Russia-Ukrainian War

[Xerxes]

3 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Its a simple equation here I think - strategically who cares more about this piece of land called Ukraine…….the West (EU/NATO/USA) or Russia?

 

That is a great point !

But i would say that point had a shelf-life that ended by the invasion. Now, the perspectives are very different.

If before we were toying with the Ukrainians, not being able to decide how much we ought to care, it is different now. 

 

 

[changegonnacome]

42 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

Now, the perspectives are very different.

If before we were toying with the Ukrainians, not being able to decide how much we ought to care, it is different now. 

 
True - it’s become a proxy fight now between the US & Russia……how can the US save face if the most logical Ukrainian-Russia ‘peace deal’ is one where Russia clearly achieved its stated strategic aim > i.e. no NATO expansion into Ukraine…..funnily enough Finland & Sweden’s accession into NATO might be an ‘out’ for everybody…..the US can say it back fired on Russia as NATO has two new members one on Russia’s doorstep, we in the West actually ‘won’….Russia can say who’s cares about Finland/Sweden wedged up in the Nordics, Russian security is predicated on the Eastern front from continental Europe going through Belarus & Ukraine, remaining either neutral or in the case Belarus a vassal state. Russia says it won. 

Edited April 18, 2022 by changegonnacome

[SharperDingaan]

Dropping a nuke WILL provoke a response. Most would expect it to be conventional precision weapons, targeting all high-value targets in the Ukraine theatre, including leadership, and the pipelines carrying Russian gas. US gives the weapons to the UN, and UN participants prosecute the strikes.

 

The Russian calculus relies on the US not matching the ante (by supplying the required weaponry), for fear of nuclear retaliation. The reality of course is that MADD immediately ratchets up the ante for all - as soon as any one player goes nuclear. The weaponry has little choice but to flow.

 

The Ukraine needs an interim  political solution. Most would expect a return to a cold-war iron curtain that includes parts of the Ukraine, NATO missiles parked in nearby countries, and the Ukraine in the middle; growing food. Nobody 'likes' it, it simply freezes the situation; but its the Russia 'old-men' know. Do nothing further, and over the next 30 years, they will all be dead from old age. 

 

All things Russian, point back to Putin. The reality is that 'Putin in a box' pops the boil, and allows the sepsis to safely drain out; the mystery is what comes after, and who does the deed. The reluctance is that whatever precedent is set, it could in-turn, be used on you. Hence, the preference for internal resolution, and limited outside 'official' help.

 

A nuke comes down, Russian forces in the Ukraine get annihilated, and the Iron Curtain comes down very rapidly. Obviously, not the optimum solution.

 

SD   

Edited April 19, 2022 by SharperDingaan

[no_free_lunch]

17 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 
True - it’s become a proxy fight now between the US & Russia……how can the US save face if the most logical Ukrainian-Russia ‘peace deal’ is one where Russia clearly achieved its stated strategic aim > i.e. no NATO expansion into Ukraine…..funnily enough Finland & Sweden’s accession into NATO might be an ‘out’ for everybody…..the US can say it back fired on Russia as NATO has two new members one on Russia’s doorstep, we in the West actually ‘won’….Russia can say who’s cares about Finland/Sweden wedged up in the Nordics, Russian security is predicated on the Eastern front from continental Europe going through Belarus & Ukraine, remaining either neutral or in the case Belarus a vassal state. Russia says it won. 

 

My take, based on reading random Ukrainian sources, is that they don't trust Russia to honor any agreements. I agree it's a proxy war but from what I can tell the average Ukrainian isn't interested in signing an agreement that won't be honored. It's not the US pulling the strings, the people there just understand what they are up against. 

[Xerxes]

6 minutes ago, SharperDingaan said:

Dropping a nuke WILL provoke a response. Most would expect it to be conventional precision weapons, targeting all high-value targets in the Ukraine theatre, including leadership, and the pipelines carrying Russian gas. US gives the weapons to the UN, and UN participants prosecute the strikes.

 

 

Who is saying it doesn’t ? The escalation ladder is what we are talking about. What response they expect vs what is given. Given all mishaps we saw in the past 8 weeks, I would say it is more likely than not that there is a huge mismatch on the escalation ladder and threshold. Moscow has a clear threshold and we don’t what that is. 
 

That said your point & Spek point differ that he is talking about direct conventional limited response within Ukraine by NATO. You are taking about U.S. increasing its supply of weaponry to UN.
 

This is not going to be Gulf War & Kuwait 2.0.
 

Pipeline carrying Russian gas does not need to be blown off, to add more damages to the Ukrainian infrastructure, the end customer can just stop receiving it and default on its contractual obligations (and deal with its consequences). Why blow off pipeline. (Other than have more business for Brookfield Infrastructure at a later date)

I guess we have different perspectives. 

 

 

[SharperDingaan]

Agreed, it's simply different POV's.

 

Putin cannot afford to lose, simply because he has too much on the table. He needs a victory in the east, a Ukraine annexation (before May 9 Victory Day), and can only continue doubling down. Should the new push fail, the remaining choices are biological or nuclear - both of which will provoke a GLOBAL response..

 

NATO, and UN participants, are NOT the same thing - the US supplying weapons via the UN does not trigger a NATO response.  The Gulf Wars and Kuwait were coalition forces, the same as the GLOBAL escalation response would very likely be. NATO does not go to war.

 

If you are going to escalate, you burn the boats (blow the pipelines). The objective is a decisive win as rapidly as possible, avoidance of a WWIII via an end to the escalation, and European (German) ongoing commitment. The world bears the temporary costs (higher gas prices), it does so because it is cheaper than escalation into WWIII, and it tries to minimize costs by getting to a practical political solution, as rapidly as possible 

 

All else equal, it will be brutal, but Russia should win the current push. But it is somewhat questionable if the Ukraine has access to unlimited supplies of western high-tech weaponry - hence the threats to cease supplying it. Of course - that is unlikely to happen. 

 

Russia is collapsing, and it is using its last reserves on Donbas. They fail to annex, the Iron Curtain comes down very quickly, and we get the political 'compromise'. 

 

Different POV.

 

SD

Edited April 19, 2022 by SharperDingaan

[Xerxes]

Understood. Cheers. 
 

I would just mention that the wrinkle would be that Russia has veto power in the UN Security Council. We can argue the flaws of the system, but for now it is what it is. 
 

UN was pretty much ignored by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld as they prepared to march the legions to Gaul for glory in 2003. So not only Moscow & Beijing can veto everything they can also ignore it as a dead body (Ala John Bolton)
 

A UN move would be symbolic, but agree that if works would be a clever way to go around the NATO dilemma. 

[no_free_lunch]

For what it's worth the Russian government and the Russian propaganda accounts I follow specifically mentioned and denied the possible use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine. I feel the arguments in its favor are written here by people who really are not following in detail the nuances of the Russian stance.  I don't think Russia has even done everything they can with conventional weapons yet.  They are not carpet bombing cities for instance.  Despite threats of murder they continue to acquire and trade prisoners of war. 

 

None of the above is to give a pass to the many war crimes committed but just a reflection of the realities on the field. 

 

They are waging a very real propaganda war, one which some in our country and certainly in Russia aligned countries buy into.  All attempts to ignore this in people's feigned understanding of Russian intention feel weak.  I cannot stress that enough. You need to consider and spend some time looking at their perspective to guess at their actions.

 

My theory is look for conventional escalation, murder of POWs, use of gas, other provocation first before nukes. 

