EPTIf the CTSO was on life support after last year, it is dead now.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 589
| 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. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
If the CTSO was on life support after last year, it is dead now. | ||
zeo
Serbia6334 Posts
On September 20 2023 18:58 r00ty wrote: I just hope that old little man gets Gaddafied so the killing can end. For Ukraines sake and for Russias as well. Your emperor has no clothes. You do know what happened to Libya after Barack and Hillarys little adventure there? | ||
|
Sadist
United States7310 Posts
On September 20 2023 21:25 Magic Powers wrote: I think we can stop trying to convince captainwaffles that he's wrong. Someone who justifies murder the way he does can't be convinced or otherwise saved. He's completely gone. Agreed dont even respond. After his twitter profile reveal he should be ignored. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8231 Posts
On September 20 2023 22:25 zeo wrote: You do know what happened to Libya after Barack and Hillarys little adventure there? We know what happened to Germany after Hitler offed himself. You can't just cherry pick a random country and claim "Ukraine is going to end up like Libya if Russia pulls out". Ukraine was already working towards and getting pretty close to becoming a first world country by the time of the invasion. There's nothing to suggest Ukraine wouldn't be FAR better off without Russian intervention. It's just another disingenuous attempt at pretending that this invasion isn't a simple archaic land grab | ||
|
r00ty
Germany1059 Posts
On September 20 2023 22:25 zeo wrote: You do know what happened to Libya after Barack and Hillarys little adventure there? I wouldn't put that exclusively on those two people. But yeah unfortunately there's more conflict ahead once the Mafia state that is the Russian federation in its current form will fall. | ||
KwarK
United States43468 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28734 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43468 Posts
The main one is that his successors have a viable exit strategy, they can blame everything on Putin and his cronies. They can say that the war was started to enrich Shoigu (as Prigozhin asserted), that Putin had terrible judgment, that his corrupt appointees stole the necessary resources to win, and so forth. Russians know that Ukraine isn’t Russia, there was no great wringing of hands when the “Russian” city of Kherson was lost. They go along with the doublethink but they do know. Putin doesn’t have the option to blame everything on Putin and so for him this is a sunk cost fallacy that he can’t get out of. He can only make things worse for Russia. Secondly, Putin is an idealist. He’s the richest man on earth and is surrounded by a mafia state of oligarchs but that’s not enough for him. He believes in the Russian Empire as a one of that is integral to Russia’s existence. To him Russia’s destiny is to rule, oppress, and casually genocide the people who lived within the maximal borders of the USSR and violence is acceptable to achieve that. That’s why the German approach of “look how rich and affluent we can all be if we stop invading each other” failed. He doesn’t want ordinary Russians to be affluent, he wants Ukrainian speakers to be put on trains going east. Thirdly, Putin is entrenched to the point that he won’t listen to advice or even reality. He was told by all the western leaders and no shortage of his own men that this would be a bad idea. However he was too powerful for a group of oligarchs to take aside and tell him that while in principle he has their full support it is, in practice, conditional on not burning down the building they all live in. A successor would be less able to drive the bus off a cliff. When people imagine someone worse than Putin I wonder what they’re imagining. Putin already invades his neighbours, even when it is contrary to all rational interests, which is something most successors wouldn’t do. And Putin, uniquely among people who would invade their neighbours, is unable to stop because his own career is tied to this specific invasion. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
On September 21 2023 01:32 KwarK wrote: When people imagine someone worse than Putin I wonder what they’re imagining. Putin already invades his neighbours, even when it is contrary to all rational interests, which is something most successors wouldn’t do. And Putin, uniquely among people who would invade their neighbours, is unable to stop because his own career is tied to this specific invasion. The doom people imagine is if someone doesn't emerge to succeed Putin and there is infighting or a civil war. A nuclear power in turmoil is unprecedented and extremely dangerous. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22051 Posts
On September 21 2023 01:52 JimmiC wrote: Except that the main motivation for all those warlords is power and enriching themselves for the future. And using a nuke ensures that that future is counted in minutes (until the counter nuke lands) or at most days when the entire rest of the world comes knocking.People imagine no leadership and different warlords attacking each other possibly with nukes. Or using nukes outside of Russia. Nukes are the big fear, it’s what is stopping the rest of the world from crushing the Russian army and it what we fear of some one else. The point of nukes is to never use them, because using them comes with the assurance that its the last thing you do. | ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
On September 21 2023 02:06 Gorsameth wrote: Except that the main motivation for all those warlords is power and enriching themselves for the future. And using a nuke ensures that that future is counted in minutes (until the counter nuke lands) or at most days when the entire rest of the world comes knocking. The point of nukes is to never use them, because using them comes with the assurance that its the last thing you do. But that assumes everyone is a rational actor which is exactly the opposite of what people fear. We fear the person who murders all their kids before committing suicide. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43468 Posts
