If Russia invades Ukraine (more)...

[Sandydragon]

I bet Ukraine wish they had kept their nukes.

[Mellsblue]

I bet Ukraine wish they had kept their nukes.

“I knew deep in my soul that we should never have given them away. If we still had our nuclear weapons now, we would have our respect and security, and be free of Russian aggression.” Major General Mykola Filatov, formerly commander of the 46th Missile Division, is not alone in his sorrow.

[Son of Mathonwy]

What would you advise we do?

It's tough, if we could get cooperation (including from the US) we should defend Ukraine. As it is, I hope there's a mountain of sanctions to cause pain to the Russian leadership.

So you advocate a bit of a scrap? I’m surprised. Can’t see how that would end well for anyone.

What would you advise?

[Banquo]

It's tough, if we could get cooperation (including from the US) we should defend Ukraine. As it is, I hope there's a mountain of sanctions to cause pain to the Russian leadership.

So you advocate a bit of a scrap? I’m surprised. Can’t see how that would end well for anyone.

What would you advise?

No clue - not sure what leverage would work. How to enable Putin to back down without losing face, and without appeasing. But cant see any happy outcome from trying to repel an invasion.

[Sandydragon]

So you advocate a bit of a scrap? I’m surprised. Can’t see how that would end well for anyone.

What would you advise?

No clue - not sure what leverage would work. How to enable Putin to back down without losing face, and without appeasing. But cant see any happy outcome from trying to repel an invasion.

Russia has 130-140000 troops on the border. To match that, NATO would need to deploy several corps which is no mean feat. Look at how long it too to build up desert shield for an idea, that’s a lot of heavy metal to move, particularly when the Black Sea has a heavy Russian naval presence.

At best, we would have gotten a division into country and ready to fight, not including lightly armed rapid response formations. That’s just Not enough particularly if Russian troops are able to use Belarusian territory as well.

So it was either put a token force in there and rely on the threat of nuclear weapons, or rely on non military pressure.

We might see some larger formations moving to Eastern Europe in the future or at least some quiet placement of logistical capabilities to allow a rapid build up elsewhere.

[Zhivago]

What would you advise?

No clue - not sure what leverage would work. How to enable Putin to back down without losing face, and without appeasing. But cant see any happy outcome from trying to repel an invasion.

Russia has 130-140000 troops on the border. To match that, NATO would need to deploy several corps which is no mean feat. Look at how long it too to build up desert shield for an idea, that’s a lot of heavy metal to move, particularly when the Black Sea has a heavy Russian naval presence.

At best, we would have gotten a division into country and ready to fight, not including lightly armed rapid response formations. That’s just Not enough particularly if Russian troops are able to use Belarusian territory as well.

So it was either put a token force in there and rely on the threat of nuclear weapons, or rely on non military pressure.

We might see some larger formations moving to Eastern Europe in the future or at least some quiet placement of logistical capabilities to allow a rapid build up elsewhere.

What Ukraine needs more than anything is defence from the air and missiles. Ground troops are not so much needed in comparison.

I'm willing to bet that the US really wants Russia to invade. That's why they're stoking the flames. They see this as an opportunity to get Russia involved in an expensive and costly (financially and politically) war that could result in the end for Putin's reign ultimately. Bit like the Soviet-Afghan war contributed to the end of the USSR.

[Zhivago]

What would you advise we do?

It's tough, if we could get cooperation (including from the US) we should defend Ukraine. As it is, I hope there's a mountain of sanctions to cause pain to the Russian leadership.

It wouldn't end well, but it could end less badly overall than appeasement. It's called a forward defence. I'm sure our NATO allies would prefer that we don't wait to defend them until that defence must take place on their territory.

The main risk of course is that it would escalate into a nuclear war, starting with tactical nukes and possibly rising uncontrollably up the ladder of escalation.

[Zhivago]

So you advocate a bit of a scrap? I’m surprised. Can’t see how that would end well for anyone.

What would you advise?

No clue - not sure what leverage would work. How to enable Putin to back down without losing face, and without appeasing. But cant see any happy outcome from trying to repel an invasion.

War is the achievement of political goals by military means. If we can't find a solution to Putin's goals politically (diplomatically), then he will resort to military might. I think the reason why we aren't even meeting him halfway on this one is because his political goals are completely incompatible with what 'we' want. He wants Ukraine back in the Russian orbit. The West wants it in its orbit. Russia is prepared to fight militarily for it. The West isn't.

