Russian Invasion of Ukraine (2022): Thread 1 - Ukrainian Liars vs Russian Liars with Air and Artillery Superiority

[LillWeeb]

Let's also not forget what happens when a weak President is in charge. Biden is shaping up to be the weakest President since Buchanan. A man who saw military units go rogue under his command and nearly start a war with the UK, and States outright defying him leading to the secession crisis of 1860...and the civil war.

Half the US population is mutinous at the moment, which is confirmed by the shrill shrieks of the US State Media. America is in no position to fight a great power war with Russia over Ukraine.

I want to be a fly on the wall in the CIA and State Department right now as they scream at each other. The Divide and conquer media strategy that was used ruthlessly domestically has come home to roost. Russia is in a position right now to Crack America like an egg because there is no fucking way Joe Biden can convince anyone dying for Ukraine is worth it.

I am not happy about this btw. This is a fucking disaster. But the glow sticks were so much smarter then everyone else. They wanted to play reindeer games with the American people and now they are caught between two fires. On one front, a severe retreat of America's globals supremacy and on the other front full on civil war against the Federal Government if they try and force the issue.

The smartest guys in the room people. Round of applause for our unelected beaurocracy who are clearly smarter then you.

Who would of thought that destabilizing your own country could backfire, they spent over a decade to convivence millions America is racist and not worth fighting for, and as a result showed the other half of the country, that this country is gay and not worth fighting for. Never mind the fact of America in decline, and other internal issues that exist and they just tuned it out.

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

Without America, other NATO nations aren't exactly in fighting form. For example:

Queen's guardsman, 31, sues for £860,000 of taxpayer cash

Former Queen's guardsman Chileshe Mwamba, 31, was deployed in Estonia in the winter of 2017 when he was subjected to extreme cold temperatures.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[LeChampion1992]

Without America, other NATO nations aren't exactly in fighting form. For example:

Queen's guardsman, 31, sues for £860,000 of taxpayer cash

Former Queen's guardsman Chileshe Mwamba, 31, was deployed in Estonia in the winter of 2017 when he was subjected to extreme cold temperatures.

www.dailymail.co.uk

That's just lawyer's looking to make a quick buck. They exist in England as they do in America. In a sane world this the soldier in question would be told to suck it up and quietly paid off since you're the governments guinea pig.

 

[Richardface]

Another article. Didn't realise how much the new Ukrainian president was fortifying Ukrainian culture with US support.

America’s Ukraine Policy Is All About Russia

Instead of doing further damage to Ukraine, policymakers should take to heart the pluricultural nature of Ukrainian society, and also reflect on America’s poor track record in trying to manage the internal affairs of other countries.

nationalinterest.org

America’s Ukraine Policy Is All About Russia

Instead of doing further damage to Ukraine, policymakers should take to heart the pluricultural nature of Ukrainian society, and also reflect on America’s poor track record in trying to manage the internal affairs of other countries.

by Nicolai N. Petro
Ukraine’s continued existence as an independent state is a well-established part of the national security agenda of the United States. The reasons for this have nothing to do with Ukraine per se, but rather, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton candidly explained back in 2012, it is to prevent the reconstitution of the former Soviet Union. Since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, this objective has been further refined into transforming Ukraine into a permanent bulwark against Russian expansion.

Because the overriding concern of U.S. policy in Ukraine is to prevent the re-emergence of America’s erstwhile Cold War rival, many unsavory aspects of current Ukrainian society, such as the rise of ethnic nationalism, tend to be overlooked by the U.S. government and media. Prior to 2014, Western analysts typically assumed that the rise of nationalism was a short-lived reaction to decades of Soviet suppression of ethnic identity. As Ukraine moved closer to Europe, therefore, it would adopt more liberal and inclusive policies toward its minorities.

This has proved not to be the case. Indeed, the intensity of popular resistance to the government’s efforts to impose a monocultural Ukrainian identity on the country’s bicultural east and south, has led many Western analysts to careen between euphoric optimism, when the ostensibly pro-Western forces in Ukraine seemed to be in the ascendance, to deep pessimism and “Ukraine fatigue,” when the ostensibly pro-Russian forces seemed to be gaining the upper hand.

Since the 2014 Maidan, the heroes and ideology of integral Ukrainian nationalism have become much more politically relevant; a useful complement to the Ukrainian government narrative of the conflict in the east as Russian aggression.

