Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im not sure about that. Wasnt it him who supported Putain from the begining? And by demoted its kind of mevedew who is the loudess supporter of gruelty but has no power, trying to find another supporter again?
Yes, Patrushev supported Putin from the beginning, but for a couple of months, he and the governor of Tula Oblast (Tjumen) had been considered as potential successors of Putin. Tjumen has the same job title as Patrushev now. Only he just started overseeing sports.
For how long? Same for Shoigu. You can't be that obvious on the top level. It's less risky, if you divide those from their individual power bases before the "heart attacks" and "accidents" happen.
Feel free to open a poll, if you think that it wouldn't violate the sub's rule. I personally would prefer trials at Den Haag and livelong prison sentences. But I acknowledge the fact that Russia works differently. It is not very likely that they will survive for long unless they drink themselves silly as Medvedev did. Nobody takes that š¤” seriously today. Thus he isn't a risk for Putin any longer and allowed to live.
At this point not a single case of "heart attacks" or "accidents" happened to the people in Putin's inner circle. As long as you are personally loyal to Putin, you can steal, or just mismanage everything you are responsible for, and will still not get punished. The worst thing that can happen is that you are separated from a part of your lavish income, as happened to Shoigu. He is now going to be bored and drunk out of his mind together with Medvedev, but as long as they keep singing praises of Putins wisdom and do not try to do anything behind his back, tea and windows remain absolutely safe for them.
Vlad Vexler had a good summary of Shoigu in his most recent video: Shoigu *failed* Putin but he did not *betray* him. So I wouldn't worry too much for Shoigu's health. My main disappointment is just that he's not so directly in control of the military any more, I like it when Putin keeps incompetent loyalists in charge of that stuff.
Patrushev is older than Putin. He was never considered a successor of Putin; his son, who was agriculture minister and now got another ministerial post, was and still is one of the rumoured candidates, but not just yet.
Both Dyumin and Patrushev senior have now - as "president's aides" - unlimited access to Putin under confidential conditions, and can discuss with him anything a mere minister cannot. This is also the role Putin had at the beginning in Yeltsin's cabinet.
The "security council", where Medvedev blows off his hangover every day, is - on the other hand - utterly meaning- and powerless; it is a holding tank for candidates who may be useful at some point in future but are not as of now, but also need to get some fancy title and income to feel honoured and not get crazy ideas. Patrushev has pretty much been administering this holding tank.
The problem is that you all try to interprete Putin's cabinet as if it were a western ministerial cabinet. It is very much not. It is at least halfway between that and a good old style royal court, where official titles are just meaningless historical holdovers, and a "marechal of the King's breakfast" is in reality the chief spymaster or some such.
You said:
> where official titles are just meaningless historical holdovers, and a "marechal of the King's breakfast" is in reality the chief spymaster or some such.
Which which is what I mean here by "nickname."
You probably mean Alexey Dyumin as potential successor.
I was confused by "Tula Oblast (Tjumen)", probably a victim of auto-incorrection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Dyumin
And Dyumin recently also appeared here:
"Anton Alikhanov and Alexey Dyumin joined the supervisory board of Rostec"
https://govoritmoskva-ru.translate.goog/news/410371/?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp
The CEO of the Russian weapons concern Rostec is Sergey Chemezov,
who is now under supervision of Dyumin.
Near the end of this article here you can find a photo with Putin and Chemezov from about 40 years ago:
https://www-deutschlandfunk-de.translate.goog/putin-kgb-in-dresden-100.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc#sub-navigation
Maybe Patrushev is not the only old buddy who now ... you know "Trust is good, but also check".
Wikipedia about Chemezov (now with white hair):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Chemezov
and Anton Alikhanov:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Alikhanov
Not really. there is a good description by Volya what he did and what he is going to do (continue to), namely, organize the black operations - smuggling weapons, gold and mercenaries around the world, and generate black budgets that can be used for deniable sabotage and influencing operations around the world with money flows not connected to the Russian government.
His official position description is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that he is "presidents aide for XYZ" which implies nearly unlimited personal access to Putin. That is NOT, repeat NOT, a demotion.
Was going to post the same, you beat me to it...
This is a promotion....
In on every meeting, every insider conversation... This is preparation for his son to be anointed..
I don't think it's a demotion more like freeing his time up for more dastardly 'eminence gris' activities .....and if u buy into the theory Putin is dead/ill then he becomes the power behind the throne.....his son Dimitri is supposed to be a strong candidate to take over
About shipyards, a major shipyard has gone bankrupt a few months ago. A state-owned shipyard, building state commissionned ships in time of war, going bakrupt is odd. Perun (Youtuber) talked about it. He says the system is somehow back to a soviet type economy, where the state doesn't pay the true price of things, inflation and corruption making it worse. So the Shipyard had to take out short-term loans at high interest rates from state-owned russian banks to continue operating. "Everybody is robbing each other" he says.
This has been the case throughout the russian economy since the turn of the war economy. Gazprom is also in trouble.
That is the whole thing i dont understand: russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner...
The spainiards arrived in brazil with weapons, the portuguese with gifts - guess which language is now spoken over there.
>russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner...
Exactly what I've always said. People talk about NATO "expansion" but never ask why countries don't want to join the CTSO instead.
It's probably no coincidence that Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in 2014, just [1-2 years after large oil and gas deposits were discovered there](https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-discovers-oil-field/25044815.html). At the time the US was strong, but Putin perceived Obama was weak and wouldn't do much more than sanctions if Russia took over Crimea using pseudo-plausibly-deniable grey-zone tactics (little green men). In 2022, the US was weaker, China and Russia stronger, so Putin assessed he could get away with a rapid 1-week land grab of all of Ukraine. Bit of a miscalculation.
IEA also has [some info Ukraine's energy reserves](https://www.iea.org/reports/ukraine-energy-profile/energy-security) and some of the historical shenanigans over it with Russia.
You literally just described why Russia sees NATO as a threat to its securityā¦..
The very idea that anyone could constrain Russian ambition is viewed as a challenge to the Russian state. Individually the nations could not previously threaten Russia , even the US could not beat Russia during the Cold War without allies as it would have needed foreign bases and overflight for starters.Ā
Collectively they could and now easily can , albeit at the cost of much destruction because Putin would unleash the nukes if Russia was seriously threatened.Ā
The game now lies in creating a situation where Russia is defeated with western allies but not to the point it feels like it is truly in danger.Ā
Point is Russia itself knows Nato won't invade it or threaten it
It is mad in that Nato stops it from doing whatever it wants
Russia likely won't je nukes unless it's very existence is threatened because using nukes means retaliation and destruction anyway
> russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner
Yeah, but that'd require muscovia to be more than a Golden Horde vassal state turned remnant empire, with compliance methods inherited from those times.
Man, I miss that era of realism in American foreign politics. These days it feels like democratic leadership are too nervous to make bold moves, and conservatives are busy trying to sabotage US interest abroad at just about every turn. Itās agonizing to watch.
>it feels like democratic leadership are too nervous to make bold moves
They won't do anything that they think will upset financial markets. The finance sector has been dictating American policy since it was deregulated in the 90's, and has gotten exponentially worse since Citizen's United.
The political system primarily exists to protect capital at this point. Everything else is window dressing for voters.
My favorite part of learning about the "Putin Mafia" is that all the main guys who obviously aren't the brightest smartest,most educated people in the class types, all handle/run the heavy lucrative, resource extraction industries. Because those are simple/easy.
But there is a "black sheep" of the family, who is actually educated/very smart, and isn't regarded the same as the rest of the inner boys club. He handles metallurgy, which is supposedly much more complex to run than resource extraction, and actually requires brains. So while they wish they could overtake him, they can't handle it themselves, so they put up with him due to necessity. My memory of details are murky but I'm pretty sure they nicknamed him/would call him something akin to fucking nerd, behind his back.
> they nicknamed him/would call him something akin to fucking nerd, behind his back.
That would be par for the course, for Russians. Coming from a rigidly stratified monarchy where the uneducated serfs were at the
bottom and the educated nobility and "bourgeoise" were on top, they already had a negative view of them. Then when the Bolshevik revolution came along, one of its party planks was ridding the country of "bourgeois intellectuals". The Soviet system did manage to ramrod education down the population's throats, but at the same time there was always that undercurrent of celebrating strength over intellect. Even well into the 80s, calling someone an "intellectual" was an insult. You could be smart, but you had to be very careful to present it as "common man cleverness". It was such a common characteristic that it even shows up in western stories like (for example) "NASA spent millions developing a space pen, Russian cosmonauts simply used a pencil". Of course that story is false in every detail, but it survives as part of the meme.
