Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

[contricusc]

There are 2 major schools of thought regarding the validity of Ukrainian statehood and sovereignity:

1. Ukraine is a sovereign country, proponents of this argument based this on the fact that Ukraine is an active member of the UN
2. Ukraine is an invented nation, and their arguments stem from an in-depth understanding of the complex historical background that led to Ukraine in the first place.

There is only one LEGAL school of thought, and that is that Ukraine is a sovereign nation, active member of the UN and recognized by all other nations, including the Russian Federation.

The second ”school of thought” you mention is just delirious ranting from Putin and his followers.

The existance of sovereign nations has nothing to do with history, ethnicity and what a territory or its inhabitants represented in the past. Sovereignty is about present and the accepted statehood recognized at the UN by other countries.

Saying that Ukraine is not Sovereign and belongs to Russia is similar to saying that South American nations should not be sovereign , because based on the complex historical background they belong to Spain and Portugal.

Ukraine has its own president, government, parliament and internationally recognized borders. It is a full member of the UN and it is rcongnized by all other member countries. You can’t get any more sovereign independent country than that.

 

[Nilgiri]

There is only one LEGAL school of thought, and that is that Ukraine is a sovereign nation, active member of the UN and recognized by all other nations, including the Russian Federation.

The second ”school of thought” you mention is just delirious ranting from Putin and his followers.

The existance of sovereign nations has nothing to do with history, ethnicity and what a territory or its inhabitants represented in the past. Sovereignty is about present and the accepted statehood recognized at the UN by other countries.

Saying that Ukraine is not Sovereign and belongs to Russia is similar to saying that South American nations should not be sovereign , because based on the complex historical background they belong to Spain and Portugal.

Ukraine has its own president, government, parliament and internationally recognized borders. It is a full member of the UN and it is rcongnized by all other member countries. You can’t get any more sovereign independent country than that.

Russia also recognised Ukraine's sovereignty...in significant established ways. It has never been a matter like say Taiwan (PRC vs ROC within one nation effectively from unresolved civil war).....or a host of other long term conflicts and tensions.

Putin has literally visited the Ukrainian parliament himself and addressed it if I am not mistaken.

On wiki it says for just 2001:

List of international presidential trips made by Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ukraine

Kyiv

August 23–24

Met with President Leonid Kuchma. Marked the 10th Anniversary of Ukraine's Independence.

Anyway this foolish Russian experiment in changing norms and extreme gaslighting on it..... simply to satisfy its ambitions in this manner..... will be one that quickens its socioeconomic collapse longer term. It has broadcast its hand to Europe especially this openly now....there will be no going back from it till there is another Russian revolution.

 

[Gary]

There is only one LEGAL school of thought, and that is that Ukraine is a sovereign nation, active member of the UN and recognized by all other nations, including the Russian Federation.

The second ”school of thought” you mention is just delirious ranting from Putin and his followers.

The existance of sovereign nations has nothing to do with history, ethnicity and what a territory or its inhabitants represented in the past. Sovereignty is about present and the accepted statehood recognized at the UN by other countries.

Saying that Ukraine is not Sovereign and belongs to Russia is similar to saying that South American nations should not be sovereign , because based on the complex historical background they belong to Spain and Portugal.

Ukraine has its own president, government, parliament and internationally recognized borders. It is a full member of the UN and it is rcongnized by all other member countries. You can’t get any more sovereign independent country than that.

One of the biggest mistake that the sons of Adam has made in the 21st century is adopting the LEGAL and ILLEGAL approach on international politics.

Fun fact, there is no such thing as legal and illegal in power politics, and especially great power politics.

The Russian military operation in Ukraine is 'ILLEGAL' in the sense that it goes against the interest of the West. In Indonesia, the majority thinks that Russia is doing what it needs to do.

This concept of legal and illegal that is defined by superficial institutions like the UN, is by its nature a Western propaganda, like I said, no one should be fooled by the 'international' stickers that the West slap on to anything to make them look legitimate, they're not. And that includes the United Nations (UN) which is in its very heart, a Western institution, ignore the 'Nation's sticker that they slap as it means nothing.

Russia being a long time great power understand this, the Soviet Union (and many non-Western countries) entered the UN because it has yet been able to create a challenger/alternative to the institution, not because they actually believe in this tools of Western imperialism masquerading as a truly global institution. The idea back then is to wait for the Soviet Union to be strong and far reaching enough and prolly came up with a competitor to the UN. The Soviet Union collapsed before it could happen but the logic stays. The only reason why nations entered the UN is because they have yet to build anything strong enough as a 'alternative' to this masquerading Western institution as most of the world even at this point lack what it takes, not because they wanted to dwell in the swamp called the UN.

So the fact that Ukraine is an active member of the UN (a Western institution) meant nothing, Ukraine is still an invented country that is a national security issue for Russia and must be secured before they become a permanent cancer.

Back then the Japanese would describe Korea as a dagger pointed at Japan's soft underbelly, Ukraine is the equivalent to Russia foday what was Korea was to Imperial Japan. It must be secured at all cost, and me a student of political realism wholly endorse this.