Sensing an opportunity to break Ukraine away from Russian influence once and for all, American elites have been largely indifferent, and sometimes even openly hostile, to the cultural pluralism and regional diversity of Ukrainian society. This has resulted in the United States taking positions that few Americans would understand or support, if they were more widely known.

Earlier this year, for example, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy imposed the most draconian restrictions on opposition media Europe has seen since the fall of the Soviet Union. With the stroke of a pen, he shut down three popular opposition news channels, employing more than a thousand journalists and support staff. Tellingly, the United States supported this egregious act of political censorship as a “defense of its sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Although numerous Ukrainian legal scholars have pointed out that the president does not have the authority to shut down any media outlet without a court order, Zelenskyy has gotten around this by retroactively annulling the appointment of the head of the Constitutional Court, and ignoring the Supreme Court’s decision to reinstate him. The entire judicial system is now paralyzed and can no longer serve as an effective check on executive rule.

Emboldened by this success, a few months later, Zelenskyy shut down the country’s most popular opposition news site Strana.ua, whose reporters have broken some of the country’s most notorious scandals. These include: “Vagnergate,” the plot by Ukrainian security forces to convince Belarus president Alexander Lukashenko that Russia was organizing a coup against him, subsequently leaked to Russia; the Rotterdam plus scandal, in which coal from eastern Ukraine was bought at the cost of transporting it from Holland, which defrauded Ukrainian consumers of more than $1.5 billion over three years; the diversion of Covid-19 relief funding; and the apparent diversion of a Ukrainian government plane intended for Ukrainians fleeing from Afghanistan for the personal use of wealthy Afghans.

Yet another undesirable consequence of American policy in the region has been the veritable explosion of corruption, even beyond the already high levels of Zelenskyy’s predecessor. According to the nonpartisan Committee of Ukrainian Voters, every fifth member of parliament from Zelenskyy’s party, Servant of the People, has been involved in one public scandal or another. According to Zelenskyy’s former finance minister, Igor Umansky, the sheer scale of corruption today has led to “the loss of an adequate perception of reality by the authorities.” Even the new Ukrainian government agencies that, at the West’s insistence, were established to fight corruption, are now widely seen as profiting from it.

These examples, to which many more could be added, highlight the core problem at the heart of America’s strategy toward Ukraine—it is not about Ukraine at all, and never has been; It has always been about containing Russia.

The paradoxical result is that, in order to strengthen Ukraine’s independence, Western governments argue that they must embed scores of their own advisors in key Ukrainian government agencies, even demanding that Western representatives be allowed to vote on key judicial and governmental appointments. After Zelenskyy’s deputy chief of staff, Oleg Tatarov, complained publicly this amounted to external administration, he abruptly found himself suspended from office and under indictment. Nearly two-thirds of Ukrainians surveyed in early 2021, however, agreed with his description.

What is Needed: A New Treaty of Westphalia

Current U.S. policy in Ukraine is following a familiar script, one that leads to a resurgence of nostalgia for the past, and typically ends with the rejection of the West’s overbearing tutelage. Proponents of the present course argue that without such tutelage there would be “backsliding” on reforms, and the possibility of Ukraine getting closer to Russia, the dreaded non plus ultra for American security interests. In fact, however, it is America’s own calculated indifference for the rights of Russophone Ukrainians that, more than anything, increases the likelihood of a future political and geostrategic blowback.

America’s real interests lie in creating the conditions for a self-sustaining, peaceful, and prosperous Ukraine; one that can make its own security decisions. Instead, current U.S. policy fosters an unhealthy dependency, which has already stymied peace efforts, by encouraging Ukrainian officials to reject dialogue with rebel leaders in Donbass, and caused enormous economic losses by cutting normal economic ties with Russia, formerly the country’s largest trading partner.

Instead of doing further damage to Ukraine, policymakers should take to heart the pluricultural nature of Ukrainian society, and also reflect on America’s poor track record in trying to manage the internal affairs of other countries. A good place to begin would be to restore some semblance of balance to America’s human rights policy toward Ukraine, by having it apply to all Ukrainians, including those in the east and south.

