Ukrainian War VI: Pyrrhus in Bakhmut

[Urkennalaid]

Tankies in general seems to have extreme difficulties computing the fact that if you visit war on other people's civilian population war will be visited on your own civilians.
Or as Arthur Harris put it.
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them."

If we're out here calling Second Thought a tankie or comparable to "Russia Today", then everyone left-leaning is a tankie.

Thinking NATO is supplying Ukraine out of the goodness of their heart is hilarious, honestly. NATO has been trying to expand, and the Ukraine invasion can help get them to have nearby allies possibly join. There is absolutely gain for NATO. It's like people hear any criticisms of NATO and the West think people support Putin or the invasion.

Also I know who Neville Chamberlain is, I just think comparing this to the precursors to WW2 is ridiculous.

[Fractalnavel]

[...] deliberately hitting hospitals because lolz.

Putin as President Snow?

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's like people hear any criticisms of NATO and the West think people support Putin or the invasion.

Wow it's almost like most of the people criticizing NATO and Ukraine in these threads have done just that lol

[Kubra]

It's so funny seeing people accuse NATO/the US of warmongering in this situation when it's one of the few times we've been on the objectively good and moral side lol.

Warmongering is never moral, no matter how horrible the enemy may be painted as. The last time NATO did a ""good"" warmongering, it turned out to be just looting.

Whatever happened to beating back the whites with a red wedge

[Urkennalaid]

It's like people hear any criticisms of NATO and the West think people support Putin or the invasion.

Wow it's almost like most of the people criticizing NATO and Ukraine in these threads have done just that lol

I didn't know that every person in the world who criticized NATO or Ukraine thinks that the citizens deserved to get invaded. I mean, people say those who criticize the Ukraine government for having nazis in its military and government is the same as supporting Putin and the invasion. Which it isn't. There are freaks I'm sure in here who do support Putin, but that's not indicative of everyone.

If I hear someone who supports Ukraine say that Russians are orcs, I'm not going to think everyone who sympathizes with Ukraine thinks that.

[Tarsonis]

Wow it's almost like most of the people criticizing NATO and Ukraine in these threads have done just that lol

I didn't know that every person in the world who criticized NATO or Ukraine thinks that the citizens deserved to get invaded. I mean, people say those who criticize the Ukraine government for having nazis in its military and government is the same as supporting Putin and the invasion. Which it isn't. There are freaks I'm sure in here who do support Putin, but that's not indicative of everyone.

If I hear someone who supports Ukraine say that Russians are orcs, I'm not going to think everyone who sympathizes with Ukraine thinks that.

Time and place, suspicions make. Often it's not what a person says, but the context in which they say it, that reveals motive. Is NATO and the West open to criticism? Sure. But when you do it in the backdrop of Russia invading Ukraine, it's fairly obvious the intent is to legitimize Russian aggression. This isn't the time for bothsidesing, there is a clear right and a clear wrong here.

[Urkennalaid]

I didn't know that every person in the world who criticized NATO or Ukraine thinks that the citizens deserved to get invaded. I mean, people say those who criticize the Ukraine government for having nazis in its military and government is the same as supporting Putin and the invasion. Which it isn't. There are freaks I'm sure in here who do support Putin, but that's not indicative of everyone.

If I hear someone who supports Ukraine say that Russians are orcs, I'm not going to think everyone who sympathizes with Ukraine thinks that.

Time and place, suspicions make. Often it's not what a person says, but the context in which they say it, that reveals motive. Is NATO and the West open to criticism? Sure. But when you do it in the backdrop of Russia invading Ukraine, it's fairly obvious the intent is to legitimize Russian aggression. This isn't the time for bothsidesing, there is a clear right and a clear wrong here.

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong. But I find that many leftists even before the war don't support NATO, and even then, why should someone be obligated to support NATO now? NATO has done heinous shit, and even during the war, they don't care about the liberation of Ukraine.

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff. This is basic analysis of politics and history. That's how the world works and how we view it.

[El Lazaro]

Time and place, suspicions make. Often it's not what a person says, but the context in which they say it, that reveals motive. Is NATO and the West open to criticism? Sure. But when you do it in the backdrop of Russia invading Ukraine, it's fairly obvious the intent is to legitimize Russian aggression. This isn't the time for bothsidesing, there is a clear right and a clear wrong here.

