Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 4
Discussion
Digga said:
Part of what NATO [ought[/i] to be considering, aside from the principal concerns for Ukraine's objectives, is what a victory over Russian actually means to NATO.
In truth, this is not something that can be openly discussed without upsetting Putin and increasing Lavrov's nuclear threats to at least twice a week, but I suspect there is some consensus, behind closed doors, that complete destruction of Russian wealth and power is required. However, that achieved - and it is on track - the matter of how to 're-educate' the perennially uneducted and propagandised is a very long stretch. I'd argue it's almost as tough a job as we utterly failed to even address, let alone attempt in Afghanistan. I suppose, at least Russia was semi-civilised at some point in the 19th century.
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people. In truth, this is not something that can be openly discussed without upsetting Putin and increasing Lavrov's nuclear threats to at least twice a week, but I suspect there is some consensus, behind closed doors, that complete destruction of Russian wealth and power is required. However, that achieved - and it is on track - the matter of how to 're-educate' the perennially uneducted and propagandised is a very long stretch. I'd argue it's almost as tough a job as we utterly failed to even address, let alone attempt in Afghanistan. I suppose, at least Russia was semi-civilised at some point in the 19th century.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
AmyRichardson said:
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
I like the way you phrased that - it is definitely a thing among many Russians.Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
Digga said:
AmyRichardson said:
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
I like the way you phrased that - it is definitely a thing among many Russians.Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
Sadly the only way Russia will be dragged into a position like Germany or Japan is by means of its total defeat. Which is unrealistic as anyone who manages to get a march on towards Moscow and looks like they're going to get there will get their capital city nuked.
So, even if Ukraine is victorious in so far as it manages to expel Russia from its borders, Russia is unlikely to change.
CivicDuties said:
Digga said:
AmyRichardson said:
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
I like the way you phrased that - it is definitely a thing among many Russians.Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
Sadly the only way Russia will be dragged into a position like Germany or Japan is by means of its total defeat. Which is unrealistic as anyone who manages to get a march on towards Moscow and looks like they're going to get there will get their capital city nuked.
So, even if Ukraine is victorious in so far as it manages to expel Russia from its borders, Russia is unlikely to change.
Gecko1978 said:
CivicDuties said:
Digga said:
AmyRichardson said:
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
I like the way you phrased that - it is definitely a thing among many Russians.Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
Sadly the only way Russia will be dragged into a position like Germany or Japan is by means of its total defeat. Which is unrealistic as anyone who manages to get a march on towards Moscow and looks like they're going to get there will get their capital city nuked.
So, even if Ukraine is victorious in so far as it manages to expel Russia from its borders, Russia is unlikely to change.
There is no such prominent person visible in Russia at this time. They have been purged from society. It is more likely that someone even more deranged would take over from Putin. There's plenty of them about.
Not saying I've got the answers, because I haven't. It appears to be an intractable problem, and the "good people" of Russia don't seem particularly bothered to do anything about it themselves, unlike in 1991.
CivicDuties said:
Digga said:
AmyRichardson said:
It's hard to know how to bring Russia to a Germany/Japan-style "1945 epiphany" whereby they stop thinking in 19thC zero-sum, great power terms and just settle into serving the prosperity and happiness of their people.
Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
I like the way you phrased that - it is definitely a thing among many Russians.Right now it seems as if they view 1990 as something of an accident that can be fixed, as opposed to something that happened for entirely good economic and social reasons.
It's an end that would be even harder to achieve without a variety of truly grotty outcomes; chaos in the old centre, eastern Russia becoming nasty little tyrannies like the 'Stans, etc.
Sadly the only way Russia will be dragged into a position like Germany or Japan is by means of its total defeat. Which is unrealistic as anyone who manages to get a march on towards Moscow and looks like they're going to get there will get their capital city nuked.
So, even if Ukraine is victorious in so far as it manages to expel Russia from its borders, Russia is unlikely to change.
t-stirring in the Eastern parts to prise them away. CivicDuties said:
Navalny is the person you're talking about, and he's dead.
There is no such prominent person visible in Russia at this time. They have been purged from society. It is more likely that someone even more deranged would take over from Putin. There's plenty of them about.
Not saying I've got the answers, because I haven't. It appears to be an intractable problem, and the "good people" of Russia don't seem particularly bothered to do anything about it themselves, unlike in 1991.
Unfortunately that is the case. I am no history expert or anything, but looking at previous countries who have shifted from an authoritarian government to a much freer one, it does seem to bounce around. You go from one lunatic to another, except a little more acceptable. Then back and forth for a while with maybe a coup in the middle, until there is some sort of balance and some sort of free(ish) election process. Of course, there are examples where this doesnt work out for the better, but you get the idea.There is no such prominent person visible in Russia at this time. They have been purged from society. It is more likely that someone even more deranged would take over from Putin. There's plenty of them about.
Not saying I've got the answers, because I haven't. It appears to be an intractable problem, and the "good people" of Russia don't seem particularly bothered to do anything about it themselves, unlike in 1991.
I cant help thinking that this is what is the likely outcome for Russia. I have frequently called out Russia as a whole for being very different to the value of life and acceptance of corruption / crime / other nations. It is absolutely baked into the history of Russia and that doesnt go away quickly. That said, when a politician can tap into the ability to lift the majority of Russians to a better society for all, I think they might have a good shot at changing. They will still be Russians and likely to be very different to what we might consider as reasonable, but it would be better than it is under Putin. How long? Who knows, but its never going to happen under Putin and I suspect its highly unlikely under whoever replaces him. Maybe the 3rd or 4th? And given what has happened in other countries, that might be 4 years or 10 years, we dont know.
hidetheelephants said:
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Big Russian offensive started. 20k troops attacking Chasiv Yar, near Bakhmut.
https://kyivindependent.com/military-over-20-000-r...
Hopefully they have enough ammo locally in theatre that it can be fended off, it seems a bit of a coincidence that the ammunition tap is about to be turned on again. This is exactly the situation the EOL cluster artillery ammunition that is specifically excluded from the funding deal is ideal for, maybe they have some left over from the previous shipment.https://kyivindependent.com/military-over-20-000-r...
Cheib said:
hidetheelephants said:
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Big Russian offensive started. 20k troops attacking Chasiv Yar, near Bakhmut.
https://kyivindependent.com/military-over-20-000-r...
Hopefully they have enough ammo locally in theatre that it can be fended off, it seems a bit of a coincidence that the ammunition tap is about to be turned on again. This is exactly the situation the EOL cluster artillery ammunition that is specifically excluded from the funding deal is ideal for, maybe they have some left over from the previous shipment.https://kyivindependent.com/military-over-20-000-r...
Gecko1978 said:
If Ukraine did expel them all it might be end of Putin and a more moderate could be found who wants peace not an ally but not a war minger either
Harsh but fair.I think the idea of ‘breaking’ Russia like either Germany or Japan is not achievable. For one thing, we now know Versailles in WW1 created the perfect environment to seed WW2. Java was different to Germany anyway - allies did not invade and drive to the gates in the same way - certainly no one is doing that to Moscow.
What is within grasp is a conflict so costly in wealth, demographics and infrastructure that the nation implodes and contracts. That goal is realistic, to a significant degree. Every month the war lasts moves Russia further down that cul de sac. It is now clear confiscated wealth is never going back to them.
Oliver Hardy said:
This is how the US aid will be allocated
$23.2 billion replenishing US army stocks
$23.2 billion military aid to Ukraine
$11.3 billion current US millinery operations
£13.8 billion Purchase of defence systems, products and service
$26 million for monitoring
That's a lot of hats. $23.2 billion replenishing US army stocks
$23.2 billion military aid to Ukraine
$11.3 billion current US millinery operations
£13.8 billion Purchase of defence systems, products and service
$26 million for monitoring
Oliver Hardy said:
This is how the US aid will be allocated
$23.2 billion replenishing US army stocks
$23.2 billion military aid to Ukraine
$11.3 billion current US millinery operations
£13.8 billion Purchase of defence systems, products and service
$26 million for monitoring
What are they going to do with all those hats ?$23.2 billion replenishing US army stocks
$23.2 billion military aid to Ukraine
$11.3 billion current US millinery operations
£13.8 billion Purchase of defence systems, products and service
$26 million for monitoring
Biggy Stardust said:
pinchmeimdreamin said:
What are they going to do with all those hats ?
That's only $37 per US citizen- one, maybe two decent hats each. It's not much.https://youtu.be/O2QJvc_SxFQ
_Al_ said:
What’s bugging me is the end game. This $60bn and any European / western assistance isn’t going to destroy the Russian war machine.
It’s clear by now that Russia isn’t deterred by steep losses. While they have oil and gas in the ground they’ll always be able to command enough cash to throw around missiles/shaheds, and even if the most optimistic account of Russian losses is right they’ll be able to sling “meat waves” at Ukraine (etc) for generations.
If nothing definitive changes all we’re doing is wasting lives and wealth. That’s playing into the “waste of time” narrative of Putin and his useful idiots. We need to think hard about what “winning” means - and do whatever that is.
Limited, announced but not detailed nato boots on the ground? “Hit them and we’re coming in”
Mass NATO troops on the Ukraine border - “Get out by summer or we’ll escort you out”
Mass forces near Russian enclave - “get out of Ukraine or lose this”?
Endorse and openly enable strategically decisive Ukraine strikes on russian war machine in Russia?
Nato conduct its own strikes to that end…?
I can’t escape the thinking that unless something like the above fundamentally changes the game that we’re just slowing down the inevitable.
That will be the Russian propaganda giving those thoughts and feelings.It’s clear by now that Russia isn’t deterred by steep losses. While they have oil and gas in the ground they’ll always be able to command enough cash to throw around missiles/shaheds, and even if the most optimistic account of Russian losses is right they’ll be able to sling “meat waves” at Ukraine (etc) for generations.
If nothing definitive changes all we’re doing is wasting lives and wealth. That’s playing into the “waste of time” narrative of Putin and his useful idiots. We need to think hard about what “winning” means - and do whatever that is.
Limited, announced but not detailed nato boots on the ground? “Hit them and we’re coming in”
Mass NATO troops on the Ukraine border - “Get out by summer or we’ll escort you out”
Mass forces near Russian enclave - “get out of Ukraine or lose this”?
Endorse and openly enable strategically decisive Ukraine strikes on russian war machine in Russia?
Nato conduct its own strikes to that end…?
I can’t escape the thinking that unless something like the above fundamentally changes the game that we’re just slowing down the inevitable.
The Russians are burning through artillery and vehicles at rates vastly exceeding replacement. They have a large buffer from the inheritance of the CCCP but that is being run down.
Whereas EU new build artillery production is only just coming on line as is domestic production of materials in Ukraine. Towards the mid/late of 2024 Ukraine are likely to gain parity and then superiority in fires.
If we can avoid the orange monster in autumn then Ukraine will most probably win this. Ukraine and it's allies have economies about 20 times the size of Russia's, Russia is putting less than 10% of it's GDP into the conflict. We can collectively easily out spend them.
Furthermore each time Russia threatens and nothing happens the West realises that there is no great threat. In fact the threat of escalation is always greater to Russia as they are by far the weaker participant.
NATO jets could for example shoot down drones and cruise missiles over Ukraine as they have for Israel. What would the Russians do, shoot at them, most likely they'd accomplish very little the NATO planes would not amble unprotected through the engagement envelopes of Russian SAMs anyway. If they do engage then NATO jets could start shooting back in a limited way which would degrade their defences.
What other forms of escalation do they have, deniably attack our infrastructure, assassinate our politicians invade NATO?
At each level the consequences for themselves are worse both materially and in terms of humiliation. If they start attacking our infrastructure then maybe they can experience all of their oil infrastructure exploding over a 24 hour period, if they start assassinating our politicians it's a particularly bad idea to paraphrase their greatest/worst leader the death of one man is a tragedy the deaths of a million is a statistic. (Kashoggi is more of diplomatic issue than thousands of Yemenis)
As for invading NATO or other direct military actions if Russia had spare capacity they'd be using it on Ukraine. As a result they'd get to attack forces much larger and better equipped than Ukraine.
The Russians have everything to fear from every form of escalation, or fear of escalation is based on it ultimately resulting in an exchange of nuclear missiles. I would argue that it is the Russians regime who should feast that the most. The further up the chain they go the more likely that someone in the military industrial complex likes the thought of shooting pootin and a bit of military withdrawal more than they like the idea of being vaporised. The idea that being humiliated will make pootin press the button rather than surrender is for the birds, he'd discover that the button is connected to the firing action of a Makarov pistol.
With hindsight if we'd flown troops in at the start of 2022 and said you have no right to invade this country, we will fight you if you do, our forces are here at the request of the democratically elected government and you should be as afraid of escalating with us as we are with you we would all be in a better place.
This fact is hopefully not gone unnoticed by the government of China, the US and Taiwan.
Edited by Talksteer on Tuesday 23 April 21:01
Talksteer said:
That will be the Russian propaganda giving those thoughts and feelings.
The Russians are burning through artillery and vehicles at rates vastly exceeding replacement. They have a large buffer from the inheritance of the CCCP but that is being run down.
Whereas EU new build artillery production is only just coming on line as is domestic production of materials in Ukraine. Towards the mid/late of 2024 Ukraine are likely to gain parity and then superiority in fires.
If we can avoid the orange monster in autumn then Ukraine will most probably win this. Ukraine and it's allies have economies about 20 times the size of Russia's, Russia is putting less than 10% of it's GDP into the conflict. We can collectively easily out spend them.
Furthermore each time Russia threatens and nothing happens the West realises that there is no great threat. In fact the threat of escalation is always greater to Russia as they are by far the weaker participant.
NATO jets could for example shoot down drones and cruise missiles over Ukraine as they have for Israel. What would the Russians do, shoot at them, most likely they'd accomplish very little the NATO planes would not amble unprotected through the engagement envelopes of Russian SAMs anyway. If they do engage then NATO jets could start shooting back in a limited way which would degrade their defences.
What other forms of escalation do they have, deniably attack our infrastructure, assassinate our politicians invade NATO?
At each level the consequences for themselves are worse both materially and in terms of humiliation. If they start attacking our infrastructure then maybe they can experience all of their oil infrastructure exploding over a 24 hour period, if they start assassinating our politicians it's a particularly bad idea to paraphrase their greatest/worst leader the death of one man is a tragedy the deaths of a million is a statistic. (Kashoggi is more of diplomatic issue than thousands of Yemenis)
As for invading NATO or other direct military actions if Russia had spare capacity they'd be using it on Ukraine. As a result they'd get to attack forces much larger and better equipped than Ukraine.
The Russians have everything to fear from every form of escalation, or fear of escalation is based on it ultimately resulting in an exchange of nuclear missiles. I would argue that it is the Russians regime who should feast that the most. The further up the chain they go the more likely that someone in the military industrial complex likes the thought of shooting pootin and a bit of military withdrawal more than they like the idea of being vaporised. The idea that being humiliated will make pootin press the button rather than surrender is for the birds, he'd discover that the button is connected to the firing action of a Makarov pistol.
With hindsight if we'd flown troops in at the start of 2022 and said you have no right to invade this country, we will fight you if you do, our forces are here at the request of the democratically elected government and you should be as afraid of escalating with us as we are with you we would all be in a better place.
