UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Locked
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 12:03pm
madd0c0t0r2 wrote: 2024-02-20 10:58amMy understanding is that Russia (or at least Sisko :) ) fears NATO encirclement
Screw you. I'm not Russia and I don't 'fear' a Nato encirclement of the country. I simply said that the USA's policy towards Ukraine caused this conflict. The pro-Ukranian stooges in this thread have been wrong about Euromaidan on this board for literally years. You can act like I'm unreasonable for acknowledging why we're here.
No, you just take their money, as per your own admission:
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-19 11:30pm However, the Kremlin only pays me...
:roll:
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

madd0c0t0r2 wrote: 2024-02-20 10:58am
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-19 08:42pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-19 07:22pm Ending the war is not Ukraine's choice to make, it's Russia's. They can end it any time they want by leaving Ukraine.
Is this a concession that Ukraine has no path to ending this war via victory at arms?
I do think EnterpriseSov should/could make their wider position clear.
Let me just get my crystal ball since any assessment is going to depend on a fuckton of gazing into it. The Ukrainian's military situation hinges entirely on the availability of Western aid that comes in, when it comes in and crucially, what form it takes. As currently the largest contributor, it falls to the American Congress, the longer they spend fucking around, the worse the situation on the ground in Ukraine gets. I don't know when/if they're going to get their shit together, does anyone else? :banghead: The same can be said for other Western nations- if the military aid dries up, Ukraine is on its own.
User avatar
3-Body Problem
Youngling
Posts: 65
Joined: 2024-01-01 04:57pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by 3-Body Problem »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 12:37pm Let me just get my crystal ball since any assessment is going to depend on a fuckton of gazing into it. The Ukrainian's military situation hinges entirely on the availability of Western aid that comes in, when it comes in and crucially, what form it takes. As currently the largest contributor, it falls to the American Congress, the longer they spend fucking around, the worse the situation on the ground in Ukraine gets. I don't know when/if they're going to get their shit together, does anyone else? :banghead: The same can be said for other Western nations- if the military aid dries up, Ukraine is on its own.
Being uncertain if your allies will continue supporting you seems bad for morale and like a pretty good reason to see if negotiating decent terms is possible.
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5195
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by LaCroix »

There is only one uncertain ally - the US. Everyone else is rallying. With sputtering engines, but they are on the right path.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
The Sisko
Redshirt
Posts: 47
Joined: 2020-08-10 12:37pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by The Sisko »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 12:24pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 12:03pm
madd0c0t0r2 wrote: 2024-02-20 10:58amMy understanding is that Russia (or at least Sisko :) ) fears NATO encirclement
Screw you. I'm not Russia and I don't 'fear' a Nato encirclement of the country. I simply said that the USA's policy towards Ukraine caused this conflict. The pro-Ukranian stooges in this thread have been wrong about Euromaidan on this board for literally years. You can act like I'm unreasonable for acknowledging why we're here.
No, you just take their money, as per your own admission:
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-19 11:30pm However, the Kremlin only pays me...
:roll:
That you are so utterly incapable of recognizing when you're being goosed is my favorite part of this entire discussion. I mean, of course I'm getting paid by the Kremlin! What other explanation is there for being against a war started by a US coup? You're hopeless.

EDIT: Thank god the west saved Ukraine from, *checks notes*, a Democratically elected government and billions in Russian aid.
Anyway, here's Wonderwall
Ralin wrote:Soft Holocaust Denial isn't Holocaust Denial.
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:16pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 12:24pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 12:03pm
Screw you. I'm not Russia and I don't 'fear' a Nato encirclement of the country. I simply said that the USA's policy towards Ukraine caused this conflict. The pro-Ukranian stooges in this thread have been wrong about Euromaidan on this board for literally years. You can act like I'm unreasonable for acknowledging why we're here.
No, you just take their money, as per your own admission:
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-19 11:30pm However, the Kremlin only pays me...
:roll:
That you are so utterly incapable of recognizing when you're being goosed is my favorite part of this entire discussion. I mean, of course I'm getting paid by the Kremlin! What other explanation is there for being against a war started by a US coup? You're hopeless.

EDIT: Thank god the west saved Ukraine from, *checks notes*, a Democratically elected government and billions in Russian aid.
So now the USA is responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine? You're completely delusional if you really believe that :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
The Sisko
Redshirt
Posts: 47
Joined: 2020-08-10 12:37pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by The Sisko »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 02:26pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:16pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 12:24pm
No, you just take their money, as per your own admission:

:roll:
That you are so utterly incapable of recognizing when you're being goosed is my favorite part of this entire discussion. I mean, of course I'm getting paid by the Kremlin! What other explanation is there for being against a war started by a US coup? You're hopeless.

EDIT: Thank god the west saved Ukraine from, *checks notes*, a Democratically elected government and billions in Russian aid.
So now the USA is responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine? You're completely delusional if you really believe that :lol: :lol: :lol:
So January 6th was a coup because it almost forced a change of government in violation of the USA constitution, but when Ukraine does it, and the leader Ukraine ends up with was chosen by the USA, that's just fine in your estimation? So much for 'Ukraine gets to decide its own fate' - I guess that stops being a part of the discusison as soon as Ukraine chooses something against US interests. Which, it did, and it was couped, invaded, and is currently being destroyed for its trouble.

All this because, a country already economically and culturally entwined with Russia was going to get Russian aid to keep it out of EU, which has long been seen by the Russians as a stepping stone to NATO membership. Your repetition and insults are doing nothing to help Ukraine win this war, and your cheer leading while they lose is probably going against your own interests, but hey, who cares? Let's just keep blaring overly-optimistic appraisals of Ukraine's situation on CNN until their army completely disintegrates! That'll show the Russians. Oh, and anyone who thinks this whole fiasco was stupid to begin with because we were never going to go as far as the Russians, why, they're just paid kremlin stooges! Everyone I disagree with is a shill!
Anyway, here's Wonderwall
Ralin wrote:Soft Holocaust Denial isn't Holocaust Denial.
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-20 02:01pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 12:37pm Let me just get my crystal ball since any assessment is going to depend on a fuckton of gazing into it. The Ukrainian's military situation hinges entirely on the availability of Western aid that comes in, when it comes in and crucially, what form it takes. As currently the largest contributor, it falls to the American Congress, the longer they spend fucking around, the worse the situation on the ground in Ukraine gets. I don't know when/if they're going to get their shit together, does anyone else? :banghead: The same can be said for other Western nations- if the military aid dries up, Ukraine is on its own.
Being uncertain if your allies will continue supporting you seems bad for morale and like a pretty good reason to see if negotiating decent terms is possible.
That's not what Volodymyr Zelenskyy thinks:
Ukraine under no pressure from allies to stop fighting - Zelenskiy
VILNIUS, Jan 10 (Reuters) - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Wednesday Kyiv was under no pressure from allies to stop fighting Russia as he began a tour of Baltic states intended to shore up support for the war effort.
On his trip to Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, Zelenskiy hopes to stop war fatigue among Ukraine's Western allies, secure more financial and military aid, and discuss Kyiv's bids to join NATO and the European Union.
But shortly before the Ukrainian leader started talks with Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda in Vilnius, Italy's defence minister said in Rome that the time had come for diplomacy to pave the way for peace.
Asked in Vilnius whether Ukraine's partners were now urging Kyiv to stop fighting, Zelenskiy said: "There is no pressure from partners to stop our defence. There is no pressure to freeze the conflict, not yet."
"There are various voices in the media, I have read them all," he told a joint press conference with Nauseda. "But I think that our partners are not yet officially ready to give us such signals. At least I haven't heard them personally."
The three Baltic states are among Kyiv's staunchest supporters in the EU and the NATO military alliance, and provided Ukraine with military aid even in the weeks leading up to Russia's full-scale invasion on Feb. 24, 2022.
All three, as well as Moldova, would be next in Russia's sights if it ends up victorious in Ukraine, Zelenskiy said.
With the prospects of a protracted war growing after a Ukrainian counteroffensive last year failed to provide the breakthrough Kyiv had hoped for, Ukraine has been appealing to its Western allies for more financial and military assistance.
Those appeals have become more urgent since EU and U.S. aid packages worth tens of billions of dollars were stalled late last year.
"That uncertainty of the partners' financial and military support to Ukraine only builds up the bravery to the Russian Federation. Therefore we should not prolong this process any more", Zelenskiy told reporters.
He said Ukraine faced an acute lack modern air defence systems against Russian missile and drone strikes.
"INTENSIVE DIPLOMACY",
Italian Defence Minister Guido Crosetto told Italy's parliament the Ukrainian counteroffensive had not produced the desired result, and the military situation had to be viewed with realism.
"From this perspective ... it would seem that the time has come for incisive diplomacy, alongside military support, because there are a number of important signals coming from both sides," Crosetto said.
Russia is progressively showing willingness to negotiate and safeguard its economy, while Ukraine's stance appears less uncompromising than before, he said.
"All of this must be taken into consideration on the path towards negotiations to stop the conflict and the subsequent process of normalisation of relations, not only of Russia with Ukraine, but also with Western countries," he said.
Russia has said it is ready for peace talks if Ukraine takes account of "new realities", suggesting an acknowledgement that Russia controls about 17.5% of Ukrainian territory.
Zelenskiy has rejected any notion that Russia is interested in talks under President Vladimir Putin, and has suggested Moscow would agree to a pause in fighting only if it needed a break to replenish its army.
Addressing a crowd of several thousand in central Vilnius, some of them waving Ukrainian or Lithuanian flags, Zelenskiy said defiantly: "There will never be 'the day after Ukraine'. There will the day after the war, and there will be the day after Putin."
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:39pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 02:26pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:16pm
That you are so utterly incapable of recognizing when you're being goosed is my favorite part of this entire discussion. I mean, of course I'm getting paid by the Kremlin! What other explanation is there for being against a war started by a US coup? You're hopeless.

EDIT: Thank god the west saved Ukraine from, *checks notes*, a Democratically elected government and billions in Russian aid.
So now the USA is responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine? You're completely delusional if you really believe that :lol: :lol: :lol:
So January 6th was a coup because it almost forced a change of government in violation of the USA constitution, but when Ukraine does it, and the leader Ukraine ends up with was chosen by the USA, that's just fine in your estimation? So much for 'Ukraine gets to decide its own fate' - I guess that stops being a part of the discusison as soon as Ukraine chooses something against US interests. Which, it did, and it was couped, invaded, and is currently being destroyed for its trouble.

