Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[DeepDish]

2 hours ago, HKP90 said:

If that's the case, their defence is in a catastrophically awful state. How can you make any strategic decisions when you literally cannot rely on anything any of your advisers are telling you.  I guess Russia are finding that out now the hard way. You can see why it is so easy to get drawn into a catastrophic nuclear conflagration with these people. All it takes is for an idiot or a lackey to say yes, and 400 people in positions of oversight to nod politely, and we're all banjaxed. 

I think Russia is a prime example of limitations of authoritarian leadership with absolutely no checks and balances and everyone living in fear for getting punished if something goes wrong. China is not there yet (Xi have to win his party's approval this autumn for another term - meaning that is his checks and balances), but their authoritarian mindset has indeed been shown for the whole world during this covid fiasco, where their strategy probably would have been scrapped a long time ago (by buying Pfizer og Moderna vaccines that actually work so that they could open up like the West have done).

[foreveryoung]

2 hours ago, juanpabloangel18 said:

I re-watched Chernobyl a few months before this invasion. Assuming it's fairly reliable in its depiction of events, one of the major themes (and problems) is that everyone in the upper echelons of power is too terrified to say anything out loud which undermines the "wisdom" and "strength" of the Soviet Union / Russia. I imagine there's a lot of that going on right now 

 

Watch the Chernobyl the lost tapes, that'll open your eyes on Russia. 

[sne]

Turkey saying no to Sweden and Finland joining NATO  

[HKP90]

2 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

You're making a whole bunch of assumptions there that suggest you grew up in a capitalist system though - the main one being that the defence staff have their jobs because of competence at defence matters, and the most likely reason for losing them would be incompetence at defence matters.

In reality you'll find a lot of key staff in the Soviet hierarchy (and this also applies to dictatorships / autocracies everywhere) is that many top officials have their job because they're loyal to the party (or specifically the person in charge of the party) rather than because they are competent. The army is often a tool of internal prestige and repression as much as something designed to fight external enemies. The US loves their military and has the most powerful one in the world but they don't feel the need to do a massive parade of all their gear every year, whereas Russia, China and North Korea sure do.

This problem is nowhere near as bad in functioning democracies. In the light of the recent events in Ukraine a lot of analysts have been repeating the mantra that an army can only be as good as the society that creates it. As mentioned by another poster above, you can see another example of this in Chernobyl. The priority was initially to try to hush up the accident so it didn't damage Soviet prestige, and anyone that wants to deal with (or learn from) the problem has to actively fight the system to do so.

That's a fair point, and well put. I'm sure you are right about party loyalty being one of the prime means by which promotions are given. That said, as someone looking in from the outside, it seems to me that the Soviet disposition to cut the balls off those who don't perform militarily (See Ukraine for details) would at least mean that some of the 'survivors' exhibited a level of competence? 

And also I should point out that in no way do I use the words capitalism and meritocracy synonymously. 

[LondonLax]

1 hour ago, sne said:

Turkey saying no to Sweden and Finland joining NATO  

Erdogan helping his buddy Putin out.

[Panto_Villan]

1 hour ago, HKP90 said:

That's a fair point, and well put. I'm sure you are right about party loyalty being one of the prime means by which promotions are given. That said, as someone looking in from the outside, it seems to me that the Soviet disposition to cut the balls off those who don't perform militarily (See Ukraine for details) would at least mean that some of the 'survivors' exhibited a level of competence? 

And also I should point out that in no way do I use the words capitalism and meritocracy synonymously. 

I think you're thinking about it the wrong way. There's generally way more accountability for failure in a democratic (and thus meritocratic) state than in an authoritarian one - if there's a major disaster, heads tend to roll at the highest level. This usually fixes both the immediate problem and the system responsible for it.

That's not really how it worked with the Soviets. Take Chernobyl as an example again. The guy in charge of the power plant made some mistakes which directly enabled the disaster, and he was sent off the to gulag. But the fundamental problem was that of reactor design, bad oversight and general cost-cutting, and there was no accountability for that. Punishing power plant managers might make them take safety protocols more seriously but ultimately they're still going to be working with dodgy reactors. Contrast the US reaction to the less serious reactor accident at Three Mile Island.

The same applied to the Soviet military. Before WW2 Stalin purged the officer corps because he thought they posed a political threat (nothing to do with their competence), which weakened the Red Army. Then, like Hitler, he continued to interfere and randomly micromanage the military campaign. I was reading today he insisted on endless frontal attacks on German positions near Kharkiv / Izyum that got 170,000 Russian soldiers killed for no reason. You can ruthlessly punish the generals for their failure but it doesn't address the real systemic problems so it'll only get you so far.

EDIT - if you've not watched Chernobyl, I'd really recommend it. It's genuinely excellent TV and it's as much about why the Soviet political system was rotten as the disaster / aftermath itself. Only six episodes too.

Edited May 16, 2022 by Panto_Villan

[magnkarl]

Erdogan wants some PKK militiamen delivered from in particular Sweden. I’d rather take Sweden and Finland’s capability than Erdogan’s strongman bs. He has good drones, but they’re still miles off US drones.

Turkey’s army has numbers, but has proven to be a gaggle of idiots akin to Russia’s army whenever they’ve tried anything but bombing civilians.

