War Invasion of Ukraine News Megathread - Thread is only for articles and discussion of articles, general discussion thread is still in Happenings.

Status
Not open for further replies.
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that the United States will impose sanctions “far beyond” the ones that the United States imposed in 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula.

“This is the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Biden said in a White House speech, signaling a shift in his administration’s position. “We will continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates,” he added.

Russian elites and their family members will also soon face sanctions, Biden said, adding that “Russia will pay an even steeper price” if Moscow decides to push forward into Ukraine. Two Russian banks and Russian sovereign debt will also be sanctioned, he said.

Also in his speech, Biden said he would send more U.S. troops to the Baltic states as a defensive measure to strengthen NATO’s position in the area.

Russia shares a border with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered troops to go into the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine after a lengthy speech in which he recognized the two regions’ independence.

Western powers decried the move and began to slap sanctions on certain Russian individuals, while Germany announced it would halt plans to go ahead with the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

At home, Biden is facing bipartisan pressure to take more extensive actions against Russia following Putin’s decision. However, a recent poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that sending troops to Ukraine is a “bad idea,” and a slim minority believes it’s a good one.

All 27 European Union countries unanimously agreed on an initial list of sanctions targeting Russian authorities, said French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, and EU foreign affairs head Josep Borell claimed the package “will hurt Russia … a lot.”

Earlier Tuesday, Borell asserted that Russian troops have already entered the Donbas region, which comprises Donetsk and Lugansk, which are under the control of pro-Russia groups since 2014.

And on Tuesday, the Russian Parliament approved a Putin-back plan to use military force outside of Russia’s borders as Putin further said that Russia confirmed it would recognize the expanded borders of Lugansk and Donetsk.

“We recognized the states,” the Russian president said. “That means we recognized all of their fundamental documents, including the constitution, where it is written that their [borders] are the territories at the time the two regions were part of Ukraine.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Putin said that Ukraine is “not interested in peaceful solutions” and that “every day, they are amassing troops in the Donbas.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday morning again downplayed the prospect of a Russian invasion and proclaimed: “There will be no war.”

“There will not be an all-out war against Ukraine, and there will not be a broad escalation from Russia. If there is, then we will put Ukraine on a war footing,” he said in a televised address.

The White House began to signal that they would shift their own position on whether it’s the start of an invasion.

“We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia’s latest invasion into Ukraine,” said Jon Finer, the White House deputy national security adviser in public remarks. “An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway.”

For weeks, Western governments have been claiming Moscow would invade its neighbor after Russia gathered some 150,000 troops along the countries’ borders. They alleged that the Kremlin would attempt to come up with a pretext to attack, while some officials on Monday said Putin’s speech recognizing the two regions was just that.

But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters Tuesday that Russia’s “latest invasion” of Ukraine is threatening stability in the region, but he asserted that Putin can “still avoid a full blown, tragic war of choice.”

Article
 
The US, Israel, NATO and the EU don't care about the Ukrainian people.
The US and Israel want Ukraine to be a new Afghanistan for Russia.
This means the goal of this conflict is to traumatize Ukraine as much as possible and have Russia occupy it and then clandestinely support insurgency and terrorisms.
Do you have any evidence for these extraordinary claims?
 
No it isn't. Russia removed the option for diplomacy when they invaded. Then vatniks justified it with "the strong rule the world" rhetoric, and now, like you, they're talking like hippies and desiring peace. Well, we can have peace at any time. Russia can sue for peace, withdraw from Ukraine, and surrender the eastern Ukraine provinces it illegally seized in 2014. Then we can have peace.
 
@Happy Fish
So then what is the exit strategy? Just keep fighting Russia in a war of attrition that will end in the deaths of many more Ukranians and Russians?
The exit strategy? In a war? I'd say winning it.
There was a comment I saw a while ago from a tankie talking about the US and its own wars that said "It doesn't matter if it's one year or twenty, eventually Yankee Doodle goes home."
That's what I imagine is going to happen to Russia and Ukraine, it doesn't matter how much time it takes, eventually the Ukrainians are going to try to fight until they leave.
If the Russians wanted to see what it was like to be a superpower again, then they got their monkey's paw wish.
No it isn't. Russia removed the option for diplomacy when they invaded. Then vatniks justified it with "the strong rule the world" rhetoric, and now, like you, they're talking like hippies and desiring peace. Well, we can have peace at any time. Russia can sue for peace, withdraw from Ukraine, and surrender the eastern Ukraine provinces it illegally seized in 2014. Then we can have peace.
What's more pathetic are the ones that go "STOP OR HE'LL NOOK!"
Putin started that war to steal another country's land and he's such an incompetent moron that he can't hold on to it and he has to threaten to nuke the land he planned to occupy. Even when the United States lost Vietnam and Afghanistan, we didn't drop a "fuck you" nuke in some pissy fit rage. If the Russians dropped a nuke then I think even China will shit itself, introducing that weapon into tactical combat is opening Pandora's box.
 
