Russian Invasion of Ukraine Megathread

How well is the war this going for Russia?

  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Blyatskrieg

    Votes: 249 10.6%
  • ⭐⭐⭐⭐ I ain't afraid of no Ghost of Kiev

    Votes: 278 11.8%
  • ⭐⭐⭐ Competent attack with some upsets

    Votes: 796 33.7%
  • ⭐⭐ Stalemate

    Votes: 659 27.9%
  • ⭐ Ukraine takes back Crimea 2022

    Votes: 378 16.0%

  • Total voters
    2,360
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's my optimist-high on copium take.
Unless russia fucks up and attacks NATO territory or viceversa, then we should be fine.
I think it depends on who's shipping in weapons. How are these weapon shipments carried out? Because I think Russia is going to start targeting them. Because if it turns out a member of NATO dies driving these shipments even on Ukrainian soil we're going to have an incident.
 
The Catholic church has been corrupted by Satan and it shows in the architecture.

The vatican auditorium literally looks like a serpent's head and the Pope speaks from within its mouth. No, I won't take my meds.
It's very symbolic of V2 and the errors and heresies which followed in its wake.

Anyhow...

FNcc9MtWYAIoHLI.jpg

Kamil Galeev of the Wilson Center in DC has an interesting thread on Twitter on why he thinks sanctions will work. He also makes the point that in the past defeat in wars intended to be short and victorious like the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 and the invasion of Afghanistan destroyed earlier rulers of Russia. He has many, many threads on Russian parliamentarianism and much else.

His stuff is interesting. Obviously bear in mind anything from a prestigious, near official DC thinktank has an obvious bias. I'm not offering it as the truth but a truth, a possible insight into DC thinking on sanctions and crushing Putin.
 
You won't find a Western homolog because Russians aren't Western. Their culture and history is different and it informs their entire outlook. It would be like comparing Roman generals to Chinese warring states generals.
If you look at the chart you would see that, according to Spengler, this is wrong. Each civilization has their Caesar, Socrates, Charlemagne etc. at around the same time in their lifecycle. That is exactly why he compared the warring states period to European civilization between 1815-1945
 
I never realized that, holy shit the average human is not only an NPC but a poorly programmed one as well.
It becomes infinitely funnier when you start gaming out that some American getting paid 9k a year to manage some podunk MUSTARD museum typed that up, staged it, thought about it, staged it differently, closed the case, walked in front of said case and went "Damn, I really did my part today! For Ukraine!" held up a paper-thin-skin covered fist, and walked off smugly to get their cellphone and take a picture.....THEN they posted it on the internet for asspats.
On a tread about a war ran by two men and their male backers, I find your comments very* misogynistic* good sir. 👩‍👩‍👧
1f0.jpeg

America/NATO/etc. is the culturally/economically big bad guy, and Russia is the small bad guy. Putin is a practically rational regional tyrant, and "we" are an insane monster trying to destroy civilization and replace it with Reddit.
Wait we did this one two hundred thousand posts ago. Kamala Harris beat us to it.
 
If you look at the chart you would see that, according to Spengler, this is wrong. Each civilization has their Caesar, Socrates, Charlemagne etc. at around the same time in their lifecycle. That is exactly why he compared the warring states period to European civilization between 1815-1945
I disagree with this theory, I think the similarities are superficial. How do you explain societies that haven't had homologs? It's a neat thought exercise but what do I know, I'm an internet retard.
 
They both suck equally. One just posts videos of herself on a surfboard to instagram for upvotes. The other gives inane rambling speeches in front of the world stage that get us into World War III.
Being an Instagram thot is merely crass and tasteless. Bing a nuclear warmonger in a position of power is a threat to all life on earth. Just this once, they don't suck "equally".
 
His stuff is interesting. Obviously bear in mind anything from a prestigious, near official DC thinktank has an obvious bias. I'm not offering it as the truth but a truth, a possible insight into DC thinking on sanctions and crushing Putin.
DC faggots have promised that sanctions "work" since forever. Actual evidence of them "working" by way of changing the targeted regime are almost non-existent. But they do "work" to make poor people in poor countries' lives even poorer and shittier, so I guess that's a kind of "working".
 