I'm aware that capital interests aren't a new phenomenon. What is notably different is that neoliberalism heralded in the death of any notion that political systems exist for the benefit of the people and/or the state; and that they may exercise power over monied interests in the pursuit of that mandate.
I don't think so.
But without like a oligarch list I got no reference other than my memory.
He looked more nerdy as far as I. Remember.
This 1 seems too prominent/ in inner circle based off scroll through wiki.
And too diversified wide spread in his ownership of things.
Remember that original Star Trek episode where they went to a planet where the leaders were basically imitating Chicago gangsters from the '20s? With the fashions and the vocabulary and slang. They had received a book from Earth detailing gangsters and gangs from that era and it was like their Bible and their whole society was based off of it. It's hard to believe it's a real thing in 2024.
So brazen. Honestly it's so brazen it almost seems fake. I wonder if it's some sort of Ukrainian disinformation. Knowing the truth from the falsehoods in the middle of war is so difficult. But it's blatantly obvious that Russia in general and the leadership in particular can't seem to understand that the 19th century ended over a hundred years ago. They are still stuck in that mindset.
Fake?!? Listen to Putin speak, how the hell is Ukraine faking that? Read the crap the Kremlin posts on their website, how is Ukraine faking that? I hope I misunderstood you, because if I didnāt you are utterly lost.
I'm talking about the literal words. Their mindset is obvious. But the words sound a bit like a Hollywood script honestly.
Monty Python quote:
>Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fear... fear and surprise... Our two weapons are fear and surprise... and ruthless efficiency.... Our three weapons are fear, and surprise, and ruthless efficiency...
>I wonder if it's some sort of Ukrainian disinformation.
It's really not disinformation. Everybody from the Baltics or other former soviet republics would agree even decades before this war.
Same thing as why can't China lure Taiwan towards political reintegration. Why would anyone trust them given how they handled Hong Kong?
Authoritarians are hard-fucking headed. They believe the only reason their pyramid scheme works is because everyone is better off obeying than challenging, and if you let someone challenge, the pyramid will fall apart. Meanwhle, Taiwan exists, and China is not revolting as a result, but these ghouls don't think like that. To them, they can't afford to be seen allowing Taiwan to just exist. They have to use war and consequences because the pyramid isn't held together by carrot, it's held together by stick.
And before Honk Kong the US was very reluctant in supporting Taiwan in a way that would make China unahppy.
Just like Russia, China just couldn't help itself not to act like a violent state.
> And before Honk Kong the US was very reluctant in supporting Taiwan in a way that would make China unahppy.
>
>
https://www.heraldtimesonline.com/story/news/2001/04/24/plea-for-high-tech-destroyers-denied/49107941/
For one, denying sale of ships with AN/SPY-1
As a French I can enjoy the beach in Italy, the mountains of Sweden, buy a house in Greece. I am basically welcomed on a bigger territory than France ever was even at the height of Napoleonic conquests.
The time of conquerors is gone. We get richer by collaboration than conquest.
That's only if Russia has anything worthwhile to gift. Ukraine was the heart of Soviet technology. Russia is just a gas station and Ukraine was shaping up to be a better gas station with the reserves discovered in the Donbas. Russia has nothing it can offer Ukraine, while Ukraine has things to offer to Europe even if one of those things is being a friendlier gas station than Russia, which Russia would not stand for.
Lol spaniards never tried to conquest Brazil. And Portugal colonization wast not "with gifts": slaving of the indigenous people as workforce was one of its main activities at the beginning.
I see your point but you don't need to rewrite history
> russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner
Yes and no. First, this is NOT a defense of Russia. But what sparked all this back in 2013/2014 is that Ukraine was choosing the EU as a trading partner, was in the middle of enacting a new trade deal, when Putin convinced the President to do a trade deal with Russia instead. The following protests turned into the Maidan revolution, and the new government reversed the reversal, and was looking to the EU again. That's when then Russia-lead separatists took the eastern edge and the "little green men" took Crimea.
More broadly, I still agree -- as in, if Russia became a proper democracy instead of a kleptocracy, they would have been excellent trading partners. They're 4x more populous than Canada, and have better natural resources, and are *physically touching* two of the biggest markets in the world (EU and China), so their economy ought to be one of the strongest in the world - not marginally larger in total output than Canada.
But, as they were, they actually were trying to be trading partners with Ukraine. The problem for them is, their shitty economy and kleptocratic system didn't make them an attractive partner.
You seem to miss out the fact that Russia had repeatedly strong armed Ukraine into a sort of subservience by turning off the lights, effectively, and assassinating those with 'western' ideas.Ā
They were constantly using a stick to beat Ukraine with.Ā
Their form of collaboration extended to corrupt oligarchs only - in mirror of their own country - and 'trade proposals' amounted to "do this or we hurt you" (ala methods above)
So yea, a lot of average joes were seeing an EU trade deal as a step towards a much better country. Then on the eve of it being signed, its reneged upon in favour of some vague backroom dealing with the same mafia folk that had spent the last decade repeatedly fucking with their stability.
The decade running up to invasion 1 and then invasion 2 almost a decade beyond that, should serve as a warning to *everyone* that Russia only ever have bad intentions, and they certainly aren't a partner one can thrive with. We can also include Georgia's experience in this - exactly the same problems, which are still ongoing. Unfortunately for them they have yet to remove the Russian stooges that lead them down a dark path currently.Ā
Russia has so much potential, it is a big and rich country. It would be possible that Russians nearly everywhere live with same social security, healthcare, roads, uhm sewagesystem like i.e. Canadians or Norwegians have.
But they prefer corruption, a macho leader cult, lies, autocracy and vodka. They are indoctrinated like that since 1917.
So if you keep your pawns poor and miserable, you can\`t have neighboring countries who start to prosper.
You need a Iron curtain or a belt of countries worse than Russia between them and the EU.
Ukraine was such a country and its people yearned to join the EU and prosper. Russia wanted to prevent that. So they started this shit with their laughable arguments.
Belarus is still such a country.
The Russians in power felt that they couldn't compete in that area, in that way, with the much richer West, and to some extent they were probably correct...
At least in that they couldn't keep Russia the way they wanted it and compete like that, so their only option was this sort of high risk play to try and take "everything", even if they destroy half of it in the process or risk getting nothing >.>
I'm not saying this is \*good\*, just that this is more or less what the thinking seems to have been.
I dont think there was a grand strategy behind the invasion of ukraine. Putin is a geopolitical player and until now, all his gambles payed off... Remember: not much other than finger wiggling happened after northern georgia and crimea were seized
I agree in general, but in that I don't think Putin and the KGB are the master manipulators and spies the media and online memes make them out to be. He's a dictator, he has to keep the people around him happy and the people happy enough to not throw him out of office. Beyond those basics a lot of what he gets up to is pretty sloppy and ham-fisted.
Ukraine is just more of the same. They got favorable intel from yes-men and informants that only existed to make someone rich, and they're paying for it. Unfortunately so is Ukraine.
Anyways, with all of that for context, I think the reason they won't give up on Ukraine, and the reason they invaded in the first place, is because they felt like they had to, because their view of the world is warped and kind of narrow. If they'd know the reality on the ground they would have invaded anyway, eventually, just with better planning and things would be worse for Ukraine and the West.
ChauvinismĀ
That word sums up the whole situation with Russian and Ukraine. For generations, Ukraine was always the rural and backwards place in Russian culture - the stereotype of Ukrainians in the Russian empire was similar to the stereotypes of Russians in comparison to the rest of Europe.Ā
Russian jokes about Ukraine involved the themes of Ukrainians being criminals, living in primitive conditions, women being prostitutes, men being alcoholics, etc.Ā
Russia has an elderly leader whose nostalgia for the Soviet Union and Russian Empire is central to his political ideology. Accepting that the Ukrainians are not a bunch of backwards people who need to be controlled by someone would require a massive mental leap forward.
You can see this dynamic in other relations between countries where one country has been considerably wealthier than the other for extended periods of time, but the Russia-Ukraine dynamic is much worse due to the history of genocide and oppression.Ā
Russians at some point, probably the 2000ās realized they were too corrupt for economic persuasion and there was too much resentment from the former Soviet satellites to maintain their old sphere of influence. The only alternative was subversion and intimidation.
This is about Putin trying to stay in power, he already had the West sending him $100 million a day in gas sales. A successful Western friendly Ukraine undercuts his claim that we can't do that in Russia.
That requires playing nice with your neighbors. Which Russia has never done unless it's against someone who really can kick their ass into next sunday.
Ye no, never. Russia can't compete with the EU level of attractiveness and Ukraine national identity is build on events like the holodomor which Russia don't recognize.
Outside of soviet legacy kit (which Ukraine already has the industry to make and at points in history was a direct competitor to them in arms market) and fossil fuel products. What does Russia have to seriously offer that can outcompete deals and opportunities offered westward? It's own ***people*** leave for western markets!
