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.

 

[Johnny_Dogg4]

 

[wannabejack]

Breaking News: Qatar to Supply Half Its PzH 2000 Howitzers to Ukraine After Buying German RCH 155 8x8 howitzers

Breaking News: Qatar to Supply Half Its PzH 2000 Howitzers to Ukraine After Buying German RCH 155 8x8 howitzersystem

armyrecognition.com

Qatar has generally maintained a neutral stance regarding the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, often advocating for diplomatic solutions and peaceful dialogue. Qatar's foreign policy traditionally emphasizes mediation and conflict resolution. The nation has engaged in various diplomatic efforts in the Middle East and beyond but has not publicly aligned itself militarily in the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Any significant shift in Qatar's stance, especially involving military support, would likely be accompanied by official statements and widespread media coverage.

If confirmed, Qatar's decision to purchase RCH 155 artillery systems and supply Ukraine with half of its PzH 2000 howitzers represents a noteworthy development in international efforts to support Ukraine. The move not only aids Ukraine's military capabilities but also reflects the complex web of global alliances and defense strategies influencing the region's security landscape.

 

[IlovethePies]

You need another vodka with that sort of posting.

Explain how referring to posters as "vatniks" and implying that they drink vodka in particular is not racist/Russophobic.

 

[IlovethePies]

With this logic any country that has a nuclear weapon can demand (and expect the world to demand they hand over) anything from any country without nukes, unless they are in an alliance with a nuclear umbrella element (NATO, ANZUS etc.). Nukes are for countries to prevent existential threats to a state. There's no existential threat to Russia. If they left Ukraine tomorrow, Ukraine would leave Russia and NATO wouldn't suddenly try to invade Moscow.

How do you know there is "no existential threat to Russia"? Or, how do you know that even if you, the clairvoyant Andre, thinks there is no existential threat, that might not be the case for the military and political leadership in Russia?

How do all these blithe assumptions get made here by individuals who claim to be able to mindread the leadership of a country finding itself under attack by NATO through its Ukrainian proxy?

What would the US do if China started arming proxy forces in Mexico with long range missiles and then began openly to discuss allowing these proxies to use them to hit targets deep within the US, including the capital Washington DC?

Would you then claim that the US would not react by using nuclear weapons, because since 1945 it hasn't done so yet?
Or, more likely, you would support the US in using nuclear weapons against China, thereby leading to the destruction of the planet.

And don't even begin to argue that the analogy is not correct because the US has not invaded a sovereign country, because if you did that , you would be a moron. The list of sovereign countries that the US has invaded, and bombed dwarfs that of Putin's Russia.

 

[Zidane98]

Explain how referring to posters as "vatniks" and implying that they drink vodka in particular is not racist/Russophobic.

Easy. Donald Trump is the biggest vatnik in the world and Poles are the biggest vodka drinkers. Ukranians also like the odd bottle here and there.

In other words vatniks & vodka drinking has nothing to do with race and everything to do with moronic defending of Russian actions in Ukraine to the nth degree. They come from all walks of life.

You may want to go back to your employer and come up with a better script for vatniks / drinking vodka. This response isn't working for you at all.

 

[Zidane98]

How do you know there is "no existential threat to Russia"? Or, how do you know that even if you think there is no existential threat, that might not be the case for the military and political leadership in Russia?

How all these blithe assumptions are made here by individuals who claim to be able to mindread the leadership of a country finding itself under attack by NATO through its Ukrainian proxy?

What would the US do if China started arming proxy forces in Mexico with long range missiles and then began openly to discuss allowing these proxies to use them to hit targets deep within the US, including the capital Washington DC?

Would you then claim that the US would not react by using nuclear weapons, because since 1945 it hasn't done so yet?
Or, more likely, you would support the US in using nuclear weapons against China, thereby leading to the destruction of the planet.

And don't even begin to argue that the analogy is not correct because the US has not invaded a sovereign country, because if you did that , you would be a moron. The list of sovereign countries that the US has invaded, and bombed dwarfs that of Putin's Russia.

Stop talking about the US. Ukraine are bring invaded by the biggest threat to world peace since Hitler in WW2 and all you can ramble on about is the US / NATO delusional conspiracies.

