Striving to make sense of the Ukraine war

[1902 1,167]

6 hours ago, kirku said:

Lies, what do you mean?

Only ~6000 russian soldiers have been killed in Ukraine, and they heroically died while inflicting 100,000 losses to the Ukranian military.

This is the reason russia now needs 300,000 men in their partial mobilisation, have stopped fighting age men from leaving the country and have allegedly started press ganging men on the streets.

Obviously.

Do you remember when they told us that NATO had to pull back to its 1991 borders and that Finland and Sweden would be next if they weren't careful?

[Herman 9,700]

9 hours ago, Well b back said:

Maybe significant 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62981293

It's funny how they're now anti war, 7 months after it started. 🤔

[1902 1,167]

33 minutes ago, Herman said:

It's funny how they're now anti war, 7 months after it started. 🤔

Though to be fair, many of them will have been anti-war before but not prepared to risk 15 years in jail for it. That calculation changes when you, your brother, your son or your partner might have to go and fight.

[TheGunnShow 5,910]

Keep putting the pressure on, Ukraine. So obvious that Putin's trying a naked landgrab with no authorisation whatsoever.

Even funnier, the Aland crisis is probably the template of how the country that has power can do a splendid job anyway.

[Herman 9,700]

24 minutes ago, 1902 said:

Though to be fair, many of them will have been anti-war before but not prepared to risk 15 years in jail for it. That calculation changes when you, your brother, your son or your partner might have to go and fight.

Fair point.👍

[horsefly 4,273]

7 hours ago, kirku said:

Lies, what do you mean?

Only ~6000 russian soldiers have been killed in Ukraine, and they heroically died while inflicting 100,000 losses to the Ukranian military.

This is the reason russia now needs 300,000 men in their partial mobilisation, have stopped fighting age men from leaving the country and have allegedly started press ganging men on the streets.

Obviously.

Do forgive me! I was forgetting what an honourable man Putin is, and how kind it is of him to facilitate the opportunity for an extra 300,000 Russians to show their love for their country by sacrificing their lives in the noble cause of torturing and murdering those nasty Na*zi Ukrainian pensioners and children. Silly me!

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

Saw Ellwood on the box this morning - asking the obvious question as to what we do if a low yield tactical nuke is used / demonstrated even here.

Frankly - I think Putin will do this at some point simply to call our bluff (I've said as much before) as his position deteriorates - I do hope cool heads have a plan and a defined tailored response.

[Sheva 123]

300,000, unfit, untrained, ill equipped, unmotivated ‘soldiers’, who mostly don’t want to be there. The mud, then severe cold and  hunger on its way, …what could go wrong!

The idea of letting out prisoners to fight, is a complete non starter, …all they would want to do, is steal vodka and get drunk.

Putin humiliated in charge of the nuclear option is the biggest danger, to everyone.

It will be a close run situation and in Biden and Truss, I have little confidence.

Consider that a showdown with Russia is what many in the US and EU really want and they have already calculated the damage that it will take.

Ukraine is being used, this hasn’t happened by accident.

 

 

 

 

 

[horsefly 4,273]

Much may depend on whether there are enough sane and brave individuals in the Russian military and political leadership who will prevent Putin taking the nuclear option. No doubt, the US are working on encouraging such people to act before it's too late. Putin's days are numbered; illness or the failure of this war will deal a fatal blow in the not-too-distant future it seems.  The speeches at the UN yesterday from Biden et al have made it very clear that the West will not let Russia gain the victory over Ukraine that is enshrined in Putin's war objectives.  The question is whether Russians in a position to act will allow Putin to push the button to take significant parts of the outside world and major Russian cities with him. Evidence suggests (protests) that the conscription law is unsurprisingly very unpopular. Let's hope that those with the power to act use that unpopularity to push for a settlement, or as impetus to overthrow the tyrant who is bringing Russia to its knees.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

There seems to be an idea that Putin is talking intercontinental nuclear. I don't think he is. I think he is talking battlefield nuclear. And saying to the West, what are you going to do now?

