Author Topic: Putin... Why?  (Read 11507 times)

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Putin... Why?
« on: January 24, 2022, 02:27:35 PM »
I just got around to watching Game of Thrones. All the scheming, killing, war and it ends were it begins. those that survived arguably no better off certainly not for the the majority that did the fighting, the cannon fodder of the rich and in charge.

Why is Putin willing to risk the unthinkable? What does he really gain if he wins? And for those that will do the fighting, what's the point?

War what is it good for..... 

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2022, 03:14:09 PM »
First thing to remember about Putin is that he is where he is.  Like many of us in that respect, indeed!  He's already chopped off several bits of Ukraine already, so it's not a blank paper exercise where normal relations, either with that country or with Nato, are foreseeably on the table.  Nor does political retirement seem like an option:  being president might be keeping him out of jail (sound familiar from anywhere?) but also more drastically may be keeping him alive.

So that leaves a bracket between nationalist brinkmanship, and outright adventurism.  Which is the more likely?  It's very hard to say.  To repeat a trope that's not remotely original to me, for all that Russia is well-known for its chess players, Putin's game is much more like poker.  Much as he'll want to maximise what he can get from bluffing, if it's clear he's always bluffing, that ceases to be effective.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2022, 03:32:12 PM »
Well, his demands for peaceful resolution make it pretty clear. He wants to prevent more NATO countries from reaching Russia's border - primarily Ukraine. And he wants NATO to back out of the baltic states.

Also Finland and Sweden.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2022, 03:33:50 PM »
And Germany and England  most likley.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2022, 03:37:49 PM »
This notion of his that NATO has been pushing aggressively toward his border is a song he's been singing for at least ten years, so it's not out of the blue in this instance.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2022, 03:41:14 PM »
I mean, I do kind of see the point while wholeheartedly disagreeing with the threat against Ukraine. We wouldn't take it too lightly if Mexico started taking steps to enter into military alliance with Russia. Especially if they had already got Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua into the pact.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2022, 03:50:09 PM »
So he wants to go back in time when USSR was 'great'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59730522

Last week, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov unveiled draft security agreements that Moscow wants America to sign. They would provide a legally binding guarantee that Nato will give up military activity in Eastern Europe and Ukraine. The proposals would appear to prohibit Nato deployments to countries that joined the alliance after 1997. Russia is also demanding an end to Nato enlargement in former Soviet territory.

Quote
"Because for Russia this is a question of life or death." - Mr Kiselev says.

But is it?

Say Russian invades and wins Ukraine without triggering a world war... What does it gain. 
In the 21 century when economics are so interconnected what's the point in these games?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2022, 04:10:54 PM »
I though NATO stopped trying to expand 20 sum years ago, really the number of exercises and stuff like that has greatly decreased over time.

As a aside into dated thinking...
Quote
In 2021, Billionaire hedge fund manager Ray Dalio placed the chance of a civil war in America in the next 5 to 10 years at 30%, citing "bad financial conditions and intense conflict."

Recent polls suggest that 50% fear civil war is inevitable, a large percentage of that have people preparing. 

If such a thing were to happen who would gain. How would anyone (other then the few very rich) be better off.?

With what we know of history and the absurdly of such wars and posturing WTF are we thinking? Why play the game.

   

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2022, 04:43:57 PM »
I though NATO stopped trying to expand 20 sum years ago, really the number of exercises and stuff like that has greatly decreased over time.

Nato actually expanded two years ago, and has three countries on its "application list".  But it's certainly been "de-focused" by the US -- right after being the only country ever to invoke its mutual-defence clause, pretty much.  The whole "pivot to China", or to "Jyna", depending on your president at the time.

And Germany and England  most likley.
Germany and where?  Why are we bandying other subnational entities here?  :)  Or "not real countries" as Putin himself might put it!

He wants to prevent more NATO countries from reaching Russia's border - primarily Ukraine.
Vlad taps his translation earphone, miming confusion.  "Russia's border...  Ukraine...  not hearing difference."

BTW, this is why Ukrainians get so annoyed when English speakers say "the Ukraine".  It's a distinction that doesn't even exist in the relevant Slavic languages, but if you're parsing it for nuance, it sounds even more like it's being demoted from a country to a landform.  Rather a country called "Border", it's now just "the border".

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2022, 05:28:22 PM »
I mean, I do kind of see the point while wholeheartedly disagreeing with the threat against Ukraine. We wouldn't take it too lightly if Mexico started taking steps to enter into military alliance with Russia. Especially if they had already got Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua into the pact.

Don't swallow Putin's bloody propaganda which persistently reverses cause and effect.

He already has invaded or otherwise threatens to invade EVERY neighboring nation. The countries that weren't part of any westerna alliance -- Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine, those are the ones he invaded *first*.

He's not planning to invade Ukraine because it's going to enter NATO -- it's the other way around, Ukraine wants to enter NATO because Russia has ALREADY INVADED IT! And the only reason that Russia doesn't want Ukraine to enter NATO, is because Russia wants to grab even more territory from Ukraine (possibly just conquer Ukraine its entirety).

