War in Ukraine/Med Cruising

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Rubicon King

Threat of sanctions never work on Vlad. Re: Crimea. And now that China is his $$$ backer, he laughs it off. Also, Germany said they would still buy gas from Russia, so that is checkmate to the sanction fear. The French are weak, the Germany have no stomach for war, and the Brits wont get in the middle of this. It's up to the ole USA and our military arms. If Russia does invade, they better have plenty of tanks in reserve. The 2500 javelins that we've sent them are going to make swiss cheese out of them...

Hooyah

What nonsense the US isn’t going to touch this conflict

[Muaddib1116]

I think he was more talking about the weaponry that we've supplied to the Ukrainians.

[letsgetsailing3]

If you want to know what Putin really wants from the the Ukraine, look at what happened to Belarus. Now he's using Belarus as a likely staging point to invade Ukraine. Probably better to look at what Putin is doing, as opposed to what he's saying.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...arus-military/

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

...the Ukraine

Just a polite note please @letsgetsailing3

Ukraine is not ‘the Ukraine’ and why it matters now
https://kyivindependent.com/opinion/...t-matters-now/

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

This part I disagree with.

You know there is no immediate path to NATO membership for the Ukrainians. I know there's no immediate path to NATO membership. The Russians know this, too. It's just not realistic at this time. Which makes this a big phony excuse for a military invasion.

So your statement that "We've done this to the Ukrainians" is really a bit of an exaggeration.

Not at all. We spent $5 billion subverting Ukraine and turning the country against Russia, then financed a violent overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government, put into power a bunch of radical nationalists including neo-Nazis, all of which in a systematic, intentional way pushed Ukraine into confrontation with Russia. We did that. THEN, we don't do anything concrete to support the Ukrainians once we've pushed them out onto this limb, having put them into this confrontation (not that there was any realistic way we ever could have done anything -- the result was entirely predictable). How is that not "doing it to Ukrainians"?

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

. . . Nobody is threatening Russia. . . .

What?! We have surrounded Russia with hostile military forces, on the territory of the former Warsaw Pact and even the Former Soviet Union. We have missiles in Poland almost within sight of the Belorussian border. We have meddled in Georgia, in Uzbekistan, in Tajikistan, in Kyrgyzstan, financing anti-Russian politicians, mounting massive propaganda campaigns. This is somehow "nobody is threatening Russia"? Are you kidding? You really don't have any idea what is going on in this region. Hint: Don't believe our own propaganda.

[hedgeworth]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Not at all. We spent $5 billion subverting Ukraine and turning the country against Russia, then financed a violent overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government, put into power a bunch of radical nationalists including neo-Nazis, all of which in a systematic, intentional way pushed Ukraine into confrontation with Russia. We did that. THEN, we don't do anything concrete to support the Ukrainians once we've pushed them out onto this limb, having put them into this confrontation (not that there was any realistic way we ever could have done anything -- the result was entirely predictable). How is that not "doing it to Ukrainians"?





What?! We have surrounded Russia with hostile military forces, on the territory of the former Warsaw Pact and even the Former Soviet Union. We have missiles in Poland almost within sight of the Belorussian border. We have meddled in Georgia, in Uzbekistan, in Tajikistan, in Kyrgyzstan, financing anti-Russian politicians, mounting massive propaganda campaigns. This is somehow "nobody is threatening Russia"? Are you kidding? You really don't have any idea what is going on in this region. Hint: Don't believe our own propaganda.

This tends to support your contention that we threw Ukraine under the bus:

https://www.businessinsider.com/fion...ukraine-2022-2

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

Nobody is threatening Russia. This threat of military invasion of the Ukraine is 100% on Putin.

I definitely agree. Despite real or imagined NATO build up or eastward expansion nobody is making any plans to attack Russia militarily.

This is just the standard reasoning promoted by dictatorial leaderships to justify their existence: 'in defence of the nation' / 'you (the people) need us because we are under attack' / 'we are defending the nation's values' / etc, etc, etc...

Please also note that the eastern european countries that joined NATO (and the EU) rushed headlong to join. Why? Because after decades under the yoke they full well understand that any failings of the west (and there are many) are still much less worse than being under the domination of Russia, the Soviet system, and Communism.

There is only one nation in wider Europe that has steadily built up it's military, has annexed (or otherwise) the territory of multiple neighbours, and despite claiming the complete opposite is about to further invade the neighbour that it claims is it's 'brother' nation.

A lot of the other things mentioned is just noise and disinformation to confuse the situation.

But there is no real 'confusion'. My previous paragraph in italics is a short but concise summary.

Also please note my use of the word further regarding invading. Because let's not forget that Russia has already invaded Ukraine, and is occupying Ukraine, in Donbas and in Crimea. That seems easily forgotten in the current situation, and I see no mention of part of any 'deal' that may be done that Russia will give back Crimea, will get out of Donbas, and will give Ukraine full control over it's internationally recognised borders.

Funny that is not even mentioned... Crickets in fact...

As a side note, that will no doubt stir up further conversation here, since Russia claims itself as the successor to the Soviet Union and all it's glory, when will it also start paying reparations to the rest of the post soviet nations which were previously 'annexed' - the damage that was done over decades amounts to hundreds of trillions, let alone the psychological trauma still present in the minds of these populations that will take generations to overcome.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Not at all. We spent $5 billion subverting Ukraine and turning the country against Russia, then financed a violent overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government, put into power a bunch of radical nationalists including neo-Nazis, all of which in a systematic, intentional way pushed Ukraine into confrontation with Russia. We did that. THEN, we don't do anything concrete to support the Ukrainians once we've pushed them out onto this limb, having put them into this confrontation (not that there was any realistic way we ever could have done anything -- the result was entirely predictable). How is that not "doing it to Ukrainians"?

What?! We have surrounded Russia with hostile military forces, on the territory of the former Warsaw Pact and even the Former Soviet Union. We have missiles in Poland almost within sight of the Belorussian border. We have meddled in Georgia, in Uzbekistan, in Tajikistan, in Kyrgyzstan, financing anti-Russian politicians, mounting massive propaganda campaigns. This is somehow "nobody is threatening Russia"? Are you kidding? You really don't have any idea what is going on in this region. Hint: Don't believe our own propaganda.

You're accepting unsubstantiated rumor as fact. Sure, you have some verified facts, but you're mixing them with others you have no proof of. That's not valid analysis. Anything you can't prove, you can't assume. I'm open to facts, I'm not open to mixing facts with rumor.

Putin has been caught lying more than once THIS WEEK. He said he has no intention of invading. Do you believe that? I sure don't. He's been setting up a pretext for invasion for months. And he's been called on it, even as he denied it.

In your opinion, if the U.S. has a relationship with a country or sends money there, it's meddling, and somehow less justified than Putin actually invading a country and killing off all the political opposition? I disagree with that. Putin's actions are not the fault of the U.S.

Putin is a chessmaster, and has zero regard for human life. He's the leader of a major power because he kills off the opposition. He supported Lukashenko politically in Belarus, and now he has 30,000 troops there, ready to invade Ukraine. There is a method to his madness. But it's never what he says it is.

There is NO moral equivalence here between U.S. actions in this region and what Russia is doing.

Yes, we absolutely disagree on this.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

I definitely agree. Despite real or imagined NATO build up or eastward expansion nobody is making any plans to attack Russia militarily.

This is just the standard reasoning promoted by dictatorial leaderships to justify their existence: 'in defence of the nation' / 'you (the people) need us because we are under attack' / 'we are defending the nation's values' / etc, etc, etc...

Please also note that the eastern european countries that joined NATO (and the EU) rushed headlong to join. Why? Because after decades under the yoke they full well understand that any failings of the west (and there are many) are still much less worse than being under the domination of Russia, the Soviet system, and Communism.

There is only one nation in wider Europe that has steadily built up it's military, has annexed (or otherwise) the territory of multiple neighbours, and despite claiming the complete opposite is about to further invade the neighbour that it claims is it's 'brother' nation.

A lot of the other things mentioned is just noise and disinformation to confuse the situation.

But there is no real 'confusion'. My previous paragraph in italics is a short but concise summary.

Also please note my use of the word further regarding invading. Because let's not forget that Russia has already invaded Ukraine, and is occupying Ukraine, in Donbas and in Crimea. That seems easily forgotten in the current situation, and I see no mention of part of any 'deal' to be done that Russia will give back Crimea, will get out of Donbas, and will give Ukraine full control over it's internationally recognised borders.

Funny that is not even mentioned... Crickets in fact...

As a side note, that will no doubt stir up further conversation here, since Russia claims itself as the successor to the Soviet Union and all it's glory, when will it also start paying reparations to the rest of the post soviet nations which were previously 'annexed' - the damage that was done over decades amounts to hundreds of trillions, let alone the psychological trauma still present in the minds of these populations that will take generations to overcome.

“ attack Russia militarily “ ok then but it’s ok to “ attack “ them in every other way

Cuba didn’t attack the US. Yet it was blockaded , which is an act of war.

Iraq never attacked the US , yet it was invaded and destroyed.

Yep let’s sit here and argue semantics “ attack militarily “

Russia has been pushed and prodded ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. Putin has shouted “ enough “. Sure he’s not subtle but the west is responsible for this face off as much as Russia.

The blood will be on our hands too

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Muaddib1116

I think he was more talking about the weaponry that we've supplied to the Ukrainians.

Most of which they are not trained in how to use and Russian AirPower will destroy anyway.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

You heard it here first: Not yet appeared in the Western press, but 45 minutes ago a story appeared in one Russian military journal that fighting broke out on the Ukrainian border. See: https://nvo.ng.ru/news/732813.html


It's reported that "five Ukrainian saboteurs" violated the Russian border, and were "eliminated". Of course Ukraine would never send saboteurs or anyone else across the border; this is obviously a provocation. But they are now killing people. This is how it begins. This is very bad.

Yes, nobody is fooled by this 'provocation' - a well used word in Russian too - but serves well to justify various actions and to disseminate amongst the Russian populate.

A civilian has also been killed, in Donbas I think.

I'll try to post more later, after breakfast here, but sadly it seems that the chance of war is greater than the chance of peace

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Thanks; very interesting articles. The third one particularly highlights some of the risks to the Russians...

Glad that you liked them, and since you did I'll post a few more in due course. I follow the situation pretty closely, for personal reasons.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by hedgeworth

This tends to support your contention that we threw Ukraine under the bus:

https://www.businessinsider.com/fion...ukraine-2022-2

I don't think you can view Trump's actions as particularly representative of long term U.S. policy.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Yep let’s sit here and argue semantics “ attack militarily “

I don't disagree with all of what you wrote. There are definitely issues on many sides in this situation, some of it going back decades.

But let's also not try to portray Russia as the innocent, oppressed, under attack nation here - to do so is to fall into the exact trap that they want you to fall into...

There are no semantics - "attack military" and "annex territory" are both VASTLY different to "economically constrain", "politically meddle", or other such measures - REALLY VASTLY DIFFERENT

And just because the West has done stupid shxt in the past, doesn't mean that other nations should continue doing it too.

Another's mistakes, or the mistakes of the past does not give one a 'free pass'. Instead one would hope it means 'hey, let's not do the same stupid shxt too/again...'

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Rubicon King

Threat of sanctions never work on Vlad. Re: Crimea. And now that China is his $$$ backer, he laughs it off. Also, Germany said they would still buy gas from Russia, so that is checkmate to the sanction fear. The French are weak, the Germany have no stomach for war, and the Brits wont get in the middle of this. It's up to the ole USA and our military arms. If Russia does invade, they better have plenty of tanks in reserve. The 2500 javelins that we've sent them are going to make swiss cheese out of them...

Umm, Ukraine do have about 2500 Western-supplied anti-tank missiles, but only about 500 of them are Javelins. 2000 of them are Swedish NLAWs supplied by the British. With a range of only 600 yards and with an ordinary HEAT charge, the NLAW has little hope of evading the jamming and active protection systems of the T90 and then penetrating the T90's reactive armor. One might get a lucky shot with top attack. The NLAW's will be a terrible threat to BTR's and other APC's, however.

The Javelin is a far better anti-tank weapon (actually, the best in the world). Unlike the NLAW, it does have a tandem charge warhead, so is capable of penetrating the T-90's front or side armor -- if the missile gets through, first, the Shtora jamming system, and then, the active countermeasures. The Javelin is infrared guided, and Shtora has formidable infrared jamming and spoofing capabilities. The Javelin is certainly a serious threat to the T-90, but 500 Javelins are not going to make "Swiss cheese" out of the world's largest tank army. The Russians have about 1000 operational T-90s. They also have 4500 T-80's and 9000 (!) T72's, of which about 2500 are operational.

Another threat to Russian armor in Ukraine, is the weaponized Turkish drone the Ukrainians bought, the Bayraktar TB-2. The Ukrainians have about a dozen of these, bought from Turkey. They carry missiles.

But this is a theoretical discussion. The Russians are not going to reinact Kursk, on the steppes of Ukraine. They are going to fight with air power and cruise missiles, much like we did in Iraq.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Hooyah

What nonsense the US isn’t going to touch this conflict

As we have officially and formally confirmed on repeated occasions. If the Germans "have no stomach for war", then this is doubly true for the U.S. today, after 20 years fighting in Afghanistan for nothing, in Iraq, etc. etc. And against an enemy which can actually fight back? With more tanks than we have? Not to even mention the nukes. Fuggedaboutit.