Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[Davkaus]

1 hour ago, Genie said:

Edward Snowdon needs to arrange a meeting with Putin and take one for the team.

Poor bloke already gave up his life for most people to not give a flying ****. I wonder how much he regrets not keeping his head down and taking that $300k per year.

[Chindie]

44 minutes ago, Mr_Dogg said:

I'm not getting what sabotaging their own equipment does for them?

It's not strictly theirs. It's run by a consortium of companies of various nations, with the majority held by Gazprom.

By attacking it they have an element of deniability, by attacking in international waters they don't risk inviting war by attacking sovereign territory, by doing it at all they draw attention to the fact that these pipelines are vulnerable (and it's unlikely to be a coincidence that this happened right as a non-Russian involved pipeline is about to go online), and it caused immediate increased pressure on the energy market and prices jumped, even though it wasn't actually servicing Europe when it was blown up.

[Marka Ragnos]

2 hours ago, tinker said:

Who's to say Putin's replacement would be less aggressive. The pool of possible candidates is surely built on Putin's mates.

I'm not sure what Russians are being told about the war, I  have seen a few clips of unrest but I would guess these are being over played by the western media.

Putin sets the agenda and controls what the Russians see and to large extent think. The same as we are but to a larger degree. (Look at the Brexit bullshit most of us were sold) 

How can Russia lose this, despite their hopeless military attempt they still have weapons and the safety of a border that they can re group behind, untouched by certain Ukrainian weapons ( a condition of them being supplied). And then attack again and again until they win or get what they want.

Isnt this the way Russia have always fought wars, by throwing Russian lives at it until they win? 

 

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution, even if it rewards bad behavior. The nuclear threat must be scaled back. There's no alternative but to deescalate. The only question are the precise conditions for detente. It's not fair, it won't solve all our problems, and it will make lots of people deservedly and tragically unhappy, but there simply aren't any gainful alternatives. 

I think the West has done a good job of showing that it won't put with Russian aggression, and Ukraine has done the same a thousand times over. That's a valuable demonstration in and of itself, and that may be the only thing Ukraine gets from all this, along with a new sense of its own identity.  

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Marka Ragnos

[Marka Ragnos]

9 hours ago, magnkarl said:

A nuke used in Ukraine would trigger article 5 due to fallout in NATO nations. It's a no go, and Putin knows it.

I would think that Russia would be far more concerned about fallout landing in Russia. As for triggering Article 5, is fallout explicitly mentioned? That seems a little odd to me since environmental effects of wars would presumably all be subject to Article 5's invocation if this were the standard.   

Edited September 28, 2022 by Marka Ragnos

[TheAuthority]

3 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution, even if it rewards bad behavior. The nuclear threat must be scaled back. There's no alternative but to deescalate. The only question are the precise conditions for detente. It's not fair, it won't solve all our problems, and it will make lots of people deservedly and tragically unhappy, but there simply aren't any gainful alternatives. 

I think the West has done a good job of showing that it won't put with Russian aggression, and Ukraine has done the same a thousand times over. That's a valuable demonstration in and of itself, and that may be the only thing Ukraine gets from all this, along with a new sense of its own identity.  

 

Appeasement always seems so reasonable in isolation. Men like Putin are not to be appeased.

[NoelVilla]

Maybe the Russians have a "Hunt for Red October" situation. 

[magnkarl]

11 hours ago, LondonLax said:

I’ve not yet heard a convincing argument as to Russia being the culprit for blowing up their own assets. It kind of **** their negotiation position, they can no longer dangle the carrot of gas to a desperate Germany in the middle of winter. It’s more probable some other party have just put further pressure on Russia by removing one of their strongest cards.

Putin got to power by what many experts say were self inflicted attacks and explosions internally to scare the population. It's not a new thing for Russia to self-sabotage.

[LondonLax]

4 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Putin got to power by what many experts say were self inflicted attacks and explosions internally to scare the population. It's not a new thing for Russia to self-sabotage.

I do understand that, but there was a clear benefit for him to use the crisis he created in those examples.

Blowing up these pipelines benefits others far more than it benefits Putin as you yourself noted (calling it stupid move by Russia). 

[magnkarl]

12 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I do understand that, but there was a clear benefit for him to use the crisis he created in those examples.

Blowing up these pipelines benefits others far more than it benefits Putin as you yourself noted (calling it stupid move by Russia). 

And I concur that it is stupid, but it wouldn't be the first time Putin did stupid things. He held a speech before this whole thing started saying he wouldn't send conscripts, now he's flooding in conscripts with no gear. He said it wasn't a war. Now he's mobilising, he keeps pushing people out of windows, he's essentially ruined any military export for Russia for the next 10 years due to the complete failure of their gear, he's lost his flag ship by having it far too close to Ukraine, he's imploded his own economy even if he was warned.

The guy isn't smart. He's a bully that shouldn't be appeased until the Russians sort him out themselves. He lives isolated in an echo chamber of idiots that keep telling him that all is grand, until he meets people who tells him to his face that they won't stand for it (China, Kazakhstan, India++), which then induces a reaction like we've now seen with sending 60-year olds to war with rusty kalashnikovs. 

[tinker]

The pipe being deystroyed means Putin can't use it as leverage when the temperatures drop and gas usage rises.

Once people start feeling the cold the problems will start, my Hive and the Mrs have made that fact perfectly clear after yesterday's slight temperature drop. 

If there's no option to use Russian gas then the discussion ends right there. If I had to guess who took the pipe out then American or the UK would be my best bet. 

