I also don’t know why they keep saying it’s going to be a stalemate, Russia is already taking kilometres on the north which is more than Ukraine managed to take during the whole two months now.
Once the offensive burns itself out, it’s almost certain that Russia will start a serious offensive of their own.
Or more accurately, they knew Ukraine would never win, but they could still profit. They didn’t care.
I think most or many of these politicians and weapons contractors genuinely believe(d) that the Ukranazis can win, they are still just coping, and it ultimately doesn’t matter if Ukraine wins or not to them, but of course they would prefer a victory.
I do wonder now actually. Looking back at the early days of the Iraq war, the yanks seemed to be honestly convinced that their “shock and awe” would win the war in a matter of weeks. That they would face no real opposition and the Iraqi people would just roll over and let them steal their resources.
And in turn with this war, the western narrative has always been “Russia is behaving like the US did in Iraq” when they never did, specifically because they’ve learned from that conflict and learned what not to do. The US meanwhile doesn’t seem to have learned a damn thing.
The thing with the US is that we know the people behind the scenes don’t gaf who wins or how long it takes so long as they can sell as many arms as possible in this war and the next one.
But if the generals agreed, that wars don’t need to be won, there are better ways of wasting weapons shooting at nothing. And if the politicians agreed, they would still have to try to or give the appearance of winning if they want to be voted in again. (Of course, voter-gullibility is reliable to some extent.) If the public agreed, they wouldn’t get so emotional about Darth Potter and the Infinity Avenger.
There are glaring contradictions in the west’s war plans. The public, the arms dealers, the military, the politicians, the fossil execs, etc, all have different interests (some slightly different, some very different). But nobody doesn’t want victory/almost everyone would be happy with victory.
They might laugh when they lose and still make a killing in profit. But I wouldn’t say they set out to lose. At the same time, the exceptionalism runs deep and they massively overestimate their abilities. Every time, even when they have the advantage.
I’m rambling now and no longer sure what I was trying to say. Maybe just that the western military model is riddled with contradictions, which they’ve managed to keep at bay for a long time. But facing Russia in Ukraine may be too much to deal with.
No it’s fine, you’re making sense. The US military industrial complex is filled with a lot of different people with different interests. Some only focused on short term profit, some on longer term profit. Losing a war now means greater long term profit for some, and less for others, winning a war flips those two groups. So it seems chaotic and self-contradictory because it isn’t a monolith, with lots of different groups vying for power. And of course, they’re all human, and make human mistakes, errors and overestimates of their own strength. So there are probably plenty who honestly believed that western weapons would win easily, and those that didn’t.
The one thing they do seem to be lacking is anyone who actually understands how dangerously ineffective their “wars for profit” system is, probably because anyone who points that out doesn’t end up in the higher echelons of a military production company.
Are the NATO imperialists now denying their previous claims about mass defections from Russia side, logistic problem of Russians, outdated weaponry from Russian military, or the rediculously expensive military supply from the Western European diaspora to Ukraine? At least they admited that Putin had the ability to takeover all of Ukraine, and that Putin’s lack of motive to occupy Ukraine and his faithfulness to his claim to protect the rebelling states in Ukraine are the reasons for the stalemate.
Don’t be silly! They never said any of that! Ghost of Kiev? Why that was just a metaphor for…uhh…you damn tankies just don’t get it! History and reality aren’t important, what is really important is that this Star War is fought between the Jedi and the Sith and the Jedi always win, so it doesn’t matter how many things we make up about it, good guys always win and we’ve deemed ourselves the good guys! You’re all morons for caring about reality and material conditions!
the Jedi always win
cries in Galactic Republic
The Jedi were a bunch of moralizing libs. Qui-Gon was the only one of them who really got it.
Putin and Russia are now claiming what I saw several people mention as a possibility many months ago, namely that Poland will intervene once the Russian offensive gets started.
The US will probably let them do so because Putin said he’s cool with it and it will guarantee they can seize some Ukrainian assets and space to subject to neo-liberal hell to try and pay off all the money they spent.
The claim being that Poland will invade (with or without Zelenski’s approval) and annex a part of the the western country that they consider historically theirs (realistically more than that really because why not). They’ll probably send in NATO units after a time and basically carve the country in half. The question is, if this happens how soon and will they push to take a larger chunk of the country that might place them in direct conflict with Russian troops just to get that border closer to Russia (NATO’s goal or one of them afterall) or will they happily just occupy the western half, militarize it and let Russia have the current eastern annexed territories plus maybe a bit more? And will there still be a Ukraine, like with Kiev and this weird slice of vertical land sandwiched between areas occupied by Russia and Poland/NATO? Or will it entirely be dissolved into new Polish lands (whether they formally do this or claim they’re just holding onto it for them while in practice ruling it with no intent to ever give it autonomy)?
