Europe War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

[Gethelred]

This is the thread for discussing the War in Ukraine. Should you want to discuss the geopolitics, the history, or an interesting tangent, head over here:

Europe - Backdrop to the war in Ukraine

This is the thread for the geopolitics, history and framework around the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If you want to discuss the events of the war, head over to this thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/war-in-ukraine-thread-4-thread-rules-updated.1376293/page-146

www.bigfooty.com

If a post isn't directly concerning the events of the war or starts to derail the thread, report the post to us and we'll move it over there.

Seeing as multiple people seem to have forgotten, abuse is against the rules of BF. Continuous, page long attacks directed at a single poster in this thread will result in threadbans for a week from this point; doing so again once you have returned will make the bans permanent and will be escalated to infractions.

This thread still has misinformation rules, and occasionally you will be asked to demonstrate a claim you have made by moderation. If you cannot, you will be offered the opportunity to amend the post to reflect that it's opinion, to remove the post, or you will be threadbanned and infracted for sharing misinformation.

Addendum: from this point, use of any variant of the word 'orc' to describe combatants, politicians or russians in general will be deleted and the poster will receive a warning. If the behaviour continues, it will be escalated. Consider this fair warning.

Finally: If I see the word Nazi or Hitler being flung around, there had better have a good faith basis as to how it's applicable to the Russian invasion - as in, video/photographic evidence of POW camps designed to remove another ethnic group - or to the current Ukrainian army. If this does not occur, you will be threadbanned for posting off topic

This is a sensitive area, and I understand that this makes for fairly incensed conversation sometimes. This does not mean the rules do not apply, whether to a poster positing a Pro-Ukraine stance or a poster positing an alternative view.

Behave, people.

 

[Mobbs]

I reckon the Russians thought it would be a short war and now they're stuck. A withdrawal would be a huge backdown that I don't see happening.

In the absence of diplomacy, that means they're going to have to be pushed out. How long does that take and what does it look like?

I agree with this. The RF were able to essentially acquire Belarus, and also Transnistria, and Georgia is underway. But Ukraine a) resisted much harder and b) got the attention of some fairly influential allies.

It truly does seem to be a case of ego/pride now. Without these things, I reckon the RF would have called it off already. (tho probably only to go back and plan a sequel later)

 

[GhostofJimJess]

I agree with this. The RF were able to essentially acquire Belarus, and also Transnistria, and Georgia is underway. But Ukraine a) resisted much harder and b) got the attention of some fairly influential allies.

It truly does seem to be a case of ego/pride now. Without these things, I reckon the RF would have called it off already. (tho probably only to go back and plan a sequel later)

What was the clincher to make them pull out of Afghanistan?

Besides getting their arses handed to them by Mujahideen.

 

[Visions]

Their propaganda department is a shocker these days.

Its been a shocker since day 1 of the war. Remember the SIMS 3 incident at the start?

That had to be the funniest attempt at failed propaganda in history.

 

[Visions]

The counter attack in Kursk was inevitable and entirely predictable.


Wonder what the Ukrainians came up with in advance.

If you go by Tom Cooper, Ukraines response is to launch another offensive from Ukraine over the border west of the current frontline.

According to him, Ukraine has already captured the towns of Novy Put, Obukhovika, Veseloye, Obod, Volfino and Medvezhe.

This would lead to the Russians in the counter attack being caught in a pincer if the UAF continue.

Maybe Mobbs might be able to find out more about it.

 

[Zidane98]

Its been a shocker since day 1 of the war. Remember the SIMS 3 incident at the start?

That had to be the funniest attempt at failed propaganda in history.

Not sure about that.

Russian TV actually put this forward as proof they weren't responsible for MH17

US dismisses Russian MH17 pictures that blame Ukraine for disaster

Russian state media shows purported satellite images of fighter jet intercept but White House says claim is ‘preposterous’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Visions]

Mate you accuse me of Russian propaganda,well judging the number of posts here by you there is no bigger lackey of Zelenski and the west than you.I will be interested to see if this post gets the same treatment as my other recent posts do and you speak of Russian control of the media,just look at what the French did to Pavlov and the same thing is happening here to me.

Didn’t realise misguided attempts at conspiracy theories were considered the trith?

That is alright though because I will be proven correct in the long and dolts like you cannot accept this,I guess the mod will ban me now because he like you does not like the truth.

So you say you will be proven correct and then post these zingers!

You do realise that the next place to be bombed will be UK sure as apples.