 

[IlovethePies]

Stop talking about the US. Ukraine are bring invaded by the biggest threat to world peace since Hitler in WW2 and all you can ramble on about is the US / NATO delusional conspiracies.

In a nutshell, you are totally wrong.
The biggest threat to world peace is US imperialism.
It is on a mission to redivide the globe in its own interests.

 

[Zidane98]

In a nutshell, you are totally wrong.
The biggest threat to world peace is US imperialism.
It is on a mission to redivide the globe in its own interests.

Great. Go start a conspiracy thread about that very topic if you desire. Nobody is stopping you. This isn't the thread for it.


This is the Ukraine war thread where Putin, harbouring delusions of recreating USSR 2.0 lite is invading Ukraine / attempting to force Russian fascism on the people of Ukraine simply because they have chosen a future as part of Europe and definitely not as a puppet state that Putin can rape / pillage for his own gain.

Keep your discussion to Ukraine / Russia and the war they are fighting and you'll be golden.

 

[IlovethePies]

Easy. Donald Trump is the biggest vatnik in the world and Poles are the biggest vodka drinkers. Ukranians also like the odd bottle here and there.

In other words vatniks & vodka drinking has nothing to do with race and everything to do with moronic defending of Russian actions in Ukraine to the nth degree. They come from all walks of life.

You may want to go back to your employer and come up with a better script for vatniks / drinking vodka. This response isn't working for you at all.

Ha ha...context is king Zidane. I can see you scurrying to the exit doors with the pathetic gibberish above which attempts to defend the indefensible.

You are referring to posters whom you think are "supporting Russia" by suggesting that they drink too much vodka and are "vatniks". Some of your comrades- in - arms here have also referred to these posters as "Boris" and also suggest that they are overindulging in vodka.

Get over yourself Zidane. Your comments express bigotry.

 

[Bloods86]

How do you know there is "no existential threat to Russia"? Or, how do you know that even if you, the clairvoyant Andre, thinks there is no existential threat, that might not be the case for the military and political leadership in Russia?

How do all these blithe assumptions get made here by individuals who claim to be able to mindread the leadership of a country finding itself under attack by NATO through its Ukrainian proxy?

What would the US do if China started arming proxy forces in Mexico with long range missiles and then began openly to discuss allowing these proxies to use them to hit targets deep within the US, including the capital Washington DC?

Would you then claim that the US would not react by using nuclear weapons, because since 1945 it hasn't done so yet?
Or, more likely, you would support the US in using nuclear weapons against China, thereby leading to the destruction of the planet.

And don't even begin to argue that the analogy is not correct because the US has not invaded a sovereign country, because if you did that , you would be a moron. The list of sovereign countries that the US has invaded, and bombed dwarfs that of Putin's Russia.

I'll happily be the "moron" that says Mexico would be justified fighting back and seeking/receiving arms to do so, if the US had invaded unprovoked.

The fact that the US has been involved in or even started other conflicts, is irrelevant, no matter how much you need to pretend otherwise.

If Russia believes there is an existential threat, they are free to relieve that threat by withdrawing to their own borders. It's not the responsibility of the nation they invaded to placate them.

 

[IlovethePies]

I'll happily be the "moron" that says Mexico would be justified fighting back and seeking/receiving arms to do so, if the US had invaded unprovoked.

The fact that the US has been involved in or even started other conflicts, is irrelevant, no matter how much you need to pretend otherwise.

Really...you think it is irrelevant that the most powerful nation in the world invades and bombs sovereign countries , and interferes in their politics at will??

 

[IlovethePies]

Great. Go start a conspiracy thread about that very topic if you desire. Nobody is stopping you. This isn't the thread for it.


This is the Ukraine war thread where Putin, harbouring delusions of recreating USSR 2.0 lite is invading Ukraine / attempting to force Russian fascism on the people of Ukraine simply because they have chosen a future as part of Europe and definitely not as a puppet state that Putin can rape / pillage for his own gain.

