Meanwhile in Ukraine

[Haumana]

It's never too much. The Nazis have little hope there in the complex. Ask Wali.

[C-Mag]

It's never too much. The Nazis have little hope there in the complex. Ask Wali.

When I listened to that, and read the article, it sounds like he was in two engagements.

[C-Mag]

Massive fuel shortages in Ukraine

[The Conservative]

All of the East is secured by the break-away republics. The Russians have encircled the large Nazi contingent there and that will take a while to resolve. The Russians have almost secured the Black Sea access: just a couple more cities to the west. As far as Kiev and the rest of Ukraine, I have no idea what Russia's goals are there?

Once they landlock Ukraine they will come to the table to negotiate. The land Russia grabbed will be brought into the Russian fold, which will force Ukraine proper to agree to terms of not joining NATO or the UN because doing so would mean that Ukraine would have no access to waterways because Russia will own them. Which until recently was one of their lifelines.

Again, Russia is winning the short game, in the long game they are going to lose.

Can you define "long game"(a year a decade, a century)and "lose"? Also how you reach this conclusion?

There are three "Long games" in this instance. Of course for anyone after a Gen-X, a long game is normally longer than their own attention span... so... Also, I l reached these conclusions because of past events, and how it has played out in the past throughout time overall.

Long Game 1 - A 40 year Cold War chess game with Ukraine
For some people, this war is going to be considered a "long game" situation since most people will ignore that it actually has been going on for well over a decade. We are just seeing the end result of a long-term plan, which can be broken down into three real causes of what we are seeing now.

1. USSR, USA, and Ukraine agreed to a non-aggression pact, and now that technically the USSR doesn't exist on paper, the agreement is null and void.

2. Because Biden gave weapons to Ukraine he technically broke the agreement (Trump refused to do so btw), and those weapons were used in attacks on the Donbas region of Ukraine the "No further East" part of the agreement was broken.

3. Russia is doing the will of the part of the country that wanted to separate from Ukraine, and in turn, returning part of what was once part of the Iron Curtain back to Russia's fold.


Long Game 2 - Testing the waters to see the true power of "The West"

Since the collapse of the USSR Russia has been a "Super Power" without any real power. The only real reason that Russia is taken seriously at all is because of the nukes, and the lack of stability people are afraid that their leadership truly has. What they think Trump would do, people are afraid Russia would be in the same camp.

That being said, as I have said before Russia is still the USSR with a different wrapper, no one ever went in and saw that the infrastructure was truly destroyed. Sure Russia said they stopped several practices, but that's like trusting the US government not to abuse its own power. Russia in my mind is still the USSR and should be treated as such.

The other aspect is that because they have been playing such a minor "superpower" role since their initial collapse they are now feeling confident with how "The West" overall has started to wain in power, at least in Russia's mind, to see if they could flex their own muscle and see what they could get away with. See if "The West" has the stomach for starting another war, or allowing Russia to ultimately take over a country like Ukraine.


Long Game 3 - Destabilizing "The West" and its image of a Shared World Economy

The US bought into the "Global Economy" back in the 90s with Bill Clinton, instead of being a world Super Power that could sustain itself from world fluctuations and problems. Starting the major outsourcing purge of the IT world in the US, Farmers, and many other fields. We also saw a dependency on global oil instead of drilling for our own because of "Global Warming"...

We promised that "no one would be left behind." Instead, we had our infrastructure gutted and moved to China.

The rest of the "modern world" followed.

Russia has attempted to break that apart by pushing a wedge into a key country, forcing changes when countries were not ready for it, and in turn, starting to put the screws on the thumbs of countries dependent on Russia and the pipeline for services such as oil and gas.

They buddied up to China and India to force two major productions of people and exports to the US and many other countries, forcing the world to re-evaluate their relationships with both. It will be a matter of time before we probably start seeing an Anti-China and Anti-India on top of the Anti-Russia viewpoints appear.

----------------------

Now with all of this above, if we take one or all three of these issues combined, Russia is playing chess while most of the world is playing a form of checkers... It will take time for the rest of the world to realize their gut reaction to protect Ukraine was not a smart one, and start to re-evaluate their stances.

Russia will already be in a corner of sorts, but it will be dependent on what "The West" wants to do from here on out. Make friends, or start to put pressure on the three largest problems "The West" actually has and force them to the table to negotiate.

China is in a very weak spot, if they lose too much production from the west (which India and Russia will not be able to compensate for) Their infrastructure bubble, as well as the housing bubble, and others will start to collapse. Weakening the strength of the Indo-Russian-China CoOp. India if they are weakened by not being able to outsource its human resource to the rest of the world, would nearly collapse its economy overnight. They get more money from people bringing it back in, than from almost anything else they produce. (except drugs perhaps, which may be only been bested by Afghanistan in the region)

Russia can't afford to keep the strenuous relationships alive without mutual give or take. If you put too much pressure on one of all three countries, their relationship will collapse, and Russia will be by itself, and in a worse situation than they are now.

