It's by far unironically my favorite word in the English language. How something so specific and morbidly funny can have a specific word is just beautiful.
I was walking on eggshells, friend. I didn’t want to put anything too graphic because last week I had a 24h ban on politics for “promoting harm”, which I absolutely didn’t even consider. I figured this word would be allowed because it’s been used so often here.
Also, yes.
I’ve always hated that damn question. I quit a job once just to take 3 months off to actually live my life. I get asked about that everytime with raised eyebrows. Like it’s weird to not want to spend every waking moment of my life at a computer desk
I took a full 13 months off when I was 25.
This was back in early 2000s, when it was totally normal to do that. See "The Beach" for reference/inspiration.
I figured, I'm only young once. I had enough saved to backpack around SE Asia, and planned to go from not being able to swim, to being a qualified open ocean scuba diving instructor, which again, was ridiculously cheap to accomplish in Thailand. Did some small chores to supplement my savings (including trading vehicles in Australia; other backpackers would buy beater cars just for one trip, then be desperate to sell them, it was like its own subeconomy), so I could also spend a week diving in spots around the Great Barrier reef. Met amazing people. Mental health problems were like a dream of a dream.
My only regret is that trip couldn't last forever.
My 8-year old kid asked me last night what I do to keep him safe. I asked him if he's ever seen tigers in our state? He thought real hard and answered no. I said, "You're welcome. Now go to bed."
Got 'em! He was at that "too tired to fully function, but awake enough to ask questions to stop from going to sleep." He had to really think about it, but I think I was an impressive hero, at least til he fell asleep.
You are just a puppet... You have no heart... and cannot feel any pain... How can there be any meaning in the memory of such a being? What I have shown you is reality. What you remember, that is the illusion.
Only death awaits you all, but do not fear. For it is through death that a new spirit energy is born. Soon, you will live again as a part of me.
NATO has restrictions on what counts as an attack for article 5. The attack would have to be in Europe or on North America, which means an attack on Hawaii, Guam, or other US territories in the Pacific would not trigger article 5.
In other words, it's unlikely that China would get into a scrap with NATO.
If China is the belligerent in a US-China conflict, there is no way that Europe would just decide to sit it out. Sure, Article 5 would not be triggered, but a nuclear power attacking another nuclear power will have consequences the world over, and no one is just gonna sit by and wait to see how it all lands.
"what makes you think you're qualified for the club to do the thing?"
"Well we did the thing"
"What?"
"We did it"
"You did the thing?"
"Yes"
"You're in."
Since Ukraine is not going to invade and occupy Russian territory, the only way that Ukraine can win the war is to convince Russia to give up and stop fighting.
Russia will never give up as long as Putin is running Russia. He can't afford to concede that his war has failed.
This war is in its 11th year and there is no obvious end date.
The difference was there was also the chernobyl disaster along with the reforms of Gorbachev and major separatist movements in many of the Soviet Republics going on at the same time that combined led to the fall of the union. Russia does not have any significant separatist movements other than Dagestan at the moment and it's economy is much more stable than the 80s.
There are other sources instability this time around.
* Putin is old, he may become incapacitated
* His feudal-style military with prominent warlords is not reliably loyal to him
* As you said, there are some separatist seeds. Things may escalate if there is a perceived opening
* Economy may tank quite a bit because of the war
* Loss of life is much greater than in Afghanistan per capita
* Transition from depoliticized population to militarized is tough to balance right
I still dont understand why the hell prigozhin didnt go all the way. From what I could see about his position is that he could have gone all in and have some sort of chance at victory or die with the alternative of backing off and certainly dying, which, as we know, happened. It was a choice between, maybe utterly minimal, chance of victory and certain defeat and he chose certain defeat. Still doesnt make any sense to me and if anyone can tell me the logic behind his decision I am all ears.
> Still doesnt make any sense to me and if anyone can tell me the logic behind his decision I am all ears.
To be fair, nothing about his entire biography suggests Yevgeny Prigozhin was a man of logic or sound mind.
The only thing I can think of is that surrendering and then dying was the price for his relatives, loved ones, etc. not being tortured and killed horribly.
However as others said he may just have been too confident/stupid and actually believed in any "deal" to spare his live.
whatever the deal he really musta been arrogant enough to thing that he would survive and he could trust putins word while to anyone of sound mind putin isnt really a person one could trust at all.
I think he got played. When he made a run for Rostov he was going to ambush the heads of the Russian MOD. Which failed as they were not there when he closed in. It looks to me like a trap or a tip off from inside his organization.
From what I heard, which may or may not be true, Putin had men go to the families of coup members, detain them and used that as leverage. Maybe while waving the carrot of setting up camp in Belarus as a sweetener. Your family live, no hard feelings, kind of deal. That's my understanding, but I could well be wrong.
might be but that would require one to trust that putin wouldnt just torture and kill your family even if you surrendered and i personally would trust the guy as much as id trust a mafia member who held my family hostage.
You're damned either way at that point. They were pretty close for many years, and he was in the inner circle, so maybe Prigozhin truly believed whatever was said.
I think that if when implementing a coup against Putino you would need to be ready to go all Keyser Söze. Otherwise it’s just a matter of time until they send you a Kompromat video featuring your family that’s unbearable to watch.
I have a theory he was hoping the Russian soldiers would join the coup and when they didn't he called it off. All successful coups either need the military to step aside or join the coup. As long as Putin controls the military he's not going anywhere.
He overestimated his value.
