Jump to content
H1nd

Strategic and tactical realities in CMBS

Recommended Posts

Regarding how the West treats Russia...

We live in a monopolar world now. US pretends to be the king of this world. Other big countries should be US sattelites or they get problems in some way - economical, political, military. Europe is US sattelite now so it is allowed to live quietly while US controls it's political establishment and says Europe what to do even if it turns against EU real profit - like with anti-russian sanctions which hurt Europe much more than US, and US made Europe to apply them anyway.

 

Russia, China and some other countries are friends of the West till they follow US as its sattelites either and do what US wants them to do irrespecrtive of Russian or Chinese real profit and national interests. As soon as Russia or China try to defend their own profit and interests they become enemies, "threats to all civil world" e.t.c. So while Russia stays independent country it will be treated by West (US) as an enemy. I hope Russia stay independent however. 

Edited by Rusknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iraq is a mess, not because that was the intent of the US to destabilize Iraq,  but because the US failed to understand that kicking over Saddam and trying to setup a democracy is nearly impossible in a region of the world where thousand of years to tribalism is the firmly entrenched mindset.

 

Dissect the entire mess and one can see the tribalism is a huge reason why Iraq and Afghanistan are relative failures despite the best but misguide intentions of the west.

 

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.  In other words, Afghanistan and Iraq turned out the way they did because the whole venture was not well thought out, mistakes were made and more importantly, social/political factors deeply entrenched in thousands of years of history were ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding how the West treats Russia...

We live in a monopolar world now. US pretends to be the king of this world. Other big countries should be US sattelites or they get problems in some way - economical, political, military. Europe is US sattelite now so it is allowed to live quietly while US controls it's political establishment and says Europe what to do even if it turns against EU real profit - like with anti-russian sanctions which hurt Europe much more than US, and US made Europe to apply them anyway.

 

Russia, China and some other countries are friends of the West till they follow US as its sattelites either and do what US wants them to do irrespecrtive of Russian or Chinese real profit and national interests. As soon as Russia or China try to defend their own profit and interests they become enemies, "threats to all civil world" e.t.c. So while Russia stays independent country it will be treated by West (US) as an enemy. I hope Russia stay independent however.

Or Russia simply has an inferiority complex as it's economic power puts it outside of "great power" status. Russia is not and never will be the power that the USSR was. That bloc was politically and economically unsustainable. China is a rising economic power, which unfortunately is also not paying attention to long term demographics and their economic model, however they are far and away in a different economic status than Russia.

Russia can try and stay "independent" and in a few decades will be a trivial little backwater with nothing of significance to contribute to the world economy. That is not the model China is following. Isolating oneself from the world economic community and hoping your one cash cow will keep you afloat is not a serious economic plan, however it is the only one Putin has. China will probably take Siberia from you leaving the European facing rump state to jump up and down and make lots of noise hoping to get someone's attention living on it's past glories. That is the future Putin is delivering for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Or Russia simply has an inferiority complex as it's economic power puts it outside of "great power" status. Russia is not and never will be the power that the USSR was. That bloc was politically and economically unsustainable. China is a rising economic power, which unfortunately is also not paying attention to long term demographics and their economic model, however they are far and away in a different economic status than Russia. 

Russia can try and stay "independent" and in a few decades will be a trivial little backwater with nothing of significance to contribute to the world economy. That is not the model China is following. Isolating oneself from the world economic community and hoping your one cash cow will keep you afloat is not a serious economic plan, however it is the only one Putin has. China will probably take Siberia from you leaving the European facing rump state to jump up and down and make lots of noise hoping to get someone's attention living on it's past glories. That is the future Putin is delivering for you. 

 

Sums it up rather nicely.  There's also the amusing tendency of some Russian sources to twist anything the west does to something intended to affect Russia.  ABMs located in a place that stands no practical chance of intereception Russian launched missiles?  PLAN TO INVADE AND NUKE THE BABIES!  Intervention in Libya?  THIS IS A BLOW AGAINST RUSSIA.  etc, etc, etc.  

 

I mean prior to Crimea Russia hardly registered much above the actual Ukraine in terms of international policy concerns.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are maybe going overboard with the Russia bashing.

 

Last I heard, Russia still had most of its tactical nukes aimed at China, that might deter China from making a grab at Siberia. :)

 

I also doubt the US would stand by and let China invade another sovereign country, I mean fair is fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are maybe going overboard with the Russia bashing.

