• 0 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 19th, 2023

help-circle


  • But there are some in this thread who would pretend Harris is more pro-genocide than Trump, which is demonstrably false.

    Is it? She’s the one who is the VP of the organization funding the genocide. I don’t recall Trump directly funding genocide, even going out of his way to circumvent US law. Maybe he did, wouldn’t put it past him, but given the information I have at least, Kamala and Joe Biden are demonstrably, empirically more pro-genocide than Trump, who remember, has already been president in the past.

    Literally the entire political analysis of liberals on this issue is based on nothing but vibes. Trump is worse than Biden/Kamla on genocide because he has more bad guy molecules in his brain of some dumb shit.








  • insurrectionist

    Insurrection against the US government is not a bad thing.

    nuke gaza, beating protestors, ensuring ukraine is wiped out

    This is happening right now under Biden. Casualties in Gaza are estimated to be on the order of 200,000 (the official numbers have stayed around 40,000 for so long now because the health ministry’s capabilities have been decimated). Protestors are being beating, not just in the US tbf, also across the whole of the “democratic” and “free” west. Ukraine has been utterly failed by the western powers who have opposed both a peaceful settlement to the conflict or fully committing. Once the war ends, it doesn’t matter if Biden or Trump is in charge. Ukraine will be looted again just like Russia in the 1990s.






  • Russia is winning because it has developed a steady momentum for keeping losses low while attriting Ukrainian forces harshly.

    The victory is not by any means a phyrric victory, given that the Russian army is now larger, more experienced and has more material than the start of the war. The Russian economy is also holding up. The only thing that could be phyrric about the war is the loss of life, which is still not too high for russia.

    Given the recent offerings, it is obvious that putin does not want to take the whole country of Ukraine. Not only will russia have to pay for the rebuilding, but it will have to face massive amounts of internal resistance for years to come, which is a headache that russia has no reason to deal with as long as they get their demand of no nato membership.

    Finally the terms themselves are very generous as I have previously outlined. The loosing side in a war doesn’t just get to keep everything with no concessions. That is not how wars work. I have also clearly stated the reasons why a ceasefire now on putin’s terms is actually beneficial for Ukraine especially if the war were to flare up again. It would buy them time to recover fighting strength while the Russians would have to unwind their militarization, as maintaining a war economy outside of war would not be taken well by the population.



  • This is very delusional thinking. Imagine trying to negotiate with the winning side and your minimum negotiating conditions are for the winning side to just abandon all of their gains for no discernible reason. This too while the winning side offers generous terms which still leave Ukraine with access to ports and most of its territory, despite Ukraine being in a desperate situation now.

    It is even more farcical when consider that these demands are already the de facto conditions. Russia holds most of the territories it is demanding. There are no current plans for Ukraine to join NATO as NATO doesn’t accept members already active in war, and the NATO countries have no actual plan for either shoring up Ukraine’s security in the future or even for rebuilding. The closest NATO states got was trying to use $50 billion from Russian funds to loan to Ukraine for rebuilding, which they didn’t even go through with because the deal involved the EU taking all of the risk while benefiting the Americans.

    In fact, ending the conflict now on Putin’s recent terms is more beneficial to Ukraine and NATO than it is to Russia, even if the conflict were to start up again in the future. The returning Ukrainian refugees will restore Ukraine’s manpower, and the NATO militaries will gain the time needed to restock weapon supplies, which they need more than the Russians do because Russian (and allied) military production is higher than that of NATO in volume.

    I am of the opinion that the terms Putin has offered are cynically generous. He knows that the west won’t let Ukraine end the conflict right now, so he can afford to boost his image right now. In later negotiations, he can point back to these terms and tell the Ukrainians that if they wanted better terms, they could have gotten them earlier.


  • Given that the Russians have been fighting this war for 2 years now, their military is sufficiently experienced. Fighting in wars is what makes conscripts into veterans in the first place. Given that NATO troops lack any experience fighting harsh land wars, and the Ukrainians facing severe manpower issues, the Russian military is in a much better shape than its enemies. Russia also outproduces the west in artillery by many times. In simple terms, Ukraine is not going to win this war, short of a black swan event.

    If you lose 95% of your skilled veterans and all you have is green recruits your experience level goes down. Larger and greener.

    Yeah, Russia has lost of 95% of its skilled soldiers, just like how they don’t have rifles, running water, and their tanks are made of paper mache, right? Pure copium analysis. If the state of the Russian military and economy is really so shit, it is even more humiliating for the collective west that they are being massively outproduced. The US spends more on its military than the next few powers combined and still can’t beat Yemen or Russia.