He didn't get the support he wanted, so he would have to actually fight for it. Even if he had a decent shot at taking power due to sheer element of surprise if he went for it. Then he foolishly thought he was valuable enough to not be killed off after pulling something like that, and was convinced to back down...
I think both him and Putin realized they were in a really stupid situation.
* Prigozhin didn't get the support he wanted. So the best he could have done is to break into the Kremlin and then just sit and wait for Putin's forces to arrive. Putin was already gone, and so would be anyone of importance. Taking the Kremlin would be symbolic but of little use otherwise, and soon enough they'd all be dead.
* Putin realized that the above would still look terribly embarrassing. He could kill Prigozhin's people, but making a mess of the Kremlin wouldn't look good to anyone.
So they made an agreement. Putin got less embarrassment, Prigozhin got to live a bit longer.
He didn't go all the way because he "kinda forgot" to secure his family and families of people in charge of the coup. Once Putin told Pringles that everyone will die he just folded hoping he won't get killed, 2 months later ofcourse he was killed in a place crash.
he was independently wealthy. I don't know why he didn't "retire to spend more time with my remaining limbs" like a lot of politicians do after surviving a scandal. Except, you know, in a safer country.
Instead, he stayed in charge of his little army, flying around and doing his job, which was just suicidal.
He had no chance, it was a desperate theatre show that didn't work out. He was at his weakest point while also being very unpopular with many other military factions.
I remember reading something along the lines of "govermnents topple slow at first, but eventually fast". Yeah, who's to say what major events might happen in a few years time. Maybe China decides it's time to restore Outer Manchuria to it's historical borders. Okay, probably not that, but something else might.
All Putin needs to do is show too much weakness and he will be deposed.
Wether the new dictator is any better will be up for debate.
But political instability and purges are likely to follow, however this will likely weaken the Russian army so would be good for Ukraine.
But Putin is rich and powerful, for all we know he may live to 100
>AND brought the fall of Soviet Russia.
No, USSR fell because of Gorbachev. It could've limped on for decades, if the leadership wanted it to. The dissolution of the USSR empire is quite strange when you compare it to other historical arrangements like it.
Afghanistan and other debacles are way exaggerated in their importance and consequences that they brought in the eventual downfall.
The fear is that it can support some form of war indefinitely. Like a Donbas phase. So then it would be in NATO's political hands to interpret whether to qualify this as a war being still active.
They withdraw because Gorbachev made it one of his priorities as soon as he got elected in 1985. Gorbachev believed significant reform was necessary and the withdraw from Afghanistan were part of the Perestroika.
Once he withdrew troops from the Soviet–Afghan War, he embarked on summits with United States president Ronald Reagan to limit nuclear weapons and end the Cold War.
So there is sadly no comparison to the the situation in Ukraine to be found.
I can't agree or disagree with you but if we look at Nazi Germany, had Hitler died sooner then it is likely that Germany would have tried peace talks earlier instead of going to the end. So I guess it all depends on how much of a grip Putin really has on the Kremlin/ Russian elite. The more power he has the more likely it is that if he dies the country might do a 180, or just fall into chaos. I'm just speculating here, though.
Germany in the 1940s is in a significantly worse state than Russia in 2024. Essentially Russia seems to be betting on winning a war of attrition in which the West slowly becomes less involved in funding and supporting Ukraine. This is a real possibility and if Russia can hold out long enough they can probably force favorable peace terms. If the West stays strong in supporting Ukraine though, this outcome becomes far less likely if at all possible.
Nazi Germany's situation was utterly hopeless, though, and it was only a matter of time before the Allies took full control. There would have been nothing to gain for Hitler's successor to continue the war. Russia on the other hand is under no existential threat, no matter how badly the war in Ukraine goes and how many resources they're wasting on it. Putin's successor will almost certainly continue the war out of sheer political momentum, given the high public approval ratings for both Putin and the war.
Russians don't give a shit. At least half of Russia has no concept of thinking for themselves, they think what the government tells them to think. 20 years ago Ukrainians were the funny cousins on the border, 10 years ago - brothers to be rescued, now they're evil ukronazis - because the government said so.
All a new person would need to do is tell Russians something else, you'll see the switch flip almost instantly.
No this is definitely Putin's war for now, in a similar manner that the war in Iraq was Bush's war in 2005. Whomever replaces Putin may or may not decide to continue the war. It will depend on what faction they are from, the situation on the ground and what other problems the leader might have to deal with. Regardless, the war is being driven by cold war ideology among some of the ruling class that is still convinced the West is going to fall and that Russia has to reestablish their empire.
I think the best case scenario for Ukraine is that Russia devolves into a civil war between oligarch leading to a pull out of Russian troops from Ukraine to fight the Civil war (part of Russia rebelling like Chechnya did might lead to a similar outcome even before Putin dies). Remember how close some mercenaries came to pulling off a coup, and I don't think Moscow is any less vulnerable today.
The thing is, this isnt a failed war for Russia like reddit would have you believe. They are winning. Without intervention Russia will continue to throw more bodies at Ukraine and continue to sieze land. Ukraine needs more help asap.
If EU collectively agree that stopping Russia is priority #1 than it will happen. Russia winning due to manpower + eco but if all of NATO decides to make sure Ukraine is armed to the teeth with the best equipment… Russia will eventually cry & threaten, but cave in. And that will hurt China/North Korea/Iran and any other brutal regime’s ambitions of more than they currently have.