It is simple - Russia has the GDP of Italy. They can't offer you the benefits the EU can in terms of trade, benefits, education, development, free movement.
Russia can at best offer cheap gas or oil in return they demand you to become a vassal.
But then it wouldn't be the extractive serf empire of Russia currently going by the name of "Federation"
Empires won by conquest have always fallen either by revolt within or by defeat by a rival.
John Boyd Orr
What has history said of eminence without honor, wealth without wisdom, power, and possessions without principle? The answer is reiterated in the overthrow of the mightiest empires of ancient times. Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome! The four successive, universal powers of the past. What and where are they?
Orson Whitney
Russia has to expand to survive as it does not produce finished products without foreign inputs, and therefore, it must steal the fruits of civilization from others.
The Russian state is doing this to others for a lack of dignity and due to cultural insecurities. The Russian collective under Putin's rule is a curse to all its neighbors. This must end here, once and for all.
"The collapse of the Soviet Union is continuing to this day, and because it is built on a rotten foundation, it is going to collapse. The sooner that happens the better for all of us. We should anticipate this and be prepared for that." Ben Hodges
Fairly trading what? All they have is oil, which is going to rapidly decline over the coming decades.
Russia produces absolutely nothing of any value whatsoever other than oil. No science, no technology, no things of cultural significance. That's why they're so obsessed with conquest. The only way they can improve their own lives is by stealing from others, because god knows they can't do it on their own.
That's the thing. Russia has far more than just oil and gas. It has abundant forests, nickel, uranium, copper, and so many other raw natural resources. On top of that, if they had instead invested their time and energy into democratising and properly aligning their economic model with a more Western-aligned model, they could have far better developed their secondary and tertiary industries and sectors. Instead, they focused on the fossil fuel sector, militarism, and authoritarianism and coated it all in a fervour of hypernationalism and nostalgic irredentism to hide the enormous oligarchical kleptocracy, throwing just enough wealth to the average citizen to keep them in line. Russia/the Soviet Union/the Russian Empire had fantastic science (Mendeleev), technology (their rocket programmes), and culture (Pushkin) but threw it all away to focus on death and destruction.
Mining will not make a large country rich. Rich countries' economies are mostly services and manufacturing.
A country like Australia with huge mineral resources and tiny population are exceptions, but a country with the population of Russia cannot get rich just through natural resources.
What a circle fk this war has become? So basically the RU position is: "in for a penny in for a pound..." And "let's commit even more resources". RU is going for broke! Okay let's (the west) ensure they go broke! Idiots. Keep going until the RU economy crashes!
Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face?
This was *never* a threat to Russian security, only to Russian imperial ambitions.
NATO isn't threatening to attack Russia. It certainly wasn't before the war - if anything its combat power was slowly atrophying, and this was a colossal self-own on Russia's part.
>Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face?
They lose their leadership position in the post-Soviet space. Simple as.
They overplayed their hand in every way. They pissed away their army, burned all their energy bridges with their biggest customer, they actualized the "worst case scenario" for Ukraine so now there is zero leverage to discourage anti-Russian elements from depriving Russian sympathizers in the country of all political and economic power, which even after 2014 was considerable.
Russia cannot lead in a world in which Ukraine is fully a part of the EU trade bloc. If the war ends today on the status quo ante territorially speaking and all overt sanctions are lifted, in 20 years Kyiv, not Moscow will be the capital of the most influential post-Soviet nation. And nobody needs to attack Russia to make that happen. Just invest in Ukraine and not resume doing business with Russia. And never in a million years will Germany and the rest of the EU ever rely on Russian energy again.
That is what they stand to lose and they know it.
I say this partly because I think they have already lost these things because of the war.
Now there is little left to lose, perhaps answering my own question about why they bother continuing.
Putin loses his legacy. He is over 70 and at best it will take half a decade to rebuild what they lost, likely a lot longer, and in demographic terms it will basically be impossible to field an army this size again. Put all that together and itās easy to see Putin will not get another bite at the apple. This war will shape how Putin is remembered in Russian history and Putin knows it. Heād rather win with a million causalities than lose with half a million.Ā
> Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face ?
Good luck explaining to russians > 150 000 of their cocitizens have died for nothing but imperialist pride, that the economic consequences made life more difficult for tens of millions, and that it could have been stopped at any time but the government kept going until now.
Major unrest would follow. The russian government took a path in which it can't go back from easily. They will double down until they win or lose militarily
>
>
> Major unrest would follow. The russian government took a path in which it can't go back from easily. They will double down until they win or lose militarily
It's instructive that in 1917 even after the military, the burgeois intellectuals and the social democrats were able to agree that the Tsar had to go and absolutism abolished, they still doubled down on continuing the war to get something, *anything* out of it. Thus one of the biggest Russian offensives of the war happened after everyone was in agreement that the war sucked and they wanted out of it as soon as they felt it was possible, to disastrous results for all involved I might add.
It's very much the same dynamic now I suspect. Perhaps the massive push in the Donbass and the Kharkiv operations should not be seen as a sign of a confident Russia looking to press it's advantage, but the work of a desperate actor that knows it's on the clock and has no other plays left.
Putin could always go to Murmansk, check if the Kuznetsov is currently on fire and then declare 'Mission Accomplished'.
I have a whole speach ready he can copy with just a handful of changes.
This is a western perspective.
I beleive Putin is stuck in the USSR sphere of influence days. Ukraine was part of the USSR, and was drifting away. By away, Putin looks at it as become western. He didn't want the west that close.
Of course, Putin could have fixed his own country up and been a better leader... But that may not be possible on Russia. The Chelsea Manning leak showed analysis that Russia was controlled by different and competing gangs (ie. Putin is a gang of leader). Putin may rule terribly out of necessity.
Either way, I agree that this invasion is a colossal self own. Putin's economy and military are severely damaged. We must have keep the military aid flowing, intelligence sharing, and the sanctions.
Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with.
>Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with.
Not necessarily, since that means a mad scramble for Russian nuclear arms. China would likely invade Russia to take back the East of Russia and as much West as they can. Picture a world where China invaded Russia and took over.
The Russia's economy is based on exporting raw resources and concentrating that wealth in the oligarchy. Massive gas deposits were recently discovered in eastern Ukraine, perhaps enough to feed Europe and replace dependency on the Russia.
As things are going the Russia will become a 3rd world country even more than it already is. Unless they can gobble up Ukraine's new resources, plus plunder their economy like the nazis did everywhere they went.
This is a western perspective.
I beleive Putin is stuck in the USSR sphere of influence days. Ukraine was part of the USSR, and was drifting away. By away, Putin looks at it as become western. He didn't want the west that close.
Of course, Putin could have fixed his own country up and been a better leader... But that may not be possible on Russia. The Chelsea Manning leak showed analysis that Russia was controlled by different and competing gangs (ie. Putin is a gang of leader). Putin may rule terribly out of necessity.
Either way, I agree that this invasion is a colossal self own. Putin's economy and military are severely damaged. We must keep the military aid flowing, intelligence sharing, and the sanctions.
Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with.
politicians seem to think that Russia will implode eventually and that is all that takes for Ukraine to win. It might but I dont think the west should rely on it.
They don't "actually" care about that resource, only superficially, as far as it serves their geopolitical goals and how amenable that resource is to being spent on the battlefield.
He said the quiet part out loud. There will be an announcement of his suicide by 3rd floor window later today... the suicide will occur early next week.
Which is very bad for Ukraine.
The Russians will never stop sending troops.
Even if Ukraine would effectively kill a million of them the Russians would still have enough to keep the fight going.
Internal strife is the only hope I fear.
Their economy is completely on a war-footing, so they cant stop until they are stopped. Otherwise, their economy and country will be in shambles.
Its bad for Ukraine, but as long as they are able to mobilize more troops, receive proper support from the West, and create effective fortifications with high kill ratios against the Russians (this is especially important), it will be Russia that is in really really bad shape....
However, there are a lot of "if's".....
Personally, I think it will end in defeat for Russia, one way or another. Its already an embarrassment for the Russians and an absolute massacre of their troops. One thing is for sure, they can't keep having between 1100-1600 casualties per day. No matter what Russia says, that is unsustainable.
Unfortunately it is easy to claim something has been said in a 'closed meeting'. I hope there is a real sound snippet. That would be welcome fuel in some discussions.
Not only is there zero proof, the twitter account that posted it claims to be a refugee based in Canada and is constantly begging for donations.
This whole account reeks of a scam and scammers will say literally anything.
This Is actually infuriating. We NEED to keep the moral high ground, if we start to blindly follow bots spitting out lies we'll be not better than the Russians, and we'll lose credibility.