This fact is hopefully not gone unnoticed by the government of China, the US and Taiwan.
Good post Talksteer and I hope you’re right!The Russians are burning through artillery and vehicles at rates vastly exceeding replacement. They have a large buffer from the inheritance of the CCCP but that is being run down.
Whereas EU new build artillery production is only just coming on line as is domestic production of materials in Ukraine. Towards the mid/late of 2024 Ukraine are likely to gain parity and then superiority in fires.
If we can avoid the orange monster in autumn then Ukraine will most probably win this. Ukraine and it's allies have economies about 20 times the size of Russia's, Russia is putting less than 10% of it's GDP into the conflict. We can collectively easily out spend them.
Furthermore each time Russia threatens and nothing happens the West realises that there is no great threat. In fact the threat of escalation is always greater to Russia as they are by far the weaker participant.
NATO jets could for example shoot down drones and cruise missiles over Ukraine as they have for Israel. What would the Russians do, shoot at them, most likely they'd accomplish very little the NATO planes would not amble unprotected through the engagement envelopes of Russian SAMs anyway. If they do engage then NATO jets could start shooting back in a limited way which would degrade their defences.
What other forms of escalation do they have, deniably attack our infrastructure, assassinate our politicians invade NATO?
At each level the consequences for themselves are worse both materially and in terms of humiliation. If they start attacking our infrastructure then maybe they can experience all of their oil infrastructure exploding over a 24 hour period, if they start assassinating our politicians it's a particularly bad idea to paraphrase their greatest/worst leader the death of one man is a tragedy the deaths of a million is a statistic. (Kashoggi is more of diplomatic issue than thousands of Yemenis)
As for invading NATO or other direct military actions if Russia had spare capacity they'd be using it on Ukraine. As a result they'd get to attack forces much larger and better equipped than Ukraine.
The Russians have everything to fear from every form of escalation, or fear of escalation is based on it ultimately resulting in an exchange of nuclear missiles. I would argue that it is the Russians regime who should feast that the most. The further up the chain they go the more likely that someone in the military industrial complex likes the thought of shooting pootin and a bit of military withdrawal more than they like the idea of being vaporised. The idea that being humiliated will make pootin press the button rather than surrender is for the birds, he'd discover that the button is connected to the firing action of a Makarov pistol.
With hindsight if we'd flown troops in at the start of 2022 and said you have no right to invade this country, we will fight you if you do, our forces are here at the request of the democratically elected government and you should be as afraid of escalating with us as we are with you we would all be in a better place.
This fact is hopefully not gone unnoticed by the government of China, the US and Taiwan.
Edited by Talksteer on Tuesday 23 April 21:01
Talksteer said:
The Russians are burning through artillery and vehicles at rates vastly exceeding replacement. They have a large buffer from the inheritance of the CCCP but that is being run down.
Whereas EU new build artillery production is only just coming on line as is domestic production of materials in Ukraine. Towards the mid/late of 2024 Ukraine are likely to gain parity and then superiority in fires.
Do you have sone links to back this up? Whereas EU new build artillery production is only just coming on line as is domestic production of materials in Ukraine. Towards the mid/late of 2024 Ukraine are likely to gain parity and then superiority in fires.
Sounds hopelessly optimistic to me right now unfortunately.
How much is Russia now spending on military v Western contributions ? I read they are firing 10x shells than Ukraine so don’t see that improving beyond 5x even with the new US money
Adam. said:
Do you have sone links to back this up?
Sounds hopelessly optimistic to me right now unfortunately.
How much is Russia now spending on military v Western contributions ? I read they are firing 10x shells than Ukraine so don’t see that improving beyond 5x even with the new US money
You mention their massive expenditure but can't see how that might be unsustainable? I don't think explanation will work with you.Sounds hopelessly optimistic to me right now unfortunately.
How much is Russia now spending on military v Western contributions ? I read they are firing 10x shells than Ukraine so don’t see that improving beyond 5x even with the new US money
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff