[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[raymondo]

I would have thought that has been the school of thought in the Pentagon for the past two years.

Containment.

Drip feed just enough weapons to Ukraine to slowly drain Russia of personnel, money and morale. Not good for Ukraine, but good for the west with no boots on the ground. Or none that we know about anyway.

Now the narrative is a little different, with Russia making small advances, emboldened by western procrastination.

Keep an eye on Moldova/Transnistria. I saw a report suggesting that rebels were to 'ask Moscow for help'.

I'm sure something will kick off in Transnistria... Russia would love to open another 'front' there .

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I would have thought that has been the school of thought in the Pentagon for the past two years.

Containment.

Drip feed just enough weapons to Ukraine to slowly drain Russia of personnel, money and morale. Not good for Ukraine, but good for the west with no boots on the ground. Or none that we know about anyway.

Now the narrative is a little different, with Russia making small advances, emboldened by western procrastination.

Keep an eye on Moldova/Transnistria. I saw a report suggesting that rebels were to 'ask Moscow for help'.

I've no doubt that one of Putin's major objectives is to go through Odessa and establish a land bridge to Transnistria.

But in the short term they've no real way of supporting the small number of troops guarding a large amount of equipment who might find themselves vulnerable to an "agreement" between Ukraine and Moldova governments.

 

[sparkie]

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

You have to think he's trying to outflank Le Pen and the French far right. But whatever his reasons, it's positive for Ukraine, so is a good news story

 

[The Clamp]

It’s good. More world leaders need to threaten Putin.

They should have blasted the Russian troops off the face of the earth when they started massing on the Ukrainian border.

Putin and his daft regime need Annihilating.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It’s good. More world leaders need to threaten Putin.

They should have blasted the Russian troops off the face of the earth when they started massing on the Ukrainian border.

Putin and his daft regime need Annihilating.

Well. Certainly when they went through it!!

 

[The Clamp]

Well. Certainly when they went through it!!

Ukraine were done for when the West failed to act decisively upon the invasion.

Putin probes and tests for weakness. When the world doesn’t react, he invades.

By now, Putin should be a small scorch mark on the floor where the Kremlin used to be.

 

[Commander]

I

It’s good. More world leaders need to threaten Putin.

They should have blasted the Russian troops off the face of the earth when they started massing on the Ukrainian border.

Putin and his daft regime need Annihilating.

I said this at the time. If NATO had amassed troops all along the Ukraine border and said you put one boot across that border and you are at war with NATO, Putin would have only have had one option, and that was to not invade. But it would have been a hugely unpopular policy with the public all over Europe.

 

[The Clamp]

I

I said this at the time. If NATO had amassed troops all along the Ukraine border and said you put one boot across that border and you are at war with NATO, Putin would have only have had one option, and that was to not invade. But it would have been a hugely unpopular policy with the public all over Europe.

I remember you saying it and I said it too .

There should have been a much stronger show of force.

But war is profitable for many in the West….

 

[raymondo]

Ukraine were done for when the West failed to act decisively upon the invasion.

Putin probes and tests for weakness. When the world doesn’t react, he invades.

By now, Putin should be a small scorch mark on the floor where the Kremlin used to be.

I am looking forward to the day when a number of drones get through air defence and hit the Kremlin. It won't affect the front line...but I believe it will happen.

 

[raymondo]

I

I said this at the time. If NATO had amassed troops all along the Ukraine border and said you put one boot across that border and you are at war with NATO, Putin would have only have had one option, and that was to not invade. But it would have been a hugely unpopular policy with the public all over Europe.

And possibly, bizarrely now in hindsight, with a lot of Ukraine, including their own leadership IMO, saying NO.
I remember the Ukrainian leadership talking against US intelligence, maintaining that Russia would not invade... Ukraine believed it was simply intimidation from Russia.
It seems crazy now, but that's how I remember it.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I remember you saying it and I said it too .

There should have been a much stronger show of force.

But war is profitable for many in the West….

To be fair, that would have been a hugely unpopular option among lots of people who don't make money from the conflict.

There'd have been lots of moaning about NATO going beyond it's remit (not unreasonably) and being imperialist and expansionist and threatening the poor ickle Russians who just want to be left alone (less reasonably).

And, you know. The whole "risking a nuclear conflagration" thing. Total nonsense in this context obviously but somebody would have suggested that Putin would respond to this by nuking London. (Bearing in mind I once heard a guy chairing a notionaly "serious" debate at the Oxford Union suggest Britain could respond to a future Argentine attack on the Falklands by wiping Buenos Aires off the map. Some people seem to have that as their default conflict resolution option).

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I

I said this at the time. If NATO had amassed troops all along the Ukraine border and said you put one boot across that border and you are at war with NATO, Putin would have only have had one option, and that was to not invade. But it would have been a hugely unpopular policy with the public all over Europe.

