Tiger
Active Member
I myself would rather see it collapse to smaller countries rather than keep it as it is as a lingering threat. It should become so small it's no threat to anyone.
-
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
I myself would rather see it collapse to smaller countries rather than keep it as it is as a lingering threat. It should become so small it's no threat to anyone.
Biden has not shown much tendency to blink. He took the unprecedented step of sharing US collected intelligence on the Russians before the war and was quick to send aid to Ukraine when the war started.
The US has potent cyber attack capabilities. Additionally NATO can interpret any detected radiation falling on a NATO country as an article 5 trigger. I also heard a rumor that Biden has told the Russians that since Russia has violated the Budapest Agreement, Ukraine should be re-armed with nukes if Russia wants to get nuclear with them. I'm not sure that one is true, but it would be karma for Russia.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Russia set to annex Ukraine territory; West warns of new sanctions | REUTERS
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/2P2FZN6GABILZDTMZZBDFWX3R4.jpg)
www.reuters.com
Happy B/D, bitch: /s
Putin to annex seized Ukrainian land, U.N. warns of 'dangerous escalation'
President Vladimir Putin will begin annexing four Ukrainian regions to Russia on Friday, a move the United Nations warned would mark a "dangerous escalation" and jeopardise prospects for peace, while Kyiv warned it would elicit a harsh response.
www.reuters.com
Happy B/D, bitch: /s
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
It seems there will be an 'event' at the Kremlin tomorrow afternoon involving State Duma.
Most likely this would be the announcement of the annexations or at least something related to it.
There will be more posturing and more threats from Putin, no doubt about it.
There is still nothing he will gain from using nukes. He will only ever gain anything from the THREAT of them.
There is still only one way to handle Putin, an archetypal bully, and that's to stand up to him and not react feebly to his threats or actions.
If a bully hits you the best thing to do is hit them back harder. Every time. That's the only language they understand.
ETA:
We also need to stand up to him with a collective, united, consistent front and this is not something we are demonstrating.
I watched the European Parliament discussing Ukraine today and it brought home that point. The US, EU and the west in general is still presenting a picture of a divided, fragmented force, each dealing with the threat in their own way and arguing amongst themselves as to what they should do.
Putin sees this as weakness and will continue to exploit it.
Most likely this would be the announcement of the annexations or at least something related to it.
There will be more posturing and more threats from Putin, no doubt about it.
There is still nothing he will gain from using nukes. He will only ever gain anything from the THREAT of them.
There is still only one way to handle Putin, an archetypal bully, and that's to stand up to him and not react feebly to his threats or actions.
If a bully hits you the best thing to do is hit them back harder. Every time. That's the only language they understand.
ETA:
We also need to stand up to him with a collective, united, consistent front and this is not something we are demonstrating.
I watched the European Parliament discussing Ukraine today and it brought home that point. The US, EU and the west in general is still presenting a picture of a divided, fragmented force, each dealing with the threat in their own way and arguing amongst themselves as to what they should do.
Putin sees this as weakness and will continue to exploit it.
Last edited:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
My sister worked in an agency with a 3-letter acronym. Let's just say NO ONE she worked with would have ever been allowed to keep their jobs and make the assumptions you are. And her intel briefs made it all the way to POTUS.
In the intelligence world, it is perfectly fine to over-estimate an opponent's capabilities, but it is an egregious sin to under-estimate them.
Plus, if Russian generals were selling off things in the nuclear arsenal, as you say, then we would have already seen rogue actors like terrorist groups with nukes.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Yes . . . and no.
Little known fact, but according to the START treaties, the opposite governments were given permission to frequently tour the opposing countries nuclear facilities, to an extent, to verify compliance with numbers of weapons, warhead disposal, etc.
3rd-party inspections (which did eventually end as relations deteriorated) would have kept even the most dishonest generals pretty honest.
First off I don't want to test my theory. The cost of being wrong is too high.
Secondly, I didn't say they were selling nuclear material, that is tracked too well on the world markets by multiple governments. But there is a big incentive to tell the next command up the food chain that the maintenance needed was done when in reality the commander pocketed the money or paid off the extortion racket and a white wash was done to pass a cursory inspection.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
See my other reply. START inspections would have VERY quickly picked up poor maintenance of anything related to nuclear material and weapons readiness.
This entire premise you are working from is simply not correct.
bobby g
Member
Of course you're right, USSR and not Russia but what was the USSR other than Russia? Yeah Joe was a Georgian but he moved to Russia. My only thought was my memory of me in primary school delusionally thinking that I could build a space ship to get out of here and bring slightly less delusional in middle school digging a shelter in my back yard by hand. Not all thought what I thought but that time scared the crap out of me. The Korean DMX in 1968 was not as bad.
President Vladimir V. Putin will sign agreements on Friday for the Russian Federation to take over four Ukrainian territories, the Kremlin said on Thursday, outlining plans to annex the regions after referendums that were widely denounced as a sham.
Dmitri S. Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesman, also said Mr. Putin would make a speech at the Kremlin.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/09/29/world/russia-ukraine-war-news
bobby g
Member
I don't agree on the nuke weapons question. The maint of the nuke weapons is very very simple to falsify. Trivial in a nation that has a national competence in deceit and lying and corruption. The US intelligence agencies have consistently and for 3 decades miscalculated Russia. We know maint on artillery systems and missiles is lacking. That's been proven by seeing the shelling patterns. We know the entire army is a potemkim project. What do we really know about the nuke weapons program?
