Jump to content

Kiev Is Burning


X-Files
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 22.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Stuart Galbraith

    1653

  • Gregory

    989

  • Roman Alymov

    6379

  • glenn239

    1299

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I know a few people on this grate site would happily go Red Dawn if the Soviets turned up on their doorstep, but would hesitate if they were fighting for Detroit. :D

But looked at objectively, only a complete nutter would fight for the land of Israel. Its ok if you like Oranges and dates, but you cant say inherently its any value in itself. Other than the fact God promised it to two different peoples.

I guess the point im making is, any land is worthless to fight over. Other than for the people whom live there.

But the question in this conflict is, on what side are those people fighting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.rferl.org/a/austin-consultation-russia-ukraine/31589961.html

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has suggested that any U.S. response to Russia's actions toward Ukraine would be carried out in conjunction with the international community.

"Whatever we do will be done as a part of an international community," Austin said on December 2 while on a visit to South Korea.

"The best case though is that we won't see an incursion by the Soviet Union into the Ukraine," he added, accidentally referring to Russia as the former Soviet Union.

Austin spoke after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who is scheduled to meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Stockholm on December 2, warned Moscow to end its troop buildup near the Ukrainian border or face hard-hitting sanctions.

Asked whether the U.S. reaction would be strictly economic, Austin declined to answer directly, saying only that the "best methods" would be used.

Austin also called on Moscow to be transparent about its military buildup and voiced hope that the United States and Russia could work to "resolve issues and concerns and lower the temperature in the region."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Austin spoke after U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who is scheduled to meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Stockholm on December 2, warned Moscow to end its troop buildup near the Ukrainian border or face hard-hitting sanctions.

Sanctions will not deter Putin, and nor will arming Ukraine.   Doesn't look like NATO will yield on expansion either. 

This article,

Russia and China are attacking US satellites with lasers and jammers ‘every day’ says top general | The Independent

Suggests things are heating up in space too.  How reliable is the source?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still not convinced he's not Putin us on. He did this once before without doing anything (and I was quite convinced he would at the time) and if Russia is going to invade, I don't see why the build up would be so long winded and telegraphed. Presumably the Ukrainians are as mobilized as they can be. The request for NATO to renounce Ukraine membership in writing is truly odd. He had to know that would never be given.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Josh said:

Still not convinced he's not Putin us on. He did this once before without doing anything (and I was quite convinced he would at the time) and if Russia is going to invade, I don't see why the build up would be so long winded and telegraphed. Presumably the Ukrainians are as mobilized as they can be. The request for NATO to renounce Ukraine membership in writing is truly odd. He had to know that would never be given.

I'm thinking the buildup is taking so long because the invasion will be massive and Russia is a big country.

In terms of the 'request' (strange wording there) from Moscow, I don't think Putin expects NATO agree to stop expansion east.  What the Russians are doing is setting the table so that later when things are going off a cliff, the West cannot claim that there was some sort of misunderstanding on Ukraine and NATO.  

 

Edited by glenn239
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I object to the phrasing of "NATO expansion". It directly supports the false Russian narrative that NATO is actively pursuing a strategy to gobble former Warsaw Pact states into "their" territory, and that this accumulation is directed against Russia.

The reality is, that none of these countries has positive memories of being under Russian influence, and they seek protection from Russia, rather than NATO aggressively expanding to Russia. And Russia does everything possible to prove them right, in the cases of Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine (arguably even in the case of Belarus). The Russian leadership understands the underlying realities very well. It's just that they want to be able to continue to behave like total assholes to their neighbors and recognize that even for them it's necessary to create a supporting narrative to minimize the repercussions of the way they act.

We shouldn't fall into this propaganda trap by parroting those lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

The reality is, that none of these countries has positive memories of being under Russian influence, and they seek protection from Russia, rather than NATO aggressively expanding to Russia.

Not really the case. Most of them joined when Russia wasn't a threat at all. Some of them joined specifically because their only threat came from the side of NATO countries themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I'm thinking the buildup is taking so long because the invasion will be massive and Russia is a big country.

In terms of the 'request' (strange wording there) from Moscow, I don't think Putin expects NATO agree to stop expansion east.  What the Russians are doing is setting the table so that later when things are going off a cliff, the West cannot claim that there was some sort of misunderstanding on Ukraine and NATO.  

 

It's a 'request' in that it isn't something he can enforce in any way. We can call it a demand if you want, but it is one that will fall on deaf ears.

But the more I think about it, the more I think it does mean the Russians will annex territory this time. The demand of NATO looks to be part of the flimsy justification that will be invented once the show starts, and more over Putin would look a bit weak making such a demand and then doing nothing about it when it wasn't met. So I think a conflict is eminent now that the statement is released. Now it is just a question of timing. Presumably it would be after any discussions between Putin and Biden, but probably shortly after said discussions to maximize the negative political effect on Biden. If Putin and Biden have a teleconference, my money is on thing getting kinetic the next day.

 

ETA: Also there are enough Russian troop movements centered on Yelnya that I think we will see a concurrent movement into Belarus, though presumably the deployment will ostensibly be at the invitation of Lukashenko.

