Striving to make sense of the Ukraine war

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

"arrogant and patronising assumption that you knew better than Ukrainians themselves what was in their best interests."

EH!

I just want to see a solution to end a conflict in which thousands have died, and many thousands more will die.

 

[horsefly 4,309]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

"arrogant and patronising assumption that you knew better than Ukrainians themselves what was in their best interests."

EH!

I just want to see a solution to end a conflict in which thousands have died, and many thousands more will die.

 

NO ONE wants to see a single person die on any side. Sadly when a dictator invades a sovereign country it has two choices, to acquiesce or resist. The Ukrainian people have chosen to defend their land as is their legal and moral right. ALL the deaths resulting from this war are the responsibility of one man alone. I suggest you take another look at your early posts in which you called for the acquiescence of Ukraine in the face of Russian "might". As Britain did in 1939 so Ukraine has done 2022 and refused surrender to a crazed dictator (despite the calls of siren voices) preferring to stand-up for democracy and self-determination in the face of tyranny. The Ukrainian people have clearly decided that the thousands of deaths and suffering incurred is indeed a price they must endure to fight for the integrity of their homeland.  As victims of an unwarranted and depraved invasion it is for them to determine what they are prepared to accept as the "solution" for ending this war, and so far they have been very clear that it must involve the complete withdrawal of Russian troops from all sovereign Ukrainian territory.  So yes, your post is indeed arrogant and patronising. Pontificating from your armchair about the need to negotiate a settlement while Ukrainians endure the horrific daily sacrifice of war is the banal equivalent of a beauty queen contestant calling for world peace, only worse. Ukrainian people know full well that the war needs a solution without your help. The help they need from every democratic power with a conscience is to provide the aid and support to secure the solution for which they have rightly fought.

[TheGunnShow 5,953]

I think the Ukrainians knew fighting was the only option they had. Otherwise Putin wanted their country wiped off the map. All his ludicrous calls for negotiation involve recognising Russian ownership of the Donbas and Crimea, none of which are acceptable as those are sovereign Ukrainian territory, recognised as such by everyone but Russia.

If he really wants peace, he needs to start from a far more realistic position, but he knows full well Ukraine won't accept that as a basis. In other words, he is obviously acting in bad faith.

Edited December 24, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[horsefly 4,309]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

I think the Ukrainians knew fighting was the only option they had. Otherwise Putin wanted their country wiped off the map. All his ludicrous calls for negotiation involve recognising Russian ownership of the Donbas and Crimea, none of which are acceptable as those are sovereign Ukrainian territory, recognised as such by everyone but Russia.

If he really wants peace, he needs to start from a far more realistic position, but he knows full well Ukraine won't accept that as a basis. In other words, he is obviously acting in bad faith.

Spot on Gunny! It is truly bizarre that the "West" has for so many years remained unresponsive as Putin very openly annexed territory from sovereign nations and declared Ukraine to be an illegitimate country that really belonged to "Greater Russia". It's as if not a single lesson was learned from the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930s. Putin's promises bear as much veracity as those of Hitler that Chamberlin bore ignominiously aloft on his little piece of paper blowing in the wind.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I have been speaking to my Son who is in the Coldstream Guards about the Ukraine situation.

He has been told that our strategists believe Putin is withdrawing deliberately. He is going to wait on Ukraine citizens particularly to endure the harshest winter they have had to face. He will resume full on in the Spring and will not be using conscripts but crack troops. And he will conquer enough of Ukraine to make it tough for Zelensky to do anything other than negotiate because they will have no infrastructure.

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

Putin will not lose this horrible war.

[Daz Sparks 1,159]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Putin will not lose this horrible war.

Maybe, maybe not. The cost to him and Russia has to be made extremely high, and before you say the cost to the Ukrainian people will be the same, whatever happens someone will pay the price.

And regardless of what you or I say, Putin's success is in no way a given. However, failing to assist the Ukrainians with as much as we can will sow an even bigger seed of disaster. The West, (us included) were 7-8 years too late as it is.

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Putin will not lose this horrible war.

Actually it all depends what you mean. Nobody is 'attacking' Russia in any meaningful sense.  

He will and can 'lose'.

I see a lot of similarities between now and the Russia that disintegrated in WWI or Afghanistan. Both ended in domestic 'revolutions'. Same will happen again, especially as the conscripted return home, desert and more so all start to question what and who they are fighting for.

Putin can certainly lose.

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

12 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Actually it all depends what you mean. Nobody is 'attacking' Russia in any meaningful sense.  

He will and can 'lose'.

I see a lot of similarities between now and the Russia that disintegrated in WWI or Afghanistan. Both ended in domestic 'revolutions'. Same will happen again, especially as the conscripted return home, desert and more so all start to question what and who they are fighting for.

