Which are reasonable?
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Yes, lots of strong man tactics from two leaders who need it right now.
Anyone thought that maybe Putin needs a drama to prove how strong a leader he is??
His popularity is on decline, there's revolt amongst the masses domestically.
People seem to be thinking just about the west, this is also about Putin.
Just by stationing troops on the border he creates a crisis across Europe, which he can use to his own advantage.
You can with the help of Nato:
Some Nato members, including Denmark, Spain, France and the Netherlands, are already planning or considering sending fighter jets and warships to eastern Europe to bolster defences in the region
What does a little bitch child like Putin do when he can't have a toy? He breaks it, after all, if he can't play with it, nobody can. Given the rumours that he has cancer as well as Parkinson's disease it would go a long way towards explaining his latest actions. He's a man with nothing to lose and if he thinks he's dying, like all true narcissistic psychopaths, what does he care if he takes Russia down anymore. He's only got a little time left on the planet. Presumably he's seen what he's doing as some glorious last chance at another victory for Russia. It will be insanely bloody if he goes into Kyiv, but I don't think he cares anymore. The only hope is if the people around him and those people negotiating either placate him or completely bypass him. Many dictators have gone the same way.
What specifically are Boris and Biden doing to strong-man this conflict?
Not wanting NATO forces in their neighborhood is completely reasonable on Russia's part.
Is Ukraine their neighborhood? I thought it was Ukraine's neighborhood? Besides, they already border half a dozen NATO countries. Whatever intentions you assume NATO has (and I tend to not think too highly of them), it's not a reasonable request for Russia to demand that another country can't join an alliance or organization.
We don’t want Russian forces in our neighborhood either? But we don’t get to choose? Ukraine and other countries have as much sovereignty over their country matters as Russia on theirs.
If Russia were to make an assault today, Nato would be caught flat footed, just as they did in Crimea. They couldn't stop them, and as Ukraine is not part of Nato, I don't think they actually would step on Ukrainian soil either. Yes, there would be sanctions etc, but they wouldn't stop Russia from invading (I'd be interested to know what sanctions Nato can put on Russia that they say will "hurt Russia badly" - enough to stop Russia invading)
But just for argument sake that they do step into Ukraine to help out...
Russia has over 100,000 troops near the border and they are all set up with land, air power units in place and I believe a big fleet heading to the black sea. Nato has 4,000 troops along the Eastern flank in Nato countries, whilst the US apparently 8,500 troops "on alert".
Holland sending 2 F-35's while Denmark a frigate to bolster the Eastern flank would be like a bee sting to Russia. The US is on the other side of the Atlantic and is the one who really Nato rely on with regards to manpower and weapons. It would be over before the US left port.
Doom and gloom, sorry
We don't need to imagine the hysteria over Russia getting too close to the US. I'm not sure reasonable is the word but understandable perhaps.
It's simply a dangerous game to push offensive forces to the border of any superpower. Ukraine should be free to request to join of course and to do so free from the threat of invasion but NATO should have a bit more sense.
I posted this before but imagine a scenario where the Mexican president, Obrador woke up tomorrow morning and decided that his country needed a strong Marxist philosophy and started conducting joint military exercises with Russia and China in Juarez, Tijuana and Monterrey? How do you think the US would react? Ukraine is the same thing to Russia, if not more.
US has a stinger military compared to the rest of the world. In a conventional war, they would at least get a stalemate if against the rest of the world.
They also have over a million people active army so no idea where does the 100K of Russia (who actually have a larger army themselves) is more than the entire army of NATO.
They have one, consisting of a lot of the same outdated equipment the Russians use.
Going toe to toe in a ground war would be tough, but the Russian Air and Naval Forces are so far behind the West now. Add a few of the 100 or so F35s now in Europe to the mix and it would be enough to keep Russia away from the skies of Ukraine.
If US/NATO fully enters the war, the air supremacy over Ukraine is gonna be realized in the first day.
Thing is, it is not very probable that they will do so.
