Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One Year into the War in Ukraine

acoup.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 190 posts

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#111

Post by wonderwonder »

miguelazo wrote: post #92
wonderwonder wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I think the west is using Ukraine as a way to whittle down Russian military forces" Of course they are. These weapon systems were built to defeat Russia and now they are being used for just that with the bonus of 0 risk to US lives. With that said the US is not making Ukraine fight, Ukraine wants to fight and is begging for the weapons that the West is providing and more of them. The Ukrainians are not puppets, we d…

The US (and their Neonazi Azov Allies) is absolutely making Ukraine fight. They have undermined diplomatic solutions at multiple points that were satisfactory even to Zelensky. Ukrainians are being used to advance US hegemonic and LNG interests, and it’s disgusting.

Interesting, can you show me the video of Zelensky saying the terms are acceptable but the US won't let him accept and are forcing everyone to fight to the death? Or are you just making this up?

Also your focus on the political orientation of a battalion that pretty much fought to the death to stop the Russian invasion is pretty telling. Should Ukraine have told them not to fight? Sorry we would rather lose the war, have our daughters raped, get tortured to death and let Russia keep stealing our kids because our potential allies are racist?

Russia is pardoning rapists and murdererers if they agree to fight for them. But partnering with Racists is worse right?

What the us is doing is more disgusting than the invading Russians, about the same, less?

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#112

Post by dragonwriter »

rainworld wrote: post #90

It’s hard to know exactly how heavy Ukrainian losses in the first phase and this second phase were; I suspect we’ll find out that they were quite a bit heavier than media coverage would lead us to believe. Actually, if you read Western mainstream media front line reports, past the headlines and between the lines, a picture of very heavy losses emerges. Units completely depleted or rebuilt several times. Territorial D…

> Actually, if you read Western mainstream media front line reports, past the headlines and between the lines, a picture of very heavy losses emerges.

You don’t even have to read “past the headlines and between the lines”.

The most common estimates I’ve seen are around 120K killed+wounded for Ukraine, which are very heavily casualties.

Not as heavy as the 200K the same sources are estimating for Russia, but still very high. This is a meatgrinder of a war. This is very clear.

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#113

Post by bigdict »

dragonwriter wrote: post #108
bigdict wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Transnistria isn’t part of Russia It is controlled by Russia. > Ukraine isn’t going to take it from Moldova. What is that based on?

> It is controlled by Russia. And Ukraine obviously supports the Moldovan government’s opposition to that condition, but Ukraine isn’t going to unilaterally invade Moldova to fight Russians while its got plenty of Russians in Ukraine to deal with.

Why are you so certain? Have you heard of the Cobasna ammo depot? It would be mutually beneficial to Ukraine and Moldova if Ukraine were to gain control of that depot and then cede back to Moldova.

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#114

Post by dragonwriter »

UIUC_06 wrote: post #77

Only people whose knowledge of history begins with WW II think everything is Munich, and that analogy applies to everything. There was 6,000 years of recorded history before Munich. It's not always correct to think that "if we appease them here, they'll be in our bedrooms next." Sometimes in history, the two sides cut a deal, and peace was maintained for a few generations, which was all anyone expected anyway.

> There was 6,000 years of recorded history before Munich.

Yeah, “Dane-geld” was written long before Munich, and references experiences much longer before Munich. The observation that accommodating aggression encourages more aggression was not first made in regards to Munich, Munich is just one notable example of that time-worn lesson being forgotten at great cost.

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#115

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

bigdict wrote: post #105
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from around that region so I'm quite familiar. Just because Putin says those people are Russians so he can claim some clay, doesn't make it a fact. Sure some are ethnically Russian, but that doesn't make them Russian citizens of the Federal Russian Republic. They are Moldovan citizens. Transnistria is a rouge separatist nation that's not internationally recognized and only exists on paper because Russia is a nucl…

> I'm from around that region so I'm quite familiar. Not sufficiently familiar then. "It is estimated that about 250,000 out of 500,000 people living in Transnistria hold Russian citizenship." That's as of 2020, "passportization" has continued since then. https://warsawinstitute.org/russia-hands-passports-diaspora/

If France were to give french passports to a lot of Germans in a particular region of Germany, that region doesn't magically become a French asset/territory.

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#116

Post by bigdict »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #115
bigdict wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm from around that region so I'm quite familiar. Not sufficiently familiar then. "It is estimated that about 250,000 out of 500,000 people living in Transnistria hold Russian citizenship." That's as of 2020, "passportization" has continued since then. https://warsawinstitute.org/russia-hands-passports-diaspora/

If France were to give french passports to a lot of Germans in a particular region of Germany, that region doesn't magically become a French asset/territory.

Transnistria is literally controlled by Russian armed forces…

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#117

Post by FollowingTheDao »

dmitriid wrote: post #75
peyton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? His speech [1] is really clear. I’m extremely disappointed in the reporting by the news here. [1]: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories.

> His speech is not worth the paper it was written on.

Isn't that true for any politician?

> Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force."

Obvious lie? That's fortunate for your opinion.

>In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories.

Yes, not Ukraine, only the occupied territories.

The fact that my original comment was flagged shows just how deep the U.S. has fallen for its own propaganda.

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#118

Post by int_19h »

anextio wrote: post #65
int_19h wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The column that was rushing towards Kyiv consisted in large part of the Russian National Guard units - those are the guys whose primary purpose is to beat up people in opposition protests. And they had the anti-riot gear packed, as Ukrainians have found out when going through the wrecks. So, yes, they were absolutely planning to suppress civilian opposition to the occupation.

[flagged]

Russia's generals are the people who are repeatedly ordering tanks to attack without infantry support with predictable results, the most recent of which we've seen under Vuhledar recently. Their incompetence is not a theory at this point, it's an empirically tested fact.

And it's not just the West saying that - I'm following many of the separatist outlets on Telegram and such, and while they broadly support the war, they're dismayed at how it is being waged. Strelkov is perhaps most notable of the critics, which is rather telling giving his role in 2014, but there are many others.

In any case, do you have other theories as to why Russia would send their National Guard with riot gear towards Kyiv during the first day of the war, if they didn't expect massive civilian resistance after toppling the government?

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#119

Post by p1peridine »

fabian2k wrote: post #29
miguelazo wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Ukraine is a sovereign actor here, it is defending itself against aggression. Of course they accept and demand weapons from the West, because surrendering or losing this war means a lot of death, suffering and loss of freedom. At the very latest after Bucha it is clear that leaving Ukrainian population under Russian control will cause terrible suffering. So what should they negotiate about, what do you think Ukraine…

> Ukraine is a sovereign actor here

Not really.

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/09/12/ukraine-the-cias...

Re: One Year into the War in Ukraine

#120

Post by dragonwriter »

dmitriid wrote: post #75
peyton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? His speech [1] is really clear. I’m extremely disappointed in the reporting by the news here. [1]: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

His speech is not worth the paper it was written on. Calling out one obvious lie: "It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force." In September Russia "held" a "referendum" in occupied territories and immediately adjusted the Constitution to include the occupied territories.

> Calling out one obvious lie: “It is not our plan to occupy the Ukrainian territory. We do not intend to impose anything on anyone by force.”

I mean, it is not a “lie” once you accept Putin’s…rather, shall we say, slippery…concept of “Ukrainian territory”.

IF it was part of the DPR/LPR (like Crimea, earlier) Russia didn’t consider it “Ukrainian territory”…or vaguely claimed by them despite never having been controlled by them, or just somewhere Russia felt like occupying, for that matter.

Post reply on HN