Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Clark Griswold]

You're new here, right?
 
 
 
Not being a dcik.  Some bold ideas.  But then there's DC which is the opposite.

I know it’s out of character with our recent record but light a candle

We have no choice really unless we wish to be reduced to some sort of second tier power

If not us who? Who stands against the aggressive and strong for those who are to be their victims? Our power is not infinite but neither are our responsibilities, we can stand up to the encroaching powers


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

I think in all likelihood the deployment of US troops to Ukraine would be an explainable reason for the political leadership in NATO to walk away from the article 5 commitments.

They didn’t start going after AQ when the Cole was bombed, they did it because we took the hit on home turf with no provocation.

Losing a chunk of 2nd Stryker deployed out of Rose Barracks across borders into Ukraine isn’t going to motivate the Germans to suddenly commit their paltry forces to avenge us. It’s going to give them the logic they need to tell their populations “this isn’t our war.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[di1630]

Remember when you are talking about NATO military actions, you are really referring to US military actions.

NATO is a joke. I spent ~5 years seeing that anything not US led in NATO was essentially a worthless only-for-show effort.

Hell, usually NATO actually gets in the way of decent COAs

[SurelySerious]

To NATO is to water down and encumber with needless bureaucratic indecision in such a way as to paralyze any meaningful progress or action.

[Prozac]

NATO’s always been as much about keeping the Germans under our thumb as it has been about deterring Soviet/Russian aggression. Don’t underestimate the good things that come from keeping virtually all of Europe under one military alliance. A peaceful Western (and now Eastern) Europe is a valid foreign policy goal for the United States and is well worth the money and effort of the last seven decades. I’d even go so far as to argue that a Europe that depends on us for defense is a GOOD thing for the United States. It allows us to continue to dictate the western world order. 

[fire4effect]

On 11/30/2021 at 2:59 PM, pawnman said:

Russia is mastering the art of pressuring their adversaries without firing a shot. 

https://atthewatersedge.org/2021/11/23/the-border-crisis-is-just-the-beginning/

This sure sounds a lot like Europe in the late 30s. That said I would venture to say being a much bigger interconnected global economy today has helped keep some past conflicts from getting completely out of hand. The price everyone on all sides would pay would be high. Not to mention the nuclear deterrent. Unfortunately the fact this is being debated to the extent it is shows how unpredictable the situation is and how a miscalculation by either side could cause it to spiral out of control.

[Majestik Møøse]

Exiting NATO is a terrible idea. I want ACGU on my side first, then the rest of NATO shortly after. I sure as hell don’t want China seizing more influence there.

[Bigred]

1 hour ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Exiting NATO is a terrible idea. I want ACGU on my side first, then the rest of NATO shortly after. I sure as hell don’t want China seizing more influence there.

In todays climate that’s the key point. Look at what China is trying to (and somewhat accomplishing) in Africa. If the US was to exit NATO you can guarantee that the Chinese would be all over it trying to push their influence. 

[di1630]

We should stay in NATO, let’s just not confuse it with some awesome military alliance. It’s a bureaucratic means to influence where 90% of the combat capability is provided by one member.

[Clark Griswold]

Some open source on the Russian deployment to the Ukrainian border

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-25/mud-could-help-decide-timing-of-any-russia-move-against-ukraine

100k there now, probably need another 100k there with gear and vehicles

Rhetorical questions:

Could they move 100k in a month from other theaters in say 4-5 days to reinforce an invasion?
Could their airborne corps affect an operation to seize an objective (city, airport, port, etc…) to create an outsized effect during Days 1/2 of an attack to put the Ukrainians on their heels?
Long range fires - could they destroy the Ukrainian Air Force and IADS on Night 1/2?

What does the world do after a successful invasion? Assuming eastern Ukraine (all territory east of the Dneiper River) is seized?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Could they move 100k in a month from other theaters in say 4-5 days to reinforce an invasion?
Could their airborne corps affect an operation to seize an objective (city, airport, port, etc…) to create an outsized effect during Days 1/2 of an attack to put the Ukrainians on their heels?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Better question.

1. Could we…?

2. How many times could we do that or start doing that before we are spent?


I don’t know if it’s suddenly forgotten but we got to “show the world” our unquestioned airlift superiority in the “greatest single airlift operation in history.”

What we really showed to anybody smart is we just spent a shit load of flight hours and build a hell of a backlog MX on the fleet of airplanes that takes time to repay. Anybody with two brain cells knows our world wide rapid response is anchored around our airlift. How many of the great power foes would be smart enough to realize they can chose to mobilize and force our prudent mass movements only to then easily stand down and let us with a few movements through slow attrition lose our ability or at least severely limit it.

There is a reason things like aircraft slants and readiness exercises are supposed to be closely held in secret.