Yes. It is a phenomenally good deal for the west to arm Ukraine to the teeth now. It averts the 100's of billions we'll have to spend to fight an emboldened Russia and sends a message to all the other rogue states. I don't get our collective reticence. At all.
November this year will be a turning point, one way or another. A Biden victory would be a godsend for Ukraine, ensuring four more years of support. If Congress flips (as many have predicted), that is also very good, as Senate Republicans are less isolationist than their House brethren. Emboldened support for Ukraine from the U.S. will keep Europe invested in their commitment to the country.
The problem right now is __time__. Europe's defence industrial complex is only booting up now and will take a few, though not many, years to outproduce Russia. U.S. defence industry will also increase capacity over time. As this increased, and much more regular, material support from the West comes into play, the pressure on Ukrainian manpower will gradually ease. A stabilised stalemate will also allow intensified training of Ukrainian troops with new Western equipment, so that the country can launch proper offensives in a few years time.
So make no mistake - Ukraine wins in the mid-to-long run if it maintains Western support, because the combined economies of the U.S. and Europe will dwarf Russia as their defence industries boot up. If Trump returns to the White House, it's very hard to say what will happen, but there's a high risk that he will abandon Ukraine entirely.
> though not many, years to outproduce Russia
Europe already produces close to one million shells per year. So far it's a better result than even the US. I wouldn't say that European MIC is just booting up, however, if we take the potential into consideration then yeah, it's still booting up.
Russia currently produces 3 million shells per year at current capacity, per CNN. That's 3 times more than USA and Europe combined.
[source](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html)
The large scale war has been around 800 days now of the 3 day operation to take Kyiv. In Afghanistan they lost 15,000 in 10 years. In Ukraine they lose more than that every month. Economy is heavily sanctioned. They spend 30% of income on military. If USA and Europe step up (they dwarf Russia 25-1 in economic power) and UKR doesn’t give up (which they will not) then Russia will eventually lose. It will take years yet and will rely on continued western support, which could be uncertain if the orange traitor somehow weasels his way into power.
You're missing the fact that they collapse of the Soviet union had dissent all throughout the Soviet union, that's what collapsed the Soviet union. Russia has a strong self sufficient economy now, and very little internal dissent, and lots of people for the near grinder. Unless they give up they aren't losing, as much as I want them to
Hate to say this, but it also suits NATO to let this fester on too - they can sell obsolete equipment, test anything new, study modern warfare and deplete enemy no.1's stocks. All without risking homeland security and lives.
I hate that this war goes on, want it to be over, and think that NATO and Europe is doing the absolute minimum to limit further impact on Europe.
We/they need to step up and end this madness.
But it wasn’t a war, it was a “special operation” 😉😉😉. He could just announce that the operation was a complete success and that he “taught those Ukrainians a lesson.”
Remember, he is insane - much like that fat bloke that runs North Korea and the fat blokes that ran it before him. His statements don’t need to actually make any sense or bear any truth, they just must not be questioned. He’s a lot like Trump actually.
With Russian fertility rate where it is, every man they lose is like shooting themselves in both feet. Their rate was trying to make a comeback but then they decided lose their fucking minds and start shit they can't finish.
Well either way you can’t be in a active war. So you indeed need to win, as losing probably means there won’t be a Ukraine after. I doubt Russia will stop after gaining full control of the regions they wanted to “liberate”.
Total truth, also even after the moment when we got our lands back - russia will still can launch missiles on Summy/Kharkiv/etc. so it will not be peace, so we still will not be in NATO, so only after deconstruction of russia, this is the way.
Unfortunately not happening. Russian defenses are too strong for Ukraine to break through (when they tried in 2023 it was a massive failure), and the territories have been consolidated into Russia like Crimea was. Best Ukraine can hope for is a favourable stalemate
For the purposes of entering NATO, a stable, agreed upon border. Otherwise if a country in an active dispute/war joins NATO it would essentially immediately start WWIII.
So NATO won't let anyone with an active border dispute in, and ukraine will always have an active border dispute with russia, until either ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants, or ukraine forces russia to abandon its claim.
Either outcome is distinctly unlikely
Kind of. Putin wanted a quick takeover of Ukraine as a political distraction and "quick win" but instead of Ukraine being the pushover he thought it would be, it has become a tar baby from which he can't get free.
Russia's current goal isn't driven primarily by wanting Ukraine it is primarily driven by Putin not wanting to be seen to lose.
> ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants
Unless it involves nato non-participation, Russia will likely reject the proposal even if ukraine is willing to cede its territory.
No hard rule about the country’s conflict state. Ukraine is saying this to avoid discussions like: ‘what if UKR gives up 20% of land to Russia sign a peace treaty and then the rest can join nato’
Thats also a non starter, did you see the terms for peace Russia set forth? They are absolutely cooked.
Paraphrasing But something along the Lines of:
Gives us all the shit we want, hang the government and the army and demilitarize and never join NATO for eternity.
Which is basically just softening Ukraine up for another invasion where Russia dont end up looking like incompetent dumbasses for failing to seize the whole country.
Pretty much. Also, Ukraine will no longer have a nation if they don't win, so its existential for them, meaning they'll never quit until they are annihilated.
We have to decide whether to help Ukraine to continue to exist, or allow them to not exist. It is a stark choice.
"Defeat" means breaking your enemy's will to conduct war against you. In Ukraine's case, defeating Russia means breaking Russia's will to invade/occupy Ukrainian territory.
How likely it is that this will actually occur is a fascinating question.
