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
 
Archive
Prigozhin LARPs as a fighter pilot and challenges Zelensky to a dogfight.

People are tired, man. War takes its toll, people have their limits. I'm trying to be optimistic, but they're opposing Russia, which for all its faults has a lot of resources to waste and plenty of obedient cattle to throw into the meatgrinder - Ukraine can't afford that, and with the West being indecisive, I think that time is not on their side.
When it simply comes to raw numbers, the odds were never on Ukraine's side. Putin overestimated his military and underestimated Ukraine's willingness to fight, the scary part begins now that reality check started to sink in.
Ehhh I still don't think "body count" is a winning strat unless you outnumber your enemy like 10-1 and have an overwhelming tech advantage.

Ukraine is still the underdog, hands-down, and while I agree that delaying aid is costing Ukrainian lives its still overly pessimistic/optimistic that Ukraine is going to just run out of soldiers any time soon.
 
Ehhhh, this reads more like Russian propaganda.
UKROPS GONNA RUN OUT OF SOLDIERS ANY DAY NOW!!!

I'm pretty sure a major part of the US's ground strategy in Vietnam was "Muh heckin body count! Gooks gonna run out troops any day now!" and we see how that worked out.
No dude, this is different.
I have no idea how to explain to Westerners how dangerous Russia actually is. It's always fun to mock it and see its supporters seethe, but underneath all the propaganda, this is a ruthless empire willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to achieve even a tiny irrelevant goal. Putin has near complete control over society, which is also under 24/7 propaganda. For those that are too smart for propaganda, violence and fear will work, or they will just be driven away, like many intellectuals, people that studied abroad etc.
It's not about Ukraine running out of soldiers, it's about Ukraine being drawn into a war of attrition where Russia continually replenishes its human and military gear from its vast resources. Don't compare Russia to the US. Compare it to Ukraine, because Ukraine is not receiving enough high tech military gear to offset its human resources deficit.
Russia does not need high tech stuff either, it just needs shells and some amount of accuracy (yes I know Perun talked about it, I am more skeptical than him for sure), and some convict/conscript waves to push over the Ukraine defenses repeatedly.
Sure Ukraine fights surprisingly determined and well, and God help them win, but we need to treat Russia as a serious threat.
The signs that Russia might fall internally to some destabilization or revolt are minimal. A lot is depending on this incoming offensive and how it goes. Taking Bakhmut, which is very likely, will be a nice propaganda boost. Advancing towards the borders of the 4 annexed provinces, another win for Putin "we're fighting against all of NATO".
Russia is indeed selling an image of a world power with a superior army that's quite fake, that is true.
What is not said is the cynical use of humans and the last resort of a war industry that Russia can still do.
Mock Russia and the ziggers, but never underestimate it.
--------------
Speaking of mocking...
State TV claims Russia fought the "entirety of the West/Europe" at Stalingrad, lmao. Shamefurrr behavior, to the point where I am left to wonder if translations are correct.
 
Last edited:
While I doubt either Russia or the EU are long for this world, Russia is probably going to collapse first. Russia is only being held to together by the personal charisma and power base of Putin himself. Once he leaves office, one way or another (and this will probably be sooner rather than later because, lets face it, despite all the rumors of the man's failing health, the dude is just old; he's not long for this world in any case), Russia will probably fall in on itself not long after, if not immediately.
Even though Putin is the Russian strongman, I don't believe he's the lone dictator the west portrays him to be.
There is at least a cadre which pulls the strings in the background.

If he is terminally ill, then they will have a succession plan orchestrated, and you would have seen someone like Medvedev spending time in the spotlight.

I think Putin will stay at least until the end of the Ukraine operation, which is likely another year away.
 
I doubt Putin will ever be toppled by anything the West does. If he does get taken out it will be from inside Russia, and he will just get replaced by someone just like him or worse.

Russia can never be a Western style democracy.

If Russia's current form of government were to change I would expect it to fully Republicanize and form another Yun Yun. Shit's too damn large for a democracy to be functional. Democracy's are for puny niggers begging to get conquered and assimilated.
 
Even though Putin is the Russian strongman, I don't believe he's the lone dictator the west portrays him to be.
There is at least a cadre which pulls the strings in the background.

If he is terminally ill, then they will have a succession plan orchestrated, and you would have seen someone like Medvedev spending time in the spotlight.

