Russia - Ukraine Conflict 2022 (113 Viewers)

[Post Ironic]

Imo when this ends Russia will keep the teritority which they claimed, Crimea too, while Ukraine won't be allowed to join NATO. I think they wanted that ever since it started.

Did you hear what Lavrov said? I hope that's an exaggeration but he said this will last for another ten years.

It may well end like that. It may go on for quite a few years and in the end become a North Korea - South Korea type situation, and eventually NATO troops may be stationed in Western Ukraine with a DMZ between the two parts. Nothing here but complete victory is a win for Russia given they already held Crimea. Their military has been badly embarrassed by Ukraine both before and after being supplied by the west.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[AFL_ITALIA]

Eu doesn't even have guns to send to Ukraine. I don't know how anybody expect Ukraine to win this. Makes no sense. I guess media did their job well enough.

What do you need Europe for when you have the United States providing it?

 

[Dostoevsky]

What do you need Europe for when you have the United States providing it?

From what I've heard it's impossible to keep the production that high. 3 months ago there were reports about shortages, I think CNN was running it. Also, 18 billion was spent back then, so it's a question for how long it will keep going. I highly doubt the US will keep pumping it no matter what.

And it's obviously escalating. But not in a good way. It seems China is quite close when it comes to sending guns to Russia. Which is not a huge surprise since they are on the same side. But if they do get together it's kinda scary.

 

[Post Ironic]

So I guess the guy saying only the West supports Ukraine and everyone else is neutral or on Russia’s side was full of shit.

The UN resolution today condemning the Russian invasion and demanding a withdrawal had 141 countries support it. 32 supported Russia and voted no, and 6 abstained. Meaningless resolution, but shows that most of the world is clearly aligned with the west and NATO on this war.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

From what I've heard it's impossible to keep the production that high. 3 months ago there were reports about shortages, I think CNN was running it. Also, 18 billion was spent back then, so it's a question for how long it will keep going. I highly doubt the US will keep pumping it no matter what.

And it's obviously escalating. But not in a good way. It seems China is quite close when it comes to sending guns to Russia. Which is not a huge surprise since they are on the same side. But if they do get together it's kinda scary.

Shortage of what? $18B is chump change, look at what was spent on the Iraq war without anyone batting an eye . But this time, at least it's being spent for an actual purpose. China won't be supplying actual men, so at the end of the day I'd still put our weaponry over theirs.

Of course this is subject to change based on the administration in power though, and that we can't know.

 

[Raphaël]

So I guess the guy saying only the West supports Ukraine and everyone else is neutral or on Russia’s side was full of shit.

The UN resolution today condemning the Russian invasion and demanding a withdrawal had 141 countries support it. 32 supported Russia and voted no, and 6 abstained. Meaningless resolution, but shows that most of the world is clearly aligned with the west and NATO on this war.

The guy ? I assume you are talking about me.
In orange countries which sanction Russia
In blue which arm Ukraine
Both orange and blue sanction and arm Ukraine

source: RTBF (belgium)
https://www.rtbf.be/article/un-an-d...nt-lukraine-le-monde-face-au-conflit-11153884

 

[Post Ironic]

The guy ? I assume you are talking about me.
In orange countries which sanction Russia
In blue which arm Ukraine
Both orange and blue sanction and arm Ukraine

source: RTBF (belgium)
https://www.rtbf.be/article/un-an-d...nt-lukraine-le-monde-face-au-conflit-11153884

Not every country is gonna throw sanctions in for very obvious reasons related to economics, etc. But it’s very clear from multiple UN resolutions in the general assembly that 75-80% of countries are supporting the Ukrainian/Western side.

 

[Dostoevsky]

So I guess the guy saying only the West supports Ukraine and everyone else is neutral or on Russia’s side was full of shit.

The UN resolution today condemning the Russian invasion and demanding a withdrawal had 141 countries support it. 32 supported Russia and voted no, and 6 abstained. Meaningless resolution, but shows that most of the world is clearly aligned with the west and NATO on this war.

The picture probably looks entirely different if you look at it population wise

 

[Vlad]

So I guess the guy saying only the West supports Ukraine and everyone else is neutral or on Russia’s side was full of shit.

The UN resolution today condemning the Russian invasion and demanding a withdrawal had 141 countries support it. 32 supported Russia and voted no, and 6 abstained. Meaningless resolution, but shows that most of the world is clearly aligned with the west and NATO on this war.

