How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[kraze]

On 6/28/2022 at 1:11 PM, Huba said:

How do you think the "collective West" would go about forcefully partitioning Russia, who is a nuclear power? We talk about what would be nice from your former subjects POV, so we would stopped feeling threatened, but it is not a realistic perspective and even @kraze agrees with that I think.

That perspective may become very realistic when Russia loses this war. You see - russians expected to occupy whole Ukraine in under a week, the mythology of an unstoppable "second army" was at an all time high - but suddenly it turned out that lots of that was BS and stakes are now extremely high. When Russia loses the war here - it may (and that's a rather large 'may') start a chain reaction in less stable regions of the empire. Because if Peter Vladimirovich Stalin couldn't defeat Ukrainian "untermenschen" - what will he do to us, hot-blooded Dagestani guys - for example?

You can see it in Kazakhstani and Azerbaijani dismissive attitudes towards Russia already. The empire has just lost two of its biggest vassals.

Russia losing some high-stakes war always caused the breakup of the Empire. See Russia losing WW1, then losing in Afghanistan (another war that shouldn't have been high-stakes, because they legit believed they will be fighting donkey riding villagers with hunting rifles) - so losing in Ukraine is most certainly a doom scenario for them. And they know it. And DMS knows it, hence he's so pro-war.

And that's why russians will resort to every warcrime imaginable short of WMD.

So it's better be controlled at that point.

Edited June 29, 2022 by kraze

[Slaughterhouse-Five]

28 minutes ago, kraze said:

He said that under his rule Crimea wouldn't be freed of russian occupation and keep being a part of Ukraine, because "it's not a sandwich to be passed back and forth". Like "I'm sorry it has happened, but deal with it". That's enough for me.

https://crimea.suspilne.media/en/news/942

The one who answered that he gave back the territory, he commited political suicide in Russia. In addition, there is a criminal article in Russia with a long term of imprisonment, even for verbal statements as a violation of the territorial integrity of the country. Politics isn’t as simple as online forums. Sometimes you have to compromise your beliefs.

[Huba]

30 minutes ago, Slaughterhouse-Five said:

The one who answered that he gave back the territory, he commited political suicide in Russia. In addition, there is a criminal article in Russia with a long term of imprisonment, even for verbal statements as a violation of the territorial integrity of the country. Politics isn’t as simple as online forums. Sometimes you have to compromise your beliefs.

And that pretty much sums up the whole situation. No matter who gets to rule Russia,  won't be able to do any concessions on Crimea, and in that regard won't make any difference for the Ukrainians. This issue has to be decided on the field of battle...

Edited June 29, 2022 by Huba

[kraze]

53 minutes ago, Slaughterhouse-Five said:

The one who answered that he gave back the territory, he commited political suicide in Russia. In addition, there is a criminal article in Russia with a long term of imprisonment, even for verbal statements as a violation of the territorial integrity of the country. Politics isn’t as simple as online forums. Sometimes you have to compromise your beliefs.

Nah, it's not that. Long before that Navalny supported the invasion of Georgia and called Georgians "rodents". And he also didn't say something vague, like politicians do, like "we will resolve the problem with Crimea when I'm in power - and it will make Ukrainians feel OK about it" - he stated quite clearly that "it's ours now, forget about it".

Plus when he made his Crimea statements - there was no criminal article yet. Not to mention that in Russia you don't need any article to put a person in jail or into the ground. Law is just a wishlist. Navalny is imprisoned only because he attempted to grab the throne. Nobody in Russia really cares about statements, as long as you are aligned with the winning side. Girkin pours buckets of **** on top of putin's head every week, a lot worse than Navalny ever did - and he's alive and not even in jail - make a guess why.

Edited June 29, 2022 by kraze

[The_MonkeyKing]

Ukraine has now been earmarked about 20 GMLRS capable systems.

For comparison the entire Gulf War had 89 of these systems. They were operating with significantly inferior ammunition. In the gulf war these systems were one of the main damage dealers of the campaign.

[FancyCat]

2 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Germany not only had to pay reparations, but also lost all it's colonies, 13 percent of it's territory in Europe and more than 10% of it's population to other countries. 

Colonies are usually more expensive than they are worth to the imperial core. The loss of 13% includes the return of Alsace–Lorraine to France, lost in 1871 and Poles to join Poland.

[FancyCat]

What does he mean by "might "off" you there too"? Kill the mother to hide the fact they took a bribe and then betrayed the deal?

