I’ve tried to search for opinions on what’s going on in Ukraine, but most posts are incredibly old. I’m not too educated on the matter myself (well, aside from keeping up most of the time with what cities are under whose control and all of that). I haven’t really heard much about the geopolitical side of things, and it’s hard to know what’s disinfo or not; That’s why I’d like to ask: What is your stance on the Ukraine war?
the end of the USSR was a disaster
The first gulf war is an interesting thing to look at. Saddamn told the US state department he would invade Kuait because they were cross drilling into Iraqi oil fields and we’re traditionally a ‘part of Iraq’.
State department said we don’t care
Of course, they did care and used that as cassus belli to attack Iraq and ‘contain’ Saddam which was the original intended consequence.
The war in Ukraine is the same. The neocons in the US have wanted Ukraine to open it’s markets to blackrock and Goldman Sachs forever. They helped foment the coup and selected Ukrainians president. They knew Russia would invade if Ukraine started the process to join NATO.
The US wanted this war. It was a trap for Putin and because he is an idiot he fell for it. The goal is to weaken Russia , sell us LNG to Germany at 200% markup and flood Lockheed and Raytheon with billions of dollars. It’s a win win for the US because no American boots on the ground they get to fight Russia via proxy until the last Ukrainian.
I’m totally against the war and old enough to understand the only way it ends is with a negotiated settlement.
It was a trap for Putin and because he is an idiot he fell for it.
You should read less NYT.
“Damned if you do damned if you don’t” is not a “trap.” Being lied to over and over is not a “trap.” Putin was backed into a corner. He didn’t want to fight but in the end it was either fight or let nazis and NATO live on Russia border and genocide Russian speaking civilians until they were ready to invade Russia itself.
If Putin is “an idiot” how did he manage to insulate Russia’s entire economy from sanctions? He spent the whole time he was trying to avoid the fight also making contingencies for when the fight happened.
The war is hollowing out the EU. They have lost access to cheap Russian energy and so their manufacturing capability is being gutted. All they have left is their Financial capital and without industry to back it up it will disappear before they can rectify their energy situation. European companies are already moving to China.
While the MIC is gaining short term profits from the war overall it will be a major loss. Furthermore the war has shown the global south the need for an alternative to $US. BRICS+ will be direct competition for american dollar hegemony destroying its value. Any $ gains the MIC makes it will have to pay back ten fold to the global south who they traditionary exploited for raw materials. The global south will have alternative buyers that will give them fairer prices in $ which will cause $ to lose more value. On top of all that it has shown how flawed NATO weapon systems really are, how they fare against much cheaper weapons from Russia, and how slowly they are produced. Any nation looking at purchasing weapons supplies is going to consider Russia because they are better value for money by factors of 2 digits and they wont have decades long wait lists.
The material reality of things on the ground in the war and in economies of the nations involved is completely contrary to your post.
I agree with a lot of your points, it was a ‘fucked if you do fucked if you don’t’ situation for Putin and actually I’m not even sure about the Great Man theory of history so even if someone else was leading Russia they would probably still have responded the same way. I don’t know, it still feels like a trap though. And of course the dialectical analysis shows that by cutting Russia off the swift system the BRICS economic integration just intensifies and accelerates de-dollarisation.
But I stand by my comment about Putin being stupid. Calling it a police action without stating exact goals means he’s already lost the information war. There also is no way to win this war unless he goes shock and awe and literally destroys the entire country. Which is not the goal. So the Russian military cant destroy everything to force a solution, and the US is loving it, just pouring infinite money, tanks, jets, climbing the escalation ladder. They intend to outspend Russia and force a domestic coup. Which also won’t happen.
So it’s a lose lose for everyone except the military industrial complex, Goldman Sachs and US LNG exporters
But I stand by my comment about Putin being stupid. Calling it a police action without stating exact goals means he’s already lost the information war.
But he didn’t do that. Putin said exactly what the SMO was supposed to do. Putin has some serious flaws but being stupid isn’t one of them. Stop reading the NYT. “because x is stupid/incompetent/insane/evil” is the weakest analysis you can do. It is almost never true and just shows that you don’t understand the situation. It’s marvel movie level thinking.
The stated aims of the SMO are Defence of the Donbas separatist states, Demilitarization, Denazification, and forcing Ukraine to stay neutral. Since Ukraine and the west proved they are pathological liars Russia’s game plan changed a little and now they have incorporated the break away states into Russia proper but the other goals have stayed the same.
Ukraine’s army will eventually collapse. They can’t stand up against Russia forever. They cant recruit soldiers fast enough, The west cant manufacture weapons fast enough and even if they could they wouldn’t want to give them away to a failed state. When that happens all that remains is tearing down some nazi monuments and installing a puppet government.
Again the MIC and LNG exporters win is a short lived boost that will ultimately accelerate their own downfall. Their wins are at the cost of their allies. USA are cannibalizing Europe to prop themselves up. This is only a win if you don’t look past the immediate future.
The stated aims of the SMO are … Denazification
Putin returned the Azov battalion leaders and fighters to Ukraine in a prisoner swap. If Azov are Nazis, as is commonly stated, Putin is doing a very, very poor job at denazification in Ukraine.
What was he supposed to do? Let Russian POWs be shot and tortured while azov nazis get treated like humans?
The plan isn’t to hunt down and kill every nazi. Its to make a society where nazism is strongly discouraged. When Ukraine surrenders there will be prison sentences for nazis in Ukraine like there are in Russia.
A negotiated settlement is worth nothing without all of the russian soldiers leaving ukraine.
https://lemmygrad.ml/post/687025
You can check out this post from about a month ago with a lot of good analysis and discussion in the comments.
well, most people here support Russia and Z.
