Forum menu
Well maybe I'm alone but I felt very much distinctly like I was bullied off the thread yesterday for wanting to keep it more on current affairs and what is actually going on. Probably a few others decided to take a rain check and come back a few pages later too, hoping the bigger egos had sorted out their hypothetical arguments about whose opinion is the most important. .
Maybe certain posters aren't trolling on purpose, however the language they use and some of their responses are antagonistic and certainly causing me to get angry. I thought, for the first time ever, about complaining to the mods and asking for them to get a timeout for a little while and think about what they say and how it may impact others. As it was I gave myself a timeout....
As an example, a single strike on an oil refinery has multiple potential implications worthy of discussion. Interpreting that as war porn is perhaps understandable in complete isolation
The thing that floors me when folks are accused of it, is; The weapons being used tell you intimate detail about the political situation, and without that knowledge you can only speculate. Take this image for instance
It's a recently publicised image of an IDF F16 with bombs under its wings, right? So, unless you know that those are M117 unguided bombs likely made in the 70's then how can you start to ask the questions that spring to mind: Has the IDF run out of guided munitions? Unless you know what these are - you have to take at face value IDF claims to be using precision weapons, and yet here is proof that they are not. and perhaps most importantly: Who has authorised the use of these indiscriminate weapons in a place like Gaza, and what are they saying publicly about it?
without knowing about "war porn" you only get half the picture.
Agreed nickc, it's a point well made
Russian talk of going nuclear is just boasting aimed at a domestic audience, everybody else knows that it’s just bluffing.
Or rather it's wishful thinking because the alternative is too horrific to contemplate? Besides, if we know that Putin is bluffing, then equally he will know that so are we, so nothing changes. All the talk about ramping up the war and strong-arming Putin is hot air. The reality is that he's going nowhere and the Ukrainians are not going to regain the territory he's gained without direct western involvement. Then there's the moral question of the west expecting Ukraine to fight a perpetual war of attrition with very little hope of victory to prevent the west being dragged into a direct confrontation with Putin. When the Ukrainians I've met tell me that they're sick of being used as cannon fodder for the west's proxy war with Russia I'm inclined to sympathise with them.
So what is their preference? For the unprovoked invasion to succeed?
The ones I've met tell me they would accept being a neutral state with the Donbas being self-governing and aligned with Russia. I have no idea if that's achievable but if it's that or a decade of attritional war with the ever-present threat of missiles being fired at them then it's a no-brainer (obviously I'm only talking about the Ukrainians I know, not saying they represent popular opinion).
They also tell me that if people in the west are so keen on continuing the war then perhaps they should volunteer themselves to go over and fight it, which I can't really disagree with. I wonder how many on this thread would be prepared to do that to uphold the principle of standing up to fascism?
The ones I’ve met tell me they would accept being a neutral state with the Donbas being self-governing and aligned with Russia. I have no idea if that’s achievable
Putin has proven that a) he was happy to invade the rest of Ukraine having sat in the southern parts for the last decade as an occupier and b) has stated verbally and has printed policy that the ownership of Ukraine is his end goal.
So sadly this would not work.
The ones I’ve met tell me they would accept being a neutral state with the Donbas being self-governing and aligned with Russia.
Given that Putin tried to Invade via Kiev kinda makes the whole idea redundant doesn't it. Putin isn't interested in having Donbas, he'd see that as failure. He wants the whole thing. I can see why some Ukrainians would settle for this as a way to stop the conflict, but I doubt that it would. It would just allow the Russian military some breathing space. If the Donbas wants to join Russia, then let Russia move out, the the Donbas can be restored to how it was before, and then; let them vote on it.
Yeah, Russia has already gone through the process of sham annexation/referenda of most of the areas it has occupied, so for Putin and his home audience, that is already Russia. Whether 'westerners' would be willing to fight and die for the cause is a moot point, because some volunteers have done just that already (in small numbers), but 'western' troops is a different beast, for all the reasons previously discussed: it'd then be a military escalation between NATO and Russia. There isn't the political will to do that yet, for good or ill, and so we're left with it being the next best/worse thing - as much material and military support as possible without going down that route.