[dylanisabaddog 4,848]

8 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

There seems to be an idea that Putin is talking intercontinental nuclear. I don't think he is. I think he is talking battlefield nuclear. And saying to the West, what are you going to do now?

That's always been your problem KG. You keep asking difficult questions and my brain hurts now. The scary thing is, what do you think Truss will do?

She is one of a tiny number of Remainers who now think that Brexit was a good idea, despite the economic evidence to the contrary. I don't mind people having different opinions to me but she's the only person I know who has moved from Remain to Leave. And now she has a say in pushing a red button. Perhaps a Civil Servant or colleague will explain to her that she's not going to be able to change her mind afterwards? 

Edited September 22, 2022 by dylanisabaddog

[Indy 3,283]

15 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

That's always been your problem KG. You keep asking difficult questions and my brain hurts now. The scary thing is, what do you think Truss will do?

She is one of a tiny number of Remainers who now think that Brexit was a good idea, despite the economic evidence to the contrary. I don't mind people having different opinions to me but she's the only person I know who has moved from Remain to Leave. And now she has a say in pushing a red button. Perhaps a Civil Servant or colleague will explain to her that she's not going to be able to change her mind afterwards? 

Truss will do whatever Biden tells her!

The reality is coming fast and there needs to be a clear dialogue with Russia, there’s a need to show that a change of leadership would open the opportunity for Russia to be considered to be reintegrated into the international community! The US lead sanctions have United some Russians behind Putin, giving him more support than he might have had if it was handled better. I have a couple close contacts in St Petersburg who work for Gasprom, both before April we’re still able to contact us on LinkedIn, both were saying that as the west pulled out of Russia, those who weren’t happy with this invasion were slowly turned by the propaganda used by the government to say look at what the West really think of us! 

The trouble is that this totally US driven sanctions pressure on the UN by the might of America, Russia energy response has had a devastating effect on EU population and with that we’re seeing the even bigger far right rise in politics, Czech Rep, Sweden now co-run by a very divided government and it’s spreading. The US is fast becoming a problem too in the eyes of many in Europe and by me to a certain degree!

So the question goes back to my original view that this land grab was always the vision, connecting those closer Russian areas of Ukraine, now come next week, they will be declared as Russian and then any attack will be considered an attack at Russia. So can there be a quick resolution, a way out for Russia or a brokered peace or we move to the inevitable use of more dangerous weapons, because any attack on Russia (From next week formerly Ukraine areas voted to join Russia) will in my opinion get a very chilling response. Will it be Nuclear I’m not sure it will be, but it might be a one shot into Kyiv, a Hiroshima type event gamble.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

The sad fact is Ukraine is the only country that has given up it's nukes!

I did wonder if we should give them ten back 😉

Nobody can cave into nuclear blackmail - else all it tells EVERY country is that they must have their own ultimate deterrent as the current nuclear powers can't be trusted to come to their aid in extremis. Japan will be first. It's actually why the UK (and France) has its own independent deterrent - doubts that the Yanks in extremis would defend us.

Simply Ukraine has to carry on the fight and if yes Putin does as I frankly expect 'demonstrate' some low yield device in some largely isolated part of the world (Balmoral) then they'll have to be a measured cool headed response no knee jerk reaction. Like all bullies, he will keep on doing what he's doing until somebody metaphorically punches him on the nose.

[horsefly 4,273]

2 hours ago, Indy said:

because any attack on Russia (From next week formerly Ukraine areas voted to join Russia) will in my opinion get a very chilling response

They will not be "formerly Ukraine areas", they will remain Ukrainian sovereign territory irrespective of any illegal sham poll conducted by an illegal invading force.

[Indy 3,283]

5 minutes ago, horsefly said:

They will not be "formerly Ukraine areas", they will remain Ukrainian sovereign territory irrespective of any illegal sham poll conducted by an illegal invading force.

