To paraphrase Charles de Gaulle, Western Europe and the US will fight to the last drop of Ukrainian blood (while making sure not to increase their citizens’ gas prices by embargoing Russian gas exports).
The US seems capable of weathering large sanctions against Russia. Can Europe? Will the people of Europe stand up and be "economic soldiers" by taking one on the chin with gas prices or cold winter, in order to fight the Russians?
I wouldn't underestimate individuals. Question is will businesses and politicians in Germany ... there is a lot of EU money tied up in Russian banks and a lot of EU investment in Russia.
also there is always American gas (not sure if this is realistic wrt to volume as those who claimed that Nordstream2-critcism was an American prop to force us to buy US gas) or perhaps we have to rethink nuclear energy.
- aggression of foreign countries regularly happen, did you remember Iraq with the lie of mass destruction/chemical/biological weapons? Afghanistan with the lie that it protect Osama Bin laden? Libya and Syria in a more "European" way (witch means a bit less publicly announced, with more discretion and low information). Ukraine is just the last one in a long row;
- in all west, and almost all the world, protests against neo-liberal govs have spread to a point that many fear (counter)putsch by angry crowds, now they are almost silenced;
- EU, after decades of push and pull, was about to consider Russian Fed. a partner, now they are back under the NATO umbrella witch actually is more harmful than useful for us Europeans...
- China is the actual winner: with Russia blocked by the wast China is it's sole strong partner option, and for China that means the ability to access far more natural resources from Russia and also far more hi tech military gear and skill, perhaps to a point of being able to technologically surpass USA, a thing so far impossible;
- with the war, hyperinflation, energy issues etc became "because of the war" instead of "to push the Green New Deal".
Long story short: most government of the world need a war, most people of the world need peace. But as always most people are unable to see their own enemy, not the other peer with a different uniform on the opposite side of the front but the one well at their own army head.
This very post is part of that propaganda: asking people to fight an in-winnable, and already obviously lost war, is asking to damage themselves for the sake of the west. Much like what happen in WWII in UE, where "the allied" decide to destroy anything, their own soldiers life included, to face devastated countries far easier to be politically conquered thereafter. If Ukrainian do want the good for their own country since it's evident that the war is lost they should not fight but instead welcome the winner and do their best to became part of it's establishment, doing so let them protect their country in the immediate from war destruction, in the short terms in sovereignty terms (anyone can oppress, but you can oppress more a devastated and defeated enemy than one that's welcome you), and in mean/long term sabotaging the invader from the inside.
Did you see colorful revolution? The so called "Arab springs"? Di you try too see the cui prodest (who benefit from them)? Well, now the plot is essentially the very same and the fact that the blackbird is actually black does not means that the crow is of another color. The very first thing to do to win a war is understand what's your enemy. The enemy actually is at our head as of the one at Russian head. It have a name: neoliberalism. The same people that try a nazi putsch in the USA in the '30s (JP Morgan -led), the same one that help original nazi even when the WWII was already started (from IBM to Standard Oil), the same mind behind "Operation Unthinkable" and "Operation Dropshot". The same who kill millions of Americans and British soldiers for their own profit.
The idea that one should accept being under a madman, a dictator and cede all your current political rights with no fighting seems like a shitty way to go, notwithstanding your opi iin that neoliberalism is just as bad as crony dictatorship.
The fact that Putin is aggravated and that Russian troops are stacking casualties, seems to counter your claim that the war isn't worth fighting.
That's true if actual Ukrainian gov is a Democratic ones, witch is not. Actual gov is a puppet-government of literally actors turned politicians [1] probably planted by some neoliberals (especially seen the links between various Ukrainians and Austrian neo-nazi AND clerical politician and businessman) with a bit of propaganda.
Actually Ukraine was spoiled of anything by a small oligarchy that before was Russian backed and after western/neoliberals backed and both equally steal anything they can. For Ukrainian Citizens a western puppet-government or a eastern one does not really change much, BUT a physically destroyed country for what it remain instead of a just badly shaped one makes a big difference.
That's the same for Kazakhstan, Kazakhs people do not see any difference before and after the failed coup and that was not much start to ignite because of Russian evil actors nor western backed evil actors but just because of skyrocketed energy prices, skyrocketed because the local dictatorship decide to follow the western neoliberals ending price-enforced prices to switch to a free market:
https://www.energyintel.com/download?issueId=0000017e-2c65-d...
