Is Russia starting to lose the war?

@vivify said
Your link doesn't support a case either way for what the Ukrainian public thought. Most publications indicate that the Ukrainian majority was in favor of the EU deal.

Well, have a look at this poll (October 2013 - a month after I visited Ukraine myself, incidentally).

https://www.dw.com/en/ukrainian-support-for-eu-association-agreement-declines/a-17189085

Note that the numbers in favour of the EU association agreement, and the numbers in favour of the Russian-led Eurasian customs union, were almost exactly equal ( 50 and 48% ).

@no1marauder said
You can't be simple minded enough to believe that the West didn't exert economic pressure on Ukraine to OK the deal.

Nothing I posted indicated what you're alleging. This is your patented tactic of deliberately misquoting me.

What I clearly said was that the West's reasons for their actions are obviously different from Russia's pettiness.

Russia threatening economic ruin just for partnering with the EU is not comparable to the West being against murderous crackdown of protesters and jailing political opponents.

@no1marauder said
I've opposed NATO and it's expansion before Putin came to power. It's use as the armed wing of neoliberal imperialism justifies that.

We talk about individual countries' violation of human rights all the time on this board; why should Ukraine's violations be ignored as its "internal politics"?

I already said the invasion was "unjustified" and "a Crime against Peace" ...[text shortened]... ettlement was possible at one point.but it now seems most unlikely because of actions by both sides.

Well given Putins plan to set up ‘filtration’ camps across Ukraine I think most fair minded people would argue that resistance was essential and it’s Putin that’s prolonging the war by exactly the same plea to reality that tells us he started it.
If this was two nations arguing over a third territory then your stance might make sense but Ukraine has been brutally and violently invaded by its neighbour there is no option other than resistance and I think there is a moral and existential reason for the west and nato to help Ukraine to defeat this invasion. I cannot understand why you think it’s acceptable for a neighbour to literally cause a neighbouring state to disappear by force of arms and brutality
And the reasoning your using to argue that having a victorious, expanded and bolstered Putins Russia snarling across the border with nato is somehow a peaceful solution to this blatant act of violence eludes me completely.

@teinosuke said
Well, have a look at this poll (October 2013 - a month after I visited Ukraine myself, incidentally).

https://www.dw.com/en/ukrainian-support-for-eu-association-agreement-declines/a-17189085

Note that the numbers in favour of the EU association agreement, and the numbers in favour of the Russian-led Eurasian customs union, were almost exactly equal ( 50 and 48% ).

The way you're quoting the article is not accurate.

It wasn't a 50/48 split; the article says only 33% were against the EU deal while 17% percent weren't sure. The rest, 50%, were for it. That's not "almost equal", that's a clear majority in favor of partnering with the EU.

I'm sure the violent crackdown on protests probably turned some undecided Ukrainians into being for the EU deal.

@vivify said
Nothing I posted indicated what you're alleging. This is your patented tactic of deliberately misquoting me.

What I clearly said was that the West's reasons for their actions are obviously different from Russia's pettiness.

Russia threatening economic ruin just for partnering with the EU is not comparable to the West being against murderous crackdown of protesters and jailing political opponents.

LMAO! What a simple minded child you sound like.

The West doesn't give the tiniest (word for excrement deleted) about "murderous crackdowns" by governments willing to play economic ball with Western multinationals and institutions that serve the global wealthy. Ask the folks in Bahrain among many other places.

Get over your fairy tales.

@kevcvs57 said
Well given Putins plan to set up ‘filtration’ camps across Ukraine I think most fair minded people would argue that resistance was essential and it’s Putin that’s prolonging the war by exactly the same plea to reality that tells us he started it.
If this was two nations arguing over a third territory then your stance might make sense but Ukraine has been brutally and violen ...[text shortened]... order with nato is somehow a peaceful solution to this blatant act of violence eludes me completely.

It's senseless to keep responding to someone who consistently and knowingly lies about your position. So I won't bother dealing with such unmitigated BS pedaled by you in the future.

@vivify said
The way you're quoting the article is not accurate.

It wasn't a 50/48 split; the article says only 33% were against the EU deal while 17% percent weren't sure. The rest, 50%, were for it. That's not "almost equal", that's a clear majority in favor of partnering with the EU.

You need to scroll down. The bit you seem to have read, in the first paragraph, reads:

"Half of Ukraine's population (50 percent) is in favor of the association and free trade agreement between Ukraine and the EU. However, one in three Ukrainians rejects signing the treaty."

And then in the next paragraph:

"Public opinion is also divided when it comes to Ukraine's possible accession to the Customs Union of Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus that Moscow intends to mold into a Eurasian Union. Forty-eight percent of participants were in favor of Ukraine becoming a member of the Customs Union of the former Soviet Republics. Thirty-six percent are against it."

