Backstory events sliding toward Nonfiction

[DreDay]

With all due respect (and I really mean it Steve) - the people that I was refering to do not write blogs or go on podcasts (except maybe someone like Kissenger) At best, they will have an "independent" think tank write a whitepaper to push their agenda. You normally don't see or hear these guys untill they retire and become college proffessorts - and God bless them for such modesty.

The position that professionals like this have no voice outside of closed door conversations that require national security clearance to enter is... rather odd.

 

With all the safeguards in place both here and Russia - we are more likely to get hit by a meteor or eaten up by undead dinazours than by nuclear weapons as long as the right people are in charge.

Safeguards... like the US misplacing a whole bunch of nukes and rampant test fraud within the strategic missile service? Sorry, I do not believe anything is foolproof. Having said that, I do NOT think a nuclear war is any where near close to happening. I've said as much several times now, but you seem to think I hold the opposite point of view.

 

Meh, that system had actually worked pretty well so far with regards to nucrlear weapon safety. It is not a popular subject in our country for obvious reasons; but it is not the Russians that are seen internatially as war criminals that had slaughtered tens of thoughsands and mamed millions in nuclear strikes .

Taking comfort in the future by what has happened in the past is not very wise, IMHO. Though the past can give us guidance about where the future might go, it is no guarantee that it will.

 

As for Putin having only 4 (all former KGB) people in his circle - with all do respect sir, you don't have a slightest clew as to what you are talking about.

Do I have sources inside the Kremlin? No. Do I have sources inside the CIA? No. I am simply repeating what I have seen from credible sources of information. Yes, I am. Can they be wrong? Sure they can. So can people at Langley. It's been known to happen.

 

This kind of analysis is what I used to do for a living and I can guarantee you that they are more than 4 towers in Kremlin. Are you even aware who Mr. Sukrov is? If you are - would you dare to call him anti-western or ex-KGB? Plese Steve, I appreciate all your research and analysis, but frankly your conclusions are not complimentary of your great research...

I'm not sure what conclusions of mine you are referring to, but I have seen a few reports that say that recently Putin's inner circle has shrunk considerably and that Sukrov is not part of it. I found one source quickly and it states:

 

The core group around Putin is led by Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev, Federal Security Service head Alexander Bortnikov, Foreign Intelligence Service chief Mikhail Fradkov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, according to Markov.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-22/putin-said-to-shrink-inner-circle-as-ukraine-hawks-trump-tycoons

This could be total bunk. I have no way to prove it either way. But I have seen more reports than just this, some of which are from Russian sources including former "insiders".

As for the "Grey Cardinal", I have not seen him mentioned in some time. I do not know what his status is within the Kremlin hierarchy.

]I don't necessarily disagree, it's just that it is generally excepted that we would not survive a nuclear war either, so we are not gonna touch that degree of confrontation with a ten foot poll; nor are the russian. If either our or theirs CIF was to propose such a level of escalation

You say that now, and I agree with it now, but if there was a conventional confrontation and most of Russia's navy sunk, it's airforce shot out of the sky, and it's vaunted Red Army scattered on the battlefield... I hope that the decision makers in the Kremlin keep it in mind.

 

PS: Just out of curiostiy, if I may ask - how old are you sir? I might be totally wrong, but I don' bleieve that you've lived (as an adult) through the 60s, 70s, and early 80s (i.e. the worst of cold war). I somewhat appreciate you conviction and bravado; but a nuclear stand-off is a horific thing and we are by no means guaranteed to come out as winers in it.

This is what I don't understand. Where on Earth did you get the notion that I think we could survive a nuclear war with Russia? Because I hold the exact opposite opinion. I grew up in the 1970s a stone's throw away from a major USAFB. I knew, as a youngster, what nuclear war was and that in the event of one there were multiple warhead ICBMs aimed right at me. Even as children we understood that in the event of a nuclear war we wouldn't have to worry about the aftermath because we'd be burnt to a crisp in the first few minutes of it.