 

[Relic]

USA and Germany both announced new defense packages for Ukraine today. The American package is valued at $275 million usd. The Germans did not release the value of their package. The contents are as follows:

USA package for Ukraine
- ATACMS / GMLRS for HIMARS
- 155mm artillery shells
- 105mm artillery shells
- 60mm mortar rounds
- TOW missiles for Bradleys
- Javelin anti-armor systems
- AT4 anti-armor sytems
- JDAMS
- Small arms ammunition and grenades
- Anti-armor mines
- Demolitions munitions
- Tactical recovery vehicles
- Helmets and body armor
- Nuclear, chemical and biological gear
- Spare parts and other equipment

German package for Ukraine
- 10 Leopard 1A5 MBTs
- 8500 155mm artillery shells
- 20 MG3 machine guns for Marders
- 20 Vector recon drones
- 34 RQ-35 Heidrun recon drones
- 1 BEAVER Bridge laying vehicle
- 1 DACHS engineering vehicles
- 1 Bergepanzer 2 with spare parts
- 4 WISENT 1 mine clearing MBTs
- 16 ZETROS trucks
- 540 MK556 assault rifles
- 80 HLR 338 sniper rifles
- 111 CR 308 rifles
- 60,000 rounds of 338 ammunition
- 1.8 million rounds of ammunition
- 2 Mine ploughs
- 400 LED lamps

Biden Administration Announces New Security Assistance for Ukraine

The Defense Department announced a significant new security assistance package to meet Ukraine's critical security and defense needs.

www.defense.gov

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1793970046101803113

 

[Iskander]

American ammunition is no longer effective... THE WASHINGTON POST

A significant portion of American precision-guided munitions has proven vulnerable to interference from Russian electronic warfare systems. After a sharp drop in their effectiveness, the Ukrainian Armed Forces stopped using certain types of Western weapons, The Washington Post writes.
As senior Ukrainian military officials told reporters, projectiles that are aimed at a target using a global positioning satellite system - GPS, are vulnerable to interference.
These precision weapons performed well at the beginning of the war, but over time the Russians found countermeasures to them. Now, some weapons that were previously considered powerful tools no longer provide an advantage.

“I’m not saying that nobody cared before, but now they [Americans] are starting to worry.
As we share information with our partners, and our partners share with us, the Russians are certainly also sharing with China," said one senior Ukrainian military official. For example, the success rate of Excalibur precision projectiles, which are fired from 155 mm artillery, has sharply fell within several months - to less than 10%. After this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces were forced to abandon the use of these ammunition last year. These shells have not been supplied to Ukraine for six months.
Similar problems have arisen with precision-guided JDAM bombs, which are dropped from aircraft. Within a few weeks of their appearance at the front, their accuracy dropped sharply, and the bombs sometimes began to miss their targets by hundreds of meters. However, in this case, the manufacturer was able to make improvements, and now Ukraine continues to use these bombs. Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs (GLSDB) also proved ineffective. The Americans are now working on new settings before making them available again.
The M30/M31 high-precision missiles, which are launched by the already legendary HIMARS and M270 launchers, did not escape the sad fate. They showed themselves powerfully during the first year of the war, destroying many Russian ammunition depots and command posts.

"But in the second year it was all over: the Russians deployed electronic warfare, turned off satellite signals, and HIMARS became completely ineffective. This ineffectiveness led to the fact that very expensive shells were increasingly used to hit lower priority targets," a senior Ukrainian military official said.
In January, Ukrainian military commanders called on Western partners to provide an alternative: M26 cluster munitions, which can also be launched from these multiple launch rocket systems. These low-tech unguided missiles are resistant to obstacles, and cluster submunitions can hit targets over a wide area even if the shot is inaccurate.
It is noted that Kyiv still considers its HIMARS missiles to be effective, but Russian jammers can cause them to miss their target by 15 meters or more.
“When it is, for example, a pontoon bridge... but there is a 10-meter deflection, it [the projectile] hits the water,” said the Ukrainian official with whom the authors of the publication spoke

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/05/24/russia-jamming-us-weapons-ukraine/

 

[Afif]

American ammunition is no longer effective... THE WASHINGTON POST

A significant portion of American precision-guided munitions has proven vulnerable to interference from Russian electronic warfare systems. After a sharp drop in their effectiveness, the Ukrainian Armed Forces stopped using certain types of Western weapons, The Washington Post writes.
As senior Ukrainian military officials told reporters, projectiles that are aimed at a target using a global positioning satellite system - GPS, are vulnerable to interference.
These precision weapons performed well at the beginning of the war, but over time the Russians found countermeasures to them. Now, some weapons that were previously considered powerful tools no longer provide an advantage.

“I’m not saying that nobody cared before, but now they [Americans] are starting to worry.
As we share information with our partners, and our partners share with us, the Russians are certainly also sharing with China," said one senior Ukrainian military official. For example, the success rate of Excalibur precision projectiles, which are fired from 155 mm artillery, has sharply fell within several months - to less than 10%. After this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces were forced to abandon the use of these ammunition last year. These shells have not been supplied to Ukraine for six months.
Similar problems have arisen with precision-guided JDAM bombs, which are dropped from aircraft. Within a few weeks of their appearance at the front, their accuracy dropped sharply, and the bombs sometimes began to miss their targets by hundreds of meters. However, in this case, the manufacturer was able to make improvements, and now Ukraine continues to use these bombs. Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs (GLSDB) also proved ineffective. The Americans are now working on new settings before making them available again.
The M30/M31 high-precision missiles, which are launched by the already legendary HIMARS and M270 launchers, did not escape the sad fate. They showed themselves powerfully during the first year of the war, destroying many Russian ammunition depots and command posts.

