| Ukraine 13:25 - Mar 4 with 1783 views | cressi |
Is this going to end with Ukraine OR
does Putin want the Russian Empire back unless the people turn against him I wonder if he gives a flying fcuk about the west. Scarey times |  | | |  |
| Ukraine on 13:40 - Mar 4 with 1737 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
Given how it’s going for him so far, I can’t imagine he’s going to be rushing to invade anywhere else.
That said he’s not exactly rational so who knows?! | | | |
| Ukraine on 13:49 - Mar 4 with 1700 views | homer_123 |
| Ukraine on 13:40 - Mar 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Given how it’s going for him so far, I can’t imagine he’s going to be rushing to invade anywhere else.
That said he’s not exactly rational so who knows?! |
Whilst it is clearly taking longer than he anticipated - I don't doubt for a second that it would stop with the Ukraine.
He is pretty intent on heading back to a USSR situation (the NATO expansion is a side show in comparison).
As I've said before, current sanctions and military support in terms of equipment is not going to stop the invasion. From a sanction perspective you need China and that ain't happening any time soon - even after the Nuclear Powerplant situation today.
Putin will end up getting what he wants re. the Ukraine, basically what he has with Belarus. The dust settles and sanctions are slowly lifted etc.
He then re-groups and goes again. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 13:52 - Mar 4 with 1679 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Ukraine on 13:49 - Mar 4 by homer_123 |
Whilst it is clearly taking longer than he anticipated - I don't doubt for a second that it would stop with the Ukraine.
He is pretty intent on heading back to a USSR situation (the NATO expansion is a side show in comparison).
As I've said before, current sanctions and military support in terms of equipment is not going to stop the invasion. From a sanction perspective you need China and that ain't happening any time soon - even after the Nuclear Powerplant situation today.
Putin will end up getting what he wants re. the Ukraine, basically what he has with Belarus. The dust settles and sanctions are slowly lifted etc.
He then re-groups and goes again. |
Couple of things
Putin harks back more to 19C Russian influence than USSR
Think this is very different to Belarus |  | | |
| Ukraine on 13:55 - Mar 4 with 1668 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Ukraine on 13:52 - Mar 4 by reusersfreekicks |
Couple of things
Putin harks back more to 19C Russian influence than USSR
Think this is very different to Belarus |
Indeed, even if the invasion is ultimately successful- which I’m sure it will be given the comparative resources, it could develop into an insurgency which ties considerable forces up there for years.
Very hard to see how this ends. | | | |
| Ukraine on 13:56 - Mar 4 with 1662 views | homer_123 |
| Ukraine on 13:52 - Mar 4 by reusersfreekicks |
Couple of things
Putin harks back more to 19C Russian influence than USSR
Think this is very different to Belarus |
Putin doesn't believe in the Ukraine as an independent country but he can't occupy it (or rather he know, longer term that isn't possible).
So - he wants to control via a puppet gov like Belarus. | |
| |
| Ukraine on 13:58 - Mar 4 with 1642 views | homer_123 |
| Ukraine on 13:55 - Mar 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Indeed, even if the invasion is ultimately successful- which I’m sure it will be given the comparative resources, it could develop into an insurgency which ties considerable forces up there for years.
Very hard to see how this ends. |
He doesn't want to stay in there, as I say, he knows that's not possible but if he can end up with a puppet Gov that allows him to control from Moscow with a smaller force Eastern based, that would likely be his ideal. | |
| |
| Ukraine on 14:03 - Mar 4 with 1630 views | hype313 |
| Ukraine on 13:55 - Mar 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Indeed, even if the invasion is ultimately successful- which I’m sure it will be given the comparative resources, it could develop into an insurgency which ties considerable forces up there for years.
Very hard to see how this ends. |
Looks like there are only 3 possible outcomes
1) Russia ultimately captures Eastern Ukraine and installs a puppet government leading to many years of insurgency, and EU/UK suffer from costs of supporting Ukrainian resistance, another refugee crisis leading to increased spending on defense instead of social care and development, and an energy crisis leading to stagflation.
