Russia invades Ukraine

[Cloud Strife]

It certainly is. What about Orban? He's probably the furthest-right actual leader (as opposed to candidate).

If you ask me, one of the worst things at the moment about this war has been Hungary. I don't believe that they can be trusted, and there are a lot of reports that Polish-Hungarian relations are at a really low level.

On a related note, Ukraine retook several villages and towns north of Kharkiv. It's quite conceivable that they will reach the Russian border with this level of minimal defence from the Russian forces. In turn, this points at Russia massing what remains of their forces in attempt to attack in the Donbas, but that means that Ukraine will have even more time to prepare.

What is interesting is that things have gone very quiet in Belarus. From "Belarus is joining the war", we've now gone to "Belarus will protect itself if attacked".

 

[Annetts key]

I'm fed up of small-minded idiots - on both sides of the Channel - who appear to want to re-enact the Napoleonic Wars.

This I very much agree with.

If you ask me, one of the worst things at the moment about this war has been Hungary. I don't believe that they can be trusted, and there are a lot of reports that Polish-Hungarian relations are at a really low level.

On a related note, Ukraine retook several villages and towns north of Kharkiv. It's quite conceivable that they will reach the Russian border with this level of minimal defence from the Russian forces. In turn, this points at Russia massing what remains of their forces in attempt to attack in the Donbas, but that means that Ukraine will have even more time to prepare.

What is interesting is that things have gone very quiet in Belarus. From "Belarus is joining the war", we've now gone to "Belarus will protect itself if attacked".

Maybe a certain someone is now wondering if they will survive if Russia no longer has enough military forces to help them, so don’t want to risk using their own military forces… Plus, as the Ukrainian military are giving a so called superpower military a very hard time, who would choose to take them on willingly?

 

[DustyBin]

I felt that Russia would take matters into its own hands against Ukraine, regardless of who was the President of the United States.

The difference is that Trump as President would turn a blind eye.
Considering that Zelensky refused to find dirt on Biden, the war would also be a form of punishment.

Pair that with Trump's threats to leave NATO or ignore an Article 5 call.
I'd be hard-pressed to believe that the EU would deliver a strong response. Or do so without entering a direct conflict with Russia.

This assumes however that Trump is the devil incarnate. It’s a popular narrative but not one I completely subscribe to.

Trump’s warning shots in regard to NATO were quite justified in my opinion; there’s absolutely no excuse for Germany for example not to pay their way. For all of his failings he had a point in this regard (even if as per usual he went about expressing it in the wrong way).

If you ask me, one of the worst things at the moment about this war has been Hungary. I don't believe that they can be trusted, and there are a lot of reports that Polish-Hungarian relations are at a really low level.

Hungary are a worry I agree, they really do appear to be the weak link in European security at present (and NATO for that matter).

On a related note, Ukraine retook several villages and towns north of Kharkiv. It's quite conceivable that they will reach the Russian border with this level of minimal defence from the Russian forces. In turn, this points at Russia massing what remains of their forces in attempt to attack in the Donbas, but that means that Ukraine will have even more time to prepare.

What is interesting is that things have gone very quiet in Belarus. From "Belarus is joining the war", we've now gone to "Belarus will protect itself if attacked".

If Belarus was going to join in I think they’d have done it by now. Lukashenko is many things but he isn’t an idiot, and this is the worst possible time to throw your lot in with Putin.

 

[najaB]

This assumes however that Trump is the devil incarnate. It’s a popular narrative but not one I completely subscribe to.

No, of course not. The devil is intelligent.

 

[gingerheid]

Lukashenko is nothing if not savvy; he has always managed to tread the most careful line between the EU and Russia, while maintaining his own survival.

 

[DustyBin]

No, of course not. The devil is intelligent.

To be fair the way he tried not leave left office was pretty stupid! I still think he was correct in regard to some matters though, in principle at least. That doesn’t make me a “supporter” incidentally.

Lukashenko is nothing if not savvy; he has always managed to tread the most careful line between the EU and Russia, while maintaining his own survival.

Absolutely, although he’s blown it this time.

 

[AlterEgo]

To be fair the way he tried not leave left office was pretty stupid! I still think he was correct in regard to some matters though, in principle at least. That doesn’t make me a “supporter” incidentally.

