Ukraine War

[Gatorubet 30727]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/08/ukraines-iron-general-zaluzhnyy-00023901

Good read on Ukraine’s Military Commander and the NATOization of the Ukrainian military since 2014.

[F250 29201]

4 hours ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

LOL. He's most DEFINITELY not a Republican. I'd be very surprised if he's ever voted for a Republican in his life.

Agree. His views are standard leftist views on this topic. Not much different than the Jacobin article below. Although I am far from being a leftist I do read Jacobin just for the dissenting viewpoint and recognize some of MACs points. He is definitely not a Republican.

Our lizard brain tends to take over in times of war so it's pretty normal to shutdown dissent and this being the CR where "shouting" down dissent is part of the game. It's probably best if he takes just takes a break.

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/03/left-antiwar-policy-ukraine-russian-invasion-war-levitz-liberal-interventionism

[sidis 10018]

24 minutes ago, F250 said:

Agree. His views are standard leftist views on this topic. Not much different than the Jacobin article below. Although I am far from being a leftist I do read Jacobin just for the dissenting viewpoint and recognize some of MACs points. He is definitely not a Republican.

Our lizard brain tends to take over in times of war so it's pretty normal to shutdown dissent and this being the CR where "shouting" down dissent is part of the game. It's probably best if he takes just takes a break.

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/03/left-antiwar-policy-ukraine-russian-invasion-war-levitz-liberal-interventionism

mmm, not sure that is it.  i don't believe that the view that the united states should not simply jump to a white-knight, leftist interventionist perspective and choose to intervene in this war between russia and ukraine is insane at all.  it is grounded view that is supported with significant history that does not bode well for such a proposition.  it is easily shamed when confronted with atrocities and the choice to simply stand by and let it happen...easy parallels being drawn to german appeasement while the holocaust was underway.  that position is also easily argued against by pointing out that sending americans into harm's way for something that does not "affect" us is just more dangerous adventurism and arrogant implementation of american hegemony.  both are not totally right, both are not totally wrong...and ultimately it is a matter of degree and what the country's population is willing to stomach in terms of isolationism vs. interventionism with both having virtuous attributes at which to point.

but that's not what i'm talking about when i say m.a.c. is proffering some insane perspectives.  his position that Ukraine should simply accept its fate of being adjacent to Russia and thus, under its control and not fight back along with his victim-blaming of ukraine...acting like they were the one that left putin with no choice but to invade the country and that if we would only give putin a chance to prove that he's an honorable and decent leader then he would show just how blameless russia is in this whole thing...all while amusingly contradicting himself (as wildcat pointed out above) in stating that ukraine should be self-deterministic.  that message, paired with his complete unwillingness to engage at any real level with those challenging him but instead just being a broken record player with the same affirmative (but silly) statements over and over is just plain bizarre.

[956 Worldwide 35598]

38 minutes ago, F250 said:

Agree. His views are standard leftist views on this topic. Not much different than the Jacobin article below. Although I am far from being a leftist I do read Jacobin just for the dissenting viewpoint and recognize some of MACs points. He is definitely not a Republican.

Our lizard brain tends to take over in times of war so it's pretty normal to shutdown dissent and this being the CR where "shouting" down dissent is part of the game. It's probably best if he takes just takes a break.

 

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2022/03/left-antiwar-policy-ukraine-russian-invasion-war-levitz-liberal-interventionism

The far left fails to grasp that now war has started— a defeated Ukraine at “peace” might very well be worse off than a Ukraine continually fighting. 

[Gatorubet 30727]

4 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The far left fails to grasp that now war has started— a defeated Ukraine at “peace” might very well be worse off than a Ukraine continually fighting. 

Getting killed fighting to prevent Russians from raping and killing your family - versus not fighting and getting executed with your hands tied behind your back…..after you watch your family get raped and killed by Russians.

 

[InkaUtexas 26908]

Just now, Gatorubet said:

Getting killed fighting to prevent Russians from raping and killing your family - versus not fighting and getting executed with your hands tied behind your back…..after you watch your family get raped and killed by Russians.

 

Yep. That would be a pretty crappy occupation. Sarajevo never surrendered after years of constant bombardment and one major reason is they new what the Serbs had done in other parts of the country that surrendered. 