On September 21 2023 01:59 Blitzkrieg0 wrote: The doom people imagine is if someone doesn't emerge to succeed Putin and there is infighting or a civil war. A nuclear power in turmoil is unprecedented and extremely dangerous. There’s already fighting, the difference between then and now is right now they’re killing Ukrainian children. If Russia implodes and they start killing each other instead then while that’s not a good thing it is absolutely preferable. It’d give the places they already conquered a shot at liberty too. Victory in Ukraine does nothing for Belarus, Georgia, Chechnya, Kalingrad (though nobody wants that back), Karelia, and so forth. Many states used the 1991 collapse as an opportunity to escape Russian tyranny but many more remain trapped. As for nukes, not ideal but they’re already making unilateral threats to nuke the west on a daily basis. In a civil war they’re at least more likely to nuke each other, though even then nobody would ever do it for the same reasons nobody has done it thus far. As for unprecedented? It literally already happened in our lifetimes. Nothing bad happened. We’ve all witnessed the total collapse of the Russian Empire. After a few years a strongman emerged, stole all their national wealth, then started invading former colonies that didn’t NATO in time. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43468 Posts
On September 21 2023 01:52 JimmiC wrote: People imagine no leadership and different warlords attacking each other possibly with nukes. Or using nukes outside of Russia. Nukes are the big fear, it’s what is stopping the rest of the world from crushing the Russian army and it what we fear of some one else. You’re describing continuity. It’s already what stops us from crushing the Russian army and it’s what we would respect regardless of who sits in Putin’s chair. The situation would largely be unchanged with the arguable improvement that Putin is backed into a corner that his successor would not be. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation617 Posts
On September 20 2023 22:16 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Well... yesterday Azerbaijan invaded Armenian backed Nagorno Karabakh militia etc. with 1500 Russian "peace keepers" in the area. they have surrendered... Russia started they wanted a diplomatic solution since Armenia stated they can no longer depend on Russia. Now this. If the CTSO was on life support after last year, it is dead now. https://twitter.com/Schizointel/status/1704426705761284183 I thought that Western community should cheer for a restored territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and getting rid of illegal Armenian occupation? On a serious note, never understood the point that Russia should have somehow intervened to defend Karabakh, when Armenia itself doesn't care to do so, never recognizing Karabakh as independent state, and Pashinyan himself stating that Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijan. As for CSTO - yeah, Armenia under current government will never be an ally to Russia. If current course of events continues for some years, I would not exclude Iran as the member of CSTO in a few years (Shoigu is about to visit Tehran soon actually, I guess for the equipment talks). | ||
|
sertas
Sweden889 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22051 Posts
On September 21 2023 02:42 Ardias wrote: You can't run a defensive treaty organisation on the basis that your only there to help the others if you feel like it. I thought that Western community should cheer for a restored territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and getting rid of illegal Armenian occupation? On a serious note, never understood the point that Russia should have somehow intervened to defend Karabakh, when Armenia itself doesn't care to do so, never recognizing Karabakh as independent state, and Pashinyan himself stating that Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijan. As for CSTO - yeah, Armenia under current government will never be an ally to Russia. If current course of events continues for some years, I would not exclude Iran as the member of CSTO in a few years (Shoigu is about to visit Tehran soon actually, I guess for the equipment talks). What use does Iran have in joining the CSTO when they know now that Russia will absolutely not have their backs if push comes to shove? As for Armenia not caring. Is that why they called upon the CSTO back in 2022? Because they don't care about the conflict with Azerbaijan? And then Russia said no and the CSTO died right then and there. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation617 Posts
On September 21 2023 02:57 Gorsameth wrote: You can't run a defensive treaty organisation on the basis that your only there to help the others if you feel like it. What use does Iran have in joining the CSTO when they know now that Russia will absolutely not have their backs if push comes to shove? As for Armenia not caring. Is that why they called upon the CSTO back in 2022? Because they don't care about the conflict with Azerbaijan? And then Russia said no and the CSTO died right then and there. They called because there was a firefight in the Armenian-Azerbaijan border. However it has nothing to do with Karabakh and what {CC}StealthBlue had posted above. Iran has use is that Russia and Iran have a common adversary in form of Western powers, mainly US. Armenian government is firmly pro-US, so it figures that Russia wouldn't be eager to support them, especially considering that all their resources are tied in Ukraine. Also other CSTO members refused to partake as well. I don't see shit being thrown at Kazakhstan though. | ||
| ||
