Cont: The Russian Invasion of Ukraine part 9

[Aridas]

Technical question. At what point we call it WW3 ? When Europe is directly involved ? When US joins in ? Or is some country from Africa needed ?

My two cents: World War 3 begins when most/all of the world is fighting. Which it likely won't be even if all of the Western world is suddenly at all-out war with russia (which wouldn't even be a particularly long war, one way or the other). Chances are you won't see most of Asia, Africa, Central and South America, and Oceania start actively fighting for Ukraine or russia. WWII became a world war because the white people had already colonized most of the world, that's not the case today.

Even so, I'm sure that if there was a brief NATO-russian scrap, a lot of people in the West would call it WW3 even though most of the world would be neutral.

Ehh. It doesn't actually have to be most of the world, in my distinctly inexpert opinion. A single overall conflict with enough different active participants with battlefields around the world could qualify.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine does not qualify at present It's pretty much a "normal" war, albeit with a distinct proxy flavor on Ukraine's side as various countries have aided them to rein in Russia's ambitions. Ukraine and Russia are doing the main fighting, overwhelmingly on their territory. The aforementioned African branch of the conflict is small, as far as I can tell. Europe joining in would certainly escalate the conflict significantly, yes, but if the main battlefields are primarily around the Russian borders (with long range strikes further in, of course), than it would still be hard to call it much more than a regional conflict. If, say, the US and China joined in on opposite sides and started fighting each other in and across the Pacific, then there would be much more grounds to call it a World War.

 

[theprestige]

Technical question. At what point we call it WW3 ? When Europe is directly involved ? When US joins in ? Or is some country from Africa needed ?

Questions of taxonomy are boring. Taxonomies are ultimately subjective. The is no "right" answer. There is no "technically correct" answer. There's just how you prefer to organize things.

Here's my taxonomy. It's just as authoritative as anyone else's. You'll need to decide for yourself if you find it technically correct, or whtaever.

The Cold War was WW3, and still is. All that's changed for me is the realization that the enemy is Russia in various guises, not the Soviet Union specifically. The war in Ukraine is part of this WW3. It's another proxy war between nuclear-armed belligerents who want to influence events without a direct confrontation.

Meanwhile, the so-called "global war on terror" is our WW4. Different enemies, different doctrines, but also a global conflict.

Many local conflicts can be part of both WW3 and WW4, of course. Many are. But don't get it twisted: Partisan saboteurs in Russia are not also terrorist foes in the GWOT. Russia will tell you they are, but Russia also tells you the Ukrainians are proper Nazis.

So there's my answer to your question. It's been WW3 since before WW2 even ended. Take it or leave it.

 

[icerat]

The Russian invasion of Ukraine does not qualify at present It's pretty much a "normal" war, albeit with a distinct proxy flavor on Ukraine's side as various countries have aided them to rein in Russia's ambitions.

What absurdity is this? You think Ukraine is a "proxy" for **defending it's own territory** with very little help apart from (reportedly) intelligence donations of weapons and money, much of which has to get paid back?

And then you *completely ignore* that actual North Korean and Iranian troops have participated directly in the war on Russia's side, boots on the ground, and the full-scale invasion was launched in part from Belarus?

 

[jimbob]

Post in thread 'Hybrid warfare in the 2020s'

Sep 2, 2026

And now bombs planted on German substations and high voltage power lines.

Saboteurs Target Critical Brandenburg Power-Grid Node - https://eutoday.net

The Brandenburg attack exposes a broad vulnerability shared across Europe. Electricity networks contain thousands of remote pylons, substations and cable routes

eutoday.net

• jimbob

• 

 

[Dr.Sid]

What absurdity is this? You think Ukraine is a "proxy" for **defending it's own territory** with very little help apart from (reportedly) intelligence donations of weapons and money, much of which has to get paid back?

And then you *completely ignore* that actual North Korean and Iranian troops have participated directly in the war on Russia's side, boots on the ground, and the full-scale invasion was launched in part from Belarus?

Very little help ? The help is essential. Ukraine might be self sufficient in drones for last year. Everything else comes from the West. Tanks, jets, artillery, missiles, assault riffles, all the ammunition, satellite intelligence and communication. Since first few months EVERY weapon, EVERY bullet is from the West. Ukraine would fold long time ago without it.
The stuff which was sold was sold under market prices, often for symbolic prices, or for vague promises, and the West will get nothing in return if Ukraine loses. It's done out of political interest. Not for profit.
The stuff typically came from strategic reserves of involved countries, lowering their own capabilities. They were given gladly, as the reserves existed for fighting Russia in the first place, but it again was done out of political interest.
NK and Belarus are also helping only unofficially.
Officially it's Russia vs. Ukraine. Realistically it's the West vs. the East. That's what's making it a proxy war. It haven't start as one. It has quickly become one.

