Surely is it more: sure, you go ahead and draw the US into a regional conflict while we continue making inroads to literally everywhere else on Earth. Good luck! It helps too that with the sanctions in place there just so happens to be one major country that can supply a great deal of Russia's needs. Oh yes and the advantage of further fracturing the US dollar hegemony.

And I will register my dislike that the only rationale that you able to come up with is that China simply got sucked into Russian rhetoric. Seems a bit Western chauvinisty to me. Have a think about it.

we should have been focusing on building alliances with countries like India and China, who Russia actually cares about, — Baden

In the real world, India and China are bitter rivals, locked in an arm race and occasionally fighting each other at the border. You cannot build an alliance where both of them would be happily sitting. There is also no clear way you can align India or China squarely in one camp within a new cold war, because during the old cold war, both China and India have been the (competing) leaders of the non-aligned movement, the G77, with a staunch anti-imperialist position. They are not going to suddenly change their mind and align themselves with the US.

Moreover, to say that "Russia cares for India or China" is meaningless. Russia is not a person. States have only interests and no friends. As for Russians, they couldn't care less about Indians.

Welcome to the cold and foggy world of geopolitics. It's a bit different from Pollyanna. "Non-western" states are not better, or more ethical than "western" ones. There's no innocence in poverty.

Better that this gets deescalated. My expectation is the more you escalate it, the more Putin will demand as a penalty for the extra dead Russians you create. That penalty being more dead Ukrainians and harsher terms for ending the conflict. — Baden

It was already shown in Kyiv how you get Putin to de-escalate: inflict serious losses and show he cannot achieve his objectives. Putin's blitz campaign utterly and decisively failed. The VDV failed in it's air assault on Antonov Airport and the attempt to either take or surround Kyiv failed. Putin did acknowledge his defeat with the total withdrawal from the Kyiv front. He understood that the Ukrainians would fight and that he would have to limit his objectives.

The West is giving Ukrainians the possibility to end this war as simply Russia won't have the ability to sustain such losses for months onward. That's the only way to make Putin to look at other options than continuing the war.

. Probably the only route to this 'People's Republic' you refer to is, ironically, the complete decimation of Ukraine caused by an indefinite extension of the war fuelled by an indefinite influx of foreign weapons: A neat way to give cover to Putin to completely destroy and subjugate the country. — Baden

Western aid isn't killing Ukrainians, it's the Russians arms and their basic doctrine of fighting wars with maximum firepower and total disregard of civilian casualties. It's up to the Ukrainians themselves how much they are going to sacrifice in this war. If they choose to throw in the towel, nobody will or can stop them from doing that. Likely they won't do that. They see the route to peace in destroying the Russian war machine, which they have been partly successful in. That's the correct way to handle Russia. You simply have to stop the Russian advances, have the ability then to go on the counteroffensive and then they will come to negotiate about an armstice. That's the only way.

The First Chechen war is one example of how you get Russians to negotiate a peace deal:

Despite Russian troops in and around Grozny numbering approximately 12,000, more than 1,500 Chechen guerrillas (whose numbers soon swelled) overran the key districts within hours in an operation prepared and led by Aslan Maskhadov (who named it Operation Zero) and Shamil Basayev (who called it Operation Jihad). The separatists then laid siege to the Russian posts and bases and the government compound in the city centre, while a number of Chechens deemed to be Russian collaborators were rounded up, detained and, in some cases, executed. At the same time, Russian troops in the cities of Argun and Gudermes were also surrounded in their garrisons. Several attempts by the armored columns to rescue the units trapped in Grozny were repelled with heavy Russian casualties (the 276th Motorized Regiment of 900 men suffered 50% casualties in a two-day attempt to reach the city centre). Russian military officials said that more than 200 soldiers had been killed and nearly 800 wounded in five days of fighting, and that an unknown number were missing; Chechens put the number of Russian dead at close to 1,000. Thousands of troops were either taken prisoner or surrounded and largely disarmed, their heavy weapons and ammunition commandeered by the separatists.

This kind of situation lead to the Khasavyurt Accords and finally a peace in Moscow... and later Putin's revenge attack on Chechnya that was basically his "Presidential Campaign".

It is a similar account for my country in getting to have the ability to negotiate a separate armstice with Russia in 1944, as then all attacks towards Finland had been repulsed, the Finns still had behind them a formidable Salpa-defensive fortification line and Finns had even made a counterattack in Ilomantsi. As there was the competition on who will get to Berlin first, Stalin made the decision to halt the fighting with Finland.

You're completing missing the escalation point. Russia has strategic objectives, which don't necessarily involve levelling Ukraine.

The problem is that this was always going to come to a head. If Putin had successfully assimilated Ukraine without military involvement. He would feel empowered and immediately look to the assimilation of a number of other previous USSR states. Growing in confidence at each turn. Meanwhile there would have been no significant sanctions and the EU would not have decided to stop buying oil and gas asap. In another five years we would have been confronted with a more powerful and confident Russian provocation. If Trump were in office at the time, or Marine LePen had won in France things could have been far worse a few years from now.

We should count ourselves lucky that the threat is currently being contained and defused. Yes there is the real threat of nuclear war, but this is nothing new and we just have to live with it. It looks to me that the best outcome from here is Russia getting preoccupied and bogged down in eastern Ukraine with continued strict sanctions on Russia and to keep Putin’s army stuck there until they are sufficiently degraded.

It looks to me that the best outcome from here is Russia getting preoccupied and bogged down in eastern Ukraine with continued strict sanctions on Russia and to keep Putin’s army stuck there until they are sufficiently degraded. — Punshhh

Oh wow how coincidental that your views are exactly those of the US imperial agenda wow its like you haven't simply regurgitated US propaganda verbatim at all so cool how you probably came to this view entirely on your own.

Yeah. Obviously you don't even read what others write. So why point out for example to policies that have been successful here, and how problematic is for the US to implement similar policies, because your not ready to have an actual discussion about them.

Live in your dreams of stereotypes and in your own prejudices.

No I absolutely read the sci-fi fantasy that was in presented in Push's post but please, continue to wave the flag of blood-hungry murderers who cannot wait to give Russia their own Afghanistan, you included.

The problem is that this was always going to come to a head. If Putin had successfully assimilated Ukraine without military involvement. He would feel empowered and immediately look to the assimilation of a number of other previous USSR states. Growing in confidence at each turn. — Punshhh

That growing confidence made him to decide that an all out invasion would be a great idea in the first place. What else was the annexation of Crimea than a huge success?

?

Simply put it: where did you get the idea that with 20 billion will end homelessness in the US?

As I've shown, just California puts half of that into fighting homelessness, and the number of homeless people in the state has only risen. For the US, it will take a lot more than just throwing money at the problem. It starts from things like attitudes and more generally, having affordable housing.

Oh wow how coincidental that your views are exactly those of the US imperial agenda wow its like you haven't simply regurgitated US propaganda verbatim at all so cool how you probably came to this view entirely on your own.

Yes it’s amazing.

Although I wouldn’t have started here. I would have neutered Putin 20yrs ago.

You ought to be aware that some people do consider all these issues and views and what history can tell us and yet still miraculously to come to this view.

I am happy with US and soon to become US/EU hegemony for many reasons. It’s not perfect, but preferable to any of the alternatives.

That growing confidence made him to decide that an all out invasion would be a great idea in the first place — ssu

Yeah, nothing to do with NATO or US goading at all. God your regugitation of propaganda is sickening.

I am happy with US and soon to become US/EU hegemony for many reasons. — Punshhh

Yes, I'm perfectly aware that you are comfortable with the biggest threat to world peace that has ever existed insofar as you benefit off the blood it spills globally on a daily basis.

To say nothing of the fact that the renewned transalanticism will come precisely at the of global fracture and instability more widely.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware that you are comfortable with the buggest threat to world peace that has ever existed insofar as you benefit of the blood it spills globally.

And your alternative to this?

I won’t hold my breath.

I don't exactly know how to be more clear about this: The US ought to fuck right off forever.

Anyway, those who think: the best solution is just low level continued fighting in which a certain population of Ukranians are subject to ongoing arbitrary death, humilation, and fear are probably monsters and should not offer an opinion on anything ever again.