Kursk is going down rapidly in 2weeks we will not be talking about Kursk it will be all over red rover by then.

I look forward to you being “correct” and if not i look forward to reminding you about it.

 

[Mobbs]

If you go by Tom Cooper, Ukraines response is to launch another offensive from Ukraine over the border west of the current frontline.

According to him, Ukraine has already captured the towns of Novy Put, Obukhovika, Veseloye, Obod, Volfino and Medvezhe.

This would lead to the Russians in the counter attack being caught in a pincer if the UAF continue.

Maybe Mobbs might be able to find out more about it.

Ooh an excuse to make a map! Brb.

Yellow = Ukraine/Russia border
Original light blue = Russian territory occupied by Ukraine
Red = Russian counter-offensive (the right hand end is per DeepState maps, the left-hand end is extended by myself because RF already held that territory (never been captured) but I think it's important to show they didn't just parachute in.
Blue = Ukrainian counter-counter-offensive
River Seym is in yet another shade of blue.



I believe the Ukrainian forces crossed the border at both Novyi Put & at Medvezhe - two separate spots at left and right end of the blue patch respectively. Veseloye definitely captured. Unsure about Obod, its also on the border in the middle and unsure if the two vectors have met each other. Obukhovika and Volfina are town names I've not yet seen mentioned.

Hard to know because both sides will bullshit us and even the most reliable maps 1) want to be sure first and 2) in DeepState's case are Ukraine-aligned and delay updates to help with OpSec.

What is not arguable - Ukraine performed this operation and it does threaten the RF push. Seems they want to go for Gloshkova. Did the counter-offensive force their hand or was it already on its way? Dunno!

 

[petrie pie]

not going to get into the nitty gritty of the battlefield. what you say may well be true, time will tell.
yes, there's lots of barrackers for team ukraine here, no-one will disagree with you on that.

Well I am not barracking for either Ukraine or Russia but I do know that this war was started long before Russia invaded Ukraine.The Ukrainians have been bombing ethnic Russians in Donbas for a decade now,long before Russia took action do people here remember the Americans and Nato saying Russia would be on its knees after 16.000 + sanctions well Russian now has the 4th largest economy in the world and it grows all the time Nato and Washington are stealing their money because they cannot stop them.

When Puttin came to power he actually asked Nato if Russia could join it this was when the Russian federation was on its knees when the Soviet bloc fell apart after Yeltsin but the Americans and Nato did not want this they wanted Russian to fall apart so they could gain control of their natural reserves of all those resources.

The problem is the west has met more than its match in Puttin he is running rings around them and looking at the fools running the west is it any wonder Macron,Starmer,Biden and Scholz what an inspiring line up of 1st grade fools who Puttin outsmarts every single day.

Most people here do not remember the Cuban missile crisis but that started when the Russians decided that if it was alright for Europe and them to be destroyed in a nuclear war then it was okay for America to be destroyed also.

 

[petrie pie]

Didn’t realise misguided attempts at conspiracy theories were considered the trith?



So you say you will be proven correct and then post these zingers!




I look forward to you being “correct” and if not i look forward to reminding you about it.

Medvedev has already stated that the UK will be a prime target if they allow Zelenskyy to bomb Russia targets I hope he aims better than he did last time when Killed civilians on a beach in Sebastopol.

 

[Andre]

Russia's current occupation is too costly to maintain. Talking 1 million plus deaths for Russia, economy wrecked, hardship for the everyday person in Russia if this was to continue long term for another 2-3 years min.

This is simply a price too much to pay for an invasion bringing zero benefit to the so called Russian Federation.

Zero benefits to the Russian Federation, but almost every war in history goes beyond the point where it would have ended if the time to stop was decided by pure logic. You'd be hard pressed to find a human event where the sunk cost fallacy isn't more strongly applied. The more countries lose, the more they feel they have to win in order to justify those losses. This only goes double for authoritarian regimes, where the strongman image used to justify / keep power, relies on winning.

Whilst Ukraine / The West wouldn't force Putin to cede power if he just left Ukraine, the reality is, if Russia does leave, then the regions of Russia that did want to break away, would at the very least have increasing protests. There's those in Europe who would go back to 'business as normal', but not all whilst Putin remains and he knows there'd be more serious attempts to remove him, with his 'cloak of invulnerability', already damaged by the Wanger rebellion, further removed by a loss of face in losing to Ukraine / The West, as there's plenty who do want it back to dealing with Europe (I.e., lining their pockets freely).

tl;dr - Russia won't leave without being pushed all the way out, no matter the losses, unless Putin dies / is removed.

