The Ukraine War thread

[Yulia]

Ultimately I believe in the right to let Ukraine decide for themselves if they want to fight.

Who has the right to decide it in Ukraine? A lot of Ukrainians I know personally want negotiations,and they're not pro-Russian obviously

 

[Which Tyler]

What is their economy like these days?

Verge of collapse - which is where it's been for about 2 years now

Ultimately I believe in the right to let Ukraine decide for themselves if they want to fight.

100% this.
If Ukraine wants to keep fighting (or at least, prefers that than giving in to Putin's demands - only to see him come back and have another go in a few years time), our job is to support them in this.

 

[Which Tyler]

Who has the right to decide it in Ukraine? A lot of Ukrainians I know personally want negotiations,and they're not pro-Russian obviously

The democratically elected Ukrainian government.
100% NOT the unelected despot of a neighbouring bully

 

[Welsh Exile]

Who has the right to decide it in Ukraine? A lot of Ukrainians I know personally want negotiations,and they're not pro-Russian obviously

The government.

 

[Yulia]

Again,a lot of Ukrainians I know (I'm talking only about my relatives and acquaintances) have their own claims to this government and its' recent decisions, let's say it softly.
Anyway, the more I'm looking on all going on,more it reminds me Paraguayan war. Hopefully I'm wrong

 

[Welsh Exile]

Again,a lot of Ukrainians I know (I'm talking only about my relatives and acquaintances) have their own claims to this government and its' recent decisions, let's say it softly.
Anyway, the more I'm looking on all going on,more it reminds me Paraguayan war. Hopefully I'm wrong

Last poll numbers I saw (which was a good few months ago to be fair) the war was still largely popular with the majority of Ukrainians.

However I’d imagine the longer the war goes on the less popular it will be. Still, it’s up to the government and if it gets to the point where the vast majority of Ukrainians don’t want it then they can take action.

 

[Yulia]

@Welsh Exile they're loosing a lot of men.. young, amazing Slavic men. I can't look at all these men dying and still loosing territory. It doesn't worth it. You just don't see it like me because you're not Slavic and don't have relatives there. And I see from time to time all those photos in Internet with young male bodies laying on the ground from both sides and can't support it

 

[TRF_Olyy]

If Ukraine stopped defending itself how many more would die in the ensuing genocide?

 

[ncurd]

The three Ukrainian's (one refugee, one who's brother is on the front lines) I know don't want the war to end with capitulation to Russian aggressors.

 

[Yulia]

They can negotiate and unfortunately must admit those territories are temporarily lost for them. Otherwise it'll be worse, I don't see here any happy ending (except Putin disappears which is kind of a miracle)

 

[Yulia]

The three Ukrainian's (one refugee, one who's brother is on the front lines) I know don't want the war to end with capitulation to Russian aggressors.

Yeah, it's a popular phrase now among Ukrainians who actually stayed in Ukraine and not in EU/Canada etc: those Ukrainians who want more the war lasting are surprisingly outside of Ukraine
Those of my relatives who are in Ukraine now, they're extremely depressed

 

[McTallshort]

They can negotiate and unfortunately must admit those territories are temporarily lost for them. Otherwise it'll be worse, I don't see here any happy ending (except Putin disappears which is kind of a miracle)

Hi Yulia. The problem with going into negotiations for Ukraine is that Russia doesn't seem interested in Negotiating unless it means regime change and demilitarisation of Ukraine which would mean a complete loss of sovereignty and Ukraine just becomes an Oblast of the Russian federation. Are the Ukrainians you talk to willing for that to happen? Genuine question.

 

[Yulia]

Hi Yulia. The problem with going into negotiations for Ukraine is that Russia doesn't seem interested in Negotiating unless it means regime change and demilitarisation of Ukraine which would mean a complete loss of sovereignty and Ukraine just becomes an Oblast of the Russian federation. Are the Ukrainians you talk to willing for that to happen? Genuine question.

Hi John. Thank you for this very simple question, without any tricks I'd even say.

