Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)

[sonson]

To play Total Devils Advocate

And to clarify, no, I'm not saying Brexit is the same as Russia invading the Ukraine etc, or anything of the sort

But look at Brexit. Look at how many British people were terrified by the EU because they perceived it as somehow being a threat to their nations sovereignty, on the basis of nothing. It was enough that it was this existential abstract imposition to make people talk in terms of it as an Imperial menace.

Whereas Russia- NATO *does exist* to be a threat to an expansionist Russia. A threat with literal nuclear weapons, the most powerful combined military in human history etc. To limit any sense of Russian sovereignty which exceeds the boundaries imposed at the end of the Cold War. Those nations have said- we *will* impose on your sovereignty. And if you try and expand- we'll all have you. This coming from multiple nations involved in invading the sovereign nations of others in the past two decades.

Again this *in no way* is a justification of Putin, who is a despot, or any of his actions.

But had Russia been led by someone who wasn't, who wasn't a warmonger or anti democratic but simply someone who on account of vying from a different culture didn't share Western values or the ideals of NATO- there would still be an imposition on the soverignty of a Russia that had any ambitions thst weren't sponsored by the US and NATO.

To add to all this

The other issue is that its not actually true.

Putin has revealed decisively prior to the Ukraine that so long as enough westerners benefitted from Russian expansion, the international community dosent a tally give a shit what Russia does, up to a point. If it benefits them. They slap Russias wrist with one hand but they hold out the other for the profit that comes from what they condemn. They happily go along with a WC there despite the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition being undertaken against LBGT population etc.

So Russia is not just contained by NATO- its member countries behaviour has actually *encouraged* Russian agression in respect to how it has responded to it. Key members of NATO nations governments, UK among them, has repeatedly sanctioned what Russia is doing. Not reprimanded, not opposed.

What's surprised us all this past week, Putin most of all, is that the narrative of the past decade repeated constantly in the 21st cebtury- namely that small soverign nations strategic to super powers are fair game if the leaders of invading countries make enough western nations money from it- was mistaken.

And I'm not sure why this is different. I'm glad it is, but very perplexed. It's an abberation to be sure.

 

[SYB_DC]

Surely trying to argue that there’s another side to this is absolutely key? Isn’t that a technique in psychology to get into the minds of ‘the enemy’ to try and predict the next moves? In this case, it also helps break down the ear/west stereotype that we’ve had ingrained in us by western propaganda for as long as we can remember.
Personally, learning about all aspects of this is brilliant, not cherry picking or getting sucked into the popularist rhetoric of good and bad provides a different perspective on things and why things are happening.

This is getting far afield philosophically, but since we've gotten into a perspective-shifting bent on the last couple pages, it's not purely an East/West thing. If you were to ask many of the African nations why they voted the way they did in the UN GA vote, you would get something philosophically underpinned by the division between global "north" and "south" - essentially, rhetoric centered around anticolonialism and wealth dynamics. From that lens, you have a former colonizer (Russia) seeking to reimpose cultural hegemony on its much poorer neighbor for no reason other than it can. That's not the same as an argument based on the philosophy of freedom, democracy, and all the other claptrap that might come out of an American right winger's mouth when convenient and be ignored when not and what I see repeated in most of the Western media.

In other words, there are numerous philosophies about how the world should be ordered. It just so happens that the morality of several of them line up squarely against Russia on this one, and that of the other major one (China) is perhaps morally neutral but comes down slightly against Russia here for practical reasons. It's quite possible to see this from Putin's perspective. The problem is that Putin's interests here - both practically and philosophically - are a booming echo of a past that much of the world would rather not return to.

 

[yamar1]

To add to all this

The other issue is that its not actually true.

Putin has revealed decisively prior to the Ukraine that so long as enough westerners benefitted from Russian expansion, the international community dosent a tally give a shit what Russia does, up to a point. If it benefits them. They slap Russias wrist with one hand but they hold out the other for the profit that comes from what they condemn. They happily go along with a WC there despite the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition being undertaken against LBGT population etc.

