Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

This is really surreal. I am asking a very simple question here and you vector off to criticise me for all sorts of weird stuff.

If you are unable (or unwilling) to say what you would change to stop the very thing you are criticising then there is no debate to be had here.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

There's nothing weird about calling you out for misinterpreting my posts.

That's three in a row now. There's nothing weird about asking if you wouldn't go to the front line to die, nor would you be happy for children or grandchildren to, why unwilling Ukrainian men should by virtue of where they were born.

I'm past dealing with your nonsense but Pierre's post 2797 above makes some pertinent points you have completely ignored in favour of this tedious line.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Comrade* Haw-Haw, a bogey man is imaginary - Russia’s actions in Chechnya, Georgia, Transnistria, & Ukraine are very real…

*Tankies don’t believe in Lords…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

*Sigh* I am not misinterpreting anything. You rant about unwilling Ukrainians being killed yet you cannot say what should happen to stop it. I think most here would express an opinion on what should happen next.

I think what you don't say, says everything.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

This was not said in the post you quoted.

Nor this in the post quoted:

You may be overdosing on the pro-Ukranian kool aid and believe recapturing Crimea is achievable, and happy to commit the Ukrainian male population to die for it.

However somewhere else (in the real world) there has to be consideration of at least the possibility for some that dying in an ill equipped, never ending and futile war isn’t any more desirable for the average Ukrainians than it is for you from the luxury of your keyboard. How they would extract themselves from that is a good question. I refer again to Pierre’s post that you have not addressed while you persist in misrepresenting mine.

Under Zelensky, they’d need to kill him first.

---------- Post added at 10:27 ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 ----------

For the purposes of this post only, I’ll concede the point and say it still doesn’t warrant sacrificing every Ukrainian man of fighting age in a war it is both losing and being inadequately resourced by its supposed allies.

What steps Ukraine, NATO, or anyone else could take between now and then to better resource the front line more than ritual human sacrifice would be welcome.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ukraine did not have the ability to stop Russia in Crimea. It is the West that is culpable here. Remember that the Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994 stated that:

The West sold Ukraine down the river and the appeasement in 2014 dialled in the invasion in 2022.

Remember also that the referendum of 1991: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_U...nce_referendum had massive majorities for independence even in Donetsk and Luhansk, disproving the narrative that the eastern Oblasts want to be part of Russia.

It basically comes down to appeasement: some think that Putin should be given the land he took by force and some think that aggression cannot be rewarded. History tells us that appeasement is a dangerous gamble ....

---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------

More ranting about unwilling Ukrainians being killed yet no comment on what they should do differently.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Until you accurately represent my points there is no point engaging with you.

But I had a wry smile as you said this to Pierre:

The penny will drop I’m sure.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

They had an army of 130,000 at the time. A year later it was double that.

Why no counter offensive in the decade that followed?

and so now is the time to take back all of Ukraine, to the last man, no matter the cost.

I doubt that could ever happen without Western troops on the ground. Is that what you suggest?

I think that Ukraine should negotiate with Russia. I ,personally, don't believe it is a war Ukraine can win. (i.e removing Russia totally from all of Ukraine)

I certainly don't think we should be pouring billion after billion after billion.....unaudited as far as I can tell, certainly I know the US senate has asked for some receipts to no avail, into a war that cannot be won.

We should pressure Ukraine to talk, hopefully stop hostilities and in the time after, spend the billions on increasing and re-arming our own armed forces and strengthening NATO.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Although they are reluctant to say it outright, both John and Pierre seem to believe that appeasement is the best outcome in Ukraine. They witter on about "ritual human sacrifice" and "to the last man, no matter the cost." yet ignore the fact that it is the Ukrainians themselves who are wanting to defend their country. The West is not making them defend their homes and their families.

Ukrainians Stand Behind War Effort Despite Some Fatigue

The Vatnik's will claim the West is forcing Ukrainians to die but this is just propaganda.

A negotiation will leave Putin with his current gains and embolden him in the future to make new demands from his neighbours. The opposite of "Peace in our time" ...

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

There’s nothing Vatnik about the observation that Ukrainian conscripts are dying in massive numbers for a cause that is unachievable.

18 month old polling may say something else, as may polling that is honest about the limited support that the West will continue to commit in the future years of the conflict.

If you are committed to fighting Putin then go and enlist yourself. Otherwise you are just another armchair general playing toy soldiers while masturbating over western propaganda like the Ghost of Kyiv.

