Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

mobby_6kl posted:

That polling was before the second invasion I assume? How would it look now? Tbh I'd be shocked if they didn't go through with this after Putin's aggression. Like why would you remain "neutral" when poo poo like this happens to Russia's neighbors.


Finland and Sweden are already sufficiently integrated into NATO that they are at the 'could join literally tomorrow' phase and everyone knows it, their situation in the event the US says 'you have 90 days until Russia hits you' is very different.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009

VostokProgram posted:

Tbf, I doubt that Ukraine on its own could have done much of anything. Being a smaller country next to a stronger, larger aggressive country just sucks.

“Poor Mexico, so far from God, so close to the US.“ -Porfirio Diaz. Swap in “Ukraine” and “Russia” and it works all too well.

lilljonas
May 6, 2007

We got crabs? We got crabs!

Cirvot posted:

It's not hard to find reactions from European leftists have looked over appalled at the how naive the American lefts reaction to this conflict has been. Where the far rights allegiances lie is the same across the two continents in question, but I guess we didn't expect the American left to be this naive.

Swedish here and I fully agree with the sentiment of the last sentence of the quote.

Yeah it's the opposite here in Sweden, the only one that has been refusing to speak out against Putin is our most right wing populist party. Their party leader was universally attacked by both left wing and centralist parties recently when he refused to say which he wo preferred as a leader between Biden and Putin. You'll mostly find support for Russia from other ethno-nationalists here, not from the left.

Melancholia
Jul 5, 2021

Cugel the Clever posted:

You keep harping on NATO, but what's your actual policy prescription? Is it that Ukraine should have never tried to chart its own course and just submitted to Russian imperialism all the sooner? If so, that's pretty incongruous with your claims that you oppose Putin's actions here!

The exact opposite. The moment the Ukrainian people sought accession to NATO (2014) the state should have been accepted with open arms. I’ve been desperately trying to make this clear. I’m not upset that NATO has been contradictorily working with Ukraine for over a decade because that’s “evil Western imperialism”, I’m upset that NATO was never going to allow Ukraine to join in the first place.

Is NATO in general, and America specifically, an evil Western bogeyman? Absolutely. I’m a leftist, I abound with criticism here. But what Putin does, what he has been doing, especially on his borders, is demonstrably worse than anything “the West” is doing. He’s a loving monster, he’s a warmonger, and he would’ve used any excuse necessary to ensure his neighbors are “friendly”.

I cannot begin to express how frustrating your reaction is. I’m completely unable to understand how you come to these conclusions based off my words. It is very likely you’re conflating what you think I’m saying with other bad faith poo poo elsewhere, but it’s no less infuriating. It feels as though you’re deliberately misunderstanding what I’m saying.

theghostpt
Sep 1, 2009

Dick Ripple posted:

Which newspaper?

IDNES for example -> https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/FRus_Ukra has photos uploaded today
:nms: warning btw, there's a photo with a corpse and a bloodied woman

Gort
Aug 18, 2003

Good day what ho cup of tea

FishBulbia posted:

Z marked convoy just passed highway cam at 46.74796664511499, 33.401800090438016

What's the significance of a Z marking?

pippy
May 29, 2013

CRIMES
I think it's just to prevent friendly fire.

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

mobby_6kl posted:

That polling was before the second invasion I assume? How would it look now? Tbh I'd be shocked if they didn't go through with this after Putin's aggression. Like why would you remain "neutral" when poo poo like this happens to Russia's neighbors.

Wellllll it's not that straightforward. Finland was also neutral in 1956, 1968, 1979, 2008, 2014... can you say that Finland is under more threat now than previously?

Also bear in mind that Finland has no territorial disputes with Russia, no breakaway provinces like Ossetia, and there is no significant Russian minority either. Unlike Georgia and Ukraine, there just isn't anything to fight over.

Russia has also previously warned that joining Nato would worsen relations between the two countries, and while Nato would protect Finland from being invaded it wouldn't do much against all other sorts of malicious behaviour, such as cyber attacks or bringing refugees to the border. Nato membership would also oblige Finland to join in the defense of other members in case there is war, which I find just as unlikely - but if that did happen then strict military neutrality would be better.

But on the other hand, Russia once again displays itself as an unpredictable brute of a neighbour, and these kinds of preparations have to be made during fair weather, as the WW2 showed that finding help once the war has started is difficult and can make unfortunate bed fellows. I'm in favour of membership personally, but I still don't think it's a no-brainer.

