Current Affairs Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bruce Wayne said:
So are you saying that Putin's response will be different if NATO defends against a Russian invasion of Estonia than it would be if NATO defends against a Russian invasion of Ukraine? Because I don't mind saying, if I were one of the Baltic states I'd be scared witless that when push comes to shove this lack of gumption would quite merrily extend to them as well and NATO's "obligation" would be fulfilled by sending a few guns and missiles and saying "good luck chaps", we can't defend your little tiddly country because it would automatically mean hundreds of thousands of casualties in our countries (apparently).
Click to expand...
Actually, perhaps NATO's response to any attack to the Baltic states might well be the same. Would a US president go to war over Estonia if it risked US citizens on US soil for example? I guess not.

Let's hope we never find out, especially as there is no indication to suggest that this is on the cards.
 
Martin Alvito said:
I don't think you're understanding the purpose of collective security and the alliance, from NATO's perspective. The point of the alliance is to deter an attack on the membership. The alliance goes to war collectively after an attack on an ally because, if it doesn't, it becomes extremely difficult to deter further aggression against its members. The situation then reverts to 1930s Europe with Hitler picking off neighbors one by one.

The objective of the alliance is to minimize the likelihood of those hundreds of thousands of deaths occurring by presenting the greatest combined threat possible. It is also trying to prevent the likelihood of tens of thousands of deaths occurring in its weaker member states in the absence of the alliance.

If we intervene in Ukraine, we more or less guarantee the hundreds of thousands of deaths. Fewer Ukrainians will die. Lots more citizens of NATO countries and Russians will. Is this a good trade?


Do you think that, if we get involved, the political leadership of the NATO countries can withdraw the way Bush 41 did from Kuwait in 1991 and get away with it?

Do you think that Putin and his political leadership will not agree to, at a minimum, use WMDs against our troops if we push on Moscow? Everyone knows Saddam Hussein's fate.
Click to expand...
Firstly, plenty of countries have had alliances that were supposed to deter attack in the past. Heck, Both world wars commenced under the umbrella of alliances that were supposed to deter attacks. They were either ignored or the pledges to come to people's aid were ignored. It was only a few years ago that Republicans were openly questioning whether it's really worth their time to come to the aid of a country like Estonia.

Secondly, you're making a massive guess that hundreds of thousands of deaths would result from NATO involvement and that guess has very little to back it up. There seems little prospect of a Russian army that is struggling to invade Ukraine either being able to hold back the collective might of NATO forces, much less actually attack one of them. We're led to believe that the threat of NATO retaliation is sufficient to stop Russia from invading a NATO country, but if NATO was coming to the aid of a non-NATO ally those same forces would be unable to stop Russia killing hundreds of thousands of people. Which is it?

Thirdly, who on earth mentioned "making a push on Moscow"? This isn't about invading Russia ffs but coming to the aid of an ally that is under attack and begging us to help. Do you think Allied forces in the second war were trying to invade Germany?
 
Yarrgh said:
Actually, perhaps NATO's response to any attack to the Baltic states might well be the same. Would a US president go to war over Estonia if it risked US citizens on US soil for example? I guess not.

Let's hope we never find out, especially as there is no indication to suggest that this is on the cards.
Click to expand...
Plenty of Biden supporters justified snaking out of Afghanistan with that rhetoric "it's not our problem". Sending bombs and weapons is great because that boosts American jobs without putting American lives on the line. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that isn't how any NATO obligation would be met if a Baltic nation were invaded. We have to ask ourselves what kind of world we want to live in, as with China coming to the ascendency we're faced with the prospect of the majority of the world being run by dictators and the largest superpower being run by a dictator. Zelensky is right when he says that they're fighting for more than just Ukraine. What are "we" willing to fight for?
 
Bruce Wayne said:
Firstly, plenty of countries have had alliances that were supposed to deter attack in the past. Heck, Both world wars commenced under the umbrella of alliances that were supposed to deter attacks. They were either ignored or the pledges to come to people's aid were ignored. It was only a few years ago that Republicans were openly questioning whether it's really worth their time to come to the aid of a country like Estonia.

Secondly, you're making a massive guess that hundreds of thousands of deaths would result from NATO involvement and that guess has very little to back it up. There seems little prospect of a Russian army that is struggling to invade Ukraine either being able to hold back the collective might of NATO forces, much less actually attack one of them. We're led to believe that the threat of NATO retaliation is sufficient to stop Russia from invading a NATO country, but if NATO was coming to the aid of a non-NATO ally those same forces would be unable to stop Russia killing hundreds of thousands of people. Which is it?

Thirdly, who on earth mentioned "making a push on Moscow"? This isn't about invading Russia ffs but coming to the aid of an ally that is under attack and begging us to help. Do you think Allied forces in the second war were trying to invade Germany?
Click to expand...
Bruce, I'll tell you that the consensus among the professionals that study this stuff is that NATO would come to Estonia's aid. I would say that the present political circumstances make that overwhelmingly likely.

