McTobe:
The most absurd comment I have seen on this thread. You must not comment on a topic you don’t have a good grasp of. You can actually learn a lot on this thread from the side arguing for and against Putin. But your comment gives you away as having a poor grasp of IR

fvck off! You're an idiot... I was responding to a comment based on what was asked! You're part of the clowns around here who lack the knowledge of what is going on around the world, who rely on tauting news from your co. You must not reply to a comment you lack knowledge about.

Over 3,000 Ukrainian troops surrender since start of Russia’s operation — DPR official
It was added that five Ukrainian troops had surrendered on Tuesday at the Azovstal steel plant in the city of Mariupol
MOSCOW, APril 20. /TASS/. Over 3,000 Ukrainian troops have surrendered in Donbass since Russia’s special military operation began on February 24, First Deputy Information Minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) Daniil Bezsonov told the Soloviev Live TV channel on Wednesday.
"The total number of prisoners of war exceeds 3,000 in the two republics (the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics - TASS)," he said.
Bezsonov added that five Ukrainian troops had surrendered on Tuesday at the Azovstal steel plant in the city of Mariupol. According to the DPR official, it was the result of the DPR militia dropping leaflets calling for surrender.

Pierocash:
This op, some comrades are cooking some vawulence for you for posting this.

How can you post this when Ukraine is winning, ask FERNANDEZISBACK.

Op ,you will see vawulence now

Upworkwriter007:
They've taken the city, and surrounded the steel plant were they withdrew to. Russia can simply blow the entire steel plant. Russia has taken over Ederson, donesk, and luhansk.

fighting is going on in mariupol, which donesk and lugansk did they took.

skywalker240:

Kingosytex:


An idiot like you should be ashamed of your master and his antics. I thought Ukraine would have been long gone but lo and behold they are still in existence.

You are a simple minded IDIOT. Because i took side with Russia(for a reason), putin is now my master. Instead of fools like you to do research and find out the main cause of the conflict, you are blindly and foolishly licking ass, like a slowpoke. There was an agreement between Russia and Ukraine to recognise the sovereignty of people of donbas. Why is Ukraine reneging on those agreement ?

grandstar:
As much as I condemn the invasion by Russia, Zelensky political inexperience has partly put his country in this position.

He should have opted out of NATO membership and allowed the "breakaway" Russofied parts greater autonomy, rather than engage in this war that will leave it in ruins, no matter which way you see it.

Russia will come out badly whether it wins or loses, due to the very harsh sanctions presently placed on it, and this does not include the cost of reconstructing Ukraine, monies which will be squeezed out of its huge "dormant" foreign reserves.

You keep saying it was Zelensky's bid to join NATO that caused this war, but that is simply putting cause and effect the wrong way round. To begin with, Ukrainian public opinion only shifted towards joining NATO after Putin's decision to seize the Crimea in 2014. The claim that it was Zelensky's bid to join NATO that caused the war is simply a Russian lie - the war began in 2014 before any such bid, and the Ukrainians have been actively fighting the Russians in the east for the entirety of that time-period.

Furthermore, Zelensky - whose native language is Russian, not Ukrainian - actually ran on a "reconciliation with Russia" platform, and spent his first months in office trying to achieve exactly that. He only gave up when Putin made clear that what he wanted was free reign for pro-Russian propaganda and impunity for his separatist stooges in the Ukrainian Duma, something no leader with any respect for his voters would permit.

Finally, NATO had already made it publicly clear on multiple occasions that it would not be offering Ukraine membership anytime soon, not least because it doesn't allow countries to join which are actively engaged in other conflicts at the time they apply for entry - another fact the Russians already knew and were reminded of repeatedly in the months leading to the start of the invasion.

I realise it's human nature to want to see both sides of any conflict, but in this case the blame really does lie entirely on the Russians. Zelensky didn't start out in office as any kind of pro-NATO zealot, he was pushed there by Russian aggression that started well before he ran for office, and Russian insistence that he turn the country that elected him into a Russian puppet "or else". Naivete had nothing to do with what followed.

dvkot:
if you big brother asked you not to follow some group of boys or cultist because they may bring trouble to you guys ... And you are doing "I'm now a big boy, i can do anything" and you go ahead and begin the initiation process eventually your brother finds out. Now tell me if he will not beat the day light out of your head?

And u ll stand n look ur elder bros cumin to ur own Hus n beat without u retaliating? Stop bringing logic here

omohayek:

You keep saying it was Zelensky's bid to join NATO that caused this war, but that is simply putting cause and effect the wrong way round. To begin with, Ukrainian public opinion only shifted towards joining NATO after Putin's decision to seize the Crimea in 2014. The claim that it was Zelensky's bid to join NATO that caused the war is simply a Russian lie - the war began in 2014 before any such bid, and the Ukrainians have been actively fighting the Russians in the east for the entirety of that time-period.

Furthermore, Zelensky - whose native language is Russian, not Ukrainian - actually ran on a "reconciliation with Russia" platform, and spent his first months in office trying to achieve exactly that. He only gave up when Putin made clear that what he wanted was free reign for pro-Russian propaganda and impunity for his separatist stooges in the Ukrainian Duma, something no leader with any respect for his voters would permit.

Finally, NATO had already made it publicly clear on multiple occasions that it would not be offering Ukraine membership anytime soon, not least because it doesn't allow countries to join which are actively engaged in other conflicts at the time they apply for entry - another fact the Russians already knew and were reminded of repeatedly in the months leading to the start of the invasion.

I realise it's human nature to want to see both sides of any conflict, but in this case the blame really does lie entirely on the Russians. Zelensky didn't start out in office as any kind of pro-NATO zealot, he was pushed there by Russian aggression that started well before he ran for office, and Russian insistence that he turn the country that elected him into a Russian puppet "or else". Naivete had nothing to do with what followed.

