Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

GlastonSpur said:
NATO began with onlooker status (since Ukraine is not part of NATO)
Click to expand...
True Ukraine isn't part of NATO, but it has been supplying Ukraine and 'poking the Russian Bear' through its closeness in relations. NATO's ability to influence matters on the ground in Ukraine itself will diminish over time, even when the Wests sanctions do have an effect, it will be on the Russian people not on Putin and he will hang on until he gets what he's wanted. Its very doubtful that Putin wants to take over the whole of Ukraine, with all that would involve militarily, economically and politically, but to seize land, just enough and for long enough, to satisfy the broad mass of the Russian public that its been a worthwhile 'special operation'


Spark said:
“Putin will get everything he wants” is also highly unlikely, as demilitarising Ukraine will now mean a long term commitment similar to the US in Afghanistan (and the Soviets before them).
Click to expand...

If Putin does want all of Ukraine, then 'no' that wont happen for the reasons you have given, but if he can secure the east and the southern coast line, with the Crimea as a fall back position, that 'strategic land grab' could go on for years and could even out last the Wests sanctions, for all sanctions fail, eventually. Of course Putin may then decided to step down... or be forced to 'spend more time with his family', either way he will have made his mark and reversed some of the humiliation of losing the cold war!
 
sglowrider said:
Many Russian experts have been saying that Putin has dreams of putting back together the former USSR -- and Ukraine is only the beginning. The next target will be Poland or the Baltic states. His legacy project.

If that's the case, it might explain his budget force for Ukraine. He needs to keep a whole of resources in the pocket for the other Soviet states. He always probably mis-read the Ukrainian sentiments as you mentioned (due to being surrounded by 'yes' men) and then had half expected rose petal-strewn roads.

But when you under-man wars, you are susceptible to being picked off in a lot of places especially later when he has to hold the key cities. The Ukrainan strategy is probably to draw them in and then pop them off in urban environments -- and increasing the bodybag count and the domestic political pressures. A poison shrimp strategy.

He may ultimately falter in Ukraine even before his other dream projects kick into gear.
Click to expand...

I can’t see it being true personally

And if it is true, that his next move would be the Baltic states or even Poland, then all of NATO will be at war with Russia. It’s not even remotely a “ooooo what’s going to happen now” scenario, it’s war.

One foot on Latvian, Estonian, Lithuanian or Polish soil…..isn’t a scenario we can all look at as something occurring in Eastern Europe….it doesn’t effect us, it does! it’s exactly the same as stepping foot on British soil, it’s literally no different, and we will be obliged and certainly willing to meet Russia with the full might of all of NATO.

That’s a scenario none of us want, but it will happen if these so called former generals stating Putins apparent plans are remotely true, which I don’t think they are.

Putin has given his nuclear threats, but before that President Biden has already warned that every inch of NATO soil will be protected with the full and entire force of the US and NATO.
 
Any more news on the impact of the sanctions? Analysis or predictions?
 
Maticmaker said:
True Ukraine isn't part of NATO, but it has been supplying Ukraine and 'poking the Russian Bear' through its closeness in relations. NATO's ability to influence matters on the ground in Ukraine itself will diminish over time, even when the Wests sanctions do have an effect, it will be on the Russian people not on Putin and he will hang on until he gets what he's wanted. Its very doubtful that Putin wants to take over the whole of Ukraine, with all that would involve militarily, economically and politically, but to seize land, just enough and for long enough, to satisfy the broad mass of the Russian public that its been a worthwhile 'special operation' ...
Click to expand...

The phrase "poking the Russian Bear" is not appropriate. This bear has not been caged - instead it is putting others in cages, by aiding repression in many of its old soviet republics, annexing Crimea and areas of E. Ukraine etc.

Resistance to this annexation and repression is not "poking the bear" - it's resistance against an aggressor.

NATO's ability to influence matters on the ground in Ukraine will only increase from here onwards. The flow of weapons and money into Ukraine will gradually ramp up. And the vast majority of Ukrainians will be more eager than ever to turn their eyes westward and away from Russia.
 
harms said:
Nothing to do with a war breaking out & changing the whole public discourse?
Click to expand...

1-10 on the first list being almost exclusively right-wing reactionaries is suspicious. It's not like those guys like Shapiro and Bongino haven't been talking of the war.
 
hellhunter said:
What's the alternative?
Click to expand...

Either don't help or actually help. I'm sure the Ukrainians are very encouraged by the west politicians condemning Russia while London is still an absolute cesspit of Russian money and influence. That will sure stop hospitals and civilian buildings from getting bombed.
 
hellhunter said:
Is it normal to use a fecking Sprinter (or similar) for conquering and occupying a city?
Click to expand...
Maybe the Russians plan to turn up late, do half a job, and say they'll give you a call next week when they have time to finish their invasion but right now they have to leave to pick up their kids from school?
 
Russia: Ukrainian nationalists prevented civilian evacuation
This morning, Mariupol's deputy mayor and a resident in the city told the BBC that Russia continued to shell the area despite a supposed ceasefire beginning at 07:00 GMT.

But Russia's defence ministry has a very different version of events.

It says Ukrainian "nationalists" prevented civilians from leaving the the cities, according to Russia's Ria news agency.

The ministry said that Russian forces came under fire after it had set up humanitarian corridors for civilians to leave the city.
Click to expand...

The problem is that Putin lost the information war the moment he invaded, because it became clear he's an outright liar. I don't know why they still try.
 
Smithy89 said:
Either don't help or actually help. I'm sure the Ukrainians are very encouraged by the west politicians condemning Russia while London is still an absolute cesspit of Russian money and influence. That will sure stop hospitals and civilian buildings from getting bombed.
Click to expand...
Without European and US sanctions, this war could go on for years. Nevermind the other aid in shape of intel, weapons and other material. Short of cutting Russian gas/oil or declaring war, I don't think there's much the West can do
 
Boycott said:
1-10 on the first list being almost exclusively right-wing reactionaries is suspicious. It's not like those guys like Shapiro and Bongino haven't been talking of the war.
Click to expand...
Using 2 lists with 10 positions on them with no context to make any conclusion is unscientific. That's not to say that it can't be true, but throwing a baseless argument in to see if it sticks is exactly the kind of stuff that Shapiro & co. are doing.
 
hellhunter said:
What's the alternative?
Click to expand...

From a German perspective the bare minimum would have been to check the usability of the equipment, before promising it to the Ukrainians and having them waste their time on it while they are at war. I can understand that the Bundeswehr might not have a lot of weapons to give in its current state, but this is just shameful. And in general the sanctions, while still having an effect, seem half-assed.
 
do.ob said:
From a German perspective the bare minimum would have been to check the usability of the equipment, before promising it to the Ukrainians and having them waste their time on it while they are at war. I can understand that the Bundeswehr might not have a lot of weapons to give in its current state, but this is just shameful. And in general the sanctions, while still having an effect, seem half-assed.
Click to expand...
These reports about nonfunctional weapons, was that the first delivery? Or the second one of DDR material?
 
hellhunter said:
These reports about nonfunctional weapons, was that the first delivery? Or the second one of DDR material?
Click to expand...

As far as I know it's referring to the second delivery, but only makes it marginally better.
 
hellhunter said:
These reports about nonfunctional weapons, was that the first delivery? Or the second one of DDR material?
Click to expand...

the 2nd delivery
I understand ukranian frustration and I also understand Germany not going full on delivering everything we got as well. But should have checked, cleaned and send the usable ones of the anti air weapons from the 2nd delivery.
 
do.ob said:
From a German perspective the bare minimum would have been to check the usability of the equipment, before promising it to the Ukrainians and having them waste their time on it while they are at war. I can understand that the Bundeswehr might not have a lot of weapons to give in its current state, but this is just shameful. And in general the sanctions, while still having an effect, seem half-assed.
Click to expand...
You’ve got to imagine other things are happening in the background, surely. They don’t need to lie about what they are doing, but we don’t need full transparency right now.
 
Smithy89 said:
Either don't help or actually help. I'm sure the Ukrainians are very encouraged by the west politicians condemning Russia while London is still an absolute cesspit of Russian money and influence. That will sure stop hospitals and civilian buildings from getting bombed.
Click to expand...
Classic whataboutism.

You want Nato to do more, but you also know a potential WWIII is hardly a more palatable option, so it's just impotent rage. This is understandable tbf, I'm sure a lot of people feel it.
 
sun_tzu said:
I would agree with a lot of that

Also one aspect that has crossed my mind is that there simply isn't any recent history of a large modern military coming up against a large amount of modern defence capabilities

Think us rolling through Iraq or Afghanistan

Or Russia ploughing through Georgia or Syria

Perhaps all sides have overestimated just how effective tanks, helicopters and planes are when they are up against modern defences?

Perhaps the Falklands is the last time the British army was involved with somebody equipped to put up some real resistance ... and that's 40 years ago

We have seen certainly for a generation the modern helicopters etc being unrivalled and I do wonder how effective even the most advanced nato armies would be coming up against the modern anti aircraft missiles, anti tank weapons and advanced electronic countermeasures... for sure I expect it would be more difficult that was experienced against the taliban or rolling into Iraq

Perhaps putin also underestimated the difficulty this would cause a rapid advance?
Click to expand...

The Yugoslav Wars featured then modern weaponry against modern defences. The Russian military in many ways hasn't moved on from that time period though whilst Ukraine is being armed with current defensive equipment.
 
Jippy said:
Classic whataboutism.

You want Nato to do more, but you also know a potential WWIII is hardly a more palatable option, so it's just impotent rage. This is understandable tbf, I'm sure a lot of people feel it.
Click to expand...

Is it? The idea that our shitty government, who take donations hand over fist from rich and influential Russians and wouldn't release the report on their shady dealings with Russia, might be letting the Russians still get away with all kinds of crookery on our turf is hardly a stretch. And then the idea that that will have a knock on effect on how effective the sanctions are and therefore potentially on how long drawn out and brutal the war is, seems to me only another short leap.

Anything we can do to wage war without increasing the risk of a nuclear war should be done at this stage, and I don't believe our government are acting to the utmost of their capabilities frankly.
 
First I’d like to say I do understand to some degree of NATO declining to intervene, even with a no - fly zone, at this stage, because it would escalate.

However, I really do think we have backed ourselves into a problem in some ways. And must have accepted Ukraine is lost. The problem with so categorically ruling out involvement has left Putin to call us on it, and almost given him a blank cheque to do what he likes. It’s one thing (albeit immoral) to not get involved beyond proxy, but the issue now is we’ve backed ourselves into a place where some of the truly horrific things Putin is doing, (like shelling escape corridors, reckless destruction of cities) which goes beyond an invasion (already bad enough) into serious war crimes, won’t be dealt with because Putin knows we’ve decided not to intervene. He knows he can do what he likes. Even if we knew we weren’t going to get involved, we have played it all wrong.

My overarching view is we are doing the right thing to not immediately escalate this, but I definitely think we could have played our hand better and not just end up in a situation to give Putin a free pass. But every bit this gets worse, the more I’m getting closer to the line of, allowing this to go unpunished is as bad an outcome as escalation. Because if we don’t, we are also OKing what goes next. And giving thought like this an opportunity to flourish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.