I read an interesting bit in an article about Putin's early years - 2002 or so. One of his advisors took him to Staraya Ladoga and was trying to convince him that it was the origin of the Rus. After a day there being taught the history of the place, at the end of it Putin is purported to have said something like "Staraya Ladoga is nice... but Kiev is better".

I think fundamentally Putin cannot accept Ukraine being out of the Russian orbit. The question is how far will he go to get it back.

[Sandydragon]

No clue - not sure what leverage would work. How to enable Putin to back down without losing face, and without appeasing. But cant see any happy outcome from trying to repel an invasion.

Russia has 130-140000 troops on the border. To match that, NATO would need to deploy several corps which is no mean feat. Look at how long it too to build up desert shield for an idea, that’s a lot of heavy metal to move, particularly when the Black Sea has a heavy Russian naval presence.

At best, we would have gotten a division into country and ready to fight, not including lightly armed rapid response formations. That’s just Not enough particularly if Russian troops are able to use Belarusian territory as well.

So it was either put a token force in there and rely on the threat of nuclear weapons, or rely on non military pressure.

We might see some larger formations moving to Eastern Europe in the future or at least some quiet placement of logistical capabilities to allow a rapid build up elsewhere.

What Ukraine needs more than anything is defence from the air and missiles. Ground troops are not so much needed in comparison.

I'm willing to bet that the US really wants Russia to invade. That's why they're stoking the flames. They see this as an opportunity to get Russia involved in an expensive and costly (financially and politically) war that could result in the end for Putin's reign ultimately. Bit like the Soviet-Afghan war contributed to the end of the USSR.

Russia will bring the full spectrum to this party. Air defence is important but it won’t stop the Russian attack on its own. My point is that to stop the Russians conventionally would require a lot of heavy metal which we don’t have forward based and more importantly don’t have the logistical support in place.

Putin May overreach here and I’m sure the US wouldn’t be too upset if he were toppled as a result.

[Zhivago]

Russia has 130-140000 troops on the border. To match that, NATO would need to deploy several corps which is no mean feat. Look at how long it too to build up desert shield for an idea, that’s a lot of heavy metal to move, particularly when the Black Sea has a heavy Russian naval presence.

At best, we would have gotten a division into country and ready to fight, not including lightly armed rapid response formations. That’s just Not enough particularly if Russian troops are able to use Belarusian territory as well.

So it was either put a token force in there and rely on the threat of nuclear weapons, or rely on non military pressure.

We might see some larger formations moving to Eastern Europe in the future or at least some quiet placement of logistical capabilities to allow a rapid build up elsewhere.

What Ukraine needs more than anything is defence from the air and missiles. Ground troops are not so much needed in comparison.

I'm willing to bet that the US really wants Russia to invade. That's why they're stoking the flames. They see this as an opportunity to get Russia involved in an expensive and costly (financially and politically) war that could result in the end for Putin's reign ultimately. Bit like the Soviet-Afghan war contributed to the end of the USSR.

Russia will bring the full spectrum to this party. Air defence is important but it won’t stop the Russian attack on its own. My point is that to stop the Russians conventionally would require a lot of heavy metal which we don’t have forward based and more importantly don’t have the logistical support in place.

Putin May overreach here and I’m sure the US wouldn’t be too upset if he were toppled as a result.

I think although he will certainly pull out all his hybrid war tricks, I think Russian public opinion will constrain him in terms of how aggresive he acts. Despite recent history Ukrainian and Russian people share a very close bond, with lots of people having family in both countries. This is not a case of him feeling free to obliterate Ukraine like he did to Chechnya. I expect whatever he does to be very focused on counter force, in terms of his targetting. And I think it's much more likely that we'll see a more limited invasion such as a land bridge between Donbas and Crimea, than a full occupation of Left-bank Ukraine. I reckon his forces on the northern border are primarily aimed at spreading out the Ukrainian defence, with the primary/initial attack coming in the south. Obviously if he is successful with his initial gains, he will have the option of extending his gains, but that will depend on how strong the reaction of the Ukrainian army and the West's sanctions is.

I think this whole crisis throws into sharp relief how flawed NATO's strategy of repelling a Russian conventional attack using tactical nukes is. I doubt NATO would risk a nuclear war to save the Baltics. It would be all a bit 'Pourquoi mourir pour Danzig?'...

[Banquo]

What Ukraine needs more than anything is defence from the air and missiles. Ground troops are not so much needed in comparison.

I'm willing to bet that the US really wants Russia to invade. That's why they're stoking the flames. They see this as an opportunity to get Russia involved in an expensive and costly (financially and politically) war that could result in the end for Putin's reign ultimately. Bit like the Soviet-Afghan war contributed to the end of the USSR.

