Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

Page 842 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
32,061
6,072
126
Because we're supposed to be better than them. I want to show the basic empathy Putin and many Russian soldiers refuse to provide.

And again, this doesn't excuse any Russian who does terrible things and is otherwise enthusiastic about the invasion; I might not enjoy watching them suffer, but I won't feel sorry if they meet a painful end. I'm just thinking of the ones who are genuinely reluctant pawns in Putin's game.
Speaking of Russian public sentiment....
The media portrayal is something else...

We must do more. The Russians want far more blood than they have already given and taken.

Putin’s supporters call for the liquidation of Ukraine as ‘genocidal rhetoric’ swells
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

you2

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2002
5,132
480
126
Uh oh:


This is fundamentally flawed because for the most part the us govt does not get the direct revenue (they get indirect via taxes) AND they do not set the prices.
 

Leeea

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2020
2,814
4,264
106
I just can't take pleasure in videos like that. Don't get me wrong, the Russians and their mercenaries are doing horrible things in Ukraine. But I can't delight in watching someone spend their last moments in agony, no matter what they've done; not even Putin, if it ever gets to that point.

For that matter... while I will fling an enthusiastic middle finger to Russian soldiers who are eager to attack Ukraine, I can't help but sympathize a bit with the reluctant ones dragged into the invasion through the draft. Imagine you're just trying to make ends meet, and suddenly you're shipped hundreds of miles away to fight a losing war you didn't really want with terrible training and sub-par (or even missing) equipment. You'd probably be frightened senseless, especially since there's a real chance you'll never see your family again.
Just follow the war closely.

Look at the aftermath of Russian occupation. Look at the horror they inflict daily with their missiles.

You will realize a fundamental truth. The Russian military is no longer human. They are not even animals. They are monsters. They gifted their souls to Satan for the glory of Putin.


You should not feel empathy for monsters.


Because we're supposed to be better than them. I want to show the basic empathy Putin and many Russian soldiers refuse to provide.

And again, this doesn't excuse any Russian who does terrible things and is otherwise enthusiastic about the invasion; I might not enjoy watching them suffer, but I won't feel sorry if they meet a painful end. I'm just thinking of the ones who are genuinely reluctant pawns in Putin's game.
Being better then them is having empathy for Dagestan's civilian population being caught in Russian tyranny without means to escape.

Being better then them is having empathy for African's civilian population being caught up in Russia famine, created to glorify Putin and pressure the world.

Being better then them is having empahty for Ukraine's civilian population, inflicted by daily terror and a genocidal plan to exterminate all of them with the Russian frost.



Russian military soldiers not reluctant pawns. They all have means to escape. They choose not to. They choose to inflict horror. They choose to inflict genocide. They choose to gift their souls to the devil. They are soulless monsters, no pawns, and not human.



Destroy the concept of the Russia. Let the federal subjects of Russia go free. They are only held together by the secret police, by horror writ mass. Put down the monster that is Russia and end the horror if its existence. Putting down the greater monster starts by putting down every monster in Ukraine.
 
Last edited:

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,593
5,128
136
Because we're supposed to be better than them. I want to show the basic empathy Putin and many Russian soldiers refuse to provide.

And again, this doesn't excuse any Russian who does terrible things and is otherwise enthusiastic about the invasion; I might not enjoy watching them suffer, but I won't feel sorry if they meet a painful end. I'm just thinking of the ones who are genuinely reluctant pawns in Putin's game.
I must have missed the mass Russian demonstrations after their invasion of Donbass, Crimea, Georgia, etc.

Where were they last year when Putin was organizing and the Biden was warning us all?

Nowhere.

That's why they are now in trench freezing their asses off as they wait to get fragged.

They still have the option for surrender before that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
11,420
584
126
Uh oh:


That doesn't even make sense since Europe isn't even in the top 5 for US exports.

1669426103420.png

Add to that high energy price hurts the US economy. Any money that's being made by the oil company is jsut a fraction that is being lost by the overall economy with increased prices and lowering demand. You think the US wants high inflation for the sake of oil profits?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,584
1,140
136
Not definitive, but is on the political backlog after certain recent events... Been seeing texts about an alliance between Central&East Asia for Siberia.
Siberia.jpeg

Sentiment towards west powers are more trustworthy than a dying power. Apparently, forcing certain big power ethnics to fight in Ukraine is 100% dick move. Didn't have Russia going mafia and doing an offer you can't refuse towards Kazahkstan, China, and Japan civs.
 
