How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Ultradave]

3 hours ago, kraze said:

@sburke

Oh I completely agree. In fact I fully agree that this is our fault due to trying to be "friends" with Russia and feeding the corrupt and, in all honesty, the West owes us nothing since we have no defense agreements of any kind.

I'm more upset about the West not realizing that a war with Russia is inevitable and it will be much much worse for everybody if Russia is allowed to go without higher army losses in Ukraine.

History shows time and again that when an insane dictator that has fanatical following isn't stopped prematurely - it ends with a huge tragedy.

It's not like Russia stops being nuclear when it invades, say, Lithuania in a few years.

I mean Putin did say his territorial claims extend to everything that wasn't in NATO pre-1997, e.g. whole USSR and its fake "people's republics" aka "Warsaw Pact".

Everyone said war with Russia was inevitable during the Cold War too. I spent 10 years as an Army officer during the 70s-80s. We pretty much expected that we'd never grow old.

Yet I just turned 65 and retired. War with Russia never happened, despite numerous proxy wars and some (many?) close calls.

This is in no way to minimize Ukraine's plight at the moment, but I think the inevitability and doom predictions are not a new thing. 

I'm not in any way an expert, (give me a target list and I can blow it up, but grand strategy, international relations is above my pay grade) but I believe the aid being provided coupled with the sanctions Russia is coming under will do the job, without increasing the possibility of US/NATO forces coming into direct conflict with Russian forces. That's the thing that during the Cold War, both sides went to lengths to avoid. 

Dave

[TheVulture]

5 minutes ago, Suchy said:

What about Migs...

The game is very simple. In private, the US, GB and the rest of NATO are as much in support of strengthening Ukraine as possible. But the planes are a serious matter and the Kremlin will certainly not accept this calmly. So NATO, as an alliance, is afraid to take responsibility for such a decision and gives us, as Poland, the green light to hand over the planes ourselves, as Poland, and not NATO as a whole. And in general we want to hand over the planes, but not as Poland alone with all its consequences, but as the whole of NATO. And yesterday the Polish authorities poker-facedly said check. And the truth came out... NATO officially does not want to take responsibility...

And the Kremlin has just announced that:

Polish offer of jets to Ukraine creates 'potentially dangerous scenario

Perhaps I'm being a bit conspiracy theorist here, but I'm inclined to view all of this as a "boiling the frog" secenario - shifting the Overton window of what they can do without escalating too fast for Russia to accept (if you'll forgive the Overton window analogy).

e.g. NATO will keep saying no to the concept of a no-fly zone, but they will keep doing so if only to keep the phrase "no-fly zone" in continual use. Russia keeps hearing the words and is focused on making sure it isn't going to happen.

Maybe at some point, they start discussing conditions under which a no-fly zone might work, while insisting that they don't think it is viable. And mentioning that there is no scenario where they'd put ground troops in to protect humanitarian corridors between Kiev and the Polish border.

Slowly the limits of what they say they are not doing move further along. And at the other end of the window, the scale of what they can actually supply to Ukraine without Russia viewing it as a sudden escalation will slowly move along. Maybe some better air defence systems that can be deployed in western Ukraine to protect humanitarian aid from accidents in the near-ish future.

The aim is to keep increasing what can be sent to Ukraine, but to do so in a way that Russia will view each new step as a problem, but not an existential threat. So psychologically you need to keep having people calling for more drastic steps that Russia would react very strongly against (e.g. a no fly zone currently), and have the official position being "no way" whilst slowly trying to create the conditions where it becomes conceivable but remote, and eventually just a minor step above what is already being done.

[Haiduk]

Kharkiv and oblast are reporting for last day and this night:

- Vovchansk town on the border with Russia. Three helicopters landed the troops in the town vicinity - a part of them was eliminated, part witdrew on Russian territory. There was a video with dead Russian troopers "somewhere in Kharkiv oblast" near gas station, but it's graphic and I will not post it here, probably this is from that place.

- Night strike of artillery at Derhachi village NW outskirt of Kharkiv, where large amount of Russian vehicles and troops has been concetrating. Reportedly many vehicles burnt, Russians withrew close to the border.