We have no idea how well the launch systems have been maintained and especially post 2008 when Russia began to drastically cut military spending. No idea. We know the facilities are sealed but we don't know if fuses are actually changed. We don't know if artillery shell casings are sound or being eaten inside by acids. We know the costs of maintaining our arsenal and it comes close to the entire Russian military budget. Consider that they have a much greater amount of warheads spread across many more sites and vast number of platforms. They spend next to nothing on it. That's a very concerning issue.
That said you can't assume they don't work but on the same point you can't assume they all do work. A nuke blowing up in a sub or on a plane is a scary thought, what if it blows up in Russia. Would putin claim a nato attack?
Anyway here is some great writing on the topic, I again turn our attention to The Atlantic so we can read something from somebody that can write.
What If Russia Uses Nuclear Weapons in Ukraine?
A look at the grim scenarios—and the U.S. playbook for each
www.theatlantic.com
I had the pleasure of making some presentations to Nunn's team back when I was a young man. Invasion of Korea was the war game if I remember correctly- to use nukes or not.
I will add to my prior comment. Bidens team has very very specific plans in place in case a nuke weapon is used. To date the Biden team has been very impressive. Polemic comments from social media folks like Trent Telenko aside there has been a very measured approach and when Trent (or others social media types) comment on things like policy and strategy that are far far outside their realm of competency they expose themselves quickly. Many posters here are just as competent.
Last edited:
Meanwhile, the mobilized are being introduced to Russian army life...
The 90km journey that changed the course of the war in Ukraine
How Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the north-east dramatically turned the tide of the seven-month-long invasion
ig.ft.com
Great media presentation & overview of the recent UKR counteroffensive
Interesting. Would that the sentiment expressed by the author would grow and continueto be made publicly.
If we want discuss this seriously we should consider Russian structure. There are 22 republics now:
How many republics and capitals are there in Russia?
The Russian Federation consists of 22 republics, which have the right to their own constitutions, state languages and capitals. How come there are...
The Financial Times last March had an essay that I found very instructive on the mentality of Russian rule today:
This excerpt is poignant because Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania served this purpose pre-1990:
"Ukraine’s place in this doctrine was accurately summed up by former US national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski: “Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”
Without listing all the 22 Republics of Russia today one by one, we might well understand a major point raised by none of the pundits in this context. That is that Russia depend on most fo those republics for a steady supply of contract soldiers. That is not just by conscription. Most of the Republics are very, very poor so the military pay and benefits are a major step up from their impoverished life. Of course there are elites in these Republics most of them Rus.
The protests are coming from, mostly, the better educated and more strategically located places like, say, Dagestan.
For the US cognizant a pretty decent parallel has been the historical source of many US military enlisted people. There has long been an attractive market of Southern black people to the military because they had better economic opportunities there than at home. That is not exploitation in any conventional way, just an easy recruitment base.
For all the demonization of Russia in most of the West the notion that the Russian population, poor minorities, are exploited seems irrefutable. They are, their education and public services are despicable. Thus, the military is an attractive way out. Remember that the vast majority of Russians support the government.
Outsiders rarely see that on either side. That is part of why Stalin thought the US would support a Communist revolution. He simply forgot that the poor and impoverished are almost never the protesters.
If Putin and his key allies are overthrown it will be a victory of an Infinitely Improbable Drive.
We all should remember that the seeds of the Russian Revolution were sown in London first, with German intellect.
I have zero intention to suggest a given outcome. I haven't any expertise for that. I do have enough education in history to say we should expect the unexpected. That said, I do think the Ukrainian resistance is capturing the world imagination, including among many Russians. That is encouraging resistance in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Moldova, not to mention many Russians. Those seeds are unquestionably weakening the Putin government as are the inability to stop protests against conscription. Were that to destroy the current Russian government I would not be surprised. Were Putin to survive I would not be surprised.
Anything else would reflect my hopes only. The extent of global 'hopers' certainly helps increase the odds against the KGB legacy surviving as it is today. Were that Putin have remained a Saint Petersburg taxi driver.
Perhaps I should have explained.
Past USSR leadership included Georgians (e.g.Stalin), Ukranians (e.g. Brezhnev), Armenians (e.g. Mikoyan). That is just three random leaders.
That their rule happened from Moscow is true, but the actual senior leadership came from all over, with many Ukrainians included.
The breakup of the Soviet Union had the effect of placing ethnic Russians in top positions.
That breakup was overseen by Gorbachev (Ukrainian mother/Russian father) and Shevardnadze (100% Georgian-became President of Georgia.
Putin is anti-USSR, he is an enthusiastic Russian Orthodox advocate and presided over reconstruction and restoration of many major churches plus co-opting the Patriarch Kiril.
He actively detests the USSR precisely because it was 'mongrelized' and atheistic,
Putins hero is Czar Peter the Great. He wants all the Russias included in Russia and regards the ethnicities other than Rus to be subjected or destroyed. They are subhuman to him. I am not inventing the 'subhuman' part. That is what he has said.
So, Russia today has nothing to do with the USSR! The USSR wanted a world Communist government. Putin wants Russian theocratic domination of the Russian Empire.
The only resemblance to the USSR is that both wanted to control all the territory they could.