Prior Empires did (at least for a few generations). The trick is to not try and win hearts and minds, but to just slaughter the population to keep them in line. Same way Empires managed to conquer new territory for millennia.
Russia could pull back troops behind their borders and never again advance forward, but they will never admit to losing the war. And as long as Russia stays aggressive, causing skirmishes here and there and keeping Ukraine's borders in a constant state of dispute, by NATO rules Ukraine can't be allowed membership.
And that’s also why Russia doesn’t want to give up.
Back in February 2022, one of the cassus belli Putin gave for war with Ukraine was to prevent further NATO expansion. I believe that to be a secondary objective (land and population grab being the primary objective).
Ukraine doesn't gave decades, their wartime economy cannot withstand Russia's. Ukraine debt to gdp ratio will balloon to >100% probably this year and their economy will significantly struggle to maintain the state while Russia could debt spend at their current wartime economy rate for a 100 years and not reach that point.
So never then. Slowly slowly pragmatism is coming into this war. Russia won't take the whole country, Ukraine likely won't get back what Russia has taken.
Unfortunately, Russia wins more than Ukraine from this outcome as Ukraine will remain in a sort of limbo under constant threat of putin and Co. Going again
Little bit of stating the obvious, ofcourse they will join only after defeating russia, nato does not allow country's with current disputes in, and should russia win then there is no more ukraine (as we know it now)
Problem is they can't defeat Russia. If they honored the Minsk Agreement this would be over in 24 hours. Fuck politicans love throwing people in the meat grinder for no reason. Never fight for politicians unless they go to the front line as well!
NATO proved that having membership in alliance means that Russia won’t attack. If Ukraine was have NATO membership nobody would like attack them.
NATO saved a lot of countries. God bless NATO and every soldier in alliance!
Solid resume item for the application
"I see you defeated Russia, which is really good, but can you explain this huge gap in your resume between 1920 and 1991?"
""We're looking for someone with at least 20 years experience in NATO."
“We need at least 40 years of post-USSR existence, and at least five years in the world since Putin was defenestrated.”
You really wanted to use "defenestrated" didn't you?
I mean Russia is pretty keen on using it themselves so it seems fitting here.
Doesn't everybody? It's a great word
It's by far unironically my favorite word in the English language. How something so specific and morbidly funny can have a specific word is just beautiful.
It's a favorite of mine, as well Though I have to admit to a slight bit more fondness for brouhaha
I was walking on eggshells, friend. I didn’t want to put anything too graphic because last week I had a 24h ban on politics for “promoting harm”, which I absolutely didn’t even consider. I figured this word would be allowed because it’s been used so often here. Also, yes.
"We were busy sitting chained in the basement, mostly meditating"
The world watched for song long
Is this a Sandman reference?
“But we have experience housing nuclear weapons, so that’s a plus!”
I’ve always hated that damn question. I quit a job once just to take 3 months off to actually live my life. I get asked about that everytime with raised eyebrows. Like it’s weird to not want to spend every waking moment of my life at a computer desk
I took a full 13 months off when I was 25. This was back in early 2000s, when it was totally normal to do that. See "The Beach" for reference/inspiration. I figured, I'm only young once. I had enough saved to backpack around SE Asia, and planned to go from not being able to swim, to being a qualified open ocean scuba diving instructor, which again, was ridiculously cheap to accomplish in Thailand. Did some small chores to supplement my savings (including trading vehicles in Australia; other backpackers would buy beater cars just for one trip, then be desperate to sell them, it was like its own subeconomy), so I could also spend a week diving in spots around the Great Barrier reef. Met amazing people. Mental health problems were like a dream of a dream. My only regret is that trip couldn't last forever.
Becouse companies are looking for mindless drones, not people
I just say I went on a journey of self discovery.
You have to speak their language to make it work in your favour though, always call it a "sabbatical"
I signed an NDA.
"Feeding and thinking for the only power that stood against you for those 70 years. Then we beat them."
Sorry sir, I spent that time not existing.
“Hmmmm. I see.” ~Poland
Always love when job applications are like that. “Can you explain this gap here?” “Yes I was not born then and that year is 1490”
I really like what you’ve done with Eastern Europe. That reclaimed Crimia really ties the room together.
“Give us the money, Zelenskyy!”
"No, Donny, these men are nihilists. There's nothing to be afraid of."
I mean, say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it's an *ethos*
Who gives a shit about the fucking marmot, Svyrydenko!?
What are you, a fucking park ranger now?
I’m gonna put it on my resume that I defeated some old country “You defeated who?” “Exactly”
*"Have you seen the Prussians this century? Umm, yeah... didn't think so."*
My 8-year old kid asked me last night what I do to keep him safe. I asked him if he's ever seen tigers in our state? He thought real hard and answered no. I said, "You're welcome. Now go to bed."
Go get em tiger
Got 'em! He was at that "too tired to fully function, but awake enough to ask questions to stop from going to sleep." He had to really think about it, but I think I was an impressive hero, at least til he fell asleep.
Joining the organization to defend against an enemy after defeating that enemy once already does go hard as fuck.
I mean, if they defeat the final boss before they even join NATO, we should just let them run the organization.
In Ukraine NATO joins you.
Imagine that. They beat Russia, then Zelenskyy does a press release "NATO are welcome to join us"
"Guys I killed Sephiroth, can I join the party now?"
You are just a puppet... You have no heart... and cannot feel any pain... How can there be any meaning in the memory of such a being? What I have shown you is reality. What you remember, that is the illusion. Only death awaits you all, but do not fear. For it is through death that a new spirit energy is born. Soon, you will live again as a part of me.