[Xerxes]

47 minutes ago, no_free_lunch said:

For what it's worth the Russian government and the Russian propaganda accounts I follow specifically mentioned and denied the possible use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine. I feel the arguments in its favor are written here by people who really are not following in detail the nuances of the Russian stance.  I don't think Russia has even done everything they can with conventional weapons yet.  They are not carpet bombing cities for instance.  Despite threats of murder they continue to acquire and trade prisoners of war. 

 

None of the above is to give a pass to the many war crimes committed but just a reflection of the realities on the field. 

 

They are waging a very real propaganda war, one which some in our country and certainly in Russia aligned countries buy into.  All attempts to ignore this in people's feigned understanding of Russian intention feel weak.  I cannot stress that enough. You need to consider and spend some time looking at their perspective to guess at their actions.

 

My theory is look for conventional escalation, murder of POWs, use of gas, other provocation first before nukes. 

Russian state prepared their people in 2014 for what was coming. In 2022, complete opposite. No preparation. Despite the obvious signs of an army massing near the border and even going to Belarusia. 
 

I believe (with no evidence) that even foreign minister Lavrov didn’t know what was in Putin mind only weeks away from the invasion. 
 

I believe what Russian state says and what Putin decides to do are two different things.  And things happen the way they did, because he chose to make it a fait accompli

no time for internal dissent.
 

On nukes, Russian state is doing is job in signalling what they have told to signal, that is there is no escalation to that. But If it does happen i don’t expect it to be signalled in advance. 
 

it is already a long war and the day is still long. We are at year 8 and counting.

[no_free_lunch]

I disagree that the invasion was not signalled. It seems there was a legion of Russian trolls making the case for it well in advance.  I remember coming across comments on different platforms where they would advocate for war and lay out the various arguments. 

 

I am seeing the same type of accounts say specifically that they won't use nukes. Or at least the more respectable ones. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by no_free_lunch

[Spekulatius]

58 minutes ago, no_free_lunch said:

I disagree that the invasion was not signalled. It seems there was a legion of Russian trolls making the case for it well in advance.  I remember coming across comments on different platforms where they would advocate for war and lay out the various arguments. 

 

I am seeing the same type of accounts say specifically that they won't use nukes. Or at least the more respectable ones. 

The Russian  are far away still from using nukes. Keep in mind that the Russian aren’t even in a war yet, it’s still a special operation. If they keep losing (not a given in my opinion) then the next escalation steps are:

1) Officially declare war

2) Mobilize (to get more conscripts)

3) Total conventional war (the entire Russian economy will be switched to war footing)

4) potential  nuke strike.

 

 

So we are still 2-3 escalation steps away from a potential nuke use. In my opinion, I nuclear escalation right now is very very unlikely because Putin would basically jump several escalation steps, which imo does not make much sense.

 

FWIW, I actually think that Putin is fairly predictable at this point.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Spekulatius

[patience_and_focus]

This is very gutsy to do in Russia right now. No idea if this is general sentiment or just one pissed off rich guy venting loss of money and stature -

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/19/russian-bank-founder-oleg-tinkov-condemns-ukraine-war-seeks-putin-exit.html

"Tinkov, in an impassioned Instagram post, also claimed that “90% of Russians are AGAINST this war!” He also argued that the remaining 10% are “morons,” and that the Russian army has been exposed as ’sh---y.”"

 

[Ulti]

https://www.thebulwark.com/i-commanded-u-s-army-europe-heres-what-i-saw-in-the-russian-and-ukrainian-armies/

[SharperDingaan]

Had a couple of games of chess recently with some Russian friends, all of whom had retired and escaped from Russia many years ago. Already good to start with, they have all have dramatically improved their 'game' over the last few months. Learnt all kinds of new ways of doing things.

 

The Russian goods, vs currency, FX rate is dramatically different - and widening. Cross the border with a railcar of Beluga Vodka under a layer of coal, and in some places - it will buy you an entire house.

