Cont: The Russian invasion of Ukraine part 6

[Aridas]

Putin accidentally called the "special military operation" a war. Oops. Doesn't he know that's a crime?

I think I heard that St. Petersburg officials have called for Putin to be arrested, given that plenty of others have been arrested because they committed that "crime."

I seriously doubt he used the word "war"

By the look of it, he did.

Unless your quibbling about the Russian equivalent likely being used instead of the English word "war?"

 

[BobTheCoward]

By the look of it, he did.

Unless your quibbling about the Russian equivalent likely being used instead of the English word "war?"

Of course.

 

[Steve]

Putin accidentally called the "special military operation" a war. Oops. Doesn't he know that's a crime?

I seriously doubt he used the word "war"

By the look of it, he did.

Unless your quibbling about the Russian equivalent likely being used instead of the English word "war?"

Of course.

I would not dare, under threat of admonishment by the mods, suggest that yet another thread has been "Bobbed"

 

[SpitfireIX]

The US House of Representatives has concurred in the omnibus spending bill as amended by the Senate.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/23/politics/house-vote-spending-bill/index.html

Now the measure goes to Biden for his signature, which is a foregone conclusion. So $45 billion in military, economic, and humanitarian aid for Ukraine (and other countries threatened by Russia) through next September 30.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I would not dare, under threat of admonishment by the mods, suggest that yet another thread has been "Bobbed"

To clarify, I don't know if the people saying it is significant are the people who would know enough Russian to know if it is, or if it represents a plurality of Russian speakers interpretation of the statements as significant.

It is a really hard thing to guage if the people claiming it matters, the journalists, actually know. It would be awesome if it did, but I don't want to be wishcasting.

 

[theprestige]

The war can’t be won on the battlefield. Even if Russia gets pushed back to its own borders, unless it says “I give up” - a political act - the war will continue but with Ukraine being at the distinct disadvantage of not being able to push into Russia.

Both as a political thing and as an operational thing, I think a Ukraine that can drive Russia out of its territory is a Ukraine that can push into Russia. The messaging would have to be handled with some care, but I don't see any serious difficulties with that.

The two prerequisites for Russia being able to occupy parts of Ukraine are Russia being able to sustain offensive operations, and Russia being able to hold a strategic defensive position.

If Russia cannot do these things, and Ukraine keeps fighting with western support, then soon Ukraine pushes Russia back to its rightful borders. After that, if Russia wants to keep playing with artillery and air strikes and anemic assaults on Ukrainian defensive positions, Ukraine should have little difficulty pushing into Russia some ways, and then using that territory as a bargaining chip for a truce or peace deal. I think that would be very strategically advantageous for Ukraine.

 

[theprestige]

Then Ukraine had strong motivation to pay retail rather than have foreign tax players cover the bill

What gibberish is this?

 

[BobTheCoward]

What gibberish is this?

Any argument that Ukraine should be helped because the situation is so dire is an argument for extracting a greater payment for aid because they are motivated to pay.

How many natural resources could Biden have annexed from Western Ukraine rather than use taxpayer resources?

 

[theprestige]

Any argument that Ukraine should be helped because the situation is so dire is an argument for extracting a greater payment for aid because they are motivated to pay.

How many natural resources could Biden have annexed from Western Ukraine rather than use taxpayer resources?

That seems like a very Ruscist solution to what most people view as a humanitarian problem.

 

[Craig4]

Any argument that Ukraine should be helped because the situation is so dire is an argument for extracting a greater payment for aid because they are motivated to pay.

How many natural resources could Biden have annexed from Western Ukraine rather than use taxpayer resources?

The people who want to make our aid to Ukraine transactional don't have the votes, the organization or the wasta so the US and allied nations are going to proceed as if they don't exist.

 

[Aridas]

That seems like a very Ruscist solution to what most people view as a humanitarian problem.

More like a "How do we extract the most obvious benefits?" solution. It's short-sighted and ignores the direct and indirect benefits that we actually are deriving by sending aid in the way we are, but I can easily see the appeal to some people.

As it stands, though, it's probably well worth noting that first of all, the *only* world leader that seems to actually want this war is Putin. Second, despite not really wanting the war, the US and its NATO allies are utterly decimating the war capabilities of possibly the most immediately dangerous foe on the planet at effectively chump change prices and no US or NATO military force casualties. The US has offered tens of billions in aid? Oh noes! That's actually equivalent to a couple percent of the US' bloated defense budget and much of it's being used to take equipment that would have been retired effectively unused for actual defense anyways, with notable costs involved, off our hands. If our defense budget was actually based on the real threats posed and divided accordingly, those tens of billions could actually save us hundreds of billions in spending per year. A bit of a specious argument given the nature of the if, but worthwhile for illustrating the point that the US is already making out like bandits when it comes to the benefits gained for the costs incurred on the military front, before getting to the various other benefits.