Putin can certainly lose.

What I meant was that if things go badly for him, then he will get nastier, It's already pointing in that direction ... freezing them out this Winter?

.What does NATO do then?

WW3?

Edited December 25, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

What I meant was that if things go badly for him, then he will get nastier, It's already pointing in that direction ... freezing them out this Winter?

.What does NATO do then?

WW3?

That may be true but that of itself is no reason to appease him.

As to WW3 (it won't be but no matter) - I'm pretty sure appeasing him now only make such an eventuality more likely.

The best short term 'hope' I would suggest is getting back to the Feb 2022 boundaries - and then perhaps some negotiation. Perhaps let Russia keep parts of the Donbas loose Crimea!

[Sheva 123]

Win or lose, just pause to think about the hardships being experienced by the soldiers in sub zero temperatures in trenches, no better than those of the eastern front WW2. It’s hard to relate to but I’ve seen how bad it gets, little food/ money, cold, dark, alone, no future and that’s the people in the villages. It’s no wonder they make and  drink vodka !

Hopefully 2023 brings some sanity and normality, …,the Ukrainians/Russians can go back to growing their potatoes and fruits, having a good drink/dance and send the greedy, power hungry politicians to hell!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

The best short term 'hope' I would suggest is getting back to the Feb 2022 boundaries - and then perhaps some negotiation. Perhaps let Russia keep parts of the Donbas loose Crimea!

•  

Edited December 25, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

All wars end in the total defeat of one side or negotiation.

Russia is too big and powerful and has nuclear power to be defeated. Putin will not accept defeat.

Negotiate.

He's already won. Europe (eg Germany) is in chaos because of the power strength that Russia has/had over them.

The Donbas was a war zone long before Putin's invasion.  Many more than half of that population classed themselves as Russian.

I've been to Russia a few times (St. P.) They are great people, and mostly against the war, but they still do not want their country to lose.

Then build a barrier.

Edited December 25, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

On 24/12/2022 at 19:06, horsefly said:

Spot on Gunny! It is truly bizarre that the "West" has for so many years remained unresponsive as Putin very openly annexed territory from sovereign nations and declared Ukraine to be an illegitimate country that really belonged to "Greater Russia". It's as if not a single lesson was learned from the appeasement of Hitler in the 1930s. Putin's promises bear as much veracity as those of Hitler that Chamberlin bore ignominiously aloft on his little piece of paper blowing in the wind.

So what is your answer, WW3?

Otherwise, what 'response' should have come from the West?

Come on, let's hear your answer.

We all know Putin should withdraw his troops. We all know he won't.

Furthermore, we all know it's an illegal invasion of a sovereign state.

Please remember this time that this is a debate ... not an insult parlour.

Edited December 25, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

Putin claims to be 'ready for peace talks': Russian leader tells state TV he is 'prepared to negotiate' an end Ukraine war - as one of his ex-commanders slams 'stupid stubbornness' of Kremlin's war strategy 

 

Praise to Buddha.

Let's hope this is finally true.

Let's hope some of the hawks behind Zelensky give way and accept the inevitable. 

They have lost Donbas and Crimea. Putin has both won and lost.

Let the death toll finally diminish.

Edited December 25, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[horsefly 4,309]

23 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Putin will not lose this horrible war.

I'll file that one alongside your posts from the first couple of weeks of the war that claimed Russia would inevitably overpower the Ukraine so they should acquiesce to Putin's demands.

[horsefly 4,309]

11 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

So what is your answer, WW3?

Otherwise, what 'response' should have come from the West?

Come on, let's hear your answer.

We all know Putin should withdraw his troops. We all know he won't.

Furthermore, we all know it's an illegal invasion of a sovereign state.

Please remember this time that this is a debate ... not an insult parlour.

Oh dear! The man who protests "this is not an insult parlour", begins his post with, "So what's your answer, WW3?". Yeah, that's right, my answer is to start WW3 just as it must be the answer you think all of Ukraine's supporters  (The US, EU, UK etc) want by continuing to help them fight for their land.

I did recommend you listen to the Reith lecture given by Russian expert Dr Fiona Hill (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001g956) who discusses this particular fear from a perspective of years of experience of Russia and its diplomacy. Obviously you decided you know better than her and still perpetuate the childishly naïve claim that unless Ukraine acquiesces to Putin's demands Russia will unleash WW3. According to your early posts, we all "new" Russia would smash Ukraine within days and wouldn't stop until it had completely overrun the country. Strange, I seem to remember Putin withdrawing troops from the vast majority of Ukraine Russia had invaded. Come back again and say something worthwhile when you have listened to Hill.

