|
Conspiratiorist posted:Fact is one of the world's largest militaries has concentrated >60% of its fighting power along the border of a country it invaded less than 10 years ago and somehow we still have no loving idea what it's going to do or how they're going to do it.
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
Truga posted:western state apparatuses and media are hyping this supposed invasion that's kicking off in 2 weeks, and how we should totally help ukraine (for 8 years straight now i might add), and just generally spreading stupid fear, almost like they're planning some kind of false flag themselves While the Western government's (and ghoulish media) messaging has been atrocious, their actions have been the opposite of saber-rattling: they're bending over backwards to avoid an escalation chain with Russia. Removing instructors from Ukraine, diplomats, urging citizens to leave, declaring again and again that they will not send troops to defend Ukraine - that's all intended to make it clear that NATO (collectively or individually) will not get into a direct confrontation with Russia. Other than receiving the new buzzword lethal aid support, Ukraine is on its own. Moral support, though: may they fight the good fight against Russian imperialism down to the last Ukrainian.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:The US is sending troops and fighter jets to Poland, and though their present mission has been publicly declared to involve staying put in Poland regardless of future events, it is odd to me that this is seen as peacekeeping while Russian movements within their own borders are provocation. And I do not disagree that Russian movements are provocation. However, if I'm skeptical of US movements as a US citizen, one might think the Russians would be particularly skeptical. It's a matter of magnitude - just like the "tripwire" forces in the Baltics, it's an useful show of commitment if you puff them up with PR but impractically small for either offensive or defensive purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:I'm not concerned about them attacking Russia, I'm concerned about them entering Ukraine, either preventatively or in response to Russia entering Ukraine, which is something one might do with forces stationed in Poland. The US is keeping their dick out. They have no way to even slow down a force concentration of this magnitude without killing so many flagged Russian military that it'd trigger World War 3. And even if it didn't escalate that far, it'd nevertheless inevitably result in thousands of US are troops casualties that Biden most definitely doesn't want on him in the lead-up to the midterms. On the contrary, they're bending over backwards to avoid an escalation chain. https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1491914139505242113 Smartest words his decaying grey matter has articulated in the past 10 years.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I don't understand how you can say we are avoiding escalation while we are actively arming one side. We are trying to keep our own troops out, sure, but that's different from avoiding escalation. Escalation in this context means a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia. NATO will nevertheless happily cheer for Ukraine, sell them weapons, provide token aid, offer juicy defense contracts to rebuild their military after its annihilated, and sound the war drums because they don't give a single poo poo about Ukrainians and are hoping Russia bleeds.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But again, remind me: who is invading? Sinteres posted:I'll admit that I've fallen short of this before, but at least under the current D&D guidelines my understanding is that we're meant to engage with each other's arguments, not what we imagine to be in their heads.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:im not sure i understand the invocations of us military intervention when it's been made abundantly clear that the us and other members of NATO have zero interest in involving themselves in a war with russia over ukraine. And the media is ghoulish because that's just what the media does. You can, however, absolutely criticize government spokesmen for sowing panic by declaring the imminence of a worst case scenario (since even taking for granted Russia will take hostile action there are degrees of magnitude possible), and getting confrontational with the odd media voices that press them to offer more than their word as backing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:my understanding of the US posture here is that it's intended to fit into its larger deterrence campaign and to undercut domestic propaganda if/when it does invade. from the new york times: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/12/us/politics/russia-information-putin-biden.html Again, there's a difference in trying to provide deterrence through being clear you believe in the possibility of hostile action as well as offering likely timetables for such, and another is consistently sending messaging implying the most likely course of action for Russia is a complete invasion with tens of thousands of casualties and destruction of Ukraine's major urban centers. That's just loving irresponsible, and without getting into how the messaging is undermined by being sent over the wishes of Ukraine's actual government.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:27
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:what should the US messaging be if all accounts heavily suggest (and its allies confirm) that the most likely course of action for Russia is, in fact, a full-scale invasion that will kill tens of thousands? That while the magnitude of force build up makes it a possibility, it'd be a very costly course of action for Russia (that is beyond pressure subsequently applied by ensuing sanctions etc), so most likely hostilities would be limited to Eastern Ukraine and avoid major urban fighting beyond perhaps Mariupol. But hey, what do I know? Maybe they really are planning a full scale invasion of Ukraine with a force concentration that'd struggle with just the East side of the Dnieper.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:Ahh yes going around saying "Russia wants to invade for lovely imperialistic reasons, has been building up troops for months and are actively looking for an excuse to do so" is the driving force behind Russian intentions to invade. the gently caress
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Armchair generalling: the forces west of the Dnieper and in Crimea just have to sit there and Ukraine has to deploy defensively to take them into account. Even if they do absolutely nothing their presence would make a push into the Donbass and eastern Ukraine easier. Well, yes. For example the Russian forces in Belarus by their presence alone would keep a significant portion of Ukraine's military busy garrisoning Kyiv, even if they did nothing. But the Ukrainian military knows this. What I'm talking about is public discourse - it's about not telling people that Kyiv is most certainly about to get turned into rubble. Who's sowing that kind of panic helping?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:47