Keep your discussion to Ukraine / Russia and the war they are fighting and you'll be golden.

a) It is not a conspiracy theory.
b) In case you hadn't noticed, I have been making the point over and over again that the US and NATO have engineered, and are escalating this war via its Ukrainian proxies. Therefore, this IS an appropriate thread for me to post my views, which I back with analysis and links.
c) The war Ukraine/Russia is actually the war US/NATO vs Russia
d) Price of gold is high atm, due to the fact that confidence in the US dollar is slowly but inexorably eroding. However, that does not mean that I am particularly concerned if you don't think I am golden.

 

[Bloods86]

Really...you think it is irrelevant that the most powerful nation in the world invades and bombs sovereign countries , and interferes in their politics at will??

It's relevant to some other conflicts absolutely.

It's not relevant to Russia's invasions of Ukraine, outside of a parallel to what I can only assume is your equal condemnation of Russia behaving in the same way, as they have been doing.

 

[Andre]

How do you know there is "no existential threat to Russia"? Or, how do you know that even if you, the clairvoyant Andre, thinks there is no existential threat, that might not be the case for the military and political leadership in Russia?

An existential threat, is a countries very existence is threatened. Russia's is not threatened. Now if the US/NATO said they plan to supply Ukraine with weapons so they can take Moscow, that'd be an existential threat. That's not happening or ever going to happen though. Putin has delusions of Empire, but he full well knows NATO isn't going to invade. If he had even the smallest fear of that, he wouldn't have stripped the borders of the new NATO nation of Finland to send troops to Ukraine. He'd have done the opposite, strengthen that border now that Finland is a NATO member.

 

[IlovethePies]

It's relevant to some other conflicts absolutely.

It's not relevant to Russia's invasions of Ukraine, outside of a parallel to what I can only assume is your equal condemnation of Russia behaving in the same way, as they have been doing.

OK...so you admit the US is involved in "some" conflicts, but despite the fact that US military advisors/politicians/CIA agents etc have been infesting Ukraine since 2014, and moreover is now involved in bankrupting its own economy in order to supply Ukraine with an inexhaustible supply of arms, you think somehow that this conflict is totally separate from any involvement from the US??

 

[Bloods86]

OK...so you admit the US is involved in "some" conflicts, but despite the fact that US military advisors/politicians/CIA agents etc have been infesting Ukraine since 2014, and moreover is now involved in bankrupting its own economy in order to supply Ukraine with an inexhaustible supply of arms, you think somehow that this conflict is totally separate from any involvement from the US??

I think those tears are affecting your reading ability.

Did I say the US was not involved in the war between Russia and Ukraine? No.

They are supplying Ukraine with arms, equipment, funds, logistical and intelligence assistance. They are obviously involved.

Lol, the US is "infesting" Ukraine, but nothing said about the nation literally invading, occupying and committing war crimes.

You were asking about the US's past invasions etc, which are not relevant to this conflict (which Russia started and has the ability to stop at any time).

The US is not bankrupting its own economy to support Ukraine. This shows a minimal understanding of a) the US budget and factors involved in their increasing federal debt, and b) the nature of the assistance to Ukraine. When you look into these things, feel free to come back and reasonably contribute to the discussion.

 

[Zidane98]

OK...so you admit the US is involved in "some" conflicts, but despite the fact that US military advisors/politicians/CIA agents etc have been infesting Ukraine since 2014, and moreover is now involved in bankrupting its own economy in order to supply Ukraine with an inexhaustible supply of arms, you think somehow that this conflict is totally separate from any involvement from the US??

The US' involvement extends no further than preventing an outbreak of regional war in Europe if Putin was successful in his invasion.

They did exactly the same with lend lease in WW2 and are doing the same now for Ukraine to help fight off invading Russian Nazis.

This is why there is also large scale support for Ukraine in Europe and most of the democratic world. The days of empire expanding & strong man intimidation are over. Putin will learn that eventually.

Ukrainian people chose a European path. They are the ones fighting off Russian fascists bravely despite massively inferior troop, infantry & artillery numbers. Not the US, not Russia, not anyone but them. Time you learnt that instead of spouting lines from a script.

