Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[megared]

5 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

With NATO expansion, there hasn't come a move of NATO missiles.  I'm seeing this several places.  

 

We agreed to remove our missiles from Turkey for the Soviet Union not putting them in Cuba (most likely).

 

And we haven't moved them since.

 

Further, the US has never invaded Russia and when Russia has been invaded the two times this century we've actually come to their assistance.  

 

Aegis is in Romania, Poland, Japan with talks of expanding to Spain and potentially Guam.  The ability to launch ICBMs from planes, subs, trucks and rail means silos aren't much of a thing anymore.  But the nukes are still there (overseas), just not tucked in a silo.  

 

Can't discount Putin's discomfort anymore than the discomfort we had with Cuba.  The concept that they'd be conducting military training exercises and flaring tensions in the Black Sea isn't that hard to picture.    

 

Letting Ukraine into NATO would be more about playing 'keep away' from Russia than any strategic advantage the country itself has for NATO.  

[FrFan]

Message from Sofia Abramovitch, daughter of oligarch Roman Abramovitch owner of Chelsea FC

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by FrFan

[ixcuincle]

 

[Forehead]

So I have to say this.  I understand we'd never want to get into a full blown war with Russia, not to the point where nukes were mutually used.  And trying to invade them is foolish.

 

However, whether it was here or on various other message boards, I'd seen talk about how Russia's military forces were superior to the US, their tech had vastly improved, etc.  Lots of it, and I'm sure much of it was coming from Russia.

 

Well, I wouldn't say Ukraine is winning, but the numbers I've seen about Russia losing helicopters, tanks...not to mention the forced conscription of troops?  Yeah, I'm pretty convinced we'd wipe the floor with them if it came to it.  And I think Putin knows it too, in the back of his head.

[Springfield]

Yeah, we’d **** Russia up something fierce.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Vlad really stretching his neck out there these days…

[Ball Security]

11 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

 

 

[DCSaints_fan]

2 hours ago, megared said:

 

It was a 'regime change':  and we've had plenty of them (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya).  Seems like Putin's end game is a non-alignment treaty, possibly a regime change as well.  

Well is he going to give back Crimea or the Donbas once this "regime change" takes place.  I don't think so.

 

Yeah perhaps if Russian prevails there will be some quadis-indepdent rump state, particularly in Russian majority areas.  But if they take Kyiv, they aren't giving it back.    

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, megared said:

 

Russia has had longstanding grievances with the expansion of NATO.  He said Ukraine in NATO is a red line for him.  Also since he relies on neighboring countries (like Ukraine) to transit oil & gas, doubt he wants western powers interfering with his ability to manipulate supply/prices.    

 

I know he has grievances.  That’s obvious. But that doesn’t make them legitimate.

[PeterMP]

31 minutes ago, megared said:

 

Aegis is in Romania, Poland, Japan with talks of expanding to Spain and potentially Guam.  The ability to launch ICBMs from planes, subs, trucks and rail means silos aren't much of a thing anymore.  But the nukes are still there (overseas), just not tucked in a silo.  

 

Can't discount Putin's discomfort anymore than the discomfort we had with Cuba.  The concept that they'd be conducting military training exercises and flaring tensions in the Black Sea isn't that hard to picture.    

 

Letting Ukraine into NATO would be more about playing 'keep away' from Russia than any strategic advantage the country itself has for NATO.  

 

What has been installed there are defensive weapons (they can't fire Tomahawks).

 

There's a big difference between having what are defensive surface-to-air and an anti-missile defense system (that we've offered to let the Russians inspect) nearby than having nuclear weapons.  There are no nuclear weapons in Poland, Romania, or Japan.

 

Letting Ukraine join NATO is about letting the Ukrainians have a right to their self-determination.  It is LETTING them.  If the Ukrainians (and other countries in the Russian "sphere of influence") want to join NATO, then they should look at themselves. 

[tshile]

My assumption has been that Putin, if successful, will:

- absorb ukraine

- absorb Moldova 

- absorb Belarus (formality - it’s a puppet government)

 

and at that people it’ll either all be “Russia” or it’ll be some form of the USSR where those areas are given the appearance of statehood within the USSR (or whatever they will be called) but realistically they’re completely controlled by Russia with no independence on any level 

 

moldova and Belarus don’t matter. They’re formalities really. Ukraine is the only one that matters. 
 

and then the question is - with only NATO countries on its border, does Russia continue to expand or not?i would think not. I don’t think Russia actually wants ww3. 

Edited February 25, 2022 by tshile

[Wildbunny]

27 minutes ago, Forehead said:

So I have to say this.  I understand we'd never want to get into a full blown war with Russia, not to the point where nukes were mutually used.  And trying to invade them is foolish.

 

However, whether it was here or on various other message boards, I'd seen talk about how Russia's military forces were superior to the US, their tech had vastly improved, etc.  Lots of it, and I'm sure much of it was coming from Russia.