I strongly doubt that's exactly what they want if we're formulating it the way you did.
I'll also "strike" you back: do you think the situation will be better without even a try of negotiations and some loss for Ukrainian side? Do you think they'll keep their current government,sovereignty or at least best territories (including Odessa and the rest of access to the Black sea) in case this war continues?
I understand what you mean,yes, Putin puts some unrealistic points for a negotiation (like Ukraine keeping only 50k or 90k of military, don't remember the correct number, for example). But these are negotiations. The side that has better positions on the field and in resources,will have a better position during negotiation, Ukrainians lost a very good opportunity during Kursk operation..but they still have good diplomatic side, brains and tongues to negotiate every point. Unfortunately they'll have to admit some territories are ,again this word, temporarily lost (noone says they must completely leave a thought to get them back/to join nato/whatever they want when they'll have such an opportunity in the future). Otherwise,as I said before, next negotiations will be worse for them (in terms of territories for example),I think it's obvious... Right now what they can do is to get better positions on the field just to be prepared for next negotiations.
About "regime change " as you called it, personally I think there should be a change..I don't discuss it with Ukrainians I know, that's just my personal thought. I'd much prefer Arestovych instead of Zelenskiy,at least he: is pretty popular among Ukrainian officers,has a very good military education, doesn't have a fear to call things like they are (instead of using turbo-patriotism) , a very smart and tricky person and a good negotiator in my opinion. And Ukraine was doing very well when he was Zelenskiy's adviser (now he's a persona non-grata and often called pro-Russian by the government because of the truth he says honestly). I think Ukraine would do much better with him and the war would have been stopped with less disadvantages for them.
But again,these are just my personal thoughts,and I'm not going to ask my relatives whether they want to die on the front line or to become Russian oblast...

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Who has the right to decide it in Ukraine? A lot of Ukrainians I know personally want negotiations,and they're not pro-Russian obviously

I think the issues with this are:

• Russia's idea of "negotiation" is essentially Ukrainian capitulation and Russia taking control of the country. Part of the reason Russia invaded is because their previous attempt to control the country with Viktor Yanukovych failed. It's the big thing Russia consistently doesn't mention in all this. Ukraine had for years and years sought closer ties to the EU and possibly membership. It wasn't looking likely any time soon but it was a stated goal. Russia supported Yanukovych and meddled heavily in Ukraine to assist his victory. As soon as he got into office, he undid all attempts to forge closer ties with the west and realigned with Russia. This is a common trend among those world leaders Russia supports. The Euromaidan was because Ukraine, with a Russian supported puppet, suddenly pivoted away without explanation from ties to the EU and turned towards Russia. Yanukovych had promised the exact opposite in the election.
• Russia has repeatedly shown through words and actions it wants full control of Ukraine and is happy trying any means to do it. Russia simply will not leave Ukraine alone and anything agreed with Russia will be meaningless. Russia breached the agreement in which Ukraine gave up its nukes, it repeatedly tried to get a puppet installed, it invaded and annexed Crimea, it attempted to directly attack and overthrow the government now it is attempting to simply slowly annex the country and grind it down with indiscriminate attacks on the civilian population.

There is no negotiating with Russia because Russia will simply try to take over again in a few years. The only option is Russian defeat and Ukraine to forge closer ties with the west. Russia has openly stated it does not recognise Ukrainian sovereignty.

 

[AlRums]

I think the issues with this are:

• Russia's idea of "negotiation" is essentially Ukrainian capitulation and Russia taking control of the country. Part of the reason Russia invaded is because their previous attempt to control the country with Viktor Yanukovych failed. It's the big thing Russia consistently doesn't mention in all this. Ukraine had for years and years sought closer ties to the EU and possibly membership. It wasn't looking likely any time soon but it was a stated goal. Russia supported Yanukovych and meddled heavily in Ukraine to assist his victory. As soon as he got into office, he undid all attempts to forge closer ties with the west and realigned with Russia. This is a common trend among those world leaders Russia supports. The Euromaidan was because Ukraine, with a Russian supported puppet, suddenly pivoted away without explanation from ties to the EU and turned towards Russia. Yanukovych had promised the exact opposite in the election.
• Russia has repeatedly shown through words and actions it wants full control of Ukraine and is happy trying any means to do it. Russia simply will not leave Ukraine alone and anything agreed with Russia will be meaningless. Russia breached the agreement in which Ukraine gave up its nukes, it repeatedly tried to get a puppet installed, it invaded and annexed Crimea, it attempted to directly attack and overthrow the government now it is attempting to simply slowly annex the country and grind it down with indiscriminate attacks on the civilian population.

There is no negotiating with Russia because Russia will simply try to take over again in a few years. The only option is Russian defeat and Ukraine to forge closer ties with the west. Russia has openly stated it does not recognise Ukrainian sovereignty.

