this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2022
27 points (100.0% liked)

World News

1036 readers
30 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] w_ortiz@lemmy.ml 24 points 2 years ago (6 children)

I don't like Zelenskiy but people saying Ukraine is responsible for this war, you have cognitive dissonance (big time).

[–] Stoned_Ape@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

people saying Ukraine is responsible for this war

I never heard anyone say that. Who the fuck would say something ridiculous like that? People either say "It's only Russia" or "It's the fucking NATO!". But "It's Ukraine"? Never heard that at all.

[–] agarorn@feddit.de 22 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I heard the Russian propaganda that Russia "had" to interfere to save Russians in Ukraine being oppressed by "Nazi" Selensky. Complete crap, but that's what some are arguing.

[–] Stoned_Ape@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Eh... I'm not saying that Russia is a pure country full of love for every human being. Humans can be quite shitty, and that's true for Russia as well as any other part of the world, and equally true for most governments.

But... there WAS an extremely cruel civil war going on in the Ukraine, and it was between "pro-west" Ukrainians and "pro-russia" Ukrainians. That's a fact. 14,000 people died in that civil war from 2014 to 2022. That's before the war started.

I have no idea if Selensky is a Nazi, but the truth is that he sure does employ a lot of people who are incredibly obvious Nazis. Right down to Nazi tattoos and all that shit.

That's not some weird fantasy, that's a fact. The only weird thing is that so many people choose to act as if that is a completely normal thing to have: Multiple militarized (sic!) Nazi battalions working for the state, paid by the state, with weapons provided by the state (and their friends).

Everybody can have their own opinion about this, but these are facts. Very obvious and provable facts.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] thervingi@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 years ago

I think Ukraine believed until the very end that Western support would stop Russians from attacking.

Ukraine made the mistake of trying to reclaim Luhansk and Donetsk, even though the Russian side is clearly stronger.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 years ago (29 children)

Ukrainian army was at its peak when the war started. It's been significantly reduced in capacity since, and the weapons that the west sends come nowhere close to replacing what was lost. If Ukraine couldn't win with its original force, why would anybody expect it to win with a hodgepodge of western weapons and a decimated army. Even western publications are starting to grudgingly accept that there is no path towards Ukraine winning this war.

What's actually happening is that Ukraine continues to lose territory. The longer this war goes on the more territory Ukraine will lose, and end up in an increasingly worse bargaining position.

[–] Ninmi@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

All the expert opinions I've seen have reduced the situation in the east to a stalemate and possible Ukrainian regains in the south. Also, with how much I hear about Ukrainians being very disorganized at the start and with the further lack of any weapons apart from their own, it's odd to claim the Ukrainian army was at its peak. The Russians seemed to have simply failed miserably trying to take over the entire country quickly.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Show me a single actual expert, as in a person with military or logistics experience, saying there's going to be some kind of a stalemate. Ukrainians were organized and trained to NATO standard at the start. If you think they were disorganized at the start, I can guarantee you they're far less organized today.

The Russians never made any claims about taking over the country quickly. This was a narrative created by the west that had no basis in reality. Feel free to show me a single statement from Russia claiming anything of the sort being the goal.

It's also pretty clear that Russia was prepared for a protracted conflict given that they had all the supplies and logistics figured out ahead of time. They wouldn't have been able to sustain the pace of war otherwise.

What's actually happening is that Ukraine built up layered defences on the contact line at Donbas over the past 8 years of the civil war. Russians along with DPR and LPR are now systematically taking those defences apart. And we're now seeing the pace of the war accelerating as these defences are being broken through.

[–] nxlemmy@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Russians never made any claims about taking over the country quickly. This was a narrative created by the west that had no basis in reality. Feel free to show me a single statement from Russia claiming anything of the sort being the goal.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-state-news-published-an-article-saying-russia-defeated-ukraine-2022-2

It’s also pretty clear that Russia was prepared for a protracted conflict given that they had all the supplies and logistics figured out ahead of time https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1575291/russia-ukraine-war-putin-troops-soldiers-abandoned-food-supplies

you're arguing with ppl who are clearly taking hopium in regards to how much Ukraine can sustain or how well Ukraine is doing but you're also making weird claims that makes me think you're dabbling in hopium for how well Russia is doing.

