Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[temporal1]

(9 hours ago)

Gravitas: Donbas rebel republics to join Russia?

The latest round of talks between Ukraine and Russia has raised hopes for a peace deal.
Will Zelensky's concessions be enough to end the war? What will determine Putin's response?
Palki Sharma tells you.

i wish there were a transcript.
paraphrasing:
this describes Ukraine’s problem with the U.S., saying “biden doesn’t care if the war continues.”
U.S. rep Blinken, Sec of State (begrudgingly) says the U.S. will respect Ukraine’s decisions in negotiations. i hope that sticks.

it grieves me to wonder if bloodshed could have been avoided, there are indications it could have been, in two ways:
1) diplomacy before invasion; 2) the U.S./West not immediately jumping in, giving Ukraine+Russia time+space to negotiate without high escalation.

this will never be known.

now, the question is, how stupid can the U.S. be from this point? there is room for more errors.
this is NOT a done deal.

[Ken]

it grieves me to wonder if bloodshed could have been avoided, there are indications it could have been, in two ways:
1) diplomacy before invasion; 2) the U.S./West not immediately jumping in, giving Ukraine+Russia time+space to negotiate without high escalation.

this will never be known.

now, the question is, how stupid can the U.S. be from this point? there is room for more errors.
this is NOT a done deal.

I think you are confused about how this war started. The whole world was encouraging and pleading for more diplomacy and negotiations in February 2022. Only one party rushed into war.

[temporal1]

2018 / CATO / WARNING

2018 / “Russia Is Not the Soviet Union”
The bottom line is that Russia is a conventional, somewhat conservative, power,
whereas the Soviet Union was a messianic, totalitarian power.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/russia-not-soviet-union

The American public and U.S. policymakers both have an unfortunate tendency to conflate Russia with the Soviet Union.
That habit emerged again with the media and political reaction to the Helsinki summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump’s critics accused him of appeasing Putin and even of committing treason for not doing enough to defend American interests and for being far too solicitous to the Russian leader. They regarded that as an unforgivable offense because Russia supposedly poses a dire threat to the United States. Hostile pundits and politicians charged that Moscow’s alleged interference in the 2016 U.S. elections constituted an attack on America akin to Pearl Harbor and 9–11.

Trump’s supplicant behavior, opponents contended, stood in shameful contrast to the behavior of previous presidents toward tyrants, especially toward the Kremlin’s threats to America and the West. They trotted out Ronald Reagan’s “evil empire” speech and his later demand that Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall as examples of how Trump should have acted.

The problem with citing such examples is that they applied to a different country: the Soviet Union.
Too many Americans act as though there is no meaningful difference between that entity and Russia.

Worse still, U.S. leaders have embraced the same kind of uncompromising, hostile policies that Washington pursued to contain Soviet power. It is a major blunder that has increasingly poisoned relations with Moscow since the demise of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) at the end of 1991.

The bottom line is that Russia is a conventional, somewhat conservative, power,
whereas the Soviet Union was a messianic, totalitarian power.

One obvious difference between the Soviet Union and Russia is that the Soviet governing elite embraced Marxism‐​Leninism and its objective of world revolution. Today’s Russia is not a messianic power. Its economic system is a rather mundane variety of corrupt crony capitalism, not rigid state socialism. The political system is a conservative autocracy with aspects of a rigged democracy,
not a one‐​party dictatorship that brooks no dissent whatsoever.

Russia is hardly a Western‐​style democracy, but neither is it a continuation of the Soviet Union’s horrifically brutal totalitarianism.
Indeed, the country’s political and social philosophy is quite different from that of its predecessor. For example, the Orthodox Church had no meaningful influence during the Soviet era—something that was unsurprising, given communism’s official policy of atheism.
But today, the Orthodox Church has a considerable influence in Putin’s Russia, especially on social issues.

