The Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[phantom000]

The big problem with negotiation is: who would be fool enough to expect Putin to honor any agreement? Declaring ceasefires just so they can immediately break them is a standard doctrine for his forces.

That is a good point, Putin has not given anyone much reason to trust him. But some kind of negotiated settlement is probably the best case ending for this situation. Even if someone doesn't get through to Putin, somehow, the Russian forces could reach a point where they couldn't fight on even if they wanted to.

A retired US general was talking to CNN about all the weakness of the Russian forces and how the Ukrainians have capitalized on Russian mistakes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/op ... NewsSearch

[Riedquat]

The big problem with negotiation is: who would be fool enough to expect Putin to honor any agreement? Declaring ceasefires just so they can immediately break them is a standard doctrine for his forces.

Yes, definitely a problem. However at some point surely the losses are going to start to be noticeable for him, so it'll be in his own self-interest. The real problem with any sort of negotiating is, I imagine, dealing with the sort of egotist who views anything other than smashing anyone who he doesn't like as "weak." And on the other side, there's the problem that having any deals at all with such an abhorrent excuse of a human being is too much for many (and Ukraine will certainly not be in the mood for letting him have an inch - why should they?) Sadly it looks like both sides will have to get hurt even further - which of course means a lot of people who never had any say in it and never wanted to be a part of a war in the first place getting hurt (why war is such a bloody awful thing) before a point is reached where any concessions are likely. And without concessions there's no end to it. And in the mean time we really, really have to hope no-one else gets dragged in and no-one gets desperate enough to do something phenomenally stupid, which I fear Putin is all too capable of. That's why I've spent the last three weeks feeling pretty anxious, in a different country. God knows how people in Ukraine, on the direct receiving end of it, manage.

Ultimately I'm hoping the rumours of him not being well (he seems to have aged a lot recently, although he's nearly 70 anyway) are true and that nature will flush this particular turd for us before too long.

[CmdrKing]

Honestly I get the sense that we are now in a phase where Ukraine lacks the tools to drive Russia out of the country, Russia lacks the resources to take the country (and is laughably short of the resources to occupy the country) and we're looking at a long, long ass half-occupation until such time as Russian leadership changes.
So yeah I hope Putin launched this invasion because he was desperate to cement his legacy due to having ass cancer or something and will shuffle the mortal coil within the year.

[Riedquat]

Honestly I get the sense that we are now in a phase where Ukraine lacks the tools to drive Russia out of the country, Russia lacks the resources to take the country (and is laughably short of the resources to occupy the country) and we're looking at a long, long ass half-occupation until such time as Russian leadership changes.
So yeah I hope Putin launched this invasion because he was desperate to cement his legacy due to having ass cancer or something and will shuffle the mortal coil within the year.

Does seem like that. In some ways that's a good thing for the world - Russia too bogged down there to be a problem for anyone else, but it's a horrendous prospect for Ukraine, because the country will just get more and more torn up; the human cost of that is horrible to contemplate.

What's slightly encouraging is that the language coming out of the talks seems to be getting slightly less aggressive as time goes on.

[Frustration]

In 30 years Russia's going to be down 11 million people while most other countries grew even more populous. By demographics, they're finished.

Because the more people, the better, right?

*looks at world population crisis and the crushing environmental effects of high densities*

[phantom000]

Honestly I get the sense that we are now in a phase where Ukraine lacks the tools to drive Russia out of the country, Russia lacks the resources to take the country (and is laughably short of the resources to occupy the country) and we're looking at a long, long ass half-occupation until such time as Russian leadership changes.

That is what is usually called a stalemate, which is usually a sign that the beginning of the end is in sight, well for this particular crisis anyways. With the Russian invasion running out of momentum and no way to breakthrough, not without risking further escalation, they might focus on annexing some part of Ukraine rather then seizing total control. The Ukrainians won't like that and will likely try to drive the Russians out completely, but after repeated failures will finally accept it would be better to loose a quarter of their country rather then the whole thing.

If that does happen then this would be a repeat of the Winter War with Finland, where the Soviets were allowed to annex part of Finland but ultimately failed to take control of the entire country.

[Riedquat]

In 30 years Russia's going to be down 11 million people while most other countries grew even more populous. By demographics, they're finished.

Because the more people, the better, right?

*looks at world population crisis and the crushing environmental effects of high densities*

Yeah, odd one that some people seem to view a falling population in a badly overpopulated world as a bad thing. I'm all for avoiding some bad means of falling populations (disease, war etc.), but not the concept as a whole. Not being horribly overpopulated looks like being rather an advantage in the future.

[Madner Kami]

A slowly falling or stagnating population isn't bad. It gets bad when you loose a considerable part of your population per generation however, because who is going to pay for the ever older-getting population, when there are ever fewer people at the working age?

[CharlesPhipps]

Because the more people, the better, right?

*looks at world population crisis and the crushing environmental effects of high densities*

Mind you, Malthusian economics has been proven repeatedly to be kind of bullshit.

Furthermore, less people might be great for the globe (theoretically) but is shitty for Russia.

Yeah, odd one that some people seem to view a falling population in a badly overpopulated world as a bad thing. I'm all for avoiding some bad means of falling populations (disease, war etc.), but not the concept as a whole. Not being horribly overpopulated looks like being rather an advantage in the future.

I mean, it's a pretty big sign something is wrong on a fundamental level.

[TGLS]

In 30 years Russia's going to be down 11 million people while most other countries grew even more populous. By demographics, they're finished.

Because the more people, the better, right?

*looks at world population crisis and the crushing environmental effects of high densities*

Yeah, odd one that some people seem to view a falling population in a badly overpopulated world as a bad thing.

A falling population is an aging population, and to be frank, the elderly are expensive to keep around. Without the young paying into health insurance and pensions, the entire thing collapses upon itself.