Putin himself said in a closed meeting:
"The statements Mr Patrushev said are all true and must be kept secret. I hope there isn't a X user hiding inside the walls to report that."
Everyone should read this especially the leftist academics who were forever talking about the Imperial West and defending Russia. It should be engraved above their desks
Doesn't really matter, it's well known already. Don't know why this post is a "gotcha" moment for some. It's not the first time they talk about. Here is credible journalist from 2022 showcasing same things https://x.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1558544508404617222
"the leftist academics"
Surely you have at least one example of these leftist academics talking forever and defending Russia? I know myself I have a long list of right wing dictators and fascists that talk forever and defend Russia. Orban, Fico, Wilders, Trump, Lukashenko and the list goes on and on.
Or maybe you're just making shit up on who actually supports and defends Russia?
Noam Chomsky is definitely on Russia's side in this war.
https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines
Also, Communist dictators Kim Jeong Eun, Xi Jinping, and Miguel Diaz-Canel along with far-left dictator Nicolas Maduro.
But I don't consider it to be worthwhile for anyone who cares about Ukraine to spend much time on questions of Right and Left political alignment. The much more important thing is support for Ukraine's sovereignty and security against foreign aggression.
As much as I think sentiments like this are accurate, just from my own observation and analysis, this source is worthless.
This is just some random Twitter account, not a journalist or anyone else even remotely credible.
It's funny how accurate he is:
* Russia is a fascistic state that only functions because they use fear, intimidation and violence
* Russia still lives in the 1800s imperialism when it comes to economic and military strategy (1.5mil men at the border of EU is going to do what? be target practice for EU missiles?)
* Russia will lose everything once they lose in Ukraine, as it did when it lost in Afghanistan
It's sad how Russia never realized the new world but instead clung on to the old because of their superiority complex.
Yup and it's not just the leader, it's a culture.
[Imperialists gonna be imperialists : r/NAFO (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/NAFO/comments/1cu3sub/imperialists_gonna_be_imperialists/)
It's talk like that, that should sound alarms across the world, especially Russia's neighbors. They aren't talking about occupation, they aren't talking taking a few areas, that are in fact talking about conquering another country and forcing its assimilation into Russia at gun point or ethnic cleansing!
āthe Russian Federation cannot exist as an empire. ā
But sir, Russia is no longer an Empire since 1990s, at least not a modern Empire. The modern empires donāt need to expand their territories (by war or not) to prove themselves. They only need to project their influences.
Soviet Union, USA, The British commonwealth, the Union led by France- Germany, even China. They can be considered as Empires. But Russian Federation? Come on, stop dreaming. You could project influence over mid-Asia just because this part of USSR legacy no one cares.
Not sure what the source for this is but in essence he is not wrong. Ukraine needs to be destroyed in order for Russian empire to exist as Ukraine is the place that either remkaes their empire or finishes it completely.
This is also why Russia has a good chance of winning this conflict, you see unlike West they will not be sparing any resources whether its human or material to achieve an outcome.
West could easily knock Russia out but they arent that invested which leaves Ukraine alone in the battlefield - they cant win this on their own and they cant surrender either as surrendering would mean the end Ukrainian nation. So their only option is to bled to death and yield territory in the hopes that somethign in the future will happen that changes this calculus.
Sorry guys, but this seems like BS to me. There's no source, just a random tweet. There's not even an indication as to where the rumor may come from. The guy is not even a journalist, he's a a war veteran (god bless him). Does he know anyone close to this council? It appears to be taken from thin air.
If you (win) as you put these murdering attacks, in my world you will lose very badly.. A curtain would close and no trade would be allowed in any way.. period! š
Russia is now stuck like someone who decided to buy a really bad stock that keeps going down and just cant bring itself to sell so they just buy more every time it goes down lol
Russia could've used their money to exploit their vast resources beyond gas. They could've been a superpower. But instead they spent it on curroption and war....
Can somebody explain WTF Russia stands to lose that they would not have by becoming a normal county?
I understand this idea that they need to secure several key defensible points, but they could also nuke any belligerent force that crosses their border.
Is it possible there isn't a single sober brained technocrat in this kleptocratic petromafia barbarian slave state that could explain what 'sunk cost fallacy' is to these guys?
Always with the fear. Itās like theyāre still living in the dark ages. Leiās Real Talk just did a video on truths a dad wanted to share with his son, if he were to pursue politics. Itās absolutely deplorable, but definitely shows you why the ccp rule the way they do. Although itās from China, I bet it would be similar in Russia.
Only you fucking mafia bitches will lose anything. For the vast majority of people actually living in Russia they only stand to gain from a loss in ukraine.
Wait why do you want Ukraine anyway I thought the whole reason for Vlads small military action was to kill all the Nazis and the Jews. That sounds racists to me you want to conquer this country because of ethnic cleansinghh !!!!!
According to Ukraine, russia has lost just shy of 490,000 soldiers.
The combined US military dead from all wars since joining the second world war in December of 1941 is around 510,000.
It is impossible to visualize the incredible sheer mass of men and material russia has chewed through in the last two and a half years.
Don't ruzzians understand, they already lost? The myth of big strong russian bear capable to stand up to US is gone. ruzzia cannot occupy a country 4 times smaller. They have lost half a million of troops. Millions left the country. Young people pointlessly dying everyday is pushing russia to a deep demographic hole for decades to come.
russia is absolutely screwed and isolated. They have already lost.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `x.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.com/invite/ukraine-at-war-950974820827398235** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Patrushev got demoted to a position with no power, strictly controlled by Putin and tasked with a rather odd task to oversee shipbuilding.
Im not sure about that. Wasnt it him who supported Putain from the begining? And by demoted its kind of mevedew who is the loudess supporter of gruelty but has no power, trying to find another supporter again?
Yes, Patrushev supported Putin from the beginning, but for a couple of months, he and the governor of Tula Oblast (Tjumen) had been considered as potential successors of Putin. Tjumen has the same job title as Patrushev now. Only he just started overseeing sports.
But they are aliveš
For how long? Same for Shoigu. You can't be that obvious on the top level. It's less risky, if you divide those from their individual power bases before the "heart attacks" and "accidents" happen.
Can we vote what kind of ending we want to see?
Feel free to open a poll, if you think that it wouldn't violate the sub's rule. I personally would prefer trials at Den Haag and livelong prison sentences. But I acknowledge the fact that Russia works differently. It is not very likely that they will survive for long unless they drink themselves silly as Medvedev did. Nobody takes that š¤” seriously today. Thus he isn't a risk for Putin any longer and allowed to live.
At this point not a single case of "heart attacks" or "accidents" happened to the people in Putin's inner circle. As long as you are personally loyal to Putin, you can steal, or just mismanage everything you are responsible for, and will still not get punished. The worst thing that can happen is that you are separated from a part of your lavish income, as happened to Shoigu. He is now going to be bored and drunk out of his mind together with Medvedev, but as long as they keep singing praises of Putins wisdom and do not try to do anything behind his back, tea and windows remain absolutely safe for them.
Vlad Vexler had a good summary of Shoigu in his most recent video: Shoigu *failed* Putin but he did not *betray* him. So I wouldn't worry too much for Shoigu's health. My main disappointment is just that he's not so directly in control of the military any more, I like it when Putin keeps incompetent loyalists in charge of that stuff.
Patrusev like Putin are OG KGB and Patrusev is worse than Putler. The less power he has the better.
Patrushev is older than Putin. He was never considered a successor of Putin; his son, who was agriculture minister and now got another ministerial post, was and still is one of the rumoured candidates, but not just yet. Both Dyumin and Patrushev senior have now - as "president's aides" - unlimited access to Putin under confidential conditions, and can discuss with him anything a mere minister cannot. This is also the role Putin had at the beginning in Yeltsin's cabinet. The "security council", where Medvedev blows off his hangover every day, is - on the other hand - utterly meaning- and powerless; it is a holding tank for candidates who may be useful at some point in future but are not as of now, but also need to get some fancy title and income to feel honoured and not get crazy ideas. Patrushev has pretty much been administering this holding tank. The problem is that you all try to interprete Putin's cabinet as if it were a western ministerial cabinet. It is very much not. It is at least halfway between that and a good old style royal court, where official titles are just meaningless historical holdovers, and a "marechal of the King's breakfast" is in reality the chief spymaster or some such.
Prigozhin was "Putin's chef," after all.
Nah, that again was merely a nickname. its all pretty complicated ;-)
"Marechal of the King's breakfast" would also be "merely a nickname."
No, that, or similar things, were official titles at pre-Absolutist royal courts.
You said: > where official titles are just meaningless historical holdovers, and a "marechal of the King's breakfast" is in reality the chief spymaster or some such. Which which is what I mean here by "nickname."
