Russia invades Ukraine

[GusB]

According to this:

Access Restricted

Kremlin ‘stockpiling bodies of Ukrainian soldiers’ to use in ‘false flag’ attack on Chernobyl​

Kyiv’s military intelligence unit believes Vladimir Putin plans to release radioactive waste and present the dead as ‘killed saboteurs’


Russia is stockpiling corpses of dead Ukrainian soldiers to plant as evidence in a false flag operation at Chernobyl, Ukrainian officials have warned.
Kyiv's Military Intelligence Directorate said Vladimir Putin planned to release radioactive waste in what would amount to a “terrorist attack”.
In a statement, it said Kremlin forces had been seen laying the groundwork by collecting “fake evidence” to blame Ukraine for a nuclear leak.
“Russian car refrigerators collecting the bodies of dead Ukrainian defenders were spotted near the Antonov airport in Hostomel,” it said. “There is a possibility that they will be presented as killed saboteurs in the Chernobyl zone.”
Russian forces have been in charge of the disused power plant since capturing it in the first few days of the war.
Ukrainian officials say the occupiers have refused to let the facility's repairmen and engineers back on to the site. They warned there was now just 48 hours' worth of diesel left with which to power its emergency generators.
Kyiv says saboteurs posing as Belarusian nuclear experts have been brought in to prepare a “man-made catastrophe for which the occupiers will try to shift responsibility to Ukraine”.
But the Kremlin claims they are technicians who were sent in to restore power to the derelict plant.

If this is true then it would seem that they're prepared to stoop fairly low in order to try and make people believe their side of events.

 

[yorksrob]

We will see through the lies.

 

[Bevan Price]

This has already happened, the Milerovo air base was attacked early in the conflict. The Ukrainians don't have much more to lose from such attacks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Mar 2022 ==


You have to question why any volunteer would want to go, considering they probably don't have the same level of Russian state propaganda inundating them and can see the horrors of the situation themselves. Is it possibly just Putin's face-saving, righteously grandiose-looking response to foreign fighters choosing to fight for Ukraine?

Edit, I've just seen some video footage of these volunteers and I conclude that it is nothing more than a propaganda stunt, as it was simply what looked like the Syrian Army with some Russian flags. I doubt many, if any, will ever see Donbass.

Probably "volunteers" sent by Assad as the price for Russia helping him to kill Syrian civilians.

 

[brad465]

I don't get the logic of that. If the reports are true, and assuming the Belarusian military commanders aren't complete idiots, surely there's no way that they'd fail to twig that it was the Russians not the Ukrainians, attacking. And if anything that would make them even more disinclined to get involved on Russia's side.

I imagine this was something that Putin never thought of at all a few weeks ago, let alone as a "tactic" in his invasion. But things are going badly enough for Russia at the moment that he's resorting to desperate measures that no more credible military would normally consider sensible.

 

[Roast Veg]

Ukraine continues to win the information war by second guessing the Russian lies before they appear. Who knows what propaganda they have prevented with their good social media skills, and long may it continue.

 

[Shrop]

I imagine this was something that Putin never thought of at all a few weeks ago, let alone as a "tactic" in his invasion. But things are going badly enough for Russia at the moment that he's resorting to desperate measures that no more credible military would normally consider sensible.

We’ve heard all sorts of stories about things going badly for Russia, but are they really? The highly publicised 40 mile long military convoy north of Kiev has had huge media coverage, with many headline-grabbing comments about breakdowns, lack of supplies, low morale etc. all designed to make people buy the papers in hope that Putin was failing. But no, this is just media exaggerations and general spouting, falling into Putin’s trap of deception.

When I first started taking an interest in what the Russians were about, I was in my early teens, on a 3 week visit to Czechoslovakia with my father in 1972. We were shown some of the horrors of the Russian invasion of Prague just a few years previously in 1968, but what really stuck in my mind was the words of our host, my Dad’s “pen-friend” (as correspondents used to be called back then). He asked if played chess (which I did), and said I should take note that the best players in the world were Russians. He said this was due to the way they think, they are naturally very good at strategy, thinking of the long game, using a myriad of tactics along the way. And so 50 years later, when Putin’s 40 mile convoy got going again after playing near dead for many, many days, to me there was no surprise at all.