 

Last I heard, Russia still had most of its tactical nukes aimed at China, that might deter China from making a grab at Siberia. :)

 

I also doubt the US would stand by and let China invade another sovereign country, I mean fair is fair.

Unless it follows the Russia model in Ukraine.  This whole deniability thing is gonna come back and bite Putin.

 

An interesting 2008 study of Siberia and it's impact on the Russian economy, future forecasts and some predictions of what China might do.  A bit long, but quite fascinating.  There are a few predictions here that are coming true faster than the authors expected.

 

http://www.dod.gov/pubs/foi/International_security_affairs/china/09-F-0759theGreatSiberianWarOf2030.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Pictures - SOF units operating, supply convoys, special purpose equipment. That all has been discussed and is within the boundaries of what most Russian citizens believe to be our involvement in Ukraine. It is within boundaries of what I believe our involvement to be as well.

Illegal military operations within the sovereign territory of a neighboring state despite official denials. Good, I'm glad we can agree on that.

No proof of any masses of greenhorn recruits riding around in battalion formations spanking Ukrainians though, and there will never be unless they actually do it.

There is tons of proof, you simply choose to discard it because you do not want to believe it. Which is why I'm not go over it again. The Russian military counter offensive in August was launched from Russian territory into Ukrainian territory when it was clear that the ATO operation was going to beat the separatists. This included multiple points of attack from Russian territory never once held by so-called separatists. Whether these forces were manned by conscripts or contract soldiers "volunteering" for combat, the end result is the same. And that is a Russian state sponsored invasion or a Russian state sponsored act of terrorism. Take your pick, because it is either one or the other.

@Larger Russian involvement - Every time the Ukrainian's fail, they always have a good scapegoat - the ghost divisions. That memorial stone that is so spread around everywhere, that comes back to my first point. Small scale involvement is undeniable. Ukrainians crying wolf every time they lose is also undeniable.

Crying wolf is a game both sides play. Every time Ukraine says they killed x Russian soldiers the Kremlin says the count is 0 because there are no Russians in Ukraine. Since the official Russian position is a 100% lie, this means the Ukrainian position is at least more reliable.

 

@T-72B3/BTR-82A - Ukrainian conflict proves a supreme testing ground for those vehicles, so sending them there in limited amounts makes sense to me from testing perspective. It makes a good case for why we haven't seen any more since early-late autumn.

It might make sense, but international law does not give Russia a special exception for such use. So it is an illegal act and Russia is solely responsible for it.

As for clearly Russian vehicles in Ukraine since then, there's been plenty. Though most are more for real services such as communications, radar, anti-air, and electronic warfare. Oh, and the Spetsnaz hit squad going around making sure the "separatists" are doing what Russia demands of them.

 

@NATO vs Russia in terms of being silent or clear - When you are the world hegemony, you can afford to be vocal about almost anything. When you are not, silence is sometimes the best case scenario.

Lazy excuse for naked aggression. There were plenty of ways for Russia to resolve its problems with Ukraine without war. However, Russia never considered any of them because it did not want a just resolution... it wanted Ukraine "disabled" as a nation state. And no, that is not something the rest of the world community would agree to. Least of all Ukraine itself.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought only children believe in generous US that supports protests and revolutions in various countries over the world just becouse US loves liberty and freedom so much that it wants to share it with all other nations . Now I see that I was wrong.

Insult me, or anybody else, like that again and you'll be banished.

 

Even some old people belive in these fairtales. Steve, you are from US, right? If so, you live in the country where big brother watching you even more closely now than it was in USSR evil empire or in modern Russia. Did you hear anything about "big data"? US goverment watching all citizens automatically without any adjudgement. US goverment also use tortures against citizens of other countries. I would say that some European countries are much more democratic places to live than modern US in fact. Do you really beilve that such country as US really want to save other nations from some kind of  dictatorship while US slowly transforms into George Orwell's novel itself?

I am sure I know more about life in the US than you do. I am now quite suspicious that I know more about life in Russia than you do. Or at least I'm better able to compare the two together.

Back in the Soviet days there was a similar argument coming out of Moscow. Yet all around where I lived I had Russians, Ukrainians, Baltic people, Poles, and a smattering of other people form areas dominated by the Soviet Union. It gave me the idea, as crazy as it might sound, that the Soviet Union wasn't the "worker's paradise" that it said it was.

Back in those days people were smuggled into the US in the boot of a car. In Soviet Russia? They were smuggled out in the boot of a car. While it is true that Russians are not barred from leaving the country like the old days, clearly not many people want to move to Russia except people looking for low wage jobs. And even then, mostly from ex-Soviet Republics. Now, thanks to Putin's actions in the last 2-3 years the number of educated/skilled foreigners moving to Russia has slowed and now totally reversed. And thanks to the collapse of the Ruble, in large part due to Putin's policies, even the low paid workers are thinking twice about moving to Russia.

So if the US is the most horrible place on Earth to live... what does that make Russia by comparison?

 

US invades other countries or support protests and revolutions there if US has some real profit from it.

This common argument coming from Russians saddens me the most. You so fully believe state media that you think that nobody in the world wants justice for themselves. Nobody wants fair treatment under the law. Nobody wants economic opportunities. Instead you believe all people are as content as Russians to be taken advantage of by a tiny number of people who are using government as both a source of personal enrichment and a means of keeping it that way. Therefore, in your thinking, anybody who is inspired to fight against their government must be doing it because the CIA tricked or paid them to.

This is a terrible, terrible mindset to have. And it shows how well Putin's policies have translated into a compliant and docile population. Which is just the way he wants it to be.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are maybe going overboard with the Russia bashing.

I personally am not bashing Russia. I am bashing Putin. If a Russian comes here to defend Putin's policies, then unfortunately it might look like I'm bashing Russians. But that isn't the case.

 

Last I heard, Russia still had most of its tactical nukes aimed at China, that might deter China from making a grab at Siberia. :)

They are buying the land, so why would they want to nuke it? :)

 

I also doubt the US would stand by and let China invade another sovereign country, I mean fair is fair.

It is the only reason why China is not sitting in possession of Taiwan right now. If China goes to war against Taiwan, the US will impose trade sanctions. China can not afford trade sanctions as it, like Russia, keeps control of its population largely through (relative) economic prosperity. The Chinese are some of the smartest people on Earth, IMHO, and they knew this quite well before the conflict with Russia. Now that they've seen what has happened to the Russian economy, they are probably even less likely to do something overtly stupid.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this thread went down the complete offtopic direction and should be locked. 

 

When there is new scenario related stuff some one would start a new thread and post the new materials there.

Edited by ikalugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this thread went down the complete offtopic direction and should be locked. 

 

When there is new scenario related stuff some one would start a new thread and post the new materials there.

Well it is definitely a thread with passionate viewpoints on both sides. Despite that I think generally it hasn't been too bad. Some of the difficulty is, we are talking about conflict a couple years in the future. There is a lot that could happen between now and then to influence how events in that scenario will play out. Some of those potential events are honestly I think uncomfortable. For example my comments above are not meant to be Russia bashing. Personally I think Russia has an important place in the world community. What I find frustrating is Putin based on his very narrow minded view of the world is taking Russia in the opposite direction. He is mis managing Russia into a dangerous downward spiral. What does that mean from my perspective for the hypothetical scenario we are discussing? It suggests that Russian military capability would be diminshed, the financial and social resources necessary for modernization of the army will not be there in the quantities forecast. In addition the army is likely going to have other commitments as conditions deteriorate on the borders and potentially the interior of the country. This in itself limits the scope of the conflict as there will only be enough capability for a limited objective offensive and the disparity in high intensity 21st century warfare capabilities between Russia and the West will continue to diverge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this thread should not be locked, there is (finally) some discussion about why and how countries wage war. In the old forums when the Irak war started there was so much hate going on among the users that a policy against politics had to be implemented.

Fortunately, it is not the case here and now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid we can't just discuss strategy here without at least mentioning the bigger picture, i.e. politics. Every thread about strategic layer will have some political component, simply because strategical aims in war stem from political decisions. Good ol' Clausewitz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 China will probably take Siberia from you leaving the European facing rump state to jump up and down and make lots of noise hoping to get someone's attention living on it's past glories. 

 

As far as Russia stays nuclear that won't happen.

 

Russia does not isolate itself from the rest of the world, a part of the world tries to isolate itself from Russia. Currently the sanctions regime does not preclude Russia from buing any critical consumer or industrial goods, as equivalents of those goods are freely available in Asia. 

 

Do the aforementioned western countries end importing the normal Russian exports? Again, no, as EU still buys Russian gas, US still buys Russian rocket engines (the RD181 contract recently sighed despite the sanctions).

 

The only important (and somewhat damaging) sanctions that were levelled against Russia were the limitations on accessing the financial markets, but even then Russian state owned companies still get western financial products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the airport, not clear.  Despite looking at numerous reports, both sides are claiming they hold it and pushed the other side out, so I don't know the truth of the matter.

 

Judging from the pictures, the airport fight looks to me like junkyard dogs fighting over a bag of garbage because the hard infrastructure looks like it is totally destroyed so I don't understand why lives are expended in continuing to fight over something that is more symbolic than strategic now.

 

Even if the Pro-Russian forces have taken it, what use is it to them?  Even if the runways are still okay, the Pro-Russian forces can't re-build the infrastructure or even bring in supply flights without the infrastructure until the front lines change enough that the airport is out of range of the longest range artillery system the Ukraine military has because any attempt to bring in flights or rebuild is going to getting destroyed by artillery strikes. 

Edited by BlackMoria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it has become the Stalingrad of this war.  The symbolic victory to be gained is worth quite a deal from both sides.  Winning it would bolster Ukrainian morale and convince folks that further sacrifice will win the war.  For Russia, winning it may create a sense of futility bringing Ukraine to the table on terms more beneficial to Russian aims.  In reality, I think no matter who wins, the war will just continue.  Just like Stalingrad didn't actually make or break the war, it just reflected a shift in the overall balance of power. The Ukrainians will just get more pissed off and Russia will be no closer to finding a way out of this.

 

Ha sniped by Sgt Joch

Edited by sburke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the Russian economy hit badly by sanctions, or the changing oil prices? Not really.

 

Budget deficit is under 0.5 percent (from the budget size) and is around 4? percent? of our reserve funds?

 

Sure we are now in stagnation/recession, but that was coming before the Ukrainian crisis and again this is not a major stagnation/recession. The reasons for it are due to the old (oil/gas based) growth model reaching it's limits. If one has even a basic grasp of economics one would know that the economy works in cycles, and should the reforms (promised by Putin during the address to the Federal Council) happen, then we would be back to growth in mid-long term.

 

Thus this whole misplaced euphoria about Russia going into some sort of unsolvable and fatal economic crisis is completely stupid and unseemly for any rational man.

 

However those events will now define position of Russia in the inevitable future global conflict, which is a sad thing really (it is always better to have a room for manuever).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia does not isolate itself from the rest of the world, a part of the world tries to isolate itself from Russia.

This is faulty logic. Let me rephrase:

A murderer does not isolate itself from the rest of the world, a part of the world tries to isolate itself from the murderer.

While perhaps true in a sense, the point is that the murderer decided to do an act that society does not find socially acceptable. Society has the right to make this decision just as the murderer has the inherent free will to act against it.

Russia's position that the West is against it is nonsense. Look at how hard Germany fought against sanctions even after Russia had clearly violated international law with Crimea to an extent not seen since the 1940s in Europe. Germany did NOT want to isolate Russia, but Russia continued to do things which Germany eventually could no longer ignore. Russia chose that path, not Germany. In fact, Merkel was being called "Frau von Ribbentrop" because she was so forgiving of Russia's obvious aggression towards Ukraine.

Currently the sanctions regime does not preclude Russia from buing any critical consumer or industrial goods, as equivalents of those goods are freely available in Asia. 

 

Do the aforementioned western countries end importing the normal Russian exports? Again, no, as EU still buys Russian gas, US still buys Russian rocket engines (the RD181 contract recently sighed despite the sanctions).

 

The only important (and somewhat damaging) sanctions that were levelled against Russia were the limitations on accessing the financial markets, but even then Russian state owned companies still get western financial products.

The sanctions are more a statement than anything else. It is one of the few ways of expressing national positions without resorting to war. As a statement it is important and it has an effect of compounding negative market positions regarding Russian investment. Putin could easily reverse and be rid of the sanctions, but he does not view Russia's economic health as more important than nationalism or protecting his regime.

The real sanctions weapon is SWIFT banking system access. Russia has already sated that it will consider being cut off from it an act of war. So in reality it is not really a sanction in Russia's eyes, but a thermonuclear strike.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be that as it may, it is one more ball that Putin has to juggle to keep on top of things.  Personally, I don't think think he is a good juggler and the balls may start dropping.  And it will be the Russian people who will pay when the fumble occurs and the balls fall to the ground.

 

Oh, about politicians and promises - let's just say in the West, politicians make them all the time and the voters get disappointed mostly all the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the Russian economy hit badly by sanctions, or the changing oil prices? Not really.