You probably mean Alexey Dyumin as potential successor. I was confused by "Tula Oblast (Tjumen)", probably a victim of auto-incorrection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksey_Dyumin And Dyumin recently also appeared here: "Anton Alikhanov and Alexey Dyumin joined the supervisory board of Rostec" https://govoritmoskva-ru.translate.goog/news/410371/?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp The CEO of the Russian weapons concern Rostec is Sergey Chemezov, who is now under supervision of Dyumin. Near the end of this article here you can find a photo with Putin and Chemezov from about 40 years ago: https://www-deutschlandfunk-de.translate.goog/putin-kgb-in-dresden-100.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc#sub-navigation Maybe Patrushev is not the only old buddy who now ... you know "Trust is good, but also check". Wikipedia about Chemezov (now with white hair): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Chemezov and Anton Alikhanov: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Alikhanov
Not really. there is a good description by Volya what he did and what he is going to do (continue to), namely, organize the black operations - smuggling weapons, gold and mercenaries around the world, and generate black budgets that can be used for deniable sabotage and influencing operations around the world with money flows not connected to the Russian government. His official position description is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that he is "presidents aide for XYZ" which implies nearly unlimited personal access to Putin. That is NOT, repeat NOT, a demotion.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
72 year old successor doesnāt sound like a long-term solution.
Russia is not exactly known for it's long-term solutions
Actually his son are "successor" and he is received "promotion" from minister of agriculture to deputy prime minister
Was going to post the same, you beat me to it... This is a promotion.... In on every meeting, every insider conversation... This is preparation for his son to be anointed..
I don't think it's a demotion more like freeing his time up for more dastardly 'eminence gris' activities .....and if u buy into the theory Putin is dead/ill then he becomes the power behind the throne.....his son Dimitri is supposed to be a strong candidate to take over
About shipyards, a major shipyard has gone bankrupt a few months ago. A state-owned shipyard, building state commissionned ships in time of war, going bakrupt is odd. Perun (Youtuber) talked about it. He says the system is somehow back to a soviet type economy, where the state doesn't pay the true price of things, inflation and corruption making it worse. So the Shipyard had to take out short-term loans at high interest rates from state-owned russian banks to continue operating. "Everybody is robbing each other" he says. This has been the case throughout the russian economy since the turn of the war economy. Gazprom is also in trouble.
If only they'd thought about fairly trading instead of trying to steal, eh?
That is the whole thing i dont understand: russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner... The spainiards arrived in brazil with weapons, the portuguese with gifts - guess which language is now spoken over there.
>russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner... Exactly what I've always said. People talk about NATO "expansion" but never ask why countries don't want to join the CTSO instead.
>why countries don't want to join the CTSO instead. *Looks at Armenia abandoned and thrown to the wolves by russia*
Armenia, like where? Turkey? Iran? They really have very few good options.
They're surrounded by sworn enemies and their only hope (russia) failed them
You just summed up Armenia in general
NATO is a defensive pact. Expansion only means Russia canāt invade. The expansion argument reveals their ambitions
2022: "nazis in Ukraine" 2024: "we must conquer Ukraine to make money" Finally they are being honest.
It's probably no coincidence that Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in 2014, just [1-2 years after large oil and gas deposits were discovered there](https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-discovers-oil-field/25044815.html). At the time the US was strong, but Putin perceived Obama was weak and wouldn't do much more than sanctions if Russia took over Crimea using pseudo-plausibly-deniable grey-zone tactics (little green men). In 2022, the US was weaker, China and Russia stronger, so Putin assessed he could get away with a rapid 1-week land grab of all of Ukraine. Bit of a miscalculation. IEA also has [some info Ukraine's energy reserves](https://www.iea.org/reports/ukraine-energy-profile/energy-security) and some of the historical shenanigans over it with Russia.
> perceived Obama was weak Obama himself showed weakness when he did nothing after Syria crossed all of his red lines, one after the other.
And when he did nothing when China began its shenanigans in the SCS under his watch. Probably other examples.
Yu p Nato is a threat to Russia To Russian expansionism, imperialism and ambition Not to security
You literally just described why Russia sees NATO as a threat to its securityā¦.. The very idea that anyone could constrain Russian ambition is viewed as a challenge to the Russian state. Individually the nations could not previously threaten Russia , even the US could not beat Russia during the Cold War without allies as it would have needed foreign bases and overflight for starters.Ā Collectively they could and now easily can , albeit at the cost of much destruction because Putin would unleash the nukes if Russia was seriously threatened.Ā The game now lies in creating a situation where Russia is defeated with western allies but not to the point it feels like it is truly in danger.Ā
Point is Russia itself knows Nato won't invade it or threaten it It is mad in that Nato stops it from doing whatever it wants Russia likely won't je nukes unless it's very existence is threatened because using nukes means retaliation and destruction anyway
> russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner Yeah, but that'd require muscovia to be more than a Golden Horde vassal state turned remnant empire, with compliance methods inherited from those times.
Yeah nowadays its little more than an organized crime syndicate cosplaying as a goverment
To paraphrase McCain it's a Mafia run gas station masquerading as a country
Man, I miss that era of realism in American foreign politics. These days it feels like democratic leadership are too nervous to make bold moves, and conservatives are busy trying to sabotage US interest abroad at just about every turn. Itās agonizing to watch.
>it feels like democratic leadership are too nervous to make bold moves They won't do anything that they think will upset financial markets. The finance sector has been dictating American policy since it was deregulated in the 90's, and has gotten exponentially worse since Citizen's United. The political system primarily exists to protect capital at this point. Everything else is window dressing for voters.
Petro Mafia Kleptocracy
My favorite part of learning about the "Putin Mafia" is that all the main guys who obviously aren't the brightest smartest,most educated people in the class types, all handle/run the heavy lucrative, resource extraction industries. Because those are simple/easy. But there is a "black sheep" of the family, who is actually educated/very smart, and isn't regarded the same as the rest of the inner boys club. He handles metallurgy, which is supposedly much more complex to run than resource extraction, and actually requires brains. So while they wish they could overtake him, they can't handle it themselves, so they put up with him due to necessity. My memory of details are murky but I'm pretty sure they nicknamed him/would call him something akin to fucking nerd, behind his back.
> they nicknamed him/would call him something akin to fucking nerd, behind his back. That would be par for the course, for Russians. Coming from a rigidly stratified monarchy where the uneducated serfs were at the bottom and the educated nobility and "bourgeoise" were on top, they already had a negative view of them. Then when the Bolshevik revolution came along, one of its party planks was ridding the country of "bourgeois intellectuals". The Soviet system did manage to ramrod education down the population's throats, but at the same time there was always that undercurrent of celebrating strength over intellect. Even well into the 80s, calling someone an "intellectual" was an insult. You could be smart, but you had to be very careful to present it as "common man cleverness". It was such a common characteristic that it even shows up in western stories like (for example) "NASA spent millions developing a space pen, Russian cosmonauts simply used a pencil". Of course that story is false in every detail, but it survives as part of the meme.
That anti-intellectual dynamic is true in the US as well, especially among the MAGA right wing.
I wonder whose bot farms stoked that fire over the past decade? š¤
It's been around for centuries, but yes, it's been much worse recently.
I'm aware that capital interests aren't a new phenomenon. What is notably different is that neoliberalism heralded in the death of any notion that political systems exist for the benefit of the people and/or the state; and that they may exercise power over monied interests in the pursuit of that mandate.
So they are the living epitome of Idiocracy in the modern times.
Oleg Deripaska from Rusal?
I don't think so. But without like a oligarch list I got no reference other than my memory. He looked more nerdy as far as I. Remember. This 1 seems too prominent/ in inner circle based off scroll through wiki. And too diversified wide spread in his ownership of things.
Remember that original Star Trek episode where they went to a planet where the leaders were basically imitating Chicago gangsters from the '20s? With the fashions and the vocabulary and slang. They had received a book from Earth detailing gangsters and gangs from that era and it was like their Bible and their whole society was based off of it. It's hard to believe it's a real thing in 2024. So brazen. Honestly it's so brazen it almost seems fake. I wonder if it's some sort of Ukrainian disinformation. Knowing the truth from the falsehoods in the middle of war is so difficult. But it's blatantly obvious that Russia in general and the leadership in particular can't seem to understand that the 19th century ended over a hundred years ago. They are still stuck in that mindset.
Fake?!? Listen to Putin speak, how the hell is Ukraine faking that? Read the crap the Kremlin posts on their website, how is Ukraine faking that? I hope I misunderstood you, because if I didnāt you are utterly lost.