Steve

[DreDay]

Debates benefit from people expressing contrary positions and offering differing points of view. Saying that you possess the ability to present such contrary and different lines of discussion, but are unwilling to because someone posts something you don't agree with, definitely doesn't add much to a debate. Certainly doesn't make it more interesting!

Steve

 

Do be quite honest sir, I simply do not have the time nor the inclanation to debate and to persuade those who are perfectly wiling to surround themselfs with blissful ignorance. It is your job (which I assume is not pro-bono) to host contreversial debates and discussions on this site in order to gain more trafic. I appreciate it and respect it, but please don't expect me (or any other soul) to waste hours trying to educate those who had been brainwashed for years (wether Russian, American, Polish, or Ukranian). However when I do see an interesting and original though; I consider it an honor to reply to it (even if I don't agree with it).

[Battlefront.com]

I am not talking about the political appointees, but real pros who CIA brass  would go to for advice...I have been lucky enough to know a few and I can guarantee you tht there is absolutely nothing moranic about them.

I forgot to address this point specifically. There's two flaws in this statement:

1. The "real pros" are not the ones who ultimately decide policy. Look at what happened in Iraq 2003-2006 as to where that can lead.

2. I never said that people like this are "morons". I explicitly said our species is moronic. We spend more resources destroying than building. We spend lavishly on policies that increase suffering and skimp on the most sensible ways to mitigate it. So yeah, in the words of Agent Kay:

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Do be quite honest sir, I simply do not have the time nor the inclanation to debate and to persuade those who are perfectly wiling to surround themselfs with blissful ignorance.

I can respect the limitation of time, but I do not respect the condescending attitude.

 

It is your job (which I assume is not pro-bono) to host contreversial debates and discussions on this site in order to gain more trafic.

I get paid the same amount whether I post one word or a million. My job is to design and produce the games that are here to be discussed. I also came up with the basic backstory for both Shock Force and for Black Sea. I certainly don't know everything there is to know about this subject, but I don't know how many people in 2009 predicted this war in Ukraine and how it would unfold. Not to mention how soon it would come about. I'm sure many in the appropriate sections of the intelligence community were, but in the general populace? Hardly.

BTW, I remember someone in the US "intelligence community" telling me in 2007 that the idea of a war in Syria was stupid to the extreme. His position was the next war would be in Iran. I was also called stupid for pulling my money out of the stock market in the early 2000s because of my conviction of the eventual collapse of the housing bubble. My mother didn't do too badly following my advice to sell her house in the summer of 2008 instead of letting it ride on the market a bit longer

I'm not a guru or an infallible source of wisdom, but I'm comfortable that I'm not ignorant of the world around me.

Steve

[Nerdwing]

EDIT: nm 

Edited February 6, 2015 by Nerdwing

[ikalugin]

Kek, not counting Ivanov in.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Yes

This is the overall premise for the war in Black Sea. Each of the three sides make mistakes based on bad assumptions. No one mistake or bad assumption leads to war, but the collection of them do.

It is a bit similar to the direct start of WWI. Russia was extremely unhappy with what the Austro-Hungarian Empire was doing in the Balkans. When diplomacy failed the Tzar figured he needed to back up his words with a credible military threat. To do that he had to mobilize military forces. Germany, who was allied with A-H, had a policy to not allow the Russians to have a huge army massed along its border. The German thinking was pragmatic... once Russia gathered its strength, Germany would not be able to fight it and the western countries who definitely wanted a war (England and France).

So individual decisions were made by individual states for their own individual reasons with their own individual goals. The result was something that all nations quickly regretted starting. But by then, it was too late.

Steve

#

That is exactly the danger. Chris hits the nail on the head here. Perhaps though there are also some parasllels to the 1930s. Putin's Eurasian Project at least as we understand its' intent and purposes may appeasr similar to Hitler's foreign policy. It is often fear and misinterpretation that causes war. And, in the nuclear age, unlike 1914 and 1939 he stakes could become very high indeed.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I can respect the limitation of time, but I do not respect the condescending attitude.