I think it depends on who's shipping in weapons. How are these weapon shipments carried out? Because I think Russia is going to start targeting them. Because if it turns out a member of NATO dies driving these shipments even on Ukrainian soil we're going to have an incident.

i can also see a different mode of escalation.
if russia fully encircles kiev and starts shelling the city, it will be a blood bath. like, potentially hundreds of thousands of civilians massacred nd starved to death. i can see nato eventually issuing an ultimatum to russia, "stop the siege or we will intervene and lift it by force" to which russia says "no" and then i could actually see nato troops moving into ukraine and start fighting the russian army there.

the rationale will be "as long as we only fight on ukrainian territory and don't invade russia itself, they probably won't nuke us because they don't want to get nuked in return"
and whether that will actually hold true i genuinely do not know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Justa Grata Honoria
Being an Instagram thot is merely crass and tasteless. Bing a nuclear warmonger in a position of power is a threat to all life on earth. Just this once, they don't suck "equally".
I'm pretty sure the reason a nuclear holocaust will happen is because of e thots and their constant selling of bath water and other means of making civilization too degenerate to allow it to survive.
 
while defaulting to believe the opposite of whatever globohomo says is slightly better than agreeing with everything globohomo says, it's still not a good way to form opinions on issues.

in this case russia is in the wrong, but in a somewhat understandable way, because essentially it has been driven into a corner and pushed to its boiling point over the past ~20 years by relentless western encroachment.
ukraine on the other hand is absolutely in the right to fight tooth and nail against the foreign invaders trying to subjugate it, but the decisions made by its politicians over the past 8 years contributed significantly to the escalation spiral that now resulted in war.
and finally, the part that gets omitted completely by the media in the west, is the involvement of western (mostly american but also EU) meddling in ukraines internal and external politics over the past decade, which in my opinion is the primary reason for ukraine-russia relations going down the shitter.
While I think Russia has been driven into a corner sphere of influence wise, I do think NATO is just the Russian boogeyman in this case. As soon as Ukraine started to leave Russia's sphere of influence its fate was sealed.

Even if Ukraine wasn't joining NATO or the EU to fall directly into the West's influence, Putin has a personal horse in all this, he does not believe Ukraine to be an actual, independent country in the first place, not because it's falling into the West's sphere of influence but is falling out of Russia's. He wrote a fucking Essay last year that straight up says the country of Ukraine is a made-up country. That it has no right to be independent because it's a part of Russia, he also thinks the same about Belarus.

This war is as much as about the West's sphere of influence encroaching into Russia as Putin finding it unacceptable that Ukraine isn't directly under Russia's thumb. Ukraine becoming a 'neutral' country probably would have only delayed the war, not prevent it.
 
No, not so much.

Cold War versions of this were like fighting with wiffle bats. We armed based freedom fighters in Asia and Africa, they armed cringe communists in those places. Even Afghanistan, which was roughly the Russian Vietnam, was never seen by the Kremlin as being of vital strategic importance to the continued existence of the USSR. They could tolerate eventually losing there. They don't see this fight in Ukraine in the same way, they think its importance is existential for Russia.

Economically, the West and the USSR didn't really compete at all. The latter was a closed system, though we did trade with them to some degree and Ford, Pepsi etc. did business in Russia. What we're saying now is different:

* This is a global economy
* We've just deplatformed you from the global economy and stolen all the assets you parked in the West :smug:

Cold War 2.0 is less stable and more dangerous because there's no detente, no mutual understanding of the other side having legitimate spheres of influence, and the economic order that allowed the USSR to just ignore Western banks, sanctions etc. no longer exists.

Also there was no mainstream voice in Western politics calling for us to bomb Russia. When Regan said it as a mic test, it was a punchline. Now there's a substantial number of influential people in the policy making class who are openly demanding a "no fly zone", which would lead to the same outcome. They're not joking, and it's possible they will get their wish.
There are a few examples of the Soviets playing economic hard ball with US companies, the one that comes to mind is the De Beers Diamond Cartel.
Additionally, as has been noted in previous blog posts, cartel members are always haunted by the prospect of profits that could be made outside of the fixed arrangement. In 1957, Russia entered the picture following the discovery of large quantities of diamonds in Siberia. De Beers recognized the threat and struck a deal with the Soviet government to purchase 95 percent of Russia’s annual rough diamond output at a 10-20 percent premium, thus ensuring that all Russian diamonds could be properly channeled through the CSO.
The Soviet Union had originally been hunting for diamonds for industrial use, but found enough gem quality stones to be a threat to De Beers.
 
I don't understand, will the winner be decided by how many innocent people can get themselves killed for propaganda purposes?
Depends on how many turds in the US can be convinced this means warrr...
 
No, you're wrong on this one.
NATO will make threats do war games and exercises in the Baltic and Poland and do nothing else.
The UN will just show up and stand idly by watching people die in a besieged city.
Right, right my bad.

@Mr Processor
The Pope likes dark souls alright, those tainted by the great deceiver.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back