The Ukraine War, implications, outcome?

[Black_Dragon43]

Pretty much every sentence here reads like a low level Russian state media late night news anchor.

The most unnecessary of the statements may have been "Russia will become Iraq / go back to 90s USSR collapse within 2 decades if they don't make a move now." There is no need to justify Russian aggression against a sovereign state. Pitiful all around.

Unfortunately @Xeon has done that from the very beginning. I’m actually beginning to wonder if he’s not a Russian agent paid to be here to spread their propaganda

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

Wow, what's this?

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/us-politics/hunter-biden-accidentally-paid-russian-prostitute-us25000-from-joes-account/news-story/497a37fc9ec1db6a36d983c5f588bcae

 

[Silverfox148]

Pretty much every sentence here reads like a low level Russian state media late night news anchor.

The most unnecessary of the statements may have been "Russia will become Iraq / go back to 90s USSR collapse within 2 decades if they don't make a move now." There is no need to justify Russian aggression against a sovereign state. Pitiful all around.

You are absolutely correct if you look at it from a moral lens, the aggression cannot be justified against a sovereign state. However, that's not how powerful countries see or behave in the world, by the same standard the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan which were US led as well as the current war in Yemen are entirely unjustified. Whether a war is justified or not is not going to stop one single war, it could be argued that no war is ever morally justified.

The real point which you and others fail to realize is that Russia and it's strategic position is in very real danger right now under U.S led hegemony, to the current Russian leadership this is an existential war/question. The Russians don't want to give up their strategic position in the world, yet economically/military/culturally they are no longer a world power, all they have really is Russian gas/oil/coal, etc. The U.S is directly/indirectly trying to undermine this via "green energy/global warming/etc", this is a direct threat to them from their eyes. They are also seeing their neighbor China grow very strong politically/economically/militarily, Russia does not want to be a vassal to China either so it leaves them in a very tricky position, watch Russia's strategic position inherited from the USSR slowly wither away to China/US or take some type of action to try to undermine/create an alternate to U.S hegemony.

The last thing this war is about is Ukraine, I suspect the Kremlin expected the current reaction of the west with seizing the hundreds of billions/sanctions/etc. This is going to get very complicated for everyone involved, the people who will suffer the most will of course be the Ukrainian people.

While their is no excuse for war crimes, let's also not forget that the Ukrainians and their leadership are not some passive entity, they are actively escalating against Russia and that is their complete right to do so , but when you escalate their will be a response from the other party. The civilians are completely innocent for the most part, but the Ukrainian leadership is not, the Japanese fought valiantly in the Pacific often times to the death yet no one went around calling them cowards after they capitulated after the two atom bombs got dropped.

If you are leading a country you must consider civilian casualties in your escalation/war.

 

[Napoolion]

You are absolutely correct if you look at it from a moral lens, the aggression cannot be justified against a sovereign state. However, that's not how powerful countries see or behave in the world, by the same standard the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan which were US led as well as the current war in Yemen are entirely unjustified. Whether a war is justified or not is not going to stop one single war, it could be argued that no war is ever morally justified.

The real point which you and others fail to realize is that Russia and it's strategic position is in very real danger right now under U.S led hegemony, to the current Russian leadership this is an existential war/question. The Russians don't want to give up their strategic position in the world, yet economically/military/culturally they are no longer a world power, all they have really is Russian gas/oil/coal, etc. The U.S is directly/indirectly trying to undermine this via "green energy/global warming/etc", this is a direct threat to them from their eyes. They are also seeing their neighbor China grow very strong politically/economically/militarily, Russia does not want to be a vassal to China either so it leaves them in a very tricky position, watch Russia's strategic position inherited from the USSR slowly wither away to China/US or take some type of action to try to undermine/create an alternate to U.S hegemony.

The last thing this war is about is Ukraine, I suspect the Kremlin expected the current reaction of the west with seizing the hundreds of billions/sanctions/etc. This is going to get very complicated for everyone involved, the people who will suffer the most will of course be the Ukrainian people.

While their is no excuse for war crimes, let's also not forget that the Ukrainians and their leadership are not some passive entity, they are actively escalating against Russia and that is their complete right to do so , but when you escalate their will be a response from the other party. The civilians are completely innocent for the most part, but the Ukrainian leadership is not, the Japanese fought valiantly in the Pacific often times to the death yet no one went around calling them cowards after they capitulated after the two atom bombs got dropped.

If you are leading a country you must consider civilian casualties in your escalation/war.

Strategically speaking obviously Russia WANTS to have better geopolitical borders. They WANT to control and influence politics all over Eurasia, from Kamchatka to Lisbon. They WANT to have all of Eastern Europe. Now there is a whole bunch of territories in-between we are talking about and population of these independent countries DO NOT WANT to be a part of the Russian empire. Eastern Europe remembers the soviet times where their language and culture was deliberately destroyed, most of the economical output were sent to Moscow and there were also gulags where native people were sent, so they can import the Russians in to "freed" homes. Now of course they have "Russian minority" to protect even if their human rights have not been touched in those countries. Baltic states gave up in 1940s without a fight, whoever worked for the old government was shot anyway. Civilian casualties still happened whoever seemed "not aligned with communist ways". Innocent people were tortured until they accepted whatever crimes they were told that they did. So this is why I see argument of "why are you fighting, it's your fault that there are civilian casualties" as victim blaming. It would not be better if you would bend over and let the Russians fk you. This is why I don't see it only Russia vs USA thing.

Unfortunately for Ukraine, they have no way out than to make the bully cry and that will take a while. They will only understand force. Just like Nazi Germany needed to be dealt with force. Appeasement did not work then nor will it work now. It would take a month if U.S and rest of NATO would really help Ukraine out and give them the offensive weapons they need. For now, this will take a lot of lives unfortunately with the weapons they have for Ukraine to get their lands back.

If NATO does not supply the weapons and Ukraine loses some land, this will not stop here. If Russia wins some kind of territory, it will downplay it's losses, they will have a victory parade (does not matter how many lives are lost in their side as well) and they will try to do something like that again. Most likely test NATO's unity on article 5.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Trevor Kuntz]

You are absolutely correct if you look at it from a moral lens, the aggression cannot be justified against a sovereign state. However, that's not how powerful countries see or behave in the world, by the same standard the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan which were US led as well as the current war in Yemen are entirely unjustified. Whether a war is justified or not is not going to stop one single war, it could be argued that no war is ever morally justified.

