Russian invasion of Ukraine

petrusha said:
They've driven away more or less everyone who's able-bodied, not yet in old age and with the capacity to flee, whether their sympathies lie with Russia or Ukraine. It used to be a thriving, vibrant city and to see it ruined in this way is very sad. There's more to say and not all of VVP's analysis regarding Donbas is incorrect, but the point is that you have to accept things as they are and not how you want.

Eastern Ukraine and even more so the middle part of the country has now become much less Russianised than it was in Soviet times, or even 30 years ago in the early days of independence (the west was never Russianised). Russia can regret that if it wants, and not everything that led to this path reflects well on Ukraine IMO, but you have to accept things as you are and not as you want them to be.

Russia trying to revisit the breakup of the Soviet Union now and add territories such as this is as ridiculous as if the UK and Northern Irish loyalists decided that they never should have let an additional three Ulster counties be part of the Irish Free State in the early 1920s so we'll claim back Donegal, Cavan, and Monaghan now. You have to let it go.

More generally, while VVP's speech the other day was pretty horrifying, the most disturbing thing I've seen in recent days was a new report on one of the state channels. They were banging on about how Ukraine wasn't really an independent state but a satellite of the USA. It was claimed that everyone in a significant state office was appointed by the Americans and Ukrainian democracy was a sham. The plan, Russian TV alleges, is to move American long-range missiles into Ukrainian territory and then launch attacks on Russia.

This is a despicably false analysis, but people in Russia are going to swallow it, unfortunately, as a pretext for regime change. (I used to think the Russian public especially gullible in this regard, but after observing the UK over the past few years I'm not quite so sure any longer.) It's very distressing.

Now, VVP's analysis that Ukraine has never been an independent state and shouldn't be one now is quite often voiced in Russia. Many people think that Russia, Ukraine and Belarus are very similar eastern Slavic peoples from the Orthodox tradition who are unified by the Russian language (large numbers of of those in the other two states who aren't first-language Russian speak it fluently), so they should be united in a single state.

But ask them whether they should invade the modern Ukrainian state, make themselves a pariah on the world stage and attract inevitable crippling economic sanctions, then of course they'll say no. It's really not remotely a big deal for them, though it evidently is for the President given his recent speech.

On the other hand, it's a different answer if you ask them whether Russia should intervene to protect, from Ukrainian persecution, fellow Russians unfortunate enough to land on the wrong side of the border. The same if you ask whether a pre-emptive strike is needed to replace a government allowing its territory to be cultivated as a launchpad for an attack on Russia.

I find it extremely distressing. But that's how propaganda works, folks. They'll largely carry the domestic population with them even though that domestic population will be a big loser from the war - not on the level of the poor people in the actual war zone, obviously, but they'll suffer nonetheless. Anyway, on that depressing note, I'm logging off for the night.
Click to expand...
Good to get a first hand account of life experiencing the propaganda from the Russian state. The Putin apologists on here should have a read then stop posting their bollocks.
 
petrusha said:
Yes, it's no doubt an ill-advised comparison. I was just trying to find a situation closer to home that might illustrate that countries can't revisit border settlements decades later just because they decide they wish things had gone differently at the time. Sorry for any offence caused.
Click to expand...
Not at all. I’m not offended.
Northern Ireland is what it is. I and most of the Republic would probably argue that it was a false state that never should have been allowed happen, but the reality is it is far more complex than mere sound bites can cover, for the centuries that shaped it.

In your analysis I would almost see us Republicans as being more likely to be the expansionists retaking the North. We never had the army to do it and probably just as well.

Before anyone new to the political threads gets up in arms about anything I’ve written there, it should be clear by now from any Irish or EU thread contributions I’ve made, that I’m purely speaking historically here and I fully support the GFA and the right of everyone in the North, Unionist or Nationalist, to determine their own futures in a Democratic and peaceful, mutually beneficial manner. Whatever that may be.
 
Russia are making a move a full assault on Ukraine apparently called up Rosgvardiya (National guard) reservists also called up.
 
petrusha said:
Yes, it's no doubt an ill-advised comparison. I was just trying to find a situation closer to home that might illustrate that countries can't revisit border settlements decades later just because they decide they wish things had gone differently at the time. Sorry for any offence caused.
Click to expand...
Stay safe.
 
