Russia Invades Ukraine

[Powderfinger]

1 hour ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I'm not so convinced the Ukraine is going to fight to the death like Poland in 41 vs Germany and the USSR. There's so much fog of war right now where the western press is saying the invasion is going terribly for Russia but Russia does seem to be at the gates of the largest cities and is taking impressive amounts of territory without large scale bombing. Eventually the rubber will hit the road and we'll see what the real truth is/was.

 

The Polish fought the German tanks on horseback. It’s only a matter of time before a poorly equipped Ukrainian resistance falls. The Russians haven’t started the real bombing yet I fear. Hopefully the Ukrainian resistance can slow down and sabotage the Russian advance for long enough to get military backing internationally.

[grouse]

In each and every war that Russia has fought throughout the years it has always been the same. little to none tactical prowess just let the sheer numbers make up for it. Who cares if a 1000 young men die or 10.000. As long as goal is achieved all is well. 

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

2 minutes ago, grouse said:

In each and every war that Russia has fought throughout the years it has always been the same. little to none tactical prowess just let the sheer numbers make up for it. Who cares if a 1000 young men die or 10.000. As long as goal is achieved all is well. 

That certainly was the Soviet tactic, but this doesn't appear to be human wave attacks. 

[grouse]

1 minute ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

That certainly was the Soviet tactic, but this doesn't appear to be human wave attacks. 

When comparing the way the Russian army operates today to a modernday western army, the Russian army still very much operates this way.  

[Gavin82]

THE dictator of Belarus has accidentally revealed that Moldova could be the next country to be invaded.

Alexander Lukashenko let slip Vladimir Putin's possible next move as he was giving a televised presentation on Russia's invasion routes in Ukraine.

[Graeme]

1 hour ago, Gavin82 said:

THE dictator of Belarus has accidentally revealed that Moldova could be the next country to be invaded.

Alexander Lukashenko let slip Vladimir Putin's possible next move as he was giving a televised presentation on Russia's invasion routes in Ukraine.

[SoulMonster]

I read that a Russian state-controlled newspaper published an article a few days ago which they quickly deleted. Apparently, the article was meant to be published after Ukraine had fallen, as a victory piece, and one must assume it was published by accident after the war didn't go so well but then quickly subtracted. Anyway, what is interesting about the content in this article was that it allegedly shed light on Putin's objectives: He wants to restore a grand Russia that includes Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, or "big russians", "white russians" and "small russians". That's the extent of his current ambition. In Putin's mind, these three countries belong together controlled from Moscow. And it fits with the reports that Putin expected Ukraine to fall quickly because of what he assumed would be substantial support from the Ukraine people. The fact that Ukraine has leaders oriented towards the West, have developed a fledgling democracy, and could become part of the EU or NATO, is barriers to Putin's ambitions and would make it harder to realize his union of these three countries, hence he had to act now to topple the Ukrainian politicians and bring the people of Ukraine back to the Russian fold where they belong. Obviously. he exaggerated the extent of support for Russia in Ukraine, and the prolonged war just increases the divide between the two countries, making his goal even harder to achieve. Not only has he failed, because he he can't win Ukrainian hearts with missiles and bombs, but he has also fucked up Russia through sanctions that were likely much harsher than he anticipated.

What's his exit strategy now? He can retreat and admit he miscalculated and ask for forgiveness. Haha. Or he can bullheadedly continue to take Ukraine, annex the country and hope eventually Ukrainians will accept being controlled from Moscow and being a part of the new Russia.

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

20 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I read that a Russian state-controlled newspaper published an article a few days ago which they quickly deleted. Apparently, the article was meant to be published after Ukraine had fallen, as a victory piece, and one must assume it was published by accident after the war didn't go so well but then quickly subtracted. Anyway, what is interesting about the content in this article was that it allegedly shed light on Putin's objectives: He wants to restore a grand Russia that includes Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, or "big russians", "white russians" and "small russians". That's the extent of his current ambition. In Putin's mind, these three countries belong together controlled from Moscow. And it fits with the reports that Putin expected Ukraine to fall quickly because of what he assumed would be substantial support from the Ukraine people. The fact that Ukraine has leaders oriented towards the West, have developed a fledgling democracy, and could become part of the EU or NATO, is barriers to Putin's ambitions and would make it harder to realize his union of these three countries, hence he had to act now to topple the Ukrainian politicians and bring the people of Ukraine back to the Russian fold where they belong. Obviously. he exaggerated the extent of support for Russia in Ukraine, and the prolonged war just increases the divide between the two countries, making his goal even harder to achieve. Not only has he failed, because he he can't win Ukrainian hearts with missiles and bombs, but he has also fucked up Russia through sanctions that were likely much harsher than he anticipated.