"But in the second year it was all over: the Russians deployed electronic warfare, turned off satellite signals, and HIMARS became completely ineffective. This ineffectiveness led to the fact that very expensive shells were increasingly used to hit lower priority targets," a senior Ukrainian military official said.
In January, Ukrainian military commanders called on Western partners to provide an alternative: M26 cluster munitions, which can also be launched from these multiple launch rocket systems. These low-tech unguided missiles are resistant to obstacles, and cluster submunitions can hit targets over a wide area even if the shot is inaccurate.
It is noted that Kyiv still considers its HIMARS missiles to be effective, but Russian jammers can cause them to miss their target by 15 meters or more.
“When it is, for example, a pontoon bridge... but there is a 10-meter deflection, it [the projectile] hits the water,” said the Ukrainian official with whom the authors of the publication spoke.

Please add the original source.

 

[Gary]

American ammunition is no longer effective... THE WASHINGTON POST

A significant portion of American precision-guided munitions has proven vulnerable to interference from Russian electronic warfare systems. After a sharp drop in their effectiveness, the Ukrainian Armed Forces stopped using certain types of Western weapons, The Washington Post writes.
As senior Ukrainian military officials told reporters, projectiles that are aimed at a target using a global positioning satellite system - GPS, are vulnerable to interference.
These precision weapons performed well at the beginning of the war, but over time the Russians found countermeasures to them. Now, some weapons that were previously considered powerful tools no longer provide an advantage.

“I’m not saying that nobody cared before, but now they [Americans] are starting to worry.
As we share information with our partners, and our partners share with us, the Russians are certainly also sharing with China," said one senior Ukrainian military official. For example, the success rate of Excalibur precision projectiles, which are fired from 155 mm artillery, has sharply fell within several months - to less than 10%. After this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces were forced to abandon the use of these ammunition last year. These shells have not been supplied to Ukraine for six months.
Similar problems have arisen with precision-guided JDAM bombs, which are dropped from aircraft. Within a few weeks of their appearance at the front, their accuracy dropped sharply, and the bombs sometimes began to miss their targets by hundreds of meters. However, in this case, the manufacturer was able to make improvements, and now Ukraine continues to use these bombs. Ground Launched Small Diameter Bombs (GLSDB) also proved ineffective. The Americans are now working on new settings before making them available again.
The M30/M31 high-precision missiles, which are launched by the already legendary HIMARS and M270 launchers, did not escape the sad fate. They showed themselves powerfully during the first year of the war, destroying many Russian ammunition depots and command posts.

"But in the second year it was all over: the Russians deployed electronic warfare, turned off satellite signals, and HIMARS became completely ineffective. This ineffectiveness led to the fact that very expensive shells were increasingly used to hit lower priority targets," a senior Ukrainian military official said.
In January, Ukrainian military commanders called on Western partners to provide an alternative: M26 cluster munitions, which can also be launched from these multiple launch rocket systems. These low-tech unguided missiles are resistant to obstacles, and cluster submunitions can hit targets over a wide area even if the shot is inaccurate.
It is noted that Kyiv still considers its HIMARS missiles to be effective, but Russian jammers can cause them to miss their target by 15 meters or more.
“When it is, for example, a pontoon bridge... but there is a 10-meter deflection, it [the projectile] hits the water,” said the Ukrainian official with whom the authors of the publication spoke

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/05/24/russia-jamming-us-weapons-ukraine/

These Russian advantages will continue to grow overtime. There are 3 factors that made the AFU, despite being an underdog to counterbalance by:

1. Having a better trained and led army
2. Larger use of guided munition
3. Earlier mobilization

All of them are now steadily replaced by to opposite. The Ukrainian army relied on slavery to recruit, they no longer mobilize and their guided munitions are getting ineffective.

 

[UkroTurk]

Brutal hit to SuperMarket /Kharkiv city center.


Just terrorists or maniacs could hit a supermarket from glidebomb!

As of now, it is known that more than 200 people could be in the hypermarket.
All services are already on site providing assistance - rescuing people and extinguishing the fire, which completely engulfed the premises, 10,000 square meters.

There will be a big number of casualties

Damn i lived there and me with my family used to buy a lot of construction materials in that store.

My family would have been inside, if we hadn't left Ukraine.

NEXTA Live

Оккупанты сбросили 2 КАБа на гипермаркет «Эпицентр» в Харькове Площадь пожара — 15 тысяч квадратных метров. Много раненых и пропавших без вести. @nexta_live

t.me

Харьков life | Харків 🇺🇦

Росія нанесла черговий жорстокий удар по нашому Харкову – по будівельному гіпермаркету – у суботу, просто посеред дня, - Президент Станом на зараз відомо, що в гіпермаркеті могли перебувати понад 200 людей. Усі служби вже на місці надають допомогу – рятують людей і ліквідовують пожежу, яка...

t.me

Харьков life | Харків 🇺🇦

❗️Момент влучання УМПБ Д30-СН по будівельному гіпермаркету у Харкові ㅤ Надіслати новину @Kharkiv_Lifebot 👉ПІДПИСАТИСЯ

t.me

Russia is still hitting Kharkiv city center. There are Another explosions.