- Night arty and MLRS strike on Balakliya town ammunition base SE from Kharkiv, where Russians massed huge number of vehicles and troops. General staff claims 500 vehciles hit, but of course it propaganda. Though here the video of Balaklia shelling and something really burns

 

 

[Kraft]

Besides the obvious worries of escalation NATO is reserving actions short of declaring war to be able to deter Putin from escalating his use of force in Ukraine.

Looking at Syria, the scale of civilian suffering has an almost unlimited ceiling, if all tricks are out of the hat there is little that would stop Russia from using chemical weapons and precisely targeting hospitals (ie not just collateral damage).

 

[BornGinger]

1 hour ago, Markus86 said:

Did anyone see this? ... It is discussed if Putin could suffer from parkinson disease

He's waving his finger as if telling Lukashenko "You've been a naughty boy, mate". His leg is maybe just making a bit of the Elvis leg shake because he's so aroused and happy to see Lukashenko again.

But he's definitely looked a bit ill in the latest videos.

Edited March 9, 2022 by BornGinger

[Haiduk]

Russian trops in Skadovsk town, Kherson oblast. Reportedly 8 vehicles entered the town. Russians broke into city administration building and took computers. Before the war Skadovsk was a place of dislocation for marines recon battalion, but now unit in other place and the town was undefended,

 

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Haiduk

[BletchleyGeek]

34 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

Vovchansk town on the border with Russia. Three helicopters landed the troops in the town vicinity - a part of them was eliminated, part witdrew on Russian territory. There was a video with dead Russian troopers "somewhere in Kharkiv oblast" near gas station, but it's graphic and I will not post it here, probably this is from that place.

I find really weird that these kind of incursions keep happening. Seems like a rather risky way of trying to infiltrate, piecemeal, platoon sized units.

[Probus]

The younger NATO crowd may be a bit afraid of Russian nukes, but for us old time Cold War 'Vets', him rattling his nuclear sticks at us does not scare us.  I grew up in the 80's with the larger threat of USSR nukes hanging over our heads every day.  He can threaten his nukes, but we all know that if he uses them it is a death sentence for him.  He has no desire to die, just stay in power after his obvious huge mistake.  Nukes wont get him any closer to that goal.

What worries me is WWIII, admittedly, after Russia's poor showing in Ukraine, I'm not too scared of his Mighty land forces.  But apart from a few countries in NATO, it would seem that NATO also has 'let dry rot eat at their tires'.  Especially Germany.  So again the USA will have to carry a large part of the burden and I don't think the USA really wants to do that right now.  If Putin starts serious ethnic cleansing, the USA will be forced to act (by its people).  But we really don't want to be dragged into a war with our current administration (*cough*Afghanistan*cough*).  My friends who are officers in the military, while outraged at Putin, don't want to start WWIII.

Just keep those arms flowing into the Ukraine and let the feisty Ukrainians beat the tar out of the Russian invaders.  The sanctions are going to eat Russia alive over the next few months if he doesn't let up.

As far as a no-fly zone is concerned (I agree this could cause WWIII).  But WHY is no one talking about how stealth will effect the enforcement of a no-fly zone?  Think about it.  If the Russians can only see our stealth aircraft at best 10% of the range (I'm thinking closer to 1% now) of the current air defenses, then we can sit back and shoot Russian planes and helicopters out of the sky with impunity forcing Russia to ground its air forces very rapidly.  Red flag exercises have shown just how effective our F-22s are.  There would be no need for SEAD missions and we've had 2 weeks+ to plan our strategies and coordinate our forces. Although there is always going to be risk with even a stealthy no-fly zone, I think the main risk is expanding the conflict into WWIII.

Just my 2 cents.

[Bulletpoint]

3 minutes ago, Probus said:

The younger NATO crowd may be a bit afraid of Russian nukes, but for us old time Cold War 'Vets', him rattling his nuclear sticks at us does not scare us.  I grew up in the 80's with the larger threat of USSR nukes hanging over our heads every day.  He can threaten his nukes, but we all know that if he uses them it is a death sentence for him.

I'm also a Cold War kid, and I must admit that this feels different. The whole MAD doctrine is based on both actors being rational.

Two questions: How crazy is Putin really? Could he launch if he wanted to?

[Sgt Joch]

15 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Isn't that kind of fatalistic shrugging what got us here, right now?  By that logic, we could say, "Well ya Russia invaded a sovereign state, happens all the time.  Someone will figure it out over there in Europe...where is Ukraine anyway.  Change the channel, those kids getting blown up is disturbing."