This whole thing is practically identical to nazi propaganda in the 1930s about the West was "surrounding" Germany, by making an alliance with Poland to defend it against Hitler's aggression.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2022, 06:11:11 PM »
I must have missed his plan to invade Finland, Finland, Mongolia, China, and North Korea.

Problem is that the world considers the ex-Soviet republics to be sovereign, independent countries, and Putin's attitude is more "ehhhh... <waggles hand>  ... kinda-sorta."

Clearly it's not legitimate to act on such notions, but it's clearly not unique to Putin, as far as domestic politics go.  Or perhaps we should say, it's not so much a perception Putin necessarily has, as one he's very happy to exploit.

While we're making woolly comparisons, one that springs to mind is if Pennsylvania and the entirety of the states of the North-East region had seceded thirty years ago...  and were now loudly discussing joining some organisation themed around militarily confronting the USA and nuking it in an act of mutually assured destruction if push came to shove.  There'd probably be...  unhappiness about that in Rump America.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2022, 09:06:43 PM »
Lengthy segment on the BBC's Newsnight on the Ukraine sitch.  Their diplomatic editor (and former tanker (not to be confused with tankie!)) Mark Urban with a package on "things Russia and Nato might haggle over short of their 'New Yalta' position", and a zoom/studio interview with Kurt "sanctions now!" Volker and Kadri Liik from the European Council on Foreign Relations.  Interesting, but I'm bewildered as before, if not more so!  Wildly divergent prognostications on whether he's just looking for a pretext and opportunity to invade, or whether there's some set of concessions he'd settle for.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2022, 10:52:29 AM »
I must have missed his plan to invade Finland, Finland, Mongolia, China, and North Korea.

Okay, you're correct he doesn't plan to invade Mongolia, China or North Korea.

Finland (and Finland) most definitely, though, don't worry.

Quote
Problem is that the world considers the ex-Soviet republics to be sovereign, independent countries, and Putin's attitude is more "ehhhh... <waggles hand>  ... kinda-sorta."

Clearly it's not legitimate to act on such notions, but it's clearly not unique to Putin, as far as domestic politics go.  Or perhaps we should say, it's not so much a perception Putin necessarily has, as one he's very happy to exploit.

While we're making woolly comparisons, one that springs to mind is if Pennsylvania and the entirety of the states of the North-East region had seceded thirty years ago...  and were now loudly discussing joining some organisation themed around militarily confronting the USA and nuking it in an act of mutually assured destruction if push came to shove.  There'd probably be...  unhappiness about that in Rump America.

I have very little tolerance for such apologetics towards imperialistic Hitleric conquerors.

Russia SUPPOSEDLY recognized those nations as independent.

That Putin regrets such recognition doesn't mean a blasted thing. Similarly Hitler I'm sure regretted that Poland was recognized as an independent nation after WW1.

Now Russia, just like Hitler after WW1, wants to reverse with a new World War, the defeat that his nation suffered at the end of the Cold War, when many nations became independent and FREE from Russian and Soviet tyranny.

Apologetics about that, and how it's all so "understandable" are despicable.

Lengthy segment on the BBC's Newsnight on the Ukraine sitch.  Their diplomatic editor (and former tanker (not to be confused with tankie!)) Mark Urban with a package on "things Russia and Nato might haggle over short of their 'New Yalta' position", and a zoom/studio interview with Kurt "sanctions now!" Volker and Kadri Liik from the European Council on Foreign Relations.  Interesting, but I'm bewildered as before, if not more so!  Wildly divergent prognostications on whether he's just looking for a pretext and opportunity to invade, or whether there's some set of concessions he'd settle for.

We should learn from bloody History. Each "concession" merely increases the appetite of the villain.

For Hitler after the Rhineland, came the Anschlus of Austria, and after the Anschluss came Sudetenland, and after Sudetenland came the rest of Czechoslovakia, and after Czechoslovakia came Poland, and (finally) WW2.

For Putin after Transnistria, came Abkhazia. After Abkhazia came South Ossetia. After South Ossetia came Crimea. After Crimea came Donbas. And now after Donbas, comes the rest of Ukraine.

Time & time again shows that concession to a villainous imperialist merely make everything worse.

Idiots want us to concede towards Putin the same way that Chamberlain made a pact in Munich with Hitler to recognize his conquest of Sudetenland.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2022, 10:57:50 AM by Aris Katsaris »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2022, 12:42:03 PM »
Instead let's just go to war with Russia. What could go wrong? Everybody likes to blame Chamberlain, but what was he supposed to do, exactly? Bomb Dusseldorf? There is only one way to stop Putin, and that is to go to war with him. Which is exceedingly dangerous. Okay, technically maybe you could ward him off with massive deployments of NATO troops to Ukraine. Does that really make sense? Threats of economic sanction have historically been not good enough, and right now even the US is already exempting energy from sanction threats which is the biggest lever.

Let's say you're in charge of not only US foreign policy, but also all of Europe, Aris. What's you next move that isn't appeasement and saves Ukraine?

