Mattias

I'll give it a shot though I am not even remotely qualified.
First off to address a previously used example - Japan. My spouse is Japanese.  I studiously avoid discussion of ww2. The Japanese version is significantly different than what I understand to be Japan's actions in ww2.   Japan was demilitarized, but never forced to really teach generation after generation of the atrocities committed.  It is still a very xenophobic society, though it does a lot of good humanitarian work around the globe.
As previously noted, no one is going to occupy Russia.  No one is going to force them to face their history.    So how do I see this going down?
In 1991 Russia had a brief moment to have its own version of a Prague spring.  It chose a different path. They allowed a criminal mob to run their country while they fed off stories of their greatness.  Meanwhile the mob ransacked their country.  Ukraine has torn the cover off just how decrepit the nation has become, and western sanctions have removed any chance of trying to patchwork it.  Russia has in effect inflicted the Morgenthau plan on itself.  China is going to be too busy dealing with its own demographic iceberg.  Russia is on its own while its industry is collapsing.  There is nothing left to rebuild a military, hell they are gonna have a hard enough time just fulfilling their basic needs.  Western companies could care less about politics, they are all about risk and reward.  Russia blew that equation out in the spring.  Western investment won't be seen at scale for quite a long time. The country is huge and will have no airline transportation system to speak of.  Maybe they'll have enough industry to keep the rail lines going.  Russia has the potential to become a massive humanitarian disaster. 
Russia won't be Ukraine's problem after this war.  Well not as currently viewed.  It will likely however evolve into an anarchic criminal mess even worse than now so strict border controls will be necessary to safeguard Ukrainian society.
In the US we have this debate now on what has been called critical race theory.  Whichever side one stands on the issue, both agree it is an issue of how you teach history.  The US is a really young country, if we are still debating our history, it is folly to think we'll somehow reeducate Russians into a different view.  The Russians will have to do that themselves and it won't happen in any of our lifetimes.
In a sense they are already being demilitarized.  As Steve noted, the army is trashed and there is no rebuilding it.  They simply don't have the resources, knowledge or societal base to do it.  Russia will be the first 3rd world country with nukes. Hopefully we can simply buy them from them and let them sort out their mess without the risk of nuclear stupidity like we have now.

Ok, so again, what exactly are you saying.  It appears that it is that Russia has a history of genocide - both cultural and physical?  And that somehow justifies...something?  You seem to be in line with kraze's direction, or are you just FYI-ing?  I can pretty much read between the lines - not a lot of nuance here, so let me respond:
Ok, I am going to call you out on this because this is just dumb, and frankly a bad direction this thread has been going since you and few others got particularly vocal.
1.  You are being pointed and vague at the same time - you pull out weird "facts" but place no context nor really any conclusions.  This is the playbook of many extremist organizations - "I am not saying anything racists but here are some statistics about [insert whoever], just saying"
2.  The "facts" you do pull on are a) pulled from Twitter echo chambers, and b) taken in isolation.  For example, if we are going to reach back into the early 20th century, or 19th century, find me a European power that did not have a history of genocidal behaviour.  By your logic we need to scrub Belgium because of the Congo, Spain for South America, UK, France and the US for North America, and  more than a few other really bad examples of behaviour that Europeans outgrew - including the Ukrainians themselves - https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/the-1919-pogroms-ukraine-and-poland-one-hundred-years-later.  Cherry picking facts and stringing them to somehow make you argument for you is a long standing tactic by extremist organizations.
3.  You dance around it but you are in fact setting up conditions and in effect lobbying for a Russian genocide - as a solution to a genocide.  That is beyond a bad idea - it is phenomenally immoral.  I am sure as you are a Twitter expert on genocide you know the pre-conditions really well.
- Treat an entire society as a homogenous group. "They are all the same, no exceptions"
- Reinforce narratives that re-frame that society as culpable and non-human - plenty of that going on here.  Main effort here is to assign blame on a society, which you have now frames as homogenous and less than human.
- Frame a problem that can only be solved through the removal of the now-subhuman, blamed, homogenous society.
- Pretend to pursue policies that attempt to find way to do this with less violence, largely to reinforce a veneer of legitimacy - "we should deport them all".
- Find reasons why that won't work "they will still want to invade us in 5-10 years, no matter what"
- Deductively lead yourselves to the Wannsee Conference solution set - but hey you tried.
WTF?!
Firstly none of what you, or anyone that seems to be promoting line this is supported by international or humanitarian law - we can (and should) hold a nation state responsible for warcrimes and illegal invasions.  We do not arrest every Russian who crosses a border after the war and charge them for it.
Second, this narrative is monumentally stupid to promote, knowing that it will never gain traction - in fact it will do the exact opposite with respect to western support to Ukraine.  It will sour support to Ukraine when they need it most.  Nor does this nonsense reflect what we have been seeing from the Ukrainian government itself.
Three, it is monumentally immoral because to go through with whatever the hell this "de-something" is, which according to kraze includes the complete destruction of the Russian state - without a safety net, very likely leading to humanitarian crisis - but "who cares:, denying democratic rights to anyone who sniffs of pro-Russian indefinitely, the erasing of a Russian culture (if there is one, oh ya I forgot a sub-strategy of setting up a genocide is to try and pretend that "they are not really a people"), and a punishing the Russian people individually for the rest of time by the sounds of it.  Why? Because the effects of the actions you are promoting are going to negatively impact children who have not even been born yet. It is why we do not do this, the effects ands stakes are that high.
Oh but Russia did this to Ukraine!!  Yes, they did, or at least tried.  And those directly responsible will be held to account.  Russia as a state must be made to pay reparations.  Further Russia will continue to suffer sanctions and the full extent of legal punishments until the make up for this useless war.  However, nothing supports the full spectrum punishment of the entirety of the Russian people for decades - that is not how this works.
Do you honestly think that the mainstream western public are going to join you on whatever revenge fantasy is being cooked up here?  One shot of a starving Russian child and all that good will will evaporate, because people in the West want Russia to pay, but not kids who can't vote, nor pay taxes - I will note that kraze or anyone else spewing this nonsense have offered zero ideas on how to avoid Russian children also being held accountable for actions they literally have no say in - oh, wait don't answer that, I have a pretty good idea what you want already.
I am past asking you guys to stop - I am asking you go somewhere else.  Internet is big and full of other places where you can sell this drivel. 

So we are pretty much going to have to agree to disagree - I think your view of things is a little overly binary.  We seem to disagree on "worse".  Your position is that a functioning Russia is worse for Ukraine, of which there is ample evidence.  My view is that a reduced and boxed in, but functioning Russia with Ukraine within NATO (we took Turkey for fewer reasons than Ukraine currently has) is the way ahead.
Based on your posts, it appears you are arguing that imperial aggressiveness is deeply embedded within Russian culture, which may have some kernels of truth - I personally think you are way over simplifying the Russian cultural construct and are very broadly painting every Russian with the same brush, so to speak.
However, where I think we definitely part ways, and frankly I suspect it will also cause a major rift between a post-war Ukraine and the west is your solution: cultural genocide.  This is very odd because while I do not believe that Russia has the way and means, or even ends to conduct a physical genocide of Ukraine - even the worst horror stories coming out of the formerly occupied areas pale in comparison to other examples of systemic physical ethnic cleansing, such as demonstrated in Rwanda.  However, I do think there is a very strong case that Russia has every intention to conduct a cultural genocide of Ukraine and erase that identity to make the entire population "Russian" in the long run.
Much of what you are proposing is the exact same thing back onto the Russian people - a collapse that erases their identity.  We can go around the trees on this but in the end, my opinion does not matter - what does matter, very much is reconstruction of Ukraine after at this wat that will run well into the hundreds of billions.  Now asking western liberal democracies to invest in a nation that is actively supporting and working towards a counter-cultural genocide - even of a nation as problematic as Russia - is a non-starter.
Your cold-blooded quote here is very telling:
"Russian "refugees" are already not welcome in any EU country that borders them and I don't see much drama about it - I think we will manage just as well. Especially since not letting in proven rapists and murderers that happily did genocide on us is "moral high ground"-free card in itself."
So many of those refugees are going to be elderly and women/children.  It would appear your position is to group them in with the "murders and rapists" and let them freeze to death along the Ukrainian border.  This is very tough talk but you can see my point here (or perhaps cannot, which is the problem); however, in my experience, more atrocities do not make things better.
I do not support your position on a Russian cultural genocide, and I am pretty sure very few in the western political halls of power, nor the voters will either. Ukraine has gained enormous positive momentum on the strategic narrative, your government has brilliantly dominated this arena and it is seeing returns in massive support.
Your narrative that you are putting on this forum only serves an end state that will wash all that good away - likely when you need it most.

So, a couple of points here.
1) I'm not sure the UNSC is functionally analogous to the Senate. For one thing, there is membership - Senators represent a different constituency than congresspeople, whereas members of the UNSC are representing literally the same thing as their national colleagues in the GA.
2) there are loads of nations that function just fine without a separate upper and lower house - an upper house is not a pre-req for good governance. But AIUI the UNSC doesn't really serve the same function as an upper house anyway; it doesn't exist to 'ratify' decisions by the GA. If I recall correctly, the UNSC exists to avoid a situation where you have - to mangle an old expression - 143 grumpy sheep and a wolf voting on dinner. The UN would never have gotten off the ground if the 40-odd tiddly little nations of the Pacific - for example - could work as a block to outvote, say, the US on the urgent need to actually address climate change. Giving the superpowers a, well, a super power seemed like the best way to address that, as imperfect as it has been. Russia has this year thrown up a glaring problem with the UNSC - ie, what to do when one of the permanent members goes rogue. Up to this point the permanent members were implicitly assumed to be the adults, and could be trusted to make good decisions for the kids. That assumption is taking a bit of a beating right now, but I don't think that eliminating the UNSC or permanent members is the way to resolve it. I don't have a good alternative to it, but I can see that if the UNSC was abolished, then a few years down the track you could easily get snowballing, where one 'side' in an argument at the UN starts accreting votes, to the point where they can pretty much force through any decisions, mandates, and sanctions that they want. The permanent members currently provide a short-circuit to prevent that happening.
3) I'm not sure that comparing a mildly dysfunctional collaborative body with a wildly ineffective legislative one is a good way to go, except that in both cases they work great in theory. You know what they say: in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
Addendum: I know you aren't arguing to eliminate the UNSC, but that option has been floated here in the last day or so. I also recognise it might seem that I have sort-of argued both for and against the UNSC, but that isn't quite right: I think that the UNSC serves useful purposes AND I know that deliberative bodies can function effectively without an 'upper house'.

OK, noted, and no longer disagreeing.
But might you and kraze possibly find it in yourselves to contribute something about the actual war here, just now and again?

Ok, so let's try and have an actual conversation about all this.  Why not?  It is "forbidden discussions" week on the thread while we wait for the UA to reload.
First, lets put the emotion to one side for a moment - we saw how well that worked last time - and try to arrive at common ground.  I am not going to comment on forum policy or poor BFCElvis' endless and thankless work in trying to keep this place from become another internet cesspool - if you have a problem with forum policy, or felt you have been wronged in some way, take it up with him and BFC.
So what to do about Russia?  Russians everywhere?  They started a land war in Europe and they are supporting it, to some extent, for 6 months while their military is, in part, committing what is pretty much confirmed as systemic war crimes.
So how will justice be served in the prosecution of this war?  How will the offenders be made to pay so that it serves as an example to those that would re-offend?
Legally.  
The whole point of this war, and one of the big reasons why we care so much is that this is not just an unjustified invasion of Ukraine, it is an attack on the entire rules based international order.  In 1949, we all sat down, even Russia within the USSR, and said that this sort of action was illegal.  Its premise and definitely in its prosecution, by Russia, have been illegal within international law and the Law of Armed Conflict.  Russia's position, beyond some very weak tea technical arguments - SMO, has been - "ya, so what are you going to do about it...we are Russia and have nukes?"
That will not stand.  It cannot stand.  It threatens the entire scheme at its heart.  That scheme, btw, pays for our lifestyles and guarantors the stability and security we need to thrive, get richer and fatter, and have the freedom to yell at each other over all sorts of stuff.
So how will we put Russia back in the box?  Well first steps are to ensure it gets the spanking it so much deserves on the battlefield.  The next step, and it is very important, is to prosecute those responsible in Russia for this atrocity, within the frameworks of the law.
"Oh but the law is so "woke", we need to get medieval here to send a real message!"
1.  Shh, grown ups talking.
2.  If we step outside the legal framework, the one we built, we will break it ourselves, which in many ways is worse.
Don't believe me, well we have a convenient historical example - Iraq 2003. 
And before anyone freaks out, let me start by saying that the invasion of Iraq in 2003 is not anywhere near what is happening in Ukraine.  The legal justification for that war was "thin" but it adhered to the rules far closer than what we are seeing today.  It was unsanctioned by UN, the evidence for the whole thing turned out to be incorrect; however, the US made a case for self-defence against a known international offender, one who had not only invaded another country but also threatened "the great Satan" repeatedly.  Further the US prosecuted that war under the LOAC.
However the repurcutions of that action, one the edge of legality in some places are still being felt today.  In Putin's last speech he references "terror/terrorism" 5 times as as a justification for this war.  The lesson here is that if we fracture to system of order, very bad things start to happen.
So we will hold Russia accountable.  We will demand reparations for lifting sanctions.  We will demand the turning over of war criminals for prosecution.  We will employ national security mechanisms to find and arrest anyone who supported Russia's war outside of the laws of whatever country they are in.  And we will do so within the defined limitations of the law.
Anything beyond that is a revenge fantasy that serves no real purpose in discussing this war.  Now are we able to continue on in peace and harmony?

As one who has held his tongue reading EVERY SINGLE PAGE thru 1,40freaking2 of this unprecedented and now legendary thread - despite all the numerous assertions with no evidence except (well informed) opinions about the past…and despite the important and profound debates on morality and ethical conduct during and after war…and the demonstrated courage and sacrifice of a nation standing up to one of the all time biggest bullies in history…and the terrific analyses of the ebb and flow of the front lines…and the historical and cultural explanations…all without daring to stick my only neck out - THIS CROSSED THE RED LINE! Loyalty DEMANDS solidarity!
FLY, EAGLES, FLY! COWBOYS, BYE BYE!
 

 
PS forum name is in honor of my first childhood best friend, who refused to abandon a downed severely wounded black ops pilot as time ran out on a mission up North. Cost him dearly the rest of his life - ended too soon. Clear skies, Allen. Never forgotten.

Cast The Capt out as insufficiently pure!
 
The revolution always eats its children.

I just did. Using posts that are less than a day old. You may not see it, but I do, and I am not alone there.

Personally I feel sort of the same as both of you.
The line is imo when you generalize whole people as rapists by blood / barbarics. And especially if you then include all Arabs in it and say that Israel is tackling the root problem as a direct reply to someone mentioning killing children / reporters.
And I'll gladly take vacation to call out such statements.
Anyway I've said what I needed I'll leave it at that. 

Kraze has been posting stuff like this since the beginning of the thread. He hasn't received any warning, although in the written official rules here, it is cleary stated as hate speech and a reason to ban someone. On the contrary his posts often get multiple upvotes. Yes, the best war forum on the net... 

Other than ad hominems (which I think we agreed are not constructive), what other knowledge do you have to contribute? Pray enlighten us.

