Beltrami2005
Member
Well but it is happening. Ukraine is armed to the teeth and fights fabolous. I have great respect for them.
The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #13,662
I think it has been discussed a little bit, and I would agree. This was a big loss for Russia, yet another reason why going in was a bad idea. That having been said, the split is real even within Ukraine. There is still a pro-Russian minority. But it's smaller than it was, more isolated, and with no chance of ever taking center stage politically, at least within the forseeable future. On the flip side, the same problem exists for Ukraine with regards to the Donbas. There are quite a few people there who also hate Ukraine now.
Lastly, on the question of "holding Ukraine", I don't think anyone here thinks Russia will conquer all or even most of Ukraine. In the areas Russia will conquer a demographic shift is already in progress, and it's something I've talked about in other posts, including relatively recently. You'll notice, despite what you write, that there isn't much of a guerilla resistance campaign in occupied areas, even ones that were clearly not pro-Russian in any meaningful way. Places like Energodar, Melitopol', and other parts of Zaporozhye and Kherson region. I think Russia will be able to hold what they conquer, assuming they can get a political settlement to end the war with them in possession of the territory. There will likely be some sort of right to return discussion after the war, and Russia will probably try to impose a state of affairs where people who don't want to live under Russia will be discouraged from coming back.
I actually agree with the point about the bad blood now between Russians and Ukrainians it's the reason strategicly this is a loss for Russia either way. And the true tragedy of this war.
I think when this is over there is also going to be no small anger in Ukraine towards the west. It's almost inconceivable that there won't be a feeling of betrayal by Ukrainians if this ends badly for them. I also have a sneaking suspicion that post Ukraine reconstruction is going to be mostly a Russian responsibility, it's not hard to see the e.u not investing in Ukraine once Ukraine stops fighting Russia especially as Russian is the country with the greatest desire for stability in the region
Last edited:
As I've said I don't think anyone questions or doubts the Ukrainian or for that fact Russians ability to fight. Both sides have proven to be resourceful, determined, stubborn and courageous in combat. Frankly there exactly they the type of forces you wouldn't want to run into. As for the current state of Ukraine military capabilities yes our are correct but this is entirely about the state of them after the war. For the situation to remain would imop require a military victory over Russia as it's doubtful a economic or diplomatic one is likely to come before the question is settled on the battlefield.
Unfortunately for Ukraine a war of attrition is not in there favour long term as stated t Russian army is also a incredibly hard army to defeat. And in terms of manpower the are for all intents on there own. In terms of material they are also at a disadvantage in terms of capabilities and mass. These are significant and growing probloms as the form of warfare is attritional. Tho that itself is actually a reflection of the strength of Ukraine in that a rapid and decisive blow was tried and deemed unachievable.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
We will see what happens. Merz must have read my earlier post on Europe and Russia:
It’s time to work this thing out and put the misery behind and look forward. You cannot build European security architecture without its biggest member, it just doesn’t work like that and will fail every single time otherwise.
Forgot to post yesterday. It appears that Timoshenko might be going back to jail (laughing) and the picture they posted is rather hilarious:
On the civilian infrastructure, electricity, heating, etc:
In the meantime, Belgorod…
Starting Friday, one Russian city on the border, Belgorod, got a taste of what the Ukrainians have been going through when it was hit by widespread outages after Kyiv’s forces launched its own strike against the city’s infrastructure.
But is it just the one strike?
In Belgorod near-daily drone attacks have become part of life, and resentment has grown in the region about the apathy of Russians in other parts of the country to their fate.
Ah, but if course, it has been going on forever and Ukraine tried to achieve just that in Belgorod for a long time (if their capabilities allowed, it would be significantly more widespread). We just decide to report it like we do.
Gladkov has still described the situation on Monday as “practically catastrophic” and admitted for the first time that it would not be possible to fully restore the system.
The temperature, meanwhile, has plummeted to just 12 degrees Fahrenheit, (-11 Celsius) and Tuesday the governor warned that the situation could deteriorate and cause further power outages across the region. He called on residents to prepare to leave at short notice in case of an emergency situation in which power and heating were totally lost.
Gladkov said residents should relocate children to relatives in parts of Russia with power and heating if they could. “We understand that it is impossible to fully restore electricity supply to residential buildings — first and foremost apartment blocks — and to industrial enterprises solely through backup generation,” he said in a video address on Telegram.
Looks like they are a step away from the situation in Kyiv, but not far behind. Klitchko also encouraged residents to leave Kyiv a few days ago.
Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/01/14/russia-belgorod-ukraine-power-outages/
Reznikov in his tweet there says that Ukraine stands and Russia fails. Looks like both fail, but one is on a much smaller and rather isolated scale. At least Reznikov stated his position as fact. Sybiha (the UA FM), on the other hand, went ballistic on the statement by the Red Cross regarding the dire situation and attacks on electrical and heating infrastructure, but dared to include Donetsk and Belgorod to the pile.
I guess, we can conclude that Russia also “acts within the international humanitarian law”. His last paragraph is, of course, completely absurd. But this isn't new. I also wonder if his office is warm or not.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
You keep posting really weird stuff. Perhaps you should define what is portrayed to be primitive.
Again, for a dude from a country that hardly contributes to the Ukrainian cause, those are some rather strong desires. Also, basically until this past year:
Care to name many such cities in Europe? I would encourage thinking and, maybe, doing some reading before replying.
A lot of the stuff you post is a lot of nonsense. For example, you stated earlier that Russian economy is the size of the Netherlands. How do you measure the economy? For insrance, by nominal GDP:
By purchasing power parity or, in “primitive” terms, the real GDP or how far the money do go compared to the prices in the United States:
And so on. Those are from Wikipedia, by the way, as I believe this is more than sufficient to make the point. What is the measurement of economy you are referring to?
You then say that the Black Sea Fleet does not exist. Does it really not? I actually don’t know for sure, but I am wondering, how does it compare to the Spain’s entire Navy? Then, if we expand the scope and refer to the entire Russian Navy as well, in order to further display the great weakness, where the Black Sea Fleet is pretty far from being the main contributor, and for a reason, how is that picture looking? 60 some (?) submarines in a primitive and backward country with the economy the size of Netherlands vs 70 or whatever it is for the USA? Imagine what a “real” country could achieve?! How does the Black Sea Fleet compares to the Dutch Navy, by the way? I have no idea (and probably for a reason).
Anyway, the point is that you should look at the situation rationally as opposed to what you post - a lot of unsubstantiated certainties and convictions far different from the reality. I understand, living, what is it, 3,000-4,000 km on a straight line away from Russia and a whole bunch of countries in front and behind (read NATO allies) doing all the heavy lifting as far as defense spending is concerned, allows for some leniency and rather ignorant assumptions (or convictions in your case) about Russian primitivity and weakness and so on. But you still should be able to do better.
About seizing Russian vessels that you also mentioned and think it should be implemented by your country: how come Spain hasn’t tried it yet and likely never will?
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Forgot to say thst we are back to “it’s Ukraine’s fault”, yet again:
U.S. President Donald Trump told Reuters that Ukraine - not Russia - is holding up a potential peace deal, rhetoric that stands in marked contrast to that of European allies, who have consistently argued Moscow has little interest in ending its war in Ukraine.
In an exclusive interview in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump said Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to wrap up his nearly four-year-old invasion of Ukraine. Zelenskiy, the U.S. president said, was more reticent.
"I think he's ready to make a deal," Trump said of the Russian president. "I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal."
Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe's largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: "Zelenskiy."
U.S. President Donald Trump told Reuters that Ukraine - not Russia - is holding up a potential peace deal, rhetoric that stands in marked contrast to that of European allies, who have consistently argued Moscow has little interest in ending its war in Ukraine.
In an exclusive interview in the Oval Office on Wednesday, Trump said Russian President Vladimir Putin is ready to wrap up his nearly four-year-old invasion of Ukraine. Zelenskiy, the U.S. president said, was more reticent.
"I think he's ready to make a deal," Trump said of the Russian president. "I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal."
Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe's largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: "Zelenskiy."
Beltrami2005
Member
Well there can be no mayor guerilla since russia genocides the local population. Males are forced into army and killed, children abducted ect. The effects on the population is devastating and was last seen in WW II in Europe. Also the land hold now, is basicly wasteland. Mined, destroyed, poisoned. So even the areas that are under russias controle are basicly worthless and a burden.
Beltrami2005
Member
You keep posting really weird stuff. Perhaps you should define what is portrayed to be primitive.
Again, for a dude from a country that hardly contributes to the Ukrainian cause, those are some rather strong desires. Also, basically until this past year:
Care to name many such cities in Europe? I would encourage thinking and, maybe, doing some reading before replying.
A lot of the stuff you post is a lot of nonsense. For example, you stated earlier that Russian economy is the size of the Netherlands. How do you measure the economy? For insrance, by nominal GDP:
View attachment 54178
By purchasing power parity or, in “primitive” terms, the real GDP or how far the money do go compared to the prices in the United States:
View attachment 54179
And so on. Those are from Wikipedia, by the way, as I believe this is more than sufficient to make the point. What is the measurement of economy you are referring to?