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2022, 12:53:42 PM »
Finland (and Finland) most definitely, though, don't worry.
"Finland 2" is my pet name for Norway, of course.  (Oops, I hate that the BB software has such a narrow time interval for fixing brainfarts.)

Quote
I have very little tolerance for such apologetics towards imperialistic Hitleric conquerors.
And very little line of argument either evidently, which is either a great combination or a terrible one, depending on how you look at it.  Noun, verb, Hitler!

Quote
Russia SUPPOSEDLY recognized those nations as independent.
Did you miss the whole "not legitimate" part?  Or just find it inconvenient for a rant you felt coming anyway?

Quote
Apologetics about that, and how it's all so "understandable" are despicable.
Good luck addressing a problem by loudly burnishing your determination not to understand it.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2022, 01:08:44 PM »
Threats of economic sanction have historically been not good enough, and right now even the US is already exempting energy from sanction threats which is the biggest lever.
In much the same way that the entire 45th US presidency makes great sense as a say to transfer funds from US taxpayers by way of a series of golf-club hotel-room rentals, the whole energy thing just seems like a massive win-win-win for Putin.  Antics on Ukraine's border drives gas prices up, Russia makes a ton of money.  Sanctions on the same gas would cause a huuuuge price spike...  and we'd expect them to be universally observed, and watertight?  Just doesn't sound remotely practically or politically workable to me.  Depending on exactly how bad things yet, which as I say is entirely opaque to me.  Best of luck to the rest of of you mystics!

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #16 on: January 25, 2022, 02:26:04 PM »
Let's say you're in charge of not only US foreign policy, but also all of Europe, Aris. What's you next move that isn't appeasement and saves Ukraine?

If I was God-emperor of United States and Europe?

- A declaration that an invasion of Ukraine and any further violation of its border by the Russian army (beyond what is established in Crimea) will be treated as a declaration of war against the whole of Europe & USA, a promise to protect Ukraine's sovereignty as if it were our own.

- Deploy (with Ukraine's permission of course) armed forces inside Ukraine, to defend it from attack.

- Demand from Russia that either Russia return Crimea to Ukraine, or atleast offer monetary compensation for its crime in annexing Crimea. If it doesn't, more sanctions on Russia, and confiscation of Russian state property abroad, as well as the confiscation of the property of Kremlin-aligned oligarchs, in the united states and europe.

- Arm Ukraine and every other Eastern European nation with a couple nuclear weapons each, so that they can defend themselves if Russia attacks them.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #17 on: January 25, 2022, 03:01:00 PM »
It seems to me there are some actual details on the ground that would help me to personally assess what I think of any of this. I won't get them, ever, but I'm aware that without this knowledge I could only guess based on abstract logic what is going on over there. I definitely wouldn't trust Western press about it. But I wouldn't trust Russian press either. So that's an issue.

Just as an example of the information I am utterly lacking is what the actual situation is with NATO (U.S.) bases in Eastern Europe. Like, what are they doing, when were they installed, what is their ostensible purpose, etc. I would need to know this in order to evaluate Putin's complaints. It's entirely within the realm of possibiliy that they are peacekeeping bases and Putin doesn't like that they protect countries he'd like to threaten. It's also within the realm of possibility that their main purpose to exist is to threaten Russia just on principle, flaring up tensions to justify large military expenditures in the Eastern Bloc area. The whole thing could be a spending boondoggle. Or a necessary defense. Or mindless sabre rattling. Hard for me to say what I think of Putin's POV without knowing more about this.

Then on the other side of things is the actual situation in some of the ex-Soviet areas. For instance, is Russia potentially on the defensive in some respects, having to take action to prevent others seizing necessary assets of theirs, or is it the reverse, that they are greedily looking at assets they would like. Are old official (or unofficial) bargains made in the late 80's being broken by either side? Putin has claimed many times that the agreement the USSR made with the West when it gave up has been breached by NATO. How the heck could I really verify if that's true? I can say that I have no trust at all in these major national powers having innate goodwill. It is totally possible the West has reneged on agreements made and cornered Russia. Like I said, maybe possible narratives could emerge depending on what's actually been going on.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #18 on: January 25, 2022, 03:15:51 PM »
Sorry, last sentence should say "many possible narratives."

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #19 on: January 25, 2022, 03:32:15 PM »
Let's say you're in charge of not only US foreign policy, but also all of Europe, Aris. What's you next move that isn't appeasement and saves Ukraine?

If I was God-emperor of United States and Europe?

- A declaration that an invasion of Ukraine and any further violation of its border by the Russian army (beyond what is established in Crimea) will be treated as a declaration of war against the whole of Europe & USA, a promise to protect Ukraine's sovereignty as if it were our own.

- Deploy (with Ukraine's permission of course) armed forces inside Ukraine, to defend it from attack.

- Demand from Russia that either Russia return Crimea to Ukraine, or atleast offer monetary compensation for its crime in annexing Crimea. If it doesn't, more sanctions on Russia, and confiscation of Russian state property abroad, as well as the confiscation of the property of Kremlin-aligned oligarchs, in the united states and europe.