Since this leaves quite a high percentage of "don't knows" in either case, it's clear that the respondents can't have thought that the two outcomes were mutually exclusive (otherwise to say "Yes" to the EU treaty would have entailed an automatic "No" to the Eurasian customs union). At least some Ukrainians, in other words, entertained the idea of saying Yes to both (a policy which could well have spared Ukraine, and the world, much trouble).

The article also points to the geographical split that has been a complicating factor in Ukrainian politics since the country became independent. We note that "EU association is still largely supported in Ukraine's west and center (64 percent), while Ukrainians in favor of the Customs Union mainly live in the country's east and south (59 percent)."

@teinosuke said
You need to scroll down. The bit you seem to have read, in the first paragraph, reads:

"Half of Ukraine's population (50 percent) is in favor of the association and free trade agreement between Ukraine and the EU. However, one in three Ukrainians rejects signing the treaty."

And then in the next paragraph:

"Public opinion is also divided when it comes to Ukraine's ...[text shortened]... Ukrainians in favor of the Customs Union mainly live in the country's east and south (59 percent)."

Okay. But even in your comparison, the majority, though slight, still leaned toward the EU.

@teinosuke said
Well, no, not really. Some Ukrainians were in favour of EU ties and some weren't. Here's Reuters (scarcely a pro-Russian source) commenting on the tug-of-war between the EU and Russia in late 2013.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-russia-deal-special-report-idUSBRE9BI0DZ20131219

[i]Public and private arm-twisting by Putin, including threats to Ukraine’s econ ...[text shortened]... present majority opinion. The mechanism we have for determining how a majority feels is an election.

Viv obviously didn't bother to look at the article which proves Russia had offered a far better deal to Ukraine in 2013 than the EU did. Ukraine would have received $15 billion within a year to help pay its government debt and a reduction in price of natural gas received from Russia.

The EU offered $19 billion in grants and loans over 7 years but only if Ukraine signed the trade and cooperation agreement and struck a deal with the IMF. But the IMF was willing to extend more credit only if Ukraine raised its retirement age and froze pensions and wages. These are typical austerity measure demanded by the neoliberal institutions in return for ever increasing debt.

@no1marauder said
Viv obviously didn't bother to look at the article which proves Russia had offered a far better deal to Ukraine

What an unintelligent post.

A deal with the EU doesn't end at the initial agreement; it opens doors to other trade deals and political alliances with the West. What made the deal popular with Ukrainians was the opportunity for such doors to open, not just the deal itself. That probably seemed as a better alternative to entering into an agreement with a hostile dictatorship.

This is obvious to anyone.

@vivify said
What an unintelligent post.

A deal with the EU doesn't end at the initial agreement; it opens doors to other trade deals and political alliances with the West. What made the deal popular with Ukrainians was the opportunity for such doors to open, not just the deal itself. That probably seemed as a better alternative to entering into an agreement with a hostile dictatorship.

This is obvious to anyone.

Yeah, ask Greece about all those great deals Western neoliberals gave them.

So after the coup, how'd that work out for Ukraine? Lowest GDP per capita in Europe?

@no1marauder said
Yeah, ask Greece about all those great deals Western neoliberals gave them.

You're on a roll with unintelligent posts. Citing a single country with a notorious history of bad government spending as point is laughable.

So after the coup, how'd that work out for Ukraine? Lowest GDP per capita in Europe?

Which has nothing to do with the EU deal.

@vivify said
You're on a roll with unintelligent posts. Citing a single country with a notorious history of bad government spending as point is laughable.

So after the coup, how'd that work out for Ukraine? Lowest GDP per capita in Europe?

Which has nothing to do with the EU deal.

LMAO! You just claimed that what the West offered in 2013 was far better than Russia's offer even though the latter clearly would have afforded Ukraine more significant short term benefits.

But it turns out what the West did after the coup led to, or at least didn't prevent, a collapse of Ukraine's economy.

@no1marauder said
LMAO! You just claimed that what the West offered in 2013 was far better than Russia's offer

Wrong. I said the EU deal was dropped because Russia threatened harsh, crippling economic retaliation; it wasn't dropped because Ukraine thought Russia's deal was better.

Third time in this thread you've misquoted me.

@vivify said
Wrong. I said the EU deal was dropped because Russia threatened harsh, crippling economic retaliation; it wasn't dropped because Ukraine thought Russia's deal was better.

Third time in this thread you've misquoted me.

Well you're wrong about that, too. The sources you and Teinosuke provided show it was scrapped because it was a crap deal that offered little.

Which turned out to be true as Ukraine's economic collapse showed.