[TwiceHorn 32083]

39 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The far left fails to grasp that now war has started— a defeated Ukraine at “peace” might very well be worse off than a Ukraine continually fighting. 

Hawks and doves "work" better in peacetime, usually, with no conflict in the immediate future.  This is where that tension and delicate balance between political philosophies (and parties, in a functional body politic) comes in handy.

[Brisketexan 106924]

32 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Yep. That would be a pretty crappy occupation. Sarajevo never surrendered after years of constant bombardment and one major reason is they new what the Serbs had done in other parts of the country that surrendered. 

Yeah.....I think it's quite clear that there is no "we'll just live under Russian occupation."  Nope.  The only two options are 1) fight to repel them from your land, or 2) flee your homeland.  I would pick 1.  Seems that Ukraine has largely picked 1.  As is their right.

[F250 29201]

40 minutes ago, sidis said:

mmm, not sure that is it.  i don't believe that the view that the united states should not simply jump to a white-knight, leftist interventionist perspective and choose to intervene in this war between russia and ukraine is insane at all.  it is grounded view that is supported with significant history that does not bode well for such a proposition.  it is easily shamed when confronted with atrocities and the choice to simply stand by and let it happen...easy parallels being drawn to german appeasement while the holocaust was underway.  that position is also easily argued against by pointing out that sending americans into harm's way for something that does not "affect" us is just more dangerous adventurism and arrogant implementation of american hegemony.  both are not totally right, both are not totally wrong...and ultimately it is a matter of degree and what the country's population is willing to stomach in terms of isolationism vs. interventionism with both having virtuous attributes at which to point.

but that's not what i'm talking about when i say m.a.c. is proffering some insane perspectives.  his position that Ukraine should simply accept its fate of being adjacent to Russia and thus, under its control and not fight back along with his victim-blaming of ukraine...acting like they were the one that left putin with no choice but to invade the country and that if we would only give putin a chance to prove that he's an honorable and decent leader then he would show just how blameless russia is in this whole thing...all while amusingly contradicting himself (as wildcat pointed out above) in stating that ukraine should be self-deterministic.  that message, paired with his complete unwillingness to engage at any real level with those challenging him but instead just being a broken record player with the same affirmative (but silly) statements over and over is just plain bizarre.

As I mentioned about a week ago. MAC isn't very good at clarifying his message. Even though I am sympathetic with his perspective he often loses me with his posts which is why I said he probably needs a break.

[Brisketexan 106924]

20 minutes ago, F250 said:

As I mentioned about a week ago. MAC isn't very good at clarifying his message. Even though I am sympathetic with his perspective he often loses me with his posts which is why I said he probably needs a break.

I'm sympathetic with his SENTIMENTS.  But when he translates them into goals that have no relationship with reality, my sympathy evaporates.  That's the problem here.

"If everyone would just do what I say, all would be sunshine and roses."  There's a metric fuckton of "never gonna happen" in the "everyone would just do what I say" part after the "if," so it renders the "sunshine and roses" part null and void.

 

[F250 29201]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The far left fails to grasp that now war has started— a defeated Ukraine at “peace” might very well be worse off than a Ukraine continually fighting. 

That's actually one of the concerns. Slowly bleeding out Russia through a prolonged war that results in a regime change could be a major geopolitical victory for the West but the cost is Ukrainian blood. Surely most here are not so naive to think that the U.S. is acting out of altruism. Is it possible that the U.S. might slow roll the fight via aid and diplomacy to bleed out Putin?

 

[Hookah Horns 3089]

The reports of widespread rapes are just abhorrent and it's hard for me to wrap my mind around how so many men are capable of raping or tolerant of their comrades raping. I find myself wondering whether the propensity towards rape says something about the character of Russian men or culture of Russia, or if instead that's naive and our soldiers would do likewise if our command structure and discipline were as shitty as Russia's. 

[InkaUtexas 26908]

11 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's actually one of the concerns. Slowly bleeding out Russia through a prolonged war that results in a regime change could be a major geopolitical victory for the West but the cost is Ukrainian blood. Surely most here are not so naive to think that the U.S. is acting out of altruism. Is it possible that the U.S. might slow roll the fight via aid and diplomacy to bleed out Putin?

