Ukraine

[PeteD01]

Trent Telenko
@TrentTelenko

This is a really nice history snapshot thread on the Battle of Kyiv that has been making the rounds.

I have a few minor objections to it based on what is missing.

Ukrainian leadership & Russian corruption thread🧵


https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1510745458477572098

[Kris]

Zelensky went to Bucha, there's a lot of pictures on Twitter, but this one really stands out to me.

https://twitter.com/Kateryna_Kruk/status/1510975889588293639

God.

[PeteD01]

No matter what happens, one must ridicule the tyrant.


In retrospect, the Kyiev operation obviously was a stretch.

[pecunia]

"This is the article that was published by the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti (Russian: РИА Новости). This media through the years was one of the main voices of Russian propaganda and fake news.
⠀
RIA Novosti is known for its systematic support of the Kremlin, violation of journalistic standards and works according to so-called “temnik” (directives and agendas from the government). The position in this article corresponds to the position of Russia."

https://medium.com/@kravchenko_mm/what-should-russia-do-with-ukraine-translation-of-a-propaganda-article-by-a-russian-journalist-a3e92e3cb64

Quite the article.  I sometimes see things and figure, "You just can't make this shi* up."  They can and did.  The phrase "alternate reality," quickly comes to mind.

[partgypsy]

It's agonizing to watch the news. I wish it would just end. I'm going to take a break. In addition to refugees, big thing affecting Poland (and probably other countries) s increase in prices (fuel, common goods, food).

[Michael in ABQ]

"This is the article that was published by the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti (Russian: РИА Новости). This media through the years was one of the main voices of Russian propaganda and fake news.
⠀
RIA Novosti is known for its systematic support of the Kremlin, violation of journalistic standards and works according to so-called “temnik” (directives and agendas from the government). The position in this article corresponds to the position of Russia."

https://medium.com/@kravchenko_mm/what-should-russia-do-with-ukraine-translation-of-a-propaganda-article-by-a-russian-journalist-a3e92e3cb64

Quite the article.  I sometimes see things and figure, "You just can't make this shi* up."  They can and did.  The phrase "alternate reality," quickly comes to mind.

Crazy pills. Lots and lots of crazy pills.

I've been seeing this kind of mindset reflect in comments on other sites for a while. Some are obviously from straight up paid Russian trolls but there's a substantial number of non-Russians buying into this as well. That article used the word Nazi 89 times in less than 2,500 words. Literally about every other sentence.

I'm surprised they didn't mention that the US is running dozens of biowarfare labs in Ukraine - because you would obviously want to pay for dozens of duplicate facilities. And we all know COVID started in Ukraine, right?

The main problem with conspiracy theories is that governments and other large groups just aren't that competent. Any large organization is subject to bureaucracy and is filled with people who care more about their budget than whatever their mission is. I've has access to classified information and it's always way more underwhelming than what is portrayed in popular culture. Giant underground bunkers? Sorry the construction cost estimates were too high. Maybe it will be approved next fiscal year. Brand new super weapons? Yeah, the technology isn't quite there yet, just another 20 years of R&D and we'll have lasers shooting planes out of the sky - we just need a bigger budget.

[zolotiyeruki]

I just saw an interesting opinion: given the destruction, pillaging, and human tragedy left in the wake of the Russian withdrawal in the north, it is now clear that there is no incentive for Ukraine to cede any territory to Russia in the hopes of limiting future suffering for the people in that territory.  In other words, Russia can't say "give us this land or we'll do X to the people," because they've already burned, raped, killed, and looted them.

Russia has no cards left to play in terms of negotiation, short of WMD.

The sweetest, gentlest, most docile animal will turn deadly the instant that you back them into a corner, threaten them, and give them no way out. That is essentially what has happened, on both sides I think. Neither Russia nor Ukraine have a way out. Russia can't back down because it will destroy them, internally. Ukraine can't back down because they will die.

This war, unless someone intervenes in some highly effective way, will only end when one side is destroyed sufficiently that they can not continue to fight.

I have seen this argument made ever since Ukraine showed that they might succeed.  For a full month now, Ukraine (and the rest of the world) have been backing Putin into a corner, economically and militarily.  Most recently in the Kiev region, where they reportedly were working to cut off and encircle the Russian army in a few places.  They backed Russia into a corner there.  Did Putin nuke?  Cause a catastrophic nuclear accident at Chernobyl?  Deploy chemical or biological weapons?  No, no, and no.  What *did* Putin do?  He backed down, turned tail, and ran, leaving massive destruction in his wake.