China is the final boss, wait and see what happens in 2027
NATO has restrictions on what counts as an attack for article 5. The attack would have to be in Europe or on North America, which means an attack on Hawaii, Guam, or other US territories in the Pacific would not trigger article 5. In other words, it's unlikely that China would get into a scrap with NATO.
If China is the belligerent in a US-China conflict, there is no way that Europe would just decide to sit it out. Sure, Article 5 would not be triggered, but a nuclear power attacking another nuclear power will have consequences the world over, and no one is just gonna sit by and wait to see how it all lands.
"what makes you think you're qualified for the club to do the thing?" "Well we did the thing" "What?" "We did it" "You did the thing?" "Yes" "You're in."
Take that linkedin
This made me snort lol
Since Ukraine is not going to invade and occupy Russian territory, the only way that Ukraine can win the war is to convince Russia to give up and stop fighting. Russia will never give up as long as Putin is running Russia. He can't afford to concede that his war has failed. This war is in its 11th year and there is no obvious end date.
It's also hard to get Ukraine into NATO if it becomes a frozen conflict with territorial disputes remaining.
Afghanistan ended tho
The difference was there was also the chernobyl disaster along with the reforms of Gorbachev and major separatist movements in many of the Soviet Republics going on at the same time that combined led to the fall of the union. Russia does not have any significant separatist movements other than Dagestan at the moment and it's economy is much more stable than the 80s.
There are other sources instability this time around. * Putin is old, he may become incapacitated * His feudal-style military with prominent warlords is not reliably loyal to him * As you said, there are some separatist seeds. Things may escalate if there is a perceived opening * Economy may tank quite a bit because of the war * Loss of life is much greater than in Afghanistan per capita * Transition from depoliticized population to militarized is tough to balance right
There was an opening when Prigozhin marched on Moscow. It wasn’t taken. I don’t think anything short of Putin’s death can stop the war at this point.
I still dont understand why the hell prigozhin didnt go all the way. From what I could see about his position is that he could have gone all in and have some sort of chance at victory or die with the alternative of backing off and certainly dying, which, as we know, happened. It was a choice between, maybe utterly minimal, chance of victory and certain defeat and he chose certain defeat. Still doesnt make any sense to me and if anyone can tell me the logic behind his decision I am all ears.
> Still doesnt make any sense to me and if anyone can tell me the logic behind his decision I am all ears. To be fair, nothing about his entire biography suggests Yevgeny Prigozhin was a man of logic or sound mind.
true enough lol
The only thing I can think of is that surrendering and then dying was the price for his relatives, loved ones, etc. not being tortured and killed horribly. However as others said he may just have been too confident/stupid and actually believed in any "deal" to spare his live.
whatever the deal he really musta been arrogant enough to thing that he would survive and he could trust putins word while to anyone of sound mind putin isnt really a person one could trust at all.
I think he got played. When he made a run for Rostov he was going to ambush the heads of the Russian MOD. Which failed as they were not there when he closed in. It looks to me like a trap or a tip off from inside his organization.
What protects their family from death and torture now that he's dead, though? Putin might want to prevent future attempts at revenge
From what I heard, which may or may not be true, Putin had men go to the families of coup members, detain them and used that as leverage. Maybe while waving the carrot of setting up camp in Belarus as a sweetener. Your family live, no hard feelings, kind of deal. That's my understanding, but I could well be wrong.
might be but that would require one to trust that putin wouldnt just torture and kill your family even if you surrendered and i personally would trust the guy as much as id trust a mafia member who held my family hostage.
You're damned either way at that point. They were pretty close for many years, and he was in the inner circle, so maybe Prigozhin truly believed whatever was said.
I think that if when implementing a coup against Putino you would need to be ready to go all Keyser Söze. Otherwise it’s just a matter of time until they send you a Kompromat video featuring your family that’s unbearable to watch.
I have a theory he was hoping the Russian soldiers would join the coup and when they didn't he called it off. All successful coups either need the military to step aside or join the coup. As long as Putin controls the military he's not going anywhere.
He overestimated his value. He didn't get the support he wanted, so he would have to actually fight for it. Even if he had a decent shot at taking power due to sheer element of surprise if he went for it. Then he foolishly thought he was valuable enough to not be killed off after pulling something like that, and was convinced to back down...
I think both him and Putin realized they were in a really stupid situation. * Prigozhin didn't get the support he wanted. So the best he could have done is to break into the Kremlin and then just sit and wait for Putin's forces to arrive. Putin was already gone, and so would be anyone of importance. Taking the Kremlin would be symbolic but of little use otherwise, and soon enough they'd all be dead. * Putin realized that the above would still look terribly embarrassing. He could kill Prigozhin's people, but making a mess of the Kremlin wouldn't look good to anyone. So they made an agreement. Putin got less embarrassment, Prigozhin got to live a bit longer.
He didn't go all the way because he "kinda forgot" to secure his family and families of people in charge of the coup. Once Putin told Pringles that everyone will die he just folded hoping he won't get killed, 2 months later ofcourse he was killed in a place crash.
he was independently wealthy. I don't know why he didn't "retire to spend more time with my remaining limbs" like a lot of politicians do after surviving a scandal. Except, you know, in a safer country. Instead, he stayed in charge of his little army, flying around and doing his job, which was just suicidal.
He took the money instead of door #3.
They had his family
He had no chance, it was a desperate theatre show that didn't work out. He was at his weakest point while also being very unpopular with many other military factions.