So, what Putin really wanted, was another Belarus, and Zelensky wasn't keen.

Anyway, at this juncture, would continuous war be right to ust allow those "separatist bits" go their way? Ireland's trading of Northern Ireland for independence, is a case in point.

Russia any way we look, will lose as the sanctions will leave its economy wounded and prostrate for decades to come. Even Putin's personal wealth stashed overseas is now beyond his reach.

I just worry that Ukraine will be left a desolate ruin, and will have to be rebuilt from the start. Mariupol is a case in point. Whatever victory Ukraine or even Russia gain, wil' be pyrrhic.

From Fareed Zakaria dialogue about this war, it seems the Russians are gaining the upper hand. For Ukraine to win this war, it needs far more than what the West is providing now.

I am also guessing that Putin might resort to biological or chemicals weapons to win the war. He won't accept defeat on no grounds.

emmafineboy:

And u ll stand n look ur elder bros cumin to ur own Hus n beat without u retaliating? Stop bringing logic here

u of course you will retaliate but he will beat the sunlight out of you

E pain you Ignoramus

Remman:
fvck off! You're an idiot... I was responding to a comment based on what was asked! You're part of the clowns around here who lack the knowledge of what is going on around the world, who rely on tauting news from your co. You must not reply to a comment you lack knowledge about.

grandstar:

So, what Putin really wanted, was another Belarus, and Zelensky wasn't keen.

Anyway, at this juncture, would continuous war be right to ust allow those "separatist bits" go their way? Ireland's trading of Northern Ireland for independence, is a case in point.

The problem with this is that Putin can always come back later and try his hand at slicing off yet more of Ukraine. If he wasn't satisfied with taking the Crimea in 2014, why should he be happy with adding just Luhansk and Donetsk to his stolen territory? Why stop now when his strategic position will be even stronger than it was last time around, assuming he's able to establish a land-bridge from Crimea to Russia?

To go along with this new round of aggression would be to make the same mistake Britain and France made with Germany during the 1938 Sudetenland crisis, when Hitler publicly swore that he had no further territorial ambitions in Europe, only to march in and seize the rest of Czechoslovakia a few months later, before carrying out an unprovoked attack on Poland in 1939, which he justified on the very same basis of "protecting ethnic Germans" from alleged Polish "atrocities", just as Putin has done with his attack on Ukraine.

There's a popular saying that seems appropriate here: "when people show you who they are the first time, believe them". Over the last 23 years, Putin has shown himself again and again to be a ruthless and untrustworthy liar, from his orchestration of apartment bombings against his own countrymen in order to win an election, to his numerous assassinations of journalists at home and abroad, to his wars of annihilation in Chechnya and Syria, to his instigation of separatism in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, to his propping up of hated tyrants in Byelorussia, Kazakhstan and Syria. This is a man whose word cannot be trusted on something as straightforward as whether it's currently morning or midnight.

Russia any way we look, will lose as the sanctions will leave its economy wounded and prostrate for decades to come. Even Putin's personal wealth stashed overseas is now beyond his reach.

From an autocrat's point of view, the great thing about unearned wealth based on kleptocracy is that it's easy enough to replace it all by just stealing some more from your subjects. The sanctions will make no personal difference to him, and he's never given any indication of caring in the least about the welfare of ordinary Russians.

I just worry that Ukraine will be left a desolate ruin, and will have to be rebuilt from the start. Mariupol is a case in point. Whatever victory Ukraine or even Russia gain, wil' be pyrrhic.

That was a foregone conclusion once the Ukrainians refused to comply with Putin's fantasies by welcoming their Russian "liberators" with flowers and mass surrender. The only thing that will make a difference now is Russia's defeat on the battlefield, in order to make sure Putin and his brainwashed subjects learn that there are limits to the butcher-boy tactics they've employed successfully in other recent conflicts. Anything less will only encourage more of the same in future.

As for the damage being done to Ukraine's infrastructure, by far the most important thing in the long run is the human capital in people's heads, not the factories and houses they've built up. The astonishingly rapid recovery of West Germany and Japan after WW2 illustrate this, as does South Korea's rise from utter ruination to OECD member. As long as the Ukrainians retain their skills, and they adopt the sorts of fair, predictable and honest institutions Russia has never had, they should quickly reach and surpass levels of prosperity their Russian neighbors have never known throughout Putin's kleptocratic rule. (This primacy of human capital and institutions over infrastructure is something the leaders of Nigeria and most other African countries have never understood, by the way).

From Fareed Zakaria dialogue about this war, it seems the Russians are gaining the upper hand. For Ukraine to win this war, it needs far more than what the West is providing now.

Here I am in complete agreement with you, and I think this reality is very gradually being reacted to by the USA and other Western countries. They're now sending armored vehicles, artillery and have now even managed to get the Ukrainians the Mig 29s they were asking for.

I am also guessing that Putin might resort to biological or chemicals weapons to win the war. He won't accept defeat on no grounds,

This is where Western resolve will be important. If it's made clear to Putin that using such weapons is highly likely to drag NATO members directly into the conflict (which will guarantee an even more swift and humiliating defeat), he will think twice about using them, and satisfy himself by spinning for his subjects a disguised withdrawal as a "victory". As he already has total control of the Russian media, this shouldn't be hard to do, as no one will dare contradict the official narrative.

Kingsnairaland:


Ukraine capital was surrounded with mine bombs so it is a tactic withdraw then let the Ukrainian remove the bomb by themselves and open up the Road then after Russia goes to other places Ukraine will think it free then suddenly Russia will appear again just watch m.

they have started raining on kiev