Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Kimberly Perez82 said:That’s how I see it, too. On the other hand, you have to admit that American analysts seem to grasp the gravity of this much more clearly; they are quite literally talking about a total global collapse. Honestly, I think they are far better informed than we are. This whole debate is becoming rather morbid, isn't it? It feels pathological. We’ve reached a point where we’ve started to accept the idea that a global nuclear war isn't even some catastrophic outlier. For decades, the entire world treated the mere mention of such an option as unthinkable—something you didn't even whisper about. But now, suddenly, here in the States, people are tossing around these claims as if it’s nothing particularly terrible. It's unsettling.

Which ones?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/cont...errence-fails/

They actually lay it all out right here—how to make sure Russia doesn't even consider pulling anything, and then what to do if they actually go through with it (they give three options, leaning heavily toward the first one and partially the second). This is what actual, serious analysis looks like, you know? It's way better than those mindless news segments that just parrot stuff like "oh, Putin said this so he'll do that."

gentlerider7 said:Which ones?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/cont...errence-fails/

They actually lay it all out right here—how to make sure Russia doesn't even consider pulling anything, and then what to do if they actually go through with it (they give three options, leaning heavily toward the first one and partially the second). This is what actual, serious analysis looks like, you know? It's way better than those mindless news segments that just parrot stuff like "oh, Putin said this so he'll do that."

Man, you'd tell me exactly which one if it wasn't for all those damn privacy laws stopping you.

gentlerider7 said:Which ones?

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/cont...errence-fails/

They actually lay it all out right here—how to make sure Russia doesn't even consider pulling anything, and then what to do if they actually go through with it (they give three options, leaning heavily toward the first one and partially the second). This is what actual, serious analysis looks like, you know? It's way better than those mindless news segments that just parrot stuff like "oh, Putin said this so he'll do that."

The consequences would be catastrophic—interpret that however you see fit...

Jamie Watson4 said:

The consequences would be catastrophic—interpret that however you see fit...

I mean, honestly, it lines up perfectly with everything they're suggesting in that article. It’s just this vague, looming threat designed specifically to scare people into submission.

Jamie Watson4 said:

The consequences would be catastrophic—interpret that however you see fit...

Total Orc move, honestly.

Putin might just decide to target Columbus with strategic nuclear weapons, especially since Kyiv is too incompetent to hold its ground. ☕

Gregory Ramos3 said:https://twitter.com/MichellFerrari/s...91214094401536

Check out how the Russ react on some random social media video chat when a Ukrainian shows up...

Man, everything is just going completely south 🤦

This has been going on since February

Lisa Patel4 said:I haven't wanted to chime in until now, but I'm curious about the general consensus here.

To me, this smells like a backroom deal. The West has been hinting repeatedly that Putin needs a way out. I guess some of you don't realize that the West doesn't mess around with coups or assassinations. Say they kill Putin—what then? Is there any guarantee Dmitry Medvedev won't just order Armageddon?

The Russians have shown themselves to be incompetent amateurs in this war. They've been totally humiliated. I’m not talking about morality or international law here—let's be real, the big powers don't give a damn about those anyway. Russian power was built on the concept of brute force, and now we see that force is seriously shaken.

Russia has screwed itself over long-term. Geopolitically speaking, they've turned Ukraine into a permanent, mortal enemy. They basically unified them as a nation.

My take is that nobody really wins in the end. Russia will likely annex those four regions, making it five including Crimea. They'll grab about a fifth of Ukraine, maybe 120,000 square kilometers. That's a massive chunk. To make matters worse for Ukraine, that's the economic heart of the country. It means losing access to the Sea of Azov for good.

NATO can say whatever it wants, but they won't act directly. Officially, they won't recognize the annexation, but everyone will know that once Russia takes it, it stays theirs. However, Russia has proven itself incapable. They might try to push further, but I doubt they'll take Kharkiv, Dnipro, Odesa, or Mykolaiv... mostly because the population in the areas they actually annex is largely pro-Russian. I don't see a way for Ukraine to ever get that territory back.