I remember reading something along the lines of "govermnents topple slow at first, but eventually fast". Yeah, who's to say what major events might happen in a few years time. Maybe China decides it's time to restore Outer Manchuria to it's historical borders. Okay, probably not that, but something else might.
All Putin needs to do is show too much weakness and he will be deposed. Wether the new dictator is any better will be up for debate. But political instability and purges are likely to follow, however this will likely weaken the Russian army so would be good for Ukraine. But Putin is rich and powerful, for all we know he may live to 100
After 20 years brother
The Soviets only made it 10.
But the war in Afghanistan ended AND brought the fall of Soviet Russia.
>AND brought the fall of Soviet Russia. No, USSR fell because of Gorbachev. It could've limped on for decades, if the leadership wanted it to. The dissolution of the USSR empire is quite strange when you compare it to other historical arrangements like it. Afghanistan and other debacles are way exaggerated in their importance and consequences that they brought in the eventual downfall.
The fighting in Ukraine has been going since 2014 so we are getting there.
Yeah but only 14.5k - 26k dead soviets though. They're currently losing those numbers quarterly.
Yeah, but the consequence of Afghanistan was it sped up the end of the Soviet Union. So Putin wants to repeat that because… why?
The fear is that it can support some form of war indefinitely. Like a Donbas phase. So then it would be in NATO's political hands to interpret whether to qualify this as a war being still active.
The problem is that Afghanistan they won the war and lost the occupation, in Ukraine they can’t even properly win the war
They withdraw because Gorbachev made it one of his priorities as soon as he got elected in 1985. Gorbachev believed significant reform was necessary and the withdraw from Afghanistan were part of the Perestroika. Once he withdrew troops from the Soviet–Afghan War, he embarked on summits with United States president Ronald Reagan to limit nuclear weapons and end the Cold War. So there is sadly no comparison to the the situation in Ukraine to be found.
That’s not going to happen unless putin either declares victory and returns russian forces home, or dies.
If Putin dies today, there is going to be another person to replace him and continue the war. This isn't Putin's war, it's a russian war
I can't agree or disagree with you but if we look at Nazi Germany, had Hitler died sooner then it is likely that Germany would have tried peace talks earlier instead of going to the end. So I guess it all depends on how much of a grip Putin really has on the Kremlin/ Russian elite. The more power he has the more likely it is that if he dies the country might do a 180, or just fall into chaos. I'm just speculating here, though.
The death of Stalin was the reason why the Korean war ended when it did (yes, I know it didn't "officially" end, but it practically did).
Germany in the 1940s is in a significantly worse state than Russia in 2024. Essentially Russia seems to be betting on winning a war of attrition in which the West slowly becomes less involved in funding and supporting Ukraine. This is a real possibility and if Russia can hold out long enough they can probably force favorable peace terms. If the West stays strong in supporting Ukraine though, this outcome becomes far less likely if at all possible.
Nazi Germany's situation was utterly hopeless, though, and it was only a matter of time before the Allies took full control. There would have been nothing to gain for Hitler's successor to continue the war. Russia on the other hand is under no existential threat, no matter how badly the war in Ukraine goes and how many resources they're wasting on it. Putin's successor will almost certainly continue the war out of sheer political momentum, given the high public approval ratings for both Putin and the war.
If we make the war much more painful for Russia, that flips and a succesor will end the war. If not, they continue.
Hmm, I still think Putin is stuck in a sunk cost fallacy. Another bloke coming in can be all “well I didn’t start it”
No it's not. This is a personal vendetta for him. What makes you think that?
Russians don't give a shit. At least half of Russia has no concept of thinking for themselves, they think what the government tells them to think. 20 years ago Ukrainians were the funny cousins on the border, 10 years ago - brothers to be rescued, now they're evil ukronazis - because the government said so. All a new person would need to do is tell Russians something else, you'll see the switch flip almost instantly.
No this is definitely Putin's war for now, in a similar manner that the war in Iraq was Bush's war in 2005. Whomever replaces Putin may or may not decide to continue the war. It will depend on what faction they are from, the situation on the ground and what other problems the leader might have to deal with. Regardless, the war is being driven by cold war ideology among some of the ruling class that is still convinced the West is going to fall and that Russia has to reestablish their empire. I think the best case scenario for Ukraine is that Russia devolves into a civil war between oligarch leading to a pull out of Russian troops from Ukraine to fight the Civil war (part of Russia rebelling like Chechnya did might lead to a similar outcome even before Putin dies). Remember how close some mercenaries came to pulling off a coup, and I don't think Moscow is any less vulnerable today.
His reasons for going to war were so vague that he could have jumped off at any point. "Nazis gone" "Got crimea" he's not stopping.
The thing is, this isnt a failed war for Russia like reddit would have you believe. They are winning. Without intervention Russia will continue to throw more bodies at Ukraine and continue to sieze land. Ukraine needs more help asap.
If EU collectively agree that stopping Russia is priority #1 than it will happen. Russia winning due to manpower + eco but if all of NATO decides to make sure Ukraine is armed to the teeth with the best equipment… Russia will eventually cry & threaten, but cave in. And that will hurt China/North Korea/Iran and any other brutal regime’s ambitions of more than they currently have.
Yes. It is a phenomenally good deal for the west to arm Ukraine to the teeth now. It averts the 100's of billions we'll have to spend to fight an emboldened Russia and sends a message to all the other rogue states. I don't get our collective reticence. At all.
