-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Russia/Ukraine conflict
- Thread starter amolina
- Start date
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
1. There was supposed to be a so called Russian presidential election in March 2024. It was of course never going to be any kind of free and fair election – just like there never has been any kind of free and fair election in what today is Russia. Some so called presidential elections in Russia has been followed by rather big protests, since the so called elections are obviously all rigged. Maybe the Russian Dictator thought that he wouldn't be able to put down the protest that could follow after the next so called election... Before the war the media situation in Russia was at least a little different. The Dictator has used the War to completely end all forms of opposing media in Russia.
2. How do we know what the Russian people think? I am still going to argue that no-one knows what kind of support the Russian Dictator really has. But unfortunately he still has enough support to remain in power. And I guess it doesn't help that millions of Russians have left the country...
But as many has pointed out before; not all Dictators are able to stay in power until they die or leave voluntarily. Sometimes their oppression cracks and then things could change very fast.
Last edited:
Germany orders four Russian consulates on its soil closed
Apparently a major layoff of spies in Germany is coming. But on the bright side more Fodder for the front lines.
Apparently a major layoff of spies in Germany is coming. But on the bright side more Fodder for the front lines.
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
Tiger
Active Member
Last edited:
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Or Russia liberated itself because of Ukraine...
The nut fringe on the right is probably not going to grow. My congressional district was held by a Republican for many years, but one of these fringe people got the nomination last election. It's now held by a (moderate) Democrat.
There are also people on the far left who are against the war. The reasoning on the right is old fashioned isolationist thinking and/or a pro-Putin stance. On the left the resistance stems from a sort of guilt that all the world's problems are the United States. They insist that NATO expanded eastward because of American meddling and not because Eastern Europe desperately wanted into NATO and Poland was willing to become a nuclear power if they couldn't.
The far left blames the US for its meddling and that caused Putin to start this war. Both extremes are against US support, but for different reasons. Though neither coalition is likely to grow significantly in the next election, the most talked about front runners for the Republican nomination are very vocally against US support for the war. And they have no chance of winning if they can't turn out the extreme right vote.
My partner came across that last night. I came across this way down that thread
Russia’s Crimea Bridge Could Collapse Anytime
This is an old article, but it talks about the folly in building that bridge in the first place. The soil under the sea bed there is very poor for supporting a bridge, it shifts and bridge supports would have to be driven down far deeper than the Russians did. There are some pretty good sized earthquakes possible in the region and in cold winters the Azoz freezes over and produces icebergs.
It is quite possible the bridge is beginning to fail. The irony that the bridge fails soon and Russia ends up isolated by their own incompetence in building a bridge.
Ukraine may be strongly encouraging the Free Russia movement and supplying them with tools to wage war on their own country, but is not directly involved in many of the activities in Russia. If we ever know for sure, it will probably be well after the war is over.
Putin knows the real results of the last election and he knows that he either really lost or he won by a far narrower margin than it appeared from the rigged election results. He was genuinely popular when Russia turned around from the disaster of the 1990s when he was in power. He did have some role in this, but the rising cost of oil and some Middle Eastern oil being offline for a while helped a lot too.
But when he changed the constitution so he could stay in power forever, people started to get a bit upset with him. We don't know the full extent of Russia's COVID experience, but it was probably vastly worse than the picture they painted.
He was looking at an uphill battle to win in 2024 and make it look like it was legitimate so he figured a war victory would be good for his reputation and he decided to invade Ukraine. A quick victory in Ukraine and a return of Ukraine to the Russian fold would have boosted his chances quite a bit.
Additionally during the pandemic he was very isolated and only spoke frequently with a couple of people. His inner circle during that time were some nutters with ideas about how Russia has a destiny and the break up of the USSR was a set back in that destiny.
There are also ideas that Russia is the inheritor of the Roman Empire. It became that when Constantinople fell. The idea assumes that there always has to be somebody who is carrying the torch for the Roman Empire and it can't just be extinct. This idea goes back centuries. It's why the crowned leader of Russia was called the Czar, which is a russofication of Caesar.