|
|
|
If the US wants to do "something, anything" they should offer full citizenship to displaced Ukrainian victims of Russian imperialist aggression.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 23:19
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's really what it all comes down to: there's no scenario in which Russia invades without accruing costs that make such an invasion not at all worthwhile. There is nothing that Russia can hope to gain from trying to annex regions of Ukraine that do not overwhelmingly want to be part of Russia. Even with over half of its military might committed, it would be a long, costly, bloody slog, followed by an extremely drawn-out, miserable, economically ruinous occupation and reconstruction. During all that, Russia would face so many sanctions from all sides that it would be effectively under a worldwide embargo. They may even run the risk of upending their recent natural gas deal with China. An already-suffering economy under those circumstances usually can't keep up a campaign of conquest in a large country like Ukraine for very long. Eh Europe can't shake their dependence on Russian petro for at least a decade, so they can make up for losses caused by sanctions (ie NS2 block, if that is even on the table which it might not be) through scarcity pricing, plus if they commit to taking certain points of Ukraine they can also reopen the Soyuz-Transgas pipeline network. If they can recoup their losses this way, plus strategic power projection gains from securing land access to Crimea and whatever foreign policy goals they can compel out of a ceasefire agreement on top, then I believe they can push limited offensive action into being considered worth the risk vs whichever negative outcomes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's assuming that everything goes perfectly according to plan, though. Japan is already planning to divert LNG to Europe in case Russia turns off the tap, and while that's not a long-term solution, it will make it a lot easier for Western European countries to cut off business with Russia if they actually invade. In the meantime, they'd have to contend with a pretty large, committed, well-funded, well-armed insurgency - those things tend to make reconstruction efforts difficult and expensive. As the U.S. saw in Iraq on more than one occasion, pipelines have a habit of getting blown up by insurgent groups. So I don't see a scenario in which they recoup their costs, much less actually profit from conquest. Even if there were such a scenario, I think it would be too much of a longshot, with high risk and little likely reward, for the Kremlin to actually sign off on it. The counterargument is that they could've accomplished all of the goals you outlined with a force concentration (and mobilization cost) a fraction of the size of the one they're currently fielding. This has long since crossed the threshold of merely looking realistic.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 00:29
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, sort of, but they also haven't gotten this much attention from the Western media and governments when they've done this in the past. Putin is still relatively popular in Russia, but his approval ratings have taken a hit from his terrible handling of COVID. So having a fake standoff with NATO over Ukraine is a useful distraction from all that. Building up a military force larger than has been seen in the past seems to be doing the trick. This isn't just "larger"; they could've committed 3/5ths of the current present frontline fighting power and it'd still be the largest mobilization in the history of the Russian Federation, the largest force concentration in Europe since the fall of the Soviet Union, and a more than sufficient fighting force for the purposes of securing Donbas + annexing a land route to Crimea and humbling the Zelensky government. So if from the beginning the goal was showmanship, they've truly gone above and beyond. And it's not cheap - Russians loathe undepoting forces, and this time they've brought everything and the kitchen sink.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 00:50
|
|
|
Number_6 posted:If Russia goes ahead with an attack, how is it likely to unfold? A phased attack, initially with precision air or missile strikes on anti-aircraft defenses and command/control facilities? A shock-and-awe type bombardment of government and economic targets? Or just rolling the tanks & APCs, blitzkrieg style? Which do you want, Crimea land bridge, or gently caress IT everything East of the Dnieper?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
PIZZA.BAT posted:It could be argued that Putin didn't expect the response they've been getting so far from this and maybe will now try to back down while losing a minimal amount of face, but the problem with that is this bluff was one hell of a bluff if so. What response?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
PIZZA.BAT posted:More arms being sent to Ukraine and all of Europe accelerating their plans to divest from Russian oil imports. I guess I could be buying the hype and Majorian is right, everyone will have forgotten about this six months from now. I wouldn't be very happy if one of my neighbors decided to make a habit of relocating a ton of their armed forces to my borders every year. It's not something you can allow yourself to become complacent with. Who knows though. Maybe this is just the new normal Other than token shows of support and loving BoJo double swearing they'll enter a mutual defense pact with Ukraine, Russia's force concentration has not initiated or accelerated any meaningful geopol moves. Maybe Qatar's near future status as US Major Non-NATO ally? But they were already hosting CENTCOM so this could just be shaking off the embarrassment that was allowing the Saudi blockade during Trump. On the contrary, what I'm not seeing is serious proposals for comprehensive, unified sanctions that the West has had 3 months to draft. It's been nothing but hot air so far.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 03:51
