RugbyRebels

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote: There is talk that Putin is going to enact martial law soon. That's a pretty scary prospect. But also seems like Putin is in denial, and he sees only escalation as the way out. Escalate to de-escalate. Miscalculated this time, he escalated too much.

Martial law is not a great prospect but perhaps a sign that the limited protests are making Putin very nervous?

A nervous Putin is worrying though - Russians don't follow weak leaders and a strongman who is seen to lose a war to a weaker opponent won't last long. If he regards winning the war as an existential threat to his leadership and it doesn't become winnable, there's no limit to what he might do. The quote of "What's the point of a world if it doesn't have Russia in it?" is alarming enough when you don't take the corollary that Putin believes that he is Russia. Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't weigh heavily if you feel you're already on the verge of destruction anyway.

Puja

Russia has such a short history of democracy (or what passes for it) that we really don't know this for a fact. Hopefully they are better than this.

Putin has many children and grandchildren. He's not going to be indifferent to the end of the world. So I still think this hard/crazy man stuff is ultimately a bluff. Neither are his lieutenants indifferent to Armageddon - they may fear for their lives under normal circumstances but this would become irrelevant in the face of Putin trying to press the big button. They wouldn't let it happen.

We need to be calm, united and firm. Otherwise it won't stop with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are doing the world (or at least, the Democratic world) a heroic service here. We need to keep them supplied, and then rebuild their country when it's over.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Martial law is not a great prospect but perhaps a sign that the limited protests are making Putin very nervous?

A nervous Putin is worrying though - Russians don't follow weak leaders and a strongman who is seen to lose a war to a weaker opponent won't last long. If he regards winning the war as an existential threat to his leadership and it doesn't become winnable, there's no limit to what he might do. The quote of "What's the point of a world if it doesn't have Russia in it?" is alarming enough when you don't take the corollary that Putin believes that he is Russia. Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't weigh heavily if you feel you're already on the verge of destruction anyway.

Puja

Russia has such a short history of democracy (or what passes for it) that we really don't know this for a fact. Hopefully they are better than this.

Putin has many children and grandchildren. He's not going to be indifferent to the end of the world. So I still think this hard/crazy man stuff is ultimately a bluff. Neither are his lieutenants indifferent to Armageddon - they may fear for their lives under normal circumstances but this would become irrelevant in the face of Putin trying to press the big button. They wouldn't let it happen.

We need to be calm, united and firm. Otherwise it won't stop with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are doing the world (or at least, the Democratic world) a heroic service here. We need to keep them supplied, and then rebuild their country when it's over.

as a sort of tangent, deploying tactical nuclear weapons is kind of standard war procedure for the Russian army according to Dannett. So...

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:
A nervous Putin is worrying though - Russians don't follow weak leaders and a strongman who is seen to lose a war to a weaker opponent won't last long. If he regards winning the war as an existential threat to his leadership and it doesn't become winnable, there's no limit to what he might do. The quote of "What's the point of a world if it doesn't have Russia in it?" is alarming enough when you don't take the corollary that Putin believes that he is Russia. Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't weigh heavily if you feel you're already on the verge of destruction anyway.

Puja

Russia has such a short history of democracy (or what passes for it) that we really don't know this for a fact. Hopefully they are better than this.

Putin has many children and grandchildren. He's not going to be indifferent to the end of the world. So I still think this hard/crazy man stuff is ultimately a bluff. Neither are his lieutenants indifferent to Armageddon - they may fear for their lives under normal circumstances but this would become irrelevant in the face of Putin trying to press the big button. They wouldn't let it happen.

We need to be calm, united and firm. Otherwise it won't stop with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are doing the world (or at least, the Democratic world) a heroic service here. We need to keep them supplied, and then rebuild their country when it's over.

as a sort of tangent, deploying tactical nuclear weapons is kind of standard war procedure for the Russian army according to Dannett. So...

It may be standard in a book. Never used in reality though...

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Russia has such a short history of democracy (or what passes for it) that we really don't know this for a fact. Hopefully they are better than this.

Putin has many children and grandchildren. He's not going to be indifferent to the end of the world. So I still think this hard/crazy man stuff is ultimately a bluff. Neither are his lieutenants indifferent to Armageddon - they may fear for their lives under normal circumstances but this would become irrelevant in the face of Putin trying to press the big button. They wouldn't let it happen.

We need to be calm, united and firm. Otherwise it won't stop with Ukraine. The Ukrainians are doing the world (or at least, the Democratic world) a heroic service here. We need to keep them supplied, and then rebuild their country when it's over.

as a sort of tangent, deploying tactical nuclear weapons is kind of standard war procedure for the Russian army according to Dannett. So...

