Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[PointOfViewGun]

Do you mean do I think Ukraine already lost? Yes I do!

Nope. Clearly, that's not what I meant. It's not rocket science or something hidden. You've been claiming for a while that the Ukrainian army is non-existent.

[Love Mountain]

Ukraine's fight is helping NATO's war against Russia. We're at war. We've been at war since a KGB agent came to power. It's not just the leader, but an entire branch of people.


Even if a peace settlement is reached, the war against Russia must continue to protect Europe. The only way to keep us safe, as the war has shown us, is to keep Russia half dead, corrupt and continuously being weakened in industry, economy and patriotism, and to create conflict between it and China, and this can be best achieved by helping Putin or whoever succeeds him with weaker control keep his seat.

Europeans are so easy to manipulate, it's quite incredible.

[Stario]

...You've been claiming for a while that the Ukrainian army is non-existent.

Indeed the Ukrainian army is "non-existent" as far as being effective for quite a while now.
Look at the map, look at the damage as far as infrastructure in Ukraine v Russian infrastructure. Look at the flattened Ukranian villages, towns, cities vs Russian ones...

[PointOfViewGun]

Indeed the Ukrainian army is "non-existent" as far as being effective for quite a while now.
Look at the map, look at the damage as far as infrastructure in Ukraine v Russian infrastructure. Look at the flattened Ukranian villages, towns, cities vs Russian ones...

It's either non-existent or non-effective. If its non-existent who is Russian soldiers fighting and getting killed by? If its non-effective how do the Russian lose so many men and equipment while only advancing at a snail's pace?

[Stario]

It's either non-existent or non-effective. If its non-existent who is Russian soldiers fighting and getting killed by? If its non-effective how do the Russian lose so many men and equipment while only advancing at a snail's pace?

It's "effectiveness" is "non-existent." Quite easy to understand. Well maybe not for some. 😆

[Kyriakos]

For how long is the pretense that Ukraine can win the war going to to continue? Up to the US elections?
Like I said, even if we assume that Ukraine will be able to take back control of everything/most of what it has lost, that'd still leave you to contend with Russia very obviously then nuking Ukraine and thus winning again by default of nothing left to oppose it there.

I'd at least be willing to see this as a plan, if we had a reason to believe US/other main Nato sides would take part directly in the war.

[PointOfViewGun]

It's "effectiveness" is "non-existent." Quite easy to understand. Well maybe not for some. 

Beautiful piggy backing there. In that case, if its non-effective how do the Russian lose so many men and equipment while only advancing at a snail's pace?

For how long is the pretense that Ukraine can win the war going to to continue? Up to the US elections?
Like I said, even if we assume that Ukraine will be able to take back control of everything/most of what it has lost, that'd still leave you to contend with Russia very obviously then nuking Ukraine and thus winning again by default of nothing left to oppose it there.
I'd at least be willing to see this as a plan, if we had a reason to believe US/other main Nato sides would take part directly in the war.

When did Russia nuke Afghanistan?

[Alastor]

For how long is the pretense that Ukraine can win the war going to to continue? Up to the US elections?

That's the working assumption. Though there have been already some whispers within the Biden admin that Ukraine may not win afterall, they are just... not too loud.

[Ludicus]

Switzerland denies Ukraine peace summit ultimatums

The focus of the Swiss-hosted Ukraine peace conference will be on nuclear safety, food safety, freedom of navigation and humanitarian aspects, rather than demanding a withdrawal of Russian forces

But...I quote,

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry website, spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told a media conference that Russia has a copy of the summit’s finalised agenda – which still contains nine of the ten Zelensky points.
Those points include the “ultimate demand” for Russia to withdraw its troops and return to the 1991 borders, reparations and compensation from frozen Russian assets.

According to the euronews, it seems that in fact “The Swiss initiative is meant to build upon Zelenskyy's 10-point peace formula and develop a roadmap for a future peace process”: Biden's absence at peace summit will be a 'standing ovation' for Putin, warns Zelenskyy.
--
--
Biden stated that he will not support Ukraine's entry into NATO, even after a hypothetical peace agreement with Russia. Biden's statements were made during an interview with Time magazine published on Tuesday, the same day he arrived in France to participate in D-Day ceremonies. Biden's position contrasts with the successive statements of other NATO country leaders, including Stoltenberg, who has repeatedly given Ukraine hope that integration will become a reality, albeit a distant one. Biden himself, on other occasions, despite rejecting Ukraine's immediate entry into NATO, has advocated for its membership in the future, during a period of peace.In France, Biden will meet with Zelensky but has already announced that he will not attend the peace conference in Switzerland the following weekend.

