Support NeoGAF

[InverseAgonist]

You people need to make up your minds about wether you want the USA to be the World Police or not.

You're kind of suffering from an interesting sense of naivety. I don't know about you, but as a Westerner, I've enjoyed the last century of Pax Americana and the freedoms in the first world and huge benefits to the entire world it's brought. See chart:

I understand from my travels and time studying abroad that many don't appreciate the fact that it's the American nuclear umbrella and armed forces providing their standard of living sustained by low defense spending or that it's America's 12 Carrier Action Groups keeping the shipping lanes free and open. But, the reality is that it is. Don't mistake the neoconservative dreams of lifting Afghanistan and Iraq into prosperous western democracies as imperialism, it never was.

But I'm sure you have an alternative situation and paradigm that would work. I'm sure all the IR research and models on multipolar worlds being unstable are wrong, not even to mention that sheer physics tells us that the n-body problem is intrinsically unstable. But it's just been waiting for you to explain the constrains and attracters that make the sensitivity to initial conditions and resulting chaotic motion stable! Your nobel awaits....

 

[Catphish]

Here is my concern and slight confusion on some's thinking process. Does everyone believe he has a working nuclear arsenal? Does everyone believe China, Iran, Pakistan and India have working nuclear arsenals that would pop off a chain event?

This is what I have been extrapolating since this conflict began, in this thread, and the media (social as well) and beyond.

- He is an unstable madman that will use nukes at any moment if he feels backed into a corner
- Let's back him into a corner with no fly zones and the like, which would have to be enforced via wartime conflict

Lots of poison has been laid. He is doing a good job great resetting Russia's economy though.

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat. I don't think it's any coincidence that the invasion occurred not too long after Biden's refusal to decline said membership. Since it wasn't taken off the table, I suspect he chose to invade now, before Ukraine had a chance to join, regardless of the likelihood of that actually happening.

Thus, I think it's quite possible, if not probable, that if he loses in Ukraine, and he's not able to secure diplomatic terms he feels comfortable with (like the permanent exclusion of Ukraine from NATO as term #1), he will escalate with tactical nukes, unless he has some other kind of scenario-changing weapon at his disposal.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

You people need to make up your minds about wether you want the USA to be the World Police or not.

Yes, we do. Other questions?

 

[Cyberpunkd]

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat.

He is not backed into any corner, wtf. His country occupies half of Asia, successfully makes buffer zones out of separatist republics in Ukraine and Moldova.

What existential threat? What is this bullshit?

He is a bully, plain and simple. This is not some grand master plan, he think USSR was humiliated in breaking up and wants to restore the Soviet Union territorial gains.

 

[akimbo009]

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat. I don't think it's any coincidence that the invasion occurred not too long after Biden's refusal to decline said membership. Since it wasn't taken off the table, I suspect he chose to invade now, before Ukraine had a chance to join, regardless of the likelihood of that actually happening.

Thus, I think it's quite possible, if not probable, that if he loses in Ukraine, and he's not able to secure diplomatic terms he feels comfortable with (like the permanent exclusion of Ukraine from NATO as term #1), he will escalate with tactical nukes, unless he has some other kind of scenario-changing weapon at his disposal.

I've said something similar. I don't think we know how Putin will behave if he has failure placed in front of him. Maybe he doesn't nuke Ukraine or parts of it to force acquiescence. Someone mentioned that "it's not in his interest to nuke them"... then again, he is shelling and murdering the entire population so what's a few thousand more. We're not dealing with a rational actor which previously was assumed when thinking about nuclear powers. If he's not rational then a lot of bad consequences come up. I'd also wonder if they DID nuke Ukraine would that actually solicit a response from NATO/West - in theory, I think the answer is NO.

 

[Vestal]

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat. I don't think it's any coincidence that the invasion occurred not too long after Biden's refusal to decline said membership. Since it wasn't taken off the table, I suspect he chose to invade now, before Ukraine had a chance to join, regardless of the likelihood of that actually happening.

From what he has said, that is exactly his delusional rationale.

However the reality is quiet different, as this invasion has been in the works for almost a decade now.

 

[darrylgorn]

Holy fuck, are we actually helping now?

 

[Catphish]

He is not backed into any corner, wtf. His country occupies half of Asia, successfully makes buffer zones out of separatist republics in Ukraine and Moldova.

What existential threat? What is this bullshit?

He is a bully, plain and simple. This is not some grand master plan, he think USSR was humiliated in breaking up and wants to restore the Soviet Union territorial gains.

*sigh*

I know it's fashionable to take on a binary position with this, a "you're either with us or against us" stance, but you're a fool if you think this, or any other similar conflict, is that simple.

Putin is a bully, yes. Putin is a ruthless dictator, and not a human being that I have any respect for, knowing what I know of his time in power. Yes. I agree.

However, he is still the leader of that country, has considerable resources at his disposal, and there are things that he wants.

You don't engage in international diplomacy with a binary mindset. A binary approach means that negotiations never take place, no concessions are ever made, and wars never end.

Wars are fought with blood and money, but they end with diplomacy.

So, what does Putin want? I don't know that for sure, obviously, but one thing I do know is that he has stated multiple times that Ukraine in NATO is a red line.

Ukraine in NATO not only takes wealth from him, but it also puts nuclear missiles, soon to be hypersonic, with a flight-time of less than 15min (some estimates I've read are closer to 5) to Moscow. This gives the West first-strike capability. Instead of Mutallty-Assured-Destruction, Russia would then be susceptible to Unilaterally-Assured-Destruction, where Moscow is potentially destroyed without them having a chance to respond.

Whether or not NATO would ever strike first is irrelevant. The simple fact that they could is the very definition of an existential threat, just as we saw missiles in Cuba as an existential threat to the US in the 60s. And that, as I understand it, is at least one reason why he forbids Ukraine joining NATO.

In those terms, Putin's character as a leader, and Putin's character as a person, are irrelevant. He is the president of Russia, and those are his terms. If we cross them, we risk the same reaction of any leader in his position.

So, come on then, have a go, call it bullshit, tear people down for trying to have a deeper understanding, shut down conversation and label people as 'appeasers' or 'apologists' or any of the rest of the shit I see like it going on in this thread. It will not serve you, or anyone else, except those who love blind obedience and followers.

 

[Catphish]

From what he has said, that is exactly his delusional rationale.

However the reality is quiet different, as this invasion has been in the works for almost a decade now.

What powerful nation doesn't plan for a wide array of potential military conflicts years, if not decades, in advance?

 

[Cyberpunkd]

This gives the West first-strike capability. Instead of Mutallty-Assured-Destruction, Russia would then be susceptible to Unilaterally-Assured-Destruction, where Moscow is potentially destroyed without them having a chance to respond.

Dead Hand - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I guarantee US has the same thing. Take your time to reply, I will wait.

 

[Catphish]

Dead Hand - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I guarantee US has the same thing. Take your time to reply, I will wait.

That's great, but that's not what I'm talking about. There. You don't have to wait.

 

[DeepEnigma]

There's a lot of context and nuance being lost in here. It's been reading like twitter binary algorithms.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

That's great, but that's not what I'm talking about. There. You don't have to wait.

It’s exactly what you were mentioning. Nowadays nuclear war will be started by a system of automatic contingencies without the need for human input. Moscow can be levelled , Russia will still launch the nukes.

 

[Catphish]

There's a lot of context and nuance being lost in here. It's starting to read like twitter binary algorithms.

Exactly. It's a fucking joke. You got the same 5 or 6 people ing or talking shit to everyone who dares say anything that amounts to a desire to understand. It's like our version of a ResetERA thread.

 

[Catphish]

It’s exactly what you were mentioning. Nowadays nuclear war will be started by a system of automatic contingencies without the need for human input. Moscow can be levelled , Russia will still launch the nukes.

Right, but they won't be able to respond until after the first strike. Meaning they never have a chance to employ missile defense to defend their capital. So, NOT exactly what I was mentioning.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Right, but they won't be able to respond until after the first strike. Meaning they never have a chance to employ missile defense to defend their capital. So, NOT exactly what I was mentioning.