 

I think a slug fest benefits the Russians. They can sit behind entrenched lines, consolidate territory they have taken and use their artillery to halt any big offensives. Plus they can resupply easier using trains vs. trucks. Though it will take time to get the conscripts up and ready and enact any major mobilization, they can play for time, state their goals was consolidate separatists areas and call it a victory if they can hold. 

Ukraine benefited from the rapid push, extension of lines and a fucked up supply chain that needed trains. But not sure they can win a drawn out slug fest. The goal is their victory since that would be terrible for Putin and the boys. When fighting a bully you go for a quick bloody nose. The UA has done that, but how far can they take it? Of note is they are not getting enough armor to do more than strengthen their zones of control. 

[Blotto 24025]

Not sure if has been discussed in either of the Ukraine threads, but I haven't noticed it. Apparently Marine le Pen has been surging in recent polls as the elections in  France get underway. While she has toned it down of late, she has a history of being sympathetic to Putin. If she gets elected, would it put cracks in the NATO alliance and opposition to Russia? One article I read on the topic said most experts think its "not likely" she could win but they also said that about Trump in '16. First round of voting starts this weekend and she seems to have a lot of momentum.

Quote

As Macron campaigns to become the first French president in 20 years to serve a second term, he has often been reminded of his 2017 victory speech in front of the Louvre where, after defeating Le Pen with 66% of the vote, he promised to ensure people had “no more reason to vote for extremes”.

Polls suggest he could once again go through to a runoff against Le Pen after this Sunday’s vote, and that she would significantly close the gap on him in a 24 April final round, with a Harris poll this week putting Macron on 51.5% to Le Pen’s 48.5%.

Le Pen has risen steadily in the polls in recent days, boosted by her promises to cut VAT on fuel in response to the cost of living crisis. Her political opponents have continued to warn that her anti-immigration project to prioritise native French people over non-French for housing, jobs and benefits, and to ban the Muslim headscarf from all public spaces, is xenophobic, racist and against the French constitution.

In a front-page interview with Le Figaro on Thursday, Macron was asked whether he bore part of the responsibility for the high support for the far right in the polls. Macron said he believed his government had “succeeded in attacking” certain factors of the far-right vote by lowering unemployment, creating jobs and beginning a process whereby factories opened after long years of deindustrialisation.

“But when you lead, govern or are president, you always have a part of responsibility,” he added. “On immigration, the results are insufficient, but we have reinforced border protections and hardened entry conditions to our territory in a context where the flow has considerably increased … due to the international context.”

Macron said there had been more arrivals to France between 2017 and 2019 than in the two years previously. “A worry was born out of that: I haven’t managed to calm it, and it has fed the extremes.” But he added that France was not “submerged” by immigration. He said that if he won a second term, he would “reinforce the fight against illegal immigration” and facilitate sending home people who had not been approved to stay.

Macron said the far right in France was still “fundamentally” the same: it attacked the Republic, had a base of antisemitism, “very clear xenophobia, and ultraconservative aims”.

Support for the far right in the polls for the first round is at its highest point: Le Pen and her far-right rival Eric Zemmour, a former talkshow pundit, have more than 30% of support between them. Polls show Macron in first position for the first round on about 26.5%. Le Pen has risen to 23% in recent days. The hard-left Jean-Luc Mélenchon is in third on about 17% and also rising. A high number of undecided voters and a potentially high abstention rate means the outcome of Sunday’s first round remains open.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/07/macron-steps-up-warnings-over-french-far-right-before-first-round-vote

[956 Worldwide 35598]

28 minutes ago, F250 said:

That's actually one of the concerns. Slowly bleeding out Russia through a prolonged war that results in a regime change could be a major geopolitical victory for the West but the cost is Ukrainian blood. Surely most here are not so naive to think that the U.S. is acting out of altruism. Is it possible that the U.S. might slow roll the fight via aid and diplomacy to bleed out Putin?

 

To be clear on what “slow roll” means— we can help Ukraine keep fighting, we can help prevent Russia from winning, but we can’t prevent Ukraine from coming to a settlement if they reach a point where they are ready to do that. We don’t have it in our capacity to speed up a Russian loss, without direct intervention and expanding the conflict to include likely nuclear war. 
 