 

[The_Capt]

3 hours ago, Slaughterhouse-Five said:

I don't want to upset dear mister The_Capt, but overall export are only a moderate part of Russian state revenues. Most are different taxes, export duties and internal mandatory contributions.

Likely explains the relative weak economic power to be honest.  Ain’t selling enough and nowhere stable enough to invest in.

However, Russia will not get many export duties when exports dry up.  And when that “moderate” state revenue dries up, how does said state offset the loss?  

Print more money or raise more taxes.  Neither make for a global economic powerhouse in-waiting.  

[Beleg85]

1 hour ago, kraze said:

You can see it in Kazakhstani and Azerbaijani dismissive attitudes towards Russia already. The empire has just lost two of its biggest vassals.

Not entirely. Tokaiev direct stand against Putin at his "Economic Forum"was indeed something unexpected, but it is too early to tell if Kazakhs can (an indeed want) to break off from Russia. They probbaly try to pull some strings at Beijing and see how far they can go against Czar. Of course, Putin did shot himself in leg by using VDV's excessive brutallity against some unarmed Kazakh protestors. But situation is still developing.

Azeri in tun were never Russian vassals, if at all they are Turkish ones.

 

Edited June 29, 2022 by Beleg85

[Offshoot]

12 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What does he mean by "might "off" you there too"? Kill the mother to hide the fact they took a bribe and then betrayed the deal?

I don't think so. You is being used generally here to refer to anyone who might be transferred for a bribe, not specifically to his mother.

[FancyCat]

36 minutes ago, Offshoot said:

I don't think so. You is being used generally here to refer to anyone who might be transferred for a bribe, not specifically to his mother.

Ahh I see.

[Grigb]

59 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

What does he mean by "might "off" you there too"? Kill the mother to hide the fact they took a bribe and then betrayed the deal?

No, he meant himself. The overall meaning of that part is higher ups do not do as they promised. Instead, they either keep you in place or send you to a sh*t hole [where you have no contact with anybody] so, they might even kill you there. 

Edited June 29, 2022 by Grigb

[billbindc]

6 hours ago, Huba said:

Exactly. I use to think the prevailing opinion is that Versailles was too harsh, and reparations too hard, exactly the same as the ones imposed on France in 1871. Germans started it, but getting revenge proved not worth it for the French at the end...

The salient point is that whatever level of reparations were imposed, Germany lost the war without being wholly defeated. 

You would be forgiven for noticing a similar situation that we are dealing with right now.

 

Edited June 29, 2022 by billbindc

[Slaughterhouse-Five]

2 hours ago, kraze said:

Nah, it's not that. Long before that Navalny supported the invasion of Georgia and called Georgians "rodents". And he also didn't say something vague, like politicians do, like "we will resolve the problem with Crimea when I'm in power - and it will make Ukrainians feel OK about it" - he stated quite clearly that "it's ours now, forget about it".

Plus when he made his Crimea statements - there was no criminal article yet. Not to mention that in Russia you don't need any article to put a person in jail or into the ground. Law is just a wishlist. Navalny is imprisoned only because he attempted to grab the throne. Nobody in Russia really cares about statements, as long as you are aligned with the winning side. Girkin pours buckets of **** on top of putin's head every week, a lot worse than Navalny ever did - and he's alive and not even in jail - make a guess why.

Oh, God! Again! The former president of Ukraine worked in the government of Yanukovych. The current president Zelensky rested with Yanukovych at his dacha. And what? People are changing. I wish you knew that. 

[Slaughterhouse-Five]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

Likely explains the relative weak economic power to be honest.  Ain’t selling enough and nowhere stable enough to invest in.

However, Russia will not get many export duties when exports dry up.  And when that “moderate” state revenue dries up, how does said state offset the loss?  

Print more money or raise more taxes.  Neither make for a global economic powerhouse in-waiting.  

I think you are constantly confusing me with Putin or those who support him. I wrote just a fact. And you are ready to attack)

[Aragorn2002]

12 minutes ago, Slaughterhouse-Five said:

I think you are constantly confusing me with Putin or those who support him. I wrote just a fact. And you are ready to attack)

Trolls are hard to keep apart.

[Aragorn2002]

18 hours ago, acrashb said:

Two very important points.  While I hope as much as anyone that the RA experiences a systemic collapse mid- to late-August, if not then this will be a long war.

