[Continuation] The Russian Invasion of Ukraine (3)

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Putin had thousands of Ukrainians abducted because he wants a bargaining chip - which suggests that there are things he wants to get diplomatically rather than through force.

And he must not get them.
If Hostage taking by a government is sucessful, then look for a new era of chaos t odescen upon the world.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by dudalb

And he must not get them.
If Hostage taking by a government is sucessful, then look for a new era of chaos t odescen upon the world.

Also... isn't abducting people and threatening to murder them getting what you want through force, not diplomacy??

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Shall we try to remain in touch with reality and maybe the action fantasy movie version of this war could have its own thread.

Just be honest and say you think Ukraine should be sacrificed in the name of "Peace".

[dudalb]

I repeat if Putin gets away with this he will do it again..and I am betting he will think that NATO is not serious about protecting it's newer members.

[dudalb]

I think, sadly, it only a matter of time before the Pacifist wng of the left demands Ukranian surrender.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by GlennB

What a ludicrous concept.

Who Dares Wins

[erlando]

Originally Posted by theprestige

What's your priority? Stopping the killing and making space and time for Ukraine to join NATO and rearm? Or punishing Putin at any cost to Ukraine?

I want the killing to stop. And I want consequences.

A failed invasion without consequences (or even with some gains as you are suggesting) is just a training exercise. Make absolutely no mistake, if Russia is not heavily punished for this they will just continue.

Returning to the status quo ante is basically patting Putin on the head going "Here's your lolly back. Now remember not to do that again as we talked about". All the Ukrainian sacrifices will be for nothing.

I suggest we let the Ukrainians decide what they want to do. If they want to keep kicking Putins Russia's ass I suggest we help as much as possible.

[erlando]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I think, sadly, it only a matter of time before the Pacifist wng of the left demands Ukranian surrender.

Well the far-right is far far out in front of them then...

ETA: For entirely different reasons though...

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Who Dares Wins

Or Loses.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I think, sadly, it only a matter of time before the Pacifist wing of the left demands Ukrainian surrender.

It is understandable people are anxious to avoid escalating the war. However, what is not apparent to many is that Putin has been carefully planning this for years, or at least since he grabbed Crimea. It might be realistic just to let Crimea go if that would be a deal breaker and all the ardent Russian nationalists can move there. However, I agree that Russia should be punished very heavily, not rewarded. They are not our mates and never will be. When Putin accuses the west of being 'unfriendly' and fascist, he is really projecting his own standards onto others.

You only have to look at Russia's pathetic explanations for going to war. It doesn't even bother to come up with one that is even remotely plausible. For example, 'Liz Truss made us do it'.

I think Putin is dying to let loose a few nuclear bombs here and there, on his way out, probably suffering from some kind of terminal illness and malicious vengeance. I hope this impression is wrong.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Or Loses.

"Or" is redundant there. 00's of km by helicopter, which will be shot down on their way. Even if they made it they'd never take off again. Meanwhile, if it even looks like they might make it, Putin will be many miles away. In all events the SAS/whatever soldiers will be stone dead (or worse) by the end and they and all concerned will know in advance that that fate awaits them.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

If Zelensky agrees to give up the territory Russia has taken, and this is what the Ukrainian people want, then fine that's what should happen. I can all but guarantee that one thing Putin will demand is Ukraine never joins NATO. If we promise them that and 5 minutes after the last Russian troop leaves, Ukraine joins NATO anyways, then fine that's great. I'm against negotiating with Russia in good faith... negotiating in bad faith however is fine by me. As far as sanctions go, well the USA can only decide what types of trade we carry out with Russia, not the rest of the world, but I'd hope severe restrictions remain in place.

Your willingness to negotiate in bad faith is noted. I, too, have no problem with promising not to join NATO, and then reneging on that promise.

My interest is primarily, what would it take to get Ukraine into a position where joining NATO is an option?

[lobosrul5]

Per CNN: The White House expanded upon news Tuesday that the US will no longer allow Russia to pay down its debt using dollars stockpiled at American banks, a shift aimed at piling additional pressure on Moscow.

Will that force a default on their outstanding debt?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by erlando

I want the killing to stop. And I want consequences.

A failed invasion without consequences (or even with some gains as you are suggesting) is just a training exercise. Make absolutely no mistake, if Russia is not heavily punished for this they will just continue.

Returning to the status quo ante is basically patting Putin on the head going "Here's your lolly back. Now remember not to do that again as we talked about". All the Ukrainian sacrifices will be for nothing.