I really am, or I wouldn't have asked for it multiple times.

You aren't. You're looking for a gotcha. So you can either accept my word that I consume a diverse array of sources, or you can assume I consume only partisan, one-sided shills, or you can assume I'm an ignorant redneck who reads Garfield in the morning and forms his opinions based on that.

I do not have to prove myself to you. You do not have to prove yourself to me. This is not college, I am not your student, and I do not have to cite my sources. The few factual statement I've made (for example, that Russia has invaded a sovereign country) are objectively beyond question.

WW2 the good War, right?

WW2 was terrible. All wars are terrible. Some are justified, though.

What about the German Civilians though?

Realpolitic: They were fucked, too damned bad. Too bad. They let Hitler come to power, or they were unable to stop him, whichever, and Hitler decided to go a'genocide'n and invadin'.

What about the occupations and expansion of the USSR?

Unfortunate. And our own fault. We should have listened to Patton.

Who gave you that idea?

Putin gave me that idea. When he said it.
 
extraordinary claims?
Try google, nothing extraordinary about it.
The usual neocon faggots have been talking about it ever since the orange revolution of 2004.

Here is a think piece by neocon witch Madeleine Albright gushing at the idea of sacrificing Ukrainians to inconvenience Putin.

All the US strategists/warmongers write articles and books you can just read them.
Straight from the horses mouth.
I recommend reading some of the PNAC papers they are enlightening.

Then what is it?
Russia will not stop as long as a NATO partnership is on the table.
Anyone with a little information knows this.
The US defiantly knows this, Russia has stated this before the war. As stated before the US wants this war so they pressure Ukraine into not taking NATO membership of the table.
Ukraine would have to defy the US to get Russia to talk.

From what I see now, I only see this ending with Russia occupying UA.
No one will start nuclear war over Ukraine. (neocons are pretty crazy lets hope not that crazy)

It's logical behavior from the Russians.

Imagine a country near the US would enter into a defensive alliance with Russia to what length would the US go to stop them?
And now imagine it would share a direct border like Mexico.
This is not a moral justification but just an observation that it's predictable what the US would do, they would go to war with Mexico if they had reasonable suspicions that Mexico could station nuclear missiles at the US/Mexico border.

The same with Russia Without Crimea Russia naval access would be severely crippled and with UA becoming a NATO ally Russia would share a large border with a country that could potentially station nuclear weapons near its border.

If I would have to negotiate on the behalf of UA with Russia I know that I would have to promise that UA will never be a NATO partner.
I know otherwise any negotiation will fail.

Why should I take what you say serious?
This is the diffrence between you and a sane person.
I take no joy in Russians dying and I take no joy in Ukrainians dying.

But you have already dehumanized an entire people in your head.
You decided to be a psychopath.
 
Why should I take what you say serious?
This is the diffrence between you and a sane person.
I take no joy in Russians dying and I take no joy in Ukrainians dying.

But you have already dehumanized an entire people in your head.
You decided to be a psychopath.
Funny how the supporters of an aggressor is the one accusing the other side of dehumanization.

I wish peace for both Russians and Ukrainians. But that peace can't come with Russia continuing to shed blood.
 
All the US strategists/warmongers write articles and books you can just read them.
Who invaded Ukraine again? You vatniks make it sound like Americans are the ones who invaded and took its land. This war is Russia's fault. Even the opinion piece you posted isn't even calling for war, she's just stating that a Russian invasion in Ukraine would end badly and half the shit she said is literally what ended up happening.
And it would generate fierce Ukrainian armed resistance, with strong support from the West. A bipartisan effort is already underway to craft a legislative response that would include intensifying lethal aid to Ukraine. It would be far from a repeat of Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014; it would be a scenario reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s ill-fated occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Not only that, but she also says this:
If Mr. Putin feels backed into a corner, he has only himself to blame. As Mr. Biden has noted, the United States has no desire to destabilize or deprive Russia of its legitimate aspirations. That’s why the administration and its allies have offered to engage in talks with Moscow on an open-ended range of security issues. But America must insist that Russia act in accordance with international standards applicable to all nations.
What a warmonger, encouraging open dialogue and diplomacy.
Really, the vatniks are pissy because the west didn't bend over and let Russia steamroll into Ukraine, which by the way, the west didn't start sending more sophisticated weapons into Ukraine until after Ukraine's own military stopped the Russian advanced on its own. This whole "American warmongers" shtick is laughable when you remember Russia's own history of intervention like when it gave the Viet Cong weapons in the Vietnam War, or when it put a bounty on American soldiers in Afghanistan or when it sent its military into Syria. Weren't they "prolonging" the civil war? A lot of Syrians were killed during that. Where was your outcry for the loss of human life then, huh?
 