We need to be very, very careful if we believe for a moment that we know Putin is up to, or that Russia is weakening. We can guess, and I would love to believe that they are at the point of collapse, but sadly I think there is a long way to go. Too many of our know-all journalists write about how Putin is weakening, and others subscribe to this thinking, but we guess at our peril. This isn’t over until it’s over, and until then we have the most horrendous and heartbreaking stories to see and hear.

 

[yorksrob]

We’ve heard all sorts of stories about things going badly for Russia, but are they really? The highly publicised 40 mile long military convoy north of Kiev has had huge media coverage, with many headline-grabbing comments about breakdowns, lack of supplies, low morale etc. all designed to make people buy the papers in hope that Putin was failing. But no, this is just media exaggerations and general spouting, falling into Putin’s trap of deception.

When I first started taking an interest in what the Russians were about, I was in my early teens, on a 3 week visit to Czechoslovakia with my father in 1972. We were shown some of the horrors of the Russian invasion of Prague just a few years previously in 1968, but what really stuck in my mind was the words of our host, my Dad’s “pen-friend” (as correspondents used to be called back then). He asked if played chess (which I did), and said I should take note that the best players in the world were Russians. He said this was due to the way they think, they are naturally very good at strategy, thinking of the long game, using a myriad of tactics along the way. And so 50 years later, when Putin’s 40 mile convoy got going again after playing near dead for many, many days, to me there was no surprise at all.

We need to be very, very careful if we believe for a moment that we know Putin is up to, or that Russia is weakening. We can guess, and I would love to believe that they are at the point of collapse, but sadly I think there is a long way to go. Too many of our know-all journalists write about how Putin is weakening, and others subscribe to this thinking, but we guess at our peril. This isn’t over until it’s over, and until then we have the most horrendous and heartbreaking stories to see and hear.

True. The enemy isn't dead until it's gone home.

I can't imagine the Ukrainians assuming it's over until the Russians are gone.

 

[XAM2175]

Flat wagons recalled to prevent use in invasion of Ukraine

Source
A purely symbolic action, IMHO...

I think the key rationale is much more likely to be "to prevent their being expropriated", actually.

 

[Bantamzen]

We’ve heard all sorts of stories about things going badly for Russia, but are they really? The highly publicised 40 mile long military convoy north of Kiev has had huge media coverage, with many headline-grabbing comments about breakdowns, lack of supplies, low morale etc. all designed to make people buy the papers in hope that Putin was failing. But no, this is just media exaggerations and general spouting, falling into Putin’s trap of deception.

When I first started taking an interest in what the Russians were about, I was in my early teens, on a 3 week visit to Czechoslovakia with my father in 1972. We were shown some of the horrors of the Russian invasion of Prague just a few years previously in 1968, but what really stuck in my mind was the words of our host, my Dad’s “pen-friend” (as correspondents used to be called back then). He asked if played chess (which I did), and said I should take note that the best players in the world were Russians. He said this was due to the way they think, they are naturally very good at strategy, thinking of the long game, using a myriad of tactics along the way. And so 50 years later, when Putin’s 40 mile convoy got going again after playing near dead for many, many days, to me there was no surprise at all.

We need to be very, very careful if we believe for a moment that we know Putin is up to, or that Russia is weakening. We can guess, and I would love to believe that they are at the point of collapse, but sadly I think there is a long way to go. Too many of our know-all journalists write about how Putin is weakening, and others subscribe to this thinking, but we guess at our peril. This isn’t over until it’s over, and until then we have the most horrendous and heartbreaking stories to see and hear.

Is it going well for Russia? Given the claim that the Russian government are putting out about as US biological weapons in Ukraine, or potentially having to draft in recruits from beyond their borders I'd say that sound more like a regime that expected a cake walk but instead found a s*** storm.

