This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

[Aardvark86]

By making it political and somehow blaming Biden ? And saying such things as has "shattered the security architecture of Europe" when it has brought together NATO like nothing has in my lifetime? LOL.

She is no different then some of the GOP grifters in US suddenly acting like all along they have been tough on Russia and Putin and it is Biden's fault.

View embedded media

I said nothing about blaming Biden, nor did the BBC post.

By any measure, the pre-invasion "deterrents" have to be viewed as a failure because, like, you know, they didn't deter anything. Whether that's because the west misjudged putin's character, or the deterrents (or really, threats thereof) weren't strong enough is irrelevant. The simple point is, they didn't deter, and how refreshingly British to acknowledge that, even at this early stage of the game.

To be clear, as I've said from my earliest participation in this thread, I "get" that the way diplomacy works is to minimize escalation, and I "get" that the west's ultimate strategy was not to lend credence to Russia's claim of being under threat from the west. So I understand our approach, and it was not at all irrational. It was an absolutely fair judgment call. But it has proved demonstrably ineffective, at tremendous human cost.

 

[86Hawkeye]

Nice.

 

[Aardvark86]

Nice.

View embedded media

That guy wears the 'stache almost as well as Mike Evans, who would be impressed.

 

[86Hawkeye]

I said nothing about blaming Biden, nor did the BBC post.

By any measure, the pre-invasion "deterrents" have to be viewed as a failure because, like, you know, they didn't deter anything. Whether that's because the west misjudged putin's character, or the deterrents (or really, threats thereof) weren't strong enough is irrelevant. The simple point is, they didn't deter, and how refreshingly British to acknowledge that, even at this early stage of the game.

To be clear, as I've said from my earliest participation in this thread, I "get" that the way diplomacy works is to minimize escalation, and I "get" that the west's ultimate strategy was not to lend credence to Russia's claim of being under threat from the west. So I understand our approach, and it was not at all irrational. It was an absolutely fair judgment call. But it has proved demonstrably ineffective, at tremendous human cost.

There are plenty of lessons to be learned from this. I have significant doubts that the West could’ve done much more to prevent Putin invading, short of agreeing to his “terms”.

However, I do think we should’ve been arming Ukraine much more than we did until very recently.

The bottom line is that Putin has done more for western unity than anything the US could’ve done. This makes this entire situation a major strategic win (notwithstanding the human costs for Ukraine).

 

[noleclone2]

I said nothing about blaming Biden, nor did the BBC post.

By any measure, the pre-invasion "deterrents" have to be viewed as a failure because, like, you know, they didn't deter anything. Whether that's because the west misjudged putin's character, or the deterrents (or really, threats thereof) weren't strong enough is irrelevant. The simple point is, they didn't deter, and how refreshingly British to acknowledge that, even at this early stage of the game.

To be clear, as I've said from my earliest participation in this thread, I "get" that the way diplomacy works is to minimize escalation, and I "get" that the west's ultimate strategy was not to lend credence to Russia's claim of being under threat from the west. So I understand our approach, and it was not at all irrational. It was an absolutely fair judgment call. But it has proved demonstrably ineffective, at tremendous human cost.

My bad-I misread "The reality is President Putin did not take the threats of deterrence seriously enough," she told MPs. as her saying President Biden!!!! LOL. And was definitely like WTF?!

 

[mnole03]

I won't ask what the 'attributes' of an electronic/video game HROT-fighter would be.

 

[86Hawkeye]

True.

 

[Aardvark86]

There are plenty of lessons to be learned from this. I have significant doubts that the West could’ve done much more to prevent Putin invading, short of agreeing to his “terms”.

However, I do think we should’ve been arming Ukraine much more than we did until very recently.

The bottom line is that Putin has done more for western unity than anything the US could’ve done. This makes this entire situation a major strategic win (notwithstanding the human costs for Ukraine).

I agree that arming sooner would have helped. I also think there was room for putting US people on the ground of a defensive nature would have helped, in that introducing the risk of killing americans could have affected the calculus. yes. I am talking about putting americans (carefully chosen in terms of functions) in harms way. we'll never know where the deterrence point was though.

I think your instinct is right in terms of strategic benefit vis a vis Russia. However, I'm less certain whether international relations just got harder or easier on the whole (ie, factoring in China). Europe gonna Europe.

 

[Aardvark86]

My bad-I misread "The reality is President Putin did not take the threats of deterrence seriously enough," she told MPs. as her saying President Biden!!!! LOL. And was definitely like WTF?!

all good bro.

 

[Aardvark86]

If W. Klitschko can beat a younger Bruce Lee, I'm pretty sure he can beat Putin...



Now PLEASE SOMEBODY GET THEIR SON TO CREATE A PUTIN CHARACTER IN EA SPORTS AND RUN/POST THE SIMULATION!!!!

 

[86Hawkeye]

 

[tumorboy]

There are plenty of lessons to be learned from this. I have significant doubts that the West could’ve done much more to prevent Putin invading, short of agreeing to his “terms”.

However, I do think we should’ve been arming Ukraine much more than we did until very recently.

The bottom line is that Putin has done more for western unity than anything the US could’ve done. This makes this entire situation a major strategic win (notwithstanding the human costs for Ukraine).

Putin's own KGB strategy has united the West. Mass poisonings , the UK radiation terrorist incident, a couple mysterious downed airlines. If he had been even remotely less aggressive with his KGB tactics. The West wouldn't be as aggressive towards Urkaine.

 

[h-hawk]

View embedded media

 

[lucas80]

Kids are so, so amazing and resilient. In the middle of war, in the middle of being torn from their homes and an uncertain future, they still find joy and play time. This hurt my heart:

View embedded media

View embedded media

🥲, 😊 and 👊 all at the same time.

 

[Joes Place]

Aside from the great information here, this thread has also helped me double my ignore list on this site. lol

 

[lucas80]

When did Russia attack the US? Do you care about what is happening in Yemen for the past several years?

1. Long time poster with only a few posts. Check.
2. Stupid take designed to misdirect a thread. Check.
3. Mods cleaned out a lot of trash last week. Check.
Just trying to decide if we have a long time lurker which has been keeping his stupid in check, or we have a new bot/troll on duty?

 

[h-hawk]

SIAP

 

[86Hawkeye]

I agree that arming sooner would have helped. I also think there was room for putting US people on the ground of a defensive nature would have helped, in that introducing the risk of killing americans could have affected the calculus. yes. I am talking about putting americans (carefully chosen in terms of functions) in harms way. we'll never know where the deterrence point was though.

I think your instinct is right in terms of strategic benefit vis a vis Russia. However, I'm less certain whether international relations just got harder or easier on the whole (ie, factoring in China). Europe gonna Europe.

Well, the world is going to be divided into two camps again. The west can handle that just as we handled it before.

 

[JupiterHawk]

View embedded media

SIAP

I am hoping their cruise missiles do not work well either.

 

[torbee]

 

[tarheelbybirth]

This is a ludicrous take. Not only have propaganda and information always been a part of warfare, the fleeting effects of social media meme-bombs, at the end of the day, are considerably less enduring than the destructive effects of real ones for purposes of gaining and holding territory.

As one who works in the WaPo building, however, it is completely unsurprising that their army of skinny-pants wearing twentysomethings would think that their preferred mode of lazy newsgathering (ie, follow twitter and hop on something somebody else is saying) would be of profound strategic effect. But it will validate their rather soft egos.

(Case in point: the WaPo has removed by-lines from its Ukraine stories, for fear of Russian prosecution. To that, I say: (i) how courageous of you - or as your t-shirts say, "democracy dies in darkness"; and (ii) what chutzpah to think that you'd actually be anything resembling a priority for them right about now.)

LOL...you think Tokyo Rose had anything like the reach of modern communications? That's kinda dumb. As for the removal of by-lines, I guess you missed that the Russian Parliament passed and Putin signed a measure criminalizing any talk of the Ukraine "situation" that in any way conflicts with the Russian govt's pronouncments. That would include calling it a "war" or an "invasion". The barely independent media sources in Russia are busily scrubbing their files to remove anything that would get them in trouble. Any western journalist trying to cover the situation FROM Russia could be arrested based on how they present their story even in the western press.

 

[torbee]

LOL...you think Tokyo Rose had anything like the reach of modern communications? That's kinda dumb. As for the removal of by-lines, I guess you missed that the Russian Parliament passed and Putin signed a measure criminalizing any talk of the Ukraine "situtation" that in any way that conflicts with the Russian govt's pronouncments. That would include calling it a "war" or an "invasion". The barely independent media sources in Russia are busily scrubbing their files to remove anything that would get them in trouble. Any western journalist trying to cover the situation FROM Russia could be arrested based on how they present their story even in the western press.

The information war is vitally important and currently UKR and the West are winning by a large margin.

 

[RileyHawk]

I said nothing about blaming Biden, nor did the BBC post.

By any measure, the pre-invasion "deterrents" have to be viewed as a failure because, like, you know, they didn't deter anything. Whether that's because the west misjudged putin's character, or the deterrents (or really, threats thereof) weren't strong enough is irrelevant. The simple point is, they didn't deter, and how refreshingly British to acknowledge that, even at this early stage of the game.

