Looks like Russia's automobile production is still down more than 60% compared to its pre-war levels. Feb 2023 produced 32.5 thousand cars, compared to Feb 2022 producing 108 thousand.

To be honest, I think the West's strategy is working pretty well. Russia is good at feigning resiliency, but it's pretty clear their economy is in the toilet. They've had to take measures that would result in riots in the street if done by any prosperous nation.

Finland maintained good relations for decades only to see a country that is much further from becoming NATO being invaded by Russia "because NATO". Now the reason is suddenly Sevastopol and not NATO. Never was NATO expansion a legitimate reason for the Russian invasion. The real reason is that Russia wants something from Ukraine, most probably halting the Westernization of a closely related Slavic nation because it would threaten the Russian regime. It wouldve been better for Ukraine had it either not given away its nukes and/or joined NATO earlier. Both scenarios were unfortunately quite unrealistic

Russia is losing its geopolitical game real hard. Instead of halting NATO expansiom it gained around 1000km more NATO border. Still think NATO expansion and Sevastopol are the primary reasons? Russia has nukes, why the fk does it care about conventional war when it comes to national security?

This post was edited by Neptunus on Apr 1 2023 06:39pm

Soviets in the 80s are different from the Soviets in the 50s-70s. The negotiations paid off because the Soviet Union started to doubt its own position. Russia isnt doing so. It learned from the mistakes of the USSR

This post was edited by Neptunus on Apr 1 2023 06:43pm

Strange how "Ukraine joining NATO would have ment thousands of kilometers of additional NATO border for Russia to defend, obviously a huge threat that they had to nip in the bud" is accepted as a justificiation for the Russian invasion, yet the exact same argument is completely shrugged off in the case of Finland. It's almost as if this talking point was disingenuous from the get go, but what do I know.

Lol it's really funny how ignorant you guys are, a year in and you still don't even know what to argue against because all you have read is low-brow western news about what's happening and your version of "the Russian side" is a small quote followed by 10 paragraphs on why it's ridiculous and wrong. Or maybe some YouTuber who condensed it into some pretty graphics for you.

Crazy how even in modern times you people still behave like the peasants the church used to rile up to go on crusades.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/russia-ukraine-war/putin-explains-how-finland-sweden-membership-in-nato-different-from-ukraines/2627019

Like why even talk about this stuff if you clearly don't care enough to try and learn about it? Just baffling.




Are you serious? Lol can you point to another nuclear power that doesn't concern itself with conventional warfare?
Where do you get this stuff? Are they just gut feelings that you don't think through fully before posting?

This post was edited by DizzyBusiness on Apr 1 2023 07:56pm

The territorial disputes were created by Russia. Crimea was Ukrainian territory ever since it left the Soviet Union. I do agree that from outside the Ukrainian measures against Russian language might be a little too harsh at times considering some ppl identify as Russophone Ukrainians primarily, but no evidence against widespread persecution exists and neither of us really know the full picture.

You have to also keep in mind there was a separatist population who was willing to take arms against their countrymen and they were supplied by Russia. There are also plenty of Russophones fighting for Ukraine now. Russian language had become an imperialist tool to manipulate Ukraine to serve Russian interests so measures had to also be taken against it. It's a conflicted topic indeed, but none of this ever justifies full scale invasion and war.

Russification was a thing in the past and it certainly seems to be a thing in the present, evident by the whole "Russian world" rhetoric. Add the antifascist twist to it and you'll have Russian patriots flocking to relive the "Great Patriotic war".

No theyre not gut feelings. The nuclear deterrent is just so strong that the major nuclear states have always been warring through proxies to avoid invoking nuke use. I didnt say they dont need conventional warfare, but any nuke state with icbms can just say "we'll nuke you if you touch us" and nobody will touch them.

This post was edited by Neptunus on Apr 2 2023 02:46am

Tiny specks on the map like North Korea are still going despite tons of sanctions and Kim is still eating caviar.



It's different because Western woke "progressives" have demanded that no negotiations can take place as long as Putin is president of the Russian federation and Zelensky has signed a law that forbids peace negotiations with Russia https://nypost.com/2022/10/04/zelensky-signs-law-declaring-talks-with-putin-impossible/

Get your facts strait pls and back your arguments up with sources instead of giving your opinion.



If you can point out an important Russian naval base in Finland and can inform us that Finland has been part of Russia for a very long time (like Ukraine) then you have a point.

Feel free to add sources, if you can

So now you've moved from the sanctions aren't doing anything to the sanctions aren't personally impacting Putin.

Do you ever get tired of moving those goal posts?

Naval base in Finland? Here you go: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porkkala_Naval_Base

Finland also belonged to Russia for the while 19th century. Russia (USSR) also invaded Finland in WW2 but failed to occupy it. It would be stupid for Finland to trust a Russia that invades its neighbours.

It's also different because when you compare Cold War negotiations, you forget that the last 10 years are more akin to 50s and 60s where tensions were rising (Cuban missile crisis etc) than to the 80s which saw the cooldown of the conflict, led to the Perestroika and culminated in the dissolution of the USSR. The Soviets themselves were willing to back down on the communist bs.

Currently theres not much to negotiate about, Russia is constantly elevating tension and irresponsibly flaunting the nuke card every now and then and you still wanna be an apologist? Negotiations with Russian terms would mean yielding to expansionism. I understand your point that NATO is a military threat to Russia, but the correct measures is to just strengthen borders like they plan to do with Finland, and not invade a country. They invasion of Ukraine is much more complex than just "NATO scary".

This post was edited by Neptunus on Apr 2 2023 04:29am

you will obviously ignore this again, but the "important naval base" talking point, your moronic "justification" to murder women and children, is completely debunked by the fact that russia already annexed the whole of crimea in 2014 - including the sevastopol base.

so it makes no sense whatsoever to list that as a "reason" for the 2022 invasion, broken kremlin bot.