Ukraine

[RiverDog]

I have to say that I'm honestly very happy with the way the world has handled this situation. If Putin doesn't set off nukes, this really could signal a change for the world, a positive change. So many people are seeing the negatives of this, but I'm seeing way more positive myself. The world doesn't want this war, not even China seems to want it. It seems only Putin and his backers want it. Even most Russians don't seem to want it. The Western nations don't want it. It seems like the world is sending up a signal that are really tired of men like Putin ruining the world for everyone.

I agree. The Russians gave the western world an issue to unite around, and its almost certainly going to result in negative consequences for them as countries in NATO that have been very cool to the alliance by not wanting to contribute their fair share of funding and troops have suddenly realized the threat the organization was created to address some 75 years ago. IMO the reason why China is so luke warm to the Russian invasion is that they fear a more united western world that could pose problems for them in the future.

I don't think I've seen the Russians so actively standing against Putin in my life. Even some of his news stations are rebelling. His soldiers seem to be unmotivated to make war. He is resorting to bombing from a distance because his soldiers don't like the up close fighting against a force as determined to resist as the Ukrainians.

I think a more positive outcome may occur worldwide than we think. If Putin falls or is at least greatly reduced in power, he may be the last of the Russian strongmen as regular Russians and the business people of Russia realize it doesn't do anything for Russia to pursue empire building. They make less money and accomplish nothing useful.

People don't like empire building any longer. They are tired of it and the type of leaders it produces.

We'll see how it goes long-term, but this may be a huge change in the world and not in the negative way. It may be a very positive change. The last kick of the old style Russian dictators.

In today's environment, it is much more difficult for the Russians/Soviets to control the flow of information to their people than it was in the last half of the 20th century. That's why I'm an advocate of sanctions, as the longer this goes on, the more pressure it is going to put on the Russian people to address the problem themselves.

[I-5]

Heard some of Zelensky's speech to the US Congress today. He has a powerful sense of oratory. The line that stood out the most to me was when he was describing the helplness feeling of being powerless to stop the killing of innocent Ukrainian children:

"I see no sense in living if it can't stop the deaths"

And another great line, this one addressed directly to President Biden:

"You are the leader of the United States. I wish you to be the leader of the world. Being the leader of the world means being the leader of peace."

There MUST be a way to establish a no fly zone over Ukraine without the US or NATO getting directly involved to trigger WW3. Are there are enough Ukrainian pilots if the US provides the equipment?

[RiverDog]

There MUST be a way to establish a no fly zone over Ukraine without the US or NATO getting directly involved to trigger WW3. Are there are enough Ukrainian pilots if the US provides the equipment?

The Ukrainian air force uses Migs and other Russian made aircraft. It would take them months to get their pilots up to speed in an American warbird. Can you imagine trying to train a Russian speaking pilot to learn a complicated set of controls all written in English? Besides, we start shipping American made warplanes to Ukraine and it would be almost as much of a provocation as it would to establish a no fly zone.

There was some talk of Poland giving Ukraine some of their Russian made aircraft if the US would backfill Poland's fleet with American planes. I'm not sure what happened to that proposal. It was probably thought to be too much of a provocation.

[Aseahawkfan]

Heard some of Zelensky's speech to the US Congress today. He has a powerful sense of oratory. The line that stood out the most to me was when he was describing the helplness feeling of being powerless to stop the killing of innocent Ukrainian children:

"I see no sense in living if it can't stop the deaths"

And another great line, this one addressed directly to President Biden:

"You are the leader of the United States. I wish you to be the leader of the world. Being the leader of the world means being the leader of peace."

There MUST be a way to establish a no fly zone over Ukraine without the US or NATO getting directly involved to trigger WW3. Are there are enough Ukrainian pilots if the US provides the equipment?

There is no way other than direct provocation of Russia. A no fly zone requires military interaction against Russian air power. Russia can interpret this as nothing other than act of war. We will be fully invested once Russian fighters start engaging N.A.T.O. and American pilots. Once they shoot down one of our guys, Americans start to get very angry and will want to go full on against Russia. You know the American mindset. We get hit, we pay back. It's why after 9/11 you saw the nation unified to go and destroy whoever did this to us. You don't hit us and expect us to cower or back down. You hit America and we will come for you. It's how we are raised.

Americans like a peaceful environment for the most part. But we also like a fight if someone pushes it on us.

[RiverDog]

Heard some of Zelensky's speech to the US Congress today. He has a powerful sense of oratory. The line that stood out the most to me was when he was describing the helplness feeling of being powerless to stop the killing of innocent Ukrainian children:

"I see no sense in living if it can't stop the deaths"

And another great line, this one addressed directly to President Biden:

"You are the leader of the United States. I wish you to be the leader of the world. Being the leader of the world means being the leader of peace."

There MUST be a way to establish a no fly zone over Ukraine without the US or NATO getting directly involved to trigger WW3. Are there are enough Ukrainian pilots if the US provides the equipment?

There is no way other than direct provocation of Russia. A no fly zone requires military interaction against Russian air power. Russia can interpret this as nothing other than act of war. We will be fully invested once Russian fighters start engaging N.A.T.O. and American pilots. Once they shoot down one of our guys, Americans start to get very angry and will want to go full on against Russia. You know the American mindset. We get hit, we pay back. It's why after 9/11 you saw the nation unified to go and destroy whoever did this to us. You don't hit us and expect us to cower or back down. You hit America and we will come for you. It's how we are raised.