Here is a think piece by neocon witch Madeleine Albright gushing at the idea of sacrificing Ukrainians to inconvenience Putin.
All the US strategists/warmongers write articles and books you can just read them.
Straight from the horses mouth.
I recommend reading some of the PNAC papers they are enlightening.

Madeleine Albright does not run the government (in fact she's dead), and the neocons have been out of power, and to an extent discredited, for a long time. So already this argument makes no sense.

But I don't see anything in her linked piece "gushing" about sacrificing Ukrainians to inconvenience Putin. She says that "Ukraine is entitled to its sovereignty, no matter who its neighbors happen to be"; is this some radical idea? She says western powers will support Ukraine, and that Putin would be foolish to invade. Where is the gushing about sacrificing Ukrainians? I question your reading comprehension.

I read some of the PNAC's work back when they were relevant (which they're definitely not anymore). First, they represent only themselves. Second, I recall nothing about them saying they don't care about Ukraine or they want it "traumatized" so Russia can occupy it and there can be an insurgency. You're making shit up.
 
Pro-war morons that shill for either side are the most disgusting and spineless retard to ever exist.
If you're oh, so dedicated to support one side of this war.
Stop being hypocrite hiding behind your keyboard, just get a plane ticket and go fight for the side you designate as righteous.
War is nothing more than a game of chess where you get to chop off one of your knuckles for every unit lost.
You may win the war but have fun with your mangled hands.
I would, except I threw out my back fucking your mother so I am disqualified from military service.

What I really want to know is what should be done about him?
Nothing that isn't determined by his own people. Why should it?

Putin is free to be Putin inside his own borders. I liked his willingness to tell globohomo to go fuck itself and to really trigger faggots who get paid outsized money to lift heavy things during the Olympics. But my respect for keeping the eternal jew from subverting his country ends at Russia's borders.
Putin's country should be on the hook for Ukraine reconstruction, but if Russians want Putin to remain in the big seat I don't see any reason to not let him because that's what the people want. And if they want to storm the capital and hang his beaten, bloody corpse from a street lamp outside the Kremlin, well that's also what the people want.

Gaddafi must go (turned out to be a bigger disaster, bringing back slavery to Afrika)
Slavery never left Africa. The arrival of Arabs just changed who they were selling slaves to. And Europeans supplanted Arabs for a time, now they are back to the arabs and internal.

Gaddafi was always going to cause a mess when he died.
 
Last edited:
Opinion discarded
You are that anime avatar that believes it's all crisis actors.

LOL, LMAO even.
You're looking for a gotcha.
Don't be paranoid, I was just asking.
Might have said something I don't know about or I could have suggested some sources to you.
They were fucked, too damned bad.
Okay, I am just assuming you don't know much about post war Germany and you are not a total psychopath. I recommend you look at what the bad guys had to deal with.

I recommend you read "Summer, 1945: Germany, Japan and the Harvest of Hate

and
Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany ( there is a film about the book it is not as detailed or impactful but most people are to lazy to read https://odysee.com/@KnowledgeBase:e/HELLSTORM-Documentary-2015-KYLE-HUNT:c)
both by Thomas Goodrich

Funny how the supporters of an aggressor
You vatniks

Well done outing yourself as exactly what I claimed you are.
A low information nigger stuck in a false dichotomy where everyone is either with you or he has to be with Putin.
pathetic.

What a warmonger, encouraging open dialogue and diplomacy.
LOL, Madeleine Albright was just a nice old lady.
Tell me you are a low information nigger without spelling it out.

I bet most of you don't know who this is and why he is significant.
1666141606223.png


Some of you really need to have some introspective and realize what you are typing.
I see Vatnik and Orc and the exclamation that Ukraine has to fight to the last man.
I see a lot of group think and regurgitating of narratives.
It's frankly disgusting and I hope it is only a matter of low information and that if you ever come to enough information you will not be so quick to cheer on a war.

I again recommend you start reading some https://antiwar.com/ it is a consistent antiwar outlet that has a great track record, it's by autistic libertarians and not some agenda driven propaganda rag.
 
Who invaded Ukraine again? You vatniks make it sound like Americans are the ones who invaded and took its land. This war is Russia's fault. Even the opinion piece you posted isn't even calling for war, she's just stating that a Russian invasion in Ukraine would end badly and half the shit she said is literally what ended up happening.