 

[Shrop]

Is it going well for Russia? Given the claim that the Russian government are putting out about as US biological weapons in Ukraine, or potentially having to draft in recruits from beyond their borders I'd say that sound more like a regime that expected a cake walk but instead found a s*** storm.

Whilst it's not turning out to be a walk in the park for the Russians, neither is it going as badly as many reports have suggested. Only when the deaths and injuries have stopped will it feel like they really are doing badly. Until then, sadly, the worst they are is like a wounded animal, but unfortunately not wounded anywhere near enough to stop the carnage.

 

[tommy2215]

We’ve heard all sorts of stories about things going badly for Russia, but are they really? The highly publicised 40 mile long military convoy north of Kiev has had huge media coverage, with many headline-grabbing comments about breakdowns, lack of supplies, low morale etc. all designed to make people buy the papers in hope that Putin was failing. But no, this is just media exaggerations and general spouting, falling into Putin’s trap of deception.

An odd take. Have you talked to Putin? Where is your proof everything is going as planned for Russia? Every bit of evidence so far is that this is has been a disaster.

Whilst it's not turning out to be a walk in the park for the Russians, neither is it going as badly as many reports have suggested. Only when the deaths and injuries have stopped will it feel like they really are doing badly. Until then, sadly, the worst they are is like a wounded animal, but unfortunately not wounded anywhere near enough to stop the carnage.

Sorry, have you been at the battlefield? Did Putin give you the plans for his invasion?

 

[YorkshireBear]

An odd take. Have you talked to Putin? Where is your proof everything is going as planned for Russia? Every bit of evidence so far is that this is has been a disaster.

I'm not sure that's the point that was being made. More that we also don't know it's going badly cos we don't actually know there plan for certain.

Although I tend to think the evidence says the opposite.

 

[Bantamzen]

Whilst it's not turning out to be a walk in the park for the Russians, neither is it going as badly as many reports have suggested. Only when the deaths and injuries have stopped will it feel like they really are doing badly. Until then, sadly, the worst they are is like a wounded animal, but unfortunately not wounded anywhere near enough to stop the carnage.

I'm not sure what reports you allude to here, perhaps you could elaborate and provide evidence to back up that statement?

However the very fact that there is death and carnage, as well as the seemingly more desperate attempts by Putin & his administration to manufacture a valid reason for all of this suggests that it really isn't going anything like as well as they had planned for, even in their worst case scenarios. Rather than chess, think of this as a game of poker. Right now Putin is shifting uncomfortably in his chair, constantly re-checking his hand whilst his mouth displays a subconscious but still noticeable twitch.

 

[Cloud Strife]

It starts to become clear what the Russians have planned. They made some progress overnight towards the south of Kyiv, and now they're starting to attack Dnipro and other cities that had previously been ignored. It seems more and more obvious that they will simply raze Kyiv if they don't surrender.

The Sarajevo scenario becomes more and more likely by the day in many cities. The question is whether the Russians have enough forces to encircle these cities - and whether they can survive constant counterattacks from the rear. We need to keep pouring military aid into Ukraine, although I suspect that the Russians have underestimated the amount of military/civilian support from the West.

This could well be a prolonged war as long as the Russians don't control Western Ukraine and therefore they don't control the Polish/Slovak borders.

 

[AlterEgo]

So what's the next lie? Probably drop chemicals in and then claim they've hit a hidden American warehouse full of the stuff.

Yes I was thinking this. This war really is impossibly horrid.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Mar 2022 ==

It starts to become clear what the Russians have planned. They made some progress overnight towards the south of Kyiv, and now they're starting to attack Dnipro and other cities that had previously been ignored. It seems more and more obvious that they will simply raze Kyiv if they don't surrender.

The Sarajevo scenario becomes more and more likely by the day in many cities. The question is whether the Russians have enough forces to encircle these cities - and whether they can survive constant counterattacks from the rear. We need to keep pouring military aid into Ukraine, although I suspect that the Russians have underestimated the amount of military/civilian support from the West.

This could well be a prolonged war as long as the Russians don't control Western Ukraine and therefore they don't control the Polish/Slovak borders.