 

Well, I wouldn't say Ukraine is winning, but the numbers I've seen about Russia losing helicopters, tanks...not to mention the forced conscription of troops?  Yeah, I'm pretty convinced we'd wipe the floor with them if it came to it.  And I think Putin knows it too, in the back of his head.

I do agree. And I don't believe that NATO excuse as well. As validate as it is, nobody hesitated to engage against Irak to defend Kuweit.

 

Just learned as well, that well sanctions that are being done over Russia does not stop trading for energy like gas. So Europe, US just bought for millions of Russian gas today.

 

Makes you think about the hypocrisy we have up there....

[TD_washingtonredskins]

3 minutes ago, tshile said:

My assumption has been that Putin, if successful, will:

- absorb ukraine

- absorb Moldova 

- absorb Belarus (formality - it’s a puppet government)

 

and at that people it’ll either all be “Russia” or it’ll be some form of the USSR where those areas are given the appearance of statehood within the USSR (or whatever they will be called) but realistically they’re completely controlled by Russia with no independence on any level 

 

moldova and Belarus don’t matter. They’re formalities really. Ukraine is the only one that matters. 
 

and then the question is - with only NATO countries on its border, does Russia continue to expand or not?i would think not. I don’t think Russia actually wants ww3. 

 

I tend to agree with this...and to this end (assuming this is the end game), I would ask if the world truly cares. Outside of any "thoughts and prayers" for the humanitarian aspect of things, do we truly care if Putin's sphere of influence gets incrementally bigger? 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

4 minutes ago, tshile said:

My assumption has been that Putin, if successful, will:

- absorb ukraine

- absorb Moldova 

- absorb Belarus (formality - it’s a puppet government)

 

and at that people it’ll either all be “Russia” or it’ll be some form of the USSR where those areas are given the appearance of statehood within the USSR (or whatever they will be called) but realistically they’re completely controlled by Russia with no independence on any level 

 

moldova and Belarus don’t matter. They’re formalities really. Ukraine is the only one that matters. 
 

and then the question is - with only NATO countries on its border, does Russia continue to expand or not?i would think not. I don’t think Russia actually wants ww3. 

It probably depends on how much support there is in Russia for Putins aggression. Based on Twitter, it doesn’t appear there is a lot of support.

[PeterMP]

6 minutes ago, tshile said:

My assumption has been that Putin, if successful, will:

- absorb ukraine

- absorb Moldova 

- absorb Belarus (formality - it’s a puppet government)

 

and at that people it’ll either all be “Russia” or it’ll be some form of the USSR where those areas are given the appearance of statehood within the USSR (or whatever they will be called) but realistically they’re completely controlled by Russia with no independence on any level 

 

moldova and Belarus don’t matter. They’re formalities really. Ukraine is the only one that matters. 
 

and then the question is - with only NATO countries on its border, does Russia continue to expand or not?i would think not. I don’t think Russia actually wants ww3. 

 

You've forgotten Finland (not part of NATO) in the west, and Kazakhstan in the south.  I wouldn't be shocked if he makes a play for parts of either one of them.

 

And I also wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't continue to try to undermine western democracies to see if he can breakup NATO or cause a revolution where some of the Eastern European countries end up with a government that request out of NATO, including using irregular Russian troops.

 

 

[tshile]

6 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I tend to agree with this...and to this end (assuming this is the end game), I would ask if the world truly cares. Outside of any "thoughts and prayers" for the humanitarian aspect of things, do we truly care if Putin's sphere of influence gets incrementally bigger? 
 

 

 

i don’t think anyone cares if Russia absorbs Ukraine, moldova, and Belarus. 
 

I think if he does anything beyond that, yeah people will care. But obviously everyone decided Ukraine doesn’t matter - I don’t know why moldova and Belarus would matter to those same people. 

[88Comrade2000]

Ukraine will fall quickly. If they get Zelinksy,  I expect a public execution. Sanctions won't do ****. Putin wants all of Ukraine and will get it shortly.

Kicking Russia from swift will never happen. Italy and Germany oppose it and they and their business depend too much on Russia.

Their won't be sanctions on the energy sector because too many nations depend on Russian gas and oil. Also, it effect the energy prices 

In those countries. 

 

Guarantee you when gas prices go past $4-5/gallon or higher nationwide ; people  won't give a **** about Ukraine and will vote in the gop, in huge numbers. 

 

Despite the agreement with Taiwan to defend them, the American people won't be supportive of America going to war with China to defend another country.

American businesses won't support a war, since they are so dependent on China. Also, since Taiwan is the #1 chip maker; they don't want a disruption.

 

The legacy of as least the mid 21st century, will be autocrats ruling in many places and expanding their control and influence and the U.S. could be one of those countries as soon as 2025.

 

 

 

Once Urkaine falls, Russia Will go after all non-Nato countries and those former satellites under NATO, will  pressure the countries to leave NATO and will do everything to make that happen, short of invasion.