And after seeing Bucha and Irpin, it’s clear what a Ukrainian loss means in actual terms— rapes, summary executions, and mass graves.  It’s immoral to tell Ukrainians they’d be better off losing the war, they’re the ones who get to decide when it’s worth it to stop fighting. 

[F250 29201]

13 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I think a slug fest benefits the Russians. They can sit behind entrenched lines, consolidate territory they have taken and use their artillery to halt any big offensives. Plus they can resupply easier using trains vs. trucks. Though it will take time to get the conscripts up and ready and enact any major mobilization, they can play for time, state their goals was consolidate separatists areas and call it a victory if they can hold. 

Ukraine benefited from the rapid push, extension of lines and a fucked up supply chain that needed trains. But not sure they can win a drawn out slug fest. The goal is their victory since that would be terrible for Putin and the boys. When fighting a bully you go for a quick bloody nose. The UA has done that, but how far can they take it? Of note is they are not getting enough armor to do more than strengthen their zones of control. 

Haven't they been asking for artillery and armor for sometime now? Last I heard Germany backed out an agreement to send armor and the U.S. has issues sending "offensive weapons".

 

[Hefeweizen 5445]

They are raping small children for fucks sake.  Boys and girls.  They are depraved and have been given carte Blanche to behave like animals by their leadership.
 

The history of Russia in WW2 is pretty well known, a lot of rape during the conquest of Germany.  

None of this is a surprise, it’s a feature for them.

[F250 29201]

7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

To be clear on what “slow roll” means— we can help Ukraine keep fighting, we can help prevent Russia from winning, but we can’t prevent Ukraine from coming to a settlement if they reach a point where they are ready to do that. We don’t have it in our capacity to speed up a Russian loss, without direct intervention and expanding the conflict to include likely nuclear war. 
 

And after seeing Bucha and Irpin, it’s clear what a Ukrainian loss means in actual terms— rapes, summary executions, and mass graves.  It’s immoral to tell Ukrainians they’d be better off losing the war, they’re the ones who get to decide when it’s worth it to stop fighting. 

You don't think the U.S. can do more with regard to weapons?

[InkaUtexas 26908]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

Haven't they been asking for artillery and armor for sometime now? Last I heard Germany backed out an agreement to send armor and the U.S. has issues sending "offensive weapons".

 

we said we would get them stuff they could use, and that means coming from the East Nato partners. Slovaks have sent in some artillery, some tanks were provided, but not sure how much. I mean, enough to create an Armored force that can break through? Probably not. 

Push the Orcs back, hold the line, and let sanctions have the time to start biting. Problem with that is as long as countries will allow for trade and access to Russia, looking at the Gulf States and China, then it will take longer. 

[InkaUtexas 26908]

Just now, F250 said:

You don't think the U.S. can do more with regard to weapons?

Weapons require training. They have old Russian shit except for the recent SAMS and ATGM's.  

 

[956 Worldwide 35598]

5 minutes ago, F250 said:

You don't think the U.S. can do more with regard to weapons?

I think in a vacuum we could but the fact is that Russia gets a choice too and has been using a lot of threats and bluffs and misdirection to keep all of us off balance. “No offensive weapons” was a peacetime strategy of deterrence, to show that a Russian attack would come at cost without causing undue alarm about a Ukrainian offensive. Deterrence failed in a huge way and it’s been a month.  Everyone is pushing the limit on how far that support can go, in the face of some pretty wild threats from a pretty unhinged person. Czech Republic and Slovakia cracked the seal by sending armor and sophisticated air defense, Prague and Bratislava remain unvaporized and so now the WWIII red line we don’t want to cross got shifted a bit further in Ukraine’s favor.

[RomaVicta 30604]

30 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

The reports of widespread rapes are just abhorrent and it's hard for me to wrap my mind around how so many men are capable of raping or tolerant of their comrades raping. I find myself wondering whether the propensity towards rape says something about the character of Russian men or culture of Russia, or if instead that's naive and our soldiers would do likewise if our command structure and discipline were as shitty as Russia's. 

I have read in more than one place that the most dangerous time for prisoners is in the time immediately following combat. The frenzy of combat mixed with resentment of the enemy is a volatile combination. A well-disciplined army can control itself.

