Russia invades Ukraine

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Azure

I said war is not as simple as this side good / that side bad. Which has proven to be true since the beginning of history.

As much as I believe Ukraine is justified in their actions, I think there will come a point at which Ukraine will want to deescalate the conflict, or at least negotiate something to stop entire cities from being razed, and the West won't allow them because the war benefits the US, and the US military industrial complex. Which goes back to my comment about this side good / that side bad.

Get it? I can believe Ukraine is justified in their actions, and yet understand that there are players in this conflict who will use them to get what they want.

Incorrect again. Ukraine will not want to negotiate at any point until their lands are liberated.

When the Luftwaffe were razing England, it strengthened their resolve. They didn't even think of negotiating. The USA won't force Ukraine to continue fighting, that is absurd.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Azure

I said war is not as simple as this side good / that side bad. Which has proven to be true since the beginning of history.

As much as I believe Ukraine is justified in their actions, I think there will come a point at which Ukraine will want to deescalate the conflict, or at least negotiate something to stop entire cities from being razed, and the West won't allow them because the war benefits the US, and the US military industrial complex. Which goes back to my comment about this side good / that side bad.

Get it? I can believe Ukraine is justified in their actions, and yet understand that there are players in this conflict who will use them to get what they want.

What is this thought based on? The US and European people will turn on cutting 'blank cheques' to the Ukraine before Ukraine wants to stop fighting.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

What is this thought based on? The US and European people will turn on cutting 'blank cheques' to the Ukraine before Ukraine wants to stop fighting.

Idiocy

[btimbit]

It's a common Russian propaganda line. "Ukraine wants peace but their capitalist NATO overlords won't let them"

It's worse than the people that say "Well maybe Ukraine should have just surrendered"

[Jacks]

I'm surprised that some of these Russian troops haven't turned their guns on their commanders (or maybe some have?). If you are being ordered into a WW1 style assault where you are just marching into a meat grinder with the alternative to be shot by your own side? You'd think some of them would band together and take their chances shooting their way out.

[Geraldsh]

Napoleon Bonaparte has been quoted as saying “there are no innocent civilians “. He was invading Italy at the time and he got stopped in the end. Time for Putin to get put on a frozen island in the arctic.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Azure

As much as I believe Ukraine is justified in their actions, I think there will come a point at which Ukraine will want to deescalate the conflict, or at least negotiate something to stop entire cities from being razed, and the West won't allow them because the war benefits the US, and the US military industrial complex. Which goes back to my comment about this side good / that side bad.

I think you've got it backwards. If anything, the US will restrain Ukraine's ambitions in order to further its own goals. For instance, I have little doubt that the US will strongly discourage Ukraine from trying to get Crimea back by force, for fear of escalation. And if the point comes where the US wants to turn its attention elsewhere (say towards China), I think it'll be the US that tries to push for negotiation.

There's zero indication that Ukraine or its people are looking to negotiate to give away their land.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Azure

Who is muddying the water? I think its been a very interesting discussion in regards to how dehumanized this war is becoming, and how many in the West look at it.

War is bad, but in this case, there is also a clear bad guy.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So you believe its going to be incumbent on the country that is being attacked to de-escalate?

Just making sure I understand you correctly here.

Well, Ukraine's actions so far have been the complete opposite. They are reinforcing Bakhmut.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, Ukraine's actions so far have been the complete opposite. They are reinforcing Bakhmut.

And why not…..they appear to have perfected an Ivan meat grinder

[Azure]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I think you've got it backwards. If anything, the US will restrain Ukraine's ambitions in order to further its own goals. For instance, I have little doubt that the US will strongly discourage Ukraine from trying to get Crimea back by force, for fear of escalation. And if the point comes where the US wants to turn its attention elsewhere (say towards China), I think it'll be the US that tries to push for negotiation.

There's zero indication that Ukraine or its people are looking to negotiate to give away their land.

You could be right, though I disagree only because I think the US has realized that destabilizing Russia and EU industry at the same time is a big benefit for them, and they will absolutely play it to that affect.

It amazes me how people don't see that, and think that if you look at it that way, and look ahead into the future on potential outcomes to this conflict, that it is 'muddying the water' to suggest that things won't go like everyone thinks they will.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by peter12

War is bad, but in this case, there is also a clear bad guy.

Oh, so now we agree war is bad.

Good thing that I never said Russia is in any slight way justified in what they are doing. So we should agree, right?