Indeed, but unfortunately another tactical move by the madman which will cause more problems. As I said it’s a move to then quantify any attack on these regions as an aggressive attack on Russia. As my point!

[horsefly 4,273]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Indeed, but unfortunately another tactical move by the madman which will cause more problems. As I said it’s a move to then quantify any attack on these regions as an aggressive attack on Russia. As my point!

And such a claim will rightly be exposed as a pathetic and illegal claim that will not alter the Ukranian response or that of its Western allies one iota. For any UN member to accept such a situation would be utterly absurd and destroy the law-based authority on which the UN rests. 

[Indy 3,283]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

And such a claim will rightly be exposed as a pathetic and illegal claim that will not alter the Ukranian response or that of its Western allies one iota. For any UN member to accept such a situation would be utterly absurd and destroy the law-based authority on which the UN rests. 

You’re forgetting that Israel’s land grab isn’t being as highlighted yet as illegal!

[horsefly 4,273]

56 minutes ago, Indy said:

You’re forgetting that Israel’s land grab isn’t being as highlighted yet as illegal!

Not sure how you get that from what I have said. I am certainly no fan of Israel's behaviour, and they should be appropriately sanctioned, but comparisons to the Russian invasion of Ukraine are far-fetched. 

Are you in any doubt that Russia's invasion of the Ukraine is illegal? Are you in any doubt that all the law-abiding members of the UN will regard any poll conducted by the Russians as both illegal and irrelevant? Are you in any doubt that to take Russian claims that such polls would establish their sovereignty would be anything other than to licence the tyranny of empire building dictatorships?

The anti-Russian powers will treat such polls with the contempt they deserve and refuse to consider them as even remotely relevant to the current conflict.

[Herman 9,700]

 

[Indy 3,283]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Not sure how you get that from what I have said. I am certainly no fan of Israel's behaviour, and they should be appropriately sanctioned, but comparisons to the Russian invasion of Ukraine are far-fetched. 

Are you in any doubt that Russia's invasion of the Ukraine is illegal? Are you in any doubt that all the law-abiding members of the UN will regard any poll conducted by the Russians as both illegal and irrelevant? Are you in any doubt that to take Russian claims that such polls would establish their sovereignty would be anything other than to licence the tyranny of empire building dictatorships?

The anti-Russian powers will treat such polls with the contempt they deserve and refuse to consider them as even remotely relevant to the current conflict.

Nope both are as illegal as each other’s but it’s strange how one is treated by the west as abysmal and the other a blind eye turned, especially by the US. That’s my point.

Why are you getting into an argument about legality of the poll! I’ve not mentioned it as legal, I’ve pointed out it’ll be used as an excuse for Putin……you really are very victor meldrew aren’t you! Do you argue with yourself if no one interacts? 😂👍😉

Edited September 22, 2022 by Indy

[horsefly 4,273]

Just now, Indy said:

Nope both are as illegal as each other’s but it’s strange how one is treated by the west as abysmal and the other a blind eye turned, especially by the US. That’s my point.

So, what are we supposed to conclude from your comparison of the two conflicts? That if we don't supply the Palestinians with weaponry to defend themselves, we shouldn't be supplying any support to the Ukrainians? Frankly I find the comparison wildly implausible. One can accept that Israel should be sanctioned for their abuses without thinking that they get close to the magnitude of threat and criminality committed by the mass Russian invasion of Ukraine. In the scale of things, the Israel/Palestine conflict bears more resemblance to the Northern Ireland conflict than it does the threat to global order that the Russian invasion has precipitated.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,504]

8 hours ago, Indy said:

Truss will do whatever Biden tells her!

The reality is coming fast and there needs to be a clear dialogue with Russia, there’s a need to show that a change of leadership would open the opportunity for Russia to be considered to be reintegrated into the international community! The US lead sanctions have United some Russians behind Putin, giving him more support than he might have had if it was handled better. I have a couple close contacts in St Petersburg who work for Gasprom, both before April we’re still able to contact us on LinkedIn, both were saying that as the west pulled out of Russia, those who weren’t happy with this invasion were slowly turned by the propaganda used by the government to say look at what the West really think of us! 