Americans like a peaceful environment for the most part. But we also like a fight if someone pushes it on us.

I'm with ASF on this one. A no fly zone would be interpreted as nothing less than an act of war. It's not our air space. It would be no different than instituting a naval blockade or mining a harbor.

I saw parts of Zelensky's speech, too. I'm all for helping him just as much as we can, but we have to keep Americans and NATO forces clear of the battle zone. The only thing we can do now is keep ratcheting down the sanctions, provide as many supplies and weapons as possible, and engage China and/or Israel to act as an intermediary.

[c_hawkbob]

We could, and absolutely should IMO, get those Polish MIGs into Ukrainian hand any way possible. It doesn't have to mean American Pilots in Ukrainian aircraft as Biden seems to think. We could prep them, paint Ukraine's flags on the tails and Ukrainian pilots could actually fly them from Poland across the border into action. I'm sick of just being a cheerleader.

[RiverDog]

We could, and absolutely should IMO, get those Polish MIGs into Ukrainian hand any way possible. It doesn't have to mean American Pilots in Ukrainian aircraft as Biden seems to think. We could prep them, paint Ukraine's flags on the tails and Ukrainian pilots could actually fly them from Poland across the border into action. I'm sick of just being a cheerleader.

I think some planes are already being transfered from Poland, but it's not as simple as slapping on a new paint job and turning over the keys. There are a number of issues that will take some time to resolve:

However, Poland's MiG-29s, though originally built during the Soviet era, have been substantially upgraded over the years and are much more advanced than Ukraine's examples. Beyond that, the cockpit layout of these aircraft is substantially different from the types that the Ukrainian Air Force has in inventory now. While it might not be necessary to train Ukrainian pilots to use all of the features found on the Polish fighters for them to take the aircraft in combat, some amount of instruction will be necessary.

There are also certain NATO-specific or otherwise sensitive systems that will need to be removed from the aircraft first. Any sort of demodification process would take some amount of time.

In addition, the basic logistics of getting the planes to Ukraine look set to be complicated. Currently, the U.S. government is not flying weapons and other military aid to Ukraine directly. Instead, planes bring it to facilities in Poland and Romania where the cargo is then loaded onto trucks for transport overland. Breaking down 28 MiG-29s, loading them onto trucks, driving them to Ukraine, and then reassembling the aircraft sounds like a process that could easily be arduous.

Whether it (Ukraine) has sufficient maintenance personnel and supply chains to support them is another question. The Polish Air Force established dedicated supply chains to support these jets.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... to-ukraine

I'm not against the idea, to the contrary, IMO we should be doing everything in our power short of placing our guys in harm's way to help Ukraine. It's just that it's not as easy as your making it sound.

[c_hawkbob]

I honestly don't give a sh!t about the logistical challenges. Those always exist and can always be dealt with. None of it moves the needle for me at all. Every thing I said still stands.

[NorthHawk]

The concern would be if the Russians would consider the movement of planes from Poland (or other NATO country) as an excuse to widen the conflict. Even if they had the Ukrainian flag on them, they are sourced from
outside of Ukraine. It seems to me Putin and maybe others around him want to draw the West into this but not to be seen as the aggressor.

[I-5]

Zelensky had an interesting answer about whether NATO involvement in Ukraine will result in WW3. He said, 'how do we know it hasn't already started?'. Then he also asked, what if UKraine falls? Good point.

[mykc14]

Zelensky had an interesting answer about whether NATO involvement in Ukraine will result in WW3. He said, 'how do we know it hasn't already started?'. Then he also asked, what if UKraine falls? Good point.

Zelensky is saying and doing what he has to.. and he's doing a damn good job of it. At the same time we do need to worry about whether or not this could turn into WW3 we need to understand the very real fact that if the Ukraine falls the US is still a country that hasn't been devastated by nuclear war. We have to think this thing out and look at worst case scenario and thankfully we have the luxury to do so. Despite the fact that Putin is a lunatic there are still other facts that we have to remember. There is a reason that Ukraine is not a NATO member. Personally I don't have a problem with them moving towards becoming a NATO country but we also knew that Russia wasn't going to sit back and allow it- they have made the same threat to Sweden and Finland. Obviously I don't know the in's and out's of this whole thing but I imagine that if there is anyway this invasion is going to end then NATO, the US, and Ukraine all need to be adamant that Ukraine won't join NATO, and that's just a start. That is how Putin can still save face in all of this and honestly we have to think that this all could have been avoided in the first place if that would have been the message all along. Honestly it is pretty shocking and if I were Zelelnsky I would be pretty pissed. Obviously they wanted to join NATO and NATO (the US) wanted them to join so we flirted with the idea. Zelensky probably thought he would get more help from NATO countries, understanding the flirting would piss Russia off, but we didn't provided the support he needed. We helped create this situation and then act surprised. We either should have been clear that we weren't going to support Ukraine joining NATO or we should have been prepared to defend them. Now it has taken a surprising turn and Putin, unable to take down the country as quickly as he thought, might start to feel cornered. I don't see him leaving the Ukraine without more, possibly claiming some of the Easter territories for Russia. At the end of the day the Ukrainians inspired the world with the defense of our country, Russia looks ill-equipped to conquer the lands of the former Soviet Union, NATO left the Ukranians out to dry a bit, and the citizens of the world, inspired by the Ukrainians, united in their disgust of expansion minded political leaders. The sanctions are hurting Russia now and that will probably continue even if their is a quick end to this thing, but over the long term it probably won't matter. European countries will still get a large portion of their energy from Russia and Putin/Russia will still intimidate European countries and remind the work that they have nuclear power every chance they get.

[RiverDog]

I honestly don't give a sh!t about the logistical challenges. Those always exist and can always be dealt with. None of it moves the needle for me at all. Every thing I said still stands.

I agree with you that we need to make every effort to get those planes to Ukraine. I was simply pointing out that dealing with those logistical challenges isn't as easy as you were making it sound. It could prove so complicated that it could take months to get planes in the numbers necessary for them to make a difference, and by that time, the war could be over. Closing the gate after the horses got out.

[RiverDog]

Zelensky is saying and doing what he has to.. and he's doing a damn good job of it. At the same time we do need to worry about whether or not this could turn into WW3 we need to understand the very real fact that if the Ukraine falls the US is still a country that hasn't been devastated by nuclear war. We have to think this thing out and look at worst case scenario and thankfully we have the luxury to do so. Despite the fact that Putin is a lunatic there are still other facts that we have to remember. There is a reason that Ukraine is not a NATO member. Personally I don't have a problem with them moving towards becoming a NATO country but we also knew that Russia wasn't going to sit back and allow it- they have made the same threat to Sweden and Finland. Obviously I don't know the in's and out's of this whole thing but I imagine that if there is anyway this invasion is going to end then NATO, the US, and Ukraine all need to be adamant that Ukraine won't join NATO, and that's just a start. That is how Putin can still save face in all of this and honestly we have to think that this all could have been avoided in the first place if that would have been the message all along. Honestly it is pretty shocking and if I were Zelelnsky I would be pretty pissed. Obviously they wanted to join NATO and NATO (the US) wanted them to join so we flirted with the idea. Zelensky probably thought he would get more help from NATO countries, understanding the flirting would piss Russia off, but we didn't provided the support he needed. We helped create this situation and then act surprised. We either should have been clear that we weren't going to support Ukraine joining NATO or we should have been prepared to defend them. Now it has taken a surprising turn and Putin, unable to take down the country as quickly as he thought, might start to feel cornered. I don't see him leaving the Ukraine without more, possibly claiming some of the Easter territories for Russia. At the end of the day the Ukrainians inspired the world with the defense of our country, Russia looks ill-equipped to conquer the lands of the former Soviet Union, NATO left the Ukranians out to dry a bit, and the citizens of the world, inspired by the Ukrainians, united in their disgust of expansion minded political leaders. The sanctions are hurting Russia now and that will probably continue even if their is a quick end to this thing, but over the long term it probably won't matter. European countries will still get a large portion of their energy from Russia and Putin/Russia will still intimidate European countries and remind the work that they have nuclear power every chance they get.

Sweden and Finland are re-thinking their neutral stance because of this crisis. What would happen if both of them apply for NATO membership? Are they going to invade them, too?

The solution might be for Ukraine to agree not to apply to NATO for a period of time, say 10 years. I can't see any other proposal that he might agree to and that would allow him to justify the actions that he's already taken.

[mykc14]

Sweden and Finland are re-thinking their neutral stance because of this crisis. What would happen if both of them apply for NATO membership? Are they going to invade them, too?

The solution might be for Ukraine to agree not to apply to NATO for a period of time, say 10 years. I can't see any other proposal that he might agree to and that would allow him to justify the actions that he's already taken.

Yes, I would not be surprised to see him invade both of those countries as well- or they could call a bluff and he does nothing. I know the general sentiment is that Putin doesn't have the support or ability to drop a nuclear bomb right now, but the more he is backed into a corner the crazier he might get. If we are going to support those countries moving into NATO then we better be ready for the consequences and be prepared to support them.

I agree a longish time period where the Ukraine says it won't join NATO could be acceptable. I was reading an article that was discussing Putin's push to actually join NATO in the early 2000's, but he didn't want to have to go through the normal application process. NATO denied him. I wonder what the political world would look like if Russia were a part of NATO?

[RiverDog]

Sweden and Finland are re-thinking their neutral stance because of this crisis. What would happen if both of them apply for NATO membership? Are they going to invade them, too?

The solution might be for Ukraine to agree not to apply to NATO for a period of time, say 10 years. I can't see any other proposal that he might agree to and that would allow him to justify the actions that he's already taken.

Yes, I would not be surprised to see him invade both of those countries as well- or they could call a bluff and he does nothing. I know the general sentiment is that Putin doesn't have the support or ability to drop a nuclear bomb right now, but the more he is backed into a corner the crazier he might get. If we are going to support those countries moving into NATO then we better be ready for the consequences and be prepared to support them.

Part of the rationale for Russia's invasion of Ukraine is that the two countries are historically and culturally linked with both speaking the same language, sort of like Hitler's invasion/takeover of the Sudetenland prior to the outbreak of WW2. That justification doesn't exist with Sweden and Finland. If Russia were to invade either or both of those countries, my guess is that NATO would go to war over it. Besides, he doesn't have the resources to fight wars on two fronts. He's already committed and estimated 75% of his conventional forces to the war in Ukraine.

I agree a longish time period where the Ukraine says it won't join NATO could be acceptable. I was reading an article that was discussing Putin's push to actually join NATO in the early 2000's, but he didn't want to have to go through the normal application process. NATO denied him. I wonder what the political world would look like if Russia were a part of NATO?

Yea, it's an interesting thought of what might have been had Russia been accepted into NATO. My guess is that even if they had been accepted, that Putin would have eventually left the alliance at some point over some dispute.

[I-5]

From everything I've seen, heard, read, and absorbed...Putin has made the biggest mistake of his political life gambling on Ukraine. Even if he manages to take over the country, the Ukrainians will never recognize any puppet government, and any occupation will be fraught with insurgents at all times...Kiev would be like how Baghdad was for the US, which ironically brings danger even closer to Russia. His military operation is a huge cluster$#%, poorly planned, poorly supplied, poorly trained, and poorly paid (some haven't been paid in months), and of course, the use of conscripts who some didn't even know they were in Ukraine. The reason his air force can't provide close air support is they simply haven't trained enough to coordinate with their army, and are as likely to kill their own as the enemy. Ukraine has also messed up Russian communication lines to the point that generals were using stolen Ukrainian cell phones to communicate to the front line, which is how the Ukrainians figured out where they were and targeted and killed them. Now he is attempting to coerce russian minorities from central Asia to 'volunteer' with the incentive of fast tracking Russian passports. No wonder Putin keeps threatening nukes - he doesn't have much left.

[RiverDog]

From everything I've seen, heard, read, and absorbed...Putin has made the biggest mistake of his political life gambling on Ukraine. Even if he manages to take over the country, the Ukrainians will never recognize any puppet government, and any occupation will be fraught with insurgents at all times...Kiev would be like how Baghdad was for the US, which ironically brings danger even closer to Russia. His military operation is a huge cluster$#%, poorly planned, poorly supplied, poorly trained, and poorly paid (some haven't been paid in months), and of course, the use of conscripts who some didn't even know they were in Ukraine. The reason his air force can't provide close air support is they simply haven't trained enough to coordinate with their army, and are as likely to kill their own as the enemy. Ukraine has also messed up Russian communication lines to the point that generals were using stolen Ukrainian cell phones to communicate to the front line, which is how the Ukrainians figured out where they were and targeted and killed them. Now he is attempting to coerce russian minorities from central Asia to 'volunteer' with the incentive of fast tracking Russian passports. No wonder Putin keeps threatening nukes - he doesn't have much left.

Baghdad is not a good analogy. I have two friends, one a former captain in the army that did a tour there and another that's a native Iraqi. The vast majority of Iraqis, although many were understandably opposed to the invasion, most were supportive of the Americans during the occupation. Indeed, although Iraq still has lots of problems, the government there has remained viable since we've left. It's not a puppet government as would result if the Russians conquer Ukraine. Resistance in Ukraine would be 20 times worse than what the US ever experienced in Iraq. Even Vietnam is not a good comparison. A better analogy would be the Russian's occupation of Afghanistan during the 80's, but even that would pale in comparison.

Outside of your Baghdad analogy, I agree with everything you've said about the situation.

Time is on the side of the Ukrainians. The longer they hold out, the more likely that the Russians will get frustrated with the operation.

[RiverDog]

One positive result, at least from my conservative POV, is that the invasion has separated out the far right from mainstream Republicans, both politicians and well as at the grass roots level. Although there are some, such as Georgia R Marjorie Greene and Fox News host Tucker Carlson, that oppose our supporting Ukraine, they are very few and far between. Polls have shown that 77% of Republicans support the sanctions with 63% of R's supporting them even if it means higher gas prices. 90% of them blame the Russians. About the same percentage of R's are likely to support military action as D's. Many of them, such as former VP Mike Pence, have openly split from Trump's POV of Ukraine.

Hopefully this split will carry over into other areas of politics. Perhaps the R's can use this issue to rid themselves of moonbats like Greene.

[I-5]

Time is on the side of the Ukrainians. The longer they hold out, the more likely that the Russians will get frustrated with the operation.

Time is not on the Ukrainian sides from the standpoint of the cost of lives, especially civilians. Who knows how many have been murdered by now, especially that theatre in Mariupol that had over 1000, mostly women and children. It’s easier for us to detach ourselves from a strategic standpoint, but it’s dire over there. This ‘stalemate’ is extremely bloody.

[Aseahawkfan]

Baghdad is not a good analogy. I have two friends, one a former captain in the army that did a tour there and another that's a native Iraqi. The vast majority of Iraqis, although many were understandably opposed to the invasion, most were supportive of the Americans during the occupation. Indeed, although Iraq still has lots of problems, the government there has remained viable since we've left. It's not a puppet government as would result if the Russians conquer Ukraine. Resistance in Ukraine would be 20 times worse than what the US ever experienced in Iraq. Even Vietnam is not a good comparison. A better analogy would be the Russian's occupation of Afghanistan during the 80's, but even that would pale in comparison.

Outside of your Baghdad analogy, I agree with everything you've said about the situation.

Time is on the side of the Ukrainians. The longer they hold out, the more likely that the Russians will get frustrated with the operation.

A really bad analogy. Iraq and Afghanistan are thousands of miles away, not our next door neighbors. We took both over with minimal casualties in less than a month.

In the case of Iraq, Iraqis were laying down their weapons and giving up to welcome America into their country. I worked with an Iraqi Kurd Shia and a Sunni Iraqi. The Shia said the Shia welcomed Americans in and supported them killing Saddam who they hated. The Sunni Shia said he did not think it was a great idea to kill Saddam, but had no motivation to fight against America and worked as an interpreter to support us. But Saddam did not treat the Sunni bad like he did the Shia, so the Sunni mostly supported him. But Iraq is 50 to 70 percent Shia, so the majority of the nation was against Saddam. We had nowhere near the resistance in Iraq the Ukrainians are putting up against the Russians.

Similar situation in Afghanistan as well except Afghans are 90 percent plus Sunni. But the northern Afghans did not like the Taliban, who up more resistance than the Iraqi. And waited us out until we left, then retook the country. America did not have as bad a time in Afghanistan as Russia.

American military and body politic works much differently than Russia. Our soldiers are generally good people who volunteer and have lots of laws and rules to follow that create a more lawful and organized military situation in foreign nations.

Putin is doing this for no other reason than empire building. Even his own people don't seem particularly motivated in this war.

But it seems constant bombings and murdering people are going to wear down the Ukrainian military down. They will eventually lose I imagine. Putin does not seem willing to back off.

[RiverDog]

Time is on the side of the Ukrainians. The longer they hold out, the more likely that the Russians will get frustrated with the operation.

Time is not on the Ukrainian sides from the standpoint of the cost of lives, especially civilians. Who knows how many have been murdered by now, especially that theatre in Mariupol that had over 1000, mostly women and children. It’s easier for us to detach ourselves from a strategic standpoint, but it’s dire over there. This ‘stalemate’ is extremely bloody.

Yes, you have a point. I was speaking from a military standpoint, not a humanitarian one.

I am fully aware of the human tragedy. That's what's so frustrating about it. Had this occurred 75-80 years ago before nuclear weapons, I would have advocated going in with all our military might and declare war on Russia. But we have to walk on egg shells.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Russia does have some history of losing a war to a smaller adversary. They had to withdraw after the First Chenchen War. That war saw a lot of the same problems seen in Ukraine. Poor logistics and planning, bad tactics, low morale and discipline due to reliance on conscripts set against a much more motivated and competent enemy on their own turf. Russia resorted to bombing infrastructure to try and win it, but the war was far too unpopular at home to allow them to continue. They did return a few years later with better tactics and also destroyed much more of grozny the second time around.

The point is, the Ukraine conflict is similar to Chechnya but on a larger scale. Bigger population and a much bigger economy. I would think Putin would benefit way more to control the Ukraine as intact as possible. If he “wins” by going to mass destruction, it’s hard to see that as a net positive. The monetary cost of the war, unrest at home, impact of sanctions, and significant casualties all to get a country that’s been burned to the ground that will need major investment to rebuild.

Putin may be too much a mobster or too mentally unstable to care about that. Hoping the entirety of Russian leadership wakes up to stop this madness and madman.

[Aseahawkfan]

Russia does have some history of losing a war to a smaller adversary. They had to withdraw after the First Chenchen War. That war saw a lot of the same problems seen in Ukraine. Poor logistics and planning, bad tactics, low morale and discipline due to reliance on conscripts set against a much more motivated and competent enemy on their own turf. Russia resorted to bombing infrastructure to try and win it, but the war was far too unpopular at home to allow them to continue. They did return a few years later with better tactics and also destroyed much more of grozny the second time around.

The point is, the Ukraine conflict is similar to Chechnya but on a larger scale. Bigger population and a much bigger economy. I would think Putin would benefit way more to control the Ukraine as intact as possible. If he “wins” by going to mass destruction, it’s hard to see that as a net positive. The monetary cost of the war, unrest at home, impact of sanctions, and significant casualties all to get a country that’s been burned to the ground that will need major investment to rebuild.

Putin may be too much a mobster or too mentally unstable to care about that. Hoping the entirety of Russian leadership wakes up to stop this madness and madman.

Putin made his name winning the second Chechen War. I did not know that until I looked up Putin recently due to the current events. He increased his power on that victory. It's another reason why I don't feel he will give up on Ukraine until victory is achieved. Putin knows losing for him is a loss of face and power. Winning no matter the cost solidifies his hold on Russia and his image of being powerful and competent militarily.

Putin wants the image of the Russian military to be strong and powerful with him as its figurehead. It's very important to Putin. He will not end Ukraine without a clear victory that further empowers him or the Russians themselves take him out. He knows he cannot look weak in Ukraine by losing.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/26/russia-ukraine-vladimir-putin-career-war-russian-president

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

That is what scares me. Even if he has to burn it all down, he’d do it if it means winning, consequences be damned. Completely poor logic.

[Aseahawkfan]

That is what scares me. Even if he has to burn it all down, he’d do it if it means winning, consequences be damned. Completely poor logic.

Not if your reasoning is to maintain and/or increase your power. Then it is perfectly logical. We know from history there are many men who do what they do for personal pride, glory, and power. The logic of their actions are driven by these motivations. Putin is one of those types.

[Stream Hawk]

I wonder what Biden meant by the statement : “For God’s sake this man cannot remain in power”. I mean, I know his intention, but it has already created some backlash.

[RiverDog]

I wonder what Biden meant by the statement : “For God’s sake this man cannot remain in power”. I mean, I know his intention, but it has already created some backlash.

Yeah, it's pretty tough talk, and he probably shouldn't have gone there as the object isn't regime change, it's to get Russia out of Ukraine. But on the other hand, it's nice to see him grow a set of nuts. The reality is that Putin isn't likely to withdraw on his own accord, so the only way that Russians leave is if Putin is removed from power one way or another, so making an appeal for his removal might get other Russians to listen.

[Aseahawkfan]

Yeah, it's pretty tough talk, and he probably shouldn't have gone there as the object isn't regime change, it's to get Russia out of Ukraine. But on the other hand, it's nice to see him grow a set of nuts. The reality is that Putin isn't likely to withdraw on his own accord, so the only way that Russians leave is if Putin is removed from power one way or another, so making an appeal for his removal might get other Russians to listen.

Is there a list of people with some power that would have any chance of removing Putin? We know the vote in Russia isn't real. So who decides who stays in power there besides Putin?

[RiverDog]

There's hope that the war may end peacefully:

Russia promised on Tuesday to scale down military operations around Kyiv and northern Ukraine as a confidence-building step, in the most tangible sign yet of progress towards negotiating an end to the war.

During talks at a palace in Istanbul, Ukraine for its part proposed adopting neutral status in the most detailed formula yet for a potential settlement to the five-week conflict.

Ukrainian negotiators said that under their proposals, Kyiv would agree not to join alliances or host bases of foreign troops, but would have security guaranteed in terms similar to "Article 5", the collective defence clause of the transatlantic NATO military alliance.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk ... 022-03-29/

Not that they look for justification, but it would be very hard for the Russians to maintain that Ukraine poses a threat to their security if there are no foreign troops, ie NATO troops, based there.

[Aseahawkfan]

There's hope that the war may end peacefully:

Russia promised on Tuesday to scale down military operations around Kyiv and northern Ukraine as a confidence-building step, in the most tangible sign yet of progress towards negotiating an end to the war.

During talks at a palace in Istanbul, Ukraine for its part proposed adopting neutral status in the most detailed formula yet for a potential settlement to the five-week conflict.

Ukrainian negotiators said that under their proposals, Kyiv would agree not to join alliances or host bases of foreign troops, but would have security guaranteed in terms similar to "Article 5", the collective defence clause of the transatlantic NATO military alliance.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/uk ... 022-03-29/

Not that they look for justification, but it would be very hard for the Russians to maintain that Ukraine poses a threat to their security if there are no foreign troops, ie NATO troops, based there.

Whatever helps Putin save face enough to end this charade. Russia is right next to Europe and Poland is N.A.T.O., so Ukraine would be no more of a risk than any other nation in that area. It's not like Ukraine at this point wouldn't help anyone wanting to take down Russia if the opportunity presented itself. But hey, Putin has to look like he did something, so make up whatever he has to make up to look good at home.

[RiverDog]

Not that they look for justification, but it would be very hard for the Russians to maintain that Ukraine poses a threat to their security if there are no foreign troops, ie NATO troops, based there.

Whatever helps Putin save face enough to end this charade. Russia is right next to Europe and Poland is N.A.T.O., so Ukraine would be no more of a risk than any other nation in that area. It's not like Ukraine at this point wouldn't help anyone wanting to take down Russia if the opportunity presented itself. But hey, Putin has to look like he did something, so make up whatever he has to make up to look good at home.[/quote]

This proposed settlement is similar to what I suggested earlier in the thread, that Ukraine agree not to join NATO for a period of time, which is essentially remaining neutral, like Finland and Sweden.

Putin should have no problem spinning this proposal to make it look like he achieved something and save face, that the agreement to keep Ukraine out of NATO was one of the objectives and thus justifies his actions to the Russian people.

[I-5]

From the reports I've been seeing, this war could continue on for a long time, possibly years. I hope something or someone is able to take Putin out before then. I'm not convinced that Russia will leave Ukraine even after he's gone though.

The images we've been seeing from Bucha and Irpin are beyond horrifying, as terrible as anything I've ever seen from WW2, especially knowing the Russians didn't even spare children from their murder spree. It boggles the mind that we are in the 21st Century but still haven't learned anything from history. The only thing that I can see driving Russia out of Ukraine is a third party getting involved, and we all know what risks that bring. It might come down to it if it keeps getting worse.

[RiverDog]

From the reports I've been seeing, this war could continue on for a long time, possibly years. I hope something or someone is able to take Putin out before then. I'm not convinced that Russia will leave Ukraine even after he's gone though.

The longer Russia pursues the war, the more effect the sanctions are going to have. How much patience will the Russian people have? Or are they completely brain washed and believe every word of the propaganda that they're being fed?

The images we've been seeing from Bucha and Irpin are beyond horrifying, as terrible as anything I've ever seen from WW2, especially knowing the Russians didn't even spare children from their murder spree. It boggles the mind that we are in the 21st Century but still haven't learned anything from history. The only thing that I can see driving Russia out of Ukraine is a third party getting involved, and we all know what risks that bring. It might come down to it if it keeps getting worse.