 

The only way Rusia is stopped, if a miracle occurred and the Russian people were able to overthrow him. Not likely. Expect dark times for the foreseeable  future.

Edited February 25, 2022 by 88Comrade2000

[tshile]

2 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

You've forgotten Finland (not part of NATO) in the west, and Kazakhstan in the south.  I wouldn't be shocked if he makes a play for parts of either one of them.

 

yup, thanks. i could see people caring about Finland, easily. Kazakhstan… I don’t think people will care (not that they shouldn’t, just that I don’t think they will)
 

2 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

And I also wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't continue to try to undermine western democracies to see if he can breakup NATO or cause a revolution where some of the Eastern European countries end up with a government that request out of NATO, including using irregular Russian troops.

 

 

oh I don’t doubt that he will. I don’t think he ever stopped. But none of that has led to war or anything more than idle threads and sanctions. I wouldn’t expect that to change. 
 

 

[Dan T.]

11 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

It probably depends on how much support there is in Russia for Putins aggression. Based on Twitter, it doesn’t appear there is a lot of support.

 

The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.  To anybody 30 or under in Russia, including most of the rank and file serving as grunts in the military, the USSR is not part of their experience. And with global connectivity, the ability of despotic thugs like Putin to control the narrative is gone.

 

So there has to be a large percentage of Russian citizens AND soldiers thinking WTF are we doing in Ukraine.  

[88Comrade2000]

21 hours ago, tshile said:

He’s not a strong public speaker anymore. 
 

between his speech issue, his age, the recognition he’s only there because we needed someone to defeat trump… I’m ok with it. 
 

But damn if he’s just not coming across as a strong public speaker at the moment. 
 

(and I generally agree with the tactic he’s taking here. Just commenting on the “look”) 

Whatever we’re doing to Russia, Belarus should be included. 
 

it needs to be made clear that when we know you’re assisting, you get the punishment too. 

Are we going to cyber attack Trump, The Gop and all of Right Wing Media?

[megared]

51 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

What has been installed there are defensive weapons (they can't fire Tomahawks).

 

There's a big difference between having what are defensive surface-to-air and an anti-missile defense system (that we've offered to let the Russians inspect) nearby than having nuclear weapons.  There are no nuclear weapons in Poland, Romania, or Japan.

 

Letting Ukraine join NATO is about letting the Ukrainians have a right to their self-determination.  It is LETTING them.  If the Ukrainians (and other countries in the Russian "sphere of influence") want to join NATO, then they should look at themselves. 

 

Guess it depends on what you believe.  Russia seems to believe it has 'more' than a defensive capability.  MK 41s can be used in both defensive and offensive postures.  So saying you're setting them up for defense when it's easy to change the configuration to fire Tomahawks isn't exactly a reassurance. 

 

Keep in mind there's treaties governing the use of land based missile systems, which NATO may or may not be following, depending on your vantage point.     

 

Quote

NATO’s nuclear deterrence also relies on US nuclear weapons deployed in Europe and supporting capabilities and infrastructure provided by Allies. A number of European NATO members have dual-capable aircraft dedicated to the delivery of these US nuclear weapons. The United States maintains full custody of these weapons at all times. These “nuclear-sharing arrangements” predate and are fully consistent with the Non-Proliferation Treaty

 

nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2020/2/pdf/200224-factsheet-nuclear-en.pdf

 

NATO has ~150 B61s deployed in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey as part of its Nuclear Weapons Sharing Program.  

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by megared

[88Comrade2000]

20 hours ago, Captain Wiggles said:

 

Been that way for over 70 years now tho. 😒

 

Once again Trump was just shaking NATO members down for money. He prolly would have redirected it to his border wall or his bank account.

 

NATOs annual budget is like $3 billion. 😬

More than Trumps worth.

[tshile]

 

 

[DCSaints_fan]

1 hour ago, Forehead said:

So I have to say this.  I understand we'd never want to get into a full blown war with Russia, not to the point where nukes were mutually used.  And trying to invade them is foolish.

 

However, whether it was here or on various other message boards, I'd seen talk about how Russia's military forces were superior to the US, their tech had vastly improved, etc.  Lots of it, and I'm sure much of it was coming from Russia.

 

Well, I wouldn't say Ukraine is winning, but the numbers I've seen about Russia losing helicopters, tanks...not to mention the forced conscription of troops?  Yeah, I'm pretty convinced we'd wipe the floor with them if it came to it.  And I think Putin knows it too, in the back of his head.

Shouldn't need much convincing. When then tried that **** in Syria, they got their clocks cleaned.  The only thing they have parity on is nukes.

[NickyJ]

2 minutes ago, DCSaints_fan said:

Shouldn't need much convincing. When then tried that **** in Syria, they got their clocks cleaned.  The only thing they have parity on is nukes.

What happened in Syria to say that the Russians got their clocks cleaned there? They went to prop up Assad, Assad remains propped up... Unless they somehow took lots of casualties, I'd say they achieved their goal.