MOSCOW (AP) — Russian troops launched their anticipated attack on Ukraine on Thursday, as President Vladimir Putin cast aside international condemnation and sanctions, warning other countries that any attempt to interfere would lead to “consequences you have never seen.”
And here I was being told that Russia was just dropping by a couple of separatist regions by invitation and wasn’t going to invade. I’m getting ready for those goalposts to move like lightning. Oh no, that’s not imperialist bullying, merely a light shelling.
Personally, I didn’t see what angle there would be for Russia to actually invade Ukraine. Recognizing Donetsk and Luhansk was justified, but going further than that takes away any legitimacy from Russian position.
I know you are being sarcastic, but there were a handful of people across Lemmy insisting there was no invasion coming.
They said that the military buildup didn’t happen, that it was just the latest in a history of false alarms, that it was just the west warmongering, etc. and basically spent the last week calling people crazy for suspecting that any attack was on the table.
Oops, just wrong about an impending war where the evidence was screamingly obvious. No biggie.
It’s unfortunate that literally everyone you were arguing with apparently was able to see the trajectory of events more clearly than you.
Hopefully some self-reflection will be in order and you can see if the same errors of judgment are compromising your ability to evaluate subsequent events in Ukraine and make excuses, and if your counterparts making the same arguments as you are similarly blind.
Nina Khrushcheva, a professor at the New School, spoke to NPR this morning. Like you, she was dismissing talk of an impending invasion as Western-driven hysteria. She confessed on the air that this was a major embarrassment for her, which I found to be a nice moment of accountability. Surely you can follow her example.
I base my assessment on the available facts. At the time I did not see the benefit for Russia to invade Ukraine since they were getting what they wanted by being measured. Clearly events worked out differently, and we’re in a new situation now. I’m not sure what self-reflection you’re suggesting I should be doing here. Are you suggesting that I shouldn’t evaluate events based on the available facts?
Totally obtuse answer. I’m saying that your assessment of what counted as “the facts” and your interpretation of them was completely wrong, and possibly driven by biases that you may want to examine further, and I gave you the example of another person who, in a similar case took ownership of their mistake.
If you think a JV debate team game where you try and twist my words into “oh, so you didn’t want me to look at ThE fAcTs?!”, that’s just a signal in favor of the conclusion that you have been and are continuing to be completely disingenuous. These are just not adult answers.
We’ll get to that, if you want an hour long tedious point by point debate where you constantly argue definitions and split differences.
But first, what I’m telling you now is that “oh, so you didn’t want me to look at the facts” is a totally obtuse and disingenuous paraphrase and a signal that nobody on Lemmy should bother trying to reason with you, because you aren’t willing to try.
Somehow the rest of the world, including everyone you were arguing with, were able to see it from the same set of “tHe FaCtS” and see the obvious and you weren’t, and you don’t want to do any self-reflection unless lead by the nose through god knows how many tedious paragraphs of details, fighting every step of the way. More responsible people, such as Nina Kruscheva are able to do that on their own.
What I’m telling you is that Russia was getting what they wanted without the need to invade. The facts are that western powers were engaged in active diplomacy with Russia, and that Ukrainian economy was crashing. Simply recognizing Donbas republics and waiting would’ve worked in Russia’s favor in the long term. Please explain to me what specifically you claim to be at odds with the facts in that assessment.
Actually invading Ukraine will clearly destroy any chance for diplomacy between Russia and Europe and help galvanize NATO. I personally don’t see how this is to Russia’s benefit, but again perhaps you can explain to me why I was deluded to think that.
Despite all your bloviating here, you haven’t actually said a single thing of substance. You just keep repeating how “ThE ReSt Of tHe WoRLd” came to a different conclusion, without explaining the basis for it.
Replying to me by saying “oh so you didn’t want me to look at the facts” is a completely disingenuous and juvenile equivocation over ordinary terminology.
It’s a signal that you are not even trying to engage in good faith. If people on Lemmy saw nothing other than this chain of comments it would be sufficient reason to never engage with you.
Please be specific what you’re claiming to be lies. What I said was that it looked like the repercussions for Russia invading Ukraine would be undesirable. Meanwhile, working diplomatically with the west would produce the results that Russia wanted. I also noted that Ukraine was carrying out attacked against ethnic Russian population in Ukraine, and even provided sources including actual research to support that. What specifically are you claiming I lied about?