What's his exit strategy now? He can retreat and admit he miscalculated and ask for forgiveness. Haha. Or he can bullheadedly continue to take Ukraine, annex the country and hope eventually Ukrainians will accept being controlled from Moscow and being a part of the new Russia.

I would have to see hard evidence this article exists. But we can't know for sure what's going on in Putin's mind. It's very possible he only wants the eastern half of Ukraine, but for the rest of Ukraine he wants that independent. That would actually be better for Russia because then they don't have to occupy the non Russian speaking part of Ukraine (which would be bloody and costly). The Russian military is controlling a sizable part of the southeastern part of the country, is starting to take the gloves off and use heavy firepower on their second largest city in Kharkov. So they aren't really losing and he's in way too deep to pull out now. If he pulls out this whole exercise will have been a waste of time for him and only gotten more sanctions on his country. Also Ukraine is up to 660,000 refugees and counting. How many of those people aren't going to come back? This is another factor Ukraine leadership has to take into account, how many people can they really afford to lose this way vs giving up the Russian speaking areas. 

 

Edit: Putin is also allegedly up to 71% approval in Russia(from 60%) since the invasion. I expect the sanctions in Russia will rally the Russian people around him. People in the west still don't understand how sanctions and human psychology work. As long as Putin has China's blessing on this, Russia will be fine. I was actually surprised to see India not come out against them, that's big for Russia too. And eventually the Germans will want that gas from Nordstream 2.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Basic_GnR_Fan

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I would have to see hard evidence this article exists. 

The article exists because it was captured before it was deleted: Наступление России и нового мира - РИА Новости, 26.02.2022 (archive.org) It was originally published by RIA.

And it was shared by journalists on social media this weekend: 

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by SoulMonster

[SoulMonster]

Quote from the article, but translated from Russian to Norwegian and then to English, so something could be lost:

"Russia is reviving its historical greatness by uniting the Russian world and the Russian people in one unity with big Russians, white Russians and small Russians".

Anyway, it suggests that Putin aims to return to the Russia of old.

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Quote from the article, but translated from Russian to Norwegian and then to English, so something could be lost:

"Russia is reviving its historical greatness by uniting the Russian world and the Russian people in one unity with big Russians, white Russians and small Russians".

Anyway, it suggests that Putin aims to return to the Russia of old.

Could be, I'll put this in the 'interesting, but not a slam dunk' category. I still think getting the Russian speaking part of Ukraine back and getting a guaranty of the rest of Ukraine being independent is what they're really aiming for here. But again, we can't know what's in Putin's mind.

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Could be, I'll put this in the 'interesting, but not a slam dunk' category. I still think getting the Russian speaking part of Ukraine back and getting a guaranty of the rest of Ukraine being independent is what they're really aiming for here. But again, we can't know what's in Putin's mind.

Maybe that's what he is aiming for now but not initially?

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

8 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Maybe that's what he is aiming for now but not initially?

That could be the case as well. That article could have just been one of many they had ready and that was just the best case scenario where the Ukrainians of all stripes welcome them as liberators type of scenario. I'm sure they wargamed out all potentialities.  

Edited March 2, 2022 by Basic_GnR_Fan

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

I guess the upside here, if there is one, is that the EU is going to get a few million refugees to help out with the aging workforce, and they'll probably assimilate quite well.