Darth Walrus
Feb 13, 2012

pippy posted:

I think it's just to prevent friendly fire.

By Russians, specifically. It's the mark they've chosen for this operation.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Gort posted:

What's the significance of a Z marking?

It's an identifier/task force marking. Nobody knows exaclty what they mean but there were one more sign that Russia was about to invade a country that still uses very similar vehicles.

White Rock
Jul 14, 2007
Creativity flows in the bored and the angry!

Knightsoul posted:

The so called NATO argument is the simple explanation of what is happening right now: look at the last 20 years, every decision/action made by Russia was in responce to NATO projection towards east.
Even in the last few days, Putin said that if Ukraine would abandon their will to join NATO or the European Union ( which is just a masked organization for the U.S. international power), the whole crisis would end.
The ongoing russian military operations are just a reality check for Ukraine: the reality that they are just an ant beside the russian big bear.


This sort of talk completely removes any agency from any Eastern European state, most which (rightly) see themselves being occupied by a foreign invader for 50+ years, and would like to avoid that in the future. Thus, NATO. Can you blame them?
I guess NATO/EU should have refused any of them to join, regardless of interest? What exactly would you like to happen, a buffer state of semi-independent countries, who would then not immediately become Russian puppet states or be in the same situation as Ukraine?

FishMcCool
Apr 9, 2021

lolcats are still funny
Fallen Rib

Gort posted:

What's the significance of a Z marking?

quote:

Just like Russian troops attacking Ukraine from the eastern flank have 'Z' marking on their vehicles, the troops attacking from Belarus use 'O' and 'V'. Depending on the direction of the attack, it seems.

https://twitter.com/TadeuszGiczan/status/1496780840075988993

A Buttery Pastry
Sep 4, 2011

Delicious and Informative!
:3:

Knightsoul posted:

Even in the last few days, Putin said that if Ukraine would abandon their will to join NATO or the European Union ( which is just a masked organization for the U.S. international power)
The EU is not just a masked organization for US international power. For sure it's part of perpetuating the international order that the US established, but that's because that international order works perfectly fine for the EU too. The moment the US tries to do anything that would be too economically disruptive to the EU, the EU will fight back, like it did when Bush was president. They literally made Bush back off a proposed steel tariff by threatening to impose their own tariffs on products from US swing states.

Saladman
Jan 12, 2010

theghostpt posted:

There's some pretty terrible photos in Czech online newspapers already. loving awful :(

Czech Republic is allowing any Ukrainian with biometric passport to enter the country without visa. Also any Ukrainian with unresolved visa status can stay in the country....

But... Ukrainians don't need visas to enter the Schengen zone anyway?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_...20Index%202022.

bad_fmr
Nov 28, 2007

Pyromancer posted:

Americans on left and right honestly believe people in the world dislike them because they hate their freedom and whatever other bullshit they were fed in GW Bush 9/11 address.
Some of them in this very thread think Putin invades Ukraine because he wholeheartedly hates democracy, and not because of pragmatic realpolitik reasons.

Preventin Ukrainean western style democracy may actually be one of the realpolitik reasons for the invasion, ironically enough. Putin does not want Russian people to see a model for a "Russian-cousin" state with working free democracy. Do not want to the people to get any funny ideas.

Elizabeth Cluppins
May 12, 2009

Wafflepoet posted:

The exact opposite. The moment the Ukrainian people sought accession to NATO (2014) the state should have been accepted with open arms. I’ve been desperately trying to make this clear. I’m not upset that NATO has been contradictorily working with Ukraine for over a decade because that’s “evil Western imperialism”, I’m upset that NATO was never going to allow Ukraine to join in the first place.

Is NATO in general, and America specifically, an evil Western bogeyman? Absolutely. I’m a leftist, I abound with criticism here. But what Putin does, what he has been doing, especially on his borders, is demonstrably worse than anything “the West” is doing. He’s a loving monster, he’s a warmonger, and he would’ve used any excuse necessary to ensure his neighbors are “friendly”.

I cannot begin to express how frustrating your reaction is. I’m completely unable to understand how you come to these conclusions based off my words. It is very likely you’re conflating what you think I’m saying with other bad faith poo poo elsewhere, but it’s no less infuriating. It feels as though you’re deliberately misunderstanding what I’m saying.