U.S. policymakers should also share with the American public what costs they are willing to have us incur in order to achieve an anti-Russian Ukraine and, most importantly, to sustain it in the face of Russia’s cultural and dominance. How exactly is a Russophobic Ukraine to be achieved when, as former Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko recently lamented, 40 percent of Ukrainians actually agree with Russian president Vladimir Putin that Ukrainians and Russians are one people, and more young people agree with this view than people over sixty! If no sensible explanation can be provided, then I submit that the current policy cannot be in the national interest of the United States.

We should instead be thinking more creatively about how to solve the region’s problems, and salvage what is left of the “Peace Dividend” promised by the end of the Cold War. A transnational and international conflict of this complexity calls for a new Treaty of Westphalia, the gist of it would be this: Russia and the United States and NATO should de-escalate; Russia and Ukraine should de-escalate; all parties should then agree to begin comprehensive negotiations aimed at achieving a post-Cold War settlement in which both Ukraine and Russia join a new pan-European security arrangement. Such a framework might just provide enough of an incentive for Russia and Ukraine to deal creatively to resolve their differences in Donbass and Crimea. Failing this, however, they should both forego the benefits of European integration, foreign investment, and security guarantees.

Last month, I had occasion to mention this idea to Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. He responded coolly, pointing out that, in the current climate, even minor agreements with the West were almost impossible to achieve. Putin’s latest proposal for meaningful security guarantees, however, suggests to me that the door to a comprehensive settlement is not yet entirely closed.

It is now up to the West to respond with greater wisdom than it did in 2008, when Russian president Dmitry Medvedev’s proposal to begin discussions on a new pan-European security arrangement were foolishly dismissed. That resulted in a decade of ever-deepening crisis. It is time to give diplomats an opportunity to take up the true challenge of this generation—to construct a post-Cold War settlement, the benefits of which would be, literally, incalculable: Europe and Eurasia’s economy would thrive from having secure and stable energy supplies, as well as new and nearby markets in which to expand.

Absent a bold, new vision on our present trajectory we will surely resurrect the Cold War, if we are lucky; or fight it, if we are not.

Nicolai N. Petro is a Professor of Political Science at the University of Rhode Island (USA), specializing in Ukraine and Russia. His latest book, "Ukraine in Crisis," was published by Routledge in 2017.

 

[George Lucas]

OP is a faggot.

Even if Russia invades the Ukraine, the US isn’t going to do anything. In past situations we implemented sanctions which of course didn’t do anything because Russia’s the biggest country in the world with an infinite amount of natural resources.

I don’t think the United States is even capable of waging a normal war. It seems like there are so many compromises and inefficiencies in our military that we would get outplayed. Any attempt at pushing Russia out of the Ukraine is likely to end up like Mogadishu. The military is feeble, a reflection of the state of the country at home.

 

[Hollywood Hitler]

I'm hoping for nuclear war, I want off Mr. Bones' Wild Ride.

 

[Desu Mountain]

They turned a country wide famine into a genocide specifically against them,

You saying the Holodomor wasn't real?

 

[Considered HARMful]

You saying the Holodomor wasn't real?

More like "Holodomor was not only in Ukraine".

 

[Super-Chevy454]

I'm hoping for nuclear war, I want off Mr. Bones' Wild Ride.

Speaking of nuclear war, I spotted this article.

Are you ready for nuclear war over Ukraine?

“Do you know we don’t rule out first-use nuclear action?” So said Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) while outlining what measures the U.S. could take against Russia over Ukraine, at whose border Moscow has been massing troops. The sena...

www.americanthinker.com

December 8, 2021

Are you ready for nuclear war over Ukraine?​

By Selwyn Duke

“Do you know we don’t rule out first-use nuclear action?” So said Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) while outlining what measures the U.S. could take against Russia over Ukraine, at whose border Moscow has been massing troops. The senator’s office later clarified that this comment related to American policy in general and not specifically to Russia. While this is actually believable (Wicker made a loose comment), what’s

Moreover, what else Wicker said, during a recent interview with Fox News host Neil Cavuto, is not reassuring. To wit: “Well, military action could mean that we stand off with our ships in the Black Sea and we rain destruction ... on Russia military capability,” the Independent related him as stating. “It could mean that we participate, and I would not rule that out, I would not rule out American troops on the ground.”

Making it worse is that the Biden Administration and the Establishment in general are all-in on this Dr. Strangelove foreign policy. As Secretary of State Tony Blinken’s spokesman, Ned Price, has put it, “If Russia chooses to fail to deescalate…we and our allies would be prepared to act. We would be prepared to act resolutely.”
Equally troubling is that geniuses in both parties are pushing to have Ukraine become part of NATO, with its “an attack on one is an attack on all” policy. This means that if Russia then invaded Ukraine, the U.S. and Western Europe would be obligated to intervene militarily. WWIII, anyone?