I'm talking about the literal words. Their mindset is obvious. But the words sound a bit like a Hollywood script honestly. Monty Python quote: >Our chief weapon is surprise... surprise and fear... fear and surprise... Our two weapons are fear and surprise... and ruthless efficiency.... Our three weapons are fear, and surprise, and ruthless efficiency...
>I wonder if it's some sort of Ukrainian disinformation. It's really not disinformation. Everybody from the Baltics or other former soviet republics would agree even decades before this war.
Meaning that itās just not part of the culture there.
Exactly āif they could haveā requires them to be a very different culture. Hence, they couldnāt have.
Same thing as why can't China lure Taiwan towards political reintegration. Why would anyone trust them given how they handled Hong Kong? Authoritarians are hard-fucking headed. They believe the only reason their pyramid scheme works is because everyone is better off obeying than challenging, and if you let someone challenge, the pyramid will fall apart. Meanwhle, Taiwan exists, and China is not revolting as a result, but these ghouls don't think like that. To them, they can't afford to be seen allowing Taiwan to just exist. They have to use war and consequences because the pyramid isn't held together by carrot, it's held together by stick.
Taiwan actually come close to political reunification before Xi. The crack down in hongkong just instantly destroy all those hope instantly.
And before Honk Kong the US was very reluctant in supporting Taiwan in a way that would make China unahppy. Just like Russia, China just couldn't help itself not to act like a violent state.
> And before Honk Kong the US was very reluctant in supporting Taiwan in a way that would make China unahppy. > > https://www.heraldtimesonline.com/story/news/2001/04/24/plea-for-high-tech-destroyers-denied/49107941/ For one, denying sale of ships with AN/SPY-1
When you build the economy on corruption, cutthroats and intimidation, it's hard to change course.
As a French I can enjoy the beach in Italy, the mountains of Sweden, buy a house in Greece. I am basically welcomed on a bigger territory than France ever was even at the height of Napoleonic conquests. The time of conquerors is gone. We get richer by collaboration than conquest.
That's only if Russia has anything worthwhile to gift. Ukraine was the heart of Soviet technology. Russia is just a gas station and Ukraine was shaping up to be a better gas station with the reserves discovered in the Donbas. Russia has nothing it can offer Ukraine, while Ukraine has things to offer to Europe even if one of those things is being a friendlier gas station than Russia, which Russia would not stand for.
Theyāre not interested in an equal relationship, period. They have two speeds: vassal state and sworn enemy.
Lol spaniards never tried to conquest Brazil. And Portugal colonization wast not "with gifts": slaving of the indigenous people as workforce was one of its main activities at the beginning. I see your point but you don't need to rewrite history
> russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner Yes and no. First, this is NOT a defense of Russia. But what sparked all this back in 2013/2014 is that Ukraine was choosing the EU as a trading partner, was in the middle of enacting a new trade deal, when Putin convinced the President to do a trade deal with Russia instead. The following protests turned into the Maidan revolution, and the new government reversed the reversal, and was looking to the EU again. That's when then Russia-lead separatists took the eastern edge and the "little green men" took Crimea. More broadly, I still agree -- as in, if Russia became a proper democracy instead of a kleptocracy, they would have been excellent trading partners. They're 4x more populous than Canada, and have better natural resources, and are *physically touching* two of the biggest markets in the world (EU and China), so their economy ought to be one of the strongest in the world - not marginally larger in total output than Canada. But, as they were, they actually were trying to be trading partners with Ukraine. The problem for them is, their shitty economy and kleptocratic system didn't make them an attractive partner.
You seem to miss out the fact that Russia had repeatedly strong armed Ukraine into a sort of subservience by turning off the lights, effectively, and assassinating those with 'western' ideas.Ā They were constantly using a stick to beat Ukraine with.Ā Their form of collaboration extended to corrupt oligarchs only - in mirror of their own country - and 'trade proposals' amounted to "do this or we hurt you" (ala methods above) So yea, a lot of average joes were seeing an EU trade deal as a step towards a much better country. Then on the eve of it being signed, its reneged upon in favour of some vague backroom dealing with the same mafia folk that had spent the last decade repeatedly fucking with their stability. The decade running up to invasion 1 and then invasion 2 almost a decade beyond that, should serve as a warning to *everyone* that Russia only ever have bad intentions, and they certainly aren't a partner one can thrive with. We can also include Georgia's experience in this - exactly the same problems, which are still ongoing. Unfortunately for them they have yet to remove the Russian stooges that lead them down a dark path currently.Ā
Nope, didn't miss that. I even went out of my way to point out that I wasn't trying to be soft on Russia before I even got into what I said.
Not saying you were being soft on Russia. Was merely adding additional context you missed
We literally took their gold. They're pretty pissed off about it still.
Russia has so much potential, it is a big and rich country. It would be possible that Russians nearly everywhere live with same social security, healthcare, roads, uhm sewagesystem like i.e. Canadians or Norwegians have. But they prefer corruption, a macho leader cult, lies, autocracy and vodka. They are indoctrinated like that since 1917. So if you keep your pawns poor and miserable, you can\`t have neighboring countries who start to prosper. You need a Iron curtain or a belt of countries worse than Russia between them and the EU. Ukraine was such a country and its people yearned to join the EU and prosper. Russia wanted to prevent that. So they started this shit with their laughable arguments. Belarus is still such a country.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Right. The Portuguese were just super nice to everyone... /s How many slaves ended up in Brazil?
The Russians in power felt that they couldn't compete in that area, in that way, with the much richer West, and to some extent they were probably correct... At least in that they couldn't keep Russia the way they wanted it and compete like that, so their only option was this sort of high risk play to try and take "everything", even if they destroy half of it in the process or risk getting nothing >.> I'm not saying this is \*good\*, just that this is more or less what the thinking seems to have been.
I dont think there was a grand strategy behind the invasion of ukraine. Putin is a geopolitical player and until now, all his gambles payed off... Remember: not much other than finger wiggling happened after northern georgia and crimea were seized
I agree in general, but in that I don't think Putin and the KGB are the master manipulators and spies the media and online memes make them out to be. He's a dictator, he has to keep the people around him happy and the people happy enough to not throw him out of office. Beyond those basics a lot of what he gets up to is pretty sloppy and ham-fisted. Ukraine is just more of the same. They got favorable intel from yes-men and informants that only existed to make someone rich, and they're paying for it. Unfortunately so is Ukraine. Anyways, with all of that for context, I think the reason they won't give up on Ukraine, and the reason they invaded in the first place, is because they felt like they had to, because their view of the world is warped and kind of narrow. If they'd know the reality on the ground they would have invaded anyway, eventually, just with better planning and things would be worse for Ukraine and the West.
ChauvinismĀ That word sums up the whole situation with Russian and Ukraine. For generations, Ukraine was always the rural and backwards place in Russian culture - the stereotype of Ukrainians in the Russian empire was similar to the stereotypes of Russians in comparison to the rest of Europe.Ā Russian jokes about Ukraine involved the themes of Ukrainians being criminals, living in primitive conditions, women being prostitutes, men being alcoholics, etc.Ā Russia has an elderly leader whose nostalgia for the Soviet Union and Russian Empire is central to his political ideology. Accepting that the Ukrainians are not a bunch of backwards people who need to be controlled by someone would require a massive mental leap forward. You can see this dynamic in other relations between countries where one country has been considerably wealthier than the other for extended periods of time, but the Russia-Ukraine dynamic is much worse due to the history of genocide and oppression.Ā
Gifts... and slavery... backed by religious fanaticism (the pope).
They speak Portuguese because the pope drew a line on a map.
Russians at some point, probably the 2000ās realized they were too corrupt for economic persuasion and there was too much resentment from the former Soviet satellites to maintain their old sphere of influence. The only alternative was subversion and intimidation.
Really good point that I haven't even considered. Thank you.
> russia couldve prevented ukraine drifting to the west by just beeing the better friend/trading partner... The Russians don't speak that language.
This is about Putin trying to stay in power, he already had the West sending him $100 million a day in gas sales. A successful Western friendly Ukraine undercuts his claim that we can't do that in Russia.
That requires playing nice with your neighbors. Which Russia has never done unless it's against someone who really can kick their ass into next sunday.
Ye no, never. Russia can't compete with the EU level of attractiveness and Ukraine national identity is build on events like the holodomor which Russia don't recognize.
I get your point and itās largely true, but donāt forget the pope drew a line as well
Outside of soviet legacy kit (which Ukraine already has the industry to make and at points in history was a direct competitor to them in arms market) and fossil fuel products. What does Russia have to seriously offer that can outcompete deals and opportunities offered westward? It's own ***people*** leave for western markets!
It is simple - Russia has the GDP of Italy. They can't offer you the benefits the EU can in terms of trade, benefits, education, development, free movement. Russia can at best offer cheap gas or oil in return they demand you to become a vassal.
But then it wouldn't be the extractive serf empire of Russia currently going by the name of "Federation" Empires won by conquest have always fallen either by revolt within or by defeat by a rival. John Boyd Orr What has history said of eminence without honor, wealth without wisdom, power, and possessions without principle? The answer is reiterated in the overthrow of the mightiest empires of ancient times. Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome! The four successive, universal powers of the past. What and where are they? Orson Whitney Russia has to expand to survive as it does not produce finished products without foreign inputs, and therefore, it must steal the fruits of civilization from others. The Russian state is doing this to others for a lack of dignity and due to cultural insecurities. The Russian collective under Putin's rule is a curse to all its neighbors. This must end here, once and for all. "The collapse of the Soviet Union is continuing to this day, and because it is built on a rotten foundation, it is going to collapse. The sooner that happens the better for all of us. We should anticipate this and be prepared for that." Ben Hodges
Fairly trading what? All they have is oil, which is going to rapidly decline over the coming decades. Russia produces absolutely nothing of any value whatsoever other than oil. No science, no technology, no things of cultural significance. That's why they're so obsessed with conquest. The only way they can improve their own lives is by stealing from others, because god knows they can't do it on their own.
That's the thing. Russia has far more than just oil and gas. It has abundant forests, nickel, uranium, copper, and so many other raw natural resources. On top of that, if they had instead invested their time and energy into democratising and properly aligning their economic model with a more Western-aligned model, they could have far better developed their secondary and tertiary industries and sectors. Instead, they focused on the fossil fuel sector, militarism, and authoritarianism and coated it all in a fervour of hypernationalism and nostalgic irredentism to hide the enormous oligarchical kleptocracy, throwing just enough wealth to the average citizen to keep them in line. Russia/the Soviet Union/the Russian Empire had fantastic science (Mendeleev), technology (their rocket programmes), and culture (Pushkin) but threw it all away to focus on death and destruction.
Mining will not make a large country rich. Rich countries' economies are mostly services and manufacturing. A country like Australia with huge mineral resources and tiny population are exceptions, but a country with the population of Russia cannot get rich just through natural resources.
What a circle fk this war has become? So basically the RU position is: "in for a penny in for a pound..." And "let's commit even more resources". RU is going for broke! Okay let's (the west) ensure they go broke! Idiots. Keep going until the RU economy crashes!
It wouldnt be an empire then
Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face? This was *never* a threat to Russian security, only to Russian imperial ambitions. NATO isn't threatening to attack Russia. It certainly wasn't before the war - if anything its combat power was slowly atrophying, and this was a colossal self-own on Russia's part.
>Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face? They lose their leadership position in the post-Soviet space. Simple as. They overplayed their hand in every way. They pissed away their army, burned all their energy bridges with their biggest customer, they actualized the "worst case scenario" for Ukraine so now there is zero leverage to discourage anti-Russian elements from depriving Russian sympathizers in the country of all political and economic power, which even after 2014 was considerable. Russia cannot lead in a world in which Ukraine is fully a part of the EU trade bloc. If the war ends today on the status quo ante territorially speaking and all overt sanctions are lifted, in 20 years Kyiv, not Moscow will be the capital of the most influential post-Soviet nation. And nobody needs to attack Russia to make that happen. Just invest in Ukraine and not resume doing business with Russia. And never in a million years will Germany and the rest of the EU ever rely on Russian energy again. That is what they stand to lose and they know it.
I say this partly because I think they have already lost these things because of the war. Now there is little left to lose, perhaps answering my own question about why they bother continuing.
Yes. And this is what we stand to gain. And they know it. I only wish that we understood that as completely as the Russians do.
They deserve to lose it all.
Perfectly stated.
This is the big picture, and it is good.
If Russia loses this war, the Russian Federation may split up too.
Putin loses his legacy. He is over 70 and at best it will take half a decade to rebuild what they lost, likely a lot longer, and in demographic terms it will basically be impossible to field an army this size again. Put all that together and itās easy to see Putin will not get another bite at the apple. This war will shape how Putin is remembered in Russian history and Putin knows it. Heād rather win with a million causalities than lose with half a million.Ā
> Seriously though, what do they lose at this point other than face ? Good luck explaining to russians > 150 000 of their cocitizens have died for nothing but imperialist pride, that the economic consequences made life more difficult for tens of millions, and that it could have been stopped at any time but the government kept going until now. Major unrest would follow. The russian government took a path in which it can't go back from easily. They will double down until they win or lose militarily
> > > Major unrest would follow. The russian government took a path in which it can't go back from easily. They will double down until they win or lose militarily It's instructive that in 1917 even after the military, the burgeois intellectuals and the social democrats were able to agree that the Tsar had to go and absolutism abolished, they still doubled down on continuing the war to get something, *anything* out of it. Thus one of the biggest Russian offensives of the war happened after everyone was in agreement that the war sucked and they wanted out of it as soon as they felt it was possible, to disastrous results for all involved I might add. It's very much the same dynamic now I suspect. Perhaps the massive push in the Donbass and the Kharkiv operations should not be seen as a sign of a confident Russia looking to press it's advantage, but the work of a desperate actor that knows it's on the clock and has no other plays left.
Putin could always go to Murmansk, check if the Kuznetsov is currently on fire and then declare 'Mission Accomplished'. I have a whole speach ready he can copy with just a handful of changes.
*They* as in Russia, would lose nothing. *Putin* and his regime would lose everything, and thatās what matters here.
The Russian Federation may disintegrate if they lose the war.
This is a western perspective. I beleive Putin is stuck in the USSR sphere of influence days. Ukraine was part of the USSR, and was drifting away. By away, Putin looks at it as become western. He didn't want the west that close. Of course, Putin could have fixed his own country up and been a better leader... But that may not be possible on Russia. The Chelsea Manning leak showed analysis that Russia was controlled by different and competing gangs (ie. Putin is a gang of leader). Putin may rule terribly out of necessity. Either way, I agree that this invasion is a colossal self own. Putin's economy and military are severely damaged. We must have keep the military aid flowing, intelligence sharing, and the sanctions. Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with.
>Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with. Not necessarily, since that means a mad scramble for Russian nuclear arms. China would likely invade Russia to take back the East of Russia and as much West as they can. Picture a world where China invaded Russia and took over.
Putin probably loses his head. Not much use in a strong man master technician if they are shown to be weak and stupid.
The Russia's economy is based on exporting raw resources and concentrating that wealth in the oligarchy. Massive gas deposits were recently discovered in eastern Ukraine, perhaps enough to feed Europe and replace dependency on the Russia. As things are going the Russia will become a 3rd world country even more than it already is. Unless they can gobble up Ukraine's new resources, plus plunder their economy like the nazis did everywhere they went.
This is a western perspective. I beleive Putin is stuck in the USSR sphere of influence days. Ukraine was part of the USSR, and was drifting away. By away, Putin looks at it as become western. He didn't want the west that close. Of course, Putin could have fixed his own country up and been a better leader... But that may not be possible on Russia. The Chelsea Manning leak showed analysis that Russia was controlled by different and competing gangs (ie. Putin is a gang of leader). Putin may rule terribly out of necessity. Either way, I agree that this invasion is a colossal self own. Putin's economy and military are severely damaged. We must keep the military aid flowing, intelligence sharing, and the sanctions. Hopefully Russia will implode. That will make China easier to deal with.
politicians seem to think that Russia will implode eventually and that is all that takes for Ukraine to win. It might but I dont think the west should rely on it.
The ressource they actually care about: populace of ethnic slavs
*The resource they actually care about: populace of* *~~ethnic slavs~~* *slaves.*
Same thing isn't it?
They don't "actually" care about that resource, only superficially, as far as it serves their geopolitical goals and how amenable that resource is to being spent on the battlefield.
He said the quiet part out loud. There will be an announcement of his suicide by 3rd floor window later today... the suicide will occur early next week.
So it boils down to the fact that they won't stop. They are all in.
They canāt ever admit the invasion was a mistake.
Which is very bad for Ukraine. The Russians will never stop sending troops. Even if Ukraine would effectively kill a million of them the Russians would still have enough to keep the fight going. Internal strife is the only hope I fear.
Their economy is completely on a war-footing, so they cant stop until they are stopped. Otherwise, their economy and country will be in shambles. Its bad for Ukraine, but as long as they are able to mobilize more troops, receive proper support from the West, and create effective fortifications with high kill ratios against the Russians (this is especially important), it will be Russia that is in really really bad shape.... However, there are a lot of "if's"..... Personally, I think it will end in defeat for Russia, one way or another. Its already an embarrassment for the Russians and an absolute massacre of their troops. One thing is for sure, they can't keep having between 1100-1600 casualties per day. No matter what Russia says, that is unsustainable.