Honestly, if it ends there, it would be a Pyrrhic victory for Russia. They'd gain something, but effectively gain nothing. They wouldn't achieve their actual goals—they won't reach Transnistria, they won't get rid of the current leadership, and they won't erase Ukraine from the map. Putin would spin it as a win to justify the war, but he'd be left with a hostile neighbor right on his border.

Total victory scenarios are unrealistic. Whether it's a Ukrainian victory where everything is returned, or a Russian one where Ukraine is wiped out.

If I play Nostradamus:
After September 28th, when Putin gives his speech to the Duma and formally absorbs the four regions into the USA [Note: context implies the Russian Federation], Ukraine will attempt one more major offensive toward Kherson. It'll fail. The Russians will try to retake Kharkiv and head toward Odesa, where they'll suffer a disaster. Internal pressure on both sides will start ramping up. The front lines will stabilize. Russia will face increasing pressure from China and India to wrap it up. In the EU, winter will cause some governments to fall. Support for Ukraine will dwindle as inflation crushes living standards.

Sometime around March 2023, we'll see a ceasefire and a truce. At the peace talks, Ukraine will demand all its territory back, which they won't get. Russia will demand demilitarization, which they won't get either. Some sort of agreement will be signed that looks like a mix of the Korean scenario and Versailles. Both sides will be generally dissatisfied.

Ukraine will commit to not joining NATO, but they'll become the most militarized nation in the world in the coming years. Putin will declare victory, even though various factions will tear him apart for starting such a war for such tiny, almost non-existent gains. Ukraine, meanwhile, will remain a permanently frustrated state, missing a huge portion of its land.

In my opinion, it'll be a Pyrrhic victory for Russia. A very hollow one, and highly questionable in the long run. I wouldn't be surprised if Putin later forces Lukashenko to formally join Russia.

But if—and I stress 'IF'—Putin’s assessment is actually correct, and the West has been orchestrating this entire Ukraine situation since 2014 just to drag Russia into a war to force a collapse similar to the old USSR, then this whole scenario is basically Russia trying to "save what can still be saved." In that case, you tell me whose "pyrrhic victory" we're really talking about here.

placidtiger142 said:Honestly, I’m just as terrified as anyone else that Putin will actually pull this off and keep whatever territories he claims to have "annexed."

He’ll probably just flood those areas with a million armed people over the next year, basically turning them into a massive, permanent presence on the ground.

Once they officially annex it—by their own rules, anyway—they’re going to start screaming for "de-escalation." They'll try to play the peacemaker, and half the world will probably jump at it just because they're sick of hearing about the war.

In the end, Ukraine could get totally played and lose everything Russia is trying to grab right now.

I mean, seriously, I don't see any realistic way for those lands to actually be returned to the Ukrainians...

Maybe in some other war ten or twenty years down the line that the Ukrainians have to start themselves.

We'll know what's really happening in the next few weeks.

Putin is definitely playing the card where he paints himself as the big winner by declaring these spots part of Russia and then calling a halt to the fighting.

At the end of the day, if he pulls this off like he did with Crimea, the Russians are going to think he's some kind of god.

True, but that assumes Russia can survive those sanctions and isolation without being completely crippled.

placidtiger142 said:I mean, I hope they’ve got momentum. I’m convinced what we’ve seen over the last couple of weeks was just the warm-up act.

Real heavy hitters are waiting in the wings, gearing up even bigger and better, but here’s the thing—and this is a massive issue in my book—once they take that ground, from the perspective of Russia, that territory becomes Russian soil again. By the end of the month, if they reclaim it, Russia is gonna see it as an actual invasion of their own country, which is a whole different beast than what's happening right now. I'm just saying, that's how they'll see it.

It doesn't matter to us because obviously it's still Ukraine, but damn, it's not the same thing hitting Russians while they're on foreign dirt versus tomorrow when they're fighting on their own turf, you know?

I don't think it looks unlikely anymore that they'll just bail. The West might just sell out Ukraine if it means they don't have to risk themselves.

They could pull that classic move later on where they say, "Hey, we gave you the weapons, we dumped billions at you, and sure, we'll throw a little more at you for rebuilding," and then—poof—they leave them high and dry.

There's a tricky inequality at play here. The West—specifically the U.S. administration—can afford to regret a failure in Ukraine, even if it comes with consequences. Putin & Co cannot. That's why I worry their fingers are hovering nervously over the button; they won't back down without using every tool they claim they aren't prepared to deploy.