I don't know that the Russian character is more inclined to rape. I don't know why it would be. 

To me, this horrible violence of all kinds indicates an army that is more rabble than soldier. The Russian soldiers are ill-supplied and losing. 

I offer no excuse for the actions nor will I object to whatever punishment befalls the perpetrators. I just don't want to get into the mindset of any group of people being sub-human.

[956 Worldwide 35598]

28 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Not sure if has been discussed in either of the Ukraine threads, but I haven't noticed it. Apparently Marine le Pen has been surging in recent polls as the elections in  France get underway. While she has toned it down of late, she has a history of being sympathetic to Putin. If she gets elected, would it put cracks in the NATO alliance and opposition to Russia? One article I read on the topic said most experts think its "not likely" she could win but they also said that about Trump in '16. First round of voting starts this weekend and she seems to have a lot of momentum.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/07/macron-steps-up-warnings-over-french-far-right-before-first-round-vote

It’s absolutely a threat to NATO and the western Alliance.  In the past she’s even made threats to withdraw from NATO’s military command in de Gaulle style.  Putin wold love nothing more than a Le Pen victory. If she’s there, it also moves the window or acceptable discussion the wrong way.  Shifting the extreme also shifts the center. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

50 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

The reports of widespread rapes are just abhorrent and it's hard for me to wrap my mind around how so many men are capable of raping or tolerant of their comrades raping. I find myself wondering whether the propensity towards rape says something about the character of Russian men or culture of Russia, or if instead that's naive and our soldiers would do likewise if our command structure and discipline were as shitty as Russia's. 

Have your seen what the average Russian male looks like ?  They aren't gettin a lot of voluntary action. This was probably touted as a sex tour to some of those conscripts.  Yes I'm burning in hell for making light of rape.

[InkaUtexas 26908]

40 minutes ago, Hefeweizen said:

They are raping small children for fucks sake.  Boys and girls.  They are depraved and have been given carte Blanche to behave like animals by their leadership.
 

The history of Russia in WW2 is pretty well known, a lot of rape during the conquest of Germany.  

None of this is a surprise, it’s a feature for them.

Beevor documents it quite well in his book The Fall of Berlin. Scary shit. 

[Gil Bang 26244]

1 hour ago, Blotto said:

Not sure if has been discussed in either of the Ukraine threads, but I haven't noticed it. Apparently Marine le Pen has been surging in recent polls as the elections in  France get underway. While she has toned it down of late, she has a history of being sympathetic to Putin. If she gets elected, would it put cracks in the NATO alliance and opposition to Russia? One article I read on the topic said most experts think its "not likely" she could win but they also said that about Trump in '16. First round of voting starts this weekend and she seems to have a lot of momentum.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/07/macron-steps-up-warnings-over-french-far-right-before-first-round-vote

That cunt is back?  Fuck. 

[bolverk 30344]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

It’s absolutely a threat to NATO and the western Alliance.  In the past she’s even made threats to withdraw from NATO’s military command in de Gaulle style.  Putin wold love nothing more than a Le Pen victory. If she’s there, it also moves the window or acceptable discussion the wrong way.  Shifting the extreme also shifts the center. 

With Zemmour running to her right and saying all the hateful shit, she hasn't had to and has therefore moderated her rhetoric on the culture war stuff like "La France pour les Français", sticking only to a populist message aimed at older, less educated and more disaffected blue collar / rural types who feel like they've been left behind by technology and modern economy. Sound familiar?

Macron has done a lot to attract foreign investment, promote entrepreneurship, and restructure the labor market over the last five years making him look arrogant and like he favors the urban elite, which has royally pissed off plenty in France who still have a strong socialist beliefs in the égalité and fraternité parts of their national motto. Plus, his over-confident ass has barely even campaigned in this election, preferring to waste time trying to talk Putin down from the ledge.

As the resident Surly Francophile, I'm not yet ready to surrender and wave the famed white flag as I think they'll come around on the obligatory second round of voting no matter the results of the first. One of my avowed socialist friends, who fucking hates Macron's domestic policies, was in absolute shock when she saw Marine got a third of the vote in the second round last time, saying something to the effect of "I can't believe there at that many who'd vote for a fascist in France!" Even though she's an avowed socialist, she came around and voted for Macron in the end.

