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

[The Clamp]

If Putin (and historically Russia) simply use their nuclear weapons as an idle threat, and people are saying they’d never actually use them (Raab has said similar on the media rounds this morning), then what is the actual risk in escalating things? If a no fly zone was created for instance? If the Russian military are struggling so much against the smaller Ukrainian one, and its civilians, what realistic chance do they have if the rest of the World turns up? Again, no doubt I’m showing naivety, but I’m struggling to understand why ‘we’ aren’t just going in there and getting the Russians out. I know there’s been a total bollocks up in the past when we’ve intervened in other parts of the World, but this seems far more simplistic - no different religion factions in fighting, no terrorist and splinter factions hiding in hills and caves. Just a massive convoy stuck on a motorway that could surely be destroyed in seconds. Like what exactly is the current end game here? Hope the Russians give up? Try and rehome the entire Ukrainian population and let their country become a Russian owned wasteland?!
I’m really struggling to understand why it’s been absolute fair game to get involved all over the bloody World previously but not here.

Even without the threat of nuclear war, nobody wants any kind of war in Europe. And it’s not just Europe, because if NATO get stuck in, it would mean 30 states get involved, all the members of NATO. That my friend, is WW3.

A no fly zone wouldn’t be very effective anyway as trying to police it would simply lead to aerial battles while missiles continue to be ground-launched into Ukraine.

At the moment, Russia is not at war with the West. They are at war with Ukraine. We are helping them without sparking WW3.

 

[The Clamp]

I watched the Sophie Raworth interview with General Sir Tony Radakin, Chief of the Defence Staff this morning.

An impressive interview - calm, measured, professional. No hesitations, and he knew what he could say, and what he couldn't.

A few takeaways:

1) We've known for - months - that Russia were going to invade.
2) We warned Russia that it would be catastrophic for both Russia and Ukraine.
3) The reports of waning morale amongst the Russian troops and poorly maintained kit (at least on the convoy) are absolutely real.
4) The Russian military are weaker than they were ten days ago.
5) Zelensky is being targeted by Russia, but he was unable to give details.
6) Regarding the threat of a Russian nuclear strike, he said we have discreet intelligence that would give us more warning than is generally assumed.
7) The Ukrainians have been effective in taking out advance Russian units.
8) He has a hotline (as do other Chiefs of Staff) to General Gerasimov, Chief of the General Staff, which is tested every day. This is to reduce the chance of escalation due to miscalculation.
9) He condemned the escalation in violence from the Russians, as their initial tactics have failed to work.
10) He noted that Putin's comments were 'bizarre' and 'ridiculous'.
11) We have to be mindful of the risk of escalation. Anti-tank weapons are defensive. But a no-fly zone would by necessity involve taking out Russian anti-aircraft installations, and probably involve engagement with Russian aircraft.
12) He highlighted the unity and cohesion of the west's response - economically, socially, culturally, diplomatically, and militarily.
13) He wouldn't be drawn on how long he thought the war would go on for.
14) The answer lies with Putin. He can bring it to an end.

It was an excellent interview. Always reassuring to know it’s the greatest military minds dealing with this and of not Putin’s mate, Boris Johnstipov.

 

[The Lemming Stomper]

.

All those who mocked CND back in the day, and supported the nuclear 'deterrent' must be feeling a right bunch of Charlies right now.

 

[crookie]

Even without the threat of nuclear war, nobody wants any kind of war in Europe. And it’s not just Europe, because if NATO get stuck in, it would mean 30 states get involved, all the members of NATO. That my friend, is WW3.

A no fly zone wouldn’t be very effective anyway as trying to police it would simply lead to aerial battles while missiles continue to be ground-launched into Ukraine.

At the moment, Russia is not at war with the West. They are at war with Ukraine. We are helping them without sparking WW3.

Indeed, a no fly zone is not a panacea. Would involve shooting down any Ukrainian planes as well, so would hinder their ability to use airstrikes. I read that our defence secretary said the subject was never raised by his Ukrainian counterpart. My impression is that the bombardment of Ukrainian cities is predominently by ground bases artillery, rockets and missiles. A no fly zone would do nothing to halt these, just escalate the situation with Russia

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[crookie]

.

All those who mocked CND back in the day, and supported the nuclear 'deterrent' must be feeling a right bunch of Charlies right now.

Why, would that have made the Soviet Union give up theirs, and indeed stop N Korea, Israel, Pakistan and India acquire them ?

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

.

All those who mocked CND back in the day, and supported the nuclear 'deterrent' must be feeling a right bunch of Charlies right now.

I doubt it.

Imagine what a disaster we'd now be in if Putin was the only one with nukes.

Can you imagine how terrified people would be of Putin's threats in that case ?

 

[Baker lite]

.

All those who mocked CND back in the day, and supported the nuclear 'deterrent' must be feeling a right bunch of Charlies right now.

Nope.

 

[The Clamp]

Indeed, a no fly zone is not a panacea. Would involve shooting down any Ukrainian planes as well, so would hinder their ability to use airstrikes. I read that our defence secretary said the subject was never raised by his Ukrainian counterpart. My impression is that the bombardment of Ukrainian cities is predominently by ground bases artillery, rockets and missiles. A no fly zone would do nothing to halt these, just escalate the situation with Russia

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

Exactly this.

 

[Baker lite]

Is anyone else worried about Russia appearing to single out the UK above anyone else in terms of him doing something nuts? Is there anything he can actual do?

Seems we must be doing something right if we, as a United Kingdom are getting up the hooter of this war criminal.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Indeed, a no fly zone is not a panacea. Would involve shooting down any Ukrainian planes as well, so would hinder their ability to use airstrikes. I read that our defence secretary said the subject was never raised by his Ukrainian counterpart. My impression is that the bombardment of Ukrainian cities is predominently by ground bases artillery, rockets and missiles. A no fly zone would do nothing to halt these, just escalate the situation with Russia

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

That is why I am conflicted a bit about the use of a NFZ now.

It doesn't deal with Putin's missiles from inside Russia or the thermobarbic artillery.

Fortunately assessments are that Putin's missile stocks are dwindling now.

The artillery is a big problem - thermobarbic with potential for chemical attack or even nuclear shells. Short of stealth bombing I think upping the supply of drones is the answer - and it is hard to "prove" who is actually operating the drone.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Indeed, a no fly zone is not a panacea. Would involve shooting down any Ukrainian planes as well, so would hinder their ability to use airstrikes. I read that our defence secretary said the subject was never raised by his Ukrainian counterpart. My impression is that the bombardment of Ukrainian cities is predominently by ground bases artillery, rockets and missiles. A no fly zone would do nothing to halt these, just escalate the situation with Russia

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

Correct. The Chief of the Defence Staff said this morning that the Russians are hardly using their aircraft and that the vast majority of the damage is being done by artillery.

 

[franks brother]

 

[Baldseagull]

DT extract

BRITAIN has frozen more Russian bank assets than any other country as part of the international wave of sanctions following Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, ministers said yesterday.

The Foreign Office announced that the UK had acted on a total of £258.8 billion bank assets, compared with £240 billion by the US and £33.8 billion by the EU.

The figures came after Boris Johnson’s Government faced criticism over the speed with which it was imposing sanctions on individuals linked with President Putin’s regime. Britain has imposed sanctions on individual members of the Russian and Belarusian elites, including Mr Putin, and at least 12 banks and companies. The Government will also push for an international limit on the import of Russian gas.

Ministers have spoken about targeting more than 100 individuals and companies, but have named only around 14 Russians – leading to criticism of Liz Truss, the Foreign Secretary.

But a Foreign Office source said: “Liz’s focus has been on hitting banks and financial institutions, which have a bigger impact on the Russian economy than sanctioning single individuals.

‘Targeting oligarchs is important but it’s by no means the most effective way to debilitate Russia’s economy’
“We’ve gone further than the EU and US on bank asset freezes, which is where Russia feels the pinch. Targeting oligarchs is important – but it’s by no means the most effective way to debilitate Russia’s economy and war machine.

“The emergency legislation we’re bringing in via the Economic Crime Bill will allow us to move faster against oligarchs. It’s something Liz has pushed hard for. More oligarchs will be sanctioned soon as part of Liz’s ‘hit list’.”

Is that not just a consequence of far more Russian money being stashed in London than elsewhere?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Is that not just a consequence of far more Russian money being stashed in London than elsewhere?

Maybe, but if true it does show that the UK government has been doing something and not nothing as claimed. What is more disturbing is that a Foreign Office source is referring to the Foreign Minister as "Liz" no doubt as part of her ongoing attempt to be the new Maggie

 

[jessiejames]

So Putin has threatened the West with a possible nuclear strike if they get involved, the West is involved are we not supplying Ukraine with weapons, we have all put in sanctions against Russia, so the West is involved but so far no nuclear weapon has been leached.maybe Putin is all talk.

 

[Baldseagull]

Maybe, but if true it does show that the UK government has been doing something and not nothing as claimed. What is more disturbing is that a Foreign Office source is referring to the Foreign Minister as "Liz" no doubt as part of her ongoing attempt to be the new Maggie

No one has accused them of doing nothing, just not as much as some others, certainly in respect of Oligarchs this is true.
I don't know what the situation is, but if we closed down say 3 banks with huge assets, it could still be seen as doing less than another jurisdiction that has closed down the same 3 banks and 5 others.
I am not trying to minimise UK efforts, just highlighting that they have focused on the cash sum total rather than the number of institutions, and that may be misleading as evidence of the claim that we have gone further than others. The EU and US may only be affecting smaller sums because they have been better at not allowing laundering of cash than the UK has.

 

[KZNSeagull]

No one has accused them of doing nothing, just not as much as some others, certainly in respect of Oligarchs this is true.
I don't know what the situation is, but if we closed down say 3 banks with huge assets, it could still be seen as doing less than another jurisdiction that has closed down the same 3 banks and 5 others.
I am not trying to minimise UK efforts, just highlighting that they have focused on the cash sum total rather than the number of institutions, and that may be misleading as evidence of the claim that we have gone further than others. The EU and US may only be affecting smaller sums because they have been better at not allowing laundering of cash than the UK has.

But surely the idea is to close down access to as much cash as possible in the short term?

 

[dazzer6666]

But surely the idea is to close down access to as much cash as possible in the short term?

Precisely. Paralysing the country’s capital reserves is actually far more effective than clobbering a long list of individuals (who will have assets all over the world in layers and layers of private companies and trusts etc that will likely escape sanctions).

 

[Eeyore]

Part owner of Bellingcat checked with 2 FSB contacts and thinks it's real.

https://twitter.com/christogrozev

It's very much what analysts have been saying for a few years.

I watched a piece on the context of the regional geo-politics by an American strategic professor from 2015 earlier.

I won't post the link as he shares my 'the bear has been poked' view, and that annoys some, and I don't want to detract from his main point.

The view, as became evident prior to ten days ago, was that Russia invading Ukraine was a laughable concept. Mainly because Ukraine would be another Afghanistan. They just wouldn't be able to hold it.

But here we are.

And this is what disturbs me. I'm guessing that many of us just hope it goes away. Like we will wake up ten days ago. But it won't. Putin will not capitulate, Ukraine will not capitulate, and, however we dress it up to contrary, the West has declared war. Albeit by proxy.

Of course, things will bite here too. My fear is that I just can't see how this can end. The exit strategy. Putin hasn't got one that won't bring his downfall. The West haven't got one that won't embolden him.

And all the while this stalemate continues Ukraine is bombed to no more. Millions on the move. Wasted civilian lives, service lives, wasted everything. And more and more distress.

I honestly can't remember what life was like before 2020. It feels like this decade has been most of it.

 

[beorhthelm]

Is that not just a consequence of far more Russian money being stashed in London than elsewhere?

its a highly dubious claim, EU froze more with one bank than counted there. i suspect the UK number is counting indirect assets, i.e. all assts of VTB bank.