Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
mxaxai wrote:I feel like it's a bit too easy for US media and politicians to take an aggressive stance and fuel the fire. They have nothing to loose. It's not their children who get sent to war, nor are their homes threatened in any way. No foreign military will ever set foot on US mainland before conquering the entirety of Europe (or Asia...). No refugees will arrive except on flights organized by the US government. It's a very comfortable position to be in.
To be fair, the same applies to large parts of Russia too. NATO would not dare to attack major targets on Russian territory short of declaring WW3.
The only ones who get fucked over are the people living in the border regions.
alberchico wrote:Based on all that's happened so far, do people here think some kind of shooting war will really occur ? I honestly just don't see it. I think by this time in February we'll be having a chuckle at how hysterical everybody became over this.
AeroVega wrote:The question is if he is willing to live with the resuliting fortification of eastern NATO countries, and perhaps the expansion of NATO with Sweden and Finland.
alberchico wrote:Based on all that's happened so far, do people here think some kind of shooting war will really occur ? I honestly just don't see it. I think by this time in February we'll be having a chuckle at how hysterical everybody became over this. I'll say it again, Russia has completely lost the element of surprise and Putin knows any combat operations in the Ukraine will be no walk in the park. The man is not stupid enough to spectacularly shoot himself in the foot like this. This is a massive bluff to squeeze some major concession from the Ukraine. Hell, even Ukraine is telling their citizens that no invasion is imminent and that they should stay calm. Also, on the streets of Kiev there is no panic or chaos of any kind, no rush to the markets to stock up on supplies, no run on the banks. If they aren't panicking, then why is everyone else ?
alberchico wrote:Based on all that's happened so far, do people here think some kind of shooting war will really occur ? I honestly just don't see it. I think by this time in February we'll be having a chuckle at how hysterical everybody became over this. I'll say it again, Russia has completely lost the element of surprise and Putin knows any combat operations in the Ukraine will be no walk in the park. The man is not stupid enough to spectacularly shoot himself in the foot like this. This is a massive bluff to squeeze some major concession from the Ukraine. Hell, even Ukraine is telling their citizens that no invasion is imminent and that they should stay calm. Also, on the streets of Kiev there is no panic or chaos of any kind, no rush to the markets to stock up on supplies, no run on the banks. If they aren't panicking, then why is everyone else ?
Flying-Tiger wrote:alberchico wrote:Based on all that's happened so far, do people here think some kind of shooting war will really occur ? I honestly just don't see it. I think by this time in February we'll be having a chuckle at how hysterical everybody became over this. I'll say it again, Russia has completely lost the element of surprise and Putin knows any combat operations in the Ukraine will be no walk in the park. The man is not stupid enough to spectacularly shoot himself in the foot like this. This is a massive bluff to squeeze some major concession from the Ukraine. Hell, even Ukraine is telling their citizens that no invasion is imminent and that they should stay calm. Also, on the streets of Kiev there is no panic or chaos of any kind, no rush to the markets to stock up on supplies, no run on the banks. If they aren't panicking, then why is everyone else ?
Question in this context: are there any signs about the Ukrainian army preparing for major movements? E.g. all soldiers in their barracks / airfields / ports? Elevated readyness of equipment? Or reserves called in (they list about 900,000 people being in reserve - that would be about 4-5x what RUS has mobilized so far)? These would be major signs of them expecting hot action and getting prepared for it. If nothing or only very little happens they don´t expect anything. They are closest to the action, they would know best. I have so far only seen many reports about RUS movements, but next to nothing about similar movements in the UKR. Anyone able to elaborate?
mxaxai wrote:Mixed signals coming from Ukraine. On the one hand, members of parliament and others are calling for support (i. e. weapon deliveries) from NATO / EU states and mobilization, on the other hand, the official line is that nothing is happening and everybody should remain calm. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/25/worl ... asion.html
M564038 wrote:They'd have to feed them and keep them warm, wherever they are. You also have to remember that Russian soldiers aren't anywhere near as well paid as in Western countries, so military spending levels don't equal each other.In all discussions about this, and wether there are real power behind Putin’s words, I believe it is important to remember that the Russian millitary budget is miniscule compared to Nato’s. The US is up in Stratosphere, of course, spending more than 10 times the amount of Russia all by itself, but there are several other Nato countries about on par with russia in spending and a lot less territory to defend with the money. In fact, both in spending per capita and spending per m2, Russia is pretty far down the list.
Keeping 100 000 soldiers warmed and fed at the Ukranian border is not cheap, and it won’t last forever.
johns624 wrote:M564038 wrote:They'd have to feed them and keep them warm, wherever they are. You also have to remember that Russian soldiers aren't anywhere near as well paid as in Western countries, so military spending levels don't equal each other.In all discussions about this, and wether there are real power behind Putin’s words, I believe it is important to remember that the Russian millitary budget is miniscule compared to Nato’s. The US is up in Stratosphere, of course, spending more than 10 times the amount of Russia all by itself, but there are several other Nato countries about on par with russia in spending and a lot less territory to defend with the money. In fact, both in spending per capita and spending per m2, Russia is pretty far down the list.
Keeping 100 000 soldiers warmed and fed at the Ukranian border is not cheap, and it won’t last forever.
johns624 wrote:M564038 wrote:They'd have to feed them and keep them warm, wherever they are. You also have to remember that Russian soldiers aren't anywhere near as well paid as in Western countries, so military spending levels don't equal each other.In all discussions about this, and wether there are real power behind Putin’s words, I believe it is important to remember that the Russian millitary budget is miniscule compared to Nato’s. The US is up in Stratosphere, of course, spending more than 10 times the amount of Russia all by itself, but there are several other Nato countries about on par with russia in spending and a lot less territory to defend with the money. In fact, both in spending per capita and spending per m2, Russia is pretty far down the list.
Keeping 100 000 soldiers warmed and fed at the Ukranian border is not cheap, and it won’t last forever.
c933103 wrote:It is up to those nations to decide which side they align with and most of those nations have picked NATO.
Russia is just like the wind in the story of the sun and the wind, keep scaring its neighbors into seeking better protection. They cannot blame anyone else but themselves for causing such situation. NATO didn't force those countries to join. Rather, NATO have held up their applications for many years
As for China,although there are no sign yet, they could use the time when NATO is busy with the eastern frontier of europe to achieve their own objectives militarily
c933103 wrote:It is up to those nations to decide which side they align with and most of those nations have picked NATO.
Russia is just like the wind in the story of the sun and the wind, keep scaring its neighbors into seeking better protection. They cannot blame anyone else but themselves for causing such situation. NATO didn't force those countries to join. Rather, NATO have held up their applications for many years
As for China,although there are no sign yet, they could use the time when NATO is busy with the eastern frontier of europe to achieve their own objectives militarily
Kiwirob wrote:c933103 wrote:It is up to those nations to decide which side they align with and most of those nations have picked NATO.
Russia is just like the wind in the story of the sun and the wind, keep scaring its neighbors into seeking better protection. They cannot blame anyone else but themselves for causing such situation. NATO didn't force those countries to join. Rather, NATO have held up their applications for many years
As for China,although there are no sign yet, they could use the time when NATO is busy with the eastern frontier of europe to achieve their own objectives militarily
And why would Nato be interested in China? It’s the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation not the Pacific Treaty Organisation!
Kiwirob wrote:Not as NATO offically, but quite a few of the individual NATO countries would be concerned if China did something that they don't consider to be in their best interestsc933103 wrote:It is up to those nations to decide which side they align with and most of those nations have picked NATO.
Russia is just like the wind in the story of the sun and the wind, keep scaring its neighbors into seeking better protection. They cannot blame anyone else but themselves for causing such situation. NATO didn't force those countries to join. Rather, NATO have held up their applications for many years
As for China,although there are no sign yet, they could use the time when NATO is busy with the eastern frontier of europe to achieve their own objectives militarily
And why would Nato be interested in China? It’s the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation not the Pacific Treaty Organisation!
Tugger wrote:OK, so lets see if can continue to discuss what is going on in the world between Russia and Europe and the nations that border on Russia that they see as "they own" to influence. And how this desire intersects with NATO and the natural expansion of it as well as nations wishing to participate in and be part of the "western" economic success vs Russia economic success.
That means Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Moldova, even Belarus, Georgia, maybe even throw in Norway and Sweden (how about Kaliningrad? There's a place no one better touch, or... OUCHY!).
And of course The USA factors in as it likes to throw it's weight around (and can). Oh! And to be sure the thread doesn't get locked for being off topic if it is brought up, China is also a big geopolitical power that sometimes causes an issue, though they really have little care or desire to be at all involved in the power plays that are going on along the boarders of Europe.
Soo... let's see where this goes?
Tugg
Kiwirob wrote:
And why would Nato be interested in China? It’s the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation not the Pacific Treaty Organisation!
THS214 wrote:Tugger wrote:OK, so lets see if can continue to discuss what is going on in the world between Russia and Europe and the nations that border on Russia that they see as "they own" to influence. And how this desire intersects with NATO and the natural expansion of it as well as nations wishing to participate in and be part of the "western" economic success vs Russia economic success.
That means Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Moldova, even Belarus, Georgia, maybe even throw in Norway and Sweden (how about Kaliningrad? There's a place no one better touch, or... OUCHY!).
And of course The USA factors in as it likes to throw it's weight around (and can). Oh! And to be sure the thread doesn't get locked for being off topic if it is brought up, China is also a big geopolitical power that sometimes causes an issue, though they really have little care or desire to be at all involved in the power plays that are going on along the boarders of Europe.