You shared a links with me earlier about how water and electricity supplies were being disrupted. that’s probably true, but its likely a direct result of the russian invasion, and the premise that invading more will solve the problem is an obvious lie.
Here’s a direct quote from page 54 of your final piece of evidence:
The revelations from the trials and investigations which confirm that the Maidan massacre of the protesters and the police was a false flag operation which involved Maidan snipers and elements of the Maidan leadership have major implications for understanding not only this crucial case of political violence in Ukraine.
Quick question, why didn’t you copy the entire quote?
The revelations from the trials and investigations which confirm that the Maidan
massacre of the protesters and the police was a false flag operation which involved Maidan
snipers and elements of the Maidan leadership have major implications for understanding not only this crucial case of political violence in Ukraine. They have major implications for
understanding the “Euromaidan” and the origins of the violent conflict in Ukraine and the
conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and between Russia and the West. The revelations from the Maidan massacre trials and investigations show that the narratives promoted by the Ukrainian and Western governments and with some notable exceptions the media that the Maidan protesters were massacred by government snipers and/or the Berkut police are false.
A lot of these videos have been fact checked as false and out of context
I mean, even twitter had this thing to debunk false claims https://twitter.com/i/events/1496815373936574469
Not saying that Russians aren’t in Ukraine right now, they could very well be, but I object strongly to people jumping to conclusions about a full scale invasion, when it looks like the real narrative is Russia has done a one off attack for political leverage.
You are from lemmygrad, so I assume you trust China at least somewhat. This was China’s stance. https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-calls-restraint-ukraine-rejects-term-invasion-2022-02-24/
I wanted to post it, but lemmy wouldn’t do it for some reason
Let’s flip this. If the US was bombing Moscow’s airport and rolling tanks across the border, would you be calling for not being too hasty about calling it an invasion?
If I was living in a Russia dominated media and social media environment, and people were making false claims about the scale of USA’s actions for the purpose of warmongering, I absolutely would want people to be cautious
Russia has come out and said they did both of these things. It’s not under dispute.
Edit: Or there is so much reporting from a variety of sources that it is not open to dispute. And no, the Russian media is not comparable to the Western media. Russian media is just way more under the thumb of the government.
I variety of sources such as Ukrainian officials, your cousin on twitter, some random farmer in Kharkov. Many of the more extreme claims are being fact checked now.
Thanks for posting the link. I know that footage from other conflicts from different times are often circulated inappropriately and are used for misinformation. You’re correct in saying that I don’t know for certain whether or not any particular source is genuine.
I am from Lemmygrad, and had not seen this exact response from China, however I don’t necessarily need to agree with everything the Chinese government says. In 1979 they didn’t like calling their own invasion of Vietnam an invasion, instead opting in favour of the term “the self-defensive counterattack against Vietnam”.
I found a link to a similar article except it’s from an Indian media outlet and you don’t need to register an account to read the whole thing. Leaving this in case anyone is interested.
Tonight, Ukrainian military invaded Luhansk, despite Russian recognition of LPR as independent Source
Despite knowing Russia would defend what they recognize as a sovereign country, they poked the bear.
Russia orchestrated a surgical strike to disable Ukraine’s military infrastructure and prevent them from killing any more people in Donbas. They succeeded completely in little over an hour. Reportedly the Azov Battalion headquarters has been destroyed as well, and leaders have fled to Poland. Too early to tell.
From everything I’ve seen so far, Russia is not occupying Ukraine. They are not invading Ukraine. Striking infrastructure outside of major cities was their goal.
I’ve never denied the first two things when they actually happened. You imply that I’m moving the goalposts but you can go through my history if you want. I’ve stayed consistent.
No it’s not. There’s not just peace and war. There’s in between. For example, in Syria, the US has never been in all at war with the Syrian government. They’ve used hybrid warfare and other methods. There was that one time as well where Trump ordered a tomahawk to destroy a Syrian air field. Still no all out war. And also when Trump ordered the assassination of Soleimani without engaging in warfare with Iran. Countries can engage in military attacks without invading or waging war.
You started by claiming this isn’t a “full scale invasion”, which if the goal is to “demilitarize” Ukraine will require that. Bolstering break-away provinces doesn’t require attacks on the capital. Russia has been using hybrid warfare in Ukraine since Crimea, but now this does begin to look like war and not some one-shot retaliatory strike.
Now it does, I agree. According to the Kremlin, the military operation was paused as it looked like Zelensky was willing to negotiate neutrality. Now that has fallen through, they have resumed the operation today, so it seems like tonight we will see a big escalation in military action now.
