War in Ukraine. Did the West handle the post Cold War era badly?

These same people won't even acknowledge mass graves full of Ukrainian civilians.

I dunno if I am allowed to link it.

But did anyone see the Russian Propaganda about a family moving to the United States? Criticizing the US for Non Gender Conforming People, Vegetarians, African Americans and Childfree people.

I wonder if SilentChief made it :P

Edit: Ironically enough, Americans are on average the second biggest meat eaters in the world, only behind Argentina. Consuming over 50% more meat than the average Russian. America also has a higher birth rate. About 25% higher than Russia (although this might be due to Russia constantly sending their people out to die in its imperial ambitions).

Should we just call this "The Ukraine War sticky" thread or something? Pretty much what it is now.

I think so.

Also, you have been doing a good job providing news in regards to the war.

@uninspiredcup: @Maroxad: pinned it now.

Retaliating on an attack on military targets, with an attack clearly aimed at civilians.

You know who does this?

Actual terror groups.

@Maroxad: Think trying to get Ukraine to stop attacking the south, as they are basically getting obliterated.

Going to use whatever pretence they can.

You seem grossly uninformed. The USA isn't kicking Putin's shins, Putin started this unjustified and illegal war. Any use of nukes would be due to this illegal and unjustified war started by Putin, along with his illegal annexations.

You are wrong on a purely objective and factual level.

You should be asking this to Putin, comrade.

Also this is some insane gas lighting. "Putin, isn't the madman, you are!"

Yeah, and only because the far right media told him to. Bizarre.

I love the Bizarro narrative some people hold that Ukraine is only winning because NATO are providing their best arms to Ukraine.

In reality, the US is pretty much supplying Ukraine with old technology. Those Javelins the US supplies Ukraine with, have been around since 1996. With the US making adjustments to them now to further optimize the tech.

This doesnt mean they havent been really effective. Because they have been. But the fact of the matter is, Ukraine is absolutely decimating Russia, with decades old technology. Imagine what the US could do with its modern tech. The US of 2022 is just so far ahead of Russia in terms of military might. As this war has demonstrated.

Good interview.

You are insane, yes the military aid from NATO 100% has kept Russia from taking full control.

Its not a Bizarro narrative... its just the truth..

Read the words I underlined... Or you know, the rest of the post. Do that and it may be obvious to see what I am talking about.

And Ukraine are winning because of 5 reasons

1. Insane levels of corruption in the Russian Military
2. NATO support
3. Superior Morale on Ukraine's end
4. Ukraine's early parts of modernization, Russia is still fighting with WW2 Soviet strategies.
5. Russia's neglect of logistics (and Ukraine's adherence to it)

@Maroxad: The US is on track to break 65 Billion in military aid to Ukraine in the last 5 months, and that's not even including anything from Europe.

Russia roughly spends 60 billion on its military per year.

Without these massive military packages to Ukraine, Ukraine wouldn't stand a chance.

Hopefully, its worth it...

The US is supplying Ukraine with mostly obsolete stuff, it is hardly the cutting edge tech that the US military uses. The fact that Russia is handily getting their chins kicked by 2 decade old US military gear says just how far behind Russia really is.

But for as good as US supplied artillery and anti tank weaponry has been. These have not been key to victory.

Ukraine's trump card is their land familiarity, actual adherence to logistics, insanely high morale, and absolute brilliance, constantly being several steps ahead of the Russian invaders. Ukraine's military structure is also heavily decentralized. While Russia is mostly top heavy. Which has made Russia very inflexible.

Russia's human wave strategy doesnt work in the 21st century. This is why we have been predicting a Ukrainian win since before the war even started. That 60 billion is a lot less impressive when you consider rampant corruption in the Russian Military. As well as Russia's military investment going towards an obsolete style of warfare. Russia using tanks as their main force, has not been going well for them.

This isn't to say that US equipment hasn't helped. And US provided intelligence has been helpful as well. But I would argue the bigger asset has been Ukraine's sheer grit and morale.

Has this been worth it? As a taxpayer, I definately support my tax money going to Ukraine. Hell I go even further and donate further for the cause. Had things gone better for Russia, they would not have stopped at Ukraine. The balkans and Poland would also be targets. And they have been eye'ing Finland and Sweden as well. Their economy is that of a military economy which relies on conflict and bullying other nations to stay afloat (compared to a civilian economy). When one of us (in this case Ukraine) is under attack from a belligerent empire, ALL of us are under attack. This is one thing you will learn really fast when playing a Paradox Interactive game.

Sure we have sent them newer stuff as well, but to begin with what Ukraine was given was equipment they were already familiar with, which is to say a lot of it was cold war era stuff. I think that was the case for most European countries to begin with.

The drones are among the newer tech they have gotten. Which they have showed creative use of.

The creativity of the Ukrainians is astounding.

There were a bunch of Ukrainian soldiers trapped in the middle of enemy territory. They feigned as Civilians to escape. As they escaped, they were able to relay intel to the rest of their military on their return.

This guy talks shit most of the time. Basically a diet-coke dictator. Not even a leader really, Putins pet.

@uninspiredcup: I have several friends from Belarus.

From the people i have met from that country, i have gathered the main thing lukashenko should be afraid of is Belarusian people. Nothing else comes even closer to being a threat to him.

Probably some very dark days coming for Ukraine. Surovikin being now responsible for operations means that the war will become much more brutal and cowardly, as yesterday attacks might indicate. Belarus testing the waters for a possible northern front isn't good news either.

Include everything from Europe and total expenditures go up to like $67 billion.

@kathaariancode: Could be. I am also reading that Russia is most likely running out of men, ammunition and vehicles.

Elon Musk allegedly spoke to Putin before making that Ridicilous Peace tweet.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/ake44z/elon-musk-vladimir-putin-ukraine

Why am I not surprised?

So the peace deal....

We attempted to take Ukraine, we can't. It's very apparent we can't.

So we'll take what we can, after killing the shit out of you, and the odd wee bit off mass torture/rape.

How can they say no? Good job Elon.

Did Russia say they wanted to take Ukraine?

@eoten:Yes. When they attempted a blitzkrieg to take the capital and replace the government with their own.

Which itself would have likely results in farce elections for the country to be re-united. Which was the repeated message on state run Kremlin media as well.

i.e. Ukraine doesn't exist...

So they've went from Nazis, to Resident Evil bio-labs with enhanced Wesker soldiers, to Nato, to "foreign negros mercenaries" (their words not mine).

They are now battling gay parades.

These people have nukes, btw.

@uninspiredcup: Completely delusional. If they spent a minute questioning the coherrency of their speech, they might realize just how deranged it is.

1. Spartans, according to some prominent interpretions had institutionalized homosexuality among men.
2. No one is forcing anything on Russia. Russia are invading a foreign nation.
3. Even in these countries, no one is forced to attend a Pride Parade.

Here is a hoping that when these people get retreat, the people who force them to retreat will be Ukrainians with Unicorn Badges (insignia for LGBTQ soldiers).

Let's be real. This machismo garbage Russians try to project is just an aesthetic. Nearly every time I see people with this mentality they are barely above Keyboard Warriors.

Edit: But sure, let them be the Spartans. We all know how history went. The Sacred Band of Thebes completely annihilated the Spartans, and lead to the downfall of Sparta's control over Greece.

The Sacred Band of Thebes was composed of 150 male same sex couples.

Oh no, not the gay parades.

Hmm now it would be nice if I could post this

Gotta say, don't even think Nazi propaganda was this unhinged.

No, just Nato (i.e. USA). It has always been Nato. It's been Nato for more than two decades and nothing else. The propaganda-skirmishes are for oblivious tools like you people. It is by far easier to appeal to the emotional part of the brain than to make generation spanning power struggle comprehensible to the pleb. Nazis/Fascists has become the alltime cult(ure) classic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO

In February 1991, Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia formed theVisegrád Groupto push forEuropean integrationunder theEuropean Unionand NATO, as well as to conduct military reforms in line with NATO standards. Internal NATO reaction to these formerWarsaw Pactcountries was initially negative, but by the1991 Rome summitin November, members agreed to a series of goals that could lead to accession, such as market and democratic liberalization, and that NATO should be a partner in these efforts.

Debate within the American government as to whether enlargement of NATO was feasible or desirable began during theGeorge H.W. Bush administration.[39]By mid-1992, a consensus emerged within the administration that NATO enlargement was a wise realpolitik measure to strengthen Euro-American hegemony.

In the absence of NATO enlargement, Bush administration officials worried that the European Union might fill the security vacuum inCentral Europe, and thus challenge American post-Cold War influence.

[39]There was further debate during thePresidency of Bill Clintonbetween a rapid offer of full membership to several select countries versus a slower, more limited membership to a wide range of states over a longer time span.

Victory by the Republican Party, who advocated for aggressive expansion, in the1994 US congressional electionhelped sway US policy in favor of wider full-membership enlargement, which the US ultimately pursued in the following years.

[41]In 1996, Clinton called for former Warsaw Pact countries and post-Soviet republics to join NATO, and made NATO enlargement a part of his foreign policy.

Interesting. A bi-partisan effort. Aggressive expansion. Begs the question why the supposed oppostion to US aggression is categorized as "far right". Evidently the "far right" was and is full on board.

Makes quite sense why "the west" wasn't interested in abondoning the cold war. Expanding a military alliance (and reap the economic benefits) without a worthy threat would not have been as succesful. Surely, active measures were taken to ensure a favourable outcome.

@palasta: I also like the X-files.

The truth is out there.

Its not as deep as X Files.

Russia is upset about the expansion of NATO. Always has been, they have always considered the expansion of it as a threat. They have been very vocal about that for 20 years. palasta is right...

NATO is a defensive alliance, not an offensive one. If Russia feels threatened by a defensive alliance, what exactly does that say about Russia?

NATO keeps expanding because Russia is such a belligerent neighbour.

@Maroxad: This. Plus the reason for invading Ukraine was simply them attempting expansion.

Go in, topple government. Oh wow, would you believe it? Everyone wants to actually join Russia, boy oh boy!

Let's have a vote.

101% said yes? Holymoly that's not even possible, but somehow it's happened. Remarkable!

That's how thought it went down. Putin expected an easy land grab.

Instead, (lulzily), he propped Nato up more than ever. And is directly expanding it through his own actions. Directly weaking Russia more than ever. Killing the shit out of, not only Ukrainians, but Russians. Displacing them as well as the sane ones are running.

From a outside perception point of view as well. A) A direct threat to Nato and all surrounding countries B) Rather than Russia being mighty, made their army look fucking terrible, and mostly due to not Nato, but Russia being Russia. Corrupt to the bone. C) Ostracised Russia

The thing that has hurt, and is hurting Russia is this guy.

This guy right here.

Russia, in typical Russian fashion, puts out lies and distorted truths. This appeals to weird ass fringe groups and right-wing folk.

People who have a bone to pick with America, or hate Joe Biden. Or just, indoctrinated by Russian propaganda itself.

Not going to pretend here Ukraine itself is perfect or that they haven't done bad shit as well, the idea that it's ze good guys VS ze bad guys is stupid. Sure lot of Russians themselves fighting there who genuinely think they are fighting Nazis, Nato and taking down fascism trying to destroy their country.

In fact, this has been documented numerous times now. Go in expected what they are told, and lo-and-behold, no evil Nazis terrorizing folk while they welcomed. Quite the opposite.

What Russia has been doing (and feel free to check some of the clips I have posted if think i'm making shit up) is using propaganda to actively dehumanize them, to make their own citizens accept what Putin is doing however barbaric. He's normalizing barbarism. Dehumanizing his own people under the guise of righteousness, exactly like what the Nazis did. Oh great fucking irony or ironies.

Get dickheads parrots "oh oh oh proxy war"

Putin is the one who views his people are nothing more than a resource to be dispensed.

People, without equipment, basic medal supplies, a sleeping bag, or even a days training, are being dumped in Ukraine as a meat shield.

When this war started a lot of those Russians were goading the destruction of Ukraine. Now they are being pushed out the door, suddenly that enthusiasm diminishes as the facade falls apart and reality kicks in.

@uninspiredcup: Ukraine and Russia are not US allies. This wasn't our fight.

You can try to chalk it up as dickhead parroting "proxy war".

But it is true that the US is funding this proxy war in Ukraine. That's exactly what it is. We are helping prolong this. We are funding a proxy war in a country that is not a US ally.

Screw Russia and Putin. I could care less about them in this conflict. I also don't care for Ukraine. I don't care for Russia. Not a US ally. We owe Ukraine nothing.

Funny how Europeans loved criticizing US funding proxy wars. Called the US war mongerors, the world police. Sticking out nose in stuff all the time.

Then when something happens in a buffer state between them and Russia they are all gun ho for US involvement.

Bring on the Nukes baby!!!!

@sargentd: Sorry, talking like i'm American. British bro.

As far as i'm concerned they've already used both chemical and radioactive weapons on our soil killing civilians. Treating us like we are (to term the phrase) "cucks".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_Skripal#:~:text=According%20to%20UK%20sources%20and,critical%20condition%2C%20before%20being%20discharged.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko

We're a Nato country, btw.

And that "you're weak and won't do shit" attitude is probably partly why they have been so bold. They legitimately expected a tap on the wrist at best.

@uninspiredcup: that guy was a double agent? Sorry not familiar with this situation? Was this a British spy who pretended to be a Russian?? Or a Russian pretending to be a Brit??

Being a double agent spy is risky business. Not the profession I would choose. Many risks involved.

So he was poisoned? A double agent spy was poisoned with nerve gas? You see this as an act of war against Britain by Russia?

Brah sounds like actually trying to justify this.

I mean, read the article.

Charlie Rowley found a perfume bottle, later discovered to contain the agent, in a litter bin somewhere in Salisbury and gave it to Dawn Sturgess who sprayed it on her wrist. Sturgess fell ill within 15 minutes and died on 8 July, but Rowley, who also came into contact with the poison, survived British police believe this incident was not a targeted attack, but a result of the way the nerve agent was disposed of after the poisoning in Salisbury. A public inquiry was launched into the circumstances of Sturgess's death

@uninspiredcup: I'm just reading what you linked..

"On 4 March 2018, Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military officer and double agent for the British intelligence agencies, and his daughter, Yulia Skripal, were poisoned"

So a britt spy pretending to be Russian??? Correct?

@uninspiredcup: this dude gave perfume he found in a trash bin to her, unknowingly a bottle with nerve gas in it and it killed her?

Is Charlie Rowley a murderer??

Was this an accident or on purpose?

For real never heard of this lol...

@sargentd: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here.

They used chemical and radioactive weapons on our soil, in an attack.

Under no context is that ok. If you're problem here is trying to contextualize it as "spies so ok", Charlie Rowley was a random British who just happened to come across it.

The area it was used in as well, anyone who came in contact with the effected area (public) would get it.

Under any context, they used chemical and radioactive weapons on our soil, including my context of killing British citizens.

But again, this is verging way off the original post. And i'm not going in loop arguments.

Yes, the nice Russians accidentally left a deadly agent after attempted murder on foreign soil.

Just a prank bro.

@uninspiredcup: seems like a very isolated attack. They were going after a double agent who was trying to spy on Russia and Russia wanted to assassinate him correct?

Yes I think it's bad and that's bad it happened within your borders. But it's literally a double agent spy. I'd hardly count that as an attack on the entire country. That is the risk you take being a double agent. Trying to deceive a country for another country.

America doesn't take kindly to spies, I doubt the UK does either when it's a foreign agent trying to deceive them?

If we had a foreign double agent spy here in America I wouldn't put it past our government to try and assassinate them either, whether it was outside our borders or not. It would be seen as a national security threat.

Crazy story though, it's no 9/11 attack but it is interesting nonetheless. I never knew of this story.

What's a little murdering and genocide? Gosh, I blame NATO!

Sure. Just like every "Ministry of Defense" is truly only for defensive purposes.

The decision for "aggressive expansion" was made right after the fall of the SU, regardless of Russia.

Debate within the American government as to whether enlargement of NATO was feasible or desirable began during theGeorge H.W. Bush administration.[39]By mid-1992, a consensus emerged within the administration that NATO enlargement was a wise realpolitik measure to strengthen Euro-American hegemony.

In the absence of NATO enlargement, Bush administration officials worried that the European Union might fill the security vacuum inCentral Europe, and thus challenge American post-Cold War influence.

Where does it say "because Russia is such a belligerent neighbour"?

Can you read and understand this little text or is your brain too preoccupied binging twitter-propaganda?

Amusing. If Russias is such a belligerent neighbour, why was Nato able to snatch up poland, czech republic, hungary, romania, slovakia, slovenia, estonia, bulgaria, latvia, lithuania etc. without Russia sending an invasion army? What belligerence are you referring to?

@palasta: I think Russia knows that they stand absolutely no chance against NATO and what they've proven with the invasion of Ukraine is exactly that every nation bordering them is much safer by being part of NATO then by itself.

And for sure that if nowadays Russia proved to be a joke even with almost 10 years of preparation for this invasion, post Soviet collapse Russia would be decimated in direct confrontation. They wouldn't even have the confidence for a response.

NATO's initial purpose is still the same it always us. To keep Russian imperialist ambitions in check and make sure Europe (Germany initially) is kept safe yet domesticated, after the whole WW2 thingy.

For the record I am in favour of the creation of a EU army and subsequent exit of Europeans from NATO. Although regarding Ukraine that changes nothing for me, if anything I support direct intervention on Ukrainian territory against Russia and think the west isn't doing what needs to be done.

The whole argument from Russia is self defeating. They were never attacked, they were never under threat. They have more missiles pointing towards NATO countries than the contrary and they proved that the reason NATO exists is still pretty valid. In fact since the invasion European sentiment towards NATO shifted considerably.

Moral is. The USSR was a shit hole, post collapse Russia was a shit hole and modern day Russia outside a couple cities is a shift hole. Is they want to seduce nations into being part of their federation they should consider being less of a shit hole instead of resorting to genocide like Russia traditionally does.

Yes there's a lot of politics involved and there are no saints but **** Russia for actually starting this war and **** the nazbols that play the victim card and defend that the best way to deal with it is by giving to Russia what they want.

@palasta: Ahh yes. I definately remember the myriad of NATO tanks and stealth planes invading Sweden and Finland eaerlier this year to force us to join.

There definately was not a referrendum. That is fake news propped up by the pro-NATO liberals.

If you are thikning about a lot of former soviet states joining Putin in 1999. Why do you think that was? The writing was on the wall, that Russia was eventually desiring to take back the land that had been liberated from them. And later on that year, Putin became the Dictator of Russia. Back in 1995, Russia had already been stationing a lot of soldiers in the baltic states. And joining NATO was met with majority support by the populace of these countries

"Where does it say "because Russia is such a belligerent neighbour"?"

Russia has been bullying foreign nations, violating our airspace, they illegally annexed Crimea, supported insurgents in Donbas, and have been funding far left and far right parties in western europe, in an attempt to destabilize their politics.

Actions speak louder than words.

Russia bombing Ukraines power plants now. Gonna be a cold winter for them if this continues.

To no ones surprise.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-ukraine-air-defence-missiles-nato-latest-b2202567.html

Russia-Ukraine war – live: Putin’s forces using rape as ‘military strategy’, UN says

The UN has apparently verified over 100 cases of rape and sexual assaults in Ukraine since Russia invaded in February

Moscow’s forces are using rape and sexual violence as part of their “military strategy,” a UN envoy has said.

Speaking during an interview with AFP, Pramila Patten, UN envoy, said that Moscow’s forces were using a "deliberate tactic to dehumanise the victims.”

The Independent reported in June that Ukraine claimed to have documented 15,000 suspected war crimes, including rapes by ill-equipped Russian soldiers who used sexual violence to strike fear into the local population.