More like what @lolachampcar said. There is a real possibility that Russia could change in very big ways on the back of this war. I think the scenario where Putin gets overthrown in a democratic coup is the least likely, but a break up of Russia and some of those new countries moving in a democratic direction is somewhat possible.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
If one of those presidential candidates wins that means the end of aid done via presidential authorization (much of Ukraine's aid is done this way). As of earlier in the month, it was the 37th (I think after the publish of that one or two more had been done, but I link this article because it does a great job of summarizing and explaining how it works) and it had been responsible for $21.1 billion in aid to Ukraine.
https://www.state.gov/use-of-presidential-drawdown-authority-for-military-assistance-for-ukraine/
That president can also use veto power to hold up aid from Congress too and while only a few fringe members are very vocal about ending aid, if the president does do that, how many of the others not so fringe have the backbone to break such a veto? From past incidents, I'm not certain.
As such, even the presidential election alone can have a huge impact on aid from the US. I'm not as familiar with the governments of other Western countries, but similar things may be at play.
BitJam
Active Member
I do not know which is why, for me, this was one of the most interesting and surprising statements Candace Rondeaux made. I was hoping people here could help shed some light on this.
It would make sense if Putin invaded because he felt his back was against the wall rather than it simply being a vanity project.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Not my read at all. In the US foreign policy is mainly determined by the President. If in the next election Biden loses to an R - it will be the end of active US support for Ukraine. Thats the best hope Putin has of avoiding any further embarrassment ... so he probably thinks, he needs to just last another 1 1/2 years.
In terms of issues Ukraine war is probably not even in the top 5 - so won't determine who someone votes for. Partisanship is very high - so most Rs will vote for R, most Ds for D and depending on how the independents break - the president gets elected.
Last edited:
Ukraine's low-risk "Offensive" strategy:
- Build up personnel and equipment in a seemingly strategic location.
- Make cautious, calculated attacks with attainable objectives that threaten to escalate.
- Make diversionary attacks in multiple places where Russia must react.
- Increase pressure when signs of weakness show.
- When Russia shifts reserves, destroy them in transit or during staging.
We haven't even seen the Western hardware they received in the winter/ spring deployed in volume yet. As you suggest, so long as Russia keeps giving them opportunities like this, it's difficult to justify giving them reason to entrench deeper.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
This is a VERY mypoic assessment. There have been several, very vocal, Republicans that have voiced continued and expanded support for Ukraine.
You seem to want to categorize every R as a part of the "Freedom Caucus", but most are not actually.
Heck, this week Russia issued an arrest warranty for Lindsay Graham b/c of his vocal support for Ukraine.
No, most R's support Ukraine, just some of the far right crazies (like the far left crazies) do not.
Last edited:
How does that correspond to the fact that all Republicans in congress have been in lockstep with Trump when he was president?
EVNow
Well-Known Member
That is not what the poll says.
Besides, I'm talking about presidential politics. Both the front runners in GOP are not for continued Ukraine war. Now a plurality of Republican voters think we are spending too much in aid for Ukraine.
Last edited:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
As long as they are mortally afraid of him - irrespective of what they think they will just do what he says.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Same with how Dems are in lockstep with Biden, they put the party and unity first (for better or for worse).
But your oversimplification really isn't true. There were a lot of "never Trumpers" that were very vocal during his presidency.
I don't group all the Dems into one bin, there are the far left socialist loonies that are nothing at all like the moderates near the middle. Same thing applies on the right side of the aisle.
The "my tribe is better than your tribe" groupthink beguiles a simplistic mind. Be better than that (everyone, not directed at you in particular). Look at the issues, look at what individuals say. And be very skeptical of BOTH sides of the MSM. They have agendas.
Last edited:
That’s enough US politics for now. These discussions have a tendency to go south really quickly and the first signs are already there.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
F-16 maintenance may make fighters not worth the cost; F-35s are preferable — military expert
Maintaining Western F-16 fighter jets may cost Ukraine dearly and not bring the appropriate effect, Austrian military analyst Tom Cooper said in an exclusive interview with NV on May 29.
It's not a matter of either HIMARS or F-16s, Ukraine needs both. As well as Patriots, tanks, artillery & munitions, APCs, etc.
www.theatlantic.com
America’s Unconvincing Reasons for Denying F-16s to Ukraine
Before giving Kyiv the weapons that it needs, the U.S. always works through a list of excuses.
www.theatlantic.com
:
