Jump to content

Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RFC on listing of Belarus as "supported by" since 2022[edit]

Should Belarus be listed in the infobox (and accordingly described in other parts of this article) concerning the events since 24 February 2022: A) no (as at present); B) as "Supported since 2022 by:  Belarus" (in Russia's side).

Please enter your answer to the question in the Survey section with a brief statement. Please do not respond to the statements of other editors in the Survey section. Back-and-forth discussion is permitted in the Discussion section (that's what it's for).

Note to closer and other participants: this RFC was started because the previous similar RFC (started on 16 March 2024) was closed on 17 May 2024 without a clear consensus regarding options A and B, but the uninvolved closer Compassionate727 stated that "Finally, there seems to be a consensus that if added, Belarus should be added with a note that its support began in 2022, although there is no reason that shouldn't be confirmed in the next RfC, which I assume will be forthcoming shortly". -- Pofka (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

  • B. The role of Belarus in this war should be described as "supported since 2022 by: Belarus" (in Russia's side) because during the highly intensified phase of this war since 24 February 2022 the Russian Army's forces were allowed to: 1) invade Ukraine from the Belarusian territory through ground (1, 2); 2) Belarus allowed Russia full access to its military airbases for Russian military aircraft to launch aircraft and its army installations to shoot artillery and missiles from Belarusian territory towards Ukraine and Russian jets have taken off from Belarus to subsequently enter Ukraine from Belarusian airspace (3, 4, 5); 3) see more information in a dedicated article Belarusian involvement in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Consequently, although no evidence was collected that the Armed Forces of Belarus themselves invaded Ukraine, the role of Belarus is clearly not equal to other military suppliers (e.g. United States/Germany to Ukraine; Iran/North Korea to Russia) because they have never allowed to use their territories for direct military actions against Ukraine/Russia (and their armies), while Belarus allowed to do that. Moreover, in June 2023 Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko claimed that "the only mistake we made’ was not finishing off Ukraine with Russia in 2014" (see: full article), so Lukashenko's Belarus clearly tractate the current Ukraine as an enemy and by exceptionally supporting Russia since 2022 sought for Ukraine's military defeat in this war. -- Pofka (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A. See previous RFC. Ivan (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A. (Summoned by feedback request service). Infoboxes are for basic factual uncontroversial information that can be consumed at-a-glance. They are not suitable for contested statements or statements where some nuance is required. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 21:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A per my comment at previous RfC. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • B per my comment at previous RfC. My very best wishes (talk) 23:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A for the same reason we should not list the United States on Ukraine's side. We should only list groups that have soldiers fighting in the war, which Belarus does not and has said that they will not. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • B the US's role in the war is similar to that of Iran; the better comparison for Belarus would be Poland, assuming that Poland starts shooting down missiles as it said it was considering. Arms suppliers should indeed be left off but those countries/territories that have used or provided their territory in combat engagements in Ukraine should be included in the infobox as belligerents (this is after all the definition of being a belligerent). Dan the Animator 03:58, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • B Per Pofka, while role is not equal to Germany, NK, Iran... Belarus has nonetheless provided support and Lukashenko wants Ukraine defeated. O.maximov (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Pinging all the participants of the previous similar RFC who had voted in the Survey section (@Slatersteven:, @My very best wishes:, @Ortizesp:, @Gödel2200:, @Иованъ:, @Manyareasexpert:, @CVDX:, @RadioactiveBoulevardier:, @Cinderella157:, @Mellk:) because I think they should be informed about this RFC and are welcome to express their opinion regarding this question once again. -- Pofka (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: May be a good idea to include supporters rather than suppliers in the infobox. Then the role of Belarus should be included as a supporter of Russia and US as a supporter of Ukraine. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dislike an RFC on a subject we had one recently about. Slatersteven (talk) 11:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should France be added as a belligerent or as at least supporting Ukraine ?[edit]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-commander-french-military-instructors-visit-ukrainian-training-centres-2024-05-27/

Clearly sending french soldiers into Ukraine to train Ukrainian units would make them active participants and targets for the russian military.

https:theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/04/british-soldiers-on-ground-ukraine-german-military-leak

It is also surprising that the British haven't been already added to the belligerents section given the leaked German military phone call that detailed British troops are on the ground helping with missile targeting. 188.247.64.30 (talk) 20:33, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When sources say France is at war with Russia, then we can add them. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:49, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Russian bias.[edit]

This whole wiki is only talking from the Western pro Ukrainian view, accusing only Russia of disinformation. And blaming the whole conflict on Russia. Everybody in international politics lies. As they always say that the first casualty of war is truth.

I'd like to see a Russian apologist give an alternate version of this history so that I can not believe it just as much as I disbelieve this one. I could learn something by reading between the lines (lies). Rlslemmer (talk) 14:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MAybe, but we go by what RS say (had you need to be far more specific in what you want us to say). We can't discuss generalities. Slatersteven (talk) 15:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russia is not an aggressor in the war[edit]

Russian President Vladimir Putin explained in detail in an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson that Moscow is not going to attack NATO countries, there is no point in this. The Russian leader noted that Western politicians regularly intimidate their population with an imaginary Russian threat in order to distract attention from internal problems. 89.204.90.122 (talk) 16:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Err, Russia was the one who attacked Ukraine, Ukraine did not attack Russia. Slatersteven (talk) 16:35, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As to there being no point to this war, that is a forum topic, and we are not a forum. Slatersteven (talk) 16:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither Putin nor Carlson are reliable sources of information, especially about politics and this war. They both lie. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious topic warning?[edit]

Can someone please advise me re: WP:Contentious topics#Awareness of contentious topics. There's a warning template there, but it requires a magic code and I can't see one listed for the scope of this page. Thanks Andy Dingley (talk) 10:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It falls under Eastern Europe. WP:GSRUSUKR are specific sanctions for this war but don't have a specific CT aware. The link to the GS might also be added to the DS alert. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so just e-e is good, thanks. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed presence of italian volounteers fighting for Russia[edit]

Many founts have confirmed the presence of italian volounteers fighting for the russian army and some of them have even been interwieved.So should we add in the list of belligerants even volounteers from other countries like franco-american for Ukraine and italo-sirians-lybyans for Russia? 2.47.239.31 (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, as that would not be national support, rather they are mercenaries. Slatersteven (talk) 11:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]