[zombux]

54 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I guess the upside here, if there is one, is that the EU is going to get a few million refugees to help out with the aging workforce, and they'll probably assimilate quite well.

ukrainian workforce is already very common in this part of the world and yes it is pretty well adapted/assimilated/whatever you call it. so yeah, that's nothing really new here and we are pretty much already prepared for that

[Gavin82]

Oleksandr Usyk says he is prepared to 'take a life' after joining Ukraine fight (msn.com)

 

Check out Vasyl and Usyk 

[Blackstar]

I read that pulled article in ria.ru when @zombux first posted it a couple of days ago. I don't know if it was originally supposed to be published after Russia had taken Ukraine (I've seen no evidence for that), but there are articles from the same writer, published before the invasion and saying more or less the same things, that are still up, so the reason this particular article was taken down was not that it "revealed" anything (the whole ria site is now blocked in the EU and the UK, but still accessible in the other countries - and for Europeans through VPN and web.archive.org):

https://web.archive.org/web/20220226204816/https://ria.ru/author_Akopov_Petr/

I assume the content of these articles, as well as similar references in Putin's speech, are domestically aimed propaganda appealing to the most nationalist portion of the Russian population. The reason that article was pulled was likely because it made estimations about the stance of EU countries (mainly Germany), which had become outdated soon after it was published.

As for what Putin's actual plan is, it's hard to tell. It seems he'll go on to take Kiev, but it will be extremely hard (and expensive) to maintain the whole country either as an annexed part of Russia (doubtful he'd go for that) or as a puppet state. So a more "realistic" goal for him would be the partition of the country, with the eastern part becoming a Russian-control state and the western part an independent (but militarily neutralized) country.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Blackstar

[Blackstar]

Meanwhile, I don't know about other EU countries, but here in Greece prices of goods - including even toilet paper - have been going up and up, following the rise in the price of fuel. If this continues, people won't afford basic goods.

I guess stockpiling toilet paper would make more sense now than in the beginning of Covid.

[-Jaro-]

Well, not engaging unarmed civilians is history:

 

 

[-Jaro-]

3 minutes ago, -Jaro- said:

Well, not engaging unarmed civilians is history:

 

 

 

[Nicklord]

9 hours ago, Gavin82 said:

THE dictator of Belarus has accidentally revealed that Moldova could be the next country to be invaded.

Alexander Lukashenko let slip Vladimir Putin's possible next move as he was giving a televised presentation on Russia's invasion routes in Ukraine.

You can see some lines at the bottom that are showing some lines going into that (almost) Russian country in Moldova

 

[downzy]

8 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

I read that a Russian state-controlled newspaper published an article a few days ago which they quickly deleted. Apparently, the article was meant to be published after Ukraine had fallen, as a victory piece, and one must assume it was published by accident after the war didn't go so well but then quickly subtracted. Anyway, what is interesting about the content in this article was that it allegedly shed light on Putin's objectives: He wants to restore a grand Russia that includes Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, or "big russians", "white russians" and "small russians". That's the extent of his current ambition. In Putin's mind, these three countries belong together controlled from Moscow. And it fits with the reports that Putin expected Ukraine to fall quickly because of what he assumed would be substantial support from the Ukraine people. The fact that Ukraine has leaders oriented towards the West, have developed a fledgling democracy, and could become part of the EU or NATO, is barriers to Putin's ambitions and would make it harder to realize his union of these three countries, hence he had to act now to topple the Ukrainian politicians and bring the people of Ukraine back to the Russian fold where they belong. Obviously. he exaggerated the extent of support for Russia in Ukraine, and the prolonged war just increases the divide between the two countries, making his goal even harder to achieve. Not only has he failed, because he he can't win Ukrainian hearts with missiles and bombs, but he has also fucked up Russia through sanctions that were likely much harsher than he anticipated.

What's his exit strategy now? He can retreat and admit he miscalculated and ask for forgiveness. Haha. Or he can bullheadedly continue to take Ukraine, annex the country and hope eventually Ukrainians will accept being controlled from Moscow and being a part of the new Russia.

I read this morning that some in U.S. intelligence feel the situation in Ukraine may take 10 - 20 years to be settled, largely due to the fact that there's no easy out.  Support for Ukraine within Ukraine and in the international community is too strong to let Russia do what it wants in the medium to long-term.  Unless someone is willing to take Putin out, it also seems unlikely Russia will back down.  

This fits well with the interview of Fiona Hill @alfierose linked to earlier:

On 3/1/2022 at 6:43 AM, alfierose said:

Interesting interview with Fiona Hill

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/28/world-war-iii-already-there-00012340

She's quite explicit and thorough regarding how Putin has long sought a restoration of the Russian empire, which would capture the larger slavic area of Eastern Europe. 