I suggest we let the Ukrainians decide what they want to do. If they want to keep kicking Putins Russia's ass I suggest we help as much as possible.

Already addressed. Repeatedly. It's unlikely that Russia will be able to rebuild an army capable of invading Ukraine within Putin's lifetime.

Further, if returning to the status quo of early February creates an opportunity for Ukraine to join NATO, and Ukraine takes that opportunity, then the chances of Putin trying again drop to almost nil, even with an army like the one he had in February.

Returning to the geopolitical boundaries of early February doesn't return Putin's army to its February condition. It's not like we're loading a save game or something.

I'm pretty sure at this point even Vladimir Putin himself doesn't have as much faith in the capability of the Russian army as you do.

[Arcade22]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Putin had thousands of Ukrainians abducted because he wants a bargaining chip - which suggests that there are things he wants to get diplomatically rather than through force.

I haven't read anywhere that they are being kept as hostages or anything. All I've read is that people have been forced or coerced into being "evacuated" into Russia.

If they are being kept as "hostages" then they are not very good at keeping them from escaping since there have been plenty of different accounts where the "hostages" simply left by buying train or air plane tickets.

I assume its more about ethnic cleansing and keeping the propaganda narrative alive that they are "saving civilians". The people who are "evacuated" to "refugee camps" are used as proof that they are saving people, not bombing them, and they can subsequently be replaced by "loyal" people in the areas Russia seeks to annex.

[crescent]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Already addressed. Repeatedly. It's unlikely that Russia will be able to rebuild an army capable of invading Ukraine within Putin's lifetime.

And Ukraine has proven capable of building much of its own military. Zelensky mentioned the Israeli model of domestic arms production.

The convoy north of Kyiv, for example, was stopped with domestically produced drones (apparently not the Turkish-built drones). They mostly use domestically produced rifles, and might have some domestically produced laser-guided artillery rounds. They're hitting individual vehicles with indirect artillery fire, such rounds would explain how they keep doing that.

If a cease fire just gives both sides time to rearm - that could benefit Ukraine more that Russia if a cease fire is structured to allow Ukraine to go all in on domestic production. They've got the technological edge and close contact with the west will allow that gap to expand.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by GlennB

"Or" is redundant there. 00's of km by helicopter, which will be shot down on their way. Even if they made it they'd never take off again. Meanwhile, if it even looks like they might make it, Putin will be many miles away. In all events the SAS/whatever soldiers will be stone dead (or worse) by the end and they and all concerned will know in advance that that fate awaits them.

People constantly plotted to take out Hitler. Many resistance fighters in Norway for example, were executed for resisting the Nazis and they knew it was the risk. IMV being a conscientious objector is perfectly valid. Dying for your country is also valid. As Esther said, 'If I perish, I perish'.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Just be honest and say you think Ukraine should be sacrificed in the name of "Peace".

Too many people here think that Ukrainian deaths are a small price to pay to keep their own precious bodies safe. They will maintain that attitude for all future Russian aggression right up to the day that they are personally in danger.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I repeat if Putin gets away with this he will do it again..and I am betting he will think that NATO is not serious about protecting it's newer members.

Of course he will. And he may be right about NATO.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Steve

Too many people here think that Ukrainian deaths are a small price to pay to keep their own precious bodies safe. They will maintain that attitude for all future Russian aggression right up to the day that they are personally in danger.

Why would you expect any nation to prioritize the safety of another nation over their own? That's not how any of this works. You also seem to think that our refusal to directly enter combat is some sort of Chamberlain "peace in our time" thing. It's not.

First off, absent nuclear war (which falls under MAD), Russia poses no credible direct threat to most of NATO. He might be able to take the Baltic states on their own, but they wouldn't be on their own, and any invasion west of that would be bound to fail. So Putin isn't the threat that Hitler was.

Second, although we shouldn't do nothing, we aren't. We're actually doing quite a bit. We are making sure that Putin cannot achieve strategic victory. He will exit this conflict weaker than he entered it.

And lastly, we don't have a mutual defense treaty with Ukraine. Why should we act like we did?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I repeat if Putin gets away with this he will do it again..and I am betting he will think that NATO is not serious about protecting it's newer members.

At this point, I don't think it's possible for Putin to "get away" with it. The damage to his military is likely irreversible. And why would he draw any conclusions about NATO not protecting members? Ukraine isn't even a member, and we're still shipping them weapons that are thwarting his plans. How much more would we be willing to do for an actual member?

