[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[Eric the meek]

I never said that anyone had explicitly accepted defeat. In fact, I said that they hadn't. What I said was that most impartial commentators are now saying it openly. I'm not sure the NYT falls into the category of impartial, that's a matter for debate.

As far as the assertion goes, I think you only have to look at objectives v outcomes, and the situation on the ground now.

Russia's objective was to protect the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine whilst cementing control over its black sea ports, all of which it has done. Ukraine's objective was to repel the Russian forces and take back all of the territory it had lost since 2014, none of which has happened.

Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives and the Ukrainians have not met theirs.

You may not be happy about this, and things may indeed change, but it is the reality on the ground, so to speak.

Just a reminder that this is day 695 of the 3 day special military operation.

 

[thejackal]

Do I detect backpedalling? I posted a video by a Youtuber, and your kneejerk reaction was to trash it. You shot the messenger. You didn't watch it.

Meanwhile, Ukraine had already claimed responsibility for shooting the plane down. Russia has admitted it got shot down, but blamed 'friendly fire'.
It thinks incompetence is preferable to letting it be known that Ukraine has the ability to bring down a command and control plane. Russia is peddling disinformation to Russians again. And those Russians are freezing in their apartment blocks, because all the blokes who can fix the water leaks and the boiler failures, have been mobilised to the front lines.

Oh dear. No, I'm not backpedalling. I'm trying to be magnanimous whilst politely letting you know that your source is poor quality. I'm not sure how else you would like me to say it?!

 

[thejackal]

Just a reminder that this is day 695 of the 3 day special military operation.

Erm.. pure whataboutery?

I'm not here to defend Russia or Putin pal.

Dear oh dear.

 

[Triggaaar]

What I said was that most impartial commentators are now saying it openly.

What commentators are you claiming are impartial?

I'm not sure the NYT falls into the category of impartial, that's a matter for debate.

You quoted them

Russia's objective was to protect the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine whilst cementing control over its black sea ports

Putin said that Ukraine had no right to exist and his intention was to take it over completely. You can't seriously believe what you are typing.

Ukraine's objective was to repel the Russian forces and take back all of the territory it had lost since 2014, none of which has happened.

Russia tried to take Kyiv, as well as the rest of the country. Ukraine's primary objective was to stop the whole country falling under Russian control - success - and then to repel Russia from Kyiv - success. They also plan to remove Russia from all of Ukraine - that's not so easy, and it is a stalemate.

Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives and the Ukrainians have not met theirs.

You may not be happy about this, and things may indeed change, but it is the reality on the ground, so to speak.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[Eric the meek]

Oh dear. No, I'm not backpedalling. I'm trying to be magnanimous whilst politely letting you know that your source is poor quality. I'm not sure how else you would like me to say it?!

You can call whatever you like poor quality, but it doesn't change the fact that the lead article in Jake Broe's video was factually correct in that the plane got shot down.

His videos about the failing utilities are also worth a watch. Have you seen them yet?

 

[hampshirebrightonboy]

I never said that anyone had explicitly accepted defeat. In fact, I said that they hadn't. What I said was that most impartial commentators are now saying it openly. I'm not sure the NYT falls into the category of impartial, that's a matter for debate.

As far as the assertion goes, I think you only have to look at objectives v outcomes, and the situation on the ground now.

Russia's objective was to protect the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine whilst cementing control over its black sea ports, all of which it has done. Ukraine's objective was to repel the Russian forces and take back all of the territory it had lost since 2014, none of which has happened.

Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives and the Ukrainians have not met theirs.

You may not be happy about this, and things may indeed change, but it is the reality on the ground, so to speak.

Looks like you’ve swallowed Kremlin propaganda hook line and sinker

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Putin said that Ukraine had no right to exist and his intention was to take it over completely. You can't seriously believe what you are typing.



Russia tried to take Kyiv, as well as the rest of the country. Ukraine's primary objective was to stop the whole country falling under Russian control - success - and then to repel Russia from Kyiv - success. They also plan to remove Russia from all of Ukraine - that's not so easy, and it is a stalemate.

I just need thejackal to claim Russia's invasion of Ukraine was justified by Estonia being part of NATO and I'll be able to fill out my bingo card.

 

[thejackal]

What commentators are you claiming are impartial?



You quoted them





Putin said that Ukraine had no right to exist and his intention was to take it over completely. You can't seriously believe what you are typing.



Russia tried to take Kyiv, as well as the rest of the country. Ukraine's primary objective was to stop the whole country falling under Russian control - success - and then to repel Russia from Kyiv - success. They also plan to remove Russia from all of Ukraine - that's not so easy, and it is a stalemate.


Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Deary me, where do you start with all of that?!

Just because I post a link doesn't mean that I think it's a completely impartial source.

Here's a quote from the speech Putin gave on the day of the invasion:

The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation. It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory.

Honestly pal, I think you're talking out yer arse.

How about you post some links to back up your claims?

 

[Eric the meek]

Erm.. pure whataboutery?

I'm not here to defend Russia or Putin pal.

Dear oh dear.

But you said 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives'

Their objective was to take Kyiv in three days. Why is that whataboutery?

 

[thejackal]

But you said 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives'

Their objective was to take Kyiv in three days. Why is that whataboutery?

I don't believe that was their objective.

From Wikipedia:

After the invasion's start, Ukrainian and Western analysts tentatively assessed that Putin seemed to have assumed the Russian Armed Forces would be capable of capturing the Ukrainian capital city of Kyiv within days, eventually leading to the commonly reached conclusion that "taking Kyiv in three days" had been the original objective or expectation of the invasion.[11][12][13]

The 3 days was a "commonly reached conclusion" by pundits, not a stated aim of the Russians.