[magnkarl]

14 minutes ago, tinker said:

The pipe being deystroyed means Putin can't use it as leverage when the temperatures drop and gas usage rises.

Once people start feeling the cold the problems will start, my Hive and the Mrs have made that fact perfectly clear after yesterday's slight temperature drop. 

If there's no option to use Russian gas then the discussion ends right there. If I had to guess who took the pipe out then American or the UK would be my best bet. 

The U.K doesn't use Russian gas (in a big way anyway). We've got a pipeline straight from Norway which supplies most of our need. I assume it won't be long until Norway agrees to cap the price for NATO allies, which will essentially implode the price for Russian gas too. Norway can afford it, Russia can't.

Source

Edited September 28, 2022 by magnkarl

[tinker]

5 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution, even if it rewards bad behavior. The nuclear threat must be scaled back. There's no alternative but to deescalate. The only question are the precise conditions for detente. It's not fair, it won't solve all our problems, and it will make lots of people deservedly and tragically unhappy, but there simply aren't any gainful alternatives. 

I think the West has done a good job of showing that it won't put with Russian aggression, and Ukraine has done the same a thousand times over. That's a valuable demonstration in and of itself, and that may be the only thing Ukraine gets from all this, along with a new sense of its own identity.  

 

I think ultimately your right as sad as that seems. What happens after that is what matters and our reliance on cheap Russian commodities has to end. Russian influence over our politicians also has to be investigated and stopped and their manipulation of social media also has to be investigated. 

Maybe it will force our politicians to start thinking about insulating our homes correctly and investing in the renewable energy sector,  via windfall taxes? 

[tinker]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

The U.K doesn't use Russian gas (in a big way anyway). We've got a pipeline straight from Norway which supplies most of our need. I assume it won't be long until Norway agrees to cap the price for NATO allies, which will essentially implode the price for Russian gas too. Norway can afford it, Russia can't.

It's the wholesale price that will rise that will cause the UK and Europe to suffer. A cap could help but I can't see it helping enough.

[magnkarl]

5 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution, even if it rewards bad behavior. The nuclear threat must be scaled back. There's no alternative but to deescalate. The only question are the precise conditions for detente. It's not fair, it won't solve all our problems, and it will make lots of people deservedly and tragically unhappy, but there simply aren't any gainful alternatives. 

I think the West has done a good job of showing that it won't put with Russian aggression, and Ukraine has done the same a thousand times over. That's a valuable demonstration in and of itself, and that may be the only thing Ukraine gets from all this, along with a new sense of its own identity.  

 

It's not 'The West' that decides what Ukraine should do. It's Ukraine. It's none of our business to tell a country that's essentially been raped and pillaged by Russia to do anything they don't want to. That is typical Chomsky\'Stop the war' thought processes that are outdated and frankly likely paid for by Russia.

[magnkarl]

2 minutes ago, tinker said:

It's the wholesale price that will rise that will cause the UK and Europe to suffer. A cap could help but I can't see it helping enough.

The wholesale price in Europe will effectively be what the US and Norway decides, as Europe will in large parts stay off of Russian product. If Norway caps the price it'd massively reduce the price automatically (also i.e. to Turkey) as they are now Europe's largest supplier. If other suppliers wanted to compete with Norway it'd drive the prices down, not up.

[magnkarl]

6 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I would think that Russia would be far more concerned about fallout landing in Russia. As for triggering Article 5, is fallout explicitly mentioned? That seems a little odd to me since environmental effects of wars would presumably all be subject to Article 5's invocation if this were the standard.   

There's environmental effects, and then there's nuclear fallout. 

If Russia Uses a WMD in Ukraine, the Fallout Could Trigger a NATO Response, Key Lawmaker Says

Quote

Russian use of a weapon of mass destruction in Ukraine could trigger NATO’s collective defense pact if any fallout drifts into an allied country, the leader of the Senate Armed Services Committee said Wednesday.

It's something the U.S has been very clear on.

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by magnkarl

[sidcow]

6 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution

What do you think Macron and Scholtz have been doing in all these phone calls? It's a total waste of time. 

Even China have said it must stop. The man won't listen. 

[magnkarl]

Russian propaganda at its finest.

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by magnkarl

[mjmooney]

9 hours ago, tinker said:

Isnt this the way Russia have always fought wars, by throwing Russian lives at it until they win? 

Historically, yes. 

Doesn't work in the 21st Century. 

 

[avfc1982am]

7 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I think ultimately we will find no way forward in the West until we sit down with Putin and work out a solution, even if it rewards bad behavior. The nuclear threat must be scaled back. There's no alternative but to deescalate. The only question are the precise conditions for detente. It's not fair, it won't solve all our problems, and it will make lots of people deservedly and tragically unhappy, but there simply aren't any gainful alternatives. 

I think the West has done a good job of showing that it won't put with Russian aggression, and Ukraine has done the same a thousand times over. That's a valuable demonstration in and of itself, and that may be the only thing Ukraine gets from all this, along with a new sense of its own identity.  

 

Is that you Scholz?? 

You couldn't have bent over any better tbh with your comments. I see what you're suggesting but you really are missing the crux of the problem in de-escalation in your format. Ukraine will be the ones to ultimately decide when this ends. Not us or Putin but Ukraine. And if walking away and giving Putin what he wants is your idea of a show of force and demonstration of Western defiance then I think you haven't really thought this through. With all respect Marka.