Edited May 16, 2022 by magnkarl

[LondonLax]

19 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Erdogan wants some PKK militiamen delivered from in particular Sweden. I’d rather take Sweden and Finland’s capability than Erdogan’s strongman bs. He has good drones, but they’re still miles off US drones.

Turkey’s army has numbers, but has proven to be a gaggle of idiots akin to Russia’s army whenever they’ve tried anything but bombing civilians.

Turkey is in too strategically important a location to be removed from NATO.

[bickster]

Erdogan doesn't have a veto he's just after something as usual

[Davkaus]

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Erdogan doesn't have a veto he's just after something as usual

Every NATO member needs to agree to allow new members to join.

[sidcow]

I'm sure the other NATO members can persuade Erdogan to lighten up. He's obviously after something. 

[avfc1982am]

I wonder if there is scope for Finland and Sweden to sign up to a treaty with other nations outside of NATO in a similar agreement to the AUKUS trilateral agreement but for security and not tech? I'm not familiar with the parameters of NATO or what could potentially be done to aid the security of other countries on the outside trying to get in. I'm sure someone on here can put me straight though? I mean if we(the UK) have already offered Finland security assurances during the application process then surely there are way to strengthen security in the region without the concern of Turkey playing games or anyone else that could veto membership. Just shooting the shit here so don't slaughter me you lot. 

[Panto_Villan]

24 minutes ago, avfc1982am said:

I wonder if there is scope for Finland and Sweden to sign up to a treaty with other nations outside of NATO in a similar agreement to the AUKUS trilateral agreement but for security and not tech? I'm not familiar with the parameters of NATO or what could potentially be done to aid the security of other countries on the outside trying to get in. I'm sure someone on here can put me straight though? I mean if we(the UK) have already offered Finland security assurances during the application process then surely there are way to strengthen security in the region without the concern of Turkey playing games or anyone else that could veto membership. Just shooting the shit here so don't slaughter me you lot. 

Realistically Finland and Sweden already have much of the protection of being in NATO because they're part of the EU, and they're long-established democracies that already collaborate regularly with NATO. I don't think there'd be much hand-wringing about the rest of the West getting involved if Russia went for either of those countries (nor would they be easy targets).

That said I'd be very surprised if Turkey actually did block the entry of those two countries into NATO. As others have said, he's after something.

[Awol]

When Russian state TV’s professional propagandists start taking this line, Putin should be bricking it.

 

 

[il_serpente]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

When Russian state TV’s professional propagandists start taking this line, Putin should be bricking it.

 

 

It will be interesting to see if he is punished or if he serves as cover for others to start admitting the reality on the ground.

Edited May 16, 2022 by il_serpente
put comments outside quote

[Mandy Lifeboats]

That video is amazing and well worth a watch.  It’s not a damning criticism of Putin or an admission of defeat.  But it’s a sign that Russian knows it needs an exit.

[Demitri_C]

10 hours ago, LondonLax said:

Erdogan helping his buddy Putin out.

Another psychopath 

[bickster]

Rhetoric and actions appear to be changing.

Azovstal Steelworks has been evacuated (of troops) there's no way the Russians would have done that last week

Putin (Via Spokesperson) also saying he now has no problem with Sweden and FInland joing NATO

Quote

Troops holed up in the last Ukrainian stronghold in the besieged port of Mariupol began evacuating on Monday, appearing to cede control of the once prosperous city to Russia after months of bombardment.

Ukraine's deputy defence minister said 53 injured troops from the Azovstal steelworks were taken to a hospital in the Russian-controlled town of Novoazovsk, some 32 kilometres (20 miles) to the east.

Another 211 people were taken to the town of Olenivka, in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatists, Deputy Defence Minister Anna Malyar said. All of the evacuees will be subject to a potential prisoner exchange with Russia, she added.[...]

Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared earlier on Monday to climb down from threats to retaliate against Sweden and Finland for announcing plans to join the U.S.-led NATO military alliance.

"As far as expansion goes, including new members Finland and Sweden, Russia has no problems with these states - none. And so in this sense there is no immediate threat to Russia from an expansion to include these countries," Putin said.

The comments appeared to mark a major shift in rhetoric, after years of casting NATO enlargement as a direct threat to Russia's security, including citing it as a justification for the invasion of Ukraine itself.

Just hours before Putin spoke, Russia's deputy foreign minister, Sergei Ryabkov, said Finland and Sweden were making a mistake that would have far-reaching consequences: "They should have no illusions that we will simply put up with it."[...]

Reuters

[bickster]

Imagine the level's of hilarity if this actually happened

Putin will really have achieved the impossible

[sidcow]

7 hours ago, Awol said:

When Russian state TV’s professional propagandists start taking this line, Putin should be bricking it.

 

 

BBC running a story this morning that a lot of pro Russian military bloggers are being increasingly sceptical of Russia's war efforts in the tone of their writing.  And that this could feed through to general sentiment towards the Kremlin from Russia at large. 

Reality starting to bite I think. 

Added to which the sheer number of families who are losing family members must be having an impact by now. There was a discussion before about the power of Russian grandmothers.  There must be a hell of a lot now missing grandsons. 

And all the affected families must be spreading the news amongst friends and more distant family.  When people start hearing about multiple deaths from all areas of their social circle even if they're not directly affected questions will surely be asked.