How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Battlefront.com]

19 minutes ago, dan/california said:

Dmitri is on fire today, as is The Pickle.

RFE/RL article on Russia's arrest announcement:

https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-deputy-chief-krasnodar-shot-dead-/32497651.html

Steve

[womble]

1 hour ago, Astrophel said:

Wallace reveals why he is not the calibre for a Nato chief and how he ranks in the second division of the already doubtful Tory government in UK.  We should be thankful that Ukraine is fighting our war and give them everything they need.  All the Ukrainians who have lost life and limb in this war deserve an apology from Wallace.  

What does he want to preserve his stocks for?  Is he planning to invade Argentina?

Hah. Which Tory is "first division" if Wallace is second?

In case you hadn't noticed, last time, it was Argentina who did the invading. Britain has some pretty far-flung interests which it is prudent to retain the capacity to defend at need. Defend. You know, like Ukrainians do. Not invade, like Russians.

We should (and are) give Ukraine what we can.  Most of the NLAWs that helped stop Russia's first attacks came from the UK. They got 800 Storm Shadows.. I don't think we have that many left on the RAF's establishment. We've promised them the entirety of the annual production of the cruise missiles. If we want to replace the ones we've given over already, we have to ramp up production (and I believe the statment implied that we were).

[Lethaface]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

Largely agree with what you wrote, but not exactly with your conclusion.  See my previous post about long standing Russian aggression.

Ukraine might not be thinking it is fighting this war on our behalf, yet it very much is anyway.  These are not incompatible concepts.  Neither is it incompatible for the West to "use" Ukraine as a tool for its own benefit, but at the same time deeply care about Ukraine's future and the lives of its people.  Those are also not incompatible and are, in fact, why the West's usual anti-war left is nearly universally in favor of arming Ukraine.

This really SHOULD have been NATO's fight (in some form) before it got to Feb 23, 2023.  Russia was clearly, and repeatedly, showing it was an active, ongoing threat to the countries within NATO.  The problem was Russia played the game of "just enough, but not too much" that NATO/West really couldn't figure out how to respond.  Lots and lots of things could have been done and were not, allow Russia's behavior to continue and even get worse.

In other words, NATO and its allies apparently needed Putin to clearly step over the line before it could get it's disorganized house in order to strike back against Russian aggression and threats to democracy.  No other options seemed to be on the table for improving the situation, therefore this war is in no small way being fought on behalf of NATO/West even if Ukraine has selfish reasons for fighting it.

Steve

Maybe it's just semantics, but another country fighting a war on 'our behalf' doesn't sound right in my vocabulary; it would mean they are fighting the war more for our interests than their own. I probably wouldn't support such a war, but I do wholeheartedly support the Ukrainians in their resolve (and our support). 
Perhaps a factor in this semantic/conceptual interpretation is that I've heard/read many people stating (in NL at least) that we/USA are letting the Ukrainians die for our cause, NATO/US is actually directing the war, bla bla and thus we should force ceasefire to stop the bloodshed. We are not in a position to stop it; Ukrainians are fighting for their own cause and we are helping them. And yes helping them in this case might also mean helping ourselves. I guess this perhaps is what you and @Maciej Zwolinski conclude/mean.

At the same time I think that whether or not NATO's posturing in the past has facilitated Russia's behavior is a different question, on another interesting level (conceptual). As are the consequences of NATO's actual posturing during the conflict. We certainly have (vested) interests in Ukraine winning the war and Russia's means of waging war detoriating, but the complete destruction of Russia's regime isn't or shouldn't necessarily our political goal (although for Ukraine it is). 

The interesting question is, of course, whether Ukraine inside NATO could have prevented this war. Another one certain people will put up is whether a more constructive/cooperative posture towards Russia in the early 90's could have done more towards a better Russia. To be honest on both subjects I don't have any new great takes :D.
For better or for worse, the main reason why Ukraine wasn't in NATO yet was to prevent a war such as the one which is taking place now; or a larger war. Now that ship has sailed. Whatever to think of Scholz, his 'zeitenwende' statement was rather accurate.
The implications for the future are as of yet largely unknown, but they will be 'large' as compared to how 'things' were before. But we haven't arrived in the 'post' era yet.
I agree that 'we' have betted enough towards this pot (the war), that we might as well go all in. But all in with the money on the table, not with the house, car and other assets. I don't get people voting for an open war between Russia and NATO. But if it comes to that, we will have to take responsibility in our own hands including doing the dying.