Attempting to pull in a country under active threats of war and immediately after civil uprising to a defensive alliance isn't a viable political move. Russia would have finally had valid justification for their 'NATO-backed coup' spin.

The fate of Ukraine was likely sealed when they chose to trust in the budapest memorandum and strive for neutrality. They might have been in NATO by now if that had been their aim since 1991, but, instead there's this.

Samopsa
Nov 9, 2009

Krijgt geen speciaal kerstdiner!
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1496785547594924032?t=0WWAocr_fLHACEofAsKpKg&s=19

Ukraine moving to arm their civilians, or at least telling Russia that they're planning to hold their cities by any means necessary. Very grim days ahead.

Gort posted:

What's the significance of a Z marking?

They are marking vehicles for certain operations iirc. The units moving in from Belarus are marked with O's (or circles?).

theghostpt
Sep 1, 2009

Saladman posted:

But... Ukrainians don't need visas to enter the Schengen zone anyway?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_...20Index%202022.

I think the implication being that they can stay more time than what the visa free entry allows
I'm not Czech though, just live here and my Czech ain't the strongest so maybe I misunderstood

paul_soccer12
Jan 5, 2020

by Fluffdaddy

Wafflepoet posted:

. But what Putin does, what he has been doing, especially on his borders, is demonstrably worse than anything “the West” is doing.

Buddy there is a genocide in Yemen right now

Zotix
Aug 14, 2011



https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1496788635940581376?t=5K8eOD_j3DUrZjbAnpnaqw&s=19

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/1496778152387178508

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEXVCuN-ylg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKb-1zLKQxQ

Zotix fucked around with this message at 11:33 on Feb 24, 2022

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

pippy posted:

I think it's just to prevent friendly fire.

And even more importantly, to make traffic management at choke points more manageable. I doubt the O's and V's and Z's are supposed to shoot each others...

Darth Walrus
Feb 13, 2012

White Rock posted:

This sort of talk completely removes any agency from any Eastern European state, most which (rightly) see themselves being occupied by a foreign invader for 50+ years, and would like to avoid that in the future. Thus, NATO. Can you blame them?
I guess NATO/EU should have refused any of them to join, regardless of interest? What exactly would you like to happen, a buffer state of semi-independent countries, who would then not immediately become Russian puppet states or be in the same situation as Ukraine?

What would your take be on Russia establishing, funding, and arming an alliance of South American (and/or Middle Eastern) countries to help them defend against US aggression?

That's not a gotcha where I think the answer is obvious, by the way - I think it's a hypothetical that's genuinely worth exploring and considering the pros and cons of to put this whole thing in perspective. I also think it's not quite as outlandish as it sounds, given how much of Putin's international policy seems to be about demonstrating that Russia can play the same game by the same rules as the US. Next time America does an imperialism, I think we can expect a shitload of Russian weaponry to mysteriously appear in the hands of their adversaries.

Dwesa
Jul 19, 2016

attack on Mariupol and Shchastia repelled for now

https://hromadske.ua/ru/posts/v-vsu-soobshili-chto-ukrainskie-voennye-kontroliruyut-mariupol-i-schaste

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=318729696949014&set=a.291203543034963

Dwesa fucked around with this message at 11:37 on Feb 24, 2022

Kaal
May 22, 2002

through thousands of posts in D&D over a decade, I now believe I know what I'm talking about. if I post forcefully and confidently, I can convince others that is true. no one sees through my facade.

Saladman posted:

But... Ukrainians don't need visas to enter the Schengen zone anyway?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_...20Index%202022.

I would expect that any special exemption for Ukrainian refugees would be with the intent of allowing them to work, which the Schengen visa prohibits. It also would mean that people could stay for longer than 90 days.

Al-Saqr
Nov 11, 2007

One Day I Will Return To Your Side.
I heard there’s massive fighting happening in Kherson I wonder how it’s going

Charlz Guybon
Nov 16, 2010

Nenonen posted:

Wellllll it's not that straightforward. Finland was also neutral in 1956, 1968, 1979, 2008, 2014... can you say that Finland is under more threat now than previously?

Also bear in mind that Finland has no territorial disputes with Russia, no breakaway provinces like Ossetia, and there is no significant Russian minority either. Unlike Georgia and Ukraine, there just isn't anything to fight over.