We are paying with a few billion here, and a few billion there. They are out there paying with their lives and I, for one, would feel much more comfortable if they had a choice in the matter.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

and your best outcome is? I'm all ears.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ian is that naive he probably will come back with Putin in The Hague.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Even if you think a negotiated settlement is the best outcome, which it might be, it would still be best if Russia understood Ukraine can continue to inflict damage on them and that they can't make further inroads into the country.

A settlement brought about by the withdrawal of Ukrainian aid will only benefit Russia. It's not even clear they would bother with one if they knew all they had to do was wait until our resolve crumbles.

Russia needs to know they can't win this war either if we're ever going to get them to any sort of realistic terms.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

And how many Ukrainian conscripts should die while the West ponders how to make Russia understand this (if indeed, it’s even achievable at all). One million? Two? Three?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I didn't say we should withdrawal aid anywhere, I said we should pressure Ukraine to talk.

This conflict is different to so many others because we're all too afraid to get involved, with good reason.

If nuclear weapons were not in the picture, we would have already had troops on the ground pushing Russia back, like we did in Kuwait.

But because we are hamstrung by the Nukes, we'll just pour money into a conflict that has stagnated.

There is no indication that Ukraine has the manpower to push Russia back from all its territory. Russia doesn't have to advance, she can just stay and hold what she has got, what's Ukraine going to do about it?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Well if we back them properly we can hopefully reduce the death toll but if Ukraine wants to keep fighting then we supply them the means to do so. If Ukraine wants to stop fighting then we of course back them.

I am not interested in discussions that treat Ukrainians as if they don't have any agency. We're in a conflict where they do have that agency and any solution has to involve their interests as well.

---------- Post added at 14:59 ---------- Previous post was at 14:52 ----------

Well behind the scenes there might be discussions about what is realistically possible with the understanding that publically the West will not waver in its commitment.

The other thing is we have no reason to believe Putin won't make further attempts even after a peace agreement is signed. What reason do we have to trust that someone who invaded a country won't do so again?

The priority would be to enable Ukraine to stop any further advancement or great loss of life. Give them the defensive capacity to withstand Russian attacks. Ukraine has proven pretty good at attacking behind Russian lines and continuing to damage them even if they could not push them back.

Getting to that situation at least means Russia has something to think about.

At that point, I wonder if we enter a frozen conflict where the attacks essentially stop but no diplomatic recognition of it being over might happen.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Conscripted individuals absolutely do not have agency.

Ian with his World War 2 rhetoric might be happy for them to go and re-enact the Battle of the Bulge while he debates flawed military strategy on social media and internet forums. It might even make for the odd exciting video if they take out some Russkies in the process. It is no less a futile and (in my view) unnecessary task.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

You may be exaggerating for effect - at this time, two years after the unprovoked invasion by Russia, the Ukrainian military casualties are reported as around 30,000, versus the reported over 50,000-355,000 Russian military deaths.

How many Russian conscripts should die while Putin ponders how to make Ukraine understand this (if indeed, it's even achievable at all). One million? Two? Three?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-68819853

https://www.channel4.com/news/factch...han%2030%2C000.

https://www.euronews.com/2024/03/03/...ine-war-uk-mod

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ukraine have lost a mere 30,000 but are trying to force men of fighting age back from abroad? Seems legit.

You turn that question round on me as if it’s equally valid - it isn’t. Russia are the big bad remember. Whether they could, or should, back down is a red herring. They won’t while they are making modest gains against an ever deteriorating Ukraine with ever depleting resources.

If the kill ratio was as claimed above Ukraine should be marching on Moscow, never mind Crimea. Similarly there would be no shortage of American dollars flowing in to bankroll it.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

That's pretty much where we have been for some time. Power stations hit, other infrastructure hit, by both sides.

But no movement in the lines.

We may well be arming Ukraine, albeit slowly but Russia isn't standing still. They have great resources. They're selling gas and oil and they can also re-arm and re-group, and I would think that they can easily hold on to what they have for as long as they want until they are ready for another offensive.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

More Vatnik word soup. The polling was done in Aug 2023 - that maybe 18 months ago in your alternative universe :)

As Damian has said, we should support the wishes of the Ukrainian people. If it clear that the majority of the population are being coerced to continue the defence of their country then, and only, then should we reassess our support.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

So when are you off to sign up, keyboard warrior?

Spare me your childish insults.

If 30% (by your own poll) of Ukrainians don’t want to fight then neither you, nor Zelensky, nor their neighbours inside or outside have the right to condemn them to death or injury on the front line by conscription.