 

[contricusc]

This concept of legal and illegal that is defined by superficial institutions like the UN, is by its nature a Western propaganda, like I said, no one should be fooled by the 'international' stickers that the West slap on to anything to make them look legitimate, they're not. And that includes the United Nations (UN) which is in its very heart, a Western institution, ignore the 'Nation's sticker that they slap as it means nothing.

You seem to have a hard time understanding the concept of legal and illegal. If you join an institution and sign treaties where you accept a certain set of rules, you should abide by those rules. The UN is not a Western institution. It is a global institution where all memebers joined on a voluntary basis. Nobody was forced to be part of the UN against their will.

If a country doesn’t agree with the legal world order set up under the UN, it has the right to withdraw from the UN and any other treaties they signed, and declare those rules and laws null. Only after doing that they will no longer have to adhere by those rules.

Russia is a part of the UN. It is even a security council permanent member with veto rights, so a privileged memeber. They also recognized Ukraine as an independent sovereign state.

When they invaded Ukraine, they did it against the rules and laws that they recognized and bowed to adhere to. This is why we say it is ILLEGAL.

If Russia considers those laws flawed, it is free to leave the UN, to withdraw from many of the international treates it has signed, and only AFTER doing that it has the legal right to ignore those rules.

But of course, they don’t want to do this, because they benefit greatly from being part of the established world order. They don’t want to go rogue from a diplomatic perspective, because it is not in their interest.

The only reason why nations entered the UN is because they have yet to build anything strong enough as a 'alternative' to this masquerading Western institution as most of the world even at this point lack what it takes, not because they wanted to dwell in the swamp called the UN.

I am eager to see an alternative to the UN created by such amazing nations like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. I wonder what the principles of such organization will be like? Maybe they will start with a rule that borders are non-binding and countries are legally allowed to invade and expand their territory. I wonder how many non-imperialist nations will like to sign-up to such an alternative UN.

To clear it out for you, that “alternative“ UN never happened because nobody trusts countries like Russia and China, and even those who cheerlead for them feel safer under the US-led world order.

So the fact that Ukraine is an active member of the UN (a Western institution) meant nothing, Ukraine is still an invented country that is a national security issue for Russia and must be secured before they become a permanent cancer.

This is why Russia and anyone thinking this way will not be able to create an alternative to the UN. If rules and treates have no value for you, why should someone sign up to the rules you propose, knowing that you will never abide by them?

Russia recongnized Ukraine as an independenmt state. Russia is a member of the UN. Russia is not respecting the borders of a sovereign independent country that it has recongnized. Russia is breaking its own rules. Russia has zero credibility. Any treaty signed with Russia has no value. This is why nobody wants to negotiate with them in the first place.

Back then the Japanese would describe Korea as a dagger pointed at Japan's soft underbelly, Ukraine is the equivalent to Russia foday what was Korea was to Imperial Japan. It must be secured at all cost, and me a student of political realism wholly endorse this.

And just like with the Japanese and Koreans, Russia will not be able to secure Ukraine, and in the future Imperial Russia will be converted into a pacifist nation that is no longer an empire and has US military bases on its territory, in order to contain China. And just like the Japanese had to apologize to the Koreans for all the abuses done to them, the Russians will have to apologize to Ukrainians.

It’s really perplexing to see that you compare Russia with Imperial Japan (which is a good comparison), yet you continue to support Russia in this war. You know they are evil, just like Imperial Japan was, but you still cheer for them.

 

[Gary]

You seem to have a hard time understanding the concept of legal and illegal. If you join an institution and sign treaties where you accept a certain set of rules, you should abide by those rules. The UN is not a Western institution. It is a global institution where all memebers joined on a voluntary basis. Nobody was forced to be part of the UN against their will.

If a country doesn’t agree with the legal world order set up under the UN, it has the right to withdraw from the UN and any other treaties they signed, and declare those rules and laws null. Only after doing that they will no longer have to adhere by those rules.

Russia is a part of the UN. It is even a security council permanent member with veto rights, so a privileged memeber. They also recognized Ukraine as an independent sovereign state.

When they invaded Ukraine, they did it against the rules and laws that they recognized and bowed to adhere to. This is why we say it is ILLEGAL.

That's not how it works, the U.S. recognized Iraq as a sovereign country as far back as the 50s but invaded anyway.

Just because Russia decided to break the rules, doesn't mean it is time to leave the organization entirely. A good statesman should know when those rules are to their advantage and press for them to be honored and at the same time know when those rules are to be broken when it's no longer to their advantage. And Putin, is very good at this, I acknowledge it.

Back when Russia was the Soviet Union, while imperfect, the rules were to their advantage. And we saw a less aggressive Soviet Union. After the fall of the Union, Russia found itself at an extreme disadvantage and it's no surprise that it led to the current launch of military operations. Nothing wrong.

The U.N is at its very core, Western. And only the might of the Soviet Union membership were able to counterbalance it. As I said, the idea for the Soviet Union (and many non-Westen countries) to enter it is likely to avoid becoming a pariah and to take advantage of it before coming up with an alternative of their own, when the time is ripe.