I am growing tired and skeptical of the argument that somehow Ukraine or The West should avoid backing Putin into some ill-define "corner," in the hopes of avoiding some hypothetical greater tragedy.  A cornered animal has no way to escape.  Putin has several.  They may not be his preferred outcome, but they are a far cry from the desperate right for survival invoked by the phrase "backed into a corner."  And Putin has shown little inclination to do anything more than talk and indiscriminately bombard civilians.

[BicycleB]

My understanding from past readings (not an expert!!!) is that fighter jets, like high end battle radars and to some extent many other weapons, are "stickier" (my word) than ordinary goods because their geopolitical implications - but also issues of supply and training.

Specifically, because they do require complex supplies and maintenance to function, and they function better when operators and maintenance staff are well trained, "buying" such an item tends to lock you into the selling country's geopolitical sphere if you want to keep using the weapon. Something like, if you want to buck the wishes of the seller, you have a few months or a year to use the weapon before you run low on parts. As a practical matter, you end up partly under the thumb of the seller.


You can't just buy fighters like lollipops. (So far, at least. I think.)

I think the "these fighters are really complicated the Ukrainian couldn't maintain them", is basically an excuse to not send them fighters because some in the government fear this would be an escalation.

With due respect, your "quote" was not what I meant. My meaning was that SELLERS of high end military equipment can be jealous, not that buyers lack skill. I certainly meant nothing disrespectful toward Ukrainians.

A previous commenter had wished a billionaire would just buy Ukraine some jets. My comment was only meant to explain the idea that private citizens can't just buy fighter jets no questions asked at the grocery store like a routine consumer product. I apologize for the confusing middle paragraph, but usually the seller makes a decision whether to sell to you or not. Some of the people (governments) with jets to sell consider their decisions carefully.

Which may look like, and sometimes be visible as, making excuses!

[KarefulKactus15]

Zelensky went to Bucha, there's a lot of pictures on Twitter, but this one really stands out to me.


https://twitter.com/Kateryna_Kruk/status/1510975889588293639

Imagine the carnage that will be uncovered in Mariupol if the evidence isn't covered up.

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

[PDXTabs]

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

Well, Israel is famous for their style of "Extraordinary Rendition."

Also, those leaders will presumably be banned from any ICC signatory for the rest of their lives.

[Sibley]

I just saw an interesting opinion: given the destruction, pillaging, and human tragedy left in the wake of the Russian withdrawal in the north, it is now clear that there is no incentive for Ukraine to cede any territory to Russia in the hopes of limiting future suffering for the people in that territory.  In other words, Russia can't say "give us this land or we'll do X to the people," because they've already burned, raped, killed, and looted them.

Russia has no cards left to play in terms of negotiation, short of WMD.

The sweetest, gentlest, most docile animal will turn deadly the instant that you back them into a corner, threaten them, and give them no way out. That is essentially what has happened, on both sides I think. Neither Russia nor Ukraine have a way out. Russia can't back down because it will destroy them, internally. Ukraine can't back down because they will die.

This war, unless someone intervenes in some highly effective way, will only end when one side is destroyed sufficiently that they can not continue to fight.

I have seen this argument made ever since Ukraine showed that they might succeed.  For a full month now, Ukraine (and the rest of the world) have been backing Putin into a corner, economically and militarily.  Most recently in the Kiev region, where they reportedly were working to cut off and encircle the Russian army in a few places.  They backed Russia into a corner there.  Did Putin nuke?  Cause a catastrophic nuclear accident at Chernobyl?  Deploy chemical or biological weapons?  No, no, and no.  What *did* Putin do?  He backed down, turned tail, and ran, leaving massive destruction in his wake.

I am growing tired and skeptical of the argument that somehow Ukraine or The West should avoid backing Putin into some ill-define "corner," in the hopes of avoiding some hypothetical greater tragedy.  A cornered animal has no way to escape.  Putin has several.  They may not be his preferred outcome, but they are a far cry from the desperate right for survival invoked by the phrase "backed into a corner."  And Putin has shown little inclination to do anything more than talk and indiscriminately bombard civilians.

I'm not making the argument that we shouldn't put Putin in a corner. I think that both Putin and Ukraine are already in the corner - and Putin put both there. Therefore, other countries should proceed without concern for putting Putin in a corner, but instead in consideration that he is in the corner. Part of that means that the people who spend lots of time trying to figure out how Putin thinks need to try to guess what he'll do when pushed.

To continue the animal analogy, I'm specifically thinking of my 2 cats, Sibley and Arwen. If you put Sibley in a corner then the only way out was to either remove the perceived threat and let her calm down, or for me (specifically me, it didn't work for anyone else to try) to pick her up and carry her away to a safe spot. Anything else resulted in injury - and Sibley was the sweetest, gentlest, most docile cat. Arwen however responds very differently. If she's cornered and threatened, she'll try to bluff her way out, and can cause damage in the process, but if pushed further she shuts down. If you have this knowledge, then you can use it to determine the best way to proceed.

Putin's been in power for a long time. We have some hints at least of how he might respond. Use that knowledge and act appropriately.

[Just Joe]

Zelensky went to Bucha, there's a lot of pictures on Twitter, but this one really stands out to me.

https://twitter.com/Kateryna_Kruk/status/1510975889588293639

God.

I've only joined Twitter today. Wow - that place is a shit show. A few pictures and then gobs of Russian apologists and propagandists sowing doubt.

[hdatontodo]

On twitter, for Ukraine, I follow

https://twitter.com/oryxspioenkop?t=6dOtR9Cb-ghD3DsQwGwURQ&s=09

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent?t=5LAQFjCOY7KcVqXSqQZMZg&s=09

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical?t=QxMIn0e4s6z4XKwynSZebQ&s=09

https://twitter.com/ELINTNews?t=AyLcGWO3VbAhGvhJO8zq_A&s=09

https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar?t=QIkXR9HSNtCnVPXKTpf0rw&s=09

And others

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

[zolotiyeruki]

I have seen this argument made ever since Ukraine showed that they might succeed.  For a full month now, Ukraine (and the rest of the world) have been backing Putin into a corner, economically and militarily.  Most recently in the Kiev region, where they reportedly were working to cut off and encircle the Russian army in a few places.  They backed Russia into a corner there.  Did Putin nuke?  Cause a catastrophic nuclear accident at Chernobyl?  Deploy chemical or biological weapons?  No, no, and no.  What *did* Putin do?  He backed down, turned tail, and ran, leaving massive destruction in his wake.

I am growing tired and skeptical of the argument that somehow Ukraine or The West should avoid backing Putin into some ill-define "corner," in the hopes of avoiding some hypothetical greater tragedy.  A cornered animal has no way to escape.  Putin has several.  They may not be his preferred outcome, but they are a far cry from the desperate right for survival invoked by the phrase "backed into a corner."  And Putin has shown little inclination to do anything more than talk and indiscriminately bombard civilians.

I'm not making the argument that we shouldn't put Putin in a corner. I think that both Putin and Ukraine are already in the corner - and Putin put both there. Therefore, other countries should proceed without concern for putting Putin in a corner, but instead in consideration that he is in the corner. Part of that means that the people who spend lots of time trying to figure out how Putin thinks need to try to guess what he'll do when pushed.

...

Putin's been in power for a long time. We have some hints at least of how he might respond. Use that knowledge and act appropriately.

Ukraine's certainly in a corner--Russia has clearly shown what they will do to Ukraine if/when they win.  I have trouble buying the argument that Putin is in a corner.  He still has plenty of ways to escape. Sure, he'll take some bruises, but he has options.

I'm not one whose job it is to inspect and analyze every image, video, and word of Putin, but from what I've seen, when challenged, he'll throw a conventional-warfare fit, and if he continues to lose, he'll back down.  He'll also push to see how far he can go before he gets his hand slapped.  See the Wagner group in the Battle of Khasham, for example.

[SunnyDays]

The best way to kill an animal is to corner it.  Give it too much space and it runs away on you.  Then you've lost control.

[Sibley]

Zelensky went to Bucha, there's a lot of pictures on Twitter, but this one really stands out to me.

https://twitter.com/Kateryna_Kruk/status/1510975889588293639

God.

I've only joined Twitter today. Wow - that place is a shit show. A few pictures and then gobs of Russian apologists and propagandists sowing doubt.

Of course its a shit show, it's social media. I don't really read the comments, that helps. I stick to some specific people. It's entirely possible to curate Twitter carefully. Same as Facebook actually.

[Just Joe]

I have trouble buying the argument that Putin is in a corner.  He still has plenty of ways to escape. Sure, he'll take some bruises, but he has options.