Putin says he wants:
Crimea to be Russian again,
Ukraine partly demilitarized and
neutral/not a NATO member.

Well, IF that was all (for Russia to feel safe, paranoid fuckers)
and IF Ukraine would get far reaching safety guarantees
it wouldn't sound a bad compromise to me (sitting in Hamburg safe and warm, still...).

In theory. In practice, nobody can trust the other side
and Putin takes what he wants, while officially acting as Robin Hood helping the poor and suppressed victims of genocide.

I also doubt Putin would accept watching a democratic neutral Ukraine prosper as possible EU affiliate while Russia will suffer from deteriorating oil and gas exports due to changing energy politics.

Putin won't stop until Ukraine end as kind of a buffer state for Russia at least, and growing Russian influence will be quite easy that way.

@petrusha Any thoughts?
 
A less important question whilst the resident strategists catch their breath...

Do we call tonights evening meal which is chicken filled with butter sauce and covered in breadcrumbs "chicken keev" now?
 
petrusha said:
Yes, it's no doubt an ill-advised comparison. I was just trying to find a situation closer to home that might illustrate that countries can't revisit border settlements decades later just because they decide they wish things had gone differently at the time. Sorry for any offence caused.
Click to expand...

Depends who settled the border, really. If you took no part in that settlement whatsoever, and you happen to find yourself lumped into a part of the world that you have no wish to be part of, it influences your perspective.
And by the way that comment is in no way a pre-emptive justification for what Putin may be about to do. I'm thinking about many other situations around the world where borders were simply drawn up by the diplomats of the great imperial powers.
This situation has to be judged on its own merits. Apart from anything else, I do find myself wondering whether all Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine wish to be part of Putin's Russia, simply on the basis of the language they speak. Also, I don't know anything about it, but are Ukrainian and Russian so very different as languages? About twenty years ago I had two students, one Ukrainian, one Russian, who always sat together and seemed to be able to communicate just fine (they were both very pretty, incidentally, but that's by the by…)
 
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
Depends who settled the border, really. If you took no part in that settlement whatsoever, and you happen to find yourself lumped into a part of the world that you have no wish to be part of, it influences your perspective.
And by the way that comment is in no way a pre-emptive justification for what Putin may be about to do. I'm thinking about many other situations around the world where borders were simply drawn up by the diplomats of the great imperial powers.
This situation has to be judged on its own merits. Apart from anything else, I do find myself wondering whether all Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine wish to be part of Putin's Russia, simply on the basis of the language they speak. Also, I don't know anything about it, but are Ukrainian and Russian so very different as languages? About twenty years ago I had two students, one Ukrainian, one Russian, who always sat together and seemed to be able to communicate just fine (they were both very pretty, incidentally, but that's by the by…)
Click to expand...
I knew a Ukrainian woman from Kiev/Kyiv...she fucking hated Russians. She was sexy as fuck too
 
Last edited:
St.Pauli support said:
Putin says he wants:
Crimea to be Russian again,
Ukraine partly demilitarized and
neutral/not a NATO member.

Well, IF that was all (for Russia to feel safe, paranoid fuckers)
and IF Ukraine would get far reaching safety guarantees
it wouldn't sound a bad compromise to me (sitting in Hamburg safe and warm, still...).

In theory. In practice, nobody can trust the other side
and Putin takes what he wants, while officially acting as Robin Hood helping the poor and suppressed victims of genocide.

I also doubt Putin would accept watching a democratic neutral Ukraine prosper as possible EU affiliate while Russia will suffer from deteriorating oil and gas exports due to changing energy politics.

Putin won't stop until Ukraine end as kind of a buffer state for Russia at least, and growing Russian influence will be quite easy that way.

@petrusha Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
That last paragraph mate is what hits the nail on the head for me. He wants Ukraine to be Russia. Been there twice to watch City and had a great time with very friendly people. You can only imagine how most of Ukraine is feeling right now. Very sad situation
 
west didsblue said:
Lazy generalisation.
No one is the same as the lying fraud acting as a Prime Minister without actually doing the job he should be doing, and bullshitting his way through it instead. That’s nothing to do with political views just about the clown who’s supposed to be running the country along with his supporting sycophants.

Agree with your second paragraph but that depends on having a government that’s fit for purpose.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you go a post without mentioning either trump, brexit or boris. Thank fuck I don’t venture into the politics threads to much, it would drive me nuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top