 

[IlovethePies]

An existential threat, is a countries very existence is threatened. Russia's is not threatened. Now if the US/NATO said they plan to supply Ukraine with weapons so they can take Moscow, that'd be an existential threat. That's not happening or ever going to happen though. Putin has delusions of Empire, but he full well knows NATO isn't going to invade. If he had even the smallest fear of that, he wouldn't have stripped the borders of the new NATO nation of Finland to send troops to Ukraine. He'd have done the opposite, strengthen that border now that Finland is a NATO member.

But you are just repeating yourself. You are simply claiming that because you don't see an existential threat, the Putin regime doesn't either.

The Russian oligarchy has no delusions of empire. Russia simply is incapable of having such delusions. Due to its historical development, Russia occupies a relatively minor position in the global capitalist economy, and in finance capital. It is the US and EU which is freezing Russian financial assets, and not vice verca.

The standpoint of the Russian capitalist oligarchy is self-defence - of their wealth, and their "right" to accumulate profits from the exploitation of workers of all ethnicities within the Russian Federation.

The standpoint of the US is that it will not tolerate the syphoning off of significant wealth by the Russian oligarchy, and instead aims to dismember Russia by fomenting political/nationalist/ethnic conflicts which will incite an internecine war between various factions of the Russian ruling elite.

The strategic aims of the US and its NATO allies are to provoke in this way the dismemberment of Russia and the installation of puppet regimes which, for a very small price, will hand over the vast material wealth to corporate USA and corporate Europe.

By integrating Ukraine into NATO, Ukraine would become a perfect platform for launching destablising incursions into Russia and for fomenting destablilsation in Russia.

Putin is well aware of this by the way.

 

[Chief]

The Russian oligarchy has no delusions of empire.

Why do they keep taking over other countries then?

 

[Zidane98]

I think those tears are affecting your reading ability.

Did I say the US was not involved in the war between Russia and Ukraine? No.

They are supplying Ukraine with arms, equipment, funds, logistical and intelligence assistance. They are obviously involved.

Lol, the US is "infesting" Ukraine, but nothing said about the nation literally invading, occupying and committing war crimes.

You were asking about the US's past invasions etc, which are not relevant to this conflict (which Russia started and has the ability to stop at any time).

The US is not bankrupting its own economy to support Ukraine. This shows a minimal understanding of a) the US budget and factors involved in their increasing federal debt, and b) the nature of the assistance to Ukraine. When you look into these things, feel free to come back and reasonably contribute to the discussion.

Bankrupting the US is hilarious. Much of the equipment sent to Ukraine is gear that was decommissioned anyway. There is very little economic aid (actual money being transferred).

The economic value of lend lease to Ukraine is insignificant.

 

[Zidane98]

But you are just repeating yourself. You are simply claiming that because you don't see an existential threat, the Putin regime doesn't either.

The Russian oligarchy has no delusions of empire. Russia simply is incapable of having such delusions. Due to its historical development, Russia occupies a relatively minor position in the global capitalist economy, and in finance capital. It is the US and EU which is freezing Russian financial assets, and not vice verca.

The standpoint of the Russian capitalist oligarchy is self-defence - of their wealth, and their "right" to accumulate profits from the exploitation of workers of all ethnicities within the Russian Federation.

The standpoint of the US is that it will not tolerate the syphoning off of significant wealth by the Russian oligarchy, and instead aims to dismember Russia by fomenting political/nationalist/ethnic conflicts which will incite an internecine war between various factions of the Russian ruling elite.

The strategic aims of the US and its NATO allies are to provoke in this way the dismemberment of Russia and the installation of puppet regimes which, for a very small price, will hand over the vast material wealth to corporate USA and corporate Europe.

By integrating Ukraine into NATO, Ukraine would become a perfect platform for launching destablising incursions into Russia and for fomenting destablilsation in Russia.

Putin is well aware of this by the way.

Putin is also well aware if there was even a slight hint of truth all these things could be done via Finland, Poland (into Kaliningrad) & the Baltics.

What does he do? Leaves those borders completely unguarded, diverts resources to maintaining an invasion of a non NAtO member.

You obviously are replying via a script. Only way to explain your responses.

 

[Bloods86]

But you are just repeating yourself. You are simply claiming that because you don't see an existential threat, the Putin regime doesn't either.