[Lethaface]

And to be fully specific in my understanding if someone in Ukraine would be fighting the war on our behalf it would mean they would actually rather be part of Russia or indifferent about it, but just fighting against Russia because we want them to do so. That's a bit hyperbole perhaps, just as I like it :).

Edited July 12, 2023 by Lethaface

[Aragorn2002]

2 hours ago, danfrodo said:

Hey Aragorn!  Hopefully he didn't do too much damage.  He's had outbursts like this before.

The pressure is probably a big factor in his words.  Zelensky has watched as NATO 'escalatory' aid increases have kept UKR from damaging RU as much as would have been possible w more aid, earlier.  Imagine the stress he is under! 

Not that NATO et al haven't been generous, but they have sometimes pissed around too long on things that ended up being delivered anyway.  3-4 months left in the campaign season -- why are we just be giving ATACAMS now??  Why not to help start the offensive season??  It's is sooooo much in interest of the world to have Putin lose so we need stop slow walking important weapons systems.

I agree, Dan, but preparing and sending military aid takes a lot of time and hard work by many people in and outside the military and not sending Bradleys, Leopards or F-16s doesn't mean nothing is happening in the background. To a certain extend I understand Zelensky's frustration, but it could backfire on him and convince Western leaders Ukraine is not a country that deserves a place in the EU or NATO. 

Personally for the moment I agree with that. Turkey, Hungary and Poland for example are ruled by corrupt,  unpredictable and unreliable dictators, which cause more problems than they offer solutions to help to strengthen the West's position.

With too many countries like that, we're doomed.

But again, I"m all in favor of sending Ukraine all we can, so they can get their country in order and live in freedom like we do.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Aragorn2002

[Aragorn2002]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

 

Double post

Edited July 12, 2023 by Aragorn2002

[mosuri]

5 hours ago, kraze said:

Western Europe should exhale with ease then because historically Russia had trouble reaching any of it.

Tsar Alexander's troops reached Paris
Tsar Iosif's troops reached Berlin
Tsar Vladimir's troops reached Bakhmut

[Lethaface]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

There's another major issue in play right now, which is that prior to Putin launching this war there was a massive disagreement amongst NATO and its allies about how to deal with increasing Russian aggression and destabilization efforts.  For the most part *ALL* nations found it expedient to largely not respond to things like state sponsored acts of murder and terrorism being committed on its territory.  It largely didn't respond to its diplomats being harassed and even physically harmed.  It didn't do anything significant about a raft of coup plots (including one in a NATO country, BTW) and election interference.  State sponsored corruption never had a serious chance of being challenged.  Russian efforts to undermine peace and stability in the Middle East was not seriously confronted.  Not to mention a war being conducted directly on the border of its territory for 8 years.  Etc.

This war gave NATO and its allies a chance to act in unison instead of continuing to debate and delay the inevitable.  This is an opportunity that Russia had expected would be squandered.  He was wrong, but it will only be meaningful if the collective action holds.  Which is why Ukraine must be supported fully and thoroughly.

While it might be that politicians in NATO and its allies are "using" Ukraine as a tool, there is a genuine emotional interest to help them.  That is genuine.  But if strategic interests were not in alignment, it would not be enough to act so strongly (or at all, a pessimist could say)

Steve

This is basically how I think but phrased differently and perhaps some different opinions on the edges. 

[Lethaface]

4 hours ago, Astrophel said:

No, Netherlands is not on "the far side of the moon".  This repeated dig at Netherlands seems quite uncalled for.  Netherlands support to Ukraine was immediate despite a large part of the population not being able to find Ukraine on a map.  After MH17 Netherlands has no illusions about modern russia.  MH17 was a deliberate act of war directed at Dutch people by russians.  Netherlands was immediately supportive of Ukraine in the current war.

Threats from Moscow were directed very early to Netherlands and the Port of Rotterdam in particular.  The nuclear hawks in Moscow were prominent.  The Dutch Government communicated a clear message that Patriot systems were on full alert and that Netherlands would not be intimidated.  The Dutch resolve has not faltered as far as I can see.  Netherlands is hosting more refugees than UK and is playing its part with provision of military and financial aid, as well as performing a vital logistics function.  Netherlands was one of the first if not the first to promise F16s.

Please let us resist the temptation to imagine fault lines in the Nato alliance.  When it comes to a russian threat to destroy the port of Rotterdam then believe me Netherlands is as much in the front line as Warsaw.

I didn't perceive those comments as offensive towards the Netherlands, but I'm not really patriotically sensitive ;-). I agree though that our country has, on this subject, done a decent job. 
And I agree on NATO. Even for our small Baltic brothers we will do our duty (although obviously that is like everything I post my opinion and or my understanding, in this case of how our armed forces would react).