It may be standard in a book. Never used in reality though...

The point is, tactical nuclear weapons are not regarded in the same way by the russion military as by us.....never say never

Ouch #1 (t'Rouble getting reddies out...)


Ouch #2 - war escalates - Russ. launches attack on fifa/uefa..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60607645

Some clear points from Finn. ex-p.m and pro-European Alexander Stubb.(tw!tter). His country has been invaded itself of course in the last 100 years, and is very much in the firing line bý considering joining NATO. :

1. The security threat is real. Putin wants to take over Ukraine, revamp the security structure of Europe & keep Finland & Sweden out of Nato. We must assume that his actions have no limits.

2. Putin is driven by nostalgia and legacy. Nostalgia of historic Russia with one language, one religion and one leader. A legacy of a leader who has made ”Russia great again”. He thus sees Belarus and Ukraine as part of Russia. Won’t necessarily stop there.

3. We are beyond the point of no return. Putin has attacked three times in 14 years (2008, 2014 and 2022). The reaction of Ukraine and its people is heroic. The rest of the world (UN) is historically united against Russia. Counter measures have been firm and fast.

4. Putin has achieved in one week the exact opposite of what he wanted: i.e. the Europeanisation of Ukraine, revitalisation of the Transatlantic relationship, the rejuvenation of Nato, unity of the EU and a radical shift in support for Nato membership in Finland and Sweden

5. Putin’s actions are causing massive harm to the Russian people. The sanctions will be as total as the isolation. No area will be speared: finance, trade, goods, services, individuals, culture, sport, energy, transport. Reserves will not last forever.

6. The world has thus changed. We have moved from a post Cold War era to a Hot War. A new Iron Curtain has been erected. We just don’t know exactly where and for how long. We need peace mediation and a ceasefire as soon as possible. The loss of life is immeasurable.

7. This is as much a fight about life, security and identity, as it is about ideology and way of life. Europe is now again split between an aggressive authoritarian regime and cooperative democracies. The aggressor will continue to pose a threat for the foreseeable future.

8. Putin has no option. He has to succeed. But Russia’s isolation will not change before regime change. Can happen only from the inside. Russian revolutions (1917/1991) - are copyright of Russian people. Their capacity to experince discomfort is high, but there is always a limit.

9. Lots of national and international talk of Finnish Nato membership. Never underestimate the capacity of Finns to remain calm, collected and determined in the face of adversity, threat and change. We have been here before and know what to do.

10. In the words of President
Niinisto: ”In the midst of an acute crisis, however, it is particularly important to keep a cool head and to assess with care the impact of past and possible future changes on our security - not hesitating, but with care ".

No. 4 is the only thing about this to even give you a hope of a smile. You could also add in to that point that the U.K. and the EU/France have, hopefully, remembered that we’re better off working together rather than sniping at each other.

Today I'm convinced someone will whack putin in a month or at least overthrow him

paddy no 11 wrote:Today I'm convinced someone will whack putin in a month or at least overthrow him

Hence why he is hiding in a bunker in the Urals.

A fire has reportedly broken out in Europe’s largest nuclear power plant located in Zaporizhzhya, following continuous shelling of buildings and units there, ​the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.
Not a good thing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60613438

Galfon wrote:A fire has reportedly broken out in Europe’s largest nuclear power plant located in Zaporizhzhya, following continuous shelling of buildings and units there, ​the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.
Not a good thing.

Energy exports must be sanctioned

It seems the coach if Locomotiv Moscow has quit in protest at the war. This might seem like a pathetically trite little thing in the face of what's happening in Ukraine, but it's the sort of little thing that might end up making a big difference inside Russia itself.

Sent from my CPH2195 using Tapatalk

The shelling of a nuclear power plant is idiotic and arguably a war crime. In other areas an article in the Times suggests that Putins cabinet didn’t have a clue over the full scope of his plans, they merely thought he would look to recognise the separatist areas, and were thus unprepared for the full range of sanctions that has hit them.

Possibly bull but it would be consistent with the level of unpreparedness that has been observed on the military front.

Sandydragon wrote:The shelling of a nuclear power plant is idiotic and inarguably a war crime.

FTFY

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/WebART/470-750071

Which Tyler wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:The shelling of a nuclear power plant is idiotic and inarguably a war crime.

FTFY

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/WebART/470-750071

So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

Banquo wrote:So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

Add it to the list.