Yes, Ukrainians are paying the price for that, but it's also not just about western military/political gain and Ukraine being 'used', it's primarily about Ukraine's survival as an independent state. Yes, western interests flow from that of course, but the alternative is a defeated Ukraine that becomes another Belarus Putin puppet state, with all the dangers that poses, and all the losses that would mean for Ukraine as a country and a people. The functional defeat of Russia is pushing it back to pre-2014 borders, and that being the internationally acceptable end point, and the most desirable one for Ukraine. It's a harsh, harsh reality that Ukrainians will do most of the dying for it, but there's no feasible alternatives currently open to do much else...
We should send some of the STW big hitters over to bore Putin to death
The weapons being used tell you intimate detail about the political situation
They also tell you a huge amount about the tactical and strategic doctrine and maturity of the military leadership.
The line between knowledge and warporn is fine and at times people do step over it, I find it a strange mixture of repulsive and curious.
But that's my issue and understand war is incredibly alluring for people who've not witnessed it. Reminds me of people watching beheading videos at the height of ISIS/AQ.
Theres some recent research published by KIIS on Ukrainian attitudes to territorial concessions.
https://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=1301&page=2
For those actually living in the most affected areas it has this.
However, despite the indicated trends for residents of the South and East, a convincing majority among them (74% in the South and 73% in the East) are against any territorial concessions.
among all categories, the majority is against any territorial concessions, in particular, 65% of Russian-speaking citizens are against concessions
Chrome used for translation.
Edit, that was mostly meh
Theres some recent research published by KIIS on Ukrainian attitudes to territorial concessions.
That feels familiar.
Afghans in Kabul were relatively ambivalent about the Taliban as they were enjoying (of sorts) a daily life free of them and gun battles with ISAF troops in their back garden.
Whereas the civilians living in contested areas had far stronger opinions and just wanted to get back to a simple life free of occupation by anyone.
So sadly this would not work.
Maybe not but it's not the place of cosseted westerners to tell them that is it? If that view is a popular one then it's up to the Ukrainians themselves to find out if it's achievable. It's all very well saying it will give the Russians breathing space, but it will also give the Ukrainian population that too, and I suspect that's who needs it most right now.
But that’s my issue and understand war is incredibly alluring for people who’ve not witnessed it.
That's exactly the problem I have with much of the 'commentary' on this thread. Maybe it should be limited to those who have served and experienced it first hand. War is one of those issues where I think those who think it's necessary should step forward and be the first in line to fight it. They'd soon change their minds.
That’s exactly the problem I have with much of the ‘commentary’ on this thread. Maybe it should be limited to those who have served and experienced it first hand. War is one of those issues where I think those who think it’s necessary should step forward and be the first in line to fight it. They’d soon change their minds.
Healthy challenge and being open to challenge is key to avoiding that, a military response is a valid response but it needs a balanced set of conflicting perspectives to ensure it's the right choice.
I have friends who are absolute hippies as a result of war, whereas others are happy to go kinetic over a minor slight, so I would not say that those who have experienced war can be objective and pragmatic all the time. In fact our bias can be an unhelpful thing.
Maybe not but it’s not the place of cosseted westerners to tell them that is it? If that view is a popular one then it’s up to the Ukrainians themselves to find out if it’s achievable
It is up to them. They are the ones asking for and then using the weapons which are being sent. If the Ukrainians werent in favour of continuing to fight then the weapons would just be gathering dust.
The obvious problem, as others have pointed out, is no one sane would trust Putin to a peace treaty as anything other than an opportunity to rearm and plan a better attack next time round.
As for being neutral. Thats effectively isolationism and that doesnt tend to end well for anyone especially small countries. As the Estonian memo said about taking advantage of that narrow period of time to join Nato "the most important lesson is simple: time is short and time will not wait for small nations."
TJ do you appreciate the enormity of that statement? If you’re right then there’s a significant chance we’ll all be dead soon. In this instance ruling out any negotiation is borderline psychopathic.
1. Did you not bother to read whst I said about nukes
2. There is no point to any negotiation fir reasins outlined
3. Why so antagonistic and personal and unpleasant?. You and you alone are stinking up this useful and informative thread with personal attacks
I have friends who are absolute hippies as a result of war, whereas others are happy to go kinetic over a minor slight, so I would not say that those who have experienced war can be objective and pragmatic all the time. In fact our bias can be an unhelpful thing.