But does he know he has taken some bruises? RE: yes-men advisors.

[Just Joe]

Twitter: I was trying to read it like a thread. I see your point.

[Sibley]

A telling side by side of Zelensky: https://twitter.com/kgorchinskaya/status/1511008603964071937

And its not just him. The tall man standing behind Zelensky in this photo (2nd photo of the tweet): https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1510974076105498630/photo/2

I think he's the chief of staff. Look at him in this video (about 28 seconds in), I believe that was 3/1: https://twitter.com/malonebarry/status/1499007215872655362
And here's what he looked like before the war, I think taken in December 2021: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andriy_Yermak

Those are just 2 men. Think of the rest of the country.

[pecunia]

You people are kind.  You talk about putting Putin in a corner.  Other sites talk about putting him in a box.

[Sibley]

You people are kind.  You talk about putting Putin in a corner.  Other sites talk about putting him in a box.

He doesn't deserve a box, or a shroud. But I am civilized, even if he is not. So yes, I will agree to go as far as is necessary, but no farther. I will not commit war crimes, nor encourage them. But when Putin dies, I would like him to have whatever burial would be considered to be most disgraceful by him.

---------
You'll need to use a translator, but: https://tsn.ua/ato/naybilshe-zhertv-u-borodyanci-venediktova-pro-masovi-vbivstva-rosiyan-na-kiyivschini-2028586.html

Reports that the situation in Borodyanka is far worse than the other previously occupied cities.

[Glenstache]

You people are kind.  You talk about putting Putin in a corner.  Other sites talk about putting him in a box.

He doesn't deserve a box, or a shroud. But I am civilized, even if he is not. So yes, I will agree to go as far as is necessary, but no farther. I will not commit war crimes, nor encourage them. But when Putin dies, I would like him to have whatever burial would be considered to be most disgraceful by him.

---------
You'll need to use a translator, but: https://tsn.ua/ato/naybilshe-zhertv-u-borodyanci-venediktova-pro-masovi-vbivstva-rosiyan-na-kiyivschini-2028586.html

Reports that the situation in Borodyanka is far worse than the other previously occupied cities.

I just want Putin to know that he will be immortalized in history books as a failure and one who brought ruin to his country through his corruption, greed, and narcissism.

[Travis]

Trent Telenko
@TrentTelenko

This is a really nice history snapshot thread on the Battle of Kyiv that has been making the rounds.

I have a few minor objections to it based on what is missing.

Ukrainian leadership & Russian corruption thread🧵


https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1510745458477572098

Russian fighter shot down yesterday with its jamming pod intact after crashing. I can't imagine Russia will have any secrets left when this is over.

[Just Joe]

You people are kind.  You talk about putting Putin in a corner.  Other sites talk about putting him in a box.

He doesn't deserve a box, or a shroud. But I am civilized, even if he is not. So yes, I will agree to go as far as is necessary, but no farther. I will not commit war crimes, nor encourage them. But when Putin dies, I would like him to have whatever burial would be considered to be most disgraceful by him.

---------
You'll need to use a translator, but: https://tsn.ua/ato/naybilshe-zhertv-u-borodyanci-venediktova-pro-masovi-vbivstva-rosiyan-na-kiyivschini-2028586.html

Reports that the situation in Borodyanka is far worse than the other previously occupied cities.

Throw his body into the local landfill.

[Travis]

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

Well, Israel is famous for their style of "Extraordinary Rendition."

Also, those leaders will presumably be banned from any ICC signatory for the rest of their lives.

Anonymous found a roster of about 2/3s of the Russian troops fighting in Ukraine along with phone numbers and email addresses.  Some of the folks on Twitter have been working hard to identify where individual units have been fighting to the point that Russian battalion commanders are already being doxxed as probable participants in these massacres. These guys can't ever leave Russia, and even then it wouldn't surprise me if in a couple years a few suddenly disappear or have an "accident" on a street corner late at night.

[pecunia]

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

Well, Israel is famous for their style of "Extraordinary Rendition."

Also, those leaders will presumably be banned from any ICC signatory for the rest of their lives.

Anonymous found a roster of about 2/3s of the Russian troops fighting in Ukraine along with phone numbers and email addresses.  Some of the folks on Twitter have been working hard to identify where individual units have been fighting to the point that Russian battalion commanders are already being doxxed as probable participants in these massacres. These guys can't ever leave Russia, and even then it wouldn't surprise me if in a couple years a few suddenly disappear or have an "accident" on a street corner late at night.

I've got to wonder if Ukraine doesn't have some sort of spy network in Russia.  These folks have a lot of relatives who live there.  About a third of the Ukrainians speak Russia.  They are very familiar with Russian culture as they share a lot of it.  A lot of those tanks being blasted at were from Ukraine.  I suspect that there are quite a few Russians that really think this war is stupid. (Which it is)  I guess there is enough other news that I haven't seen any of these news reporters or the talking heads even mention that.

[Sibley]

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

Well, Israel is famous for their style of "Extraordinary Rendition."

Also, those leaders will presumably be banned from any ICC signatory for the rest of their lives.

Anonymous found a roster of about 2/3s of the Russian troops fighting in Ukraine along with phone numbers and email addresses.  Some of the folks on Twitter have been working hard to identify where individual units have been fighting to the point that Russian battalion commanders are already being doxxed as probable participants in these massacres. These guys can't ever leave Russia, and even then it wouldn't surprise me if in a couple years a few suddenly disappear or have an "accident" on a street corner late at night.

I've got to wonder if Ukraine doesn't have some sort of spy network in Russia.  These folks have a lot of relatives who live there.  About a third of the Ukrainians speak Russia.  They are very familiar with Russian culture as they share a lot of it.  A lot of those tanks being blasted at were from Ukraine.  I suspect that there are quite a few Russians that really think this war is stupid. (Which it is)  I guess there is enough other news that I haven't seen any of these news reporters or the talking heads even mention that.

I've seen a number of things (social media posts, news articles, etc) that indicate that many of the Russian side relatives don't believe their Ukrainian side relatives that Russia is attacking. It's destroying a lot of families. Similar to what happened in the US with Trump supporters and their non-Trump supporting relatives, though the circumstances are much more serious of course.

[KarefulKactus15]

As someone with parents who are still firm Qanon believers, I can see this.  Before the Qanon thing I woulda said no way.

Unfortunately I see now how incredibly easy it is to misinform the masses.     Fucking frighteningly easy.

[Travis]

I wonder if Russian leadership will face any long term consequences for this. It seems that as long as they have nukes it would be impossible to impose anything harsh.

Well, Israel is famous for their style of "Extraordinary Rendition."

Also, those leaders will presumably be banned from any ICC signatory for the rest of their lives.

Anonymous found a roster of about 2/3s of the Russian troops fighting in Ukraine along with phone numbers and email addresses.  Some of the folks on Twitter have been working hard to identify where individual units have been fighting to the point that Russian battalion commanders are already being doxxed as probable participants in these massacres. These guys can't ever leave Russia, and even then it wouldn't surprise me if in a couple years a few suddenly disappear or have an "accident" on a street corner late at night.

I've got to wonder if Ukraine doesn't have some sort of spy network in Russia.  These folks have a lot of relatives who live there.  About a third of the Ukrainians speak Russia.  They are very familiar with Russian culture as they share a lot of it.  A lot of those tanks being blasted at were from Ukraine.  I suspect that there are quite a few Russians that really think this war is stupid. (Which it is)  I guess there is enough other news that I haven't seen any of these news reporters or the talking heads even mention that.

According to SBU (Ukrainian CIA), they have people everywhere. They share a common language, have deep-seated hatred for Russia, a motivation to succeed, and a corrupt and technically falling-behind adversary, they're likely very good at their jobs.

[LennStar]

No matter what happens, one must ridicule the tyrant.


In retrospect, the Kyiev operation obviously was a stretch.

The decisions were far removed from reality, you mean?

[Glenstache]

No matter what happens, one must ridicule the tyrant.


In retrospect, the Kyiev operation obviously was a stretch.

The decisions were far removed from reality, you mean?

Putin was taking the long view. Unfortunately, he tabled the wrong ideas.

[PDXTabs]

WSJ: Ukraine’s Zelensky Calls for Removing Russia From U.N. Security Council After Alleged War Crimes. I'm hugely in support of this if for no other reason than the fact that nowhere in the UN charter does it say that the Russian Federation is on the security council.

[LennStar]

WSJ: Ukraine’s Zelensky Calls for Removing Russia From U.N. Security Council After Alleged War Crimes. I'm hugely in support of this if for no other reason than the fact that nowhere in the UN charter does it say that the Russian Federation is on the security council.

It's one of those inofficial things. Every official nuclear power is there and has a veto and so on.

[maizefolk]

WSJ: Ukraine’s Zelensky Calls for Removing Russia From U.N. Security Council After Alleged War Crimes. I'm hugely in support of this if for no other reason than the fact that nowhere in the UN charter does it say that the Russian Federation is on the security council.

It's one of those inofficial things. Every official nuclear power is there and has a veto and so on.

That's not entirely correct. Pakistan isn't even on the council right now, India is a rotating member at the moment but doesn't have a veto. And of course there is North Korea.

The easier way to understand the five countries with veto power on the UN security council is these were the five major allies that triumphed at the end of World War II.

[pecunia]

I think Red China was added later.

[OtherJen]

I think Red China was added later.

No, China is a founding and permanent member of the Security Council, along with the US, France, UK, and USSR (now represented by Russia, although as noted elsewhere, this may be in violation of the charter, given that there are 14 other former SSRs now without permanent Council representation).

[PDXTabs]

I think Red China was added later.

No, China is a founding and permanent member of the Security Council, along with the US, France, UK, and USSR (now represented by Russia, although as noted elsewhere, this may be in violation of the charter, given that there are 14 other former SSRs now without permanent Council representation).

I think that you are both right. The ROC was the original member. The PROC wasn't given the seat until 1971. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

[pecunia]

Here's a story that strongly infers that Putin is worried about being poisoned and let go of a bunch of staff.  This video does somehow make me doubt whether it is credible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD4i-A80GIU

He may wind up in one of those boxes himself before this "special operation" is over.

[maizefolk]

I think Red China was added later.

No, China is a founding and permanent member of the Security Council, along with the US, France, UK, and USSR (now represented by Russia, although as noted elsewhere, this may be in violation of the charter, given that there are 14 other former SSRs now without permanent Council representation).

I think that you are both right. The ROC was the original member. The PROC wasn't given the seat until 1971. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

Yup. And that's probably the most relevant precedent for Russia's current permanent seat+veto power. China was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council, but the population and territory of the China that won World War II is now three countries: Mongolia, China (PRC/Mainland) and China (ROC/Taiwan). ROC has continuity of government with the Chinese government that won World War II, PRC has the vast majority of the territory and population that belonged to the China that won World War II. In '71 the UN switched which of those three it considered to have the best claim to the "China" seat on the council but nothing officially changed in the rules of the security council.

Similarly, the USSR was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council. But the population and territory of the  USSR that won World War II is now fifteen different countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. In China's case two of the three successors officially call themselves China. In the USSR's case zero of the 15 call themselves the USSR. Initially Russia probably got the seat by being the biggest of the 15 and being the one with the old soviet capital. Now we can add "and the only one with nuclear weapons" to that, but originally four of the fifteen were nuclear powers: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine.

[PDXTabs]

Yup. And that's probably the most relevant precedent for Russia's current permanent seat+veto power. China was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council, but the population and territory of the China that won World War II is now three countries: Mongolia, China (PRC/Mainland) and China (ROC/Taiwan). ROC has continuity of government with the Chinese government that won World War II, PRC has the vast majority of the territory and population that belonged to the China that won World War II. In '71 the UN switched which of those three it considered to have the best claim to the "China" seat on the council but nothing officially changed in the rules of the security council.

Similarly, the USSR was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council. But the population and territory of the  USSR that won World War II is now fifteen different countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. In China's case two of the three successors officially call themselves China. In the USSR's case zero of the 15 call themselves the USSR. Initially Russia probably got the seat by being the biggest of the 15 and being the one with the old soviet capital. Now we can add "and the only one with nuclear weapons" to that, but originally four of the fifteen were nuclear powers: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine.

I feel compelled to point out that when the League of Nations didn't work out it was dissolved and the UN was created. We could do that again. This whole permanent veto thing generally seems like a bad idea to the democrat in me.

[Travis]

Yup. And that's probably the most relevant precedent for Russia's current permanent seat+veto power. China was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council, but the population and territory of the China that won World War II is now three countries: Mongolia, China (PRC/Mainland) and China (ROC/Taiwan). ROC has continuity of government with the Chinese government that won World War II, PRC has the vast majority of the territory and population that belonged to the China that won World War II. In '71 the UN switched which of those three it considered to have the best claim to the "China" seat on the council but nothing officially changed in the rules of the security council.

Similarly, the USSR was one of the victors in WWII and has a permanent seat on the council. But the population and territory of the  USSR that won World War II is now fifteen different countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. In China's case two of the three successors officially call themselves China. In the USSR's case zero of the 15 call themselves the USSR. Initially Russia probably got the seat by being the biggest of the 15 and being the one with the old soviet capital. Now we can add "and the only one with nuclear weapons" to that, but originally four of the fifteen were nuclear powers: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine.

I feel compelled to point out that when the League of Nations didn't work out it was dissolved and the UN was created. We could do that again. This whole permanent veto thing generally seems like a bad idea to the democrat in me.

The only reason Korea got a UN troop commitment was because the USSR left the room. The whole thing could've been shelved at that point if in its first major test nothing happened because one member said "no."

[maizefolk]

I feel compelled to point out that when the League of Nations didn't work out it was dissolved and the UN was created. We could do that again. This whole permanent veto thing generally seems like a bad idea to the democrat in me.

I can certainly see where you are coming from.

But if we went down that road, from a democratic point of view giving every nation one vote in the general assembly seems a much more questionable choice from a democratic perspective. If we don't think equal votes for states in the US senate is fair, why should San Marino (population 34,000) get the same say in world affairs as India (population 1,380,000,000)? In the USA the ratio between the population of the smallest state with two senators and the largest is 68x. That's pretty bad from a one person one vote stand point but in the UN the ratio between the populations of the smallest state with one vote and the largest is 140,000x.

If I was trying to design an equitable system of world government the UN is far too broken to do the job and removing the veto would do very little to move it in the direction of a democratic world government (7 countries have half the world's population but less than 4% of votes in the GA while 2/3rds of the votes in the GA are controlled by countries representing less than 9% of the world's population).

At the same time getting rid of the veto would substantially reduce our power of self-determination here in the USA (which really is a reasonable approximation of a democracy, warts and all) in favor of vesting more power in a very undemocratic institution.

[PDXTabs]

I feel compelled to point out that when the League of Nations didn't work out it was dissolved and the UN was created. We could do that again. This whole permanent veto thing generally seems like a bad idea to the democrat in me.

I can certainly see where you are coming from.

But if we went down that road, from a democratic point of view giving every nation one vote in the general assembly seems a much more questionable choice from a democratic perspective. If we don't think equal votes for states in the US senate is fair, why should San Marino (population 34,000) get the same say in world affairs as India (population 1,380,000,000)? In the USA the ratio between the population of the smallest state with two senators and the largest is 68x. That's pretty bad from a one person one vote stand point but in the UN the ratio between the populations of the smallest state with one vote and the largest is 140,000x.

If I was trying to design an equitable system of world government the UN is far too broken to do the job and removing the veto would do very little to move it in the direction of a democratic world government (7 countries have half the world's population but less than 4% of votes in the GA while 2/3rds of the votes in the GA are controlled by countries representing less than 9% of the world's population).

At the same time getting rid of the veto would substantially reduce our power of self-determination here in the USA (which really is a reasonable approximation of a democracy, warts and all) in favor of vesting more power in a very undemocratic institution.

You are correct that every member having an equal vote seems wrong. I'm still not sure that permanent veto power for the original five is the way to go. Right now the USA looks pretty good compared to Russia. I'm not convinced that will always be the case.

[Abe]

The UN is a pointless waste of resources, except for humanitarian purposes. There is no political will to do anything to help one another. The security council part should be dissolved and those resources given to the UNHCR. We should just admit as a species we don’t care enough about other countries and stop pretending. It’s frankly embarrassing.

The atrocities revealed now will make Russia’s goal of occupying the eastern part of Ukraine impossible. They will have to not only harshly subjugate a guerrilla force within the region, but do so while fighting an advanced regular force, and dealing with increasingly crippling sanctions that will destabilize Russia itself. It is possible that civilian Russians will be brainwashed into joining this fight and being ground into cannon fodder, much like Germans were under Hitler, and the country will turn into a cult like North Korea. It is a obvious that Putin and the Russian soldiers have no strategy except inflicting suffering for the sake of it. They are nihilistic anarcho-fascists, which is especially worrying since they have weapons of mass destruction, and there’s no clear plan other than killing as many people as possible to claim the ground they stood on. This seems to be the beginnings of an ethnic cleansing strategy. However I doubt they will use nuclear weapons at this point, because they would have done so by now. The plan seems to shell Ukraine out of existence conventionally.

I do not see any political scenario where Russian sanctions will be lifted with Putin in power. Additional Russian banks have now been cut off from swift, and Europe is doing the politically tenable calculus of stopping coal, but not gas, imports.

Also this has turned the Cold War (which didn’t really end, just has a brief intermission) into a Hot War. There is no scenario where Russia gets anything out of this other than pointless suffering, the question is how much damage they will cause as they thrash about pointlessly. Unfortunately there is no scenario short of engaging Russia on the battlefield where NATO or the UN keeps any moral standing. The security council remains as pointless as usual, and now more than ever, seems to be just a tool of the US and Russia to justify whatever idiotic invasions they carry out. In the US, we appear weak and mealy-mouthed, singing about freedom whole twanging guitars but not willing to burden any amount of suffering. The rest of the world already saw our society composed of hypocritical arrogant weaklings who pick on weaker dictators and cower from pseudo-strong ones, and this is mostly proving their point. We are even too weak to profit off other countries’ wars, like we normally do! The boards of Lockheed and Boeing must be losing their minds! Given Russia’s reluctance to nuke Ukraine, we don’t have much excuse anymore. Our lack of action at this point is shameful, and any future flag-waving is doubly so.

The only relative victor politically in this conflict will be China, which will seem shrewd and maybe siphon off some of Russia’s mineral/oil wealth.

[Sibley]

Abe, agreed. The UN has never seemed to have a point to me. Yes, it's great to try to keep everyone talking rather than shooting at each other, but that doesn't seem to be working very well.

For a slightly lighter note - Russian air support accidently bombed the Russian brigade. Then this: "After the air bombardment of their own positions, the commander of the 38th Motorized Rifle Brigade, Colonel Kurbanov Andrey Borisovich, asked the commander of the Eastern Military District, Colonel General Chaiko Alexander Yurevich, to no longer provide him with such air support"

Oops?

https://www.dialog.ua/war/249349_1649152568  (in Russian)

[pecunia]

I wonder how this will affect countries neighboring Ukraine.  In particular there is the country of Moldova.  It is a Romanian speaking country.  On the border with Ukraine there is an area called Transnistria.  Some people who live there want to break away from Moldova and do their own thing.  It is semi autonomous region that has Russian troops helping to act as peace keepers.  I guess the area has a lot of Russian speakers.  Russia seems to encourage this "breakaway" Republic thing to effectively gobble up territory.  I read they give the people in Transnistra free gas.

On 17 September 2006, a referendum was held in Transnistria asking voters to choose between renouncing independence and becoming part of Moldova or claiming independence and possibly becoming part of the Russian Federation in the future. The referendum favored Russian to Moldovan integration, 98.07 to 96.61 percent.

As Ukraine borders this Transnistria region, the people have to be aware of the actions of the Russians.  If there was a referendum taken now, I just wonder if the people would say, "Hell no!  Russia keep away!"  I would also think Moldova would be clamoring to get into NATO.  All those refugees do not give Russia a good name.

The news doesn't seem to cover this country.  Sorry, if I strayed too far from the main topic.

[lemanfan]

The only relative victor politically in this conflict will be China, which will seem shrewd and maybe siphon off some of Russia’s mineral/oil wealth.

I think your observations of the United Nations are correct.  One thing that I think about a bit is the "joint statements" that Russia and China issued a while back. It seems to me like they have a plan for how to use global institutions like the UN to their benefit in order to create that "multi-polar" world they like to talk about.  They also use all the right words (promoting democracy, sustainability and stability, fighting terrorism) even if I think they mean something else with them. It simply seems to me like China knows how to play the game, better and better, and use Russia in this work.

[Travis]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1510276474175115281.html

Summary of Battle for Kyiv. It's missing a lot that will get filled in during the coming months, but it's a good breakdown of what happened.

[maizefolk]

I would also think Moldova would be clamoring to get into NATO....The news doesn't seem to cover this country. 

Moldova's constitution creates some barriers to NATO membership. But just since Russia invaded Ukraine, Moldova put in an application to join the EU:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/moldovan-president-says-moldova-applies-eu-membership-2022-03-03/

[pecunia]

I would also think Moldova would be clamoring to get into NATO....The news doesn't seem to cover this country. 

Moldova's constitution creates some barriers to NATO membership. But just since Russia invaded Ukraine, Moldova put in an application to join the EU:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/moldovan-president-says-moldova-applies-eu-membership-2022-03-03/

I think they were next on Putin's list after Ukraine.  Of course, they probably still are as Russians are still pounding Ukrainian cities.