- Arm Ukraine and every other Eastern European nation with a couple nuclear weapons each, so that they can defend themselves if Russia attacks them.

Seems like you are ready to start World War III.  As President of the USA how would you justify this brinksmanship to the people who elected you.  How does USA benefit from this?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #20 on: January 25, 2022, 03:42:19 PM »
As for why Putin is doing what he's doing and why now, I'm sure there are a lot of reasons but one more of them I didn't see mentioned is because he can. Nobody can take the American will to defend anyone else seriously after what we just saw happen in Afghanistan. We didn't have what it took to defend a burgeoning democracy from a lightly armed ragtag gang of sex slavers after over a year of zero combat casualties, people we knew and loved, served with and lived alongside for years, people we made promises and commitments to, people we in the end despite all of that betrayed anyway. Nobody believes that we will put it all on the line to defend Ukraine from Russia. We don't have strong ties with Ukraine. We don't have obligations. We don't have common bonds forged on the battlefield by two decades of war. I'm sure they are great people. I'm sure they deserve better than what's happening to them and what might happen. They deserve better than the America they are getting. We all do. It would be nice if Russia believed we might step up, if there were a plausible deterrent, but any possibility of that died along with democracy and women's rights in Afghanistan. We are woke and meek, broke and weak. The cavalry is not on the way. Good luck.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #21 on: January 25, 2022, 03:51:11 PM »
We are woke and meek, broke and weak.
So, current US policy -- nay, entire society! -- is terrible and wrong.  Cherry post situation normal.  But same question to you:  if you were US president, what would you do be doing?  Or even for that matter, if you were Agent Smith, and able to have a super-majority of (young, able-bodied, etc) mini-cherries acting exactly as you'd wish, what'd (all y'all) you do?

You needn't stint on telling the Europeans what we should be about.  L-wd knows there's plenty of blame to go around there.  The Irish reaction is especially darkly hilarious.  After a sustained period of hand-wringing and telling other people what they should be doing, the political class here has rather abruptly run out of all rhetorical road when Russia announced a naval exercise in the Irish maritime EEZ.  At which point the "nothing to do with us, we're neutral, someone else do something!" line completely explodes over everyone's face.  That means Ireland is the only party able to do anything about it...  and won't be doing anything about it.  Probably not even monitoring it, due to lack of capacity, and surfeit of general embarrassment.  "Hi, massive Russian fleet?  This is the LÉ Tiny Tiddler Patrol Boat...  would you like us to make you an nice cuppan tae, maybe?"

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #22 on: January 25, 2022, 04:24:58 PM »
As for why Putin is doing what he's doing and why now, I'm sure there are a lot of reasons but one more of them I didn't see mentioned is because he can. Nobody can take the American will to defend anyone else seriously after what we just saw happen in Afghanistan. We didn't have what it took to defend a burgeoning democracy from a lightly armed ragtag gang of sex slavers after over a year of zero combat casualties, people we knew and loved, served with and lived alongside for years, people we made promises and commitments to, people we in the end despite all of that betrayed anyway. Nobody believes that we will put it all on the line to defend Ukraine from Russia. We don't have strong ties with Ukraine. We don't have obligations. We don't have common bonds forged on the battlefield by two decades of war. I'm sure they are great people. I'm sure they deserve better than what's happening to them and what might happen. They deserve better than the America they are getting. We all do. It would be nice if Russia believed we might step up, if there were a plausible deterrent, but any possibility of that died along with democracy and women's rights in Afghanistan. We are woke and meek, broke and weak. The cavalry is not on the way. Good luck.

I agree one of the biggest reason is because Putin can and in the past 20+ years a lot of reason why he might think that the West does not have the will to stop them

Afghanistan was lost in 2003 when the US went to war with Iraq. And again Russia had the same experience with Afghanistan so they ought to know better.

Putin may want to bring back the good old days but the good old days methods don't work, But then learning from History is for losers   

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #23 on: January 25, 2022, 05:03:53 PM »
Just as an example of the information I am utterly lacking is what the actual situation is with NATO (U.S.) bases in Eastern Europe. Like, what are they doing, when were they installed, what is their ostensible purpose, etc. I would need to know this in order to evaluate Putin's complaints. It's entirely within the realm of possibiliy that they are peacekeeping bases and Putin doesn't like that they protect countries he'd like to threaten.
Purpose?  That's necessarily rather fuzzy, isn't it?

When they were installed is (relatively) easy enough, and likewise what troops are deployed when.  You might need to dig slightly deeper than the Western press, and into the upper levels of defence policy wonkery, though that's not a hard-and-fast distinction either.  But they're not "USA (doing business as Nato, Inc)", it is actually a multinational organisation, y'know.  Poland might have a US-led brigade forward-deployed there one year, and then an entirely different one from various other countries the next cycle, possibly with a different US battlegroup in another country by then.

They're definitely not peacekeepers, it's a mutual defence body.  By treaty it's explicitly defensive: "Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked."  OTOH, a jaded Russian eye is going to look at said "defensive alliance", and see a certain family resemblance to the participants in assorted "coalitions of the willing".

Quote
It's also within the realm of possibility that their main purpose to exist is to threaten Russia just on principle, flaring up tensions to justify large military expenditures in the Eastern Bloc area.
If you recall the Tony Soprano-like rhetoric from a certain Former Administration, most of the members don't even meet Nato's own guideline on spending.  (Not that contrary to that Fa--  fine fellow, that's "spending", not "protection money owed to the US", of course.)  Whether you consider that as "large" or not may also vary.  Granting that Poland and the Baltic States all do -- not entirely coincidentally you might think.  I was a little surprised to learn that the biggest spender (proportionate to GDP, which is how the guideline is framed) is actually not the US but Greece.  While Turkey, which has a huge standing army, is significantly below the 2%.  (Traditionally of course their main interest is in possible war with each other, so this almost feels like it should be in a separate column.)

Quote
For instance, is Russia potentially on the defensive in some respects, having to take action to prevent others seizing necessary assets of theirs, or is it the reverse, that they are greedily looking at assets they would like.
Greed and necessity are rather difficult to objectively tell apart.  "We want peace, but we need to achieve it from a position of strength!" -- every warmonger, since always.  Is Russia entitled to a warm-water port?  To have contiguous access to all its own territory?  To militarily protect the interests of all its citizens?  To ensure self-determination of areas with Russian majorities?  Russian sentiments on such matters and international law don't necessarily coincide -- surprise-surprise.  (Not something unique to Russia, of course, but there are degrees...)

Quote
Are old official (or unofficial) bargains made in the late 80's being broken by either side? Putin has claimed many times that the agreement the USSR made with the West when it gave up has been breached by NATO.
No (and yes).  Respectively.  Though they were more related to the reunification of Germany, than to the breakup of the USSR, which was far more of a self-inflicted...  injury?  Improvement?  Process?  Let's just just "thing", I guess.  James Baker and Helmut Kohl gave "assurances" to Gorbachev, but they weren't affirmed by Bush or by the Nato structure, so not really binding even at the time.  And definitely not in any treaty, so absolutely not binding on future Western governments -- much less the Eastern European ones, more to the point.  But this is a huge part of the narrative in Russia -- I'd say "understandably", clearly others feel that only sentences using every possible part of speech, conjugation and declension of the word "Hitler" can suffice -- and very clearly not some personal quirk of Putin.  If anyone, pin the start of in on Boris Yeltsin...  pretty much the person who did break up the USSR, if we're going to ascribe it to just a single individual.

Putin may want to bring back the good old days but the good old days methods don't work, But then learning from History is for losers   
A popular evaluation of Putin is that he's a great tactician, but a terrible strategist.  But that's also related to the question of whether he's acting in his own interests, or of his country's.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #24 on: January 25, 2022, 05:23:31 PM »
Seems like you are ready to start World War III.

No, it seems to me that you are, by appeasing Putin.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #25 on: January 25, 2022, 06:19:11 PM »
Well gee, Aris, you got it all figured out. Hey, while we're at it we can just make the same declaration about Taiwan - heck how about the whole world? And nobody ever gets invaded again.

#1 - making such a declaration could precipitate immediate invasion with the guess that we won't actually go all in

#2 - same thing with starting deployments. Remember the part where Putin already has a massive army on Ukraine's border?

#3 - bordering nukes. Got it. Triggering several Cuban Missile crises all at the same time. Like that one didn't come close enough to armageddon.

Oh, and yeah NATO is defensive. Well if you ignore Bosnia? To say nothing of NATO countries acting unilaterally.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #26 on: January 25, 2022, 06:28:08 PM »
After a sustained period of hand-wringing and telling other people what they should be doing, the political class here has rather abruptly run out of all rhetorical road when Russia announced a naval exercise in the Irish maritime EEZ.
Apparently there's a response to this in train.  Someone has decided to...  sail out to the exercise area in their yacht (yes, their yacht) and to...  hold up a sign telling them to please leave.  I shizzle ye not.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2022, 08:56:54 PM »
Well gee, Aris, you got it all figured out. Hey, while we're at it we can just make the same declaration about Taiwan - heck how about the whole world? And nobody ever gets invaded again.

Yes, the concept called "internationally recognized borders", and not counting Putin's invasions, and a couple other incidences around the world, the world has been remarkably good the last 70 years about averting invasions, conquests and annexations, WHENEVER EVERYONE AGREES TO GANG UP ON THE INVADER.

Occasionally there's a country that tries to think it can escape with annexing a neighbouring nation (see Iraq attacking Kuwait) usually caused by some superpower winking at it and saying "we won't actually mind if you annex your neighbouring nation".

So, yes, the thing that actually allows Peace, is everyone's determination to go to War against invaders.

And the thing that actually enables War (like the first Gulf War) is when moral cowards are saying that they won't go to war over some minor invasion of a neighbouring nation.

Quote
#2 - same thing with starting deployments. Remember the part where Putin already has a massive army on Ukraine's border?

Yes, that massive army is much less likely to attack if it needs to kill also Americans and Europeans, rather than Ukrainians which of course don't really matter.

I don't see you explaining how we'll avoid a Putin invasion, according to your brilliant tactic of letting him conquer the whole of Ukraine.

Quote
#3 - bordering nukes. Got it. Triggering several Cuban Missile crises all at the same time. Like that one didn't come close enough to armageddon.

Russia should feel free to unilaterally disarm, if Russia thinks that having nuclear weapons is bad and doesn't do anything to protect a nation from invasion.

Quote
Oh, and yeah NATO is defensive. Well if you ignore Bosnia? To say nothing of NATO countries acting unilaterally.

Hell, yes, NATO is a defensive alliance. Do you think that (a) Estonia entered NATO in order to grab a piece of Russia or (b) Estonia entered NATO in order to protect itself from Russia

dingdingding it was (b). Which means that NATO is a defensive alliance, with a defensive purpose. And every nation joining it, is in order to *defend* themselves from Russia, not in order to attack it.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2022, 09:32:23 PM »
- A declaration that an invasion of Ukraine and any further violation of its border by the Russian army (beyond what is established in Crimea) will be treated as a declaration of war against the whole of Europe & USA, a promise to protect Ukraine's sovereignty as if it were our own.
I assume beyond Donetsk and Luhansk too, unless you're retro-declaring war immediately, or assuming that those were put down spontaneously during your coronation.

Quote
- Deploy (with Ukraine's permission of course) armed forces inside Ukraine, to defend it from attack.
Permission?  By assumption, you're god-emperor of Ukraine!  (Ireland sends cheese in humble tribute.  Grass-fed!  Ish.  The UK wonders aloud, "is this the Brexit we voted for?")

Quote
- Demand from Russia that either Russia return Crimea to Ukraine, or atleast offer monetary compensation for its crime in annexing Crimea. If it doesn't, more sanctions on Russia, and confiscation of Russian state property abroad, as well as the confiscation of the property of Kremlin-aligned oligarchs, in the united states and europe.
"How much for just the peninsula," to paraphrase John M. Ford.  Are we assessing this as cash-value of the region, regardless of the wishes of the inhabitants, or more by way of a sort of "fine" for violating international law?  Talking of which...

Quote
- Arm Ukraine and every other Eastern European nation with a couple nuclear weapons each, so that they can defend themselves if Russia attacks them.
In order lawfully not to exceed even your divine-rulerly powers, missing step here of either "all concerned give three months' notice of withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty", or else if you go with the Nato legal theory on this, "declare a state of general war".  (Probably also speed-acceding Ukraine to Nato, but that kinda implicit in what you set out anyway.)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2022, 10:48:49 PM »
Quote
I don't see you explaining how we'll avoid a Putin invasion, according to your brilliant tactic of letting him conquer the whole of Ukraine.

Frankly I don't think we can deter Putin's invasion without paying too high a price for it. We could also offer Putin trillions of dollars to not invade, that would probably work, at least for a while. Let's point out that massive fortifications and promises of defense didn't exactly stop Germany from taking a little stroll into Poland, Belgium and beyond. As much as appeasement didn't work, neither did the alternatives that followed appeasement.

Quote
Recognising that Poland was likely to be Germany's next target, they gave guarantees to defend Polish independence. Britain and France, who had renewed their entente in February, began joint military planning. Both countries continued rearming and in April 1939 Britain introduced peacetime conscription for the first time in its history. However, war was still viewed as a last resort.

Wow, its kind of like offering guarantees to defend Ukrainian independence, huh? Worked great. Might have been necessary and morally correct to go to war in retaliation for the invasion of Poland, but what it most definitely did not do is stop the invasion.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2022, 11:24:31 PM »
Frankly I don't think we can deter Putin's invasion without paying too high a price for it.
That's the full-pot-value question, isn't it?  How much of a price are "we" prepared to pay.  And which of "us" do "we" think should be paying it?

Quote
We could also offer Putin trillions of dollars to not invade, that would probably work, at least for a while.
Danegeld, Danes...

Quote
Let's point out that massive fortifications and promises of defense didn't exactly stop Germany from taking a little stroll into Poland, Belgium and beyond.
In the interests of accuracy, neither Poland nor Belgium (on different borders in different directions, indeed) had the massive fortifications.  That was specifically France.

Quote
Wow, its kind of like offering guarantees to defend Ukrainian independence, huh? Worked great. Might have been necessary and morally correct to go to war in retaliation for the invasion of Poland, but what it most definitely did not do is stop the invasion.
Britain and France very clearly didn't have the military means to defend Poland -- France couldn't even defend itself, with Expeditionary Force help, and the UK only by dint of the Channel and such fortunate contingencies.  Nato pretty clearly does have the means to defend Ukraine (or would, if it had the political will).

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2022, 11:25:53 PM »
NewsnightWatch:  British LibDem almost declares war...  on the wrong side.

"... we're on the brink of war with Ukraine...  and Russia involved."  Just about saved that one.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2022, 09:39:31 AM »
Britain and France very clearly didn't have the military means to defend Poland -- France couldn't even defend itself, with Expeditionary Force help, and the UK only by dint of the Channel and such fortunate contingencies.  Nato pretty clearly does have the means to defend Ukraine (or would, if it had the political will).

If France had tried to defend Poland, they might not have made the mistakes that kept them from successfully defending themselves. The Fall of France was enabled by atrocious mistakes by French generals and truly unfortunate good luck for the Germans.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2022, 10:56:52 AM »
Britain and France very clearly didn't have the military means to defend Poland -- France couldn't even defend itself, with Expeditionary Force help, and the UK only by dint of the Channel and such fortunate contingencies.  Nato pretty clearly does have the means to defend Ukraine (or would, if it had the political will).

If France had tried to defend Poland, they might not have made the mistakes that kept them from successfully defending themselves. The Fall of France was enabled by atrocious mistakes by French generals and truly unfortunate good luck for the Germans.

One of the biggest issues that the Allies had to overcome at the beginning of WW2 was updating thier thinking on war.

I suspect the same problem today on both sides. Conventional war no loner makes sense to achieve what one imagines is gain.
 

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2022, 11:03:21 AM »
All of the military deterrence strategies being proposed assumes that Putin wouldn't relish a hot war with the west. Are we sure about that? In a limited theatre, presuming we aren't going to start sorties on Moscow and triggering a true WW3? The "let's declare protection for Ukraine strategy hinges on Putin backing down.

Quote
The Fall of France was enabled by atrocious mistakes by French generals and truly unfortunate good luck for the Germans.

And we don't think it is possible for American generals to make atrocious mistakes then? Or at least to be ineffective? Let's remember that the Russians have 100,000 troops already in place. We've put 8500 on alert. How quickly do you think the US could deploy or redeploy troops? We could try the whole "no fly zone" deal with air superiority, but that doesn't really stop an invasion. I don't think this military option is as solid and easy as you seem to think. We might win eventually, but lets remember that we're dealing here with a pretty modern army. Not like Iraq. There would be really high casualties on both sides, like Normandy high.

Honestly, the biggest deterrent to Putin invading is the collective memory of trying to occupy Afghanistan, and how much worse Ukraine would be potentially on that front.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2022, 12:34:20 PM »
Given the risks of escalation, I don't think war is Putin's preferred outcome. Whether or not he finds it an acceptable outcome is the question, which probably depends on his estimation of the US's ability to turn his army into dog meat.

It's very tempting to think Russia's lost the ability to operate a truly modern military system. Which moves them more towards the Iraq level of capabilities. They may have lots of effective equipment but that doesn't mean they can use it well enough to keep the US from using it for target practice. It also depends on the US making an effort rather than simply bluffing.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2022, 02:46:07 PM »
If France had tried to defend Poland, they might not have made the mistakes that kept them from successfully defending themselves.
Or more likely, accelerated the process.  See also, war on two fronts, division of forces, etc.

Honestly, the biggest deterrent to Putin invading is the collective memory of trying to occupy Afghanistan, and how much worse Ukraine would be potentially on that front.
Afghanistan kinda has form in that area.  Let's not make light of their track record!  But wholesale and long-term occupation sounds pretty grim, sure.  But there's all sorts of options that might be running through Putin's nasty little mind short of that.  There's the "push on Kyiv, install a puppet" theory the Brits have been floating.  There's pushing out from Donbas, maybe creating a corridor to Crimea.  Bear in mind there's a lot of ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, and even some Russian citizens.  Not by all means all secessionists, but on average less outraged by the idea than the ethnic Ukrainians.  There's just continuing to rack up the tension to keep gas prices nice and high, and get attention for whatever unreasonable demand he happens to have that week.

Given the risks of escalation, I don't think war is Putin's preferred outcome. Whether or not he finds it an acceptable outcome is the question, which probably depends on his estimation of the US's ability to turn his army into dog meat.
He has to first estimate the US willingness, and that's by most calculations been pretty low for quite a while.  Lots of "don't vote for That Candidate, we'll end up in a war with Russia!" memes six years ago.  "No more foreign wars!" was a pretty popular sentiment even back when those were costing the US zero casualties.  What's the appetite for a conflict where the stakes very quickly start at 'entire forward-deployed armoured battalion killed or captured' and potentially escalate to "full nuclear exchange"?

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2022, 02:52:51 PM »
Germany would have been the ones fighting on two fronts if France had done more than sit on their ass while Poland was invaded. During the invasion of Poland, France wasn't really fighting on the one front they did have.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2022, 03:04:49 PM »
France was stuck in the past behind of the Maginot line.

All this posturing, a relic of the past... we have no idea

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2022, 03:22:04 PM »
Basic hex-and-counter-wargame revision, people!

