|
surf rock posted:One thing that's confusing me as I read along here: why is it a given that NATO wouldn't be interested in adding Ukraine? Is it purely concern about the Russian reaction, or is there something intrinsically about Ukraine that makes it an undesirable member compared with the other Eastern European countries that were added? NATO has said twice that it won't take them in the near future. That date keeps being moved back. First it was because Ukraine was politically divided. Now its because of corruption, a weak democratic system (the former president is currently evading arrest in Kyiv), and the ongoing conflict. Zelensky could probably try to officially cede Crimea and DNR/LNR, at which point we'd get back to that weak democratic system issue, and nationalists would probably do maidan pt 3.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
Budzilla posted:I re-read your post. Do we have short and intermediate range nukes in Europe again? I thought we removed them all in the 90's, unless you count B61s, but those are literal bombs delivered by fighter-bombers, not decapitation strike weapons. But Russia isn't demanding that we stop deploying short and intermediate range nukes, not according to anything I have read. Every story just says missiles. You can't have a modern military without short and intermediate range conventional missiles. Yes, some conventional missiles are nuclear capable, but this has never been a serious problem in arms control treaties.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
Clevername posted:Do we have short and intermediate range nukes in Europe again? I thought we removed them all in the 90's, unless you count B61s, but those are literal bombs delivered by fighter-bombers, not decapitation strike weapons. Nobody needs intermediate range nuclear weapons in the age of Submarine delivered IRBMs and ICBMs. The only weapons we have in Europe are B61 gravity bombs. And regardless, Mutually Assured Destruction ensures the use of any such weapons is basically an end game only. Russia is largely playing up propaganda to justify aggression against Ukraine and give Putin a strong man image he desires. https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-...host%20nations. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
Clevername posted:Do we have short and intermediate range nukes in Europe again? I thought we removed them all in the 90's, unless you count B61s, but those are literal bombs delivered by fighter-bombers, not decapitation strike weapons. If I recall it correctly, Russia was complaining about hypothetical Tomahawk launches from Aegis Ashore installations. Then there was also something about drones, and some other thing too. But all of those predate US withdrawal from INF, there's probably something extra they've become unhappy with. Edit: To be clear, their INF complaints are not about nukes in any way. Nukes are a separate topic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
"""U.S. military's top officer spoke to his British counterpart by phone today, spokesman says. Gen. Milley's call follows reports that a small team of British commandos have deployed to Ukraine along with anti-tank weapons""" GOOD STUfF WE GOT HERE In glad that Boris is ready to initiate trident when his soldiers get gunned down by Russian troops.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:16
|
|
|
Boris is going to pre-emptively nuke Moscow if he learns that it could save him from Sue Gray.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:17
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Boris is going to pre-emptively nuke Moscow if he learns that it could save him from Sue Gray. Lol the London banking system is far too invested in Russia to ever intervene. It's sarcasm because the Brits will prolly be in Kiev and be flown out before the possibility of the fall
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
I figured its embassy evacuation crew or similar, maybe a few instructors to train Ukrainian soldiers use the AT weaponry UK is giving them. Just went along with the bit since Boriss frenetic death throes are quite amusing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:27
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:If I recall it correctly, Russia was complaining about hypothetical Tomahawk launches from Aegis Ashore installations. Then there was also something about drones, and some other thing too. But all of those predate US withdrawal from INF, there's probably something extra they've become unhappy with. I thought INF was the Intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty? Their complaints are not really INF complaints, they are just complaints.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
Clevername posted:I thought INF was the Intermediate range Nuclear Forces treaty? Their complaints are not really INF complaints, they are just complaints. You thought kind-of incorrectly. INF is the shorthand for American audiences, with the formal, and typically used in Europe, name being to the tune of Treaty on elimination of short- and medium-range missiles. The subject of the treaty is very simple - straightforward ban on any ground-based missile systems with strike range between 600 km and 6000 km (or somewhere around that, dont quote me on the numbers).