The real point which you and others fail to realize is that Russia and it's strategic position is in very real danger right now under U.S led hegemony, to the current Russian leadership this is an existential war/question. The Russians don't want to give up their strategic position in the world, yet economically/military/culturally they are no longer a world power, all they have really is Russian gas/oil/coal, etc. The U.S is directly/indirectly trying to undermine this via "green energy/global warming/etc", this is a direct threat to them from their eyes. They are also seeing their neighbor China grow very strong politically/economically/militarily, Russia does not want to be a vassal to China either so it leaves them in a very tricky position, watch Russia's strategic position inherited from the USSR slowly wither away to China/US or take some type of action to try to undermine/create an alternate to U.S hegemony.

The last thing this war is about is Ukraine, I suspect the Kremlin expected the current reaction of the west with seizing the hundreds of billions/sanctions/etc. This is going to get very complicated for everyone involved, the people who will suffer the most will of course be the Ukrainian people.

While their is no excuse for war crimes, let's also not forget that the Ukrainians and their leadership are not some passive entity, they are actively escalating against Russia and that is their complete right to do so , but when you escalate their will be a response from the other party. The civilians are completely innocent for the most part, but the Ukrainian leadership is not, the Japanese fought valiantly in the Pacific often times to the death yet no one went around calling them cowards after they capitulated after the two atom bombs got dropped.

If you are leading a country you must consider civilian casualties in your escalation/war.

This whole situation has made it crystal clear for me how wrong the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were. I was 9/10 years old when those invasions happened, and coming from a (formerly) very conservative family, thought George W Bush was a good guy when I was a kid.

Over the years, I realized Iraq and Afghanistan were just a huge waste of lives, resources, and energy, but now I feel like they were also completely immoral and without any long-term justification at all. I cannot point to any positive consequence at all from either war. My 25-year-old friend got turned into red mist on a dirt road in Afghanistan for literally zero gain whatsoever.

I really hope that Putin loses this war so that the Russians who currently support it at 80% approval rates can someday come to the same realization of how losing 10000+ soldiers, billions of rubles of resources, and inflicting thousands of civilian and Ukrainian military deaths was all a huge waste for absolutely nothing.

Yesterday, I saw a photo of a family burned to partial ashes in Bucha and all I could think about was how alive they were 6 weeks ago before Putin invaded and now they are dead and gone forever. Totally f*cked up. I know he has no conscience, but I wish there was a way I could force him and Bush (or Cheney or whoever) to experience the fear and moment of death of every dead civilian and every dead conscript/enlistee caused by these wars. It's what is deserved.

 

[Silverfox148]

This whole situation has made it crystal clear for me how wrong the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were. I was 9/10 years old when those invasions happened, and coming from a (formerly) very conservative family, thought George W Bush was a good guy when I was a kid.

Over the years, I realized Iraq and Afghanistan were just a huge waste of lives, resources, and energy, but now I feel like they were also completely immoral and without any long-term justification at all. I cannot point to any positive consequence at all from either war. My 25-year-old friend got turned into red mist on a dirt road in Afghanistan for literally zero gain whatsoever.

I really hope that Putin loses this war so that the Russians who currently support it at 80% approval rates can someday come to the same realization of how losing 10000+ soldiers, billions of rubles of resources, and inflicting thousands of civilian and Ukrainian military deaths was all a huge waste for absolutely nothing.

Yesterday, I saw a photo of a family burned to partial ashes in Bucha and all I could think about was how alive they were 6 weeks ago before Putin invaded and now they are dead and gone forever. Totally f*cked up. I know he has no conscience, but I wish there was a way I could force him and Bush (or Cheney or whoever) to experience the fear and moment of death of every dead civilian and every dead conscript/enlistee caused by these wars. It's what is deserved.

Agree 100% on Iraq and Afghanistan , WMD sounds even more if not just as crazy as denazification, it was all bullshit. I will ask you this in a genuine way, knowing how committed Cheney/Bush were , would you have counseled the Iraqis to escalate against the U.S military including with the use of civilians knowing there was very little chance they would prevail? Or would you counsel them on seeking a cease fire and eventual deescalation or would that be giving up? It's a serious question because I see people arguing for more escalation while at the same time being surprised and shocked that stuff like Buchna is happening, what exactly do people think will happen in a war?
The theory that the Russian military was going to collapse en masse and Putin was going to be dethroned in a coup as the basis for escalation has not borne any fruit and is unlikely too.

If this war continues in it's current form, the Russian military is only going to get more frustrated and commit more atrocities against civilians, they will get frustrated but they are unlikely to give up in masse, same goes for Putin. We've seen this movie before in Vietnam, it's atrocious for civilians. Same goes for the Ukrainian military, we've already seen the POW videos. I'm not calling for Ukraine to give up in any way, but their main advantage right now is to hole up in urban areas and exact costs on the Russians via Urban warfare, again that is the right of the Ukraine armed forces, but we've seen this tactic before in Chechnya to great effectiveness on the parts on the Chechnians up until the Russians decided just to level the place.

The Russian leadership view this as an existential conflict, so they are unlikely to give up. Hence a stalemate, with means Ukraine gets turned into rubble. Easy to say fight to the death/destruction when it's another country and not mine. Zelensky and the entire Ukrainian government have a responsibility to their own people to do as much to protect their civilians and seek de-escalation as it benefits their own country the most, expecting anything but destruction out of the Russian leadership is wishful thinking and it doesn't help civilians on the ground.

 

[Silverfox148]

Strategically speaking obviously Russia WANTS to have better geopolitical borders. They WANT to control and influence politics all over Eurasia, from Kamchatka to Lisbon. They WANT to have all of Eastern Europe. Now there is a whole bunch of territories in-between we are talking about and population of these independent countries DO NOT WANT to be a part of the Russian empire. Eastern Europe remembers the soviet times where their language and culture was deliberately destroyed, most of the economical output were sent to Moscow and there were also gulags where native people were sent, so they can import the Russians in to "freed" homes. Now of course they have "Russian minority" to protect even if their human rights have not been touched in those countries. Baltic states gave up in 1940s without a fight, whoever worked for the old government was shot anyway. Civilian casualties still happened whoever seemed "not aligned with communist ways". Innocent people were tortured until they accepted whatever crimes they were told that they did. So this is why I see argument of "why are you fighting, it's your fault that there are civilian casualties" as victim blaming. It would not be better if you would bend over and let the Russians fk you. This is why I don't see it only Russia vs USA thing.