Are you actually saying Russia cannot shot 100 nukes coming in 5 minutes, but they will be able to in 15?

Is there any proof of anti-nuke défense system actually working?

 

[Vestal]

What powerful nation doesn't plan for a wide array of potential military conflicts years, if not decades, in advance?

Do we seriously need to go over this shit again? Feels like every few days someone comes up just "asking questions" and try to view Russia in a less harsher light.. But its the same questions/line of thinking that have been answered not just by the posters here, but also by the news media, military experts, diplomatic experts, and Putin himself.

 

[Catphish]

Do we seriously need to go over this shit again? Feels like every few days someone comes up just "asking questions" and try to view Russia in a less harsher light.. But its the same questions/line of thinking that have been answered not just by the posters here, but also by the news media, military experts, diplomatic experts, and Putin himself.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

So, what does Putin want? I don't know that for sure, obviously, but one thing I do know is that he has stated multiple times that Ukraine in NATO is a red line.

That's the excuse given by a liar that you're buying into entirely without question. So what you do know is nothing but a lie and how to run with it.

 

[iamblades]

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat. I don't think it's any coincidence that the invasion occurred not too long after Biden's refusal to decline said membership. Since it wasn't taken off the table, I suspect he chose to invade now, before Ukraine had a chance to join, regardless of the likelihood of that actually happening.

Thus, I think it's quite possible, if not probable, that if he loses in Ukraine, and he's not able to secure diplomatic terms he feels comfortable with (like the permanent exclusion of Ukraine from NATO as term #1), he will escalate with tactical nukes, unless he has some other kind of scenario-changing weapon at his disposal.

You are overthinking it with the NATO thing. Ukraine was not getting into NATO any time in the next 50 years on it's pre war path. Besides, he knows NATO is in no way an offensive threat to Russia. He is worried about long term structural problems that he doesn't have a good answer for.

The reason he is doing this is basic grand strategy for ever Russian ruler for hundreds of years. Possession of Ukraine is basically mandatory for Russia to have halfway defensible borders. Which is problematic when Ukraine for very understandable reasons says 'fuck no, we've seen this story before'.

The reason he is doing it now is because he's not going to have an army capable of offensive action in 5 years just based on Russia's demography and economy. In fact it's looking more and more like he may have waited 10 years too long given the performance of the Russian military.

I too am worried about how Putin may escalate as he gets more desperate, but it's not because of American or NATO actions that he is desperate. He is desperate because he is ruling a dying country and is trying to find a way to hold it together so he can be seen in history as a savior of the Russian people.

Also the US president is completely incapable of taking NATO off the table due to the structure of the US constitutional system, so that was a pointless ask anyway. It was either evidence that Putin completely misunderstands how a democracy functions or that he was asking for something he knew he couldn't get on purpose.

 

[InverseAgonist]

Ukraine in NATO not only takes wealth from him, but it also puts nuclear missiles, soon to be hypersonic, with a flight-time of less than 15min (some estimates I've read are closer to 5) to Moscow. This gives the West first-strike capability. Instead of Mutallty-Assured-Destruction, Russia would then be susceptible to Unilaterally-Assured-Destruction, where Moscow is potentially destroyed without them having a chance to respond.

This is such bullshit. The US has no IRBMs in Europe since the Pershing IIs were withdrawn in the late 80s/90s and the BMD defenses in Poland and Romania are clearly defensive. The Russians are paranoid and think the US will base nuclear tipped Tomahawks there, despite the US offering to let them monitor the sites. The B2 was more strategically unbalancing.

The entire paradigm of a sneak nuclear attack is silly in todays networked world. This isn't the 1950s where it could work, because everything went through Moscow. Things are distributed and redundant. Both sides have SLBMs that ensure a second strike capability that could provide a strategic counter-value response that is game ending. It just don't work like this.

It's paranoid Russian mentality that you're buying into. Don't.