Maybe I'm stupidly naïve, but I have to trust the French will pull through in the end.

[Hookah Horns 3089]

3 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think in a vacuum we could but the fact is that Russia gets a choice too and has been using a lot of threats and bluffs and misdirection to keep all of us off balance. “No offensive weapons” was a peacetime strategy of deterrence, to show that a Russian attack would come at cost without causing undue alarm about a Ukrainian offensive. Deterrence failed in a huge way and it’s been a month.  Everyone is pushing the limit on how far that support can go, in the face of some pretty wild threats from a pretty unhinged person. Czech Republic and Slovakia cracked the seal by sending armor and sophisticated air defense, Prague and Bratislava remain unvaporized and so now the WWIII red line we don’t want to cross got shifted a bit further in Ukraine’s favor.

We should try doing more of the same instead of promising we won't get involved directly and never putting Putin off balance in the slightest about what NATO will do about his atrocities. 

[Hookah Horns 3089]

4 hours ago, F250 said:

Haven't they been asking for artillery and armor for sometime now? Last I heard Germany backed out an agreement to send armor and the U.S. has issues sending "offensive weapons".

 

I haven't heard of any requests for artillery from them, seems like they're good on that so far. They've mostly been begging for air defense (SAMs) and planes from what I've read. 

The "offensive weapon" distinction is fucktarded and weak. 

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

The reporting I’ve heard is that it takes a week between the time we promise weapons and when they get delivered. I’ve also heard there are other countries like Slovakia who are quietly providing arms. We don’t need to know everything that’s going on. Neither do the Russians. I do think Poland should give them those MIGs.

I saw on CNN tonight that we’re conducting live fire drills with the Poles just miles from the Ukrainian border. I think that sends a strong message. “Don’t even think about it!” If the Russians tried to move one inch onto NATO territory, we would fuck them up so hard. That has to be the most humiliating thing for Putin. He can’t even take Kyiv (still not encircled, and now they’re reportedly backing off, raping and pillaging and attacking the civilian population on the way).

[956 Worldwide 35598]

Finland is “hurtling” towards NATO membership.  I am sure the cyberattacks yesterday made the Finns re-assess NATO membership yesterday.

If there are two solid lessons from this war:

1. NATO and the U.S. were not attempting to encircle Russia and leave them surrounded by more powerful nations and Alliances on all their borders. 

2.  We should have been doing (1). 

https://www.economist.com/europe/finland-is-hurtling-towards-nato-membership/21808705

 

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Finland is “hurtling” towards NATO membership.  I am sure the cyberattacks yesterday made the Finns re-assess NATO membership yesterday.

If there are two solid lessons from this war:

1. NATO and the U.S. were not attempting to encircle Russia and leave them surrounded by more powerful nations and Alliances on all their borders. 

2.  We should have been doing (1). 

https://www.economist.com/europe/finland-is-hurtling-towards-nato-membership/21808705

Retired Admiral James Stavridis is a contributor on MSNBC. I gather that he’s encouraged the Finns and the Swedes to join NATO in the past. I assume we have diplomats who’ve done so as well. I don’t know how much pressure we’ve ever put on them. (Or Putin them which is happening now.) But Stavridis speaks very highly of the Swedish and Finnish militaries and often says that if they applied for NATO membership on Wednesday then they’d be approved on Friday. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Finland should be auto-approved by email 

[956 Worldwide 35598]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Retired Admiral James Stavridis is a contributor on MSNBC. I gather that he’s encouraged the Finns and the Swedes to join NATO in the past. I assume we have diplomats who’ve done so as well. I don’t know how much pressure we’ve ever put on them. (Or Putin them which is happening now.) But Stavridis speaks very highly of the Swedish and Finnish militaries and often says that if they applied for NATO membership on Wednesday then they’d be approved on Friday. 

The U.S. doesn’t pressure countries to join NATO. I know that won’t be believed, but we simply don’t.  We absolutely lobby other members to accept when we want to push a prospect through. But we don’t lean on countries to start the process and we absolutely don’t lean on the Finns or Swedes. 