This is why I find arguments made by John Mearsheimer so unsatisfying.  They fail to explain why Putin has spent so much focus on Ukraine not having any right to sovereignty and his larger worldview of a rightful Russian empire. 

NATO inclusion might have given Putin the reason or argument he needed to justify his actions, but to say that the West bears responsibility for entertaining the inclusion of Ukraine into NATO is, frankly, absurd.

On 2/28/2022 at 2:09 PM, Blackstar said:

Yes, it's the same interview I posted and I mentioned it. He thought that a  full scale invasion wasn't very likely and that if there was an invasion, it would be limited to Donbass/Eastern Ukraine. That doesn't mean his overall analysis is wrong, though.

The problem for Mearsheimer is that he wants to put most of the responsibility on what's happening on NATO.  As I noted earlier, one can criticize the U.S. and partially Europe for not having a more hands off approach to Ukraine and Georgia, but it's a bit of a reach to suggest that the US and NATO own any responsibility for what's happening today in Ukraine.  It's akin to the suggestion that NATO has been driving a bit outside of their lane, and therefore it makes Putin's response of crashing both cars as an understandable response.

He comes across, to me at least, as being a Putin apologist at some parts..

And as an uber-realist, he's also not very consistent.  On the one hand he wants to argue, as realists do, that large powers deserve to have their own spheres of influence respected by other great powers with respect to Russia and Ukraine.  And on the other he's also on record with saying that the U.S. should use everything at its disposal (including a full-on military intervention) against China should it make any real effort to take Taiwan. 

Mearsheimer shows the limits of the realism-school of thought.  It would have never accounted for the level of Ukrainian opposition we're seeing today.  It would have viewed a fractured EU and NATO as incapable of serving as a backstop against this level of Russian aggression.  Realism certainly has its place and deserves to be considered.  But realism in its purest form, for me at least, is far too limited and in some cases too amoral.  Actions are not weighed by their morality but solely based on power politics.  It would be foolish to ignore those aspects, but we're not going to progress any further if all calculations are considered only within a realism framework.

[Basic_GnR_Fan]

53 minutes ago, downzy said:

And as an uber-realist, he's also not very consistent.  On the one hand he wants to argue, as realists do, that large powers deserve to have their own spheres of influence respected by other great powers with respect to Russia and Ukraine.  And on the other he's also on record with saying that the U.S. should use everything at its disposal (including a full-on military intervention) against China should it make any real effort to take Taiwan. 

Mearsheimer shows the limits of the realism-school of thought.  It would have never accounted for the level of Ukrainian opposition we're seeing today.  It would have viewed a fractured EU and NATO as incapable of serving as a backstop against this level of Russian aggression.  Realism certainly has its place and deserves to be considered.  But professors realism in its purest form, for me at least, is far too limited and in some cases too amoral.  Actions are not weighed by their morality but solely based on power politics.  It would be foolish to ignore those aspects, but we're not going to progress any further if all calculations are considered only within a realism framework.

I'm a fan of Mearsheimer and I think you have him slightly wrong. He doesn't say great powers 'deserve' to be regional hegemon's, he only says they all 'desire' to be regional hegemons, and that great powers will do whatever they can to prevent other great powers from becoming regional hegemons. Because if another great power becomes a comfortable regional hegemon, they will feel free to roam, potentially into your sphere of influence. That's why he's saying it would be wise for the US to limit Russian or Chinese attempts to be regional hegemons. In his analysis, he sees China as the only potential long term rival for the US on the global stage so he says preference should be given to limiting them. He also says it would be good for NATO and Russia to have an independent Ukraine in between each as a buffer state.

I don't think he would have underplayed Ukrainian resistance because he accounts for nationalism being an important factor, and the nationalism of the Ukrainians (non Russian speaking) is very strong against Russia. 

I can see how a realist position may come across to someone as 'being an apologist' for another power. But he simply asks the question, what if China was threatening to add Canada or Mexico into on their defense pacts/sphere of influence? The US would go ballistic and do whatever they could to throw China out of it's sphere of influence. And if China ever becomes a comfortable regional hegemon, they just might try to pull this in the future.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Basic_GnR_Fan

[zombux]

 

[Gavin82]

https://www.thesun.ie/news/8446456/us-fighter-jets-elephant-walk-biden-warns-putin/