It happens to be the case that this was in fact Ukranian policy toward their own seperatist regions before the war, but this is very inconvenient to mention.

Anyway, those who think: the best solution is just low level continued fighting in which a certain population of Ukranians are subject to ongoing arbitrary death, humilation, and fear are probably monsters and should not offer an opinion on anything ever again.

As I said, I would have neutered Putin 20yrs ago. I don’t like this situation, but is there a better alternative?

Are you going to make me say it again?

Nuclear war is 'most probable outcome', viewers are told, 'but we will go to heaven while they simply croak'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10762143/Ukraine-war-Russian-state-TV-says-nuclear-strike-probable-losing.html

more and more like a jihad

They were spewing American intelligence about it early in the war. Do you care enough for me to look it up? If you looked it up yourself would you believe it? — frank

Depends on the source. I've seen news reports to that effect but nothing convincing as yet. I don't think we're going to get reliable intelligence on exactly what was said and then it's down to speculation to fit pro or anti Chinese bias. But I'm open to being wrong on that.

I thought you were all about it ending with negotiations. I realized a couple of weeks ago that this could actually lead to WW3. You're catching up! — frank

Unfortunately, I am. I still don't think it will lead to WW III, but with every escalation, my confidence wanes.

The US ought to fuck right off forever.

I’m not wholly averse to something along those lines. But what would it look like?

Depends on the source. I've seen news reports to that effect but nothing convincing as yet. I don't think we're going to get reliable intelligence on exactly what was said and then it's down to speculation to fit pro or anti Chinese bias. But I'm open to being wrong on that. — Baden

The NYT broke the story. The source is apparently Biden administration officials.

But we already knew Russia and China were becoming fast friends.

Unfortunately, I am. I still don't think it will lead to WW III, but with every escalation, my confidence wanes. — Baden

I hope it doesn't go that way, but it could. And I don't think the amount of aid supplied by the US will make much difference either way.

I hope it doesn't go that way, but it could. — frank

Especially if nothing happens in Moldova, it's again a positive sign. The first positive development is that Belarus has been able to keep out of Putin's disastrous attack.

It happens to be the case that this was in fact Ukranian policy toward their own seperatist regions before the war, but this is very inconvenient to mention. — StreetlightX

The separatism that Russia actually failed to instill other places in Ukraine (they tried, but failed) as they had done in other former Soviet states. Something inconvenient to mention for the anti-West people... like what Russia did in Moldova (or Abkhazia or South Ossetia).

Yet Russia covert actions aside, I think it would be good to Ukraine later to become part of the EU as the union is for example minority rights and these should be observed when talks about Ukrainian membership are held:

The Council of Europe’s constitutional experts have criticized controversial language legislation adopted in Ukraine earlier this year and previous regulations regarding educational institutions signed into law by the country's previous president, Petro Poroshenko.

The so-called Venice Commission on December 6 said it specifically took issue with what it sees as an extremely short transition period for the converting of Russian-language schools into Ukrainian-language institutions.

The commission also said it considers quotas for minority languages in radio and TV programs to be unbalanced. "To avoid the language issue becoming a source of inter-ethnic tensions within Ukraine, it is of crucial importance to achieve an appropriate balance in its language policy," the commission said. "The authorities have so far failed to do so."

The State Language Law, which went into effect on July 16, declares that Ukrainian is "the only official state language" in the country. It adds that "attempts" to introduce other languages as the state language would be considered an effort to "forcibly change the constitutional order."

Poroshenko signed the bill into law days before he left office following his electoral defeat to rival Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

No I do not agree that participation in an anti-democratic economically fascist region of control is a good idea.

Also, I imagine people who like seeing dead Ukrainians think: well, Russia just murdered a whole bunch of people thanks to European expansion. In response, let's do more European expansion. This is a good idea and not something only a complete and utter psychopath would think of.

But what would it look like? — Punshhh

...not sending $33b in blood money, say?

Do you really find this so hard?

I don't want Ukraine to be part of the EU just as I don't want Albania and North Macedonia to join. These are corrupt to the bone and we already have enough corruption as it is.

Additionally, a union should benefit all its members and I don't see the benefit of these countries joining the EU either. We've plenty of members, plenty of red tape, plenty of issues keeping it together as it is. Why would it be a good idea to further increase EU membership?

Also imagine how people who like seeing dead Ukrainians to think: well, Russia just murdered a whole bunch of people thanks to European expansion. In response, let's do more European expansion. This is a good idea and not something only a fucking psychopath would think of. — StreetlightX

This is simply delirious rambling.

Anyway, as an Australian this doesn't concern you. Yet it's something that does affect my life, it's something that concerns those Ukrainians who I know. And I can see how stunned Russians living here have been from what their country has become. You just keep up with the stereotypical anti-Americanism.

Anyway, as an Australian this doesn't concern you. — ssu

As someone capable of empathy and who is not a sociopath who enjoys cheering on dead Ukrainians for the sake of American imperialism, this is irrelevant.

Also considering I live on the planet Earth which is currently susceptible to nuclear destruction thanks to war mongering bloodhounds like you, it kinda does concern me.

Why would it be a good idea to further increase EU membership? — Benkei

It worked for the Czechs, the Latvians, the Estonians, the Polish.

Why would it for some reason not work for Ukrainians, if they are willing to make those reforms others have done? They want to be part of Europe, so I guess are then open to change things. And I don't think they like the rule of oligarchs.

It simply takes the EU to be firm in it's requirements and Ukraine willing to make a new start. They aspire to be taken as Europeans. I think we should slam the door in front of them.

As someone capable of empathy and who is not a sociopath who enjoys dead Ukrainians, this is irrelevant. — StreetlightX

Well, you surely haven't shown that empathy.

Simply just you repeat and repeat typical ragging and potshots at the US. Your first comment on this thread sums up your view in everything perfectly:

Remember, the US are warmongering murderers and nothing they say ought to be taken seriously.

With the black hole of Afghanistan no longer supplying the American arms industry, what better opportunity to make up for lost profits? — StreetlightX

(I should remind people that here with saying "nothing they say ought to be taken seriously" StereotypeX meant the US warnings about an imminent attack by Russia on Ukraine.)

As if genuinely, you would be interested in Ukrainians. Or in anything else than just hating the US.

What is your counterfactual? What do you think would happen if additional aid shipments didn't reach Ukraine? Without NATO whispering in Ukrainians ears they would have all surrendered? Then why did they put up enough resistance to stall the advance and turn it into an urban combat grind before a single NATO shipment arrived?

It seems likely to me that:
A. The heavy resistance to the invasion that began before NATO aid arrived was likely to continue regardless of what was provided.
B. Russia would have made more progress into Kyiv and Kharkiv proper if Ukraine had fewer quality anti-tank weapons.

Because of A and B, C follows, that more combat would have occured in the large cities Russia attempted to take, and that Russia would have followed the same disasterous ROE it used in Mariupol.

The ambushes on Russian supply lines and MANPADs used to down all the Russian rotary wing assets in there insane air assaults without SEAD all used existing Ukrainian weapons. The old Stingers they had have more confirmed kills than any other platform (Starstreak didn't arrive till much later). Russia's naval losses were from a Grad, a 1960s rocket artillery system, and Neptune missiles, a system designed and built in Ukraine. As far case video evidence goes, the biggest killer of Russian tanks has been old 152mm Soviet artillery shells.

Certainly NATO weapons that arrived after the invasion have been hugely helpful, allowing Ukrainians to abandon the initial strategy of ceding ground and drawing Russia into urban combat, where their advantage in hardware counts for less. Precision munitions are particularly helpful for counter battery fire and dealing with armored columns, but also reduce the risk of off target shells hitting civilians or infrastructure to a large degree. It also greatly reduces the number of shells that need to be fired, which means fewer munitions falling in settled areas.

Part of the reason Russian bombing and shelling as killed so many civilians and damaged so much infrastructure is because they ran out of precision munitions extremely quickly. The other factor is that, in some cases, the shelling appears to intentionally target residential areas as a means of breaking morale. This sort of strategy has been shown to actually increase resistance, so again, another factor more relevant than NATO.