The trouble is that this totally US driven sanctions pressure on the UN by the might of America, Russia energy response has had a devastating effect on EU population and with that we’re seeing the even bigger far right rise in politics, Czech Rep, Sweden now co-run by a very divided government and it’s spreading. The US is fast becoming a problem too in the eyes of many in Europe and by me to a certain degree!

So the question goes back to my original view that this land grab was always the vision, connecting those closer Russian areas of Ukraine, now come next week, they will be declared as Russian and then any attack will be considered an attack at Russia. So can there be a quick resolution, a way out for Russia or a brokered peace or we move to the inevitable use of more dangerous weapons, because any attack on Russia (From next week formerly Ukraine areas voted to join Russia) will in my opinion get a very chilling response. Will it be Nuclear I’m not sure it will be, but it might be a one shot into Kyiv, a Hiroshima type event gamble.

The first bold point is hampered by what opportunities the people of Russia have to depose Putin if that option appeals to them. The number of influential Russians falling out of high up windows probably acts as a deterrent here. 

I don't think it's fair to characterise the sanctions on Russia like they're only down to the US. Other parts of the world diverge with the US on sanctioning countries, but they agree they're a necessary tool with Russia as a passive means of pressuring Russia. Neither do I think it's true that there's much opposition to the US position in Europe, which is actually far more vulnerable to a belligerent Russia than the US is. 

Awful as they were, Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended World War 2 because the world saw the devastating destruction that nuclear weapons could do. As nuclear weapons have proliferated, the promise of mutually assured destruction has ensured that nuclear powers tend to tread lightly with each other and try not to **** each other off too much. However, that has always been in a context where nuclear powers don't go off on imperial adventures to grow their own empires. 

For all the talk of 'American Empire', the US influences through money and trade for the most part, not conquest. Even Iraq was not about conquest. On the other hand, Russia's intentions towards Ukraine are the absolute destruction of a sovereign state that has engaged in no aggression towards Russia. 

At the end of the day, regardless of international law, if Russia is allowed to simply take land of neighbours on a whim, with no repercussions, then it can simply carry on. That's why Putin must not succeed in winning anything from Ukraine. If he goes further and launches a tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine, then there has to be a direct retaliation against Russia of some form. Personally, I think the best answer would be to furnish Ukraine with a nuclear arsenal to replace the arsenal that it surrendered. I think that would be defensible, since Ukraine would be a nuclear power in its own right were it not for the fact that it surrendered them because it trusted Russia's lies. 

 

[kirku 1,332]

14 hours ago, Herman said:

It's funny how they're now anti war, 7 months after it started. 🤔

They not anti-war, they're anti-mobilisation.

Two new elements have emerged today:

• The mobilisation seems to be almost total in the provinces, especially amongst the ethnically central Asian areas, and much lighter touch in St Petersburg and Moscow. Hardly surprising but really does ram home the imperialism at the heart of the russian empire.
• There are rumours that the decree allows them to mobilise up to one million men.

[Herman 9,700]

11 minutes ago, kirku said:

They not anti-war, they're anti-mobilisation.

Two new elements have emerged today:

• The mobilisation seems to be almost total in the provinces, especially amongst the ethnically central Asian areas, and much lighter touch in St Petersburg and Moscow. Hardly surprising but really does ram home the imperialism at the heart of the russian empire.
• There are rumours that the decree allows them to mobilise up to one million men.

It was my half-arsed attempt at sarcasm.😳

I did see a video earlier of men in Dagestan being persuaded to join up. They weren't having it and I can see some of these areas pushing back.

[kirku 1,332]

9 minutes ago, Herman said:

It was my half-arsed attempt at sarcasm.😳

I did see a video earlier of men in Dagestan being persuaded to join up. They weren't having it and I can see some of these areas pushing back.