And yes, these things take time, and he's essentially untouchable whilst he's in power (and will probably be dead before he has a chance to reach the Hague when he's out of power).
What can we do? Is getting involved (which would still take time to do - though hopefully less time than it would have taken 2 weeks ago) worth the risk nuclear war between Russia and NATO?

I don't have any answers.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... on-ukraine

ICC launches war crimes investigation over Russian invasion of Ukraine

International criminal court inquiry has been expedited by unprecedented number of countries backing move

A war crimes investigation has been launched into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine after an unprecedented number of countries backed the move and Boris Johnson called the military intervention “abhorrent”.

Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor for the international criminal court (ICC), said he would begin work “as rapidly as possible” to look for possible crimes against humanity or genocide committed in Ukraine.

The referral for investigation by 39 countries – including the UK – will shave several months off the process because it allows Khan to bypass the need to seek the approval of the court in The Hague.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

In the absence of a real-life James Bond, assassination from without is... a touch unrealistic.
Given his complete control of Russian media, what I understand is access to all Russian social media, the locking up protestors, and the new (?) Russian treason laws - a 1917 style revolution from within is... a touch unrealistic.
Which leaves us two options - a palace coup, which "we" in the West might be able to influence
Being taken to see the Moskva river by the Praetorian Guard, which "we" in the West probably can't do much about

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

Add it to the list.

And yes, these things take time, and he's essentially untouchable whilst he's in power (and will probably be dead before he has a chance to reach the Hague when he's out of power).
What can we do? Is getting involved (which would still take time to do - though hopefully less time than it would have taken 2 weeks ago) worth the risk nuclear war between Russia and NATO?

I don't have any answers.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... on-ukraine

ICC launches war crimes investigation over Russian invasion of Ukraine



International criminal court inquiry has been expedited by unprecedented number of countries backing move

A war crimes investigation has been launched into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine after an unprecedented number of countries backed the move and Boris Johnson called the military intervention “abhorrent”.

Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor for the international criminal court (ICC), said he would begin work “as rapidly as possible” to look for possible crimes against humanity or genocide committed in Ukraine.

The referral for investigation by 39 countries – including the UK – will shave several months off the process because it allows Khan to bypass the need to seek the approval of the court in The Hague.

ARTICLE CONTINUES...

In the absence of a real-life James Bond, assassination from without is... a touch unrealistic.
Given his complete control of Russian media, what I understand is access to all Russian social media, the locking up protestors, and the new (?) Russian treason laws - a 1917 style revolution from within is... a touch unrealistic.
Which leaves us two options - a palace coup, which "we" in the West might be able to influence
Being taken to see the Moskva river by the Praetorian Guard, which "we" in the West probably can't do much about

Yep, I got nothing; a lot of chat on online paper websites about taking him on militarily, quite blase about the consequences even nukes. I don't think we can go there. Somehow, 'regime change' has to be the answer.

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: as a sort of tangent, deploying tactical nuclear weapons is kind of standard war procedure for the Russian army according to Dannett. So...

It may be standard in a book. Never used in reality though...

The point is, tactical nuclear weapons are not regarded in the same way by the russion military as by us.....never say never

We can never say never. I'm just objecting to your use of the phrase 'kind of standard' for a technique that has never actually been used and would clearly require approval from the top. But I agree, from my layman's understanding, Russia's rulebook may take a more aggressive line in this area. Not that I've seen Russia's rulebook, or ours, or the US's.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: It may be standard in a book. Never used in reality though...

The point is, tactical nuclear weapons are not regarded in the same way by the russion military as by us.....never say never

We can never say never. I'm just objecting to your use of the phrase 'kind of standard' for a technique that has never actually been used and would clearly require approval from the top. But I agree, from my layman's understanding, Russia's rulebook may take a more aggressive line in this area. Not that I've seen Russia's rulebook, or ours, or the US's.

I was quoting from Dannatt's TV interview, who probably knows his stuff,and certainly our playbook. My point was he said the russians see tactical nukes as a standard part of their weaponry.

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:The shelling of a nuclear power plant is idiotic and inarguably a war crime.

FTFY

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/WebART/470-750071

So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

As Z says, energy sanctions. And a complete ban of Russian banks (and indeed all entities) from SWIFT. Seizure of all Russian assets. (I'm not saying we should do these things immediately, but we should probably work through this list if things continue as they are).

But not even these would bring the invasion to a halt, or reverse it (although they would increase the chance of such things). Direct military intervention is the only thing that would work, and that would be a very bad idea.