In a very hopeful counterpoint, Turkey has lifted it's opposition to Finland and Sweden joining NATO.  I assume Turkey got what it wanted, but in any event this is a fantastic development for containing Russia.

https://nationalpost.com/news/nato-to-boost-rapid-reaction-force-ukraine-military-support

 

Finland and Sweden joining NATO will defending the Baltic states a lot easier. It will also be a major reinforcement of NATO in the arctic region. Yes, very good development.

[Huba]

7 minutes ago, billbindc said:

The salient point is that whatever level of reparations were imposed, Germany lost the war without being wholly defeated. 

You would be forgiven for noticing a similar situation that we are dealing with right now.

 

OTOH, France was completely defeated in 1871, and spent next 40 years preparing to take revenge. The only way to avoid creating the vicious circle seems to be prolonged occupation and regime change, and one that is somehow accepted by the occupied. For obvious reasons it's off the table now.

IMO what can be realistically expected  in present situation is  what @The_Capt outlines, and in rather minimalistic than maximalistic version. Any peace acceptable to Ukraine will be seen as humiliating by Russians and viewed as temporary by them. Hope lies in making them sign it, and making sure they won't ever be in a position to try to change it militarily - cause we know 100% that they will want to.

[Aragorn2002]

8 hours ago, The_MonkeyKing said:

The details are what matter. Here is what Finnish officials and the president commented:

• Sweden/Finland will lift its arms embargo 
There was never an arms embargo. Every deal is weighted case by case as before by authorities. Pretty direct quite from the president.
• Both will support Turkey on PKK, stop support to YPG 
Direct quite from the president: "There will be no changes to the relationship with the PKK/YPG"
• They will amend their laws on terrorism 
Finland's changes made in the resent years were judged to be sufficient already (EU "standard" laws). Sweden is going to do similar changes soon. Written this way in the agreement.
• They will extradite terror suspects
Everything will continue according to EU regulations and international law as before. "This is a legal matter and cannot in anyway be effected by political agreements" - Finnish president.
• They will share Intel with each other 
Could mean lots of things. Totally unknown to me
• Turkey, Finland and Sweden will establish a permanent joint mechanism to consult on justice, security and intelligence
Could mean lots of things. Totally unknown to me

I think Biden made a phone call to Erdogan. Nothing more.

[The_Capt]

7 hours ago, FancyCat said:

Why I ask whether Russia and the Russian people consider it a war, why is Medvedev saying stuff like "if Ukraine invades Crimea, it will be war". Isn't Russia still hiding the KIAs and WIAs from public knowledge? I was under the impression this was to try and defer foreign involvement but "special military operation" serves a domestic purpose as well, no?  Russia still has not mobilized, and I'm beginning to think that it's not just simply due to the burden of explaining it's failure in Ukraine so far, it is also gonna have to explain why despite after mobilizing Russia is still gonna lose. (Which I think is a valid separation to consider) if one considers that military defeat brings about regime changes, certainly making a distinction between a "special operation" and a war might just be enough leeway to get Putin out of getting overthrown.

So this is an interesting spin by the Russians - special military operation.  Last two terms there make sense but are important - this is a military led operation with all other governmental orgs in support.  In fact they have likely moved beyond Russian hybrid warfare; however, all the contractors still leave me wondering.  

So all this hangs on "special", which is vague and does not have a common point of reference.  For example, for a small territorial defence force, any military operation outside of their own territory would be "special".

So what makes this current Russian operation "special"?  I frankly have no idea, beyond political manipulation; however, my questions are:

- It is not total war - so limited short term objectives with a clear exit strategy...?  I am sure the Russian plan may have looked that way but I am left wondering how they thought they were going to do it.  Maybe in Russian mindset anything not total war, is not war?

- No full mobilization - specially selected and trained forces-in-being?  Very doubtful given the reports we had at the start of this this, a lot of reports of forces simply being lied to.  I am not sure about selection as no criteria is really visible.  No indication of special training for this, like COIN, nation building/stability operations, CIMIC or anything on the Peace Support Spectrum.  Nothing I have seen looks like upscaled SOF: Direct Action, Special Warfare, C-WMD or SpR - the closest was maybe special warfare in the Donbas but this looks a lot more like employing locals as cannon fodder and not "support to resistance".   There was something like a decapitation DA at the opening but that was a special operation within the "special operation"?

- How is this less than full spectrum?  At this point the only thing the Russian have left off the table are WMDs (and there are arguments for thermobaric and DPICMs in this regard).

The tricky part is the definition of "war", which is oddly without a common universal definition given how much we do it.  The narrow legal interpretation is a "formal legal declaration", which has not happened but that is window dressing on reality.  We get the slightly wider Clausewitzian definitions of "political discourse built on decision of arms", so we have to be killing each other as an extension of policy - this war definitely meets that one.  Then there are even broader definitions; an irreconcilable violent collision of certainties as a function of human social interaction.  Or an extension of evolutionary impulse etc. 

So short of a formal legal definition, this war meets pretty much every other mainstream view on the thing.  Further, the word war itself does not matter because we all agreed, even Russia, that we would not conduct acts of "aggression" except under specific circumstances - and this thing definitely meets the definition of "aggression"":

  http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/GAres3314.html

Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, subject to and in accordance with the provisions of article 2, qualify as an act of aggression:

(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof,

(b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State;

(c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State;

(d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State;

(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;

(f) The action of a State in allowing its temtory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State;

(g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein

So there is that.

This may be why we in the west are collectively having so much trouble understanding this for what it is, we have been fighting pretty low stakes affairs for years and this one is of the old gods of existential survival in several dimensions.

Honestly, it does not matter what Russia calls this, it is what it is, a war they started and one we need to finish.  But, and I stand by this, this cannot mean the complete destruction of Russia as a state - too many risks there.  So this will likely remain a limited war, or at least I really hope so, because the stakes are extremely high. 

[Huba]

4 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

I think Biden made a phone call to Erdogan. Nothing more.

The true victory for Turkiye seems to be this:

 

[sross112]

Interesting article on AP:

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-nato-biden-madrid-jens-stoltenberg-de44b391b62aa3b9ccbd37ca12518f26

It says the US is permanently stationing V Corps headquarters in Poland and adding 20,000 troops back into Europe. It is also increasing rotational deployments of troops to eastern European countries. It references the 1997 agreements not to permanently station combat formations in the eastern European nations and that is why we see the units there on rotational deployments instead of permanent basing. Additionally 2 squadrons of F-35s will be moved to the UK and more AA assets moved to Germany and Italy. Overall a pretty big commitment although not up to Cold War levels, but building up that way again. 

A statement from the article that I liked:

“There has been no communication with Moscow about these changes, nor is there a requirement to do that,” John Kirby, a spokesman for Biden’s National Security Council.

Seems the West isn't trying to play nice and talk to Putin about such things, which is a good sign of stiffening in the stance. 

[paxromana]

31 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Finland and Sweden joining NATO will defending the Baltic states a lot easier. It will also be a major reinforcement of NATO in the arctic region. Yes, very good development.

A masterstroke by Putrid in his 'special military operation' to prevent NATO expansion on Russia's borders ... 

Ooooh ... wait a minute ...

[Battlefront.com]

10 minutes ago, Huba said:

OTOH, France was completely defeated in 1871, and spent next 40 years preparing to take revenge. The only way to avoid creating the vicious circle seems to be prolonged occupation and regime change, and one that is somehow accepted by the occupied. For obvious reasons it's off the table now.

IMO what can be realistically expected  in present situation is  what @The_Capt outlines, and in rather minimalistic than maximalistic version. Any peace acceptable to Ukraine will be seen as humiliating by Russians and viewed as temporary by them. Hope lies in making them sign it, and making sure they won't ever be in a position to try to change it militarily - cause we know 100% that they will want to.

Yup, which is the primary reason I came to the conclusion that Russia would lose an outright war with Ukraine pretty much since 2013.  Russia's history of how it views the world, in particular Ukraine, is extremely consistent through hundreds of years.  Simply put, Russia views Ukraine as a subject to its will.  Period.  Ukraine has always viewed itself as distinct and different from Russia.  The difference now is that, for the first time in hundreds of years, Russia isn't physically capable of subduing Ukraine for the long term (or as we are seeing in this war, even the short term!)

These two positions are completely incompatible.  There is no ability to negotiate some sort of end to this war.  Either Ukraine surrenders or Russia ceases being able to wage war on Ukrainian territory.  That's the only way this current round of fighting stops.

People say "Russia will never give up" and I agree.  Which is why I am convinced it is headed towards military and political collapse.  Russia decided this war is about its very existence, so it has become a self fulfilling prophecy.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

11 minutes ago, Huba said:

The true victory for Turkiye seems to be this:

 

Quite a few of us here predicted that Turkey was simply negotiating to get something in return for supporting Sweden and Finland.  And sure enough... 

Steve