Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[avfc1982am]

21 minutes ago, Anthony said:

Putin has to keep up the pretence of democracy, so has to be seen to be following due process, which may mean for example an enabling act allowing him to, well, do whatever he wants.

"This is a lawful country. We don't do anything unlawful, honest guv."

He really doesn't it's one subject he really doesn't care about since relationships with the West dissolved. That ship sailed a long time ago and most Russian's will openly admit democracy doesn't exist and hasn't for 20 years. It also means Putin has what he's always wanted which was for Russians just to accept he's in charge until he says otherwise, or dies. He's the new Tzar in his own eyes now so democracy in any format does not fit that ideology.

There has been mass propaganda in Russia since the start of this War in regards to Western hypocritical democracy against honest(lol) Eastern Autocracy so the idea Russians care is also pretty mute at this point in time. It might be a dream for some but it's most definitely of the pipe dream variety and they all know it. 

[avfc1982am]

 

[Genie]

6 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

 

It’s an interesting take, if Washington/The West stop supporting Ukraine let Russia win then the war will end. It’s not their fault war rages on.

[HKP90]

7 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

 

I see that the main opposition to the war is still that it didn't work, not that it was wrong, then? 

Rancid country. 

[avfc1982am]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

It’s an interesting take, if Washington/The West stop supporting Ukraine let Russia win then the war will end. It’s not their fault war rages on.

It's their favourite excuse for the demolition of Ukraine and it's population. "The West stopped us from stopping the war". Absolute cretins and 100% the reason why NATO should give Ukraine everything to smash them back to Russia, including fast jets to control the skies.

The only way Ukraine get everything back will be by dominating the skies imo. Air cover is essential when ground troops are advancing which is why very little ground is been taken back the last few weeks. 

I just finished watching a BBC doc series on the aircraft carrier QE yesterday from back in 2021. I have to say the behaviour of Russian and Chinese forces towards the UK and coalition forces is ridiculously antagonistic in international waters, especially the Russians. Just a horrid warmongering Country that need a serious slap. I'm sure one of the Russian ships threatening the UK ship in the black sea at the time was the Moskva which Ukraine sunk. Great doc tbh and highlights just how pathetic Russia really are. 

 

[blandy]

34 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

Air cover is essential when ground troops are advancing which is why very little ground is been taken back the last few weeks. 

Spot on. To be more effective Ukraine needs aircraft with well trained pilots and ground-crew and they need more weapons and ammunition, plus more well trained soldiers. For may reasons, some understandable, some less so, they haven't really got/been given what they need to progress effectively.

[Genie]

So Ukraine have been given weapons to stop Russia advancing, which they did anyway? 

Can they realistically regain any significant territory?

I am struggling a little with the strategy if I’m honest.

Even if Ukraine push Russian troops all the way back to Russia I assume Putin will continue with is reign of terror from the homeland.

[Anthony]

15 minutes ago, Genie said:

Even if Ukraine push Russian troops all the way back to Russia I assume Putin will continue with is reign of terror from the homeland.

Sort of, but once he's been pushed out of Ukraine, Ukraine's borders are no longer 'in dispute', which clears a major obstacle to Ukraine joining NATO.

Then if he attacks a NATO member...

[Genie]

Just now, Anthony said:

Sort of, but once he's been pushed out of Ukraine, Ukraine's borders are no longer 'in dispute', which clears a major obstacle to Ukraine joining NATO.

Then if he attacks a NATO member...

Just got to get them out first which doesn’t look remotely realistic currently. 

The best hope is some internal Russian collapse like we almost had.

[Nigel]

7 minutes ago, Anthony said:

Sort of, but once he's been pushed out of Ukraine, Ukraine's borders are no longer 'in dispute', which clears a major obstacle to Ukraine joining NATO.

Then if he attacks a NATO member...

Its highly unlikey NATO will let Ukraine in that quick, if at all. Its far too aggressive to Russia.

Far more likely is that they will have their army kept up to NATO standards with continued training and finances.

[avfc1982am]

39 minutes ago, blandy said:

Spot on. To be more effective Ukraine needs aircraft with well trained pilots and ground-crew and they need more weapons and ammunition, plus more well trained soldiers. For may reasons, some understandable, some less so, they haven't really got/been given what they need to progress effectively.

So you have to ask yourself why are we not really providing the kit they need to be more effective? It's a little like watching a lightweight fight a heavyweight with one hand behind its back. Without doubt, every military commander must be looking at this thinking the same thing, that Ukraine have very little chance of recovering all lost territory without air superiority or very good air cover at the least. They will lose a lot more troops and effectiveness without it which is obviously whats happening. 

It's the one snagging thing that leaves me feeling quite cynical about what NATO are doing tbh. It doesn't take a brainbox to work out that this is being drawn out when in reality we(NATO) would've been preparing for this scenario for decades and certainly with Ukraine being the frontline since 2014 when Russia took Crimea. Not personally, but we in the West knew this day was coming with Russia because it's been on the cards so long.   

What honestly concerns me is Ukrainians not having the man power to keep this going long enough. Yes they currently have a large battle group ready to go but if.... when they decide to go all in, if Russian forces hold, and then reinforce, then what? Frontlines become static and people give up on the objective just like what has been happening in the Donbas all these years. It will have all been for nothing as far as Ukrainians are concerned. 

 

[magnkarl]

3 hours ago, avfc1982am said:

I'm not sure. There was talk last week that Putin was trying to purge the senior command at Wagner in Africa however, you would just replace one scumbag with another and probably create more carnage if troops are disillusioned with this. I fail to see any benefit for any of the Countries occupied by Wagner. They're literally taking everything, even wood is being exported. 

I don't see Putin tearing anything down either. Show is for the media, not reality in which things will continue along the same path if there is money to be made. 

At this point I'd say that any casualties among Russian command or Wagner is a good thing for the world, especially if Wagner and Russia has more 'freedom marches'.

It could enable some African countries to take back control of their gold\diamond mines if there's enough upheaval and funding stops for Wagner.

[avfc1982am]

1 minute ago, magnkarl said:

At this point I'd say that any casualties among Russian command or Wagner is a good thing for the world, especially if Wagner and Russia has more 'freedom marches'.

It could enable some African countries to take back control of their gold\diamond mines if there's enough upheaval and funding stops for Wagner.

Sudan, Syria, Libya, CAR, Madagascar, Sudan, Mali..... the list goes on. Where weakness and tanked economies exist, so does Wagner. Below is a map of where they're operating. Not really Countries that have the ability to remove Russia/Wagner or any well eqquiped private military company which is why they're there in the first place. 

 

Of course I'd love to believe, just like yourself that Countries could force Russia out but I think it's wishful thinking tbh. Especially when it's now fact that the state is funding all of this. 

[blandy]

Just now, avfc1982am said:

So you have to ask yourself why are we not really providing the kit they need to be more effective? It's a little like watching a lightweight fight a heavyweight with one hand behind its back. Without doubt, every military commander must be looking at this thinking the same thing, that Ukraine have very little chance of recovering all lost territory without air superiority or very good air cover at the least. They will lose a lot more troops and effectiveness without it which is obviously whats happening. 

It's the one snagging thing that leaves me feeling quite cynical about what NATO are doing tbh. It doesn't take a brainbox to work out that this is being drawn out when in reality we(NATO) would've been preparing for this scenario for decades and certainly with Ukraine being the frontline since 2014 when Russia took Crimea. Not personally, but we in the West knew this day was coming with Russia because it's been on the cards so long.   

What honestly concerns me is Ukrainians not having the man power to keep this going long enough. Yes they currently have a large battle group ready to go but if.... when they decide to go all in, if Russian forces hold, and then reinforce, then what? Frontlines become static and people give up on the objective just like what has been happening in the Donbas all these years. It will have all been for nothing as far as Ukrainians are concerned. 

The thing is, as I see it anyway, that it's not "NATO" dragging its heels. It's up to individual nations to provide (or not) weapons and support. NATO is purely there as an organisation set up to protect member nations from aggression.

The next factor is the pretty parlous state of EUropean nations defence capability - there just isn't that much kit lying about which is easy to donate. A lot of what has been given is older kit that was in storage. There's not the capacity to provide a lot of kit that is used by European nations to form their own defence force's capabilities.

Then there's interoperability - like with Jets particularly - training pilots to fly and operate western jets and weapon systems is not a quick thing, wether they're RAF pilots or Ukrainians. And the same applies to groundcrew.

Then there's ITAR and export control laws, which are particularly relevant when it comes to the more complex and intelligent kit. These laws serve 2 purposes. 1 is the obvious one - "we absolutely do not want enemy states such as Russia, Iran, or potentially China etc.) getting hold of and reverse engineering western weapons systems at the leading edge of technology  - the damage done could be immense. The 2nd purpose of these laws, particularly US ITAR regulations is protectionism and support for the US defence companies by the US Gov't.

There's more, but you get the idea. Different nations are supporting (or not supporting) Ukraine according to their own imperatives and political situations and outlooks. The US has done loads, and has the capacity to do that. The UK has done well, with limited capacity to help. Same applies to Poland....others not so much.

Collectively we probably need to and should do more, but it's not all that simple.

[avfc1982am]

1 minute ago, blandy said:

The thing is, as I see it anyway, that it's not "NATO" dragging its heels. It's up to individual nations to provide (or not) weapons and support. NATO is purely there as an organisation set up to protect member nations from aggression.

The next factor is the pretty parlous state of EUropean nations defence capability - there just isn't that much kit lying about which is easy to donate. A lot of what has been given is older kit that was in storage. There's not the capacity to provide a lot of kit that is used by European nations to form their own defence force's capabilities.

Then there's interoperability - like with Jets particularly - training pilots to fly and operate western jets and weapon systems is not a quick thing, wether they're RAF pilots or Ukrainians. And the same applies to groundcrew.

Then there's ITAR and export control laws, which are particularly relevant when it comes to the more complex and intelligent kit. These laws serve 2 purposes. 1 is the obvious one - "we absolutely do not want enemy states such as Russia, Iran, or potentially China etc.) getting hold of and reverse engineering western weapons systems at the leading edge of technology  - the damage done could be immense. The 2nd purpose of these laws, particularly US ITAR regulations is protectionism and support for the US defence companies by the US Gov't.

There's more, but you get the idea. Different nations are supporting (or not supporting) Ukraine according to their own imperatives and political situations and outlooks. The US has done loads, and has the capacity to do that. The UK has done well, with limited capacity to help. Same applies to Poland....others not so much.

Collectively we probably need to and should do more, but it's not all that simple.

I should have maybe left out the NATO bit tbh. Anyway thanks for the informative response blandy and yes I totally understand most of the reasoning behind not just your response but why there are so many hurdles in order to aid and supply and the all the implications of this. 

Take all this aside though including the stuff you have highlighted and much more as we could get into many specifics, the main point I am trying to make is this has been coming for a long long time with Russia. Anybody with an eye on what has been happening could see Russia, as well as China have been increasing their sphere of influence around the world for the last couple of decades, alarmingly so in Russia's case as this has been purely conflictual especially since Putin came to power. Georgia, Chechnya, Syria, Ukraine.

The UK and US have been training Ukraine forces for several years now so the powers that be knew this was coming one way or another whether directly or otherwise. We would have been fully aware of the Ukrainian military inventory. I'm also sure we knew that Ukraine did not or still don't have the capability to push Russia fully out anytime soon. I just feel there is no real rush to see this conflict ended.

Maybe the plan is just to break Russia over time with as little effort as possible, which is how I feel things are proceeding personally. It doesn't bold well for Ukrainians though, at least for the foreseeable future, because at this rate another 5-10 years looks a better estimation for this conflict to end.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, avfc1982am said:

The UK and US have been training Ukraine forces for several years now so the powers that be knew this was coming one way or another whether directly or otherwise. We would have been fully aware of the Ukrainian military inventory. I'm also sure we knew that Ukraine did not or still don't have the capability to push Russia fully out anytime soon. I just feel there is no real rush to see this conflict ended.

Maybe the plan is just to break Russia over time with as little effort as possible, which is how I feel things are proceeding personally. It doesn't bold well for Ukrainians though, at least for the foreseeable future, because at this rate another 5-10 years looks a better estimation for this conflict to end.

Good post in total. On this bit I have a different angle. I agree that training and support has been going on a good while. But I’m less convinced there was a relevant plan for an invasion until not long before it happened. But since late 2021 there’s been some iterative planning. It’s all been pretty much on the fly. That’s why it’s all been slow and little by little. I also think you’re right about “no rush”, but for multiple reasons. It maybe suits people who don’t want Russia to implode suddenly as a nuclear state. It suits cash strapped European nations with not so much spare military equipment. It suits nations who are cautious about a judder turning the world even more on its head and it suits those who want to try and have time to influence who follows Putin. It’s way more complex than I can pick apart. We don’t really understand the way the cogs work in Russia beyond a superficial degree.

[avfc1982am]

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

Good post in total. On this bit I have a different angle. I agree that training and support has been going on a good while. But I’m less convinced there was a relevant plan for an invasion until not long before it happened. But since late 2021 there’s been some iterative planning. It’s all been pretty much on the fly. That’s why it’s all been slow and little by little. I also think you’re right about “no rush”, but for multiple reasons. It maybe suits people who don’t want Russia to implode suddenly as a nuclear state. It suits cash strapped European nations with not so much spare military equipment. It suits nations who are cautious about a judder turning the world even more on its head and it suits those who want to try and have time to influence who follows Putin. It’s way more complex than I can pick apart. We don’t really understand the way the cogs work in Russia beyond a superficial degree.

Some good points. I think its way more complex than we can all pick apart tbh. I'm left with more questions than answers. 

[Enda]

One undertone in this discussion is that it’s an active decision on the part of the likes of the US and the UK to draw this conflict out.

That might be true, but I think the simpler explanation is that they just don’t want to commit that much kit. Biden for example is under pressure from Republicans for spending so much on Ukraine in the first place.

[ender4]

36 minutes ago, Enda said:

I think the simpler explanation is that they just don’t want to commit that much kit. Biden for example is under pressure from Republicans for spending so much on Ukraine in the first place.

Which means that Biden and Sunak probably need to get the war finished before they lose the next election, or Ukraine could be screwed.

[villa89]

12 minutes ago, ender4 said:

Which means that Biden and Sunak probably need to get the war finished before they lose the next election, or Ukraine could be screwed.

I think sleepy Joe will be six foot under before this war ends.