Same. Much as I think our current crop of politicians are a bunch of useless CU next Tuesdays, I'm glad I live in a country where elected politicians and not soldiers decide on military deployments. Yes, I know that doesn't always work out - Iraq war etc. but it's far better than the green machine deciding as happens in some countries. The thought of some of the headbangers I served under making those kind of decisions is too awful to contemplate.
Why so antagonistic and personal and unpleasant?
TJ there was nothing antagonistic in that comment, just an alternaive point of view. You of all people should understand that. 🤔
For a thread that daily deals with the horror of death and destruction this one really has a low bar for taking offence where there is none. Someone having a different view on whether war is justifiable or effective really shouldn't be perceived as offensive or unacceptable.
The thought of some of the headbangers I served under making those kind of decisions is too awful to contemplate.
Word.
Love a meme.
Ukraine isn't Afghanistan. I think that it's fair to say that most Ukrainians know that Russia would only use a negotiated transfer of territory to pause and regroup, just as they did in 2014. Most Ukrainians probably understand that as recently as 1992, Ukraine held the third largest nuclear deterrent in the world, which were traded in exchange for peace with Yeltsin. It's very much an existential fight for them.
Appeasement doesn't work
Yep. I agree with TJ there. Putin doesn't have the luxury of being able to hide his ambitions or explain them away as hubris, the only way forward is containment until such time as Putin is too weak and/or senile to go on the offensive.
Look up a Russian doctrine called “Escalate to De-Escalate” if you want to know how Russia thinks about their use. Essentially it boils down to – Tell your enemy that you will use them right at the start of any conflict in order to shock them into doing what you want; surrendering, or negotiating.
Thank you for the context Nickc - also the point about late model Israeli F16s pictured fitted with 1970s vintage "dumb" bombs is quite salient here too.
Ukraine isn’t Afghanistan.
I'm well aware, the point was that often those furthest from the fighting often hold a different or lower resolution opinion to those who see it up close.
I've met a few Ukrainians in the UK who have a variation of views on this topic, the one thing they all share is wanting it to be over. The how varies due to their own context, I wouldn't presume to be so arrogant to tell them they're wrong.
As much as I admire the engineering involved in some military vehicles and equipment, I find some folk's seemingly infatuation for machinery and equipment that is actually killing people as per design a bit much.
I'm not sure why I find people who are equally as passionate for old equipment and vehicles from say the 2nd world war more acceptable, I don't know but do accept it as a bit of a double standard.
I do think that there has to be some sort of concession at some point for the war to end, and think it'd be better to do it sooner than later to try to limit the amount of destruction to Ukraine (this might be too late for some cities).
But as long as Ukraine are given weapons and hope of a win, the concessions do not look an acceptable option to them.
China is the only country I can think of who can broker this deal, I just don't know what they would get out of doing it.
Some of the kit I've used is now in a few museums. All the kit @blokeuptheroad used is definitely in museums 😉
Every generation will have had people invested across a spectrum of motivations; some we might understand, some we might find a bit bizarre.
I think over the course of many public engagement events I've probably met every stripe.
As I said earlier, war and warfare is incredibly alluring for reasons only a psychologist could fathom.
TJ do you appreciate the enormity of that statement? If you’re right then there’s a significant chance we’ll all be dead soon. In this instance ruling out any negotiation is borderline psychopathic.
No personal attack or name calling there at all🙄
TJ there was no personal attack. I simply disagreed with your statement. If you want to read more into it there’s not much I can do about that but I can assure you it’s not the case.
Aye right. Direct quote above. Everyone can see.
Anyway its stunk up this thread enough
war and warfare is incredibly alluring for reasons only a psychologist could fathom.
Youd need rather more than one. And although it was me having a dig on this topic yesterday, I do actually wholly agree the fascination with the actual fighting is odd, the "interest" in outcomes of conflict I can understand a bit better. As in, what's the least horrible way to achieve a lasting peace that does not trigger further conflicts in different countries.
Someone mentioned confusion asto why it becomes more acceptable with passage of time. I also dont really understand that either.
Take this guy, in my view, literally one of the most horrible ** to ever have lived. He gets a massive statue and as often as not gets lauded for achievements, and not pilloried for being a mass murdering *. Its bizarre.