War is a rich man’s game, and this one is no different.
Putin is a reactionary, that isn’t in question. He’s not going to bring any benefit to the workers of Russia. The only reason he’s popular is because he brought stability after the Soviet Union was taken out behind the barn. After that happened, they had Yeltsin, a drunk, incompetent disaster of a person and a politician. Putin’s a far better alternative.
He started this war to protect the interests of Russia as a political entity, which does not include Russian workers. NATO has been aggressive towards Russia because the United States’ empire has no tolerance for anyone not playing ball with them, even if they’re capitalists themselves. This war has nothing to do with denazifying Ukraine (more on that in a moment), it’s entirely about preserving the interests of Russian national capital.
On the end of Ukraine we have Zelenskiy, who is all too happy to throw Ukrainian men into the meatgrinder to get in good with NATO and other liberal alliances. Ukraine has a history of radical nationalism (and by proxy naziism, given the proclivities of many “national heroes” of the country to be bedfellows with the NSDAP and related people/orgs) which provides a good reason for Putin to start this mess.
Make no mistake, this war is the same as any other: a way for powerful, rich men to play chess with real human lives to boost their ego and their buddies’ interests. There is no benefit for any working person to be found in the war itself or in the victory of either side.
Yes, there are nazis in Ukraine. No, this does not justify slaughtering tons of working class lives (most of whom are not even nazi-adjacent).
Being anti-war is the only stance one should take. No war but class war.
its a war between G7 and global south , its a war between Russia and NATO countries , its a war between Donbass ordinary army against Nazis or nazified people. Its a war to decide which way the future of the world will go , either it will be BRICS+CELAC+ASEAN+SCO or NATO+G7+WEF.
Do I support innocent civilians dying or workers being sent to fight and getting killed? No. Do I support stamping out of Nazis? Yes. Russia has a right to security guarantees on its border which the west has continually undermined for the last 30 years. Ukraine is being use as pawn to destroy Russia and Russia made the ugly decision of striking back. I welcome the downfall of NATO.
I welcome the downfall of NATO.
Considering Russia’s invasion has directly lead to the doubling of NATO’s border with Russia (via Finland joining), the soon to be member Sweden, as well as many NATO countries spending more on defense, I fail to see how Russia’s invasion has done anything but strengthen NATO.
You think countries like Sweden taking money away from public services and funneling them into corrupt and bloated private military-industrial corporations makes them “stronger”?
The war is a proxy war between NATO and Russia that started in 2014 after the Maidan coup. When NATO threatened to allow Ukraine to join, it was a major escalation that demanded a response from Russia. In that sense, their SMO is an act of self-defense. I unequivocally support Russia on this, not because I agree with the Russian government’s domestic policy or long term vision for the world, but because NATO is the greater evil, and if they successfully contain Russia, then China is next, and we may never see a free world in our lifetimes.
2014 after the Maidan coup.
There was no such thing. Yanukovich broke his election promise regarding starting the EU association process, protests happened, snipers shooting at protesters and this law happend, which resulted in his impeachment and new elections.
Even if you consider his impeachment to be sus (the Rada played it fast and loose but has the power and had the votes) ordinary elections were held soon after, legitimising the following president (Poroshenko).
When NATO threatened to allow Ukraine to join
First off, There was never a point in time where Ukraine wasn’t allowed to join in principle. Membership is generally open.
Secondly, regarding European geostrategy, NATO is irrelevant in this case as Ukraine wanted to join the EU and the EU, too, is a defensive alliance.
it was a major escalation that demanded a response from Russia.
Escalation of what? Russia’s inability to re-constitute parts of its empire?
See, this is what really annoys me as a European: All these “NATO is threatening Russia” takes are incredibly Seppo-brained. Also, displaying the worst part of brainrot coming out of geostrategic Realism: They’re predicated on the idea that the only states ever having any agency are the US and Russia (because “superpower”) and everyone else is their pawn.
What possible reason could have countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland have to join NATO? Might it have something to do with being invaded, time and time again in history, by Russia and treated as colonial subjects?
Russia has been conquering its neighbours before the US even existed. Or do you seriously think a continent-sized country comes along naturally, without conquest?
(Side note: You should look at the Soviet opinion on geostrategic Realism. They called it a fig-leaf for imperialism, which is a completely fair point – and Russia, and anyone else using this “big player and a bunch of chesspieces without will of their own” model, is guilty of the same thing.)
but because NATO is the greater evil,
NATO is a fucking joke in this conflict. For one, the US has to be dragged kicking and screaming into doing anything. Turkey is being… Turkey. Even more, for many members it’s a moderating force: If you ask Poles we should immediately put boots on the ground, march to Moscow, not worry about nukes it’s more important Russia gets dismantled than us not getting glassed. That’s the kind of attitude Russia has, over the centuries, imprinted in its neighbours.
On balance I’m in favour of dismantling NATO, with the caveat that without Europeans in the mix, the US might get worse. But that’s a general point, “NATO good” or “NATO bad” doesn’t really play into whether Russia is in the fault here. And it is: It violated the territoriality integrity of Ukraine, of borders it itself very much agreed to not so long ago.
What kind of precedent does that set, saying “Here, give up your nukes and we’ll respect your borders” and then violating those very borders? When you go by “the purpose of a system is what it does” then boycotting nuclear non-proliferation seems to be what Russia is intent on doing because who is ever going to give up nukes if the result is getting invaded by a nuclear power.
Last, but not least: How can it be a bloody proxy war if Russia is participating directly. And Ukraine is fighting as a proxy for… Ukraine? Do words have meaning?
Colonialists gtfo
So we’re just gonna ignore that the US admitted to installing Porochenko lol okay
