so do I, tho I also hope otherwiseI think it's gonna be later. I think it could go for years.
You sure that's true? Everything I'd read made it sound like Putin's initial objective had been for Kyiv to capitulate and essentially the entire country to be absorbed into Russian territory, ideally within a few days. Which is far short of what they've actually achieved, or seem likely to achieve.they seem to basically have achieved/be achieving their objectives
This is kind of what I was talking about earlier in the thread, too - you have to get into the worldview that a load of Russian soldiers rolling over the border of a neighbouring state and indiscriminately shelling residentials areas is just routine stuff, but a US jet bombing them while they're doing it would be an act of unprovoked aggression by America.I think both sides generally do. Russia and the U.S. have been playing this proxy war game war 70+ years, after all, so not to respect it is bad form.
within certain limits ofc - you can send these kinds of weapons, but not those weapons. you can sanction, but no boots on the ground. and so on.
I suppose it would technically be "unprovoked", from a coldly amoral, pragmatic, geopolitical POV, since Ukraine is not a member of NATO.This is kind of what I was talking about earlier in the thread, too - you have to get into the worldview that a load of Russian soldiers rolling over the border of a neighbouring state and indiscriminately shelling residentials areas is just routine stuff, but a US jet bombing them while they're doing it would be an act of unprovoked aggression by America.
Vietnam, Afghanistan, Chechnya I (tho that was more of an "internal" Russian affair), Afghanistan again + Iraq, now this
Yeah, its rare I disagree with your analysis P, but if we recall the early days of the war and the propaganda that supported the invasion, it was all the war will last 2 days, the Russian army was strong (not inept and absolutely riddled with corruption), and would be greeted by cheering Ukrainians, none of which has been proven true.You sure that's true? Everything I'd read made it sound like Putin's initial objective had been for Kyiv to capitulate and essentially the entire country to be absorbed into Russian territory, ideally within a few days. Which is far short of what they've actually achieved, or seem likely to achieve.
That's a much more complicated case, because that war has so many sides. There were some fairly limited US/UK/French air strikes against Syrian government targets, which were indirectly an anti-Russian action given Syria's status as a Russian client state, but AFAIK the great majority of Western intervention in Syria has been in the form of the CJTF-OIR action against ISIS and a couple of other Islamist groups, which made them tacit allies of the Syrian government and Russia.Syria?
It will go on like this until it changes.I think it's gonna be later. I think it could go for years. Hope I'm wrong.
if you take away the word "neighboring" the U.S. has regularly done the same thingyou have to get into the worldview that a load of Russian soldiers rolling over the border of a neighbouring state and indiscriminately shelling residentials areas is just routine stuff, but a US jet bombing them while they're doing it would be an act of unprovoked aggression by America.
tea basically said itSyria?
Yeah, its rare I disagree with your analysis P, but if we recall the early days of the war and the propaganda that supported the invasion, it was all the war will last 2 days, the Russian army was strong (not inept and absolutely riddled with corruption), and would be greeted by cheering Ukrainians, none of which has been proven true.
I quite like this guys analysis - he seems fairly sober though he's got a pro-Ukraine bias:
In this thread he points to a stalemate situation despite Russian attempts to break through, against the supposedly vastly weaker Ukrainian army. which he reads as strategic failure. Idk enough about the situation to know whether he's right but his analysis is well informed.
that's been going on for 100 years or morethe growing awareness of the way the Russian imaginary has structured Ukraine, the war, and how out of whack this is with actual Ukrainian conceptions of themselves as a nation-state with a distinct identity
Another factor that I don't think will necessarily influence the war but is worthy of note nonetheless is the growing awareness of the way the Russian imaginary has structured Ukraine, the war, and how out of whack this is with actual Ukrainian conceptions of themselves as a nation-state with a distinct identity. Two very different worldviews facing off.
This is a great thread about this sort of thing as expressed in pulp literature:
What effect might awareness of this sort of thing have on international relations?
This btw is why the ravings about "regime change" from the conspiracy left are so absolutely insane and out of touch with reality. The US has had more than a decade to get rid of Assad if that were their intention. These CIA masterminds are obviously not very good at their jobs. The extent that this stuff is still listened to on the left - rather than ridden out of town on a rail - depresses me.tea basically said it
that wasn't really a direct confrontation between the U.S. and Russia
and the U.S.'s unwillingness, for various reasons, to support a faction capable of replacing Assad, blunted it even as a proxy confrontation
Syria is more like the Spanish Civil War - one side using the opportunity to test out new weapons and tactics, while also supporting its ally
ofc unlike the Nazis and Spain, that testing turned to be spectacularly unhelpful - actively counterproductive - but same idea