...Yes, and allowance has been duly given throughout c1400 pages of discussion. In general, I don't address him unless he addresses me.
However, he also uses his righteous anger to push a quite nasty view of the irremediably barbarous nature of ALL Russians, now and forever, polities, groups or individuals.
.... While all Ukrainians absolutely should be preoccupied right now with the high velocity killing of all armed Russians occupying their country, a lot of our discussion here also circles around the fate of Russia and Russians postwar.
And whether some people here like it or not, Ukraine (and the world) is going be living and interacting with Russians long term. No sane adult is about to back some vile crusade to exterminate them, to occupy Russia, to wall Russians off from 'civilised' humanity, or any other such lunacy. They don't disappear into a flaming pit (unless most of us come with them....).
But sadly, there will be people who will try to pull that kind of thing within Ukraine after the victory, taking it upon themselves to decide by force who is an 'orc' or collaborator, on what will become increasingly thin evidence. Blood libel and collective guilt. First, it won't work. Second, it will utterly foul the fruits of victory, especially in Crimea.
IMHO, Crimea needs to go back to Ukraine (Russia's historical claims are now forfeit due to its terrible crimes, frankly) but WITH the population who lived there in 2014 enjoying the full rights of citizens. Regardless of their native tongue, which happens to be mainly Russian.
FWIW

It’s quite predictable and invariably one dimensional. Almost like what an algorithm might generate. Content seems to tend to two classifications: Russians are subhuman evil things, or jokes about Russian incompetence.

Sure, and Dem Deutschen Volk, similarly, had no excuse not to know better before enlisting en masse in Hitler's death cult.
That all had little to do with my original point, but our friend chose to beat his usual drum, as he does on cue whenever anyone suggests some kind of future where any (*shudder!*) Russians might actually dig out of their current civilisational rut.

Newest LivemapUA update🙂

You are right in general but in specific details it is not as clear cut as you stated.
RU lost. RU lost even before the war started Despite this fact the war in Ukraine is still going on and it might turn to the worst As i said - we (me included) consistently underestimate RU Nat capability to prolong and male bloody any conflict they are involved in  Let me give you an example of how you underestimated RU ISR capabilities
What if I tell you RU Nats saw it weeks before it started?
Here is an example from 31-Aug 8 AM
This is from 30-Aug. Note Balaklya. 
But actually, they noticed UKR preparations in Kharkiv direction at least one month before the offensive started: 
22-Jul
7-Aug
Balaklya and Sukhi Yar are on the roads from Chuhuev to Izum. He basically described UKR offensive intent. 
You are telling me how bad RU ISR is while I was looking for a weeks at RU Nat writing - UKR are concentrating forces at Kharkiv direction for offensive most likely aimed at Izum. 
What if tomorrow RU Nats blow up Nuclear station. What if tomorrow you will have to fight them? What your estimations will be? That their ISR is crap? And what if it is not? What if they have a lot of civilian eyes looking at your every move? What's if they have Telegram based network of volunteer agents all over Ukraine? What if it is incompetence of RU MOD that mask their true HUMINT capabilities? 
Do not underestimate RU Nat ability to take lives of our boys if RU crap hits EU fan.  I cannot be there with boys but at least I try to warn you and others here not to dismiss RU Nat volunteers. It is their turf as well. They can and will surprise you.  

I am not really sure why anyone believes that "mobilization" is some sort of magic spell that will solve this war for Russia....on either side of this equation.  We have covered this before but a review may be in order.
Key here is the term "peer-conflict".  That means a relative symmetry between military capability and architectures to the point that numbers start to matter in determining outcome.  In this situation theoretically the side with the higher force ratios will have a better chance of winning.  At this point this conflict is nowhere near a level of qualitative parity.
Beyond the morale issues, which are legion, a loose measure of military quality is DETO - Doctrine, Equipment, Training and Organization.  (Before anyone weighs in, yes there are about a half dozen national variations on this that take into account everything from policy to infrastructure, but lets keep it simple).
So, yes, Russia has a big scary population base - we are probably talking 30+ million fighting age males, assuming you could tap even 10 percent of that - excess and fit-ish - that is 3+ million troops Russia could throw at this war.  Assuming mass conscription doesn't trigger a major political upheaval; the first problem is you have to turn those 3+ million civilians into combat capable military formations - something the Russian have demonstrated problems with before the war. 
Second major problem is that one has to turn them into military fighting formations of the same or better quality than the UA.  And remember the UA is already force generating and will continue to do so long after this war is over...because Russia.  So Russia has to go from zero to hero faster than the UA are already doing.  Now before someone spouts of "mass has a quality all its own" - a truism which has died an ignoble death in this conflict - in modern warfare one still needs relative parity for quantity to matter.  I welcome any nation to try low quality human wave attacks on the modern battlefield.  In fact the UA is demonstrating the exact opposite right now - high quality empowered small is kicking dumb-large to death.  So now in order to mobilize Russia needs to meet a bar it did not have on 23 Feb, let alone in time to get out in front of things now.
Third major problem, Russia does not even have the essential skillsets to create a peer military.  And I am talking everywhere.  For example, in order to create an ISR architecture on par with the West they need an entire military ISR complex that does not exist anywhere near that level.  It took the US decades - dating back to AirLand Battle (hey go check out CMCW while you are at it!) - to construct the ISR architecture they are pumping into Ukraine right now.  Further Ukraine has a home grown system they 1) have training and technical support for from the west, 2) have a 6 month head start, and 3) are not living under crippling sanctions.  Some Iranian drones do not make an ISR architecture, it is what you plug those drones into.
So Russia can "mobilize" all it wants; however, it will be mobilizing a Cold War era military, one worse than it had before this war.  They will be nowhere near DETO parity with the UA for maybe a couple decades.  With their new drones they can watch all those columns of T55s, driven by conscripts with a months training, supported by a rickety logistics corp get hammered by HIMARs and next-gen drone swarms.  
I will give the Russians points for stubborn, they have that in spades.  This war is clearly at the "cut your losses" point.  The RA has left as much hardware on the battlefield as the Iraqi Army did in the Gulf War - when you are in that league, get out!  Mobilization will not save them, this is not 1941, it is 1905.

My wife edited this

Kind of off topic, but I do have one major gripe.  The F'n Russians have ruined military fiction for me.  Now every time I look at a book depicting a Russian advance all I can think of is... "yeah no way.  Too much fantasy, maybe I'll go back and just read the Silmarillion".  sigh

That would be Huginn or Muninn scouting for the Allfather.

Already dated. They don't have Izium taken and it's been in UA hands for a least a day. 

One of the best sentences in this thread.
It even applies to us, the forummembers.

Steve,
Your premise seems to hinge on me not fully understanding the need to relentlessly curb stomping of the russian war machine, in all its constituent parts, into submission - well beyond Ukraines borders of 2013 and the capacity of it threatening any of its neighbours.
I can assure you that notion is completely unfounded… 
The thing is, that at the same time I genuinely believe that “we” are fighting for certain values. Values that does not really include the unnecessary degradation of human beings (that definitely being everyone of us). 
My point here, in the forum context, is that he did’t post that video, made into a meme, on this forum. “We” did that. And what does that say about us? 
That said, I have zero interest in a prolonged discussion on this point. I love the thread and follow it religiously for all it gives. It really is a haven of sanity and life-affirming absurdity.
Please consider my post a soft voice, whispering in your ear as we roll along the colonnades on our triumph.

I have to be on the phone today as well. So, mini update:
1. RU reports UKR made crossing near Lyman
2. RU local soldier at Izum demands urgent actions from RU command (implying nothing is done yet) or Izum grouping will be surrounded and lost. Says Lyman loss=encirclement of Izum (AFAIR the last road from Izum is going through or near Lyman)
3. Izum has communication with RU land, just take more time (seems they are relying on that road at Lyman)
4. I think you saw video of UKR in Kypaunsk. I am guessing they were there for some time already - that's why RU destroyed the bridge. You do not blow the bridge if you hold enemy few km away. 
Kypaunsk as road and rail road logistics hub is lost.