Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

[Geronimo]

Dauphin's right that the lack of interest in offering a narrow constitutional amendment to facilitate the court means that there must be more motive to dodging the court than just constitutional adherence. Claiming that dodging the court is purely about respecting the constitution would be like Russia claiming its refusal to negotiate the status of any part of the oblasts annexed from Ukraine is purely about respecting the Russian constitution's prohibitions against negotiating the status of any Russian territory with any foreign state.

In both cases the conversation shouldn't end with using the constitution as an excuse. Rather, if the constitution is really the barrier, the conversation would be how to fix that in a way that preserves the intended goal of the constitutional obstruction.

[The Mad Monk]

I appreciate you are an an asshat and can't read. I said you can make an amendment. You choose not to, means it's not the constitution, but rather a desire to not offer up US citizens for prosecution

You should look into what is required to amend the Constitution in this country. (We reversed the Prohibition amendment roughly nine years after it was clear it was a mistake that caused us a LOT of damage)

[Berzerker]

unapproved

[BeBMan]

Interesting

Not much travel options for Vlad anymore, but then he's mostly sitting behind the table anyway these days....

[Geronimo]

You should look into what is required to amend the Constitution in this country. (We reversed the Prohibition amendment roughly nine years after it was clear it was a mistake that caused us a LOT of damage)

It is a lot of process but it doesn't have to cost much. Amendments can be handled without special elections. The main obstacle to a clearly benign amendment is dysfunctional partisan politics making even broadly acceptable proposals into a partisan issue that the less motivated party will turn into a bargaining chip for concessions elsewhere and the low obstruction threshold of the amendment process making it an easy political hostage.

[Berzerker]

unapproved

[Berzerker]

So do you claim that the Separatists were unarmed?

Where did I claim that?

Did uncle Sam round up and arm a bunch of Nazis christen them "Azov" and give them secret order to start a proxy war with Russia by attacking the unarmed Separatists? When did the Separatists get armed? Who armed them? You've said that the Separatists declared independence because they wanted peace. Historically not really the ideal way to obtain peace, especially in a state that is not at war IMHO, but whatever. If they wanted peace so bad why do we have no attempts to surrender? That seems like a legitimate pacifist response when attacked by a force that is not otherwise at war from a state you just declared independence from. Can you find a single instance of such a surrender?

I said the separatists didn't want to be ruled by the coup backers

They wanted to conquer the entire Donbas from Ukraine and make it part of Russia.

Then why did they agree to Minsk? About a 1/3rd voted for independence and a small majority voted for a Minsk-like deal

Azov was a brand new militia limited to Mariupol

'April 2014: The Azov Battalion’s first violent attack was in April 2014 when it clashed with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk'

https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion

In August 2014 however, before Azov did much of anything besides fight those Mariupol street fights with Separatist Neo-nazi militias, the Ukrainian government Anti-terrorist operation had almost reached the Russian borders. The neo-nazi street fighting was overrun by Ukrainian government forces. Peace was about to break out. The Ukrainian government forces weren't ethnic cleansing or genociding. They were literally taking the streets back from the gangs. Separatist "Minister of Defence" Igor Girkin (Muscovite employed by FSB) publicly warned that without Russian military involvement the Donbas republics would collapse. He said recruitment from the locals was failing.

So a half year after the war started the Donbas told Moscow they needed help because local recruitment couldn't stop Azov. I thought the separatists were little green men.

[PLATO]

Dauphin's right that the lack of interest in offering a narrow constitutional amendment to facilitate the court means that there must be more motive to dodging the court than just constitutional adherence. Claiming that dodging the court is purely about respecting the constitution would be like Russia claiming its refusal to negotiate the status of any part of the oblasts annexed from Ukraine is purely about respecting the Russian constitution's prohibitions against negotiating the status of any Russian territory with any foreign state.

