Current Affairs Ukraine

[Diogenes the Cynic]

That's the problem with looking at a war strategy that's different in time scale and nature than what we'd do. Constriction is probably a very good description of the Russian tactics and if they tolerate higher losses they will probably settle in for the long term grind. Can see this going on for years and years - Russia 'excels' at 'frozen' wars.

What a goddamn unnecessary mess and waste of human life this is.

Now is the time to plan and budget for the long haul.

Dramatically increase spending to the military and start planning now.

Pray for peace and prepare for war as the old saying goes.

All vanity projects should be off the table and funds redirected.

 

[Martin Alvito]

I agree. We are basically telling the world that if you have nuclear weapons you can do what you want and we will not respond through direct conflict. Kind of makes the threat impotent. It will be interesting, though incredibly sad, to see what impact and how quickly economic war through mega sanctions, has.

We've been saying that for decades, which is why states like India, Pakistan and North Korea acquired the things. The point of having them is to deter war. It is not to use them.

Biden's oath is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. There is nothing about saving Ukrainians at the risk of WWIII in there. Intervening would be doing the opposite of his charge. His treaty commitments under Article 5 apply to those states, and not this one.

It's harsh, but reality often is. The solution here is not to try and roll back the clock. It's to make sure that something like this cannot happen again.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Russia own half of the worlds nuclear weapons..

Do you reckon these will all be functional? They have to be replaced every ten years or so and though the figures claimed by Russia might be true they are so creative with the truth that it is hard to tell.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Yes, and NATO pretty much own the other half, and yet we're to believe that this fact is no deterrent at all and the moment NATO shoots down a single Russian plane that Coventry will be flattened again.

The scale as reported by the UN between the US and Russia looks roughly the same. But as per my previous post I am not sure if these figures are verified or what the Russians (and Yanks) say.

Nuclear Weapons – UNODA

www.un.org

 

[blulouie]

Id love that to be true, though we have to remember we are being given information by the Western media, Russia don’t give a flyer about making slow progress in my opinion, in fact it suits them, Ukraine are running out of medical supplies, food and water. While Putin will relish sticking two fingers up against the West raising tensions and assessing weak spots and responses to see how much he can get away with. Russia are used to slow progressive wars, they've done it everywhere, they can be like a constrictor just slowly squeeze the life out of a country through attrition, cutting supply lines and siege and then install their regime. The longer they sit there the more tension they raise politically, the more Ukraine become desperate. Putin is perfectly happy to accept sanctions and put his people into poverty. Adrenaline is there the first few weeks, but as conditions get harder people become desperate. Certainly some of the scenes around Ukrainian people in cites fighting for food or children dying of dehydration are desperate.

I dont wholly buy the incompetence of the Russian army thing that comes from Western Media outlets, we're as vulnerable to propaganda as anyone, Putin is a serious dude, im sure there are wins for Ukraine, but this dude knows what hes doing he was at this for almost a year, arguably a decade in Checynya, through sieges and attrition and has been planning his Ukraine offensive for a long time. They are in key strategic areas outside cities, ground is going to start getting harder now, the weather better and Ukraine's supply lines in these cities are diminishing. Hes perfectly happy i think holding this hand for now and making slow incremental progress.

For me his end game is to have a puppet regime right on the doorstep of the EU and NATO and curb the west to east influence and political and military pathways for the intervening nations to the EU and Nato. Its quite possible he can achieve this - only Ukraine can stop him, because it doesn't seem that anyone else is prepared to go in there.

I am fully aware that both side's in any conflict will use propaganda for their own use.
But particularly in this case one side has the whole free worlds media focused in reporting on the "special operation " the other side has endorsed a total media blackout , even for its own citizens.
There's many news feeds that give a balanced view if you choose , although there's plenty not to be trusted.
Then we form our own opinions , my opinion is Putin waited for the optimum time to start this through world events over the past recent years. Again my opinion is he did not expect the west to unite in the way it has. Nor Ukraine to give such stern resistance.
To me its quite obvious it has not gone to plan and dont believe he wants a long drawn out war and is prepared to escalate things by using thermobaric , cluster bombs & hiting hospitals , nuseries and civilian housing.
The longer it goes on his own country's system is breaking down and losing support of people as the sanctions hit hard.
My hope is he gets taken out of the equation before we reach the point of no return.
Its what we are all praying for.

 

[WA Toffee]

I see this used a lot, but why is that the case? I mean across NATO the collective armed forces and nuclear arsenal are far larger than that of Russia. If a NATO member was invaded would we be using the same language, that we can't fight back because Putin might use a nuclear weapon?

I'm not going to pretend to be any kind of expert in international diplomacy or logistics of warfare, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect someone who has control of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world to consider using some of that as a last resort if it looked like the only way to avoid defeat.

If a NATO country is invaded, I would fully expect it to be defended by all other NATO members. Perhaps that is one reason Putin won't enter a NATO country?

 

[Mrk]

I'm not going to pretend to be any kind of expert in international diplomacy or logistics of warfare, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect someone who has control of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world to consider using some of that as a last resort if it looked like the only way to avoid defeat.

If a NATO country is invaded, I would fully expect it to be defended by all other NATO members. Perhaps that is one reason Putin won't enter a NATO country?