Soo... let's see where this goes?
Tugg
How come you forgot Finland? We have 1 300 km of same border with Russia. ???
frmrCapCadet wrote:It is unfortunate that NATO so explicitly expanded into eastern Europe.
frmrCapCadet wrote:Too bad he could not have put top notch negotiators to come up with some face-saving clarifications to Russia. This would have required some major reductions in offensive weaponry in our eastern European allies.
L410Turbolet wrote:frmrCapCadet wrote:It is unfortunate that NATO so explicitly expanded into eastern Europe.
Since we are getting into revisionist history... it was even more unfortunate that Roosevelt let Stalin play him like a violin at Yalta.frmrCapCadet wrote:Too bad he could not have put top notch negotiators to come up with some face-saving clarifications to Russia. This would have required some major reductions in offensive weaponry in our eastern European allies.
Endless catering to Russian paranoia and inferiority complexes and some third rate membership? Brilliant.
AeroVega wrote:Can we stop discussing China and not get this thread locked as well? Thanks.
L410Turbolet wrote:frmrCapCadet wrote:It is unfortunate that NATO so explicitly expanded into eastern Europe.
Since we are getting into revisionist history... it was even more unfortunate that Roosevelt let Stalin play him like a violin at Yalta.frmrCapCadet wrote:Too bad he could not have put top notch negotiators to come up with some face-saving clarifications to Russia. This would have required some major reductions in offensive weaponry in our eastern European allies.
Endless catering to Russian paranoia and inferiority complexes and some third rate membership? Brilliant.
frmrCapCadet wrote:It is unfortunate that NATO so explicitly expanded into eastern Europe.
GDB wrote:While I do not want to tarnish a whole nation bssed on a few flaky politicians and a flakier and now sacked Admiral, also I get their wider concerns but still, Germany, Putin just isn’t that into you either, your the ‘West’ and therefore the enemy too.
GDB wrote:As for the smaller Baltic states, they got ‘absorbed’ in to the USSR in 1940 and had 50 years of that.
Why do some wonder why they were so keen to join organisations that they see as offering both economic assistance and protection?
frmrCapCadet wrote:The US expected the USSR to remove offensive weapons from Cuba, rightfully so.
Zeppi wrote:Have a read here: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60140566
Putin and Russia really collectively live in a parallel universe. It's scary indeed...
tomcat wrote:Zeppi wrote:Have a read here: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60140566
Putin and Russia really collectively live in a parallel universe. It's scary indeed...
This being said, it would seem logical that the Ukrainian government would want to regain control over the Donbas region. Doing so, that would be the ready made excuse for Russia to intervene with its own army (and possibly, push westwards until they would face some resistance). No doing so, and Russia could keep spreading the narrative that Ukraine is a failed state, undermining the authority of the Ukrainian government. A third way could be for the Ukrainian government to find a political agreement with the rebels over the status of Donbas (anything from a region with more autonomy to a possible independence from Ukraine). Russia would then loose its leverage to undermine the authority of the Ukrainian government.
GDB wrote:WTF? Are they trying to engineer a confrontation? Luckily for such a very short time but it's a clear escalation from bombers going near NATO airspace with transponders off.
Or just an intimidation, despite the risks of interception and maybe being brought down if they don't immediately comply?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian ... r-estonia/
SL1200MK2 wrote:GDB wrote:WTF? Are they trying to engineer a confrontation? Luckily for such a very short time but it's a clear escalation from bombers going near NATO airspace with transponders off.
Or just an intimidation, despite the risks of interception and maybe being brought down if they don't immediately comply?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian ... r-estonia/
It’s seems they are trying to start a confrontation. It’s like bums from another neighborhood trying to start fights in a nicer neighborhood. They have a pretty pathetic and low existence at this point.
Niinistö: I was disappointed and surprised by Brussels after the list of demands from Moscow was on the table. If you have a union and then someone comes from the outside and makes demands that may be directed at the U.S., but concern some countries inside the union, then there should be a reaction coming from your backbone. If someone is walking across your property, you would also react. But I’m missing this reflex. I didn't even see this kind of reaction in December from the European Parliament, which usually reacts to everything bad that happens in the world. I found that embarrassing. This disappointment sits deeper in my mind and heart than I could express.
Aesma wrote:davidjohnson6 wrote:Putin also gets a buffer zone that he controls between Russia proper and NATO territory. Combined with Belarus and the Kaliningrad enclave, he pretty much controls the eastern border of Europe. Armenia is unlikely to go radically against Moscow, and Russia also controls bits of Georgia
That's a lot of square miles and people which gives strategic defensive depth from any hostile intent that may originate in Europe... and will likely last for decades. The last two attacks on major population centres in Russia have originated in Paris and Berlin. The areas near China are largely empty of people and already have strategic depth. Who knows whether liberal democracy will be around in Europe in 50 years... or if a populist demagogue will emerge.