With respect to a military intervention, I feel very strongly that the political situation in the Western capitals would make it extremely difficult for NATO leaders to walk away from an invasion of Russia subsequent to an intervention in Ukraine. This is not a "massive guess". It is informed by previous history with respect to interventions by democratic countries. I am suggesting that, once we start tossing language like "war criminal" around, political leaders start facing massive pressure from their domestic audiences to produce an outcome.

If we crushed Russia in the field, there would be enormous demand to remove Putin and try him for war crimes. He knows this. Both he, and his political leadership, would be desperate to prevent that outcome. He might very well back up a step and start using WMDs before being crushed in the field, and hope that he could contain the situation from there.

If you're betting that Putin would be removed from within prior to that happening, I don't think that's a great bet. No two nuclear weapons states have gone to war because no one in any of those capitals wants to risk things escalating to nuclear exchange. Even if I thought the risk of some sort of WMD usage was very small, which I don't, I would still suggest that it's an unacceptable risk to take.
 


A very interesting map - no idea on the background or political views of the person creating it so can't guarantee its acceptable.

But if this is roughly accurate, one of the two narrative extremes of "Russia is weak, the army really isn't that great look at what Ukraine are doing to them Nato would destroy them haha" and "Russia is going to invade all of Eastern Europe and then us, we need to go to war NOW to prevent that" is wrong.

I'm almost certain they're holding back their proper trained army for any future Nato clash, but if they wanted to steamroll Eastern Europe they'd need Ukraine dealt with quickly and move on. It doesn't seem the will is there for that, which doesn't point towards "they're going to take over Europe".
 
Bruce Wayne said:
Plenty of Biden supporters justified snaking out of Afghanistan with that rhetoric "it's not our problem". Sending bombs and weapons is great because that boosts American jobs without putting American lives on the line. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that isn't how any NATO obligation would be met if a Baltic nation were invaded. We have to ask ourselves what kind of world we want to live in, as with China coming to the ascendency we're faced with the prospect of the majority of the world being run by dictators and the largest superpower being run by a dictator. Zelensky is right when he says that they're fighting for more than just Ukraine. What are "we" willing to fight for?
Click to expand...
Personally, I'm not willing to go to Ukraine or Russia to fight for the West's geopolitical power. Because the "we" surely involves everyone eligible for conscription in this situation.
 
efcfanwirral said:


A very interesting map - no idea on the background or political views of the person creating it so can't guarantee its acceptable.

But if this is roughly accurate, one of the two narrative extremes of "Russia is weak, the army really isn't that great look at what Ukraine are doing to them Nato would destroy them haha" and "Russia is going to invade all of Eastern Europe and then us, we need to go to war NOW to prevent that" is wrong.

I'm almost certain they're holding back their proper trained army for any future Nato clash, but if they wanted to steamroll Eastern Europe they'd need Ukraine dealt with quickly and move on. It doesn't seem the will is there for that, which doesn't point towards "they're going to take over Europe".
Click to expand...


US intelligence suggests that Russia has committed 75% of its total forces to the war in Ukraine, so no he’s not withheld his “proper army” they are already in Ukraine.
 
efcfanwirral said:


A very interesting map - no idea on the background or political views of the person creating it so can't guarantee its acceptable.

But if this is roughly accurate, one of the two narrative extremes of "Russia is weak, the army really isn't that great look at what Ukraine are doing to them Nato would destroy them haha" and "Russia is going to invade all of Eastern Europe and then us, we need to go to war NOW to prevent that" is wrong.

I'm almost certain they're holding back their proper trained army for any future Nato clash, but if they wanted to steamroll Eastern Europe they'd need Ukraine dealt with quickly and move on. It doesn't seem the will is there for that, which doesn't point towards "they're going to take over Europe".
Click to expand...

It's an interesting set of maps. The big expanses between urban areas allows both sides to portray areas under control fairly favourably is my guess.

I don't think we'll know where is under what control until we'll after the event.
 
Mutzo Nutzo said:
No…given the absolute state of his armed forces.

What he does have however are nukes, chemical weapons and the delivery mechanisms to kick off WWIII
Click to expand...

Martin Alvito said:
Which, we hope, will stay right where they are in the absence of a US/NATO intervention, because their use would dramatically increase the likelihood of such an intervention.
Click to expand...
Got to say I'm very distrustful of those in the media who push the narrative that Ukraine is the only thing holding Russia back from taking multiple other countries and ending up on our doorstep, so a no fly zone NOW is the answer. I don't feel they're acting in good faith. The idea of them having committed the majority of their forces to Ukraine doesn't at all match up with that.
 
efcfanwirral said:
Personally, I'm not willing to go to Ukraine or Russia to fight for the West's geopolitical power. Because the "we" surely involves everyone eligible for conscription in this situation.
Click to expand...
Pledging your life under the command of Johnson - what could possibly go wrong?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top