Biden To Hold Talks With Zelenskiy After Voicing Opposition To Ukraine Joining NATO.

It comes shortly after Biden told Time magazine in an interview that he did not support NATO membership for Ukraine -- a position in contradiction with that of NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg -- which is likely to raise questions from Zelenskiy.
…In the wide-ranging June 4 interview with Time, Biden said that "peace looks like making sure Russia never, never, never, never occupies Ukraine. That's what peace looks like."
But, he added, "It doesn't mean NATO, [that] they are part of NATO."
“It means we have a relationship with them like we do with other countries, where we supply weapons so they can defend themselves in the future. But...I am not prepared to support the NATOization of Ukraine."

[conon394]

Full interview here

https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-t...024-interview/

I would point out Biden is just making clear US policy that was not to put Ukraine in NATO no matter what Putin on or Tankiies say but Ludicus you seem you to have failed to quote the bit where Biden is opposed absolutely to Putin's aims with respect to Ukraine so um err beig a bit tankie.

[conon394]

That's the working assumption. Though there have been already some whispers within the Biden admin that Ukraine may not win afterall, they are just... not too loud.

Really from what source.Please.

[Alastor]

Really from what source.Please.

From many sources conon, here it is from politico: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/0...r-aid-00154143

Do you really believe everyone in Capitol Hill is blind?

[Ludicus]

Historical revisionism and the geopolitics of the present. On the occasion of the 80th anniversary of D-Day. La Russie est invitée à célébrer les 80 ans du du Débarquement en Normandie, mais pas Vladimir Poutine-Le Figaro.
"Russia will be invited to be represented because of its role and sacrifices among the Soviet peoples, as well as its contribution to the victory in 1945...Unlike the Kremlin regime, France does not pursue a policy of historical revisionism"
---
France, which organized the commemorations of the 80th anniversary of D-Day, decided not to invite Putin (who, incidentally, was present at the 70th anniversary, even after the annexation of Crimea). However, they wanted to invite some Russian representatives, heirs of the men who helped fight Nazism. The White House and the UK expressed their disagreement, and France backed down. Everything became confused: perhaps Stalin did not defeat Hitler? I watched the commemorations of the political geopsychology of the present with perplexity.




British Conservative MP Tobias Ellwood, who served as the UK's Defence Minister—and despite being one of the strongest supporters of Western aid to Ukraine—said in Politico in May that if Russia were not invited, there was a risk of "confusing today's geopolitics with the unity of purpose to defeat Nazism in the past." France riles allies by inviting Russia to D-Day ceremony-Politico


Churchill centered his 1945 election campaign against the "Soviet enemy" and was not re-elected because the USSR was viewed with sympathy by the British electorate, allies of the British and Americans in the fight against Hitler.
Why did Churchill get voted out so quickly after World War

(...) Many British people looked on in admiration to the Soviet Union and how it was taking on the lion's share of the struggle against fascism. They naturally became more sympathetic to their political cause. Membership of the British Communist Party reached an all-time high and their influence far outweighed their size, with members in key positions in large factories and throughout the labour movement. It is important to realise this was before the cold war and the creation of the ‘iron curtain’. At this time, immediately after the defeat of Hitler, Russia was viewed in a far more favourable light by the vast majority of the population. When the football team Moscow Dynamo flew to Britain in November 1945 tickets for the games sold out in a few hours. When Dynamo played they were cheered as loudly by British fans as they did for the home side. When a story broke that these visiting footballers were to be accommodated in army barracks the public were outraged and the Soviet embassy was overwhelmed with offers from ordinary Londoners offering to host team members in homes.

Max's Lecture on Armageddon: The Battle For Germany 1944-45

Even some knowledgeable people are still amazed to be told that US and British troops on the battlefield, in the course of the entire war, killed around 200,000 German soldiers while the Russians killed over three million. But there is a clear understanding first, that the Soviet Union did most of the fighting necessary to defeat the Wehrmacht, and second, that the United States provided a critical portion of the tools necessary to do so, for all the nations of the Grand Alliance.
While the Soviets were compelled to fight Germans almost every day of their war, in the West the Americans and British waited until conditions overwhelmingly favoured their arms before launching each of their great operations. To say this is not to criticise; nor is it to underrate the extraordinary ferocity of the fighting some western allied troops endured. It is merely to recognise an obvious reality, reflected in the vastly smaller casualties the Westerners endured, to do their part towards victory... At least 27 million Soviet citizens died in the war, against a million British, American and French people combined. In whole war Brit & American ground troops- that is, not counting air bombardment- killed about 200,000 Germans. Russians killed around four million of Hitler’s people.

