Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[pawnman]

36 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

I think it’s a terrible idea to hurt Russia’s economy and their people just because we don’t like what Putin is doing.  Mass punishment doesn’t work on me or you or anyone. Human beings hate that shit.
 

i’m not sure what specific military effect we want to achieve by turning off some grandmother‘s credit card, or what we expect Russian civilians to do, but I’m not going to chuckle at starving civilians standing in food lines. They are innocent.

So you don't want to commit the military and you don't want sanctions.

What's left, some strongly worded letters written to the Russian embassy?

[brickhistory]

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Ouch!

That'll buff out...

[arg]

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Ouch!

That's a good BMW ad.

Let's see who gets this.

[hockeydork]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

I think it’s a terrible idea to hurt Russia’s economy and their people just because we don’t like what Putin is doing.  Mass punishment doesn’t work on me or you or anyone. Human beings hate that shit.
 

i’m not sure what specific military effect we want to achieve by turning off some grandmother‘s credit card, or what we expect Russian civilians to do, but I’m not going to chuckle at starving civilians standing in food lines. They are innocent.

Meh, wanna know whats not funny? Having artillery shells landing in apartment complexes, for no reason, in a country that did jack shit to antagonize its neighbor. 

Maybe the Russian people need to go drag their government out of the Kremlin, the jig is up. Maybe Alex Ovechkin needs to sack up and say you know what, Putin, playing in the NHL is better than the KHL. I guess the Russian conscripts are innocent, since they got told to go blow shit up and kill people, half of whom probably have no idea why. Ukrainian's are sure as shit innocent, they didn't do anything wrong either. The 14 year old brainwashed jihadi in Afghanistan who picked up an RPG was innocent too. 

So its either the civilian Russian grandmother who has to choose between continuing to gobble Putin's chode of lies or getting her Visa turned off, or the Ukrainian teacher with two days military training shooting at invading Russians, wondering if he'll make it to the end of the week while his wife and kids flee to Poland. 

If the Russians starve, its their own damn fault. Better a dead Russian than a dead Ukrainian, that calculus is simple right now. Or we could send Americans to die. 

Edited March 9, 2022 by hockeydork

[brickhistory]

Clown show going on between various governments in NATO but not invoking NATO regarding sliding the Ukrainians some MiG-29s.

Poland:  We'll give you MiGs, send 'em to Ramstein, the Ukrainians pick 'em up.  In return, you give us used F-16s.

DC:  Wha???!!!

 

On a serious note, if this is some sort of a thing, where would the MiGs be based?  Inside Ukraine and they are insta-HVAs for the Russians.  Outside Ukraine and the host nation just joined the war.

So, either a clownshow or some psyop thing that, again, I'm not smart enough to deciper.

[Best-22]

I'm really hoping the planes are already in Ukraine flying missions and we're just pretending we can't figure out how to get them there. It would avoid escalation but still help the Ukrainians; plus I think we could get away with it. We've already seen the Russians attacking deserted Ukrainian bases and wasting missiles on places where IADS used to be weeks ago.. so there's clearly a weak spot in Russian real time Intel gathering. 

 

I know global geopolitics is incredibly difficult, but i also know there is a lot of really smart diplomats and strategists on our side. I choose to believe the west is the one playing 4D chess here. 

[hockeydork]

2 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Clown show going on between various governments in NATO but not invoking NATO regarding sliding the Ukrainians some MiG-29s.

Poland:  We'll give you MiGs, send 'em to Ramstein, the Ukrainians pick 'em up.  In return, you give us used F-16s.

DC:  Wha???!!!

 

On a serious note, if this is some sort of a thing, where would the MiGs be based?  Inside Ukraine and they are insta-HVAs for the Russians.  Outside Ukraine and the host nation just joined the war.

So, either a clownshow or some psyop thing that, again, I'm not smart enough to deciper.

I am def not qualified to comment how effective they would be in helping the Ukrainian war effort.  But I agree they'll get punched by cruise missiles almost instantly. I don't know what their dollar value is (any idea?), but I think that money could be spent way more effectively (food rations, more anti tank missiles, maybe a medium range SAM?). Even without their fighters/bombers, I feel if Russia wants to just level Ukraine, they have plenty of rockets and artillery to do it, and even without their Air Force I feel like they probably brought a shit ton of their own SAMs to wreck 30 Polish Migs pretty quickly. 

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

So you don't want to commit the military and you don't want sanctions.

What's left, some strongly worded letters written to the Russian embassy?

Have all the sanctions you want.  I love the ones targeting their elite.  But celebrating bread lines?  Do you think that will make people hate the dictator or hate us?

I know it’s an unpopular opinion.  But I’m uninterested in hurting civilians.  I don’t think it will be effective and I don’t think it’s a good look.  

[hockeydork]

3 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

Do you think that will make people hate the dictator or hate us?

 

They've already been taught to hate us (especially the older population). The youngins (the ones protesting on the streets in Moscow & who know how to get to free media) know whats up, they are the internal hope for changing this. It's the only way to put pressure on the Kremlin without nuclear badminton. 

[Prozac]

10 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

Have all the sanctions you want.  I love the ones targeting their elite.  But celebrating bread lines?  Do you think that will make people hate the dictator or hate us?

I know it’s an unpopular opinion.  But I’m uninterested in hurting civilians.  I don’t think it will be effective and I don’t think it’s a good look.  

Might not make them love us, but it also might make them start asking questions about what they’re seeing on state TV and why the rest of the world is reacting so harshly. I don’t think the idea is to starve the Russian people. I do think the idea is to squeeze Putin at every possible pressure point. 

[hockeydork]

18 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

Have all the sanctions you want.  I love the ones targeting their elite.  But celebrating bread lines?  Do you think that will make people hate the dictator or hate us?

I know it’s an unpopular opinion.  But I’m uninterested in hurting civilians.  I don’t think it will be effective and I don’t think it’s a good look.  

Also, noble indeed, but its not fair for you to feel like you have to carry the burden of somebody else's poor decisions. If you were commanding a nuclear sub and got word DC just got nuked by the Russians, are you going to not nuke Moscow because of the innocent civilians who literally had nothing to do with it?

Putin knew that the global response to this was possibly going to be crippling sanctions against his country. He and his enablers did it anyways. Don't carry his bad karma baggage for him. Last thing we need is for people in the west to start feeling bad for him and like they're responsible somehow for all of this. 

[tac airlifter]

11 minutes ago, Prozac said:

Might not make them love us, but it also might make them start asking questions about what they’re seeing on state TV and why the rest of the world is reacting so harshly. I don’t think the idea is to starve the Russian people. I do think the idea is to squeeze Putin at every possible pressure point. 

Copy the idea.  Has this particular method of pressuring a dictator ever worked?  It didn’t on Saddam, and it didn’t on Ghadafi.  Or Milosevek.  It’s not working in Iran or N Korea.  When you target civilians for suffering, all it really does is hurt civilians.  If you have a counter example I’m game to hear it.  

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

Copy the idea.  Has this particular method of pressuring a dictator ever worked?  It didn’t on Saddam, and it didn’t on Ghadafi.  Or Milosevek.  It’s not working in Iran or N Korea.  When you target civilians for suffering, all it really does is hurt civilians.  If you have a counter example I’m game to hear it.  

Was actually very effective in Iran and N. Korea. nK even more so because sanctions were backed by a UNSCR. 

 

 

[FLEA]

57 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

I am def not qualified to comment how effective they would be in helping the Ukrainian war effort.  But I agree they'll get punched by cruise missiles almost instantly. I don't know what their dollar value is (any idea?), but I think that money could be spent way more effectively (food rations, more anti tank missiles, maybe a medium range SAM?). Even without their fighters/bombers, I feel if Russia wants to just level Ukraine, they have plenty of rockets and artillery to do it, and even without their Air Force I feel like they probably brought a shit ton of their own SAMs to wreck 30 Polish Migs pretty quickly. 

One of the important aspects though is this is what Ukraine asked for. We may assess they need something different but it's a bit irrelevant. If we give them fighters and it's a total disaster it's on them, but at least they were responsible for the decision. 

[ecugringo]

Didnt Iraq have sanctions in the 90's that the UN estimated was responsible for over 500k dead mostly children?

You think in WW2 the allies wanted unconditional surrender.  That made the Germans and Japanese only fight on harder.  More people died in the last year of hte war than all the previous combined.

I dont know what the solution is but backing Putin in a corner could be dangerous.  If he loses in Ukraine more of Russia will break away and he will lose more resources. Mostly the oil around the Caspian Sea which is vast.  He will lose out on the revenue from transportation of crude as well.  Even China could become aggressive in Russia's east.

They can be starved out through sanctions but I think that will only draw more internal support for Putin.

Putin can also show his neighbors that if you go against him he will exhaust all resources to burn you down like Ukraine.  Maybe that is his path to victory and create a new economic zone with his neighboring allies and China?  If he can take Ukraine he will have a stable food source and can influence the global food market.

Also, I guess we're buying Crude from Venezuela now...Good job Brandon!

 

[hockeydork]

8 minutes ago, ecugringo said:

You think in WW2 the allies wanted unconditional surrender.  That made the Germans and Japanese only fight on harder.  More people died in the last year of hte war than all the previous combined.

Isn't it different tho, because it was foreigners on German and Japanese territory. Those soldiers and civilians (thought) they were defending their homes, which is why they fought to the death. The Ukranian's are the ones defending their homes, and they are the ones who are probably only going to fight harder.

Nobody is pushing for Ukrainians to advance into Russian territory and rule Russia. Just for them to leave Ukraine, which Putin could do with a phone call but won't because of his massive ego.  He could end it all right now. 

[hockeydork]

15 minutes ago, FLEA said:

One of the important aspects though is this is what Ukraine asked for. We may assess they need something different but it's a bit irrelevant. If we give them fighters and it's a total disaster it's on them, but at least they were responsible for the decision. 

Roger, makes sense. 

[hockeydork]

20 minutes ago, FLEA said:

One of the important aspects though is this is what Ukraine asked for. We may assess they need something different but it's a bit irrelevant. If we give them fighters and it's a total disaster it's on them, but at least they were responsible for the decision. 

Looks like Kirby said no bueno to the Migs, thankfully. I think that could've kicked off WW3. 

[FLEA]

2 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

Looks like Kirby said no bueno to the Migs, thankfully. I think that could've kicked off WW3. 

I agree. And in that case, I fully support NATO sending other aid if they determine its not in their interest to send something that could threaten their own interests. 

 

Edit: Sounds like we are sending patriot batteries though!

Edited March 9, 2022 by FLEA

[tac airlifter]

26 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Was actually very effective in Iran and N. Korea. nK even more so because sanctions were backed by a UNSCR. 

Seeing as how both locations are decisively NOT resolved in our favor, I’ll disagree.  None of the sanctions have caused the populace to rise up.  They just suffer.  I do not think this COA is wise. 

[ecugringo]

6 minutes ago, hockeydork said:

Isn't it different tho, because it was foreigners on German and Japanese territory. Those soldiers and civilians (thought) they were defending their homes, which is why they fought to the death. The Ukranian's are the ones defending their homes, and they are the ones who are probably only going to fight harder.

Nobody is pushing for Ukrainians to advance into Russian territory and rule Russia. Just for them to leave Ukraine, which Putin could do with a phone call but won't because of his massive ego.  He could end it all right now. 

It is different but.....If Putin goes home he's done.  He cant just hang a Uey and pretend nothing happened.  And then what?  You get a global friendly Russia?  Or Putin 2.0?  I just feel like hes going to double down and go all in.

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

Have all the sanctions you want.  I love the ones targeting their elite.  But celebrating bread lines?  Do you think that will make people hate the dictator or hate us?

I know it’s an unpopular opinion.  But I’m uninterested in hurting civilians.  I don’t think it will be effective and I don’t think it’s a good look.  

What sanctions do you think would target only the elites?

[FLEA]

Just now, tac airlifter said:

Seeing as how both locations are decisively NOT resolved in our favor, I’ll disagree.  None of the sanctions have caused the populace to rise up.  They just suffer.  I do not think this COA is wise. 

Ok, Ill explain nK because I know this one a lot better. I've also realized a lot of confusion on what sanctions are, how they are enforced, and what we can and cant do with them. Im by no means an expert but I do have a decent grasp on some of this. 

Sanctions can generally be unilateral, or cooperative. The strongest sanctions are cooperative sanctions backed by a UNSCR. This is the case of nK. The reason the UNSCR is important is because it gives the UN the authority to appoint a military commander to enforce the sanctions using military force. In the case of nK, the USINDOPACOM commander is the UNSCR commander and is authorized under the UN to enforce maritime trade against nK. 

North Korea, operates a rice economy. In short, farm crops are traded for commodities more routinely than fiat currency. Under KJI, there was a massive military buildup through the 90s until his death. Specific of note he passed an ordinance through the party cabinet that allowed military commanders the authority to sequester a farmer's crops to feed their battalion. The problem is, this led to corruption, because more often than not, commanders were taking the crops to use as currency and not to feed the battalion. Obviously this caused a lot of starvation. 

When KJU came to power, there were questions about his legitimacy, as it is with any ascension to power in a monarchy (or dictatorship, its not clear what nK is right now). This led KJU to consolidate power by purging but he also realized his father was deeply unpopular with the military and with the working class due to the mass hunger. So KJU led a massive expansion of internal economic expansion and gutted the military. The ONLY military capital he continued growth investment in was his nuclear and SOF forces. This was because DPRK probably assessed they can no longer win a conventional war against sK, even without US support. Therefore, asymmetric capabilities as deterrence became their only option. 

To fuel this growth faster, KJU sought to bring an end to to the war by finally signing peace accords and permanently ending the UN mission to the Korean peninsula. (Different UN mission, this is the 1950's UN mission to maintain the armistice) This would have had major geopolitical effects on the peninsula, but in short he assessed he could further divest his military into the economy if he needed to. And its what brought nK to the talking table, in and of itself a major step. 

The reason the peace talks failed is because nK was insistent that they maintain some nuclear capability because it was their country's only form of defense after gutting their forces. However, this is basically a red line for the US because as one of five benefactors of the NPT, we do not what other country's having nukes. We also we uncertain what allowing nK to continue to hold nuclear weapons would mean for other NPT signers who were not party to the talks. 

That said, there is still hope. nK has temporarily withdrawn but their internal economic policies seem to still be in place. 

 

 

 

Iran is a bit of a different story and I'm less smart on it. Iran was cooperative sanctions that were not backed by a UNSCR. So we relied on the participation of Germany, France the UK and a few other European traders to enforce the sanctions. This arrangement did work and also brought Iran to the talking table. Whether the agreement was good or not is immaterial now because it was simply the best agreement we were going to get. Withdrawing, in my opinion, was a massive mistake. The reason is because Europe largely supported the agreement and they were reluctant partners on the sanctions to begin with. So when we withdrew, the sanctions became unilateral and became near useless. Because of that, when we returned during this administration to the talking table, our bargaining leverage was extremely low. It is being reported by media that Iran is likely going to get away with a steal in this next agreement. I would say its shortsighted to say Iran didn't go our way though because it did go our way and then we withdrew from it. 

[ViperMan]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

I think it’s a terrible idea to hurt Russia’s economy and their people just because we don’t like what Putin is doing.  Mass punishment doesn’t work on me or you or anyone. Human beings hate that shit.
 

i’m not sure what specific military effect we want to achieve by turning off some grandmother‘s credit card, or what we expect Russian civilians to do, but I’m not going to chuckle at starving civilians standing in food lines. They are innocent.

It's not necessarily about punishment per se. Though it will be punishing, to be sure. It has multi-pronged effects that are more important. Namely, no one in Russia will be able to avoid figuring out WTF is going on since their money is now worth less than shit. It will cause their government many problems at home. It will limit the ability of the Russian military to make war, because as we all know, it's not lift and thrust that makes airplanes fly, it's money. It will cause massive rift within the Russian power brokerage. It will amplify distrust of the government. It will sow doubt among those who actually trust Putin. It will diminish their future ability to modernize their war machine. In short, it will do all manner of objectively good things.

So yeah, sorry your average Ivan is getting it in the pants, but when you compare that to what's happening to your average Ukrainian, that pain inflicted against the Russian populace is meaningless. Fuck 'em.

[DirkDiggler]

55 minutes ago, ecugringo said:

Didnt Iraq have sanctions in the 90's that the UN estimated was responsible for over 500k dead mostly children?

You think in WW2 the allies wanted unconditional surrender.  That made the Germans and Japanese only fight on harder.  More people died in the last year of hte war than all the previous combined.

I dont know what the solution is but backing Putin in a corner could be dangerous.  If he loses in Ukraine more of Russia will break away and he will lose more resources. Mostly the oil around the Caspian Sea which is vast.  He will lose out on the revenue from transportation of crude as well.  Even China could become aggressive in Russia's east.

They can be starved out through sanctions but I think that will only draw more internal support for Putin.

Putin can also show his neighbors that if you go against him he will exhaust all resources to burn you down like Ukraine.  Maybe that is his path to victory and create a new economic zone with his neighboring allies and China?  If he can take Ukraine he will have a stable food source and can influence the global food market.

Also, I guess we're buying Crude from Venezuela now...Good job Brandon!

 

The bold above is historically incorrect.  Unconditional surrender was agreed upon by the Allies at the Casablanca conference for multiple reasons, the most important of which were convincing Stalin that the US/UK wouldn't negotiate a separate peace with Hitler, preventing Germany from a repeat of WWI non-military defeat claims, and the destruction of Germany/Japanese ideologies.  There's no consensus or firm historical evidence that the unconditional surrender requirement made either Germany or Japan fight harder; in any case no negotiated settlement would have been possible given the National Socialist genocide in the USSR and the Holocaust, and the Japanese war crimes across China and the Pacific (not to mention Bushido code and the massive Japanese military influence in all Japanese affairs of the time).

  The last year of the war MAY have been the bloodiest; its impossible to know given incomplete casualty counts in the USSR and China.  Certainly it was much worse for the civilian populations across Europe and Japan.  1942-43 may have been bloodier overall but with incomplete data its impossible to say.