Russia will bring the full spectrum to this party. Air defence is important but it won’t stop the Russian attack on its own. My point is that to stop the Russians conventionally would require a lot of heavy metal which we don’t have forward based and more importantly don’t have the logistical support in place.

Putin May overreach here and I’m sure the US wouldn’t be too upset if he were toppled as a result.

I think although he will certainly pull out all his hybrid war tricks, I think Russian public opinion will constrain him in terms of how aggresive he acts. Despite recent history Ukrainian and Russian people share a very close bond, with lots of people having family in both countries. This is not a case of him feeling free to obliterate Ukraine like he did to Chechnya. I expect whatever he does to be very focused on counter force, in terms of his targetting. And I think it's much more likely that we'll see a more limited invasion such as a land bridge between Donbas and Crimea, than a full occupation of Left-bank Ukraine. I reckon his forces on the northern border are primarily aimed at spreading out the Ukrainian defence, with the primary/initial attack coming in the south. Obviously if he is successful with his initial gains, he will have the option of extending his gains, but that will depend on how strong the reaction of the Ukrainian army and the West's sanctions is.

I think this whole crisis throws into sharp relief how flawed NATO's strategy of repelling a Russian conventional attack using tactical nukes is. I doubt NATO would risk a nuclear war to save the Baltics. It would be all a bit 'Pourquoi mourir pour Danzig?'...

Agreed- the big hope is the 'Russian Mothers'.
NATO is a pretty flaccid thing tbh- maybe this will provide the necessary viagra.

[Sandydragon]

What Ukraine needs more than anything is defence from the air and missiles. Ground troops are not so much needed in comparison.

I'm willing to bet that the US really wants Russia to invade. That's why they're stoking the flames. They see this as an opportunity to get Russia involved in an expensive and costly (financially and politically) war that could result in the end for Putin's reign ultimately. Bit like the Soviet-Afghan war contributed to the end of the USSR.

Russia will bring the full spectrum to this party. Air defence is important but it won’t stop the Russian attack on its own. My point is that to stop the Russians conventionally would require a lot of heavy metal which we don’t have forward based and more importantly don’t have the logistical support in place.

Putin May overreach here and I’m sure the US wouldn’t be too upset if he were toppled as a result.

I think although he will certainly pull out all his hybrid war tricks, I think Russian public opinion will constrain him in terms of how aggresive he acts. Despite recent history Ukrainian and Russian people share a very close bond, with lots of people having family in both countries. This is not a case of him feeling free to obliterate Ukraine like he did to Chechnya. I expect whatever he does to be very focused on counter force, in terms of his targetting. And I think it's much more likely that we'll see a more limited invasion such as a land bridge between Donbas and Crimea, than a full occupation of Left-bank Ukraine. I reckon his forces on the northern border are primarily aimed at spreading out the Ukrainian defence, with the primary/initial attack coming in the south. Obviously if he is successful with his initial gains, he will have the option of extending his gains, but that will depend on how strong the reaction of the Ukrainian army and the West's sanctions is.

I think this whole crisis throws into sharp relief how flawed NATO's strategy of repelling a Russian conventional attack using tactical nukes is. I doubt NATO would risk a nuclear war to save the Baltics. It would be all a bit 'Pourquoi mourir pour Danzig?'...

Which is precisely why new members to NATO aren’t just waived through. We don’t really know what Putins objectives are here.
It could be to carve up a bit of the Ukraine to solidify other gains or he might want the whole country . Given the timings, I still think this is largely driven by a need to test Biden.

Bottom line however is that the Ukrainians can’t defend everywhere, they are too outnumbered. I suspect the Ukrainian military will fight hard and hope they can bog down the Russians long enough for Putin to wish he hadn’t bothered. Given that China has decided not to observe any sanctions, that might make Putin a bit braver.

[morepork]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

[Sandydragon]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

We haven’t evolved that much, and it’s not just white Europeans and their colonial offspring who are capable of dick waving.

[Zhivago]

Rasputitsa is a bitch

[Son of Mathonwy]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

Yep, and one of the reasons Brexit was so sad. A move away from cooperation, towards borders and sabre-rattling (and worse).

[kk67]

Didn't like the rhetoric coming out of Stoltenberg this afternoon. It seems that having being played like a fish has inflamed his pride to a dangerous level.

[kk67]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

It turns out that the 'Ukrainian special forces' regiment that were teaching that sweet old grey-haired Granny how to use an AK47 are actually Neo-Nazis. That wasn't mentioned 2 days ago.