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:33
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:I figured its embassy evacuation crew or similar, maybe a few instructors to train Ukrainian soldiers use the AT weaponry UK is giving them. Just went along with the bit since Boriss frenetic death throes are quite amusing. Haha okay. Just making sure as upthread people were talking about Ukraine nuking themselves and I definitely don't want to be associated with that crowd. But yes I too love Boris trying to act tough or competent. In reality Boris is still stuck in an infinite loop of hiding his alcoholism from his subordinates and the public with louder
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 03:40
|
|
|
oh no 150+ new posts oh poo poo have russia invaded after all--- nope, no, it's all tedious clancychat (clancychat-lite, i guess?) for the sake of not just posting about other people's posting: i'm about 99% convinced that russia is not going to invade. it would be too costly economically (both due to inherent costs of doing an invasion and due to further sanctions), there isn't much to be gained by actually invading at this point (as opposed to threatening invasion), and there really isn't much popular support for doing something like that (unlike the whole "IT'S COMING HOME" sentiment with crimea) plus, afaik the internal situation in russia is much more precarious than in, say, 2014 - the economy is really not doing so well, and there is much more mistrust (bordering on hostility) towards the current government and mr putin personally (at least from what i can see) one thing i can see triggering some kind of military response is ukraine attempting large-scale military action against DNR/LNR (though not even that is a given). this is exceedingly unlikely with zelensky in charge, imo also and apropos of nothing, i loving hate zelensky's personal style. loving 2000-s камеди клаб presenter-looking rear end
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 04:19
|
|
|
nurmie posted:loving 2000-s камеди клаб presenter-looking rear end Maxim galkin wanna be mutherfucker
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 04:28
|
|
|
Russia is going to nuke it's own cities to stop the NATO encroachment threat. I know it may seem Clancy but I've drink 100 ₽ hair tonic and saw the future. cinci zoo sniper posted:I figured its embassy evacuation crew or similar, maybe a few instructors to train Ukrainian soldiers use the AT weaponry UK is giving them. Just went along with the bit since Boriss frenetic death throes are quite amusing. A group of about 30 elite UK troops has arrived in Ukraine to help train Ukrainian military on new anti-tank weapons from UK. @TheRangerRegt troops flew out on military planes that airlifted anti-tank weapons during course of the week WAR CRIME GIGOLO fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 04:41
|
|
|
nurmie posted:oh no 150+ new posts oh poo poo have russia invaded after all--- nope, no, it's all tedious clancychat (clancychat-lite, i guess?) We're currently looking at the largest concentration of conventional ballistic missiles and active armored fighting vehicles in Europe since the fall of the USSR, as well as the largest mobilization of contract forces in Russian military history. If this is just a bluff, what kind of bluff is it? What's the goal of threatening?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:12
|
|
|
This is all a big conspiracy to harm PiS's polling numbers
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:16
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:If this is just a bluff, what kind of bluff is it? What's the goal of threatening? Given modern spy tech, if they weren't putting the necessary forces in place, the threats would be seen as obviously empty. Cugel the Clever fucked around with this message at 05:37 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:34
|
|
|
As for what's to gain, I've repeated it a few times in the thread but maybe it bears concisely breaking it down: Crimea is the HQ of the Russian Black Sea fleet, as well as a significant staging point for Russian Air Forces. While they control the peninsula, their only access to it is by air or sea; the Kerch bridge is relatively circuitous and not well suited towards mass movements, and would be destroyed with relative easy in the early stages of a conflict (we might even see that happen if the Ukrainian Airforce gets lucky before its wiped out). Russia also doesn't have control of the freshwater canal that provides drinking water to Crimea, which is a big issue during summers. Securing a land route would allow dramatically easier resupply and reinforcement of the peninsula, which consequently improves Russia's threat projection against Ukraine and any state with a Black Sea coast, especially Turkey. If Russia has any territorial goals, this is the one. Meanwhile, the Western countries that would normally challenge Putin are experiencing a period of unprecedented instability, and their entire policy regarding Ukraine appears to have been predicated on the idea that Russia would never risk a conflict this large in the first place, so now they're just hoping the Russians only grab a land bridge rather than try to cut Ukraine in half, while posturing about sanctions as if that stopped the chemical attacks in Syria and the numerous assassinations and cyber attacks over the past decade.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:40
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:now they're just hoping the Russians only grab a land bridge rather than try to cut Ukraine in half, while posturing about sanctions as if that stopped the chemical attacks in Syria and the numerous assassinations and cyber attacks over the past decade. Yeah, Biden specifically said if it was just a minor land grab there may not be much retaliation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEYXyKamyN4
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:55
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Yeah, Biden specifically said if it was just a minor land grab there may not be much retaliation. full on Neville chamberlain vibes on this one. Like unbelievable comparisons can be made. Doesn't he realize grabbing a LAND bridge would mean that Donetsk and luhansk have the go ahead to become part of Russia proper? The other problem with this point is that we will literally call anything a minor border incursion so we don't have to respond. So even if half the country falls Biden will go oh well Ukraine is still a country therefore all is well and peace has been maintained. It's bullshit and outright selling Ukraine out. Because while Ukraine says it will fight etc etc Ukrainian line troops will do as some did in the Crimean invasion, they will put the black balaclava on and join the Russian side. Please know this isn't because I think they're weak or pussies etc, but simply when offered the choice between survival and guaranteed death or exile, the underpaid Ukrainians will choose survival as many other humans would.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:12
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Yeah, Biden specifically said if it was just a minor land grab there may not be much retaliation. That was his usual verbal gaffes or his senility talking, the administration hurried to say that what he said before wasn't what he meant, this is what he meant. https://www.npr.org/2022/01/20/1074466148/biden-russia-ukraine-minor-incursion "If any Russian military forces move across the Ukrainian border, that's a renewed invasion, and it will be met with a swift, severe, and united response from the United States and our allies." etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:14
|
|
|
Wheeljack posted:That was his usual verbal gaffes or his senility talking, the administration hurried to say that what he said before wasn't what he meant, this is what he meant. Yeah, I'm not buying it. He said what he meant the first time and said the quiet part out loud. And the truth is the Biden isn't going to do anything as long as Putin gets it over with quickly and doesn't make too obvious of a mess. Now, if the news media makes a big deal over it and starts calling Biden weak he might get mad and bomb some innocent family like he did in Afghanistan, but I doubt he'll do that in Eastern Europe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:18
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:Yeah, I'm not buying it. He said what he meant the first time and said the quiet part out loud. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVbUXmAlE3M Biden bumbling the key part of the foundational document of the United States. The simplest explanation is the most likely to be correct, and that's that he added another gaffe to his long, long list. The effect may be the same though, emboldening Putin to make a move, since he heard what he wanted to hear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:53
|
|
|
FishBulbia posted:Zelensky could probably try to officially cede Crimea and DNR/LNR, at which point we'd get back to that weak democratic system issue, and nationalists would probably do maidan pt 3. That's not a power the Ukrainian President or Parliament has, it can only be done via referendum. Same goes for a hypothetical Presdet Lyashko annexing Kuban or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:18
|
|
|
Wheeljack posted:
Yeah Putin basing his strategy on watching a Biden presser seems likely
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:06
|
|
|
nurmie posted:for the sake of not just posting about other people's posting: i'm about 99% convinced that russia is not going to invade. it would be too costly economically (both due to inherent costs of doing an invasion and due to further sanctions), there isn't much to be gained by actually invading at this point (as opposed to threatening invasion), and there really isn't much popular support for doing something like that (unlike the whole "IT'S COMING HOME" sentiment with crimea) The wildcard here is the psychotic obsession with the great patriotic war and the need to relive it. Even if it doesn't make sense economically (like Crimea), what can be more noble than sending your soldiers to die to make Russia Great? Can a price be put on historical legacy? Possible that the whole security-military apparatus will not relent until they close that Gestalt. Cugel the Clever posted:Achieving aims lesser than those extreme ones they've made publicly (which, themselves, are part of the game). It's a pretty classic negotiating tact. It also was probably hoped it would destabilize Ukraine enough without requiring action. What's a point where pretending to be preparing for an invasion becomes actual preparations for an invasion? Major provocation? At some point the Czar will look ne po-pacanski if he backs out
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:16
|
|
|