It's not, but should Russia fully invade Ukraine I could well see the US deciding to control the airspace and keep watch over proceedings from afar. Nato doesn't want Russia bordering a major member state any more than Russia wants any of its neighbours joining Nato, it already hates the Baltic states being there.
There's basically zero chance of the US trying to control Ukrainian airspace. They can't without entering a shooting war with Russia, and they are absolutely not going to do that over Ukraine.
I would hope they wouldn't but it did happen a lot during the Cold War over the Bering Sea and Caucasus regions.
The US is obviously much stronger militarily than Russia. They were stronger than the Soviet Union for much of the Cold War, and the Russia is decidedly not the Soviet Union. Russia has a stronger military than any other NATO member state, though the point of an alliance is that every member doesn't have to individually match up to the threats.
This wouldn't be another Crimea... This is a huge country with 40mil people that would not roll over. They don't need nor want western troops to help, they are just asking for equipment.
The long answer would be nope.
Sounds doom and gloom! But I don't think it's quite that bad.
USA have troops stationed abroad, so it won't take them long to get to the border I'm sure.
Also, Ukraine have a fair number of troops who are trained and supplied by US/UK, so it would be their job to defend untill reinforcements could join.
Nato won't deploy until provocation for fear of provocation themselves id imagine.
Do you believe Russia will invade imminently?
They won't try to control the airspace, however I could definitely see some experimental US EW equipment being trialed . Also, a lot of monitoring for the s400 performance, which will involve flying close to borders and might cause some mishaps.
But ther point I was making is, once Russia and their 100K troops on the ground step into Ukraine, it's over almost immediately.
USA can use their air force, but they are not going to launch missiles into Ukraine and Russia will basically control it almost immediately before anyone can react.
Ukraine IMO isn't the endgame for Russia, and there are a lot of pro Russian communities living in nearby countries since the break up of the Soviet Union and this show of taking Ukraine will only encourage those areas to help endorse further control by Russia going forward.
The US have no treaty obligations whatsoever to directly intervene in Ukraine. It's not going to happen. The only way the US enter a war with Russia, is if Russia invade a NATO country.
Oh yeah, sure, I agree with that. I believe the post you were replying to was talking about Russia attacking a NATO country, though.
I'm not sure where you've heard those rumours but I wouldn't simply assume that those are true.
The same France who wouldn't allow NATO to use its airspace as part of the armament rush and has, along with Germany, called on Europe to figure the situation out through security talks? France and Germany want none of it.
The issue is, how fast does this training is supposed to happen?
Biden states they would deploy troops of Nato deploys a rapid reaction force,
We'll have to see whether it happens or not I guess, hopefully we won't have to though!
UK have been training Ukrainian troops since 2015,
He's talking about deploying a rapid reaction force to the NATO countries on Russia's borders, not to Ukraine itself.
Why is Russia so irritated by Ukraine potentially joining NATO? They are already bordered by Estonia and Latvia which are NATO states, and if they continue this nonsense Finland may elect to join the alliance.
The answer is after the question mark, they think that the US are purposely yet discreetly surrounding them militarily and stepping into what they consider their bubble. And it's not a one sided thing, why NATO and the US obsessed with Russia?
If I was Putin and had the opportunity I would actually try to put a military base in Northern Mexico and an other one in Haiti.
I get from it they will be deploying troops (maybe not in Ukraine itself) when and if Nato deploy their rapid response team.
Maybe I read it wrong?
Jets don’t fly themselves, and Ukraine is known to have a serious deficiency in both men and material for an air campaign. Besides that, you’d need time to train pilots used to flying 30 year old Russian jets on how to fly something like an F35. It isn’t just plug and play.
Last edited:
The US and NATO rapid response teams are the same thing. Basically its just Biden saying if Russia invades Ukraine, he has a load of troops ready to move to protect the other NATO members on Russia's western border.
Good job the jets have pilots then
That makes sense, thanks.
I read it as 8500 extra troops above the already allocated into the response team.
Ukraine doesn’t have the trained pilots.Good job the jets have pilots then