I’ll be honest the next massive typhoon, earthquake, volcano that comes down on some 3rd world shithole, we park the grey tails and pay fedex/Kallita/etc to haul it and preserve our readiness over trying to win the world opinion race by writing the biggest check.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Better question.
1. Could we…?
2. How many times could we do that or start doing that before we are spent?
I don’t know if it’s suddenly forgotten but we got to “show the world” our unquestioned airlift superiority in the “greatest single airlift operation in history.”
What we really showed to anybody smart is we just spent a shit load of flight hours and build a hell of a backlog MX on the fleet of airplanes that takes time to repay. Anybody with two brain cells knows our world wide rapid response is anchored around our airlift. How many of the great power foes would be smart enough to realize they can chose to mobilize and force our prudent mass movements only to then easily stand down and let us with a few movements through slow attrition lose our ability or at least severely limit it.
There is a reason things like aircraft slants and readiness exercises are supposed to be closely held in secret.
I’ll be honest the next massive typhoon, earthquake, volcano that comes down on some 3rd world shithole, we park the grey tails and pay fedex/Kallita/etc to haul it and preserve our readiness over trying to win the world opinion race by writing the biggest check.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup, they wear us out with feints and bluffs then when winded they just push us over.  

I'm sure the brain trusts of Russia/China have considered this and the just slight backup of maritime delivery right now, frankly I'm kind of amazed they haven't moved yet, if they ever wanted to or if I were their advisor I'd tell them to.

My answer to that is the grim realization that Cold War 2.0 is in full swing, it's time to face that and make the call whether or not to commit the USA plus reliable allies to long term strategic and conventional deterrence and denial military operations with associated economic, diplomatic and cultural efforts to isolate the aggressive autocracies and their proxies scattered around the world.  The practical first step to that in relation to the crisis du jour we are discussing, potential Russian aggression, is a sizeable long term US led military mission to the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine.

Pre-positioning and overseas basing while expensive solves some of the logistical problems you mentioned, demonstrates resolve, hopefully deters aggression and imposes cost on our enemies.

But to your point, yes to using Commercial Lift versus military airlift when possible.

[DirkDiggler]

55 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Yup, they wear us out with feints and bluffs then when winded they just push us over.  

I'm sure the brain trusts of Russia/China have considered this and the just slight backup of maritime delivery right now, frankly I'm kind of amazed they haven't moved yet, if they ever wanted to or if I were their advisor I'd tell them to.

My answer to that is the grim realization that Cold War 2.0 is in full swing, it's time to face that and make the call whether or not to commit the USA plus reliable allies to long term strategic and conventional deterrence and denial military operations with associated economic, diplomatic and cultural efforts to isolate the aggressive autocracies and their proxies scattered around the world.  The practical first step to that in relation to the crisis du jour we are discussing, potential Russian aggression, is a sizeable long term US led military mission to the Baltics, Poland and Ukraine.

Pre-positioning and overseas basing while expensive solves some of the logistical problems you mentioned, demonstrates resolve, hopefully deters aggression and imposes cost on our enemies.

But to your point, yes to using Commercial Lift versus military airlift when possible.

Would you be willing to spend a significant chunk of the 50K servicemembers lives that you propose to send to Ukraine?  Including mine?  Honestly asking.  What's your threshold in lives spent/material used to stop Russian aggression?

  If it helps, I'm honestly leaning towards us taking a stand on this.  A phenomenal Estonian officer friend of mine is right on the frontlines of this nonsense.  The last time I wished him a happy birthday, he said it would be much more cheerful if more Americans were there (he actually gets American sarcasm), and said he had a great birthday mining bridges and stockpiling weapons in the woods in case Mr. Putin came calling (cause that's actually what he's been doing lately).  I'd go stand next to him in a heartbeat.  I seriously would, despite the horrid consequences of a full on clash with Russia.  If it we reduce to emotional tribalism and the US says the Ukrainians are part of my tribe, I'm all for standing up to and if necessary stomping the the Russians the fuck out.  

[HeloDude]

Biden will do nothing (nothing meaningful) if/when Putin invades…same as when China invades Taiwan.

To be fair, it’s one of the few things I would be in agreement with Biden.

[Clark Griswold]

22 hours ago, DirkDiggler said:

Would you be willing to spend a significant chunk of the 50K service members lives that you propose to send to Ukraine?  Including mine?  Honestly asking.  What's your threshold in lives spent/material used to stop Russian aggression?

  If it helps, I'm honestly leaning towards us taking a stand on this.  A phenomenal Estonian officer friend of mine is right on the frontlines of this nonsense.  The last time I wished him a happy birthday, he said it would be much more cheerful if more Americans were there (he actually gets American sarcasm), and said he had a great birthday mining bridges and stockpiling weapons in the woods in case Mr. Putin came calling (cause that's actually what he's been doing lately).  I'd go stand next to him in a heartbeat.  I seriously would, despite the horrid consequences of a full on clash with Russia.  If it we reduce to emotional tribalism and the US says the Ukrainians are part of my tribe, I'm all for standing up to and if necessary stomping the the Russians the fuck out.  

I don't have an answer to those questions you asked, I'm not sure that there is a quantifiable number of casualties I or anyone else could say in terms of risk you could determine that would sway whether or not it is a mission we should do based on that percentage or risk.  I think the threshold is whether you are willing to take combat casualties or not, if I were the POTUS making the call i would be willing to risk American lives for this mission, not brazenly, stupidly or carelessly but with the highest seriousness that this is America risking blood and treasure for the principle of a world not ruled only by force and self-interest. 