 

[petrie pie]

What was the clincher to make them pull out of Afghanistan?

Besides getting their arses handed to them by Mujahideen.

Mate you do know that Alexander was the only one to have defeated the Afghans and the British empire and the Americans both ran away with their tail between their legs,you really need to study your history a little and then you would not be such an easy target.

I bet you do not know who Alexander was do you go on you can admit it.

 

[Mobbs]

What was the clincher to make them pull out of Afghanistan?

Besides getting their arses handed to them by Mujahideen.

Imo the primary reason they left Afghanistan is backlash from the Russian people, who were losing tolerance for the Russian lives lost. "Gruz 200", the term for a casket containing a war casualty, came into use during the war and consequently became synonymous with the arguments of those who demanded a situation change.

So yes, it was related to them getting their arses handed back to them.

 

[petrie pie]

Zero benefits to the Russian Federation, but almost every war in history goes beyond the point where it would have ended if the time to stop was decided by pure logic. You'd be hard pressed to find a human event where the sunk cost fallacy isn't more strongly applied. The more countries lose, the more they feel they have to win in order to justify those losses. This only goes double for authoritarian regimes, where the strongman image used to justify / keep power, relies on winning.

Whilst Ukraine / The West wouldn't force Putin to cede power if he just left Ukraine, the reality is, if Russia does leave, then the regions of Russia that did want to break away, would at the very least have increasing protests. There's those in Europe who would go back to 'business as normal', but not all whilst Putin remains and he knows there'd be more serious attempts to remove him, with his 'cloak of invulnerability', already damaged by the Wanger rebellion, further removed by a loss of face in losing to Ukraine / The West, as there's plenty who do want it back to dealing with Europe (I.e., lining their pockets freely).

tl;dr - Russia won't leave without being pushed all the way out, no matter the losses, unless Putin dies / is removed.

You take the cake mate,As the Eagles said it will be a cold day in hell when Ukraine triumphs, keep on posting as you are nearly as funny as Zelenskyy.

 

[petrie pie]

Imo the primary reason they left Afghanistan is backlast from the Russian people, who were losing tolerance for the Russian lives lost. "Gruz 200", the term for a casket containing a war casualty, came into use during the war and consequently became synonymous with the arguments of those who demanded a situation change.

So yes, it was related to them getting their arses handed back to them.

Will you ever learn mate.

 

[Zidane98]

Will you ever learn mate.

Mobbs delivers.

 

[Visions]

Well I am not barracking for either Ukraine or Russia but I do know that this war was started long before Russia formally invaded Ukraine in 2022.The Ukrainians have been bombing ethnic Russians soldiers in Donbas for a decade now,when Russia initially took action do people here remember the Americans and Nato saying Russia would be on its knees after 16.000 + sanctions well Russian now has the 4th largest economy in the world and it grows all the time Nato and Washington are stealing their money because they cannot stop them.

You have the grammar level of a grade 3 kid with plenty of mistakes but I will correct some parts for you.

When Puttin came to power he actually asked Nato if Russia could join it this was when the Russian federation was on its knees when the Soviet bloc fell apart after Yeltsin but the Americans and Nato did not want this they wanted Russian to fall apart so they could gain control of their natural reserves of all those resources.

NATO didn't reject anything because Putin never had Russia apply to join NATO.

 

[Mobbs]

Will you ever learn mate.

Which bit was wrong?

Imo the primary reason they left Afghanistan is backlast from the Russian people, who were losing tolerance for the Russian lives lost. "Gruz 200", the term for a casket containing a war casualty, came into use during the war and consequently became synonymous with the arguments of those who demanded a situation change.

• Is my opinion not that the primary reason Russia pulled out of Afghanistan, civilian backlash from affected families/populace?
• Is Gruz 200 not the term for a casket containing a war casualty?
• Did it not come into use during the Russo-Afghani war?

Which one of the above are you disputing? Just so that I can check if maybe I've worded it insufficiently.

Also waiting to hear which part of the following was incorrect, per the post on the previous page, as you had challenged it:

• Can Storm Shadow reach up to 560km.
• Does Putin have a palace in Sochi near Gelendzhik.
• If both are true, is the palace in Sochi near Gelendzhik within 560km of from where Ukraine could launch a Storm Shadow missile?

 

[IlovethePies]

You have the grammar level of a grade 3 kid with plenty of mistakes but I will correct some parts for you.



