• lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Thanks for the response. As a hypothetical: If we could go back in time, was there ever a point you believe the world or specific nations should’ve reached out to Hitler to negotiate a ceasefire and to let him have whatever piece of land he gained at that point in time? What are the long-term consequences of permitting such blitzes for territorial control only to be slapped on the wrist and permitting said tyrant to remain in power?

    The problem with peace is that it’s not without precedent; and that precedent is to say, “the bully gets rewarded.” Ultimately, isn’t it the victim who has every right to decide how much they’re willing to bleed to fight back against the bully? Hence why every voice from NATO has been, “it’s up to Ukraine to decide for how long they wish to continue this war.”

    At this point I don’t believe Ukraine is desperate enough to take that bargain. I think they know the wind is in their sails. I also think both sides are holding their breath and long-term decision-making based on the outcome of the US Presidential election. If things somehow went very south for Ukraine and they were at risk of losing significantly more territory (not a +1% gain) and Trump gets reelected and the alliance fragments, then perhaps they’d try to negotiate such a DMZ on the condition that they also get into NATO to ensure Russia will not re-arm and attack refreshed.

    • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      If things somehow went very south for Ukraine and they were at risk of losing significantly more territory (not a +1% gain) and Trump gets reelected and the alliance fragments, then perhaps they’d try to negotiate

      Shouldn’t it be obvious that at that point, Russian high command would see no point in negotiating much of anything? The best time for Ukraine to negotiate and sue for peace is when they have the initiative due to some technical/strategic innovation that leads to short term battlefield success (at least until the Russians adapt). The gains following the introduction of HIMARS back in 22 are one example. But himars is a child’s toy compared to real military innovation, which was already done in 1945 and we’ve been living in low key terror ever since.

      But besides jokes about letting Ukraine have nukes again, I cannot see them ever winning a conventional war of attrition. They simply lack the manpower.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        True but it’s also true that if Ukraine high command believes they have good odds at pushing Russia back and crippling Russia akin to what Afghans did to the USSR, then they will maintain the fight.

        It seems self-evident that the victim shall decide what cards they want to play in this moment, and they’re resolved to fight. That’s nobody’s decision but theirs.

        I’ll add that Ukraine has clearly shown what Intelligence and Technological Superiority can do to offset manpower advantages.

        • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          One immediate difference is that the mountains of Afghanistan are very ill suited to fighting a conventional artillery centered war, unlike the steppes of eastern Ukraine.

          Also I disagree with the second paragraph. As our (inshallah) future president says, “you exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you”. Ukraine’s decision making is dependent on the internal politics of the US and to a lesser extent the EU. I kinda doubt the EU by itself could handle supplying Ukraine if America elects trump and tells them to take a hike). Shit, we are seeing europe turning to fascism before our very eyes now that they’re experiencing real inflation since the Russians cut off their cheap gas.

          I am very worried about how that will affect Ukraine aid as europe turns inward and starts focusing on rooting out the evil immigrants who are apparently to blame for all their problems.

          Despite all that, as a Russian and a socialist I do hope Ukraine isn’t conquered and the Russian pseudo monarchy has a revolution and is replaced with something more democratic. I just don’t see a clear path to there with how things are going in the world.

          • lennybird@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Sorry for the delay in response. That you are Russian yourself, I figured it worth giving pause to what you say and myself tie to process and sufficiently respond, as it’s not every day an American gets to speak to a Russian in these times.

            I completely agree that a huge part of Ukraine’s future is dependent upon continued aid from the West. But I think it’s self-evident that Zelenskyy feels – at least for the moment – that there are now long-standing agreements both with Europe and the USA that can ensure something of long-term planning. Of course, we are ALL – Europe, America, Zelenskyy, Putin, the world – holding our collective breaths to see what the outcome of the US Presidential election will be. Thus far it’s a mixed max on the world stage in terms of leadership. I hope that Germany maintains some semblance of sanity; and it looks like the UK certainly will. The big question is whether the USA can. I think that will determine major decision-making for both Zelenskyy and Putin.

            As a Russian, what do you see as the most probable course for change in Russia? I understand Putin is drafting from ethnic minority groups far away from St. Petersburg and Moscow to ensure the upper middle-class isn’t impacted too greatly… But do you think there will come a time he does? What is the tipping-point?

            • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Honestly, I’m not full on Russian. I haven’t lived there since 2022 and when I did I was not meaningfully politically active, nor do I personally know many people who are. All I really have is the language and a view of Russian social media.

              However Russia still has free and open Internet access, with the notable exception of Facebook Instagram and Twitter (and lots of people evade those blocks as well- laws on firewall evasion are harsh but enforced pretty selectively, like for content piracy in the West).

              Unfortunately many politically opinionated Russians seem to have very right wing politics only occasionally dressed up in “liberal” language (hey, kinda like America). For example, a prevailing opinion among “liberal” opposition is that Gaza should be annexed and/or turned into a parking lot by Israel (possibly because Putin himself has expressed lukewarm verbal support for Palestine). And also like America this is a generational thing with the youth seeming to be more left wing/anticapitalist, but that position is locked out of politics. But even on e.g. reddit you still have plenty of people on /r/askarussian. Same for YouTube and telegram. Those are all proper social media with sizeable Russian populations and relatively lax censorship. I’m sure there are some on the fediverse too, but they can’t get too uppity lest they invoke the wrath of roskomnadzor (fedi is more vulnerable to selective censorship than centralized networks like yt/tg). I’ll compile and link to a list of English speaking public figures I like in a followup comment.

              As for the future changes, it’s very hard to predict, but I think the most probable change in Russia will start after something happens to the physical health of one very paranoid man. The war is so clearly against the objective interests of a very large portion of Russia’s ruling class that I’m amazed it was allowed to happen at all, but so far it seems like an effective method/excuse to tighten the screws on internal opposition. Seems like that’s really the only thing the regime excels at and how they stay in power. The tipping point (as it was all the other times) is a physically unbearable economic crisis, to the point people start experiencing real hardship such as famine. At that point people start looking around for alternative answers to their political questions.

    • aleph@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Again, while there are definitely some parallels between Putin’s annexation of Crimea and Hitler’s of the Sudetenland, there are also plenty of differences that make a direct comparison complicated and not altogether helpful. Hitler’s goals were obviously more wide-ranging, proactive, and expansionist, whereas Putin’s were much more localized and reactive to a perceived threat. A diplomatic solution didn’t work with Hitler but it might have for Putin.

      I understand and sympathize with Ukrainians who want to fight to the bitter end, but how much longer will that take? How many more lives will be lost? Is a military victory even likely?

      With Ukraine recently being given access to long-range US missiles with which they have conducted strikes within Russian territory, the war seems to be gradually escalating with neither side willing to back down.