Russian special military operation in Ukraine #37

New post caveat emptor Today at 6:16 pm

@Arrow
No it didn't. Modern Russia doesn't have nearly as a wide reach as SU did. Objectively, I am not sure if that is even possible. If it is, it will not happen in near future.

Honestly, it is a very tricky question you are trying to answer.
What does "superpower" mean, first of all?
Russia today is about half a size of the Soviet Union population - the sole thing that hinders seriously a "superpower" status.
Yet we have countries of double the population size, who are so far away from any "power" status that it makes the thing shocking actually.
VVZh was citing once that no country smaller than 300mln will be really independent in coming years ... Well ... There is something to back this prophecy, agree?

I try to understand some people, but it doesn't work. Gentlemen, there has been no Russian state for over 100 years in the area of ​​today's Ukroshitstan. No matter how much some here defend that antichrist Lenin, his ideology killed millions of Russians and gave away part of the territory of the Russian Empire, today's Ukrishitstan - for nothing. And what now, you expect everyone to say "from tomorrow we are Russians" ? Forget megalomania and Kiev as Russian city, because the only thing needed now is to finish off the Ukroshitstan army

I don't pretend at a political resolution for the Ukraine or the territories presently part of the Ukraine

I simply point out the military necessity of doing so, if Russia is to survive and develop itself without having to face down from this direction a constant stream of extremists, terrorists, insurgents and whoever else funded and armed by the West.

As for the political resolution, Putin claims these new regions as part of Russia. One can understand the need for hard-line policies during the current crisis. And one can understand the need to secure a land-bridge to the Crimea and water supplies for it too. I myself am neither hot nor cold towards the idea; of these only the Donbass has fought for its independence from the Ukraine and there is only evidence for them wanting it. I wasn't at the recent referendums in Kherson, Melitopol, etc.., I can't vouch as to their validity or turnout or whatever.
But let's say it's all now Russia and this will be accepted by everyone. What of the rest of the Ukraine?

And you're right that simply saying that everyone's now Russian is no solution. It won't work, and you'll be left with people who do not identify openly, and are indistinguishable from the mainland Russian population, but who will sabotage the country from within, as the Ukrainian elites among others did in the USSR during the 80s. In the meantime they will also siphon off a prodigious portion of resources for their own development at the expense of other Russian regions, as the Ukrainian elites did throughout the entire existence of the USSR; and ended up with 1/3rd of its industries despite only accounting for 1/6th of its population. And yes you might protest, that back then there was the Ukrainian SSR, a Ukrainian nomenclature, their own sort of state apparatus and hierarchy - but trying to prevent all that is no solution either. You will suffer a widespread lack of legitimacy despite all propaganda, as Russia did in Chechnya until Kadyrov managed to solidify his own power with Russia's backing and build up the same Chechen national state in all essence except within Russian borders. By this I mean central and western Ukraine. In eastern Ukraine Russia might be able to get away with simply annexing these regions into Russia with no special considerations other than the nationalist insurgency and Ukrainian intelligence operatives that it will be battling here and there (mainly Odessa and maybe Zaporozhie, rather than the Donbass of course).

Lenin gave away nothing.

The Soviet/Rada Ukraine in 1917 - lead by non-Bolshevik and nationalist leftists - declare its autonomy and then independence already long before the Bolshevik Revolution and the bourgeiois Russian Government in 1917 approved the autonomy of Soviet Ukraine. When the October Revolution occured it is clear that Ukrainian leftists wanted their independece no matter what and the only thing Lenin could do was approved it.

Lenin actually tried his best to kept Russia and Ukraine together and approval of Ukraine independence as a memer of the Union was the best way to do it.

Lenin's idea about national liberation is what help us to gain independence from France and America, so yes at least to me and many others, Lenin is a savior. You may not want to understand that but fact is fact.

Our people know Russia mainly via the Soviet Union and our people love Russia via the Soviet Union, we admire Russai for giving birth to Lenin and the first socialist country who thrived for social equality and national liberation, and many Vietnamese people tends to favour Russia in this conflict because they believe that many Russian people are fighting for the Soviet legacy against the aggression of Maidan facist and Western imperialism.