If you split the French army between two entirely separate fronts, then the Germans don't have to fight on both at the same time, they get to pick which they think is the weaker...  your plan having just drastically weakened one of them further.  And you'll recall they did pretty well against the entire French army, as reinforced by the BEF (forward defence for the UK, so that part makes a certain basic strategic sense, in the way that a FEF in Poland would not have), rather than just roughly half of it.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #40 on: January 26, 2022, 03:34:01 PM »
Except the Germans do have to fight on both fronts because the French would be invading Germany with intent. Concentrating on one front at the expense of the other wouldn't work (if the French had actually comprised a second front), they didn't have the troops or the depth.

They beat the French army by the skin of their teeth. If any of a half-dozen things hadn't broken their way, they would have gotten bogged down and stalemated, if not routed completely. And if the French had realized sticking on the defensive was a recipe for failure, at least half of those things would have gone very badly for the Germans indeed.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #41 on: January 26, 2022, 03:43:52 PM »
I'm not even quite clear which bad strategy you're arguing for in which hypothetical situation now.  Having clearly unwisely split the French forces to go on the offensive on (say) the French front, if Germany attacks on the Polish ones?  That's just doubling down on the initial blunder.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #42 on: January 26, 2022, 03:51:56 PM »
So the Germans take Warsaw while the French take Berlin. Doesn't seem like a bad strategy to me.  Or the Germans get stuck in Alsace-Lorraine, Belgium or Pais-de-Calais while the Poles take Berlin. You're over-estimating the capabilities of the German army they had absolutely no ability to fight on multiple fronts. 

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #43 on: January 26, 2022, 05:04:58 PM »
So France in this case is executing a pincer movement where they sail their troops in the North Sea to land on the Polish coast, past presumably a number of U-Boats that probably don't want all those troops to land. While simultaneously invading Germany pre-emptively? But no, we were stipulating defensive action I think. So the other half of French forces wait on the border for their Eastern border troops to get deployed and ready.

Now, let's wonder how the French are planning to resupply that Army in Poland. They have no ammo dumps there, and it is unclear how much fuel the Polish have available for them. Not to mention food and other necessities.

I'm not sure what any of that buys you versus France saying "If you invade Poland, we'll attack you from the West". Considering that to invade Poland, Germany still has to split its forces because it wouldn't want to leave the western border undefended.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #44 on: January 26, 2022, 05:16:25 PM »
They left a skeleton force on their Western border and gambled that France would let them get away with it. Which France did. You're right that a credible threat from the French to invade would have severely complicated Germany's strategy.

I know there were some plans to land reinforcements in Danzig but I don't know how realistic they were.

alai

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #45 on: January 26, 2022, 06:03:33 PM »
Bonus "Putin war aim" theory from Channel 4 News:  seize Mariupol.  This is Russian-speaking, and is part of the Donetsk region, so the obvious strategy there would be to (pretend to) use the Donbas separatists (see also:  Little Green Men).  As well as red meat to the Greater New Old New Russia base, apparently also logistically useful in relation to Crimea.  Port currently militarily blockaded by the Russians, by way of their control of both sides of the Kerch Strait.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #46 on: January 27, 2022, 04:29:22 PM »
Why do they keep talking about a cease-fire? Shouldn't it be something like dont-start-fire?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #47 on: January 27, 2022, 04:40:24 PM »
Why do they keep talking about a cease-fire? Shouldn't it be something like dont-start-fire?

There is already fighting of Russian backed separatist forces in Ukraine. Which previous administrations didn't want to see
(Ukrainian Russian separatist includes Russian solders that removed thier identification so we could pretend Russia wasn't involved. !00,000 troops on the boarder, were not the agressor you are... and it works on Fox  )

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #48 on: January 27, 2022, 08:46:04 PM »
There is already fighting of Russian backed separatist forces in Ukraine. Which previous administrations didn't want to see
(Ukrainian Russian separatist includes Russian solders that removed thier identification so we could pretend Russia wasn't involved. !00,000 troops on the boarder, were not the agressor you are... and it works on Fox  )

Don't be so quick to assume you know anything about what's really going on. I read a Reddit comment today from someone in the Ukraine claiming that it's known there that it was a Ukrainian person who had been abused and snapped, shooting at his own people. Is that a real story, or a Russia sock puppet? Or just made up. And you can ask the same questions about what you're hearing.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Putin... Why?
« Reply #49 on: January 27, 2022, 11:46:36 PM »
It's unlikely we'll get into a hot war with Russia to save Ukraine after we just pulled out of Afghanistan because among a number of other reasons it would give the appearance that we believe white people are worth saving but Arabs are not. The only offset to that fact is that almost all of the people we'd be killing would also be white people and while that's enough for a large number of the woke crowd, it's dicey, I'd say only a 40% chance, if it would tip over to include most of them. Many of the woke crowd are vegans and generally don't support people killing people because they see humans as animals too deserving of protection, but if it was pointed out that many vegans would see a drastic reduction in the human animal population as being the best possible thing to happen to the rest of the animals, I don't have evidence to disagree. You get into the weeds a little bit there though because though they wouldn't mind the humans killing each other, especially since they'd practically all be whites, there would inevitably be non-human animals that are caught in the crossfire or suffer indirectly and that's a hill too high to die on.