The Russian oligarchy has no delusions of empire. Russia simply is incapable of having such delusions. Due to its historical development, Russia occupies a relatively minor position in the global capitalist economy, and in finance capital. It is the US and EU which is freezing Russian financial assets, and not vice verca.

The standpoint of the Russian capitalist oligarchy is self-defence - of their wealth, and their "right" to accumulate profits from the exploitation of workers of all ethnicities within the Russian Federation.

The standpoint of the US is that it will not tolerate the syphoning off of significant wealth by the Russian oligarchy, and instead aims to dismember Russia by fomenting political/nationalist/ethnic conflicts which will incite an internecine war between various factions of the Russian ruling elite.

The strategic aims of the US and its NATO allies are to provoke in this way the dismemberment of Russia and the installation of puppet regimes which, for a very small price, will hand over the vast material wealth to corporate USA and corporate Europe.

By integrating Ukraine into NATO, Ukraine would become a perfect platform for launching destablising incursions into Russia and for fomenting destablilsation in Russia.

Putin is well aware of this by the way.

So because Putin may be delusional, Ukraine has to compromise its sovereignty and its people?

Got it.

 

[IlovethePies]

Why do they keep taking over other countries then?

As far as I know, they haven''t taken over a single country. Ukraine hasn't been "taken over".

If you are referring to Crimea,
a) Crimea is not a country. It was formerly part of the Russian Socialist Republic, before Khruschev decreed that it would become part of the Ukrainian Socialist Republic. Naturally, this was decades before the Stalinist bureaucracy embarked upon its path to destroy the Soviet Union. Had they foreseen anything, the Stalinist bureaucrats in Moscow at the time would never have made such a decree.

b) The reason Russia took over Crimea (which by the way was supported by a vast majority of the Crimean population, as expressed in the referendum at the time) was because not doing so did pose an existential strategic threat to Russia. The entire Russian Black Sea fleet is based in Sevastopol. Allowing Ukraine, and hence NATO, to take over this port would have been a catastrophe for Russia's strategic national security.

 

[Bloods86]

As far as I know, they haven''t taken over a single country. Ukraine hasn't been "taken over".

If you are referring to Crimea,
a) Crimea is not a country. It was formerly part of the Russian Socialist Republic, before Khruschev decreed that it would become part of the Ukrainian Socialist Republic. Naturally, this was decades before the Stalinist bureaucracy embarked upon its path to destroy the Soviet Union. Had they foreseen anything, the Stalinist bureaucrats in Moscow at the time would never have made such a decree.

b) The reason Russia took over Crimea (which by the way was supported by a vast majority of the Crimean population, as expressed in the referendum at the time) was because not doing so did pose an existential strategic threat to Russia. The entire Russian Black Sea fleet is based in Sevastopol. Allowing Ukraine, and hence NATO, to take over this port would have been a catastrophe for Russia's strategic national security.

Ah so just because Russia wanted a more strategic port, they were justified in invading another country, and conducting a sham referendum to pretend (to absolutely no-one) that it was the legitimate will of the people.

Not to mention the other parts of Ukraine, and other countries Russia has invaded.

 

[IlovethePies]

Ah so just because Russia wanted a more strategic port, they were justified in invading another country, and conducting a sham referendum to pretend (to absolutely no-one) that it was the legitimate will of the people.

Not to mention the other parts of Ukraine, and other countries Russia has invaded.

Are you serious???
When did I say Putin was justified in invading Ukraine? I have consistently made the point that his invasion of Ukraine was criminal and reactionary, and completely played into the hands of US/NATO - who were provoking him precisely into this action.

When will the posters here learn that explaining does not equate to justifying.

Of course, US and Ukrainian propaganda claimed that the referendum was a sham.

However, history shows that both the US and EU have no concern about sham and illegality when it suits their interests:

"In 1991, Croatia and Slovenia held illegal referenda to secede from Yugoslavia. These were not carried out on an all-national basis, as the US claims would be needed in Ukraine for a legal Crimean referendum. Nevertheless, by January 1992, the European Union had recognised both as independent states. The US followed its example in April 1992."

US hypocrisy on Crimean independence referendum

All invocations of Ukrainian sovereignty are in reference to a government that was installed by a coup engineered and financed by the Western powers.

www.wsws.org