Max Hastings, a historian totally unsuspicious of communist sympathies, writes in The Finest Years -Churchill 1940-1945:

“The Western Allies never defeated the main German armies - they only helped the Russians destroy them”

“And if Roosevelt and Churchill had the satisfaction of occupying higher moral ground than Stalin, it is hard to dispute the Soviet warlord's superior claim to be called the architect of victory”.

“Despite all the enthusiasm of George Mashall and his colleagues for the invasion of Europe, it remains impossible to believe that the United States and Great Britain would be willing to accept millions of casualties to play the role of wearing down the Red Army at Stalingrad, Kursk, and 100 other smaller bloodbaths between 1942 and 1945."
----

When historical accounts disturb us greatly, we invent a mythified past and erase from memory what bothers us. Stalin used to erase enemies from photographs, and today it is the West's turn to do the same. What has been forgotten is that the blood of Soviet soldiers and people was crucial in combating the Nazi regime. Erasing the Soviet Union from the victory photograph of D-Day replicates Stalin's methods in the West.
--

Full interview here
but Ludicus you seem you to have failed to quote the bit where Biden is opposed absolutely to Putin's aims with respect to Ukraine.

Not at all, what Biden said is very clear in my quote.

.
…In the wide-ranging June 4 interview with Time, Biden said that "peace looks like making sure Russia never, never, never, never occupies Ukraine. That's what peace looks like."
But, he added, "It doesn't mean NATO, [that] they are part of NATO."
“It means we have a relationship with them like we do with other countries, where we supply weapons so they can defend themselves in the future.

Biden is "opposed absolutely to Putin's aims", but he will not send troops to Ukraine, nor will he support Ukraine's entry into NATO - which is something new.

Edit- In France, today, Le Pen has won the EU elections and the far-right scores big gains in Germany (AFD), which is not good news for Europe. It's probably not good news for Ukraine either.

[Kyriakos]

I wonder if we actually will get the new world war after all.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germany-proposes-new-voluntary-military-service-boost-defence-2024-06-12/

Article is about plans for a non voluntary conscription in Germany. Some parties of the coalition (namely the christian democrat one) want a fully mandatory conscription to return there.
In such a war, those who can will do very well to stay neutral. The devastation would be unparalleled to anything before it.

[Ludicus]

A new survey by the Institute for Global Affairs, found the overwhelming majority of Western public opinion is in favour of ending the war in Ukraine through negotiations: 94% of Americans and 88% of Western Europeans. New Survey: The New Atlanticism – IGA June,5





In an Odoxa poll, 74 % of the French rejects the idea of sending troops to Ukraine. In these European elections, Macron, who continues to promise to send troops to the carnage in Ukraine without first attempting any negotiation, dragging us all into the next madness of this century, saw his support reduced to 15% of the votes, and risks going down in history as the authoritarian neoliberal who not only broke records for suppressing civil rights in France in the last 60 years, but also opened the doors to the rise of the French far-right.

Meanwhile, the business of death—the arms market—is alive and well, generating enormous profits. It has many advantages and few disadvantages, one of the reasons why there is no firm will to find a negotiated solution to end this war.
Lindsey Graham, who became world famous for advising the Israeli government to vaporise 2.3 million Palestinians with an atomic bomb, has called called Ukraine a "goldmine", adding that Washington could lose access to critical minerals worth trillions of dollars if Russia wins the war. American Senator Reveals Real Reason Why...

Blinken at a Press Availability

...as I mentioned before, virtually all of the security assistance that we’ve provided Ukraine and the security assistance that would be in – that’s in this supplemental budget request, that gets invested right here in the United States. That’s where it’s spent... it provides good jobs here in the United States. It builds our own defense industrial base.

[AqD]

In such a war, those who can will do very well to stay neutral. The devastation would be unparalleled to anything before it.