2) A full blow escalation with a dictator with an arsenal of nuclear bombs larger than that of the US, or
3) Ukraine reaching a compromise to avoid further destruction and bloodshed by agreeing to not joining NATO and remaining a neutral, while Eastern Ukraine provinces with a Russian-speaking majority get autonomous status as Russia has been demanding all the while. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 14:05 - Mar 4 with 1618 views | DinDjarin |
An already worn down Russian army would be foolish to step outside of Ukraine.
NATO would destroy them in literally a few days which then puts Putin in a corner and then who knows what. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ukraine on 14:18 - Mar 4 with 1574 views | J2BLUE |
| Ukraine on 14:05 - Mar 4 by DinDjarin |
An already worn down Russian army would be foolish to step outside of Ukraine.
NATO would destroy them in literally a few days which then puts Putin in a corner and then who knows what. |
Ukraine are doing NATO a service with every piece of Russian kit they destroy. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 14:30 - Mar 4 with 1527 views | longtimefan |
| Ukraine on 14:18 - Mar 4 by J2BLUE |
Ukraine are doing NATO a service with every piece of Russian kit they destroy. |
Plus NATO will be sucking up all the signals intelligence they could have ever wished for and will have gained significant knowledge about Russian operations processes and methods. I'm sure they already have identified significant weaknesses they could exploit. | | | |
| Ukraine on 14:33 - Mar 4 with 1523 views | cressi |
| Ukraine on 14:18 - Mar 4 by J2BLUE |
Ukraine are doing NATO a service with every piece of Russian kit they destroy. |
I agree it has not been as easy as they thought its the nuclear weapons which are the major concern with a despot near the button if things do escalate. | | | |
| Ukraine on 14:37 - Mar 4 with 1512 views | Pendejo |
| Ukraine on 13:40 - Mar 4 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Given how it’s going for him so far, I can’t imagine he’s going to be rushing to invade anywhere else.
That said he’s not exactly rational so who knows?! |
Be interesting to know the size of his elite forces and how much exposure they've had in the Ukraine given the stories of young conscripts.
If there was genuine fear of another front opening, you'd keep some back.
Likely to have gambled on weight of numbers to win in Ukraine.
Would be completely different story v NATO even if it remained conventional. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 14:41 - Mar 4 with 1497 views | clive_baker |
| Ukraine on 13:49 - Mar 4 by homer_123 |
Whilst it is clearly taking longer than he anticipated - I don't doubt for a second that it would stop with the Ukraine.
He is pretty intent on heading back to a USSR situation (the NATO expansion is a side show in comparison).
As I've said before, current sanctions and military support in terms of equipment is not going to stop the invasion. From a sanction perspective you need China and that ain't happening any time soon - even after the Nuclear Powerplant situation today.
Putin will end up getting what he wants re. the Ukraine, basically what he has with Belarus. The dust settles and sanctions are slowly lifted etc.
He then re-groups and goes again. |
I wouldn't say the sacntions aren't working, although that depends on your definition of working I guess and expectations. The sanctions are severe and wide reaching, all of their capital markets have effectively been wiped out, and most academic and economic experts agree that they'll prove to be quite devestating, crippling, to the Russian economy. I don't know what they can do to stablise the Ruble without access to their foreign reserves. It's awful, and as always it most impacts those who can least afford it, but it's effectively going to kill the Russian economy. I agree China following suit would strengthen the impact and faster (never going to happen) but I don't think an increasing reliance on China is a good outcome for Russia or Putin.
And it's not just economically, but socially and culturally where they're being hit. Whether they result in Putin backing down is another thing, although he might be left with little choice if he runs out of funds to maintain the war. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 14:42 - Mar 4 with 1491 views | TJS |
It's looking like the Russians could control the whole country within the next few weeks and I'm not convinced how effective any insurgency would be.
If they have full control of the air and heavy military presence on the western borders it could be very difficult to get weapons or fighters in without triggering a direct confrontation with NATO. |  | | |
| Ukraine on 14:48 - Mar 4 with 1442 views | clive_baker |
| Ukraine on 14:37 - Mar 4 by Pendejo |
Be interesting to know the size of his elite forces and how much exposure they've had in the Ukraine given the stories of young conscripts.
If there was genuine fear of another front opening, you'd keep some back.
Likely to have gambled on weight of numbers to win in Ukraine.
