Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Tarrou said:
China seemingly turning against them is really significant
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's the right reading of the room

They have abstained but as they knew Russia would veto that seems fairly logical

They are offering financing still just not in dollars which ties in with the longer term aim of having the yuan as a secondary reserve / international currency base
 
T00lsh3d said:
So what you’re saying is….they are showing their true colours
Click to expand...

We've managed to not support or condemn Russia in Ukraine, US in Iraq, and the USSR in Afghanistan :lol:
But *true colours* - every country has the same "true colours" - self-interest and cowardice. Which country had the guts to do sanctions on the US in 2003? The concept itself is so absurd.
 
noodlehair said:
That would probably be beneficial to them compared to Ukraine joining NATO.

Although more realistically you'd think they were either hoping for a quick surrender and being able to negotiate terms to keep NATO and the west out. Or to gain some territory on their own border.

Even just distabalising Ukraine would have benefits.

It's still a weird one as they've gone so all in with it they'll end up looking weak even with those outcomes...and risk making the region more hostile than the hassle it would be worth. That's before getting to the international consequences with non allies using it as fuel and allies having no real reason to do much more than distance themselves.
Click to expand...

How so, though?
 
Written by Lawrence Freedman, professor of war studies in London.

The point about wars (and I have studied many) is that they rarely go according to plan.

Chance events or poorly executed operations can require sudden shifts in strategy.

The unintended consequences can be as important as the intended. These are the pitfalls surrounding all wars and why they should only be embarked upon with good reason (of which the most compelling is an act of self-defence
Click to expand...
https://samf.substack.com/p/a-reckl...campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=url
 
Skåre Willoch said:
This is really what I’m struggling to wrap my head around. What can Russia possibly gain from this? A never ending insurgence and guerilla warfare for decades?
Click to expand...

He is hoping to widen the cracks in NATO so whenever he wants something he can get it by moving troops to the border and asking how certain are you NATO is there for you and wouldn't you rather just give me your lunch money.
 
berbatrick said:
We've managed to not support or condemn Russia in Ukraine, US in Iraq, and the USSR in Afghanistan :lol:
But *true colours* - every country has the same "true colours" - self-interest and cowardice. Which country had the guts to do sanctions on the US in 2003? The concept itself is so absurd.
Click to expand...
These countries couldn't give a flying feck about India, south Asian, or any non European country at that. The British empires negative effects upon the South Asian continent are still seen to this day. They're faced with ferocious racism and mocked so often. Yet it's india who is showing its true colours :lol:
 
sport2793 said:
I'm sorry but I take offense to this. Sadly, the US and UK had a habit of royally screwing India during the Cold War (and before that too, obviously). Let's not forget Nixon and the Blood Telegram which led to an Indo-Pak war where US threatened intervention against India and the Soviet Union of all people stepped in to provide deterrence.

Do Indians in India agree with Russia's actions? Of course not but the economic and defense ties are too intertwined at the moment to risk Russian retaliation nor economic setback that could affect the ability to support the millions of impoverished people.

In time this will probably change as the US proves itself willing to be a more reliable partner to India to counter China.
Click to expand...

I should have said governments and not countries. I didn’t mean to cause offence.
 
noodlehair said:
That would probably be beneficial to them compared to Ukraine joining NATO.

Although more realistically you'd think they were either hoping for a quick surrender and being able to negotiate terms to keep NATO and the west out. Or to gain some territory on their own border.

Even just distabalising Ukraine would have benefits.

It's still a weird one as they've gone so all in with it they'll end up looking weak even with those outcomes...and risk making the region more hostile than the hassle it would be worth. That's before getting to the international consequences with non allies using it as fuel and allies having no real reason to do much more than distance themselves.
Click to expand...

Ukraine joining NATO would have just as much impact on Russia as Baltic countries joining in early 2000s I.e. none whatsoever. It was never about Ukraine joining NATO.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
He is hoping to widen the cracks in NATO so whenever he wants something he can get it by moving troops to the border and asking how certain are you NATO is there for you and wouldn't you rather just give me your lunch money.
Click to expand...

That might well be his plan, but I just don't see that it's ever going to work. The entire reason Ukraine is being invaded is because they're not yet in NATO. I guess they could try it on Finland, but odds are they will join NATO long before that. I also don't think Russia has any desire to invade Finland. Finland is also in the EU, so that's another potential issue.
 
berbatrick said:
We've managed to not support or condemn Russia in Ukraine, US in Iraq, and the USSR in Afghanistan :lol:
But *true colours* - every country has the same "true colours" - self-interest and cowardice. Which country had the guts to do sanctions on the US in 2003? The concept itself is so absurd.
Click to expand...
I think that’s why I had to comment. The original post was greeted with a load of whataboutism and rhetoric, whereas really….it’s all any of these countries ever do (further their own agendas)
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
He is hoping to widen the cracks in NATO so whenever he wants something he can get it by moving troops to the border and asking how certain are you NATO is there for you and wouldn't you rather just give me your lunch money.
Click to expand...

… by attacking a non-NATO country?
Which NATO has said numerous times they won’t defend with military personnel?
Which said themselves they expect no backing from NATO?
And has forced NATO and the US to say in the clearest way possible that they will defend any NATO country with full and devastating force (which was to be expected)?
 
Its amusing in a way to see so many Republicans - bar the few Trumpers and well Trump who again banged on about the election being stolen keeping very quiet, nothing from ol Turtleneck or Captain Mexico Cruz.
 
In the end, ukranian soldiers, civilians and russian soldiers will die for absolutely nothing, feck putin, feck nato
 
How heroic behavior affects morale & psychology is an interesting subject. I wonder what the research says. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Snake Island 13 unleashed a visceral anger within Ukrainian military.

The Tunisian protests were sparked by the guy who burned himself.
 
Relevated said:
These countries couldn't give a flying feck about India, south Asian, or any non European country at that. The British empires negative effects upon the South Asian continent are still seen to this day. They're faced with ferocious racism and mocked so often. Yet it's india who is showing its true colours :lol:
Click to expand...


Give it a rest or start a new thread, this is about Ukraine and Putin, embarrassing yourself.
 
Sarni said:
Ukraine joining NATO would have just as much impact on Russia as Baltic countries joining in early 2000s I.e. none whatsoever. It was never about Ukraine joining NATO.
Click to expand...

This is my point as well. It’s a false narrative.
 
On a positive note we’ve managed to collect 50 tones of goods in aid to Lviv people in Kraków today. Will continue tomorrow with more coming. Planning to pack as much stuff as my car can fit.
 
Sarni said:
Ukraine joining NATO would have just as much impact on Russia as Baltic countries joining in early 2000s I.e. none whatsoever. It was never about Ukraine joining NATO.
Click to expand...

If that was the case there wouldn't currently be a war going on.

Putin isn't going to commit half his armed forces to a war that will obviously provoke a worldwide backlash if he doesn't feel threatened.

There's not much hope of occupying or claiming Ukraine either long term but he can occupy some if it or use it as a bargaining chip. I think something has obviously happened recently which has made him feel he needed to act drastically.

The alternative explanation is that he's suddenly gone completely mad but that doesn't really make sense considering the efforts from his side to try and avoid imagery of Russian aggression.
 
Sarni said:
On a positive note we’ve managed to collect 50 tones of goods in aid to Lviv people in Kraków today. Will continue tomorrow with more coming. Planning to pack as much stuff as my car can fit.
Click to expand...

50 tons? Wow. That’s great! Kudos.
 
Sarni said:
On a positive note we’ve managed to collect 50 tones of goods in aid to Lviv people in Kraków today. Will continue tomorrow with more coming. Planning to pack as much stuff as my car can fit.
Click to expand...

Wow that's really good stuff, keep up the good work!
 
The Kremlin’s pre-invasion research suggested Ukraine was fertile ground for subversion, but the shock of war may transform Ukrainians’ willingness to resist in unpredictable ways.
Click to expand...


 
Skåre Willoch said:
This is really what I’m struggling to wrap my head around. What can Russia possibly gain from this? A never ending insurgence and guerilla warfare for decades?
Click to expand...

Aside from the "having finally tipped over the edge of lunacy" argument - Russia has been chipping away at the foundations of Western democracies and their institutions for years now, and I imagine that with the shifts in various governments and the EU in recent years, Putin thought this was the optimal moment to show his hand and expose what he hoped/hopes is a lack of unity and strength amongst his oldest and most bitter foes - Western Democracies. With the economic challenges each are facing, and the individualistic nature of each's critical infrastructure reliance, he probably thought a better opportunity to upset the traditional apple cart was unlikely to come around again soon.

Did he think that this movement alone would win over the whole of Ukraine? Probably not, but I think he hoped - and probably still does - that a weak and unsubstantial response from NATO and the West would cause division and disillusionment amongst the Ukraine populous. He doesn't need the population's support, but more so their ambivalence towards any regime he instates.

The latter is where he's got it totally wrong - the response from Ukraine and their leaders has been unbelievable and inspiring. What's more, it seems the international responses are ramping up too, with nations finding common ground/agreed courses of actions relatively swiftly.

Long story short - I doubt the move is really going to plan for him, but that probably puts Putin in a more dangerous and unpredictable place. Goodness knows what he'll do next.
 
noodlehair said:
If that was the case there wouldn't currently be a war going on.

Putin isn't going to commit half his armed forces to a war that will obviously provoke a worldwide backlash if he doesn't feel threatened.

There's not much hope of occupying or claiming Ukraine either long term but he can occupy some if it or use it as a bargaining chip. I think something has obviously happened recently which has made him feel he needed to act drastically.

The alternative explanation is that he's suddenly gone completely mad but that doesn't really make sense considering the efforts to try and avoid imagery of Russian aggression.
Click to expand...

How is he going to feel less threatened now, than if Ukraine joined NATO? This is going to have serious consequences for the Russian economy, and it's not like it's done anything to lower tension with NATO, or other non-NATO countries. It's quite likely that this is going to lead directly to Finland and Sweden joining NATO. And it's not like Ukrainians will have warmed up to Russia either.

A decade ago half the population supported a pro-Russian candidate, but I'm sure only a very small minority of even those would ever support what's going on now. Best case scenario for Putin is that they now go on to conquer Ukraine fairly quickly, toppling the government and installing their own puppet government. But those will have next to zero legitimacy with the people, so Putin will have to have his army occupying the country, which is obviously going to get ugly. And if Ukraine ever gets out from under the thumb of the Russians again they're sure to seek some kind of alliance, or even NATO membership.
 
noodlehair said:
If that was the case there wouldn't currently be a war going on.

Putin isn't going to commit half his armed forces to a war that will obviously provoke a worldwide backlash if he doesn't feel threatened.

There's not much hope of occupying or claiming Ukraine either long term but he can occupy some if it or use it as a bargaining chip. I think something has obviously happened recently which has made him feel he needed to act drastically.

The alternative explanation is that he's suddenly gone completely mad but that doesn't really make sense considering the efforts from his side to try and avoid imagery of Russian aggression.
Click to expand...

I think option two there is the most likely reason. Win some extra territory (including Crimea). Save face.The eastern parts are happy to become Russian (or a separate east Ukraine), and he’ll officially keep his valuable Black Sea port in Sevastopol under Russian control.

I don’t think he’ll restart the war if the hypothetical west Ukraine then proceeds to join NATO in a decade or three, as Putin got what he wanted. More (strategically important) land, and a big war (hailed as a win) to be remembered by in Mother Russia.

EDIT: I didn’t include the options :lol:
Option 1: He actually felt threatened by Ukraine
Option 2: Blatant land grab when the timing felt right
Option 3: Lunacy
 
VorZakone said:
Click to expand...

Interesting bit:

Notably, when looked at from a national perspective, the Ukrainian population appeared to possess only a moderate level of resolve.

However, when broken down by region – north, south, east and west – it becomes clear that attitudes in the south and east of the country exhibit much less faith in the Ukrainian state.
Click to expand...
 
groovyalbert said:
Pretty sure every country with a border close to Russia would disagree with you. And then some.
Click to expand...
Not if we had a real EU defense army capable of protecting Europe (Including Greece against Erdogan) independently of how Pennsylvania voted in the last American election.
 
Thanks so much for all the updates here...
And fantastic to see members of redcafe making real efforts to help out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.