Western Ukraine and places like Lviv don’t interest them much and they don’t wish to control those places after the war. As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits and in any case forms the basis of the Russian cultural claim to the region as far as Kiev.

This is clearly an attempt by Russia to enforce a buffer zone they felt had been promised but denied by NATO. It is unpleasant to think about but in 50 years, history students will be asked to write essays about this conflict and there will be exam questions about the role of NATO and the USA post-1991 generating the pretext for war. Students will receive no marks for insisting NATO was beautifully wise and honest all the time and no responsibility can be attached to their actions.

The entire conflict is so profoundly depressing. Nothing detracts from Russia’s agency or Putin’s bloodthirsty actions, which amount to war crimes. But it is worth looking at things like Putin’s visit to Ground Zero after September 11th and wondering how on earth relations 21 years later have become so appallingly sour.

 

[Annetts key]

In view of the current war where Russia has invaded Ukraine, Dr. John Campbell talks with Vlad Vexler about the state of mind of Vladimir Putin and asks the question

Putin's mind, is he mad?

They discuss what motivates Putin and talk about the factors that they think are influencing Putin.

Embedded YouTube video:

Direct link to the video on YouTube

 

[DustyBin]

Yes I was thinking this. This war really is impossibly horrid.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Mar 2022 ==


Western Ukraine and places like Lviv don’t interest them much and they don’t wish to control those places after the war. As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits and in any case forms the basis of the Russian cultural claim to the region as far as Kiev.

This is clearly an attempt by Russia to enforce a buffer zone they felt had been promised but denied by NATO. It is unpleasant to think about but in 50 years, history students will be asked to write essays about this conflict and there will be exam questions about the role of NATO and the USA post-1991 generating the pretext for war. Students will receive no marks for insisting NATO was beautifully wise and honest all the time and no responsibility can be attached to their actions.

The entire conflict is so profoundly depressing. Nothing detracts from Russia’s agency or Putin’s bloodthirsty actions, which amount to war crimes. But it is worth looking at things like Putin’s visit to Ground Zero after September 11th and wondering how on earth relations 21 years later have become so appallingly sour.

I don’t think this is a popular view but I generally agree with you. Nothing can or will detract from Putin’s appalling actions, but the West really hasn’t done anything to recognise, let alone address, Russian concerns over the last 20 years. Or as Lavrov once put it, “you listen but you’re not hearing us” (or words to that effect).

 

[yorksrob]

Yes I was thinking this. This war really is impossibly horrid.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Mar 2022 ==


Western Ukraine and places like Lviv don’t interest them much and they don’t wish to control those places after the war. As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits and in any case forms the basis of the Russian cultural claim to the region as far as Kiev.

This is clearly an attempt by Russia to enforce a buffer zone they felt had been promised but denied by NATO. It is unpleasant to think about but in 50 years, history students will be asked to write essays about this conflict and there will be exam questions about the role of NATO and the USA post-1991 generating the pretext for war. Students will receive no marks for insisting NATO was beautifully wise and honest all the time and no responsibility can be attached to their actions.

The entire conflict is so profoundly depressing. Nothing detracts from Russia’s agency or Putin’s bloodthirsty actions, which amount to war crimes. But it is worth looking at things like Putin’s visit to Ground Zero after September 11th and wondering how on earth relations 21 years later have become so appallingly sour.

The only thing creating a pretext for this war is Russia's nationalist tenancy.

You try to shift the blame to the west (as always) but in reality the expansion of NATO is just normal countries wanting some form of defence against their untrustworthy neighbour.

 

[AlterEgo]

The only thing creating a pretext for this war is Russia's nationalist tenancies.

You try to shift the blame to the west (as always) but in reality the expansion of NATO is just normal countries wanting some form of defence against their untrustworthy neighbour.

I do not try to shift the blame to the west, but merely say that causes of war are rarely simple and in the round there are myriad factors.

You would not get very far by simply saying “Serbia and Germany started it, nothing else to discuss” when asked to comment on the causes of World War One - one of the most terrific, wasteful, nonsensical evils of the modern era - even though the Serbs and Germans were totally mad on ethnic nationalism. There’s quite a bit more to it than that.

