Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[NurembergVillan]

Humans are absolutely shite sometimes, eh?

[HanoiVillan]

6 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

I think the current military think-tank prediction is they’re most likely to want to quickly encircle Kiev and force regime change.

Nobody knows for sure, obviously, but it’s certainly plausible (apparently you can drive a tank from the Belarus border to Kiev in two hours).

You're right, none of us know, but I think for now I'm gonna stick with my prediction (and accept I may look foolish later). Forcing a change of government in Ukraine would be a much bigger escalation than forcing them to grant a federal status to provinces they barely hold currently. It would also be much more costly.

[bickster]

6 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

(apparently you can drive a tank from the Belarus border to Kiev in two hours)

I doubt you could drive a supercharged Lada to Kiev from Belarus in that time, let alone a tank, even less a tank division or two. Its 150 km by road from the shortest border crossing and the terrain isn't exactly Blitzkreig enabling crossing all the tributaries to the Dnieper River. That shortest route also goes directly through Chernobyl where as you can imagine the infrastructure isn't exactly well kept anymore

Yet another example of people on the internet talking shite and not even looking at something basic like Google Maps to fact check anything

[Nicho]

I dont know if its a cult of personality thing I have fallen for but Putin seems to savy and clever for the other leaders. Whether that is just because Russia are massive and powerful I dont know.

If he invades Ukraine he will do it knowing it wont cause all out war, either with NATO or specific allied countries.

No one wants War, not even Putin. Bit of Guerilla fight, insergence, uprising yes but not War surely. 

 

[LondonLax]

Russia had some good success running this same play against Georgia so maybe Putin thinks it will work again?

[Panto_Villan]

7 hours ago, bickster said:

I doubt you could drive a supercharged Lada to Kiev from Belarus in that time, let alone a tank, even less a tank division or two. Its 150 km by road from the shortest border crossing and the terrain isn't exactly Blitzkreig enabling crossing all the tributaries to the Dnieper River. That shortest route also goes directly through Chernobyl where as you can imagine the infrastructure isn't exactly well kept anymore

Yet another example of people on the internet talking shite and not even looking at something basic like Google Maps to fact check anything

The irony here is that you piqued my interest enough to make me do 15 minutes of my own research on the topic, but all it did was illustrate the fact that you don't exactly practice what you preach:

According to Google Maps it's 133km along the roads from the Belarus border to the edge of Kiev (because if you're encircling the city you only need to reach the edges). A light tank like a BMT-3 does 71kph so could do it in less than 2 hours, and an IFV like a BTR-90 could be there in eighty minutes. Even a heavy battle tank like the T-90 does 60kph, so would only take 2 hours and 13 minutes.

The roads look pretty good the whole way, but ironically enough they're best around Chernobyl. However that shouldn't be a surprise given the reactor sarcophagus they finished a few years back was one of the biggest engineering projects in Europe at the time and all that heavy machinery and materials needed to reach the site somehow. So Chernobyl is probably a great place to attack though given it's sparsely populated but has good roads (the idea that the area is a radioactive wasteland is a myth).

It should go without saying that the Russians aren't going to be able to get an entire armoured division of heavy tanks to Kiev in two hours while under hostile fire, especially if the Ukrainians blew the bridges, but nobody was saying they could. The claim was that a tank could be driven from the Belarus border to Kiev in 2 hours, which it can.

[bickster]

31 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

The claim was that a tank could be driven from the Belarus border to Kiev in 2 hours, which it can.

So you can see it's a stupid thing to claim in the first place? Because it's not happenning is it for some of the reasons you've mentioned and many more besides

So what would be the point in making such a pointless claim? Is it to win points on the internet or as some sort of validation for a journalist to get in the game. No Idea, I have no idea who said it first but they are an idiot

EDIT: To encircle a city you need to get to the other side

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Nicho said:

I dont know if its a cult of personality thing I have fallen for but Putin seems to savy and clever for the other leaders. Whether that is just because Russia are massive and powerful I dont know.

If he invades Ukraine he will do it knowing it wont cause all out war, either with NATO or specific allied countries.

No one wants War, not even Putin. Bit of Guerilla fight, insergence, uprising yes but not War surely. 

He’s extremely smart at the short term things, getting what he wants in the here and now. Controlling and influencing people to a very particular purpose. But I think he’s actually pretty awful at the “what next” or longer term stuff. Like with this current shemozzle, he’s got world leaders, serious politicians, diplomats (and also Liz Truss and Bunter) at his beck and call, he’s projecting a “strong Russia” vibe, the world, or the west is fearful and curious. He’s forging renewed pacts with China…and so on.

But all that could lead to cancellation of Nordstream 2, seizure of I’ll gotten wealth, more NATO forces close to Russia, renewed resolve amongst previously fragmenting western nations, financial hardship for Russian people and so on.

[sne]

The US would never forgive him if he attacked Ukraine during the Super Bowl tonight. 

[HanoiVillan]

1 minute ago, sne said:

The US would never forgive him if he attacked Ukraine during the Super Bowl tonight. 

Nah, American networks would just ignore it until the game is finished anyway, the game is better for ratings. 

Unlike America, Russia doesn't primarily consider TV ratings in its actions, seen a lot of baffling assertions that 'they won't do it during the Olympics' and there's no way they give a shit about that IMO, just Americans projecting their own national pathology. 