I'm going to try to retell a joke I saw without butchering it too much.

A: Putin is right: Russia is engaged in a war with NATO for the future of global power.
B: So how's the war going?
A: Russia has lost 10,000 troops, 500 tanks, and 200 aircraft.
B: And NATO?
A: They haven't shown up yet.

The damage to Ukraine is tragic and heartbreaking, but it's also pretty clear from the conflict that Russia's non-nuclear forces are not up to the task of fighting NATO. Not before the invasion, and certainly not after.

[crescent]

Originally Posted by crescent

And Ukraine has proven capable of building much of its own military. Zelensky mentioned the Israeli model of domestic arms production.

The convoy north of Kyiv, for example, was stopped with domestically produced drones (apparently not the Turkish-built drones). They mostly use domestically produced rifles, and might have some domestically produced laser-guided artillery rounds. They're hitting individual vehicles with indirect artillery fire, such rounds would explain how they keep doing that.

If a cease fire just gives both sides time to rearm - that could benefit Ukraine more that Russia if a cease fire is structured to allow Ukraine to go all in on domestic production. They've got the technological edge and close contact with the west will allow that gap to expand.

(Clarifying) I mean a cease fire that leaves Russia angry, but largely off Ukrainian land. Get Russia out, and then time would be on Ukraine's side, even if Russia were unrepentant.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by erlando

Well the far-right is far far out in front of them then...

ETA: For entirely different reasons though...

Putin has managed to find "Useful Idiots" on both sides of the political spectrum.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Per CNN: The White House expanded upon news Tuesday that the US will no longer allow Russia to pay down its debt using dollars stockpiled at American banks, a shift aimed at piling additional pressure on Moscow.

Will that force a default on their outstanding debt?

I don't know if that alone will do it, but it will make if more difficult for Russia to pay.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by Steve

Too many people here think that Ukrainian deaths are a small price to pay to keep their own precious bodies safe. They will maintain that attitude for all future Russian aggression right up to the day that they are personally in danger.

Originally Posted by Steve

Of course he will. And he may be right about NATO.

So... you're going to what? Accuse NATO of perfidy ahead of the fact, without evidence?

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Steve

Too many people here think that Ukrainian deaths are a small price to pay to keep their own precious bodies safe. They will maintain that attitude for all future Russian aggression right up to the day that they are personally in danger.

BY which time it will be too late.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

So... you're going to what? Accuse NATO of perfidy ahead of the fact, without evidence?

I think this is what I talk about when I say that fashionable cynicism is biting us in the butt.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Why would you expect any nation to prioritize the safety of another nation over their own? That's not how any of this works. You also seem to think that our refusal to directly enter combat is some sort of Chamberlain "peace in our time" thing. It's not.

First off, absent nuclear war (which falls under MAD), Russia poses no credible direct threat to most of NATO. He might be able to take the Baltic states on their own, but they wouldn't be on their own, and any invasion west of that would be bound to fail. So Putin isn't the threat that Hitler was.

Second, although we shouldn't do nothing, we aren't. We're actually doing quite a bit. We are making sure that Putin cannot achieve strategic victory. He will exit this conflict weaker than he entered it.

And lastly, we don't have a mutual defense treaty with Ukraine. Why should we act like we did?

I have to disagree with you here. Why do you think the West (Sweden, UK, USA) were desperate for the Baltic States to join the EU and later NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union. At the time Russia was brassic. It didn't have a pot to piss in. The military were unpaid. The elite KGB/FSB guys had to take lowly jobs such as cab driving. Putin never forgot the searing humiliation.

After WWII the Soviets were gift Kaliningrad - and never answered for its own war crimes - and has been a bane to nearby countries ever since, with its open naked aggression towards Gotland. Their defence bod releasing a TV clip with him tapping Gotland as a future Russian gain just a month ago, flying their nuclear capable aircraft over it deliberately, tampering with the communications, letting airlines know that they would have trouble landing and having to turn back as a result - pure provocation, to the extent today there was a power cut in Gotland and immediately people panicked it was Russian sabotage (there was an innocent explanation). And why is Kaliningrad a sore point? The Suwaki corridor. a natural border leading from Kaliningrad between the north of Poland and the south of Belarus. This is why Putin is desperate to control Mariupol and Odesa - for the straight route from the Black Sea ports to the Baltic. Make no mistake, it has grand plans on the scale of Peter the Great.