Would be completely different story v NATO even if it remained conventional. |
That's my take on it too. It's also interesting how the Russian airforce hasn't been overly utilised as yet either. It felt relatively 'light touch' relative the the supposed scale and capabilities of the Russian military, and I do wonder if it's cannon fodder that have been sent in thus far. That said, the longer and harder they're met with resistance, the less likely I make it that Putin would set his sights further than Ukraine, although I think that was never likely anyway. Not now at least. | |
| |
| Ukraine on 15:11 - Mar 4 with 1386 views | PhilTWTD |
| Ukraine on 14:41 - Mar 4 by clive_baker |
I wouldn't say the sacntions aren't working, although that depends on your definition of working I guess and expectations. The sanctions are severe and wide reaching, all of their capital markets have effectively been wiped out, and most academic and economic experts agree that they'll prove to be quite devestating, crippling, to the Russian economy. I don't know what they can do to stablise the Ruble without access to their foreign reserves. It's awful, and as always it most impacts those who can least afford it, but it's effectively going to kill the Russian economy. I agree China following suit would strengthen the impact and faster (never going to happen) but I don't think an increasing reliance on China is a good outcome for Russia or Putin.
And it's not just economically, but socially and culturally where they're being hit. Whether they result in Putin backing down is another thing, although he might be left with little choice if he runs out of funds to maintain the war. |
Indeed, and the impact on the political situation in Russia too. Already there have been signs of oligarchs going off-script if not yet very critical and perhaps the first big Russian business calling for an end to the war, for rather obvious reasons.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/business/energy-environment/lukoil-russia-oil |  | | |
| Ukraine on 15:15 - Mar 4 with 1376 views | Guthrum |
| Ukraine on 14:37 - Mar 4 by Pendejo |
Be interesting to know the size of his elite forces and how much exposure they've had in the Ukraine given the stories of young conscripts.
If there was genuine fear of another front opening, you'd keep some back.
Likely to have gambled on weight of numbers to win in Ukraine.
Would be completely different story v NATO even if it remained conventional. |
They committed a sizeable chunk of special forces and airborne in the first day or two. The lack of success would indicate that they failed and took heavy casualties. The armoured thrust to link up with troops landed at the airfield near Kyiv would have been led by better units (time being of the essence). They've had to put a lot of naval infantry ashore along the coast to back up the separatists and forces coming out of Crimea. Those are the decent quality troops.
The conscripts are showing up because that is the bulk of the Russian military. All the follow-up and logistics units will be crewed by them, as will much of the infantry be.
I really think it was an attempt at a surgical strike, not a weight-of-numbers offensive. The latter would have involved many more troops on the first day or two, with wider frontages of attack. As it was, they tried to seize an airfield near Kyiv, fly in reinforcements and grab the city quick, with an armoured thrust from the north to provide a ground link-up. The same principle as Arnhem, with seemingly a similar, if not worse, result. |  |
| |
| Ukraine on 15:25 - Mar 4 with 1319 views | Guthrum |
| Ukraine on 14:48 - Mar 4 by clive_baker |
That's my take on it too. It's also interesting how the Russian airforce hasn't been overly utilised as yet either. It felt relatively 'light touch' relative the the supposed scale and capabilities of the Russian military, and I do wonder if it's cannon fodder that have been sent in thus far. That said, the longer and harder they're met with resistance, the less likely I make it that Putin would set his sights further than Ukraine, although I think that was never likely anyway. Not now at least. |
There could be a number of reasons.
Firstly, Ukraine is well (and increasingly, thanks to supplies from outside) equipped with antiaircraft weapons. That makes it very risky to operate large numbers of 'planes until that can be reduced. Wouldn't at all surprise me if radar info from friendly nations has not been "leaked" to Kyiv.
Secondly, how much of the Russian airforce is both of decent quality and suitable for the required operations (specifically ground attack)? They've put a lot of development into air superiority fighters and strategic bombers over the last decade or so, but neither of those categories is very useful in this scenario.
Thirdly, perhaps quite a bit of it - especially defensive elements - is being held back to patrol and defend the rest of Russia's very extensive borders. | |
| |
| Ukraine on 15:48 - Mar 4 with 1247 views | Churchman |
I think it has to be remembered Ukraine is a big country, bigger that France. In a conventional war it was always going to take time and it’s only just over a week since they started. It isn’t that long.