Demilitarization is just the reduction of armed forces. So yes you can demilitarize a country without a full scale invasion.
And here I was being told that Russia was just dropping by a couple of separatist regions by invitation and wasn’t going to invade. I’m getting ready for those goalposts to move like lightning. Oh no, that’s not imperialist bullying, merely a light shelling.
Personally, I didn’t see what angle there would be for Russia to actually invade Ukraine. Recognizing Donetsk and Luhansk was justified, but going further than that takes away any legitimacy from Russian position.
It seems like recognizing the Donbass region as separate republics was always going to be a stepping stone to attacking the rest of Ukraine.
Totally didn’t see that coming
I know you are being sarcastic, but there were a handful of people across Lemmy insisting there was no invasion coming.
They said that the military buildup didn’t happen, that it was just the latest in a history of false alarms, that it was just the west warmongering, etc. and basically spent the last week calling people crazy for suspecting that any attack was on the table.
Oops, just wrong about an impending war where the evidence was screamingly obvious. No biggie.
they were saying this shit for 8 fucking years of course we thought it would be prudent to ignore it you idiot
I’m sure half of lemmygrad thinks NATO blew up Kyiv
It’s unfortunate that literally everyone you were arguing with apparently was able to see the trajectory of events more clearly than you.
Hopefully some self-reflection will be in order and you can see if the same errors of judgment are compromising your ability to evaluate subsequent events in Ukraine and make excuses, and if your counterparts making the same arguments as you are similarly blind.
Nina Khrushcheva, a professor at the New School, spoke to NPR this morning. Like you, she was dismissing talk of an impending invasion as Western-driven hysteria. She confessed on the air that this was a major embarrassment for her, which I found to be a nice moment of accountability. Surely you can follow her example.
I base my assessment on the available facts. At the time I did not see the benefit for Russia to invade Ukraine since they were getting what they wanted by being measured. Clearly events worked out differently, and we’re in a new situation now. I’m not sure what self-reflection you’re suggesting I should be doing here. Are you suggesting that I shouldn’t evaluate events based on the available facts?
Totally obtuse answer. I’m saying that your assessment of what counted as “the facts” and your interpretation of them was completely wrong, and possibly driven by biases that you may want to examine further, and I gave you the example of another person who, in a similar case took ownership of their mistake.
If you think a JV debate team game where you try and twist my words into “oh, so you didn’t want me to look at ThE fAcTs?!”, that’s just a signal in favor of the conclusion that you have been and are continuing to be completely disingenuous. These are just not adult answers.
What specifically are you claiming was completely wrong in my assessment?
We’ll get to that, if you want an hour long tedious point by point debate where you constantly argue definitions and split differences.
But first, what I’m telling you now is that “oh, so you didn’t want me to look at the facts” is a totally obtuse and disingenuous paraphrase and a signal that nobody on Lemmy should bother trying to reason with you, because you aren’t willing to try.
Somehow the rest of the world, including everyone you were arguing with, were able to see it from the same set of “tHe FaCtS” and see the obvious and you weren’t, and you don’t want to do any self-reflection unless lead by the nose through god knows how many tedious paragraphs of details, fighting every step of the way. More responsible people, such as Nina Kruscheva are able to do that on their own.
What I’m telling you is that Russia was getting what they wanted without the need to invade. The facts are that western powers were engaged in active diplomacy with Russia, and that Ukrainian economy was crashing. Simply recognizing Donbas republics and waiting would’ve worked in Russia’s favor in the long term. Please explain to me what specifically you claim to be at odds with the facts in that assessment.
Actually invading Ukraine will clearly destroy any chance for diplomacy between Russia and Europe and help galvanize NATO. I personally don’t see how this is to Russia’s benefit, but again perhaps you can explain to me why I was deluded to think that.
Despite all your bloviating here, you haven’t actually said a single thing of substance. You just keep repeating how “ThE ReSt Of tHe WoRLd” came to a different conclusion, without explaining the basis for it.
Replying to me by saying “oh so you didn’t want me to look at the facts” is a completely disingenuous and juvenile equivocation over ordinary terminology.
It’s a signal that you are not even trying to engage in good faith. If people on Lemmy saw nothing other than this chain of comments it would be sufficient reason to never engage with you.
all of the bullshit “justifications” you’ve been fed are lies
Please be specific what you’re claiming to be lies. What I said was that it looked like the repercussions for Russia invading Ukraine would be undesirable. Meanwhile, working diplomatically with the west would produce the results that Russia wanted. I also noted that Ukraine was carrying out attacked against ethnic Russian population in Ukraine, and even provided sources including actual research to support that. What specifically are you claiming I lied about?
Unless you’re part of the Russian state propaganda network, that’s not what I said… or it was a really great self-report.
I said you’ve been lied to.
LIE
You shared a links with me earlier about how water and electricity supplies were being disrupted. that’s probably true, but its likely a direct result of the russian invasion, and the premise that invading more will solve the problem is an obvious lie.
There was never any legitimacy
Given what NATO and Ukraine have been up to, there absolutely was
https://twitter.com/ASBMilitary/status/1496876089838342156
https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/unicef-nearly-2-dozen-attacks-on-water-supply-systems-in-donbas-recorded-since-years-start.html
https://english.elpais.com/international/2022-02-22/no-power-no-water-civilians-in-donbas-region-feel-effects-of-escalating-ukraine-russia-crisis.html
https://jacobinmag.com/2022/02/maidan-protests-neo-nazis-russia-nato-crimea
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356691143_The_Maidan_Massacre_in_Ukraine_Revelations_from_Trials_and_Investigation
Here’s a direct quote from page 54 of your final piece of evidence:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356691143_The_Maidan_Massacre_in_Ukraine_Revelations_from_Trials_and_Investigation
Quick question, why didn’t you copy the entire quote?
I miss-read that =\
You just combed the document for a quote that supported your biases without actually reading it.
No I read some of a 74 page document and my brain stopped working around page 54 =/
how about you find the sentence that says Ukraine committed genocide…
They will likely point to the false-flag ops that occurred as some vague justification or to set up the usual ambiguity.
I hate being right on this situation :/
Same. I was hoping that it was all some big bluff to extract concessions without going all out.
Nothing says “protecting civilians” like a little shelling
There has been no shelling of civilian targets.
On what basis do you make that claim?
On the basis of “Putin can do no wrong and his farts taste like cotton candy” I presume
Unnecessary.
Just a little different way than how you support the thin air claim of citizen bombing. It is called citation of facts.
You didn’t cite anything
…except that civilians tend to live in cities, like Kyiv. Or hospitals in Syria. Right, you certainty contradicts the facts.
There is still no invasion into Ukraine. Fake news.
Literally within 3 hours of your comment.
https://twitter.com/ThomasVLinge/status/1496753930625290240
A lot of these videos have been fact checked as false and out of context
I mean, even twitter had this thing to debunk false claims
https://twitter.com/i/events/1496815373936574469
Not saying that Russians aren’t in Ukraine right now, they could very well be, but I object strongly to people jumping to conclusions about a full scale invasion, when it looks like the real narrative is Russia has done a one off attack for political leverage.
You are from lemmygrad, so I assume you trust China at least somewhat. This was China’s stance.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-calls-restraint-ukraine-rejects-term-invasion-2022-02-24/
I wanted to post it, but lemmy wouldn’t do it for some reason
Let’s flip this. If the US was bombing Moscow’s airport and rolling tanks across the border, would you be calling for not being too hasty about calling it an invasion?
If I was living in a Russia dominated media and social media environment, and people were making false claims about the scale of USA’s actions for the purpose of warmongering, I absolutely would want people to be cautious
Russia has come out and said they did both of these things. It’s not under dispute.
Edit: Or there is so much reporting from a variety of sources that it is not open to dispute. And no, the Russian media is not comparable to the Western media. Russian media is just way more under the thumb of the government.
I variety of sources such as Ukrainian officials, your cousin on twitter, some random farmer in Kharkov. Many of the more extreme claims are being fact checked now.
The standard role call of disinformation, distortion, and denial. Weren’t you denying there were Russian troops on the border, just a few days ago?
Thanks for posting the link. I know that footage from other conflicts from different times are often circulated inappropriately and are used for misinformation. You’re correct in saying that I don’t know for certain whether or not any particular source is genuine.
I am from Lemmygrad, and had not seen this exact response from China, however I don’t necessarily need to agree with everything the Chinese government says. In 1979 they didn’t like calling their own invasion of Vietnam an invasion, instead opting in favour of the term “the self-defensive counterattack against Vietnam”.
I found a link to a similar article except it’s from an Indian media outlet and you don’t need to register an account to read the whole thing. Leaving this in case anyone is interested.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/china-calls-for-restraint-in-ukraine-rejects-the-term-invasion-2786419
Did you mean to write a blank comment?