 

[Wardy's twin]

I never said that anyone had explicitly accepted defeat. In fact, I said that they hadn't. What I said was that most impartial commentators are now saying it openly. I'm not sure the NYT falls into the category of impartial, that's a matter for debate.

As far as the assertion goes, I think you only have to look at objectives v outcomes, and the situation on the ground now.

Russia's objective was to protect the Russian-speaking population of Eastern Ukraine whilst cementing control over its black sea ports, all of which it has done. Ukraine's objective was to repel the Russian forces and take back all of the territory it had lost since 2014, none of which has happened.

Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives and the Ukrainians have not met theirs.

You may not be happy about this, and things may indeed change, but it is the reality on the ground, so to speak.

Russia's most important objective in 2022 was to remove the Zelenskyy government and make Ukraine a subordinate state , it has clearly failed to do that and instead has received a bloody nose.

If Russia was really interested in protecting the Russian speaking population then why does in bomb Odessa which has a large proportion of Russians?

 

[hampshirebrightonboy]

Deary me, where do you start with all of that?!

Just because I post a link doesn't mean that I think it's a completely impartial source.

Here's a quote from the speech Putin gave on the day of the invasion:

Honestly pal, I think you're talking out yer arse.

How about you post some links to back up your

Deary me, where do you start with all of that?!

Just because I post a link doesn't mean that I think it's a completely impartial source.

Here's a quote from the speech Putin gave on the day of the invasion:

Honestly pal, I think you're talking out yer arse.

How about you post some links to back up your claims?

You talk about impartial sources then you quote Putin! Couldn’t make that up.

 

[thejackal]

Russia's most important objective in 2022 was to remove the Zelenskyy government and make Ukraine a subordinate state , it has clearly failed to do that and instead has received a bloody nose.

If Russia was really interested in protecting the Russian speaking population then why does in bomb Odessa which has a large proportion of Russians?

No it wasn't. If that was the case, post some evidence of it.

 

[thejackal]

You talk about impartial sources then you quote Putin! Couldn’t make that up.

What?!? We're talking about Russia's stated objectives. Who else would I quote? Boris?!

This is getting stupid.

I'm not supporting Russia here but you guys are just spouting baseless talking points with no evidence.

 

[Eric the meek]

I don't believe that was their objective.

From Wikipedia:


The 3 days was a "commonly reached conclusion" by pundits, not a stated aim of the Russians.

Here is an extract from a Putin quote that you, yourself posted:

'To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine'

Has Putin achieved the demilitarisation of Ukraine? No.
Has Putin achieved the 'denazification' of Ukraine(assuming any nazis exist)? Given he only controls 20% of Ukraine, then 80% of nazis in Ukraine are still there.

How does this possibly fulfill your claim 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives' ?

 

[thejackal]

Here is an extract from a Putin quote that you, yourself posted:

'To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine'

Has Putin achieved the demilitarisation of Ukraine? No.
Has Putin achieved the 'denazification' of Ukraine(assuming any nazis exist)? Given he only controls 20% of Ukraine, then 80% of nazis in Ukraine are still there.

How does this possibly fulfill your claim 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives' ?

Speculation

 

[Triggaaar]

Deary me, where do you start with all of that?!

How about with answering the question:

What commentators are you claiming are impartial?

Here's a quote from the speech Putin gave on the day of the invasion:

Putin's soldiers had uniforms specifically for marching in Kyiv to claim total victory. He also stated at other times that Ukraine had no right to exist and it was clear from the military column he sent to Kyiv that he intended to take it. Remember what he said in the days before the invasion? 'We're not going to invade, it's just military exercises.' And then in the days afterwards - it's not a war, it's just a special military operation.

Honestly pal, I think you're talking out yer arse.

And yet everyone here thinks it's you that's talking out your backside.

How about you post some links to back up your claims?

“There is no Ukraine”: Fact-Checking the Kremlin’s Version of Ukrainian History

The notion that Ukraine is not a country, but a historical part of Russia, appears to be deeply ingrained in the minds of Russian leadership. Competing interpretations of history have turned into a…

blogs.lse.ac.uk

What Putin Gets Wrong About Ukraine's Statehood

Experts say Putin’s remarks are intended to justify Russian claims over Ukraine

time.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/opinion/ukraine-war-national-identity.html

Speech by President von der Leyen at the European Parliament Plenary on the Russian aggression against Ukraine

This is a moment of truth for Europe.

ec.europa.eu

 

[thejackal]

Here is an extract from a Putin quote that you, yourself posted:

'To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine'

Has Putin achieved the demilitarisation of Ukraine? No.
Has Putin achieved the 'denazification' of Ukraine(assuming any nazis exist)? Given he only controls 20% of Ukraine, then 80% of nazis in Ukraine are still there.

How does this possibly fulfill your claim 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives' ?

Go back and read my original post. The Russian army has not been driven out. No territory won back by Ukraine.

You're clutching at straws because you're emotionally invested but that doesn't change the facts.

 

[Triggaaar]

Here is an extract from a Putin quote that you, yourself posted:

'To this end, we will seek to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine'

Has Putin achieved the demilitarisation of Ukraine? No.
Has Putin achieved the 'denazification' of Ukraine(assuming any nazis exist)? Given he only controls 20% of Ukraine, then 80% of nazis in Ukraine are still there.

How does this possibly fulfill your claim 'Clearly, by anyone's measure, the Russians have met their objectives' ?

Quite

 

[Triggaaar]

Go back and read my original post. The Russian army has not been driven out. No territory won back by Ukraine.

The Russian army was driven out of the Kyiv region, and other areas like Kherson. So you're wrong when you say that no territory has been won back by Ukraine.

Being that you're against Russia, you must be please to be wrong about that?