The very same move by EU commission that skyrocketed the EU gas and electricity prices, blaming Russia perhaps to avoid much social unrest.
In the actual state of things Ukrainian can fight back better under Russian Federation NOT as a defeated nation but as a nation that freely decide to join and because of that demand and pretend a small freedom, slowly working from the inside to elicit more. The alternative is just something good for USA and UK who benefit from a long conflict because they fortify their grip on EU and justify they big internal economical mess with another war. All, of course, against our own people interest. Not differently than Putin propaganda inside Russian Fed. to ensure a better grip on his people against his own people interest.
Long story short: who benefit from that war are just the various form of dictatorship in charge in various part of the world, western world formal (but not substantial) democracies, more and more formal dictatorship themselves, who loose are the people of all various nations, more or less.
[1] not joking see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servant_of_the_People the plot and and who made it, Vladimir Zelenskiy, actual President, was the main actor, "the President", Serhiy Trofimov (First Deputy Head of the Administration) the executive producer, even Ivan Bakanov actual head of Ukrainian intelligence was the lawyer of Quarter 95 studio!
They're banning Russia from SWIFT and Germany is now sending 1,000 antitank and 500 stinger missiles to Ukraine. The latter will kill a lot of Russians and save a lot of Ukrainians, even though Germans aren't standing in the line of fire.
It is pretty unlikely that Russia won't retaliate economically and I can't see any way this continues and people would support EU governments sending money to Russia for energy.
Provided Putin's government doesn't crumble soon the gas exports are getting shut down one way or another, it just hasn't happened today. Probably not the kind of thing you want to turn off with the flick of a switch without giving people time to prepare -- there are probably many thousands of workers around the EU working out plans for when the Russian gas gets turned off.
I am quite confused at the naivety of some of the US / EU social media posters here and elsewhere - it seems like many buy into the propaganda that an experienced military power like Russia doesn't know how to fight a war? That too against a weaker military and an untrained civilian army? One should really ponder what the end goal of such misinformation is ...
Indian generals are already commenting on how the Russian strategy on Ukraine seems to be to precisely avoid urban warfare - "Psychological warfare, avoiding casualties: Why Russians aren’t storming Ukraine’s cities" - https://theprint.in/defence/psychological-warfare-avoiding-c...
If the internet comments romanticising the current conflict and encouraging civilian to pick up arms and become "freedom fighters" are anything to go by, our generation seems to be the least prepared for war of any kind ...
Have you not seen any examples in history of "civilian freedom fighters" (there's an Arabic word for that, I think.........) getting a lot over an "experienced military"?
Victory of civilian militias, guerilla groups, etc. against imperial powers is usually because occupation of the former's territory is a sunk cost for the latter. America, Haiti, Cuba, Vietnam, etc. are not really comparable to this present conflict, in which the imperial power is adjacent both in terms of land and history.
Exactly. Many are missing the point that Russia is not trying to annexe Ukraine, but have 2 goals - ideally do a regime change that favours Russia's security concerns or destabilise the country and make it such a shit hole that even the west avoids it. The west on the other hand want to prolong this conflict because it knows that the longer the people are in a state of warfare, the more the people will turn against the Russian invaders (provided ofcourse, their local support and propaganda weakens).
True. But I am the kind of person who prefers to hear the truth than be fed false hope. False hope is the easiest way to demoralise someone when they face reality.
This is clearly advice for civilian people who intend to fight in any case. There is obviously a threat to life here, so each person is empowered to make decisions based on this knowledge. I would add to defensive strategy:
1. Communications - Ideally a radio, or visual (i.e. hand signals). This way you can ask for help, supplies, or warn people of an oncoming threat. The better your communication, the better you can coordinate your efforts.
2. Choke points - Not just for vehicles, but also for personnel. Ideally you would have some advantage over the choke points, such as height. You are unlikely to have a long-distance advantage over a trained soldier.
3. Disable infrastructure - As the thread suggests, bridges, roads, trains, paths - anything you find useful, your enemy also finds useful.
4. Identification - Ideally you need to be able to quickly identify one another, and potentially somebody who is not one of you.
For offence strategy:
1. Petrol + <censored> (search engine) - It is possible to make a highly flammable substance that sticks to anything it touches. This is highly effective against personnel.
2. Burning barricade - For pathways or alleyways that cannot be easily blocked off, start a large tire fire. This location will essentially be unpassable until the fire is extinguished. Tire and oil fires are notoriously difficult to put out.