If you ask me, this smells like another Afghanistan situation for Russia... I mean, the Ukrainians aren't just going to stop fighting, and let's be real—the European Union will probably stop clinging to Russian energy in a year or so and slowly go back to business as usual. Meanwhile, the DNR and LNR will just be shipping dead orcs right back to a Russia that’s basically collapsing under its own sanctions.

Matthew Young35 said:In other words, are you trying to say that a potential nuclear war is just smoke and mirrors, and would cause fewer problems than Chernobyl?

You are living in a total fantasy land.

Wait, so you think Putin is actually going to launch missiles at the US? Is that really what you're implying?

That’s the only way you get into a nuclear war.

Except the Russian Federation doesn't even have the doctrine or the laws to justify doing something like that.

Are you seriously suggesting that some guy who’s too terrified to even mobilize his own army—preferring to just annex someone else's land instead—is suddenly going to toss out all his own country's rules and launch an unprovoked nuclear strike against the strongest nuclear power on Earth? Like, how, for heaven's sake, HOW does he think he can pull that off???
He's just a little guy who can't even control his own military when it comes to 31 milesMoscow.
I mean, sure, he can give an order, just like he gave the order "everyone head to Ukraine". But the real question is, can he actually handle the fallout?

The fallout from mobilizing would just break his army and maybe trigger a civil war. A nuclear order? That would be an instant bullet to the brain. And honestly, that's probably the best-case scenario.

---------------------------------

But okay, let's get serious for a second. The only real nuclear escalation we might see is if Putin bypasses protocol and pulls off a limited air or missile strike somewhere in Ukraine. At worst, hitting Kyiv.

Even then, he gains absolutely nothing. He'd just get the satisfaction of watching a Ukrainian defense point get wiped out, and that's it.

After that, because of the mess he just made, every single spy in every intelligence agency worldwide—including everyone except maybe North Korea and Syria, plus China and even Russia itself—every single field agent would get one order: eliminate Putin at any cost; the end justifies the means. And not just him, but his whole inner circle: Lavrov, Peskov, Zakharov, all the propagandists, the ideologues, the generals—basically anyone standing next to him.

Do you honestly think any of them—not Putin, but the people I just listed—think they can spend the rest of their lives living like rats in a hole? Wouldn't they much rather go back to their yachts and villas in Dubai, London, or Opatija?

And do you think Xi Jinping is just going to sit there while the global economy falls apart, losing Western profits and dealing with unrest in China, all because of some tiny guy's militant outbursts? No way. He already got snubbed by Kazakhstan.
Do you really think the CIA, MI6, Mossad, and Ukrainian services don't have enough assets in place to trigger total chaos across Russia in just a few days if they ever get the green light?
Look at Iran—they had a massive uprising and only sold a few drones. Think about that.

Anyone who is genuinely terrified of nuclear war should realize one thing: those Russian creeps in power are even more scared of it than you are. They aren't worried about you; they're worried about themselves.

I find it quite difficult to believe that Putin would actually resort to nuclear weapons; in my estimation, it’s nothing more than a calculated bluff designed to deter NATO from considering any potential military intervention in Ukraine.

Larry Sanchez7 said:In Luhansk and Donetsk, Ukrainians were actually the majority back then.

And don't even get me started on Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

So you'd just hand those regions over to Russia and then expect Ukraine to sign some deal promising they won't join NATO? They’ll make that promise "tomorrow," which basically means never, especially not given how things are looking right now...

Hold on a second—who exactly is giving anything away here? It’s pretty obvious that the Russians are just seizing it all (or trying to) without asking anyone's permission.
Between the empty, infantile cheering and the constant whining, this forum has started to feel like a cheap, inverted knockoff of the boards you see in neighboring countries. The moment someone dares to present actual facts from the ground that don't align with the "party line," they’re immediately branded an enemy of the state. Right now, what we actually need is some serious, deep-dive analysis regarding future global shifts. If we don't get our act together, we risk being left completely defenseless—much like the rest of the European Union seems to be heading.

