Combatintman

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Sorry I should have replied to this earlier ... I've got a few in various stages of readiness on my hard drive that I'll work on.  I'll guarantee at least one of those before Xmas and hopefully more.

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Since when did what become an acknowledged fact?  
To restate my point - the Afghan withdrawal pathway started in February 2020 and was supposed to have been put to bed well before it actually was put to bed.  There is an argument to say that it was sooner than that as the previous US administration was widely reported to be on the cusp of a deal in 2019 but stepped away from the dialogue in September 2019 following the death of US personnel in a Kabul IED attack.  From those start points the obvious question to ask in relation to the theory that the Afghan withdrawal is related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in 2019 or 2020?
In my response to the reemergence of this canard ... President Biden announced the withdrawal decision on April 14, 2021 and being an insider on matters Afghan and somebody who regularly attended meetings at the European Delegation, HQ Resolute Support and the UK and US embassies, I can tell you for a fact that nobody in the international community in Kabul had any idea which way President Biden was going to go until the decision was announced.  The supplementary question; therefore, is ... was a Russian invasion of Ukraine on the cards in April 2021?  The article I posted in my last post indicates that this was not the case until September 2021 which was after the last US service member walked up the ramp of a C17 in Kabul. 
The main problem with politically motivated theories of this ilk (and this is one, because it has been doing the rounds for at least over a month now and the handling of the Afghan withdrawal is a subject of justified scrutiny in the US) is that very few people are prepared to run the facts down and, as I said in my August 18 post, the most obvious explanation is usually the right one
Feel free to challenge any of the above (on another thread) but Afghanistan and intelligence analysis is my day job, so it is always handy to have some facts to hand before doing so.
As to "actual proof that there was early intel" - that is a big ask - intelligence is generally classified and/or on a limited distribution.
To bring this back on topic - guess which country beginning with 'R' and ending with 'ussian Federation' has been buying up container loads of medical equipment, body armour, helmets and other assorted military paraphernalia from local suppliers in Kabul this month?

Which army-sized research team is going to do the TO&E research for that lot for every single year spanning the game time span?  One of the dramas with the CMFI expansions was the additional TO&Es for a two-year time frame for a theatre and forces that is a lot better documented than the Cold War period.

Quoting myself ...
So - your theory holds no water at all.

It was done because there was an existing agreement with the Afghan gov't.  It was not actually Biden's plan, it was Trump's.  That is not an intended criticism.  Getting out of Afghanistan was always going to be a mess whether it was implemented by a republican or democratic leadership.

Hopefully you can soon have a "cold one", just pre-ordered this battle pack.

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. 

The Saudis have used AMRAAM to knock Iranian UAVs down fired by the Houthis in Yemen across the Saudi border.  In fact, such success with AMRAAM underpinned the argument for the US to continue selling AMRAAM to the Saudis.  Not a cheap solution for sure.

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.

Ok then, well good luck with that then.  So you plan is for the west to support until Russia shatters and then Ukraine ride it out as a lone state?  Unfortunately Ukraine does not appear in the Bible so I am not sure western support will last.
“A shattered Russia with an unsecured nuclear arsenal vs a lone state in a sea of people who can only agree on the fact that they hate you.” Is not a geopolitical solution.  Neither is hoping that making their dysfunction worse or them being pushed deeper into crisis will somehow lead to them forgetting you.
Your proposed strategy will have set conditions for long term direct threats to your nation without any real mitigating mechanisms against increasing regional insecurity.  This is extremely bad for business, so western economic investment is going to be very difficult.  Reconstruction is also at risk, as you note terrorism will be a significant threat in your country.  If these conditions create enough significant humanitarian crisis you could waves of former-Russian refugees try and get into Ukraine - which you can of course turn away by force, completely losing any strategic narrative high ground you have.
About the only way you approach would work would be for all Russians to cease to be at all, a strategy of extermination, but of course I know you are not proposing that.
I have to say that your isolationist entirely uncompromising view of the future sounds a lot like the narratives coming out of Russia itself, just pointed in the other direction.
 
 

It is my advanced Microsoft Word skills that are the most valuable of that lot to me now

Nine months of my life on operations in the role, two years of my life in a PSYOPs unit and three months of my life on courses suggest otherwise ...

So I would offer that you undertake a learning journey into this area: https://www.rand.org/topics/psychological-warfare.html
Closely linked to Influence operations:
https://jpia.princeton.edu/news/strategic-influence-operations-call-action
And the concepts of Reflexive Control:
https://georgetownsecuritystudiesreview.org/2017/02/01/disinformation-and-reflexive-control-the-new-cold-war/
 
And subversive warfare:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/understanding-subversion-considerations-our-special-forces-waller
I think you will find that 1) this is an enormously complex field of operations, far beyond WW2 propaganda, and 2) no, western governments do not practice this on their own people.  Governments do strategic communications and public affairs but conducting psychological operations directly at ones citizenry occurs in autocratic regimes and not so much in western democracies.
 

PRE-ORDER | meaning, definition in Cambridge English Dictionary
 

The other factor is that Ireland is a non-permanent member of the UNSC right now and its diplomats have put in some pretty solid performances which the call for Russia to be booted out of the UNSC is its most recent example.