Also the "civil war" you keep bringing up is kinda weird since Russia would obviously send in people to stir trouble so they can claim they must save Ukrainians like Russia and the US did\do in the Middle East, Latin America, etc all the time.

the truth is none of us know wtf is actually going down but its clear all sides have people suffering and the worlds fuel and food supply is getting fucked with so no one everyone is suffering (except China is prolly getting a ton of super cheap fuel from Russia and learning what not to do when they try to take Taiwan)

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-state-news-published-an-article-saying-russia-defeated-ukraine-2022-2

The actual article doesn't say what business insider claims though when taken in context. It clearly talks about the ongoing fighting and simply states reunification with Ukrain being the end result

https://web.archive.org/web/20220226051154/https://ria.ru/20220226/rossiya-1775162336.html

However, even if we go with the business insider narrative, the fact that it was written isn't really surprising. This stuff is always written ahead of time. For example, US had a story ready for the case if Apollo mission went wrong.

you’re arguing with ppl who are clearly taking hopium in regards to how much Ukraine can sustain or how well Ukraine is doing but you’re also making weird claims that makes me think you’re dabbling in hopium for how well Russia is doing.

Please do enlighten us what these weird claims are specifically.

Also the “civil war” you keep bringing up is kinda weird since Russia would obviously send in people to stir trouble so they can claim they must save Ukrainians like Russia and the US did\do in the Middle East, Latin America, etc all the time.

Russia sends a few people to stir trouble and they manage to fight the whole Ukrainian army for eight years. Russia must have some real Übermensch.

the truth is none of us know wtf is actually going down but its clear all sides have people suffering and the worlds fuel and food supply is getting fucked with so no one everyone is suffering (except China is prolly getting a ton of super cheap fuel from Russia and learning what not to do when they try to take Taiwan)

Of course the whole world is suffering, and none of us know exactly what's happening. However, it's possible to get a general picture of how the events are unfolding and what to expect.

[–] TheConquestOfBed@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

People still plugged in to lib media are so used to being gaslit that they always assume if your analysis points to the success of a side, you obviously support that side and have a vested interest in them "winning". Gorbachev, as naive and fucking incompetent as he is, is correct that Russian socialism is dead and Putin is standing at the helm of a conservative wing of the bourgeoisie.

Reactionary anti-imperialists like the Russian Federation's govt aren't going to further the goals of communism. No one will "win" this war. It's a prerequisite to a shift in power, our Bosnian Crisis heralding much larger conflict that may kill all of us, and I don't think anyone here is mentally prepared for the buildup, removal of personal freedoms, and propaganda that will be built up in the interwar period.

Russia has effectively introduced a catalyst into a near-homogenous solution of American Imperialism. The precipitants falling out of it will form a new iron curtain around the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Belt and Road Forum. With China, Russia, Iran, and possibly India forming the core of the group as they persuade neocolonies of western powers to dedollarize their economies.

The other side will be AUKUS, its Euro hostages, and some groupings of former British/French colonies who still believe in the NATO project for some reason. America is the most worrying of all, due to its refusal to ascribe to a No-First Strike policy and the increasing number of reactionaries saying a "small nuclear war" wouldn't be so bad.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's basically where we're at now. Completely agree that the world is breaking up into two major economic bloc, one being BRICS around China and the other being the western bloc around US. It's also clear that BRICS has a much stronger industrial base, and that it's where most productive growth will be happening.

Since US bloc is in active decline right now, the situation is indeed highly volatile. US is becoming increasingly desperate and trying ever more risky gambles in their attempts to contain China and to prevent their colonies from developing independently. As US continues to get more desperate, a possibility of a nuclear conflict looms ever closer.

One of the major goals with provoking Russia into a war was to cause an economic collapse there in hopes of breaking it up. Russia provides China with the resources and food that China needs, making it impossible for US to blockade China. A secondary goal was to cleave Europe from the east economically and politically. I would say this goal has been achieved, at least in the short term. As the economic situation in Europe becomes more desperate this may reverse.