Not only that, but she also says this:

What a warmonger, encouraging open dialogue and diplomacy.
Really, the vatniks are pissy because the west didn't bend over and let Russia steamroll into Ukraine, which by the way, the west didn't start sending more sophisticated weapons into Ukraine until after Ukraine's own military stopped the Russian advanced on its own. This whole "American warmongers" shtick is laughable when you remember Russia's own history of intervention like when it gave the Viet Cong weapons in the Vietnam War, or when it put a bounty on American soldiers in Afghanistan or when it sent its military into Syria. Weren't they "prolonging" the civil war? A lot of Syrians were killed during that. Where was your outcry for the loss of human life then, huh?
I can already tell you what his response will be.

"No. I never said those were good BUT"
And then go on a screed about how the US wants to turn Ukraine into a Mad Max wasteland, and how we've never actually considered that killing people is bad or something.

He cannot arrive at the same conclusion as us, because he does not believe in the same things. He believes that Ukraine's government is a terrorist regime bent on killing Russians at the USA's behest. He believes that the USA wants an insurgent war, rather than a free Ukraine.

This doesn't even make sense from an armament standpoint, of course. You don't give terrorists HIMARS or NASAMs because these systems don't work unless you actually control territory. You don't give them armored recovery vehicles or medical transports. But he's also convinced that Russia is winning by missile striking power plants. So where do we even start?
 
They're not sending their best (Putinbots).

That's the funny thing: they ARE sending their best, both soldiers and shills. They are all just pathetic jokes is all. Take for example (I think they were called) the 4th Guards Tank Division (or something like that). It was one of Russia's most experienced and highly decorated tank divisions. They got almost completely wiped out early in the conflict losing most of their experienced tankers. Tanks can be repaired or replaced (if they aren't captured by the other side because they were abandoned and as long as it can be afforded), but losing experienced troops is a bigger loss not as easily overcome. And Russia has gone through a LOT of their experienced troops, including INSTRUCTORS who would have been more useful training new troops to be competent soldiers instead of fighting on the front lines. But apparently Putin doesn't give a shit about experienced troops and just wants cannon fodder to be tossed into the meat grinder.
 
LOL, Madeleine Albright was just a nice old lady.
Tell me you are a low information nigger without spelling it out.

Here is a think piece by neocon witch Madeleine Albright gushing at the idea of sacrificing Ukrainians to inconvenience Putin.
Can't even keep a consistent argument for more than 30 minutes.
I can already tell you what his response will be.

"No. I never said those were good BUT"
And then go on a screed about how the US wants to turn Ukraine into a Mad Max wasteland, and how we've never actually considered that killing people is bad or something.

He cannot arrive at the same conclusion as us, because he does not believe in the same things. He believes that Ukraine's government is a terrorist regime bent on killing Russians at the USA's behest. He believes that the USA wants an insurgent war, rather than a free Ukraine.

This doesn't even make sense from an armament standpoint, of course. You don't give terrorists HIMARS or NASAMs because these systems don't work unless you actually control territory. You don't give them armored recovery vehicles or medical transports. But he's also convinced that Russia is winning by missile striking power plants. So where do we even start?
You gave him too much credit, he decided to contradict himself on the same page. Almost as if he didn't actually read the source he posted.
 
I support Ukraine because John Bolton and Lindsay Graham and Bill Kristol and the rest of the totally trustworthy Neocons assure me that this time they're right. Besides, after pulling out of our 20 year adventure in Afghanistan, where else are they supposed to direct their Democracy exporting energies?

This is not a case of a war based on mistaken or fraudulent information. Russia is invading a sovereign nation. That's not "propaganda". It's objective fact

To believe this you have to believe that the US had nothing at all to do with the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Do you believe that the US had nothing to do with the coup?
 
I know this is a very unpopular opinion, and many would say even stupid, but it's special because it's mine.

I still think Russia will win this war. This is a battle for survival for them also; not your average Russian so much, but Putin and those who support him know that if they do not succeed, they are dead.

Russia was a slow roller in WWII, and I believe that is the case now; next spring they will throw in everything they've got with full mobilization.
 
Okay, I am just assuming you don't know much about post war Germany and you are not a total psychopath. I recommend you look at what the bad guys had to deal with.

Not sure why the shouting, but...

I know enough about it. What I don't know is why it really matters to the question you posed. My answer to "what about them" is that they were fucked.

I mean... they were. What do you want me to say? For that matter, what were the people of the 1940s to say... "Boy, gosh, we really want Hitler to stop invading countries and committing genocide, but the Germans will suffer if we do that, so I guess we just let him do it."?

Like I said. War sucks. That doesn't mean it isn't going to happen. Try blaming the people who start the damned things. Sometimes that has been us. I never said we were saints. But other times it hasn't been.

To believe this you have to believe that the US had nothing at all to do with the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Do you believe that the US had nothing to do with the coup?

Why would I have to believe that? Ukraine is still a sovereign country, regardless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back