Last edited:

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
23,881
19,498
136
So
Not definitive, but is on the political backlog after certain recent events... Been seeing texts about an alliance between Central&East Asia for Siberia.
View attachment 71750

Sentiment towards west powers are more trustworthy than a dying power. Apparently, forcing certain big power ethnics to fight in Ukraine is 100% dick move.
You have such a track record of being right on geopolitical events......
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,584
1,140
136
You have such a track record of being right on geopolitical events......
Doesn't matter apparently Russia messed up huge this month. Basically ending any continued capability of central and east asia to have Russia as a safe neighbor. [Yeah, we definitely don't trust you after this moment.] All investments in Russia basically are null and void, that didn't get nuked by sanctions or held off. The only way to protect investments is to actually physical get it or it is just an NFT.
 
Last edited:

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
23,881
19,498
136
Doesn't matter apparently Russia messed up huge this month. Basically ending any continued capability of central and east asia to have Russia as a safe neighbor. [Yeah, we definitely don't trust you after this moment.] All investments in Russia basically are null and void. The only way to protect investments is to actually physical get it or it is just an NFT.
Where are you getting this analysis from? If you're the one making the leap that Russia is going to be invaded by it's neighbors then my comment about your track record stands and it does matter because your ability to analyze data is shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,584
1,140
136
If you're the one making the leap that Russia is going to be invaded by it's neighbors..
No, this idea has been around for awhile since 2014. However, it was exclusive to China only. The most recent take is Kazakhstan, China, and Japan since they have the most assets in Russia[Siberia]. Which so far hasn't filtered out of the deep yet.

Two scenarios specific to China:
China ignores Russia's demands => Gets all assets destroyed (Kazakhstan and Siberia assets specifically)
China falls inline with Russia => Has to get involved with Ukraine and Japan. Troops in enemy territory.

China however has maneuvered to make Japan a partner rather than a threat. Which means the plan has defaulted to that of Russia will eventually attack China assets local to them. This also has gone to warm-cold conflict with Russia conscripting Chinese in Siberia. Admin regions of Siberia have been leaning towards tighter Beijing connections slowly since 2012, and aggressively in 2021+.

Kazakhstan and Japan have their own issues which spun up post-Ukraine invasion and not big on news pre-Ukraine invasion. The pot has been indicatively tipped and the group does not want to be held hostage by Russia now or later like NATO/EU is. It won't be a blitzkrieg unless the resources are in imminent danger.
 
Last edited:

Indus

Diamond Member
May 11, 2002
7,844
4,035
136
Just follow the war closely.

Look at the aftermath of Russian occupation. Look at the horror they inflict daily with their missiles.

You will realize a fundamental truth. The Russian military is no longer human. They are not even animals. They are monsters.
You hit the least common denominator right there of fact. But when their minds are already made up.. it's hard for them to see the truth when their mind is already filled with misconceptions.

Never become desperate enough to trust the untrustworthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,090
2,555
146
No, this idea has been around for awhile since 2014. However, it was exclusive to China only. The most recent take is Kazakhstan, China, and Japan since they have the most assets in Russia[Siberia]. Which so far hasn't filtered out of the deep yet.

Two scenarios specific to China:
China ignores Russia's demands => Gets all assets destroyed (Kazakhstan and Siberia assets specifically)
China falls inline with Russia => Has to get involved with Ukraine and Japan. Troops in enemy territory.

China however has manuevered to make Japan a partner rather than a threat. Which means the plan has defaulted to that of Russia will eventually attack China assets local to them. This also has gone to warm-cold conflict with Russia conscripting Chinese in Siberia. Admin regions of Siberia have been leaning towards tighter Beijing connections slowly since 2012, and aggressively in 2021+.

Kazakhstan and Japan have their own issues which spun up post-Ukraine invasion and not big on news pre-Ukraine invasion. The pot has been indicatively tipped and the group does not want to be held hostage by Russia now or later like NATO/EU is. It won't be a blitzkrieg unless the resources are in imminent danger.
wat
 

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,584
1,140
136
Two ideas with the earliest Chinese-specific and the Kazakhstan and Japan-inclusion.

1. The 2014+ discussion by analysts was a full take over of Siberia by China.
2. The most recent going around in the ring is to protect assets by all three: China, Kazakhstan and Japan. Of which, the invasion part is mostly to protect resources and existing businesses used by all three. Of which, China on average is a big importer of Siberian goods in Urals, Siberia, Far East districts. China has been operating in pro-western interests of recent. They need token western powers involved for something in the aftermath.

If there is an invasion then it would be to protect assets: Chinese/Kazakhstan/Japan business within Siberia.
The aftermath is likely to split Siberia away, while the 2014 plan was to be governed under China fully. Given the pro-western movement of China it will have to support an independent Siberian Democratic state.

