How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[Haiduk]

It's a great news! 

Commander of Azov Denys Prokopenko "Redis" is free!

Deputy of Azov commander Sviatoslav Palamar "Kalyna" is free!

Acting commander of 36th marines brigade Serhiy Volyna is free!

 

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by Haiduk

[Harmon Rabb]

2 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

It's a great news! 

Commander of Azov Denys Prokopenko "Redis" is free!

Acting commander of 36th marines brigade Serhiy Volyna is free!

 

 

Heroyam Slava!

[akd]

Hmm…release of Azovstal defenders, including dreaded Azov Ukro-nazi leaders, in conjunction with mobilizing 300,000 Russians.  Maybe it was all just to try to keep the Nat-Zs reined in online?

But didn’t mobilize enough cannon meat to appease the Girkin:

 

Edited September 21, 2022 by akd

[sburke]

10 minutes ago, Zeleban said:

I told you that the main task of mobilization in Russia is to exert moral pressure on the West. Judging by the latest posts of some participants, this strategy is successful.

I don't think that has anything to do with what  @The_Capt posted.  In fact, I don't think it represents a change in position at all.  He has brought this up before however that was way back before everyone decided victory was just around the corner.  UA still needs to take Kherson and from the post above the RA is still fighting hard for it.  It will be likely 4-6 months before we see another major offensive push by the UA.  Retaking the Donbas and Crimea is quite a bit away and a lot can change between now and then so let's just see what that means before I see a post calling anyone a revisionist sellout undermining support for the UA please.

[kraze]

You all remember how it was possible that a russian general was captured?

[Twisk]

9 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

 

<longer comment snipped to cut to the chase>

But in any case I do not think the question of Western will is based around resolve or willpower but on high levels of government opinion. Granted this is a type of willpower but its different from electorate willpower. Whether Ukraine goes into LPR/DPR/Crimea is based on:

- Ukrainian People

- Ukrainian Gov.

 

- Western Governments/agencies

 

- Russian Gov
- Russian People

I don't think that Western electorates particularly care or will care until something drastic happens. This isn't a boots on the ground situation and from everything I've seen people are fine supplying the means for Ukraine to continue blowing up Russians from now till Kingdom come. Russia could threaten Nuclear War but part of their problem is that they've already threatened it repeatedly so will threatening it again arouse Western electorates to force the hands of their governments?

 

So yes there are limitations to how far the West will support Ukraine but its not much to do with it being post-pandemic or post-Afghanistan and far more to do with what does President and Prime Minister so-and-so believe from internal government data gathering (intel, diplomacy, etc..). John Q. Public isn't setting the terms of willpower in the key Ukrainian support pillars.

 

[billbindc]

5 minutes ago, Twisk said:

<longer comment snipped to cut to the chase>

But in any case I do not think the question of Western will is based around resolve or willpower but on high levels of government opinion. Granted this is a type of willpower but its different from electorate willpower. Whether Ukraine goes into LPR/DPR/Crimea is based on:

- Ukrainian People

- Ukrainian Gov.

 

- Western Governments/agencies

 

- Russian Gov
- Russian People

I don't think that Western electorates particularly care or will care until something drastic happens. This isn't a boots on the ground situation and from everything I've seen people are fine supplying the means for Ukraine to continue blowing up Russians from now till Kingdom come. Russia could threaten Nuclear War but part of their problem is that they've already threatened it repeatedly so will threatening it again arouse Western electorates to force the hands of their governments?

 

So yes there are limitations to how far the West will support Ukraine but its not much to do with it being post-pandemic or post-Afghanistan and far more to do with what does President and Prime Minister so-and-so believe from internal government data gathering (intel, diplomacy, etc..). John Q. Public isn't setting the terms of willpower in the key Ukrainian support pillars.

 

Support for Ukraine from the US goes through the legislature and there are already rumblings among the folks likely to win the House in November that aid to Ukraine is excessive (read: "making the opposition look good"). That support is actually fairly popular in general in the US but that may not matter for at least some period of time. 6 months is a lifetime in American politics. We should take nothing for granted.

Edited September 21, 2022 by billbindc

[Huba]

Wouldn't the distinction between pre- and post-2014 territories disappear after the referendums? RU plan obviously is to dare  us to call the nuclear bluff a week from now, not when UA army will be forcing the Perekop. IMO the nuclear threat will be most notorious in upcoming weeks, after UA starts making gains in the newly annexed territories. After we cross that Rubikon, the question of UA advancing into Donbas or Crimea will be mostly of practical nature - will they have enough oomph to do it? And I don't see how we can determine that now.

Edited September 21, 2022 by Huba

[FancyCat]

2 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Support for Ukraine from the US goes through the legislature and there are already rumblings among the folks likely to win the House in November that aid to Ukraine is excessive (read: "making the opposition look good"). That support is actually fairly popular in general in the US but that may not matter for at least some period of time. 6 months is a lifetime in American politics. We should take nothing for granted.

the vote was 368-57, hardly a issue. 

Good point made by Kherson Cat. I can't recall even hearing of specific Russians being returned except like one or two cases of corruption. 

 

 

[Twisk]

9 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Support for Ukraine from the US goes through the legislature and there are already rumblings among the folks likely to win the House in November that aid to Ukraine is excessive (read: "making the opposition look good"). That support is actually fairly popular in general in the US but that may not matter for at least some period of time. 6 months is a lifetime in American politics. We should take nothing for granted.

It does but
 

1. Neither party is making non-support a pillar of their platform. So voters aren't being brought into a decision point on it and don't seem to naturally care.

2. Because of the election cadence voters need to care around elections so the next 2 months or in 2 years.

3. The Democratic party is full on hawk mode and the balance of the Republican party is pro-support. Anti-Ukraine Republicans are rare and look to be doing iffy politically. Even if they do well wouldn't have enough clout to stop support through 2024

 

Essentially the Ukrainians are guaranteed support without electoral interference for at least 3 more fighting seasons (winter '22-'23, summer '23, winter '23-'24). So willpower for support is going to be centered in the halls of power rather than main street for some time. Western electoral support will likely follow government support until something drastic happens and not before. Essentially Ukraine would need to run into a Yalu River moment for the western electorate to bulk but at that point its already happened.

Edited September 21, 2022 by Twisk

[BlackMoria]

My sense of all this is it seems the start of 'end game'.   The great russian bear is cornered.   But an animal is most dangerous when it is cornered.  There will be much roaring and bellowing and hissing and one can get very severely savaged if one makes a incorrect move or action to confront the beast.   But the bottom line is this.  The bear knows it is cornered and it will do anything to escape its fate, which is why this is the most dangerous moment in the hunt.   The hunters must be thoughtful, determined, resolved and patient to close with the beast and finish it off.   That is where I think we are on the cusp of.  The final fury before the bear is laid low.   There is deadly danger for everyone involved in this figurative dance of death.

My analogy and sense of where I think we are right now.

[FancyCat]

Maybe Ukraine gave Medvedchuk for free considering how Putin responded to the last offer.

 

[JonS]

1 hour ago, keas66 said:

That's a bit Disappointing  Captain ?

Seems to me like you are basically saying Putin/ The Russians  has/have won 

Cast The Capt out as insufficiently pure!

 

The revolution always eats its children.

[The_Capt]

45 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

pre-invasion, it was all the rage, a Russian mechanized spearhead slicing thru the Suwałki Gap and allowing the occupation of the Baltic states with Russia daring the rest of NATO to grind itself down for the little Baltics. I seriously question your expertise and judgment on NATO if this is what you got you all worried about about, one year of paying some bills for Ukraine to shed its blood and ensure the safety of NATO for....oh, lets say 30 years?

So where on this thread or anywhere else for that matter will you find an analysis/assessment by me, or anyone else here for that matter that mirrors this?  In fact we were all going the other way while mainstream analysis was saying above.

One year?!  Ok, I think we are done here - you can push back but you are crossing some lines here.  We will be paying off this war for at least a decade, likely longer. The realignment of energy in Europe alone is going to take that long, let alone the reconstruction bill for Ukraine.  The investment in NATO will likely go into the trillions in that time.

You wanna push back with facts, sure let's hear em, but this is more a temper tantrum that the world is harsh and things are likely not going to go all the way you want.  Or you could simply disagree with me and we shall see, but it appears that ship has sailed.  So stamp your feet, hold your breath, it is not going to change likely endgame reality.

Or I could lie to you and tell you that the west will stand behind Ukraine all the way to the 2013 border, even if it takes 10 years and a nuclear war...there, feel better?

[Huba]

2 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

Maybe Ukraine gave Medvedchuk for free considering how Putin responded to the last offer.

 

Some more details are emerging:

 

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, keas66 said:

That's a bit Disappointing  Captain ?

Seems to me like you are basically saying Putin/ The Russians  has/have won  - Letting the Russians hold onto the Ukrainian Territory taken by force  and not supporting the Ukrainians in their fight to re-establish their original Borders   over fears of  escalation . After reading your in-depth analyses over the last 8 months - this seems like an odd turning back to acceptance of the idea that Russia needs to be tolerated/negotiated with  ... just because they have Nukes .

I'm pretty sure we argued that particular idea to death several times on this thread - and how it would do nothing but encourage like minded despots around the globe to  try similar strategies with their neighbours

No the Russians have definitely not won - hell they will be lucky to still have a country by the time this is over.  I am saying that there is a likely limit to western support for this war and it lies somewhere in the Donbas and at the border to the Crimea.  Be it because of nuclear escalation or fatigue.  

Sorry, but I am not invested in telling people what they want to hear - there are enough mouthpieces out there doing that - but how I see things.  This is how I see things.  You can disagree, I am not saying that I am absolutely correct and this is a unavoidable reality.  I am saying that under the current conditions it is likely to happen.

I am not advocating for this btw, my personal feelings are not part of this.  This is how I expect things to go down on the current trajectory.

Again, if things change, like a sudden collapse of the Russian power structure, then this is not the expected future anymore.  However, on the train we are on...etc...etc.    

[sburke]

5 minutes ago, Huba said:

Some more details are emerging:

 

so.... Russia has not declared war so they can go home now?

[The_Capt]

33 minutes ago, billbindc said:

Support for Ukraine from the US goes through the legislature and there are already rumblings among the folks likely to win the House in November that aid to Ukraine is excessive (read: "making the opposition look good"). That support is actually fairly popular in general in the US but that may not matter for at least some period of time. 6 months is a lifetime in American politics. We should take nothing for granted.

I gotta be honest.  Military support is not what I am worried about.  My major concern is the reconstruction bill when the shooting does stop. If we do not commit to that, or pawn it off to NGOs in some weird humanitarian aid scheme, we have failed.  We are talking hundreds of billions to put Ukraine back in its feet and as soon as it falls off the front page we have a bad habit of moving on.  That, plus the bruises from our other nation building ventures, is probably the biggest risk in this war to my eyes.

If we do not set the conditions to win the peace and in doing so, securing against the next conflict, we pretty much went through all this for nothing.

[billbindc]

32 minutes ago, FancyCat said:

the vote was 368-57, hardly a issue. 

Good point made by Kherson Cat. I can't recall even hearing of specific Russians being returned except like one or two cases of corruption. 

 

 

That was in this Congressional term. The next, with a House run by folks bitterly opposed to the President, will be different. Do *not* assume smooth sailing. There are rumblings already.

[billbindc]

5 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I gotta be honest.  Military support is not what I am worried about.  My major concern is the reconstruction bill when the shooting does stop. If we do not commit to that, or pawn it off to NGOs in some weird humanitarian aid scheme, we have failed.  We are talking hundreds of billions to put Ukraine back in its feet and as soon as it falls off the front page we have a bad habit of moving on.  That, plus the bruises from our other nation building ventures, is probably the biggest risk in this war to my eyes.

If we do not set the conditions to win the peace and in doing so, securing against the next conflict, we pretty much went through all this for nothing.

Yep…as some swole Brit said back in the day “we are not at the beginning of the end but at the end of the beginning”. We have entered the phase where the aggressor is likely to try once more to regain control of the initiative…at least politically (I don’t think military is possible now). It’s unlikely to work and we then have to manage the direct military endgame. And *then* we have to figure out how to form some kind of sturdy peace. Those of you saying “How *dare* you consider alternatives to total victory” need to get over yourselves. There are a myriad of ways this war could still go badly for Ukraine and there are alternatives to getting everything you would like to have. You may wish to refer to the pithy phrase about perfect and good. I’ve already used up my cliche quota.

[chuckdyke]

Enough said.

 

[keas66]

1 hour ago, sburke said:

It will be likely 4-6 months before we see another major offensive push by the UA.  Retaking the Donbas and Crimea is quite a bit away and a lot can change between now and then so let's just see what that means before I see a post calling anyone a revisionist sellout undermining support for the UA please.

 Things seems to have quietened down for sure - but is the consensus  that the  Campaigning season is now over ?

[poesel]

26 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

We will be paying off this war for at least a decade, likely longer. The realignment of energy in Europe alone is going to take that long

Sorry, but this is wrong. Oil is no problem at all. Gas will (mostly) be done by the end of next year. Nuclear might really take longer because the uranium rods need to be certified. You cannot just switch the supplier. AFAIK, this takes quite some time.

Excluded is of course Hungary...

That's the power of capitalism. If something is expensive, someone will make (more of) it until it is cheap. Getting from here to there might be bumpy, though.

10 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

My major concern is the reconstruction bill when the shooting does stop.

The EU will pay for that in the long run, no doubt. There will be endless grumbling and moaning, but in the end we will all be better off.

[sburke]

4 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Enough said.

 

I guess they are going right now.  Hey take your mobile and make sure to take lots of selfies when there and post them please.

[sburke]

1 minute ago, keas66 said:

 Things seems to have quietened down for sure - but is the consensus  that the  Campaigning season is now over ?

Logistically I think UA needs to reorganize for another push.  Meanwhile the fight for Kherson continues as well as continued pushing around Lyman while there is opportunity.  So no I would not characterize it as "campaign season over" so much as it isn't like moving cardboard chits on a game board.  The UA has a lot of prep work to make another large offensive.