Pay attention to what I'm saying. My entire issue with what is happening is how the US is going to deal with the situation, or already are.

People quickly forget the $2 trillion dollar war campaign in the ME the past 20 years only to turn their backs and leave.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Azure

Oh, so now we agree war is bad.

Good thing that I never said Russia is in any slight way justified in what they are doing. So we should agree, right?

Pay attention to what I'm saying. My entire issue with what is happening is how the US is going to deal with the situation, or already are.

People quickly forget the $2 trillion dollar war campaign in the ME the past 20 years only to turn their backs and leave.

Keep sending money and weapons until one of Putin's cronies puts a bullet in his head?

[peter12]

Azure, I don't see your point at all. Everyone knows that the US is using this war as a proxy to destabilize Russia.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by peter12

Azure, I don't see your point at all. Everyone knows that the US is using this war as a proxy to destabilize Russia.

The conversation goes back war not being as simple as this side bad / that side good.

IMO, you have a clear black and white between Russia / Ukraine, but then you have outside interests, and those outside interests are going to create a situation where their interests are going to become more important than Ukraine defending their country, and the outcome won't be something people are happy with. Therefore war isn't as simple as this side good / that side bad, because if it were, we would support Ukraine to retake their entire country, at all costs, because that is 100% within their right.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Azure

The conversation goes back war not being as simple as this side bad / that side good.

IMO, you have a clear black and white between Russia / Ukraine, but then you have outside interests, and those outside interests are going to create a situation where their interests are going to become more important than Ukraine defending their country, and the outcome won't be something people are happy with. Therefore war isn't as simple as this side good / that side bad, because if it were, we would support Ukraine to retake their entire country, at all costs, because that is 100% within their right.

The logic in this is confusing to me.

1. War is not as simple as this side good / that side bad.
2. In this war, Ukraine is good, Russia is bad.
3. Outside interests are involved.
4. I predict those outside interests will influence the war to an ending that will make people unhappy.
5. Therefore war is not as simple as this side good / that side bad.

[peter12]

Sorry, Azure, this doesn't make any sense to me. What are the potential negative outcomes if Ukraine liberates its territory from the Russians? Is this some kind of convoluted European energy concern?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So you believe its going to be incumbent on the country that is being attacked to de-escalate?

Just making sure I understand you correctly here.

Ultimately de-escalation requires two sides.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by peter12

Sorry, Azure, this doesn't make any sense to me. What are the potential negative outcomes if Ukraine liberates its territory from the Russians? Is this some kind of convoluted European energy concern?

Nothing, that’s not what he is saying.

If you can push the Russians to the original borders, then after that try to de-escalate, that should be the goal but of course the Russians will be worried you keep trying to push into their (original) territory.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by peter12

Sorry, Azure, this doesn't make any sense to me. What are the potential negative outcomes if Ukraine liberates its territory from the Russians? Is this some kind of convoluted European energy concern?

I personally don't care about European energy concerns. If Canada were smart we would be taking advantage of them right now as well.

My concern is the end game here.

Russia is going to keep sending thousands of their people into the meat grinder.

The US and the west is going to keep supplying resources, money and weapons for obvious reasons.

Despite this advantage to Ukraine, it is still resulting in entire cities being razed by Russia in their meat grinder, constant attacks on civilian centers (see the other day), etc.

Ukraine is thus going to ask for either weapons to properly drive Russia back (say F-16s or more air power & heavy long range artillery).

What happens then?

If you agree Putin is a madman, and the Russians are morally corrupt, what is going to stop them from using nuclear weapons? Right now they have zero problem targeting civilian buildings. We have evidence of mass graves going back to last year, evidence of rape. We know they are recruiting people from prison to join Wagner.

This doesn't end with someone in Putin's circle killing him, especially if you believe that he has a lot of support from his inner circle, and that they are as morally corrupt as he is.

On top of that, I don't for a second believe the US cares about Ukraine for any other reason than to destabilize Russia, carve out EU industry to make them more dependent on US resources, and further push NATO into Eastern Europe. Once they feel they have accomplished their goal, they will pull back, and the mandate & rhetoric will change. The most obvious issue being getting Sweden & Finland to join NATO, and getting Russia to deescalate in exchange for an agreement that Ukraine will not be joining NATO.

Once that happens, Ukraine will have to accept whatever terms imposed on them, including giving up territory if that is what the US decides.