That is only, and I do truly mean only if "The West" has the balls to stand up to all three "Axis" countries and take their balls home to rebuild their own infrastructure instead of depending on slave labor or cheap labor overall.

If that happens, Russia will lose in the long game, which will take between 2 to 5 years if we really play hardball, otherwise 10+

[TheOneX]

All of the East is secured by the break-away republics. The Russians have encircled the large Nazi contingent there and that will take a while to resolve. The Russians have almost secured the Black Sea access: just a couple more cities to the west. As far as Kiev and the rest of Ukraine, I have no idea what Russia's goals are there?

Once they landlock Ukraine they will come to the table to negotiate. The land Russia grabbed will be brought into the Russian fold, which will force Ukraine proper to agree to terms of not joining NATO or the UN because doing so would mean that Ukraine would have no access to waterways because Russia will own them. Which until recently was one of their lifelines.

Again, Russia is winning the short game, the long game they are going to lose.

Can you define "long game"(a year a decade, a century)and "lose"? Also how you reached this conclusion?

Russia has two ticking time bombs. The first is a very low fertility rate resulting in an old population and not enough young men to defend it. The second, and most relevant to this discussion, is oil, or more specifically Europe's move away from oil.

Russia in it's current form is an oil state, much like Venezuela. The use oil profits to prop up their economy. They are the primary provider of fossil fuels to Europe, and Europe is Russia's primary consumer. Europe no longer using fossil fuels is going to be very bad for Russian fossil fuels industry, and therefore Russia. This invasion has only accelerated Europe's plans to decouple itself from Russian oil.

So the short answer to your question is the long game is the amount of time it takes Europe to stop using fossil fuels on a large scale.

[Martin Hash]

Both China & India will be fossil fuel energy hungry for decades to come.

[TheOneX]

Both China & India will be fossil fuel energy hungry for decades to come.

Yes, but the trick is getting the fossil fuels to China and India. Pipelines are out of the question for India. Everything will need to be shipped by sea or train which means only oil, but no natural gas. Even then India will still only be a minor player for Russian oil as it likely would just be cheaper to get oil from the mid east.

Pipelines would be possible to China, but they would be long and expensive. It would probably take decades for Russia to replace the volume of Europe with China due to the currently lack of infrastructure.

[C-Mag]

Both China & India will be fossil fuel energy hungry for decades to come.

Not only them, Everywhere. I believe we will be in Green Energy Utopia in ten years like I believe in the Jab. Until I see the proven technology, I'm not getting on that bus. Hell, we don't have enough metals to make the batteries required to get everyone on that shit. Petro is not dead and won't be until a viable technology comes along.

The long game theory relies on the status quo for the next 40 years. Let's look back to 1982. China was weaker that Soviet Russia. Almost none of our high tech military warfare existed. The US government had far more prestige than we do today. Fact is, we have no idea what the world will look like in 2062. You wanna make predictions that far out .

I tend to believe in trends hundreds and thousands of years old. China has never been able to export their military power. Russia is huge, when strong influences Europe and Asia, but is not really Colonial. And at the rate of destruction of the US right now, by 2062 our grandkids could be buying outlawed music from the blackmarket using State authorized carbon credits.

[Martin Hash]

Both China & India will be fossil fuel energy hungry for decades to come.

Yes, but the trick is getting the fossil fuels to China and India. Pipelines are out of the question for India. Everything will need to be shipped by sea or train which means only oil, but no natural gas. Even then India will still only be a minor player for Russian oil as it likely would just be cheaper to get oil from the mid east.

Pipelines would be possible to China, but they would be long and expensive. It would probably take decades for Russia to replace the volume of Europe with China due to the currently lack of infrastructure.

Yeah, on a macro scale, it's not looking good for Russia in the longterm. Ukraine really is their only hope. Makes a lot more sense.

There's another thing I heard about why the invasion happened when it did: apparently, the Ukrainian army was massing on the border of the Donbass region and were going to go on the offensive against the frozen conflicts. Russia invaded first by a week to take the initiative. The narrative in the west was portrayed as the Ukrainians were simply responding to Russian troop movements, not the other way around.

[C-Mag]

This war is fucking sad. We've seen reports of Russian troops not wanting to fight this stupid as war. Now we have Ukrainian units doing the same. Like Wali, they've had enogh.
https://twitter.com/timand2037/status/1 ... 5575934977

Report: another company of 79th #Ukrainian Brigade refuses to fight, declaring loss of confidence in the army command, failure of adequate supplies, etc. They say 1/3 is left of their manpower, the rest dead or wounded. Not POWs. Full video here:

The Pope has finally come out strong on the War. He is holding NATO responsible for inciting this war and calls for peace. The first major world leader to call for peace. I hope he gets somewhere.