The NY Times says they've lost seven generals now and somewhere between 7 and 15 thousand military deaths.
Apparently the Russian offensive is being managed from Moscow, so they keep making mistakes just due to the lack of a coordinating commander on the ground. — frank
On 5 February 2022, two anonymous US officials reported Russia had assembled 83 battalion tactical groups, estimated to be 70-percent of combat capabilities for a full-scale invasion on Ukraine. It was also predicted that a hypothetical invasion would result in 8,000 to 35,000 military casualties and 25,000 to 50,000 civilian casualties. It was anticipated by the officials that the possible launch window could start on 15 February and persist until the end of March, when extremely cold weather would freeze roads and assist in the movement of mechanized units.[181] — Wikipedia
Since the Soviet Union’s collapse, the pace of change has varied from one Post-soviet country to another. Some, such as Belarus, have slowed down and tried to hold on to their Soviet heritage; others leapt as far forward and as quickly as possible. The Baltic states and the former Warsaw Pact countries shrugged off their Soviet past and took steps to integrate with NATO and the EU in the early 1990s, completing the process by 2004 – just before Russian imperialism began to reemerge. Unfortunately, Ukraine and Georgia had not yet completed that path by then. Both were left outside the Euroatlantic community, and both later became targets of military aggression by Russia, at the cost of lives and territory.
In September Yushchenko’s health began to fail, and medical tests later revealed he had suffered dioxin poisoning (allegedly carried out by the Ukrainian State Security Service), which left his face disfigured. — Britannica
During the tumultuous months of the revolution, candidate Yushchenko suddenly became gravely ill, and was soon found by multiple independent physician groups to have been poisoned by TCDD dioxin.[141][142] Yushchenko strongly suspected Russian involvement in his poisoning.[143] — Wikipedia,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Independence
What risk free option though? Ukraine in NATO would not be tolerated by any Russian leader, not only Putin, the question is, is it worth invading the country to this extent and causing so much damage? I think most of us would say "no". — Manuel
Russia's Ukraine invasion may have been preventable
The U.S. refused to reconsider Ukraine's NATO status as Putin threatened war. Experts say that was a huge mistake. — MSNBC
A New York Times article recently suggests that Putin, being surrounded by "yes" men, had no idea the war would go this way. He thought Russian forces would (by and large) be welcomed with open arms. Do you all believe this? — Xtrix
So the Russian legitimate security concerns triggered by the West that led to this war ultimately consisted in whose flag is decorating the Ukrainian parliament building. Is this consistent with your claim that a legitimate security interest is an “interest some party might have about their security which actually relates to their security (as opposed to a connection made only for political rhetoric)”? It doesn’t seem to me so because a decorative component of a Parliament building has literally nothing to do with national security — neomac
> You'd just agreed that fighting over national identity was immoral
Did I? Can you fully quote where I agreed with that? — neomac
I 100% agree with you — neomac
if all diplomats lie then there might be concrete situations in which one party believes to be more trustworthy than the other during a negotiation. For example, the Ukrainians can reasonably suspect that a call for negotiation from the Russians is to allow Russians to re-supply their war machine and continue the war. And the Russians can reasonably suspect the same of the Ukrainians. And one of them may be right. So my question is, in this hypothetical situation, are there any alternative moral principles that could tell us how the hypothetical party in “good faith” should proceed, when the other doesn’t seem to be? — neomac
As far as I can recall, you didn’t tell me which experts you chose, even less why you found their arguments more persuasive. — neomac
but you didn't formulate any alternative strategy to me to prove that it doesn't apply to you, — neomac
Still I’m explicitly asking you to specify these legitimate security concerns — neomac
China has territorial claims over Taiwan. — neomac
Taiwan is a partner of the US so if the US wants to protect Taiwan then the US should get prepared to counter Chinese aggression — neomac
for me the West is like the mob that is helping the victim (Ukraine) against the bully (Russia), it’s not the mob who is encouraging the bully (Russia) to abuse the victim. Isn’t the same for you? If not why not? What else should the West do to help Ukraine against the Russian bully. — neomac