I think Putin will stay at least until the end of the Ukraine operation, which is likely another year away.
I firmly believe that Putin is the only relevant political force in Russia, everything else is a dress up. I watched him consolidate power and erase any potential opposition since I was a kid.
His oligarch friends might have some pull, but it doesn't seem to keep him in check, if they're even trying - I suspect they're not particularly eager, considering his paranoia.
The fact that this war was even greenlit IMO lends credence to this idea, can hardly imagine a collective stupid enough to actually approve it.

Feel free to disagree, but I think this has all the markings of an ego-driven disaster fomented by a petty dictator.
 
Even though Putin is the Russian strongman, I don't believe he's the lone dictator the west portrays him to be.
There is at least a cadre which pulls the strings in the background.

If he is terminally ill, then they will have a succession plan orchestrated, and you would have seen someone like Medvedev spending time in the spotlight.

I think Putin will stay at least until the end of the Ukraine operation, which is likely another year away.
Russian history and succession plans don't exactly have a good history. Also, with both his parents making it to their 90s, I really don't see him retiring for a while. He really doesn't strike me as the sort who can just walk away from power.
 
No dude, this is different.
I have no idea how to explain to Westerners how dangerous Russia actually is. It's always fun to mock it and see its supporters seethe, but underneath all the propaganda, this is a ruthless empire willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to achieve even a tiny irrelevant goal. Putin has near complete control over society, which is also under 24/7 propaganda. For those that are too smart for propaganda, violence and fear will work, or they will just be driven away, like many intellectuals, people that studied abroad etc.

You could swap every instance of Russia for America and Putin for POTUS and it would still be accurate.

For further reading please see: Vietnam, the 1st Gulf War, the 2nd Gulf War and Afghanistan.
 
You could swap every instance of Russia for America and Putin for POTUS and it would still be accurate.

For further reading please see: Vietnam, the 1st Gulf War, the 2nd Gulf War and Afghanistan.
There are significant differences between the neoliberal empire model and the authoritarian non-ideological one, but it's a long list and it would degenerate into a "Argue about whose shambolic empire is better or worse" discussions.
I think it ultimately comes down to whom poses the largest threat to you, and who does not. If you're in Afghanistan, you're probably equally resentful towards both Russia and the US, maybe more against the US because it's more recent. If you're in Iraq likely against the US. If you're in East Europe like me, US is an almost irrelevant quantity, unless you're Serbian, and then it's your hated enemy.
Can't really expect everyone to be on the same page here.
 
I firmly believe that Putin is the only relevant political force in Russia, everything else is a dress up. I watched him consolidate power and erase any potential opposition since I was a kid.
His oligarch friends might have some pull, but it doesn't seem to keep him in check, if they're even trying - I suspect they're not particularly eager, considering his paranoia.
The fact that this war was even greenlit IMO lends credence to this idea, can hardly imagine a collective stupid enough to actually approve it.

Feel free to disagree, but I think this has all the markings of an ego-driven disaster fomented by a petty dictator.
Putin has all the hallmarks of being a one man show. He has no successor. Medvedev was his personal pawn. Men like him don't think that far ahead because they are only concerned with their legacy, their current greatness, and living as long as possible. He's no different than Hitler in that regard.
 
Screenshot_20230207-060511_Twitter.jpg

Anyone else hear of this? I'm dubious of Twitter backed by Telegram but we haven't seen a General get killed in a while.
 
Putin has all the hallmarks of being a one man show. He has no successor. Medvedev was his personal pawn. Men like him don't think that far ahead because they are only concerned with their legacy, their current greatness, and living as long as possible. He's no different than Hitler in that regard.

Putin came to power in and fed an environment that requires he not prepare a successor. If he were to prepare a successor, either he would have to constantly fear the knife in his back when his successor wanted the reins, or the pit of vipers he manages to keep at each others' throats would take their frustrations out on the successor.

Best case, you end up with all the power players selecting not the best leader, but a leader they believe they can replace.
This is how Hugo Chavez ended up with the un-churroable bus driver Maduro as his successor: a retard so completely spineless he will be in power forever because it is impossible for any successor to be as completely cucked as he is.
Or how the 2nd or 3rd Caliph got elected; the previous guy had died suddenly with just enough time to force the biggest rivals for power into an isolated election hut (that is, no time rally supporters; its a wonderful bit of death-bed statecraft). Isolated, with no time to prepare or try to summon allies/make deals. So a number of electors selected the oldest guy there; because it was 1000AD, and they elected him because they figured he'd die pretty soon and they'd be able to make ready to take over the power vacuum. Then the mad lad lives for like another two decades, and outlives several of the electors.
 
Last edited:
I did a quick search on Ulyanov but I found nothing about him being dead.
Or being a general for the VDV.
I would rate this as sus.
Does (or did) he exist? The name seems a bit John Smith like so there might be one or many souls of that name drawing breath.
 