To be clear, as I've said from my earliest participation in this thread, I "get" that the way diplomacy works is to minimize escalation, and I "get" that the west's ultimate strategy was not to lend credence to Russia's claim of being under threat from the west. So I understand our approach, and it was not at all irrational. It was an absolutely fair judgment call. But it has proved demonstrably ineffective, at tremendous human cost.

Or there was no deterring this invasion. SMH

 

[Aardvark86]

Well, the world is going to be divided into two camps again. The west can handle that just as we handled it before.

Well, I hope we don't use the same playbook, because chi and rus are different animals in terms of economic power. And we're probably not the same animal either in that respect

 

[Aardvark86]

The information war is vitally important and currently UKR and the West are winning by a large margin.

Important Yes (maybe not vitally so) and yes, but the mentality in this building sees it as an end in itself. Which it is most definitively not.

and of course, judging by some of the posts/tweets in this thread, Putin may be - let's see, what's a fair term? - "holding his own" on the information war on his home front.

 

[Aardvark86]

Or there was no deterring this invasion. SMH

that is certainly a possibility, though I tend to doubt it.

But perhaps more importantly, if an event were prospectively undeterrable, and that event had a substantial probability of significant loss of life, wouldn't game theory suggest an even more aggressive response?

 

[Tom Paris]

Putin is in fact a badass (not just training but involvement in development of Russian hand/hand tactics), but at 65, he ain't beating either of the Klitschko's.

Vlad Klitschko does have a weak chin, though.

 

[Phenomenally Frantastic]

More war crimes.

 

[Phenomenally Frantastic]

Morbid to think, but how many of these AirBnB hosts have been or are going to be murdered by Russian Nazis before this is all said and done?

 

[Aardvark86]

Vlad Klitschko does have a weak chin, though.

i'm sure that's been taken into account for his avatar.

 

[Tom Paris]

If W. Klitschko can beat a younger Bruce Lee, I'm pretty sure he can beat Putin...

View embedded media

Now PLEASE SOMEBODY GET THEIR SON TO CREATE A PUTIN CHARACTER IN EA SPORTS AND RUN/POST THE SIMULATION!!!!

Lee's first kick to the head in round 1 would have knocked Klitschko silly.

 

[Phenomenally Frantastic]

Men & women with consciouses.

 

[86Hawkeye]

 

[SivHawk]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/proud-band-ukrainian-troops-holds-123259027.html

 

[golfinghawkeye]

Vlad Klitschko does have a weak chin, though.

Reading this made me instantly think of this fight. Apologies for the ot post.

 

[Tom Paris]

Reading this made me instantly think of this fight. Apologies for the ot post.

View embedded media

I watched that one live.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Important Yes (maybe not vitally so) and yes, but the mentality in this building sees it as an end in itself. Which it is most definitively not.

and of course, judging by some of the posts/tweets in this thread, Putin may be - let's see, what's a fair term? - "holding his own" on the information war on his home front.

I'm trying to understand your take. The information front is absolutely vital - a massive loss of support at home was critical in forcing the Russian withdrawl from Afghanistan. Perhaps I'm just reading it wrong, but it just seems that you have an issue with journalists doing what journalists do...at least so far as it doesn't fit into your criteria (whatever they are). Getting info out about pretty much everything IS the end in itself if you're a journalist. What else would it be?

As for that second claim..."holding his own" on his home front? I guess if jailing thousands of his own people with more to come while streets are teeming with protestors qualifies...sure...that's a solid assessment. *shrug*

 

[golfinghawkeye]

I watched that one live.

So did I. While not Buster Douglas beating Tyson shocking I was surprised. I was a big fan of the Klitschko brothers and more so now.

 

[Hammer93]

I'm trying to understand your take. The information front is absolutely vital - a massive loss of support at home was critical in forcing the Russian withdrawl from Afghanistan. Perhaps I'm just reading it wrong, but it just seems that you have an issue with journalists doing what journalists do...at least so far as it doesn't fit into your criteria (whatever they are). Getting info out about pretty much everything IS the end in itself if you're a journalist. What else would it be?

As for that second claim..."holding his own" on his home front? I guess if jailing thousands of his own people with more to come while streets are teeming with protestors qualifies...sure...that's a solid assessment. *shrug*

Journalism has been trash for several years now. Very few sources for good information.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Journalism has been trash for several years now. Very few sources for good information.

More lol...there are plenty of good sources and relying on multiple sources increases your chances of getting a reasonable story. I'm not going to ask what you claim are the "few sources" left.