Try to imagine what historians will say about this war in 50 years. Try to imagine how the US might feel about Russian-sphere military bases within touching distance of its borders. Try to imagine if the US was a great power plonked in Central Asia with 14 land borders with friends and enemies and how that would affect its geopolitics. Try to imagine how you might feel about your fellow man if this country was dragged into a war:

- on a totally false pretext
- on the basis that you were at immediate harm if no action was taken
- where the objective was regime change
- in a country where there were heavy mineral deposits
- where the invasion and subsequent war cost hundreds of thousands of lives
- which was supported by almost nobody, not even some of your close allies

I’m sorry, but your relentless insistence on there being only one cause for the conflict doesn’t make much sense, especially when you roundly discount literally 100% of the Russian side of events. Life is just not like that and neither is war. Again, none of this justifies the illegal, murderous, cynical invasion of a sovereign country by Russian forces, which amount to war crimes, and every dead Russian soldier is a success in this war.

 

[Typhoon]

True. The enemy isn't dead until it's gone home.

I can't imagine the Ukrainians assuming it's over until the Russians are gone.

I would have thought that the Ukrainians won't even assume that it is over even if the enemy retires to a dacha somewhere on the East Siberian Sea. It was too easy for Russia to reek havoc in Ukraine - bombing at least one hospital, destroying residential districts, killing non-combatants in their hundreds, causing others to flee for their lives, attacking nuclear power plants. No need to conquer, just turn parts of the country into a wasteland. Even if the Russian troops go home right this minute, the impact will be felt well after my lifetime. This is so much worse than Crimea, it will take decades at least before Ukrainians will be able to trust Russia again. Putin may be able to achieve his objective in the long term simply because many Ukrainians will be simply too scared to return to their country, fearing a repetition, so installing a puppet government with the connivance of pro-Russian Ukrainians will be much easier to achieve.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Western Ukraine and places like Lviv don’t interest them much and they don’t wish to control those places after the war. As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits and in any case forms the basis of the Russian cultural claim to the region as far as Kiev.

This is clearly an attempt by Russia to enforce a buffer zone they felt had been promised but denied by NATO.

These two paragraphs seem to contradict each other: The first implies that Russia's actions are motivated by wanting to control natural resources plus restore greater Russia, the second states that they are motivated by wanting a buffer zone. I'm not sure they can both be true at the same time.

My own sense is that the buffer zone argument is just an excuse: Putin wants Ukraine for Nationalistic reasons plus possibly the raw materials, and there's nothing NATO could have done that would have prevented Putin from wanting to invade Ukraine to satisfy his nationalism.

 

[yorksrob]

I do not try to shift the blame to the west, but merely say that causes of war are rarely simple and in the round there are myriad factors.

You would not get very far by simply saying “Serbia and Germany started it, nothing else to discuss” when asked to comment on the causes of World War One - one of the most terrific, wasteful, nonsensical evils of the modern era - even though the Serbs and Germans were totally mad on ethnic nationalism. There’s quite a bit more to it than that.

Try to imagine what historians will say about this war in 50 years. Try to imagine how the US might feel about Russian-sphere military bases within touching distance of its borders. Try to imagine if the US was a great power plonked in Central Asia with 14 land borders with friends and enemies and how that would affect its geopolitics. Try to imagine how you might feel about your fellow man if this country was dragged into a war:

- on a totally false pretext
- on the basis that you were at immediate harm if no action was taken
- where the objective was regime change
- in a country where there were heavy mineral deposits
- where the invasion and subsequent war cost hundreds of thousands of lives
- which was supported by almost nobody, not even some of your close allies

I’m sorry, but your relentless insistence on there being only one cause for the conflict doesn’t make much sense, especially when you roundly discount literally 100% of the Russian side of events. Life is just not like that and neither is war. Again, none of this justifies the illegal, murderous, cynical invasion of a sovereign country by Russian forces, which amount to war crimes, and every dead Russian soldier is a success in this war.

I think you'll find that a large number of countries were dragged into various incredibly destructive wars during the last century.