We'll see.

As many have noted, if the men in russia had half the courage of the women in Iran...

[littleyellowbirdie 2,504]

32 minutes ago, kirku said:

They not anti-war, they're anti-mobilisation.

Two new elements have emerged today:

• The mobilisation seems to be almost total in the provinces, especially amongst the ethnically central Asian areas, and much lighter touch in St Petersburg and Moscow. Hardly surprising but really does ram home the imperialism at the heart of the russian empire.
• There are rumours that the decree allows them to mobilise up to one million men.

Open protests and people actively trying to flee Russia has to undermine the perception, even in Russia, that the war is supported by ordinary Russians. 

To be honest, the thing that worries me most now is that I think Putin is very motivated by whatever is the best chance of saving his own skin. As far as the war is concerned, by conventional methods, he's clearly screwed, but equally the domestic audience is turning and the only way he loses power is from being killed. What's concerning is, that in his shoes as someone who clearly has absolutely no ethical limits, a tactical nuclear strike does actually look like it'd be worth a punt. Personally, I think it would make most sense for him to target Kyiv. 

The best option at this point is to give Putin a means to save his own skin. Someone needs to persuade someone like Erdogan, Xi Jinping, or maybe Kim Jong Un to offer him political asylum now, because we can't allow Russia to get away with what it's doing, but I do genuinely think nuclear risk is only getting higher. 

Final thought, the priority for the next few days should be decapitating separatist administrations so that even the pretense of referendums is made impossible, because those referendums will be the pretext for bringing nukes into the equation. 

Edited September 22, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

13 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

What's concerning is, that in his shoes as someone who clearly has absolutely no ethical limits, a tactical nuclear strike does actually look like it'd be worth a punt. Personally, I think it would make most sense for him to target Kyiv. 

No. His first thoughts would be to demonstrate the use of a small nuke (say 10KT) - to intimidate and to show willing. Little or no loss of life.

However the West must 'black-hat' all such moves and I would suggest in the first instance of such use respond with a non-nuclear but punishing response. Signals, probably privately communicated (via China so the message hits home) would need to be sent that further use of such will result in NATO expelling all Russian forces forthwith from Ukrainian. If escalated further there will be Western military strikes on Russian assets.

Simply it's a ladder. Nobody wants nuclear war and in the first instances conventional munitions will suffice to answer.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,504]

22 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

No. His first thoughts would be to demonstrate the use of a small nuke (say 10KT) - to intimidate and to show willing. Little or no loss of life.

However the West must 'black-hat' all such moves and I would suggest in the first instance of such use respond with a non-nuclear but punishing response. Signals, probably privately communicated (via China so the message hits home) would need to be sent that further use of such will result in NATO expelling all Russian forces forthwith from Ukrainian. If escalated further there will be Western military strikes on Russian assets.

Simply it's a ladder. Nobody wants nuclear war and in the first instances conventional munitions will suffice to answer.

I genuinely hope you're right and I'm wrong.

[Yellow Fever 3,734]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I genuinely hope you're right and I'm wrong.

My main concern is that the UK is one of the more obvious initial targets to intimidate and dissuade the West. I was not joking when I noted Balmoral. We don't have similar low level nukes (or conventional munitions)  to respond and the USA certainly wouldn't want to escalate immediately on that. He'd have kicked the Yanks poodle. Cutting a North Sea gas inter connector is actually more likely.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,504]

12 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

My main concern is that the UK is one of the more obvious initial targets to intimidate and dissuade the West. I was not joking when I noted Balmoral. We don't have similar low level nukes (or conventional munitions)  to respond and the USA certainly wouldn't want to escalate immediately on that. He'd have kicked the Yanks poodle. Cutting a North Sea gas inter connector is actually more likely.

One of Putin's pet commentators suggested nuking the Queen's funeral was a missed opportunity, but If Russia attacked UK territory in any way then that's the NATO treaty invoked and World War 3 has officially begun.

Edited September 23, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie