Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[HanoiVillan]

Just now, hippo said:

All hinges on if Putin goes on to attack a NATO state.

I don't see him doing that in the short term. But the resources he captures from Ukraine only make him stronger.

I doubt the sanctions will make much difference .

What 'resources' do you think Russia can take from Ukraine, that would make a difference in deciding whether to attack a NATO member state?

Russia is one of the most resource-rich nations in the world; Ukraine isn't, and it's main resource is fertile soil. 

I mean you're not wrong that everything changes if Russia goes on to attack a NATO member state, but frankly if it is going to we'd be better off building nuclear bunkers in our back gardens than chatting about it on the Internet. 

[7392craig]

1 minute ago, hippo said:

Seriously ?

He will own a country with 40m people. And all the reserves they have. Russia gets stronger - no question. 

In the short term yes. I can’t imagine sanctions will be the only deterrent used if this continues. If he attacks a NATO country then surely the shit hits the fan?

[HanoiVillan]

1 minute ago, magnkarl said:

The thing is, I doubt NATO would be against admitting Finland (probably the best defensive army in Europe) and Sweden (good population pool, extremely good fighter aircraft), these two are also part of the EU which means they're much harder to invade from the get go.

Georgia on the other hand? Where does Turkey stand in all this? Erdogan is also a madman, but he's proven that he's able to call out Putin when need be.

I generally agree with you that it would be politically easier for NATO members to admit stable 'western' European nations with no active border disputes with Russia, i.e. Sweden and Finland over Georgia, but there is no evidence the former two are interested in this that I'm aware of. 

Turkey has called repeatedly for de-escalation. 

[MachoFantastico]

I'm sure Putin will be shaking in his boots thinking about all those sanctions. 

[Lichfield Dean]

Out of curiosity, does anybody have an indication of how much support all this has amongst the general Russian population?

[magnkarl]

3 minutes ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Out of curiosity, does anybody have an indication of how much support all this has amongst the general Russian population?

I saw a report on french tv the other day from Moscow, most people said that Putin wouldn't invade another Rus country, that they were bretheren and so on. Even if he did it was all the West's fault. They've been brainwashed, the opposition's been slaughtered for years and there's no one saying anything against Putin's cleptocratic reign anymore. 

As soon as Russian families start losing young men though, the flute will sing a different tune.

[The Fun Factory]

Deeply concerning. This could either result in a further weakened Ukraine (best case scenario), a long running war or a  wider eastern European war. Putin is unhinged and there is nobody that can stop him once he had made a decision. And they have nuclear weapons.

Edited February 24, 2022 by The Fun Factory

[Jareth]

So glad we have the tories in charge at these major moments of the century.

[Jareth]

19 minutes ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Out of curiosity, does anybody have an indication of how much support all this has amongst the general Russian population?

Like that **** matters

[bobzy]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

So glad we have the tories in charge at these major moments of the century.

Part of why Russia is moving IMO. We’re (the government) so entwined with Russia and such a big voice internationally that Putin (possibly) knows we’ll do jack shit here. 

[Jareth]

New cold war basically - hooray. Putin is an absolute prick.  

[Awol]

28 minutes ago, 7392craig said:

He’s lost the plot. I can’t see how he thinks Russia comes out better if this runs it’s full course.

If you don't want other states to interfere with your invasion then suggesting that you'll nuke them if they do is a pretty effective deterrent. It's why the Cold War stayed cold, the existence of nuclear weapons on either side of a disagreement tends to prevent too much escalation.  It's being outside that defensive nuclear umbrella that makes a state vulnerable, whether it's Iraq being invaded by us or Ukraine being invaded by Russia. 

Putin comes out 'better' in his framing if Ukraine is reattached to Russian control. Sanctions don't last for ever, we can't go to war with Russia and overthrow his regime (see nuclear weapons) and eventually he gets what he wants. The only way he loses is if the Ukrainians can raise the costs to Putin so much that he is pressured from within Russia to end it, so it comes down to whether Ukrainians can mount a long term insurgency and bleed the Russians enough. That's the only route the West can really offer assistance, and what we've already been doing for weeks with supplies of 1000's of anti-tank rockets, anti-aircraft missiles, etc. 

[Jareth]

Just now, bobzy said:

Part of why Russia is moving IMO. We’re (the government) so entwined with Russia and such a big voice internationally that Putin (possibly) knows we’ll do jack shit here. 

They do not give a **** about the UK - note salisbury. 

[Awol]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

Like that **** matters

It matters more than any other factor. 

[The Fun Factory]

FTSE 100 down over 2.5% already today

[Jareth]

1 minute ago, Awol said:

The only way he loses is if the Ukrainians can raise the costs to Putin so much that he is pressured from within Russia to end it, so it comes down to whether Ukrainians can mount a long term insurgency and bleed the Russians enough. That's the only route the West can really offer assistance, and what we've already been doing for weeks with supplies of 1000's of anti-tank rockets, anti-aircraft missiles, etc. 

He loses when he dies. Hence his recent actions. Only hope is that other senior Ruskis see things differently. I would not be surprised. 

[Mr_Dogg]

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

New cold war basically - hooray. Putin is an absolute prick.  

Doesn't seem very cold to me.

[magnkarl]

1 minute ago, Awol said:

If you don't want other states to interfere with your invasion then suggesting that you'll nuke them if they do is a pretty effective deterrent. It's why the Cold War stayed cold, the existence of nuclear weapons on either side of a disagreement tends to prevent too much escalation.  It's being outside that defensive nuclear umbrella that makes a state vulnerable, whether it's Iraq being invaded by us or Ukraine being invaded by Russia. 

Putin comes out 'better' in his framing if Ukraine is reattached to Russian control. Sanctions don't last for ever, we can't go to war with Russia and overthrow his regime (see nuclear weapons) and eventually he gets what he wants. The only way he loses is if the Ukrainians can raise the costs to Putin so much that he is pressured from within Russia to end it, so it comes down to whether Ukrainians can mount a long term insurgency and bleed the Russians enough. That's the only route the West can really offer assistance, and what we've already been doing for weeks with supplies of 1000's of anti-tank rockets, anti-aircraft missiles, etc. 

Agreed. I wonder where Ukraine will defend themselves? Dnieper and north of Kiev?

Knock out enough tanks in a column and clog up the roads. 

The defense minister of Ukraine is calling for everyone who can carry a weapon to enlist.

[Jareth]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

It matters more than any other factor. 

Have you seen any Russian elections where this matters? What are the scared people going to do?

[magnkarl]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

Have you seen any Russian elections where this matters? What are the scared people going to do?

The Soviet Union almost collapsed because of their long war in Afghanistan. They lost that war to a guerrilla style grinding costly affair. It ended the largest empire on Earth.