|
It was all Russian hybrid warfare bullshittery; they're too broke to afford a serious push for more Ukrainian territory.
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
Keeping the strait only costs Russia nothing if Ukraine lets them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2018 00:24
|
|
|
 That picture should be on the dictionary next to SPOOK.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Couple weeks ago, while going through the DDR archives on an unrelated inquiry, researchers chanced upon Putin's Stasi ID from back when he worked as a KGB agent in East Germany through the 80s.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
The world doesn't end. But it certainly stands a good chance of collapsing modern global civilization, if not by itself then by combining it with our already scheduled ecosystem collapse.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:This has nothing to do with Eastern Europe. Yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
If it's a bluff it's a expensive one, given the number of forces they seem to be moving.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/pmakela1/status/1461716198471655424 The spooky toys are out.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I'm not convinced Russia will invade Ukraine. But, if they did what would their official reason be? Fresh and straight from the horse's mouth: https://tass.com/politics/1364315 "The situation at several sections of Russia’s state border is difficult, with threats of armed conflicts and incidents amid heightening pressure from the US and its allies. Risks of provocations by Ukrainian special services and radical organizations in Crimea and against economic and transport facilities in the Azov and Black Seas have increased." Plus Peskov adding that the three other members of the Normandy Four are "unwilling to see that the Minsk Agreements are the key document for the settlement in Ukraine."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
Somaen posted:Conversely, sanctions for Crimea and Donbass in 2014-15 and Ukraine not falling apart made Putin back off from pushing the Novorossiya project to Transnistria because he got a bloody nose. If he sees that Ukraine has no friends and backers he can attack, if he judges political costs to be too much he will back off pretending he was just playin'. Hope this helps But what can NATO actually do to dissuade Putin here, now? Russia is already being sanctioned heavily and having their military infrastructure sabotaged by MI6 and that didn't prevent them from building up a war chest and have the force readiness for this presumed operation. So what happens now? Sleepy Joe ain't risking triple digit American bodybags in the leadup to the midterms over the loving Ukraine, so what's the hope, that Macron will risk French lives and military prestige and starting WW3?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2021 15:16
|
|
|
PugWings posted:Put another way, I don't know how people look at the world today and conclude the super/regional powers have the capacity/popular support for drawn out warfare. This works in Russia's favor since, while they may have the forces in place for a push, can opt to just rain down cruise missiles and airstrikes on every Ukranian military facility of value while holding the line against an Ukranian response. And what can NATO tangibly do in response to that, go kill Russians in Russian territory? This would completely devastate Ukraniain military infrastructure, nipping at the bud any ideas they might've had of a campaign in Donbass, and demonstrates the Zelensky government and its Western backers are impotent, securing primary policy goals without risking a protracted occupation with an active insurgency.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
The Ukranian government was seemingly planning on launching a campaign on Donbass this year, and changed their minds only after the preemptive Russian response was to heavily reinforce the region with the largest troop movement since the war started. What we're seeing now is partly a continuation of that, since they already had the logistics train in place. So the question is, "How is bombing Ukrainian facilities from Russia without moving forward to grab territory actually help Russia?" Again, it literally demolishes any illusions that if push comes to shove Ukraine can put on pressure on Donbass, and it demonstrates to the Ukrainian populace that the Zelensky government is impotent and the West cannot and will not defend them - which in an ideal Russian scenario is a shift back towards their orbit, because while certain groups and parts of Ukraine will always be anti-Russia that's not necessarily true of the government or broader political echelon. I'll add, unless the trajectory of the situation dramatically changes, this is what I at least expect Russia will attempt. I'm no prophet; maybe Putin will actually go and try to take Mariupol, too. And tangentially, the Ukranian military's assessment that was posted earlier in the thread is as close to a worst case scenario as it gets for them - not necessarily what they believe will happen but it's genuinely their job to plan for that given the severity of the situation. And since you were pointing out costs, fact is this seems too much movement of forces for just posturing. They're pulling vehicles out of central reserve unit depots - this is expensive. Rumor by way of Bloomberg is they've also non-publicly mobilized multiple reserve divisions, which is the sort of thing you do if you expect to have to secure territory. If this is all just a bluff then it's a very convincing one.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:All the "what is America gonna do, send Jim Bob from West Virginia to defense Kiev? Oh, for sure as a consequence of this the Baltics and Poland are going to call for large scale military commitments from NATO, who with a heavy heart would have to pay the MIC hundreds of billions to maintain. And in doing that, Putin might end up with a domestic political goldmine, because now NATO would be at the door in force and Russians could feel a genuine threat from the West, which he could embrace to tighten his slipping political control. But either way, I'm certain western defense contractors are positively salivating at the idea of a new Iron Curtain - the Cold War, the *real* Cold War is coming back, baby!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 18:48
|
|
" takes ignore that there's a lot of groundwork to be done to shore up the alliance system that this threat is the perfect opportunity for. It might not help Ukraine if Russia decides to invade, but it might help the Baltic states a decade down the road.
