually, separatists have basically half of region under their control. If you will look at map and frontline, remaining part of region is controlled by Ukraine: https://www.polgeonow.com/2020/09/ukraine-war-2020-map.html. So, I expect that Russia will try to take remaining part of Donbass and Luhansk with cities like Mariupol or Kramatorsk.
I don't believe that West would recognize these regions in exchange for a peace. Actually, it was big surprise for me that Germany put sanctions connected with Nord Stream 2. I expected just tradional phrases that they're ''deeply concerned.
And complete bankrup for Russia sound like uthopia for me.

I beleive that Putin is a hero for Russian people, same like when he took Crimea. But is it really win for Russia? What is cost of it. Falling ruble, sanctions - if these sanctions with Nord Stream 2 will really happen, it will be big thing. How much money they will have to put into destroyed region and it's economy.
And no victims, I wouldn't say so when during conflict thousand of separatists and Russian soldier were killed.
And Donetsk and Luhanks request to join Russia - it's just matter of time.

Despite the fact that the energy market is favorable at the moment, it can be considered that Russia has already lost the northern stream - 2, since the recent agreement between Bidenn and the German chancellor implied the veto of the northern stream not only in the event of an invasion of Ukraine, but also in the event of any movements of the Russian contingent on non-government controlled Ukraine territories.

As for Putin’s rating, it’s too early to talk about it, but it’s safe to say that he will receive real support from the population on the eve of the elections in 2024, but not earlier. The population of any country likes high-profile victories, especially if there are no victims in these victories, so I won’t be surprised if Donetsk and Lugansk turn to Putin with a request to be included in Russia through a referendum, and most importantly ... Putin will go for meeting.

I think most politicians, and especially Presidents are transactional, and that should be a good thing. The Saudi's (for example) are not going to convert to democracy, and there is no real reason why the US should lose its troops and treasure in order to force them into being one, but that does not mean the US should not get something from the Saudis if the deal is a net benefit to us.

I really don't know what Russia or Putin potentially would have to offer Trump if he were president in 2025. Trump was tough on Putin during his first term and increased the sanctions against Russia during his term. Before covid, it looked like a second Trump term was going to be almost automatic, and if Putin had something to offer, he could have made a deal with Trump. The Trump presidency made the US a net oil/energy exporter, which would be the only potential leverage that Putin might have, however, Trump could easily implement policies that would make the US energy independent again.

I would note that if the Nordstream 2 pipeline was operational today, it is likely that Europe, especially Germany, would be much more willing to look the other way than they are today (even though Germany is really not helping with the situation currently). It was Trump that forced these delays via sanctions, and Putin could have offered Trump something to allow for the Nordstream 2 to be built. Trump was never going to be in office forever, so it would have benefited Putin for the Nordstream 2 to be built today, and for Germany to be relying on it for energy for years.

Russia: We will invade Ukraine!
USA: If Russia invades we will fight back and invade Ukraine!
Europe & NATO: We will not sit back, we will invade Ukraine too!

Ukraine: WTF!!!!!

I liked everything you said especially the bold part. That reminds me of the US a lot. When the US invaded Iraq for having nuclear warheads (which was of course bullsiht) nobody did anything to stop them. That's how a superpower acts. If anyone has any power to stop Russia, go do it, if you can...

So, the West will have to suck this one up.

The crisis has deepened in Ukraine ,  President Putin said last night that Russia will recognize Donbas areas as Independent states and will send military troops inside Ukraine to these areas, NATO countries will certainly react to it. Let's watch and wait how the situation unfolds. The markets have shown strong reaction to this news and  entire  financial got spooked and dumped.

AFAIK there hasn't been any significant resistance inside those regions for a long time. There's tight control by the local authorities (pretty much dictatorships - with permanent curfews etc). If no one was able to put up much of a fight there against those forces, surely nothing is going to happen now with the arrival of Russian military reinforcements.

The question is how much further will Putin move into Ukraine. It's possible that he will play tough for a few months and "negotiate" to get Luhansk/Donetsk/Crimea recognized as part of Russia by the West in exchange for a peace deal. But in a sort of macabre way, it would probably be better for Ukraine in the long run if Putin tried to move further. This could bankrupt Russia and end up with a complete withdrawal like Afghanistan in 1980s. At a huge cost to both sides.

Any country can say whatever they want. The US said that Juan Guaidó was the legitimate president of Venezuela despite him never having any real hold over the country; they recognized the anti-Assad forces as the true leaders of Syria; they recognized the anti-communist regime as the legitimate leaders of Vietnam in the Vietnam War; they long recognized what is now Taiwan as the legitimate leaders of all of China; etc. In all of those examples, the force backed by the superpower lost. I don't know that Ukraine will ever retake effective control of those regions, but it's not as if Russia's declaration is what will put an end to the issue, and it's not as if Russia is the only country with a history of making these sorts of declarations.

If the disputed territories had mostly Ukrainian nationalists, I don't think that Russia could hold it long-term (even if they could win every single battle fought). But the issue is that a sizable percentage of the population in those regions supports Russia. And if Ukraine is too weak to retain the territory, Russia is willing to exert force to take it, and many more residents are willing to fight for Russia than against Russia, then it seems inevitable that the territories will go to Russia.


The "Russiagate" stuff is indeed largely conspiracy nonsense, but Trump is more transactional and self-interested than Biden, so I think he'd be willing to lift sanctions in a few years if he could negotiate a deal with Putin which looked like a win.

There has been fighting going on at the border of the disputed territory between the Ukraine military and the separatist militia. Presumably, there is Ukrainian military equipment and personnel at the border of the area that separatists occupy.

Why would they bomb the territory they already control, makes no sense.

If Ukraine were to agree to give up parts of its country that are under the control of separatists, it would avoid bloodshed associated with war, and would not really change much in terms of Ukrraine. This would be an ideal outcome for Ukraine.

I think this is a good indication that an invasion is imminent. Russia may initially claim to be going into areas controlled by separatists under the pretext of "liberating" those areas, but there is always the potential that the Russian military will not stop at those areas. Any invasion is going to be accompanied by airstrikes (likely), so if Russia limits airstrikes to the areas controlled by separatists, the invasion is likely to be limited to that area.

---

update:
an invasion appears to have started

Ahem... wasn't Lithuania technically "part of another country" when it was recognized by Iceland in 1991?

Anyway, technicalities aside, yes, Donetsk/Luhansk is Russia's Trojan horse to send troops there (after being promptly asked to do so by the people of the new countries) and then perhaps expand a hundred or so km into Ukraine because they will need a buffer zone to defend from those pesky Ukrainians. Kharkiv is a goner too probably, eventually.

So, Putin today officially recognised Luhansk and Donetsk People's Republics as independent stats. It's something unbeleavable how president of one country can simply decide that part of another country will be independent state.
With this action he probably will find reason to justify sending Russian troops to Donetsk and Luhansk to protect people from "regime" of Ukraine. And later simply accept these states into Russia like they did with Crimea.
In Putin speach there was lot of shit said, like threat from Ukraine to make nuclear weapon.

Yeah, Ukraine can't win war against Russia. But now Russia is spreading agenda that Ukraine will attack Eastern region which is under control of separatists. How stupid it would be when there probably 170k or more Russian troops dislocated by the border.
Avoiding invasion is best interest for Ukraine, but they don't have many tools in their hands when they have such neighbour.

I have no idea what Zelenski would be willing to offer. I agree that the Russians generally cannot be trusted when it comes to guarantees of peace.

The problem is that Ukraine likely cannot win a war against Russia if Russia is willing to continue any war it is fighting. Ukraine can possibly make the war too bloody for Russia to continue, and eventually win when Russia withdraws. Even if Ukraine did win this way, they would still incur heavy losses themselves. So trying to avoid an invasion is in Ukraine's best interest.

Do you mean that they would give up offcially Luhansk and Donbass which is under control of separatists? Or you mean giving up piece of Eastern Ukraine which is under of control of Kyiv? I think that none of these scenarios is possible. When it comes to Russia, promise of peace means nothing and it don't gives any guarantees that they won't come here again.

Haven't followed up what exactly has happened in Ukraine, however, invading it's territory won't surprise me. Let me remind you that Russia invaded and claimed most of the region of Crimea, back in 2014, it wouldn't surprise me if Putin is aiming on an expansive policy.

If such thing occurs, it will have disastrous consequences for both worldwide economy, but also in human life. A war would be the last thing we'd want now, hopefully, NATO will step in before the situation turns into a disaster.

It is hard to say what is actually known, and how reliable the intelligence is.

When we withdrew from Afghanistan, the US intelligence predicted that it would take months for the Taliban to take over the country when it actually took about 48 hours, and there was nearly zero resistance. Now US intelligence is saying that Ukraine could fall within 48 hours of Russia launching an invasion. I am not sure the basis for that prediction, however, I do believe there will be much more resistance to an invasion as Ukraine has resisted Russia in recent years.

It does appear that western intelligence was right about a false flag operation. There was a bombing against the leader of a separatist group that had no casualties. I would expect a failed assassination attempt to have some civilian and/or security casualties.

Putin has claimed to be withdrawing his troops from the Ukraine border, but there does not appear to be evidence of that. It does appear that war is imminent.

The best time for Russia to invade would be after the Nordstream 2 pipeline is complete (perhaps one year later), during the winter, when Europe would be dependent on Russian gas via the pipeline. Germany and Frace appear to be the weak links in potential sanctions against Russia. That is fitting considering that an invasion of Ukraine would be the biggest war in Europe since WW2, and neither country was on the right side of either world war (Germany was part of the Axis, and France quickly fell).

Trump is not going to start a new war in response to a Russian invasion, although I do believe he would be open to continuing military operations in the region if he is convinced that is what is best for the US. Trump was harder on Russia than either Obama or Biden, despite the baseless claims of being a Russian agent.

---

The Ukraine president has called for a meeting with Putin, so the two sides can come to a peaceful "settlement". It is possible that Ukraine will be willing to give up some of its territory in exchange for the promise of peace. This could be seen as a win at home for Putin (which is likely the root cause for the Russian aggression), and would avoid the bloodshed associated with war.

I don't think it's just the Biden administration that's being played, we all are.  The fact that Biden has relaxed Trump's sanctions against Russia has emboldened Putin.  I'm not big on conspiracy theories, but I have no doubt that a shady menage trois exists between Putin, Zelenskyy, and Biden.

Biden also has a lot of lobbyists to whom he must answer, and the one lobby he's been answering to for the last 49 years lost a revenue stream when he pulled out of Afghanistan.  For four years Trump tried to pull out of Afghanistan, and for four years he was obstructed because he had no intention of starting another conflict.  There's also no chance that Trump would have abandoned billions of dollars worth of weapons in Afghanistan, which would have effectively left the US with a weapons surplus.  That's not good, if your goal is protecting the MIC's revenue streams.

This is all complicated by the divide within Ukraine itself.  There's a significant difference in culture and even language between Western and Eastern Ukraine, with the east being inhabited by predominantly ethnic Russians.  I think Putin is hoping to incite a civil war within Ukraine, and aligning himself with the east, but I think he is underestimating the Eastern Ukrainians' indifference over which corrupt government collects their taxes.