GOP base warms to giving Russia some of Ukraine’s territory​


When President Biden on Tuesday night delivers his second State of the Union address, one of the major orders of business is likely to be Ukraine — particularly in light of flagging GOP support for funding its defense against Russia’s invasion.

We’ve written about this shift in opinion before, including as recently as a month ago. The December speech before Congress by Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky doesn’t appear to have moved the needle much, with half or more of Republicans now saying either that we’re doing too much to help Ukraine or that we should stop funding its defense, period. Those sentiments in his party had led now-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) to suggest a GOP-led House could be reluctant to send more money.

A new batch of polls ahead of Biden’s speech confirms the evolution of what was once a very bipartisan issue. A Washington Post-ABC News poll, for instance, shows half of Republicans now say we’re doing “too much” for Ukraine. That’s up from 18 percent in April 2022.

More strikingly, an NBC News poll last week showed 63 percent of Republicans opposed “providing more funding and weapons to Ukraine,” while 32 percent were in support. That’s perhaps the most severe GOP rebuke of funding Ukraine on record, and it comes as the Biden administration has decided to start sending tanks.

But then there’s the question of why. It’s not just about the financial cost, and it’s not really a matter of Republicans siding with Russia over Ukraine, as Fox News host Tucker Carlson once said he did. It’s mostly about their having less faith in Ukraine’s war effort and growing skepticism that Russia’s invasion poses a threat to the United States.
And perhaps most notably, it features an emerging willingness to give Russia some of the Ukrainian territory it seeks.

Support for Ukraine’s cause overall remains overwhelmingly bipartisan. But Republicans are more skeptical that Ukraine can emerge victorious. A Fox News poll released last week showed Democrats thought Ukraine was winning the war by a 2-to-1 margin, 61 percent to 26 percent. But Republicans were split, with 43 percent saying Russia was winning and 42 percent saying Ukraine was winning. It’s the second poll since the 2022 election that suggests Republicans are more likely than Democrats to view Russia as winning the war.

Similarly, a December poll from Fox News showed 34 percent of Democrats thought Ukraine was “very likely” to survive the invasion and remain a free country, but just 15 percent of Republicans agreed.

Beyond that, Republicans are less likely than before to believe the United States truly has something at stake in the war.

A Marquette University poll this month showed 37 percent of Democrats thought what happens with the war matters a “great deal” to life in the United States, compared to 24 percent of Republicans. And while a Pew Research Center poll at the start of the war showed half of Republicans regarded the invasion as a “major threat” to U.S. interests, just 29 percent now say that’s the case. (Democrats’ belief that Russia is a “major threat” in that time has declined only slightly, from half to 43 percent.)

Perhaps most striking, though, is a the GOP’s willingness to cede Ukraine’s territory in the name of ending the war.

A new Gallup poll gave people a binary choice between supporting Ukraine’s efforts to reclaim its territory, and ending the war quickly — even if it meant Russiawas allowed to keep conquered territory. A slight majority of Republicans picked the former, but 41 percent were willing to countenance Russia keeping the territory in the name of ending the war. That’s compared to just 16 percent of Democrats who believed the same.

And if you layer on top of that the financial question, Republicans appear even more open to Russia keeping some territory. A November poll for the Chicago Council on Global Affairs posed a somewhat similar dilemma: between supporting Ukraine for “as long as it takes” even if it means higher domestic gas and food prices, or negotiating a settlement “even if that means that Ukraine will lose some territory.”
Republicans had been split on the same question in the summer of 2022, but by November they chose the quicker settlement by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, 63-33. Democrats were essentially flipped, siding 61-36 in favor of “as long as it takes.”

Of course, this isn’t the first time Americans have countenanced Russia claiming Ukrainian territory. But when the United States took a more hands-off approach to Russia annexing Crimea in 2014, the partisan split was reversed. Back then it was Republicans who were more slightly likely to believe supporting Ukraine was in the national interest, and who favored taking a firm stand against Russia.

Such surveys pose something of a chicken-and-egg problem: Perhaps a growing portion of the GOP simply believes the costs aren’t worth it, given the uncertain prospects for Ukraine’s success. Or perhaps Republicans who prefer a more noninterventionist foreign policy with regards to Ukraine are backfilling the reasons for pulling away from the war.

But the result is the same: About half or more Republicans are now pretty skeptical about continued U.S. involvement, and many in the GOP are willing to give Russia at least some of what it invaded Ukraine for.