You don't have to understand us people if you feel it is difficult to understand. But the fact is fact that it is the during the Soviet Union that Russian people managed to achieve not only the superpower status, but also the charisma and presitige of the stronghold of social progress and justice. Such a feat was not achieveable during the Tsarist Russia, and will never be replicable by the current Putinist government, to be honestly.

And your claim that "his ideology killed millions of Russians" is completely bullshit. Millions of Russians was killed by German facists and Tsarist compradors backed by Western powers who wanted to enslave Russia.

I'll correct you in some places - the Rada in Kiev and its declaration of the Ukrainian National Republic grew out of the chaos following the February revolution, but was ultimately a creature of the Germans, granted its idea of national self-determination did resonate among the population. It drew its support among the bourgeois in Kiev and the Ukrainian landowners, albeit unlike post-1991 Ukraine they didn't have enough time to cement themselves and sell their ideas to the population

Soviet Ukraine was declared by Ukrainian communists the same year (1917), and as a counter to the Rada in Kiev, being supported fully by the Bolsheviks in Russia proper. The Ukrainian leftists organized the declaration of their government and a rebellion against the UNR in Kharkov, and the Red Army arrived to provide support. Soviet Ukraine at that stage was part of a federation with Soviet Russia (and later on joined it).
Then we had the Brest-Litovsk treaty and the dissolution of Soviet Ukraine in all effect, before Germany was defeated in the war and the Bolsheviks arrived again to set it up in a new format.

I have not heard of the Ukrainian leftists calling on independence from Russia as part of a separate state; although I'm not familiar enough with the history.

What is true at least according to an account that I read, is that Lenin himself was entertaining the idea of a separate Soviet Ukraine, and separate Soviet Russia and so on. It was actually Stalin at the time who argued against him in this regard, and instead advocated a single Russian Federal Soviet state, with all national autonomies and republics as part of it. In the end they both compromised and agreed on the idea of a Soviet Union, with various union republics part of the same state on nominally equal terms, such as Russia and the Ukraine. And that's how the USSR came to be.

But Lenin and all of that crap is the past and that doesn't influence things anymore. Best to realize that and move onto the present

It influences everything, because it's part of history, and to a large extent we have the situation of 1917 repeating now, minus the communism. You can bet the Ukrainian elites at the start of the war were keeping a very nervous eye on Kharkov, and the Russian military in turn tried to enter it on day 3 or so of the war. It was no doubt a vital objective that the Ukrainians successfully kept. If they hadn't, we would have seen an alternative Ukrainian government being declared within the first week or 2.

No it didn't. Modern Russia doesn't have nearly as a wide reach as SU did. Objectively, I am not sure if that is even possible. If it is, it will not happen in near future. wrote:

What do you mean by this? Due to the technical evolution, the Russia military continues to get more powerful with fewer men and planes. Look at the TU-95 alone as an example of this. The destructive power and reach of this ancient plane has MASSIVELY grown due to the evolution of its weapons. Just a single plane can devastate just about any nation on the planet. A single TU95 would have stopped Nazi Germany in its tracks. Consider that. Russia TU-22 fleet could probably bring global shipping to a complete halt without use of nuclear weapons.

What do you mean by this? Due to the technical evolution, the Russia military continues to get more powerful with fewer men and planes. Look at the TU-95 alone as an example of this. The destructive power and reach of this ancient plane has MASSIVELY grown due to the evolution of its weapons. Just a single plane can devastate just about any nation on the planet. A single TU95 would have stopped Nazi Germany in its tracks. Consider that. Russia TU-22 fleet could probably bring global shipping to a complete halt without use of nuclear weapons.

The fallacy in your logic is where you miss that everyone else's military also gets more modern and more powerful too

The only relevant metric is - how powerful militarily is Russia now relative to its contemporaries, versus how powerful militarily the Soviet Union was in say the 80s against other powers then?

The issue with assimilating Ukraine in its entirety is that it becomes Russian territory and your next Nato threat is literally next door; Poland. Maybe better to acquire the eastern part and somehow turn the western part in a demilitarized zone; not sure how or who should govern that. wrote:

Having a border with Poland means that any aggression has to be launched from Poland. Now NATzO is using proxies
as aggressors and pretending it is an innocent 3rd party. So removing the proxies gives a big negative incentive
to NATzO as it now has to face the music for its actions.

So Ukrs are claiming they were promised 321 tanks. Looks like a number pulled from the rear end.