In an Odoxa poll, 74 % of the French rejects the idea of sending troops to Ukraine. In these European elections, Macron, who continues to promise to send troops to the carnage in Ukraine without first attempting any negotiation, dragging us all into the next madness of this century, saw his support reduced to 15% of the votes, and risks going down in history as the authoritarian neoliberal who not only broke records for suppressing civil rights in France in the last 60 years, but also opened the doors to the rise of the French far-right.

which is exactly why conscription and patriotism need to be brought back. All defense preparations need to be based on worst case scenarios not the fantasy of happy people living together. Decades of negligence have left us exposed and vulnerable, and not just in hardware. If WW2 happens today, people would themselves and run!


Regardless, we have plenty of money for continued support as long as Ukraine is willing to fight. We need to fully restore our industry capacity and supply lines anyway, and weapons have to be made, fired or not.

Remember 2 years ago some geniuses were saying Russia would resort to nuke if we start sending real weapons?

[Kyriakos]

Ukrainians will keep fighting, until it is obvious they are losing heavily, or until they get rewarded for their very real courage by a small nuke at a major city of theirs.
Either way, Ukraine will be the victim, and it certainly deserved better, Russia should have never invaded.
Imo the chance of peace died when Russia refused to just sign the Donbass over to Ukraine without any aspirations of autonomy - Russia already had taken Crimea.

But there is a chance we will get to world war. After all, ww tends to happen when the situation isn't sustainable and you need another reload. Of course after ww3 the planet will be a lot worse, with entire countries no longer existing and wasteland in between those that still do.

[Ludicus]

But there is a chance we will get to world war...

Indeed. But The US and the USSR were able to coexist during the Cold War, because in the case of war, mutual destruction was assured. Why won't the US/Biden help negotiate a peaceful end to the war? Do we have to wait for Trump to be elected president, really?...Trump threatens to cut US aid to Ukraine quickly if reelected

[Alastor]

Either way, Ukraine will be the victim, and it certainly deserved better, Russia should have never invaded.

So it should have allowed the NATO takeover, as well as US bases in an increasingly hostile and better armed Ukraine sharing an important thousands of kms long border with them, they should have also accepted the slow elimination of the Russian separatists in Donetsk, along with the effective rooting out of Russian culture from the rest of Ukraine?

I don't disagree that this war should have been avoided. I do believe it was completely avoidable. But you are saying specifically that Russia should have never invaded, so I'm just wondering what do you think a workable alternative would have been for Russia in the face of all this US pressure?

[Legio_Italica]

I don't disagree that this war should have been avoided. I do believe it was completely avoidable. But you are saying specifically that Russia should have never invaded, so I'm just wondering what do you think a workable alternative would have been for Russia in the face of all this US pressure?

Putin’s ultimate objectives have been laid bare by the war, and the latter isn’t necessary to pursue them. Any accomplishments post-invasion have fallen far short so far, isolating the Russian state geopolitically while hemorrhaging blood and treasure, without achieving his stated goals of regime change in Kiev or barring Ukraine from NATO membership. The primary purpose of deploying ground forces is to occupy and hold territory and/or force regime change, so we can safely assume these, rather than NATO expansion, have been the actual non-negotiable red lines since long before the second phase of the 2014 invasion launched in 2022. As far as the Kremlin is concerned, Ukraine can exist as a Russian satellite, or not at all.

Eroding the international credibility of the US and our European allies would be better served by preparing for an invasion that never actually occurs. Putin could mass his forces on the border, militarize the economy, and deepen ties with US adversaries, blaming NATO aggression for everything, without incurring the cost of war or validating anti-Kremlin narratives about imperialism, while making western leaders look like warmongering alarmists in contrast to the strong, peaceful Russian state trying to build a more multipolar order. The longer that goes on, the greater leverage he would have to exact detailed concessions excluding Ukraine from NATO and build ties with pro-Russian separatists in the former Soviet space.

As is, he has pushed Europe firmly into the US sphere of influence and made the once mighty Russian Empire a Chinese client state compelled to show effusive public gratitude for a partnership with North Korea, once considered the cartoonish subject of Soviet ridicule. Maybe he’ll get his frozen conflict in Ukraine, or even grind it to dust entirely . But I fail to see how turning the former breadbasket of the Empire into a no man’s land is a success for anyone involved. If he thinks there are extremist factions in Kiev now, just wait and see how crazy things get when it is a failed state. The US learned that lesson with ISIL and Shiite militias in Iraq, despite what began as a quick and total military victory for American forces, especially compared to anything happening in Ukraine.