|
Or maybe NATO should just, idk, disband.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:As someone living in the Baltics, I think I’ll pass on that one. Hey, ideally NATO should've disbanded 30 years ago, but as someone not living in the Baltics I'd take your sovereignty's sacrifice to modern Russian opportunism over more mil spending waste and the risk of an escalation cycle that fucks everyone over. That is already loving everyone over. That said, you'll get your wish as there really aren't a lot of reasons for NATO not to answer for a request of heavy militarization of the Baltics & Poland; the only realistic alternative security guarantee (as in, doesn't result in the alliance breaking down as a farce) would be immediate strategic nuclear response to any assault by Russia on a NATO state.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
How are u posted:You know that Putin is choosing to be a warmonger, right? His choices are not some immutable force of nature. He could just...not. Just as NATO could just... not exist as a continuously expanding military coalition whose implicit purpose is antagonizing the USSR's successor state as well as serving as an enabler for military adventurism in Africa and the Middle East. Let us not forget it was Western policies that created Putin and his oligarchs - and it's Western policies that are allowing him to hold onto power by severely hurting the people of Russia and of everyone in Russia's orbit.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 19:41
|
|
|
How are u posted:Why would you call the Russian Federation "the USSR's successor state" instead of by its name? The USSR is long dead and gone. That's kind of weird. I'm sorry, did I forget what was NATO created for?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
CMYK BLYAT! posted:i assure you, Anatoly Chubais, Yegor Gaidar, and Boris Yeltsin are not westerners, nor were they mind-controlled by the CIA to enact privatization as they did. they made absolutely terrible policy decisions in retrospect, but that's still on them. the oligarchic system persists because it's extremely beneficial to those in power, Putin included. he's quite aware of this, and of the effectiveness of blaming external problems for all ills to distract the population ire away from domestic problems. suggesting that Putin remains in power because of fear of NATO expansionism, rather than Putin remaining in power of his own volition and greed via widespread election rigging and consolidation of power under the federal executive, is a pretty lol take. Russia was promised a seat at the table following what it rightfully saw as a self-liberating return to democracy and embracement of European norms. Instead, the Central European states were treated - as they have been for the past 300 years - as geopolitical spoils of war for the West while Anthony Lake and Bill Clinton stabbed Yeltsin in the back. People here can hee-haw about how "maybe Putin just shouldn't be a warmonger" all they want, but the rise of someone like him was pretty much guaranteed as the domestic response to the repeated broken promises and humiliation by foreign powers, just like decades of Western policies precipitated Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus ending up as deeply poor and corrupt broken countries, and how decades of Russophobic 'containment and isolation' American policy have both aided the regime's grip on power and left us with an aging autocrat worried about his legacy and perhaps thinking the current situation as his last best chance to reverse NATO encroachment. There was a huge opportunity to move past all of this and Clinton's garbage foreign policy squandered it, so I'll freely accuse its architects and perpetuators of bearing responsibility for the immense misery and loss of life and property that has followed, and that is most likely about to follow again. And I don't believe pinning blame in the West's policies and responses as a huge contributing factor to the current clusterfuck is neither dictator apologia nor reductionist of the self-determination of the nations in question - on the contrary, thinking it's all about Putin while ignoring the historical and current geopolitical and cultural contexts that drive Russia's policy goals is missing the forest for the trees. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Nov 24, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
How are u posted:I don't think that free people practicing democracy should be sacrificed to autocrats, period. We should stand behind Ukraine. We should stand behind Taiwan. The 21st century should be democracies supporting and defending each other. If that means a conflict with Putin the Poisoner then so be it. I agree, but instead the free people practicing democracy will shoot for half-measures that only kick the can down the road while increasing kinetic risks. Like I can already tell there'll be a bunch of economic sanctions that will make people in safe Western capitals feel good about themselves while hurting the Russian economy and the average Russian very badly, yet doing not a drat thing that actually hurts the oligarchs or Putin or the war chest they've spent the last three years compiling. The Ukranians meanwhile will get a bunch of weapons they aren't really trained to use. And the Russian military, if they know what they're doing and the weather is cooperative, will beat the living poo poo out of the Ukranians while NATO flies patrols over the Black Sea and postures but does little of actual consequence. The rest I already discussed - Poland and the Baltics will be heavily militarized, Putin can treat that as a boogeyman, the MIC profits, and we all hope the constant saber rattling doesn't spark into out-of-control escalation as the world goes to poo poo from ecological collapse.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2021 04:58