EDIT: Hypersonic weapons don't help your argument, they argue against it actually as they expand the radius of which you can strike targets quickly outward. There's nothing you couldn't do with SLBMs and airlaunched hypersonics, that you could Ukrainian phantom nuclear weapons from the US boogeyman.

 

[Taxexemption]

You are overthinking it with the NATO thing. Ukraine was not getting into NATO any time in the next 50 years on it's pre war path. Besides, he knows NATO is in no way an offensive threat to Russia. He is worried about long term structural problems that he doesn't have a good answer for.

The reason he is doing this is basic grand strategy for ever Russian ruler for hundreds of years. Possession of Ukraine is basically mandatory for Russia to have halfway defensible borders. Which is problematic when Ukraine for very understandable reasons says 'fuck no, we've seen this story before'.

The reason he is doing it now is because he's not going to have an army capable of offensive action in 5 years just based on Russia's demography and economy. In fact it's looking more and more like he may have waited 10 years too long given the performance of the Russian military.

Pretty sure he is doing it now cause the US looks weak. Leaving behind weapons in a retreat from Afghanistan, high inflation, a shortage among their allies of various energy products supplied by Russia. A culture war that has Americans increasingly divided. We've been owning ourselves an aweful lot lately. We look weak, and honestly I think we are weaker then we have ever been in my lifetime.

 

[Catphish]

That's the excuse given by a liar that you're buying into entirely without question. So what you do know is nothing but a lie and how to run with it.

As someone as verbose and flauntingly intellectual as you appear to be, I would expect you to know the difference between repeating someone's words, and believing them.

I'm not running with anything. I'm using a publically-made statement as a factor in a thought process.

Seriously. You guys need to give this shit up. I'm on the side of the West, I support the West, and I support US actions in this endeavor, as are most people, I assume, that I've seen shouted down in this thread.

Asking questions and exploring thought isn't tantamount to treason, unless you're an idiot.

Fucksake.

 

[Catphish]

This is such bullshit. The US has no IRBMs in Europe since the Pershing IIs were withdrawn in the late 80s/90s and the BMD defenses in Poland and Romania are clearly defensive. The Russians are paranoid and think the US will base nuclear tipped Tomahawks there, despite the US offering to let them monitor the sites. The B2 was more strategically unbalancing.

The entire paradigm of a sneak nuclear attack is silly in todays networked world. This isn't the 1950s where it could work, because everything went through Moscow. Things are distributed and redundant. Both sides have SLBMs that ensure a second strike capability that could provide a strategic counter-value response that is game ending. It just don't work like this.

It's paranoid Russian mentality that you're buying into. Don't.

Last time. I won't say it again.

I'm not buying into Putin or Russian mentality. I'm simply stating what the man said, and I am speculating on, while I try to understand, what his motives are and what his future moves may be.

I'm done arguing about what should be fucking obvious for today. Have fun.

 

[M1chl]

Holy fuck, are we actually helping now?

Wait S-300 is RU system, so USA buy that shit on some market and send it Ukraine? I don't think that they will be serving there Patriot system. Maybe I misunderstood.

 

[iamblades]

Pretty sure he is doing it now cause the US looks weak. Leaving behind weapons in a retreat from Afghanistan, high inflation, a shortage among their allies of various energy products supplied by Russia. A culture war that has Americans increasingly divided. We've been owning ourselves an aweful lot lately. We look weak, ans honestly I think we are weaker then we have ever been in my lifetime.

That certainly doesn't help, but It's not the direct motivation behind the move. A stronger west may have been successful in deterring him, but he has his own clear and stated reasons for doing what he's doing that have nothing to do with us.

 

[DrAspirino]

I believe it is quite possible, if not probable, that the whole reason he kicked this off in the first place is because he feels backed into a corner already, and views Ukrainian membership in NATO as an existential threat. I don't think it's any coincidence that the invasion occurred not too long after Biden's refusal to decline said membership. Since it wasn't taken off the table, I suspect he chose to invade now, before Ukraine had a chance to join, regardless of the likelihood of that actually happening.

