Ukraine Invasion: Part 20

[HappyWinter]

Thanks to everyone for taking part in the thread.

Place marking as found this interesting to follow.

Place marking

@OriginalFloorboards

Thank you. Nothing to add other than the threads are my go-to place every evening and I appreciate all those that add to them with informative links, rationale, thoughts etc.

Same here. Very grateful for these informative posters and the chance for everyone to discuss.

Exactly brewery, get them in now.
If Putin does start to turn the tide in the dombas region he may feel emboldened to go after Kiev again!
Get peace keepers , armed in now!it would Also stabilise that whole region for the refugee's!
They wouldn't have rust far too flee, not at risk from the putrid sex trafficking etc.

How are we in this age with centuries of experience And yet it seems beyond us to implement this.

The optics are surely good to do it, and troops around Chernobyl etc.

It's a legitimate way to get extra troops in.

Thanks for the new thread.

Would it have to be the UN sending in peace keepers though? Which they can't, because Russian veto? Unless they do declare it genocide perhaps and then are obligated to go in?

It does seem that the West are very reticent to step in in any direct way, even supplying peace keeping troops. Genocide is suddenly no longer a reason to intervene.

With so much power between the West, I cannot see why this is being allowed. Putin is emboldened to use chemical weapons.

I guess we don't know all the information. They must deem it to dangerous for a good reason

Too

Thanks for the new thread and to all contributors.

.

I read that NATO is supposed to be building up its troops on the NATO borders with Ukraine. Do we know this for sure or just pie in the sky or figment of my imagination? Perhaps the build up is not just defensive. Obviously, if it is offensive (to the extent needed for peace keeping/humanitarian support), NATO could not say that. Just like Russia swore blind it was just military exercises right to the point of invasion on 24 Feb

I am clutching at straws

If NATO will not free up the Black Sea or have a NFZ, any idea that they would send any form of force into Ukraine is for the birds.

I listened to the reports of rape, multiple, in front of family, murdering the poor victims afterwards on the World Service this morning.

We are complicit in Ukraine's destruction.

I feel very depressed this morning. How do Ukraine 'win' against an aggressor who is willing to go to such depraved lengths to achieve their goals?
Ukraine is fighting with one hand tied behind its back, we can arm them but we can't physically help them by increasing their numbers and what use are numbers against chemical weapons anyway?
Russia have crossed the line, and once that line is crossed on one occasion without serious repercussions it will be crossed again.
If NATO stop cheering from the sidelines and offer really meaningful help WWIII is triggered. It's a fucking mess.

I don't know how we achieve it but it's got to be time to stop buying Russian energy at the very least. Is there any way the EU and U.K. could pool their energy resources and introduce rationing to stop relying on Russian oil and gas? I imagine that's not possible with gas? And Hungary are a sticking point anyway.

pmk

The problem with sending peacekeepers in is the effect of drawing a line where the UA and Russian troops are engaged. That line over time unwittingly then becomes a de facto border that Russia can claim has vindicated their original political aspirations, except it will likely be more West than the Donbas and closer to the Dnipro. Do we think Ukraine would accept that? Not at all.

I still speculate the long game is Russia loses militarily, politically with social unrest and a change of regime. The more damage is done to Ukrainian people and property the more likely this is to happen, eventually. The West can then engage with Russia, metaphorically beat them up a bit, turn the psyche towards European integration but on a democratic mandate. There is then only one bad guy, in Asia, allowing a sharp focus to constrain their ambitions with the benefit of substantial natural resources having been collected on route.

This is a 30-40 year plan. In the meantime no western army is engaged in Ukraine, in large numbers, other than a testing bed for the evolution of higher tech weapons including drones in particular. Wars can bring advantages to protagonists whether it’s securing natural resources, political change, training, disaster capitalism, showcasing weapons, each to different degrees.

Bear in mind this war could be 7 years into its 40 year plan.

Russia have possibly done a sarin attack. It is going to be bloody difficult to verify.

Cynically, that's assuming anyone actually wants to verify it. If it's proven, then the west has a choice of either acting, or visibly allowing a red line to be crossed. Neither is good.

If it remains a rumour then there's wiggle-room.

How to get verifiable proof that Russia has used chemical weapons from a city that is deep inside Russian held territory?

As abhorrent as chemical weapons are, lets not forget that so called conventional ones are hardly less deadly and Russia is using them indiscriminately with little effective sanction.

.

Marqs @marqs
Railroad tracks in the Shebekinsky district of the #Belgorod region in #Russia, near the border with #Ukraine, were destroyed by unknown persons - governor

@TargusEasting

Eye opening and realistic speculation, how awful. Can’t believe this will be allowed to go on for that long.

I know Zelensky is grateful for all the help he receives but there is an underlying feeling that Ukraine and it’s people have been sacrificed.

PMK

So if Russia have used chemical weapons in Mariupol then what are the West going to actually do? So far, apart from sanctions, which although appeared unprecedented at first, don't actually seem to have made any difference. We're not actually really doing anything. (I completely understand the nuclear risk etc.) But if we allow this supposed red line to be crossed, and do nothing (which is definitely possible) then we'll just give Putin carte blanche to do whatever the hell he likes. But what can we do?

It's such a bloody mess.

Agree that it's almost easier for the west not to have it verified.

@TokyoSushi

I can’t help feeling like there could be a way the West could overpower Russia, surely some of the most experienced, richest nations could do something about Genocide occurring in Europe.

I always thought it was really insensitive the comments from Biden and NATO about the retaliation if Putin touched ‘one inch’ of NATO territory with what was occurring within their neighbours back yard.

Pmk and thanks for the new thread

@Alexandra2001

How to get verifiable proof that Russia has used chemical weapons from a city that is deep inside Russian held territory?

As abhorrent as chemical weapons are, lets not forget that so called conventional ones are hardly less deadly and Russia is using them indiscriminately with little effective sanction.

I have to agree here. The use of chemical weapons (if true) is a worrying escalation - though I wonder if it’s also a sign that Russia are fucked and realise it.

However conventional weapons are no less horrendous just because they’re “legal” and then we have the widespread use of sexual violence which on my view can actually be one of the most devastating to recover from.

I do also wonder about the optics of the west being seen to step in when chemical weapons have ‘only’ been used against the Azov regiment - in other words stepping in to help neo-nazis. I can imagine Putin would see that as vindication.

Apologies @toastfiend @MagicFox, I should have put a trigger warning or not posted it.

The AP Interview: Zelenskyy seeks peace despite atrocities
apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-kyiv-boris-johnson-business-24cd8742435251d9dd46bcc29302bd13