Russia invades Ukraine

Don't have to be a mindless warmonger to stand up to a bully.

 

You're right, I should have said the countries of NATO rather than NATO as an organisation. Individual states are already pouring weaponary in to help Ukraine. How far are they prepared to go? The longer the war the entrenched all sides will become. Will NATO want Russia right next to Poland?

I mean it's really all pretty pathetic. Pale Blue dot and all that.

 

Someone elsewhere (sorry cant fin the post) mentioned the far right Nazis in Ukraine. Whilst Putin is clearly overplaying that, there have been, even on pro-Ukraine Telegram accounts, photos of Ukranian far-right militia being armed to fight Russia so it's not without its merit, despite the Ukranian leader being Jewish. War and politics always make strange bedfellows.

Who'd have thought that Chechyn's would be fighting for Russia given what they did to Grozny.

 

Nice to be right about something for once. I can go back to being a selfish, pacifist coward now.

 

There's a couple of videos floating about showing Ukranian's coming out to protest at Russian troops in their towns/cities. One even claims to have led to the RUssians leaving (unconfirmed)

 

Here's a video, once of many ive seen of damaged Russian columns of tanks/supply vehicles, with Ukranians taking the diesel from them. Apparently they're using Turkish made drones to wreck a lot of damage. Apparently they are hard to spot as they are quite small and give off very little heat and unfortunately for Russian troops are brutally powerful.

 

WTF?

 

Well, despite studying a doctorate in international politics, I've so far decided to not get involved in this thread. Part of my reasoning for staying quiet, is that, well, my view of what's happening doesn't lay the blame for the conflict entirely at the feet of the Russians.

But, if I may, I just want to make a couple of broad points.

It's still very, very unlikely what's happening in Ukraine will lead to "WW3", as many seem convinced it will, and as many in the media seem to want. The biggest threat to Western security right now is NATO personnel getting caught up in the conflict, delivering arms and other means of assistance to Ukraine. It's not that I fear Russia will strike first, I worry how the West - given our propensity to want to out-do one another with our responses - will respond if NATO personnel were killed. Thing could spiral very quickly. Also, there are some very over emotional juveniles advising president Biden advocating particularly ridiculous measures - such as a no fly zone over Ukraine. Thankfully, Joe hasn't done anything drastic.

Personally, I don't want to send my family or Brits to fight for Ukraine. That's not because I don't believe in freedom or democracy or because I'm a pro-Putin nutter, I just don't see essential to British interests.

In my opinion, the West bears a good 80% responsibility for what's happening. I know that won't go down well here but, as someone who's studied Russo-Western relations for many years, that's how I see it. I know this will likely me a Putin apologist, but whatever. Putin is evidently a thuggish character, but many in my field have been warning this would happen for twenty years or more. NATO expansion is the root cause of this. While it might genuinely have been benign, that isn't how the Russians see it. A country that has a very different historical experience, in terms of invasions, wars etc, than us in the West. What's more, we failed to take Russian concerns seriously. We laughed at them. Trouble is, enjoying the unipolar moment following the end of the Cold War, leaders in the West have subscribed to a fundamentally flawed view of geopolitics. Unfortunately, this crisis has made it clear that realists were right, and that the liberal international order is dead. What do I mean by that? Well, Germany is rearming. Switzerland are revoking their traditionally neutral status. We look set to return to a harsh reality of great powers, security and strategic interests, vying for position, alliances, blocs and so forth. It never really went away. We just thought it did, and now we're scrambling. We over relied on Russian gas and American arms protection, even at a time when the Americans were washing their hands on Europe and moving towards Asia. We've pushed Russia into the arms of China, too, which is perhaps the greatest own goal we've scored. Liberal democracy, economic integration and international institutions were all said to render war a thing of the past. But these were false hopes.

Boris, only a few months ago, laughed at the prospect of major tank battles on European land mass in the future. Those days are gone, he said.

Adapt to the system or it punishes you. We're being punished.

Also, economic sanctions will have been factored in by the Russians. To be secure, nations, like Russia, will tolerate almost any hardship.

Russians also appear to be pulling punches but it looks like their efforts will be ramped up in the next few days. Russians never been great at urban warfare as such. They're using old Soviet aircraft and their oldest armoured vehicles, 50% of those amassed have not committed yet.

Hearts go out to Ukrainians caught up in it. I'm as anti war as anyone. But what really annoys me is that we've encouraged Ukrainians to put themselves in this position by giving them false promise after false promise. It'd have taken them decades to meet the standards to join NATO or the EU. But we promised them anyway. Russia won't tolerate it. Great powers don't tolerate military blocs on their borders (consider the Monroe Doctrine and how the US responded in the Cuban missile crisis).

Anyway, I'll leave it there. Hope we manage to get a ceasefire soon but I suspect this is going to drag on for quite some time, unfortunately.

 

I think you need to study a lot harder. And try reading the words instead of just looking at the pictures.

 

Just one point ........"oldest armoured vehicles, 50% of those amassed have not committed yet.". They can't manage the logistics of that 50%....(fuel and munitions shortages so how will they cope if they commit 100%. I know there is a propaganda war going on here on both sides but there is sufficient video evidence from ordinary people posting on twitter using mobile phones to show that many Russian ground troops are clearly uncomfortable with the situation and not committed. It is a far cry from the ruthless efficient invading force that was the Wehrmacht in WW2

 

I don't think my post made reference to armoured vehicles of any kind.

 

I think it's fair to say he's done his homework, whether you agree with him or not. He's entitled to his opinion without being belittled.