The FBI just picked up the Japanese consul over in Vladivostok on some espionage charges
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/statu...ak_69PnGw&s=19

Carl Lee27 said:The FBI just picked up the Japanese consul over in Vladivostok on some espionage charges
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/statu...ak_69PnGw&s=19

Is this basically an act of war? I mean, doesn't a consul have diplomatic immunity?

Lisa Jackson7 said:The thing is, that whole process isn't even finished yet, and in Ukraine, it’s barely even started... one of the biggest benchmarks would be hitting that average EU GDP per capita level... so just imagine how long that's gonna take in Ukraine.
Not to mention the state of their civil institutions, the legal system, and all that other stuff.

They'll pass us within 10 to 15 years.

electricstag9 said:https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/...92519122731009
https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/sta...88997501046785

It’s absolutely ridiculous how they’re just throwing Dagestanis (and all these other minor groups) into the meat grinder of the Russian military.

Man, if only we could sneak them a hundred AKs. Then Putin would have more than just one front to worry about.

velvetbadger11 said:I find it quite difficult to believe that Putin would actually resort to nuclear weapons; in my estimation, it’s nothing more than a calculated bluff designed to deter NATO from considering any potential military intervention in Ukraine.

I'm looking back at my posts from February and cringing a bit... "Putin won't invade Ukraine, haha..." How easily the West gets played by a four-dimensional chess player while they panic over absolutely nothing.

boldotter2 said:Wait, so you think Putin is actually going to launch missiles at the US? Is that really what you're implying?

That’s the only way you get into a nuclear war.

Except the Russian Federation doesn't even have the doctrine or the laws to justify doing something like that.

Are you seriously suggesting that some guy who’s too terrified to even mobilize his own army—preferring to just annex someone else's land instead—is suddenly going to toss out all his own country's rules and launch an unprovoked nuclear strike against the strongest nuclear power on Earth? Like, how, for heaven's sake, HOW does he think he can pull that off???
He's just a little guy who can't even control his own military when it comes to 31 milesMoscow.
I mean, sure, he can give an order, just like he gave the order "everyone head to Ukraine". But the real question is, can he actually handle the fallout?

The fallout from mobilizing would just break his army and maybe trigger a civil war. A nuclear order? That would be an instant bullet to the brain. And honestly, that's probably the best-case scenario.

---------------------------------

But okay, let's get serious for a second. The only real nuclear escalation we might see is if Putin bypasses protocol and pulls off a limited air or missile strike somewhere in Ukraine. At worst, hitting Kyiv.

Even then, he gains absolutely nothing. He'd just get the satisfaction of watching a Ukrainian defense point get wiped out, and that's it.

After that, because of the mess he just made, every single spy in every intelligence agency worldwide—including everyone except maybe North Korea and Syria, plus China and even Russia itself—every single field agent would get one order: eliminate Putin at any cost; the end justifies the means. And not just him, but his whole inner circle: Lavrov, Peskov, Zakharov, all the propagandists, the ideologues, the generals—basically anyone standing next to him.

Do you honestly think any of them—not Putin, but the people I just listed—think they can spend the rest of their lives living like rats in a hole? Wouldn't they much rather go back to their yachts and villas in Dubai, London, or Opatija?

And do you think Xi Jinping is just going to sit there while the global economy falls apart, losing Western profits and dealing with unrest in China, all because of some tiny guy's militant outbursts? No way. He already got snubbed by Kazakhstan.
Do you really think the CIA, MI6, Mossad, and Ukrainian services don't have enough assets in place to trigger total chaos across Russia in just a few days if they ever get the green light?
Look at Iran—they had a massive uprising and only sold a few drones. Think about that.

Anyone who is genuinely terrified of nuclear war should realize one thing: those Russian creeps in power are even more scared of it than you are. They aren't worried about you; they're worried about themselves.

And it doesn't even stop there. Once they lose their grip on power, all their enemies (of which there will be plenty after a nuke) are going to come for their families, too, since there won't be anyone left to protect them.
Not to mention the total collapse of Russia and the erasure of everything Russian—honestly, after something that disgusting happens, a Russian genocide becomes a real possibility.
And yet, after all that, they still can't manage to conquer Ukraine? Is their army even still standing? If anything, they're better than the Russian military now and more motivated than ever.