Political impacts of Ukraine war

[YZT580]

This. Many of the people who were pro-Russian, including ethnic Russians in the east, had a change of heart in February 2022.

President Zelenskyy, I believe, is an ethnic Russian, or he grew up with Russian as his native tongue and didn’t learn Ukrainian till much later in life.

And Azerbaijan is next. Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan? probably Moldavia, eventually Poland. Putin wants to re-create the Russian empire. He and his crowd control Russia. If he dies someone of his same ilk is going to take his place: there are certainly enough loud mouths spouting threats to supply at least one leader. It is no secret that their goal is to exterminate Ukraine again. Putin intends to duplicate that. Most of the Russians living in Ukraine are there because Stalin forced their move to take over farming the land whose owners he had murdered. The fact that Russia couldn't allow a fair election when they voted to partition says it all. The majority appear to favour Ukraine. Any negotiations, from what I can see, are only intended to give him time to re=build his forces to try again.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Ahhh, so 'Ukraine' for now since it contains a large number of those who don't self identify themselves as being 'Ukrainian' though they are citizens of 'Ukraine'.

Missed again. It's not about Ukrainians talking about themselves. It's about how non-Ukrainians try to frame the situation to promote their own agendas. Everything else you wrote is your own fabrication.

 

[HavokFour]

Azerbaijan isn't too thrilled with Russia as of late.

Baku could lift arms embargo on Ukraine, media reports

Azerbaijan’s once warm relations with Russia are cooling fast.

tvpworld.com

 

[Brad Sallows]

Brad,
Ukraine is a democracy that decided as a democracy to move away from Russia.

The US is a democracy that decided as a democracy to invade Iraq. That turned into a shit-show. It isn't necessary to delve any deeper into those two facts to recognize that appeals to what democracies decide are insufficient.

If the US invaded Canada, Canadians could righteously defend ourselves. If there isn't an obvious practical path to success, what would be the point? What are the differences between governance from Ottawa or Washington that would be worth dying for; more importantly, what are the differences that would justify compelling others to risk death or lesser injury with unlikely prospects for success? Now shift the frame to Ukraine and Russia. For each person who considers the questions, the answers might be different - there is always going to be some threshold at which the differences are intolerable. But try to keep emotion out of the analysis.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Any negotiations, from what I can see, are only intended to give him time to re=build his forces to try again.

Works both ways. Ukraine could use a pause, too. Is European NATO ready for a fight? If not, them too.

The best CoA is to demonstrate to Putin he will lose before he tries. The demonstration has to be convincing in terms Putin has a natural inclination to grasp and absorb. Statements of intent won't do. Material strength is needed.

 

[YZT580]

The US is a democracy that decided as a democracy to invade Iraq. That turned into a shit-show. It isn't necessary to delve any deeper into those two facts to recognize that appeals to what democracies decide are insufficient.

If the US invaded Canada, Canadians could righteously defend ourselves. If there isn't an obvious practical path to success, what would be the point? What are the differences between governance from Ottawa or Washington that would be worth dying for; more importantly, what are the differences that would justify compelling others to risk death or lesser injury with unlikely prospects for success? Now shift the frame to Ukraine and Russia. For each person who considers the questions, the answers might be different - there is always going to be some threshold at which the differences are intolerable. But try to keep emotion out of the analysis.

Your remarks suggest the death of civilization. Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler all worked from the same premise: might is right. The Magna Carta would never have been penned if people hadn't fought for it. The U.S. would be part of the British Commonwealth and there would still be a country called Rhodesia. Nations are not founded on power. They are founded upon common goals and supported by other nations not necessarily with the same goals but with the same commitment to self-determination. It is either that or they are no better than serfs dependent upon their lords for their very existence. That is what you appear to be advocating