So Russia is not just contained by NATO- its member countries behaviour has actually *encouraged* Russian agression in respect to how it has responded to it. Key members of NATO nations governments, UK among them, has repeatedly sanctioned what Russia is doing. Not reprimanded, not opposed.

What's surprised us all this past week, Putin most of all, is that the narrative of the past decade repeated constantly in the 21st cebtury- namely that small soverign nations strategic to super powers are fair game if the leaders of invading countries make enough western nations money from it- was mistaken.

And I'm not sure why this is different. I'm glad it is, but very perplexed. It's an abberation to be sure.

Putin will be shocked how hard Russia has been hit and turned on. The whole world is more or less against him right now, and rightly so.

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

Putin will be shocked how hard Russia has been hit and turned on. The whole world is more or less against him right now, and rightly so.

Indeed. The question is how he reacts to it. Is he rational or not?

 

[OzzyMac]

To add to all this

The other issue is that its not actually true.

Putin has revealed decisively prior to the Ukraine that so long as enough westerners benefitted from Russian expansion, the international community dosent a tally give a shit what Russia does, up to a point. If it benefits them. They slap Russias wrist with one hand but they hold out the other for the profit that comes from what they condemn. They happily go along with a WC there despite the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition being undertaken against LBGT population etc.

So Russia is not just contained by NATO- its member countries behaviour has actually *encouraged* Russian agression in respect to how it has responded to it. Key members of NATO nations governments, UK among them, has repeatedly sanctioned what Russia is doing. Not reprimanded, not opposed.

What's surprised us all this past week, Putin most of all, is that the narrative of the past decade repeated constantly in the 21st cebtury- namely that small soverign nations strategic to super powers are fair game if the leaders of invading countries make enough western nations money from it- was mistaken.

And I'm not sure why this is different. I'm glad it is, but very perplexed. It's an abberation to be sure.

It could be as simple as Ukraines untapped oil and gas reserves. The EU wants to reduce it's dependancy on Russian resources and therefore the last thing they need is Russia having control over more of them.

Well it's thought that popped into my head anyway

 

[Slim999]

This war does seem to be unravelling for Russia.
I'm starting to think Khordokovsky is correct and this is going to go tits up for VP very quickly.

As Lenin said....
" There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen" ....

And as Lennon said...

"Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace"
"War is over "
etc

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

This war does seem to be unravelling for Russia.
I'm starting to think Khordokovsky is correct and this is going to go tits up for VP very quickly.

As Lenin said....
" There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen" ....

And as Lennon said...

"Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace"
"War is over "
etc

It does. But what really worries me is he lack of options now

He has nowhere to go.

Is a ceasefire possible? Does that stop the ICC stuff? Even if it does, does he remain in power? If not, can he live in Russia?

 

[yamar1]

Indeed. The question is how he reacts to it. Is he rational or not?

Hes impossible to weigh up for sure.

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

Hes impossible to weigh up for sure.

And that’s why he’s dangerous. He’s not a rational actor at the best of times, but he’s also fucked now

 

[yamar1]

It does. But what really worries me is he lack of options now

He has nowhere to go.

Is a ceasefire possible? Does that stop the ICC stuff? Even if it does, does he remain in power? If not, can he live in Russia?

And a man with nothing to lose is a dangerous man.

And that’s why he’s dangerous. He’s not a rational actor at the best of times, but he’s also fucked now

Thats what makes this so interesting, if i should say such a thing. The next week or two will decide his fate imo.

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

And a man with nothing to lose is a dangerous man.

Exactly my point. I hate the “poking the bear” shit, it’s so lazy. But he is backed into a corner now. He either comes out fighting (with the big guns) or we find a solution. And I don’t know what that solution is.

Plenty of dictators with nowhere to run have found places to live, Amin and the like, but they never had the nuclear threat.

 

[SYB_DC]

And that’s why he’s dangerous. He’s not a rational actor at the best of times, but he’s also fucked now

He's a perfectly rational actor. Based on what has happened this century with pretextual invasions of weaker countries by more powerful ones, he would rationally have expected a relatively muted reaction of hand-wringing. Lest anyone forget, that's initially exactly what he got.