All this because, a country already economically and culturally entwined with Russia was going to get Russian aid to keep it out of EU, which has long been seen by the Russians as a stepping stone to NATO membership. Your repetition and insults are doing nothing to help Ukraine win this war, and your cheer leading while they lose is probably going against your own interests, but hey, who cares? Let's just keep blaring overly-optimistic appraisals of Ukraine's situation on CNN until their army completely disintegrates! That'll show the Russians. Oh, and anyone who thinks this whole fiasco was stupid to begin with because we were never going to go as far as the Russians, why, they're just paid kremlin stooges! Everyone I disagree with is a shill!
First you say the USA led a coup in Ukraine, then you say Zelensky was chosen by the USA? Care to back up any of your bullshit assertions with actual evidence in your pointless attempts to justify Putin's invasion? :lol:
User avatar
The Sisko
Redshirt
Posts: 47
Joined: 2020-08-10 12:37pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by The Sisko »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 03:03pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:39pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 02:26pm
So now the USA is responsible for the Russian invasion of Ukraine? You're completely delusional if you really believe that :lol: :lol: :lol:
So January 6th was a coup because it almost forced a change of government in violation of the USA constitution, but when Ukraine does it, and the leader Ukraine ends up with was chosen by the USA, that's just fine in your estimation? So much for 'Ukraine gets to decide its own fate' - I guess that stops being a part of the discusison as soon as Ukraine chooses something against US interests. Which, it did, and it was couped, invaded, and is currently being destroyed for its trouble.

All this because, a country already economically and culturally entwined with Russia was going to get Russian aid to keep it out of EU, which has long been seen by the Russians as a stepping stone to NATO membership. Your repetition and insults are doing nothing to help Ukraine win this war, and your cheer leading while they lose is probably going against your own interests, but hey, who cares? Let's just keep blaring overly-optimistic appraisals of Ukraine's situation on CNN until their army completely disintegrates! That'll show the Russians. Oh, and anyone who thinks this whole fiasco was stupid to begin with because we were never going to go as far as the Russians, why, they're just paid kremlin stooges! Everyone I disagree with is a shill!
First you say the USA led a coup in Ukraine, then you say Zelensky was chosen by the USA? Care to back up any of your bullshit assertions with actual evidence in your pointless attempts to justify Putin's invasion? :lol:
I was referring to the person who took over Ukraine after its legal president was chased out of the country by a Maidan-led sniper attack
Bloomberg wrote:Ukrainian protesters killed in downtown Kyiv in 2014 were fired on by domestic law enforcement officers, not Russian snipers, according to an investigation by the nation’s prosecutors.[

While Moscow influenced the decisions of then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s government, the order to shoot at protesters gathered on Independence Square in the capital was issued by the authorities and was carried out by Ukrainian forces, Interfax-Ukraine news service reported, citing prosecutor Oleksii Donskyi in Kyiv.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ter-deaths

which led to The US' preferred candidate being installed:
BBC wrote:Voice thought to be Nuland's: What do you think?

Jonathan Marcus: At the outset it should be clear that this is a fragment of what may well be a larger phone conversation. But the US has not denied its veracity and has been quick to point a finger at the Russian authorities for being behind its interception and leak.

Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.

Jonathan Marcus: The US says that it is working with all sides in the crisis to reach a peaceful solution, noting that "ultimately it is up to the Ukrainian people to decide their future". However this transcript suggests that the US has very clear ideas about what the outcome should be and is striving to achieve these goals. Russian spokesmen have insisted that the US is meddling in Ukraine's affairs - no more than Moscow, the cynic might say - but Washington clearly has its own game-plan. The clear purpose in leaking this conversation is to embarrass Washington and for audiences susceptible to Moscow's message to portray the US as interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs.

Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

Nuland: My understanding from that call - but you tell me - was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a... three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?

Pyatt: No. I think... I mean that's what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it.

Nuland: OK, good. I'm happy. Why don't you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.
The then Ukrainian president was not legally removed from office:
Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych Driven From Power
https://www.rferl.org/a/was-yanukovychs ... 74346.html
Radio Free Europe wrote:But a legal gap remains. According to the terms of an EU-brokered peace deal finalized on February 21, Yanukovych was due to sign a measure returning Ukraine to its 2004 constitution. (In 2010, Yanukovych restored the country's 1996 constitution, which hands greater power to the presidency.)

Yanukovych, however, failed to sign the measure. The omission appears to leave Kyiv in the kind of legal limbo that may prove fodder for future arguments against the current government transition.
It was illegal, it was a coup, and while Zelenskyy may not have been hand-seleted by the US, every government since 2014 has been illegal. The person who took charge in the aftermath very much WAS our choice. These are facts you cannot insult away.
Anyway, here's Wonderwall
Ralin wrote:Soft Holocaust Denial isn't Holocaust Denial.
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28821
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Broomstick »

3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-19 09:10pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-19 08:58pmBecause your entire argument is fundamentally flawed and based on the notion that Putin might offer something that he hasn't offered before, despite making absolutely no indications of doing so and if anything is doubling down. To assume he's going to suddenly change is, frankly, absurd.
If we're being honest, Ukraine has no hope of getting better terms via strength at arms so what does losing a slow bloody meatgrinder of a war get them in the end besides, at best, a pyrrhic victory?
If someone would rather go down fighting than surrender I don't see why I should stop them. Especially since all indications, based on what the Russians have already done, are that if Ukraine does surrender then the surrender would be followed by mass slaughter, stealing of children, and theft of everything. How is giving into that better than fighting to the end?
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-19 09:46pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-19 09:40pmIf we assume that's true, losing gets them the same thing as surrendering does- Ukraine ceases to exist.
One of these possibilities at least allows for a sizable Ukrainian diaspora to pick up and rebuild elsewhere. The other sees the ruined corpse of a nation disrespectfully buried after a futile struggle. I know which one I'd prefer.
It's not your choice to make. It's not about what you would want.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 03:39pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-20 03:03pm
The Sisko wrote: 2024-02-20 02:39pm
So January 6th was a coup because it almost forced a change of government in violation of the USA constitution, but when Ukraine does it, and the leader Ukraine ends up with was chosen by the USA, that's just fine in your estimation? So much for 'Ukraine gets to decide its own fate' - I guess that stops being a part of the discusison as soon as Ukraine chooses something against US interests. Which, it did, and it was couped, invaded, and is currently being destroyed for its trouble.

All this because, a country already economically and culturally entwined with Russia was going to get Russian aid to keep it out of EU, which has long been seen by the Russians as a stepping stone to NATO membership. Your repetition and insults are doing nothing to help Ukraine win this war, and your cheer leading while they lose is probably going against your own interests, but hey, who cares? Let's just keep blaring overly-optimistic appraisals of Ukraine's situation on CNN until their army completely disintegrates! That'll show the Russians. Oh, and anyone who thinks this whole fiasco was stupid to begin with because we were never going to go as far as the Russians, why, they're just paid kremlin stooges! Everyone I disagree with is a shill!
First you say the USA led a coup in Ukraine, then you say Zelensky was chosen by the USA? Care to back up any of your bullshit assertions with actual evidence in your pointless attempts to justify Putin's invasion? :lol:
I was referring to the person who took over Ukraine after its legal president was chased out of the country by a Maidan-led sniper attack
Bloomberg wrote:Ukrainian protesters killed in downtown Kyiv in 2014 were fired on by domestic law enforcement officers, not Russian snipers, according to an investigation by the nation’s prosecutors.[

While Moscow influenced the decisions of then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s government, the order to shoot at protesters gathered on Independence Square in the capital was issued by the authorities and was carried out by Ukrainian forces, Interfax-Ukraine news service reported, citing prosecutor Oleksii Donskyi in Kyiv.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ter-deaths

which led to The US' preferred candidate being installed:
BBC wrote:Voice thought to be Nuland's: What do you think?

Jonathan Marcus: At the outset it should be clear that this is a fragment of what may well be a larger phone conversation. But the US has not denied its veracity and has been quick to point a finger at the Russian authorities for being behind its interception and leak.

Voice thought to be Pyatt's: I think we're in play. The Klitschko [Vitaly Klitschko, one of three main opposition leaders] piece is obviously the complicated electron here. Especially the announcement of him as deputy prime minister and you've seen some of my notes on the troubles in the marriage right now so we're trying to get a read really fast on where he is on this stuff. But I think your argument to him, which you'll need to make, I think that's the next phone call you want to set up, is exactly the one you made to Yats [Arseniy Yatseniuk, another opposition leader]. And I'm glad you sort of put him on the spot on where he fits in this scenario. And I'm very glad that he said what he said in response.

Jonathan Marcus: The US says that it is working with all sides in the crisis to reach a peaceful solution, noting that "ultimately it is up to the Ukrainian people to decide their future". However this transcript suggests that the US has very clear ideas about what the outcome should be and is striving to achieve these goals. Russian spokesmen have insisted that the US is meddling in Ukraine's affairs - no more than Moscow, the cynic might say - but Washington clearly has its own game-plan. The clear purpose in leaking this conversation is to embarrass Washington and for audiences susceptible to Moscow's message to portray the US as interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs.

Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.

Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff. I'm just thinking in terms of sort of the process moving ahead we want to keep the moderate democrats together. The problem is going to be Tyahnybok [Oleh Tyahnybok, the other opposition leader] and his guys and I'm sure that's part of what [President Viktor] Yanukovych is calculating on all this.

Nuland: [Breaks in] I think Yats is the guy who's got the economic experience, the governing experience. He's the... what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in... he's going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it's just not going to work.

Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that's right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step?

Nuland: My understanding from that call - but you tell me - was that the big three were going into their own meeting and that Yats was going to offer in that context a... three-plus-one conversation or three-plus-two with you. Is that not how you understood it?

Pyatt: No. I think... I mean that's what he proposed but I think, just knowing the dynamic that's been with them where Klitschko has been the top dog, he's going to take a while to show up for whatever meeting they've got and he's probably talking to his guys at this point, so I think you reaching out directly to him helps with the personality management among the three and it gives you also a chance to move fast on all this stuff and put us behind it before they all sit down and he explains why he doesn't like it.

Nuland: OK, good. I'm happy. Why don't you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.
The then Ukrainian president was not legally removed from office:
Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych Driven From Power
https://www.rferl.org/a/was-yanukovychs ... 74346.html
Radio Free Europe wrote:But a legal gap remains. According to the terms of an EU-brokered peace deal finalized on February 21, Yanukovych was due to sign a measure returning Ukraine to its 2004 constitution. (In 2010, Yanukovych restored the country's 1996 constitution, which hands greater power to the presidency.)