|
|
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Lol, maybe you're not a native English speaker, but a boogeyman typically refers to a false threat. If Russia beats the living poo poo out of Ukraine, as you said, it's not the boogeyman, it's the wolf at the gate and it's got a taste for blood. Oh, so you're saying Russians would be fully justified in feeling threatened by said militarization? Yes, that can only end well.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2021 05:49
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:A generalized european war would harm American strategy much more than it would help it. And the US certainly isn't going to risk killing 2/3rds of its population for a country it has no treaty obligation with. I said it before but after Afghanistan, and despite him being one of the chief architects of the past 20 years of American policy irt Russia, I don't think Sleepy Joe is risking any American bodybags over Ukraine. He's got no spine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:We could give them weapons? Taxpayer money is already buying the finest weapons from the best defense contractors on the planet and handing them to Ukrainian troops and militias who aren't trained in their use. drilldo squirt posted:Maybe station some troops to dissuade the Russians from attacking? And risk triple digit ARE TROOPS bodybags in the leadup to the elections, for a nation we have no formal defense treaty with? Are you nuts?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2021 06:23
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:I think we all agree on those points, but they are only secondary when trying to predict Russia's future actions (which is what everyone's been doing - predicting whether Russia will invade or not, cut gas to Europe or not etc). These actions will be determined by Putin's "solipsism" : Which outcome of this crisis will benefit me personally the most? What will leave me in power 5-10 years from now, unopposed domestically and important internationally? I already said this two weeks ago but what we're going to end up with are a sanctions package that hurts the average Russian but does nothing against Putin or the oligarchs or Russia's military, and a heavily militarized NATO border. Both of these things are domestic political goldmines, from his perspective.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2021 19:06
|
|
|
Biden is Stalin.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2021 07:11
|
|
|
Stalin was Hitler
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
Back to reality: https://twitter.com/idreesali114/status/1468612822343028741 Putin has been greenlit.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:i don't think that was ever gonna happen Oh me neither but here we had more than a few people calling the troop movements a bluff because Putin wouldn't risk a shooting war with the US. Well the US has made it publicly clear it won't get into a shooting war with Russia over Ukraine.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
How are u posted:The ideal solution would be fore somebody to poison putin and this whole problem goes away. The assassination of the head of state of a nuclear power during a period of high tensions sounds like it'd only make problems bigger.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2021 20:05
|
|
|
The fact NATO militaries are oriented towards heavily asymmetrical ME intervention/occupation is absolutely part of the calculus of why they aren't getting involved - reduced preparedness equals increased casualties, which they're unwilling to absorb. They haven't put boots on the ground in a theatre where they don't have complete air superiority for over three decades, and they won't start now over Ukraine.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I'm just not sure what the goal of a limited invasion would be. Mariupul and access to the Dnieper to provide water to Crimea before summer. Also demonstrates the Zelensky government is impotent and his Western backers won't lift a finger to protect Ukraine.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:The US almost has treaty obligations with Taiwan, way more than it had with Ukraine. The US's treaty obligations irt Tawain can be summed up as "idk maybe"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Yeah Im hoping this is a first wave to leave. Obviously we are not seeing the entirety of the realpolitik that's occuring. The Southern Military District is right next to Ukraine anyway, and this excludes the elements that have been based in Crimea. It's nothing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2021 08:34
|
|
|
This is such a piece of poo poo analysis. quote:When war broke out in the South Caucasus between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Russia dispatched a peacekeeping force and, with its enormous influence in the region, constructed a system of relationships dominated by Russia. The current arrangement is dominated by Turkey. Azerbaijan and Turkey got everything they wanted, Russia's security client Armenia got absolutely punked, and the division Russia has sitting in Nag-Kar for peacekeeping has done nothing to stop the skirmishing. That conflict wasn't some big win for ascendant regional power Russia, but for NATO-aligned Turkey. quote:At worst, it’s a prime candidate for a war of attrition as the U.S., weary of Russia’s anti-aircraft capability, fires cruise missiles from afar. (Russia can, of course, shoot some down, but the losses would be huge.) A stand-off Air/Naval intervention by the USMil is most certainly not in the cards given the escalation risk. quote:The Russians have not engaged in multidivisional offensives since 1945. The Soviets engaged in miltidivisional offensives in Afghanistan, and the Russians did in Chechnya and Georgia. quote:In the end, the thing that the Russians will have gained is that they sat down across from the Americans as equals, and the rest of the world will have seen it. But they already accomplished just that, earlier this year! There are far cheaper and less destabilizing ways to secure a photo op with Biden than mobilizing the entire western and southern and most of the central military districts. Only way this isn't ending in a push into Ukranian territory is if A) Putin decides last minute war isn't worth the cost (and nothing NATO or the US has done has altered the initial calculus that led to the beginning of mobilization) or B) he gets what he wants in terms of security guarantees. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Dec 29, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 00:52
|
|
|
Russia already had a division-strenght presence in Armenia so the peacekeeping element is no gain. It seems plenty of garden variety thinkpiece writers are trying to use the Armenia-Azerbaijan situation to paint the picture of a regional power expanding its buffers, and consequently framing the Ukraine situation within that context, but the truth to me seems closer to a regional power that's been backed into a corner with NATO-backed states challenging its previous spheres of influence.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 03:24
|
|
|
Grape posted:Turkish foreign policy has almost never really had much to do with anything NATO wide aside from USSR fears, let alone NATO approved. Oh, I'm well aware of the game Erdogan plays. I'm just emphasizing that the conflict wasn't any kind of win for Russia, and if anything it was a win for a state that's a member of NATO - even if said state was very much acting out of their own intiative and interests rather than as part of any broader alliance policy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 04:01
|
|
|
Grape posted:Yeah I could see the ArmAz conflict in the context of Russia worrying about their brand as influential, impactful, and relevant. And instability in that area effects that brand one way or the other. That's it. Like if/when the Ukraine situation flares up, and hypothetically Erdogan nudges Azerbaijan to make a move, the Russian response would be to grant the Azeris quick concesions to make it go away. Realistically they can't afford to get involved but it's a matter of national prestige to pretend they're relevant. Morrow posted:The proper view is of a Russia in decline, making very risky military moves to defend a shrinking sphere of influence. That's my take, with consideration to Putin himself as an aging autocrat potentially worried about his legacy. I also think old guard analysts as exemplified by Friedman's piece there are rather stuck in a cold war mindset where military posturing was freely employed with an end goal of achieving bilateral summits, ignoring how its use in said capacity has greatly fallen out of favor in the last few decades.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 04:45
|
|
|
The power of gas prices.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
High level defense US-Russia talks on the 10th, NATO-Russia on the 12th, and OSCE meeting on the 13th. This coincides with the end of the freezing spell that just settled over Ukraine, meaning the ground should be firm enough to mobilize armor.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2022 05:01
|
|
|
At the very least they're going to secure a land bridge to Crimea with access to the Dnieper.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:not a regular in this thread at all so forgive my ignorance: Russia already annexed a bit of Ukraine and are now poised towards annexing a bit more - they certainly have the force disposition to do so with few losses. While they may go for targets of opportunity depending on the weather and how the Ukranian military responds, a direct regime change is unrealistic. Military action would however kick the teeth in of the current government, painting it and its Western backers as impotent. This is a costly action, which would indicate Putin/military planners feel they have no other recourse to secure geopolitical objectives. Note also that mobilizing forces to the magnitude they already have is in itself costly and they wouldn't have done so without serious intent to follow through. That's the quick of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2022 21:27
|
|