Agree on the above, except that now Russia has made the decision to transition from WANT to TAKE(invasion of Ukraine).

How does one handle a nuclear armed adversary which views this TAKING as an existential matter? Is it by direct confrontation and a defeat of their military? Why wouldn't their military use nuclear weapons they possess if they were facing an outright defeat even if Putin is not around ? The US turned to nukes and obliterated two whole cities full of civilians in a war, why wouldn't the Russian military do it, knowing they seem to care even less about civilians than the U.S does.

People are taking this situation way too lightly with the fight to the death/escalate until the Russian military is defeated/Putin is overthrown. I guess the concept of tactical retreats/defeats is over for the time being and everyone is demanding maximalist positions which of course will end with maximalist damage for everyone involved.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Napoolion]

Agree on the above, except that now Russia has made the decision to transition from WANT to TAKE(invasion of Ukraine).

How does one handle a nuclear armed adversary which views this TAKING as an existential matter? Is it by direct confrontation and a defeat of their military? Why wouldn't their military use nuclear weapons they possess if they were facing an outright defeat even if Putin is not around ? The US turned to nukes and obliterated two whole cities full of civilians in a war, why wouldn't the Russian military do it, knowing they seem to care even less about civilians than the U.S does.

People are taking this situation way too lightly with the fight to the death/escalate until the Russian military is defeated/Putin is overthrown. I guess the concept of tactical retreats/defeats is over for the time being and everyone is demanding maximalist positions which of course will end with maximalist damage for everyone involved.

Ukraine has to win on their own land, that is the best outcome, which is why you see how careful Ukraine has attacked anything on Russian soil, just one oil refinery so far with helis and even then not exactly saying if they did it. Also why the west has been so painfully slow giving Ukraine the heavier weapons they need on attack. I would not cross the Russian border, there is really no benefits to do it and especially not give Russia a reason for general mobilization, they are doing limited covert mobilization right now. They are working on their people's minds though right now, to get some kind of mobilization going. I also think Ukraine understand that as well, which means that it is highly unlikely they cross the Russian border. They don't want to give a good reason for Russians to fight, it has all been pointless vague things so far and even then people believe it. But if they can say that there are Ukraine's troops on Russian soil, it would help getting more cannon fodder and a reason to fight. I am definitely not underestimating Russians if it comes for them to fight in their own soil, but in Ukraine, they really do not understand why they are there.

It is unlikely Putin is overthrown. They beat anyone who tries and poison/take care of any leaders who might be powerful enough to oppose Putin. Also average Russian has never seen democracy (they just remember the 90s chaos) and only watch state TV. They are used with one leader throughout history since getting wrecked by the mongols. Younger people though have more access to the outside world, but surprisingly a lot of them still don't speak English. Big contrast to Eastern Europe where everyone speaks at least one extra major language.

Best case scenario - West just keeps suppling with better weapons. Unfortunately Russia just has to suffer, mainly because they are not going to retreat yet themselves. The more troops desert, the better. From home calls when Russian soldiers were at Kyiv, it is unlikely most of them want to return to the battlefield unless they find a clever way to really make them. They saw what the war was like. Even if it is defeat, the current government will tell that the operation was successful (they have successfully DE nazified everything or whatever even that means in their propaganda), but Ukraine does not give any more land away. It is unlikely they get Crimea back though and not sure what they do with the Donbass. Would be great if Ukraine can keep it with some Russian education in that area or whatever so Russians have something to tell in their own media too "of how they showed them".

Not that great scenario - Some western politician's ego thinks he/she is an peace angel and can save the day and forces Ukraine to a shitty peace deal with Russia. We will see a new bigger crisis emerge again in a few years time because the "West is weak". Unfortunately this is how the Putin/Russians think. It means that their politics of lying, deceiving works to get what they want and they will not stop doing it. This is how the Germans thought before ww2 after the appeasement.

Mad max scenario - How it all escalated, nobody really knows, but at least you look good wearing leather pants and nipple rings.

 

[Trevor Kuntz]

Agree 100% on Iraq and Afghanistan , WMD sounds even more if not just as crazy as denazification, it was all bullshit. I will ask you this in a genuine way, knowing how committed Cheney/Bush were , would you have counseled the Iraqis to escalate against the U.S military including with the use of civilians knowing there was very little chance they would prevail? Or would you counsel them on seeking a cease fire and eventual deescalation or would that be giving up?

I would kind of argue that this is exactly what did happen in Vietnam and Afghanistan and Iraq. In the latter two, the governments did fall, but enough locals and foreign fighters opposed the US occupations that, in the end, we left without making any long-term gains. We achieved tactical success (removing the governments) and strategic failure.

The theory that the Russian military was going to collapse en masse and Putin was going to be dethroned in a coup as the basis for escalation has not borne any fruit and is unlikely too.

I don't think this is the goal. Maybe the wish of many in Ukraine or on Reddit, but not the strategic goal.

The NVA wasn't fighting to collapse the US government and the Mahdi Army wasn't fighting to collapse the US government, they were fighting because they believed the US did not belong there and I would imagine they hoped that they could exact enough damage that US political will would diminish until US forces were withdrawn.

I'm not calling for Ukraine to give up in any way, but their main advantage right now is to hole up in urban areas and exact costs on the Russians via Urban warfare, again that is the right of the Ukraine armed forces, but we've seen this tactic before in Chechnya to great effectiveness on the parts on the Chechnians up until the Russians decided just to level the place.

That could very well happen. Grozny got flattened. That is on Putin whether he chooses to destroy civilian cities or not, but he has no justification here.

Easy to say fight to the death/destruction when it's another country and not mine. Zelensky and the entire Ukrainian government have a responsibility to their own people to do as much to protect their civilians and seek de-escalation as it benefits their own country the most, expecting anything but destruction out of the Russian leadership is wishful thinking and it doesn't help civilians on the ground.

I think it doesn't make sense until it happens to you. If US invaded Canada, I honestly don't know if it would be like April 9, 1940 (Nazi invasion of Denmark) or like this Ukrainian-Russian war. At some point, the people make that decision for themselves when they leave or take up arms. I imagine some Ukrainians look back in history at Poland (1920) or the two Finnish wars (1939, 1941) and wish for the same outcome of self-determination from Russia. I like that you approach this from a geo-political viewpoint, but obviously, this isn't Russia's first war of aggression with a neighboring country.