The world is a turbulent and dangerous place and I am not sure apathy about it is the best strategy.  It sure wasn't for global terrorism, and it really hasn't seemed to work in this case either.  At best this is kicking crisis down the road so our kids can deal with them, at worst we find ourselves in a mess and have no idea how we got here because we were to busy fighting over the deck chairs. 

Having read a fair amount of history and previous generations didn't seem to go "meh", not sure we should either.

I don’t know where you see apathy. The west is reacting forcefully as it has in the past to similar crises.

I just think it is important not to panic and take drastic actions that can lead to WW3 and nuclear holocaust. The West dealt with many similar crises in the past: Tibet 1950, Hungary 1956, Cuba 1962, Czechoslovakia 1968, Afghanistan 1979, Kuwait 1990, Yugoslavia 1990s, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Isis 2010.

The Cold War playbook has worked before and will work here again.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, kraze said:

Russia is an empire. Like any other empire in history - it consists of dozens of different ethnicities. And to keep that all together and not infighting permanently - an empire has to erase ethnicity's culture, language, identity - naturally nobody would agree to any of that peacefully - so an empire has to genocide its way through all the resistance to forced change until people are turned into a grey mass with no past and no roots.

It's been like that since ancient Egypt and Rome and it's no different now.

Furthermore an empire has to expand to exist, because empires are extremely conservative and improving living conditions among other things isn't the priority because of that - so stagnation is death of an empire. Proven by the USSR and British Empire in 20th century.

With Ukraine, however, it's amplified by the ever falsified russian history, where they want their roots to start in Kyivan Rus and not in Golden Horde, khans of which created Muscovy, because for a supposed empire to have its roots among barbarians is degrading or something.

So they just have to have Kyiv or their history makes no sense even to them.

This thing with ethnic cleansings here isn't something recent - it's been going on for 300 years. Russia first captured most of Ukrainian territories only in 18th century and since then they did continuous genocides with millions of victims, down to literally forbidding us from speaking our native language - in fact it was forbidden as recently as 1991.

Hence why you see putin spewing insanity about "Lenin inventing Ukraine" and other fascist nonsense about "borderlands" (Kyiv being a "borderland" of 'Kyivan' Rus was always funny to us).

As for us - seriously we didn't hate russians up until 2014, we would've happily never cared about them at all. I mean I personally wasn't even interested in what's going on in their country and even happily ignored their trashy behavior towards us up until 2014.

In English this has long been called "Russification".  The Wikipedia definition of it is as follows (my bold):

"a form of cultural assimilation process during which non-Russian communities (whether involuntarily or voluntarily) give up their culture and language in favor of Russian culture. "

 

Kraze didn't mention another element of the Empire strategy, which was pushed by the Soviets in a massive way... relocation of ethnic Russians to non-Russian areas.  Russia knew for a long time that the best way to have a loyal base of operations in some distant non-Russian area was to put a bunch of Russians there.  The state could draw from this population to administer the non-Russians and ensure their domination by Russia.

Because of the friction between Russians and non-Russians, the transplanted Russian population would be more dependent on the Russian/Soviet state for defense than the local population around it.  A very logical and successful strategy.

This is *part* of the reason why there are so many ethnic Russians living outside of the traditional Russian borders.  Especially in Russia's far eastern regions where there was 0.0% Russians living there to start with, as opposed to places like Ukraine and the Baltics where Russians moved around in those areas for centuries.

Steve

[rocketman]

5 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm also a Cold War kid, and I must admit that this feels different. The whole MAD doctrine is based on both actors being rational.

Two questions: How crazy is Putin really? Could he launch if he wanted to?

Me too. Just the mention of going full nuclear brought back childhood fears, nightmares and the looming threat of total annihilation. I can’t turn those emotions off even as an adult.

Edited March 9, 2022 by rocketman

[db_zero]

Every year Russia holds a big military parade. Rows of soldiers marching, shiny tanks and afv go rolling past the stand.

Going to be interesting to see it this year…if for some reason it isn’t canceled.

[Sgt Joch]

8 minutes ago, Probus said:

As far as a no-fly zone is concerned (I agree this could cause WWIII).  But WHY is no one talking about how stealth will effect the enforcement of a no-fly zone?  Think about it.  If the Russians can only see our stealth aircraft at best 10% of the range (I'm thinking closer to 1% now) of the current air defenses, then we can sit back and shoot Russian planes and helicopters out of the sky with impunity forcing Russia to ground its air forces very rapidly.  Red flag exercises have shown just how effective our F-22s are.  There would be no need for SEAD missions and we've had 2 weeks+ to plan our strategies and coordinate our forces. Although there is always going to be risk with even a stealthy no-fly zone, I think the main risk is expanding the conflict into WWIII.

Sure, might work…

What happens if Russia then decides to launch missiles against against NATO air bases in Eastern Europe or uses its submarines to sink U.S. aircraft carriers close to Russia?

Once you start shooting down Russian planes and killing Russian pilots, you have no idea where this will end up.

[Battlefront.com]

37 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

He's waving his finger as if telling Lukashenko "You've been a naughty boy, mate". His leg is maybe just making a bit of the Elvis leg shake because he's so aroused and happy to see Lukashenko again.

But he's definitely looked a bit ill in the latest videos.

Physical illness has been suspected for some time now as one of the possible reasons Putin has been so physically isolated from others.  It doesn't make matters better for a dictator when, under stressful circumstances (which existed before the war) people think you're physically weak. 

This is also one theory about "why now" for this war.  If Putin has something that is either going to for sure kill him (e.g. terminal cancer) or likely to be so debilitating that he is ousted (e.g. Parkinsons) this might have been his only chance.  Given his obsession with Ukraine and how it continually thwarts his schemes, this is psychologically consistent with Putin.

Steve

[Probus]

2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Physical illness has been suspected for some time now as one of the possible reasons Putin has been so physically isolated from others.  It doesn't make matters better for a dictator when, under stressful circumstances (which existed before the war) people think you're physically weak. 

This is also one theory about "why now" for this war.  If Putin has something that is either going to for sure kill him (e.g. terminal cancer) or likely to be so debilitating that he is ousted (e.g. Parkinsons) this might have been his only chance.  Given his obsession with Ukraine and how it continually thwarts his schemes, this is psychologically consistent with Putin.

Steve

If this is the case, do you think Putin's generals will blindly follow his orders to use nukes or chemical weapons?

[Battlefront.com]

14 minutes ago, Probus said:

The younger NATO crowd may be a bit afraid of Russian nukes, but for us old time Cold War 'Vets', him rattling his nuclear sticks at us does not scare us.  I grew up in the 80's with the larger threat of USSR nukes hanging over our heads every day.  He can threaten his nukes, but we all know that if he uses them it is a death sentence for him.  He has no desire to die, just stay in power after his obvious huge mistake.  Nukes wont get him any closer to that goal.

No, but this of course assumes that a) Putin is still rational (this should be questioned) and b) those around him won't carry out his orders.  The latter depends on how much groundwork Putin might have laid to bypass various command level checks and balances.

14 minutes ago, Probus said:

What worries me is WWIII, admittedly, after Russia's poor showing in Ukraine, I'm not too scared of his Mighty land forces. 

Yes, even a conventional war with Russia without nukes is a very scary thought.  A lot of people would die, a lot of them civilians.  And it would almost insure a bloody breakup of the Russian Federation, which at least right now is not a sure thing.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Just now, Probus said:

If this is the case, do you think Putin's generals will blindly follow his orders to use nukes or chemical weapons?

See above.  The answer is "no, but...".  Putin is one of the most devious leaders in modern history.  If he gets it into his head that he wants the option to throw nukes around, given time he might figure out a way around internal state safeguards.  Even with one launch facility/platform.

It's definitely nothing we want to screw around with.

Steve

[panzermartin]

I wonder, has anyone here studied the steps of nuclear war with Russia. In case of someone pressing the button, does that mean that everyone goes full nuclear the exact moment launching all his arsenal at once to all cities targeted to overwhelm defenses ? Or will it be like, I start with a tactical nuke to terrorize you, you either back down or respond and then it escalates step by step to the bigger bombs and the end of us all. 

[The_Capt]

28 minutes ago, Sgt Joch said:

I don’t know where you see apathy. The west is reacting forcefully as it has in the past to similar crises.