NATO didn't reject anything because Putin never had Russia apply to join NATO.

a) Pathetic. You want to discount his arguments because his grammar doesn't meet your lofty expectations??
b) He is correct. Russia did wish to join NATO. Yeltsin floated the hope, as did Putin.
The Russian ruling elite emerged like a Mafia by dismantling and stealing the nationalised property of the former Soviet Union.
These parasitic morons believed that they could seamlessly join the fraternity of US/NATO imperialism.
They didn;t realise that imperialism is the same as the Predator, and for the imperialists, the resources and wealth of the ex Soviet Union was their prey.
The imperialists rebuffed any idea of Russia joining NATO because Russia was their next target.

Well done Petrie. I admire your strength. Keep up your efforts against these ignoramuses whose only argument against you is that your punctuation doesn't match their irrelevant standards.

 

[Visions]

a) Pathetic. You want to discount his arguments because his grammar doesn't meet your lofty expectations??
b) He is correct. Russia did wish to join NATO. Yeltsin floated the hope, as did Putin.
The Russian ruling elite emerged like a Mafia by dismantling and stealing the nationalised property of the former Soviet Union.
These parasitic morons believed that they could seamlessly join the fraternity of US/NATO imperialism.
They didn;t realise that imperialism is the same as the Predator, and for the imperialists, the resources and wealth of the ex Soviet Union was their prey.
The imperialists rebuffed any idea of Russia joining NATO because Russia was their next target.

Well done Petrie. I admire your strength. Keep up your efforts against these ignoramuses whose only argument against you is that your punctuation doesn't match their irrelevant standards.

a) If you even bothered to read his initial post, you will see that I restored it with the accurate narrative, not the BS conspiracy he spouts.
b) You are wrong. Just because Yeltsin and Putin asked the question of joining NATO, it doesn't mean they wanted to join despite your claims. They never applied which means they weren't ever interested in joining.

But keep on your merry way pretending and rewriting history.

 

[DaTBird187]

What was the clincher to make them pull out of Afghanistan?

Rambo and his bow and arrow.

 

[barreness]

On this, I don't think anybody fails to notice Russia consider Ukraine part of its sphere of influence. The disagreement is on whether or not Russia thinks something, makes it right.

And on the naming conventions. Ukraine was actually not called Little Russia, it was simply called Russia. Russia, on the other hand was called Muskovy. Again, "Little Russia" was a name applied only by Russia, and again, Russia saying something, doesn't make it so.

I remember a Richmond Reserves player once calling me "dickhead ****wit" during a game (when there used to be reserves), because I asked him if he was a natural blond. Does this mean someone had to edit the records in the Registry of Births, Deaths & Marriages? Or does it mean someone created a label for their own purposes?
Ukraine or Vkraina if us dickhead ****wits choose to get it right is a combo of V and KRAINA which translates to "In Country", and is an organic change of name by people within Ukraine, not Moscovites outside Ukraine. Nobody anywhere can agree on where this name was developed, or who suggested it, actually nobody seems to know.

Notice how in we can take the same definitions and read it different ways. "Borderlands" isn't really wrong, it's just how you choose to read it - not the borderlands of another region, but the region, up to its borders. The name is otherwise often thought to simply represent a word for "territory", kind of like if you look around you pointing and saying "this area" and someone else says "Oh is that the name for this place?"

Then this (again and again and again and again):

Yeh sure, it's competing historical narratives. All must be considered before coming to a grasp of the situation

So, how do you back candidates in a revolution? I'm guessing you mean candidates in an election process that was necessary subsequent to the results of a vacancy developing in correlation with a revolution.
There's no intallation, and in backing a candidate - yeah I'd back the one I didn't know was a monster, too..

The candidate that the US backed was the only option when put to a vote of the representatives. You'll note the communist party refused and a chunk of the ruling party for regions either the same or didn't rock up. The police had thrown down their arms and protesters controlled the Rada and the presidential palace, not exactly a free vote right.

The elected leader(the same one chosen by the US) was a Ukrainian nationalist that had allegedly been involved in the murder of Russians in Chechyna. This is obviously called absolute rubbish by Ukraine but he was named by a fellow nationalist fighter and the case has never been tried.

Then you went off on a bit of a woo tangent with CIA bases ... I remember when Russia made this accusation, and the question in response was "bases near the border? really? where?" and Russia shut their whore mouth within nanoseconds.