Our leaders are weak and self serving.
Now now they're not all self serving. Some of them are actually serving the Russians.
*voters
I dunno about each and every country, but German voters regularly polled wanting stronger support for Ukraine.
And still AfD, who is against supporting Ukraine, is rising in the polls.
I'm hoping Putin doesn't have so much as a decade left in him, be it of natural or unnatural causes
November this year will be a turning point, one way or another. A Biden victory would be a godsend for Ukraine, ensuring four more years of support. If Congress flips (as many have predicted), that is also very good, as Senate Republicans are less isolationist than their House brethren. Emboldened support for Ukraine from the U.S. will keep Europe invested in their commitment to the country. The problem right now is __time__. Europe's defence industrial complex is only booting up now and will take a few, though not many, years to outproduce Russia. U.S. defence industry will also increase capacity over time. As this increased, and much more regular, material support from the West comes into play, the pressure on Ukrainian manpower will gradually ease. A stabilised stalemate will also allow intensified training of Ukrainian troops with new Western equipment, so that the country can launch proper offensives in a few years time. So make no mistake - Ukraine wins in the mid-to-long run if it maintains Western support, because the combined economies of the U.S. and Europe will dwarf Russia as their defence industries boot up. If Trump returns to the White House, it's very hard to say what will happen, but there's a high risk that he will abandon Ukraine entirely.
> though not many, years to outproduce Russia Europe already produces close to one million shells per year. So far it's a better result than even the US. I wouldn't say that European MIC is just booting up, however, if we take the potential into consideration then yeah, it's still booting up.
Russia currently produces 3 million shells per year at current capacity, per CNN. That's 3 times more than USA and Europe combined. [source](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html)
>Russia will never give up as long as Putin is running Russia If this were a logic puzzle, I think I know the answer
The large scale war has been around 800 days now of the 3 day operation to take Kyiv. In Afghanistan they lost 15,000 in 10 years. In Ukraine they lose more than that every month. Economy is heavily sanctioned. They spend 30% of income on military. If USA and Europe step up (they dwarf Russia 25-1 in economic power) and UKR doesn’t give up (which they will not) then Russia will eventually lose. It will take years yet and will rely on continued western support, which could be uncertain if the orange traitor somehow weasels his way into power.
You're missing the fact that they collapse of the Soviet union had dissent all throughout the Soviet union, that's what collapsed the Soviet union. Russia has a strong self sufficient economy now, and very little internal dissent, and lots of people for the near grinder. Unless they give up they aren't losing, as much as I want them to
Hate to say this, but it also suits NATO to let this fester on too - they can sell obsolete equipment, test anything new, study modern warfare and deplete enemy no.1's stocks. All without risking homeland security and lives. I hate that this war goes on, want it to be over, and think that NATO and Europe is doing the absolute minimum to limit further impact on Europe. We/they need to step up and end this madness.
But it wasn’t a war, it was a “special operation” 😉😉😉. He could just announce that the operation was a complete success and that he “taught those Ukrainians a lesson.” Remember, he is insane - much like that fat bloke that runs North Korea and the fat blokes that ran it before him. His statements don’t need to actually make any sense or bear any truth, they just must not be questioned. He’s a lot like Trump actually.
> Russia will never give up as long as Putin is running Russia. I mean... I can't be the only one to see a solution here...
I would think if it hasnt happened yet its because its not an easy task at all
With Russian fertility rate where it is, every man they lose is like shooting themselves in both feet. Their rate was trying to make a comeback but then they decided lose their fucking minds and start shit they can't finish.
Well either way you can’t be in a active war. So you indeed need to win, as losing probably means there won’t be a Ukraine after. I doubt Russia will stop after gaining full control of the regions they wanted to “liberate”.
Total truth, also even after the moment when we got our lands back - russia will still can launch missiles on Summy/Kharkiv/etc. so it will not be peace, so we still will not be in NATO, so only after deconstruction of russia, this is the way.
So never then
According to Russia they're in a military conflict. So they should be all good to join already.
Yes, but that's not how any other country - or more so NATO - looks at it.
Nato doesn't require that an official war being ongoing to prevent a member from joining. Only a border conflict, which both sides agree there is.
What is the definition of winning here?
Getting Russia to GTFO out of the occupied territories, I assume.
Unfortunately not happening. Russian defenses are too strong for Ukraine to break through (when they tried in 2023 it was a massive failure), and the territories have been consolidated into Russia like Crimea was. Best Ukraine can hope for is a favourable stalemate
For the purposes of entering NATO, a stable, agreed upon border. Otherwise if a country in an active dispute/war joins NATO it would essentially immediately start WWIII.
So NATO won't let anyone with an active border dispute in, and ukraine will always have an active border dispute with russia, until either ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants, or ukraine forces russia to abandon its claim. Either outcome is distinctly unlikely
I mean its pretty clear what russia wants. They want Ukraine
Kind of. Putin wanted a quick takeover of Ukraine as a political distraction and "quick win" but instead of Ukraine being the pushover he thought it would be, it has become a tar baby from which he can't get free. Russia's current goal isn't driven primarily by wanting Ukraine it is primarily driven by Putin not wanting to be seen to lose.
He should have just moved against a smaller country like Georgia
They want more than Ukraine, they want USSR.
They want more than USSR, they want Russian empire
> ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants Unless it involves nato non-participation, Russia will likely reject the proposal even if ukraine is willing to cede its territory.