Then how come that Ukraine didn’t threaten Russian national security and yet Russia is invading Ukraine? — neomac
Concerning for sure, but not as concerning as Russia having amassed up close to half the world's nuclear ☢ weaponry all by themselves (and threatened to use them), making Russia the top ☢-dog in the world. Plus violating other nations' airspaces + whatever. — jorndoe
New York Times article recently suggests that Putin, being surrounded by "yes" men, had no idea the war would go this way. He thought Russian forces would (by and large) be welcomed with open arms. Do you all believe this? — Xtrix
Putin doesn't care so much about sanctions. The risk was that the Ukrainians would put up a fight and that has materialized. If Putin would have assumed that the Ukrainians will fight, he would have started cautiously and more methodically and likely have had an extensive air campaign first.I think he knew of certain risks involved in invading Ukraine, but I have doubts he would have done so had he known the extent of these sanctions, which are extreme. — Manuel
I understand that Germany, Finland and many others are now increasing military or wanting to join NATO and the like, all things Russia would not have wanted. — Manuel
did you go to Ukraine yourself, talk to the soldiers there, gather that intelligence directly. — Isaac
And this just shows how illogical and wrong it is to believe the fig-leaf of NATO expansion being the reason for this invasion. — ssu
Attacking Ukraine just transformed NATO back to it's original form and increased the military spending and made both Sweden and Finland to start the process of joining NATO. Russian aggression is the sole reason why they are changing their security stance. — ssu
This is a familiar line of argument for anyone who ever debated a holocaust or climate change denier: — Olivier5
Why do people trust other people? Perhaps because life would be next to impossible if one trusted no one. — Olivier5
And so did the Soviet Union with quite a success.The US and Europe spent billions on undermining communism, fought proxy wars, instigated covert regime changes, created the largest spying rings ever seen... — Isaac
Wrong. What I say is that these were only minor issues that had minor effects. The reasons why the Soviet Union collapsed as it did are different.Your argument is that none of that had any effect whatsoever. I — Isaac
Really, learn your history first. — ssu
I'd call that genuine Western hubris, if Americans or others think that the Soviet Union collapsed because of them. The Soviet Union collapsed on itself. — ssu
If anyone were arguing that NATO expansion were the reason for the war then you could reasonably point to the inefficiency of the technique as a counterargument. — Isaac
Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, after years of EU and NATO expansion and constant Western interference in Russia and neighboring countries like Ukraine. — Apollodorus
In any case, Russia cannot logically be expected to accept the Black Sea being turned into a NATO lake (controlled by NATO states Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, and possibly Georgia). — Apollodorus
I said it was next to impossible. — Olivier5
So whom do you trust, if you don't trust 'the media'? — Olivier5
It is an established fact — Olivier5
You just read what the Forum's official Putin troll has said here: — ssu
Lol.If we're having a grown up discussion, one does not occasionally interject to say "of course, Santa Claus doesn't really exist". — Isaac
the case of this thread (and with subjects that are targets of active information warfare) it might be useful to occasionally say this. Just for clarity.. — ssu
If it's written by a US newspaper my working presumption is that it's a lie until I can find the same story in the Chinese owned state media. — Benkei
Red Cross aid convoy struggles to reach Mariupol
Gruesome evidence points to war crimes on road to Kyiv
Russian forces regrouping for attack - Nato — BBC Headlines
To provide impartial news and information to help people understand and engage with the world around them.
We are impartial, seeking to reflect the views and experiences of our audiences – so that our output as a whole includes a breadth and diversity of opinion and no significant strand of thought is under-represented or omitted. — BBC Editorial Values
London described the two outlets as “Russian propagandists and state media who spread lies and deceit about Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine,” although no examples of falsehoods or deceitful statements from RT or Sputnik were given. — RT
I said it was next to impossible. So whom do you trust, if you don't trust 'the media'? — Olivier5
I have no trouble in mentioning those times when they have acted as such.True. Does that apply to occasionally reminding everyone what imperialist warmongering bastards America are too! — Isaac
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.