This is the problem with that line of thinking though - the use of nuclear weapons by Russia would guarantee their defeat, not avoid it.

If Putin uses nukes, it's because he knows he's defeated and he wants to take as many people down with him.

 

[Tramps_mate]

Do you reckon these will all be functional? They have to be replaced every ten years or so and though the figures claimed by Russia might be true they are so creative with the truth that it is hard to tell.

Apparently of the 6500 they have, 1500 or so are within operational capability.

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

We've been saying that for decades, which is why states like India, Pakistan and North Korea acquired the things. The point of having them is to deter war. It is not to use them.

Biden's oath is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. There is nothing about saving Ukrainians at the risk of WWIII in there. Intervening would be doing the opposite of his charge. His treaty commitments under Article 5 apply to those states, and not this one.

It's harsh, but reality often is. The solution here is not to try and roll back the clock. It's to make sure that something like this cannot happen again.

And therein lies the problem in certain respects - we cannot make states like Russia follow treaties and international rules.

Russian policy has focused largely on co-optation and subversion. They got their man in the white house and NATO seemed under threat. They went to work on Brexit and weakened the EU through Brexit. Whilst doing this had agents releasing chemical weapons on UK soil but they have ramped there play up by invading a sovereign European nation. And this deterrent is clearly not preventing war, it is preventing us from effectively helping a desperate people under threat of annihilation.

Putin is looking at our rules and fears as handcuffs and clearly thinks we are weak. As you say it is harsh but this is the reality that we face. An emboldened Putin and watching Xi are most definitely looking to change the world order, and this is a pivotal moment in the worlds direction of travel, IMO.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I'm not going to pretend to be any kind of expert in international diplomacy or logistics of warfare, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect someone who has control of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world to consider using some of that as a last resort if it looked like the only way to avoid defeat.

If a NATO country is invaded, I would fully expect it to be defended by all other NATO members. Perhaps that is one reason Putin won't enter a NATO country?

No one is contemplating actually invading Russia as far as I'm aware, they're just talking about defending Ukraine from the barbaric attack they're currently facing.

 

[tsubaki]

And therein lies the problem in certain respects - we cannot make states like Russia follow treaties and international rules.

Russian policy has focused largely on co-optation and subversion. They got their man in the white house and NATO seemed under threat. They went to work on Brexit and weakened the EU through Brexit. Whilst doing this had agents releasing chemical weapons on UK soil but they have ramped there play up by invading a sovereign European nation. And this deterrent is clearly not preventing war, it is preventing us from effectively helping a desperate people under threat of annihilation.

Putin is looking at our rules and fears as handcuffs and clearly thinks we are weak. As you say it is harsh but this is the reality that we face. An emboldened Putin and watching Xi are most definitely looking to change the world order, and this is a pivotal moment in the worlds direction of travel, IMO.

I do agree with that, but I think a lot of Russian action here has been almost certainly designed to make it clear the rules based order has never existed, that the US and it’s allies have repeatedly broken them (and they are not wrong to say that).

If we are looking to call their bluff then I think going down the rules based route is the best way to do it - frame it as a ceasefire because of the potential impact on food stocks globally for example, say that if there is a peace with redrawing of borders that the countries who need Ukrainian food / other resources can have a stake in that preserving the peace. Anything that makes them (Russia) look threatening to smaller nations.

Getting involved in ever-increasing sanctions whilst hoarding food / profiting from food prices is only going to harm us and strengthen them.

 

[efcforever]

Ah, the old "just give Hitler Sudetenland" play...

Worked a treat!

 

[Simon Buttle]

Stuff on Sky saying that the Mayor of Melitopol has been kidnapped by the Russians

 

[Martin Alvito]

And therein lies the problem in certain respects - we cannot make states like Russia follow treaties and international rules.

Russian policy has focused largely on co-optation and subversion. They got their man in the white house and NATO seemed under threat. They went to work on Brexit and weakened the EU through Brexit. Whilst doing this had agents releasing chemical weapons on UK soil but they have ramped there play up by invading a sovereign European nation. And this deterrent is clearly not preventing war, it is preventing us from effectively helping a desperate people under threat of annihilation.

Putin is looking at our rules and fears as handcuffs and clearly thinks we are weak. As you say it is harsh but this is the reality that we face. An emboldened Putin and watching Xi are most definitely looking to change the world order, and this is a pivotal moment in the worlds direction of travel, IMO.

I agree with most everything you have to say. I suspect that the only divergence is my opinion about what to do about it.

We can't go back and undo stupidity like letting Putin poison his adversaries and collectively shrugging. We can draw a line in the sand, say "no more", and defend that line. We have made that line harder to defend, in that our actions to date render its credibility questionable.

We should stake it out anyway. We should say, "Look, we're human. We [REDACTED] it up. You know human beings, too. You know that we tend not to do what we should until our backs are against the wall. Well, here we are."

That requires a humility that generally isn't present in public discourse. I think it's a believable position anyway, precisely because it is human.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Ukraine: how the global fertiliser shortage is going to affect food

Food prices already rose sharply during the pandemic, and they’re only going higher.

theconversation.com