Now that the gamble in Ukraine failed, US will likely focus on provoking a conflict in Taiwan next. There are already signs of this happening right now. US military think tanks state that the window for military action against China is closing, and that China will reach parity within a few years. Others argue that this has already happened given that US loses all their simulated war games in South China Sea. Either way, US has to act it soon or secede its role of a global hegemon.

[–] TheConquestOfBed@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm not a huge fan of continuing the BRICS acronym, simply on the basis that Brazil and South Africa don't seem to be aligned in any particular direction. The US isn't concerned about Lula so it seems like they'll be more of an independent regional power for now.

AMLO seems to be signalling a shifting political climate in Mexico. That could get pretty hairy in the future, esp if they start to consider CELAC membership more important than their ties to North America.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago

Yeah, BRICS isn't really descriptive and now with Iran and a few other countries likely to join it's even less accurate. It does look like the current members do have strong economic ties that will be built on going forward. Where it's going to have the most meaning is around having its own reserve currency based on the basket of member currencies. This is one of the biggest threats to US economically.

What's happening in Mexico is very interesting, and it's looking like left wing governments are starting to appear all over Latin America. This is an unprecedented situation. Previously, US only had to deal with a one or two adversaries in the region and they could easily choke them economically leading to regime change. However, now we have Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Chile, Mexico, Cuba, and likely Brazil in the near future. All of these countries are starting working to work together and reinforce each other. Meanwhile, China and Russia are providing them with trade opportunities that were previously closed off. This is a large scale disaster for US imperialism.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] basiliscos@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How much of territories Ukrain returned back to its control? Ukrain has a few tactical wins, like sinking down russian ship(s) and repell Russians from an island. But what are strategical gains since April?

[–] Ninmi@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

From what I've seen, apart from Snake Island, they've made small gains at the very edges of the battle line but lost a City at the heart of the eastern battle. From what I've read, they're trying to form a bigger counteroffensive right now and have been urging Ukrainians to evacuate from occupied territories before the real battles commence as it'll get ugly. They're also getting another big batch of tanks from Poland.

[–] basiliscos@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (5 children)

lost a City at the heart of the eastern battle.

Actually, it is quite a large port-city Mariupol, and a few minor cities like Lisitchansk and SeveroDonetsk. As the result whole territory of LPR is deoccupied from Ukraine (or lost by Ukraine). It is quite a strategic win of Russia, isn't it?

they’re trying to form a bigger counteroffensive right now

It is not fair to compare "plans" with "gains". Every side might have big plans, but from military point of view it is better to compare initiative and territorial gains.

They’re also getting another big batch of tanks from Poland.

The amount of tanks is about 200, as I've heard. It is actually quite a few number, as Ukrain had about 6'500 of them in 1992 ( English wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Forces_of_Ukraine ). Would it be 10 000 of tanks, yep, that definitely might change the situation drastically.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] thervingi@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago

Tanks are useless if you don't have air superiority. They will just get blown up. Same with artillery. You can't go on the offensive without controlling the skies.

Ukraine's only real advantage is the Bayraktar drone.

[–] thervingi@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Which experts are you reading? Western experts in the media are too biased in favour of the Ukrainian side to make accurate predictions.They have been wrong too many times to trust them.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] thervingi@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (6 children)

The longer this war lasts, more Ukrainians will die and more territory Ukraine will lose. A ceasefire is in Ukraine's interest.

[–] nxlemmy@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

should Taiwan accept China as its owner as well?

[–] thervingi@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Doesn't Taiwan claim ownership over the Chinese mainland as well? They see themselves as the legitimate China.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

As long as Taiwan claims ownership of the mainland, the pro-Taiwan-independence movement is fighting both mainland China and the Taiwanese government. It's a real dumb move on Taiwan's part.

[–] nxlemmy@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They don't threaten to invade or attack other people for even saying the name of mainland china.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JohnBrownEnjoyer@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes. What point do you think you made?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] gigamo@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

So, he's condemning Ukrainians to continue dying for no reason. I didn't expect them to take the "to the last Ukrainian"-position this literally.

load more comments
view more: next ›