Live data from Hacker News

Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

reuters.com

321–330 of 1001 posts

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#321
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speech of a bully, of an aggressor. The only correct reply is a direct retaliatory attack on his offensive positions.

How long do you think Russia can hold out if the entire world sanctions them? Do you think they'd trade Ukraine for trade with every world partner? Bottom line: Russia can only win a physical war - they cannot win an economic war. This is bait and bad bait at that. The longer Russia continues to provide us with video evidence of their bullying only makes it easier for us to convince undecided countries to sanction Ru…

> How long do you think Russia can hold out if the entire world sanctions them? Do you think they'd trade Ukraine for trade with every world partner? Bottom line: Russia can only win a physical war - they cannot win an economic war.

Forever? Look at North Korea: Kim Jong-un is doing fine.

It's a fantasy that the "entire world" would sanction them: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/world/europe/china-russia...:

> China on Wednesday criticized the expansion of economic sanctions against Russia, saying that they were unlikely to solve the Ukraine crisis and that they had the potential to harm average people as well as the interests of Beijing.

Putin doesn't care about Russia economy the way you think he does: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/02/lavrov-rus...:

> Their intentions are different from ours too. Putin’s goal is not a flourishing, peaceful, prosperous Russia, but a Russia where he remains in charge. Lavrov’s goal is to maintain his position in the murky world of the Russian elite and, of course, to keep his money. What we mean by “interests” and what they mean by “interests” are not the same. When they listen to our diplomats, they don’t hear anything that really threatens their position, their power, their personal fortunes.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#322

I am for keeping Ukraine as a neutral buffer separating Russia and the US. NATO proposed Ukrainian and Georgian membership of NATO in 2005-2008, in the clear knowledge that this would destabilize the situation. France, Germany, and others were against this. The proposal began the issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJBQikfYyKs We then openly backed the 2014 putsch in Kiev, an open act of aggression just as irrespo…

Will the people downvoting this comment mind telling me what is wrong with it? I'm not a Russian apologist, just a fan of history, and am trying to understand why so many people reject this narrative. edit: Now I am downvoted too just for asking..? This just makes me think that there is not a solid answer?

Now the original comment is flagged and gone. I will still leave this reply here because it expands on the original comments claim with more sources than just Wikipedia;

> We then openly backed the 2014 putsch in Kiev, an open act of aggression just as irresponsible as a military incursion. CIA John Brennan, Senator John McCain, and Diplomat Victoria Nuland were there in Ukraine when Yanukovych was being overthrown. There is also evidence to show that we were involved through NGOs in overthrowing and promoting an atmosphere desiring the overthrow of Yanukovych.

This is an aspect to this that way too many people just ignore as "Russian misinformation".

The Orange revolution was a prior US attempt [0] at facilitating a regime-change in Ukraine from pro-Russian politics to pro-Western politics, which failed.

In 2014 there was the next attempt McCain not only riling up protesters [1], but meeting with the future PM Arseniy Yatsenyuk and leader of right-wing militias Oleh Tyahnybok [2] that were the muscle behind the 2014 revolution [3].

Arseniy Yatsenyuk was already declared the US's "man" during the leaked "Fuck the EU Nuland" calls [4], same Victoria Nuland that was literally handing out cookies to Ukrainian protesters [5].

Yatsenyuk wasn't even too shy about these connections; His OpenUkraine foundation's list of partners reads like the who is who of US regime change actors, down to the CIA's a National Endowment for Democracy and literal NATO itself [6].

Tho it was a bit too blatant, so they ended up putting his wife in charge of the foundation and removing the partners list.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/nov/26/ukraine.usa

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-uk...

[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahn...

[3] https://youtu.be/KfD_CaSIxmQ

[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

[5] https://euobserver.com/tickers/122437

[6] https://web.archive.org/web/20140407065419/http://openukrain...

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#324
post #6

I just woke up to this news and I'm wondering if it's possible for Apple and Google to brick all Russian phones? This would probably be more effective on their population at large than any form of sanctions.

That would be pretty dumb move. Then they can no longer spy on Russians.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#325
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speech of a bully, of an aggressor. The only correct reply is a direct retaliatory attack on his offensive positions.

The reason Putin is invading is because he knows the U.S. is weak, its leadership is politically weak, and there's very little it will do, and even if it does, it doesn't have popular support. It's the effect of clear incentives. If the U.S. intervenes, a retaliatory cyber op from Russia against critical infrastructure would make america amish again. Then, wait until midterms when the president loses the house and se…

> and even if it does, it doesn't have popular support

Anecdotally, I've never seen so many people in my (wildly different) social circles agree on something political.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#326
post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Very, very few Americans support Putin. Less than 5%.

Most Trump supporters believe whatever Trump says. This gets you already way above of 5 percent.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine won't exist in 48 hours; the fact that the Azov battalion exists should be an indicator that very few will fight for the government.

Hmmm, I was wondering what RT (German version) [0] meant by Putin wanting to denazify the Ukraine ("Putin launches special military operation to protect Donbass and denazify Ukraine"). Since they (Azov) are headquartered in Donetsk Oblast, is it them who Putin wants to permanently remove right now, and is this his purpose for starting this war? [0] https://de.rt.com/europa/132333-putin-verkundet-militarische...