Edited December 26, 2022 by horsefly

[horsefly 4,309]

11 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

All wars end in the total defeat of one side or negotiation.

Russia is too big and powerful and has nuclear power to be defeated. Putin will not accept defeat.

Perhaps you would like to remind us of the outcome of Russia's invasion of Afghanistan. Surely poor benighted Afghanistan must have been completely routed in weeks given that "Russia is too big and powerful and has nuclear power to be defeated". Or did Russia start WW3 after it withdrew in ignominious defeat?

Edited December 26, 2022 by horsefly

[horsefly 4,309]

10 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Putin claims to be 'ready for peace talks': Russian leader tells state TV he is 'prepared to negotiate' an end Ukraine war - as one of his ex-commanders slams 'stupid stubbornness' of Kremlin's war strategy 

 

Praise to Buddha.

Let's hope this is finally true.

Let's hope some of the hawks behind Zelensky give way and accept the inevitable. 

They have lost Donbas and Crimea. Putin has both won and lost.

Let the death toll finally diminish.

Oh dear! The man who said "I have no intention of invading Ukraine" says "I'm ready for peace talks".  I really don't need to say anything more do I!

Edited December 26, 2022 by horsefly

[TheGunnShow 5,953]

11 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Putin claims to be 'ready for peace talks': Russian leader tells state TV he is 'prepared to negotiate' an end Ukraine war - as one of his ex-commanders slams 'stupid stubbornness' of Kremlin's war strategy 

 

Praise to Buddha.

Let's hope this is finally true.

Let's hope some of the hawks behind Zelensky give way and accept the inevitable. 

They have lost Donbas and Crimea. Putin has both won and lost.

Let the death toll finally diminish.

Considering that Putin's usually said the Donbas and Crimea, which were illegal annexations, should be Russian, he's not acting in good faith (not to mention he's already broken the peace deal with the Ukraine where they gave up their nukes). No-one else recognises those annexations. We, in the West, just have to keep supporting Ukraine and keep the pressure on.

There's already a perfectly sound barrier. It's called the existing international border.

Edited December 26, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

13 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

The best short term 'hope' I would suggest is getting back to the Feb 2022 boundaries - and then perhaps some negotiation. Perhaps let Russia keep parts of the Donbas loose Crimea!

•  

Although you like this BR - I think its extremely unlikely. I suspect Ukraine will have to press on until Putin's own position becomes untenable and ultimately rational Russian heads prevail that can negotiate a lasting peace.

That will only come about via defeats on the battlefield and possible coups and revolutions at home (or in Belarus).

Russian 'enclaves' such as Crimea pose a threat to southern Ukraine (and Moldova) and excuses for the likes of the Russian expansionist warlords to continue to make trouble.

 

[BroadstairsR 2,184]

45 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Oh dear! The man who said "I have no intention of invading Ukraine" says "I'm ready for peace talks".  I really don't need to say anything more do I!

You stated that the West should have responded to Putin's aggression before (meaning Crimea?)

I asked you how they should have done that, start a war?

You avoided answering as usual.

As to the above?

Well see.

 

Edited December 26, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[Daz Sparks 1,159]

32 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Although you like this BR - I think its extremely unlikely. I suspect Ukraine will have to press on until Putin's own position becomes untenable and ultimately rational Russian heads prevail that can negotiate a lasting peace.

That will only come about via defeats on the battlefield and possible coups and revolutions at home (or in Belarus).

Russian 'enclaves' such as Crimea pose a threat to southern Ukraine (and Moldova) and excuses for the likes of the Russian expansionist warlords to continue to make trouble.

 

From the moment it was clear that Putin had failed to secure his goal of occupying Ukraine and installing a puppet government, Zelensky has been crystal clear that ALL annexed territory would have to be back under Ukrainian control, either by negotiation, or force. Nothing has changed as far as I can see. This will go on for a while.

Edited December 26, 2022 by Daz Sparks

[Yellow Fever 3,804]

10 minutes ago, Daz Sparks said:

From the moment it was clear that Putin had failed to secure his goal of occupying Ukraine and installing a puppet government, Zelensky has been crystal clear that ALL annexed territory would have to back under Ukrainian control, either by negotiation, or force. Nothing has changed as far as I can see. This will go on for a while.

Don't disagree DS. What is  rational and what Putin will accept / do are two different things.

[Daz Sparks 1,159]

5 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

You stated that the West should have responded to Putin's aggression before (meaning Crimea?)

I asked you how they should have done that, start a war?

You avoided answering as usual.

As to the above?

Well see.