When America inevitably pull the plug when it ceases to be value for money,, regardless of what Ukrainian public opinion says, rest assured I will return to say “I told you so”.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I have done far more for Ukraine that you have done so please spare the trolling.

Enough now ...

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Quite the accusation of trolling from someone it took more than 3 attempts to finally quit misrepresenting my posts.

Doing anything for Ukraine won’t cleanse the soul given your bloodlust for a permanent conflict regardless of the cost in the lives of Ukrainian conscripts.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

and thats enough. Enjoy your rest from this one comrade.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

and your best outcome is? I'm .......still...........all ears

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Still waiting. No worries though. I think I have all I need.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

What was the question?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I wasnt aware members were on deadlines set by Pierre, I must have missed that memo ... :dunce:

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I'm not sure anyone knows ...

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

It was following this statement.

I was just enquiring what Ian’s best outcome was, to no avail.

---------- Post added at 21:20 ---------- Previous post was at 21:19 ----------

It’s right there, for the third time of asking.

Still waiting.

---------- Post added at 21:21 ---------- Previous post was at 21:20 ----------

No worries, no deadlines were set.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ta :tu:

The best outcome in 2024 IMO is that Ukraine prevents significant advances by Russia. It shouldn’t have come to this but posturing in the US Congress held up military aid for months and Ukraine has been forced to ration its stockpiles. Russia now knows it has to push hard to get what it can before the new tranche of aid gets to the front. Ukraine will have a few sticky months but it will hold on.

The offensive we hoped to see in summer of 2023 will likely occur this time next year.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I had already replied to this question i.e. we should support the wishes of the Ukrainian people in their fight against the invasion. What the result of this support will be is uncertain. This is in the hands of the West, in terms of the support they will give and in the hands of the Ukrainian people themselves if they decide that they are unable to fight Russia on their own.

As I mentioned, the will to fight still seems strong so we (the West) should give them all the help they need to resist the occupation. I feel appeasement, as history tells us, would be a mistake.

Don't forget that the reason why Pierre wants someone to guess at the "best outcome" is so he can underwrite his position that Ukraine "negotiates" a deal that would leaves Russia in control of large swathes of occupied Ukraine. His words:

Remember that Ukraine, on its own, has no bargaining position so Russia would essentially dictate terms. This is what, it seems, is the "desired outcome" for some here.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I tend to agree.

The absence of war is not the same thing as peace. There is highly credible evidence of rape and torture of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians in the occupied territories, as well as the kidnap and ‘re-education’ of Ukrainian children on an almost industrial scale. An armistice in which Russia retains control of any Ukrainian territory simply surrenders those people to their fate as well as giving Russia breathing room to regroup and then come back for more. Anyone who thinks this is not what would happen, 5 or 10 years from now, has not been paying attention to how Russia has been treating its near abroad for the last 20 years or more.

Regretfully, the only way Ukraine can have actual peace is to fight for it, and the only way it can do that is with Western support because Russia’s material advantages far outweighs Ukraine’s. Ukraine’s best weapon - apart from Western munitions - is that Russia’s imperial arrogance is such that it never troubled itself to develop strategy or weapons tech that could actually overcome a peer. They thought they could just roll into Kyiv and once that became untenable, they have resorted to using their surfeit of expendable men and rusty old tanks to try to win by weight of numbers. As long as Ukraine has the weapons to absorb this, eventually - even if it takes another year or more - Russia can and will be exhausted.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

They've being doing that for 12 months, the lines haven't changed significantly for a year.

Russia, I think, for the time being is content to hold what they have taken.

Does it though. You don't think that Russia's economy and industry hasn't been on a war footing while there's been a pause, you don't think Russia is re-arming and re-grouping?

We've had a year of essentially two punch drunk fighters not doing too much, the odd swing from a missile or drone. They've punched each other out. So what do you think two rested and re-armed fighters are going to do, probably just beat each other to a pulp again.

---------- Post added at 11:48 ---------- Previous post was at 11:36 ----------

That's because, I believe, that Ukraine will struggle to achieve their objectives of pushing Russia back to pre-2014 boundaries.

So the difference between my best outcome and yours is not different in regards to Russia, in say 2-3 years time, still controlling large swathes of occupied Ukraine.

I believe the only difference between both our scenarios is less people die in mine.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Until the next time Russia invade…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

If....they invade.