Yanukovych, however, failed to sign the measure. The omission appears to leave Kyiv in the kind of legal limbo that may prove fodder for future arguments against the current government transition.
It was illegal, it was a coup, and while Zelenskyy may not have been hand-seleted by the US, every government since 2014 has been illegal. The person who took charge in the aftermath very much WAS our choice. These are facts you cannot insult away.
Literally NONE of that is evidence for your claim of the Revolution of Dignity being a US coup. Also, we have rules about using sources that are behind a paywall that require you to cut and paste the relevant info, something that you have not done for that Wall Street Journal article.
The clear purpose in leaking this conversation is to embarrass Washington and for audiences susceptible to Moscow's message to portray the US as interfering in Ukraine's domestic affairs.
Which as you have so helpfully demonstrated, such as you.
User avatar
3-Body Problem
Youngling
Posts: 65
Joined: 2024-01-01 04:57pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by 3-Body Problem »

Broomstick wrote: 2024-02-20 03:50pmIf someone would rather go down fighting than surrender I don't see why I should stop them. Especially since all indications, based on what the Russians have already done, are that if Ukraine does surrender then the surrender would be followed by mass slaughter, stealing of children, and theft of everything. How is giving into that better than fighting to the end?
The goal would be to get as many more people out as you can before coming to terms. The Russians can't touch Ukrainians that aren't in the country anymore. Zelensky would save lives by encouraging more people to flee the country rather than to urge them to continue fighting.

The dead have no use for a country.
It's not your choice to make. It's not about what you would want.
Sure, but it's not like I have any ability to make either side stop. If I did no nation would ever be able to violently interact with any other ever again.

My opinion is based on a belief that there isn't a win condition for Ukraine and that prolonged conflict will lead to more death and suffering than evacuation and capitulation will.
madd0c0t0r2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 277
Joined: 2020-12-23 11:03am

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by madd0c0t0r2 »

Could the disscussion about euromaiden be split to a different thread?

There's a stupid disscussion to be had there* but it has zero bearing on the current situation in Ukraine.

*We can debate the merits of populist uprisings Vs coups and russian money in opposition groups across Europe and wether in the great game** the proportional response to losing influence in a territory is an invasion killing roughly 660,000 so far.

** but to truly understand we must go back to the 8th century. Smirk.
madd0c0t0r2
Padawan Learner
Posts: 277
Joined: 2020-12-23 11:03am

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by madd0c0t0r2 »

madd0c0t0r2 wrote: 2024-02-20 10:58am
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-19 08:42pm
EnterpriseSovereign wrote: 2024-02-19 07:22pm Ending the war is not Ukraine's choice to make, it's Russia's. They can end it any time they want by leaving Ukraine.
Is this a concession that Ukraine has no path to ending this war via victory at arms?
I do think EnterpriseSov should/could make their wider position clear.

I'll go first:

My views have changed over time. At the very start of this thread I thought Russia would not invade as it was crazy and costly. I did not expect Ukraine to fight as well as it did in the first year, and I did not expect the re-emergence of trench warfare in the plains of Ukraine in the second year.
I really expected Europe manufacturing to get their shit together, and I expected Russia to struggle financially harder than it has so far.


I think the following things:
In the current situation, I agree with James Meek's summary of the situation:
Neither side can be said to have won at the front, but there’s no doubt what’s happening in terms of shells and soldiers: Russia is pulling ahead. Ukraine’s allies in Europe and North America are dawdling, bickering among themselves, or, in some cases, like Slovakia, actively turning against it. As things stand, the advantage in men and materiel that Russia is accruing will eventually give Putin an advantage, allowing him to dismember, punish or perhaps even swallow Ukraine whole, as he chooses...

They estimate that it requires as many as a quarter of a million shells a month for an offensive, and at least 75,000 a month just to hold its ground... Instead of seven thousand shells a day, its guns are rationed to two thousand or fewer, which means that Russia is able to mass artillery and troops for offensives more safely. No matter how many FPV drones Ukraine has – and each one requires its own human controller – they have a range of only a few miles, which makes them a last-ditch weapon...

no matter how many new soldiers Ukraine manages to call up, it can’t compete with Russia, body for body. It can’t beat an increasingly old-school Soviet army of massed tanks, artillery and human waves with a numerically inferior Soviet-style force of its own.
In summary, I do not think under the current situation Ukraine can win, or hold the line indefinitely through force of arms alone.

I also think that the following things are true:
Russia:
There are an extremely large number of cases where a large invader has essentially given up and gone home despite dominating in force of arms. The treasure expended has to be worth the return.
My understanding is that Russia (or at least Sisko :) ) fears NATO encirclement, fears loss of buffer states in a sphere of influence around it, and deeply desired Crimea as a Black Sea fleet home.
So far, the invasion has increased the number of NATO countries, the incorporation of the Donetsk territories but no extension of sphere of influence, and the Crimean port is now too unsafe to keep ships in (and the navy is somewhat smaller than it was). In all these factors, the invested money has not yet produced a good return.


Ukraine
Ukraine has agency here. They can choose to negotiate whenever. They can choose to defend their country if they wish.
Negotiations are unlikely to start in earnest until after the US election, and the fall out from that. Whichever party thinks they have best odds of winning support there would want to delay negotiation until their hand is stronger.

I think that Ukraine, after the Crimean invasion, the Donbas splitting, and the Russian atrocities against Ukrainian civilians feel they have their backs against the wall. They may be unable to currently win, but to be honest, when Russia was bearing down on Kyiv, they also thought they were unable to win and (mostly)* held fast anyway. There's a certain irrational bloody-mindedness that happens when you are defending your home against a totalitarian invader with a pretty shit reputation. Every time a line was drawn, Russia crossed it. When areas were taken, the Ukrainians suffered pretty badly. Dying fighting or dying under occupation while your wife is gang raped kinda means going down fighting seems like the least bad option.

*Corruption and Russian influence and abettors are still being weeded out of the country's logistics chains. The pressure of war makes it hard to hide such allegiances. As the number of 'waiters' in positions of power reduces, the influence of Russia is declining. It doesn't mean their replacements are suicidal patriots, but it does mean they are looking for other ways forward then merely waiting to be assimilated.
A vision of a return to 1991 borders might not be realistic, but it is a clear vision. When it comes to rebuilding a shattered country after the war, the EU and allies looks like a better option than an oligarchic petrostate.

A final factor that I think is important for Ukrainian morale is that Russia has had some periods of being a complete joke in this invasion. The October 2022 Ukrainian breakthrough that rolled up a lot of area. The weird (politically driven?) determination to capture Bakhumut, and the subsequent rebellion and counter-invasion of Wagner's mercenary forces. Like, remember that? That was weird. So, from the Ukrainian point of view, the Russian army competence is not predictable. If they continue to hold out or loose slowly enough, the chance of something weird and brittle occurring goes up. Putin's death being one. It's not a strategy, but it might explain some of the stubborness.

NATO
I think Nato has 4 goals.
1) punish Russia for trying to change the map boundaries. This is a big concordance to try and send a message to any other leaders with ideas about land grabbing. The azerbajin-armenia-artsakh mess previously mentioned is long running, tiny and with almost no risk of spilling or escalating further. Artsakh is nearly 20 times smaller than just the Donbas. The punishment needs to be expensive, and or humiliating. The block is willing to pay quite a lot for the offendor to be suitably punished. In game theory terms, the future threat must be credible.
2) Let Russia and Ukraine do some testing and experimenting on how gear actually performs in a peer-type war. This is partly from wanting strategic understanding of Russia, which did invade. It's mostly wanting to understand how a future war involving China, India or Pakistan might play out, and what sort of technologies and counters need to be developed
3) Keep Russia busy. Between assassinations that accidently kill our civilians, cyber-attacks on infrastructure, fucking around in elections and sponsoring far right parties, Russian agents have been a nuisance pushing as close to the line of 'not worth reprisal' as they could. The war is an excuse to strip some of that out, and, I think, was anticipated to create enough internal politics and economic difficulties to keep russia mostly naval gazing for a decade.
4) Opportunists within the bloc also have their own agenda. The NATO fans feel relevant again, and the EU fans are seeing unprecedented continental unity against an outside threat. The MIC have secured extra funding for another decade or two. The Greens; Resilience; and Fortress Europe factions have been able to force gas divestment far faster than previously though possible.

Other players
Both India and China benefit from the current situation. They are effectively getting cheaper fuel since the sanctions split the market, they are both selling to stuff to both sides, and they too are very interested in how a land-war peer conflict at this tech level plays out.


I also think the current situation is brittle and is likely to change in 6 months, just as it has every 6 months since the Russian invasion. One possibility of emergent tactics is below.
The Russian military journalist Alexander Kharchenko, who argues that Russian use of FPV drones was one of the causes of the failure of the Ukrainian counter offensive, suggested in January that the battle lines were more fluid than generally thought. ‘The number of drones at the front is growing exponentially,’ he wrote on Telegram. ‘Dozens of “birdies” [drones] will fly at a single armoured vehicle, and a soldier can be chased by two or three.’ Front-line trenches, he pointed out, were held at the expense of troops and vehicles ready to supply them with food and ammunition and evacuate the wounded. If that supply chain couldn’t make it the last mile to the trenches, the trenches would fall. ‘The recipe for a breakthrough is extremely simple,’ he wrote. ‘Quadruple the number of FPV drones and concentrate them on a small section of the front. After supplies fail, you’ll be able to weed out the exhausted [survivors] without much difficulty. Crucially, this scenario can be carried through with only a small investment of time and money. It’s realistic. The main thing is to stay ahead of the enemy.’
---

In other news, Japan pledges aid to Ukraine now in excess of $10 billion worth of financial aid. It cannot provide direct military support under its own regulations. Although that gets a little fuzzy when the money goes to hospitals and the money that was going to hospitals can go to tanks.
https://www.reuters.com/world/japan-hos ... 024-02-19/
In the BBC news program I saw this on, the talking head suggested this was 1) Japan keeping leadership with the G7, 2) part of the wider effort to ensure that the post WW2 consensus that borders do not change, and strongly punish countries that attempt to do that. Japan in particular wants that message sent to China 3) Part of japan's very long running efforts of soft-power through infrastructure loans and expertise


A good, even handed article by James Meek: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n04 ... ies-in-one
it has a lot of good insight, and it's the source of most of the unattributed quotes in this post.
Sisko seems unable to tell when they are being goosed.

Anyhow. This is a ghetto edit, as I forgot a major sub point for NATO 1). They are being careful with what they give Ukraine, and (reportably) complaining when attacks occur across the 1991 Russian border. They want to give Russia no fear of losing its own map boundaries and give it a clear 'this land is yours' position to retreat to. There is a wish to punish without escalation
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28821
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Broomstick »

3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-20 04:31pm
Broomstick wrote: 2024-02-20 03:50pmIf someone would rather go down fighting than surrender I don't see why I should stop them. Especially since all indications, based on what the Russians have already done, are that if Ukraine does surrender then the surrender would be followed by mass slaughter, stealing of children, and theft of everything. How is giving into that better than fighting to the end?
The goal would be to get as many more people out as you can before coming to terms. The Russians can't touch Ukrainians that aren't in the country anymore. Zelensky would save lives by encouraging more people to flee the country rather than to urge them to continue fighting.
Millions have already fled Ukraine.

The problem with encouraging even more to do so is that those people need somewhere to go. Who is going to take them in? Borders are closing all around the world, immigration is getting more and more difficult. Telling people to leave is useless if there is nowhere for them to go.

As for "not touching people not in the country anymore" - you might want to ask Zelimkhan Khangoshvili, Ruslan Israpilov, Abdulvahid Edelgiriev, Umar Israilov, Alexander Litvinenko, or Maksim Kuzminov about that. Except you can't, because all of them were killed by Russian agents while outside of Russia (or Ukraine for that matter). You see, that's another flaw with "run away" - the Russians follow. They kill people years after they leave and they don't care about damage to innocent bystanders.

Not everyone wants to spend the rest of their lives looking over the shoulder or having to pick up and flee again and again.
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-20 04:31pm My opinion is based on a belief that there isn't a win condition for Ukraine and that prolonged conflict will lead to more death and suffering than evacuation and capitulation will.
Where are the remaining Ukrainians going to evacuate to? Which country on the map is willing to take in millions of people?

Capitulation? Are you serious? Russia has engaged in mass rape, mass torture, mass kidnapping, mass deportation, and mass murder on all the occupied areas of Ukraine they've held. Would YOU be willing to drop trou and bend over for a regiment of Russians to ass-rape you? Because that's essentially what you're expecting Ukrainians to submit to.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29312
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Vympel »

Agree that the Euromaidan topic should be taken to a different thread. If you wish the discussion to continue there, please move replies there. Otherwise let's not jam up this thread about it. Also note that this thread will in a few days be locked and a new thread created due to the 2 year anniversary approaching.

Anyway, Avdiivka again.

Hundreds of Ukrainian Troops Feared Captured or Missing in Chaotic Retreat
Hundreds of Ukrainian troops may have been captured by advancing Russian units or disappeared during Ukraine’s chaotic retreat from the eastern city of Avdiivka, according to senior Western officials and soldiers fighting for Ukraine, a devastating loss that could deal a blow to already weakening morale.

The Russian capture of Avdiivka has emerged as a significant symbolic loss for Ukrainian troops, a sign of the battlefield impact of the failure of the U.S. Congress, so far, to approve more military assistance as dwindling supplies of artillery shells make it even harder to hold the line.

Estimates of how many Ukrainians were captured or missing vary, and a precise count may not be possible until Ukraine solidifies new defensive lines outside the city. But two soldiers with knowledge of Ukraine’s retreat estimated that 850 to 1,000 soldiers appear to have been captured or are unaccounted for. The Western officials said that range seemed accurate.

American officials say the loss of Avdiivka is not a significant strategic setback, arguing that Russian gains in eastern Ukraine will not necessarily lead to any collapse of Ukrainian lines and that Moscow is unlikely to be able to follow up with another major offensive.

But the capture of hundreds of soldiers could change that calculus. American officials have said in recent days that morale was already eroding among Ukrainian troops, in the wake of a failed counteroffensive last year and the removal of a top commander. Because of those problems, the officials said, Ukraine’s military has struggled with recruitment.

Ukrainian military officials have said they want to mobilize up to 500,000 more people, but the request has met political resistance and is stalled in Parliament. The capture of hundreds of soldiers, especially those with battlefield experience, would make the need for more troops more acute and complicate the effort to recruit more.

As a result, the fall of Avdiivka may be more important than it initially seemed.

The Ukrainian military command has acknowledged that some soldiers were captured in the retreat from Avdiivka but has tried to downplay the numbers and the significance.

On Saturday, Gen. Oleksandr Tarnavsky, the commander of Ukraine’s military fighting in the area, said on the Telegram messaging application that the retreat had gone according to plan but “at the final stage of the operation, under pressure from the superior forces of the enemy, some Ukrainian servicemen fell into captivity.” He did not disclose how many troops were captured.

Dmytro Lykhovii, a spokesman for General Tarnavsky, disputed reports that hundreds of soldiers were captured, calling it misinformation. But he acknowledged that Russia had captured some service members and that a “certain number” of soldiers were missing.

But some soldiers and Western officials said a failure to execute an orderly withdrawal, and the chaos that unfolded Friday and Saturday as the defenses collapsed, was directly responsible for what appears to be a significant number of soldiers captured.

They said the Ukrainian withdrawal was ill-planned and began too late.
The soldiers and Western officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive intelligence assessments that are at odds with Ukrainian government statements.

Retreating under withering artillery fire, drones and airstrikes is one of the most difficult military maneuvers, challenging commanders to minimize loss of life and allow units to fall back without ceding more land than intended.

Based on interviews with soldiers, Ukraine’s forces were unprepared for how quickly the Russian advance in Avdiivka gathered speed last week.

Ukraine tried to buy time for its regular infantry forces to pull back, out of the city, using its special operation forces and the elite 3rd Separate Assault Brigade to cover the retreat. But the units could not slow the Russian advance or get every Ukrainian soldier out.

Senior Ukrainian officials say the Russian forces also suffered heavy losses in the battle. Russia took Avdiivka by sheer mass, sending in troops and armored vehicles until Ukrainian defenses folded. Thousands of Russia soldiers were killed and wounded, the officials said.

A chaotic retreat is not inevitable. Withdrawing troops without taking heavy losses is difficult, but possible, if it is done in a deliberate, unrushed operation, according to American strategists.

In Avdiivka, Ukraine appeared to have waited too long to start withdrawing and the frantic retreat quickly turned costly.

For the Ukrainians, the challenge of pulling out of Avdiivka was compounded by the fact Russia had surrounded the city on nearly three sides. A single paved road was the most viable way into and out of the city. That route, which Ukrainian troops nicknamed the road of life, came under direct threat earlier this month, making the withdrawal far more dangerous.

When Ukrainian forces began pulling back, unverified open source videos and photos showed units retreating under artillery fire and bodies scattered along roads and in tree lines. Ukrainian military units have long struggled to communicate with each other because they often have different radio equipment. Soldiers with knowledge of the retreat said the communication problems were a factor in the withdrawal, leading to soldiers being captured, killed and wounded.

The soldiers interviewed by The New York Times suggested that some units pulled back before others were aware of the retreat. That put the units left behind at risk of encirclement by the Russians.

Since the war began nearly two years ago, Russian forces have tried to encircle and capture Ukrainian forces. While well-prepared defenses and overhead drones have prevented many of those maneuvers from succeeding, in Avdiivka, the Russian encirclement appears to have worked. Western officials suggest the maneuver was one reason soldiers were captured during the retreat.

Unverified videos posted to social media also showed Russian forces executing Ukrainian troops in and around Avdiivka. On Sunday, the prosecutor’s office in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk oblast said on Telegram it was launching an investigation into “into the shootings of unarmed Ukrainian prisoners of war in Avdiivka and Vesele.”

The Kremlin itself does not appear to have been prepared for the speed of the Ukrainian collapse in Avdiivka. Often Kremlin propaganda pushed through the state-controlled news media leads the themes on Russian social media, said Jonathan Teubner, the chief executive of FilterLabs AI, which studies Russian messaging and public opinion. But as the Ukrainian defense in Avdiivka collapsed, the discussions on Russian social media started shifting before the Kremlin settled on new messaging.

“Russia wasn’t really prepped for this either in terms of a prepared propaganda blitz,” Mr. Teubner said. “They have now pounced on it, but haven’t managed to launch a successful coordinated messaging campaign yet.”

Prisoners of war are one of the biggest challenges to morale in any war. Ukraine has pressed Russia repeatedly to agree to exchange prisoners.

As of November, the Ukrainian government said that Russia had 3,574 Ukrainian military personnel in captivity.

In January, Ukraine used a Western-provided Patriot missile to take down a Russian cargo plane that officials thought was carrying missiles and munitions. Russian officials said it was transporting Ukrainian prisoners of war. American officials have said it appeared probable that some Ukrainian prisoners were on the plane.
For those following the progress in the day to day, the idea that Ukraine conducted an orderly withdrawal from the city was an understandable message for them to put out but clearly not true -and according to this it was an unexpectedly rapid collapse, followed by a disorganised rout as their positions became untenable.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4301
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

EU extends sanctions against Russia for occupying part of Ukraine
The EU Council has extended sanctions against Russia for the occupation of certain territories of Ukraine not controlled by the government. The sanctions will remain in effect until February 25, 2025, citing the Official Journal of the EU.

According to the report, the EU Council imposed sanctions against Russia on February 23, 2022, and on October 6, 2022, in response to the illegal annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, the Council adopted an additional decision to expand the geographical scope of restrictions to cover all areas not controlled by the government on the territory of Ukraine.

Furthermore, on December 14 and 15, 2023, the European Council confirmed Russia's aggressive war against Ukraine, which is a clear violation of the UN Charter, and reiterated the EU's unwavering support for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, as well as its inherent right to self-defense against Russian aggression.

"As long as the Russian Federation’s illegal actions continue to violate the prohibition on the use of force, which is a serious breach of international law, it is appropriate to maintain in force all the measures currently imposed by the Union and to take additional measures, if necessary. Consequently, the restrictive measures contained in Decision (CFSP) 2022/266 should be renewed for a further 12 months, until 24 February 2025," the statement reads.
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10324
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Solauren »

Gandalf wrote: 2024-02-19 06:11pm
Solauren wrote: 2024-02-19 06:01pm Giving Russia ANYTHING at the table beyond 'give everything back and fuck off', shows the world, including Russia, there is no consequence for invasions, and you will not be punished.

In other words - welcome to Warlordism, with modern technology.
If that's your criteria for warlordism, then we've been there a long time. Hence the massive size of countries like the USA, Canada, and Australia.
I was thinking more 'post World War 2'
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 16351
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Gandalf »

Solauren wrote: 2024-02-20 08:02pm I was thinking more 'post World War 2'
That just privileges countries who got their conquest out of the way earlier and managed to hold on to their gains subsequently.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10324
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Solauren »

The point still stands. If Russia comes out ahead in any way from this, then it will only encourage more acts like this by both Russia, and other parties.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
User avatar
The Sisko
Redshirt
Posts: 47
Joined: 2020-08-10 12:37pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by The Sisko »

EnterpriseSovereign wrote:Also, we have rules about using sources that are behind a paywall that require you to cut and paste the relevant info, something that you have not done for that Wall Street Journal article.
Funny that you suddenly care about academic rigor or following the board's debate rules, but noted. I legitimately tried to get around the paywall, but had little success. Consider it an invalid citation.

It's midterms week, and I've seen how this Euromaidan discussion has gone in the past, I have no interest in continuing it past this point because there's nothing more to say, really. I've posted links and evidence to support what I think and it's dismissed out of hand. Let's just move on.
maddoctor2 wrote:Sisko seems unable to tell when they are being goosed.
Cute, but I don't believe or disbelieve things just because of their source, claiming bias to escape debate is not only cowardly, it's also incredibly lazy. If a point is so thoroughly wrong, it should be easy to disprove. The Soviet Scientist who thought he could force epigenetics by putting Oranges in the Siberian Tundra was no more right just because his government said he was than you are because your government says you are. Period. If you can't accept that, then, well...
Broomstick wrote: 2024-02-20 04:52pm
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-20 04:31pm
Broomstick wrote: 2024-02-20 03:50pmIf someone would rather go down fighting than surrender I don't see why I should stop them. Especially since all indications, based on what the Russians have already done, are that if Ukraine does surrender then the surrender would be followed by mass slaughter, stealing of children, and theft of everything. How is giving into that better than fighting to the end?
The goal would be to get as many more people out as you can before coming to terms. The Russians can't touch Ukrainians that aren't in the country anymore. Zelensky would save lives by encouraging more people to flee the country rather than to urge them to continue fighting.
Millions have already fled Ukraine.

The problem with encouraging even more to do so is that those people need somewhere to go. Who is going to take them in? Borders are closing all around the world, immigration is getting more and more difficult. Telling people to leave is useless if there is nowhere for them to go.
It's better to be a poor, starving immigrant who's still in one piece than to be dead. This is probably why absolutely staggering amounts of Ukrainian manpower are not in Ukraine anymore. Thankfully, European countries are ready to turn over Ukrainian refugees for the meat grinder, starting with Estonia. In fact, Ukrainian officials are begging for the west to let their refugees go hungry so that they have no choice but to go and die for Ukraine in the trenches. Lovely stuff.
Broomstick wrote:As for "not touching people not in the country anymore" - you might want to ask Zelimkhan Khangoshvili, Ruslan Israpilov, Abdulvahid Edelgiriev, Umar Israilov, Alexander Litvinenko, or Maksim Kuzminov about that. Except you can't, because all of them were killed by Russian agents while outside of Russia (or Ukraine for that matter). You see, that's another flaw with "run away" - the Russians follow. They kill people years after they leave and they don't care about damage to innocent bystanders.

Not everyone wants to spend the rest of their lives looking over the shoulder or having to pick up and flee again and again.
Well, their two options are to slowly die fighting in Ukraine, or to die quickly someday with a quick ice-pick to the temple. Of course no one wants to be in that position. It's absolutely fucking disgusting that they are. But what is realistically the third option? If Ukraine somehow does turn this around and win at this point, what will be left? So many men are dead, millions have fled the country, what's not in Russian hands is being bombed to pieces. As discussed by Elfdart earlier, at this point the only reason to keep it going is to scoop up the remainder for cheap and make Ukraine a western-owned entity completely.
Broomstick wrote:
3-Body Problem wrote: 2024-02-20 04:31pm My opinion is based on a belief that there isn't a win condition for Ukraine and that prolonged conflict will lead to more death and suffering than evacuation and capitulation will.
Where are the remaining Ukrainians going to evacuate to? Which country on the map is willing to take in millions of people?
They're going to have to go somewhere. The ones capable of fighting have already decided to GTFO of dodge, so this isn't even an academic question. If you don't count Russia then the current winners in the 'Who Can Take the Most Fighting Age Men From Ukraine' contest are Poland and Germany, respectively. They've already taken in a million or more people, each. (unsure what percentage is fighting age/conscription age men, but I'm sure it's not low, either). Poland's at 1.6 as of 2023 Yes Yes Yes, Wikipedia...
I'm stupendously awful at math - my handlers have to count my Rubles. Is there even a way to calculate how much of the country is likely to flee after this is over?


Broomstick wrote:Capitulation? Are you serious?
Kapitulerin?! Gegen Bolschewismus?! DAS GEHT NICHT!

Broomstick wrote:Russia has engaged in mass rape, mass torture, mass kidnapping, mass deportation, and mass murder on all the occupied areas of Ukraine they've held. Would YOU be willing to drop trou and bend over for a regiment of Russians to ass-rape you? Because that's essentially what you're expecting Ukrainians to submit to.
If that is the case then we can someday expect a trip to Canadian parliament in their future.

The irony of decrying war crimes while supporting a far-right government that venerates the Nazis, oh man. It's impossible to make up this shit.

Ukraine's Nazi Problem is Real
NBC wrote:On the eve of World War II, Ukraine was home to one the largest Jewish communities in Europe, with estimates as high as 2.7 million, a remarkable number considering the territory’s long record of antisemitism and pogroms. By the end, more than half would perish. When German troops took control of Kyiv in 1941, they were welcomed by “Heil Hitler” banners. Soon after, nearly 34,000 Jews — along with Roma and other “undesirables” — were rounded up and marched to fields outside the city on the pretext of resettlement only to be massacred in what became known as the “Holocaust by bullets.”

The Babyn Yar ravine continued to fill up as a mass grave for two years. With as many as 100,000 murdered there, it became one of the largest single killing sites of the Holocaust outside of Auschwitz and other death camps. Researchers have noted the key role locals played in fulfilling Nazi kill orders at the site
....

In another ominous development, Ukraine has in recent years erected a glut of statues honoring Ukrainian nationalists whose legacies are tainted by their indisputable record as Nazi proxies. The Forward newspaper cataloged some of these deplorables, including Stepan Bandera, leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), whose followers acted as local militia members for the SS and German army. “Ukraine has several dozen monuments and scores of street names glorifying this Nazi collaborator, enough to require two separate Wikipedia pages,” the Forward wrote.
Anyway, here's Wonderwall
Ralin wrote:Soft Holocaust Denial isn't Holocaust Denial.
User avatar
3-Body Problem
Youngling
Posts: 65
Joined: 2024-01-01 04:57pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by 3-Body Problem »

Solauren wrote: 2024-02-20 08:02pm
Gandalf wrote: 2024-02-19 06:11pm
Solauren wrote: 2024-02-19 06:01pm Giving Russia ANYTHING at the table beyond 'give everything back and fuck off', shows the world, including Russia, there is no consequence for invasions, and you will not be punished.

In other words - welcome to Warlordism, with modern technology.
If that's your criteria for warlordism, then we've been there a long time. Hence the massive size of countries like the USA, Canada, and Australia.
I was thinking more 'post World War 2'
So are we going to have multi-year-long threads about every US use of force or is the destruction wrought by Western nations somehow different than when Russia does it?
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18670
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by Rogue 9 »

On Point on NPR today interviewed Yaroslav Trofimov, the Wall Street Journal's chief foreign affairs correspondent, who is Ukrainian-born. The audio of the episode is at the link, 46 minutes long.
A Ukraine-born journalist on his country's 'battle for survival'

February 20, 2024

By Paige Sutherland and Deborah Becker

This week marks the second anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

For Wall Street Journal correspondent Yaroslav Trofimov, that means two years of stories of resilience and determination. He tells those stories in his new book "Our Enemies Will Vanish."

Today, On Point: A Ukraine-born journalist on his country's 'battle for survival.'

Guest

Yaroslav Trofimov, chief foreign-affairs correspondent at the Wall Street Journal. Author of "Our Enemies Will Vanish: The Russian Invasion and Ukraine's War of Independence."

Also Featured

Sergiy Stakhovsky, former professional tennis player from Ukraine.

Transcript

Part I

DEBORAH BECKER: This is On Point. I'm Deborah Becker in for Meghna Chakrabarti. It was two years ago this week that marked the start of Russia's war with Ukraine. That's when the world began to see more of Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

He appeared outside the presidential headquarters in Ukraine shortly after Russia first attacked in February of 2022. In a 30-second selfie video posted on social media, Zelenskyy had a clear message.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY: [Tape] (SPEAKING UKRAINIAN)

BECKER: He's saying, "Our soldiers are here. The citizens are here. We're all here. We will defend our independence. That's how it will go. Glory to Ukraine." A few days later in his State of the Union address, President Biden pledged U.S. support to Ukraine.

PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: [Tape] Six days ago, Russia's Vladimir Putin sought to shake the very foundations of the free world, thinking he could make it bend to his menacing ways. But he badly miscalculated. He thought he could roll into Ukraine and the world would roll over. Instead, he met with a wall of strength he never anticipated or imagined. He met the Ukrainian people.

BECKER: Is that wall of strength still strong? And how has Ukraine been able to hold its own these past two years? What was predicted to be just a short battle where Russian military power would quickly overtake its smaller neighbor is now a two-year-long war that some worry could potentially threaten the globe.

Our guest this hour has a lot of knowledge about Ukraine, both professional and personal experience. The Wall Street Journal's chief foreign affairs correspondent and Ukrainian author Yaroslav Trofimov is with us. His latest book is titled Our Enemies Will Vanish: The Russian Invasion and Ukraine's War of Independence. Yaroslav, welcome to On Point.

YAROSLAV TROFIMOV: Great to be in the show.

BECKER: So we should start by saying your book is really about the first year of the war between Russia and Ukraine. And let's start where you begin the book, which is this conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which you say wasn't a 2022 conflict, but actually has very strong roots back in 2014. Can you explain?

TROFIMOV: Yeah, exactly. I mean, we're now marking actually the 10th anniversary of the war because Russia interfered in Ukraine militarily in 2014 by invading Crimea and annexing that peninsula. But also by really sponsoring a really bloody conflict in the eastern Donbas region. 14,000 people died there in 2014 and 2015 and the rest of the world sort of looked at it and shrugged. They didn't really intervene.

And Ukraine was begging for weapons. It never received any. And that sense of impunity is probably what, uh, convinced President Putin that he could invade the entire country and again, nobody will do anything.

BECKER: Hmm. So here we are going from 2014 to 2022. There are certainly rumors of an impending Russian attack coming to Ukraine. Can you tell us what it was like at that time? What were you hearing from folks? Did many people flee? Like, describe what was happening just before the Russian attacks.

