Russia invades Ukraine

____no5 said:
Staying neutral is not the goal, but getting the facts right as much as possible, is. How else one can have an original view for what’s happening and therefore be able to make important decisions in life?
Click to expand...
The problem is that you assume the voice of caution and reason when Russia or China might be to blame for something, but go all in on gut feel, innuendo, and confirmation bias when the west might be to blame. How about picking one approach and sticking to it across the board? (Preferably a rational one...?)
 
So, ruzzia beginning to reap what it had sow... Like I said, complete mafia clans mentality. Now the western 'avoid escalation at any cost' looks so weak. fuck russia, crush dead empire. give Ukraine all it needs to achieve swift Victory.
 
So, are you telling me that the bastards are backstabbing one another and can't be trusted? Oh wow, this was the least expectable thing of them all!

surprised_Pikachu_face.jpg
 
for some users it was a mystery how russia upper echelons operates. I got the impression, They thought about russia as a normal, albeit authoritarian, country with many levels of power distribution.
 
As I'm browsing Twitter, most of the Russian shills are changing their tune once again.

So, the narrative has switched thusly:

"It's futile to fight Russia, they will win -> Ukraine is prolonging the war by fighting back, do not support them -> We just want peace, this loss of lives is terrible, peace negotiations should start ASAP -> Russia was only protecting itself from NATO aggression -> The reports on the offensive are propaganda, Russia has a lot of reserves -> now it's 'ONLY AN IDIOT WOULD BE HAPPY ABOUT CHAOS AND DESTABILISATION IN A NUCLEAR SUPERPOWER'"

All peppered with allusions or downright mentions of Ukrainians being Nazis, Banderites and child-killers and implicit threats with Russia's (theoretical) nuclear capabilities, but that's a given.

I'm genuinely intrigued as to what the next stage of development of the typical Quisling's mind will be.
 
I agree with this theory. putin had dellusions of grandeur, but the ruzzian elites wants to go back to 'business as usual' and making money. ruzzian 'business men' not wanted this war to happen. Or, more precisely, they did not expected war would last longer than three days and ruzzia's army will fail. When Tsar fails to confirm his greatness, blame game begins
https://twitter.com/x/status/1672626588045791233
 
Last edited:
Zelensky is apparently saying it's "unprecedented and absurd" to not have a timeframe for Ukraine's NATO membership. On this point I think he's missing the obvious problem of accepting a member who's in the middle of a hot war, which would immediately trigger Article 5 and throw the entire alliance into a direct war with Russia. While I'm sure he'd prefer that outcome to his current situation, I think the only absurd thing here is the utter naivete of the argument he's making, which only serves to undermine his credibility.

NATO is obviously not going to bring in Ukraine until the war is settled and the situation between Ukraine and Russia looks stable again. (Or unless NATO winds up in a hot war with Russia for other reasons, at which point you might as well bring in Ukraine because doing so would pose no additional risk.)
 
I don't think he genuinely expects an admission any time soon, he just wants to build pressure for quicker military aid. Think of it as a war-time negotiation tactic: Make absurdly high demands so that eventually asking for F-16s and cluster bombs seem like a compromise when that's what he actually wants.
Just because I stand with Ukraine doesn't mean I don't believe Zelensky isn't cynical when he needs to be.
 
If Ukraine would be given clear path to NATO membership, does not mean Article 5 is immediately activated. NATO just needs to show leadership and strength. And to stop looking at russia over the shoulder. Please, do not repeat errors of the past.
 
Perun said:
Think of it as a war-time negotiation tactic: Make absurdly high demands so that eventually asking for F-16s and cluster bombs seem like a compromise when that's what he actually wants.
Click to expand...
I think making unrealistically high demands is different from making absurdly high demands, though. It's one thing to sound overly optimistic, but entirely another to sound ridiculous, and I think these particular comments are ridiculous. Sounding overly optimistic doesn't necessarily undermine your credibility, but sounding ridiculous does.

Azas said:
If Ukraine would be given clear path to NATO membership, does not mean Article 5 is immediately activated. NATO just needs to show leadership and strength. And to stop looking at russia over the shoulder. Please, do not repeat errors of the past.
Click to expand...
If Ukraine became a member while the war with Russia was still going on, Article 5 would be immediately activated the moment Russia intentionally attacked Ukrainian troops. So how can you set a concrete timeframe before the war with Russia ends? The best you could do is lay out a roadmap that starts when the war is over, so it couldn't have any actual dates attached to it, just "end of war + x years" milestones, which doesn't sound like what Zelensky is expecting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top