For his part, Russian president Vladimir Putin has said that NATO troop and weapons deployment to Ukraine is a “red line” for him. Of course it is. Just as we couldn’t back down during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, Russia wouldn’t back down on Ukraine. The same is true of China vis-à-vis Taiwan.
Like it or not, you must tread softly in another great power’s backyard. Enter it and refuse to back down, and war will almost assuredly result because that power can’t realistically back down. Doing so would mean losing face and sending the ultimate message of weakness. For if you can be pushed around at your own doorstep, in what way can’t you be dominated?
Despite this, our chicken hawks insist on playing chicken with a nuclear power over...what? Few ask what the national interest is, and no one explains. We do hear bloviating about Ukraine’s “sovereignty” and border integrity from the same people who’ve made our border a sieve-like conduit for a southern invasion, as Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson pointed out last night. These people also talk about defending “democracy” while having stolen an election here and undermining our republic with unconstitutional policy and two-tiered justice.
Then, last year, sociopathic congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) actually said that we aid “Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don't have to fight Russia here.” Perhaps Schiffty has been watching the flick Red Dawn too much. (He should note that in the film’s remake, in 2012, the Chinese troops invading American soil were digitally altered post-production to appear North Korean in deference to Beijing, our main geopolitical rival.)

In other words, if you thought there couldn’t be anything as irrational as our coronavirus policy — where authorities insist on reordering civilization over a pathogen that more than 99.9 percent of the infected will survive — welcome to our Russia policy. We’re acting as if a nation with an economy one-eighth the size of China’s is today’s Roman Empire and we’re Gaul; our “cure” of military intervention in its backyard would definitely be worse than the disease, too. Russia is now the COVID-19 of geopolitics.
To be clear, none of this concerns whether you love, hate or are indifferent about Putin. It’s not about whether Russia is right or wrong on Ukraine. It’s about applying Just War Doctrine and, again, recognizing that you can only do so much at a great power’s doorstep.

An aside: Note that both our world wars, along with the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, began under Democrat administrations. And having in power detached-from-reality leftists who can’t judge human nature, as we do today, is always dangerous.
In fact, if they stay at the helm long enough, their folly may provide for their voters a harsh object lesson in how there really are things worse than white privilege, microaggressions and sexual constraints.
Below is an excellent Tuesday Tucker Carlson Tonight segment on the Russia-Ukraine folly.

 

[FAQnews Correspondent]

Joggers and Arabs make shit fighters. Half of them will desert before their transport plane even touches down in Germany, and the other half will be lost to attrition before they even engage the enemy.

Are you saying that we can ship them out of the country and into Germany with the excuse that we're sending them to war?

Pretty sure this was already happening in Syria, there were glimpses of some US regular activity in the north during Trump's presidency + intelligence active in the region (for Baghdadi + Soleimani), but no real conflict or large-scale military movements.

Also isn't Russia rumored to do similar stuff through Wagner?

I guess the future of warfare is literally Rainbow Six operatives duking it out in the dark. No matter what flag they're draped in, caskets are bad PR, after all.

You mean Rainbow Six 1-3, right?

 

[Sped Xing]

Cmon. Do something.

 

[FAQnews Correspondent]

Who would of thought that destabilizing your own country could backfire, they spent over a decade to convivence millions America is racist and not worth fighting for, and as a result showed the other half of the country, that this country is gay and not worth fighting for. Never mind the fact of America in decline, and other internal issues that exist and they just tuned it out.

I wonder if they really do think they can fight an entire war with just soyboys that press a button in an air conditioned building half way across the world from the "fight."

 

[Vince McMahon]

I hope that Putin doesn't do anything crazy. I'd really to have to start my life all over again.

 

[CreamyHerman’s]

If it does happen and the US intervened, I called it a year ago.

 

[Greyfield]

More like "Holodomor was not only in Ukraine".

Yup, Holodomor is a fraud term made up by Ukrainian nationalists towards the end of the 20th century to get some genocide clout, as sick as that is. The famine hit all regions of the Soviet Union, and Ukraine wasn't even the hardest hit. Kazakhstan got hit by it harder than any other region proportionally, they lost 1/3 of their population since they were a nomadic people forced into little collective farms.