 

I get paid the same amount whether I post one word or a million. My job is to design and produce the games that are here to be discussed. I also came up with the basic backstory for both Shock Force and for Black Sea. I certainly don't know everything there is to know about this subject, but I don't know how many people in 2009 predicted this war in Ukraine and how it would unfold. Not to mention how soon it would come about. I'm sure many in the appropriate sections of the intelligence community were, but in the general populace? Hardly.

BTW, I remember someone in the US "intelligence community" telling me in 2007 that the idea of a war in Syria was stupid to the extreme. His position was the next war would be in Iran. I was also called stupid for pulling my money out of the stock market in the early 2000s because of my conviction of the eventual collapse of the housing bubble. My mother didn't do too badly following my advice to sell her house in the summer of 2008 instead of letting it ride on the market a bit longer

I'm not a guru or an infallible source of wisdom, but I'm comfortable that I'm not ignorant of the world around me.

Steve

 

Could I make a suggestion Steve. You may of corse have tried this already. On another site I am a member of the policy is for he admnistrator t send a private message to the individuals involved asking them to tone it down or desist as they are breakig forum rules or are dangerously close to doing so.

 

As a History and Politics graduate I uderstand how difficult it can be to avoid bias, including of course national bias which may well be the issue here. With an issue like this it is very hard to avoid politics and I find myself having to be very careful. Sometimes I am conscious of steering a little too close to the wind myself and needing o take extra caution and the same is likely true for many of us.

 

Maybe it is the case that Skinfaxi lacks the experience to see this. However, it seems to me that he is a smart, well educated and intelligent man who could contribute much insight from the Russian perspective. It would be a shame to lose him which is why I tried to steer him back on course - and I was getting the feeling it was actually starting to work. Hopefully the short banning imposed on him will be succesful in doing the rest of the work and he wil have learned his lesson.

 

Steve has probably already though of most of this so please consider this only as a personal suggestion from me  .

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I can respect the limitation of time, but I do not respect the condescending attitude.

 

I get paid the same amount whether I post one word or a million. My job is to design and produce the games that are here to be discussed. I also came up with the basic backstory for both Shock Force and for Black Sea. I certainly don't know everything there is to know about this subject, but I don't know how many people in 2009 predicted this war in Ukraine and how it would unfold. Not to mention how soon it would come about. I'm sure many in the appropriate sections of the intelligence community were, but in the general populace? Hardly.

BTW, I remember someone in the US "intelligence community" telling me in 2007 that the idea of a war in Syria was stupid to the extreme. His position was the next war would be in Iran. I was also called stupid for pulling my money out of the stock market in the early 2000s because of my conviction of the eventual collapse of the housing bubble. My mother didn't do too badly following my advice to sell her house in the summer of 2008 instead of letting it ride on the market a bit longer

I'm not a guru or an infallible source of wisdom, but I'm comfortable that I'm not ignorant of the world around me.

Steve

 

There is an old Arab proverb. He who predicts the future lies even when he tells the truth

 

Best we can do is t look at current trens and historical background and predict what may happpen in the future. And, as in the case af Syria the event we expect might happen but it might happen differently to the way we expected. For example. I might predict a geeral Middle East conflagration as he next war. My prediction is that it will be caused by Islamic State and oil (maybe  future moderns Combat Mission game scenario here) However, if the conflict I predict occurs the causes and circumstances could well be very different to thse I was thinking might lead to the predicted conflict.

 

Likewise we might predict a war between Russia d NATO but, instead of the Ukraine it might vbe caused by Belorussia or the Baltic States.

[Placebo]

The West knows this because Russia spends considerable energy reminding them. For example, the nuclear bomber in the English Channel last week.

 

I live in Southampton (England) - did i miss something?

[TheVulture]

I live in Southampton (England) - did i miss something?