Poles are a bit unhinged to be honest in the things they say. The anti-communism reactionary fever they have has made them deranged and I honestly worry they’ll try something like invading Belarus or fighting directly with Russia. US doesn’t want this as it kiboshed their claims that stray Ukraine air defense missile that landed in Poland was Russian really quick but if Polish troops are eyeball to eyeball with Russian ones or on the border of Belarus they might not be able to stop them. Especially if Wagner decides to go on the offensive (RT recently reported that Lukashenko has said he worries about them) and I still think Wagner is mercenary enough that if someone were to pay them to stage an attack to allow a response that they might do so.
Eh, I think Wagner is kept on a leash tighter more so now. I like the rest of your analysis though.
If this plays out, it will be interesting to see how reactionaries talk about NATO annexation after reducing Russia’s motive to a land grab. I say interesting. What I mean is, it’ll never come up unless an anti-Imperialist brings it up. And then they’ll misuse a logical fallacy to avoid admitting that NATO is a fuck.
Oh they’ll claim NATO had to do it, that NATO intervened to save the poor Ukrainians, that they now live under glorious Polish/NATO rule instead of evil Putler rule and how much better their lives are and how actually they should have pushed further in and pushed the Russians out entirely.
And then they will get back to mentioning 17.09.1939 with straight face again.
Same way they talk about Germany or South Korea being occupied, probably - pretend it’s something else
I’m not sure about that, but we are right now in the phase of manufacturing consent for intervention. Not sure exactly how that intervention would look since it’s rather unspecified now, but grabbing part of Ukraine is probable. No idea if it will work, up to last year i would say that revanchism for “kresy” is dead and officially opposed by every government since 1945 including the bourgeois ones but here we are again. They can also just go and do it regardless of popular support.
On a side note, Russia recently warned Poland that acts of hostility against Belarus are acts of hostility against Russia, so they might suspect something more?
They’d dearly like to punish Belarus. They don’t dare attack Russia directly because taking a nuclear blast to the face is not fun or profitable but they could be deranged enough to think Russia wouldn’t really use nukes to protect Belarus.
And as to intervening. They’ve invested a lot. It’s not just give-aways to the arms manufacturers and swapping out old stocks for new better, more profitable ones for the conflicts to come and spending a little coin to bleed Russia to try and weaken them. It’s the fact Ukraine has sold itself to western capital and if Russia takes it entirely or forces a capitulation to its own terms, such things might be annulled or ignored and at any rate if it goes back into Russia’s sphere it will be very hard to enforce such things. So invading even part of it as “peacekeeping” could be hedging their bets to make sure they still walk away from the board with something no matter what.
What’s dangerous is they could be betting that they could push the lines right back up to the territories that Russia annexed after a legal vote in them, declare Russia can have those but everything else is off limits and then proceed to not dismantle Ukrainian intelligence and allow them to continue conducting terrorist attacks deep into Russia and into the annexed new Russian territories while allowing them to hide under the NATO overcoat. Russia might suspect as much and doing so thusly could put us directly into a conflict between Russia and NATO at which point the chances Russia makes good on its warning and uses nuclear weapons increase. It’s a very dangerous and dicey situation. I think Russia understands it can’t just grind at the front forever and has to undertake an offensive to take Kiev or at least push further in and really put the screws to the Nazi fascist regime there.
Because the terrorism by fascists and their liberal stooges is what this is all about. It’s why Russia moved into Ukraine in the first place, it’s what set off this larger conflict because Ukraine couldn’t stop its Nazi battalions from committing genocide against Russian speakers and because they kept shelling and dropping bombs and trying to blow up bridges in Crimea. It’s what the US wants more of, a destabilized region on Russia’s borders, western/Ukrainian intelligence cells and their groomed Russian liberal agents. They can’t fight Russia directly but they can fund and fuel an insurgency, terrorist attacks deep into Russia, try and convince the Russian people they’re unsafe with Putin around and only getting rid of him for some more pliable puppet will bring them safety. Meanwhile it also encourages a brain drain as non-ideological and liberal types seek to flee a place beset by terrorism and still under heavy sanctions for the better paying, safer west. Much as how the west plundered Russia of many of its brilliant people in the 90s because of the situation of deprivation and misery after the fall of the Soviet Union.
hahaha , fucking dying empire and their western idiots
Courage is definitely a substitute for weapons and training in a modern military.