How does one handle a nuclear armed adversary which views this TAKING as an existential matter? Is it by direct confrontation and a defeat of their military? Why wouldn't their military use nuclear weapons they possess if they were facing an outright defeat even if Putin is not around ? The US turned to nukes and obliterated two whole cities full of civilians in a war, why wouldn't the Russian military do it, knowing they seem to care even less about civilians than the U.S does.

People are taking this situation way too lightly with the fight to the death/escalate until the Russian military is defeated/Putin is overthrown. I guess the concept of tactical retreats/defeats is over for the time being and everyone is demanding maximalist positions which of course will end with maximalist damage for everyone involved.

Yes, this is the worst-case scenario. In the Korean War, Gen. MacArthur wanted to use tactical nuclear weapons against Chinese forces. For this and other reasons, Truman removed him from command of the UN forces. Leaders have to make these decisions all the time, so it is Putin's game to play or not play, but until he withdraws his forces from Ukraine, everyone else loses except him.

Maybe this war ends like the Russia-Georgia War and Russia annexes territory and claims victory, but if that is the case, it still seems like Putin overplayed his hand with his attempted siege of Kyiv and I will have a hard time seeing what his next move would be in 5 or 10 years, assuming he is still in power then.

 

[Cyberthal]

I remember from Saturday morning cartoons that the comedian killing civilians was the bad guy.

Times change.

Exposing the False Flag - Vox Popoli

As I mentioned on last night’s Darkstream, I knew “the massacre at Bucha” was a false flag the moment I read the first headline about it. It is not necessary to know anything at all about what the globalist media claims happened in Bucha to know, beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt, that the […]

voxday.net

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

I remember from Saturday morning cartoons that the comedian killing civilians was the bad guy.

Times change.

Exposing the False Flag - Vox Popoli

As I mentioned on last night’s Darkstream, I knew “the massacre at Bucha” was a false flag the moment I read the first headline about it. It is not necessary to know anything at all about what the globalist media claims happened in Bucha to know, beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt, that the […]

voxday.net

Yup, this. Better save the article somewhere because the web hosting company hosting that site is going to get canceled, because they don't fit the Western media's narrative.

In this false flag operation (which Coach Red Pill warned some weeks back in his YouTube vids), Zelensky IS the movie's concept artist, sound guy, producer, director, camera man, art director, set dresser, prop master, actor, production designer, best boy, technical director, post-production director all rolled into one.

And Sam is the movie's executive producer and sponsors the entire movie.

 

[Trevor Kuntz]

Yup, this. Better save the article somewhere because the web hosting company hosting that site is going to get canceled, because they don't fit the Western media's narrative.

In this false flag operation (which Coach Red Pill warned some weeks back in his YouTube vids), Zelensky IS the movie's concept artist, sound guy, producer, director, camera man, art director, set dresser, prop master, actor, production designer, best boy, technical director, post-production director all rolled into one.

And Sam is the movie's executive producer and sponsors the entire movie.

By this logic, Eisenhower must have gunned down his own GIs in Malmedy, huh? The denialism is insane.

 

[Cyberthal]

Zelensky had a great one-liner about Azov's atrocities:

"They are what they are."

Debunking « Bucha Massacre » (t.me copypasta) - GreatAwakening

Source: Vladimir Rogov, member of the Main Council of the Civil-Military Administration of the Zaporozhye region - https

greatawakening.win

As Machiavelli knew, a healthy dose of terror goes a long way towards winning hearts and minds.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Silverfox148]

Ukraine has to win on their own land, that is the best outcome, which is why you see how careful Ukraine has attacked anything on Russian soil, just one oil refinery so far with helis and even then not exactly saying if they did it. Also why the west has been so painfully slow giving Ukraine the heavier weapons they need on attack. I would not cross the Russian border, there is really no benefits to do it and especially not give Russia a reason for general mobilization, they are doing limited covert mobilization right now. They are working on their people's minds though right now, to get some kind of mobilization going. I also think Ukraine understand that as well, which means that it is highly unlikely they cross the Russian border. They don't want to give a good reason for Russians to fight, it has all been pointless vague things so far and even then people believe it. But if they can say that there are Ukraine's troops on Russian soil, it would help getting more cannon fodder and a reason to fight. I am definitely not underestimating Russians if it comes for them to fight in their own soil, but in Ukraine, they really do not understand why they are there.

It is unlikely Putin is overthrown. They beat anyone who tries and poison/take care of any leaders who might be powerful enough to oppose Putin. Also average Russian has never seen democracy (they just remember the 90s chaos) and only watch state TV. They are used with one leader throughout history since getting wrecked by the mongols. Younger people though have more access to the outside world, but surprisingly a lot of them still don't speak English. Big contrast to Eastern Europe where everyone speaks at least one extra major language.

Best case scenario - West just keeps suppling with better weapons. Unfortunately Russia just has to suffer, mainly because they are not going to retreat yet themselves. The more troops desert, the better. From home calls when Russian soldiers were at Kyiv, it is unlikely most of them want to return to the battlefield unless they find a clever way to really make them. They saw what the war was like. Even if it is defeat, the current government will tell that the operation was successful (they have successfully DE nazified everything or whatever even that means in their propaganda), but Ukraine does not give any more land away. It is unlikely they get Crimea back though and not sure what they do with the Donbass. Would be great if Ukraine can keep it with some Russian education in that area or whatever so Russians have something to tell in their own media too "of how they showed them".

Not that great scenario - Some western politician's ego thinks he/she is an peace angel and can save the day and forces Ukraine to a shitty peace deal with Russia. We will see a new bigger crisis emerge again in a few years time because the "West is weak". Unfortunately this is how the Putin/Russians think. It means that their politics of lying, deceiving works to get what they want and they will not stop doing it. This is how the Germans thought before ww2 after the appeasement.

Mad max scenario - How it all escalated, nobody really knows, but at least you look good wearing leather pants and nipple rings.

Solid post, let's hope for the scenario with the least casualties both among civilians and military.

 

[Napoolion]

I remember from Saturday morning cartoons that the comedian killing civilians was the bad guy.

Times change.

Exposing the False Flag - Vox Popoli

As I mentioned on last night’s Darkstream, I knew “the massacre at Bucha” was a false flag the moment I read the first headline about it. It is not necessary to know anything at all about what the globalist media claims happened in Bucha to know, beyond any shadow of a reasonable doubt, that the […]

voxday.net

Yup, this. Better save the article somewhere because the web hosting company hosting that site is going to get canceled, because they don't fit the Western media's narrative.

In this false flag operation (which Coach Red Pill warned some weeks back in his YouTube vids), Zelensky IS the movie's concept artist, sound guy, producer, director, camera man, art director, set dresser, prop master, actor, production designer, best boy, technical director, post-production director all rolled into one.

And Sam is the movie's executive producer and sponsors the entire movie.

Why do you think Russians are not doing any war crimes if they come from this environment? Imagine what they do to others, if they treat each other like that?

Dedovshchina - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also why nobody wants their culture:

Typical russian toilet - Latest News

2,472 points • 297 comments

9gag.com

Russian media has told countless times that in Ukraine there are nazis and whatever things, so it gives Russian soldier an excuse for their actions, since well, they are the Nazis. Who ever told that quote seems to be right: The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists. Also, Russian government have given most wile prisoners amnesty if they will fight in Ukraine.

There has been plenty of intercepted calls where Russian soldiers call to home and say that they are allowed to shoot anyone. Bucha is just the tip of the iceberg, what has happened in other occupied cities is probably more horrific.
In 2021 Russian army made a standard instruction for mass burial:

В России принят стандарт срочного массового захоронения людей | Оренград

Документ был разработан в этом году за 6 месяцев, норма вступит в силу с февраля 2022 года. С февраля 2022 года в России впервые будет введен национальный стандарт «Срочное захоронение трупов в военно

orengrad.ru

Probably will see now more of that, they will hide their crimes more from now on.

Here is some more of stuff you guys can deny and tell it is all fake. (explicit content warning, but since they are on the media sites I am not sharing anything directly and also I think it serves the victims right for the world to know what happened to them)

Russians burned swastikas into victims’ bodies, raped girls as young as 10: reports

Lesia Vasylenko said that “10-year-old girls have been found with “vaginal and rectal tears” after being raped, while dead women have been found “with swastika shaped burns.…

nypost.com

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1510966912724963328

View: https://twitter.com/Mariana_Betsa/status/1510966912724963328

Bodies of mutilated children among horrors the Russians left behind

Deep in the forest outside Kyiv, where the mushroom-pickers used to roam and rich city folk built their palatial dachas, Maria Dabizhe, 80, sat sifting through

www.thetimes.co.uk

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1510576059984527361

View: https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1510576059984527361

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1509154949120286723

View: https://twitter.com/AntonDykyi/status/1509154949120286723


Removing the bodies from Russian made torture cellars:
Pravda Gerashchenko
Pravda Gerashchenko
Pravda Gerashchenko

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1510555041526169606

View: https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1510555041526169606


Russian narrative for all of this is obviously same old: "Remember guys, it didn't happen. And if it did, it's fake news. And if it isn't, they deserved it. And if they didn't, others have done worse."

But here comes another psychological problem for the Russians, which were the same for Germans where they did not want to know about concentration camps or simply just denied those existed. It is the same thing here, you can show them pictures as much as you want or explain it, but in the end, their mind will not believe it, since it would collapse their current world view.

 

[Xeon]

By this logic, Eisenhower must have gunned down his own GIs in Malmedy, huh? The denialism is insane.

When 9/11 happened, there was this popular conspiracy theory back then which says that it's orchestrated by the US gov to give them an excuse to invade Afghanistan. I used to think that was insane and people who thought of that must be nutcases. But in recent years, I start to realize that all these doesn't sound as farfetched as I used to think it was.

There has been plenty of intercepted calls where Russian soldiers call to home and say that they are allowed to shoot anyone.

This is war, and this is the real world. What do you expect? Is everyone going to play nice during war and behave like good boys?

Most importantly, seeing this, Zelensky is still going to continue escalating and still not bulge a single inch or compromise, in spite of the chaos that happened in Bucha (assuming that's not a false flag)? If that's the case, then he's an accomplice to Putin. The right thing to do now, is for him to seek a resolution with Russia, e.g. declaring Ukraine a neutral state to minimize the deaths. Is he doing that, or still insistent on getting more Ukrainians killed, and fight to the last man? The way out of this is de-escalation, something Zelensky and his handlers/owners are not willing to entertain.

Here is some more of stuff you guys can deny and tell it is all fake. (explicit content warning, but since they are on the media sites I am not sharing anything directly and also I think it serves the victims right for the world to know what happened to them)

Regardless of whether the massacre in Bucha was done by Ukrainians or Russians, war is a tragic thing which is why some people like myself, have been in support of de-escalation.
Nothing but de-escalation and compromises. It doesn't help that the US gov and NATO are adding fuel to the fire. They wanted this to be a proxy war don't they?

Previously, a week or so ago, there were talks of Ukraine going to declare itself Neutral, but not sure what happened to that.

I guess Zelensky's owners gave him orders to continue prolonging this.

But there is hope. Ukrainians can save themselves right now : march together as a nation to Kyiv and capture Zelensky, deliver him to the Russian troops and it will be over.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

Russian Ruble Relaunched Linked to Gold & Commodities

In linking the ruble to gold & commodities, Russia has set the stage for seismic shifts in the global monetary system.

www.bullionstar.com

 

[Cyberthal]

9/11 was an inside job. The planes flew just like cruise missiles: fly by wire. Uninterruptible autopilot.

Blame Cheney. Or his masters.

 

[Trevor Kuntz]

Regardless of whether the massacre in Bucha was done by Ukrainians or Russians, war is a tragic thing which is why some people like myself, have been in support of de-escalation.

Yes, you have been supporting one-sided compromise and de-escalation since this started, but for whatever reasons, you completely buy into Russia's viewpoint and only expect Ukraine to compromise as if it is Ukraine's fault for being invaded, bombarded, and occupied. Why, in your opinion, is Ukraine obligated to compromise and accepted terms unconditionally when they are not the ones invading a sovereign country?

I do not buy Putin's false flag cover anymore than I believe that the 21000 Polish officers and civilians shot themselves in the back of the head in Katyn.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Napoolion]

Pretty decent theory of the reasons behind the Putin's decision to start the invasion:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x54juxDGBzU

 

[Silverfox148]

Yes, this is the worst-case scenario. In the Korean War, Gen. MacArthur wanted to use tactical nuclear weapons against Chinese forces. For this and other reasons, Truman removed him from command of the UN forces. Leaders have to make these decisions all the time, so it is Putin's game to play or not play, but until he withdraws his forces from Ukraine, everyone else loses except him.

Maybe this war ends like the Russia-Georgia War and Russia annexes territory and claims victory, but if that is the case, it still seems like Putin overplayed his hand with his attempted siege of Kyiv and I will have a hard time seeing what his next move would be in 5 or 10 years, assuming he is still in power then.

Solid Post Trevor, refreshing to have a good discussion, instead of just the raw emotions(which is fine and has it's place) but eventually one has to move on.

It looks to me like the Russians may be trying to set up their own off ramp to this conflict by focusing on the East of Ukraine/Dombass and Crimea in the South east part and consolidating there. That may allow the Russian army to reform and consolidate for a focused attack on the Ukrainian army eastern positions. I hope that is the case as that may lessen civilian casualties as some of those areas are "Russian" friendly.

They were never going to be able to hold onto Kiev and the western parts due to committed Ukraine resistance as well as continued western weapons support.

I still hold that Ukraine will be ground down and pulverized by the Russians (rightly or wrongly). Russia cannot afford to lose this war just as the US could not afford to lose a war against Mexico.
It's existential for the Russians just as much as it is for the Ukrainians.

 

[Napoolion]

Solid Post Trevor, refreshing to have a good discussion, instead of just the raw emotions(which is fine and has it's place) but eventually one has to move on.

It looks to me like the Russians may be trying to set up their own off ramp to this conflict by focusing on the East of Ukraine/Dombass and Crimea in the South east part and consolidating there. That may allow the Russian army to reform and consolidate for a focused attack on the Ukrainian army eastern positions. I hope that is the case as that may lessen civilian casualties as some of those areas are "Russian" friendly.

They were never going to be able to hold onto Kiev and the western parts due to committed Ukraine resistance as well as continued western weapons support.

I still hold that Ukraine will be ground down and pulverized by the Russians (rightly or wrongly). Russia cannot afford to lose this war just as the US could not afford to lose a war against Mexico.
It's existential for the Russians just as much as it is for the Ukrainians.

Raw emotions were necessary mainly, because I read a lot about war crimes not happening. We will also hear less about these going forward, since most of the evidence will be burned in mobile crematoriums. Especially it goes for Mariupol. I also felt that discussion here made Ukraine the bad guy and I saw a lot of classic Russian media narrative just thrown here again and again (chem labs, chem doves, Ukrainian's are nazis, NATO vs. RU). If no one points those inconsistences out, does not challenge them and does not reply, there is a threat that it is accepted as a blind truth. Especially for Fastlaners, because we are an edgy bunch never to trust anything what is in traditional media and mostly with a good reason. There is a ton of garbage being fed there in our media and in Russia, it is no exception. Russia (still the invader) has history of info operations experience under it's belt. This is why in this war it is especially interesting that both sides have to contribute hugely into info operations. Ukraine to get aid and Russia to justify its invasion while trying to minimize the sanctions. I reply mostly, because I have heard the same Russian propaganda against my country (Yes, we are Nazis too according to them) since 2006, so I already see the patterns how they think and act. if Ukraine loses, my country is most likely next.

Now that aside, I agree with bigger thing happening for East Ukraine/Donbass. Which concerns the civilian casualties in that region, they should run and latest evidence suggest that a lot of them are doing that. I think for those Russians who are not leaving there, it will be especially bitter to see that it matters little that they are Russians too. Those people have seen war since 2014 and honestly don't care at this point who wins. I also agree with Kiev part, just to show Russian miscalculation of the resistance they will get, Ukraine is huge. There will be a major offensive in that part in 3-4 days from Russians. This will be hell on earth. Both sides are currently reinforcing it. I am a little optimistic for Ukrainians though, mainly because Russia is scraping the barrel without actually calling out the general mobilization part. They have a huge manpower issue. It is always easier to defend than to attack, since based up to today, Russians have lacked the coordination and skill to use combined warfare. Some of their soldiers are way from far east, never to hear Chernobyl nuclear disaster and frankly, a little stupid (digging trenches near Chernobyl just shows the lack of awareness what is going on, I am still not underestimating them, they do what they are told, don't question or think like we do and that can be especially scary). I think Russia can afford to lose the war though, mainly because they control the media, they can paint it as a win. Even if they win a little land only, that can also mean victory for them, mostly because they do not give two fks about the soldiers who were lost. "Victory needs sacrifice" is their mantra. We probably will see more clearly in a week how long this war will last.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

Here here, some of you may need VPNs to access this piece of news below:

Total News Blackout: US General Captured Leading Azov Nazis in Mariupol (confirmations coming in) | VT Foreign Policy

www.veteranstoday.com

Not surprising, after all, US CIA agents were caught leading the riots in Hong Kong in 2019.

Sam's forces are already in Ukraine long ago, dressed in Ukrainian military uniform. That's how Ukraine held so long against the Russians.

 

[Cyberthal]

Sounds like casus belli for regime change... in DC.
Nobody will miss the pedo in chief.

 

[Silverfox148]

Raw emotions were necessary mainly, because I read a lot about war crimes not happening. We will also hear less about these going forward, since most of the evidence will be burned in mobile crematoriums. Especially it goes for Mariupol. I also felt that discussion here made Ukraine the bad guy and I saw a lot of classic Russian media narrative just thrown here again and again (chem labs, chem doves, Ukrainian's are nazis, NATO vs. RU). If no one points those inconsistences out, does not challenge them and does not reply, there is a threat that it is accepted as a blind truth. Especially for Fastlaners, because we are an edgy bunch never to trust anything what is in traditional media and mostly with a good reason. There is a ton of garbage being fed there in our media and in Russia, it is no exception. Russia (still the invader) has history of info operations experience under it's belt. This is why in this war it is especially interesting that both sides have to contribute hugely into info operations. Ukraine to get aid and Russia to justify its invasion while trying to minimize the sanctions. I reply mostly, because I have heard the same Russian propaganda against my country (Yes, we are Nazis too according to them) since 2006, so I already see the patterns how they think and act. if Ukraine loses, my country is most likely next.