One scenario is certain, one isn't.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

They have form, so I would posit it’s highly likely (Chechnya x 2, Georgia, Transnistria, Ukraine x 2)…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Well this invasion seems to have cost them a lot more than they expected, in men, equipment and of course sanctions - so they may think a little harder next time.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Given that they have suffered massive losses over the past 2 years and yet still haven’t thought a little harder about stopping … I’d say that’s doubtful. They are still actively attempting to advance, at great material and human cost, and they are still randomly dropping missiles on Ukrainian cities. The evidence very much points to them not stopping until they are made to stop.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I think the sunk cost fallacy is coming into play here.
https://time.com/5347133/sunk-cost-fallacy-decisions/

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Huh :confused:

---------- Post added at 14:51 ---------- Previous post was at 14:48 ----------

I'm sure they have thought about it, and decided otherwise.
Its a little harder to stop once you have started, esp when you have a madman in charge who would never make himself look weak or wrong.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

The same could be said of Western support for Ukraine, such to the extent even the most vociferous proponents of “til the last Ukranian” cannot actually define a realistic Ukrainian victory. The logic is continue expending under-resourced Ukrainian conscripts to Russia from the NATO border because war is inevitable so they might as well fight it now.

Separately, there was an interesting piece about intimidation of journalists under the Zelensky regime in the Guardian today. Including the serving of conscription papers being issued to journalists investigating corruption and critical of how the war is going.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/20...-intimidate-us

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1714683908

Ah, if only they had the freedom of journalists in Russia, never having to worry if whilst you were on a slippy staircase near an open window, something suboptimal might occur…

never mentions the Russian conscripts, Russian prisoners offered freedom if they fight in the invasion, or mercenaries fighting for the Russians…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

He doesn’t, but wouldn’t ending the war sooner save them too?


Not sure what your point is.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

No, you wouldn’t, would you…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Indeed. Much whataboutery.

The last time I mentioned that conscripts were on both sides there wasn't much sympathy for the Russians.

Hugh may find his meme dismissing my posts as funny but when you scratch the surface it's actually quite callous.

There's actually much agreement about many features of this war:

Ukraine are losing.
Ukraine can't "win" (I'm yet to see an achievable definition of this).
Support needs to be much more than it has been to date to stand still.

The only real question is whether you believe support will actually come otherwise the only function of the meat grinder is to slow Russia down to protect Poland. There might be merit in this tactically from Poland's perspective but I'm not sure it's one that adequately informed Ukrainians would necessarily fight for which is why a functioning political opposition and a free press important. Also why I reference conscription so often - a Ukrainian volunteer army can go and have itself slaughtered chasing the Crimean dream for Zelensky all it wants.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

It’s been stated on here, several times, that victory for Ukraine is total victory. Pushing back Russia to pre-2014 borders.

Anything else is “appeasement”

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

At least we can say the rhetoric matches the tactics - straight out of the 1930s.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

This.

Russia will not stop until it understands that it cannot continue. Ukraine continues to fight because it realises that ‘peace’ now would simply be a pause allowing Russia to regroup before coming back for more.

---------- Post added at 13:38 ---------- Previous post was at 13:37 ----------

The 1930s, when the UK and France realised far too late that appeasement simply delayed the inevitable (or, if you take a more charitable view of Chamberlain, appeasement attempted to hold Hitler back while the UK and France scrambled to catch up on years of complacency in military preparedness, ironically a situation we now find ourselves in once more).

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Is it not then easier, and more cost effective, for Ukraine to surrender to the NATO border rather than sacrifice themselves for it?

We wouldn’t be debating F-16s then.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

What do you mean by ‘surrender to the Nato border’?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

As was suggested. Surrender their entire territory so that NATO can play toy soldiers with their own toy soldiers, and provide sufficient defensive and offensive ammunition for the next phase of an inevitable never ending war?

If that’s not most cost effective, in terms of Ukrainian lives or money, I’m open to idea on how the drip feeding of resource that won’t achieve anything meaningful is advantageous to Ukranian conscripts.

I do not, for a second, subscribe to the “til the last Ukrainian” narrative - but if I do accept it I he last Ukranian lives under a NATO shield (ironically in Poland).

It’s a fact easy to be lost among some as they white knight Ukranian women refugees.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

The problem Ukraine has at present is that Nato will not admit a member already at war and not in control of its whole territory. Putin has a viable plan B, if his army is unable to conquer the country - and it plainly isn’t; its present micro-advances are coming at immense human and material cost - then he can keep it in a state of permanent-war, thereby keeping Ukraine out of Nato. Once Ukraine is in Nato, his dream of a greater Russia is dead.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ukraine has far more problems than that, to be fair.