One of his greatest follies as president was his sheer vanity and unpredictability, matching that of Putin. Incidentally I think that’s the reason if Trump were in office, Russia wouldn’t have launched a full scale assault; the non-zero risk of a very aggressive ego-boosting retaliation by the USA.

 

[DustyBin]

One of his greatest follies as president was his sheer vanity and unpredictability, matching that of Putin. Incidentally I think that’s the reason if Trump were in office, Russia wouldn’t have launched a full scale assault; the non-zero risk of a very aggressive ego-boosting retaliation by the USA.

I’m inclined to agree. I think all of the world’s nutters were wary of him for the reasons you’ve mentioned. Even Comrade Kim knew he had to behave himself, and he’s probably the craziest of the lot!

 

[najaB]

One of his greatest follies as president was his sheer vanity and unpredictability, matching that of Putin. Incidentally I think that’s the reason if Trump were in office, Russia wouldn’t have launched a full scale assault; the non-zero risk of a very aggressive ego-boosting retaliation by the USA.

Trump always has been 90% talk and 10% grift, 0% action. Putin knows that had his pet project been re-elected he would be able to do whatever he wanted (it's amazing what leverage a half a billion dollars or so of personal debt gives you), confident that Trump would talk big and do nothing.

Consider his 'attack' on an empty airbase in Syria - sounded big but achieved nothing, and he couldn't even remember which country he had ordered an attack on:

 

[DustyBin]

Trump always has been 90% talk and 10% grift, 0% action. Putin knows that had his pet project been re-elected he would be able to do whatever he wanted (it's amazing what leverage a half a billion dollars or so of personal debt gives you), confident that Trump would talk big and do nothing.

Consider his 'attack' on an empty airbase in Syria - sounded big but achieved nothing, and he couldn't even remember which country he had ordered an attack on:

Remind me what Obama did when the chemical weapons “red line” was crossed on his watch?

Trump demonstrated that he’d use military force, but in such a way that avoided potential escalation. It was the right move IMO and it paved the way for further interventions.

The airbase wasn’t empty (as I’m sure you’re actually aware) and multiple targets were destroyed.

 

[najaB]

Remind me what Obama did when the chemical weapons “red line” was crossed on his watch?

Tried to get a coalition of the west but nobody else supported him (understandable after having been burned in Iraq).

The airbase wasn’t empty (as I’m sure you’re actually aware) and multiple targets were destroyed.

Given that the US gave the Russians several hours warning of the attack, most of the serviceable aircraft had been removed. The Syrians were able to resume their attacks on the rebels within hours of the attack:

Syrian warplanes took off from the air base hit by US cruise missiles yesterday to carry out bombing raids on rebel-held areas, in a defiant show of strength.

Just hours after the al-Shayrat airfield was bombed with 59 US Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from warships in the Mediterranean, aircraft struck targets in the eastern Homs countryside, according to a monitoring group.

Syrian warplanes take off once again from air base bombed by US Tomahawks

Syrian warplanes took off from the air base hit by US cruise missiles yesterday to carry out bombing raids on rebel-held areas, in a defiant show of strength.

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[DustyBin]

Tried to get a coalition of the west but nobody else supported him (understandable after having been burned in Iraq).

What was stopping him doing what Trump did though? The options were clearly limited, but Trump at least took some action and was subsequently able to assemble a coalition, which resulted in more extensive strikes by the US, UK and France.

Given that the US gave the Russians several hours warning of the attack, most of the serviceable aircraft had been removed. The Syrians were able to resume their attacks on the rebels within hours of the attack:

Syrian warplanes take off once again from air base bombed by US Tomahawks

Syrian warplanes took off from the air base hit by US cruise missiles yesterday to carry out bombing raids on rebel-held areas, in a defiant show of strength.

www.telegraph.co.uk

I’m not disputing this, the damage was limited but some serviceable equipment was lost. Had it not been for the presence of the Russians I don’t think any warning would have been given.

 

[Annetts key]

The Pentagon just distributed this rundown of U.S. military assistance provided to Ukraine:

(Picture shows a list of military equipment)
Source

 

[nw1]

If you ask me, one of the worst things at the moment about this war has been Hungary. I don't believe that they can be trusted, and there are a lot of reports that Polish-Hungarian relations are at a really low level.

I certainly wouldn't trust Orban on anything. For years, I've considered him a thoroughly nasty piece of work.

 

[Chingy]

I notice Finland (and most likely Sweden) are starting the application process to join NATO.

Finland should submit an application to join the Nato military alliance, Finnish President Sauli Niinisto and Prime Minister Sanna Marin said in a joint statement on Thursday.

"Finland must apply for Nato membership without delay," Niinisto and Marin said.

This is a major policy shift triggered by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Finland, which shares a 1,300 km (810 mile) border and a difficult past with Russia, has previously remained outside the alliance.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-61404062

Putin has now achieved the exact opposite of what he "supposedly" set out to prevent. We await for the inevitable reaction from the Kremlin.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Putin has now achieved the exact opposite of what he "supposedly" set out to prevent. We await for the inevitable reaction from the Kremlin.

It's really bad news for Russia. The Russian military defence doctrine has largely meant that the border with Finland has been guarded by conscripts, as it was highly unlikely that they would invade. Now, with NATO, Russia will need to ramp up their military spending there, which means pulling resources from elsewhere. NATO won't need to spend very much, as it's enough for Sweden and Finland to keep doing what they do now.

The Swedish marine/air power and Finnish ground power should not be underestimated as well.

I'd expect Ukraine to push back Russian forces into Russia N of Kharkiv within days now. They're making constant gains there, which suggests that Russia is probably intentionally pulling out of the area. I'd expect Ukraine to retake all the territory reaching up to the river to the east of Kharkiv, which should allow them to take out the vital railway line to the east with artillery. Russia really isn't progressing, and it seems that Ukraine is punishing them every time they try and push forwards in a meaningful way.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davida...on-trying-to-cross-a-river-in-eastern-ukraine is just remarkable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

NATO isn't going to invade Russia. Not now, not at any point, not ever. It's a defensive alliance. Any suggestion that Finland would invade Russia is utter delusion on Putin's part. There is only one aggressor in this war, and it's not NATO.

The US might do such things with allies who are also in NATO, but it's not an act of NATO. Finland won't.

 

[najaB]

NATO isn't going to invade Russia. Not now, not at any point, not ever. It's a defensive alliance. Any suggestion that Finland would invade Russia is utter delusion on Putin's part. There is only one aggressor in this war, and it's not NATO.

We know that. But Putin doesn't appear to believe it. He seems to think that NATO is a direct threat to the existence of the Russian state.

 

[Cloud Strife]

We know that. But Putin doesn't appear to believe it. He seems to think that NATO is a direct threat to the existence of the Russian state.

And in fairness, they are. We now know that NATO would obliterate Russia in a conventional war, and worse, that Russia could collapse within days in the event of a NATO invasion. Of course, NATO won't invade, but from a defence point of view - a porous and leaky Finnish border (on the Russian side) is a real danger. The Finns are perfectly capable of infiltrating Russia and blowing up key infrastructure in the North, and there's not much Russia can realistically do about it.

It's worth pointing out that this is nothing new, though. The Soviets were also paranoid that they would get destroyed by NATO, and a lot of diplomacy during the Cold War focused around reassuring the Soviets that NATO had no interest in directly threatening them. That's why the Berlin Wall was so important for peace, because it established clearly that both sides could do what they wanted within their spheres of influence.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And in fairness, they are. We now know that NATO would obliterate Russia in a conventional war, and worse, that Russia could collapse within days in the event of a NATO invasion. Of course, NATO won't invade, but from a defence point of view - a porous and leaky Finnish border (on the Russian side) is a real danger. The Finns are perfectly capable of infiltrating Russia and blowing up key infrastructure in the North, and there's not much Russia can realistically do about it.

The thing is they are not going to. Putin is delusional. There is no reason whatsoever for Finland to want to invade Russia.

 

[TheEdge]

Geopolitics in January

1. NATO/West had a respect for the abilities of the Russian armed forces
2. Finland and Sweden were neutral countries.
3. German defense spending was embarrassingly small.

Geopolitics in May

1. The Russian forces are a war crime committing laughing stock.
2. Finland (and probably Sweden) are joining NATO.
3. German defense spending has exploded.

Not going the way you planned this is it Vlad?

 

[Cloud Strife]

The thing is they are not going to. Putin is delusional. There is no reason whatsoever for Finland to want to invade Russia.