[956 Worldwide 35598]

18 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Finland should be auto-approved by email 

I agree, although it’s gotta be shitty for Ukraine.  “Wait, we are fighting a war with Russia partly because we want to be in NATO even when y’all didn’t really want us, and the result is that Finland is in NATO? Wtf? ”

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

5 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The U.S. doesn’t pressure countries to join NATO. I know that won’t be believed, but we simply don’t.  We absolutely lobby other members to accept when we want to push a prospect through. But we don’t lean on countries to start the process and we absolutely don’t lean on the Finns or Swedes. 

Yeah, I doubt that we ever pressure anyone. But I’m sure we’ve let them know that if they want in then they’ll be more than welcome. 

[956 Worldwide 35598]

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Yeah, I doubt that we ever pressure anyone. But I’m sure we’ve let them know that if they want in then they’ll be more than welcome. 

I think before 2014 most of the Alliance, including the U.S., would have balked a bit at Finland.  Finland was an example of a country that was solidly Western and European yet had seemingly reached an acceptable accommodation with Russia.  They were a useful and credible interlocutor while being deeply integrated and cooperative with us.  They had the closest thing to a “normal” relationship with Russia that any of Russia’s neighbors have. That was good for Russia and good for us.

The rapid freak out of the Finns should be exceedingly firm evidence to those who think Russia is behaving normally and that accommodation is possible. 

[TwiceHorn 32083]

14 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I have read in more than one place that the most dangerous time for prisoners is in the time immediately following combat. The frenzy of combat mixed with resentment of the enemy is a volatile combination. A well-disciplined army can control itself.

I don't know that the Russian character is more inclined to rape. I don't know why it would be. 

To me, this horrible violence of all kinds indicates an army that is more rabble than soldier. The Russian soldiers are ill-supplied and losing. 

I offer no excuse for the actions nor will I object to whatever punishment befalls the perpetrators. I just don't want to get into the mindset of any group of people being sub-human.

This is an interesting topic.

James Jones' The Thin Red Line is not only taken from a Kipling poem but is an allusion to the temporary psychopathy of the combat soldier (they cross the thin red line between sanity and insanity) that underlies much of the novel, based on Jones' combat experience.

I'm not sure the Russian character or even the rabble that may be Russian conscripts necessarily leads to atrocities.  But I am sure the lack of NCO leadership does.  Additionally, rape is about power, according to all the psychologist types, and not about sex.  I imagine that being a Russian conscript is about as powerless as it gets.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

This is an interesting topic.

James Jones' The Thin Red Line is not only taken from a Kipling poem but is an allusion to the temporary psychopathy of the combat soldier (they cross the thin red line between sanity and insanity) that underlies much of the novel, based on Jones' combat experience.

I'm not sure the Russian character or even the rabble that may be Russian conscripts necessarily leads to atrocities.  But I am sure the lack of NCO leadership does.  Additionally, rape is about power, according to all the psychologist types, and not about sex.  I imagine that being a Russian conscript is about as powerless as it gets.

....and sexless.... 

[Neonmoon 38130]

21 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I agree, although it’s gotta be shitty for Ukraine.  “Wait, we are fighting a war with Russia partly because we want to be in NATO even when y’all didn’t really want us, and the result is that Finland is in NATO? Wtf? ”

I agree, it is a little shitty if you look them as equals, but they’re not. Finland easily checks boxes that Ukraine struggles with. Now, if you look at Hungary compared to Ukraine, then it’s starts to look real shitty. 

[TexArcher 39074]

10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not sure the Russian character or even the rabble that may be Russian conscripts necessarily leads to atrocities.  But I am sure the lack of NCO leadership does.  Additionally, rape is about power, according to all the psychologist types, and not about sex.  I imagine that being a Russian conscript is about as powerless as it gets.

War is hell, and it makes people crazy, and when you're taught to dehumanize an enemy so that it's easier to kill them, it's not surprising that you come to look at their women as things to be used for your own gratification.

This doesn't excuse it, at all, of course.  But wartime rapes are not a uniquely Russian problem and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Russian character.  It has to do with the human character when it's conditioned by psychological manipulation and intense stress to the point that it basically becomes animal character.

Fuck Russia a thousand times for creating all of this suffering.