The fallacy is believing on a “a once Ukraine is in NATO”. There’s Poland and disputed territory now. Unless Poland invade from the other side, proving the Russian point.

Ukraine ceases to exist in any meaningful way - no return of the refugees - and thus a rump state headed by the Zelensky regime that none of its neighbours takes seriously.

Unless of course the F-16s turn up :rofl:

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I suspect you may be surprised - pleasantly, I hope - on the F-16 front, within the next 3 to 4 months.

Supposed territorial disputes between Ukraine and Poland, or Ukraine and Hungary, are part of Russia’s info-ops campaign and un-serious. Ukraine’s international boundaries are uncontested and established at the United Nations.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Disputed territory is disputed territory. The only question is whether you think dead Ukrainians is a price worth paying on the way to defeat.

Russia will down every F-16 within a month. And I assure everyone I’ll lament the death of the conscript in the cockpit. In case there is any doubt.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Made up propaganda from the Putin regime is made-up propaganda - you’re not even pretending anymore…

https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/88585

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

So it’s not disputed territory?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Not on the basis of anything Russia says, no. And there is no credible evidence of anyone else disputing Ukraine’s borders as established at the UN in 1991 either.

Thanks for the prediction re the survivability of the F-16s though. That’s a firm prediction we can easily evaluate a month after they are confirmed to be in active service in Ukraine.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I’m more than happy to have my speculation held against event when they come to pass. It’s the crux of my argument that Ukrainian conscripts are mere fodder on the front line for a regime out of ideas.

I doubt any F-16s will be airborne in combat under the Zelensky regime for more than mere hours but I feel that’s splitting hairs for now.

I’m not quite sure why 1991 borders have more value than say, 1946 other than for academic reasons.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...ent-may-3-2024

Quite an interesting (and fairly even-handed) read on the state of the invasion…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Hopefully they don't get anywhere near Kharkiv.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

What makes you think it is disputed territory?

What are the grounds for the alleged dispute?

---------- Post added at 09:36 ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 ----------

There are already five NATO members* who have borders with Russia (or Russian territories), so not sure what point you’re trying to make?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I wonder what Russia is going to do now?

https://asiatimes.com/2024/05/france...e-battlefront/

That is of course if the source is reliable.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Here’s the original article (that everyone else appears to be promulgating) on the author’s substack.

https://weapons.substack.com/p/franc...ops-to-ukraine

The link in his post supporting his assertion appears to be non-viable..

http://first%20units%20of%20the%20fr...o%20slavyansk/

Strangely enough, a similar story was published by TASS, the Russian state-owned news agency, on the same day - I wonder if that was the source of Stephen Bryen’s article?

https://tass.com/politics/1769801

Point of information - the French 3rd Infantry Regiment are Jungle Warfare specialists, based in Guiana, South America - what value would there be in attaching them to the Ukrainian 54th Independent Mechanized Brigade, which is mainly Tanks, Artillery, and MLRS?


I am sure it is pure coincidence that this article appears just as President Xi is visiting President Macron in France…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

None of whom have been invaded, and all of whom would get better resourced than Ukraine.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Still cant work out what your point is :confused:

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

My point has been consistent throughout - Ukraine are only in this war because of the West who will ultimately let them down.

The Mujahadeen
Saddam
Gaddafi
Afghanistan second time round

Useful allies at one point but disposed of when it ceased to be cost effective. But hey trust America, they mean it this time, I’m sure.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Gosh, and there I was thinking they were in a war becasue Russia invaded them. I'm sure the president would be proud of you comrade.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

There’s no need to throw “comrade” or similar around for pointing out objective facts.

Similarly anyone should be allowed to suggest a negotiated settlement without being called “appeasers”. What Russia may (or may not) do in 5, 10, or more years ignores the ability to resource Ukraine (or neighbouring countries) or develop their armed forces or the United States to develop a slush fund to dip into (like seemingly Israel has).

This can be done without Zelensky getting the begging bowl out for Europe to deport men aged 18-60, or the newly eligible for conscription HIV positive, cancer patients and people with learning difficulties. I’m sure everyone appreciates why, as Ukraine retreats despite a “10 to 1” kill ratio I’m sceptical about the figures given by Ukraine.

