Live data from Hacker News

Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

reuters.com

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#931

In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard Zbigniew Brzezinski did say that if Europe went to war again it would start in Ukraine. Some choice quotes: “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” “However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine,…

So many commentators did not live through post-USSR 90s to completely miss the mentality and culture which shapes Putin's decisions. First, you need to understand values of a person, then their goals, then their methods to achieve the goals. 90s in post-USSR countries were a relatively free environment (from state prosecution) and it naturally selected for individuals which wanted as much power as possible and were w…

What do you suppose makes it so impossible for a soft cult politician to recognise a warrior when they see one? Because warriors seem to have no problem seeing the other way around.

The Americans had their noses rubbed in it for 20 years in Afghanistan, only to see the warrior Taliban spring right back up overnight. I can’t imagine a more effective wake-up call than that.

It would have been better if they had just called Gorbachev and asked if invading Afghanistan could ever work or they should just drop it. He has the experience and I’m sure he would have been happy to share it.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#932
post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it doesn't make sense that a nation as sophisticated as Russia would accept such a high risk of loss. Which means that they might actually believe the risk of NATO intervention is low. Or they see it like Poker as an "all in" move. Either lose now on their own terms in Ukraine or eventually they lose anyway as Ukraine joins NATO and Russia's nuclear advantages are "neutralized". Meanwhile there's the chance NAT…

> Or they see it like Poker as an "all in" move. The “all in” move was when they suggested they NATO not meeting their demands to permanently commit to excluding Ukraine and withdraw allied forces from Eastern European members of NATO was an aggressive act pushing them to war in Ukraine. When NATO didn't fold, they either had to invade or show the Putin regime as a paper tiger, which is a mortal blow for an authorita…

...mortal blow for an authoritarian regime.

Let's not pretend we can just torment Russia until a "good Russian leader" emerges to attend to our every desire. No politician who would ever receive 1% of the vote in Russia would support Ukraine joining NATO. NATO was formed to impoverish Russia and its allies, and that is still its obvious and declared purpose. Likewise, USA has relatively few politicians who would support China installing missile batteries along the Mexico border.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#933
post #924
post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different A…

> As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine With words. EU has also supported Ukraine with words recently. I've seen ads on the telly making an emotional statement that "Ukraine is Europe". Europe as a continent does not exist: it is a small corner of Asia. Eurocentricism needs to stop. This us-vs-them game needs to stop. This invasion is terrible for normal people, Ukrainian (bombs), Russian (sanctions)…

> With words.

According to Wikipedia, many NATO members are either Arms or non-lethal aid suppliers.

""" Arms suppliers: Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States

Non-lethal military aid: Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Sweden, European Union, Belarusian opposition """[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukrai...

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#934

What is the endgame here? Russia is outclassed by NATO both economically and militarily. If NATO intervenes economically, Russia will lose much. If NATO intervenes militarily, Russia will lose much (but at great cost to NATO). The risk of NATO intervention is high, right? Russia understood this before invading, right? So it seems Russia is accepting a high risk of loss. But it doesn't make sense that a nation as soph…

The risk of US/UN intervention should be high, because that was the quid pro quo for Ukraine to abandon its nuclear weapons in the Budapest Memorandum. No country with nuclear weapons is ever going to give them up again. No security assurances will be seen as sufficiently reliable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...

DPRK claimed to have learned this particular lesson from events in Libya.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#935

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 do you understand the neo-McCarthyism raging through our country? If you even say something other than "Putin is Satan" or "Russia bad", you get downvoted to oblivion. Enjoy. Don't bother mentioning the complexities of this situation or once again, you'll be downvoted.

It is pretty wild. When engaging with the same people downvoting you, they do not even seem to disagree with this take violently, but think you are pro-Russia just because you bring up problems with how NATO/the West reacted to this.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#936

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has thousands of nuclear missiles. This makes them immune to NATO invasion.

I had this mind as I wrote up my post but didn't mention it because I didn't consider the nuclear option as a serious option. Or maybe I'm just optimistic/delusional. But how would the nuclear option play out? Here I am, a Russian oligarch. I ordered the Ukrainian invasion because I bet that NATO wouldn't intervene because of my nukes. But it turns out I was wrong and NATO is pushing back my invasion. So I fire some…

> The risk of NATO intervention is high, right?

This is a classic game of "chicken", and NATO has basically told everyone they wouldn't get directly involved.

All your arguments happen to apply to NATO commanders too.

Here I am, head of a NATO member. I see Russia invade a country that we don't really care that much about. If we intervene there's a chance the world might end (and I will die). If we don't do anything except say some stern words online we'll lose some face but our money and lives are safe.

Do I intervene?

In a game of "chicken" the side with the most to lose and the side that believes they are most "rational" will lose. That losing side seems to be NATO now. Putin's image of being an irrational dictator willing to win at all costs is why he's winning this "chicken" game easily.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#937

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk of a NATO military intervention is non-existent. Biden said it explicitly. Wrt economic reprisals, Putin probably did the math and found it acceptable. They might be kicked out of SWIFT, they will probably get closer to China.