I can grant you the sanctions argument, but not the oil prices. That is not borne out by any reasonable economic analysis.

 

Budget deficit is under 0.5 percent (from the budget size) and is around 4? percent? of our reserve funds?

Reserve funds are being spent down very quickly. But besides that, the way the Russian economy is structured gives a very false sense of strength. Yes, the budget has been balanced well in prior years, almost exclusively due to high energy prices and very established markets in the West. The West is not buying as much as it was before the crisis and the price is now almost 1/2 of what Russia needs to balance it's budget. So deficit spending is going to be necessary to pay for expenses, yet Russia's banks do NOT have the money and the West is not lending to Russia. Nobody wants to buy Rubbles either. So where is this deficit financing going to come from? I do not see China or India lining up with money in hand.

Further, the good income for the Russian state came from state controlled energy companies. These are HIGHLY leveraged and require large amounts of foreign investment to continue operating. Now they have to pay back large debts with a greatly reduced Rubble and they have insufficient sources to fund going further.

Which means, while the Russian state theoretically has run a very low deficit, it was only made possible by the high deficits of state run companies. This shows the Russian real budget deficit, in meaningful terms, was much higher. It's an accounting trick only.

Sure we are now in stagnation/recession, but that was coming before the Ukrainian crisis and again this is not a major stagnation/recession. The reasons for it are due to the old (oil/gas based) growth model reaching it's limits. If one has even a basic grasp of economics one would know that the economy works in cycles, and should the reforms (promised by Putin during the address to the Federal Council) happen, then we would be back to growth in mid-long term.

Putin has completely mismanaged and misappropriated funds for his entire career. He has crashed even that into a brick wall due to the war in Ukraine. Foreign investors don't want to invest, domestic investors don't want to either. I do not have any hopes of a speech translating into a reversal of all these bad things.

 

Thus this whole misplaced euphoria about Russia going into some sort of unsolvable and fatal economic crisis is completely stupid and unseemly for any rational man.

Personally, I am not euphoric. I am quite sad for Russians. As a businessman I am also sad because I have many Russian business partners. In fact, we were negotiating a publishing deal for Black Sea when Putin started the war in Ukraine. The deal is now dead (not our decision either).

 

However those events will now define position of Russia in the inevitable future global conflict, which is a sad thing really (it is always better to have a room for manuever).

This weekend a house burned down in the next town. The people did something very stupid with their fireplace and as a result their entire house is gone. I feel bad for the people, but I recognize that they burned their own house down because they did something very stupid. I do not blame the fireplace for the results.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the Russian economy hit badly by sanctions, or the changing oil prices? Not really.

 

Budget deficit is under 0.5 percent (from the budget size) and is around 4? percent? of our reserve funds?

 

Sure we are now in stagnation/recession, but that was coming before the Ukrainian crisis and again this is not a major stagnation/recession. The reasons for it are due to the old (oil/gas based) growth model reaching it's limits. If one has even a basic grasp of economics one would know that the economy works in cycles, and should the reforms (promised by Putin during the address to the Federal Council) happen, then we would be back to growth in mid-long term.

 

Thus this whole misplaced euphoria about Russia going into some sort of unsolvable and fatal economic crisis is completely stupid and unseemly for any rational man.

 

However those events will now define position of Russia in the inevitable future global conflict, which is a sad thing really (it is always better to have a room for manuever).

umm Russia's budget was based on oil at $100 a barrel.  It is trading at far below that for the foreseeable future.  It doesn't take an economist to know, if I just took a 60% pay cut, my finances are screwed. With so little transparency in the economy and so much corruption (Rosneft being just one example) how certain are you that any of the information you are getting is valid?  Interesting article on the origins of that Rosneft deal just a little while ago. 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/four-horsemen-russias-economic-apocalypse-104900173.html

 

The central bank just stated the rate hike in December was a mistake, so essentially they are saying Russia has lost 6 weeks of time trying to deal with the economic situation pursuing a failed policy.  Things like that do not inspire confidence and the only "policy" Putin has declared is to spend more of the reserves.  Again if I took a 60% pay cut, I know I would have to spend any savings I have to pay my bills.  That isn't a policy but rather a recognition of reality.  A policy would be me trying to figure out how to reduce my expenses by 60% or generate new sources of income.   Russia is now looking at being degraded to junk status.  That doesn't really do anyone any good, but the lack of direction coming from leadership, the lack of transparency and the continued catering to an inner circle of corruption is pretty much all anyone else is seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...