Going by Paradox rules, Putin has a better claim to conquer Ukraine than the USA does to come to its defense: 1.) Ukraine is a USSR core state 2.) Ukraine has a -50 "Recently Overthrew Government" modifier from the 1992 Yeltsin Coup 3.) Who gives a gently caress and if we spill a single drop of American blood over this it will be another damnable crime to add even more skulls to the already interminable death debt this country has inflicted on the planet (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:32
|
|
|
forbidden dialectics posted:Going by Paradox rules, Putin has a better claim to conquer Ukraine than the USA does to come to its defense: Apparently a single drop of American blood is more valuable than 13 thousand Ukrainians Putin already murdered. Go to hell you racist piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:39
|
|
|
This thread is good when it's eastern Europeans posting their insights and lived experience, and very bad when it's Americans posting their stupid rear end takes about geopolitics
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:41
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Apparently a single drop of American blood is more valuable than 13 thousand Ukrainians Putin already murdered. Go to hell you racist piece of poo poo. But have you considered the midterms are coming up
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Apparently a single drop of American blood is more valuable than 13 thousand Ukrainians Putin already murdered. Go to hell you racist piece of poo poo. The living are indeed more valuable than the dead, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:Because appeasing aggressive autocrats has always worked so well. It worked out super well for sinteres, so I can see why he wants to repeat it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:46
|
|
|
I just feel like any appeal filled with pathos has to take into account how much death the military spending would alleviate domestically, specifically regarding covid. I dunno how it is overseas but 13,000 is like next week for us, we're very acclimated to this level of dying. Not to mention that an actual war would cause more death than less, no? Very weird appeal is all I'm saying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:50
|
|
|
Somaen posted:This thread is good when it's eastern Europeans posting their insights and lived experience, and very bad when it's Americans posting their stupid rear end takes about geopolitics But all of those Eastern Europeans are actually affluent expats, after all they speak English. The real truth is out there, on Twitter, and only me who speaks American can read it. fnox fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:51
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:You are living in a delusional fantasy world where giving the bully what he wants somehow doesn't result in the bully coming back to take more of your poo poo the next day. I even used a different analogy for you. Russia is the military equal to NATO simply because it has a vast nuclear arsenal. That's all you need to keep big bad scary NATO away from you. It isn't that long since this thread was scared posting about how defending Ukraine could lead to Russia just nuking everyone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:58
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:I just feel like any appeal filled with pathos has to take into account how much death the military spending would alleviate domestically, specifically regarding covid. I dunno how it is overseas but 13,000 is like next week for us, we're very acclimated to this level of dying. Not to mention that an actual war would cause more death than less, no? Very weird appeal is all I'm saying. A big difference is that covid mostly kills the elderly. If Russia invades Ukraine it will be mostly kids killing each other there edit: actually I think I misread this post Flavahbeast fucked around with this message at 09:03 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 09:01
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:I just feel like any appeal filled with pathos has to take into account how much death the military spending would alleviate domestically, specifically regarding covid. I dunno how it is overseas but 13,000 is like next week for us, we're very acclimated to this level of dying. Not to mention that an actual war would cause more death than less, no? Very weird appeal is all I'm saying. Nobody wants a war, except for Russia, apparently. The goal is to stop the war from going through, or to punish Putin enough he ends up worse off than before if he actually attacks. Again, nobody expects armored divisions to drive across the Carpathians. Are sanctions too much of a sacrifice to be justified by avoiding the death of thousands and vassalisation of potentially millions? steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 10:16 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 10:11
|
|
|
Why would you think that Russia wants war?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 10:18
|
|
|
uno.mannschaft posted:Why would you think that Russia wants war? Could have something to do with Russia bringing a massive army to Ukraine's border, making less reasonable demands than my girlfriend back in 8th grade, and threatening a "military-technical measures" in the event of non-compliance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
Because they are starting a war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 10:20
|
|