EPTRusso-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 572
| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22048 Posts
On September 04 2023 01:31 JimmiC wrote: Why would Russia keep firing missiles if they are pushed back to their borders? That is such an odd hypothetical. Because they are sore losers and feel safe that Ukraine won't counter-invade? | ||
|
pmp10
3380 Posts
On September 03 2023 20:37 Magic Powers wrote: There's nothing indicating that the Kyiv administration or Zelensky specifically have been pressured by anyone. Firstly that news post remains unconfirmed, and only Washington Post has reported it. Secondly it's phrased as an encouragement, not a coercion or anything of that sort. Well, unconfirmed or not it worked. The Ukrainian position has changed as a result. And this is really a minor thing compared to western refusal to symbolically invite Ukraine to NATO at the summit. Even if you disregard all the rumors of 'third track' diplomacy, clearly the option to negotiate is beeing kept open. It's just that nobody wants to be seen twisting Zelensky's arms just yet. | ||
|
Yurie
12001 Posts
On September 04 2023 01:31 JimmiC wrote: Why would Russia keep firing missiles if they are pushed back to their borders? That is such an odd hypothetical. To stop them from joining Nato. Launching one a month is not a high expense if that is a priority. The consequence is shut off trade. I personally think it is insane to shut off trade due to that but Russia does not. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mikau
Netherlands1446 Posts
On September 04 2023 01:31 JimmiC wrote: Why would Russia keep firing missiles if they are pushed back to their borders? That is such an odd hypothetical. Why would Russia invade Ukraine despite a close relationship with the west/EU clearly being in their best interest? Because they can. Because projecting strength is more important to them than self preservation and self interest. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8231 Posts
On September 04 2023 01:42 Yurie wrote: To stop them from joining Nato. Launching one a month is not a high expense if that is a priority. The consequence is shut off trade. I personally think it is insane to shut off trade due to that but Russia does not. Russia is already shut off trade for a number of decades at this point. Sure, at some point, naive politicians will start thinking it's a good idea to rely on Russian trade again, but you'll have to have a generation shift first | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18186 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16117 Posts
On September 04 2023 01:31 JimmiC wrote: Why would Russia keep firing missiles if they are pushed back to their borders? That is such an odd hypothetical. Because as far as Russia is concerned, Ukraine is invading THEIR sovereign territory. I know it's a bunch of bullshit, I know none of us recognize their claims to the Donbas, Luhansk and Crimea as legitimate but that's not relevant. As far as Russia is concerned, they have every legal justification they need to keep this war going until Ukraine gives up. It doesn't have to make sense to us. I don't even think it makes sense to the Kremlin. But it's what they are telling their people and as long as their people continue to allow and support what they are doing they are going to keep doing it. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16117 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:27 Acrofales wrote: pretty sure that if Russia is lobbing missiles into Ukraine with the sole purpose of keeping them from joining NATO and that is literally the only thing that is stopping them, NATO will write a specific clause to make the occasional missile acceptable. or maybe they'll allow Ukraine to join without any exceptional clauses and dare Russia to keep lobbing missiles... Any new member will require a unanimous consent of all of the members. Do you really think if Turkey and Hungary were able to just make up reasons for Sweden to not join NATO that they'll accept Ukraine as a member while they are in an active state of war with Russia? It won't happen. I'm sorry but it just won't. You guys need to be realistic about this. | ||
KwarK
United States43460 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:31 Vindicare605 wrote: Because as far as Russia is concerned, Ukraine is invading THEIR sovereign territory. I know it's a bunch of bullshit, I know none of us recognize their claims to the Donbas, Luhansk and Crimea as legitimate but that's not relevant. As far as Russia is concerned, they have every legal justification they need to keep this war going until Ukraine gives up. It doesn't have to make sense to us. I don't even think it makes sense to the Kremlin. But it's what they are telling their people and as long as their people continue to allow and support what they are doing they are going to keep doing it. Russian legalism is completely arbitrary. They maintain that these parts of Ukraine are sovereign Russian soil until it means they have to do something, then they pretend otherwise. That’s why the west gets away with “don’t use our weapons on real Russian soil” without Russia complaining. Russia is self aware when it comes to this. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16117 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:41 KwarK wrote: Russian legalism is completely arbitrary. They maintain that these parts of Ukraine are sovereign Russian soil until it means they have to do something, then they pretend otherwise. That’s why the west gets away with “don’t use our weapons on real Russian soil” without Russia complaining. Russia is self aware when it comes to this. Yea but that's not going to stop them from continuing to shoot missiles into Ukraine even after the borders get reestablished. I know their version of legalism is completely arbitrary, but again that doesn't seem to matter. Arbitrary or not, if that's the justification they're going to use to keep the violence going and their people still buy it then that's all they need. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18186 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:33 Vindicare605 wrote: Any new member will require a unanimous consent of all of the members. Do you really think if Turkey and Hungary were able to just make up reasons for Sweden to not join NATO that they'll accept Ukraine as a member while they are in an active state of war with Russia? It won't happen. I'm sorry but it just won't. You guys need to be realistic about this. If Hungary and Turkey don't want Ukraine to join, it won't have much to do with missiles. Sure, they might use it as a convenient excuse, but they'll just as readily make up some other excuse if Russia stops lobbing missiles. Let me clarify: Turkey and Hungary won't be principally opposed to Ukraine joining. They'll be opportunistically opposed until enough other NATO members give them stuff in order to no longer be opposed. I'd be more worried about Germany, France and even the UK and US being opposed for an actual worry about what happens if Russia continues lobbing missiles AFTER they sign. I just don't think it'll be a deciding factor. Unless, of course, Trump or some other wackjob Republican wins the presidency, in which case I think Russia gets "appeased" instead of Ukraine supported. But that election is likely to happen way before Ukraine wins back all their territory . | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5739 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:31 Vindicare605 wrote: Because as far as Russia is concerned, Ukraine is invading THEIR sovereign territory. I know it's a bunch of bullshit, I know none of us recognize their claims to the Donbas, Luhansk and Crimea as legitimate but that's not relevant. As far as Russia is concerned, they have every legal justification they need to keep this war going until Ukraine gives up. It doesn't have to make sense to us. I don't even think it makes sense to the Kremlin. But it's what they are telling their people and as long as their people continue to allow and support what they are doing they are going to keep doing it. Their people know perfectly well it's all bullshit. Did you see how they reacted to losing Kherson? | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2702 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:56 Vindicare605 wrote: Yea but that's not going to stop them from continuing to shoot missiles into Ukraine even after the borders get reestablished. I know their version of legalism is completely arbitrary, but again that doesn't seem to matter. Arbitrary or not, if that's the justification they're going to use to keep the violence going and their people still buy it then that's all they need. All you're arguments seem based around some weird assumption that Russia can't lose this war (unless they want to). It's like telling an MMA figther he can't lose if he doesn't tap out. Useless when his opponent is about to break his arm. Basic principle is the same. Hurt your enemy untill he doesn't want or can't keep fighting. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16117 Posts
On September 04 2023 03:09 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: All you're arguments seem based around some weird assumption that Russia can't lose this war (unless they want to). It's like telling an MMA figther he can't lose if he doesn't tap out. Useless when his opponent is about to break his arm. Basic principle is the same. Hurt your enemy untill he doesn't want or can't keep fighting. It's not that I don't think Russia can lose as much as I don't see a way for Ukraine to win. This isn't an MMA fighter with a human body and human stamina this is a country with MASSIVE reserves of natural resources and a much larger population than the country it's fighting. If they want to keep fighting, they can. If Ukraine is limited in what it can do to actually STOP Russia's ability to produce weapons because they aren't able to use the weapons we give them for that purpose, and any full on invasion into Russia without foreign assistance seems like suicide then I don't see how they actually force Russia into an armistice if Russia is unwilling to sign one. The only way I see this ending in a positive way for Ukraine is with regime change, and everything we've seen from the Russian public paints that as an unlikely outcome. You can go back in this thread a few hundred pages to how I felt about this topic at the start of this war. I thought there'd be no way the Russian public would tolerate losing another 100,000 soldiers in another poorly thought out invasion. We're at the point where Russia has lost almost a million killed and wounded, and they STILL aren't willing or able to force Putin out of office. If nothing changes in that regard then Putin can just keep this war going as long as he wants, and the longer this goes on for Ukraine the worse it is. This is their country bearing all of the scars of the war, their people are displaced, their cities are being leveled. I just don't see an end to the conflict since both sides are unwilling to give up anything and aren't able to decisively beat the other on the battlefield either. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On September 04 2023 02:33 Vindicare605 wrote: Any new member will require a unanimous consent of all of the members. Do you really think if Turkey and Hungary were able to just make up reasons for Sweden to not join NATO that they'll accept Ukraine as a member while they are in an active state of war with Russia? It won't happen. I'm sorry but it just won't. You guys need to be realistic about this. If the Kyiv administration says there is no war, then there is no war. Russia can keep firing missiles all they want, that doesn't constitute war. It constitutes state terrorism. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22048 Posts
On September 04 2023 03:09 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: I ofc can't speak for others but I don't think Ukraine can/wants to counter invade. And without invading and basically conquering Russia there is no way to stop Russia from being able to fight if they want to.All you're arguments seem based around some weird assumption that Russia can't lose this war (unless they want to). It's like telling an MMA figther he can't lose if he doesn't tap out. Useless when his opponent is about to break his arm. Basic principle is the same. Hurt your enemy untill he doesn't want or can't keep fighting. (that, or Putin gets removed/dies and his successor is willing to accept peace) | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22048 Posts
On September 04 2023 03:39 Magic Powers wrote: Thats not how things work. especially not in relation to NATO and the alliance being pulled into fights, especially when that fight is with Russia.If the Kyiv administration says there is no war, then there is no war. Russia can keep firing missiles all they want, that doesn't constitute war. It constitutes state terrorism. | ||
| ||