3. Sabotage - Sabotage resources the enemy may want or need (but make sure your allies are aware of this). Food/water can be poisoned, fuel can be contaminated.
4. Weapons - Don't waste time aiming too much. Fire in the location of the enemy and move location. A single shot, then move to a random location. The goal is to make them take cover and remain in cover. If you can, coordinate it such that as one person/groups moves, the others provide covering fire. You will need a lot of ammunition, even if you are highly conserving it.
Tactics to be aware of:
1. Flanking - If you are successfully holding an enemy in a location, they or other support are likely trying to flank your position. Know all entry points to your location in advance and have exit routes planned.
2. Large weapons - If you have an enemy held in a location and they are not able to flank you, the other option is using a large weapon. This could be a tank, launcher, air support, shelling, etc. Ideally you retreat before this happens.
General points:
1. Food/water - You will not operate for long without these. At least 2 litres of water a day and at least 2000 kcal a day. Ideally 4 litres of water and 4000 kcal.
2. Sanitation - You need to maintain basic hygiene. Disease will make you ineffective incredibly quickly. Shit when you need to, a common mistake is to wait for days for a toilet to be available.
3. Medical supplies - Ideally you have some medical supplies on hand. Most likely injury is to be shot or hit with shrapnel, most penetration wounds will not kill you. Blood loss is your greatest immediate concern to deal with.
4. Morale - Make sure people are paired up at least - long periods of solitude are awful for mental well-being. Be prepared for nothing to happen for a long time, then lots to happen all of a sudden. Maintain alertness and always assume the enemy is watching.
This basically asking Ukrainian to die with protracted war. This book has been written without consideration of Russia tactics. It is predominantly to cater American invasions. I suggest reading up what happen in Grozny. Invasion of Eastern Germany back in WW2 by red army is also a good indicator how Putin can do. Currently a newer tactic is to killed the people in leadership roles which was used effectively by Soviet in Stalingrad vs Nazi Germany. USA did use it in Iraq with their poker cards. Currently, Putin is rumored to do so with 10K Chechen fighters. Unlike American of trying to preserve the leadership and going for surrender, Russia historically is to switch leadership. Hence, decapitating Zelensky would be the most likely outcome in coming weeks.
There is no question the Ukranian people would fight a resistance already, the colonel is just trying to get them not be killed early and achieve the desired outcome.
(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:
(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
They probably need an "I'm a militia" armband or something, but it's not inconcievable they're protected under the Conventions.
(6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
Ukraine has claimed to have caught Russians disguised as Ukrainian soldiers, which I think actually qualifies as a true war crime under international treaty.
I think you are right. The Hague conventions precludes the use of your enemy’s flag or uniform. The distinction between some war crimes and some ruses de guerre is somewhat blurry (for example, doing the same thing with a warship would not be a crime as long as you identify yourself properly before attacking).
Correction: You are wary of taking the advice. The advice itself seems useful and accurate. Given you are willing to actively fight for your land, here are the steps to be as effective as possible.
And HN philosophy table aside, I find it offensive you throw the word "terrorist" in the conversation of Ukrainians defending their homes from an active invasion by a foreign power. Terrorist would be a Ukrainian bombing a grocery store in Moscow, not fighting back at a tank in their street.
I didn't claim Ukrainians taking arms are terrorists, just that they can be seen like that by the Russian army. There had been already many cases of someone's freedom fighters being someone else's terrorists.
Russians are not exactly going to care either way....
They literally are calling Ukrainians Nazis, and claiming they are committing genocide on unarmed Russian civilians... They are dehumanizing Ukrainians so the Russian soldiers can justify killing Ukrainians...
Either flee, or fight/resist/help... Don't think that you and your family can just hide peacefully in your home -- with no weapons -- and not be raped, abused, murdered, or otherwise harmed. It's war. Military tactics have made them view you as less than human (or monsters) so they can rationalize not treating you as such. You might not encounter such mistreatment by the first group that finds you, but eventually someone will take out their pain and suffering on you.
Run for your life, or fight/resist/help, as your personal ethics and situation will allow.
This isn't a dehumanization tactic, it's a fearmongering one. They're calling the Ukranian government pro-nazi because they're playing on the fact that it legitimized ultranationalists who want to ethnically cleanse Russians from the east, and their response to large neo-nazi paramilitaries like the Azov Battalion, was to give them official support and incorporate them into the state, nazi symbolism and all.
Of course, Russia doesn't actually give a shit about 'oppressed ethnic Russians', and has turned a blind eye to its own ultranationalists going across the border to train and fight. But this isn't the type of propaganda you think it is. It justifies the fight to conscripts who were lied to and told they'll be participating in brief peacekeeping.
Particularly galling considering the Ukrainian president is Jewish, his grandfather fought the Nazis in the Red Army and lost a great many members of his extended family to the Holocaust:
Even more galling, the fact that Vladimir Putin has been funding neo-nazi and assimilated groups like the Rassemlement National or Eric Zemmour in France, or the AfD in Germany.
Nazism (in understanding of the Russian propaganda) is not equal to antisemitism. To see the used pattern replace Jews with ethnic Russians and Holocaust with 8 years of Donbas shelling. They literally tried to paint the Donbas war as an act of genocide from the Ukrainian army, though it's hard to call them successful in this regard.
This is propaganda BS. The Russian government tries to paint itself a protector of Ukrainian people oppressed by a small number of neo-Nazi and the puppet US-controlled government. Luckily, it's not only words. Not only they a really careful to minimize civilian collateral damage, they haven't even bombed living quarters of the Ukrainian army on the first day of the invasion in the hope of increasing rate of defections.
Yes, they call the Ukrainian government Nazis. They are avoiding civilians because it's already a very borderline world way. If Russia throws one nuke, or engaged in blatant war crimes, the west would be more willing to be involved
Why are you presenting an opinion of a far-right marginal politician as an official position of the Russian government? And why do you engage in dehumanizing tactics? No, they are not devils in flesh who can not wait but to perform some war crimes for love of it and do not do it only because of fear for the Western reaction. They try to win over the loyalist parts of the Ukrainian population and to lessen dissent in Russia.
It's dehumanizing Russia state a fact that Russia is dehumanizing Ukrainians?
I can't follow your logic.
I linked to a BBC clip that was heard by hundreds of thousands of people (or more). While he might not be Putin himself, he is a prominent politician in Russia. If you believe Russia has free and fair elections, then he must be influential of a large number of people, and even if he's "far right", he's certainly not "marginal".
Putin himself has also made statements that Ukraine is committing Genocide of Russians [0].. so does that make Putin far-right as well? Are Putin's comments even the official position of the Russian government? He is, after all, just a
"politician" himself....
I'm not claiming "Russians" are war criminals just looking for an opportunity, I'm saying that if you're in a country being invaded... do not count on the invading forces to follow international conventions and treat you like an unarmed combatant when they see you... While most might -- you only have one life, and it only takes one soldier to end it. I would suggest people in such a situation flee, or resist.... not sit around and hope that soldiers in war will act like good human beings to an unarmed innocent bystander.
> Luckily, it's not only words. Not only they a really careful to minimize civilian collateral damage, they haven't even bombed living quarters of the Ukrainian army on the first day of the invasion in the hope of increasing rate of defections.
This is bullshit. It’s like when the US role play the white knight and say they don’t kill civilians. War is bloody and confusing. If you drop bombs, you are certain to kill people, some of them without wanting to. If you start a war, you own it, blood and all. Stop being such an hypocrite.
No, I do not. But I detest the dehumanizing tactic wildly used by both sides. You can easily verify how the Russian army acts on the ground in respect to civilians using a ton of videos shot by Ukrainian citizens.
Random Russian soldiers not being rabid beasts does not put them on the good side. It just means that even in Russia, not everyone is either purely evil or good.
But they have so much restraint. Commendable. If only their humanism had prevented them to invade a sovereign country without even declaring war properly.
Not sure what this guy's credentials are, but here he tries to give advice to the people who have i) overthrown a corrupt government with little but baseball bats, tires, and home-made molotovs ii) stopped and maybe even reversed the progress of what has been hailed as the "2nd army in the world".
He retired as a Major in the US Army (he’s also a Colonel in the California State Guard, but that's less of a qualification) after 24 years of infantry service, including two combat tours in Iraq, and he is the chair of urban warfare studies for the Modern War Institute at the US Military Academy (West Point). [0]
So, when it comes to urban warfare, he probably has some idea what he is talking about.
I was not trying to say he wasn't trustworthy, I am sure he means well. (plus, I am certainly not qualified to judge his advice)
What I am thinking about is this: how confident can you generally be with applying your expertise/giving advice, when you yourself learn about the circumstances from secondary sources? I mean, he's not on the ground, but he confidently describes very specific barricade shapes, etc. If I were a naive protester, I could set up these barricades — and immediately interfere with the regular army, with movement of our own troops, etc.
> how confident can you generally be with applying your expertise/giving advice, when you yourself learn about the circumstances from secondary sources?
How do doctors know about diseases they haven't had themselves?
Someone who's experienced one specific conflict, even first hand, may know less than someone who's studied a range of conflicts and derived and war-gamed doctrine from what they saw.
1) You don't fight an army the same way you protest your government. Yes there was gunfire, fighting and massacre during Euromaidan, but fighting riot police (most of whom were not shooting the protestors with live ammunition) is nothing like fighting an army that's coming in with assault rifles, tanks, apcs, air strikes, etc.
2) That's a massive accomplishment by the armed forces of Ukraine, but it is still useful to advise civilians and make them better prepared in case the fight gets to that point. They weren't handing out assault rifles to civilians for the lulz. I'm sure there are a lot of people among them who have no fighting experience.
From his twitter bio: Chair of Urban Warfare Studies, Modern War Institute(@warinstitute)| Colonel (CA) | @MilWritersGuild | Author, Connected Soldiers
> stopped and maybe even reversed the progress of what has been hailed as the "2nd army in the world". Dunno, wish I had his self-confidence.
I also wish I had self-confidence to say anything that suggests that Ukraine reversed progress of German troops. It was Soviet Union that did that in an offensive which started shortly after the battle of Stalingrad. Ukraine was under Nazi occupation throughout majority of the war with one major nationalist insurgency group fighting both Nazis and Soviets simultaneously.
Twitter does a great job of elevating expertise signaling individuals, especially with long threads where mentions of "past experiences" and other name dropping dramatically boosts one's exposure.
As a reaction to floods in Indonesia, the USA has sent several helicopters as aid, the Germany several motor boats, and the USSR a truckload of "Swimming 101" textbooks.
We've got, like, 99% of media talking about this, could we please avoid it on technical resource? As much as I love reading opinions of tech people, I'd still rather not see these kind of disputes here. Sorry if I offended anyone.
I cancelled my subscription to The Economist after it basically turned into the Covid news in 2020 and was offering little value over what I could get anywhere.
I agree with you that if this goes on, HN needs to stop talking about it, or at least scale back to rare instances where something materially new happens. I think there's some room in the first couple days for these stories to dominate though, it's kn everybody's mind and it's tough to just shut it out entirely
there are so many links to chose from on HN, I don't know how people can be so petty and lament on what others engage with. If the frontpage doesn't have enough there is the new posts section that have some interesting things that usually stays hidden. it might not get the same volume of discussion but it's still better than complaining that others aren't being absorbed by identical content at all times.
HN is pretty good at absorbing divisive mind killer topics, at most they get 1 popular post or 2. Not saying it's not annoying, but the fault is on the media ecosystem with its fatigue-inducing non-stop coverage, HN just touches and go.
You should see reddit, the whole site is flooded with the topic for the 3rd day straight now, even cats subreddits for crying out loud.
I think the best advice would be to surrender and avoid pointless loss of life. You only have one life, is it really worth throwing away so your elite rules instead of your neighbors' elite?
My grandpa was held in a concentration camp in Poland (red triangle). He escaped, got picked up by British intelligence, went back in, and helped more prisoners escape on his way back out. His last words to me were "give 'em hell." But you do you, I guess.
That’s right. I was born In Odessa a city in a country I proudly visited more then 15 years ago to see the apartment block where I was born. Today the picture of the steps that’s been the poster of my Facebook profile for a decade is guarded by a Ukrainian tank. I’m happy to see that modern day freedom fighter Ukrainians are standing up for democratic principals and what I was bright to this country to escape from. It’s a difficult situation. I admire they’re courage.
Don't claim that fighting to defend your family, city, and nation is irrational, even when the odds are against you.
Some people have strong values, that they're willing to risk their life for even a chance to preserve. Some people don't. But if you're not, for God's sake, don't spend your time trying to dissuade and condemn those who are.
For sure, and I see now how it reads as me saying doing so is irrational. That wasn't my intention though.
I just meant that comparing this to how someone's grandfather fought the Nazis is BS, and the people who chose to not fight shouldn't be judged by that false comparison.