I suspect the plan was a case of ‘kick the door down and the whole rotten edifice will collapse’ that hasn’t worked out. Underestimating resistance, over estimating capability - what’s the cliche? The first thing to go out of the window is the plan. The Russians have clearly struggled a bit, but will have learnt a lot for the next one.
Unless the West interferes, which it won’t, Putin will have the job done sooner rather than later. What happens next? A big rush to quietly get back to normal, drop sanctions, let the dirty money flow etc is my guess. I hope either the Russian military or the force of brave people deal with Putin, but he knows how to wield power and appears at the moment far too strong.
The only fly in the ointment is the countries next on Putin’s list, the noise they make and whether NATO is serious about defending them. I’ve heard a lot about Article 5, but any agreement can be ripped up or interpreted in different ways.
Nobody remembers the U.K. US and Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s security when they gave up nuclear weapons, conveniently. If I was Putin, I’d be remembering that. |  | | |
| Ukraine on 16:03 - Mar 4 with 1202 views | Pendejo |
| Ukraine on 15:15 - Mar 4 by Guthrum |
They committed a sizeable chunk of special forces and airborne in the first day or two. The lack of success would indicate that they failed and took heavy casualties. The armoured thrust to link up with troops landed at the airfield near Kyiv would have been led by better units (time being of the essence). They've had to put a lot of naval infantry ashore along the coast to back up the separatists and forces coming out of Crimea. Those are the decent quality troops.
The conscripts are showing up because that is the bulk of the Russian military. All the follow-up and logistics units will be crewed by them, as will much of the infantry be.
I really think it was an attempt at a surgical strike, not a weight-of-numbers offensive. The latter would have involved many more troops on the first day or two, with wider frontages of attack. As it was, they tried to seize an airfield near Kyiv, fly in reinforcements and grab the city quick, with an armoured thrust from the north to provide a ground link-up. The same principle as Arnhem, with seemingly a similar, if not worse, result. |
Trying to pull two of your answers hear, and make up my own take.
Russia's elite troops (or rather the bulk of them) are still engaged / embedded in Syria or guarding their NATO borders, after all their other, extensive, borders are either with puppet states or those that are either friendly or cordial China, India, Belarus, Georgia and Kazakhstan)
Plus a genuine belief that they'd be welcomed in. This I'd categorise with Saddam's WMD, i.e. subordinates so sacred of him they tell him what he wants to hear on the basis he's not so loco he'd actually test the theory...
What's their resource like close to Bering Straits? | |
| |
| Ukraine on 16:08 - Mar 4 with 1195 views | Guthrum |
| Ukraine on 15:48 - Mar 4 by Churchman |
I think it has to be remembered Ukraine is a big country, bigger that France. In a conventional war it was always going to take time and it’s only just over a week since they started. It isn’t that long.
I suspect the plan was a case of ‘kick the door down and the whole rotten edifice will collapse’ that hasn’t worked out. Underestimating resistance, over estimating capability - what’s the cliche? The first thing to go out of the window is the plan. The Russians have clearly struggled a bit, but will have learnt a lot for the next one.
Unless the West interferes, which it won’t, Putin will have the job done sooner rather than later. What happens next? A big rush to quietly get back to normal, drop sanctions, let the dirty money flow etc is my guess. I hope either the Russian military or the force of brave people deal with Putin, but he knows how to wield power and appears at the moment far too strong.
The only fly in the ointment is the countries next on Putin’s list, the noise they make and whether NATO is serious about defending them. I’ve heard a lot about Article 5, but any agreement can be ripped up or interpreted in different ways.
Nobody remembers the U.K. US and Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s security when they gave up nuclear weapons, conveniently. If I was Putin, I’d be remembering that. |
Articles 5 and 6 are pretty specific. Trying to side-step them would in effect mean the dissolution of the entire Treaty.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
The Budapest Memorandum does not commit the signitories to come to Ukraine's defence if attacked, just to raise the issue at the UNSC (but, strictly, only if it involves the use of nuclear weapons). It is mostly about respecting the country's borders and economy. [Post edited 4 Mar 2022 16:09]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