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/RVf3ppmN/Genghis-Khan-Equestrian-Statue.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/RVf3ppmN/Genghis-Khan-Equestrian-Statue.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
The EU and US (and any other willing countries) need to implement a complete block of any trade with Russia and cut them off from any financial institutions they have control of. Ideally then they would give countries that still continue to trade an ultimatum to stop (or severely curtail) within 12 months or they'll face sanctions to. Ofc the latter will never happen as that would collapse the global economy (if China, India etc. didn't play ball) but it's still madness to me there's EU & US trade with Russia still happening.
Direct quote above. Everyone can see.
Care to explain where the personal attack was? I literally have no idea what you're talking about. The main thing that stinks up this thread is the complete lack of tolerance for any form of different opinion to the majority and the active cancellation of others views, which you're indulging in right now.
The EU and US (and any other willing countries) need to implement a complete block of any trade with Russia and cut them off from any financial institutions they have control of.
Agree and said as much when all this kicked off. The problem though is that western populations won't tolerate the hardships that would result, and western govts won't provide the economic support to their populations. Look at the impact that energy price inflation had. A total economic blockade would be much worse.
The problem though is that western populations won’t tolerate the hardships that would result
This is the same gamble that Hitler relied on. He thought US soldiers would be soft and would run away at the slightest hardship as he thought their lives so cosseted and luxurious. The same is also true of the great war when Kitchener worried that young men wouldn't volunteer as they'd become too used to the finer things and too individualistic to sign up.
I watched that BBC2 documentary about the Ukrainian soldiers defending the railway. It's eye-opening. Safe to say that those fellas wouldn't settle for the Donbas being Russian.
The problem though is that western populations won’t tolerate the hardships that would result
People are more resilient and resourceful than what they and others often believe. At the outset it may be uncomfortable but people adapt.
Heard good things about the doc, fair play to the team capturing it as raw as you can for TV audiences.
This is the same gamble that Hitler relied on. He thought US soldiers would be soft and would run away at the slightest hardship as he thought their lives so cosseted and luxurious.
Japan misjudged it even more badly - they thought that the U.S. wouldn't have the stomach for war and would sign a peace treaty that ceded Asia and the Western Pacific to Japan. Japanese right-wingers were utterly deluded about the U.S. and tried to assassinate Charlie Chaplin in 1932, assuming that this would lead to war with the U.S. (and therefore a glorious victory for the Emperor.)
Delusions like this seem to be a common, nearly universal, mistake - people get caught up in their own propaganda about the righteousness of their cause and the purity of spirit of their nation and assume that their side will quickly prevail.
Kersch bridge was damaged last night, along with the sustained attacks on svestapol it must be getting increasing difficult for the russians in crimea, I wouldn't be surprised if we will see some ground assaults soon.
Tactically with the A50's removed from play, the black sea fleet seemingly neutralised, and now the bridge out of action its looking really difficult to continue to defend
Sorry, A50's ?
Russias airborne radar / command centres
Ukraine are systematically destroying key radar and comms capabilities in crimea, along with a quarter of the black sea fleet. With the bridge potentially damaged again (I haven't seen any formal confirmation of damage yet) its going to cause more issues
Sorry, A50’s ?
Beriev A-50 radar plane. Russia only had about 6 of them. Ukraine has shot down 2, it sounds like Russia has withdrawn them from operations near the border. Makes it much easier for the Ukraine air force to operate.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1748344835038212552
https://twitter.com/UKikaski/status/1761379098666877096
I think the Russian air force has 6 A50U's and the Ukrainians have claimed 3 - one in a drone attack last year, and shot down two more with SAMs this year. And they've claimed they've damaged the repair facility that the Russians use for these planes.
This is the same gamble that Hitler relied on. He thought US soldiers would be soft and would run away at the slightest hardship as he thought their lives so cosseted and luxurious.
Don't think there's any doubt that western armed forces would put up a fight, quite the opposite in fact. The problem lies in western economies, governments and civilian populations. Anywhere you look in the west you can see examples of how unprepared and unwilling western countries are to commit to an effective war effort. Republicans in the US are worrying about how much money the weapons are costing. The UK govt doesn't want to mitigate energy price inflation. The German govt won't countenance not using Russian gas. If we moved to a war-based economy (which is what would be required) market capitalism would effectively be suspended, markets would crash and millions in the west would see their pensions, savings and assets collapse. The west may be tougher than Putin thinks, but I don't think anyone is ready or willing for what is really required.