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

[wellquickwoody]

I don't know how to word this but... somehow it bothers me that US jets, UK jets and ship mounted US air defense systems are immediately used to help take down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel...but the same does not happen for Ukraine .

I'm not saying the US and UK should not have intervened to help Israel (that invited the attack by shelling Iranian leaders in Damascus a few days back)... but just my head and emotions spinning on what this reveals about Ukraine's place in the pecking order.
I'm happy to be corrected or helped out by different views .

Good point.

 

[beorhthelm]

I don't know how to word this but... somehow it bothers me that US jets, UK jets and ship mounted US air defense systems are immediately used to help take down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel...but the same does not happen for Ukraine .

I'm not saying the US and UK should not have intervened to help Israel (that invited the attack by shelling Iranian leaders in Damascus a few days back)... but just my head and emotions spinning on what this reveals about Ukraine's place in the pecking order.
I'm happy to be corrected or helped out by different views .

US has provided missle defense systems to Ukraine. they dont have any missile destroyers in the Black Sea, due to long standing maritime agreements. their range is limited anyway, which helps narrow strip of Israel but not much use 100miles in land in Ukraine. NATO aircraft flying missions over Ukraine would be a major escalation and what Russia claims we wanted all along.

what this show is how we regard many middle eastern nations, that we regularly run military missions over them, they have no air defense and little say in the matter.

 

[raymondo]

US has provided missle defense systems to Ukraine. they dont have any missile destroyers in the Black Sea, due to long standing maritime agreements. their range is limited anyway, which helps narrow strip of Israel but not much use 100miles in land in Ukraine. NATO aircraft flying missions over Ukraine would be a major escalation and what Russia claims we wanted all along.

what this show is how we regard many middle eastern nations, that we regularly run military missions over them, they have no air defense and little say in the matter.

Good points.

 

[hampshirebrightonboy]

I don't know how to word this but... somehow it bothers me that US jets, UK jets and ship mounted US air defense systems are immediately used to help take down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel...but the same does not happen for Ukraine .

I'm not saying the US and UK should not have intervened to help Israel (that invited the attack by shelling Iranian leaders in Damascus a few days back)... but just my head and emotions spinning on what this reveals about Ukraine's place in the pecking order.
I'm happy to be corrected or helped out by different views .

In the absence of direct involvement, at least give Ukraine enough Patriot systems so they can defend themselves.

 

[raymondo]

In the absence of direct involvement, at least give Ukraine enough Patriot systems so they can defend themselves.

Exactly this .
Ukraine are defending with one arm tied behind their back, citizens dying, while air defense systems sit idle throughout Europe and the US.

 

[The Clamp]

I fear Ukraine only has a few terrible months left before defeat.

Unless the west steps up massively, Ukraine will fall.

Our boots on the ground. Our pilots in the air. Only this will stop Russia.

 

[essbee1]

I fear Ukraine only has a few terrible months left before defeat.

Unless the west steps up massively, Ukraine will fall.

Our boots on the ground. Our pilots in the air. Only this will stop Russia.

I agree. I secretly hope something will happen that forces our hand [but
fear what that will be].

 

[raymondo]

I fear Ukraine only has a few terrible months left before defeat.

Unless the west steps up massively, Ukraine will fall.

Our boots on the ground. Our pilots in the air. Only this will stop Russia.

An alternative to boots on the ground could still be:
- full air defense systems
- maximum supply of shells, missiles, drones...NOW, NOW
- the US to start being allies again

But, like you, I'm very fearful that the west doesn't have the stomach/ process even for fast supplies, let alone boots on the ground.
Governments/societies too comfortable and busy worrying about their inflation rates (4.9 or 5.1... oh shock horror), the next elections... rather than the effing elephant in the room

 

[Nobby]

An alternative to boots on the ground could still be:
- full air defense systems
- maximum supply of shells, missiles, drones...NOW, NOW
- the US to start being allies again

But, like you, I'm very fearful that the west doesn't have the stomach/ process even for fast supplies, let alone boots on the ground.
Governments/societies too comfortable and busy worrying about their inflation rates (4.9 or 5.1... oh shock horror), the next elections... rather than the effing elephant in the room

yep totally agree Raymondo.

Hindsight is a great thing, but the Allies and Nato should have got involved in Ukraine's defence.
Directly, as they have with Israel
Maybe they should now.

What's Putin gonna do? Whinge and moan and call in the UN

So what.

Ukraine needs our help more than Israel does.
Ukraine is in big trouble without direct help.

 

[The Clamp]

I doubt we will go boots on the ground. Not until it’s too late anyway.

Right now, Putin is having it all its own way and soon he’ll have his ally, Trump in the White House. Then it’s game over for any U.S. assistance.

Putin will win Ukraine and start looking further afield.

Then it's a European war. Not a World War because Trump will never fight against Putin.

In twenty years time we will look back and regret that we could and should have stopped this at the Ukrainian border.

But war keeps the lights on and the wheels greased for some people.

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

I don't know how to word this but... somehow it bothers me that US jets, UK jets and ship mounted US air defense systems are immediately used to help take down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel...but the same does not happen for Ukraine .

I'm not saying the US and UK should not have intervened to help Israel (that invited the attack by shelling Iranian leaders in Damascus a few days back)... but just my head and emotions spinning on what this reveals about Ukraine's place in the pecking order.
I'm happy to be corrected or helped out by different views .

It’s surely a NATO issue, where if we actively took part in combat we’d potentially be triggering article 5 and would effectively be at war with Russia.

Might have been a different response if Israel were part of NATO.

I also get the impression that we’re not as worried about the military capabilities of Iran.

 

[raymondo]

It’s surely a NATO issue, where if we actively took part in combat we’d potentially be triggering article 5 and would effectively be at war with Russia.

Might have been a different response if Israel were part of NATO.

I also get the impression that we’re not as worried about the military capabilities of Iran.

Sure, yep .
But then, as has been said above, give Ukraine the supplies they need so they have a chance to win.
Also, Iran is not far away from being nuclear capable (from what I've read recently); and I believe Israel are playing the US, inviting an attack, diversion from Gaza concerns, the US 100% onside.
Ukraine never invited an attack.

Sorry, don't want to derail this thread but it's intertwined completely at the moment.

I need to paint my fence and calm down.

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

Sure, yep .
But then, as has been said above, give Ukraine the supplies they need so they have a chance to win.
Also, Iran is not far away from being nuclear capable (from what I've read recently); and I believe Israel are playing the US, inviting an attack, diversion from Gaza concerns, the US 100% onside.
Ukraine never invited an attack.

Sorry, don't want to derail this thread but it's intertwined completely at the moment.

I need to paint my fence and calm down.

I agree, just trying to rationalise why our response might have been difference.

I am likewise becoming more inclined to bury my head in the sand and let them crack on with it, worrying about any of this over a football forum isn’t going to change anything. I’m trying to strike a sustainable balance between being informed and blissful ignorance.

 

[peterward]

US has provided missle defense systems to Ukraine. they dont have any missile destroyers in the Black Sea, due to long standing maritime agreements. their range is limited anyway, which helps narrow strip of Israel but not much use 100miles in land in Ukraine. NATO aircraft flying missions over Ukraine would be a major escalation and what Russia claims we wanted all along.

what this show is how we regard many middle eastern nations, that we regularly run military missions over them, they have no air defense and little say in the matter.

Well that's true but also not really.

They've given NASAMs.

But of many 100's of F16 they've delivered 0

Of the 160 patriot batteries theyve given 0, they have supplied some missiles for donated batteries, which has just increased to 3, that's 3 of 12 or 25% of what they have..... compared to USA 0% of 160.

Ukraine has pleaded for deep strike ATACMs to track and hit back the missile sites that fire at them and they've got 0 ("could be deemed an escalation")

The US appeasement, escalation management slow drip just enough has failed. Russia isn't contained by our escalation management and simply sees it as lack of resistance to its evil so pushes harder against the open door.

Jake Sullivan needs firing, a white collar intellectual escalation manager is useless against a lawless gangster mafia state.

Mainly in context of Iran strikes, but equally relevant to Russia.... Excellent points made today here by Andrew Michta.... we need a return to real hard power deterrence.

 

[A1X]

Here we go again

NATO is not going to be getting directly involved in Ukraine. It never was and it never will. It will support it (or at least should), but those hoping for / demanding scenarios where NATO troops are shooting at Russians or NATO jets are taking out Russian drones / missiles are going to be disappointed.

And anyone who doesn’t understand why the scenarios differ might like to consider why fighting Iran and fighting Russia would be entirely different propositions. It also suggests a misunderstanding of what NATO is, and they view it in the same way Putin does rather than the way NATO members do.

 

[raymondo]

Well that's true but also not really.

They've given NASAMs.

But of many 100's of F16 they've delivered 0

Of the 160 patriot batteries theyve given 0, they have supplied some missiles for donated batteries, which has just increased to 3, that's 3 of 12 or 25% of what they have..... compared to USA 0% of 160.

Ukraine has pleaded for deep strike ATACMs to track and hit back the missile sites that fire at them and they've got 0 ("could be deemed an escalation")

The US appeasement, escalation management slow drip just enough has failed. Russia isn't contained by our escalation management and simply sees it as lack of resistance to its evil so pushes harder against the open door.

Jake Sullivan needs firing, a white collar intellectual escalation manager is useless against a lawless gangster mafia state.

Mainly in context of Iran strikes, but equally relevant to Russia.... Excellent points made today here by Andrew Michta.... we need a return to real hard power deterrence.

Thank you , an excellent post that puts meat on the bones of my emotions today

 

[essbee1]

Here we go again

View attachment 180475

NATO is not going to be getting directly involved in Ukraine. It never was and it never will. It will support it (or at least should), but those hoping for / demanding scenarios where NATO troops are shooting at Russians or NATO jets are taking out Russian drones / missiles are going to be disappointed.

And anyone who doesn’t understand why the scenarios differ might like to consider why fighting Iran and fighting Russia would be entirely different propositions.

I get that...but nobody can really be so sure about anything any more; never say never etc,

 

[raymondo]

Well that's true but also not really.

They've given NASAMs.

But of many 100's of F16 they've delivered 0

Of the 160 patriot batteries theyve given 0, they have supplied some missiles for donated batteries, which has just increased to 3, that's 3 of 12 or 25% of what they have..... compared to USA 0% of 160.

Ukraine has pleaded for deep strike ATACMs to track and hit back the missile sites that fire at them and they've got 0 ("could be deemed an escalation")

The US appeasement, escalation management slow drip just enough has failed. Russia isn't contained by our escalation management and simply sees it as lack of resistance to its evil so pushes harder against the open door.

Jake Sullivan needs firing, a white collar intellectual escalation manager is useless against a lawless gangster mafia state.

Mainly in context of Iran strikes, but equally relevant to Russia.... Excellent points made today here by Andrew Michta.... we need a return to real hard power deterrence.

Really good piece by Michta, and some interesting responses to it. Thanks.

 

[raymondo]

Here we go again

View attachment 180475

NATO is not going to be getting directly involved in Ukraine. It never was and it never will. It will support it (or at least should), but those hoping for / demanding scenarios where NATO troops are shooting at Russians or NATO jets are taking out Russian drones / missiles are going to be disappointed.

And anyone who doesn’t understand why the scenarios differ might like to consider why fighting Iran and fighting Russia would be entirely different propositions. It also suggests a misunderstanding of what NATO is, and they view it in the same way Putin does rather than the way NATO members do.

I understand.
But the gulf between immediate support for Israel, and drip drip supply of weapons and air defense to Ukraine is visibly huge IMO..
No, I don't expect, want NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, and provision of certain weapons, air defense to Ukraine would hopefully mean less discussion needed on that.

If Ukraine lose and Russia takes it up to the Polish border, then, in the next tournament, there likely WILL be troops from EU/UK on the ground at the border, or crossing it.
If Trump is in he will probably be a passive ally of Putin, so no NATO involvement then, just geographic Europe defending itself.

 

[sparkie]

I fear Ukraine only has a few terrible months left before defeat.

Unless the west steps up massively, Ukraine will fall.

Our boots on the ground. Our pilots in the air. Only this will stop Russia.

I'm not so gloomy.

Total defeat is off the table, I think - that is beyond Russia's battered military capability now.

Serious setbacks for Ukraine, perhaps. Kharkiv could be very vulnerable, losses in the East. Putin won't give up on Odesa but that is a difficult aim for Russia even now.


What is true, I firmly believe, is the better Russia does, the bigger the military aid from Europe. Macron has hinted that French troops would be used if Kyiv or Odesa were in danger.

I think it is up to Europe now. The US is now an unreliable ally. Maybe, just maybe, and a longshot, if Trump miraculously doesn't win the US election then things may fully turn and the US will be back.