I was replying to someone else and mistakenly end up replying you. Is that a fair explanation for 3 downvotes on a blank comment?
I didn’t downvote you, was just wondering.
The Russians literally have boots and bombs on the ground in several major cities including Kiev. In what universe is that not an invasion?
Boots on the ground in Kiev? Are you serious? I have to see this. Let’s see where you’re getting this from.
Looking a little further, they’re trying to get boots on the ground by taking the Kiev airport.
Yeah so you were wrong, weren’t you? But let’s keep going. How do you know they took Kiev airport? Or even what their intentions are?
They’re attacking the airport right now with paratroopers.
Really? Again, let’s see where you are getting this from.
It’s hard to do a lot worse than literally being wrong about an invasion every step of the way in real time.
That’s why @pingveno@lemmy.ml had to dip out of this thread without providing a single piece of evidence for what they’re saying
⠀⠀⠘⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠑⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡔⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠢⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⠴⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⡀⠤⠄⠒⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣀⠄⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡠⠔⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠢⠤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠑⢄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠃⠀⢠⠂⠀⠀⠘⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢤⡀⢂⠀⢨⠀⢀⡠⠈⢣⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⢀⡖⠒⠶⠤⠭⢽⣟⣗⠲⠖⠺⣖⣴⣆⡤⠤⠤⠼⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡈⠃⠀⠀⠀⠘⣺⡟⢻⠻⡆⠀⡏⠀⡸⣿⢿⢞⠄⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢣⡀⠤⡀⡀⡔⠉⣏⡿⠛⠓⠊⠁⠀⢎⠛⡗⡗⢳⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢱⠀⠨⡇⠃⠀⢻⠁⡔⢡⠒⢀⠀⠀⡅⢹⣿⢨⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠠⢼⠀⠀⡎⡜⠒⢀⠭⡖⡤⢭⣱⢸⢙⠆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡸⠀⠀⠸⢁⡀⠿⠈⠂⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⡍⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⢢⣫⢀⠘⣿⣿⡿⠏⣼⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⠊⠀⣀⠎⠁⠀⠀⠀⠙⠳⢴⡦⡴⢶⣞⣁⣀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠐⠒⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⠀⢀⠤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠀
https://twitter.com/ASLuhn/status/1496850284668076032
Tonight, Ukrainian military invaded Luhansk, despite Russian recognition of LPR as independent
Source
Despite knowing Russia would defend what they recognize as a sovereign country, they poked the bear.
Russia orchestrated a surgical strike to disable Ukraine’s military infrastructure and prevent them from killing any more people in Donbas. They succeeded completely in little over an hour. Reportedly the Azov Battalion headquarters has been destroyed as well, and leaders have fled to Poland. Too early to tell.
From everything I’ve seen so far, Russia is not occupying Ukraine. They are not invading Ukraine. Striking infrastructure outside of major cities was their goal.
Heres tanks 200 km from Kyiv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPGyfFSWFJU
https://twitter.com/franakviacorka/status/1496751495928295428
“Russia is not
massing troopsbombinginvadingoccupying Ukraine.”I’ve never denied the first two things when they actually happened. You imply that I’m moving the goalposts but you can go through my history if you want. I’ve stayed consistent.
You’ve lost all credibility.
There was no full-scale invasion two days ago. I stand by what I said.
Just a half-scale invasion then? Is that like being half pregnant? It’s kind of either/or.
No it’s not. There’s not just peace and war. There’s in between. For example, in Syria, the US has never been in all at war with the Syrian government. They’ve used hybrid warfare and other methods. There was that one time as well where Trump ordered a tomahawk to destroy a Syrian air field. Still no all out war. And also when Trump ordered the assassination of Soleimani without engaging in warfare with Iran. Countries can engage in military attacks without invading or waging war.
You started by claiming this isn’t a “full scale invasion”, which if the goal is to “demilitarize” Ukraine will require that. Bolstering break-away provinces doesn’t require attacks on the capital. Russia has been using hybrid warfare in Ukraine since Crimea, but now this does begin to look like war and not some one-shot retaliatory strike.
Now it does, I agree. According to the Kremlin, the military operation was paused as it looked like Zelensky was willing to negotiate neutrality. Now that has fallen through, they have resumed the operation today, so it seems like tonight we will see a big escalation in military action now.
Demilitarization is just the reduction of armed forces. So yes you can demilitarize a country without a full scale invasion.