Russia also improves its food security. In Soviet times, Ukraine was the breadbasket of the USSR
If Russia becomes dependant on Ukraine for food, then it's not a buffer anymore, it's Russian territory, that is now even closer to "enemies". Doesn't really seem logical.
As for the attack from Paris, that was more than 2 centuries ago !
GDB wrote:L410Turbolet wrote:frmrCapCadet wrote:It is unfortunate that NATO so explicitly expanded into eastern Europe.
Since we are getting into revisionist history... it was even more unfortunate that Roosevelt let Stalin play him like a violin at Yalta.frmrCapCadet wrote:Too bad he could not have put top notch negotiators to come up with some face-saving clarifications to Russia. This would have required some major reductions in offensive weaponry in our eastern European allies.
Endless catering to Russian paranoia and inferiority complexes and some third rate membership? Brilliant.
Yet Churchill seems to get the blame, of course from guess where? Clue, not from Russia.
Stalin knew how ill FDR was, knew a long journey would make it worse, the other reason to insist on Yalta was that the ‘Man Of Steel’ was in reality terrified of flying.
It just won’t do to keep on with this whole narrative about NATO somehow ‘forcing’ itself Eastwards, the nations concerned wanted to join NATO and also the EU first chance they got.
France for De Gaulle Anglophobia/general hissy fit reasons left NATO in 1966 (to the dismay of his senior military and intel people), the US response did not even involve any economic let alone military sanctions, barely a strong word, what a contrast to Hungary in 1956, the Czechs in 1968, the Poles had troops massed on their border in ‘81/82 to ensure they cracked down on independent trade unions.
As for the smaller Baltic states, they got ‘absorbed’ in to the USSR in 1940 and had 50 years of that.
Why do some wonder why they were so keen to join organisations that they see as offering both economic assistance and protection?
One of the first well known large cyber attacks against a nation was against Estonia in 2007, from guess where?
Being better off, free and no longer a Soviet Republic or satellite nation really gets under the skin of Putin and his apologists.
That’s the real issue, everything else is BS from today’s ‘useful idiots’.
While I do not want to tarnish a whole nation bssed on a few flaky politicians and a flakier and now sacked Admiral, also I get their wider concerns but still, Germany, Putin just isn’t that into you either, your the ‘West’ and therefore the enemy too.
kelval wrote:GDB wrote:L410Turbolet wrote:
Since we are getting into revisionist history... it was even more unfortunate that Roosevelt let Stalin play him like a violin at Yalta.
Endless catering to Russian paranoia and inferiority complexes and some third rate membership? Brilliant.
Yet Churchill seems to get the blame, of course from guess where? Clue, not from Russia.
Stalin knew how ill FDR was, knew a long journey would make it worse, the other reason to insist on Yalta was that the ‘Man Of Steel’ was in reality terrified of flying.
It just won’t do to keep on with this whole narrative about NATO somehow ‘forcing’ itself Eastwards, the nations concerned wanted to join NATO and also the EU first chance they got.
France for De Gaulle Anglophobia/general hissy fit reasons left NATO in 1966 (to the dismay of his senior military and intel people), the US response did not even involve any economic let alone military sanctions, barely a strong word, what a contrast to Hungary in 1956, the Czechs in 1968, the Poles had troops massed on their border in ‘81/82 to ensure they cracked down on independent trade unions.
As for the smaller Baltic states, they got ‘absorbed’ in to the USSR in 1940 and had 50 years of that.
Why do some wonder why they were so keen to join organisations that they see as offering both economic assistance and protection?
One of the first well known large cyber attacks against a nation was against Estonia in 2007, from guess where?
Being better off, free and no longer a Soviet Republic or satellite nation really gets under the skin of Putin and his apologists.
That’s the real issue, everything else is BS from today’s ‘useful idiots’.
While I do not want to tarnish a whole nation bssed on a few flaky politicians and a flakier and now sacked Admiral, also I get their wider concerns but still, Germany, Putin just isn’t that into you either, your the ‘West’ and therefore the enemy too.
It's a common anglo saxon misconception to think that France left NATO in 1966. It never did.
Instead, it left the "integrated" command since it had no voice in the decisions taken and it was "commanding" in name only, and asked for the OTAN military infrastructures to leave french soil.
On the other side, it did always support the missions that NATO did, as well as participate in the military exercices.
It's not all black and white, and France was never neutral, even tough not totally aligned with the U.S.
As for the main subject, I really don't know what Putin expects to get with this show of force, and after such ambitious demands, and remain doubtful that he can leave with his hands empty.