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong. But I find that many leftists even before the war don't support NATO, and even then, why should someone be obligated to support NATO now? NATO has done heinous shit, and even during the war, they don't care about the liberation of Ukraine.

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff. This is basic analysis of politics and history. That's how the world works and how we view it.

Genocide apologetics and alliance with fascism to own the libs

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong...

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff.

Lord in Heaven...

[Urkennalaid]

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong. But I find that many leftists even before the war don't support NATO, and even then, why should someone be obligated to support NATO now? NATO has done heinous shit, and even during the war, they don't care about the liberation of Ukraine.

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff. This is basic analysis of politics and history. That's how the world works and how we view it.

Genocide apologetics and alliance with fascism to own the libs

You literally just proved my point, like you are the person I was talking about. Me criticizing NATO doesn't mean I support Putin, in fact, I vehemently hate Putin, Yeltsin and all the oligarch stooges. But you proved my point.

[El Lazaro]

Genocide apologetics and alliance with fascism to own the libs

You literally just proved my point, like you are the person I was talking about. Me criticizing NATO doesn't mean I support Putin, in fact, I vehemently hate Putin, Yeltsin and all the oligarch stooges. But you proved my point.

You literally just proved my point, like you are the person I was talking about. Me criticizing Putin doesn't mean I support NATO, in fact, I vehemently hate NATO, the EU and the liberal globalist elite cabal. But you proved my point.

[Aguaria Major]

Warmongering is never moral, no matter how horrible the enemy may be painted as. The last time NATO did a ""good"" warmongering, it turned out to be just looting.

Whatever happened to beating back the whites with a red wedge

Self-identified "anti-war" people in this conflict (or at least, those who make the argument that Ukraine should just surrender/that Ukraine shouldn't seek protection against Russia) are overwhelmingly bad-faith actors who actually want Russia to win, but who know that saying so isn't politically viable; like all people, they're perfectly fine with violence as long as it's someone they like doing it, and/or for what they believe to be a good cause.

This person probably believes Russia's invasion to be "self-defense", or that Russia is "anti-imperialist" (or even that they're helping to spread """communism"""), or some other vatnik garbage.

[Spirit of Hope]

Tankies in general seems to have extreme difficulties computing the fact that if you visit war on other people's civilian population war will be visited on your own civilians.
Or as Arthur Harris put it.
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them."

If we're out here calling Second Thought a tankie or comparable to "Russia Today", then everyone left-leaning is a tankie.

Thinking NATO is supplying Ukraine out of the goodness of their heart is hilarious, honestly. NATO has been trying to expand, and the Ukraine invasion can help get them to have nearby allies possibly join. There is absolutely gain for NATO. It's like people hear any criticisms of NATO and the West think people support Putin or the invasion.

Also I know who Neville Chamberlain is, I just think comparing this to the precursors to WW2 is ridiculous.

Its complicated. But your presentation of they dynamics isn't a good one. First NATO as an organization isn't really giving equipment to Ukraine, it is the member states of NATO that are giving equipment to Ukraine. Second they aren't giving equipment to drive expansion, Finland and Sweden, really the last two European countries likely to join, are already in the process of joining NATO and remarkably quickly.

It is true to state that equipment donations are more complicated than just countries feel bad for Ukraine, though that is definitely part of the dynamic. The primary driver is the fact that major contributors of aid see Russia as a threat. By contribution as % of GDP the biggest senders are the Baltic states and Poland, who all border Russia and would rather prefer the Russian military get destroyed and the Russian leadership not see military conquest as a viable strategy. Another factor is signaling to other countries that may be considering military conquest.

[Urkennalaid]

I'm always surprised about how Western Liberals get so MAD when you slightly criticize NATO or the West at all as if they're literally in Donetsk right now getting bombed by Russian forces. Like, I get why the Ukrainian civilians want NATO intervention, I understand why there's resentment on the ground there, but you have people from like...places thousands of miles away saying how every leftist criticizing NATO and the West is a tankie fascist supporter. (Still love how unserious the term tankie is.)

