Russia - Ukraine Conflict 2022 (71 Viewers)

[Strickland]

We discussed it before, I disagree that this war has anything to do with internal considerations. I think Putin is much more popular then people give him credit, he is an extension of the people and Russians culture, not an opponent of it.

The Levada rating is generally considered to be more trustful, as they're officially named a foreign agent in Russia (therefore at least formally not a part of Russian State propaganda). Look at what annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine did to Putins ratings, app. 20 point jumps both times:

https://www.levada.ru/en/ratings/

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Juventino[RUS]]

The Levada rating is generally considered to be more trustful, as they're officially named a foreign agent in Russia (therefore at least formally not a part of Russian State propaganda). Look at what annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine did to Putins ratings, app. 20 point jumps both times:

https://www.levada.ru/en/ratings/

all these ratings are pure fake

- - - Updated - - -

Reuters: Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba said he could neither confirm nor deny Ukraine's involvement in the fire at the oil depot in Belgorod

 

[Strickland]

it can be wrong but It's strange or not only depending on your assumption of Russia end game here.
To me it's annexing/establishing proxies in east part of Ukraine and forcing naturality as secondary goal. I Don't think Russia has real interest in actually occupying western Ukraine.

Dealing of Russia with eastern Ukraine could have played out like the war for Crimea and Donbass, a limited conflict with less intensive fighting and less deaths. those conflict had a few thousand deaths over 10 years opposed to the tens of thousands already and that number will only get worse.

NATO didn't make them do anything, Russia asked for considerations and guarantees on Ukraine status and they were ignored for a decade. Now from Russian perspective they have the casus Belli to forcibly submit the whole country into "naturality" instead of just occupying some of the territories they want. This gives them a much stronger negotiating position to force Ukraine into larger territorial concessions.

Also that rejection of their concern caused Putin and Russia to take this as a sign of disrespect or belittling and and it caused them to go blindly into this show of force (which failed ). I don't think we should ignore Putin ego and dreams of unipolar world. They went up a tree they can't get down from and more people suffer for it.

I guess we will all see what the final agreement between the sides will look like and then in hindsight people will be much smarter on how and if this could have been avoided to a degree.

Man every time I try to bring the discussion back to the point we're arguing - the real, tangible influence of NATO on the conflict, you bring out 5 paragraphs of sideways stuff like "negotiating positions" and crap like that. To sum it up, NATO/the West bruised Putins ego. That we can agree on, but imo all of the blame, 100% still lies on Russia here, Putins ego is his problem and no one else's.

Could the West have done better? imo yes, but not by being softer and gentler with Russia/Putin, but the complete opposite - by being a lot harsher. Putin made his plans clear already in 2007, it took Germany ~15 years to grasp that he was serious and not at all speaking figuratively.

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

Man every time I try to bring the discussion back to the point we're arguing - the real, tangible influence of NATO on the conflict, you bring out 5 paragraphs of sideways stuff like "negotiating positions" and crap like that. To sum it up, NATO/the West bruised Putins ego. That we can agree on, but imo all of the blame, 100% still lies on Russia here, Putins ego is his problem and no one else's.

Could the West have done better? imo yes, but not by being softer and gentler with Russia/Putin, but the complete opposite - by being a lot harsher. Putin made his plans clear already in 2007, it took Germany ~15 years to grasp that he was serious and not at all speaking figuratively.

NATO Is a world saving organization and they've done everything right but they should have added Sweden, Norway and Finland to NATO long time ago. All this nonsense about threats to Russia from NATO bases in Ukraine has nothing to do with reality. Russian propaganda has turned people frm the west into antiamerican\nato imbeciles unfortunately.

 

[Tomice]

The Levada rating is generally considered to be more trustful, as they're officially named a foreign agent in Russia (therefore at least formally not a part of Russian State propaganda). Look at what annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine did to Putins ratings, app. 20 point jumps both times:

https://www.levada.ru/en/ratings/

Thats fair, its a part of the considrations. But you can also look at this and say that at his lowest ever heis at 60%, which is absourdly high. If those numbers legit it proves my point that he is an extansion of russian sentiment.

- - - Updated - - -

Man every time I try to bring the discussion back to the point we're arguing - the real, tangible influence of NATO on the conflict, you bring out 5 paragraphs of sideways stuff like "negotiating positions" and crap like that. To sum it up, NATO/the West bruised Putins ego. That we can agree on, but imo all of the blame, 100% still lies on Russia here, Putins ego is his problem and no one else's.