How are 'we' making sure Putin cannot achieve strategic victory? Fine rhetoric from the politicians, with people like Boris Johnson desperate to go to Kyiv and boost his flagging popularity with Thatcher style gungho-jingoism (he hasn't been invited, though). OK so there have been 'sanctions'. Diplomats have been sent home. Weapons are being supplied.

Ukraine really needs to win this.

What happens if it does not?

At what point do the atrocities become such that something more drastic needs to be done? What is an acceptable figure of dead people before it is too high?

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Putin has managed to find "Useful Idiots" on both sides of the political spectrum.

About a 3rd of US Republican congress critters.

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1511450233095569411

On the other side there's Tulsi Gabbard, and... that's about the only name I can think of in federal office.

ETA: oh I didn't realize she's not even in office anymore. So... yeah.

[Vixen]

A German called 'Vladimirov' is claiming in unconfirmed reports that a US commander, Roger Cloutier, has been captured by the Russians; plus a NATO team of French, German, Swedish and UK officials are trapped in Mariupol desperate to escape with several helicopter attempts failed so far.

Quote:

REPUBLIC
@_TheRepublic_
#MARIUPOL Military officers from #France, #Germany, #UK, and #Sweden are currently on the territory of the #Azovstal industrial complex and are requesting #Russia|n forces to grant them a green corridor to evacuate. (per journalist German #Vladimirov).

https://twitter.com/_TheRepublic_/st...bu8-nMM-V4pxMg

I am guessing this is fake information but shows you what is circulating out there.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I think, sadly, it only a matter of time before the Pacifist wng of the left demands Ukranian surrender.

Utter garbage.

Just because you think people will react a certain way doesn't make it either likely or correct, and in this case, you're just wrong.

Every "left-wing pacifist" is demanding Russia gets the hell out.

Originally Posted by erlando

A failed invasion without consequences (or even with some gains as you are suggesting) is just a training exercise. Make absolutely no mistake, if Russia is not heavily punished for this they will just continue.

I don't think that's going to happen. Every [sane] country has put ever-tightening sanctions that won't be lifted until Russia agrees to a war crimes tribunal at the very least.

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Per CNN: The White House expanded upon news Tuesday that the US will no longer allow Russia to pay down its debt using dollars stockpiled at American banks, a shift aimed at piling additional pressure on Moscow.

Will that force a default on their outstanding debt?

Not yet, but it'll happen within 6 months. Won't mean anything when it does anyway.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by Vixen

At what point do the atrocities become such that something more drastic needs to be done? What is an acceptable figure of dead people before it is too high?

There really is no figure. My line in the sand is if they use WMD, then we may as well either cede central Europe to Putin, because he'll just keep going, or just get it over with and first strike them to minimize damage to the west. Otherwise, trying to avoid global thermonuclear warfare is a reasonable course of action.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

At what point do the atrocities become such that something more drastic needs to be done? What is an acceptable figure of dead people before it is too high?

At the point he attacks a NATO country.

At the moment he can barely keep up the attacks in Ukraine.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

A German called 'Vladimirov' is claiming in unconfirmed reports that a US commander, Roger Cloutier, has been captured by the Russians; plus a NATO team of French, German, Swedish and UK officials are trapped in Mariupol desperate to escape with several helicopter attempts failed so far.

https://twitter.com/_TheRepublic_/st...bu8-nMM-V4pxMg

Why would you take any notice of it?

[crescent]

Originally Posted by Vixen

A German called 'Vladimirov' is claiming in unconfirmed reports that a US commander, Roger Gloutier, has been captured by the Russians; plus a NATO team of French, German, Swedish and UK officials are trapped in Mariupol desperate to escape with several helicopter attempts failed so far.

https://twitter.com/_TheRepublic_/st...bu8-nMM-V4pxMg

The claims of foreign military in the Mariupol kettle is not new. The Russians are not just claiming that there are foreign people there, but actual current active duty special forces. (ETA: The claim is often made by the same people who, since day three, have been putting out maps showing the Joint Forces Area also kettled up. If Russia can just advance another 220km clear through hostile territory, they might finally do that. Which means, they don't stand a chance of actually doing that, much less of it happening five weeks ago as shown on pro-Russian maps.)

It seems unlikely. Mariupol was doomed to encirclement, that was clear days before it was actually encircled. There was no surprise in that - any foreign-government troops could have been removed. Given that they thought Kyiv would only last a few days, it seems unlikely that any forces foreign forces would just be left there, they knew that Mariupol would fall sooner or later and the presence of active-duty Americans or French or UK or any other nation would cause too much difficulty.