Also, you have people out here literally supporting Ukranian armies wearing black sun and Nazi memorabilia. But yes, the people criticizing America in this situation are the fascists. If I could, I'd ship Wagner and Azvo and every right-wing military group and put them on an island.

[Tarsonis]

Time and place, suspicions make. Often it's not what a person says, but the context in which they say it, that reveals motive. Is NATO and the West open to criticism? Sure. But when you do it in the backdrop of Russia invading Ukraine, it's fairly obvious the intent is to legitimize Russian aggression. This isn't the time for bothsidesing, there is a clear right and a clear wrong here.

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong. But I find that many leftists even before the war don't support NATO, and even then, why should someone be obligated to support NATO now? NATO has done heinous shit, and even during the war, they don't care about the liberation of Ukraine.

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff. This is basic analysis of politics and history. That's how the world works and how we view it.

You don't have to support NATO, but when NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive, and you're trashing NATO in the war thread, honestly what conclusion do you expect people to draw?

[El Lazaro]

I'm always surprised about how Western Liberals get so MAD when you slightly criticize NATO or the West at all as if they're literally in Donetsk right now getting bombed by Russian forces. Like, I get why the Ukrainian civilians want NATO intervention, I understand why there's resentment on the ground there, but you have people from like...places thousands of miles away saying how every leftist criticizing NATO and the West is a tankie fascist supporter. (Still love how unserious the term tankie is.)

Also, you have people out here literally supporting Ukranian armies wearing black sun and Nazi memorabilia. But yes, the people criticizing America in this situation are the fascists. If I could, I'd ship Wagner and Azvo and every right-wing military group and put them on an island.

Cry about it, fascist sympathizer.

[Urkennalaid]

There is no both sidesing here. Life isn't black and white, although Putin is still clearly in the wrong. But I find that many leftists even before the war don't support NATO, and even then, why should someone be obligated to support NATO now? NATO has done heinous shit, and even during the war, they don't care about the liberation of Ukraine.

Like every conflict has multiple sides which does bad stuff. This is basic analysis of politics and history. That's how the world works and how we view it.

You don't have to support NATO, but when NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive, and you're trashing NATO in the war thread, honestly what conclusion do you expect people to draw?

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory. Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

[El Lazaro]

You don't have to support NATO, but when NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive, and you're trashing NATO in the war thread, honestly what conclusion do you expect people to draw?

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory. Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

We don’t have an anti-Communist Russia, but we should. All fascist and Marxist political parties should be banned and have their members arrested once the liberator flag of NATO flies over Moscow.

[Urkennalaid]

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory. Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

We don’t have an anti-Communist Russia, but we should. All fascist and Marxist political parties should be banned and have their members arrested once the liberator flag of NATO flies over Moscow.

I mean, to be fair, people thought the same thing in the past, except they always tried to ban the Marxist parties first and let the Fascists gain power. Also, I can't tell if you're joking or serious. You probably are serious, so I wouldn't be surprised if you said you were apart of NAFO or some shit.

I'm guessing you think Marxism and fascism is the same hyh.

[Tarsonis]

You don't have to support NATO, but when NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive, and you're trashing NATO in the war thread, honestly what conclusion do you expect people to draw?

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory.

Yes. because as incompetent as Russia is, without weapons, training, and other supplies provided by NATO, Ukraine would have lost a long time ago.

Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

And that makes Putin invading Ukraine NATO's fault how?

[Urkennalaid]

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory.

Yes. because as incompetent as Russia is, without weapons, training, and other supplies provided by NATO, Ukraine would have lost a long time ago.

Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

And that makes Putin invading Ukraine NATO's fault how?

They helped make Putin gain power(along with Gorbachev by the end of his career.) If the West didn't try to interfere in literally ANY left leaning government, we wouldn't have insane right-wingers like Putin. You think without NATO interference in the USSR, people like Yeltsin or Putin would still come into power?

Also El Lazaro, it's really hilarious you think Marxism and fascism is the same and that Russia is in anyway pro-communist.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Thing is... the Ukrainian Army was much like the Russian one prior to 2014, corrupt, incompetent to a laughable degree and entirely ineffective at its purpose.
This only changed... because NATO countries started training and equipping a new one after the old army nigh deserted wholly in 2014.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

why? japan was, to my knowledge, decimated at that point. they had no real way of counterattacking and a blockade could’ve ended their resistance.

