Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Best-22]

6 hours ago, FLEA said:

You misread my take and the situation very severely. I agree Putin overstepped with Ukraine. I'm not backing his decision. Im saying this could have been solved with diplomacy as recently as 3 weeks ago and nobody was interested in doing that. Putin handed us a letter and told us want would prevent his action and we completely dismissed it. Now I'm not saying just cave to all of his dands but certainly some of them were entertainable. Everyone thought Putin was bluffing, and he wasn't. I dont think he was justified but I think this was preventable. Putin didn't miscalculate, the vast majority of Intel shows he expected sanctions and started hardening his economy for it. We miscalculated. When you're talking about the world's largest nuclear power and the lives of 10s of millions of civilians, you do not get to ride on a pass of " 'Merica, yeah." You need to be a responsible player. Our interests is the lives of our citizens, that certainly becomes more important to me than Ukranian lives or freedoms any day. But there are far to many people on here that seem ready to just jump straight to war not believing Putin will go tooth an nail on this. You already miscalculated once. Why are you so sure you won't do it again? 

Fixed this for you:

 

You misread my take and the situation very severely. I agree Putin overstepped with Ukraine. I'm not backing his decision. Im saying this could have been solved with diplomacy as recently as 3 weeks ago and Putin wasn't interested in doing that. We handed Putin a letter and told him what would prevent the sanctions, and he completely dismissed it. Now I'm not saying just cave to all of our demands, but certainly some of them were entertainable. Everyone thought we were bluffing, and we weren't. I dont think he was justified and I think this was preventable. The west didn't miscalculate, the vast majority of Intel shows he expected to quickly roll over Ukraine and be done before the sanctions really started to hurt. He miscalculated. When you're talking about the world's largest nuclear power and the lives of 10s of millions of civilians, you do not get to ride on a pass of "Russia feels threatened" You need to be a responsible player. Our interest is the lives of our citizens, that certainly becomes more important to me than Ukranian lives or freedoms any day. But there are far to many people on here that seem ready to just jump straight to appeasement believing Putin will stop if we just give him this one more thing. You already miscalculated once. Why are you so sure you won't do it again? 

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

Not a relevant historical comparison

A country seizing parts of a neighboring country while governments with the power to stop it say things like "its not our concern" and "we don't want to start a bigger war" certainly seems analogous to me.

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, Best-22 said:

1. Quibbling 

2. Haze yourself. 

Great arguments!

we should definitely follow you into WW3! America!

[BashiChuni]

31 minutes ago, pawnman said:

A country seizing parts of a neighboring country while governments with the power to stop it say things like "its not our concern" and "we don't want to start a bigger war" certainly seems analogous to me.

Comparing hitler to Putin shows how lacking your knowledge on the situation is. 2022 Russia is not 1930s Germany. 
 

if you think Putin has ambitions to conquer all of Europe then we simply cannot have a debate. 
 

and yes, we do not want to start a war over Ukraine. No one cared about Ukrainian until a few weeks ago, and suddenly everyone is foaming at the mouth to take on the Russian bear. Your emotions are being manipulated to enter a colossal strategic mistake. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by BashiChuni

[pawnman]

9 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

Comparing hitler to Putin shows how lacking your knowledge on the situation is. 2022 Russia is not 1930s Germany. 
 

if you think Putin has ambitions to conquer all of Europe then we simply cannot have a debate. 

I definitely think he will take as much as he can get away with. Do I think he's gonna start a war with NATO by invading a member country? Seems unlikely. But I can definitely see him trying to pick off Moldova or Finland.

And in response to your edit: we did care about Ukraine, otherwise we wouldn't have been considering them for NATO membership. And I think it perfectly rational to oppose a country like Russia trying to just take over a country by force.  

Maybe you're content to cede US global leadership to any country willing to commit to military action against their neighbors. I'm not.

Edited March 4, 2022 by pawnman

[BashiChuni]

1 minute ago, pawnman said:

I definitely think he will take as much as he can get away with. Do I think he's gonna start a war with NATO by invading a member country? Seems unlikely. But I can definitely see him trying to pick off Moldova or Finland.