If Ukraine in NATO (ha ha) is the answer then defining a “Ukraine” now at 80% of 2022 borders is surely advantageous than spending 1, 2, 3 more years battling on retreating front lines.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

But what about the Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian, & Finnish conscripts?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz994d6vqe5o

Time to reassess then? With Ukrainian men of fighting age, hiding from Press Gangs?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

As always with BBC reports from Ukraine, it’s difficult to get a sense of what’s actually going on because their correspondents have an unfortunate habit of generalising the particular. See, for instance, last month’s THE SKY IS FALLING reportage from the border region near Kharkiv when the Russian offensive began there, which forewent any attempt to assess events strategically in favour of hard-hitting footage of exhausted Ukrainian solders on the very localised sections of the front accessible to BBC reporters. Of course, as has happened numerous times in the last 2 years, the Russian advance halted for almost no Russian gain and at an extreme cost in Russian manpower and equipment. Such reports do not however give Jeremy Bowen the same opportunities to put on his flak jacket and helmet and frown earnestly into the camera while things go bang in the distance.

Likewise, I’ve no doubt it is distressing for young Ukrainian men who wish to avoid the draft, but such things always happen in countries that turn to conscription to continue existential conflicts, and the BBC has been characteristically uninterested in contextualising what’s happening in terms of broader population support (which so far as I can see, remains strong), or even whether draft dodging is prevalent across the country as opposed to just the one place they have reported from (Odesa).

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I think being made to fight for a country you don’t want to die for is probably more than “distressing”.

The BBC are preparing the keyboard generals wanting Ukrainian men to die for every inch, plus Crimea, for inevitable disappointment sold as a sensible outcome.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/06/...s-kyiv-claims/

Oh dear, oh dear.

Still, this time next year Rodney we will be sunning it up in Crimea.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

This isn’t new.

There’s what you might call an ‘escalation management’ faction in the White House, led by Nat Sec advisor Jake Sullivan, who are wonkish academic types that have all along been advising Biden that the world will end if Russia loses this war too badly. They have been slow-walking aid to Ukraine from the outset. The 2023 summer offensive failed because Ukraine was trained for manoeuvre operations that no Nato country would attempt without air superiority, except of course they weren’t provided air superiority fighters to go with it.

The US has provided tons of military aid useful for preventing Russia advancing but has only ever provided serious offensive firepower, such a long-range tactical missiles, (HIMARS and ATACMS) when they have been shown up by European allies who have been more willing to supply similarly lethal arms (principally, SCALP/Storm Shadow cruise missiles from France and the UK). Similarly, the US only began publically to change its position on the use of American missiles to attack positions within Russia when its European allies made a nonsense of their position by loudly declaring Ukraine should be able to do so.

It’s not that Sullivan et al want Russia to win this, so much as they are terrified of what happens if Russia loses. They have self-moderated themselves into not doing everything they can to help Ukraine because they don’t want to see Russia actually deploy tactical nuclear weapons (which Russia regularly threatens to do, but has shown absolutely no sign of actually doing) and, worse, they don’t want a defeated Russia suffer an uncontrolled fracture the way the USSR did in the early 1990s.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...6&d=1718704266

;)

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Meantime, Ukranians getting conscripted (against their will) to the front line meat grinder is an acceptable price to pay while America at best resources at stalemate and at worst a managed defeat?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-Kremlin.html

Farage also out doing his bit to end the Parliamentary consensus on this.

Ultimately the clock has run out on Ukraine ever regaining its territory lost in 2022, never mind 2014. There’s only bogging down Russian resources for longer. This may well suit some of Ukraine’s neighbours, the USA and wider NATO objectives but as ever in the absence of democratic accountability for the Zelensky regime there’s no voice for the men being marched to their deaths or the refugees in the west.

If we levelled with them that much of the rhetoric from 2022 was merely lies and that their objectives and ours only coalesced within a short timeframe I suspect the Ukrainian support (within and outside it’s borders) for the forever war would be minimal.

---------- Post added at 11:18 ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 ----------

At least Ukraine are winning the meme war I guess.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Well, instead of memes, the Russians have you…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Oddly Hugh I can’t remember the last time you actually addressed a point made. It’s all playing the man, not the ball.

That said if all I had to work with was supporting sending Ukranians to their deaths in the name of western imperialism I’d probably play the man too.

What little consensus remains over Ukraine will be gone by 2025. A new boss in town in Washington and who knows. This could be all over by February. Before a single F-16 ever saw action.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

This is one of those posts I’ll keep bookmarked (a bit like all the ones where you predicted further lockdowns and covid waves that never occurred) ;)

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

There certainly are still waves of Covid - the Winter Covid Infection Survey tracked that over 2023/4. Wastewater analysis around the world shows multiple waves per year in all seasons based on new (but not named) variants.