[cashead]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

It turns out that the 'Ukrainian special forces' regiment that were teaching that sweet old grey-haired Granny how to use an AK47 are actually Neo-Nazis. That wasn't mentioned 2 days ago.

Hahaha goddamnit Ukraine.

[Zhivago]

How many generations in Europe will have to put up with this toxic testosterone fueled duck waving? All this pseudo academic analysis of military readiness and history just to accommodate another stupid fucking white man (Ghost Dog reference). Are we evolving or stuck in the mud of the primordial ooze?

It turns out that the 'Ukrainian special forces' regiment that were teaching that sweet old grey-haired Granny how to use an AK47 are actually Neo-Nazis. That wasn't mentioned 2 days ago.

Azov Battalion? Yeah, they're a bunch of nutcases. But they aren't representative of the Ukrainian armed forces (or political scene) as a whole, they are merely a hangover from the 2014 chaos. Clearly the Ukrainian government is slowly sidelining them, giving them harmless tasks like training old grannies.

You should bear in mind that the latest Ukrainian parliamentary elections only saw one far-right party represented, Svoboda, and they got only 1 seat out of 450.

But don't let the reality get in the way of your urge to parrot Kremlin propaganda.

[Sandydragon]

Things just got worse.

Reports in the Times online that there has been artillery fire between the Russian backed separatists and Ukrainian forces. Dmitry Peskov, Russia's foreign minister said:
' It's absolutely clear that the situation is escalating. This is a matter of very, very deep concern. We have repeatedly warned that the excessive concentration of Ukrainian armed forces in the immediate vicinity of the line of demarcation, coupled with possible provocations, could pose a terrible danger. Now we see that those provocations are taking place'.

How convenient that Russia has all those troops ready to intervene as peacekeepers.

[Zhivago]

Things just got worse.

Reports in the Times online that there has been artillery fire between the Russian backed separatists and Ukrainian forces. Dmitry Peskov, Russia's foreign minister said:
' It's absolutely clear that the situation is escalating. This is a matter of very, very deep concern. We have repeatedly warned that the excessive concentration of Ukrainian armed forces in the immediate vicinity of the line of demarcation, coupled with possible provocations, could pose a terrible danger. Now we see that those provocations are taking place'.

How convenient that Russia has all those troops ready to intervene as peacekeepers.

These ceasefire violations are very common. I wouldn't regard this as news.

What might be news is the recently constructed pontoon bridge right by the Ukrainian border by Chernobyl

[Sandydragon]

Things just got worse.

Reports in the Times online that there has been artillery fire between the Russian backed separatists and Ukrainian forces. Dmitry Peskov, Russia's foreign minister said:
' It's absolutely clear that the situation is escalating. This is a matter of very, very deep concern. We have repeatedly warned that the excessive concentration of Ukrainian armed forces in the immediate vicinity of the line of demarcation, coupled with possible provocations, could pose a terrible danger. Now we see that those provocations are taking place'.

How convenient that Russia has all those troops ready to intervene as peacekeepers.

These ceasefire violations are very common. I wouldn't regard this as news.

What might be news is the recently constructed pontoon bridge right by the Ukrainian border by Chernobyl

I take your point, but does the Russian Foreign Minister talk specifically about provocation every time they happen? The news about the bridge is interesting.It does appear the the news that Russia was withdrawing was just horse shit for the domestic audience.

[Zhivago]

I take your point, but does the Russian Foreign Minister talk specifically about provocation every time they happen? The news about the bridge is interesting.It does appear the the news that Russia was withdrawing was just horse shit for the domestic audience.

True, but for me the most compelling fact is simply the sheer number of violations. I have been following the status on liveuamap.com very frequently for months now and the latest violations are greatly increased in number. It's also very clear that all the shelling is landing on the Ukrainian side, which means that it's clearly only the separatists engaging in these violations.

My guess is that the separatists are trying to provoke Ukraine into a strong reaction, which Russia will then use to justify intervention.

[Sandydragon]

I take your point, but does the Russian Foreign Minister talk specifically about provocation every time they happen? The news about the bridge is interesting.It does appear the the news that Russia was withdrawing was just horse shit for the domestic audience.

True, but for me the most compelling fact is simply the sheer number of violations. I have been following the status on liveuamap.com very frequently for months now and the latest violations are greatly increased in number. It's also very clear that all the shelling is landing on the Ukrainian side, which means that it's clearly only the separatists engaging in these violations.

My guess is that the separatists are trying to provoke Ukraine into a strong reaction, which Russia will then use to justify intervention.

totally agree, just like South Ossetia.Then the Russians will intervene to keep the peace.