Napoolion, when I said raw emotions I was not referring to you, I was mainly referring to Blackdragon, you have been pretty measured and steady in your analysis/commentary. As for others who haven't been, like I said raw emotion is to be expected for all sides especially the Ukrainian side. People are dying, atrocities are being committed, none of it can be morally justified. I see people on all sides doing so, some more than others. Russia is the aggressor here, so most the blame and the moral responsibility falls on them, no question about it.

With respect to the chemical labs/bioresearch labs, those are of specific interest in the United States public right now, our government has been caught lying about these things with respect to Covid and the fact they were indirectly funding gain of function research in China which may or may not have lead to the whole Covid outbreak. That is a very sensitive topic here in the US and if Ukraine is smart they will should steer clear of this whole topic as there does appear some type of bio research labs in Ukraine funded/helped by the US but what they were doing is unclear. In any case that's not really why Putin attacked anyway and it's just a red herring from him, but a significant part of the US public including myself is very wary of any foreign/domestic biolabs being funded by the US. They aren't just going to take the US governments pronouncements that it's all fake as that's what they said about the Chinese biolab until enough evidence came out that they couldn't deny it. Hunter Biden is somehow associated with these labs also according to some reports(and almost all reports regarding him and Ukraine have some merit to them).

There is a tremendous amount of propaganda flying back and forth including here in the US by US Media Outlets, this war is going to last for years and our media is pushing for escalation with respect to Russia which has little cost to the US but has a very high cost for Ukrainians. This is going to be a long proxy war and if Ukraine wants to be a US proxy against Russia so be it, but it's an active choice they are making.

And yes you are correct if Putin is successful at some point your country would be forced to likely join some type of new Russian Union, that I do agree with.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Silverfox148]

Here here, some of you may need VPNs to access this piece of news below:

Total News Blackout: US General Captured Leading Azov Nazis in Mariupol (confirmations coming in) | VT Foreign Policy

www.veteranstoday.com

Not surprising, after all, US CIA agents were caught leading the riots in Hong Kong in 2019.

Sam's forces are already in Ukraine long ago, dressed in Ukrainian military uniform. That's how Ukraine held so long against the Russians.

Xeon, I don't believe this general was really captured in the Mariupol. Interestingly he has been involved with training up and assisting the Ukrainian army.

It's pretty clear that the Ukrainian army in the East have been expecting and training for this invasion in the East for years. Their proficiency in the use of almost all of the western weapons systems they have been given is high, that type of proficiency takes a long time and practice which suggests they have been training for years. In effect the Russian army fell into a well laid trap in the East, it reminds me of the defense in depth strategy that the Japanese started to employ against the US, during the later stages of the US campaign in the Pacific, it exacted a very heavy toll on the US personnel on the islands of Peleilu, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, etc. I expect casualty figures similar to what the Russians are taking now.

Admirable on the part of the Ukrainians as it was on the part of the Japanese, but ultimately the US was unwilling to take such high casualty figures in trying to invade the home islands of Japan and just got it over with by dropping two atom bombs and leveling two Japanese cities.

At some point the Russians will come to the same conclusion and level the cities and perhaps employ one or two tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian cities unfortunately. I'm surprised so called experts can't see this is where it is headed. I suppose if they did, they would have to begin to deescalate and start looking for off ramps before it goes that far.

LANDCOM Commander, Lt. Gen. Cloutier, and Acting Deputy for the Ukrainian Land Forces, Major General Oleksandr Holodniuk, visit IPSC

U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Roger L. Cloutier Jr., Commander of NATO's Allied Land Command, and Acting Deputy for the Ukrainian Land Forces, Major General Oleksa...

www.army.mil

 

[Choate]

You are absolutely correct if you look at it from a moral lens, the aggression cannot be justified against a sovereign state. However, that's not how powerful countries see or behave in the world, by the same standard the wars in Iraq/Afghanistan which were US led as well as the current war in Yemen are entirely unjustified. Whether a war is justified or not is not going to stop one single war, it could be argued that no war is ever morally justified.

The real point which you and others fail to realize is that Russia and it's strategic position is in very real danger right now under U.S led hegemony, to the current Russian leadership this is an existential war/question. The Russians don't want to give up their strategic position in the world, yet economically/military/culturally they are no longer a world power, all they have really is Russian gas/oil/coal, etc. The U.S is directly/indirectly trying to undermine this via "green energy/global warming/etc", this is a direct threat to them from their eyes. They are also seeing their neighbor China grow very strong politically/economically/militarily, Russia does not want to be a vassal to China either so it leaves them in a very tricky position, watch Russia's strategic position inherited from the USSR slowly wither away to China/US or take some type of action to try to undermine/create an alternate to U.S hegemony.

The last thing this war is about is Ukraine, I suspect the Kremlin expected the current reaction of the west with seizing the hundreds of billions/sanctions/etc. This is going to get very complicated for everyone involved, the people who will suffer the most will of course be the Ukrainian people.

While their is no excuse for war crimes, let's also not forget that the Ukrainians and their leadership are not some passive entity, they are actively escalating against Russia and that is their complete right to do so , but when you escalate their will be a response from the other party. The civilians are completely innocent for the most part, but the Ukrainian leadership is not, the Japanese fought valiantly in the Pacific often times to the death yet no one went around calling them cowards after they capitulated after the two atom bombs got dropped.

If you are leading a country you must consider civilian casualties in your escalation/war.

I never failed to realize that Russia's strategic position is 'in very real danger' right now. Although rather than the threat coming from US hegemony, it is their government which is riddled with corruption, their economy suffering from massive human capital flight, and their dwindling population due to living standards/medical care/lifestyle - all of this before the Russian war on Ukraine started.

Trying to seize a 300 mile wide stretch of land from one's neighbor does not solve any of these problems, only creates many more - while exacerbating these original problems even further.

A Democratic, politically stable, and economically successful Ukraine does not create an existential threat, nor a NATO threat, to Russia. The real issue is it creates a threat to Putin's stagnated militarized dictatorship.

Ukraine's independence will never be preserved by creating Russian protectorates in it via Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia's long term goal is submission - which is why even neutrality would be at best, a temporary ploy.