In both cases the conversation shouldn't end with using the constitution as an excuse. Rather, if the constitution is really the barrier, the conversation would be how to fix that in a way that preserves the intended goal of the constitutional obstruction.

I think the main reason was the possibility of prosecution related to various "peacekeeping" roles. The U.S. just felt that they would be singled out for one and that unjust actors would try to create situations that might be no-win situations.

[BeBMan]

Dmitry Medvedev threatens to launch missile strike on ICC in response to war crimes warrant against Putin

https://meduza.io/en/news/2023/03/20/dmitry-medvedev-threatens-to-launch-missile-strike-on-icc-in-response-to-war-crimes-warrant-against-putin

Kremlin threats are sooo 2022....

[Berzerker]

but they backed that threat up

[pchang]

How many missiles would it take before Russia managed to hit the building they are aiming for?

[PLATO]

How many missiles would it take before Russia managed to hit the building they are aiming for?

All of them. Then 50-50 if they can hit it.

[Geronimo]

Where did I claim that?

If you agree that they were armed then that is progress. Since the Separatists would consist of Russian armed neo-nazi militias seizing Ukrainian public buildings you can't claim that the proxy war was somehow begun by Washington Nazis. Russia was in the game to conquer from the start and in the Donbas they wanted to do so via proxy war. Russia started the proxy war.

I said the separatists didn't want to be ruled by the coup backers

So what? They started a war. That was the problem. I didn't want to be ruled by Donald Trump. If Pence had somehow been prevailed upon to withhold certification of Biden's electors in 2021 and Trump had managed to get himself certified as the presidential winner through mob violence and intimidation of Congress and the supreme court I would still be participating in starting a war if I joined an armed militia that seized the public buildings in my state and declared independence. If in that situation, Trumps government created a legal mechanism for private militias to move in to battle my militia and reclaim control of my state for the federal government it wouldn't matter if Chinese and Russian crowdsourcing raised some neo-nazi militias of Americans under that mechanism. The war was on the moment we declared independence through armed revolt. Blaming the PRC or Russia in that case for the resulting proxy war would be ludicrous even if my militia didn't turn out later to have been armed by deliveries through Canada of NATO originating weapons and the militia had been taken almost immediately over by non-US citizens from the countries sending our weapons. Blame for this hypothetical war could be assigned to the milita, perhaps to the foreign NATO officers that took command of our miltia but not to the Russians or to the PRC.

Your entire premise that this Donbas war and especially Russia's subsequent vast 3 sided invasion of Ukraine is an engineered proxy war imposed by Washington spycraft is absurd. From its very roots this war had direct Russian material and managerial support and direction. Even if it had not, the rebellion would have constituted an act of war through insurrection. Short of sending in an army to "liberate" the area like Russia tried to do, there is nothing Washington could have done to make or to allow peace in the area.