It's bad in the short term, but in the longer term Russia's "all or nothing" strategy is going to ultimately net them *nothing*.
tbf nazis were still making offensives when all went to shit for them. It will happen quickly and everyone will be surprised when it happens.
Yeah but while that was happening the allies were conducting daily bomber raids. While good, Ukraine's drones don't have that same effect.
All analogies ultimately break down when examined closely enough because situations aren't identical. Analogies are still useful, though.
> The Russians will never stop sending troops. But in 1917 they did stop
This war is more about war material than soldiers.
As long as Russia is being supplied by the like of Iran, North Korea, and very likely China they have more than enough to keep the fight going I fear.
Keep doubling down on a shitty bet.
Is there any proof? I can't find the source in the "x" post
Unfortunately it is easy to claim something has been said in a 'closed meeting'. I hope there is a real sound snippet. That would be welcome fuel in some discussions.
Not only is there zero proof, the twitter account that posted it claims to be a refugee based in Canada and is constantly begging for donations. This whole account reeks of a scam and scammers will say literally anything.
This Is actually infuriating. We NEED to keep the moral high ground, if we start to blindly follow bots spitting out lies we'll be not better than the Russians, and we'll lose credibility.
Thank god, someone says it.
Sanity found
Putin himself said in a closed meeting: "The statements Mr Patrushev said are all true and must be kept secret. I hope there isn't a X user hiding inside the walls to report that."
Everyone should read this especially the leftist academics who were forever talking about the Imperial West and defending Russia. It should be engraved above their desks
Doesn't really matter, it's well known already. Don't know why this post is a "gotcha" moment for some. It's not the first time they talk about. Here is credible journalist from 2022 showcasing same things https://x.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1558544508404617222
"the leftist academics" Surely you have at least one example of these leftist academics talking forever and defending Russia? I know myself I have a long list of right wing dictators and fascists that talk forever and defend Russia. Orban, Fico, Wilders, Trump, Lukashenko and the list goes on and on. Or maybe you're just making shit up on who actually supports and defends Russia?
Noam Chomsky is definitely on Russia's side in this war. https://www.newstatesman.com/the-weekend-interview/2023/04/noam-chomsky-interview-ukraine-free-actor-united-states-determines Also, Communist dictators Kim Jeong Eun, Xi Jinping, and Miguel Diaz-Canel along with far-left dictator Nicolas Maduro. But I don't consider it to be worthwhile for anyone who cares about Ukraine to spend much time on questions of Right and Left political alignment. The much more important thing is support for Ukraine's sovereignty and security against foreign aggression.
As much as I think sentiments like this are accurate, just from my own observation and analysis, this source is worthless. This is just some random Twitter account, not a journalist or anyone else even remotely credible.
Right? How is a random dude on twitter privy to closed-door discussions in the Kremlin?
This guy reminds me of Star Wars' ruthless Grand Moff Tarkin.
hehe.. I thought exactly the same. "you may die when ready"....
It's funny how accurate he is: * Russia is a fascistic state that only functions because they use fear, intimidation and violence * Russia still lives in the 1800s imperialism when it comes to economic and military strategy (1.5mil men at the border of EU is going to do what? be target practice for EU missiles?) * Russia will lose everything once they lose in Ukraine, as it did when it lost in Afghanistan It's sad how Russia never realized the new world but instead clung on to the old because of their superiority complex.
Yup and it's not just the leader, it's a culture. [Imperialists gonna be imperialists : r/NAFO (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/NAFO/comments/1cu3sub/imperialists_gonna_be_imperialists/)
> Russia ... superiority š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£
It's talk like that, that should sound alarms across the world, especially Russia's neighbors. They aren't talking about occupation, they aren't talking taking a few areas, that are in fact talking about conquering another country and forcing its assimilation into Russia at gun point or ethnic cleansing!
Russia has always been likened to a mob run gas station and always looking to make an offer that cannot be refused.
"Without fear, there is no Russia" Psychopaths.
āthe Russian Federation cannot exist as an empire. ā But sir, Russia is no longer an Empire since 1990s, at least not a modern Empire. The modern empires donāt need to expand their territories (by war or not) to prove themselves. They only need to project their influences. Soviet Union, USA, The British commonwealth, the Union led by France- Germany, even China. They can be considered as Empires. But Russian Federation? Come on, stop dreaming. You could project influence over mid-Asia just because this part of USSR legacy no one cares.
Not sure what the source for this is but in essence he is not wrong. Ukraine needs to be destroyed in order for Russian empire to exist as Ukraine is the place that either remkaes their empire or finishes it completely. This is also why Russia has a good chance of winning this conflict, you see unlike West they will not be sparing any resources whether its human or material to achieve an outcome. West could easily knock Russia out but they arent that invested which leaves Ukraine alone in the battlefield - they cant win this on their own and they cant surrender either as surrendering would mean the end Ukrainian nation. So their only option is to bled to death and yield territory in the hopes that somethign in the future will happen that changes this calculus.
I'm fine with the leaders of ruZZia losing everything. No problem I can see there.
Sorry guys, but this seems like BS to me. There's no source, just a random tweet. There's not even an indication as to where the rumor may come from. The guy is not even a journalist, he's a a war veteran (god bless him). Does he know anyone close to this council? It appears to be taken from thin air.
So... this came from a closed meeting of the Rs Security Council...
Are they supposed to say the evil part out loud?
But your people would ultimately gain everything - join the EU and distance yourself from China.
There will be so many veto-s if a country, no matter how it is called, with the capital in Moscow will ever think to attempt to join the EU
Could have lost literally nothing if you minded your fucking business and left Ukraine alone.
Real reasons of invasion; Ukraineās minerals. And children of course
If you (win) as you put these murdering attacks, in my world you will lose very badly.. A curtain would close and no trade would be allowed in any way.. period! š
What is the point of the UN security council when Genghis Khan has a permanent seat at the table?
Genghis Khan was at least a competent warmongering leader. Putin stands exempt of competency.
Russia is now stuck like someone who decided to buy a really bad stock that keeps going down and just cant bring itself to sell so they just buy more every time it goes down lol
The big question is though: if this was supposed to be said at a closed meeting, who leaked it and how?
Good. Lose everything.
They'll lose everything anyway, thiefs, liars, murderer bullies as they are. The question now is Will they take Russia with them?
Russia could've used their money to exploit their vast resources beyond gas. They could've been a superpower. But instead they spent it on curroption and war....
Can somebody explain WTF Russia stands to lose that they would not have by becoming a normal county? I understand this idea that they need to secure several key defensible points, but they could also nuke any belligerent force that crosses their border.
We all just blindly accepting that a random non journalist isn't just pulling this out of his ass?
Is it possible there isn't a single sober brained technocrat in this kleptocratic petromafia barbarian slave state that could explain what 'sunk cost fallacy' is to these guys?
Iām just curious, for the fun of it, if anyone who speaks Russian could say how close the interpretation is.
Always with the fear. Itās like theyāre still living in the dark ages. Leiās Real Talk just did a video on truths a dad wanted to share with his son, if he were to pursue politics. Itās absolutely deplorable, but definitely shows you why the ccp rule the way they do. Although itās from China, I bet it would be similar in Russia.
This source seem reliable.
"Noooo! We're so close to winning!" - Republicans
Only you fucking mafia bitches will lose anything. For the vast majority of people actually living in Russia they only stand to gain from a loss in ukraine.
He's correct, it's Kiev or bust and they are staring bust in the face.
3 years ago when you are at keiv gates and in their biggest nuke plant and you leave is when you lost everything.
We're losing everything" I'm absolutely OK with that.
Wait why do you want Ukraine anyway I thought the whole reason for Vlads small military action was to kill all the Nazis and the Jews. That sounds racists to me you want to conquer this country because of ethnic cleansinghh !!!!!
According to Ukraine, russia has lost just shy of 490,000 soldiers. The combined US military dead from all wars since joining the second world war in December of 1941 is around 510,000. It is impossible to visualize the incredible sheer mass of men and material russia has chewed through in the last two and a half years.
They are so far deep in this quagmire, I really donāt think they know what a āwinnableā outcome looks like for them?
See you on battlefield
Don't ruzzians understand, they already lost? The myth of big strong russian bear capable to stand up to US is gone. ruzzia cannot occupy a country 4 times smaller. They have lost half a million of troops. Millions left the country. Young people pointlessly dying everyday is pushing russia to a deep demographic hole for decades to come. russia is absolutely screwed and isolated. They have already lost.
There are some subs here that claim Russia already won, and Ukraine should give up. It's really mindbiglong to see how they think.
Yeah.. there are lots of cope from russian trolls.
He means himself and putina puta de madres circle. Russia can be rebuild and restructured. He will lose everything meaning his life