What they obviously needed was to draft Mel Gibson to give them a rousing speech before sending them into the meat grinder. That would have changed everything.
deleted by creator
And for what?
For the sake of the people in the Donbass who were being shelled since 2014. For the sake of no nuclear war. For the sake of bringing NATO to its heels.
deleted by creator
So did the casualties/severity of those things increase or decrease after the three day special military operation begun?
“You can’t call the cops to arrest me for beating my wife, it’ll just make me want to hurt other people!”
-UkraNazis as they shelled Donbass and acted surprised when Russia gave them a taste of their own medicine.
Look, I support the fastest resolution as possible to prevent more casulties as long as it is effective, but this argument is nonsensical. Even the New York Times was reporting on Ukraine shelling their own cities with cluster munitions back in 2014. You can’t just say “people will die if we intervene, so go ahead and keep murdering people, we won’t stop you”.
As an aside, three day thing never came from Russia, that was Belaraus and a US general estimating it was possible to take Kiev in three days if they wanted to.
Remember though that many of them were Nazis so not actual people.
with that said, we should keep in mind that there are still plenty of non-Nazis who either joined the army voluntarily because they were misguided, or who were forced to join as part of their drafts, and that’s certainly a tragic situation
And many children or people who weren’t in the military at all died
yes, unintended deaths are practically unavoidable (especially when the Nazis fire from civilian buildings), and the mass displacement of civilians is also tragic
Absolutely. Ukraine pretends to have the intrestes of the civilians at heart but it only serving the western capitalists over their own people. If Zelensky and his dictatorship cared about the Ukrainian people they would have went against NATO to form a peace treaty. Rather than that, he serves American weapon manufacturers
If Zelensky and his dictatorship cared about the Ukrainian people they would have went against NATO to form a peace treaty.
Which by all accounts, they had multiple close attempts at until the NATO Overlords put a stop to it. Not only would they have saved many lives, they probably would have ended up with better terms than they would get now. Even if he didn’t give a shit about his people, and I don’t think he does, the country would have been better off taking the deals that had already been negotiated.
We can only hope that as many of those people are in the platoons that have surrendered as possible. Which honestly seems likely to me, the far-right elements are not going to surrender because they know they wouldn’t be treated quite as kindly.
I don’t want any more innocent civilians to die if it can be avoided, and I do consider children and elderly thrown into the front lines with a gun and a salute to be civilians.
Imagine getting downvoted for saying that war is terrible
we are used to extremely bad faith comments about this war from liberals. If they had thrown in criticism about Ukraine/nato I guarantee it’s not downvoted
deleted by creator
And for what?
This take betrays a lack of understand of the nature of the war. It wasn’t for those things.
deleted by creator
NATO expansion is certainly about resources, but it’s fundamentally about destroying Russia like they helped do to the USSR three decades ago, both to get rid of Amerika’s second biggest geopolitical enemy and to weaken China. The Russian intervention in the war was to prevent this, not to conquer Ukraine’s natural resources (although I’m sure there are capitalists as well as people in the Russian government who want to do this). Intervening in the genocide in the Donbas after all these years also helped increase popular support for the Russian government, which does matter to some extent
I agree it really is a war between capitalists and as such I have a tendency to say fuck them all. But NATO nuclear missiles in Ukraine with a 6 min flight time… yeah I can see why Putin reacted the way he did so gotta say in the final analysis the west provoked this war because they wanted to give Russia it’s own Vietnam. Who loses? The people. Who wins? The capitalists. Same as it ever was.
That’s why we need to focus on the goal of dismantling capitalism. that my internet friend is the real enemy
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Are you aware of the context behind the war? The history of fascism in Ukraine since World War 2? The continued ignoring of Russia’s security demands (very reasonable ones by the standards of a massive country) by NATO? The history of illegal NATO invasions and war crimes? The US-planned fascist coup in 2014? The almost decade-long mass slaughter of the people in the Donbas? It’s also worth pointing out that Russia refused to recognize the independence of the Donbas republics for eight years, only advocating for autonomy within Ukraine after the fascist coup. What exactly do you think Russia should have done in this case? War is terrible, yes, but it’s also the only option sometimes.