 

As usual, inertia among Western nations and the criminal US President of the day contrived to make Putin believe that annexing Crimea was a done deal. I know he invaded on Obama's watch, however, I strongly hold the view that he was emboldened by Trump being his Patsy and the "kompromat" that he holds on him, Clinton would have dealt with him far differently, and whilst he would have undoubtedly still held Crimea, I'm not so sure further Military ambition would have been realised.

However, despite the above, more sensible heads in the Pentagon, the UK, France and other NATO members got to work with added haste from 2014. It is no accident that NLAW, Javelin and other NATO weapons were seen in use from day one of Putin's SMO, neither was it accidental that the Ukrainian Military were so well strategically prepared and were in receipt of significant intelligence assistance.

This whole sorry affair could probably have been averted if the US President of the day was much stronger and was blessed with historical wisdom and foresight, it was Trump and he has neither, in fact he precipitated this situation much more than he helped to prevent it. 

To conclude, I proffer that in the circumstances, the West probably have done just about enough in response to Putin's aggression, and must carry on this vein, now that it is clear that Putin has pretty much thrown all he has, conventionally, at Ukraine, we, the West, must keep the pressure up and continue to support Ukraine.

[horsefly 4,309]

22 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

You stated that the West should have responded to Putin's aggression before (meaning Crimea?)

I asked you how they should have done that, start a war?

You avoided answering as usual.

As to the above?

Well see.

 

All you ever come up with is the childish dichotomy that unless Putin is appeased the only other option is start a war and end up with WW3. So, I ask again, what happened after the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in 1979? Seems you somehow forgot to answer that question. Please explain how that war supports your view that, "Russia is too big and powerful and has nuclear power to be defeated. Putin will not accept defeat."

[Daz Sparks 1,159]

11 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Don't disagree DS. What is  rational and what Putin will accept / do are two different things.

The Russian Military is seriously groaning under the weight of it's losses, at some point the losses will become unsustainable, and this point must be reached before Ukraine's Military buckles. Which brings me to believe that Putin will be forced to accept a very bitter pill to swallow.

The performance of his Military Commanders, the equipment, the soldiers, the logistics, the Navy and the Air Force have been sub par to say the least, and it is not  beyond the realms of possibility that Putin is as yet unaware of this fact. History has shown us that dictators are starved of the truth by dint of the fear of their minions. 

[horsefly 4,309]

11 minutes ago, Daz Sparks said:

As usual, inertia among Western nations and the criminal US President of the day contrived to make Putin believe that annexing Crimea was a done deal. I know he invaded on Obama's watch, however, I strongly hold the view that he was emboldened by Trump being his Patsy and the "kompromat" that he holds on him, Clinton would have dealt with him far differently, and whilst he would have undoubtedly still held Crimea, I'm not so sure further Military ambition would have been realised.

However, despite the above, more sensible heads in the Pentagon, the UK, France and other NATO members got to work with added haste from 2014. It is no accident that NLAW, Javelin and other NATO weapons were seen in use from day one of Putin's SMO, neither was it accidental that the Ukrainian Military were so well strategically prepared and were in receipt of significant intelligence assistance.

This whole sorry affair could probably have been averted if the US President of the day was much stronger and was blessed with historical wisdom and foresight, it was Trump and he has neither, in fact he precipitated this situation much more than he helped to prevent it. 

To conclude, I proffer that in the circumstances, the West probably have done just about enough in response to Putin's aggression, and must carry on this vein, now that it is clear that Putin has pretty much thrown all he has, conventionally, at Ukraine, we, the West, must keep the pressure up and continue to support Ukraine.

Spot on Daz! Interesting to see that the only people in the US opposing military and financial support for Ukraine's defence are the extremist MAGA loon Putin patsies. Chastened by the Iraq war Obama and the UK were naively reticent to involve themselves in crucial conflicts and Putin seized the moment with glee to intervene in Syria and the Crimea. However the biggest Putin enabler of all was Trump by a mile, who did everything but fall to Putin's feet and lick his boots on camera. Remember this embarrassing episode (one among many):

 

[MooreMarriot 311]

Another accident involving a fall from a window :

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64101437

Edited December 27, 2022 by MooreMarriot

[Hook's-Walk-Canary 213]

On 25/12/2022 at 22:43, BroadstairsR said:

Putin claims to be 'ready for peace talks': Russian leader tells state TV he is 'prepared to negotiate' an end Ukraine war - as one of his ex-commanders slams 'stupid stubbornness' of Kremlin's war strategy 

 

Praise to Buddha.

Let's hope this is finally true.

Let's hope some of the hawks behind Zelensky give way and accept the inevitable. 

They have lost Donbas and Crimea. Putin has both won and lost.

Let the death toll finally diminish.

Sadly, too many vested interests in keeping the war going, Broadstairs. Look no further than Biden and his handlers.