 

[philosopher]

Yes I was thinking this. This war really is impossibly horrid.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Mar 2022 ==


Western Ukraine and places like Lviv don’t interest them much and they don’t wish to control those places after the war. As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits and in any case forms the basis of the Russian cultural claim to the region as far as Kiev.

This is clearly an attempt by Russia to enforce a buffer zone they felt had been promised but denied by NATO. It is unpleasant to think about but in 50 years, history students will be asked to write essays about this conflict and there will be exam questions about the role of NATO and the USA post-1991 generating the pretext for war. Students will receive no marks for insisting NATO was beautifully wise and honest all the time and no responsibility can be attached to their actions.

The entire conflict is so profoundly depressing. Nothing detracts from Russia’s agency or Putin’s bloodthirsty actions, which amount to war crimes. But it is worth looking at things like Putin’s visit to Ground Zero after September 11th and wondering how on earth relations 21 years later have become so appallingly sour.

I do sort of understand Russia’s ’buffer zone’ argument. However trying to to improve your country’s security by trying to force neighbouring countries to be demilitarised and invading them if they do not comply is in my view likely to backfire. All it will do is making other neighbouring countries anxious and to beef up their defences and thus increasing tensions. You can see this with the very united response from NATO and EU to Putin’s invasion.

There must be loads of countries that have a poor geographic defensive position. France for example can easily be invaded from the east and historically suffered frequent invasions from Germany, such as the Franco Prussian War in 1870 and the two world wars. For countries in such as situation, their security would be better served by establishing good relations with their neighbours rather than continually threatening them or worse invading them. France and Germany after World War Two concluded they had to be friendly to each other and as a result they have not fought since 1945 and now relations between the two countries are very good.

Russia establishing good relations with Ukraine, the EU and NATO rather then continually seeing parts of Eastern Europe as buffer to protect Russia would far better aid Russia’s security.

 

[yorksrob]

I would have thought that the Ukrainians won't even assume that it is over even if the enemy retires to a dacha somewhere on the East Siberian Sea. It was too easy for Russia to reek havoc in Ukraine - bombing at least one hospital, destroying residential districts, killing non-combatants in their hundreds, causing others to flee for their lives, attacking nuclear power plants. No need to conquer, just turn parts of the country into a wasteland. Even if the Russian troops go home right this minute, the impact will be felt well after my lifetime. This is so much worse than Crimea, it will take decades at least before Ukrainians will be able to trust Russia again. Putin may be able to achieve his objective in the long term simply because many Ukrainians will be simply too scared to return to their country, fearing a repetition, so installing a puppet government with the connivance of pro-Russian Ukrainians will be much easier to achieve.

Yes, this will poison relations between Russia and it's immediate neighbours for many years to come.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don’t think this is a popular view but I generally agree with you. Nothing can or will detract from Putin’s appalling actions, but the West really hasn’t done anything to recognise, let alone address, Russian concerns over the last 20 years. Or as Lavrov once put it, “you listen but you’re not hearing us” (or words to that effect).

The problem is that - as is now very evident, the concerns of Putin's regime have never been the welfare of the Russian people or anything like that: It has always been about restoring an some kind of authoritarian USSR (albeit a non-communist one), with Putin's cronies thereby able to keep power and enrich themselves permanently. They have for a long time seen the very concept of liberal democracy as an intrinsic threat to their power and will do whatever they can to undermine it everywhere - as they have been doing for years. So while I agree with you to the extent that you have to talk to people and try to understand them, the concerns of the Russian regime are simply not concerns that we can or should remotely entertain.

 

[oldman]

Try to imagine how the US might feel about Russian-sphere military bases within touching distance of its borders.

Try to imagine how the EU might feel about Russian-sphere military bases within touching distance of its borders (and with a history of crossing them).

If they want a demilitarised Ukraine and object to NATO in east-central Europe, how about a demilitarised Belarus and demilitarised zones in southern and north-west Russia?

 

[Annetts key]

I do not try to shift the blame to the west, but merely say that causes of war are rarely simple and in the round there are myriad factors.

You would not get very far by simply saying “Serbia and Germany started it, nothing else to discuss” when asked to comment on the causes of World War One - one of the most terrific, wasteful, nonsensical evils of the modern era - even though the Serbs and Germans were totally mad on ethnic nationalism. There’s quite a bit more to it than that.

Try to imagine what historians will say about this war in 50 years. Try to imagine how the US might feel about Russian-sphere military bases within touching distance of its borders. Try to imagine if the US was a great power plonked in Central Asia with 14 land borders with friends and enemies and how that would affect its geopolitics. Try to imagine how you might feel about your fellow man if this country was dragged into a war:

- on a totally false pretext
- on the basis that you were at immediate harm if no action was taken
- where the objective was regime change
- in a country where there were heavy mineral deposits
- where the invasion and subsequent war cost hundreds of thousands of lives
- which was supported by almost nobody, not even some of your close allies

I’m sorry, but your relentless insistence on there being only one cause for the conflict doesn’t make much sense, especially when you roundly discount literally 100% of the Russian side of events. Life is just not like that and neither is war. Again, none of this justifies the illegal, murderous, cynical invasion of a sovereign country by Russian forces, which amount to war crimes, and every dead Russian soldier is a success in this war.

With all due respect, war is mainly about resources (often coal, oil, gas or similar) or power.

If the humans on this planet had taken notice of the environmental damage we are doing to our own planet, and had reduced our use of fossil fuels and plastics (and we can’t say we did not know, scientists have been telling us for over thirty years about climate change) we would have likely been in a different situation. Primarily because oil and other fossil fuels would have had far less value.

Norway has been a NATO member since 24 August 1949 (72 years ago). That’s before Putin was born.
Poland joined NATO on 12 March 1999 (23 years ago).
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania joined NATO on 29 March 2004 (18 years ago).

This war is far more likely due to Putin isolating himself and surrounding himself with yes men. Hence he has deluded himself. I don’t think he’s mad. But the threat to Russia (prior to Russia further invading Ukraine this year) only existed in Putin’s head.

If the military of the ‘west’ was such threat, why would so many ‘western’ companies trade with and set up operations in Russia? Why would so many tourists visit Russia? Why would so many Russians visit countries outside Russia?

A dictator becoming deluded and suffering from paranoia is not unusual. Then they make ill informed decisions. The vastly different situation in Ukraine for the Russian forces compared to what Putin expected clearly shows the disconnect between the reality that existed and what was in Putin’s head seventeen days ago.

 

[AlterEgo]

These two paragraphs seem to contradict each other: The first implies that Russia's actions are motivated by wanting to control natural resources plus restore greater Russia, the second states that they are motivated by wanting a buffer zone. I'm not sure they can both be true at the same time.

My own sense is that the buffer zone argument is just an excuse: Putin wants Ukraine for Nationalistic reasons plus possibly the raw materials, and there's nothing NATO could have done that would have prevented Putin from wanting to invade Ukraine to satisfy his nationalism.

I meant rather that Russia doesn’t have much interest in controlling *all* of Ukraine, the end game is probably a Belarus-style client state of about half of Ukraine’s current territory. Russia has clearly overtly nationalist and irredentist claims over Ukraine but I suspect it wants to leave a neutral rump of western Ukraine as part of a peace deal to act as a “buffer”.

 

[Annetts key]

The problem is that - as is now very evident, the concerns of Putin's regime have never been the welfare of the Russian people or anything like that: It has always been about restoring an some kind of authoritarian USSR (albeit a non-communist one), with Putin's cronies thereby able to keep power and enrich themselves permanently. They have for a long time seen the very concept of liberal democracy as an intrinsic threat to their power and will do whatever they can to undermine it everywhere - as they have been doing for years. So while I agree with you to the extent that you have to talk to people and try to understand them, the concerns of the Russian regime are simply not concerns that we can or should remotely entertain.

This, I agree with.

 

[najaB]

As has been mentioned in the thread, eastern Ukraine is rich with fossil fuel deposits...

So is western Ukraine for what it's worth. There are two main deposits: on land to the east and in the waters to the west.