Ukraine launched their ATO in 2014 and the JFO in 2018. Ukraine did make the first strike as inconvenient that fact might seem to some.
Donbass had no say in Maidan nor did they vote for Poroshenko. The LPR and DPR asked to become part of Russia. The Minsk accords asking for autonomy within Ukraine was a compromise Putin wanted not them. Putin jailed anyone agitating for full-on direct intervention or even just aiding the Donbass republics, which is why February last year took some Russian commentators by surprise. The treatment of Strelkov pretty much supports the theory that initially, Donbass wishing to become part of Russia was an inconvenience to Putin.
Georgia’s invasion of South Ossetia set the precedent that it doesn’t really matter who the aggressor is. The western media is simply unconditionally against Russia.
Found the UkraNazi
deleted by creator
Are you saying you wish I was a teenager so you could force your microdick on me?
Ukraine didn’t ask to be invaded, or make the first strike in this warz they’re being invaded by an agresssor and are defending themselves.
I will take your position in good faith and just assume you are very misinformed. Not entirely your fault, if you only started paying attention to the region in the past couple of years this is exactly the narrative that has become mainstream.
A lot of the underlying circumstances of the war date back to 2014 (and earlier, but we will try to keep a fairly tight time frame here). A more pro-Russian leader (Yanukovych) was elected by the people, which they US obviously did not want, so a US-backed coup was staged. Surprising nobody, this is US Foreign Policy 101. You can read about Victoria Nuland for more specifics, but there are leaked phone calls of her explicitly selecting the next leader of the country which ended up being Poroshenko. The new administration rolled back several amendments to the constitution and began a widespread crackdown on its political opponents (specifically anyone with Communist ties or leanings) and banned anyone from any communist party of holding office. The crackdown renamed thousands of streets and cities named after famous communists and removed many statues of the same. Even the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic flag was banned. Totally not fascist.
The above was, incidentally, when Russia first become involved, which led to the annexation of Crimea that you are probably familiar with. It is also when the Ukrainian military began shelling Donetsk and Luhansk due to pro-Russian movements there.
Interestingly, a lot of western sources were much more open about fascist elements in Ukraine and crimes comitted thereof, because they did not have the vested interest in hushing those things like they do now. In the years leading up to the current operation, you can find many stories from the New York Times or Washington Post harping on Azov and neonazi elements in Ukraine, it wasn’t a secret but people were just not paying attention to Ukraine at that point.
You don’t need to take my word from it, but I do encourage you to do your own reading. Please let me know if you need any suggested sources and I will be glad to provide some.
Ukraine is the aggressor
I would say Amerika is the fundamental aggressor, this wouldn’t have happened without the coup and Ukraine’s people are being sacrificed for its geopolitical aims
Agreed. Ukraine is the aggressor of proxy for the American Empire
Certainly not. They have the right to defend themselves at the very least
Who is ‘they’? Guess you don’t mean the native Russian speakers in Donbass who were told ok your political parties are now all illegal and you have to submit to Goldman Sachs and black rock corporate takeover of your resources?
Seriously look at the polls of actual Ukranians. They’re not a monolith. Eye opening
They as in Ukrainians, as is clear from the context.
the native Russian speakers in Donbass who were told ok your political parties are now all illegal and you have to submit to Goldman Sachs and black rock corporate takeover of your resources?
Citation needed
Seriously look at the polls of actual Ukranians. They’re not a monolith. Eye opening
I know polls. The ones I’ve seen suggest that the majority of Ukrainians want to fight until victory and no territorial concessions. Obviously you’ve seen diffent polls.
Point still stands, THEY have a right to defend themselves.
https://dailycaller.com/2023/01/24/zelenskyy-big-banks-ukraine-financial-support/
Citation provided
And further about the idea it is a monolith here’s the polling data
https://usefulidiots.locals.com/post/4318784/ukrainian-journalist-shocked-by-new-poll
So do Ukrainian citizens in Donbass who are being shelled by Azov Nazis have the right to defend themselves?
Citation provided
So it seems like nobody was told to submit to Blackrock. Instead Zelenskyy asked for investment money and got it.
And further about the idea it is a monolith here’s the polling data
Have you actually read the article and linked poll? What’s the point you’re trying to make? Seems pretty unrelated to what I said before.
So do Ukrainian citizens in Donbass who are being shelled by Azov Nazis have the right to defend themselves?
Yes.
They can’t truthfully say what they want as people with political beliefs against the dictator are arrested
True, People in Ukraine get arested and worse for being against Zelensky.