It's not just Putin, but the Russian mentality full stop. They have a very deep-rooted fear of being invaded, to the point of downright paranoia. That paranoia will be even worse now, because it's very clear that NATO tactics would tear through Russian defences.

Not going the way you planned this is it Vlad?

From a tactical point of view, they should have set up a small task force with the sole intention of taking out Zelensky. The power vacuum and chaos could have been accompanied by a simultaneous small attack, which might have encouraged the interim President to agree to substantial concessions. Yet, they chose WW2-style tactics without considering that Ukraine has been preparing for this day since 2014.

Russia seems to be very short on missiles as well now.

 

[TheEdge]

From a tactical point of view, they should have set up a small task force with the sole intention of taking out Zelensky. The power vacuum and chaos could have been accompanied by a simultaneous small attack, which might have encouraged the interim President to agree to substantial concessions. Yet, they chose WW2-style tactics without considering that Ukraine has been preparing for this day since 2014.

Which makes the whole situation even more insane. There was clearly some belief they would be welcomed as liberators. But the Russian forces have been fighting Ukrainians in the east for years now. They knew the sort of defense they'd be dealing with.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Which makes the whole situation even more insane. There was clearly some belief they would be welcomed as liberators. But the Russian forces have been fighting Ukrainians in the east for years now. They knew the sort of defense they'd be dealing with.

Yes, it really is inexplicable. It's like they believed that Russian speakers were Russian without even doing basic research in places like Kherson.

It would be really interesting to know what kind of intelligence was reaching the top levels. Did they really not know or understand what the Ukrainian forces were capable of?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not just Putin, but the Russian mentality full stop. They have a very deep-rooted fear of being invaded, to the point of downright paranoia. That paranoia will be even worse now, because it's very clear that NATO tactics would tear through Russian defences.

They probably would, yes, leaving nuclear Russia's only defensive option.

The thing is, they won't. Even the US isn't going to invade Russia, despite its general delight in invading smaller countries that hack it off a bit. Finland definitely isn't. Russia doesn't really need to defend that border at all, it could just paint a line on the ground and it'd serve the same purpose.

 

[najaB]

It would be really interesting to know what kind of intelligence was reaching the top levels. Did they really not know or understand what the Ukrainian forces were capable of?

As we saw with the 2003 invasion of Iraq it doesn't matter what the intelligence agencies are passing to leadership if that leadership is already committed to a particular course of action.

 

[TheEdge]

As we saw with the 2003 invasion of Iraq it doesn't matter what the intelligence agencies are passing to leadership if that leadership is already committed to a particular course of action.

I feel like this is more a situation of "if you like your family out of prison and to not wake up tomorrow with a sudden case of death" to not tell Vlad something he doesn't want to hear.

 

[GS250]

They probably would, yes, leaving nuclear Russia's only defensive option.

The thing is, they won't. Even the US isn't going to invade Russia, despite its general delight in invading smaller countries that hack it off a bit. Finland definitely isn't. Russia doesn't really need to defend that border at all, it could just paint a line on the ground and it'd serve the same purpose.

That's exactly what the nuclear deterrent is there for. For a hypothetical situation where NATO's forced poured across the border and smart bombs and missiles were reducing the Kremlin to rubble. If that ever happened....yes, I'd expect the button to be pressed. No doubt about it. Its not there to willy wave in a relatively local conflict, although psychologically, its clearly made a lot of Westerners wary of dealing with Putin.

Finland is unlikely to be invaded at all. Whether its part of NATO or not. Think we've had this discussion before but their military, especially their Army is well equipped and trained. Its whole ethos and setup is to defend against a Russian assault. They have potentially 2-3 million citizens already part trained to fight in a war against Russia thanks to national service.

I would though, considering the timing of their application to join, more than ensure they pay their way. And also....I wouldn't be doing anything overly provocative like basing nuclear weapons there. I very much doubt the Finnish people would want that anyway.

 

[najaB]

I wouldn't be doing anything overly provocative like basing nuclear weapons there. I very much doubt the Finnish people would want that anyway.

Well, it's not a requirement of NATO membership, so it wouldn't be a problem.

 

[ainsworth74]

Well, it's not a requirement of NATO membership, so it wouldn't be a problem.

Yes NATO is a nuclear alliance but no one is going to forced to host nuclear weapons against their will.