I may well have underestimated Boris’s commitment to “let the bodies pile high” in the earlier waves though. Not convinced we saw any economic benefit though but I see little value in resurrecting the Covid thread to discuss our economic stagnation given the multitude of ways the Conservatives can be blamed for it.

Efforts to keep Trump of the ballot may well succeed, or Biden might see some improved cognitive condition between now and November. But I can only make a judgement based on my perception of events. Other interpretations are available.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukrain3
 

Well, if all I had to work with was defending a country who repeatedly invaded a neighbouring country, and that country has also invaded other neighbouring countries this century, and defends sending Russian conscripts into a meat-grinder in the name of Putin’s neo-Soviet Union, I’d be pretty embarrassed too.

It’s pointless replying to your posts with counter-points, because the counter-points have all been posted before, such as the very high likelihood of Putin using a cease-fire to re-arm and re-populate his military before his third invasion of Ukraine, just get poo-poohed by you…

Your vatnik pro-Russian posts are laughably transparent, even with your crocodile tears over lack of elections and conscription, even though the same thing happened in the U.K. when it was under threat of invasion.

---------- Post added at 13:23 ---------- Previous post was at 13:21 ----------

More vatnik outpourings - set up a false narrative, then base all posts on that…

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I’m not sure I’ve made a single post that’s “pro-Russian” - an interpretation of events that predicts an outcome of Ukrainian defeat (on some level) as an observation of objective reality isn’t in an of itself a “pro”-Russian stance.

I’ve certainly suggested ways that Ukraine, or NATO, could effectively use any period to leave themselves in a better position to defend later.

I absolutely reject your sleight on my concern for conscripted Ukranians as “crocodile tears”.

There’s nothing incorrect about the statements that there are efforts to remove Trump from the ballot, nor that Biden is clearly suffering from cognitive decline.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

There are some Ukrainians being conscripted against there will but no where near what you imply (though it closely follows what Russian bots are posting).

Try actually talking to a Ukranian rather than sourcing info frrom Russia. They are easy to find depending on where you look.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Ukraine need around 10% of fighting age men to join up, it appears they don’t want to.

It’s not F16s they need.

It would seem that they quite simply do not have the manpower to push Russia back.

https://cepa.org/article/ukraines-wa...iption-crisis/

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Scaring thing is that if Trump get in, he will more than like pull all US equipment and resources from Ukraine

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

... and yet everyone thinks your Putins best mate ;) {smoke, fire, you know the saying ....}

I'm starting to think you're getting sponsored to post "Ukranians getting conscripted (against their will)", given how often you repeat it.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

We could sponsor him to stop saying it, I'll chuck a quid in for that

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I think it'd be preferable for Ukraine to have a volunteer army that NATO adequately resources if it seeks to use it as a pawn, tbh.

---------- Post added at 06:09 ---------- Previous post was at 06:06 ----------

I'd propose it's more likely a limitation of the counter argument it resorts to jibes instead. Ultimately, some are too far gone on the kool aid (every inch, plus Crimea) to realise it's a mere fantasy and the US has form for letting down it's short term allies.

I did see a Ukraine flag at their match in Germany with "give us elections" at kick off swiftly removed. Of course, it must have been the Kremlin that instigated it. Ukrainian refugees couldn't possibly want democracy.

---------- Post added at 06:16 ---------- Previous post was at 06:09 ----------

I'd propose that all conscripts are against their will. Otherwise why didn't they sign up? Indeed, why do they need conscription at all if they are overwhelmed with volunteers to mobilise?

It's only an existential threat, after all.

Of course no rational person could make this observation, it must be a Kremlin endorsed line.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

I consider this statement to be wholly accurate.

And very happy for someone to explain to me how and why it is inaccurate.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

The facts are accurate. The inference is not. In WW1 we didn’t conscript until 1916, after the initial swell of volunteers pretty much stopped. There were demonstrations against it but enough men accepted it as necessary, if undesirable, for the policy to work.

We conscripted from the outbreak of WW2 but extended it to unmarried women and all men up to 60 in 1941 because ancillary services (civil defence, police, women’s army auxiliary) were getting too few volunteers.

The British armed forces have never wanted to go back to conscription because it always causes training and discipline issues you don’t get in a willing, professional volunteer army. There is no reason to suppose human nature is very much different in Ukraine today.