Russia has also previously warned that joining Nato would worsen relations between the two countries, and while Nato would protect Finland from being invaded it wouldn't do much against all other sorts of malicious behaviour, such as cyber attacks or bringing refugees to the border. Nato membership would also oblige Finland to join in the defense of other members in case there is war, which I find just as unlikely - but if that did happen then strict military neutrality would be better.

But on the other hand, Russia once again displays itself as an unpredictable brute of a neighbour, and these kinds of preparations have to be made during fair weather, as the WW2 showed that finding help once the war has started is difficult and can make unfortunate bed fellows. I'm in favour of membership personally, but I still don't think it's a no-brainer.

Putin said Russia should not let the republics go in 1917. One of those countries was Finland.

GABA ghoul
Oct 29, 2011

First confirmed OSINT front line information

https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1496794231763255297?t=uwUceTQsl5D9f7sLdk1d0A&s=19

:(

Zotix
Aug 14, 2011



loving christ, I just watched a video of a rocket/ missile whatever the gently caress just kill a kid on a bike. That's enough of this for tonight. gently caress all of this.

Willo567
Feb 5, 2015

Cheating helped me fail the test and stay on the show.
This poo poo is just so loving depressing and scary. I know I said that Putin wouldn't nuke the world, but I'm still really nervous about his warning and what those consequences would be if someone were to intervene. Is there any reason to believe that with that vague threat he isn't bluffing

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Nenonen posted:

Wellllll it's not that straightforward. Finland was also neutral in 1956, 1968, 1979, 2008, 2014... can you say that Finland is under more threat now than previously?

Also bear in mind that Finland has no territorial disputes with Russia, no breakaway provinces like Ossetia, and there is no significant Russian minority either. Unlike Georgia and Ukraine, there just isn't anything to fight over.

Russia has also previously warned that joining Nato would worsen relations between the two countries, and while Nato would protect Finland from being invaded it wouldn't do much against all other sorts of malicious behaviour, such as cyber attacks or bringing refugees to the border. Nato membership would also oblige Finland to join in the defense of other members in case there is war, which I find just as unlikely - but if that did happen then strict military neutrality would be better.

But on the other hand, Russia once again displays itself as an unpredictable brute of a neighbour, and these kinds of preparations have to be made during fair weather, as the WW2 showed that finding help once the war has started is difficult and can make unfortunate bed fellows. I'm in favour of membership personally, but I still don't think it's a no-brainer.
Obviously Finland is probably under no direct threat now, although that's not necessarily what Putin thinks.

Maintaining neutrality was definitely the right move to keep good relations since the fall of USSR but shouldn't the relations worsen when one of the countries starts invading its other neighbors? From purely self-interest view of course it might be better to just continue freeloading off nato strength of course :)

fatherboxx
Mar 25, 2013

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1496796176234000390?t=9oF4Biha1xq_mTeWO5Oj-g&s=19

Beyond ghoulish

Saladman
Jan 12, 2010
Yeah if I lived in Finland I would be pushing hard for NATO now.

I'm not sure here, Switzerland, really needs it. I'd probably support us joining if Putin goes and does a ground attack on Kiev and takes much of the country, but probably be lukewarm if he "only" takes Donbas.

I wonder if we'll join sanctions in any meaningful way, or if all the oligarchs will still be able to ski in Gstaad next winter.

Zotix posted:

loving christ, I just watched a video of a rocket/ missile whatever the gently caress just kill a kid on a bike. That's enough of this for tonight. gently caress all of this.

I don't want to see that in particular, but where are those kinds of videos posted now that LiveLeak is gone?

Kamrat
Nov 27, 2012

Thanks for playing Alone in the dark 2.

Now please fuck off
It's so weird watching the live-streams from the OP (the ones that are still up), people are just going on with their day, getting groceries, walking at a leisurely pace, hanging out with friends etc.

Answers Me
Apr 24, 2012
https://twitter.com/ajenglish/status/1496787040197046273?s=21

‘Issuing weapons to anyone who wants them’ sounds like a recipe for absolute chaos

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Darth Walrus posted:

What would your take be on Russia establishing, funding, and arming an alliance of South American (and/or Middle Eastern) countries to help them defend against US aggression?