And if he does then we have a different calculus. But for now based on what he has said and done we do not get involved. And we try to extinguish the flames and passions of war. 

[pawnman]

Just now, BashiChuni said:

And if he does then we have a different calculus. But for now based on what he has said and done we do not get involved. And we try to extinguish the flames and passions of war. 

Why would Moldova change your calculus? Not a NATO country. Why would Finland change your calculus? Not a NATO country.

Or is your assertion that only Ukraine is so useless and backwater as to not warrant a response? AFTER, may I remind you, signed security agreements with the US in exchange for their nukes.

If this is what a US security agreement buys a country, we're at a real disadvantage in any diplomatic efforts to counter China or Russia in the future.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Anybody feel like discussing how this whole thing could’ve been avoided if only Putin had considered our Western perspective and not just thought with his Eastern one? Maybe there are some tweets on the subject?

It’s perfectly fine to acknowledge there are 2+ perspectives in every conflict. To whatever degree one might understand the other, the fact remains that whoever decides to take up arms is more at fault for upsetting peace and stability.

If I’m reading some of these opinions correctly, they’re saying that just because Russia is wrong to have invaded Ukraine that doesn’t relieve the West of culpability. That must be true since here we are, but the problem with the next step of identifying what we could’ve/should’ve done differently is it forces us to prove a negative. It is not a fact that not expanding NATO/disbanding NATO/losing the Cold War/not entering WW2/etc. would have resulted in a more peaceful world today, especially if the person responding to these moves may or may have not been a rational actor. It may be that Russia was going to retake Eastern Europe no matter what and under whatever pretext was most convenient. We’ll never know, and just because Putin’s said something on the topic carries little water given his loose relationship with the truth.

So while I encourage introspection to identify specific steps we could’ve taken to help avoid catastrophe, unwinding 30 years of the new world order and all the national interests that we have made concrete gains on is a bridge too far for me.

[BashiChuni]

Ok they never had nukes first of all. Those were always controlled by Moscow. Common misconception. And used skillfully by the Ukrainians at the time to get leverage. That security agreement isn’t what you think. 
 

it changes the calculus if he continues to show aggression into other countries that do not have the same strategic red line that Ukraine has for him. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by BashiChuni

[BashiChuni]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Anybody feel like discussing how this whole thing could’ve been avoided if only Putin had considered our Western perspective and not just thought with his Eastern one? Maybe there are some tweets on the subject?

It’s perfectly fine to acknowledge there are 2+ perspectives in every conflict. To whatever degree one might understand the other, the fact remains that whoever decides to take up arms is more at fault for upsetting peace and stability.

If I’m reading some of these opinions correctly, they’re saying that just because Russia is wrong to have invaded Ukraine that doesn’t relieve the West of culpability. That must be true since here we are, but the problem with the next step of identifying what we could’ve/should’ve done differently is it forces us to prove a negative. It is not a fact that not expanding NATO/disbanding NATO/losing the Cold War/not entering WW2/etc. would have resulted in a more peaceful world today, especially if the person responding to these moves may or may have not been a rational actor. It may be that Russia was going to retake Eastern Europe no matter what and under whatever pretext was most convenient. We’ll never know, and just because Putin’s said something on the topic carries little water given his loose relationship with the truth.

So while I encourage introspection to identify specific steps we could’ve taken to help avoid catastrophe, unwinding 30 years of the new world order and all the national interests that we have made concrete gains on is a bridge too far for me.

Agree with some of this. But it’s not just understanding HOW we got here, it’s understanding how NOT to get to WW3. 
 

I think we all agree that’s a bad thing. To not get a full war between nuclear powers, it’s in our best interests to know what actions we take that piss off our adversary. And if you want to piss your adversary off, know what the consequences are. 

the problem is you all are REACTING to Putin and not anticipating his next moves or motives based on what HIS security goals are  

in this case the consequences of continuing to poke Putin COULD be WW3. Just be aware and ready to fight it if that’s acceptable to how you see the geopolitical landscape. 
 

given the horrendous US foreign policy blunders since the 1950s I don’t have a lot of confidence in how we will solve this. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by BashiChuni

[goingkinetic]

You don't think the Ukrainians were smart enough to crack the codes of the nukes sitting in the Ukraine? We didn't guarantee that we'd come to their defense during the Minsk accords, but it still makes our leader of the free world standing highly questionable.

[BashiChuni]

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Anybody feel like discussing how this whole thing could’ve been avoided if only Putin had considered our Western perspective and not just thought with his Eastern one? Maybe there are some tweets on the subject?

If I’m reading some of these opinions correctly, they’re saying that just because Russia is wrong to have invaded Ukraine that doesn’t relieve the West of culpability. 

I think he DEFINITELY considered our western perspective. And he concluded that NATO/the west will be mad at his invasion but not get involved directly. And he’s been proven correct. 
 

and I wouldn’t say we are “culpable”, it’s still Putin’s fault for doing this. I’m saying the narrative that Putin is “crazy and illogical” is not correct. Understanding the WHY behind his actions are critical. And he does have some legitimate reasons for the actions he is taking (in his mind). There are things we could have done as the west to cool things down. 

[BashiChuni]

12 minutes ago, goingkinetic said:

You don't think the Ukrainians were smart enough to crack the codes of the nukes sitting in the Ukraine? We didn't guarantee that we'd come to their defense during the Minsk accords, but it still makes our leader of the free world standing highly questionable.

Lol. No. They had zero control over those nukes. To say otherwise is just not correct. 

why should we guarantee we will defend them? We do not care about Ukraine. Period. it’s not a vital national security concern to the United States, but it is to Russia  

if we left our nukes in turkey would the Turks have the ability to use them? 

Edited March 4, 2022 by BashiChuni

[goingkinetic]

Really were you there in the silos with the Spetznatz watching the nukes? You're making a blanket statement upon which you have no basis to claim. 

If we left nukes anywhere without US eyes on them 3 years I'm betting they could figure it out. Or at least remove the weapons grade plutonium and make their on bomb. As Flea said, anyone can figure out how to build a bomb these days. History lesson fall of the Soviet Union 1991, Minsk accords 1994. How exactly did the soviets have eyes on for 3 years?

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

if you think Putin has ambitions to conquer all of Europe then we simply cannot have a debate.

"Foundations of Geopolitics," is a textbook in the Russian military's Academy of the General Staff (their senior staff college). It advocates for a Eurasian empire ruled by Russia. Here's a few highlights:

• Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad Oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term "Moscow–Berlin axis".
• The United Kingdom, merely described as an "extraterritorial floating base of the U.S.", should be cut off from Europe.
• Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.
• Georgia should be dismembered. Abkhazia and "United Ossetia" (which includes Georgia's South Ossetia) will be incorporated into Russia. Georgia's independent policies are unacceptable.
• Russia needs to create "geopolitical shocks" within Turkey. These can be achieved by employing Kurds, Armenians and other minorities.
• Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke "Afro-American racists". Russia should "introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics".

I'd say they're being quite successful with a lot of their goals over the last couples years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

[FLEA]

2 hours ago, goingkinetic said:

I’ve been giving historical examples to justify my argument. Which you dismiss as “not relevant”. I would argue thats typical academic hubris because it might derail your argument. Youre using youtube videos of academics to justify your own non-historical viewpoint. Its like a bunch of professors sitting in a circle smelling their own farts and telling each other how wonderful they are.

Academics won WW2. Yes, Academics. Turing, Einstein, etc.... Academics and industry. Get something straight, US military never won a war. US industry backed by academia won every one from the 20th century on. 

 

2 hours ago, Best-22 said:

Fixed this for you:

 

You misread my take and the situation very severely. I agree Putin overstepped with Ukraine. I'm not backing his decision. Im saying this could have been solved with diplomacy as recently as 3 weeks ago and Putin wasn't interested in doing that. We handed Putin a letter and told him what would prevent the sanctions, and he completely dismissed it. Now I'm not saying just cave to all of our demands, but certainly some of them were entertainable. Everyone thought we were bluffing, and we weren't. I dont think he was justified and I think this was preventable. The west didn't miscalculate, the vast majority of Intel shows he expected to quickly roll over Ukraine and be done before the sanctions really started to hurt. He miscalculated. When you're talking about the world's largest nuclear power and the lives of 10s of millions of civilians, you do not get to ride on a pass of "Russia feels threatened" You need to be a responsible player. Our interest is the lives of our citizens, that certainly becomes more important to me than Ukranian lives or freedoms any day. But there are far to many people on here that seem ready to just jump straight to appeasement believing Putin will stop if we just give him this one more thing. You already miscalculated once. Why are you so sure you won't do it again? 

Your interest isn't the lives of our citizens though. You have argued at every corner your interest is Ukranian freedom and you are willing to sacrifice our own country to a pyre to insure it. So for fuck yourself. 

[SurelySerious]

Can you elaborate how this is “bull shit”?
im curious how that can be the case when Putin has called NATO expansion eastward to his border “unacceptable”
how in the world is that bullshit? He is ing telling you plain as day. 
 

It doesn’t mean it’s a sentiment we have to validate as acceptable in the world forum. That’s the part that YOU don’t get.

[goingkinetic]

So the Battle of Britain was won by academics and British industry because the Spitfires were so much superior to the ME-109. That must be it, those pilots fighting for the sovereign British empire had no part in it.

[goingkinetic]

Oh wait, the British almost lost the Battle of Britain because they were running out of pilots

 

[FLEA]

6 minutes ago, goingkinetic said:

So the Battle of Britain was won by academics and British industry because the Spitfires were so much superior to the ME-109. That must be it, those pilots fighting for the sovereign British empire had no part in it.

The battle of Britain, was a battle....  The war was literally won by the US capability to outproduce and replace British losses in a 3 year period faster than Germany could destroy them. 

to out it in perspective, US and UK commanders could afford to take risker actions because the loss of resources was a non issue to them. 

Edited March 4, 2022 by FLEA

[goingkinetic]

The war would have been over if the Germans had gained and maintained air superiority. In addition, the British industrial capacity was below the Germans at the time. Newsflash, sometimes the outcomes of battles end wars. Aka Hastings 1066.

[hockeydork]

I'm sorry but anybody who thinks this was about NATO getting close to his boder needs to have their heads checked. We could have disolved NATO 10 years ago, he'd still have invaded. 

Go watch Star Wars, it will tell you everything you need to know. This is about power. My neighbour is from Russia and she said that Putin's Russia will not be happy till the world recognizes their greatness and the empire is restored. They are embarrassed that they don't have their empire anymore, they have never gotten over it. 

In summary:

* Putin is a mega narcissist, he wants to restore Russia into a super power and empire. Anybody who believes a word that comes out of his mouth that is to the contrary, get your head checked. Just look how competitive he is. He cannot stand that the USA is where it is compared to the shell of the USSR he presides over.

*He was going to invade, NATO or not. He is not dumb, he is a patient and calculating man. We could have guaranteed no NATO. Hed still be trying to reclaim Ukraine. Fact. 

*If he wasn't limited by his own lifespan, he'd 100 percent try and march all the way through Europe, maybe not at once, but little bites at a time. What his successor will do is anybody's guess. 

* He guessed right on the west not wanting to engage directly with him him. He guessed wrong on our willingness to reunite and isolate him and bleed his economy for all the Ukrainian's hes killed, even if it hurts ourselves in the process. He was banking on the world not caring about dead Ukranians. He's actually affirmed that NATO needs to exist, and the Europe needs to rearm itself, which Trump did have right IIRC.

*He, like most emperors before him, gives zero shit about his own people. Russia is like home ownership. He wants the grandest home, the bigger the better. But it's HIS Russian empire. Calling him a president is about as accurate as saying Russia has freedom of the press. He is a Czar in presidential clothing, what he wants goes.

If Ukraine is restored to mother Russia, the same song and dance will come out in 10 years about say Poland. It's too close to his border, he'll slowly use information warfare to attempt to internally fracture Poland so that he can get it.

[FLEA]

Just now, goingkinetic said:

The war would have been over if the Germans had gained and maintained air superiority. In addition, the British industrial capacity was below the Germans at the time. Newsflash, sometimes the outcomes of battles end wars. Aka Hastings 1066.

Look I know this is hard for you to fathom but at the end of the day, 1 pilot and 1 plane is not winning a war. A war is a statewide effort. That's what total war is, it's the whole country unifying as one apparatus to win. US industry and academia definitely won the war for us. There are not many serious thinkers who think otherwise. It was the first time in history we saw the advantage of literally just being able to throw money on a fire until the fire went out. It doesn't mean the people that actually fought aren't heroes or were valuable, but the strategy the US used to win WW2, and literally every conflict we've planned for after that, are heavily reliant on the capability to gen up industry to reconstitute losses. Why do you think we folded on the F-15EX? Did we really need it? Or did we recognize and industrial advantage to Boeing keeping additional fighter production lines open? 

Academia fell out in Vietnam but came back after GWOT. Prior to Vietnam you use to no kidding be able to major in Military Science and Strategy at most US universities. The war/defense department were largely staffed by civilians and policy makers would get degrees in it. The military would pull key academics from universities to solve hard problems and the imbed them with industry to drive technological solutions. 

This is the American way of war man. This is how we fight. Money and technology. I'm not sure how else I can explain it to you. 

 

 

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

I'm sorry but anybody who thinks this was about NATO getting close to his boder needs to have their heads checked. We could have disolved NATO 10 years ago, he'd still have invaded. 

Go watch Star Wars, it will tell you everything you need to know. This is about power. My neighbour is from Russia and she said that Putin's Russia will not be happy till the world recognizes their greatness and the empire is restored. They are embarrassed that they don't have their empire anymore, they have never gotten over it. 

In summary:

* Putin is a mega narcissist, he wants to restore Russia into a super power and empire. Anybody who believes a word that comes out of his mouth that is to the contrary, get your head checked. Just look how competitive he is. He cannot stand that the USA is where it is compared to the shell of the USSR he presides over.

*He was going to invade, NATO or not. He is not dumb, he is a patient and calculating man. We could have guaranteed no NATO. Hed still be trying to reclaim Ukraine. Fact. 

*If he wasn't limited by his own lifespan, he'd 100 percent try and march all the way through Europe, maybe not at once, but little bites at a time. What his successor will do is anybody's guess. 

* He guessed right on the west not wanting to engage directly with him him. He guessed wrong on our willingness to reunite and isolate him and bleed his economy for all the Ukrainian's hes killed, even if it hurts ourselves in the process. He was banking on the world not caring about dead Ukranians. He's actually affirmed that NATO needs to exist, and the Europe needs to rearm itself, which Trump did have right IIRC.

*He, like most emperors before him, gives zero shit about his own people. Russia is like home ownership. He wants the grandest home, the bigger the better. But it's HIS Russian empire. Calling him a president is about as accurate as saying Russia has freedom of the press. He is a Czar in presidential clothing, what he wants goes.

If Ukraine is restored to mother Russia, the same song and dance will come out in 10 years about say Poland. It's too close to his border, he'll slowly use information warfare to attempt to internally fracture Poland so that he can get it.

You made a bunch of claims with zero evidence so I'm just going to ignore them as your poorly informed opinions. 

[hockeydork]

25 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Your interest isn't the lives of our citizens though. You have argued at every corner your interest is Ukranian freedom and you are willing to sacrifice our own country to a pyre to insure it. So for yourself. 

So whats your plan to fix all of this, just curious. Make it clear that any country with nukes can go invade and take what they want? In that case let's go get Cuba, it's too close to our borders. We feel threatened.