Azov are ideological extremists but I wouldn't read much into it being a motivator for Putin. It's a combination of imperialism, a significant population of ethnic Russian separatists being in Ukraine, and NATO concerns.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#328

To some extent this situation feels analogous to a street mugging happening in very slow motion The thug accosts the victim, threatens and then proceeds to assault the victim in full view of a large number of bystanders who are numerous enough to defend the victim and alter the outcome but not convicted enough to take on the inconvenience of doing so. Nevertheless all the bystanders voice words of encouragement and s…

When the thug has nuclear weapons, responses get a lot trickier.

The thug also thinks his knife won't be needed.

Often I wonder which of our leaders has ever played poker. It seems like Putin has figured out that we won't push all-in, ever, so he steals another pot.

If the west really cared about this, the only way now is to retaliate way out of proportion to what's happened.

Before this happened, the west also didn't act like it wanted to contain the Russians, so the Russians got brave. If there had been some sort of response the Russians would have backed off. It's somewhat stable for both sides to bluster about this or that minor victory. Can't do that now.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#330

Does anyone have any projections for how this war will go? Is the Ukrainian military powerful? Will this turn into a guerilla war, or will it go the way of total war? Or will it result in total capitulation? And another key question. What will Western governments actually do? What if the war gets really bad? Does the West actually have the balls to put real, biting sanctions on the regime? And will this crash the eco…

Good questions, hard to answer. A few quick thoughts. I will try to dispassionately focus on the facts of the military situation as I understand them. That's going to be hard to do, but I'll try. I'm sure there are experts who know much more than I do.

> Does anyone have any projections for how this war will go? Is the Ukrainian military powerful?

There are many projections, though wars are notoriously hard to predict.

Ukraine has a military, but Russia is extremely powerful and has one of the largest militaries in the world. Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/military-... Russia has tons of equipment & everything else it needs to overwhelm Ukraine.

Geography is a key issue in wars, and Ukraine's geography is awful for Ukraine in a Russia/Ukraine conflict. Again, here's my understanding. Ukraine is just a flat plain on the path from Russia, so geography provides relatively little protection to Ukraine. The Dnieper River (which runs basically North/South in the middle of Ukraine) does provide some geographic protection, but by that point Ukraine has lost a huge amount of its territory. Kyiv (the capital of Ukraine) is on the Dnieper river, but it's way to the north near Belarus, and thus Kyiv is relatively easy for Russia to reach via Belarus. The Carpathian mountains in the west and the Crimean mountains in the south make it harder for other countries to help Ukraine. The eastern part of Ukraine has a lot more Russians than the western part, so the eastern parts will be easier for Russia to hold since they'll get more help from the population.

One discussion of a plausible outcome is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9c_HhpvBpg

(Binkov uses a sock puppet to lighten an otherwise somber subject.)

> Will this turn into a guerilla war, or will it go the way of total war? Or will it result in total capitulation?

Russia can take whatever it wants from Ukraine, at least initially. Russia's military is just too powerful, and there aren't any serious geographic barriers to prevent Russia from taking whatever it wants in the short term if Russia really wants to do so.

Whether or not it'll become a guerilla war is up to the Ukrainians. However, if the Ukrainians are willing to make it a guerilla war, and that seems likely at least on the western side, they can make Ukraine very hard to hold (at a horrific cost in Ukrainian lives). In the long run, if the Ukrainians are willing to seriously apply guerilla warfare, I think there's a good chance they'll make at least the western side too painful to hold if Russia goes that far.

I would not be surprised if Russia only took part of Ukraine, e.g., the easternmost parts of Ukraine, perhaps up to the Dnieper River, and perhaps also take Kyev. Russia gets lots more land, and it creates fear (which they may interpret as respect) in everyone around them.

> And another key question. What will Western governments actually do? What if the war gets really bad? Does the West actually have the balls to put real, biting sanctions on the regime? And will this crash the economy?

Western governments have already sent in a lot of military gear to help Ukraine. Western governments won't put troops in. They aren't obligated to do so (Ukraine is not a member of NATO), and the geography of Ukraine would make it hard to do anyway. Western governments have made that quite clear.

They'll put in sanctions. They will probably hurt Russia significantly. I think for Putin this is more about honor, and thus any sanctions will probably not be enough by themselves to force Russia out.

One huge problem is that the EU absolutely needs oil. Solar & wind get press, but they aren't enough today (or for years to come). The EU can't heat their homes or move their people without oil. Russia has oil.

Russia is more likely to grab eastern parts or the eastern side of Ukraine (east of the Dnieper). Russia could take the whole country, but is unlikely to keep it permanently due to guerilla resistance, so it either won't try or it will eventually give up western Ukraine. Sanctions by themselves won't be enough, but sanctions + guerilla warfare would plausibly recover at least the western side of Ukraine.

I do think that there will be serious negative consequences long-term for Russia, beyond sanction-related ones. It suddenly gives a powerful reason for other countries to join NATO (such as Finland and Sweden and a rump of Ukraine) and for them all to increase their military spending. It also gives them a very good reason to not trust Russia in the future.

This is a sad time.

Post reply on HN