The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[rsemmes]

Your whataboutism doesn't work on us. We are non-aligned and have always denounced Israel's occupation Palestine and the US support of Israel and we also denounce the US attack on Iran. So listen, your Russia is in the wrong here. You should stop trying to make excuses for them. And quit the whataboutism. It's tiresome.

Ukraine is the one being invaded and you keep expecting Ukraine to give up for the sake of peace. That might be how it was back in imperial days, but modern nationalism doesn't work that way. Practically all modern nations make it a core axiom that not one square centimeter of the motherland will be given up. Even if you manage to completely defeat the Ukrainian military, the situation will just devolve into endless guerilla war. It'll be like the Soviet adventure in Afghanistan, except worse. You're the invader. You're the one who should pull back for the sake of peace.

Two questions then, but please, feel free to give a High Horse speech again...

Are we digging Ukraine's hole deeper and deeper?
Continuing the attrition war will be cost free for Ukraine in lives and for NATO in money?
What reality tells you?

Sorry, three.

 

[rsemmes]

Ukraine said it recaptured more of its territory than Russia had managed to seize this year, despite restrictions on US satellite services critical to its defence.

Russia drops cluster bombs on Ukraine as Kyiv consolidates front line

Russia’s territorial gains this year are effectively nil as it heads into trilateral talks with Ukraine, US.

www.aljazeera.com

Including Stepnogirsk, Omelnik, Orijiv, Mala Tokamachka, Pokrovsk, Dobropillia, Kostiantinivka and Kupiansk; obviously.

 

[swerve]

Upon a pause of the war, Ukraine would immediately redouble its efforts to rearm, would invite foreign troops for ... training, would invite foreign "advisors", would try to integrate its air defence into NATO, would stockpile millions of drones etc. With a constant revanchist attitude of the people against Russia, probably for centuries onwards.

Why would the russians allow that? The best course of action for the russians is to keep grinding Ukraine into nothingness. Until it becomes a permanently destroyed/failed country, forever isolated, with no future and with demographics even much worse than the current situation.

Remind me . . . . what did Ukraine do in the 20+ years before the Russians marched in in 2014?

Spent bugger-all on the armed forces. Let them decay. Let state-owned arms manufacturers decay. Russia wanted a weak, harmless Ukraine? All it had to do was - nothing. It could have kept Ukraine sweet with friendly words, open borders, & some modest subsidies.

The wars were both begun by Russia, either via proxies (e.g. Strelkov/Girkin) or direct invasion.

The best course of action for the russians is to keep grinding Ukraine into nothingness. Until it becomes a permanently destroyed/failed country, forever isolated, with no future and with demographics even much worse than the current situation.

Really? Russia could have had a friendly & potentially profitable neighbour between it & western countries. Wouldn't that have been better?

 

[KipPotapych]

In reality, it is probably about 360,000 barrels a day right now. The (less) vodka math is as follows. Normal refining capacity (as far as diesel is concerned) is at least 1,800,000 bpd (probably more - December 2025 saw on average 1 mbpd heading out of the country, if I recall correctly). Provided the estimate of (nearly) 30% of capacity being affected is correct, we have production of about 1,260 kbpd with internal demand set about 900 kbpd, probably less now as the harvest season wraps up (the figure is the average daily).

@personaldesas, it appears that my less vodka math was relatively on point. One of us (me and Ronald) is wrong about the internal demand here and I am going to say it is me, but will not insist (laughing):



PS I am sure he is still using the harvest season numbers for the internal demand and will do so to the mid- or late- November, when the exports will rise sharply all else being equal -> I won’t be surprised if we see half a mil plus bpd heading out of the country.

 

[Redshift]

Two questions then, but please, feel free to give a High Horse speech again...

Are we digging Ukraine's hole deeper and deeper?
Continuing the attrition war will be cost free for Ukraine in lives and for NATO in money?
What reality tells you?

Sorry, three.

No Russia are digging the hole deeper and deeper, your twisted logic is just barmy, the more that people defend themselves against aggression the more aggression is what they will get, great victim blaming speech there .

 

[deyhere]

Remind me . . . . what did Ukraine do in the 20+ years before the Russians marched in in 2014?

Spent bugger-all on the armed forces. Let them decay. Let state-owned arms manufacturers decay. Russia wanted a weak, harmless Ukraine? All it had to do was - nothing. It could have kept Ukraine sweet with friendly words, open borders, & some modest subsidies.