 
No dude, this is different.
I have no idea how to explain to Westerners how dangerous Russia actually is. It's always fun to mock it and see its supporters seethe, but underneath all the propaganda, this is a ruthless empire willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of men to achieve even a tiny irrelevant goal. Putin has near complete control over society, which is also under 24/7 propaganda. For those that are too smart for propaganda, violence and fear will work, or they will just be driven away, like many intellectuals, people that studied abroad etc.
It's not about Ukraine running out of soldiers, it's about Ukraine being drawn into a war of attrition where Russia continually replenishes its human and military gear from its vast resources. Don't compare Russia to the US. Compare it to Ukraine, because Ukraine is not receiving enough high tech military gear to offset its human resources deficit.
Russia does not need high tech stuff either, it just needs shells and some amount of accuracy (yes I know Perun talked about it, I am more skeptical than him for sure), and some convict/conscript waves to push over the Ukraine defenses repeatedly.
Sure Ukraine fights surprisingly determined and well, and God help them win, but we need to treat Russia as a serious threat.
The signs that Russia might fall internally to some destabilization or revolt are minimal. A lot is depending on this incoming offensive and how it goes. Taking Bakhmut, which is very likely, will be a nice propaganda boost. Advancing towards the borders of the 4 annexed provinces, another win for Putin "we're fighting against all of NATO".
Russia is indeed selling an image of a world power with a superior army that's quite fake, that is true.
What is not said is the cynical use of humans and the last resort of a war industry that Russia can still do.
Mock Russia and the ziggers, but never underestimate it.
--------------
Speaking of mocking...
State TV claims Russia fought the "entirety of the West/Europe" at Stalingrad, lmao. Shamefurrr behavior, to the point where I am left to wonder if translations are correct.
The thing that's fucked Russia for the last 30 years is emigration. The historian Stephen Kotkin has pointed out that something like 40% of Russia's top earners live abroad. I'm not talking about oligarchs, but professionals, engineers, scientists, Doctors, business people. My local panel beaters are Russians, and are the best in the area.

This has suited Putin, because having all the dynamic energetic people leave the country makes it easier for him to run Russia as a Kleptocracy.

He thought he could do sweetheart deals with a handful of engineers to keep the Russian energy and defense sector going but he's now discovered that everything is interconnected and Russia's complete lack of a consumer electronics industry is fucking him.

He can't put decent officers in charge of units larger than a brigade because he knows the first thing any competent patriotic officer would do is start planning to get rid of him. He tried to build up units like the VDV on a micro level, but then a hack general had them do a daytime drop against a defended position.

He is not going to win this war, the west has already made clear that they're going to keep flooding Ukraine with weapons. If he was to win some small victory tomorrow against Ukraine all that would happen is that the west would increase the supply, and Germany would suddenly discover a couple of hundred Leopard tanks that were in fact perfectly serviceable.

Putin is a dumb mother fucker, who enjoyed doing shit that humiliates the west while bringing absolutely no benefits to Russia. Such as the Skripal poisoning, or making Germany twist itself into knots over NORD 2 and the supply of gas. Well now they've had enough of him, know that it's pointless to try and negotiate with him, and are going to make him bleed.

He's even made the few allies he's got left in Europe such as Hungary and Austria look like arseholes. A pro Russian country like Serbia knows it's a waste of time to rely on them as an ally. Also the way Russia sold out Armenia, forcing them to basically beg and sign away their sovereignty to get Russian help hasn't gone unnoticed on the world stage.

Putin is a 2nd rate security hack, that people projected their own fantasies of a nationalist leader onto.
 
Because a third party unilaterally handing someone else's territory over to a belligerent has never, ever gone bad anywhere in the world or at any time in history. Nope. Not once.
So much for security assurances, America's word seems to worth as much as Russia's.

Though frankly, I'm not surprised that cuckservaties are gravitating toward appeasing Russia, I don't think that's news to anyone here.
This is certainly beneficial to Russia whose propaganda will gobble it up to show that Ukraine doesn't decide anything and that they're fighting solely at America's behest.
At the very least US government first has to decide if they go forward with this idea if it ever gets that far, it would still be up to Ukraine to decide in the end.

I can see the possibility of some concessions on Ukraine's side, but only under REAL assurances of security from the West along with expedited EU and NATO integration for whatever remains of Ukraine. Because otherwise it's only a matter of time until Putin goes for the next round, the only way it doesn't happen is if it means war with the entire West.
 
Daily Mail on the newly defunct Gen Ulyanov whose existence was perhaps doubtful:


Serious enough, but there's likely plenty more where he came from.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back