Could the West have done better? imo yes, but not by being softer and gentler with Russia/Putin, but the complete opposite - by being a lot harsher. Putin made his plans clear already in 2007, it took Germany ~15 years to grasp that he was serious and not at all speaking figuratively.

Again, I have never said or contridicted the fact it's 100 on russia. I agree with everything you are saying here and said it myself many times. We seem to be cought in a strawman loop where every time the discussion turn to nuance Im asked to re confirm it's russia fault. What the point of brining the discussion back to thatv every time?

I think I was pretty consistent in saying its russia fault, they have zero moral justification and the west only blame is not being harder on russia.

I said this before the war even started

It's the west fault in the sense that they failed to establish any sort of deterrence against Russia on one hand and failed to bring them closer on the other (if it ever was a possibility ofc).

I completely agree that Putin is an extension of Russian sentiment and culture and not some tyrannical whackjob who hijacked a country.

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

 

[kappa96]

Man every time I try to bring the discussion back to the point we're arguing - the real, tangible influence of NATO on the conflict, you bring out 5 paragraphs of sideways stuff like "negotiating positions" and crap like that. To sum it up, NATO/the West bruised Putins ego. That we can agree on, but imo all of the blame, 100% still lies on Russia here, Putins ego is his problem and no one else's.

Could the West have done better? imo yes, but not by being softer and gentler with Russia/Putin, but the complete opposite - by being a lot harsher. Putin made his plans clear already in 2007, it took Germany ~15 years to grasp that he was serious and not at all speaking figuratively.

Pretty much this. To some Tuz posters NATO had the moral obligation to not stroke putler's ego, therefore NATO has some blame because they did. Ukraine's self determination is not important.

The only thing NATO and the EU can be blamed is not going scorched earth against putler back in 2008 when he invaded Georgia.

 

[Tomice]

forza tomice, i enjoyed you playing the devil's advocate.

still fuck russia though. i still can't see no rational and acceptable reason for what they are doing. and this war only serves chinese (and to a lesser extent, indian and opec) interests. terrible call, whatever angle you look at it from.

Just trying to keep it lively

The funny thing is I probebly dislike Russia and have more reasons to then all the triggered westren zelots here crying putin apologist constently.

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

Pretty much this. To some Tuz posters NATO had the moral obligation to not stroke putler's ego, therefore NATO has some blame because they did. Ukraine's self determination is not important.

The only thing NATO and the EU can be blamed is not going scorched earth against putler back in 2008 when he invaded Georgia.

They should have sanctioned Russia really badly back then

 

[kappa96]

Also they should drop the "they didn't know in what they are getting in" rutine the russian soldiers spew.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/03/30/7335744/

Russia has a long history of pillaging everything in their path.
Some "brothers" , huh?

 

[campionesidd]

it can be wrong but It's strange or not only depending on your assumption of Russia end game here.
To me it's annexing/establishing proxies in east part of Ukraine and forcing naturality as secondary goal. I Don't think Russia has real interest in actually occupying western Ukraine.

Dealing of Russia with eastern Ukraine could have played out like the war for Crimea and Donbass, a limited conflict with less intensive fighting and less deaths. those conflict had a few thousand deaths over 10 years opposed to the tens of thousands already and that number will only get worse.

NATO didn't make them do anything, Russia asked for considerations and guarantees on Ukraine status and they were ignored for a decade. Now from Russian perspective they have the casus Belli to forcibly submit the whole country into "naturality" instead of just occupying some of the territories they want. This gives them a much stronger negotiating position to force Ukraine into larger territorial concessions.

Also that rejection of their concern caused Putin and Russia to take this as a sign of disrespect or belittling and and it caused them to go blindly into this show of force (which failed ). I don't think we should ignore Putin ego and dreams of unipolar world. They went up a tree they can't get down from and more people suffer for it.

I guess we will all see what the final agreement between the sides will look like and then in hindsight people will be much smarter on how and if this could have been avoided to a degree.

You didn’t listen to Putin’s insane speech where he basically said Ukraine is part of Russia and doesn’t deserve to be a country? The man told you why he is invading, and yet you keep making pathetic excuses for him. It’s ridiculous really.

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

Also they should drop the "they didn't know in what they are getting in" rutine the russian soldiers spew.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2022/03/30/7335744/

Russia has a long history of pillaging everything in their path.
Some "brothers" , huh?

thievery by Russian soldiers is easy to explain - a huge mass of soldiers enter the Russian army from villages, from the provincial and poor regions of the country and because other social elevators doesn't exists there they choose contract military service for some kind of stability and in addition to monetary allowances, various benefits and material compensations have been established for soldiers alongside with social package

- - - Updated - - -

You didn’t listen to Putin’s insane speech where he basically said Ukraine is part of Russia and doesn’t deserve to be a country? The man told you why he is invading, and yet you keep making pathetic excuses for him. It’s ridiculous really.

he's a madman

 

[Tomice]

You didn’t listen to Putin’s insane speech where he basically said Ukraine is part of Russia and doesn’t deserve to be a country? The man told you why he is invading, and yet you keep making pathetic excuses for him. It’s ridiculous really.