Of course, it was expected. One country is shelling cities, infrastructure, killing civilians, threatening with nuclear weapons, while the other one is fighting for its survival and defending its right for self determination. You have to be seriously deranged or come from another authocratic regime to side with Russians or to approach this topic with whatabouttery.

 

[Elvin]

The picture probably looks entirely different if you look at it population wise

are you saying an ordinary Raj is ok with one country trying to annex another?

 

[Dostoevsky]

are you saying an ordinary Raj is ok with one country trying to annex another?

I'm saying that huge number of population is in the other batch, so countries per se (its number) can give a different view of the same thing.

No idea about the average guy. But an average guy never matters in geopolitics.

 

[Elvin]

I'm saying that huge number of population is in the other batch, so countries per se (its number) can give a different view of the same thing.

No idea about the average guy. But an average guy never matters in geopolitics.

Exactly, so the looking at that map "population wise" is useless.

 

[Seven]

What do you need Europe for when you have the United States providing it?

The US has never provided things for free.

- - - Updated - - -

And Russia has been running out of modern tech and modern weapons and rolling old shit onto the battlefield.

As long as the US is willing to support Ukraine they won’t lose this. It’s likely to be a long grinding war of attrition, until the US gets sick of it and forces a diplomatic end with Russia probably allowed to keep some its gains, or the Russian elite and oligarchs get sick of this war and the sanctions on them and the pariah state Russia have turned into again and overthrow Putin.

But the Russkies don’t have a snowballs chance in hell of defeating the Ukraine while America fully backs them.

I think all of this will inevitably lead to Putin's death tbh. I've felt that way since the war started.

 

[Dostoevsky]

Exactly, so the looking at that map "population wise" is useless.

So why should average Joe from England matter more than average Jao Ming?

 

[Dostoevsky]

The US has never provided things for free.

Neither will this be, nor it will be cheap. That's why is hilarious people think those are donations for free, how they present it

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

The guy ? I assume you are talking about me.
In orange countries which sanction Russia
In blue which arm Ukraine
Both orange and blue sanction and arm Ukraine

source: RTBF (belgium)
https://www.rtbf.be/article/un-an-d...nt-lukraine-le-monde-face-au-conflit-11153884

You're right, I'm very surprised Congo, Chad, and Bolivia haven't provided child soldiers and cocaine.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

The US has never provided things for free.

Even if that's the case, it still allows them to survive and fight back. I don't see how doing nothing instead is the preferable.

Neither will this be, nor it will be cheap. That's why is hilarious people think those are donations for free, how they present it

You highlighted the UK loan paid off in 2006, it was $3.75 billion at 2%, generous at the time. They ended up paying a total of $7.5 billion over 59 YEARS. That comes out to $127 million per year, which is quite "cheap." How is this the doomsday scenario you are trying to present?

 

[Seven]

Even if that's the case, it still allows them to survive and fight back. I don't see how doing nothing instead is the preferable.

I didn't say that.

I just said there's a reason the US are doing this.

- - - Updated - - -

You're right, I'm very surprised Congo, Chad, and Bolivia haven't provided child soldiers and cocaine.

I can agree with the child soldiers, but I really wouldn't be so quick to assume Bolivia did not provide cocaine.

- - - Updated - - -

Not every country is gonna throw sanctions in for very obvious reasons related to economics, etc. But it’s very clear from multiple UN resolutions in the general assembly that 75-80% of countries are supporting the Ukrainian/Western side.

Realistically the only countries that would not condemn Russia are countries that believe they can expand their own territory or countries that depend on Russia for economic or political reasons. Territorial integrity is sacrosanct.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

I didn't say that.

I just said there's a reason the US are doing this.

Oh of course, there are multiple I'm sure. Even down to the most basic of "the enemy of my enemy..."

 

[GiocataGrande]

Oh of course, there are multiple I'm sure. Even down to the most basic of "the enemy of my enemy..."

Selling Weapons is the biggest one:

The EU shipping their old stockpiles to Ukraine means they will have to replace them at some point and the US companies know this very well. These companies make a killing atm. They also profit enormously on the Cartels in Mexico killing eachother and civilians as we speak, but thats another part of the discussion


Well made report on it: recommend watching if you have the time