The Russian Invasion of the Ukraine.

[Vixen]

Let's speak in simple terms. Do the western allies (I Jesus hope they're allied) have military options at this point? In the immediate future? In the current theater of war and only there?

Granted that war with Russian forces is not like war with ISIS or Serbia. But how long could they sustain an offensive that was met with sophisticated assaults?

No, it is unlikely other countries will be directly participating in the war, IMV, unless there is a casus belli incident, although they can provide support in the form of arms and transport.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I notice that certain Putin fanboys are conspicuous by their absence. Perhaps they haven't gotten their talking points sent to them yet.

It's the same "They are all waiting to told what the narrative is" feeling we'd get so often from the Trumpers.

 

[trustbutverify]

I notice that certain Putin fanboys are conspicuous by their absence. Perhaps they haven't gotten their talking points sent to them yet.

Although their politics are identical, we're not exactly talking Bobby Fischer here. Give them time to get their stories straight.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

It's the same "They are all waiting to told what the narrative is" feeling we'd get so often from the Trumpers.

The straightest through line for right wingers is that they admire being powerful.

Being powerful feels nice, and there's no better expression of that than victimizing someone weaker than you. I really doubt that the Putin fanboying is explained by much more than that.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

No, it is unlikely other countries will be directly participating in the war, IMV, unless there is a casus belli incident, although they can provide support in the form of arms and transport.

Russia has launched a full scale military invasion of an ally. How is that not cause for war?

I don't think Russia have thought this through because I'm pretty sure that if it does kick off China will be putting the boot in on Russia and Russia are not winning that fight.

 

[plague311]

Russia has launched a full scale military invasion of an ally. How is that not cause for war?

To slightly alter Wyatt Earp's phrase in Tombstone:

"I'm not fighting you, Russia. There's no oil in it."

 

[Andy_Ross]

Let's speak in simple terms. Do the western allies (I Jesus hope they're allied) have military options at this point? In the immediate future? In the current theater of war and only there?

Granted that war with Russian forces is not like war with ISIS or Serbia. But how long could they sustain an offensive that was met with sophisticated assaults?

Russia have barely ten divisions fully equipped, they are at least a generation behind NAT in hardware.
Their economy is in the dumps. They couldn't sustain a prolonged attack, they don't have the manpower or resources to support it for any length of time.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Poland is the only NATO country that borders Ukraine, and doing some googling, no it does not sound like forces there are sufficient for an operation into Ukraine.

The US has, I believe, 1 brigade from the 82nd Airborne in Poland.

NATO would not undertake operation in to Ukraine, they would however be able to field enough troops and equipment to the NATO borders to stop any Russian attack.

 

[Ryokan]

Russia has launched a full scale military invasion of an ally. How is that not cause for war?

Ukraine might be a friend of the west, but there is no alliance with them.

It's the idea that Ukraine might possibly, at some time in the future, ally with the west that is probably reason #1 for Putin's attack.

 

[JoeMorgue]

*Notices the rest of NATO looking at us*

Oh so NOW the USA's giant military is a good thing.

No **** that. Let the glorious perfect Utopia's of Europe who do everything right and are better than us in every way deal with it. Throw your universal health care and better public transport and beer that isn't piss and "real" cheese at Putin, see how that works.

 

[Andy_Ross]

On Fox Trump phoned in and told Laura Ingraham that Putin didn't invade Ukraine during his administration for "a very good reason, and I'll explain that to you someday."
Ingraham and Trump blamed Biden for Russian aggression.

After Ingraham mentioned that Russian forces were reportedly engaged in an amphibious attack, Trump said, "you told me about the amphibious attack by Americans. You shouldn't be saying that, they should do that secretly."

"No. That was the Russians," Ingraham said

 

[JoeMorgue]

The UK has banned Russian commercial/civil airflights from it's airspace. Wager we'll see other countries follow suit.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

It's the idea that Ukraine might possibly, at some time in the future, ally with the west that is probably reason #1 for Putin's attack.

Seen elsewhere on the internet, Russian logic: when your neighbors start joining NATO because they're afraid you'll invade them, so you invade one of your non NATO neighbors to scare your neighbors away from joining NATO.

I think Russia knows it has to win quick. It can't do sustained. Its stuff is simply not in that great of shape. Their only aircraft carrier can't even be out to sea doing literally nothing without breaking down. They are in the absolute worst place for a war of attrition.

But they can do a lot of damage in the short-mid term and I'm scared of what happens when they run out of options.

I think that win or lose, we're going to see nuclear politicking again. There's no damn reason to invade Ukraine. As targets go it's not strategic or economic, just convenient. The only strategy that makes sense to me:

1) Invade Ukraine, show some force, etc
2) Drive all your other neighbors to NATO in self-defence
3) Use the enemy at your gates to reignite the Cold War
4) Keep going by threatening nukes over every damn thing

Sanction Russia? Nukes. Close a pipeline? Nukes. The oligarchs have stolen everything else of value but that one trump card, so I think we're going to see it played. A lot. Maybe even used? Think Russia could nuke Kyiv and plausibly claim it was a last-ditch suicide bomb by evil Ukrainian neo-Nazi fascist pig-dogs? It would certainly give them the edge in brinksmanship with the West.

 

[Ryokan]

*Notices the rest of NATO looking at us*

Oh so NOW the USA's giant military is a good thing.

No **** that. Let the glorious perfect Utopia's of Europe who do everything right and are better than us in every way deal with it. Throw your universal health care and better public transport and beer that isn't piss and "real" cheese at Putin, see how that works.

The rest of NATO is looking at you? Where do you have that from?

Both UK and France has about the same military budget as Russia. NATO without USA would probably handle Russia just fine, if it came to that.

We're not looking at the USA. We're looking at each other, because that's how NATO works.

 

[Ziggurat]

Russia has launched a full scale military invasion of an ally. How is that not cause for war?

I don't think Russia have thought this through because I'm pretty sure that if it does kick off China will be putting the boot in on Russia and Russia are not winning that fight.

No, China is not going to war with Russia.

They are in a funny spot here. In general, China's interests line up more with Russia than with the West, but this case is an exception. And the reason is Taiwan (and a little bit Tibet and Xinjiang). China hates separatist movements (and classifies an independent Taiwan as one), and doesn't want to give the idea any legitimacy. China is under threat from separatists, it can't really use them as weapons against others. But Russia does like them, because that's how they peel off parts of neighboring countries into puppet states. So China isn't going to back Russia here. But because of their shared anti-US interests, they're unlikely to come to blows over this either. It's more that China just won't back Russia up here, even though on most other issues they will.

 

[JoeMorgue]

We talk about the invasion of Ukraine only making sense in the framework of national ego as if that's some how weird or unique.

Nearly all wars are just power grabs and in almost all cases in modern war the aggressor winds up losing.

Starting a war is almost always stupid and yes there usually is one side who "starts" it. Hasn't stopped countries from doing it.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The rest of NATO is looking at you? Where do you have that from?

Both UK and France has about the same military budget as Russia. NATO without USA would probably handle Russia just fine, if it came to that.

We're not looking at the USA. We're looking at each other, because that's how NATO works.

I've always assumed the EU would be better off leaving NATO and making their own European alliance. That way they could still have a mutual defense system but not be constantly embarrassed by having to back up the US in its many botched imperial conquests.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

BBC are bigging up the Russian military, describing it as "one of the most powerful militaries in the world".

Seriously BBC? I mean I know they're way more powerful that the Ukrainian military but they're not that powerful.

 

[Garrison]

Just when I thought this situation couldn't get much worse, there's fighting near the Chernobyl nuclear site.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

No, China is not going to war with Russia.

They are in a funny spot here. In general, China's interests line up more with Russia than with the West, but this case is an exception. And the reason is Taiwan (and a little bit Tibet and Xinjiang). China hates separatist movements (and classifies an independent Taiwan as one), and doesn't want to give the idea any legitimacy. China is under threat from separatists, it can't really use them as weapons against others. But Russia does like them, because that's how they peel off parts of neighboring countries into puppet states. So China isn't going to back Russia here. But because of their shared anti-US interests, they're unlikely to come to blows over this either. It's more that China just won't back Russia up here, even though on most other issues they will.

I disagree. China covets Russian resources and hates the Kremlin. Sure, they aren't exactly bestest buddies with the US either but they won't want to be on the sidelines forever.

ETA: That said your points regarding Taiwan are absolutely on point.