[NamEndedAllen]

Unexpected resupply of weapons for the Russkies?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/wagner-turns-over-2000-heavy-weapons-including-tanks-sam-systems

[Lethaface]

4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Thanks for the reminder of MH-17.  Russia is so horrible that it's easy to make a list of its crimes, but it's tricky keep that list short.

Steve

Although It's just anecdotal I've been on the MH-17 flight quite a number of times (flying to/from Malaysia) and indirectly know some people who perished on the flight (I also witnessed part of the impressive ceremony through the country). At the times I was on the flight I was more worried about it going over Afghanistan.
Apart from that; the way the Russian regime handled MH-17 was rather infuriating for anyone involved. At the same 'time', our intelligence services have had quite some interactions with their Russian counterparts before and after that incident. So the way Russia behaved was not a surprise.
Also on another note, as a human I'm not convinced those who shot down that airplane did intentionally destroy a civilian airplane full of passengers. But 'we' certainly didn't forget, nor forgive.
 

Edited July 12, 2023 by Lethaface

[Carolus]

2 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:

Unexpected resupply of weapons for the Russkies?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/wagner-turns-over-2000-heavy-weapons-including-tanks-sam-systems

Well, only the part that was not used ("dozens") is an actual new addition, right? The rest must have been deployed in Ukraine.

The crew issue remains, as people explaiend to me after I shared that one tweet which speculated that Russia has been ramping up vehicle production. Generally, Wagner (core) was considered higher quality than RA regulars. 

Problem is, even another 10 low quality crewed T-64s is still not something you want to face if you have to count every Bradley you have. 

[Aragorn2002]

8 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Although It's just anecdotal I've been on the MH-17 flight quite a number of times (flying to/from Malaysia) and indirectly know some people who perished on the flight. At the times I was on the flight I was more worried about it going over Afghanistan.
Apart from that; the way the Russian regime handled MH-17 was rather infuriating for anyone involved. At the same 'time', our intelligence services have had quite some interactions with their Russian counterparts before and after that incident. So the way Russia behaved was not a surprise.
Also on another note, as a human I'm not convinced those who shot down that airplane did intentionally destroy a civilian airplane full of passengers. But 'we' certainly didn't forget, nor forgive.
 

How sweet it would be to see dutch F-16s shoot down Russian planes and bomb the hell out of their ground troops. Revenge is so much better than forgiving.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Aragorn2002

[Lethaface]

3 hours ago, Astrophel said:

Wallace reveals why he is not the calibre for a Nato chief and how he ranks in the second division of the already doubtful Tory government in UK.  We should be thankful that Ukraine is fighting our war and give them everything they need.  All the Ukrainians who have lost life and limb in this war deserve an apology from Wallace.  

What does he want to preserve his stocks for?  Is he planning to invade Argentina?

Without wanting to but actually repeating myself; this is not our war. Are you dying for it?

[kraze]

1 hour ago, Lethaface said:

Which is historically correct. But history != future, but then we now have NATO exactly for this reason. 
Also to be fair, it's not like other (European) countries have been fairies historically. For my country we don't have to go back very far, even for officially known/recognized 'mishaps'. We have our 'politionele acties' in Indonesia directly after WW2, for example. So personally I don't think history is that relevant today, I mean it is interesting but one doesn't need history to declare the facts on the ground today. As a matter of fact, extrapolating history is often a fallacy used for predicting the future. 

And that's the point.

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

It can (and is both), most proxy wars are, at least the defensive ones.  Ukraine definitely represents Western interests in this war, which also overlap with their own self defence.  See all the wars where those overlaps did not happen and exactly what we did about it.  If Russia suddenly did not matter to us or Ukraine kicking their butts on our behalf did not matter, watch how fast support would dry up on what would be viewed as a "border skirmish in Eastern Europe". 

I guess the crux is in semantics, see my previous post. There is overlap but that isn't the 'root cause/interest' for the warring parties.

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, danfrodo said:

Imagine the stress he is under! 

This

[Lethaface]

2 hours ago, Carolus said:

The problem is we might actually be in a perpetual world war, we just don't fully realise this yet. I admit, my feelings and thoughts are a bit hawkish on this matter. 

It is not a conventional war for sure. It might never end up as another one after Ukraine, or it might. But it is already going and and it is not a war the vast majority of the Western peoples and their governments are even acknowledging that they are involved in.

The West and our democratic systems have an enormous amount of self-made problems we need to solve and plenty of moral flaws. 

But the alternative that is currently trying to flip as many government around to globe to its side is one of completely nihilistic exploitation at best or one of ethno-fascist state ideology at worst. The question whether Putin, Xi, Kim Un, the Iranian regime or Assad and their apparatuses and followers will do completely unspeakable things to anyone in this forum and our families is not one of morals to them - it is merely one of whether it is useful to them and whether they have the  opportunity to do it and maybe to get away with it.

There has been an embarrassing but small social media campaign a while ago in Germany of people from the right-populist to neo-fascist spectrum adopting pfps with a Russian flag and a message like "I'm not at war with Russia" or "I am a friend of the Russian people", which was sparked after a comment of the German foreign affairs secretary describing Germany or the West to be "at war" with Russia (diplomatically wrong and it might have been just a side comment, but it might also hint at her actually having a deeper understanding of the situation at large).

I could only think at how many of these people would end up if Russia established a regime just like in the occupied zones in Ukraine in Germany. "This must be a mistake, I called NATO bad on twitter" - "You have a nice daughter, German. And now dig the f*ing hole."

It is a new cold world war between "the worst system of government except for all other systems" and "the difference between you and the Uyghurs is that the Uyghurs are handily in reach of the CCP, but Xi promised the next illegal Chinese police station will come to a port city near you shortly", with Russia and China pouring enormous amounts of resources into psyops, cyber, social networking and industrial espionage. Information warfare which makes their own populations and the populations of their enemies forget the extent of their own crimes and massacres. People openly clamour that the Tianamen Square massacre is a Western psyop and don't forget one million dead Russian babies in Donbass CNN is telling you nothing about.

Look how we in this forum needed to brainstorm for a bit to remind ourselves what Russia has actually done in the past. Blatant murders of journalists and dissidents, in our own countries, while grinning into our faces. China just put out bounties for the heads of dissidents from HongKong. The next polonium tea is green. 

All of it fields in which the West is currently not able and/or not willing to compete in, and/or largely unable to defend itself against. And every country in Asia, Africa, America and Europe that is flipped through corruption, military support and propping up dictators will make economic sanctions more toothless, and the global order more hollow, turning their societies isolationist to achieve Schmittian multipolarity, or blocking decisions in entities like NATO, EU or UN. 

It very much does look like a global underhanded war of systems to me.

There is nothing in history that says things always have to improve or that the Western Man is the rightful God-given owner of global power, and thank goodness we majorly don't believe in the latter anymore. But I always hoped whichever hegemony eventually replaces the West would be more or at least equally humane, not gleefully more cruel. And I don't think a hope like that is a bad thing to work towards.

 

The war you speak of has been going on already for a long time, it is called geopolitics ;-). China has, probably since Desert Storm or before, came up with a doctrine to win that war.

There is however difference between a full hot war right now vs a economy backed mainly sea/ocean based war of attrition later. The propaganda channels don't always present the full width of information; for example on the submarine 'front' for the USA/NATO .

 

[kevinkin]

Over at War Zone this afternoon:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/wagner-turns-over-2000-heavy-weapons-including-tanks-sam-systems

Prig de-fanged?

 

[Carolus]

8 minutes ago, kevinkin said:

Over at War Zone this afternoon:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/wagner-turns-over-2000-heavy-weapons-including-tanks-sam-systems

Prig de-fanged?

 

If Girkin is right and the Prigozhin camp more or less made Putin agree to their demands, this is not a "defanging", but part of the deal. 

For the public, Prigozhin moves into the background. The state media continues to announce how successful Putin has put down the traitors. Some chairs in the MoD get rearranged. But Putin also received Wagner equipment for the army to stabilise the frontline. 

[Lethaface]

38 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:

How sweet it would be to see dutch F-16s shoot down Russian planes and bomb the hell out of their ground troops. Revenge is so much better than forgiving.

I personally wouldn't object

[Carolus]

17 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

The propaganda channels don't always present the full width of information; for example on the submarine 'front' for the USA/NATO .

 

Quick comment or PM regarding the "submarine front" for the uniniciated possible?

[Lethaface]

41 minutes ago, kraze said:

And that's the point.

I guess someway or somehow we can sometimes actually agree

[Lethaface]

1 minute ago, Carolus said:

Quick comment or PM regarding the "submarine front" for the uniniciated possible?

Look into the fleets currently available & underway. Something with Virginia class I guess.

[JonS]

17 hours ago, dan/california said:

It could be argued that the U.S. has NEVER fought a war that had the stakes this one has for Ukraine

*cough*1861?*cough*

Edited July 12, 2023 by JonS