I'm not naive and nor foolish to think evil will ever be completely vanquished nor blind to the fact that our opponents are not necessarily evil or completely bad, they have their reasons for pushing their agendas the way that we do but from our perspective that's not enough to justify doing what they want to the way they want to do it.  

In this life and on this world, nations fight when there is no other way to solve our differences.  I'm not ever gonna think they have the right to invade and take Ukraine, there is no cajoling or rationalization to persuade me of that, we have the power to stop them and the fight there is important to maintaining the balance between powers and the systems & relationships we have established that have generally been beneficial to the world.

But on that happy note I found this podcast on the subject worth the time on my commute:

https://mwi.usma.edu/mwi-podcast-a-looming-showdown-over-ukraine/

Realistic assessment of the situation I fear.

[Prozac]

There are other ways to thwart Russian aggression aside from committing American combat troops. I’’m sure the Ukrainians could become quite adept at using Apaches, Abrams’, F-16s, and any number of Western weapons platforms. US/NATO intelligence would also be a force multiplier. So would covert cyber ops/information warfare. We can make things pretty complicated for Putin without fighting him directly. 

[Majestik Møøse]

That really depends on what the Ukrainians think. In most of our unwinnable wars, the locals didn’t seem to care who their leaders were. Does the average Ukrainian think their life would be better or worse under Putin? 

[08Dawg]

In my mind, this issue really boils down to where the country is right now.  I don't think we've ever been as divided and bitter as we are right now, and it's for multiple reasons.  Party politics is one reason...twenty years of war is another.  Even if the president decided to commit to military action, going force on force with Russia or China is a far different animal than counter insurgency ops along the Euphrates.  I just do not think the American people have any appetite for seeing young Americans coming home in body bags, likely by the tens of thousands, fighting for a country that most people probably can't find a map and that I would argue, does not come across as beneficial to us. 

[Negatory]

18 minutes ago, 08Dawg said:

In my mind, this issue really boils down to where the country is right now.  I don't think we've ever been as divided and bitter as we are right now, and it's for multiple reasons.  Party politics is one reason...twenty years of war is another.  Even if the president decided to commit to military action, going force on force with Russia or China is a far different animal than counter insurgency ops along the Euphrates.  I just do not think the American people have any appetite for seeing young Americans coming home in body bags, likely by the tens of thousands, fighting for a country that most people probably can't find a map and that I would argue, does not come across as beneficial to us. 

Yeah. When you put it that way, f$&% that. I’m not interested in being a pawn in another failed war like Vietnam.

At the same time, if we don’t use our military for things like this, it begs the question as to what’s the point of even having the military we have? Do we only exist to police Iran/N Korea/etc?

[Prozac]

8 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

That really depends on what the Ukrainians think. In most of our unwinnable wars, the locals didn’t seem to care who their leaders were. Does the average Ukrainian think their life would be better or worse under Putin? 

Unfortunately, many of us see the world through sand colored glasses as we’ve spent our entire careers in the Middle East. A nascent democracy & modern European economy is a very different animal from a stone aged loose collection of villages. There is a very recent history of political movements in Ukraine that suggests that anyone there who is not of Russian descent absolutely does not want to see a Ukraine ruled by Russia. The current government wants very badly to be a full NATO member for exactly that reason. Ukraine also sits in a highly strategic geographical position and having it as a strong ally would give the US and Western Europe significantly more leverage in the entire Black Sea region. 

[DirkDiggler]

https://apple.news/AuHOBXX0PTayOagAYVqaS8w
 

Interesting article on interpreting Putin’s view on Ukrainian sovereignty 

[SurelySerious]

https://apple.news/AuHOBXX0PTayOagAYVqaS8w
 
Interesting article on interpreting Putin’s view on Ukrainian sovereignty 

Oh definitely. He’s on the record as claiming that the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union. Ukraine was “gifted” Crimea…so he took it back. [it’s a gift , Todd]

He 100% still views Russian greatness as a return to the Soviet era poise, and in that world view, Ukraine is just a Russian extension.

[Lawman]

Oh definitely. He’s on the record as claiming that the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the breakup of the Soviet Union. Ukraine was “gifted” Crimea…so he took it back. [it’s a gift , Todd]

He 100% still views Russian greatness as a return to the Soviet era poise, and in that world view, Ukraine is just a Russian extension.

This is a guy who was in command of a significant organization in Eastern Germany as the wall came down.

He’s on record demanding the military commander in East Berlin use force to put down the groups reunifying the country and was told by the military commander “yeah you’re on your own.”

Unfortunately we (Americans) view the guy through meme source only and really think it’s just some shirtless bald dude riding bears and swilling vodka while he runs a broke down superpower. He’s probably one of the most intelligent leaders on the planet, and anybody in the political sphere who recognizes that gets lambasted either as calling up old Reagan policy (Romney) or being in love with the guy (Trump).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kaputt]

[Swizzle]