Elsewhere, Ukraine is rich in potential wealth and very poor in actual wealth right now. It might be possible to use its time of need to exploit the crap out of that potential wealth, but the long term effects of that will very possibly be negative overall, both in international relations and in general. A quick buck via obvious exploitation certainly is a quick buck, but it has consequences in other ways that can easily outweigh the short term gain.

 

[jeremyp]

Both as a political thing and as an operational thing, I think a Ukraine that can drive Russia out of its territory is a Ukraine that can push into Russia. The messaging would have to be handled with some care, but I don't see any serious difficulties with that.

The two prerequisites for Russia being able to occupy parts of Ukraine are Russia being able to sustain offensive operations, and Russia being able to hold a strategic defensive position.

If Russia cannot do these things, and Ukraine keeps fighting with western support, then soon Ukraine pushes Russia back to its rightful borders. After that, if Russia wants to keep playing with artillery and air strikes and anemic assaults on Ukrainian defensive positions, Ukraine should have little difficulty pushing into Russia some ways, and then using that territory as a bargaining chip for a truce or peace deal. I think that would be very strategically advantageous for Ukraine.

I think Ukraine would be under tremendous pressure not to push into Russia from the USA and it’s other allies. Plus, if it did, the narrative of Russia defending its homeland becomes real and that usually ends badly for invaders.

It isn’t going to happen.

The best chance of peace is Ukraine pushing Russia out of their territory and some sort of deal being signed that lasts long enough for Ukraine to join NATO.

 

[trustbutverify]

Any argument that Ukraine should be helped because the situation is so dire is an argument for extracting a greater payment for aid because they are motivated to pay.

How many natural resources could Biden have annexed from Western Ukraine rather than use taxpayer resources?

Have you considered relating this advice to people who run soup kitchens?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Have you considered relating this advice to people who run soup kitchens?

People at soup kitchens lack the ability to pay.

Do you doubt Ukraine's ability to pay? Could they have agreed to transfer 3% of western Ukraine to the US if a certain level of military success was met?

 

[theprestige]

Peace makes plenty. I'm sure when this is over, Ukraine will be happy to offer favorable trade agreements and reconstruction incentives to western governments and businesses. No need to nickel and dime them up front, or resort to extortion.

But we can save that conversation for later, once Ukraine has joined western Europe's economic and security structures. Right now the important thing to remember is that the sooner Ukraine wins, the sooner we all win.

If one simply must insist on being a dick to Ukraine out of some misplaced philosophical principle, take it to the R&P sub.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Peace makes plenty. I'm sure when this is over, Ukraine will be happy to offer favorable trade agreements and reconstruction incentives to western governments and businesses. No need to nickel and dime them up front, or resort to extortion.

But we can save that conversation for later, once Ukraine has joined western Europe's economic and security structures. Right now the important thing to remember is that the sooner Ukraine wins, the sooner we all win.

If one simply must insist on being a dick to Ukraine out of some misplaced philosophical principle, take it to the R&P sub.

...I don't think it is being dick or nickel and diming or extortion. I think it is a square deal

 

[Craig4]

...I don't think it is being dick or nickel and diming or extortion. I think it is a square deal

You have a very unsophisticated understanding of a "square deal".

 

[trustbutverify]

People at soup kitchens lack the ability to pay.

Maybe some of them can... the kitchen should look into it before feedings. But even if they can't afford food, so much the better. Make them sign an agreement to have any potential future income garnished. I mean, what choice do they have?

 

[Aridas]

Well, if true, the consequences here are rather problematic for Russia.

Economic mobilization in Russia.
"mandatory conversion of bank deposits
of individuals - citizens of the Russian Federation into state defense loan bonds expected to be issued by the government of the Russian Federation in early 2023"
Good luck there.

Rumours from multiple sources of an upcoming bank run in Russia.

If there is a mass attempt to remove Russians' money from the banks, that's pretty much guaranteed to go bad for Russia. Quite possibly even worse if the banks are indeed refusing to let them.

Russian Telegram is saying that some ���� banks are refusing to give people their money. To prevent cash withdrawals, they are blocking debit cards from working and turning off ATMs.

 

[8enotto]

Zelensky visits Biden and speaks before congress. Much support and whatnot. R members even talk of seizure of Russian assets in US holding.

Pootie's little helper responds by saying that they somehow totally failed to discuss Russian concerns. He is very unhappy.
Duh, the main concern there was to help drive Russia out of Ukraine.