He also said bio labs, nazis, NATO and a million other reasons. You pick his "true" reason to suite you argument

You'er either trolling or you cant comprehend text. Either way Im not bothering with strawmman arguments anymore.

 

[Post Ironic]

Just trying to keep it lively

The funny thing is I probebly dislike Russia and have more reasons to then all the triggered westren zelots here crying putin apologist constently.

So you’ve been trolling the whole time. Good to know. Thanks.

Dusan and Nzoric get labelled NATO blamers because they have been blaming the west/NATO since before this whole thing kicked off. Saying things like “I’m not justifying Russia’s invasion but NATO is also at fault for it.” Poor fellows, having their own statements used against them.

Triggered western zealots? Boring lol

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

Seeing all these Maxar photos when I own PlanetLab stock, feelsbadman

 

[Juventino[RUS]]

official Kremlin newspaper from 2014 - Russia is not going to annex Crimea and send troops

 

[U Picciriddu]

This video is staying under the radar here.

Guys I really recommend watching it. It gives a clear view about NATO weapons making the difference, Russian wounded/casualties/captured soldiers (up to 40k), strategical problems for Russia, etc. The best Caspian report so far imo.

 

[Knowah]

You'd think Europe and the US would've learned their lesson with WW2 that appeasing an aggressive nation WHO TELLS YOU WHAT THEY WANT does not give the results you're looking for. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of many within modern politics who truly believe there is always room for diplomacy with everyone.

That is simply not the case. What's the phrase, some people just want to watch the world burn? I don't think it's a burning world but some people just want to use their power to accrue more power. And no amount of appeasement (seen as weakness and thus used to accrue more power) or diplomacy (seen as weakness as they use it to delay and to confirm to the diplomats that they are willing to talk while they seize power elsewhere) works with people in these mindsets.

Across Europe, America, and most of the world, nations who don't necessarily always think of using their power for territorial gains believe everybody thinks the same and everybody feels the same. This is simply false. Also, I blame the American thought process concerning diplomacy on the US being a relatively new nation. The US cannot fathom how a nation with a thousand years of history on the same lands feels or thinks. The US cannot fathom how Russians view Ukrainians and the lands of Kiev and the lands that their pagan ancestors fought over and ruled as tribes 1300 years ago feel. And because the US cannot fathom this thought process of TRUE history, the US believes that everybody is okay with the modern nation states and modern borders.

This is so naive, it truly is American.

 

[Ronn]

He also said bio labs, nazis, NATO and a million other reasons. You pick his "true" reason to suite you argument

You'er either trolling or you cant comprehend text. Either way Im not bothering with strawmman arguments anymore.

There’s a difference between all other reasons and that one particular one: all others justify the invasion based on homeland security, while historical claim, is, well, a historical claim.

 

[U Picciriddu]

You'd think Europe and the US would've learned their lesson with WW2 that appeasing an aggressive nation WHO TELLS YOU WHAT THEY WANT does not give the results you're looking for. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of many within modern politics who truly believe there is always room for diplomacy with everyone.

That is simply not the case. What's the phrase, some people just want to watch the world burn? I don't think it's a burning world but some people just want to use their power to accrue more power. And no amount of appeasement (seen as weakness and thus used to accrue more power) or diplomacy (seen as weakness as they use it to delay and to confirm to the diplomats that they are willing to talk while they seize power elsewhere) works with people in these mindsets.

Across Europe, America, and most of the world, nations who don't necessarily always think of using their power for territorial gains believe everybody thinks the same and everybody feels the same. This is simply false. Also, I blame the American thought process concerning diplomacy on the US being a relatively new nation. The US cannot fathom how a nation with a thousand years of history on the same lands feels or thinks. The US cannot fathom how Russians view Ukrainians and the lands of Kiev and the lands that their pagan ancestors fought over and ruled as tribes 1300 years ago feel. And because the US cannot fathom this thought process of TRUE history, the US believes that everybody is okay with the modern nation states and modern borders.

This is so naive, it truly is American.

Kiev existed before Moscow did tho.

Russia can’t decide about the territorial integrity of Ukraine, that’s simply the case tho. Doesn’t have much to do with the US.