[RD] Russia Invades Ukraine: Eight
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
sylvanllewelyn
Perma-newb
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,877
Why only blame the US? European members of NATO also have agency, nobody has to "obey" the US.
The US even wants to quit NATO.
The US even wants to quit NATO.
Verbose
Deity
That's just tired by now.
NATO is Moscow's enemy-of-choice because NATO has nothing to do with anything, and is not a threat to Russia per se. Blaming it is safe.
This war would not stop if NATO just imploded and went up in smoke. It would mutate and expand however.
Maybe it would even be worth it, just to get the object-lesson of exposing the enormity of the Russian official lies over this war?
Sarin
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,416
Ah, yet another Russian propaganda. The truth is, it was driven by the former Eastern Bloc countries that didn't want to end up in Russia's orbit again like Belarus and Ukraine.
Some geopolitical realities exist; Russia is around 2/5 of all of Europe, so it is rather tied to Europe by geography. US needs be the leader of a part of Europe, since that is its main sphere and has been after ww2. Such overlaps tend to be "solved" with massive wars, which is exactly what we will get eventually.
More critically for people in our continent, one should realize that non-russian Europe is not its own power and won't ever be that either, split as it is into many countries which often don't even like each other.
More critically for people in our continent, one should realize that non-russian Europe is not its own power and won't ever be that either, split as it is into many countries which often don't even like each other.
Verbose
Deity
No they don't. The entire Russia powerplay here is based an the fact that none of that NEEDS to be the case. Russia need not be as major power in Europe – it might want to, hence the problem... But the same goes the US.
Europe itself neither needs to be united or divided. We might like the lack of open warfare and major parts of Europe not trying to kill each other once every generation, like it used to be, however.
(Most toxic Swede of the 20th c. – professor Rudolf Kjellén, who formulated the whole geopolitics malarky...)
Press-gang mobilization has obvious consequences.
Facing every imaginable shortage, tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops, tired and bereft, have walked away from combat and front-line positions to slide into anonymity, according to soldiers, lawyers and Ukrainian officials. Entire units have abandoned their posts, leaving defensive lines vulnerable and accelerating territorial losses, according to military commanders and soldiers.
Some take medical leave and never return, haunted by the traumas of war and demoralized by bleak prospects for victory. Others clash with commanders and refuse to carry out orders, sometimes in the middle of firefights.
“This problem is critical,” said Oleksandr Kovalenko, a Kyiv-based military analyst. “This is the third year of war, and this problem will only grow.”
More than 100,000 soldiers have been charged under Ukraine’s desertion laws since Russia invaded in February 2022, according to the country’s General Prosecutor’s Office.
Nearly half have gone AWOL in the last year alone, after Kyiv launched an aggressive and controversial mobilization drive that government officials and military commanders concede has largely failed.
It’s a staggeringly high number by any measure, as there were an estimated 300,000 Ukrainian soldiers engaged in combat before the mobilization drive began. And the actual number of deserters may be much higher. One lawmaker with knowledge of military matters estimated it could be as high as 200,000.
That is how Vuhledar, a hilltop town that Ukraine defended for two years, was lost in a matter of weeks in October, said the 72nd Brigade officer, who was among the very last to withdraw.
The 72nd was already stretched thin in the weeks before Vuhledar fell. Only one line battalion and two rifle battalions held the town near the end, and military leaders even began pulling units from them to support the flanks, the officer said. There should have been 120 men in each of the battalion’s companies, but some companies’ ranks dropped to only 10 due to deaths, injuries and desertions, he said. About 20% of the soldiers missing from those companies had gone AWOL.
“The percentage has grown exponentially every month,” he added.
apnews.com
Desertion threatens to starve Ukraine’s forces at a crucial time in its war with Russia
Desertion is starving the Ukrainian army of desperately needed manpower and crippling its battle plans at a crucial time in its war with Russia, which could put Kyiv at a clear disadvantage in future ceasefire talks.Facing every imaginable shortage, tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops, tired and bereft, have walked away from combat and front-line positions to slide into anonymity, according to soldiers, lawyers and Ukrainian officials. Entire units have abandoned their posts, leaving defensive lines vulnerable and accelerating territorial losses, according to military commanders and soldiers.
Some take medical leave and never return, haunted by the traumas of war and demoralized by bleak prospects for victory. Others clash with commanders and refuse to carry out orders, sometimes in the middle of firefights.
“This problem is critical,” said Oleksandr Kovalenko, a Kyiv-based military analyst. “This is the third year of war, and this problem will only grow.”
More than 100,000 soldiers have been charged under Ukraine’s desertion laws since Russia invaded in February 2022, according to the country’s General Prosecutor’s Office.