[Jareth]

Hopefully this leads to Chelsea's owner being booted out of the country - I mean if they go and overthrow a democracy they are officially cut out of life in all Western countries - absolutely no way their companies can continue sponsorship or their oligarchs can continue their investments.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said:

seen a lot of baffling assertions that 'they won't do it during the Olympics' and there's no way they give a shit about that IMO

It’s not baffling. Russia is trying to pivot trade and energy supply towards China and to reforge relationships with the Chinese state and president Xi. Dragging attention away from China’s proud staging ( and stage management of China’s image) of the games would absolutely not be an aid to enhancing Russia’s standing with Xi.

[sne]

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Nah, American networks would just ignore it until the game is finished anyway, the game is better for ratings. 

Unlike America, Russia doesn't primarily consider TV ratings in its actions, seen a lot of baffling assertions that 'they won't do it during the Olympics' and there's no way they give a shit about that IMO, just Americans projecting their own national pathology. 

Was more thinking about the top brass and military abroad who'd be forced to stop watching the game.  

As for the Olympics they went into Ukraine during the Sochi Olympics 2014 so... 

Maybe should have added a smiley in the previous post

 

[sne]

25 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Hopefully this leads to Chelsea's owner being booted out of the country - I mean if they go and overthrow a democracy they are officially cut out of life in all Western countries - absolutely no way their companies can continue sponsorship or their oligarchs can continue their investments.

But American owners still OK?

Edit: Or the Saudis? 

Edited February 13, 2022 by sne

[HanoiVillan]

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

It’s not baffling. Russia is trying to pivot trade and energy supply towards China and to reforge relationships with the Chinese state and president Xi. Dragging attention away from China’s proud staging ( and stage management of China’s image) of the games would absolutely not be an aid to enhancing Russia’s standing with Xi.

China is not going to reject a new geopolitical realignment because an invasion happened during the Olympics. 

[astondalston]

Conflicted is a great podcast series in which an ex Al Qaeda member turned MI6 agent gives his view on War on terror events since the Bosnian conflict.

This episode in particular gives some good context to Russian, and particularly Putin’s motivations. Well worth a listen (as is the whole series)

Conflicted: Enter Russia

 

[blandy]

33 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

China is not going to reject a new geopolitical realignment because an invasion happened during the Olympics. 

Of course not. Nevertheless (to me) it’s not baffling that one leader (Putin) understands that the other (Xi), a sport lover who politicises/sports washes/ domestically and internationally presents China’s credentials and standing around sporting excellence, event staging and so on, really would rather that the focus of the world is not dragged away from that Olympian preening right now.

[HanoiVillan]

5 minutes ago, blandy said:

Of course not. Nevertheless (to me) it’s not baffling that one leader (Putin) understands that the other (Xi), a sport lover who politicises/sports washes/ domestically and internationally presents China’s credentials and standing around sporting excellence, event staging and so on, really would rather that the focus of the world is not dragged away from that Olympian preening right now.

I'm not sure what we're arguing about here but this isn't going to be a factor in when an invasion happens, if it happens. 

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I'm not sure what we're arguing about here but this isn't going to be a factor in when an invasion happens, if it happens. 

From my perspective, you appeared to be baffled by and refute any link as pure American bias, assertions Russia won’t invade while the Olympics are on. I think that while I have no idea about the timing generally, that Putin is and will be cognisant of the importance China places on world focus on the olympics and that would be a factor in the timing of any invasion.

personally, I no longer think he will invade at all, I thought if he was going to, he’d have already done it. The “best” moment has passed.  He’ll just keep the fire smouldering, ramping down forces on the borders, ramping them back up, the odd paramilitary incursion…

But what do I know.  

[Awol]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

He’s extremely smart at the short term things, getting what he wants in the here and now. Controlling and influencing people to a very particular purpose. But I think he’s actually pretty awful at the “what next” or longer term stuff. Like with this current shemozzle, he’s got world leaders, serious politicians, diplomats (and also Liz Truss and Bunter) at his beck and call, he’s projecting a “strong Russia” vibe, the world, or the west is fearful and curious. He’s forging renewed pacts with China…and so on.

But all that could lead to cancellation of Nordstream 2, seizure of I’ll gotten wealth, more NATO forces close to Russia, renewed resolve amongst previously fragmenting western nations, financial hardship for Russian people and so on.

That's all true, but if he's betting the farm on rebuilding the Russian Empire as a major geopolitical component of a new Eurasian, rather than Euro-Atlantic dominated world order, it doesn't really matter. 

I'd also question the point about renewed Western resolve, if anything it looks a lot like the original EEC countries are more concerned with avoiding confrontation at all costs than demonstrating solidarity with an Eastern Europe that has good reason to be nervous of Russian ambitions. Even under direct pressure in the WH from Biden, Chancellor Schulz wouldn't commit to binning NS2. Macron's peacocking is just that, seeing everything through the (non-existent) paradigm of EU strategic autonomy.  

But on the more immediate issue of go / no-go, the massive snap exercises with Belorussian forces finish on the 20th of Feb, same day that the Olympics end. Open source analysis shows Russian field hospitals being constructed from Belarus to Crimea, and troops have been surged in from as far away as Siberia. He may not have made a final decision yet, but the level of readiness Russian forces are now at cannot be maintained for weeks and months. The West will not allow Russia a veto over the freedom of democratic sovereign states to decide their own economic and military associations, so Putin either backs down in humiliation or goes to war.  The latter seems more likely, imho.