Russian invasion of Ukraine

urban genie said:
What putin needs is China to threaten an invasion of the Republic of China, give the yanks something else to be busy cunts about.
Click to expand...
“Busy cunts”?

I thought that was spelled “global savior for 17th & 18th century empires”?

My bad.
 
Brightwell’s left peg said:
I’m sure there’s a tactical reason for placing an aircraft carrier and strike group into the Med, but I can’t for the life of me think what it is when dealing with Russia? Just one of the thousands of thermonuclear weapons in their armoury would solve that ‘small problem’ should they get into conflict.

I just can’t see any situation where the US would get into a conventional war with Russia without escalation to tactical nukes and the inevitable big boys, so I don’t see the point of deploying an aircraft carrier and support group.

I’m admittedly about as ‘Civvy’ as it gets, so happy to be educated by someone who can tell me what strategic/political value they think it will provide?
Click to expand...
You answered the question numerous times, but then skipped over it in order to get scary about nukes!

“AIRCRAFT carrier”

Control the skies over Ukraine, if invited, patrol the Black Sea, project power and see over the horizon.

The Black Sea is essential to Russia and Ukraine “almost” owns access to the northern Black Sea.

Crimea changed that, and with Ukraine, Crimea, and a friendly and compliant Turkey, it gives Russia COMPLETE control over the Black Sea, access to the Eastern Med & their new Middle Eastern seaport buddy in Syria!

Russia is doing in the “west” what China is doing in the South China Sea/Taipei/Philippines & Far East…pushing their boundaries OUT to protect from US and their Allies hemming them IN.

There are 2 Siperpowrrs in the world and a Wannabee. The Wannabee revolves around one man and his Soviet obsession. I worry less about him than the other one, which has designs on not being hemmed on by the Japan/South Korea/Taipei “oriental curtain” that hems them in. Take Taipei and they negate the southern islands of Japan being an informal blockade and can project their “new and improved” world’s fastest growing Navy into the Philippines Sea and deep water Pacific…that the US currently owns.

Get rid of Duterte and the Philippines becomes up for grabs. If China grabs it, then their power projection into the Pacific becomes very, very expensive to even attempt to replicate or address….and we all know the Royal Navy, Oz or NZ, ain’t getting that job done!

Step back and you see THE major geopolitical HOTSPOTS of the world being fought over without firing a weapon YET.

The question now is whether there is ENOUGH TRADE AND DIPLOMACY IN THE WORLD to stop these two Superpowers from taking what they feel they both deserve and need for their future protection AND power projection?

Xi Jinping (July 2021)

“The Chinese people will never allow any foreign forces to bully us. Anyone who dares to try will have their heads bashed bloody against a Great Wall of Steel.”

Hmmm, not much room for interpretation there…
 
Last edited:
ChicagoBlue said:
You answered the question numerous times, but then skipped over it in order to get scary about nukes!

“AIRCRAFT carrier”

Control the skies over Ukraine, if invited, patrol the Black Sea, and see over the horizon.
Click to expand...
And if needed, fight in the deep whilst not intervening on sovereign soil.
 
Semper aggressus said:
It fucking doesn’t need that. My wife is Taiwanese, most of her family are there and she needs to pop back for a couple of weeks soon. Communist pricks can stay the fuck out of Taiwan.
Click to expand...
Well it obviously doesn't need that or any other tension in the south china seas.

The point was if it ain't the ukraine then it's normally the middle east or taiwan america will be send battleships and threaten sanctions.

They have a few "go to" places globally they percieve danger and take turns to worry about invasion or conflict in each of them.
 
Last edited:
Brightwell’s left peg said:
I’m sure there’s a tactical reason for placing an aircraft carrier and strike group into the Med, but I can’t for the life of me think what it is when dealing with Russia? Just one of the thousands of thermonuclear weapons in their armoury would solve that ‘small problem’ should they get into conflict.

I just can’t see any situation where the US would get into a conventional war with Russia without escalation to tactical nukes and the inevitable big boys, so I don’t see the point of deploying an aircraft carrier and support group.

I’m admittedly about as ‘Civvy’ as it gets, so happy to be educated by someone who can tell me what strategic/political value they think it will provide?
Click to expand...

It‘s about showing unity and strength. Or bluff and counter bluff. Russia builds up troops on the border and makes demands. NATO counters with a show of unity and strength. Russia are looking for weakness and division - I expect they thought they would get weakness and division, instead, bar a few missteps which you will always get in the beginning, they are getting the opposite, indeed they are pushing countries like Finland and Sweden, who declined to join NATO, into the NATO camp.

Whatever Putin is trying to achieve here, it doesn't seem to be working.
 
urban genie said:
Well it obviously doesn't need that or any other tension in the south chima seas.

The point was if it ain't the ukraine then it's normally the middle east or taiwan america will be send battleships and threatwn sanctions.

They have a few "go to" places globally then take turns to worry about invasion
Click to expand...
A big issue is that if Putin decides to try and take Ukraine, and NATO take no action, NATO will look weak and China may just decide to take Taiwan, and then Japan.

Sounds like a real life game of Risk, one move may trigger another.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
I’d suggest that Germany are looking at it from a commercial point of view as they’ve worked very hard to get this far with their partnerships. One could go so far to suggest that this is why Russia are pushing it so far, to ensure NordStream2 is brought online therefore bypassing the Ukraine and having direct influence on European countries.

Looks like they’ve already influenced Germany.
Click to expand...

Germany’s position is looking increasingly isolated. Because of history, there is a tendency to shy away from confrontation and Nordstream is definitely a factor.

The Germans may come off the sidelines a little bit, but at the moment they are not even a minor player in this and I doubt if many countries in Europe are even listening to them.
 
BobKowalski said:
Germany’s position is looking increasingly isolated. Because of history, there is a tendency to shy away from confrontation and Nordstream is definitely a factor.

The Germans may come off the sidelines a little bit, but at the moment they are not even a minor player in this and I doubt if many countries in Europe are even listening to them.
Click to expand...
They have been incessant in their need to get this going which also gives them a huge influence.

Putin really does have influence in Europe, and we’ve brought it on ourselves.
 
BobKowalski said:
Germany’s position is looking increasingly isolated. Because of history, there is a tendency to shy away from confrontation and Nordstream is definitely a factor.

The Germans may come off the sidelines a little bit, but at the moment they are not even a minor player in this and I doubt if many countries in Europe are even listening to them.
Click to expand...
The longer we can jawbone this into the Spring, the less Nordstream becomes a watershed issue.

America has disliked, and warned against, Nordstream, as it is a geopolitical weapon. However, Germany is Germany, and the U.S. can only jawbone them so much. The sooner Germany gets their solar, wind, nuke future squared away, the better!
 
ChicagoBlue said:
Not in the Black Sea!

“Vigil” was about the Atlantic Fleet and Baltics, not the Black Sea, or even the Med, IMHO. ;-)

Deep Blue? That’s the China fight!
Click to expand...
There’s many ways to push negotiations but, in the end, all measures are about achieving the same goal.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
The longer we can jawbone this into the Spring, the less Nordstream becomes a watershed issue.

America has disliked, and warned against, Nordstream, as it is a geopolitical weapon. However, Germany is Germany, and the U.S. can only jawbone them so much. The sooner Germany gets their solar, wind, nuke future squared away, the better!
Click to expand...

Germany is stubbornly wedded to Nordstream, not helped by ex-politicians having their noses in the Nordstream money trough.

Also, Germany moves at the pace of a sloth when it comes to major decisions over their climate policies.

Germany is definitely out of sync with the rest of Europe over Ukraine. Frankly, they have been embarrassing themselves.
 
Work with a Ukrainian outsourcing company. Spoke at length about the possoble invasion. They seem calm about the situation. Think media are blowing it up more than they should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat
The Future’s Blue! said:
A big issue is that if Putin decides to try and take Ukraine, and NATO take no action, NATO will look weak and China may just decide to take Taiwan, and then Japan.

Sounds like a real life game of Risk, one move may trigger another.
Click to expand...
Japan???

I see you operate under the “Go big or go home” philosophy!
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
Many pundits whom I trust have argued that Putin has no choice - that a Western allied Ukraine, on the very borders of Russia, represents an existential threat to Russia and cannot be tolerated.

I bought into this line for quite awhile. But then, I started thinking...
===
1) How likely is it that the West will attack Russia? We're a peace-loving Democracy, loath to engage in warfare. Moreover, Russia is armed with nuclear weapons. It's almost unforeseeable that the West would initiate war with Russia;

2) What about border proximity? Isn't that a legitimate concern? - Frankly, I doubt this very, very much. Maybe 50 years ago this was relevant. But modern warfare is extremely rapid, spanning any border with ease.
===
In short, invasion of Ukraine is mostly popular with the Russian populace. And Putin is making excuses to do so. By all accounts the Crimea annexation boosted Putin's popularity enormously.

Invasion of the Ukraine proper though is bound to be a fish of another kettle altogether. Russian troop casualties are bound to be high and sustained. Prolonged warfare with a high death rate isn't going to be popular.

Thus, I still think that Russia won't invade the Ukraine; this invasion strikes me as a made up pretext designed to curry favor with the Russian populace. But who knows? This is just my opinion - and if Russia does invade the Ukraine - it's somewhat surprising for me - but strikes me as a huge, huge mistake for Putin.
Click to expand...
Nail on head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top