That's not a gotcha where I think the answer is obvious, by the way - I think it's a hypothetical that's genuinely worth exploring and considering the pros and cons of to put this whole thing in perspective. I also think it's not quite as outlandish as it sounds, given how much of Putin's international policy seems to be about demonstrating that Russia can play the same game by the same rules as the US. Next time America does an imperialism, I think we can expect a shitload of Russian weaponry to mysteriously appear in the hands of their adversaries.

I mean, you might want to start another thread if you want to discuss this but I don't see any scenario where the hypothetical doesn't collapse pretty quickly. Who signs up to this alliance? What actual US (potential or otherwise) aggression are these countries worried about and how do they see an alliance with Russia helping them? What does the presence of Russian arms actually do to US options in the region?

And then if you can get through all that, you need to ask 'Is the world a better place if a regime that would align with Putin was able to defend itself against US coersion?' and there I would put to you that in any scenario you can convincingly construct the answer to that question is almost certainly going to be 'no' (whereas a world in which Ukraine was able to deter Russian aggression would obviously be a much better place).

But there's a reason this isn't happening today, which is that it doesn't makes sense for any of the actors you are talking about.

Goatson
Oct 21, 2020

The real 12 points was the Thug-Friends we made along the way

paul_soccer12 posted:

Buddy there is a genocide in Yemen right now

Can you demonstrate how genocide in Yemen is related to European affairs and to this war in particular?

FishBulbia
Dec 22, 2021


I don't think they intended to defend these areas at all



FishBulbia fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Mar 3, 2022

Melancholia
Jul 5, 2021

Elizabeth Cluppins posted:

Attempting to pull in a country under active threats of war and immediately after civil uprising to a defensive alliance isn't a viable political move. Russia would have finally had valid justification for their 'NATO-backed coup' spin.

The fate of Ukraine was likely sealed when they chose to trust in the budapest memorandum and strive for neutrality. They might have been in NATO by now if that had been their aim since 1991, but, instead there's this.

I don’t disagree with any of this. It was never possible for Ukraine to join NATO with separatists - to say nothing of actual Russian military - fracturing the country’s east. I understand that. My response to the other person merely reflected what outcome I would have personally liked to see happen. It’s indisputable that the Ukrainian people sought to secure political, economic and military safety with the “West” and that European and American actors have every indication to the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian government, and certainly Putin that this was possible.

Zelenskyy, Putin, and the Ukrainian people have obviously been operating under the assumption that Ukraine could join NATO. At no point has NATO or individual NATO states ever made it clear that this would never be possible. My entire takeaway from this entire situation (besides gently caress Putin) is this: NATO leaders failed the Ukrainians, like the Georgians, because they were never as serious about Ukraine as Putin. They aren’t loving responsible for this (as some think I’m saying or implying), I would not say (as some have) that NATO betrayed the Ukrainians, but I do feel the Ukrainian people were fundamentally abandoned.

paul_soccer12 posted:

Buddy there is a genocide in Yemen right now

We’re talking about southeastern Europe right now, comrade. We’re not playing the “Who’s loving worst” game right now, we’re talking about what that oval office Putin is doing in Ukraine. You need to be able to separate these things.

Melancholia fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Feb 24, 2022

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Charlz Guybon posted:

Putin said Russia should not let the republics go in 1917. One of those countries was Finland.

That was about Ukraine, though, and more specifically rationalizing why it's totally logical that Russia should take back Crimea and Donbass. Russia has at no point voiced any dissatisfaction over the sovereignty of Finland, unless you count Zhirinovsky as the true representative of Russia.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zotix
Aug 14, 2011



Saladman posted:

Yeah if I lived in Finland I would be pushing hard for NATO now.

I'm not sure here, Switzerland, really needs it. I'd probably support us joining if Putin goes and does a ground attack on Kiev and takes much of the country, but probably be lukewarm if he "only" takes Donbas.

I wonder if we'll join sanctions in any meaningful way, or if all the oligarchs will still be able to ski in Gstaad next winter.

I don't want to see that in particular, but where are those kinds of videos posted now that LiveLeak is gone?

I found them both in the r/worldnews and r/Ukraineinvasion subreddit.

There were two videos one is like a security cam of the strike and the second is the aftermath from someone walking the street from a different angle and the vehicles and such in the videos show that it's the same incident. I believe one video was hosted on Twitter, and the second was hosted elsewhere.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5