 

[Aridas]

What absurdity is this? You think Ukraine is a "proxy" for **defending it's own territory** with very little help apart from (reportedly) intelligence donations of weapons and money, much of which has to get paid back?

Ukraine defending its own territory against Russia's unprovoked invasion is not reason to call it a proxy, of course. However, the form and nature of the involvement and aid rendered to Ukraine by the nations that have been aiding Ukraine, as well as the actual reasoning behind most of that aid, gives Ukraine's side a distinct flavor of proxy. Those other nations aiding Ukraine are not officially at war with Russia.

And then you *completely ignore* that actual North Korean and Iranian troops have participated directly in the war on Russia's side, boots on the ground,

Those are effectively hired by Russia as mercenaries, are they not? North Korea and Iran are not at war with Ukraine, at last check. Wars commonly include the use of mercenaries of various kinds.

and the full-scale invasion was launched in part from Belarus?

You speak of Russian troops under orders from Russia, at last check.

It's not that these things were ignored, but rather that they're just not relevant for the specific question.

 

[icerat]

Those are effectively hired by Russia as mercenaries, are they not? North Korea and Iran are not at war with Ukraine, at last check. Wars commonly include the use of mercenaries of various kinds.

No, actual North Korean and Iranian soldiers. Iranians earlier in the war launching drones in particular, the Russians didn't have the knowhow. Not so much now afaik.

North Korea has literally sent tens of thousands of combat troops and is sending more as we speak. Not mercenaries. Though of course NK itself I assume gets something in return. North Korea absolutely is at war with Ukraine.

Russia doesn't consider itself at war with Ukraine either, remember. It's an anti-terrorist Special Military Operation

 

[a_unique_person]

Very little help ? The help is essential. Ukraine might be self sufficient in drones for last year. Everything else comes from the West. Tanks, jets, artillery, missiles, assault riffles, all the ammunition, satellite intelligence and communication. Since first few months EVERY weapon, EVERY bullet is from the West. Ukraine would fold long time ago without it.
The stuff which was sold was sold under market prices, often for symbolic prices, or for vague promises, and the West will get nothing in return if Ukraine loses. It's done out of political interest. Not for profit.
The stuff typically came from strategic reserves of involved countries, lowering their own capabilities. They were given gladly, as the reserves existed for fighting Russia in the first place, but it again was done out of political interest.
NK and Belarus are also helping only unofficially.
Officially it's Russia vs. Ukraine. Realistically it's the West vs. the East. That's what's making it a proxy war. It haven't start as one. It has quickly become one.

That framing of Russia fighting the "Collective West" is the message that the pro-Putin trolls are giving.

 

[icerat]

Very little help ? The help is essential. Ukraine might be self sufficient in drones for last year. Everything else comes from the West. Tanks, jets, artillery, missiles, assault riffles, all the ammunition, satellite intelligence and communication.

Ok, that was all in my "except for" - which I agree is a bit more than "very little". I retract the phrasing.

Since first few months EVERY weapon, EVERY bullet is from the West.

That's not true at all. Even outside of drones, Ukraine produces a hell of a lot of it's own stuff.

 

[Dr.Sid]

That framing of Russia fighting the "Collective West" is the message that the pro-Putin trolls are giving.

It is partially true. The best kind of manipulation.
The West does have interest in defeating Russia. The West helps Ukraine a lot, and amount of material military help is stretching the gray zone of neutrality.
On the other hand the West did not start the conflict, it even was denied Ukraine attempts at joining Nato or EU in fear of escalation. And the West did not fully commit, it did not send soldiers, it did not attack Russia directly, again mostly in fear of escalation. Russia is still officially nuclear power.
Well maybe you could even say the West is as involved as it considers possible.

 

[Dr.Sid]

That's not true at all. Even outside of drones, Ukraine produces a hell of a lot of it's own stuff.

Hell of a lot maybe. Not majority in any area AFAIK, and none in many others. Not nearly enough. And only recently. But ok, I retract "every".

 

[jimbob]

No, actual North Korean and Iranian soldiers. Iranians earlier in the war launching drones in particular, the Russians didn't have the knowhow. Not so much now afaik.

North Korea has literally sent tens of thousands of combat troops and is sending more as we speak. Not mercenaries. Though of course NK itself I assume gets something in return. North Korea absolutely is at war with Ukraine.

Russia doesn't consider itself at war with Ukraine either, remember. It's an anti-terrorist Special Military Operation

Minor correction as to whom you are replying.

Aridas, not me.

Those are effectively hired by Russia as mercenaries, are they not? North Korea and Iran are not at war with Ukraine, at last check. Wars commonly include the use of mercenaries of various kinds.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

TBH, I still don't understand Putin's logic in trying to trigger Germany. The economic disparity is the polar opposite of WW2. He could have had an easier time bullying a relatively weak country like Romania, and had the plausible deniability that maybe the drone was jammed and flew way off course, since Romania has a border with Ukraine. Of all the ways to poke NATO, GERMANY? Seriously?? Putin must be completely nuts. As if Europe needed even more poking to ramp up weapon production even more.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I do agree NATO is essentially at war with russia --by proxy. Of course they're also a sovereign country which has decided, and continuously decides, to continue fighting the war, for their continued existence as a country and people. The trolls who seem to think of Ukraine as some kind of European colony or US territory that's being made to fight, on behalf of the US or Europe, just tick me off.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Whether or not that's true, Putin's narrative is already that he's at war with NATO and the decadent west. He doesn't actually need to trigger NATO. He's got nothing to gain from it, especially without going "yeah, we attacked Germany" and immediately triggering article 5. It's not even a propaganda point. Like, why even bother? That guy must be nuttier than a walnut tree.

 

[icerat]

Whether or not that's true, Putin's narrative is already that he's at war with NATO and the decadent west. He doesn't actually need to trigger NATO. He's got nothing to gain from it, especially without going "yeah, we attacked Germany" and immediately triggering article 5. It's not even a propaganda point. Like, why even bother? That guy must be nuttier than a walnut tree.

(1) Because if he can trigger some kind of response, even limited, he can then use it as the excuse to mobilise.
(2) If it causes Germany (or anyone else) to be concerned about a full attack, then they worry about their own defence and supply less to Ukraine
(3) I also think he's partly trolling. He believes Europe and NATO is weak and won't respond even to an incursion into Estonia. This a way to laugh at NATO ... and simultaneously have evidence for any critics that the risk of all out war with NATO is low.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

(1) Because if he can trigger some kind of response, even limited, he can then use it as the excuse to mobilise.
(2) If it causes Germany (or anyone else) to be concerned about a full attack, then they worry about their own defence and supply less to Ukraine
(3) I also think he's partly trolling. He believes Europe and NATO is weak and won't respond even to an incursion into Estonia. This a way to laugh at NATO ... and simultaneously have evidence for any critics that the risk of all out war with NATO is low.

1) It's an authoritarian regime with control over the media. He can just say WTH he wants on TV as a justification.
2) Given the sheer economic capacity, Germany can easily ramp up production to cover both. AND it's a good reason for France, Poland, Sweden, etc, to ramp theirs up too.
3) Then why not just poke Estonia?

But then I have no idea what's going through Putin's delusional brain. And in all fairness, he probably doesn't either

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Also, I wonder how delusional putin is about the situation in Ukraine, and with the west. On the one hand I hear his closest circle doesn't dare tell him how badly things are going, but at the same time he looks dejected or downright miserable in public appearances, like in his latest meeting with Modi (screenshot from the latest Caolan Robertson vid).

So his escalating hybrid war campaign against Europe might be desperation, or it could be that he genuinely believes NATO/Europe won't respond. Or both, I guess.

 

[Wudang]

We meet today to discuss Russia’s attack in Leipzig.

This was an attack using military-grade material, carried out by Russian operatives on EU soil.

We won't tolerate it.

Europe and NATO won't just maintain our pressure on Russia.

Press corner

Highlights, press releases and speeches

ec.europa.eu

 

[icerat]

TBH, I still don't understand Putin's logic in trying to trigger Germany. The economic disparity is the polar opposite of WW2. He could have had an easier time bullying a relatively weak country like Romania, and had the plausible deniability that maybe the drone was jammed and flew way off course, since Romania has a border with Ukraine. Of all the ways to poke NATO, GERMANY? Seriously?? Putin must be completely nuts. As if Europe needed even more poking to ramp up weapon production even more.

They are doing *major* provocations againt Romania. Drones are constantly overflying there. Naval drones within 100 metres or so of Romanian offshore platforms. A freighter was sunk a few days ago, in Romanian economic waters.

Cargo Ship With 12 Crew Sinks In Black Sea Off Romania Following Suspected Drone Attack

Marine Insight - The maritime industry guide.

www.marineinsight.com