It sounds great, but the reality is that you can barely get NATO countries to send significant arms, let alone send their troops off for a facedown with the red army in a non NATO country.

A quick look at the posts from the first half of this thread history, where dozens are fretting about the threat of Putin nuking us serves as a reminder enough people are really only thinking of themselves to make this suggestion a complete non starter

 

[jcdenton08]

It’s good. More world leaders need to threaten Putin.

They should have blasted the Russian troops off the face of the earth when they started massing on the Ukrainian border.

Putin and his daft regime need Annihilating.

Quick double tap to the back of the head would be a great start.

 

[The Clamp]

There’s only a few ways this will go.

A disgruntled Ruskie lobs Putin out of a window = an unstable Russia with a different lunatic at the helm = WW3

NATO gets involved = WW3

Russia attempts to invade a NATO country = WW3

Zombie outbreak = WWZ

 

[Eric the meek]

There’s only a few ways this will go.

A disgruntled Ruskie lobs Putin out of a window = an unstable Russia with a different lunatic at the helm = WW3

NATO gets involved = WW3

Russia attempts to invade a NATO country = WW3

Zombie outbreak = WWZ

There are many scenarios that could happen. WW3 is just one of them.

Putin could be killed. He could die of natural causes. Or he could just disappear, with lots of rumours but no evidence of his demise. Even if he carries on, he could be overthrown, or press the button and nothing happens. Or the missile explodes on launch. Or launches OK and goes way off course.

Putin v2.0 could be worse, could be a pussycat, or unable to prevent a dangerous, febrile atmosphere developing in Moscow.

The Russian Federation could begin a process of disintegration, with Moscow unable to continue to administer the ethnic republics. Local warlords might eye up the nuclear missile sites in their areas. A civil war could emerge, with local conflicts and allegiances coming and going. If the ethnic communities, having been oppressed for a century or more, don't fight each other, they may go for the oppressors - the Russians.

With the Moscow command and control melting away, Russian troops in Ukraine could walk off the battlefield and simply go home.

WW3 is not a foregone conclusion.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Most likely scenario I think is some sort of frozen conflict in Ukraine which rumbles on for ages but neither side makes significant gains, but they continue to suffer horrible losses, until a new de facto border is arrived at and in the years to come agreed on by succeeding national leaders.

Ukraine probably will join NATO at some stage. Russia, I personally think won't have the will or the strength to take further bites out of Ukraine knowing that a NATO response is likely, but will continue to be a malign but diminishing actor on the world stage

 

[beorhthelm]

I'd be in favour as well. But we have to be open that this would mean heavy British casualties and a very high risk of escalation.

Surely much easier is to provide them with weapons and equipment. What did we give them? 13 Tanks? We've still only given them tiny proportions of the equipment we have. Ammo is even more critical. We can backfill from other countries, mostly the US.

And most importantly of all, we can enforce sanctions. Close this loophole where we're just sending everything via central Asia instead and we're buying Russian oil via India. It's hard to do, but we can do more.

On all of this, as ever, our government hasn't matched it's rhetoric with action

if you dont know, maybe look it up before coming to such a conclusion? we've given billions in aid, including training 22k Ukrainian troops, providing 200 armoured vehicles, tactical vehicles, 15000 anti-tank missiles, mobile artillery, MRLS missile systems, storm shadow cruise missiles, artillery shells, and much more. though "only" 14 tanks.

What military equipment has the UK sent Ukraine?

Britain has supplied a range of weapons, vehicles, technology and armour to help Ukrainians fight the Russian invasion.

www.forces.net

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#U

 

[A1X]

It also should be said for all the rhetoric that sending in NATO troops is just the sort of galvanising moment Putin craves. He gets to unite his own population in “look, I was right” and it allows him to harden his alliances with allies sceptical of the west (notably Iran, China and India).

Plus it does make the likelihood of a global conflict more likely, which some on here seem to be very blasé about but I’d rather we didn’t go there if it’s all the same to you.

 

[Billy the Fish]

if you dont know, maybe look it up before coming to such a conclusion? we've given billions in aid, including training 22k Ukrainian troops, providing 200 armoured vehicles, tactical vehicles, 15000 anti-tank missiles, mobile artillery, MRLS missile systems, storm shadow cruise missiles, artillery shells, and much more. though "only" 14 tanks.

What military equipment has the UK sent Ukraine?

Britain has supplied a range of weapons, vehicles, technology and armour to help Ukrainians fight the Russian invasion.

www.forces.net

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#U

I said this earlier in the thread when a similar claim was made, google operation orbital.

UK has be training the UFA since 2014, when most other nations wouldn't touch the conflict with a 20ft shitty stick.