> Putin probably did the math and found it acceptable I assume military belligerence, aggression is about domestic political power moves. Meaning, in this case, Putin's calculus gives more weight to tightening his grip on Russia than any economic impacts. -- IIRC, studies have shown that economic sanctions empowers the hardliners. The hardships impacting the citizens drives them to embrace the hardliners more. Also,…

> There really are no good options.

You can in fact strangle these regimes and it's very effective. We did it to the USSR, we did it to Cuba, we did it to Venezuela, we did it to North Korea. The outcomes were excellent in fact: those regimes were largely held in check and their ability to maneuver was made far more difficult. Crippling regimes like Putin's and making it difficult for them to function at max power, is a very reasonable outcome. Putin isn't going away whether we make it hard or easy on Russia most likely, so the rational choice is very obvious. Containment and strangulation is just fine.

The best options are what should have occurred over the prior eight years, for which it is now too late.

The good options going forward are to topple Lukashenko in Belarus (civil war, flood the nation with weapons, arm the resistance at any cost), aggressively move on Moldova and Russia's interest there (immmediately; as in eight years ago), and generally take Russia's few proxies away from them to weaken Putin's dreams of a new empire, that includes declaring a proxy war on Russia's off the books military activities in Africa and elsewhere. We have drastically more resources and reach than they do, we should kill their proxies anywhere we find them by funding it appropriately.

Very aggressively target Russia's currency and any international use of it. Attempt to destroy their economy. That includes by working with Western Europe to build nuclear energy and move away from Russian energy. This isn't solved in a day, but it can be solved over 10 and 20 years.

Cyber attack Russia's interest anywhere and everywhere they can be reached. They do the same to us, stop pretending we can be their friends. Russia isn't interested in being a liberal democracy or a pal to the civilized world, Putin's Russia is interested in power and conquest.

Blockade Russia off from the global Internet, which would be relatively easy for the US to accomplish. Enhancing their isolation that much more.

Remove them from Swift and make them a global pariah economically ex China and select few others.

Return the people of Russia to the conditions they enjoyed under the Soviet Union economically by strangling the nation, until or unless they get rid of Putin and return to the civilized fold and give up their ambitions to conquer more of Europe. It's probable that only the people of Russia can stop Putin, that includes people nearest to him (which is always an outsized threat to dictators; I assume Putin will do some purges if the pressure gets too great). Russia is well acquained with revolutions, our task now is to squeeze Russia until another one occurs. We outlasted the USSR trivially, the next task is to end the Russia that exists today (prompt revolution and see it broken into numerous smaller nations).

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#938

Updates from Russia today: - City centers are blocked by policy to prevent protests/marches - Arrests of people at protests - Volgograd airport has been closed - Russians lining up at banks to withdraw cash, bank limits put in place midway through the day

so the Russian people aren't entirely enthusiastic about this. Maybe they'll have another revolution.

I imagine the usual deal that they are kind of horrified but will be arrested / killed if they try to do much about it.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#939
post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good times breed bad times. PS: I agree about the feeling of infaillible institution and international order..

Recent times were largely the result of an unusually unipolar (read: US) world after the USSR collapsed. In more normal bi- or multi- polar periods (50s - 90s), international order often submitted to great power politics. What was right or legal was less important than who wanted what.

I'd argue the good times were a result of the massive transfer of wealth from the wealthy to the middle classes that was caused by the two world wars. Since the neoliberal shift of politics in Western powers in the 70s, we have been on a slow return back to the crazy levels of inequality that rival any of those ever seen prior to 20th century. We are now reaping what was sown by the Thatcher/Reagan privatisation and financialisation of everything in the economy. Takes a while for the effects to really kick in but I think much of the geopolitical dynamics we are seeing can be traced back to this.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#940

What is the endgame here? Russia is outclassed by NATO both economically and militarily. If NATO intervenes economically, Russia will lose much. If NATO intervenes militarily, Russia will lose much (but at great cost to NATO). The risk of NATO intervention is high, right? Russia understood this before invading, right? So it seems Russia is accepting a high risk of loss. But it doesn't make sense that a nation as soph…

Sociologist Greg Yudin explained what the leadership might think in an article[1] (he wrote the same on Facebook in Russian on January 19).

TL/DR: Putin and the exKGB elites are dissentful of the cold war lost to the US, see NATO as a direct threat (even though military generals don't think it is), and the internal dissent with Putin seems to them inspired from abroad. They were shocked by Libyan rebel and by the Ukrainian in 2014. Of course, the only thing they do is brute force, and every step they make only makes the conflict more real.

Regarding the common folk, here's a survey[2] from December or January. TL/DR: they accepted the propaganda's POV that it's all the West's fault. When shown evidence of earlier military build-up, they'd suggest it was fake news.

[1] https://www.thebigq.org/2022/02/23/what-are-the-reasons-behi...

[2] https://www.ridl.io/ru/nas-vtjagivajut-v-vojnu/

Post reply on HN