Nobody has the intention to invade Ukraine

Nevermore

Well-known member
Citizen
How come we're not discussing this yet?

Over the past few months, Russia has moved a large number of troops near the Ukrainian border. Although they insist they don't have any intention to invade, there have been talks between the US and Russia during which Russia has made bold demands, such as requesting that Ukraine, Finland and Sweden must never become NATO members. Concerns about a major war started by Russia are rising, and there are certainly worries that Putin isn't just interested in visiting Chernobyl, so they might not even stop at conquering Ukraine.

Meanwhile, the German government is only vaguely discussing "consequences" should Russia attack Ukraine, but then everyone is quick to insist that they shouldn't cancel the highly controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline. One of the biggest hindrances is the moderate left German party SPD, which is heading our current three-party government. Former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder, himself an SPD member, has spent the past two decades being a well-paid consultant for various Russian energy corporations such as Gazprom and Rosneft, and he's a personal friend of Vladimir Putin. So clearly he is just a well-respected elder statesman and not a highly biased lobbyist. There's an infamous quote by Schröder insisting that Putin is a "flawless democrat".

The whole situation is a massive powder keg, and people are worried it might end up severely shifting the balance of power in Europe.

At the very least, the current president of the US isn't a bumbling moron who is rumored to be blackmailed via a certain tape involving bodily fluids...
 
Last edited:

Dekafox

Fabulously Foxy Dragon
Citizen
There's already been electronic attacks going on recently. A bunch of government websites got defaced last week, and now there's reports of a "ransomware" specifically targeting Ukraine systems - except this one doesn't offer any way to pay a ransom, making it purely destructive.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
Everyone is talking about vague consequences against russia if they continue this aggression. Canada is, the US is, the fact is: they have nothing to use against them, and putin wants to see the band back together.

Putin, however, is not stupid. He knows that if he shoots vaguely in the direction of a nato soldier: it's war. Which is why he's outright demanded that ukraine is never allowed to join. He can't afford to start, let alone win, a world war in an attempt to rebuild the soviet union.
 

Ungnome

Grand Empress of the Empire of One Square Foot.
Citizen
Which is why we should just grant all said nations NATO status. Putin will continue to be a bad actor until someone with teeth actually stands up to him.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
I'm in favour of that solution, but it does raise an interesting question: Russia has already invaded ukraine. They still hold the crimean peninsula. If NATO accepts ukraine, do we have to go to war over the peninsula, cause NATO or not: putin ain't about to just give it back.
 

Pocket

jumbled pile of person
Citizen
There's already been electronic attacks going on recently. A bunch of government websites got defaced last week, and now there's reports of a "ransomware" specifically targeting Ukraine systems - except this one doesn't offer any way to pay a ransom, making it purely destructive.
That's just called a virus.
 

Dekafox

Fabulously Foxy Dragon
Citizen
Technically regular ransomware is a virus too.

Anyways, here's a article on it: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...mware-targets-ukraine-in-data-wiping-attacks/
This is what I was referring to, from the initial warning:
However, the MBRLocker's ransom note uses the same bitcoin address for all victims and does not provide a method to input a decryption key. When combined, this typically indicates fake ransomware designed for destructive purposes.
It apparently also screws with the MBR and overwrites files instead of encrypting them, according to the article.
 

Pocket

jumbled pile of person
Citizen
Ah, so they're actually tricking people into sending them money. OK, I guess technically that's ransomware. In the same way that it's still a hostage situation even if you always intended to shoot the hostages.
 

Teufel

Active member
Citizen
At the very least, the current president of the US isn't a bumbling moron


larry-david-unsure.gif


Put the kibosh on sending lethal aid to Ukraine last spring because Russia promised to draw-down and Biden rewarded Putin with a summit


Waived sanctions on the Nord Stream pipeline and Democrats employed the dreaded Jim Crow 2.0 filibuster to stop new sanctions against it


Oversaw a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that emboldened our enemies


Withdrew support for a different pipeline from the Mediterranean to Europe that would come from our allies, which is kind of like taking care of Russia's competition


Are we sure there isn't a pee tape? Some Hunter Biden kompromat? Or maybe Putin just remembers how after he invaded Crimea the O'Biden administration didn't do much except send Ukraine some easily hacked drones and other useless non-lethal aid.


We should be letting Moscow know we will make an invasion of Ukraine very bloody for them and that doesn't require sending an army.

 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
While I absolutely agree that they need REAL weapons, I honestly hate that we're in the position to HAVE to send lethal weaponry to anyone at all. Why are we still doing this cold war bullshit at all?
 

The Mighty Mollusk

Scream all you like, 'cause we're all mad here
Citizen
Because a lot of the same people from the Cold War era are still in positions of power and they don't think it ever ended.
 

Nevermore

Well-known member
Citizen
Here's a scenario:

Russia invades Ukraine, in coordination with China, which invades Taiwan. This creates a dilemma for the US, with two new warzones at the same time.
 

wonko the sane?

You may test that assumption at your convinience.
Citizen
Nope: cause any action from china on that scale will result in one side (or the other.) ending their production in china. The US won't do that at all, because the backlash from the population which will suddenly find itself without... literally anything that has a computer chip, battery, or molded plastic. And frankly: china's economy is INCREDIBLY precarious right now, due to how they basically faked and forced growth, so they NEED to be the worlds sweats shop for the forseeable future.

Invading taiwan might be something china wants in the long term, but in the here and now: they literally cannot afford it. Because even the brainwashed masses will revolt when they drop to north korean levels of starvation.
 

Teufel

Active member
Citizen

Pale Rider

...and Hell followed with him.
Citizen
I'm going to assume that a "minor" incursion will bring sanctions while a "major" incursion is when NATO shots will actually be fired at Russians. At that point, we're all just waiting for the nukes to fly.
 

MrBlud

Well-known member
Citizen
“Oversaw a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that emboldened our enemies”

That’s how the withdrawal was always going to go. While I suppose some sort of orderly non-disastrous withdrawal would theoretically be possible; given the only viable options of Trump or Biden it was always 100% going to be a shitshow.
 

Wheelimus

Administrator
Staff member
Council of Elders
Citizen
I can't think of a single candidate from 2020 who would have handled the Afghanistan withdrawal any better. It would have always been a clusterhug.
 


Top Bottom