I'm thinking the presence of foreign special forces in Mariupol is a fiction invented by Russia to explain why it can't seem to collapse the pocket. The reality is just that Ukraine put its most fanatical troops there, trained them very well, equipped them very well, and gave them the tools to spend eight years digging tunnels and preparing. There are foreigners in that mix - but not foreigners who are currently active duty on their home nation's militaries.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by crescent

The claims of foreign military in the Mariupol kettle is not new. The Russians are not just claiming that there are foreign people there, but actual current active duty special forces.

It seems unlikely. Mariupol was doomed to encirclement, that was clear days before it was actually encircled. There was no surprise in that - any foreign-government troops could have been removed. Given that they thought Kyiv would only last a few days, it seems unlikely that any forces foreign forces would just be left there, they knew that Mariupol would fall sooner or later and the presence of active-duty Americans or French or UK or any other nation would cause too much difficulty.

I'm thinking the presence of foreign special forces in Mariupol is a fiction invented by Russia to explain why it can't seem to collapse the pocket. The reality is just that Ukraine put its most fanatical troops there, trained them very well, equipped them very well, and gave them the tools to spend eight years digging tunnels and preparing. There are foreigners in that mix - but not foreigners who are currently active duty on their home nation's militaries.

I mean... obviously. Your reasons for them doing so is probably correct. Or its propaganda for the gullible that NATO is actually being the aggressor perhaps.

[ohms]

Originally Posted by Vixen

A German called 'Vladimirov' is claiming in unconfirmed reports that a US commander, Roger Cloutier, has been captured by the Russians; plus a NATO team of French, German, Swedish and UK officials are trapped in Mariupol desperate to escape with several helicopter attempts failed so far.

https://twitter.com/_TheRepublic_/st...bu8-nMM-V4pxMg

I am guessing this is fake information but shows you what is circulating out there.

He is currently in Turkey:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ltg-r...433146880-EWX3

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Jimbo07

So... you're going to what? Accuse NATO of perfidy ahead of the fact, without evidence?

Sure, that word will do. I think NATO leaders are so terrified of Russia using nukes that they will be effectively paralyzed if Russia was to invade the Baltic countries. Their response will be slow. And even if ultimately effective there will be civilian deaths similar to Ukraine while they waffle.

[Captain_Swoop]

Originally Posted by Steve

Sure, that word will do. I think NATO leaders are so terrified of Russia using nukes that they will be effectively paralyzed if Russia was to invade the Baltic countries. Their response will be slow. And even if ultimately effective there will be civilian deaths similar to Ukraine while they waffle.

Is that why the USA and Britain already have troops and hardware on the ground in the Baltic states?

Britain has a force of Challenger Tanks, armoured recon, artillery and mechanised infantry there as part of the enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) Force.
eFP is a NATO multinational, combat-ready force in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, on a persistent, rotational basis.
About 900 British personnel rotate on a continuous basis alongside US, Danish, French, and host nation forces.

This has been reinforced over the last couple of months in response to the fighting in Ukraine.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by crescent

The claims of foreign military in the Mariupol kettle is not new. The Russians are not just claiming that there are foreign people there, but actual current active duty special forces. (ETA: The claim is often made by the same people who, since day three, have been putting out maps showing the Joint Forces Area also kettled up. If Russia can just advance another 220km clear through hostile territory, they might finally do that. Which means, they don't stand a chance of actually doing that, much less of it happening five weeks ago as shown on pro-Russian maps.)

It seems unlikely. Mariupol was doomed to encirclement, that was clear days before it was actually encircled. There was no surprise in that - any foreign-government troops could have been removed. Given that they thought Kyiv would only last a few days, it seems unlikely that any forces foreign forces would just be left there, they knew that Mariupol would fall sooner or later and the presence of active-duty Americans or French or UK or any other nation would cause too much difficulty.

I'm thinking the presence of foreign special forces in Mariupol is a fiction invented by Russia to explain why it can't seem to collapse the pocket. The reality is just that Ukraine put its most fanatical troops there, trained them very well, equipped them very well, and gave them the tools to spend eight years digging tunnels and preparing. There are foreigners in that mix - but not foreigners who are currently active duty on their home nation's militaries.

Yes, apologies. It seems Lt. Col Cloutier has recently left a Linkedin message saying he is fine.