You then say that the Black Sea Fleet does not exist. Does it really not? I actually don’t know for sure, but I am wondering, how does it compare to the Spain’s entire Navy? Then, if we expand the scope and refer to the entire Russian Navy as well, in order to further display the great weakness, where the Black Sea Fleet is pretty far from being the main contributor, and for a reason, how is that picture looking? 60 some (?) submarines in a primitive and backward country with the economy the size of Netherlands vs 70 or whatever it is for the USA? Imagine what a “real” country could achieve?! How does the Black Sea Fleet compares to the Dutch Navy, by the way? I have no idea (and probably for a reason).
Anyway, the point is that you should look at the situation rationally as opposed to what you post - a lot of unsubstantiated certainties and convictions far different from the reality. I understand, living, what is it, 3,000-4,000 km on a straight line away from Russia and a whole bunch of countries in front and behind (read NATO allies) doing all the heavy lifting as far as defense spending is concerned, allows for some leniency and rather ignorant assumptions (or convictions in your case) about Russian primitivity and weakness and so on. But you still should be able to do better.
About seizing Russian vessels that you also mentioned and think it should be implemented by your country: how come Spain hasn’t tried it yet and likely never will?
Spain has seized multiple russian vessels.
- Motor Yacht Tango — Owned/linked to Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg; seized in Palma de Mallorca under a Spanish court order at the request of U.S. authorities.
- Superyacht Valerie — Linked to Sergei Chemezov (head of state conglomerate Rostec); provisionally immobilised in Barcelona by Spanish authorities.
- Luxury yacht Lady Anastasia — Seized under EU sanctions in Spain; linked to Russian oligarch Aleksandr Mikheyev (head of Rosoboronexport).
- Superyacht Crescent — Reportedly detained in Spain (e.g., Tarragona) as part of sanction enforcement against oligarch-linked assets.
Spain seizes another Russian yacht believed to belong to an oligarch. (Published 2022)
The ship was impounded in the Spanish port of Tarragona pending an inspection to establish its exact ownership, Spain’s transport ministry said.
Hoover
Member
Nonsense. And all but Trump are knowing that. It is disgusting by Trump to blame the victim, and not the aggressor. Putin wants only the surrender of the Urkaine (nothing more are the Russian "peace plan"). Instead of supporting the victing Trump supports Russia for meeting all Russian requirements.
Putin will end his invasion if he gets all his demands solved. And Trump wants to make "big deals" with Russia, the Ukraine is an annoying obstacle on that way.
Last edited:
Russia is not commiting genocide in Ukraine nor are they forcing Ukrainian pows or civilians into the military. Being wrong about things is fine and glad to see your ere learning but please don't strait up lie about war crimes in a highly visible war if this was true we would know. Rawanda that's a genocide palistine aswell tho it's a more drawn out affair. To be honest one of the remarkable things about this war is despite its length and difficulty there has been remarkably few civilian casualties compared to other and often much less intense conflicts. To be clear I'm not saying ther hasn't been mass suffering just putting things in the context of a genocide? No thank God this isn't even close
Beltrami2005
Member
Spare me the paternalistic tone. I think you are 100% wrong and i prove you wrong. Russia is committing genocide in Ukraine
Allegations of genocide of Ukrainians in the Russo-Ukrainian war - Wikipedia
The goal is the elimination of the ukrainian ethnicity. Which very existance is denied by Putin in his own speeches.
Its the very goal of this war to erase Ukrainian identity and ethnicity.
Here he holds a speech where he denies ukrainians even exist:
File:Обращение Президента Российской Федерации 2022-02-21.webm - Wikipedia
Btw they do force civilians into military
Fighting their own country: Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians have been forcibly conscripted by Russia
They also torture and massacre civilians in large scales.
I'll even use the same source tho I think there are better ones
en.wikipedia.org
.
As you can see by the very same source only 4% are civilian casualties compared to 30% Afghanistan (not a genocide) and 80% palistine a actual genocide. This isnt about being patronizing it's about being objective and realistic, you may not like Russia you may want them to lose and that's fine. But accusing Russia of genocide when they clearly take precautions to limit civilian casualties is just wrong. And I feel the need to correct that statement rather then let it stand as false information should be called out
As to Putin denying the existence of Ukraine that if I recall right has to be taken into context of his speech at the time, were he was talking about the history of the region in point of fact he seems very willing to let there be a Ukraine in one form or another after this war and indeed was of that position before it. Either way even if that was his position it's still not genocide. Its a political position not systematic murder of entire ethnic groups
As to the forcibly conscripting hundreds of thousands of Ukraine civilians into the military? Well Russia has definitely had some predatory foreign recruitment policies. Thet article is imop pure propaganda. Also unrealistic if one thinks about it for a second those troops would simply defect once they hit the combat line would they not?
On top of that frankly Russia's recruitment prosses is a rather transparent one and the numbers for it suggest the need for this type of action is unneeded. Or not worth the risk of international intervention in the war it could spark.
Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian war - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
As you can see by the very same source only 4% are civilian casualties compared to 30% Afghanistan (not a genocide) and 80% palistine a actual genocide. This isnt about being patronizing it's about being objective and realistic, you may not like Russia you may want them to lose and that's fine. But accusing Russia of genocide when they clearly take precautions to limit civilian casualties is just wrong. And I feel the need to correct that statement rather then let it stand as false information should be called out
As to Putin denying the existence of Ukraine that if I recall right has to be taken into context of his speech at the time, were he was talking about the history of the region in point of fact he seems very willing to let there be a Ukraine in one form or another after this war and indeed was of that position before it. Either way even if that was his position it's still not genocide. Its a political position not systematic murder of entire ethnic groups
As to the forcibly conscripting hundreds of thousands of Ukraine civilians into the military? Well Russia has definitely had some predatory foreign recruitment policies. Thet article is imop pure propaganda. Also unrealistic if one thinks about it for a second those troops would simply defect once they hit the combat line would they not?
On top of that frankly Russia's recruitment prosses is a rather transparent one and the numbers for it suggest the need for this type of action is unneeded. Or not worth the risk of international intervention in the war it could spark.
Last edited:
Beltrami2005
Member
My statement stands as firm as Mt Everest. The russian junta openly says they want ukraine erased, i posted even speech by Putin himself.I'll even use the same source tho I think there are better ones
.Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian war - Wikipedia
As you can see by the very same source only 4% are civilian casualties compared to 30% Afghanistan (not a genocide) and 80% palistine a actual genocide. This is about being patronizing it's about being objective and realistic, you may not like Russia you may want them to lose and that's fine. But accusing Russia of genocide when they clearly take precautions to limit civilian casualties is just wrong. And I feel the need to correct that statement rather then let it stand as false information should be called out
I also feel the need to correct your false statement and happily will do so again.
Please elaborate which precautions Russia takes when it massacres civilians like in Bucha?
I would also like to know how Russia uses precaution not to kill civilians while torturing them?
Here the Un report:
In the areas Russia holds, it systematicly hunts civilians, bans the ukrainian language, torture and massacres are widespread. It takes children hostage and abducts them. The areas that were liberated show widespread massacres and crimes against humanity. What you think happens in the areas that russia still holds?
Ethnical cleansing was and is always a method used by Russia. They did it in evry area they occupied. Why should they not use it now? Even more so their own leader set the erasure of ukrainians as goal of that war:
Here great summary:
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/hate-speech-and-calls-for-genocide-in-putins-russia/
No I won't go into all these detailed as it's clearly just a rabbit hole of ludicrous claim after ludicrous claim if a four year war with historicaly low civilian casualties doest convince you that there is not just no genocide but not actually convince you that efforts must be taken to achieve that intentionally then there is not much to say.
4% is low man like super low even accounting for the slow nature of this war were evacuations can and do take place. Tho this is somewhat offset by the range of drones and use of civilian transportation a combination that byits nature makes civilian casualties impossible to avoid unless a army chooses to give it's opponents "free logistics"
Beltrami2005
Member
1. Russia is unable to hold most of Ukraine.
2. Nobody knows what horrors happen in the areas that are under russian occupation.
We do know tho though what horrors happened in the areas that Ukraine liberated. That alone is enough to understand why russia in its very core is not a european nation. Its also the reason why i support that our best option as Europeans is to keep all connections to russia cut, build a huge wall and have minimum contact,. Im also a big supporter of a zero tolerance stance towards russian agressions.
Any russian fighter jet entering EU airspace should be dealed with military means, any ship violating european seas should be entered and confiscated, if it attacks should be sunk.
I firmly believe that this is the language russia understands and which secures peace. What endangers peace is when we act reluctant.
I also believe that Russia would not have attacked Ukraine when Europe would have made clear from day 1 that what we have now will be the result. Putin believed Europe looks away. Which didnt happen. He bet mostly on Germany to shrug it off and do business as usual.
Had he knew in what clusterfuck this turns into, this would not have been the case. Appeasement always leads to war.
Aggression like that is what leads to war
Russia has no interest in holding all of Ukraine as they have stated on many occasions.
And yes I agree what happens in further Russia occupied areas will be similar to what has happened. That is to say in context of a ongoing war not very much in the context of genocide nothing
We have been over this Russia is a part of Europe like it or not. It's not really a matter of opinion economic, social, military geography they are a part of Europe. They are also a part of Asia turns out gigantic countries with the military power to remain sovereign have a impact in the geographical locations the reside in. Go figure
There is a whole ot of discussion about airspace violations on these forums if you would like to read them. My opinion is that what your suggesting is a bad idea especially as for all the talk Europe Cleary does not war war with Russia. The tanker issue is quickly starting to escalate fundamentally it has already had the impact least wanted that is the probable creation of a separate insurance and regerstration system outside the current systems ability to sanction effectively. It may also lead to a remilitarization of the seas
I don't know if Russia would have invaded knowing what they know know. I tend to think they of course would have done it differently but lets say that wasn't a option I think they still would have. I base this on the fact there goals haven't changed they imop didn't act because they wanted to they acted because they feared cost if inaction.
A better question is would the west have kept the status quo of Ukraine as a neutral state if they knew the way tigs would be now. The cynical part of me says probably not as it seems there goal was never to help Ukrainian but to hurt Russia.
I would suggest that Russia has indeed committed acts of genocide against Ukraine. War is ugly and the destruction of cities seems to be the norm. Removing children and sending them to Russia to be adopted and assimilated is another matter all together. Forcing Ukrainians to accept Russian passports in occupied land is also genocide. There are a whole host of things that Russians are perpetrating against Ukrainians that qualify as genocide. Civilian casualties aren't the only measure of genocide although that might be what some people typically look for. That being said when the war eventually reaches it's conclusion I don't believe Russia will ever face these charges.
The Ten Stages of the Russian Genocide in Ukraine
Source: EU Debates, News & OpinionsThe Ten Stages of the Russian Genocide in UkraineBy Emily MullinAnd the Genocide Watch Ukraine Team Talks about a negotiated settlement of Russia’s war against Ukraine have dominated international headlines. As many hope that President Trump can talk Mr. Putin...
www.genocidewatch.com
Beltrami2005
Member
Ukraine as a "neutral state" is code for a impoverished Ukraine without any chance of development. Ukraine is european and thus wants to be part of Europe. There is zero chance for development in a russian dominated ukraine. It would be stuck in misery just like belarus or russia itself.
Its up to Ukrainians to decide their future and they chose Europe with overwhelming numbers. And now after Russia commited so many crimes against them, thats set in stone.
I dont denie Russia has impact, its just 100% negative and its Europes core interest to see russia as weak as possible.
As i said, appeasement leads always to war. When Russia knows any airplane entering european airspace will get shot down, Russia wont do it. Evry weakness shown is exploited. Its as simple as that.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #13,680
Unable to capture at this point. If they could capture it, it would be a different situation.
This is simply not true. Areas under Russian occupation that aren't in the immediate near-front area are accessible to civilians including foreign reporters. German TV did a story from Mariupol'. Additionally I've posted videos from towns that are in bad shape under Russian control in several posts above, including interviews with residents. This isn't the 1950s, there is no iron curtain. There's internet and tourism in Russia. If you wanted to travel to Mariupol' for example you easily could.
Frankly I think this is B.S. European nations are responsible for things like the Holocaust and the Belgian Congo. I would argue that Russia committing war crimes is very much in line with the history of European nations. The attempt to label some as "European" and others as not is simply a politically-motivated smear. And let's be clear, there's little difference in culture, mindset, and the reality within between Russia and Ukraine. I'd understand if you were trying to draw the line at the EU border. It would still be, in my opinion, fundamentally wrong. But it would have at least some objective reality to it. Trying to draw the line between Ukraine and Russia is ridiculous.
I don't think a naval blockade of Russian transit through the Baltic and Mediterranean would ensure peace. I think it would ensure the opposite.
I don't think it was possible to make it clear from day 1 that this would be the result, because nobody knew it would be the result.
Hindsight is 20/20. I don't think there's any major policy maker that accurately predicted the course this war would take, but I'm happy to be proven wrong. Who knew? Who predicted a 4+ year trench war dominated by drones?
The old tried and true "Hitler" argument. Except reality is more complex than that. Sometimes the opposite of appeasement also leads to war. And sometimes a compromise can help avoid war. The key thing to understand is that compromise isn't a question of what's right but a question of the middle ground between what two sides want.
How do conflicts spiral into war?
When does deterrence work – and when does it fail? Understanding spiral and deterrence theories may keep conflicts from escalating further.
goodauthority.org