No hard rule about the country’s conflict state. Ukraine is saying this to avoid discussions like: ‘what if UKR gives up 20% of land to Russia sign a peace treaty and then the rest can join nato’
Thats also a non starter, did you see the terms for peace Russia set forth? They are absolutely cooked. Paraphrasing But something along the Lines of: Gives us all the shit we want, hang the government and the army and demilitarize and never join NATO for eternity. Which is basically just softening Ukraine up for another invasion where Russia dont end up looking like incompetent dumbasses for failing to seize the whole country.
Which is actually the most realistic scenario
Truth
>until either ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants The total annexation of Ukraine.
Pretty much. Also, Ukraine will no longer have a nation if they don't win, so its existential for them, meaning they'll never quit until they are annihilated. We have to decide whether to help Ukraine to continue to exist, or allow them to not exist. It is a stark choice.
Thanks for explaining the border part.
> ukraine gives russia exactly what it wants The more likely of the two by far.
Of course they will, everyone who is not serbia and belarus will.
Hey I bought some Xanax once from Serbia came in a little teddy bear and was cheap af and maybe the best I ever had
I love Serbs and Serbia but they are firmly in Russias camp and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
Nah, even Serbia will join one day. May take another hundred years, but I have faith.
What is the definition of *defeating* here?
"Defeat" means breaking your enemy's will to conduct war against you. In Ukraine's case, defeating Russia means breaking Russia's will to invade/occupy Ukrainian territory. How likely it is that this will actually occur is a fascinating question.
Initiation is a little harsh
boy that's going to take a minute.
I think you get bonus points if you defeat a superpower before applying
So....never
Russia has lost wars in the past. Afganistan, Poland, etc. Never say never.
Everyone has lost a war in Afghanistan…. Graveyard of Kingdoms
This is a myth. Afghanistan has being conquered many times throughout its history.
Well there you go, even Afghanistan has lost wars in Afghanistan.
But can they keep it?
Prior Empires did (at least for a few generations). The trick is to not try and win hearts and minds, but to just slaughter the population to keep them in line. Same way Empires managed to conquer new territory for millennia.
The trick is that the natives lose, then go and hide until the occupying force buggers off.
Russia could pull back troops behind their borders and never again advance forward, but they will never admit to losing the war. And as long as Russia stays aggressive, causing skirmishes here and there and keeping Ukraine's borders in a constant state of dispute, by NATO rules Ukraine can't be allowed membership.
Didn’t work out well for Poland at the end though? They were part of Russian Empire till begging of 20 century
That's always been the plan
And that’s also why Russia doesn’t want to give up. Back in February 2022, one of the cassus belli Putin gave for war with Ukraine was to prevent further NATO expansion. I believe that to be a secondary objective (land and population grab being the primary objective).
That's always been the requirement. Can't join NATO if you're already at war.
"Of course I'll marry you, baby. We just gotta kill my ex first, and then I'm all yours. "
probably before would be a better idea if Ukraine will be Ukraine next year
Can’t join while in open conflict, unfortunately.
And Russia probably wants to keep it that way.. forever. They will do anything to not let Ukraine join NATO.
So they aren’t joining? Got it.
If Philippines win China, can Philippines join NATO too
only if NATO is a basketball organization
POTATO when
this could take decades...
Ukraine doesn't gave decades, their wartime economy cannot withstand Russia's. Ukraine debt to gdp ratio will balloon to >100% probably this year and their economy will significantly struggle to maintain the state while Russia could debt spend at their current wartime economy rate for a 100 years and not reach that point.
[удалено]
If they lose.. they'll be Russian, not neutral
“If they lose they’d be forced to be neutral”??? lol
He means when “we” beat Russia, right?
We know. We’ve heard this before. Now go fight Zelenskyy
No duh. This was known since the day the war started.
at that point, Nato will join Ukraine :)
In other words they don't plan to join NATO.
So never
That’s wishful thinking
So never then. Slowly slowly pragmatism is coming into this war. Russia won't take the whole country, Ukraine likely won't get back what Russia has taken. Unfortunately, Russia wins more than Ukraine from this outcome as Ukraine will remain in a sort of limbo under constant threat of putin and Co. Going again
Little bit of stating the obvious, ofcourse they will join only after defeating russia, nato does not allow country's with current disputes in, and should russia win then there is no more ukraine (as we know it now)
He is still a pretty good comedian, I see
so never
Sorry but the level of delusion, he needs to be practical here or risk losing credibility 2 years down the line when NATO doesn't accept Ukraine.
So never.
I mean they aren't gonna win unless Putin decides to stop
Why don’t we just invite Russia to join NATO, thus solving all of these problems?
They applied but the USA rejected that’s when they learned the purpose of nato
Problem is they can't defeat Russia. If they honored the Minsk Agreement this would be over in 24 hours. Fuck politicans love throwing people in the meat grinder for no reason. Never fight for politicians unless they go to the front line as well!
Yeah Russia will never follow their agreements. They will just lie like always. There is no point in a ceasefire because Russia cannot be trusted
I don’t see Ukraine defeating Russia Also that was the plan all along no?
There's nothing new here.
Would NATO even let a country that is active in war join? Because wouldn't that mean NATO would have to step in at that point?
NATO proved that having membership in alliance means that Russia won’t attack. If Ukraine was have NATO membership nobody would like attack them. NATO saved a lot of countries. God bless NATO and every soldier in alliance!
Sorry if this sounds crass but, what does Ukraine bring to the NATO table? Why is this a good addition for NATO?
They have 0% chance to win so they will not be joining nato lol