 

BBC report from last week:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31049952

 

Hardly a new occurrence, but Russia has stepped up these kinds of activities several fold in the last few months, and this one went on longer than most. But not terribly dramatic in itself.

[Battlefront.com]

BBC report from last week:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31049952

 

Hardly a new occurrence, but Russia has stepped up these kinds of activities several fold in the last few months, and this one went on longer than most. But not terribly dramatic in itself.

Indeed. The big complaint about the latest round is that the aircraft (bombers and fighters) are flying with their transponders off. That is a very dangerous thing to do when flying into a heavily traveled air corridor.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Could I make a suggestion Steve. You may of corse have tried this already. On another site I am a member of the policy is for he admnistrator t send a private message to the individuals involved asking them to tone it down or desist as they are breakig forum rules or are dangerously close to doing so.

Occasionally I do this when I think there's something good that can come from it.

Maybe it is the case that Skinfaxi lacks the experience to see this.

Based on the line of argument, I think the more obvious conclusion to draw is that he has a narrow point of view and there is no room for discussion of it. I've seen people with his mindset far too many times to know that nothing good comes from it. When his temporary ban is up we'll see if he can differentiate between what is and isn't on topic, but I don't have much hope of it. 16 years of this makes me a little cynical sometimes!

However, it seems to me that he is a smart, well educated and intelligent man who could contribute much insight from the Russian perspective.

I have my suspicions that the poster is in fact someone who has long since been banned and has a proven track record of offering nothing of use to this Forum. If it is who I think it is, the perspective is not Russian in his case, but right wing German. Not that there is much tangible difference in this specific view of the world.

 

Steve has probably already though of most of this so please consider this only as a personal suggestion from me  .

Indeed I have and your suggestion is respectfully deemed not applicable to this case

Steve

[ikalugin]

I do wonder as to what would happen on those talks between EU and Russian leaders.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Occasionally I do this when I think there's something good that can come from it.

Based on the line of argument, I think the more obvious conclusion to draw is that he has a narrow point of view and there is no room for discussion of it. I've seen people with his mindset far too many times to know that nothing good comes from it. When his temporary ban is up we'll see if he can differentiate between what is and isn't on topic, but I don't have much hope of it. 16 years of this makes me a little cynical sometimes!

I have my suspicions that the poster is in fact someone who has long since been banned and has a proven track record of offering nothing of use to this Forum. If it is who I think it is, the perspective is not Russian in his case, but right wing German. Not that there is much tangible difference in this specific view of the world.

 

Indeed I have and your suggestion is respectfully deemed not applicable to this case

Steve

 

I know from studying history at degree level that there are lots of source issues including bnational bias. For example French lancers at Waterloo mercilessly cut down Ponsonby. But when Briish cavalry charged d'Erlon's corps it is seen, by the same British sources, as a glorious cavalry charge although thousands of unfortunate French infantry would have been mercillesly cut down by th British cavalry.

 

Similarly, considering the history it is going to be inevitable that there are ging to be greart differences of opinion between Westerners, Russians and Ukranians, For example, as the Ukranians would see it they were forced into the Soviet Union by the bayonets of the Red Army between 1918 and 1921 nd again after 1945. From tha perspective they would not wish to be under Moscow's control again. For Russia the issues might be an "unfair" end to the Cold War and their Eurasian Union project might be viewed throgh this prism. Combined with that of course is the experience of the Cold War itself - both the West and Russia viewing each other with mutual suspiscion based on the Cold War fears and hostiklities. As we will all be aware there are a lot of complex issues.

 

I chose   to give the gentleman in question the benef of the doubt once - I do not know him and so I prefer to avoid a rush to judgement. He may or may not be the troublemaker you mentin but, if he does not follow the forum rules despite warmngs and other members offering him friendly advice then, as you say, the options are limited. We can but hope he gets the message and accepts the advice/offers made. Anyway, I think I have said enough on that particular subject

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I do wonder as to what would happen on those talks between EU and Russian leaders.

We wull have to wait and see. And we will have to see whether the parties involved, in particular n the Russian/Russian seperatist side keep  their agreements. However, as with the last ceasefire it probably would not take much for any ceasefire to break down as the last one did. It took years to sort the Yugolslavia situation out and I suspect this one is just as complex, if not more so given the historical, nationalistic,military, political and economic issues involved.

[Der Zeitgeist]

Looks like they're having tons of fun over there. 

 

[Cpl Steiner]

Coming late to this thread, which seems to be a little "heated" judging by a few posts above. I hope my contribution does not pour petrol on the fire!

 

I read the following today in an article on negotiations between France, Germany and Russia over Ukraine...

 

"Putin is increasingly seen as a reckless gambler who calls bluffs and takes risks, and is inscrutable, paranoid and unpredictable. Trying to work out what he wants is guesswork. The Europeans sound scared."

 

This, I think, gives some credence to the idea that the Ukrainian conflict has the potential to spiral out of control into something much worse, involving direct conflict between Russia and NATO. Brinkmanship is a dangerous game.

[Lethaface]

It seems McCain has heavily criticized Merkel for this meeting. Wonder if this is good cop, bad cop strategy or just EU and republicans disagreeing about this subject. Personally I think the latter. Unless Putin invades Ukraine in full force aiming for Kiev I don't see the EU willing to ante the stakes beyond sanctions.
Where Putin a real gambler he takes both of 'm as hostages in return for East Ukraine

Edited February 6, 2015 by Lethaface

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Coming late to this thread, which seems to be a little "heated" judging by a few posts above. I hope my contribution does not pour petrol on the fire!

 

I read the following today in an article on negotiations between France, Germany and Russia over Ukraine...

 

"Putin is increasingly seen as a reckless gambler who calls bluffs and takes risks, and is inscrutable, paranoid and unpredictable. Trying to work out what he wants is guesswork. The Europeans sound scared."

 

This, I think, gives some credence to the idea that the Ukrainian conflict has the potential to spiral out of control into something much worse, involving direct conflict between Russia and NATO. Brinkmanship is a dangerous game.

 That is certainly one way of viewing Putn? Is he a new Hitler? Possibly he could become one. Putiin, like Hitler takes risks. On he other hand Putin may be more like Otto von Bismarck who can also be seen as an aggressive risk taker but, unlike Hitler, we remeember /Bismarck as a great European international statesman

 

But you are quite corect there is great potential for miscalculation on btgh  sides. Steve compare t6he situation to that pre 1914

[LUCASWILLEN05]

It seems McCain has heavily criticized Merkel for this meeting. Where Putin a real gambler he takes both of 'm as hostages in return for East Ukraine

I don't see Putin as being a reckless gambler in that way. A calculating risk taker may be closer to the mark. However a calculated risk could gbecome a reckless gamble very easily and that is how I see the 2017 war scenario starting.

[Battlefront.com]

We wull have to wait and see. And we will have to see whether the parties involved, in particular n the Russian/Russian seperatist side keep  their agreements.

Russia has been putting in a lot of effort to change the control dynamic in the last few months, in particular January when a roving group of Russian Special forces made some "house calls" on the groups with track records of acting on their own. A number of leaders of such groups were killed or captured. And please, don't anybody try to challenge me on this as there is ample photographic evidence and the separatists themselves have stated, very clearly, that they were attacked by Russian special forces. In this war the evidence doesn't usually get nearly this strong. So I am not making a political statement, but an observation based on actual events.

The largely unsuccessful separatist offensive has also neutralized many others thanks to Ukrainian artillery. The separatist elements most gravely affected were the ones most active during the "cease fire". They have accused Russian leadership of deliberately pushing them into Ukrainian firetraps so as to reduce their ability to act independently in the future. This is a similar tactic the Red Army used in 1944 when moving into Ukraine. When partisans were encountered they were either eliminated on the spot or were used as cannon fodder. Again, I am making no political statements here, just stating facts on the ground.