 

SD

 

[no_free_lunch]

Fires reported at a Russian research facility and at a large chemical plant.  Similar to the sunken Moskva these are clearly just "accidents".  It's also possible that hybrid wars play in both directions. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by no_free_lunch

[Pelagic]

An interesting interview with a captured Russian airborne soldier. Taking him at face value, it's amazing how little preparation they received for the invasion. No briefing or battle plan or anything really, just board helicopters and fly into Ukraine.

 

 

[Xerxes]

I am telling you guys the whole thing was made up in Putin’ brain on the go. Even internally at the highest level they were probably shocked. If soldiers were not ready, don’t think their people were ready in contrast to the 2014 annexation.  
 

it was an internal shock and awe as well as an external one.  

[no_free_lunch]

The population was prepared.  You can tell us all you want but I saw the trolls advocate for war.

 

 The specifics of the attack were likely held close to the chest but that's a different thing.  

[Xerxes]

Everything is relative. If there was 10,000 trolls in 2014 and 50 trolls in 2022, it doesn’t make my argument wrong. Now I was neither paying attention to the trolls then and now. But I have seen the comparison argument in the western media a lot (The Economist even had an essay on it calling the contrast with 2014 odd), which made the whole thing confusing to decipher leading up to the war. 
 

Anyways. Point taken you saw some trolls. Agree to disagree. 
 

 

[Spekulatius]

6 hours ago, Xerxes said:

I am telling you guys the whole thing was made up in Putin’ brain on the go. Even internally at the highest level they were probably shocked. If soldiers were not ready, don’t think their people were ready in contrast to the 2014 annexation.  
 

it was an internal shock and awe as well as an external one.  

No, this attack was prepared for quite some time. The buildup of forces took month. It’s just that the cannon fodder soldiers were not prepared. They were informed on a need to know basis and it turned out they knew less than they needed to.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

Guys 

I am NOT talking about massing armies. Or doing war maneuvers. 
 

all of which they have done on and off as early as April 2021. 
 

the average joe sitting in Moscow coffee having that latte didn’t see it coming. (An actual all out invasion). Even the spy chief on public TV was off the rail when talking with Putin and that was not staged. 

[Castanza]

11 hours ago, Xerxes said:

Guys 

I am NOT talking about massing armies. Or doing war maneuvers. 
 

all of which they have done on and off as early as April 2021. 
 

the average joe sitting in Moscow coffee having that latte didn’t see it coming. (An actual all out invasion). Even the spy chief on public TV was off the rail when talking with Putin and that was not staged. 

That’s just denial though. Same thing had always happened throughout history and especially during modern times. People ignored 70k civ causalities during the GWOT. People in China probably ignore Uighur situation and people in Russia ignored their military buildup. 

[Spekulatius]

13 hours ago, Xerxes said:

Guys 

I am NOT talking about massing armies. Or doing war maneuvers. 
 

all of which they have done on and off as early as April 2021. 
 

the average joe sitting in Moscow coffee having that latte didn’t see it coming. (An actual all out invasion). Even the spy chief on public TV was off the rail when talking with Putin and that was not staged. 

I think you are right about the average Joe ( or Ivan) not see the war coming. Most people in Ukraine did not see it coming either.

[Benderok]

Yeah you are both right that the average person in Russia didn't see it coming and those who did couldn't imagine in their dreams such a scale. I think the reason for that being is that everyone who even loosely followed the situation from 2014 just got tired of this stuff coming from this TV's as well as the TV propaganda would never tell them what was actually developing there, even if we think they knew something. Xerxes's observation on spy chief is spot on i think. 

[SharperDingaan]

Think in terms of impact x probability. At the top of the chain, people very likely saw high impact, but almost no probability of it occurring - as it just wasn't rational. Then Putin goes crazy, and they all have to follow. 

 

The generals will all be familiar with Hitler's failed foray into Russia. Their best hope is that Ukraine falls, failing which what happened to von Brauchitsch happens to them.  https://www.britannica.com/biography/Walther-von-Brauchitsch

 

SD