And the famine wasn't an intentional killing of a specific region, it was more about selling as much grain as possible so they could industrialize even if people ended up dying, and a lot of that death was due to the people (understandably) revolting against the new system by burning their own crops and killing their own animals. The correspondance among the leadership as the famine was happening wasn't "Ha, just as planned", it was panic and denial.

 

[Marcus the Mong]

China and Russia should just coordinate to launch their takeovers of Taiwan and Ukraine simultaneously if they have plans to go for them regardless.

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

Zero reason to do anything about this.

Not that it matters, but Ukraine has a shit ton of land handed over to it via the USSR's actions. Where do you think that land they scraped off Poland in 1939 went? But the Ukrainian state has been nothing but combative and distortive of the history. They turned a country wide famine into a genocide specifically against them, venerate the Nazis that slaughtered not just Ukrainian Jews, but Ukrainians that fought in the Red Army (which was the vast majority of Ukrainians fighting in WW2), and make huge demands as a minor power towards great powers in the world. On top of all that, Ukraine is more corrupt than any country in Africa and wastes almost all the aid it gets.

Ya, this is an easy call. The best course is to see if you can get anything out of Putin by selling out Ukraine and letting them have it.

I was wondering when the stalinist apologist would come to the Forefront.
10 million ukrainians died under Joseph Stalin the administrator of that region so happen to be a Jew
They actually fought alongside the German Army and actually 1 million ukrainians volunteered to fight for the axis Hitler just didn't trust them and thought they were communist
he should have let them fight for him would have solved his Manpower problems and the Red Menace would have been crushed

 

[Greyfield]

I was wondering when the stalinist apologist would come to the Forefront.
10 million ukrainians died under Joseph Stalin the administrator of that region so happen to be a Jew
They actually fought alongside the German Army and actually 1 million ukrainians volunteered to fight for the axis Hitler just didn't trust them and thought they were communist
he should have let them fight for him would have solved his Manpower problems and the Red Menace would have been crushed

You're deeply ignorant of the history.

2-3 million Ukrainians died in the famine at most. The total population of Ukraine around that time was over 30 million, they didn't lose 1/3 of their population, not even close. You know who did though? Kazahks.

And the vast majority of Ukrainians that did fight in WW2, fought under the Red Army. That's 4.5 million troops. Yes there was a volunteer Nazi army, but it's nowhere near the size Ukrainians today pretend it was.

And the Jewish administrator you're referring to was Lazar Kaganovich. The fact that Ukrainian nationalists picked him as the boogie man is hilarious because there are a bunch of letters of him begging Stalin to reduce the grain quotas in Ukraine in particular and Stalin telling him no. The main driver of collectivization was Stalin, but also the main person who gave Ukraine a national identity and a place in the world was also Stalin. Ukrainians would never admit it, but Stalin is the father of their nation.

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

You're deeply ignorant of the history.

2-3 million Ukrainians died in the famine at most. The total population of Ukraine around that time was over 30 million, they didn't lose 1/3 of their population, not even close. You know who did though? Kazahks.

And the vast majority of Ukrainians that did fight in WW2, fought under the Red Army. That's 4.5 million troops. Yes there was a volunteer Nazi army, but it's nowhere near the size Ukrainians today pretend it was.

And the Jewish administrator you're referring to was Lazar Kaganovich. The fact that Ukrainian nationalists picked him as the boogie man is hilarious because there are a bunch of letters of him begging Stalin to reduce the grain quotas in Ukraine in particular and Stalin telling him no. The main driver of collectivization was Stalin, but also the main person who gave Ukraine a national identity and a place in the world was also Stalin. Ukrainians would never admit it, but Stalin is the father of their nation.

All the New York Times which initially denied all the claims of Ukrainian genocide we should trust them this time

I love the stalinist apologists the Justice hilarious is the people who deny Mouse genocide it's not a genocide because you know it may have been targeted at a specific region of the country but it was just a general famine

And yes it was 10 million ukrainians that starve to death due to targeted theft of their grain

And Joseph Stalin was a terrible leader who nearly lost the entire country and had to go crying to the capitalist West for weapons

 

[Ptolemy]

NATO doesn't survive flinching on Ukraine if Ukraine is offered membership and then invaded.

Indeed, but it is not going to get offered membership anytime soon.