I understand this because Indonesia actually attempted this once. Replace the UN with its own. It's called CONEFO

The Conference of the New Emerging Forces (CONEFO) was an effort by President Sukarno of Indonesia to create a new bloc of "emerging countries" that would be an alternative power centre to the United Nations and to the "old-established forces"—a category in which Sukarno included both the United States and the Soviet Union.​

CONEFO - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So even at a relatively young age of 20 years, Indonesian leaders at the time already knew that in essence, the UN is a Western Institution and nobody is fooled by the 'global', 'international' stickers that they slapped on everything to appear legitimate. The idea is to enter it, reap benefits, and leave it when it's no longer to their advantage, and we actually did once

By letter of 20 January 1965, Indonesia announced its decision to withdraw from the United Nations "at this stage and under the present circumstances".​

Indonesia | United Nations

www.un.org

So if Indonesia understood this way back when it was just a young pup in int'l power politics, then a veteran player like Russia would've known better. What Putin is doing makes sense and the fact that he chose to ignore the LEGAL and ILLEGAL that is termed by the UN (a Western institution) underscores his deep understanding of how world affairs work. He is a gem when you compare him to many Non-Western politicians.

I am eager to see an alternative to the UN created by such amazing nations like Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. I wonder what the principles of such organization will be like? Maybe they will start with a rule that borders are non-binding and countries are legally allowed to invade and expand their territory. I wonder how many non-imperialist nations will like to sign-up to such an alternative UN.

To clear it out for you, that “alternative“ UN never happened because nobody trusts countries like Russia and China, and even those who cheerlead for them feel safer under the US-led world order.

That alternative will come sooner rather than later because the country responsible for making the UN upheld to such a degree, the U.S. is not only being increasingly unable to rein in the declining trend of the Western order, it's now actually actively undermining it, for example:

Blinken willing to work with Congress on potential sanctions against ICC

Republicans seek help from secretary of state after prosecutor Karim Khan requests arrest warrant for Israeli PM Netanyahu

www.theguardian.com

This is why Russia and anyone thinking this way will not be able to create an alternative to the UN. If rules and treates have no value for you, why should someone sign up to the rules you propose, knowing that you will never abide by them?

This is not true, the U.S.-led UN leadership only makes sense for Europe and most notably Eastern Europe, Indonesia for example doesn't feel threatened by Russia. In Africa, Sahelian nations are kicking out French troops and involvements while inviting Russians.

And just like with the Japanese and Koreans, Russia will not be able to secure Ukraine, and in the future Imperial Russia will be converted into a pacifist nation that is no longer an empire and has US military bases on its territory, in order to contain China. And just like the Japanese had to apologize to the Koreans for all the abuses done to them, the Russians will have to apologize to Ukrainians.

This is at most, a pipe dream. One of the reasons why Japan, a country that has 10x smaller industrial capacity than the U.S was willing to start a war is their false belief of self-superiority, likely determined by their unbroken success since the Meiji restoration against giants like Qing China and Romanov Russia. And that false sense of superiority led them to fight an un-winnable war many years later.

Russia today has its share of success, but also its share of defeats and humiliation (such as losing the Soviet Empire), they'll not be as reckless as the Japanese. And Putin, a master politician that comes from obscurity will understand it better not to pick an unwinnable fight, but rather a slow methodical approach that pays off (like invading Ukraine and not the Baltics).

 

[contricusc]

That's not how it works, the U.S. recognized Iraq as a sovereign country as far back as the 50s but invaded anyway.

The US never tried to annex Iraq territory and it never claimed Iraq is not a country. You see, if Russia just tried regime change in Ukraine, and when it failed withdrew from the war, we wouldn’t be in the current situation. Where Putin failed miserably is when he started annexing territories, first with Crimea and then with the other Ukrainian provinces.

If Putin was not an amateur, he would have created an independent country in Crimea (Kosovo style), that would be fully independent from Russia, self governing and democratic (at least in appearance). He could have tried the same thing for the Dontetsk and Luhansk republics.

In time, if the local population of those regions was happy with the new status quo as independent countries, it would have been difficult for Western nations to oppose their independence.

But the moment Putin accepted the annexation of territories, he removed any doubt about his imperialistic intentions and he broke all the rules he promised to adhere by. This is when Putin los all his credibility and turned Russia into a pariah state.

Just because Russia decided to break the rules, doesn't mean it is time to leave the organization entirely. A good statesman should know when those rules are to their advantage and press for them to be honored and at the same time know when those rules are to be broken when it's no longer to their advantage. And Putin, is very good at this, I acknowledge it.

Russia should have been kicked out of the UN, if Western leaders had any backbone. You don’t respect the rules, you’re out.

While Putin is playing the rules to his perceived advantage, he is ruining Russia’s credibility and standing. When you respect the rules only when it suits you, nobody trusts you anymore.

Back when Russia was the Soviet Union, while imperfect, the rules were to their advantage. And we saw a less aggressive Soviet Union. After the fall of the Union, Russia found itself at an extreme disadvantage and it's no surprise that it led to the current launch of military operations. Nothing wrong.

If they don’t like the rules, they should first withdraw from the treaties, and only after that they should act against the rules.