 

What a childish reply to a well thought out post. No issue if you disagree but express why you disagree in a constructive manner.

 

Sorry my post should have been directed to Pinball Wizard who made reference to only 50% committed thus far.
He is well entitled to his views which, admittedly are backed up by study but theory re Geopolitics is one thing but what goes on on the ground and more importantly in the psyche of the Russian troops actually tasked with firing on what may well be Russian civilians trumps the plans of the leadership. Superior numbers and equipment mean jack-sh*t if the troops are not motivated and come up against a determined and committed force (who wouldn't be if they are fighting on home ground and protecting their families and homes). You only have to look at the Russians attempts to subjugate Afghanistan and the US doing the same and both ultimately failing to see that.

 

Wow to say you wasn't go to get involved that's a pretty long thread.

 

I'm not a expert in military strategy. I don't claim anywhere that I am. But I know I've read hundreds of books, peer reviewed articles and written thousands of words myself on matters of international politics and conflict.

My point was that it's easy to get all giddy and think that the Ukrainians are getting the upper hand. The Russians, despite what people might tell you, are not stupid. I added that, from my basic understand of battlefield strategies, the Russians seem to struggle more in urban warfare. I've had a few conversations with other academics and we're still trying to figure out why the Russians are obviously pulling punches. There are several militarily expects confused, but many suggest they'll start to turn the screw soon.

The wehrmacht weren't ruthlessly efficiently. Far from it. That's a western fetishisation of the German forces of WW2. It's bizarre to say the least. But I know what you're trying to say Tekkytyke

The best thing that can come out of this, from a British citizen's point of view, is that Europeans might start taking their security more seriously now and they'll invest more adequately.

Statistyke, if there's a specific area you would like give me a lesson in, speak up. What should I study more? Could you give me a reading list?

Happy to be challenged on any of my views. The whole thing is a tragedy. It could have been avoided but for a lot of Western hubris. Prominent scholars have warned for years that of we kept compressing Russia - granted, not a 'nice' state or regime - then it'll end with Ukraine destroyed. We led Ukraine down the garden path. I'd sooner we ditched our exceptionalism and our pride and understood thay countries like Russia will do almost anything to protect themselves, as would we. We were foolish.

For anyone who's interested, YouTube John Mearsheimer and Ukraine. A lecture of his from 2015 is growing in popularity at the moment, understandably. You'll see a lot of what he said in 2015 is being played out.

Interestingly, I specialise in why great powers persist with conflicts for longer than they originally anticipate, even as they realise they either can't win, or winning will cost far more than they'd like to pay. This could be another case study.

 

I can see a lot of where you're coming from, but I think on a couple of points I would fundamentally disagree, NATO just don't expand themselves, expansion is only possible because the countries that became free after the collapse of the Soviet Union are frightened stiff of Russia, and for good reason...they join the organisation of their own free will, Nato is the only protection they have. Russia has nothing to fear from Nato, there are no Nato countries on their border with the exceptions of Latvia and Estonia, both small nations with populations smaller than Leeds city region, Finland and Sweden are non Nato buffer states as are Belarus and Ukraine, Putin, by his action has actually threatened that status quo.

 

I have often heard a maxim that Urban warfare is a great leveller (in more than one sense of the word). Against determined defenders on home turf it comes down to small groups fighting it out. Tanks mobile artillery are not as much use hence why many times rockets,shelling and missiles are used first. This has both positives and negatives . Demoralising and destruction of infrastructure but derelict buildings make great cover and potential for ambushes and snipers for defenders. It is usually the most bloody and brutal element of war. This is what the Russian army sent in is facing. It is increasingly possible that it may turn into a bloody war of attrition lasting months if not years. Only my opinion you understand.

 

All fair points. And I agree that states should have a right to join whatever organisations they want.

There are issues though. From a British perspective, the problem with admitting countries like Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Romania, Bulgaria etc is that they bring very little to the organisation in terms of military power but they bring huge liabilities. The rounds of NATO expansion in 1999 and 2004 were accepted by Russia because they were too weak to stop it. But we knew that Russia wouldn't tolerate Eastern expansion of NATO, so much so that the West promised Russia that NATO wouldn't expand an inch past Germany. But the Russians were weak, we were over confident and reckless. Ukraine and Georgia were promised admission in 2008, following the Bucharest Summit, and Russia responded in Georgia later that year. That was a warning shot. Remember that NATO was largely created to contain Russia. "Keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down".

And while there's only 2 NATO nations bordering Russia, Russia views the wedge starting with Poland and opening up across Belarus and Ukraine strategically important. Consider how many forces have made their way into Russia across that area.

It took Crimea in 2014 because Sevestopol is the only warm water port Russia has access to. Ukraine joining NATO would likely mean they lost access to it.

Even if Russia knew Ukraine wouldn't join NATO, it feared it becoming a launch past for US hardware. The US has hardware in Ukraine already. Countries don't like having rockets pointed at them. Now Russia is in a position to fight back and it is doing.

It's a tragedy. Awful that the world seems to work like this but it does. Look at Germany, they're rearming in light of this, which no liberal theorist would have predicted.

Ukraine should have been made a buffer state and built up economically. Russians happy, West is happy, Ukrainian living standards rise. Ukraine were never getting into the EU or NATO (too muxh corruption and government ties to neo nazi organisations... thats not a conspiracy by the way) but we lavished them woth promises and they got brave with the Russians.

Zelensky committed his country to destruction when he suggested Ukraine would look to acquire nuclear weapons. Courageous as he may be, he showed a serious lack of experience there.