So, uh, the Ukraine-Russian situation

[XRay]

45 minutes ago, Armchair General said:

You have an point, but the main problem is that everyone has became too dependent on international trade to the point where isolationism is no longer an short-term option.

Sanctioning a country does not constitute isolation. It will disrupt supply chains, but it is not going to be anywhere near remotly like isolationism in the 1930s. And even then, that is not even anywhere near isolation that people think it meant either, since it mainly referred to isolating the US from European politics, and we were still pretty much involved in the world. We still pursued the Monroe Doctrine at the time, and even the Great Depression and tariffs could not completely stop international trade.

While the point of massive sanctions on Russia and Belarus is indeed to isolate them, I do not think we are going to sanction India and other countries to the same degree. We can cut off India's access to our capital market for example, but the purpose is to make it costly and painful to trade with Russia, not to destroy India's economy. We are not going to bar India from SWIFT or seize their currency reserves.

[Armchair General]

1 hour ago, XRay said:

Sanctioning a country does not constitute isolation. It will disrupt supply chains, but it is not going to be anywhere near remotly like isolationism in the 1930s. And even then, that is not even anywhere near isolation that people think it meant either, since it mainly referred to isolating the US from European politics, and we were still pretty much involved in the world. We still pursued the Monroe Doctrine at the time, and even the Great Depression and tariffs could not completely stop international trade.

While the point of massive sanctions on Russia and Belarus is indeed to isolate them, I do not think we are going to sanction India and other countries to the same degree. We can cut off India's access to our capital market for example, but the purpose is to make it costly and painful to trade with Russia, not to destroy India's economy. We are not going to bar India from SWIFT or seize their currency reserves.

I know that isolationism isn't the exact word that I meant earlier, the term escapes me but I don't think that pursuing an embargo is it, either.

 

And I really don't think that the sanctions are working as fast as you'd expect. Mostly because while it's depriving the Russian government an single source of revenue and certain resources, it's not really enough to hurt the Russian military, considering that an lot of it has been sitting around since the Cold War ended. Only thing that will make an difference is another country fighting alongside with Ukraine or another shipment of whatever they need; but it's too early to tell which way the war going, considering how the situation around Kyiv has been in an stalemate for the past week or two.

[Acacia Sgt]

It's no longer a stalemate.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/3/ukraine-retakes-whole-kyiv-region-as-russian-troops-pull-back

Russia is seemingly shifting focus more strictly on the east and south, since taking Kyiv has, ultimately, failed.

This withdrawal is also why the... details about Bucha and other towns is just coming to light.

[Etrurian emperor]

3 hours ago, Armchair General said:

If this is actually endorsed by Putin, we might be looking at an prelude for the next world war if he does this to another country.

Putin already controls every single aspect of the Russian media so its definitely directly or indirectly endorsed by him. 

[XRay]

1 hour ago, Armchair General said:

And I really don't think that the sanctions are working as fast as you'd expect. Mostly because while it's depriving the Russian government an single source of revenue and certain resources, it's not really enough to hurt the Russian military, considering that an lot of it has been sitting around since the Cold War ended. Only thing that will make an difference is another country fighting alongside with Ukraine or another shipment of whatever they need; but it's too early to tell which way the war going, considering how the situation around Kyiv has been in an stalemate for the past week or two.

It is not going to work over night to stop military aggression right now, but they can inflict damage over time by reducing Russia's ability to sustain a war.

Russia is withdrawing out of Kyiv and refocusing their efforts in the east and south, so Ukraine is not in danger of being toppled any time soon. Ukraine can win this war if we give them what they need. Manpower should no longer be an issue at this point since Ukraine is mobilizing its entire population.

54 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

It's no longer a stalemate.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/3/ukraine-retakes-whole-kyiv-region-as-russian-troops-pull-back

Russia is seemingly shifting focus more strictly on the east and south, since taking Kyiv has, ultimately, failed.

This withdrawal is also why the... details about Bucha and other towns is just coming to light.