The bottom line is that Russia is a conventional, somewhat conservative, power, whereas the Soviet Union was a messianic, totalitarian power. That’s a rather large and significant difference, and U.S. policy needs to reflect that realization.

An equally crucial difference is that the Soviet Union was a global power (and, for a time, arguably a superpower) with global ambitions and capabilities to match. It controlled an empire in Eastern Europe and cultivated allies and clients around the world, including in such far‐​flung places as Cuba, Vietnam, and Angola. The USSR also intensely contested the United States for influence in all of those areas.

Conversely, Russia is merely a regional power with very limited extra‐​regional reach.
The Kremlin’s ambitions are focused heavily on the near abroad, aimed at trying to block the eastward creep of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the U.S.-led intrusion into Russia’s core security zone.
The orientation seems far more defensive than offensive.

It would be difficult for Russia to execute anything more than a very geographically limited expansionist agenda, even if it has one.
The Soviet Union was the world’s number two economic power, second only to the United States.

Russia has an economy roughly the size of Canada’s and is no longer ranked even in the global top ten.
It also has only three‐​quarters of the Soviet Union’s territory (much of which is nearly‐​empty Siberia) and barely half the population of the old USSR. If that were not enough, that population is shrinking and is afflicted with an assortment of public health problems (especially rampant alcoholism).

All of these factors should make it evident that Russia is not a credible rival, much less an existential threat, to the United States and its democratic system. Russia’s power is a pale shadow of the Soviet Union’s.

The only undiminished source of clout is the country’s sizeable nuclear arsenal.
But while nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent, they are not very useful for power projection or warfighting, unless the political leadership wants to risk national suicide. And there is no evidence whatsoever that Putin and his oligarch backers are suicidal.
Quite the contrary, they seem wedded to accumulating ever greater wealth and perks.

Finally, Russia’s security interests actually overlap substantially with America’s—most notably regarding the desire to combat radical Islamic terrorism.

If U.S. leaders did not insist on pursuing provocative policies, such as expanding NATO to Russia’s border, undermining longtime Russian clients in the Balkans (Serbia) and the Middle East (Syria), and excluding Russia from key international economic institutions such as the G‑7, there would be relatively few occasions when vital American and Russian interests collide.

A fundamental shift in U.S. policy is needed, but that requires a major change in America’s national psychology.

For more than four decades, Americans saw (and were told to regard) the Soviet Union as a mortal threat to the nation’s security and its most cherished values of freedom and democracy.

Unfortunately, a mental reset did not take place when the USSR dissolved, and a quasi‐​democratic Russia emerged as one of the successor states.

Too many Americans (including political leaders and policymakers) act as though they are still confronting the Soviet Union.

It will be the ultimate tragic irony if, having avoided war with a totalitarian global adversary, America now stumbles into war because of an out‐​of‐​date image of, and policy toward, a conventional, declining regional power. Yet unless U.S. leaders change both their mindsets and their policies toward Russia, that outcome is a very real possibility.

Ergo, 2022: Ukraine

U.S. politicians have, at best, been extraordinarily lazy regarding refusing to acknowledge Russia as a different entity from the USSR.
They loved having a stated adversary, were unwilling to let it go. Even after it had gone.

It’s not unlike awful hollywood formula movies. They see a winning pattern, and proceed to run it into the ground.
hollywood is ‘way too influential in D.C. (historically, entertainers were relegated to “bottom” social+power status) not made wealthy+powerful. hollywood is convinced, if they can make a successful movie ABOUT being POTUS, they can use the same methods to create (whatever story they want to see in D.C., and in the world). Flamboyant fantasies. No foundation. Smoke+mirrors.
https://www.careerexplorer.com/careers/actor/education/

There are actual diplomats that dedicate their lives to: diplomacy.
ha. “ain’t nobody got time for that.” (return attention to Beyonce.)

Now what? How to save face without destroying the entire world / enabling China to just take all?

i have NO INTEREST in pointing fingers. WHAT’S DONE IS DONE.
The only thing left is response / how to end bloodshed.

For those present who think “Putin was wrong to invade Ukraine,” NO ONE IS ARGUING.
You get to nurse that fact - FOREVER, if you choose. GO FOR IT. CHERISH IT. NO ONE IS ARGUING.

Now, what to do to stop suffering in Ukraine, to back off from WWIII, to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

- - - - - - -

i continue to pray for resolution. i pray for the suffering. i pray for non-escalation of misery.
i pray for God to have mercy on each of us.

i’m thankful for men working quietly behind the scenes to find resolution.
i’m thankful BOTH SIDES are present. no one has walked out. that’s of utmost importance.
i’m thankful for grown ups who don’t live for microphones+cameras.

[Szdfan]

For those present who think “Putin was wrong to invade Ukraine,” NO ONE IS ARGUING.
You get to nurse that fact - FOREVER, if you choose. GO FOR IT. CHERISH IT. NO ONE IS ARGUING.

People have argued that Russia was justified in attacking Ukraine — i.e. NATO expansion and denazification. Please stop gaslighting.

[temporal1]

For those present who think “Putin was wrong to invade Ukraine,” NO ONE IS ARGUING.
You get to nurse that fact - FOREVER, if you choose. GO FOR IT. CHERISH IT. NO ONE IS ARGUING.

People have argued that Russia was justified in attacking Ukraine — i.e. NATO expansion and denazification. Please stop gaslighting.

Please stop accusing me of gaslighting. i don’t even know what that is.

There has been a little discussion about the possibilities you mention. i see no reason to not consider all possibilities. Do you believe these views should not be allowed on this forum? They are not dominant. admin+mods have not interferred.

Is it worth endlessly nursing disagreement over minor discussions (that appear to have ended)?
At this time of actual war, i would hope most would defer to prayers for resolution, to end suffering ASAP.
Esp on this forum.

i’m encouraged in another thread:
it gives me hope (maybe most) are praying and focused on resolution, and conversion of souls.

Poll: Loving Putin
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4642

one thing -
for those members who are dedicated to making sure everyone knows “Putin did wrong,”
what do you view as “the next step?” “how to proceed?”

“being right” isn’t the be-all, end-all. it’s a small part of the whole.

[Szdfan]

For those present who think “Putin was wrong to invade Ukraine,” NO ONE IS ARGUING.
You get to nurse that fact - FOREVER, if you choose. GO FOR IT. CHERISH IT. NO ONE IS ARGUING.

People have argued that Russia was justified in attacking Ukraine — i.e. NATO expansion and denazification. Please stop gaslighting.

Please stop accusing me of gaslighting. i don’t even know what that is.

Ok, please stop telling people you disagree with that they are misunderstanding or misinterpreting or wrong about other people that you agree with. People can defend themselves. They don't need you to defend them. Please stop trying to police the forum.

[temporal1]

People have argued that Russia was justified in attacking Ukraine — i.e. NATO expansion and denazification. Please stop gaslighting.

Please stop accusing me of gaslighting. i don’t even know what that is.

Ok, please stop telling people you disagree with that they are misunderstanding or misinterpreting or wrong about other people that you agree with. People can defend themselves. They don't need you to defend them. Please stop trying to police the forum.

you made an accusation based on what you found others saying.
my response was my best effort to explain MY pov, not theirs, and, i do rely on admin+mods to moderate. i point that out to remind this forum has admin+mods.

voicing opinions, offering personal explanations is not policing.

you never complain when your forum pals jump to your support/defense. everyday.

i agree with your wife.

- - - - - -

Most important:

what do you view as the next step / how to proceed? - (Ukraine / Russia / the West / U.S.)?

“i don’t know” is an acceptable answer.

[Szdfan]

what do you view as the next step / how to proceed? - (Ukraine / Russia / the West / U.S.)?

While peace negotiations are critical, I don't think anything is going to change until the situation on the ground changes -- when the cost of fighting is too much for either side, or there is a stalemate. Up till now, Putin has refused to meet with Zelensky directly, probably because he's hoping for Russia to be in a more advantageous situation than they currently are in. Russia's statements that they were going to dial down the fighting in Western Ukraine yesterday were encouraging, but the fact that they continued to shell western cities overnight is an indication that Ukraine should not take anything Russia says in good faith. Russia also clearly also wants to grab more land in the east.

I'm afraid there's a lot more bloodshed ahead until something shifts for a peace deal to happen.

[temporal1]

what do you view as the next step / how to proceed? - (Ukraine / Russia / the West / U.S.)?

While peace negotiations are critical, I don't think anything is going to change until the situation on the ground changes -- when the cost of fighting is too much for either side, or there is a stalemate.

Up till now, Putin has refused to meet with Zelensky directly,
probably because he's hoping for Russia to be in a more advantageous situation than they currently are in.

Russia's statements that they were going to dial down the fighting in Western Ukraine yesterday were encouraging,
but the fact that they continued to shell western cities overnight is an indication that Ukraine should not take anything Russia says in good faith. Russia also clearly also wants to grab more land in the east.

I'm afraid there's a lot more bloodshed ahead until something shifts for a peace deal to happen.

Thanks.

i haven’t been aware that Putin has refused to meet with Z, it strikes me as normal for diplomats to meet first, to lay the groundwork for final talks. That doesn’t seem odd to me. In the Gravitas video, there is mention of the next step being Putin+Z, face to face.
To me, that’s a positive indicator they are getting close.

To me, i’m impressed Putin isn’t asking for ‘way more.
i don’t have details, of course, but, from what i’ve seen, which is mostly from what mike has posted about the talks (very little).

i don’t care for the constant media interpretation and speculation of what’s going on! very destructive! left or right.
the Gravitas video is no exception. they frame it as tho Z is surrendering! there’s no need for that. not helpful.
not as outrageous as biden, but, still, not constructive.

as Soloist repeats, it’s a matter of trying to find reality in the midst of opinion/propaganda.

Russia cannot ever deny the invasion.
None involved are without sin.

How to find relief from bloodshed is PRIMARY. As in any emergency: stop the bleeding. No matter who it is.

On some level, there could be an anaology (every first responder knows) - domestic disputes are emotional+dangerous.
The U.S. is in the thick of it, getting out will be tricky.

To repeat, i hope the U.S. will “allow” Ukraine to agree to resolution.

Along with that, i hope the media will back away from its over reaching judgments+speculation. They’re ‘way overboard with it.
Drama sells. That’s what drives them. Theater.

The world NEEDS to be a whole lot more BORING. Esp regarding militaristic hyperbole.

For myself, the sooner to resolution the better. No one needs another 10-20 year war.
The U.S. has had too many in its still brief existence.

[temporal1]

Page 81:

Just a little aside to this whole Ukraine/Russia mess...

It was Zelensky who was President of Ukraine when Trump suggested he might want to look into the Hunter Biden situation, a call for which he was eventually impeached. And it was the Russian puppet president Poroshenko who Biden threatened to withhold $1Biliion from if the prosecutor looking into Hunter Biden's connection with the Ukranian energy company Barisma wasn't immediately fired... which he was. It seems as though it is in the Biden family's best interest for Russia to be in power over Ukraine.

I don't know-- or frankly, care-- whether Russia had any legitimate reason to want to invade Ukraine. What I do care about is that there are millions of innocent people who's lives are being forever changed... in both countries. Not only those in Ukraine who will live with the memory of the bombs, the blood and the destruction, but also their family members in Russia who will one day realize what their country did.

I fear for the people who will choose Russian prison over being silent in their calls for peace.

It all just needs to stop. Now.

From Jess’s keyboard to God’s ear.