Thus, I think it's quite possible, if not probable, that if he loses in Ukraine, and he's not able to secure diplomatic terms he feels comfortable with (like the permanent exclusion of Ukraine from NATO as term #1), he will escalate with tactical nukes, unless he has some other kind of scenario-changing weapon at his disposal.

THIS. SO MUCH THIS.

Never corner a man (any man), because you don't know what he's capable of.

You can hate Putin and all that, but right now he's cornered and we can only speculate how much he will escalate this war.

If he was a dictator of any country, this would've been over by now, but since he has the nuclear "button" at his disposal, the entire world has to be extremely careful regarding this matter.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Do we seriously need to go over this shit again? Feels like every few days someone comes up just "asking questions" and try to view Russia in a less harsher light.

This is why I barely participate in this thread. There is no discussion to be had. Just "only good Russian is a dead Russian" , "he's just a dumb dictator doing dictator things" type rhetoric and reductive pile-on's practicing the very things one claims to hate. People like to understand the inner workings of the human condition and what drives people to do things, from serial killers to mass shooters. Especially in wartime scenarios, even more so I would argue. That is human nature to question them, unless of course you get your talking points uploaded to you.

That's the excuse given by a liar that you're buying into entirely without question. So what you do know is nothing but a lie and how to run with it.

That's a dismissive non-answer.

"He's a liar, while true, trust US bro... ok."

Everyone is a damned liar in the great geopolitical game. There is definitely a discussion here as to why things are happening the way they are, outside of biblical levels of binary angels vs demons. Shit, even the bible has more context than those who are serving to stifle discourse and McCarthy people who want to discuss the actual psychology behind this geopolitical landscape.

 

[Catphish]

Also the US president is completely incapable of taking NATO off the table due to the structure of the US constitutional system, so that was a pointless ask anyway.

Please explain what you mean by this.

 

[Wildebeest]

I'm feeling more dread about this whole thing today than normal. I should really just stop.

As for having a binary view of the conflict that lacks nuance by mocking claims about "legitimate concerns" about Nato expansion.

Ukraine should totally negotiate for peace with an offer to not join Nato even though there seems little reason to be optimistic about it. If this is a "golden bridge" out of the conflict for Putin then good. But Putin cannot be expected to honour treaties with Ukraine because he has no respect for their sovereignty. The "Nato expansion" thing is also likely just a euphemism for the ex Soviet Union countries being independent to Russia, so the Nato expansion issue will not be settled until all those nations are subsumed into the Russian Federation.

 

[iamblades]

Please explain what you mean by this.

Any agreement by a president can immediately be thrown out by the next president with the stroke of a pen. See the JCPOA.

The only way to get a binding agreement from the US government is a formal treaty ratified by congress, which was never ever going to happen.

 

[Catphish]

Any agreement by a president can immediately be thrown out by the next president with the stroke of a pen. See the JCPOA.

The only way to get a binding agreement from the US government is a formal treaty ratified by congress, which was never ever going to happen.

Gotcha. Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Vestal]

This is why I barely participate in this thread. There is no discussion to be had. Just "only good Russian is a dead Russian" , "he's just a dumb dictator doing dictator things" type rhetoric and reductive pile-on's practicing the very things one claims to hate. People like to understand the inner workings of the human condition and what drives people to do things, from serial killers to mass shooters. Especially in wartime scenarios, even more so I would argue. That is human nature to question them, unless of course you get your talking points uploaded to you.

I am all in favor of discussion. But actual discussion, and not jumping into this thread and asking the SAME EXACT questions, or bring up the "same line of thinking" that has been debated, discussed, and chewed on in this thread multiple times.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

"He's a liar, while true, trust US bro... ok."

That's incorrect. They(the poster) was already questioning the US side which wasn't discouraged by my post. What was encouraged was questioning the enemy side, they demonstrated they believe the enemy entirely with their "I know".

 

[Rest]

Obligatory

What does the Senate have to do with this?

 

[DeepEnigma]

That's incorrect. They(the poster) was already questioning the US side which wasn't discouraged by my post. What was encouraged was questioning the enemy side which they demonstrated they believe entirely with their "I know".

Or, we question the thought process of everyone involved, and why they are involved, and what makes some proxy wars more important than others, etc.. Especially when everyone's lives are in the balance should this go nuclear from a wrong decision.

Nothing is wrong with that, nor are they a "Russian plant, bot" or other such Ree type bullshit in doing so. That has been used way too liberally by a handful of people.

 

[EviLore]

Russian propaganda is complete denial of reality. Align yourself with that and you’re not forming your own opinion as a free-thinking person.

 

[akimbo009]

Pretty sure he is doing it now cause the US looks weak. Leaving behind weapons in a retreat from Afghanistan, high inflation, a shortage among their allies of various energy products supplied by Russia. A culture war that has Americans increasingly divided. We've been owning ourselves an aweful lot lately. We look weak, and honestly I think we are weaker then we have ever been in my lifetime.

The US leaving behind some Humvees and un-useable hardware shouldn't indicate a diminishment in strategic strength. I mean, I don't DOUBT that Putin is inhaling his own fumes like so many on Twitter/Facebook, but none of that excludes the fact we have 12 massive carrier groups and dozens of nuclear armed subs capable to conventionally and otherwise clean house on Russia (or China for that matter).

No, what he miscalculated was Europe - and frankly - so did I. Their unification and engagement here has been the wild card in the Wests favor. It's impressive, and took a ton of diplomacy leading up to this moment - but that is what disrupted the plans by Putin as much as anything.

And no - the US isn't "weaker than any time in your life time" - our capabilities are absurd, and even a handful of entry level weapons in the hands of the Ukrainians is annihilating the best weapons that Russia has - which happen to also be better than anything China has (though China is probably better funded and trained, if inexperienced). So yeah, I don't think you're right on that account - at all.

 

[Vestal]

The US leaving behind some Humvees and un-useable hardware shouldn't indicate a diminishment in strategic strength. I mean, I don't DOUBT that Putin is inhaling his own fumes like so many on Twitter/Facebook, but none of that excludes the fact we have 12 massive carrier groups and dozens of nuclear armed subs capable to conventionally and otherwise clean house on Russia (or China for that matter).

No, what he miscalculated was Europe - and frankly - so did I. Their unification and engagement here has been the wild card in the Wests favor. It's impressive, and took a ton of diplomacy leading up to this moment - but that is what disrupted the plans by Putin as much as anything.

And no - the US isn't "weaker than any time in your life time" - our capabilities are absurd, and even a handful of entry level weapons in the hands of the Ukrainians is annihilating the best weapons that Russia has - which happen to also be better than anything China has (though China is probably better funded and trained, if inexperienced). So yeah, I don't think you're right on that account - at all.

The percieved weakness of the US related to our relationship with our Western Allies and Nato, along with our serious and very public internal discourse which he helped sow in the last 10-15 years.

 

[akimbo009]

The percieved weakness of the US related to our relationship with our Western Allies and Nato, along with our serious and very public internal discourse which he helped sow in the last 10-15 years.

Sure, but it was a miscalculation by Putin - clearly.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

THIS. SO MUCH THIS.

Never corner a man (any man), because you don't know what he's capable of.

You can hate Putin and all that, but right now he's cornered and we can only speculate how much he will escalate this war.

If he was a dictator of any country, this would've been over by now, but since he has the nuclear "button" at his disposal, the entire world has to be extremely careful regarding this matter.

He has 17 million square kilometers of his own land + controls several puppet regimes. The fact you'd even buy into the "cornered" rethoric makes me queasy. Joining NATO means a country is off the menu in his expansionist policy and that's the real problem for him.

 

[Vestal]

Sure, but it was a miscalculation by Putin - clearly.

Well..... Yeah hehe

But if we are honest, I think it was a miss calculation by EVERYONE, and not just Putin.

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

Or, we question the thought process of everyone involved, and why they are involved, and what makes some proxy wars more important than others, etc.. Especially when everyone's lives are in the balance should this go nuclear from a wrong decision.

Nothing is wrong with that, nor are they a "Russian plant, bot" or other such Ree type bullshit in doing so. That has been used way too liberally by a handful of people.

That proxy war discussion appears to go outside the purview of this thread and into valuations that are rooted in the context of the events. These may not pertain to current activities except to advance ill-educated speculation by the incredulous ignorati.

 

[Catphish]

Russian propaganda is complete denial of reality. Align yourself with that and you’re not forming your own opinion as a free-thinking person.

And simply dismissing anything coming out of Russia, and discarding it out-of-hand, to the point where you don't even acknowledge it, delivers you similarly.

 

[iamblades]

I'm feeling more dread about this whole thing today than normal. I should really just stop.

As for having a binary view of the conflict that lacks nuance by mocking claims about "legitimate concerns" about Nato expansion.

Ukraine should totally negotiate for peace with an offer to not join Nato even though there seems little reason to be optimistic about it. If this is a "golden bridge" out of the conflict for Putin then good. But Putin cannot be expected to honour treaties with Ukraine because he has no respect for their sovereignty. The "Nato expansion" thing is also likely just a euphemism for the ex Soviet Union countries being independent to Russia, so the Nato expansion issue will not be settled until all those nations are subsumed into the Russian Federation.

We already knew this though. Ukraine has multiple signed treaties with Russia, signed by Yeltsin, Medvedev, and Putin himself that never mentioned Crimea as a disputed territory, and yet Putin took it anyway.

Ukraine's treaty terms are entirely up to them, but I don't see why they would accept anything less than the 1991 borders that Russia itself agreed to.

 

[Rest]

How many of those 180,000 do you think are frontline units? For every frontline unit there are multiples in support units required to feed, fuel, and maintain the combat force.

Once a unit has upwards of 10% casualties it can no longer be expected to achieve its role, and in combined arms maneuvers you are only as effective as your weakest link.

Under strength units need to be consolidated and replenished, which we can see when Russia is recalling units based abroad. It can also use reserves as well but these have a disadvantage of informing the Russian public that this "not a war" is going poorly and frankly if their frontline troops are this bad, the reserves won't do a thing. What they can't do is replace their frontline professional soldiers with cooks, national guard, conscripts, or Syrian "volunteers" and expect to win where their professional soldiers did not.

While I generally agree with you, I don't think it should be dismissed just how many people Russia could conscript and send in. Ineffectiveness at the individual level, and even in larger units won't matter if Russia can force Ukraine into attrition. IF Russia can get bodies into Ukraine, they don't even need to feed them after a point, because hungry soldiers will pillage when they get hungry enough. Many armed men sent into a country will eventually drain resources, destroy property and infrastructure, and kill people.

As stunning as the ineffectiveness of the Russian armed forces seems to be, they only have to be so effective in the long run. Putin wants to take Ukraine, all he needs to do that is convince the Ukrainian people that it's not worth it to resist. He can do that with a disorganized army given enough time.

 

[EviLore]

And simply dismissing anything coming out of Russia, and discarding it out-of-hand, to the point where you don't even acknowledge it, delivers you similarly.

No. Putin’s administration has zero credibility.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That proxy war discussion appears to go outside the purview of this thread and into valuations that are rooted in the context of the events. These may not pertain to current activities except to advance ill-educated speculation by the incredulous ignorati.

You know, you can reply normally without using thesaurus.com and acid drop riddles you've done in the past.

This pseudo intellectual bullshit gets old fast.

 

[Insane Metal]

Russian propaganda is complete denial of reality. Align yourself with that and you’re not forming your own opinion as a free-thinking person.

I mean, based on what we see from the outside it's basically 1984 materialized. Remnant of USSR.

 

[akimbo009]

Well..... Yeah hehe

But if we are honest, I think it was a miss calculation by EVERYONE, and not just Putin.

That's true. To my own surprise to some extent. It wasn't a clever ruse either, but it has become a trap for Russia - which yeah, fuck Putin - let him chew his leg off.