However, China's business is to get Vlad's control away from Siberia. Thus less likely to suicide vest their economy like they did with Ukraine and EU and everyone else. Russia retreats from Ukraine, only to start a fight against China or Japan. Which is going to harm investments on increased exports from Siberia. Russia is completely willing to do this, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

The alliance is in the new agreements in the Kazakhstan(late September 2022 K-C) and Japan(early November 2022 J-C). Each agreement has a low key security arrangement to protect each others goods. If Russia does something to one's economy, all of them have to react to protect each economy. They are prepared for an eastern front action by Russia. It is also heavily implied they will do the actions pre-emptively. So all three will rush to get their goods secured sooner than later when they get blown up. This is collaborated with the Russian Defense Ministry pushing anti-CCP propaganda lately. They are already gearing up for the next enemy aka China.
 
Last edited:

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
23,881
19,498
136
Two ideas with the earliest Chinese-specific and the Kazakhstan and Japan-inclusion.

1. The 2014+ discussion by analysts was a full take over of Siberia by China.
2. The most recent going around in the ring is to protect assets by all three: China, Kazakhstan and Japan. Of which, the invasion part is mostly to protect resources and existing businesses used by all three. Of which, China on average is a big importer of Siberian goods in Urals, Siberia, Far East districts. China has been operating in pro-western interests of recent. They need token western powers involved for something in the aftermath.

If there is an invasion then it would be to protect assets: Chinese/Kazakhstan/Japan business within Siberia.
The aftermath is likely to split Siberia away, while the 2014 plan was to be governed under China fully. Given the pro-western movement of China it will have to support an independent Siberian Democratic state.

However, China's business is to get Vlad's control away from Siberia. Thus less likely to suicide vest their economy like they did with Ukraine and EU and everyone else. Russia retreats from Ukraine, only to start a fight against China or Japan. Which is going to harm investments on increased exports from Siberia. Russia is completely willing to do this, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

The alliance is in the new agreements in the Kazakhstan(late September 2022 K-C) and Japan(early November 2022 J-C). Each agreement has a low key security arrangement to protect each others goods. If Russia does something to one's economy, all of them have to react to protect each economy. They are prepared for an eastern front action by Russia. It is also heavily implied they will do the actions pre-emptively. So all three will rush to get their goods secured sooner than later when they get blown up. This is collaborated with the Russian Defense Ministry pushing anti-CCP propaganda lately. They are already gearing up for the next enemy aka China.
Your posts are very short on links.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous and Leeea

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
454
35
91
So Ukraine has no right to self determination and no right to defend itself because the west is bad? Ukraine is asking the west for help, not Russia. Do you suppose there is a legitimate reason for that?

Edit : Look at the first post on this page which sums up Russian negotiating tactics in all their glory.
No. Rather, Ukraine was manipulated by the West in 2004 onward through the color revolution and NATO enlargement. The goal of the latter is not to give Ukraine the right to self determination but to use that as a pretext for containing Russia. That's why the U.S. has over 700 military bases and installations worldwide, and according to one of its former Presidents, the most warlike in modern history:


Around 400 of those are even used to encircle China:


Recall that when the Soviet Union fell apart, the West guaranteed that NATO would not advance one inch forward:


But the U.S. reversed that during the late 1990s, as part of aggressive policies towards other countries, prompted by Reagan's "evil empire" speech. Kennan, who actually formulated containment policies against the Soviet Union, correctly predicted that by doing so it the West would meet the ire of nationalist countries like Russia and even China:


And that's precisely what happened.

One question that wasn't answered: if NATO was meant to counter the Soviet Union, and given the fact that Russia wanted to even join NATO, then why did the U.S. insist on not only NATO enlargement but even a pivot to the Middle East through Bush, and later a pivot to Asia through Obama? Why was the U.S. and its chamchas so keen on containing not just Russia and China but even other members of BRICS and emerging markets? Might it have to do with the idea of a grand chessboard strategy


and the need to use a combination of neoconservatism (backed by American exceptionalism) and neoliberalism to make sure that other countries remain in the orbit of U.S. influence or are contained?
 

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
454
35
91
They can defend themselves all they want, as long as they pay for it. Why should our tax dollars be sent to them? With the amount of money we have sent them, we could have ended homelessness in every part of this country.

Besides, they got themselves into this mess by deciding to be puppets for the west. Let them deal with it.
That's a notable point. Someone came up with a montage in relation to that:

 

ralfy

Senior member
Jul 22, 2013
454
35
91
This is remarkably insane and is not internally consistent. (The Shah came after the Soviet Union fell apart?!)

More than anything though this shows a basic misunderstanding of sovereign debt. The US is not at all concerned about our sovereign debt levels and most of it is owned by our own citizens anyway.
Remarkably insane. Work on controlling your emotions and improving your reading comprehension.

The post is not meant to be chronological but to show various points about by argument. The Shah and his murderous police force were supported by the U.S. So was Pinochet and many more:


As for sovereign debt, the only thing you got right in your post is your last sentence. I completely agree.


 
  • Haha
Reactions: zinfamous

ASK THE COMMUNITY