They didn't even have color photography in WW2 and there wasn't a cell phone in every pocket. As horrifying as the images that we're seeing from Ukraine, they don't hold a candle to what went on in both theatres during WW2, either in scale or debauchery.

However, I will have to admit that after having seen some of the images that you're referring to, I am being drawn closer to supporting direct military involvement by the US despite the risks. It's getting very hard to sit here and watch innocent people being murdered. I'm hearing that the Russians are using mobile crematoriums to hide the evidence of their brutality.

[Aseahawkfan]

The longer Russia pursues the war, the more effect the sanctions are going to have. How much patience will the Russian people have? Or are they completely brain washed and believe every word of the propaganda that they're being fed?

What power do they have to make change? Is there a leader who can organize them effectively? I don't know. Places like Russia, China, North Korea, and most Middle Eastern monarchies really don't have the societal elements in place to change leadership save by force. The people in power in these areas maintain control of the means to make change very tightly including weapons. It's very hard to revolt in these areas and make change. It's even harder to make changes without revolting when your voice and vote don't matter.

So not sure why you continue to think sanctions will work well and seem to think the Russian people have a choice in the matter. I don't believe they have a choice. I don't believe the sanctions are sufficient to crush Russia while Putin is in power.

Sanctions don't do much. We've seen it time and time again in Iran or North Korea or Iraq. They never work because the people in power just funnel resources to the people they need to to stay in power and kill anyone else before they even have a chance to organize and revolt effectively.

Your belief these sanctions are unprecedented is just not true. They are unlikely to prove effective. North Korea has literally lived under these type of sanctions or worse for decades and it has not weakened or stopped them. I don't think they will be effective in Russia. No nation can admit another nation made them submit with sanctions or they prostrate themselves to that nation. Putin will never do it. I doubt even most powerful Russians will do it. You can't let another nation dictate terms to you and maintain power. It would be like the United States capitulating to China because they sanctioned us from buying anything in dollars, cut off our manufacturing, and did everything they could do ruin us economically over say The Iraq War.

Would America ever backdown to another nation doing this to us? No. We would not, not even by voting the current party out. Any attempt to force capitulation from a foreign power means we have lost our sovereignty and power. It would mean the same for Russia. I doubt any loyal Russian would go with this even if in their best economic interest. You cannot allow foreign nations to influence your behavior or you no longer power in your nation.

[RiverDog]

The longer Russia pursues the war, the more effect the sanctions are going to have. How much patience will the Russian people have? Or are they completely brain washed and believe every word of the propaganda that they're being fed?

What power do they have to make change? Is there a leader who can organize them effectively? I don't know. Places like Russia, China, North Korea, and most Middle Eastern monarchies really don't have the societal elements in place to change leadership save by force. The people in power in these areas maintain control of the means to make change very tightly including weapons. It's very hard to revolt in these areas and make change. It's even harder to make changes without revolting when your voice and vote don't matter.

I assume that by "they", you mean the common citizens of Russia. They would need the cooperation of a significant number of the military, which is not a far fetched idea. Just as they are in this and any other country, the Russians draw their soldiers and generals from the general population, and when they see their country being driven into a shambles, it's not a far fetched idea that they could take action.

So not sure why you continue to think sanctions will work well and seem to think the Russian people have a choice in the matter. I don't believe they have a choice. I don't believe the sanctions are sufficient to crush Russia while Putin is in power.

Sanctions don't do much. We've seen it time and time again in Iran or North Korea or Iraq. They never work because the people in power just funnel resources to the people they need to to stay in power and kill anyone else before they even have a chance to organize and revolt effectively.

Your belief these sanctions are unprecedented is just not true. They are unlikely to prove effective. North Korea has literally lived under these type of sanctions or worse for decades and it has not weakened or stopped them. I don't think they will be effective in Russia. No nation can admit another nation made them submit with sanctions or they prostrate themselves to that nation. Putin will never do it. I doubt even most powerful Russians will do it. You can't let another nation dictate terms to you and maintain power. It would be like the United States capitulating to China because they sanctioned us from buying anything in dollars, cut off our manufacturing, and did everything they could do ruin us economically over say The Iraq War.

First of all, I didn't say that sanctions will work. I said that the longer the war lasts, the more effect they will have. Secondly, as I keep pointing out, these aren't your ordinary, garden variety sanctions. Usually, a country like Russia can duck them by simply getting what they need from another country. But these sanctions are unprecedented. They are the most comprehensive sanctions that have ever been imposed on any country in the history of the world.

[I-5]

They didn't even have color photography in WW2 and there wasn't a cell phone in every pocket. As horrifying as the images that we're seeing from Ukraine, they don't hold a candle to what went on in both theatres during WW2, either in scale or debauchery.

However, I will have to admit that after having seen some of the images that you're referring to, I am being drawn closer to supporting direct military involvement by the US despite the risks. It's getting very hard to sit here and watch innocent people being murdered. I'm hearing that the Russians are using mobile crematoriums to hide the evidence of their brutality.

Of course it doesn’t compare in scale (did I ever claim it compared in scale?). It’s a sick sport to compare debauchery, but do you think its any less horrifying when you hear a resident from Bucha describe seeing 2 Chechen soldiers rape a young girl, then hold her from behind while the other slits her throat then try to burn her body to destroy evidence, or mow down a group of girls with a machine gun and run over their bodies with a tank to flatten them? Can’t hold a candle to WW2?

As for the mobie crematoriums, I haven’t heard any reports that they are used for Ukrainian bodies, but I have heard they are used for dead Russian soldiers so they don’t have to repatriated to Russia. They really put a low value on conscripts - but I’ve lost any pity I may have felt early on for them, after seeing the brutality their military inflicted on civilians. Russia will never ever admit they are committing genocida, even if you throw the evidence in their face.

[RiverDog]

Of course it doesn’t compare in scale (did I ever claim it compared in scale?). It’s a sick sport to compare debauchery, but do you think its any less horrifying when you hear a resident from Bucha describe seeing 2 Chechen soldiers rape a young girl, then hold her from behind while the other slits her throat then try to burn her body to destroy evidence, or mow down a group of girls with a machine gun and run over their bodies with a tank to flatten them? Can’t hold a candle to WW2?

Correct. Can't hold a candle.

The Germans would perform experiments on live human subjects, no anesthesia. My college roommate's dad, a POW in a Japanese prison camp, saw them tie a rope to each arm and leg of a prisoner, the opposite end to trees, cut them down simultaneously after taking bets on which appendage would end up with the most of the body. Read up on the Rape of Nanking sometime:

The population of Nanking was subjected to an uncontrolled butchery that came to be known as "the Rape of Nanking." As the Japanese army poured into the city, fleeing residents were shot or bayoneted. Thousand of suspected members of the Chinese Army who had shed their uniforms for civilian clothing, were apprehended, their hands tied behind their backs and led en mass to killing fields where they were shot, beheaded, used for bayonet practice or killed in some other gruesome manner before being dumped into mass graves. Thousands of others were buried while still alive. Rape was rampant as thousands of women were repeatedly forced into brutal sex and often murdered once the lust of their attackers had been satisfied. The carnage lasted for six weeks and took an estimated 40,000 lives.

I'm not trying to trivialize the brutality being employed by the Russians, I'm objecting to the comparison. Even if there wasn't a difference in scale, It's simply not on the same level of horror as that which occurred during WW2. The atrocities committed by the Germans and Japanese during WW2 were much more gruesome and inhumane than anything the Russians are accused of doing.

As for the mobie crematoriums, I haven’t heard any reports that they are used for Ukrainian bodies, but I have heard they are used for dead Russian soldiers so they don’t have to repatriated to Russia. They really put a low value on conscripts - but I’ve lost any pity I may have felt early on for them, after seeing the brutality their military inflicted on civilians. Russia will never ever admit they are committing genocida, even if you throw the evidence in their face.

Here's an article on Ukraine's accusations that the Russians are using mobile crematoriums to destroy evidence of war crimes:

The city council in Mariupol has accused Russia of setting up places to burn the bodies of those killed by its forces in the relentless siege of the port city in southern Ukraine.

In a Telegram post, the city council said that "the killers are covering their tracks" and that the Russians had set up "mobile crematoriums."

This followed a decision by the leadership of the Russian Federation for "the destruction of any evidence of crimes of its army in Mariupol," the post added, according to a translation.

https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-mariup ... ge-1695500

The claims have not been independently verified, but it would make complete sense based on the evidence we've already seen.

[c_hawkbob]

I agree with I5, the difference is scale and it's ridiculous to argue level of debauchery. "As bad as it gets" is as bad as it gets, whether it be one girl or 6 million Jews. Please no more comparative examples.

[RiverDog]

I agree with I5, the difference is scale and it's ridiculous to argue level of debauchery. "As bad as it gets" is as bad as it gets, whether it be one girl or 6 million Jews. Please no more comparative examples.

My "scale" comment is being blown out of proportion. Here's exactly what I said:

.."they (Russian atrocities) don't hold a candle to what went on in both theatres during WW2, either in scale or debauchery.

The use of the term 'scale' was merely an afterthought and should not be interpreted as my central argument. My point was that there was no comparison, on any level or by any definition, of what we've witnessed in Ukraine that would come close to approximating the evil and horrors that occurred during WW2, and any attempt to do so trivializes the event. It's not unlike some politicians tossing around the term 'holocaust' when they want to make a point.

I will agree to the "as bad as it gets" characterization so long as we limit it to the current century. But I'm not the one that used WW2 as an analogy, I was merely responding to its use, so please don't complain to me about the comparative examples being used. I wasn't the first to use them.

[I-5]

The use of the term 'scale' was merely an afterthought and should not be interpreted as my central argument. My point was that there was no comparison, on any level or by any definition, of what we've witnessed in Ukraine that would come close to approximating the evil and horrors that occurred during WW2, and any attempt to do so trivializes the event. It's not unlike some politicians tossing around the term 'holocaust' when they want to make a point.

I will agree to the ‘as bad as it gets"characterization so long as we limit it to the current century. But I'm not the one that used WW2 as an analogy, I was merely responding to its use, so please don't complain to me about the comparative examples being used. I wasn't the first to use them.

Just like I used the word ‘classy’ as an afterthought in another thread. The takeaway is we all focus on whatever we choose to focus on.

Being the war in Ukraine is only a month old, I think its relevant to mention WW2 or Vietnam in terms of harm to civilians. When all is said and done, I wouldn’t bet against Putin trying to live up to his idol Stalin in terms of brutality. He clearly worships Stalin, and maybe only Stalin out of the entire history of Russia and the USSR.