Furthermore, a signed peace agreement is not peace. The Separatists never complied with any of the agreements. You say Zelensky tried to implement the agreement and Nazi miltias under Washington control stopped him by threating violence. That's not what candidate Zelensky said. He said "The Minsk peace process, which has stopped: It must be restarted. It is a war with Russia, so the talks should be with Russia. It must be in the diplomatic format, with the presence of Western partners. We will never sacrifice our people or our territories." The problem Berz is that Russia claimed it was not bound by treaty as it was not a party to it. Russia had neo-nazi Alexander Zakharchenko and neo-nazi Igor Plotnitsky as the lead negotiators (and frequent Moscow visitors) on behalf of the Separatists who were led by non-Ukrainian resident FSB agent and Russian citizen Igor Girkin who had never lived a day of his life in Ukraine, let lone the Donbas. Russia also had fellow muscovite Russian citizen Mikhail Zurabov to separately represent Russia themselves. The OSCE also had a chair, represented by a Swiss Heidi Tagliavini and Ukraine had one chair for a Ukrainian to represent its interests. The agreement was thus the result of two Russian agents from Ukraine reporting to a Russian citizen FSB agent, one Russian diplomatic official, one Swiss and one Ukrainian. Russia had 3 out of 5 chairs, yet Russia claimed it was not a party to the agreement. You ask over and over why Russia would sign a peace agreement if it didn't want peace? It signed because it It flatly declared all along that it had no obligations under the agreement. Its signature said "our enemy Ukraine must meet these demands". How does that indicate Russia wanted peace? How does that indicate Russia wanted an end to the proxy war? It also signed to gain leverage to end the Sanctions against Russia. It clearly would not need peace to lobby for that. Russia refused to meet with Zelensky about the treaty and disavowed any obligations to it. The one time Putin met with a desperate Zelensky he refused to even discuss Minsk II or the earlier Minsk I. Russian soldiers were serving in the Donbas, reporting to Putin. This in addition to any Donbas originating soldiers who were also illegally present in Ukraine and had to leave per the Agreement. If Russia wanted a Minsk peace it would have to at least acknowledge the treaty obligations and it refused. When Zelensky didn't not "implement Minsk" it wasn't a broken promise. He had insisted all along that the Minsk process was stopped and it was incumbent on talks with Russia to proceed with it. Talks Russia refused to have. Russia willfully kept the war going Berz. The Russian trained and commanded Separatist army never stopped attacking Ukraine or receiving fresh supplies from the Russian border.

How does anything about Minsk make you think Russia wanted peace?

Then why did they agree to Minsk? About a 1/3rd voted for independence and a small majority voted for a Minsk-like deal

Russia agreed to Minsk for precisely the same reasons Hitler agreed to the Munich agreement. It's safer to defeat your enemies piece-meal through sowing division and wiping your arse with the agreements later than it is to honestly tell everybody upfront that you plan on coming back later to conquer everybody when their guard is down. Do you think Hitler desired peaceful settlement whatsoever when Munich was signed? Hitler wanted to create opportunity to conquer. Putin wanted sanctions relief and security for Crimea. His annexations in not just the Donbas but even further West show he wanted much more than peace. I am amazed that you constantly harp about Merkel accepting that Minsk needed to be pursued to give Ukraine time to prepare but assume the Russian parties were totally sincere in their negotiations. Russia envisioned an agreement that would force Ukraine to pull back all of the heavy weapons in the Donbas while the Separatists could remain in place providing cover for Russia military and sanctions against Russia could unravel as Ukrainian political concessions floundered at implementation. Putin has placed the highest possible priority on sanction-proofing Russia's economy and this would be much faster to achieve if the existing sanctions were lifted. Everything Russia has done with respect to Minsk was optimized for war not for peace.

'April 2014: The Azov Battalion’s first violent attack was in April 2014 when it clashed with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk'

https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/azov-battalion

This was Azov fighting as little more than a street gang in Mariupol. The idea that Azov unilaterally broke the peace is completely false.

So a half year after the war started the Donbas told Moscow they needed help because local recruitment couldn't stop Azov. I thought the separatists were little green men.

Donbas didn't tell Moscow anything. A Russian citizen Muscovite FSB agent who had never previously lived in Ukraine publicly complained directly to the Russian government that locals didn't want to join the Separatists. The Separatists were little green men top to bottom. They recruited as many locals as they could certainly but the movement was commanded, supplied and trained exclusively by Russian citizens.

[PLATO]

It is completely ludicrous and totally irresponsible to see anything other than blatant aggression coupled with serious war crimes that have caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people as ANYTHING other than Russia's responsibility at this point.

TENS of THOUSANDS dead and probably HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS DEAD. This would not be the case if the Russian military had not invaded. This was not caused by anything other than a megalomaniacs desire of Empire. He has basically said as much himself. To me this is case closed!

[Broken_Erika]

Russia appears to be beefing up it's tank force in Ukraine with.....T-54s and T-55

https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1638472120534458368