Yeah, it is getting pretty horrifying and sick.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/03/all-wars-are-like-this-used-as-a-weapon-of-war-in-ukraine

And that just further lends credence to reports on social media of girls under 10 with torn... I will just let people look it up themselves. It is hard to type it and I wish it is not true. If I had a daughter and something like that happened, I know I would push the nuke button right now.

[Armchair General]

1 hour ago, XRay said:

And that just further lends credence to reports on social media of girls under 10 with torn... I will just let people look it up themselves. It is hard to type it and I wish it is not true. If I had a daughter and something like that happened, I know I would push the nuke button right now.

To make it so bad, it's not just the Russians who are doing it, according to that article.

[Tetragrammaton]

Please take a look at the Chechnya, it's the future of Ukraine.

Either being Russia's dogs, fight and die for Russia, or Russia will kill them all.

Russia will not let Ukraine to be a potential threat in the future, no anti-Russia is allow to live another day.

Edited April 6, 2022 by Tetragrammaton

[Acacia Sgt]

There's now visual confirmation the Russians did dug trenches at the Red Forest:

 

[Jotari]

6 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

There's now visual confirmation the Russians did dug trenches at the Red Forest:

 

What the fuck are they thinking. Like, why are they doing this? I get traveling through it for expedience, but why are they hulking down there? Is a poisoned land no one can live in really so strategically necessary that it's worth killing your own soldiers just to stand in?

[Acacia Sgt]

Just now, Jotari said:

What the fuck are they thinking. Like, why are they doing this? I get traveling through it for expedience, but why are they hulking down there? Is a poisoned land no one can live in really so strategically necessary that it's worth killing your own soldiers just to stand in?

Admittedly, I wouldn't know. I have seen, however, some people theorize that it's very possible the soldiers... just plain didn't knew, because Russia wouldn't want to teach the Soviet government made such a screw-up there. Alternatively...

https://www.voanews.com/a/europe_russian-tv-series-blames-cia-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster/6169810.html

That it was Western sabotage.

As it is, I don't know how... truly plausible it can be, but I wouldn't be surprised if there really has been some kind of cover-up about the disaster over there. Then consider they are conscripting soldiers young enough to have been born after the fact. Or they thought it wasn't that bad anymore. Or that it was safe to dig up the soil again. Or any combination of reasons ultimately.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

4 minutes ago, Jotari said:

What the fuck are they thinking. Like, why are they doing this? I get traveling through it for expedience, but why are they hulking down there? Is a poisoned land no one can live in really so strategically necessary that it's worth killing your own soldiers just to stand in?

Maybe they want irradiated soldiers to come home from the front lines, sell a reality that the "Nazis are using chemical/nuclear weapons". But Russia already owns all of the media, so it begs the question of whether the extra steps are necessary. I remember reading an article on Nazi propaganda during Germany's invasion of Stalingrad. How they had to retool the narrative in accordance with each setback until they finally banned discussion of the subject in the press once the Russian Counter-Offensive was in full swing. The great victory of taking the city announced in November became very unbelievable when German sons stopped writing back over the Winter. Selling a lie to one or two people is trivial, but selling a lie to a country is a careful science. 

[Jotari]

14 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Admittedly, I wouldn't know. I have seen, however, some people theorize that it's very possible the soldiers... just plain didn't knew, because Russia wouldn't want to teach the Soviet government made such a screw-up there. Alternatively...

https://www.voanews.com/a/europe_russian-tv-series-blames-cia-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster/6169810.html

That it was Western sabotage.

As it is, I don't know how... truly plausible it can be, but I wouldn't be surprised if there really has been some kind of cover-up about the disaster over there. Then consider they are conscripting soldiers young enough to have been born after the fact. Or they thought it wasn't that bad anymore. Or that it was safe to dig up the soil again. Or any combination of reasons ultimately.

I find it unlikely that Russia could cover up Chernobyl to any great extent. It's not North Korea. They have the internet, they can leave the country, it only happened like 30 years ago. I do find it likely that they just plain didn't realize they were at Chernobyl until someone had committed to it and it was too late to back down without looking like an idiot. Either that or the specific stretch of land is strategically valuable in ways I don't comprehend.

[Acacia Sgt]

1 minute ago, Jotari said:

I find it unlikely that Russia could cover up Chernobyl to any great extent. It's not North Korea. They have the internet, they can leave the country, it only happened like 30 years ago. I do find it likely that they just plain didn't realize they were at Chernobyl until someone had committed to it and it was too late to back down without looking like an idiot. Either that or the specific stretch of land is strategically valuable in ways I don't comprehend.

Perhaps not yet.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/russia-nearly-isolated-online-mean-internets-future-rcna19389

But yeah, the fact they are (were?) making that TV series blaming the CIA shows they do still acknowledge it. How much they know/tell, however, is what's a bit in question now.

Chornobyl is the most direct path between Belarus and Kyiv, so it makes sense Russian troops would take over and pass through in their northern campaign. The hunkering down was likely... well, who knows. Perhaps since it was clear that their offensive was stalling, they were taking defensive positions or were planning to set up artillery or something.

[Sunwoo]

Honestly, I imagine one can cover up Chernobyl the same way some parts of America cover up the Civil War and Civil Rights Movement. They can't hide that it happened, so they lie the fuck about it.

[Armchair General]

Well this popped into my newsfeed, a few minutes ago.

 And Biden might be sending some Stinger anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, but I can't really find an recent news article about it.

[Acacia Sgt]

US Senate votes to bring back Lend-Lease to aid Ukraine:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/06/senate-unanimously-approves-lend-lease-00023668

Russia suspended from Human Rights Council:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/7/un-to-vote-on-suspending-russia-from-rights-council

[Jotari]

2 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

US Senate votes to bring back Lend-Lease to aid Ukraine:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/06/senate-unanimously-approves-lend-lease-00023668

Russia suspended from Human Rights Council:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/7/un-to-vote-on-suspending-russia-from-rights-council

This vote reveals a lot about the situation in the world. I'm seeing a lot of talk about how, outside of the west, only Japan is really concerned about the war (and personally as far as terms go I don't see any reason not to count Japan as part of the west, but I also just hate the term the west in general for how nebulous, yet inaccurate, it is, yet there is no reasonable substitute). That the rest of the world is just waiting and watching to see how they can benefit, which is obviously true to some extent, but this vote shows not nearly as true as people are making it out. That's a lot of countries voting against Russia on a pretty serious issue. True, there are still a large number of Absentee votes, mostly from Muslim countries who, to be fair, are most reasonably put in the camp of "This shit isn't new, we've been having wars for decades now", but the only countries outright backing Russia are largely the former communist states (which also says a lot about the reality of the cold war in the modern age).

[Sunwoo]

If you add together the against and the abstentions you'll still get less than those in favor.

What an interesting list. It gives the basics of where each country stands on this. It's not surprising to see that a lot of the countries voting against throwing Russia off are some of its old communist/soviet buddies whom it still maintains ties to. I'm more curious about the handful of African countries that voted against it though, I can't say I know enough about Russian ties with various African countries to tell what could've influenced them.

The abstentions are more interesting though. I suppose in a way you could interpret that as "I'm taking the official position of neutral," even if the countries' politicians may have actual opinions. A lot of these guys are in Latin America, South America, Africa, and around the Middle East/Western Asia region. It's kind of interesting to note and it reminds me of the good ol' days of playing mafia when not having an opinion on the major things happening in the game got you called scum

EDIT: @Jotari I see South Korea has also thrown its lot in with the "West". But yeah, for the most part it seems like this is an issue mostly Europe and U.S. allies care about.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Sunwoo

[Acacia Sgt]

It's possible that some votes aren't as much Pro-Russia as they're Anti-West.

Still, abstaining to vote is essentially a Yes vote on paper since those don't count for the two-thirds majority needed (so final result is only 117 votes count, and Yes wins because it's over two-thirds of that, and not of the full total). So why one would vote to abstain can be interpreted differently in light of that.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Acacia Sgt

[Jotari]

5 minutes ago, Sunwoo said:

If you add together the against and the abstentions you'll still get less than those in favor.

What an interesting list. It gives the basics of where each country stands on this. It's not surprising to see that a lot of the countries voting against throwing Russia off are some of its old communist/soviet buddies whom it still maintains ties to. I'm more curious about the handful of African countries that voted against it though, I can't say I know enough about Russian ties with various African countries to tell what could've influenced them.

The abstentions are more interesting though. I suppose in a way you could interpret that as "I'm taking the official position of neutral," even if the countries' politicians may have actual opinions. A lot of these guys are in Latin America, South America, Africa, and around the Middle East/Western Asia region. It's kind of interesting to note and it reminds me of the good ol' days of playing mafia when not having an opinion on the major things happening in the game got you called scum

EDIT: @Jotari I see South Korea has also thrown its lot in with the "West". But yeah, for the most part it seems like this is an issue mostly Europe and U.S. allies care about.

The majority of Latin America seems against Russia near as I can see, with only Bolivia and Cuba outright against (I'm almost surprised Brazil went for an abstentee, but what I know about Brazil's politics is no doubt trenched in massive bias against Bolsonaro and just ignorant in general). Oceania is also solidly against Russia, but that's no real surprise, most of those countries have their defense completely controlled by the US, so their foreign policy is probably under massive sway by the US (and just in general they're so isolated that it's easy for them to take the moral high ground on almost anything).

Africa is definitely the biggest mixed bag.

What really surprises me the most is Kazakstan, Kyrgistan and Turkmenistan supporting Russia. I don't know anything about their relationship with Russia, but I would have thought their sympathies would lie more with Ukraine than Russia, given their situation is more similar to Ukraine if Russia decides to get the soviet band back together.

[Sunwoo]

6 minutes ago, Jotari said:

The majority of Latin America seems against Russia near as I can see, with only Bolivia and Cuba outright against (I'm almost surprised Brazil went for an abstentee, but what I know about Brazil's politics is no doubt trenched in massive bias against Bolsonaro and just ignorant in general). Oceania is also solidly against Russia, but that's no real surprise, most of those countries have their defense completely controlled by the US, so their foreign policy is probably under massive sway by the US (and just in general they're so isolated that it's easy for them to take the moral high ground on almost anything).

Africa is definitely the biggest mixed bag.

What really surprises me the most is Kazakstan, Kyrgistan and Turkmenistan supporting Russia. I don't know anything about their relationship with Russia, but I would have thought their sympathies would lie more with Ukraine than Russia, given their situation is more similar to Ukraine if Russia decides to get the soviet band back together.

I think I was lumping in some of the small Caribbean island nations with Latin America, but that might be incorrect to do so. But yeah, on second glance it looks like my initial estimates were a bit off.

Also, my only explanation for Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan is that maybe they're worried that if they support Ukraine then Russia WILL go after them next. Also, what I know about Turkmenistan is that they're run by a dictator and John Oliver did an episode on that country, which somehow ended with him baking the largest marble cake ever. Not sure if that can explain why they might be pro-Russia though.

[Armchair General]

Well, Putin has finally appointed an theater commander for the "operation" in Ukraine.

Outside of implying that the invasion was several armies operating with little oversight, this guy has an history of going after residential areas during his time in Syria.

Edited April 10, 2022 by Armchair General

[Tetragrammaton]

On 4/8/2022 at 12:17 AM, Acacia Sgt said:

Russia suspended from Human Rights Council:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/7/un-to-vote-on-suspending-russia-from-rights-council

It is just a Human Rights Council, not something special.

The Council was called "cesspool of political bias", "hypocritical", "makes a mockery of human rights".

https://www.bbc.com/news/44537372

 

[AnonymousSpeed]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/04/15/ukraine-facial-recognition-warfare/

Highly concerning, in my honest opinion.

MOD EDIT: Link contains a photo of a dead body, please use discretion when opening it.

Edited April 17, 2022 by eclipse
Content warning

[eclipse]

Given the state of the news coming out of Ukraine, the number of good articles with photos of dead bodies is on the rise.  Please make a note if an article contains such photos.  Please refrain from posting articles with pictures of excessive blood/gore.