We need to keep the Ukrainians supplied with arms, food, fuel and intelligence to keep their defence, and if necessary, their resistance going. We also need NATO to build up defences in European member states bordering on Russia or Belarus, similarly the EU needs to do this for Finland. Moldova (neither EU nor NATO) needs to be considered. Should we (EU, NATO, whatever) place troops there? Not fair on the Ukrainians that we would draw a line there, but still worth seriously considering.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: FTFY

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/WebART/470-750071

So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

As Z says, energy sanctions. And a complete ban of Russian banks (and indeed all entities) from SWIFT. Seizure of all Russian assets. (I'm not saying we should do these things immediately, but we should probably work through this list if things continue as they are).

But not even these would bring the invasion to a halt, or reverse it (although they would increase the chance of such things). Direct military intervention is the only thing that would work, and that would be a very bad idea.

We need to keep the Ukrainians supplied with arms, food, fuel and intelligence to keep their defence, and if necessary, their resistance going. We also need NATO to build up defences in European member states bordering on Russia or Belarus, similarly the EU needs to do this for Finland. Moldova (neither EU nor NATO) needs to be considered. Should we (EU, NATO, whatever) place troops there? Not fair on the Ukrainians that we would draw a line there, but still worth seriously considering.

Seems the 1sr para is happening, albeit slowly, and the last para is in place. The problem is that the long term is a bloody long time for 41m Ukrainians. Awful- i have nothing.

Zhivago wrote:

Galfon wrote:A fire has reportedly broken out in Europe’s largest nuclear power plant located in Zaporizhzhya, following continuous shelling of buildings and units there, ​the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.
Not a good thing.

Energy exports must be sanctioned

I hope our leaders are talking to their nuclear power experts on this. If there's any potential for another Chernobyl - or worse - then this could indiscriminately kill untold numbers in Ukraine or any nearby state (including Russia) - so we should make a point that this is a clear war crime (and that the wind is just as likely to take the deathcloud into Russia as anywhere else) and step up sanctions.

Maybe Putin hasn't watched Chernobyl (the series). But then the real horror of that was the potential deathtoll the characters fought to avoid. I don't think such things keep Putin awake at night.

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: So what's the next move? Pretty clear that nothing done so far is going to stop him. Even if we think he'll get toppled in the mid-term, in the short term, Ukraine and its people will be devastated.

As Z says, energy sanctions. And a complete ban of Russian banks (and indeed all entities) from SWIFT. Seizure of all Russian assets. (I'm not saying we should do these things immediately, but we should probably work through this list if things continue as they are).

But not even these would bring the invasion to a halt, or reverse it (although they would increase the chance of such things). Direct military intervention is the only thing that would work, and that would be a very bad idea.

We need to keep the Ukrainians supplied with arms, food, fuel and intelligence to keep their defence, and if necessary, their resistance going. We also need NATO to build up defences in European member states bordering on Russia or Belarus, similarly the EU needs to do this for Finland. Moldova (neither EU nor NATO) needs to be considered. Should we (EU, NATO, whatever) place troops there? Not fair on the Ukrainians that we would draw a line there, but still worth seriously considering.

Seems the 1sr para is happening, albeit slowly, and the last para is in place. The problem is that the long term is a bloody long time for 41m Ukrainians. Awful- i have nothing.

The hope is that these sanctions really have an effect. And the Russians aren't willing to put up with soviet-style hardship these days. But potentially this could go on for years, decades even.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: As Z says, energy sanctions. And a complete ban of Russian banks (and indeed all entities) from SWIFT. Seizure of all Russian assets. (I'm not saying we should do these things immediately, but we should probably work through this list if things continue as they are).

But not even these would bring the invasion to a halt, or reverse it (although they would increase the chance of such things). Direct military intervention is the only thing that would work, and that would be a very bad idea.

We need to keep the Ukrainians supplied with arms, food, fuel and intelligence to keep their defence, and if necessary, their resistance going. We also need NATO to build up defences in European member states bordering on Russia or Belarus, similarly the EU needs to do this for Finland. Moldova (neither EU nor NATO) needs to be considered. Should we (EU, NATO, whatever) place troops there? Not fair on the Ukrainians that we would draw a line there, but still worth seriously considering.

Seems the 1sr para is happening, albeit slowly, and the last para is in place. The problem is that the long term is a bloody long time for 41m Ukrainians. Awful- i have nothing.

The hope is that these sanctions really have an effect. And the Russians aren't willing to put up with soviet-style hardship these days. But potentially this could go on for years, decades even.

In the meantime, Ukraine gradually empties and misery for 41m +....gawd, can't see any alternative that doesn't involve catastrophe.