Nearly half have gone AWOL in the last year alone, after Kyiv launched an aggressive and controversial mobilization drive that government officials and military commanders concede has largely failed.
It’s a staggeringly high number by any measure, as there were an estimated 300,000 Ukrainian soldiers engaged in combat before the mobilization drive began. And the actual number of deserters may be much higher. One lawmaker with knowledge of military matters estimated it could be as high as 200,000.
That is how Vuhledar, a hilltop town that Ukraine defended for two years, was lost in a matter of weeks in October, said the 72nd Brigade officer, who was among the very last to withdraw.
The 72nd was already stretched thin in the weeks before Vuhledar fell. Only one line battalion and two rifle battalions held the town near the end, and military leaders even began pulling units from them to support the flanks, the officer said. There should have been 120 men in each of the battalion’s companies, but some companies’ ranks dropped to only 10 due to deaths, injuries and desertions, he said. About 20% of the soldiers missing from those companies had gone AWOL.
“The percentage has grown exponentially every month,” he added.
Desertion threatens to starve Ukraine's forces at a crucial time in its war with Russia
Some take medical leave and never return, haunted by the traumas of war and demoralized by bleak prospects for victory.
apnews.com
This suffering was caused by an illegal invasion by Russia made on false pretexts.
France refused Ukraine application in 2008 and look what happened...
Finland and Sweden joined because of Russia actual action. All eastern European members joined because they feared Russia potential action (rightfully looking at Georgia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldavia)
Last edited:
Verbose
Deity
No, I'm saying none of the things you think are "real" are in fact necessary – and that's why Russia has started an ever-expanding war in Europe. Again... first time in a rather a long time. Because literally nothing in the situation is real in the sense of being somehow necessary or unavoidable.
We gather guarantees, build alliances, mutual security systems, seek deterrence etc., precisely because nothing is guaranteed – but that is the way to manage risk, and make the world relatively safe-as-in-predictable.
Russia's war in Ukraine is the kind of thing that happens when that fails.
Snowygerry
Deity
That may have been a mistake yes, we actually opposed Ukrainian membership in 2008 on the grounds that easternmost parts of Ukraine would undefendable by the Western allies in case of actual war, and the US would turn out to be unreliable ally.
A new Eastern European, anti-Russian alliance alongside NATO would have been a better choice imho, and it may yet to come to that.
But that presupposes a (nuclear) armed Germany, something we've all been avoiding since 1945.
A new Eastern European, anti-Russian alliance alongside NATO would have been a better choice imho, and it may yet to come to that.
But that presupposes a (nuclear) armed Germany, something we've all been avoiding since 1945.
And Russia's actual action was to prevent further expansion and deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine.
Verbose
Deity
The scenario that currently worries not a few looking for historical parallels – is the risk that the Ukraine war is the analogue of the Spanish Civil War – i.e. a war that is a test run for power-blocs shaping themselves – and as such just a preamble for an upcoming Main Event, should Russia be allowed to defeat Ukraine.
Which is of course part of the argument why it is better, cheaper, less risky, might leave loads more people alive in the end – if it ends in Ukraine, and the Russian imperial-restoriation-aggression turns out to be a dud in the end.
Snowygerry
Deity
Well you clearly failed to prevent the first, and may well end up with the second too.
Discussions over sending European troops to Ukraine reignited
With the prospect of American disengagement from Kyiv following Donald Trump's return to the White House, Paris and London are not ruling out leading a military coalition in Ukraine.
www.lemonde.fr
But there are limits to the number of French, British, Belgian and Dutch troops we can deploy to the Dnjepr, that's where the Germans and Poles etc. come in.
It would be easier if your army came a bit closer, like in 1945, then we can deploy to the Rhine again.
Last edited:
Verbose
Deity
There was no NATO there – no NATO was going near the place. That's just more Russian propaganda-imvention. Then it's ironic if this is what Russia will get in the end of course.
But better actual NATO presence in Ukraine in the end, something that would actually be real – than a repeat of Russian fabrications and renewed aggression.
We don't care what Russia says (which isn't what it actually thinks anyway, since it's a pack of lies). The only thing that actually matters now is whether Russia is deterred or not.
Currently it is not. It thinks it is "winning". So it will attack again.
EnglishEdward
Deity
I am OK with Normandy.It would be easier if your army came a bit closer, like in 1945, then we can deploy to the Rhine again.
so more than one million deaths because Russia was afraid.
Verbose
Deity
Or maybe a million deaths because Russia in the end just found continued peace unbearable – and assumed war would be better. And now it is committed to liking this war, whatever it brings.
Similar threads
- Locked
