I am not answerable to you. If you inject yourself in by quoting me and expect me to explain an idea don't be dissapointed if I refuse.

If you insist on not doing the research yourself perhaps this will help you better understand what is the widely accepted series of events that have transpired.

"Putin’s Sept. 21 speech indicates strategic changes that were almost certainly agreed to during his discussion with China’s Xi Jinping at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. Initially, Putin’s aims were maximalist: His “SMO” was meant to demilitarize and “denazify” Ukraine, per his Feb. 24 war speech. Russia’s goals were identical when Putin expressed them on May 9, although he was unwilling to commit to a mobilization that would stress the Russian state. Now, however, the “denazification” and demilitarization rhetoric is gone: “Novorossiya,” the Russian imperial term for Ukraine’s non-Crimean south, has returned."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3659420-putins-final-goal-in-ukraine-has-demonstrably-shifted-as-has-his-escalation-calculus/amp/

If I can contrast Putins war aims to Israel it may also help.
Having vague and obfuscated goals, even going as far as to popularise an obscure word "denazify", is a way of masking any shortcomings in the end result.
The opposite would be Israels war aims.
Destroy Hamas' capacity.
Recover hostages.

Straightforward and clear. Anyone can judge the outcome against those stated objectives.

When the goal is to "denazify" an entire nation of some 40 million people, it is so vague that its extremely difficult to judge any outcome.
Perfect for optics if in fact your miltary fails in several key battles.

As for what I see happening here. You quoted me. You wanted me to explain a widely accepted fact. I refused and you didn't relent.
Your childishly writing PS in a reply and even keeping score of your self determined "wins" on a niche gaming sub forum.

There is no debate in good faith if you as long as your not able to concede any shortcomings of Russia in any aspect.
You could work on that.
Equally, don't. I really don't care. Just forgo involving me in your crusade of anti Ukrainian propaganda and childish point scoring.

I'd appreciate that.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Nov 20 2023 08:21am

Marilyn MacRoe

You now went at extreme length, going as far as trying to go at me ad hominem all to dodge a very simple queston:

What were the three goals proclaimed by the Russians when they invaded, how were they defined and how have they changed?



A simple "I do not know" answer will suffice. Thank you.

This post was edited by Malopox on Nov 20 2023 08:43am

You almost got the joke

"Please don't make me a joke. End the interview with what I believe. I don't mind making jokes, but I don't want to look like one. I want to be an artist, an actress with integrity." © Marilyn Monroe

I am not answerable to you. Although I have provided two sources that clearly explain the position. They even include quotes from none other than your poster boy Vlad.

Their goals have changed. Its a fact.
Feel free to prove otherwise or don't quote me. It's fairly simple.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Nov 20 2023 09:24am

1) You started out by saying that "their goals got changed as they got their asses handed to them". I personally disagree with this statement as per my understanding of events is that Russians pulled back as there was a peace treaty initialed by Zelensky on which he reneged at the behest of Boris Johnson. Nevertheless I kept my opinion to myself and asked you to clarify what those goals were and how they changed.

2) Then you have provided a link to a literal Ukrainian psyop article written by one of their main propagandists - Mr. Andrusiv. His article fails to mention the 3 stated goals and how they have changed.

3) Then you provided an article to The Hill. I'm not sure what is the point of this article as it again - it fails to mention the 3 stated goals and how they are defined or how they changed.

4) Here is an article from Moscow Times - a media that has been banned in Russia quoting Mr. Lavrov in December stating that goals have not changed. You can look up how Russians define those goals including the goal of "denazification" which triggers you so much. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/12/28/moscow-to-achieve-ukraine-goals-thanks-to-patience-lavrov-a79830

I see you are getting emotional and annoyed as you should be.

You are being asked a very simple question that can be googled off a wikipedia article in 3 minutes, yet you persevere in your arrogance not to yield a feet of your hill you are dying on right now for everyone to see.

This post was edited by Malopox on Nov 20 2023 09:39am

Prox1m1ty when he gets called out for his nonsense:

Western assessments and ascribing Russia their own goals is nonsensical and the whole point of it is to ascribe them some 'hard' target which they didn't meet so then we can continuously frame everything they do as a fail. Reading ISW/British Intel is basically exactly what they do time after time as to create this illusion that Russia is losing because it's failing to meet goal after goal.

You're not answerable but at least be honest enough to say that the Russians didn't publicly provide hard goals. No where did they say they will take city X by this date or whatever. Goals are also a spectrum, with maximalist desires probably being taking full control of Ukraine through a new Russian puppet government on the one side and on the other side complete loss of all Russian influence with NATO gaining complete control of Ukraine, with bases, NATO membership, etc.

Forgive me if I don't believe what comes out of Lavrovs mouth. If you do that's on you.
There is no emotion on my part other than amusement in your denial of an obvious fact.
So far you've accused me of racism, bigotry, ad hominem and being emotional. None of which are true

I'll say it again for you. Russias goals have changed due to defeats in strategic battles.
Hostomel airfield, Russian retreat from Kherson, Russian retreat from Kharkiv oblast.
You are aware of these events and how they affected Russias strategic outcomes? Are you not?

This is not my opinion. It is a fact. Whether or not it's too painful for you to concede is again, a you problem. Please deal with that. I am not interested in indulging your denial.