One cannot justify the Russian war on Ukraine via an endless supply of red herrings, whether those are state-supplied (Ukraine has Nazis) or childish talking points such as those in this thread (topics like Joe Biden's son and other transparent deflections).

It is not Russia that has no choice but to win - but Putin.

 

[Napoolion]

With respect to the chemical labs/bioresearch labs, those are of specific interest in the United States public right now, our government has been caught lying about these things with respect to Covid and the fact they were indirectly funding gain of function research in China which may or may not have lead to the whole Covid outbreak. That is a very sensitive topic here in the US and if Ukraine is smart they will should steer clear of this whole topic as there does appear some type of bio research labs in Ukraine funded/helped by the US but what they were doing is unclear. In any case that's not really why Putin attacked anyway and it's just a red herring from him, but a significant part of the US public including myself is very wary of any foreign/domestic biolabs being funded by the US. They aren't just going to take the US governments pronouncements that it's all fake as that's what they said about the Chinese biolab until enough evidence came out that they couldn't deny it. Hunter Biden is somehow associated with these labs also according to some reports(and almost all reports regarding him and Ukraine have some merit to them).

When Covid started, it began in Wuhan, China. Chemlab stories raise questions for me:
1) Why China, with mass control over it's country could not see that the U.S (main enemy of China) is developing dangerous bio weapons with Chinese staff in Chinese territory.
2) As I remember China has tried to shift the blame for their internal audience for long time. Claiming that C0VlD-19 virus originated from an American military base in Maryland in 2021.
3) Why U.S should do some sketchy chemlab stuff in Ukraine, a country which has been in covert war with Russia since 2014. Why not go for Romania or Bulgaria who are also in NATO and don't have the sudden Russian invasion threat. Also why do it in a country where Russia clearly meddles with it's internal politics and supports pro-russian parties in that country and thus had some influence over them.
I thought it was all a false flag to use chemical weapons, which was used during Syrian civil war. I don't think any of us have enough information to really understand what is going with all of that, but also people take any conspiracy theory without clear evidence quite fast into their minds in this day and age, so have to be careful with that.

It's pretty clear that the Ukrainian army in the East have been expecting and training for this invasion in the East for years. Their proficiency in the use of almost all of the western weapons systems they have been given is high, that type of proficiency takes a long time and practice which suggests they have been training for years. In effect the Russian army fell into a well laid trap in the East, it reminds me of the defense in depth strategy that the Japanese started to employ against the US, during the later stages of the US campaign in the Pacific, it exacted a very heavy toll on the US personnel on the islands of Peleilu, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, etc. I expect casualty figures similar to what the Russians are taking now.

Admirable on the part of the Ukrainians as it was on the part of the Japanese, but ultimately the US was unwilling to take such high casualty figures in trying to invade the home islands of Japan and just got it over with by dropping two atom bombs and leveling two Japanese cities.

At some point the Russians will come to the same conclusion and level the cities and perhaps employ one or two tactical nuclear weapons against Ukrainian cities unfortunately. I'm surprised so called experts can't see this is where it is headed. I suppose if they did, they would have to begin to deescalate and start looking for off ramps before it goes that far.

It reminds me the winter war with Finland. Russian incompetence and valiant defense. Especially the slashing convoys part. To the credit of Russians, they learned some mistakes from that war and could hold on to the Nazi Germany later on, though poor tactical level in some parts of the front from higher ups resulted a lot of unnecessary deaths. Attacking with exactly the same plan 10 times a day for example. Biggest difference from that is Finns were highly outnumbered, that can't be said about Ukraine now. Most likely they will have equal or even more troops in the front. Some are stationed at borders near Belarus and other parts but a lot of them will go to East too. Russians though have more heavy steel.

I think nukes are difficult to use. Japan attacked U.S first, so at the time, it felt more justified, nobody really understood what atomic bomb is either. People's morale of killing civilians has been numbed during world war two already too, German attacks on London, but mostly bombers just bombing the shit out of Germany. Soviets doing the same. Germans wanting to do more of it, but could not.
I think use of nuclear weapons means NATO direct involvement in the war. I don't think they can afford to just let it slide. World would change drastically after that.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

1) Why China, with mass control over it's country could not see that the U.S (main enemy of China) is developing dangerous bio weapons with Chinese staff in Chinese territory.

The Chinese Communist Party is not omnipresent. You just need enough money to bribe the local officials to get them to zip their mouths. China is progressing fast but their local/provincial government officials are extremely corrupt and take bribes.

Why U.S should do some sketchy chemlab stuff in Ukraine, a country which has been in covert war with Russia since 2014.

1) The biolabs were funded by the US Dept of Defence if I'm not wrong, not their Dept of Health. If it's for normal health research, why is their DoD in charge of that? Unless the US doesn't have a health ministry and their DoD has to do that job?

2) The locations of the biolabs were on the eastern part of Ukraine, near to Russia's border. This doesn't make sense since the closer you're to Russia (in the case of US and Ukraine), the more dangerous it is. Logically, they should have positioned it nearer to the western part, nearer to Lviv and Poland. So why do the eastern part? Unless it's easier for them to release "it" into Russia's western border? That's the only logical explanation I can think of.

 

[Lyinx]

I never failed to realize that Russia's strategic position is 'in very real danger' right now. Although rather than the threat coming from US hegemony, it is their government which is riddled with corruption, their economy suffering from massive human capital flight, and their dwindling population due to living standards/medical care/lifestyle - all of this before the Russian war on Ukraine started.

Trying to seize a 300 mile wide stretch of land from one's neighbor does not solve any of these problems, only creates many more - while exacerbating these original problems even further.

A Democratic, politically stable, and economically successful Ukraine does not create an existential threat, nor a NATO threat, to Russia. The real issue is it creates a threat to Putin's stagnated militarized dictatorship.

Ukraine's independence will never be preserved by creating Russian protectorates in it via Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia's long term goal is submission - which is why even neutrality would be at best, a temporary ploy.

One cannot justify the Russian war on Ukraine via an endless supply of red herrings, whether those are state-supplied (Ukraine has Nazis) or childish talking points such as those in this thread (topics like Joe Biden's son and other transparent deflections).

It is not Russia that has no choice but to win - but Putin.

Russia never had to invade to do anything. they could have tried (instead) to make better items for the world/improve it/add value, and they would be much further ahead.
But try it by adding land and creating animosity among other nations? not such a smart idea.