Some people chose not to put "their country" before their own lives, and that's fine with me.
Nah, I don't think folks should be mocked, that's not productive. Resistance can take many forms, and you'll note that I didn't mention "fighting." He was a soldier before his unit was captured, but that wasn't where he was most effective: what he did was pay attention, strategize, and help others escape with him.
Resist. Whether that involves a Kalashnikov, or simply shitting in a water supply, resist. I won't judge you if you don't. It's your internal critic that you're going to spend the rest of your life with.
There are cases when you might be right, but your advice does not apply to Russian invasions.
The millions of people who have lived in the countries from Eastern Europe, all of which have been invaded by the Russians at the end of WWII, have learned that being ruled by the Russian government, either directly or indirectly through their servants that are installed as supposedly independent local governments is far worse than being ruled by any other elite.
Not only the Russian elites have always been greedier than other elites, but they were not content to steal your assets, they also forced you to say all the time that you are happy about it, which was even more annoying than being dispossessed.
> is it really worth throwing away so your elite rules instead of your neighbors' elite?
When the difference is between your elected government and an invading regime that's well known for being violently oppressive even against their own people - yes. Also, the Ukrainian people can easily see the how life goes for people who stayed in DNR/LNR.
You either fight totalitarianism or flee it; accepting it is a really lousy option.
I think this sort of behavior could only be advocated by somebody who doesn't understand actual tyranny; if you think that you're a slave to the 'elite of the modern West', than you have no perspective what being a slave is really like. Nor why anybody would fight against it.
People thought they would be spared if they surrendered to the Nazis. That sure turned out well for them huh? There are many situations in life where it's not worth fighting. Fending off foreign aggression is not one of those times. If they're invading, they have absolutely no care for your safety and they have no higher authority to fear for anything they do to you.
Genocide was an inherent part of Nazi ideology, though, and the NSDAP had openly declared its contempt for many of the people it conquered. There hasn't been anything comparable to Hitler or Nazism in any of Russia's wars.
Raphael Lemkin (who coined the word genocide) recognized the Ukrainian Holodomor and applied the term 'genocide' in his 1953 article "Soviet Genocide in Ukraine".
The Russians have murdered much more people in the Eastern European countries that they have occupied than the Nazis ever have. If the Nazis had not been defeated relatively quickly they might have killed much more, but as it happened, the victorious Russians had much more years available to kill everybody who was believed as able to oppose them. Totaled over all the Eastern Europe and the various minorities of Soviet Union, many millions of people, mostly those being the formerly well-educated professionals of the occupied countries, have been either killed immediately or imprisoned, and most have died during detention.
The only difference between the Nazis and the Russians has been that the Russians were more careful to hide many of their actions and as former allies of USA, unlike the Nazis, they have not been the subjects of so many movies or novels describing their crimes during WWII and during the first decades after WWII.
I agree that I was referring to the behavior of the former USSR and of the earlier Russian empire, so to the last few centuries until Gorbachev, not to the present Russia.
Nevertheless, unlike Germany, which has apologized publicly many times for what the Nazis have done, and which has paid consistent reparations for a part of the victims of the Nazis, neither Putin nor any other Russian leader has ever apologized for any past actions of Russia. Paying reparations would be even more unconceivable for the Russians, who continue to claim that they have "liberated" the people whom they have enslaved after WWII.
I have seen nothing in the public speeches of Putin that would indicate that he would ever behave in relation with an invaded territory differently than it was traditional for the Soviet Union leaders or for the earlier Russian tsars.
Until the man himself would say and act otherwise, in a credible way, the only rational assumption is that an invading Russia will behave like always in the past.
Maybe not the "best", but good advise nonetheless - sometimes if you have no way out, it's just preferable to stay and fight. Most times, it is better to run because war is ugly and you best leave it to those trained in it. Safeguarding your family should be your top priority, and for a civilian a political fight later is always the better option.
Yes you only have one life, and you will arrive at the end of it and all you can do with your final thoughts is think about what the point of it all was. Did you simply exist, or did you make some small difference?
Everyone has his own priorities and point of view but I think the only way a life is "thrown away" is if a person does nothing at all with it.
Hahaha elite Russians like Putin and friends will be so glad to extract all the life of slavery you so gladly gave them if you prepare to surrender. Pro-tip: newspaper rolled up in your pants to protect your knees and legs. Having to get down in a big rush with no kneepads gets old and bloody very quickly.