I've linked the article so many times yet no one reads it. It's the nyt, they have CIA sources and it quotes Ukrianian soldiers, it's literally bragging about the CIA's work in Ukraine.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/25/world/europe/cia-ukraine-intelligence-russia-war.html

There is also one more secret: The base is almost fully financed, and partly equipped, by the C.I.A.
“One hundred and ten percent,” Gen. Serhii Dvoretskiy, a top intelligence commander, said in an interview at the base.

....The listening post in the Ukrainian forest is part of a C.I.A.-supported network of spy bases constructed in the past eight years that includes 12 secret locations along the Russian border.

.....The C.I.A. and other American intelligence agencies provide intelligence for targeted missile strikes, track Russian troop movements and help support spy networks.

But the partnership is no wartime creation, nor is Ukraine the only beneficiary.

It took root a decade ago, coming together in fits and starts under three very different U.S. presidents, pushed forward by key individuals who often took daring risks. It has transformed Ukraine, whose intelligence agencies were long seen as thoroughly compromised by Russia, into one of Washington’s most important intelligence partners against the Kremlin today.


.........The relationship is so ingrained that C.I.A. officers remained at a remote location in western Ukraine when the Biden administration evacuated U.S. personnel in the weeks before Russia invaded in February 2022. During the invasion, the officers relayed critical intelligence, including where Russia was planning strikes and which weapons systems they would use.

“Without them, there would have been no way for us to resist the Russians, or to beat them,” said Ivan Bakanov, who was then head of Ukraine’s domestic intelligence agency, the S.B.U.

And all for what purpose? Well nobody can agree entirely, but it might be a bit of each : Russian imperialism, resource plundering, land bridges, soviet nostalgia, the silovici pockets, perhaps even literally believing their own rhetoric re biolabs and nazism and Russkiy Mir - Dugin states Russkiy Mir is necessary for the survival of Russia.

Those things all figure, the main purpose is to have Ukraine remain under the Russian sphere or at least 'neutral'. The US knew this and went ahead backing the nationalists, costing maybe a million lives so far

 

[barreness]

The Ukrainian people could have sided with fascism and let the Russians take over, but instead chose to fight. The Russian state is far more capitalist and fascist than any other in the region, except maybe Hungary.

See this is where the disconnect lies; Is Russia fascist? kinda, Imperialist is probably a better term, these are all nebulous terms though. Ukraine went towards Fascism after the revolution.

Svoboda was a part of the coalition that formed the post rev govt(from wiki)

The All-Ukrainian Union "Freedom" (Ukrainian: Всеукраїнське об'єднання «Свобода», romanized: Vseukrainske obiednannia "Svoboda"), commonly known as Svoboda, is an ultranationalist political party in Ukraine. It has been led by Oleh Tyahnybok since 2004.

Its predecessor, the Social-National Party of Ukraine (SNPU) formed and officially registered as a political party in October 1995. The SNPU was characterized as a radical right-wing populist party that combined elements of ethnic ultranationalism and anti-communism. During the 1990s, it was accused of neo-Nazism due to the party's recruitment of skinheads and usage of neo-Nazi symbols

The elected leader(hand picked by the US) was a nationalist with rumours of a questionable past

You can make the argument that nationalism(and the rough end of the spectrum with ultras and Fascism) was the only way to challenge Russian influence, Azov and various neonazi units were particularly effective fighting forces for instance. I don't think you can make the argument Ukraine sided against fascism though.

Energy diversification which has happened (and is further planned) will counter-balance the lack of Russian energy supplies.

As in green transition or importing LNG from the US and Kuwait(UAE? I can't remember). Sure they have, it costs more though

Ukraine's supplies of arms are not the ones making the choice to continue the conflict.

Sure they are, without one of the largest arms supply missions in history they would have had no choice but to negotiate years ago

Russia's leaders have a direct conflict of interest in profiting from the war. It's not the Ukrainians making the profits off the arms they use to defend themselves.

If you believe there's no corruption in Ukraine, naive I would say. A bunch of Ukrainians have profited from this and will flee the country when it's all over

In every war, profiteers make profits on both sides. It doesn't mean you just shrug and can't figure out which side is the aggressor. Russia is the aggressor and they're driven by the profits of those who make the decisions. This is not true for Ukraine.

Yeh sure. Russia is the aggressor, to suggest it's just because Putin is a bit loose in the top paddock is silly

 

[Aussie in exile]

I reckon the Russians thought it would be a short war and now they're stuck. A withdrawal would be a huge backdown that I don't see happening.

In the absence of diplomacy, that means they're going to have to be pushed out. How long does that take and what does it look like?

Yep. The thought they would be in kiev within 3 days of their illegal invasion. How wrorng there were

 

[petrie pie]

a) If you even bothered to read his initial post, you will see that I restored it with the accurate narrative, not the BS conspiracy he spouts.
b) You are wrong. Just because Yeltsin and Putin asked the question of joining NATO, it doesn't mean they wanted to join despite your claims. They never applied which means they weren't ever interested in joining.

But keep on your merry way pretending and rewriting history.

You are the person who attempts to divert from the established facts. LovethePies speaks the truth and for a person of your political bent this is unacceptable, you attack me for my grammar but at least I can spell and do not deny facts.

 

[Mobbs]

Yebat barreness that's a lot to read first thing in the morning! I need to become a coffee drinker. I know West Oz is like another part of the world but as I say when talking about time zone issues with Russian friends : "stupid round planet". Can't be arsed quoting so I'll do it this way:

Naming Conventions: I agree, it's a bit of "whatever" - I'm not stating anything bold, just negating those who upscale names into things they aren't, in order to tie a claim to it.

Yatsenyuk - Nothing to disagree with there. He came to power when Yanukovich left office and the US gave an opinion that it seemed workable. Pretty sure Yatsenyuk lost the support of his party not long after and announced resignation, then the election was held and the new bloke went in transparently.

Svoboda: Yes Svoboda were attached to a coalition of sorts (3 parties, I think?) including Yatsenyuk's - and I at no point will claim Svoboda are anything other than the resident ratbag party like One Nation or Reform UK, tho even more extreme. Thankfully they were only a hanger-on and only for those months between Yanukovich and Poroshenko. Pretty sure they've still been contesting elections and never get more than 2% support and more recently less than 1%. I get myself confused a bit sometimes thinking Yetsenuk was the president, not the prime minister - so I'm not 100% sure on who's who year to year.
Ukraine definitely leaned more to nationalism after the revolution - meaning self-determination of that nation's own future. It's pure dichotomy, nationalism v external subservience. Somehow Russia equates nationalism with nazism, or that word again "fascism". It seems to be a language disconnect.

CIA personnel in Ukraine : Sorry all, thought everyone was talking about the Russian claim there were NATO bases in Ukraine near the Russian border. Yes CIA did train Ukrainian intelligence officers on-site. In fact I think that's how the MH17 reality was exposed - Ukrainian intel used this specific education & network to reveal the Russian complicity. Note though that a) Ukraine requested this involvement, b) there's no "bragging" but there is thankfulness for the assistance, and c) this was an enabler, with minimal US personnel to help create a Ukrainian system. This is a fantastic venture focussed on giving Ukraine the power to grow its intelligence gathering prowess against the threat of an imperialist neighbour who have been invading everyone around it for decades.

Pro-Russian v Neutral : No such thing as neutral to Russia. The Russian form of neutral, is Russian. They are on a purely imperialist bent, and if you don't oppose Russia, you become a Russian conduit to attack those who do (Belarus, Chechnya). And the US have indeed supported Ukraine (not nearly enough imo), but this hasn't caused any loss of life. Russia invading is the cause.
My analogy is this: If a bunch of my mates comes to a bunch of your mates and tries to murder you all, and you all fight back, and one of you dies in the attempt - are you at fault for their death? If a neighbour throws your mate a crowbar to fight with, but that mate dies in the fight, is your neighbour to blame for them dying?

Imperialist v fascist. I personally rarely use the word fascist as I have never been fully clear what it means. I use the word imperialist. I also will call Russia terrorist due to deliberate and targetted attacks on purely civilian populations, and genocidal, due to their history of ethnic deportations and ethnoforming, including in Ukraine multiple times.
Are Russia the only country guilty of imperialism? Hell no. It's basically another word for colonialism. Does it make it right. Also hell, also no.

I see you still seem to think that negotiating with Russia is somehow going to result in less destruction to Ukraine than fighting on - even though negotiating with Russia never goes this way. Russia has ultimately either destroyed or subjected every group who tried to negotiate with them. I cannot understand how some could believe Ukraine will be different. Russia haven't even claimed to have changed its nature. It's like an abuser saying "oh I'm different now honey, I've changed, I won't hit you anymore" except it's lacking all of those words and instead is a demand to stop resisting.

Until there is any sign of change, Russia will continue to act the way it has acted every time prior. If Ukraine negotiates on Russia's terms, Ukraine is dead. Everybody, everywhere, knows this. Especially Russia. Russia counts on it.