That and membership of NATO

 

[Yulia]

Well hopefully at least 20% of Ukrainian male population will see this mythic Russian defeat and even more mythic joining to the EU and nato.
Not seeing another option as mentioned previously Paraguayan variant if Ukrainian government will follow the same way you both described...but hopefully Arestovych will become next president (maybe even not only Ukrainian one,but Russian as well)

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Well hopefully at least 20% of Ukrainian male population will see this mythic Russian defeat and even more mythic joining to the EU and nato.
Not seeing another option as mentioned previously Paraguayan variant if Ukrainian government will follow the same way you both described...but hopefully Arestovych will become next president (maybe even not only Ukrainian one,but Russian as well)

What's so mythic about it? If NATO decided to enter the war properly, and assuming nukes weren't used, Russia would lose quite handily. They are struggling as it is against just Ukraine and largely relying on superior manpower and more equipment in the same meatgrinder tactics they've used since WW2. Bearing in mind Russia's economy is smaller than Italy's, it's a natural resources juggernaut but it's not an economic one.

NATO's military spending and manpower are greater than Russia's and if NATO did join more actively and pushed Russia out, Ukraine joining NATO would become pretty much a certainty, with EU membership more likely than at any other point in history.

It's not a question of if NATO could defeat Russia in a conventional war, it very clearly could, it's whether NATO want a conventional war.

 

[Yulia]

What's so mythic about it? If NATO decided to enter the war properly, and assuming nukes weren't used, Russia would lose quite handily. They are struggling as it is against just Ukraine and largely relying on superior manpower and more equipment in the same meatgrinder tactics they've used since WW2. Bearing in mind Russia's economy is smaller than Italy's, it's a natural resources juggernaut but it's not an economic one.

NATO's military spending and manpower are greater than Russia's and if NATO did join more actively and pushed Russia out, Ukraine joining NATO would become pretty much a certainty, with EU membership more likely than at any other point in history.

It's not a question of if NATO could defeat Russia in a conventional war, it very clearly could, it's whether NATO want a conventional war.

If..if..if...if blablabla.
Not nato,but Americans first of all. You are absolutely incapable to do anything with Russia without them, you can only beg them to stay with you in case of danger. So, if Americans would like to die for Europeans or Ukrainians, they'd already do it. They don't want because they're not fools, and that's their right. Other discussion without is just blabla. Yes, Putin won't use nukes against nuclear countries because he didn't use it against non-nuclear Ukraine...L-logic

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

If..if..if...if blablabla.
Not nato,but Americans first of all. You are absolutely incapable to do anything with Russia without them, you can only beg them to stay with you in case of danger. So, if Americans would like to die for Europeans or Ukrainians, they'd already do it. They don't want because they're not fools, and that's their right. Other discussion without is just blabla. Yes, Putin won't use nukes against nuclear countries because he didn't use it against non-nuclear Ukraine...L-logic

You know combined European armies are larger than the Russian army? The Ukrainian army was smaller and worse than that of any major European nation when the war started and they've still largely held the Russians, despite massive disadvantages.

Given how Russia is struggling to defeat just Ukraine, why are you so sure it will fare well against Ukraine with the full support of any other nation?

Hell Russia has needed Iranian weapons and North Korean manpower along with foreign mercenaries to get where it is. The Iranian weapons are now probably off the table.

 

[McTallshort]

You know combined European armies are larger than the Russian army? The Ukrainian army was smaller and worse than that of any major European nation when the war started and they've still largely held the Russians, despite massive disadvantages.

Given how Russia is struggling to defeat just Ukraine, why are you so sure it will fare well against Ukraine with the full support of any other nation?

Hell Russia has needed Iranian weapons and North Korean manpower along with foreign mercenaries to get where it is. The Iranian weapons are now probably off the table.

I think what @Yulia means is there is currently very little chance of European armies getting involved directly in shooting war with Russia. Which I would agree with to a point but I would also add that the more America withdraws from NATO and becomes increasingly more pro Russia I the chances of some European armies getting involved actually increases. If America deals itself out then it's no longer in a position to tell not only Russia what to do but also the likes of Poland and Finland what to do and if those nations feel threatened by Russia then I absolutely could see a number of expeditionary forces being deployed. You see we are now back in the days before 1945 were larger nations would attack smaller nations and other nations would send forces to support those smaller nations. Don't Forget North Korea has an expeditionary army allied to Russia directly fighting Ukraine. Why would Poland or Estonia not do the same? It's absolutely in their interests to see Russia in it's current form defeated.