It also appears he vastly miscalculated the speed at which his forces could take over Ukraine. That miscalculation and Ukrainian battle and PR strength, is why he's in such tough shape. I don't see irrationality here, but I do see a rational man left with very tough choices that nobody would want to choose among and all of which likely make him angry to even contemplate.

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

He's a perfectly rational actor. Based on what has happened this century with pretextual invasions of weaker countries by more powerful ones, he would rationally have expected a relatively muted reaction of hand-wringing. Lest anyone forget, that's initially exactly what he got.

It also appears he vastly miscalculated the speed at which his forces could take over Ukraine. That miscalculation and Ukrainian battle and PR strength, is why he's in such tough shape. I don't see irrationality here, but I do see a rational man left with very tough choices that nobody would want to choose among.

We assume he’s still a rational actor. I said earlier in the thread that he doesn’t look well, it’s based on very little

 

[SYB_DC]

We assume he’s still a rational actor. I said earlier in the thread that he doesn’t look well, it’s based on very little

I guess right now a large part of the issue is the doubt; that doubt exists because nothing he's done so far has seemed terribly irrational.

 

[Sam Handwich]

This war does seem to be unravelling for Russia.
I'm starting to think Khordokovsky is correct and this is going to go tits up for VP very quickly.

As Lenin said....
" There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen" ....

And as Lennon said...

"Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace"
"War is over "
etc

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

I guess right now a large part of the issue is the doubt; that doubt exists because nothing he's done so far has seemed terribly irrational.

Indeed. (Obviously within the realms that going to invade someone is rational)

Where does he go next? He has no good moves. Theoretically he could retreat and sell it domestically, but he’s probably too proud?

 

[MonkeyLove]

And that’s why he’s dangerous. He’s not a rational actor at the best of times, but he’s also fucked now

Whether he is rationale or not is questionable. But even if he is it might benefit him to portray he is not. He will be very familiar with Nixon’s madman strategy.

Therefore genuinely rational or not I expect him to escalate as it benefits him. He went into Swedish airspace today. Something against NATO is almost a given imo.

I also expect a stronger response to the sanctions. They will bring him down be it quickly or slowly. They are already positioning economic war and I’d expect him to threaten the West to cajole them into softening them

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

Whether he is rationale or not is questionable. But even if he is it might benefit him to portray he is not. He will be very familiar with Nixon’s madman strategy.

Therefore genuinely rational or not I expect him to escalate as it benefits him. He went into Swedish airspace today. Something against NATO is almost a given imo.

I also expect a stronger response to the sanctions. They will bring him down be it quickly or slowly. They are already positioning economic war and I’d expect him to threaten the West to cajole them into softening them

Feels almost Trumpian.

I almost feel the sanctions/economic impacts have gone too far already. By too far I mean, the point of no return rather than wrong. How do western companies row back on them? These are not temporary things.

 

[SAFCOldie]

Indeed. (Obviously within the realms that going to invade someone is rational)

Where does he go next? He has no good moves. Theoretically he could retreat and sell it domestically, but he’s probably too proud?

He likely just wants control of the SE area. They'll come to some arrangement IMO with both sides being able to claim some sort of victory.

 

[MonkeyLove]

He's a perfectly rational actor. Based on what has happened this century with pretextual invasions of weaker countries by more powerful ones, he would rationally have expected a relatively muted reaction of hand-wringing. Lest anyone forget, that's initially exactly what he got.

It also appears he vastly miscalculated the speed at which his forces could take over Ukraine. That miscalculation and Ukrainian battle and PR strength, is why he's in such tough shape. I don't see irrationality here, but I do see a rational man left with very tough choices that nobody would want to choose among and all of which likely make him angry to even contemplate.

The best tweet I’ve seen on his rationality is this from professor McFaul. He was US ambassador to Russia so clearly knows people in the Russian inner circle. There seems to be some debate…

You must be logged on to see media items