The wars were both begun by Russia, either via proxies (e.g. Strelkov/Girkin) or direct invasion.


Really? Russia could have had a friendly & potentially neighbour between it & western countries. Wouldn't that have been better?

Remind me . . . . what did Ukraine do in the 20+ years before the Russians marched in in 2014?

Spent bugger-all on the armed forces. Let them decay. Let state-owned arms manufacturers decay. Russia wanted a weak, harmless Ukraine? All it had to do was - nothing. It could have kept Ukraine sweet with friendly words, open borders, & some modest subsidies.

The wars were both begun by Russia, either via proxies (e.g. Strelkov/Girkin) or direct invasion.


Really? Russia could have had a friendly & potentially neighbour between it & western countries. Wouldn't that have been better?

why didn't the US and the EU wait for Yanukovych's tenure to run out? he had less than a year or so remaining and would have lost in the elections as he's ratings were very poor. why does the US and EU use lethal force when they deem necessary but Russia shouldn't?


Russia kept Ukraine sweet with more than friendly words. cheap gas, cheap loans, Ukrainian factories supplied specialised equipment to Russian enterprises, Ukraine was making serious money via transit fees, business was booming. when Ukraine was is trouble, Russia made available 15 billion, of which 3 billion was given to Ukraine instantly to avert a looming bankruptcy.

then you regime change Yanukovych because he suspends the EU trade deal in favour of Russian money, install proper thugs as leaders while the Russians are watching, then you expect Russia to maintain sweet and friendly words? as if that is not enough, you attempt regime change in Belarus then another regime change in Kazakhstan where Russia had to intervene to keep that government standing. Russia felt attacked, they had to do something.

will the protests in France gain international support? any sanctions for the Macron government? anyone willing to go share cookies to the protesters? are these bad protesters? sure maiden protesters were fighting for freedom

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

why didn't the US and the EU wait for Yanukovych's tenure to run out? he had less than a year or so remaining and would have lost in the elections as he's ratings were very poor. why does the US and EU use lethal force when they deem necessary but Russia shouldn't?

You're raising events from more than a decade ago, which are not relevant to the current war in Ukraine. However, on the basis you raised the issue, the US and EU didn't force him out. He was forced out by popular protests.

Like most corrupt leaders, Yanukovych didn't think along the lines of "I'm unpopular and will lose the next election, so I should accept the loss and just ride off into the sunset". He would have absolutely believed he could have won the following election, whether by fair means or foul. Remember, he tried to fix the 2004 election in his favour - and it almost worked. There were also allegations he suppressed the Opposition in Ukraine almost immediately after winning the 2010 election and that the 2012 parliamentary elections were not free or fair because he changed the law to make it harder for the opposition to campaign and make it easier for the ruling party.

Yanukovych fled Ukraine after he realised he had lost the support of the military and security forces. He tried suppressing the Euromaiden protests, and it backfired. In that situation, he realised it was likely he would have no way to stay in power (because no one would fix the election for him and then stamp out the inevitable protests) and he didn't want to end up in jail for the rest of his life.

Russia kept Ukraine sweet with more than friendly words.....

That's sort of a decision for the Ukrainian people, not backroom deals between corrupt leaders who "know better". If the Ukrainian government (duly elected by the Ukrainian public) decides it doesn't want to give Russia what it wants, that is the reality Russia must deal with. Does it continue having to offer cheap gas if a contract is up for renegotiation? Not at all. But annexing bits of Ukraine and then conducting a full invasion is not a legal or morally acceptable response to your guy(s) not winning elections there.

will the protests in France gain international support? any sanctions for the Macron government?

Support for what and sanctioning the French government over what? The protesters want more funding for schools, but it's not there because of a budget crunch. Financing public spending is not something other governments would intervene over. Besides, Macron will be stepping down because of the term limits, and there will be a free and fair election next year (Opposition candidates likely to win).

I doubt anyone is taken in by the false equivalence you're trying to make, please discuss the situation in Ukraine only.

 

[deyhere]

Events from more than a decade ago that is still shaping the war and the future of Ukraine today. so you regime change a corrupt leader for another corrupt leader right? Yanukovych won the elections is 2004 and was robbed by the then incumbent president with support from EU and US, he had no powers to rig elections, he was in opposition at the time. to cut the story short, Russia wouldn't have invaded if not for the blatant and arrogant regime change that took place in Ukraine.

we size every opportunity to topple governments that are facing any sort of protests from their public, no matter what it is about, we dive in there and make it our narrative then if we don't like the government, we back protests till government falls, miraculously our people take charge over there. tried it in Iran and it failed.

has the Macron government failed the French people? don't the French public need freedom from the Macron government? do the protesters need international help? sanctions anyone?