I just think it is important not to panic and take drastic actions that can lead to WW3 and nuclear holocaust. The West dealt with many similar crises in the past: Tibet 1950, Hungary 1956, Cuba 1962, Czechoslovakia 1968, Afghanistan 1979, Kuwait 1990, Yugoslavia 1990s, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Isis 2010.

The Cold War playbook has worked before and will work here again.

I was referring to your previous post and commentary on the "average citizen".  My point being that it matters just what one does before a crisis as it does what one does after has occurred.  Our track record on the latter is solid, but our performance on the former abysmal at times, including the current one.

My underlining point being that while we have been wrapped up in our own nonsense we clearly lost the bubble on this one and should reflect on that moving forward.  Or we could just go back to ignoring it and risk it happening again.

[akd]

1 hour ago, Suchy said:

And the Kremlin has just announced that:

Polish offer of jets to Ukraine creates 'potentially dangerous scenario

Coming soon to a headline near you:

Europe offer of additional food and medicine to Ukraine creates a “potentially dangerous scenario.”

[The_Capt]

42 minutes ago, Probus said:

The younger NATO crowd may be a bit afraid of Russian nukes, but for us old time Cold War 'Vets', him rattling his nuclear sticks at us does not scare us.  I grew up in the 80's with the larger threat of USSR nukes hanging over our heads every day.  He can threaten his nukes, but we all know that if he uses them it is a death sentence for him.  He has no desire to die, just stay in power after his obvious huge mistake.  Nukes wont get him any closer to that goal.

I am stretching to remember a time where thing were this tense during the Cold War, Cuban Missile Crisis was the only time that US and Russian forces were literally in confrontation but it stayed Cold.  

If you recall the lead in scenarios for movies like The Day After and Threads or any books for that matter, they started with an invasion of a country by the USSR and then a collision with US/NATO troops in that country leading to an escalation.  We have that first condition, and I think everyone is working very hard to avoid the second one.

I think what has changed is the BMD equation.  I have no idea what the US has been working on for over 30 years but the thanks to NK, the ability to hit incoming ICBMs is no longer zero in the US (not sure about the rest of the West).  And what had to be keeping Russian leadership up at night is just how high above "zero" that number is, because it breaks MAD when it gets high enough.  We do know it is not 100% ability to stop nuclear attack or there would be NATO involvement in this war, and it would likely be over. 

[The_Capt]

7 minutes ago, akd said:

Coming soon to a headline near you:

Europe offer of additional food and medicine to Ukraine creates a “potentially dangerous scenario.”

What is interesting about this is that the US and Europe are likely already contributing the most dangerous thing they can, ISR.  A lot of those Russian tanks that are getting "blowd up" are likely a result of ISR feeds be given to the Ukrainians from the West, particularly satellite. 

The problem of crossing the Rubicon in these scenarios is to make sure you know where it actually is.

[Kraft]

Russian Foreign Ministry said it does not seek regime change in Ukraine (anymore). I guess the Nazi ordered Genocide of ethnic russians is something Putin can work with.

Sounds like someone is ready to tap out soon, but I doubt Ukraine is going to accept current Russian demands

Edited March 9, 2022 by Kraft

[TheVulture]

Back on the economic front https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/fitch-cuts-russias-rating-says-debt-default-imminent-2022-03-08/

Quote

 

Fitch cuts Russia's rating further into junk, says debt default imminent

March 8 (Reuters) - Fitch on Tuesday downgraded Russia's sovereign rating by six notches further into the junk territory to 'C' from 'B', saying a default is imminent as sanctions and trade restrictions have undermined its willingness to service debt.

The country's financial markets have been thrown into a turmoil by Western sanctions after it invaded Ukraine, raising significant concerns over its ability and willingness to service debt.

The rating firm pointed to Presidential decree, which could potentially force a redenomination of foreign-currency sovereign debt payments into local currency for creditors in specified countries.

"‍Further ratcheting up of sanctions and proposals that could limit trade in energy increase probability of a policy response by Russia that includes at least selective non-payment of its sovereign debt obligations," the ratings agency said in a statement.

On March 16, Russia is due to pay $107 million in coupons across two bonds, though it has a 30-day grace period to make the payments.

The 'C' rating in Fitch's assessment is only one step above default, bringing it in line with the Moody's current equivalent score of 'Ca'.

The change comes less than a week after Fitch revoked Russia's investment-grade status, slashing its rating to "B" from "BBB". 

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by TheVulture