If not, they are just rule-breakers that cannot be trusted in the future for any new treaties and negotiations. This is why nobody is willing to negotiate a peace deal with Russia right now. Because Putin’s word and signature is worth less than toilet paper.

So if Indonesia understood this way back when it was just a young pup in int'l power politics, then a veteran player like Russia would've known better.

Indonesia had all the reasons to contest the UN world order, where a small number of nations had privileges and veto powers. But Russia has no such reasons, because Russia is a big beneficiary of the UN. You are confusing the UN for a Western institution, when in fact the UN is an institution that serves the interests of exactly five countries: US, UK, France, China and Russia.

Those five countries are more “equal” than the others under the UN system. Western countries like Germany, Italy or Canada are actually undermined by a system where China or Russia hold more power than they do.

What Putin is doing makes sense and the fact that he chose to ignore the LEGAL and ILLEGAL that is termed by the UN (a Western institution) underscores his deep understanding of how world affairs work. He is a gem when you compare him to many Non-Western politicians.

What you call his deep understanding of world affairs, I call plain ignorance and stupidity. Putin is unable to play and win by the rukes of the XXI century, so he tries to bend the rules in his favor, without knowing that the anarchism he promotes in world affairs would be his downfall.

“Might is right” does not favor Russia, and Putin still didn’t realize that. He thought he can do whatever he wants in his backyard, but the US is watching and can slap him whenever it sees fit, while Putin has no way to fight back and has to ignore every humiliation.

This is not true, the U.S.-led UN leadership only makes sense for Europe and most notably Eastern Europe, Indonesia for example doesn't feel threatened by Russia. In Africa, Sahelian nations are kicking out French troops and involvements while inviting Russians.

Indonesia doesn’t feel threatened by Russia, but would you say the same about China? Would you prefer a world order ruled by Russia and China instead, where Russia is allowed to rule its backyard (Eastern Europe and Central Asia) while China gets the South China Sea and Southeastern Asia?

Be careful what you wish for, as it might come true.

Russia today has its share of success, but also its share of defeats and humiliation (such as losing the Soviet Empire), they'll not be as reckless as the Japanese. And Putin, a master politician that comes from obscurity will understand it better not to pick an unwinnable fight, but rather a slow methodical approach that pays off (like invading Ukraine and not the Baltics).

Yes, Putin is aware of his weakness and not as reckless as Imperial Japan. But he was still stupid enough to fall into the trap and invade Ukraine. The slow methodical approach works both ways.

What I see is the US slowly normalizing the idea that US weapons can be used to shoot at Russian military assets without any repercussions for the US. First in Ukraine, then in Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, and soon in Russia proper. By the end of the year we will most likely see US missiles pounding Russian military assets inside Russia, while Russia being too afraid to fire a single shot at the US military. Something like that was unthinkable two years ago, but Putin’s “strategic leadership“ made all this possible.

 

[UkroTurk]

Czech Foreign Minister

 

[FiReFTW]

Russia should have been kicked out of the UN, if Western leaders had any backbone. You don’t respect the rules, you’re out.

LMAO you serious bro? You might aswell kick half the countries out then, including israel and your beloved USA.

 

[Relic]

All the bickering back and forth about laws, rules and international committees and organization. Here is the reality that has been proven time and again.

Only two thing that matter on the international level.

1. Force and one's ability to project it over an adversary in conflict.

2. Alliance networks to help you overcome your enemy.

All of the "legal" talk is BS. The United Nations, like the League of Nations before it, is a hollow entity because it doesn't have any real ability to project hard power. Any of the powerful members simply tell everyone to "F-off" when something they're doing is being challenged.

This is what I've been trying to tell people since the outset of the war in Ukraine. This is simply about interests. NATO's differ from those of Russia and given that Russia won't launch nukes out of fear of retaliation, we ought to be supporting Ukraine FAR GREATER than we are already. Russia is a legitimate existential threat in Europe due to their expansionist history. Europe needs to start acting like it, backed by their NATO allies.

The European Union spent more than $3 Trillion usd in response to Covid-19. USA spent more than $3 Trillion usd. Britain spent $500 Billion usd. Canada spent $350 Billion usd. Australia spent $30 Billion usd...

Countries spent this kind of money because they thought Covid-19 could be an existential threat. It would only take a fraction of that commitment to get the industrial base of the West churning. $500 Billion usd is all it would take, split between 30+ countries, to render Russia's effort in Ukraine as useless. There simply isn't the political will to do correct thing for the West's interests and commit to an effort that would ensure a Russian defeat.

 

[Gary]

The US never tried to annex Iraq territory and it never claimed Iraq is not a country. You see, if Russia just tried regime change in Ukraine, and when it failed withdrew from the war, we wouldn’t be in the current situation. Where Putin failed miserably is when he started annexing territories, first with Crimea and then with the other Ukrainian provinces.

If Putin was not an amateur, he would have created an independent country in Crimea (Kosovo style), that would be fully independent from Russia, self governing and democratic (at least in appearance). He could have tried the same thing for the Dontetsk and Luhansk republics.

In time, if the local population of those regions was happy with the new status quo as independent countries, it would have been difficult for Western nations to oppose their independence.

But the moment Putin accepted the annexation of territories, he removed any doubt about his imperialistic intentions and he broke all the rules he promised to adhere by. This is when Putin los all his credibility and turned Russia into a pariah state.

Putin's original goal was just that, regime change. He set up for Kyiv with a light force of 200K men, spread all the way from Northern Ukraine all the way to Crimea in the South. The idea back then was once Zelensky flees, Russia would install their men in Kyiv and everything will be back to business as usual, Russia will likely send back the bulk of their army home and that's it. Of course, his calculation was proven wrong as the resistance is much much stiffer than thought. It is becoming clear that to Pacify Ukraine, it is not enough to merely occupy some buildings in Kyiv. But to destroy the Ukrainian nation, physically and psychologically. And that is only possible by taking over all of Ukraine and turn it into a Russian province (Novorossiya)

Add that to further development from 2022, 2023 and so forth, now Putin will have no choice but to militarily occupy Ukraine at least until Kyiv and Odesa are secured.

Russia should have been kicked out of the UN, if Western leaders had any backbone. You don’t respect the rules, you’re out.

Yes, if that led to that, then my earlier argument about the UN being a Western institution in disguise will finally be proven correct.

While Putin is playing the rules to his perceived advantage, he is ruining Russia’s credibility and standing. When you respect the rules only when it suits you, nobody trusts you anymore.

The Other great powers with Veto powers don't have any credibility either mate. The UN is a playground for criminals hidden by a supposed legitimacy cloak.

If they don’t like the rules, they should first withdraw from the treaties, and only after that they should act against the rules.

If not, they are just rule-breakers that cannot be trusted in the future for any new treaties and negotiations. This is why nobody is willing to negotiate a peace deal with Russia right now. Because Putin’s word and signature is worth less than toilet paper.

I don't see anything wrong with this, simply because everyone did the same

Indonesia had all the reasons to contest the UN world order, where a small number of nations had privileges and veto powers. But Russia has no such reasons, because Russia is a big beneficiary of the UN. You are confusing the UN for a Western institution, when in fact the UN is an institution that serves the interests of exactly five countries: US, UK, France, China and Russia.

Russia has been a big beneficiary, true. The Veto power gave them a lot of leverage. But it's a lot less than what it used to be when the Moscow empire stretched all the way to Germany.

Putin's military operation is necessary to at least tilt the balance and privileges back to Moscow's favor, however small.

Those five countries are more “equal” than the others under the UN system. Western countries like Germany, Italy or Canada are actually undermined by a system where China or Russia hold more power than they do.

Germany and Canada are US dogs that's it. They do not have what it takes to be a great power. They're wealthy of course but they're no great power.

In the book written by John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. All Great Powers are wealthy countries, but not all wealthy countries are great power. Japan, Germany and Canada are categorized as such (Wealthy non-great powers)

What you call his deep understanding of world affairs, I call plain ignorance and stupidity. Putin is unable to play and win by the rukes of the XXI century, so he tries to bend the rules in his favor, without knowing that the anarchism he promotes in world affairs would be his downfall.

Your hatred of him has blinded you.

“Might is right” does not favor Russia, and Putin still didn’t realize that. He thought he can do whatever he wants in his backyard, but the US is watching and can slap him whenever it sees fit, while Putin has no way to fight back and has to ignore every humiliation.

Conventionally, the Russians have no chance, but put into equation Russia's nuclear arsenal and the fact that no one will win a nuclear exchange, the conventional power equation is nullified. The Russians have made it clear that a DIRECT NATO attack on their troops meant nukes dropping like sugar in New York, Washington, Berlin, London, Paris, etc.

So there's no such thing as the U.S. dealing with Russia from a position of strength. Had it been the situation, the U.S. would've sent their troops in Ukrainian soil a long time ago. Funnily enough, the proponents of US military intervention are not the U.S. themselves, but tiny Eastern European countries with no power of their own, think Estonia, or Lithuania.

What is clear on the other hand is that Putin dealt with Zelensky from the position of strength, and it will be a shame if Putin doesn't use the aggregate advantage of Russia vis-a-vis Ukraine and not pacify the country.

Indonesia doesn’t feel threatened by Russia, but would you say the same about China? Would you prefer a world order ruled by Russia and China instead, where Russia is allowed to rule its backyard (Eastern Europe and Central Asia) while China gets the South China Sea and Southeastern Asia?

Be careful what you wish for, as it might come true.



Yes, Putin is aware of his weakness and not as reckless as Imperial Japan. But he was still stupid enough to fall into the trap and invade Ukraine. The slow methodical approach works both ways.

What I see is the US slowly normalizing the idea that US weapons can be used to shoot at Russian military assets without any repercussions for the US. First in Ukraine, then in Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, and soon in Russia proper. By the end of the year we will most likely see US missiles pounding Russian military assets inside Russia, while Russia being too afraid to fire a single shot at the US military. Something like that was unthinkable two years ago, but Putin’s “strategic leadership“ made all this possible.

Time is not on the U.S. side, you simply saw this from a European perspective while I view this affair by positioning myself in a U.S. position. The U.S. problem is not exclusively Ukraine. They're now scrambling to try to stave off China, while fighting mounting insurgents in the Middle East, Africa (Sahel), and Afghanistan from the likes of ISIS and their affiliates.