So, yes, jfman’s words are factually correct. But like a sort of Farage of the Far Left, he is very good at leaving inferences hanging in the air (which he might later deny he made if they prove objectionable). And the inference here is that people being conscripted against their will is evidence that the war does not have popular support, and that the Ukrainian ‘regime’ is unpopular, avoiding democratic accountability and possibly illegitimate.

As others have noted, we faced our own existential struggle between 1939 and 1945. In that time, as well as conscripting people into various forms of national service far more broadly than Ukraine has done, Parliament passed Acts on 2 occasions extending its own life beyond the norm (The Prolongation of Parliament Acts, 1940 and 1942). There is nothing happening in Ukraine that is out of the ordinary for a democratic state facing an existential threat. Unless of course you’ve been captured by that part of Russia’s information operations that has led you to think otherwise. Note, they don’t need you to think Russia is in the right. They just need you to think Ukraine might be in the wrong for your voice to contribute to their wider aim of making support for Ukraine in democratic western states harder to sustain.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Tl;dr I’m right. Lots of historically irrelevant narrative from conflicts almost a century old. Anyone who disagrees with the official western narrative is, automatically, parroting Russian narrative.

Support for Ukraine is western states is waning because without adequate commitment and support - which the US have consistently not given - it’s simply a fools errand. And the best justification is it keeps Russia away from Poland. While strategically a noble aim, sacrificing a generation of Ukrainian men seems like the kind of thing you should at least have their consent for.

Ukraine have banned opposition political parties, trade unions, and broadcast media that doesn’t endorse the state narrative. Journalists have found themselves followed, and even conscripted, to intimidate and silence them. And that’s just the it’s in the Guardian. This is absolutely not the norm. Nor a “Russian narrative”. While I appreciate it’s a useful trope to censor legitimate criticism, I’m not having it.

Much like the insult of “the Farage of the Far Left”.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Mmmhmm. The biggest state-on-state armed conflict in history has nothing to tell us about the biggest-state-on-state armed conflict that has since occurred. Obviously. Tl:dr …. Your argument’s holed below the water line, but that’s what happens when you get your opinions from Russian botnets.

It is by no means a fools errand. The White House is presently preoccupied with worrying about a total Russian collapse at least as much as it worries about someone in Moscow going mad and authorising a small nuclear detonation. They remember USSR 1991 and they don’t want it to happen to the motherland. For that reason, they give Ukraine what it needs to survive (which, incidentally, is somewhat less than they are treaty-bound to do as a result of persuading Ukraine to give Russia all its nukes) but not what it needs to win.

I happen to think the policy is flawed because Russia has doubled down and is going to destroy itself trying to take Ukraine either way. It is suffering a bad case of sunk cost fallacy. The question is whether that happens quickly or slowly, and whether half-hearted Western aid emboldens the likes of China vis a vis Taiwan.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Your second paragraph outlines entirely why it’s a fools errand. Their capabilities are defined by people with no interest in their success or survival. If anything the next White House could be worse - the best outcome is the status quo.

The policy is flawed because Ukraine cannot win, will not return to 2022 borders and not recapture Crimea. Conscripting Ukrainian men in this full knowledge, essentially being lied to by their own Government that has censored all opposition, is the objectionable part.

In World War 2 everyone had the same goal.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

To win ?

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Yes. With a clear, obvious, defeat for the Nazis.

Not everyone resourcing Ukraine has the exact same goal.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

… which doesn’t affect the point I was making, with regards to conscription and suspension of elections in Ukraine, which you have floated as acts delegitimising Ukraine’s effort at national survival. The comparison with the UK in WW2 is entirely valid and instructive.

Re: Russia has invaded Ukraine
 

Did we ban sections of the press, intimidate journalists, ban opposition parties and trade unions?

Link to journalist intimidation from that well known Putin mouthpiece “the Guardian”:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-intimidate-us

My view is Zelensky has gone much further, even setting aside 20th century principles being applied in a 21st century war. He’s banned parties that added up to over 2 million votes at the last parliamentary election. Banning trade unions silences the voices of largely working class men who will be sacrificed in this escapade given the levels of corruption that will ensure the political class, their sons and their brothers dodge the draft.

In World War 2 the Chamberlain government collapsed. I doubt there’s any mechanism by which Ukrainian opposition to Zelensky (within his own party or the opposition that haven’t been banned) to do the same. Other than the previous mentioned bullet, of course.