TROFIMOV: Well, it was more than rumors, you know, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Bill Burns had flown to Kyiv to meet with President Zelenskyy and to warn him of very detailed intelligence that the Russians were planning to come in via Belarus to kill or capture him, to decapitate the government, to create filtration camps for the Ukrainian elite. So pretty much the entire Russian war plan. And these warnings were also public to a great extent.

BECKER: But no one knew exactly when, right? No one knew exactly when.

TROFIMOV: Right. There were dates that were being offered and then the invasion wouldn't happen on that date. And the Russians also kept delaying it in part because of the Olympics that were underway in China at the time.

And so really for me, having covered so many wars in my life, the signs were pretty clear. And so I had, I was in Kyiv for a whole month before the war began, really preparing for it. But for many people in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities who have never seen war, proper war in their own hometown, it was something unimaginable. It was unthinkable. And I think until the very last day, there was a sense of "This can't possibly happen." And there weren't people fleeing. There weren't people stocking up. There wasn't any run on banks or on cash machines. In fact, life was very, very normal up until the last day.

BECKER: And what were politicians saying? What were the country's leaders on both sides saying at that particular time? What were they telling the public? Was that contributing to this sort of, almost disbelief, if you will, or non-acceptance that it was going to happen anytime soon? What were the public statements like?

TROFIMOV: Well, President Zelenskyy was calling for calm and downplaying the risk of a full-scale invasion. But the Ukrainian military was preparing — secretly, in part because they didn't want the Russians to know that they're preparing. As General Zaluzhnyi, the commander of the Ukrainian forces at the time, said, you know, we wanted the Russians to think we're just checking out Facebook and smoking joints all the time.

And in fact, they were successful in saving the Ukrainian air defenses and much of the air force this way. As for me, the day before the invasion, I went to see the former president of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, who called me for an interview and then after that leaned towards me and said, "You know, tomorrow at 4 a.m., there will be war. You better go to the airport and get out of here if you want to leave." So clearly, if he knew, lots of other people in government also knew.

But I think the fact that Russia had massed a relatively small force around Ukraine, only about 200,000 people, 200,000 soldiers, to many Ukrainian leaders, it was a sign that it wouldn't go for Kyiv, it wouldn't go for the whole country. Because it was just too small. And it only made sense if you expected that the Ukrainian army wouldn't fight. Russia probably was, that probably was the expectation in Moscow. Because Russian officials were saying that Ukrainians and Russians are one people. Russian military analysts were predicting that Ukrainian officers will switch sides right away. And, in fact, Russian troops were carrying parade uniforms because they really expected to be in Kyiv in a couple of days

BECKER: And have a victory parade.

TROFIMOV: Absolutely. Absolutely.

BECKER: You wrote that there were documents that were found on Russian officers suggesting that this would take about 10 days in Ukraine.

TROFIMOV: Yeah. And it's not just the Russians who were expecting this, let's be frank. You know, the U.S. and other western governments had the very same expectations. The U.S. had closed down its embassy in Kyiv, withdrew diplomats, withdrew personnel, and gave only a symbolic amount of weapons to Ukraine. That was really, you know, ammunition for an insurgency, you know, some anti-tank missiles, but not really weaponry that is necessary for conventional war because the expectation was that the Ukrainian army will collapse.

BECKER: Hmm. And how did it stay afloat for the most part, would you say? Why didn't it collapse?

TROFIMOV: I think there are so many reasons. One of them is just how much Ukraine had changed since 2014. When this conflict first began, there wasn't really much hatred for Russia in the Russian-speaking parts of Ukraine. Russia, for many, was a country with higher wages, better job opportunities. Zelenskyy himself at the time was working in Moscow. He hosted the New Year's Day show on Russian state television on January 1, 2014.

But then the Ukrainians saw what happens when the Russians come in, when the Russians seize their cities. And it was at this eight-year experience of Russia ruling Donetsk and Lugansk, you know, the two biggest series of the Donbas. And there, you know, the economy collapsed. It was basically gangster mob rule. And majority of the population escaped that. They voted with their feet and they fled to the rest of Ukraine, to the west, anywhere but not to live in that sort of the new "Russian world" promised by Putin.

And so everyone else in Ukraine saw that experience. And when I traveled in January to places like Kharkiv, you know, the biggest Russian speaking city in Ukraine. There were 100,000 refugees from Donbas there. And so everybody knew that life under the Russians would be infinitely worse than what they had now. And I think this spirit of resistance seeped through the entire society, and that's not something that the Russians realized and were counting on. So all these cleavages and divisions that Ukraine had in the past, over language, over relations with Russia, were no longer there by the time the Russian armies crossed the border and invaded.

BECKER: We'll talk about the Ukraine fighters in just a bit, but I kind of think we need to lay out what do you think Russia's main objective here is and what is Ukraine's? Can you tell us what's the ultimate goal of both of these countries here?

TROFIMOV: I think the Russian objective is very clear, and it hasn't changed since the beginning. The Russian objective is to wipe out Ukraine as a state, as a culture, and even as a language and any sort of viable separate entity. The former Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, who is the leader of Russia's ruling party and often says what Putin thinks, just in January said that no Ukrainian state, no matter how friendly, will be acceptable to us. We'll wipe it out, you know, five or 10 years down the line. And Ukrainians have a choice to be Russians or to die.

And so I think the struggle is existential. It's not about territory. It's not about how much of Ukraine Russia will grab. I mean, the ultimate goal of Russia, of the Russian state, is to basically wipe out Ukraine.

BECKER: And does that go beyond Ukraine, do you think, for Russia? Because of course there are concerns among world leaders that it does and could. Do you think right now the intent on Russia's part is to go beyond Ukraine?

TROFIMOV: Well, I'll just quote President Putin. He himself last year said that he sees himself as continuing the work of Emperor Peter the Great in collecting "historical Russian lands," quote-unquote. And he named among them the town of Narva, which is in Estonia, a member of the European Union and a member of NATO. So clearly, you know, as the saying goes in Russia, wherever a Russian flag was once raised, it's Russia.

BECKER: And what about Ukraine? What do you think Ukraine's main goal is here? Is it to just survive? Or what is it?

TROFIMOV: Well, I mean, Ukraine's goal as enunciated by the government, and I think shared by the majority of Ukrainians, is to reclaim all of its land that is internationally recognized, including Crimea, including Donbas. Obviously, it's very hard. And we've seen that last year's counteroffensive didn't really bring much success, in part because the historical opportunity to do so was missed in 2022.

Part II

BECKER: I want to bring up now the story of Ukrainian professional tennis player-turned-soldier Sergiy Stakhovsky. He was with his family on vacation in Dubai when Russia invaded Ukraine. But then the 36-year-old returned to his home country to fight because he says for him, there just was no other option.

SERGIY STAKHOVSKY: It's not about obligation, about defending your country. It's about obligation of what's right and what's wrong. And what Russia did and what they still continue in doing on Ukrainian soil is not wrong. It's just immoral, unacceptable. I don't know even the words which we could describe what is happening and what they continue to do.

BECKER: And Stakhovsky says he plans to fight until his country is free again.

STAKHOVSKY: Ukrainians are not gonna live under rule of one person. They want their rights and they want their freedom. The only way Russia can take away these rights and this freedom, they have to kill us all.

BECKER: I'm wondering, Yaroslav, if you could tell us — that story that we just heard from Sergiy, is that sort of a common story that people in Ukraine are very motivated to fight? And we also should mention that Sergiy could have been exempted from fighting had he chosen to seek an exemption, but he didn't. There just seems to be so much motivation. Is that really what is fueling things in Ukraine so much and allowed it to fight off a much larger military power?

TROFIMOV: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. And at the beginning of this show, you played this clip from President Zelenskyy when he came out and said, "We're all here." And I remember driving into Kyiv the next morning and hundreds and hundreds of men and women were coming out of high rises and heading to a stadium to pick up weapons and go to the front line right away. Because, they were telling me, you know, "What else are we going to do? Our city is being attacked. Somebody has to defend it."

And so I've spent some time with Sergiy on the front lines in Bakhmut, one of the probably bloodiest places during this war. And when he was crossing the border on foot into Ukraine in the first days of the war, he was crossing with another character in the book, a Ukrainian entrepreneur who was skiing in Austria and then rushed back and used his own funding and the money of other entrepreneurs to create an entire brigade that's fought on the Kharkiv front.

So it was really common to see as Ukrainian women and children were leaving the country towards Poland and the west, Ukrainian men were coming back from abroad to pick up weapons and fight.

BECKER: You know, it seems that there were so many volunteers on the Ukrainian side. There are many people on the Russian side: mercenaries, Chechen fighters. Did this change the tone of the war, do you think? Or from what you witnessed? I mean, how did it affect things to have very different groups of people fighting?

TROFIMOV: Well, on the Russian side, it wasn't just mercenaries. It was prisoners.

BECKER: Right.

TROFIMOV: And especially in the battle of Bakhmut, it was Russian murderers, rapists, you know, and other common criminals who had a choice. You either spend the rest of your life in prison camps or you go to Ukraine, and if you survive six months in the battlefield, which not many did, then you're free. And so it's these people who were thrown by the thousands and the thousands against Ukrainian volunteers who included people like Sergiy, who included Ukrainian singers, poets, you know, some of the cultural elite.

And Sergiy told me at the time in Bakhmut, you know, we are losing our best. Ukraine is losing their best and Russia is losing their worst in this war. And unfortunately, that's true because a great many of these volunteers have died in the last two years.

BECKER: Why was Bakhmut one of the bloodiest battles? Can you tell our listeners what happened there?

TROFIMOV: Well, Bakhmut is a city, was a city of about 70,000 people. And I remember going there before the war to taste the sparkling wines that it was famous for. It had this big méthode champenoise winery there. But that became the biggest battle of last year.

And it was because Wagner, a group led by Prigozhin, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who has since been mutinied and has since died in a plane crash, really made it their mission to seize it at any cost. And by Prigozhin's own reckoning, they lost 30,000 people dead for this little town. And Ukraine unfortunately also lost a great many soldiers there.

And once Russia finally captured it in May last year, there was not a single building standing there. It was a town with a population of zero. And that's unfortunately what it looks like when Russia takes Ukrainian cities. The city of Avdiivka that the Russians took just in recent days looks exactly the same. And the Russians pay the same price of tens of thousands of soldiers, hundreds of tanks and armored personnel carriers and fighting vehicles to just take smoldering ruins.

BECKER: Why do people stay in these communities? Or why did they, at least? You have a lot of anecdotes in your book that you've spoken with so many people who did stay during incredible, incredible violence. And, you know, I think at one point, I read that you, I had to really think about it when you said that so many people sometimes are self-delusional, right? They think they're going to be protected. It's almost like being a war correspondent. So why do so many people stay? Why didn't more people flee? Were they not able to?

TROFIMOV: Well, I think, first of all, I think if you look at cities other than Mariupol, which was encircled pretty quickly and people could not flee. And many, many people died there in the spring of 2022. Nobody knows how many, 10, 20, or 30, 40,000, nobody's been counting them.

So if you take this aside in all the other cities on the front lines, most people did flee at the end. And they did listen to Ukrainian authorities who organized evacuations. But many didn't. And I think you're right. First of all, for people who haven't lived through war, it's very hard to imagine that it would happen. And then, you know, motivations are really different. Some people think it will never happen to them. Others have relatives they have to take care of. Others are too sick, too old to leave. Some others just believe in fate. Others tell me that, well, you know, this apartment is all I have. And then, you know, a week later the apartment is in smithereens because it was killed by a shell.

There was also a small minority in some towns in Donbas that was there because they wanted the Russians to come and they were waiting for the Russians. That's also a fact.

BECKER: Hmm. Do — I know there are no real exact estimates from either side, but how many lives have been lost on both the Ukrainian side and the Russian side so far? And what are the estimates that you would consider reliable?

TROFIMOV: Right. So it's really hard to know. On the civilian side, the only numbers that we have are from the United Nations. That doesn't count anything it hasn't verified. And so it doesn't count, for example, the people who died in Mariupol because the U.S. has no access to any of the occupied cities.

So Ukrainian estimates are, you know, many tens of thousands of civilians died and tens of thousands of soldiers. And, you know, we have seen American estimates of how many Russian casualties there have been. They're in the hundreds of thousands.

BECKER: Far more than 2014.

TROFIMOV: Oh yeah, absolutely. Far, far, far more.

BECKER: Mm-hmm. And I think — I mean, as we said, you're a journalist, you work for the Wall Street Journal, but you're also Ukrainian. So I wonder what has it been like to cover this conflict when it's so personal?

TROFIMOV: I think on some level it's obviously much harder, especially, you know, I grew up in Kyiv and so every little piece of geography there has memories for me. Memories of my childhood of growing up, you know, place where I had my first kiss, place where my grandmother took me to check out my eyes. You know, the library, the movie theater where I saw Fellini movies as a teenager.

And so suddenly seeing these streets empty, dead. You know, everything's shuttered, people gone, cars gone. And the boom of artillery. It feels like a personal insult. And I did feel, you know, angry, enraged by this. And then what do you do? You know, you just have to keep working and telling the story.

And I think by traveling through all the front lines and by going to witness what was happening, in a way it's purifying. It makes it easier to handle the situation. But also it's, you know, I had a sense of mission. I probably took more risks in this war than I had taken in Iraq or in Afghanistan because of this sense of purpose. And through the book and through the articles that I was writing at the time, I just tell the stories of people. So, you know, I'm not writing about my own feelings. You know, I try not to. And just trying to kind of be this almost like a lens of a camera in the field, zooming in on what other people are doing, what they're saying, what they're feeling.

And people talk a lot in this circumstance. It was really interesting. Especially if you come to the areas that had been occupied by the Russians, every interview lasts hours because people just say all those things they couldn't tell you, they couldn't tell anyone while the Russians were there for the previous many months.

BECKER: Yeah. Some of the stories you told about the things that you went through, you know, going from building to building, seeking cover while shelling was taking place overhead — really dramatic, dangerous, dangerous circumstances that you wrote about in this book. I'm wondering: Weren't you frightened? And did that sense of purpose kind of just alleviate a lot of that fear and keep you going? Or what was that about?

TROFIMOV: Well, of course, you know, it's scary sometimes. It's usually scary afterwards once you realize what you've done. But I was blessed to work with a great photographer throughout this, the reporting in Ukraine, Manu Brabo. Spanish photographer, Pulitzer Prize winner, who's very courageous. And with great security advisors.

And obviously a lot of the war experience reporting that I had from previous wars didn't apply in Ukraine. You know, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, you don't have to fear enemy aircraft or long-range missiles hitting you. So you could estimate your risk profile in a way that you can't really in Ukraine. But again --

BECKER: So this was the most dangerous for you, would you say?

TROFIMOV: Oh, for sure, for sure. Absolutely.

BECKER: Go ahead. Were you gonna continue there?

TROFIMOV: Sure, yes. But again, you know, as a journalist, I could go and report and come and pull out and go somewhere relatively safer. Obviously, the civilians and the soldiers trapped in the cities could not.

BECKER: Mm-hmm. And you said you weren't supposed to write about your feelings, but there were times in the book where you did. You talked about being angry, not just — what was surprising to me was that it was not just about what was happening in Ukraine, but you were angry about Russian lives lost as well. Angry about all of this. Explain a little bit of that anger for us.

TROFIMOV: Yeah, so, you know, there was a very sort of foggy early morning and we decided to follow Ukrainian special forces just as the city of Lyman was being liberated from the Russians in October 2022. So the Russians had just left hours earlier, overnight.

And so we drove on this country road and suddenly stumbled upon this scene of death. Several smoldering vehicles and Russian soldiers lying on the asphalt dead. You know, some of them missing their limbs. They were cut down by shrapnel. And they were so recently killed that they seemed alive, kinda just resting.

And I remember walking past there, looking into the, into the young faces of these men and thinking, why on earth did you have to die? And you know, like one guy had his phone next to him and I was thinking, you know, his spouse or his mother is probably trying to text him right now and trying to figure out what's happening with him. And for what? For what possible purpose? This man had to travel thousands of miles to Ukraine just to die in that morning. Just because, you know, someone in the Kremlin decided he wants to relive his imperial dreams.

BECKER: That is traumatic, Yaroslav. Very traumatic. How do you heal from something like that?

TROFIMOV: Well by writing a book, you know, putting it on paper. I guess that's one way. And just by, you know, keep going, keep doing this. So I think, I think it's important, it goes back to this idea of a sense of purpose. Because too many people look at the war in Ukraine as sort of a geopolitical frame. Russia, America, West, NATO. I think what's really important is to tell the stories of people whose lives are altered by this conflict, sometimes altered forever. And I think the purpose of the book was that. Just to tell these stories.

BECKER: Mm-hmm. Now there have been some negotiations. Are you optimistic that talks can go on or at least maybe restart, so there might be an end to some of this?

TROFIMOV: I definitely don't think — and I think it's not just me, you know, anyone you ask in the U.S. government or in Western, European governments would tell you that they don't think — that any peace process is possible before the U.S elections for sure. Just because President Putin thinks he could get a much better deal from President Trump if he gets reelected to the White House.

But apart from that, I think the positions are just too far apart. Ukraine wants to remain independent. And Ukraine wants to regain its land. And Russia wants to eliminate Ukraine from the face of the earth, you know, from the map. So how can you negotiate with the government that still believes that it wants to exterminate you and it can exterminate you?

And the odds of that are improving because Ukraine right now is outgunned. Ukraine has a severe shortage of ammunition because Republicans in the House of Representatives for now four months have declined to vote for the military aid for Ukraine. And that is, you know, that is giving Putin new hopes that he can have it all.

BECKER: Yeah, we're gonna talk, I think, more about the U.S. and help that has assisted the Ukrainian effort throughout the two-year war.

Part III

BECKER: Yaroslav, before the break we were talking about help from the West. And we've heard a lot about this throughout the war. And your new book is about pretty much the first year of the war between Russia and Ukraine. And there's been a lot of piecemeal help from the West, particularly the U.S., in part because I think no one really understood that the war was going to go on this long, and people did think it was going to be over quickly.

But I'm wondering what you think about the comments that have been made since, particularly recent comments by Russian President Putin, that the reason this war has gone on so long is because of help from the West and without it perhaps there would've been some type of negotiated deal to end the fighting. What do you think of that?

TROFIMOV: Well, obviously if there hadn't been this help from the West, the war would've ended with the Russian flag raised over Kyiv. There is also a possibility and that's clearly what President Putin wants.

I think if we look at it historically the very first few month of resistance really occurred without much Western help in terms of weapons. The Ukrainians repelled the Russian armies from Kyiv using their own Soviet vintage weapons and ammunition. American artillery only started to arrive around July 2022. And then it was really piecemeal.

It was piecemeal for various reasons. One of them was this fear of Russian red lines, fear of provoking a possible nuclear response. And Moscow kept threatening. And, but every time these capabilities arrived, you know, there was no Russian red line, as it turned out. You know, Ukrainians compared this to extinguishing a fire. There was a fire and Ukraine needed a bucket of water, and it got a bucket of water, but in, you know, 20 little glasses. And so over time, the fire kept raging. If all of this help had arrived early on, the fire could have been extinguished.

BECKER: You think so? You think it could have been completely extinguished? This war would've been over, Ukraine would've been in control of its borders had the U.S. and other Western nations provided more military support from the get-go?

TROFIMOV: I think Ukraine would've been in a much better position. And the pivotal moment that I talk about a lot in the book was in September, October 2022, when Russia only had about 100,000 combat troops left in Ukraine. Its elite units were decimated. President Putin was refusing a call-up of reservists to the mobilization because doing so would've meant acknowledging that his so-called special military operation was not going to plan.

And Ukraine was asking for tanks, armored personnel carriers, fighting vehicles, more artillery, aircraft, battery missiles, and was turned down. Told it's impossible. We cannot possibly have American or German tanks in the fields of Ukraine. That's too provocative. And so when the Ukrainian troops attacked in the Kharkiv region and routed the Russian army and broke through the Russian lines and kept pressing into Kherson, into Lyman, that offensive eventually ran out of steam because Ukraine didn't have all this ammunition and all this equipment.

Then there was a long process of, you know, reconsidering. And the following year, last year, 2023, the so-called mountain of steel did arrive. So Ukraine got its Abrams and Leopard tanks and strikers and Bradleys and battery missiles and is getting F-16s now. But you know, by then Russia had mobilized hundreds of thousands of troops, spent the winter building fortifications, laying out minefields. And when the Ukrainian counter-offensive was finally launched with all this mountain of steel last year, it didn't achieve success because Russia was ready and prepared and strong in the way that it wasn't during that pivotal moment in September, October the previous year.

BECKER: And now of course, U.S. support is on hold, as you mentioned, because of what's happening in Congress here. But I wonder, you know, are you surprised, I guess, by the shift in attention to what's happening in Ukraine? And in the book at the end you do mention that there are other conflicts that have happened since the start of this war. There's a lot that's going on. I wonder if you're concerned that perhaps attention has shifted and what that might mean for Ukraine.

TROFIMOV: I think the concern is not that the attention has shifted. It's concern that you suddenly see a significant, I don't wanna say majority, but an important part of the Republican party in the U.S. embracing Russian narratives on Ukraine. And calling for pulling the plug on Ukraine at a time where, you know, the U.S. is really — Russia has no economic leverage over the U.S.

There's not much Russia can give the U.S. There's no economic pain inflicted on the U.S, unlike in Europe. Because Europe has had to make sacrifices. Europe has had to sever its dependence on Russian natural gas, and the European economies are actually paying the price for that. But yet in Europe you don't see this. Europe is ramping up its support.

In America, for reasons that are really hard to understand for Ukrainians or Europeans, suddenly there is a desire to see Ukraine lose.

BECKER: You think so?

TROFIMOV: Obviously this is not the entire Republican party. You know, we've seen that in the Senate there was a bipartisan agreement on aid for Ukraine. But the fact is that the House of Representatives hasn't considered aid for Ukraine for four months now.

BECKER: Hmm. So I wonder, does that make you, what does that make you feel in terms of what might happen next? I mean, I know it's really difficult to predict, but are you really concerned about what could happen next in Ukraine? Because I know in the book you say although this fighting continues, it's clear that Ukraine has won the war for its independence. I mean, has it? Or is that now under threat?

TROFIMOV: I mean, you know, it's impossible to predict the future with 100% certainty. But the fact is that Russia is also very exhausted. Now Russia has finally managed to seize for the first time a Ukrainian town, Avdiivka. The first --

BECKER: Just over the weekend. Yeah.

TROFIMOV: Yeah. The first gain it's made since May last year at the cost of tens of thousands of soldiers. And the U.S. accounts for only about half of aid to Ukraine. The Europeans account for the other half. And the European commitments are growing. But the fact is that because of this lag, you know, Ukraine is losing more people. Every day of delay is measured in more Ukrainian casualties. And so you create the price that Ukraine is paying for its independence is increasing.

BECKER: Well, there were some recent reports in the New York Times that Ukraine has actually been forcing men into the military. Do you think that Ukraine is going to need to do this? When you wrote about the fighters in Ukraine and many of the folks who were volunteering and motivated, you know, time has a way of changing things, as you just mentioned. And I wonder, does Ukraine need to take these kinds of steps to force people into military service so it has enough manpower to continue to fight?

TROFIMOV: Well, Ukraine has been mobilizing people, you know, since the very beginning of the full-scale invasion. It's not something new.

BECKER: But this is forcing people actually, according to the New York Times reports.

TROFIMOV: Well forcing as in, you know, like drafting, like, you know, like there was a draft in the U.S during the Vietnam war. Both Russia and Ukraine are, you know, have compulsory mobilization for certain kinds of people, especially people with military experience. Unfortunately, many of the volunteers have been killed or injured. And so, for the state to survive, it does need to draft young people to fight.

BECKER: And it — I mean, are there other ways for Ukraine to make sure that it has what is needed for it to continue in this fight? I mean, what do you think? If there's a stall in aid from the U.S. — and I know you, as you mentioned, it's 50% — but if there is some waning interest on the part of some international partners, and if there is concern about having enough manpower, what do you think or what do you expect Ukraine might do? Will it change its strategy or what could happen here?

TROFIMOV: Well, I think there isn't really a waning interest in Europe. I think in Europe there is a sense of unease and alarm and understanding that Europe needs to do more. And it is doing more. And in Germany, the UK, France have all just signed security agreements with Ukraine. They're ramping up their ammunition production. And the European Union just passed a $54 billion package of aid for Ukraine.

But as far as the Ukrainians are concerned, if the Russian goal is to destroy the country, the state, and take it all over, it's not like they can change that. So they have to fight even if, you know, the conditions are much less advantageous to them. There are some ways and some technologies, you know, Ukraine has been pioneering the usage of combat drones in revolutionary ways that have offset the shortage of artillery ammunition, for example. You know, this precision drone revolution is something that is unique to this battlefield. But you know, Ukraine on itself can only do so much. It does need help.

BECKER: Right. You know, a lot has happened since some of the events that you wrote about in this book. Certainly since the end of the first year of the war between Russia and Ukraine, there have been changes in the Ukrainian military leadership. You mentioned the plane crash that took the leader of Russia's mercenary forces.

Then there was the death last week of Alexei Navalny. And the major Russian victory in Ukraine over the weekend. A lot has been happening here. Do those events, do you think, if you could pick, say, two of them as the big influencers on what might happen here, which ones would you choose?

TROFIMOV: Well, first of all, I wouldn't describe the loss of Avdiivka as a major victory. It's a town of 30,000 people. You know, not even in the top 1,000, I think, towns in Ukraine. So as for the pivotal moments, I guess the disappearance of Wagner as a fighting force is pretty important. Because Wagner was the only Russian unit that was really capable of offensive operations in Ukraine.

And it was destroyed first in Bakhmut and then in this uprising by Prigozhin, which for the first time showed the cracks that this war has produced inside the Russian regime. Wonder what else is happening there under the surface, it's a hard but brittle society. And so the Russians are dying in large numbers in this war. And there will be repercussions at some point from that. I think that's something to keep in mind as we look forward, because Russia is not invincible. The victories that it has achieved came at a tremendous, tremendous cost. You know, Russia lost probably more people for Avdiivka than the Soviet Union lost in the entire war in Afghanistan.

BECKER: There was a lot of coverage in this country of the recent interview with Russia President Putin and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. And I'm wondering if you had a chance to see that? There were some — it was a lengthy interview, about two hours long. There was a lot of talk about Ukraine, the history of Ukraine, the Russian objective, and the Russian president saying that he did in fact want to have negotiations with Ukraine. I'm wondering what you thought of that interview.

TROFIMOV: Well, I think the very fact that he spent the first half an hour of it laying out all the reasons for why Ukraine doesn't really exist, shouldn't really exist, and Ukraine is a Russian land tells you all you need to know. I think the negotiations he was floating were negotiations with the U.S. about how the U.S. should hand over Ukraine to him, in his view. The Russian goals are the same. And I think negotiations for him is another way of saying capitulation by Ukraine.

BECKER: So how long, how much longer do you think it could go on? It's been two years almost. Just about. How much longer do you think this fighting will continue? Your book suggests that you think it might be some time.

TROFIMOV: Oh yeah, absolutely. Well, I certainly don't think it could end this year and it could go for longer. And it's hard to predict because now it's a war of attrition. It's a war of attrition that does favor the Ukrainians because the Russian military is losing more tanks, more howitzers, more personnel carriers than they can manufacture or repair. So at some point they will run out, like, say, two or three years down the line.

But ultimately it comes down to the resilience of the two societies, which society will crack first? For internal reasons, because of the pressures from the casualties, from the, you know, the economic impact of the war, the overall international environment. And we don't know that. It could be Russia, it could be Ukraine. And we've seen it in World War I when the front lines didn't move, didn't move for years and years, and then when they moved it was because of what was happening inside Russia or inside Germany.

And I think whether Ukraine is the one to crack first depends on international aid, American aid, and European aid, that is indispensable to keep it afloat.

BECKER: And I just want to make sure that folks know as we end this conversation in the last minute here, can you explain — the title of your book is Our Enemies Will Vanish. And that's a line from the Ukrainian National Anthem?

TROFIMOV: Absolutely. Well it goes, "Our enemies will vanish like dew at sunrise." It's sort of a very poetic, nonviolent way of vanishing, I guess. And, you know, it comes from the anthem that was written in the 19th century when Ukraine did not exist as a separate country. The language was banned. The culture was banned. This anthem was banned. And yet Ukraine found a way to be reborn again and again to achieve its independence more than 30 years ago. And now, you know, two years into the war, it's still standing, still fighting and refusing to give up.

BECKER: All right. Yaroslav Trofimov, chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent at the Wall Street Journal and author of our Enemies Will Vanish: The Russian Invasion and Ukraine's War of Independence. Thanks so much for being with us.

TROFIMOV: Thank you. It was great.

This program aired on February 20, 2024.
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
User avatar
3-Body Problem
Youngling
Posts: 65
Joined: 2024-01-01 04:57pm

Re: UKRAINE WAR - 1 YEAR AND GOING.

Post by 3-Body Problem »

Broomstick wrote: 2024-02-20 04:52pmMillions have already fled Ukraine.

The problem with encouraging even more to do so is that those people need somewhere to go. Who is going to take them in? Borders are closing all around the world, immigration is getting more and more difficult. Telling people to leave is useless if there is nowhere for them to go.
Refugee status gives zero fucks about normal border restrictions. What country is in a position to easily turn away thousands of people desperate to enter their nation? Beyond this crisis, the rich powerful nations who are used to picking and choosing who they let in are in for a rude awakening when climate change forces ever more migration.
As for "not touching people not in the country anymore" - you might want to ask Zelimkhan Khangoshvili, Ruslan Israpilov, Abdulvahid Edelgiriev, Umar Israilov, Alexander Litvinenko, or Maksim Kuzminov about that. Except you can't, because all of them were killed by Russian agents while outside of Russia (or Ukraine for that matter). You see, that's another flaw with "run away" - the Russians follow. They kill people years after they leave and they don't care about damage to innocent bystanders.

Not everyone wants to spend the rest of their lives looking over the shoulder or having to pick up and flee again and again.
Russia will, potentially, kill some dozen particularly hated individuals the war will kill thousands. Should ordinary citizens who are beneath Russia's notice die for the security of powerful men who might be assassinated if they flee?
Capitulation? Are you serious? Russia has engaged in mass rape, mass torture, mass kidnapping, mass deportation, and mass murder on all the occupied areas of Ukraine they've held. Would YOU be willing to drop trou and bend over for a regiment of Russians to ass-rape you? Because that's essentially what you're expecting Ukrainians to submit to.
The bigger issue is that Ukraine and Russia have been at war since 2014, war is a violent hateful thing that often brings out, and sometimes even encourages, the worst in men. A settled peace with UN peacekeepers and neutral observes will hardly be ideal for anybody stuck in Ukraine and certainly the military heads and political figures will have it even worse, but the current war is worse than that will be. If my options were a slow grinding death under a steel rain or a risk of mistreatment at the hands of a conquering nation until I have the means to flee, I'd take the chance to live and see freedom elsewhere.
Locked