If you're implying that the U.S. simply has the time to climb the escalation ladder and use its weapons as cards while ignoring China on the other side of the world, then you're wrong. For every weapon the U.S sends to Ukraine, that's less weapons for the U.S. to stockpile for an eventuality in Taiwan. For every attention the U.S. puts into Ukraine, that's less attention to the Middle East where ISIS's comeback is always on the horizon + Iran and its proxies.

While the U.S interests is global, Russia is local. Ukraine is literally next door and Russia could put all its effort in that direction, the U.S cannot

 

[mehmed beg]

One of the biggest mistake that the sons of Adam has made in the 21st century is adopting the LEGAL and ILLEGAL approach on international politics.

Fun fact, there is no such thing as legal and illegal in power politics, and especially great power politics.

The Russian military operation in Ukraine is 'ILLEGAL' in the sense that it goes against the interest of the West. In Indonesia, the majority thinks that Russia is doing what it needs to do.

This concept of legal and illegal that is defined by superficial institutions like the UN, is by its nature a Western propaganda, like I said, no one should be fooled by the 'international' stickers that the West slap on to anything to make them look legitimate, they're not. And that includes the United Nations (UN) which is in its very heart, a Western institution, ignore the 'Nation's sticker that they slap as it means nothing.

Russia being a long time great power understand this, the Soviet Union (and many non-Western countries) entered the UN because it has yet been able to create a challenger/alternative to the institution, not because they actually believe in this tools of Western imperialism masquerading as a truly global institution. The idea back then is to wait for the Soviet Union to be strong and far reaching enough and prolly came up with a competitor to the UN. The Soviet Union collapsed before it could happen but the logic stays. The only reason why nations entered the UN is because they have yet to build anything strong enough as a 'alternative' to this masquerading Western institution as most of the world even at this point lack what it takes, not because they wanted to dwell in the swamp called the UN.

So the fact that Ukraine is an active member of the UN (a Western institution) meant nothing, Ukraine is still an invented country that is a national security issue for Russia and must be secured before they become a permanent cancer.

Back then the Japanese would describe Korea as a dagger pointed at Japan's soft underbelly, Ukraine is the equivalent to Russia foday what was Korea was to Imperial Japan. It must be secured at all cost, and me a student of political realism wholly endorse this.

Legal or illegal, you may say? There is no such thing?
Then some people can say that about Palestine.
Also it is really interesting that person who is against Western Imperialism is for other people Imperialism and activity looking for any presedan.
As I have said on these boards many times, when someone looks at the world in the prism of hate and oversimplifie everything, sooner or later he will come to the paradox
The real politic is never based on that but it's now.

 

[Gary]

Legal or illegal, you may say? There is no such thing?
Then some people can say that about Palestine.

Legal and Illegal definitions that is based on the assumption of some Western institutions like the U.N should never be used as standards. That's what I meant.

Simply put, the Russian military operation is illegal according to the UN, but completely legal according to Russia. and that's fine, diverging opinions must be accepted. The pro-West will justify UN resolution against Russia because it suits their goal, while some anti-West justify Russian operation because it suits theirs.

I'm neither pro-West nor pro-Russia, but I could understand why taking over Ukraine is such a huge importance for Russia, and it's completely justified from a power politics lens.

Also it is really interesting that person who is against Western Imperialism is for other people Imperialism and activity looking for any presedan.
As I have said on these boards many times, when someone looks at the world in the prism of hate and oversimplifie everything, sooner or later he will come to the paradox
The real politic is never based on that but it's now.

Good that you put Palestine into the argument. Palestine is damning evidence that the order in which the UN thrives and continues to promote is at best, Western. Right now, the West is dumping whatever imaginary credibility they have so that Israel could take Gaza, a small desolate city while Russia is gaining on their loss of credibility to justify its takeover of Ukraine, a 'country' with abundant natural resources and fertile farmland.

 

[mehmed beg]

Legal and Illegal definitions that is based on the assumption of some Western institutions like the U.N should never be used as standards. That's what I meant.

Simply put, the Russian military operation is illegal according to the UN, but completely legal according to Russia. and that's fine, diverging opinions must be accepted. The pro-West will justify UN resolution against Russia because it suits their goal, while some anti-West justify Russian operation because it suits theirs.

I'm neither pro-West nor pro-Russia, but I could understand why taking over Ukraine is such a huge importance for Russia, and it's completely justified from a power politics lens.



Good that you put Palestine into the argument. Palestine is damning evidence that the order in which the UN thrives and continues to promote is at best, Western. Right now, the West is dumping whatever imaginary credibility they have so that Israel could take Gaza, a small desolate city while Russia is gaining on their loss of credibility to justify its takeover of Ukraine, a 'country' with abundant natural resources and fertile farmland.

The same things can be used to justify Russian intervention in Syria? The same things can be said when USSR invaded Afghanistan?
I understand that it is power politics if that's in itself reason d' etre then anything can be justified.
I think that scholastic arguments are pretty weak. Funny enough that's what both West , Russia and China uses.

 

[Gary]

Smart man, he wants to avoid the same fate of Ukraine

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1794673683300057494

 

[contricusc]

Smart man, he wants to avoid the same fate of Ukraine

With such moves, he may just hasten his own Maidan moment.