Your knowledge is wrong. Google Operation Downfall and it’s japanese counterpart- Operation Ketsu-Go. The Japanese due to their extremely nationalistic culture and society being stratified to the limit would not surrender but rather literally starve their population to death. A blockade would not work as well, the resulting famine probably killing more people than the two nukes. You have to also remember that the Kamikaze, although initially ineffective, were slowly becoming more and more deadly. While there were idiotic tactics like there stupid suicide boats which have killed many more Japanese than Americans, there were some things which were extremely effective, such as the Ohka. They were working on more improved versions of it and the US fleet blockading Japan would bring them in range (maybe) of land-based Ohka’s, which were literally unstoppable for WW2 AAA (save for pilot error which considering the level of training is probably the single most dangerous thing for em)

you should note that Ketsu-Go was a completely desperate defensive plan for a reason. their navy and air force were, as stated by the US government and its officials, nonexistant or comically impotent. they did not have the fuel to run what was left of their damaged navy. their planes were poorly built, in short supply, low on fuel, and piloted by untrained fanatic suicide bombers who rarely actually hit their targets. the existing US blockade was absolutely devastating for the Japanese economy and military and the US airforce was regularly doing massive bombing raids with no resistance. the Japanese plan assumed, unfoundedly, that the US had to invade at all.

many people in the upper government in Japan were seeking surrender, and even the militarists could only come up with a last-ditch strategy to go out fighting.

[El Lazaro]

We don’t have an anti-Communist Russia, but we should. All fascist and Marxist political parties should be banned and have their members arrested once the liberator flag of NATO flies over Moscow.

I mean, to be fair, people thought the same thing in the past, except they always tried to ban the Marxist parties first and let the Fascists gain power. Also, I can't tell if you're joking or serious. You probably are serious, so I wouldn't be surprised if you said you were apart of NAFO or some shit.

I'm guessing you think Marxism and fascism is the same hyh.

Apart of NAFO? I think “from” is the correct word, but I guess I’m probably not with whatever it is.

No, the latter is a disease borne from festering piles of shit, and the former is eating sewage while claiming to be protecting yourself against the disease. Both disgusting, inhuman concepts which shouldn’t be anywhere near society.

[Spirit of Hope]

You don't have to support NATO, but when NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive, and you're trashing NATO in the war thread, honestly what conclusion do you expect people to draw?

NATO is the only thing keeping Ukraine alive?

What?

Hell, the Russian army is so incompetent that when they reach 1 mile of ground in a village thats already bombed, they consider it a "massive" victory.

It turns out fighting a war is hard. The view that the Russian army is entirely incompetent and unable to learn is a view entirely divorced from reality. Attacking a reasonably well trained, motivated, and dug in force is hard and the Ukrainian army meets all of those criteria. Since 2014 they have cycled a large number of personnel through the Donbass and built up significant defenses there because Ukraine expected that Russia might escalate the conflict.

As to NATO members keeping Ukraine alive, yes they have. Ukraine would have run out of money and ammunition by now if it wasn't for the aid it has received from NATO member states. Now Ukraine would probably still be fighting, but would be in a far worse position than it currently is in.

Also, NATO is the reason WHY Ukraine is in this situation, as if for decades they didn't support the increasing liberalization and capitulations to the West in the USSR. NATO allies LOOOVED Yeltsin, and many countries within NATO had no problem at all trying to work with Putin at times. Sure, NATO always saw Russia as a threat, but they'd rather have an anti-communist Russia, which the oligarchs did.

Sure countries were willing to work with Putin, with the basic idea being that if you traded with Russia then Russia would be drawn into the international order, become more democratic, and less likely to engage in war. It's a rather standard playbook for international relations. Notably however there has been a lot of signaling to Russia that military aggression isn't acceptable, most prominently with the sanctions that stagnated the Russian economy after 2014. True NATO member countries continued to do business with Russia, but they also didn't expect Russia to conduct the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Hind sight is 20/20 and all that.