 

[personaldesas]

Events from more than a decade ago that is still shaping the war and the future of Ukraine today. so you regime change a corrupt leader for another corrupt leader right? Yanukovych won the elections is 2004 and was robbed by the then incumbent president with support from EU and US, he had no powers to rig elections, he was in opposition at the time. to cut the story short, Russia wouldn't have invaded if not for the blatant and arrogant regime change that took place in Ukraine.

The Russia you're describing seems surprisingly helpless, always the victim. It always comes back to "poor us, we don't want any of this, but the strong West forces us to."

Do you really think Russia is so weak that it's just a pawn of countries with power? I give Russia much more credit than that. I don't believe for a second that it's incapable of making its own decisions.

has the Macron government failed the French people? don't the French public need freedom from the Macron government? do the protesters need international help? sanctions anyone?

So if the French now elect a new government Berlin doesn't like, following your logic Germany couldn't be helped but had to invade France, and we're all supposed to nod along and say, "Well, Germany had no choice".

 

[rsemmes]

No Russia are digging the hole deeper and deeper, your twisted logic is just barmy, the more that people defend themselves against aggression the more aggression is what they will get, great victim blaming speech there .

I used before the example of The Lost Cause, the ACW. The British Empire kept supporting the South even after it was clear that the war was lost; the Union won financial compensation from an international tribunal for that.

The war should have ended in 2022 (let's say 2023), Ukraine wants to defend itself (like Iran) and we want to keep Ukraine in the fight, to get a weaker Russia, as we have stated; in 2022 and that Dutch report and everywhere else.
My logic is the reality of what it is happening, real politik. We defend Ukraine as much as we defend Iran, but we will fight to the last Ukrainian soldier because it is in our interest.

I have to say that I am a bit confused about your logic or with your decision to read whatever you want to read. It is clear that I am "blaming" (asking, actually) us: "Are we digging...", not the victim of our real politik.
Should I say victims? Iran, Russia (you know that Ukraine is killing Russian civilians, right?) and, yes, the great victim of our real politik: Ukraine. And Yemen, and the Houthis... and Indochina and Vietnam... and Libya and Iraq and Egypt and Gaza and Lebanon... and the Spanish Republic. Seaspear gave a try to History, do you want to give a barmy try to "defend", "aggression" and "victim" or to your barmy History?

 

[tonnyc]

Two questions then, but please, feel free to give a High Horse speech again...

Are we digging Ukraine's hole deeper and deeper?
Continuing the attrition war will be cost free for Ukraine in lives and for NATO in money?
What reality tells you?

Sorry, three.

When the Soviets occupied Afganistan, the Afghani did not stop and calculate "throwing the Soviets out will cost us so much in lives lost and money." They just decide to keep fighting. Decades later, when it was the US that was in Afghanistan, the Afghanis still didn't stop and calculate, "the US is so much stronger than us, throwing them out will cost us so much in blood and money." They just kept fighting.

Why are you surprised then when the Ukrainians does not stop to make that calculation? Do you not learn from history? When Nazi Germany invaded Russia, did your great-grandfathers stop to calculate how much Russian lives will be lost if they kept fighting or did they just decide to fight to defend their motherland, no matter the cost? Did your government back then cry out, "oh no, we can't possibly accept help from those capitalist Americans and imperialist Brits" or did they instead just grabbed everything offered and demanded, "MORE!"

History is full of examples like these. You can talk all you want about colour revolutions and Yanukovich and whatever but they became irrelevant the moment you invaded Ukraine. Before then there were plenty of Ukrainians who would listen to Russian grievances and even sided with you. But the moment you invaded, the overriding issue becomes "get the invaders out first". And anyone who is patriotic understands that. After all, if someone invades your country, you would have done the same."

 

[SolarisKenzo]

european - russia call, President Putin was at the phone for around 90 minutes also briefing on possible Abu Dhabi negotiations.
Some sources are saying that the call was "unexpected", but it was confirmed that european leaders were told about it.
Stubb himself said EU partners and Ukraine were informed before the phone call and some points were agreed with the E5.

 

[deyhere]

The Russia you're describing seems surprisingly helpless, always the victim. It always comes back to "poor us, we don't want any of this, but the strong West forces us to."

Do you really think Russia is so weak that it's just a pawn of countries with power? I give Russia much more credit than that. I don't believe for a second that it's incapable of making its own decisions.



So if the French now elect a new government Berlin doesn't like, following your logic Germany couldn't be helped but had to invade France, and we're all supposed to nod along and say, "Well, Germany had no choice".

No, Russia is strong, that's why it could fend for it's self in the mist of this brutal economic attack and NATO sponsored war. fellow forum members that say Russia shouldn't have invaded are wrong in my opinion. this is Russia standing up to the west and holding their ground solidly. welcome to the multi polar world.

why wait for French elections? lets just joins hands to free the French of Macron and his government. France needs to be free

 

[rsemmes]

It seems that Ukraine has started to push back Russia in Orijiv. At least, away from Gogola St and the bridge.

Loading…

www.google.com

tonnyc
I think you want to replay (with another High Horse speech) to Deyhere, I didn't start any "calculations" nor I am painting by numbers.
I am curious about why when I am asking questions some people are reading anything they want to read but a question.
I am also curious about how you got your hands on his great-grandparents passports. You claim to know where they were, checking stamps in the document, maybe?

You could also point out to Redshift our efforts to defend Afghanistan, every single time. Do you think he considers The Great Game as real politik?

Edit
Add the www
.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1V8NzjQkzMOhpuLhkktbiKgodOQ27X6IV&ll=47.5974162727357%2C35.81675730927479&z=12

 

[personaldesas]

No, Russia is strong, that's why it could fend for it's self in the mist of this brutal economic attack and NATO sponsored war.

Then Russia can take responsibility for its own decisions. Being pressured by the West does not establish that it had no choice but to invade Ukraine. If you think invasion was the right choice, defend that choice instead of blaming the West for Russia’s decision.

welcome to the multi polar world.

And you think Russia is up there with the US and China? Really?

why wait for French elections? lets just joins hands to free the French of Macron and his government. France needs to be free

And you still haven’t answered the question: would a change of government in France forces Germany invading it?

 

[personaldesas]

If Western aid means Russia is “really fighting NATO” rather than Ukraine, did Lend-Lease mean Germany was really fighting America rather than the USSR? Does Russia’s use of Iranian and Chinese equipment mean Ukraine is really fighting Iran and China? Or does it only count when it's not Russia?

 

[rsemmes]

Ukraine is using Chinese components, Russia is using NATO components, France is financing Russia... A kind of... Like in every war.

Without NATO the war would had been over in 2023, maybe 2022.

 

[Hoover]

Ukraine is using Chinese components, Russia is using NATO components, France is financing Russia... A kind of... Like in every war.

Without NATO the war would had been over in 2023, maybe 2022.

And without Chinese support the war would have ended 2024. So what?
With the difference that China is supporting a war against UN Charta (a war crime) and NATO supports the rightful defence of an attacked country.

 

[rsemmes]

And without Chinese support the war would have ended 2024. So what?
With the difference that China is supporting a war against UN Charta (a war crime) and NATO supports the rightful defence of an attacked country.

Ministry of Finance attracted USD 41.7 billion in external financing in 2024.
www... kmu.gov.ua/en/news/u-2024-rotsi-minfin-ukrainy-zaluchyv-417-mlrd-zovnishnoho-finansuvannia-iz-iakykh-30-u-hrantovii-formi
Plus another $40bn+ in direct military aid.
If you want to go for war crimes, you have a very long list... France in Indochina and the UK in Iraq or both of them in Egypt, if your memory fails you.

Sorry, reality trumps fairy tales.

 

[personaldesas]

Ukraine is using Chinese components, Russia is using NATO components, France is financing Russia... A kind of... Like in every war.

Without NATO the war would had been over in 2023, maybe 2022.

Even if that were true, how is that different from any other war? Lend-Lease also changed the course and duration of the war against Germany. You said yourself that this is normal. "Like in every war". Yet somehow it only turns the supporter into the “real” opponent when Russia needs an excuse for poor battlefield performance.

Is your “we’re fighting NATO” fairy tale really easier to swallow than admitting that Ukraine, with outside help, has resisted Russia's poorly planned and executed invasion?

Maybe you should follow your own mantra:

Sorry, reality trumps fairy tales.