Edited by Josh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Josh said:

But the more I think about it, the more I think it does mean the Russians will annex territory this time. The demand of NATO looks to be part of the flimsy justification that will be invented once the show starts, and more over Putin would look a bit weak making such a demand and then doing nothing about it when it wasn't met.

So there we might have a useful metric for Russian motivations.  If, as you say, the NATO thing is a 'flimsy justification', then massive annexations will result.  However, if the invasion executes a regime change (a la Budapest and Prague during the Cold War), and then Russia unilaterally implements the Minsk Accords without annexations, (or very small ones), then the NATO expansion issue was the issue.

Quote

So I think a conflict is eminent now that the statement is released. Now it is just a question of timing. Presumably it would be after any discussions between Putin and Biden, but probably shortly after said discussions to maximize the negative political effect on Biden. If Putin and Biden have a teleconference, my money is on thing getting kinetic the next day.

I doubt Biden's political fortunes will impact Russian calculations; these should be purely military in terms of the timing and scale to perform the political mission objective.   What I will be surprised at is, if 24 hours into a war the Russians have not yet started shooting down NATO satellites.  In fact, it may soon be the case that no US military satellite will ever be allowed to fly over Russian territory again.

Quote

ETA: Also there are enough Russian troop movements centered on Yelnya that I think we will see a concurrent movement into Belarus, though presumably the deployment will ostensibly be at the invitation of Lukashenko.

An interesting obsevation, thanks.  And thanks to EU diplomatic bungling with Belarus recently, I doubt Putin will have any trouble getting that permission. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Pleb said:

Not really the case. Most of them joined when Russia wasn't a threat at all. Some of them joined specifically because their only threat came from the side of NATO countries themselves. 

Poland has a long memory of Russia being an existential threat. The Balts can make a plausible claim of intimidation all through the 1990s.

NATO was not intimidating anyone in Eastern Europe to join. In fact, even Putin wanted to join. He was fine with NATO having the Eastern Europeans joining, they asked him about it.

Meanwhile, I believe this is significant.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Poland has a long memory of Russia being an existential threat. The Balts can make a plausible claim of intimidation all through the 1990s.

NATO was not intimidating anyone in Eastern Europe to join. In fact, even Putin wanted to join. He was fine with NATO having the Eastern Europeans joining, they asked him about it.

That's 4 countries out of like 14. 

In reality, for countries like Slovakia the only potential danger was coming from NATO member Hungary and NATO in general. Same could be said about Romania. Nobody wanted to be on the receiving end of another "humanitarian bombing" campaign.

Not to mention some of the newer members were literally bombed by NATO not too long ago. Read something about Montenegro and its road to NATO. Specifically about Dukanovic and his DPS party, that has been in power since 1990.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Pleb said:

That's 4 countries out of like 14. 

In reality, for countries like Slovakia the only potential danger was coming from NATO member Hungary and NATO in general. Same could be said about Romania. Nobody wanted to be on the receiving end of another "humanitarian bombing" campaign.

Not to mention some of the newer members were literally bombed by NATO not too long ago. Read something about Montenegro and its road to NATO. Specifically about Dukanovic and his DPS party, that has been in power since 1990.

Hungary, Romania, Albania. Why even debate the others, since they don't create any kind of security risk for Russia, and were not even members of the Warsaw pact. If people want to complain about the Balkans, it's time for another threafd.

And once again, Putin asked about joining Nato, in 2002. It even engineered its own special relationship with NATO. If people want to pretend Putin is somehow defending Slavic concerns in Eastern Europe, they need to address why he never have a damn about them before 2007. 

The truth is, the narrative of encroachment on Eastern Europe was engineered by Putin. He gave permission for it to happen, he was consulted. Why did all those NATO members that who ajoin on Russia join? Probably because they could envisage what happens to Georgia and Ukraine eventually happening to them. And it still might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TrustMe said:

If NATO mobilises to go to  to war with Russia over Ukraine expect Russia to drop a tac nuke on them. 

Greater than 50% chance I believe. If the Russians invade, they might think they will need to have some sort of demonstration to show how much fire is being played with. Ight be nuclear, might be something else. 

I think the Russians are betting on the west not lifting a finger. The west, increasingly, from reading statements about what's going on, is betting that the Russians are bluffing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pleb said:

Same could be said about Romania. Nobody wanted to be on the receiving end of another "humanitarian bombing" campaign.

Care to share with us which of these current Eastern European NATO members were threatened with a 'humanitarian bombing campaign' and by whom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, ex2cav said:

Greater than 50% chance I believe. If the Russians invade, they might think they will need to have some sort of demonstration to show how much fire is being played with. Ight be nuclear, might be something else. 

I think the Russians are betting on the west not lifting a finger. The west, increasingly, from reading statements about what's going on, is betting that the Russians are bluffing. 

That's an interesting point. I wonder if Putin will stage a unannounced  'nuclear test' to scare NATO?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Daan said:

Care to share with us which of these current Eastern European NATO members were threatened with a 'humanitarian bombing campaign' and by whom?

Any country that has a foreign minority could be targeted with the Kosovo treatment. Namely, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia. Then there is Montenegro that was literally bombed by NATO and then later on joined the NATO itself. 

And even if we ignore Kosovo, if your main adversary is in NATO, then joining NATO has its benefits since major NATO countries will try to stop any kind of conflict between NATO members. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...