In summary, I very much believe that Russia has had little operational and tactical control of the separatists until very recently. The purpose of gaining that control is, I think, fairly obvious. Russia is trying to make sure that if it cuts a second deal that this time it will work.

It has also been said that Putin tried to negotiate the deal without Ukrainians, but the West insisted that Kiev be actively involved. We'll know more about that, and the results of the latest talks, in good time. But for now I am cautiously optimistic that we might finally have an acceptable solution to this mess.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

It seems McCain has heavily criticized Merkel for this meeting. Wonder if this is good cop, bad cop strategy or just EU and republicans disagreeing about this subject. Personally I think the latter. Unless Putin invades Ukraine in full force aiming for Kiev I don't see the EU willing to ante the stakes beyond sanctions.

Where Putin a real gambler he takes both of 'm as hostages in return for East Ukraine

It seems pretty obvious that the US has switched to the "bad cop" roll, while the EU is playing "we don't know that we are a cop, but I guess maybe we are" roll

Seriously, it appears that the US has changed it's role to being more aggressive, Russia has changed it's role to being more cooperative, and the EU is trying to bridge the gap that remains. With Ukraine being in a much stronger position now than it has ever been, the chances of it backtracking in any significant way is unlikely. It has the right ingredients for a real resolution.

Speaking of which, Girkin just gave another interview where he stated that there is no longer a military solution for the separatists. Either Russia invades directly or, eventually, Ukraine will regain the Donbas. If there is a settlement out of these latest talks it would seem that Putin has come to the same conclusion.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-04/russian-fire-starter-says-putin-now-hostage-to-ukraine-war

Steve

[Lethaface]

 That is certainly one way of viewing Putn? Is he a new Hitler? Possibly he could become one. Putiin, like Hitler takes risks. On he other hand Putin may be more like Otto von Bismarck who can also be seen as an aggressive risk taker but, unlike Hitler, we remeember /Bismarck as a great European international statesman

 

But you are quite corect there is great potential for miscalculation on btgh  sides. Steve compare t6he situation to that pre 1914

 

Personally I think you're wandering of quite a little bit. This is not 1930/40. Russia's governmental institutions are perhaps not very high on the (utopian) democratic scale, I'd like to think they are quite far from the Nazi regime. If this thing escalates internationally clandestine efforts mimicking the Russian effort would be most likely, accompanied by public financial, logistical and non offensive military aid. TBH I suspect this is already happening, in smaller or larger scale. I see three semi likely end states for this conflict:

1. Diplomatic solution in which East-Ukraine gains some sort of autonomy allowing both Ukraine and Russia to walk away without losing face. 

2. Separatists hold gains against UKR efforts and with time East Ukraine joins Russia in South-Ossetian fashion.

3. Ukraine defeats the Separatists (including 'vacationers') in such fashion that Russia is bound to back down

 

With all options leaving Crimea in Russian hands.

 

CMBS shows the unfavorable consequences for all parties in the conflict. Would be great if Porosjenko, Putin and Obama could duke it out in a public AAR battle

[Lethaface]

It seems pretty obvious that the US has switched to the "bad cop" roll, while the EU is playing "we don't know that we are a cop, but I guess maybe we are" roll

Seriously, it appears that the US has changed it's role to being more aggressive, Russia has changed it's role to being more cooperative, and the EU is trying to bridge the gap that remains. With Ukraine being in a much stronger position now than it has ever been, the chances of it backtracking in any significant way is unlikely. It has the right ingredients for a real resolution.

Speaking of which, Girkin just gave another interview where he stated that there is no longer a military solution for the separatists. Either Russia invades directly or, eventually, Ukraine will regain the Donbas. If there is a settlement out of these latest talks it would seem that Putin has come to the same conclusion.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-04/russian-fire-starter-says-putin-now-hostage-to-ukraine-war

Steve

 

 

Here's hoping you're right and a real resolution can be reached. I'll toast to that!