Russia invasion of Ukraine

[mangamuscle]

No, it has not happened, yet; but I am old enough to clearly see what is coming and why.

The USA has the Manifest Destiny set of beliefs. Russia has something similar and up to the fall of the USSR one could say it was a matter of time until they became a worldwide empire. But that is over now and it is clear to see that Putin wants to reverse the tides of history. On the other side, the pandemic has made Putin's popularity deep to unprecedented levels and just like in the USA, a quick fix is a quick military victory, i.e. like Dubya did in Iraq.

It is obvious that the "red lines" Putin keeps warning about are things that would make an invasion more lengthily or even unfeasible. The fabricated migrant crisis in Belarus has the obvious intention to create a constant flux of migrants into the EU that would distract resources and maybe even allow some commandos to target key infrastructure at the right moment.

Another distraction would be if Putin can convince or coerce China of invading Taiwan, they know the USA can be 100% effective in two simultaneous war theaters. China also believes it is their historic right to rule over Taiwan and Xi Jin Ping popularity in China is also declining thanks to the effects of the pandemic.

All in all this reminds me of world war I, troops are in the move and at the right moment a fabricated excuse will mark the moment shit hits the fan.

If anyone is thinking "why now?" the answer is easy, because as times goes on it would become impossible for Russia to invade due to increased Military might of the Ukraine Army and inevitable economical decline of Russia. Thorium reactors are being tested atm in China and Indonesia and there will be a quick shift from oil (which represents about 30% of Russia's GDP) to nuclear energy for electricity production in a few years time.

[TheForsaken]

You should stop consume Western media. There is nothing but "China bad, Russia evil" there.

No, Russia is not going to invade Ukraine.
What do they even need Ukraine for? Ukraine is worthless.
The only thing that Russia wants is Crimea and they already have it.

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

Xi Jin Ping popularity in China is also declining thanks to the effects of the pandemic.

This is delusional lol
CCP's popularity and support in China is higher than ever thanks to their extremely effective control of the pandemic.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by TheForsaken

You should stop consume Western media. There is nothing but "China bad, Russia evil" there.

No, Russia is not going to invade Ukraine.
What do they even need Ukraine for? Ukraine is worthless.
The only thing that Russia wants is Crimea and they already have it.


This is delusional lol
CCP's popularity and support in China is higher than ever thanks to their extremely effective control of the pandemic.

We must instead consume CCP pravda and pretend Taiwan or Uighur don't exist as propaganda A is bad but propaganda B is good.

[Jaden]

No, Russia is not going to invade Ukraine.
What do they even need Ukraine for? Ukraine is worthless.
The only thing that Russia wants is Crimea and they already have it.

I don't really believe Putin is planning any invasions, either.

But with your logic we should also ask: Why did they want Crimea so badly? Russians had easy access to it before, and they suffered lots of sanctions in exchange for little value. The whole affair had some "we take it because we can" energy, it was a show of strength that was popular domestically.

So they could try similar things elsewhere - incite rebellion in some border region by subverting the local Russian speaking population or some other group, declare that territory their protectorate, then roll in the tanks to crush opposition. Could be in Ukraine, or maybe Belarus or even like Estonia. And that kind of manuever could easily spark a war.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Jaden

I don't really believe Putin is planning any invasions, either.

But with your logic we should also ask: Why did they want Crimea so badly? Russians had easy access to it before, and they suffered lots of sanctions in exchange for little value. The whole affair had some "we take it because we can" energy, it was a show of strength that was popular domestically.

The ''best'' reason I did heard was a possible wish to get a buffer zone betweem them and NATO and better acces to the black sea.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

The ''best'' reason I did heard was a possible wish to get a buffer zone betweem them and NATO and better acces to the black sea.

This twitter thread is the best rundown of the situation I have seen.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1466807256285171717

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

This twitter thread is the best rundown of the situation I have seen.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1466807256285171717

Putin are better explained as driven by compellence/deterrence

I would have to disagree on that important detail. NATO and the EU have never military threatened the USSR/Russia, it has always been the other way around. Any long range weapons are there for retaliatory strikes.

That is not to say that Putin does not want a buffer zone, but not one against military offenses, the one thing he fears the most is the expansion of democracy. Let's face it, Russia is an oligarchy (and the USSR was also one). That is the reason Ukraine is pro-western values, that is why Lukashenko in Belarus lost the election and why Russia has mounted missinformation campaign against the EU for years, watch a few minutes of RT (Russia Today) channel to get what I mean.

So Putin is trying to strong arm Ukraine into submission, but he is failing and painting himself on a corner. The thing is that he is playing the long game, he can have those troops on the border for years, waiting for the best moment to attack while repeating ad nauseum that he has no hostile intentions, just like he did with Crimea.

The thing is, NATO should be worried, the invasion of Crimea has many parallels with the German invasion of the Rhineland and if he gets Ukraine there is no reason to think he would stop at that (for starters, Moldova is neither part of NATO or the EU), remember that:

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile — hoping it will eat him last.

BTW, if China gets Taiwan, there is no reason for them to stop at that, the Philippines would give them more control of maritime lines than those scrawny man made islands.

[McW]

No one seem to care what Crimea wants, imo all this is more alike Texa, California cases...

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by McW

No one seem to care what Crimea wants, imo all this is more alike Texa, California cases...

After Russia's annexation of Crimea, they have made like China did in Tibet and incentivized the migration into the peninsula:

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-soc...on-expert.html

This has exacerbated the fresh water supply problem and no one would be surprised if the mission Russian troops stationed in Crimea have is to take control of the North Crimean Canal of the Dnieper river.

[AnimeFan188]

U.S. Military Steps Up Planning For Evacuation Operation In Ukraine
As Crisis Deepens: Report

"The Pentagon has been conducting more immediate planning for potential evacuations of
U.S. diplomatic personnel and other American nationals from Ukraine in the event of a
new, large-scale Russian military intervention into that country, according to a report from
CNN. At the same time, U.S. officials are warning that there may be limited options to
deter the Kremlin from conducting such an operation. This news came ahead of a virtual
summit between U.S. President Joe Biden's with Russian President Vladimir Putin today
over this brewing crisis, with intelligence assessments already warning for weeks that
Russia could launch a new invasion of its neighbor as soon as January.

Victoria Nuland, the U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, included details
about U.S. military contingency planning in briefings to members of Congress on Dec. 6,
2021, according to CNN. The State Department would need to formally request support
from the Department of Defense to carry out a so-called non-combatant evacuation
operation, or NEO, before any such mission could be carried out."

See:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...deepens-report

[ramlaen]

Sorry Ukraine but under the bus you go.

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden...4a37fa325f07b5

Administration officials have suggested that the U.S. will press Ukraine to formally cede a measure of autonomy to eastern Ukrainian lands now controlled by Russia-backed separatists who rose up against Kyiv in 2014.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

Sorry Ukraine but under the bus you go.

I think it is too early to say that, diplomats are in the initial sage of trying to negotiate some kind of peace deal.

The more I think about it, this situation is a mirror image of the iraq war. Back then iraq was under Russia's sphere of influence but they didn't risk going to war directly with the USA, they just gave military support. The USA btw used the lame WMD excuse to start that war.

Back then it had been decades since the last big armed conflict the USA had fought (the vietnam war, which btw, they lost).

As a mirror image, the autocratic saddam regime is the opposite of the democratically elected ukraine government.

The thing is, if the USA gives the Ukraine army weapons that negate Russia air superiority and gives Ukraine economical support (while giving Russia thought economical sanctions), this could easily become another afganistan that would bankrupt putin in the long run, he desperately need an easy win and no doubt will try to destabilize the government in Kiev and maybe even resort to assassinations or bomb attacks).

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

The more I think about it, this situation is a mirror image of the iraq war. Back then iraq was under Russia's sphere of influence but they didn't risk going to war directly with the USA, they just gave military support. The USA btw used the lame WMD excuse to start that war.

Back then it had been decades since the last big armed conflict the USA had fought (the vietnam war, which btw, they lost).

The Gulf war started when the Iraqi army invaded its neighbors, not because Iraq had chemical weapons.

The Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973 and the last US soldiers withdrew from Vietnam in 1975, 16 years before the Gulf war.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

The Gulf war started when the Iraqi army invaded its neighbors, not because Iraq had chemical weapons.

You are talking about the time Bush senior repelled the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam (which was a relatively short offensive which lasted a little over a month). I am talking about the Invasion of Iraq by the allied forces under the pretense of the existence of WMD.

The Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973 and the last US soldiers withdrew from Vietnam in 1975, 16 years before the Gulf war.

It was in 2003 when the allied forced invaded Iraq, about three decades later than the Paris accords. The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan was completed on February 15, 1989, so yeah, it has already been three decades since the Russian army has been part of a major offensive (which btw, they lost).

Just this morning I heard Putin is talking about Genocide in the Donbass region committed supposedly by Ukraine military forces, ahh, the smell of a lame excuse for war first thing in the morning.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

You are talking about the time Bush senior repelled the invasion of Kuwait by Saddam (which was a relatively short offensive which lasted a little over a month). I am talking about the Invasion of Iraq by the allied forces under the pretense of the existence of WMD.



It was in 2003 when the allied forced invaded Iraq, about three decades later than the Paris accords. The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan was completed on February 15, 1989, so yeah, it has already been three decades since the Russian army has been part of a major offensive (which btw, they lost).

I wasn't sure if you were talking about the 1991 or 2003 war because you said "Back then it had been decades since the last big armed conflict the USA had fought" and the 1991 war was a far bigger conflict than the 2003 war.

Just this morning I heard Putin is talking about Genocide in the Donbass region committed supposedly by Ukraine military forces, ahh, the smell of a lame excuse for war first thing in the morning.

He has another neighbor he can look at if he wants an actual example, but like you say it is just posturing on his part.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

the 1991 war was a far bigger conflict than the 2003 war.

By which metric? The prior was the expulsion of an unwelcome invading force and the Kuwait government did paid the bill for military expenses. The latter was the invasion of a country which had plenty of experience after being at war with Iran for a decade. At first the casualties expected from the USA army were thought to be similar to those from the Vietnam war, but superior technology did paid out in the end. Which does not change it was a lengthily and costly occupation with its share of crippled for life war veterans.

Putin expects to quickly squash Ukraine like they did with Chechnya, but even if he does not, it is not exaggeration to say Vladimir has been preparing for this war since he became Russia's head of state. I am no mind reader, but the reason the USSR fell was because they went over budget with the war in Afghanistan, if you look now they have a very low debt to gdp ratio, he is prepared for this war to last for years if needs be and squash any internal revolts like Lukashenko is doing atm in Belarus.

[ramlaen]

Originally Posted by mangamuscle

By which metric? The prior was the expulsion of an unwelcome invading force and the Kuwait government did paid the bill for military expenses. The latter was the invasion of a country which had plenty of experience after being at war with Iran for a decade. At first the casualties expected from the USA army were thought to be similar to those from the Vietnam war, but superior technology did paid out in the end.

There were some 3x the number of soldiers involved in the 1991 war.

While outmatched, the Iraqi army in 1991 was capable and actually able to fight back.

Veterans of the Iran-Iraq war were a greater factor in the 1991 war than in the 2003 war.

Kuwait paid for some of the coalitions expenses, but this is irrelevant to how big or small a conflict the 1991 war was.

The Iraqi army was broken in 1991, the primary reason Saddam was not deposed then was due to the UN coalition being explicitly formed to repel the invasion of Kuwait and not to overthrow the Iraqi government (similar to the purpose of UN forces in the Korean war).

Which does not change it was a lengthily and costly occupation with its share of crippled for life war veterans.

The Iraqi insurgency and Iraqi civil war are separate events from the 2003 invasion.

[mangamuscle]

Originally Posted by ramlaen

The Iraqi army was broken in 1991, the primary reason Saddam was not deposed then was due to the UN coalition being explicitly formed to repel the invasion of Kuwait and not to overthrow the Iraqi government (similar to the purpose of UN forces in the Korean war).

The Iraqi insurgency and Iraqi civil war are separate events from the 2003 invasion.

That is BS. You can't separate the war fom the invasion, the reason bush senior didn't invade was precisely because it would entail a great cost in time, money and military personnel lives. Simply defeating saddam hussein (or any other dictator) does not mean he or some other autocrat (who you can bet will not be an ally of the USA) would seize power or worse, Iran could have moved in an set a puppet government.

But back to the main subject:

Germany is set to close almost half of its nuclear power capacity before the end of the year

https://www.yahoo.com/now/germany-cl...060000902.html

This announcement is not new news, but reinforces the probability that Putin knew all along and is planning to order his puppet sock (lukashenko) to close the gas pipeline to Europe this winter. Putin of course will play good cop and say he can become a mediator ... if sanctions against Russia are lifted. A month later the pipeline would close again to get more sanctions lifted. If the EU sends special forces to Belarus to open the pipeline, then Putin will seize the opportunity to invade Belarus altogether.

[mangamuscle]

World powers vow to prevent nuclear war

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20220104_24/

While this seems like good news, imo this is a preparation step from Russia & China to wage war. Because we know everybody loses if there is a nuclear weapons exchange, but if only traditional warfare is on the table, there can be winners and losers.

[mangamuscle]

US intelligence indicates Russia preparing operation to justify invasion of Ukraine

https://us.cnn.com/2022/01/14/politi...lag/index.html

I was thinking that Putin might not be able to play the long game, because Hungary is having elections this year and if Viktor Orban loses, he would not longer be able to destabilize the EU politically, by invading Ukraine he would be able to directly give assistant to other autocratic regime *coff* Kazakhstan *coff*