Edited April 9, 2022 by TexArcher

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

14 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think before 2014 most of the Alliance, including the U.S., would have balked a bit at Finland.  Finland was an example of a country that was solidly Western and European yet had seemingly reached an acceptable accommodation with Russia.  They were a useful and credible interlocutor while being deeply integrated and cooperative with us.  They had the closest thing to a “normal” relationship with Russia that any of Russia’s neighbors have. That was good for Russia and good for us.

The rapid freak out of the Finns should be exceedingly firm evidence to those who think Russia is behaving normally and that accommodation is possible. 

I’ve heard that the Finns have always had a good channel of communication with Putin. They’re strong enough that Putin probably wouldn’t want to fuck with them and joining NATO would be seen as a threat. Poking the bear, as it were. But now the calculation gets a little bit more complicated. I’d love it if they joined NATO just to stick it to Putin. But realistically they probably don’t have to because if Putin ever steps foot on their land then they’d be a member of NATO the next day and things wouldn’t go well for the Russians who apparently suck at war. 

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

7 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Fuck Russia a thousand times for creating all of this suffering.

This. And a thousand times more of this. It’s all for no good reason. It’s completely pointless. Even if they had succeeded in taking Kyiv, assassinating Zelensky, and reinstalling a puppet government (like the one they had under Yuschenko when Trump’s future campaign manager Paul Manafort was working for them), they wouldn’t have been prepared to be an occupying force and would’ve been devastated by the insurrection. There is no end game.

Putin loses either way. He’s not going to reabsorb Ukraine. The more war crimes he commits just because he’s a spoiled brat who isn’t getting his way only turns the rest of the world against him.

They say that he’s pulling back from Kyiv, trying to regroup, and sending a new general with combat experience in Syria to manage things. (Ukrainian snipers, that’s your next target.) Putin’s going to do some more really shitty things. I just hope we have some people in place to reciprocate. 

[Hermanator 7674]

17 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

The reports of widespread rapes are just abhorrent and it's hard for me to wrap my mind around how so many men are capable of raping or tolerant of their comrades raping. I find myself wondering whether the propensity towards rape says something about the character of Russian men or culture of Russia, or if instead that's naive and our soldiers would do likewise if our command structure and discipline were as shitty as Russia's. 

At this point the overwhelming evidence shows it's human nature. Our soldiers did the same in Vietnam and other conflicts when the leadership faltered. Same as soldiers from every army around the world going back as far as history is recorded and most likely since the dawn of mankind. Humans as a species are wired fucked up and probably due to the evolutionary demands of survival in a truly hostile world.

[HenryJames 67400]

[HenryJames 67400]

DP

Edited April 9, 2022 by HenryJames

[RomaVicta 30604]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

This is an interesting topic.

James Jones' The Thin Red Line is not only taken from a Kipling poem but is an allusion to the temporary psychopathy of the combat soldier (they cross the thin red line between sanity and insanity) that underlies much of the novel, based on Jones' combat experience.

I'm not sure the Russian character or even the rabble that may be Russian conscripts necessarily leads to atrocities.  But I am sure the lack of NCO leadership does.  Additionally, rape is about power, according to all the psychologist types, and not about sex.  I imagine that being a Russian conscript is about as powerless as it gets.

The Thin Red Line was the first realistic war novel I ever read. It's fantastic. From Here to Eternity probably was the mythical Great American Novel prior to the end of WWII IMHO. It's a novel of so much more breadth than the very good movie made of it.

ps Forgot to mention that I didn't know the thin red line reference other than Kippling. Thanks for that.

Edited April 9, 2022 by RomaVicta

[TwiceHorn 32083]

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

The Thin Red Line was the first realistic war novel I ever read. It's fantastic. From Here to Eternity probably was the mythical Great American Novel prior to the end of WWII IMHO. It's a novel of so much more breadth than the very good movie made of it.

ps Forgot to mention that I didn't know the thin red line reference other than Kippling. Thanks for that.

Not sure where I got that, but I didn't make it up.  I think it might have been in the foreword of the edition I read.

[Caponata 151]

 

[Gatorubet 30727]

5 minutes ago, Caponata said:

 

She should go to Ukraine and explain this to the Russian Syrian vets beginning to rape her after killing her documentary videographer travel companion  “But I’m against sanc….. ARGHHH!!!”