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think Putin didn't expect what was originally just another round of annual saber-rattling on the border with Ukraine to garner this insane level of attention from the international media. Annual round? The force buildup reached peak 2014-2015 levels... in April. RusMil starts moving tons of poo poo in October. No open mass troop movements at this point, mostly equipment. Early November Belarus and Russia sign a ton of integration deals involving Military C&C, economics, and migratory policy. At this point it becomes obvious that something strange is going on, as the primary fighting elements for the Russian military, already in their operating theatres, begin movements under opsec into and around the border regions with Ukraine. The CIA Director visits Russia to speak with Putin specifically about Ukrainian troop build ups. A week later snap exercises and formation drills begin in the Western and Southern Military Districts, and soon after theater-level assets are spotted being pushed to the front, indicating multi-division escalation, while reserve vehicles are pulled out of central reserve unit depots. This latter part is something that never happens for exercises, as it's a huge logistical strain and you'd only do it if you expect to lose tons of vehicles or are snap forming new units. This is now mid-November, and international media finally notices as a vast mobilization of material from all military districts begins to make its way on rail towards the Ukrainian border alongside rumors of personnel activations, and then the Belarusian and Black Sea exercises are announced as if to explain them away. So I don't believe this was some kind of annual thing that got out of hand. RusMil spent months moving equipment for something big before the media noticed, and this is in the context of Russia shuttling currency into their foreign monetary reserves for the better part of the past 3 years, which is now at an all-time high despite the pandemic. Conspiratiorist fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Feb 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 04:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1493381856393375745 It's the little things.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 06:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1493602139846893577 cocktease
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 18:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1493502755440570370 For people who didn't catch the crank, a number of Southern Military Districts training grounds are actually farther from the border rather than closer. The announcement is also conflating WMD and SMD forces rtbing with general de-escalation, when there's also forces from the Northern, Central, and Eastern Military Districts encircling Ukraine.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
NATO's Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre has received a request for international assistance from Ukraine due to expected "large-scale emergencies of various nature."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 21:23
|
|
|
Russia must have intel those perfidious Ukrainians are planning something.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_JRSioZZyQ loving ghouls
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Biden absolutely does not sound like this is over. Not a single Russian boot has taken a step back. Orthanc6 posted:"Look at all those people, going about their lives" White House said tomorrow so its tomorrow, duh.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:20
|
|
|
I've been flippant but tomorrow's not bad. Full moon, cold, clear, no chance of serious precipitation until the 18th, only light precipitation after that, frozen ground on the relevant regions of Ukraine. Maybe tomorrow Vlad will OK recognizing Donetsk and Luhanks as genuine independent states and that'll make Ukraine jump, and there's the legal/political justification you need since you've got these independent nations as recognized by Russia, with a majority Russian citizens and on Russia's border, under attack from a hostile foreign power attempting to absorb them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
Are we allowed to do it ironically?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:45
|
|
|
BREAKING NEWS: Someone got close enough for the Reuters stream to pick up and started playing the Soviet Anthem. Now they're playing Komm Susser Tod.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 23:58
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:There has been an active invasion for eight years. Brave of you to recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea itt
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:20
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think that stretches the definition of "active invasion" beyond recognition. It was an active invasion and illegal occupation eight years ago. Now it's a dead issue; Crimea is part of Russia, rightly or wrongly. There is currently no active invasion of Ukraine by Russia. There may be one in the near future, but I strongly doubt it. Donbas my dude.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:25
|
|
|
Right.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:27
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Of course they were. I never claimed they weren't. I'm not seeing any evidence that that's what's happening right now with Donbas and Lukhansk, though. The State Duma passed legal authorization for the Russian military to operate in Eastern Ukraine in 2014 and it was never revoked, so you've got flagged military there and that's no secret.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:41
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Calling that an "active invasion" is a stretch. By that definition, the U.S. has been invading Cuba for 63 years straight. They have.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:49
|
|
|
King.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 00:50
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I don't think "killing people in other countries" is a workable definition for the phrase "active invasion." Are drone strikes invasions, too? What about espionage, if it leads to deaths? More formally I'd say the situation with the LNR/DPR is a slow-bleeding active conflict, since flagged Russian forces adhere to the Minsk ceasefire but Ukraine and the People's Militias violate it all the time, and whenever the latter receive a "sudden surge in volunteers" there's good reason to believe it's out-of-uniform Russian regulars. With how static the lines are you're free to call it an occupation, but calling it just an insurrection is a bit disingenuous since Russia had to come in and save the separatists after their hybrid warfare strategy with them failed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 01:06
|
|
|
I don't believe anything has happened that Putin didn't expect to happen. And not a single Russian boot has taken a step back.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 01:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ameliairheart/status/1493744616448970755 "I'm not touching you."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 02:46
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, that, but it's also probably aimed at maximizing whatever concessions can be wrung out of Ukraine and NATO: "Look at what we've got going here. Look at how much damage we could do if we wanted to. It would be wise to give us what we're asking for if you don't want to keep dealing with this year after year." I agree, with the caveat it's not mutually exclusive with launching an actual attack: they could have dunno Scholz broker a "peace deal" that exchanges Ukraine dropping its NATO aspirations, giving up the territories they lost to the Russians and separatists, and opening NS2 in exchange for not committing to a wider invasion (that they likely weren't going to do anyway, but had the capability to pursue).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:48 |
|
|
When we're at the point where Ukrainian metro areas are being shelled it's not appeasement.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2022 03:17
|
|