How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Jason Harvestdancer]

That's pretty deep Jason! I notice that you tend to post in this thread just after the Russians have a few victories. This must be a happy time for you.

When all you have is emotion, I expect temper tantrums like that.

Again, very deep! I'm actually much more optimistic that your side will lose. What you don't understand is that when the invader attacks, the people rally around the defender. At some point, the Russians will need to return home. The Ukrainians are at home. They are fighting for their land. It's not Russia's land. And all the other border countries and the so-called neutral countries are joining NATO and will make future Russian invasions much more difficult. Your side has lost incredible soft power. Your side has great power as a gas station, but it is dwindling. Wait until Europe is off the Russian oil/gas. This is coming soon. Russia will become what it fears the most - insignificant.

Do correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Jason an American isolationist rather than overt pro-Russian? If so, it's unfair to label him as the latter. Besides, the probability of someone posting "just after the Russians have a few victories" is pretty high because Russia is still having (small) victories almost daily. I don't think you can deduce anyone's pro-Russian tendencies based on that.

Your optimism about the outcome of the war is only half right. It's doubtful that Russia will exit the territories it's currently occupying, and will likely be able to get Luhansk and Donetsk before the war is over. But it will be and should be made as costly as possible. Right now, Ukraine is still strapped for basic equipment and ammunition, and stopping Russian advances will not be cheap.

He's an American isolationist: ........ unless there's a republican in charge.

Which is why I opposed the initial Iraq invasion when Democrats across the country were lining up to suck W's dick.

 

[IIDB Staff]

Reminder:
Address the argument, not the person.

Also, there's some bickering going on that could well lead to moderator action if it continues. Consider taking a break before replying!

 

[TomC]

Which is why I opposed the initial Iraq invasion when Democrats across the country were lining up to suck W's dick.

"Democrats"?

I hadn't yet reached my straight democrats voting stage. I still believed that there were good Republicans with some clout.
But the huge numbers of people, from both parties, lining up to approve Bush's stupid invasion, made me very angry. Especially the politicians I thought should be at least as well informed as I was. But the Cheney administration was very good at lying. The war would make a ton of money for the people who can afford to buy Senators. And it would take people's minds off the economic disaster that Federal policies were creating.

Of course all of the powerful were supporting the war. Just like modern Russians are supporting Putin's Invasion.
Tom

 

[Jayjay]

He's an American isolationist: ........ unless there's a republican in charge. I'm just pushing back at the glee that many have at the misery the Ukrainians are suffering. Yes, the Russians will have some victories. But at what cost? They have created far more enemies and have lost allies. The Russian war has greatly energized and motivated NATO. Russia has pushed the west into diversifying away from Russian oil/gas. This will be the biggest downfall for Russia. A gas station doesn't have much value if it can't sell it's gas. Selling to China and India isn't nearly as profitable for Putin. And finally, Ukraine has beaten most of Putin's goals. It isn't going to de-arm. Russia was unable to conquer the Northern part. It wasn't able to take away Odessa (Ukraine's port). Most important of all: Russia has united Ukraine into hating Russia. Russia will have an angry neighbor on its border for generations. Before the invasion, Ukraine was really 50-50 between the west and the east. No longer. Russia will be the big loser in the long term.

I think Putin's calculus is a little bit different. Look at it from Russian point of view: sure, there are sanctions and economic hardships, but whatever land they conquer, they get to keep forever. A hundred years from now, who's going to remember a minor economic slump or a few casualties? All that will be remembered is the glorious liberation of historical Russian territories from nazis. All the downsides you listed are temporary and will pass eventually.

Ukrainian army is wholly dependent on western, and in particular US aid. What happens if/when Republicans win the midterms and "Moscow" Mitch McConnell again makes it his mission to sabotage Biden's agenda, including aid to Ukraine? What happens when Trump starts campaigning and claims that Americans should come first and Ukraine is not his problem, and that he could cut a "deal" with Putin as soon as he's elected? What's EU going to do when its shores get riddled with refugees due to widespread food shortages in Africa and Middle-East?

Ukraine might get to keep Odessa, its only remaining port after other annexations, but even that isn't certain yet. Russia has very clear strategic interest in both denying Ukraine any access to the Black Sea, and having land bridge to Transnistria/Moldova. The whole situation is looking very bleak for Ukraine. The only hope is that in the war of attrition, the weapons keep flowing, and Russia will eventually be worn down enough to give up. But us westerners have the attention span of a squirrel and are not necessarily able to wage that kind of Johnny Depp on tv gotta go.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ukraine might get to keep Odessa, its only remaining port after other annexations, but even that isn't certain yet. Russia has very clear strategic interest in both denying Ukraine any access to the Black Sea, and having land bridge to Transnistria/Moldova. The whole situation is looking very bleak for Ukraine. The only hope is that in the war of attrition, the weapons keep flowing, and Russia will eventually be worn down enough to give up. But us westerners have the attention span of a squirrel and are not necessarily able to wage that kind of Johnny Depp on tv gotta go.

It's a war of attrition but so long as the weapons keep flowing Ukraine will probably win it.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

There is an interesting book, "Klimat - Russia In The Age Of Climate Change". Much of Northern Russia is tundra, which is starting to thaw. By 2050 much of that will become an uninhabital swamp. Agriculture in Southern Russia is going to be a problem. Pooty's dream of a mighty Russian empire is probably doomed, Ukraine or no.

 

[Jayjay]

Ukraine might get to keep Odessa, its only remaining port after other annexations, but even that isn't certain yet. Russia has very clear strategic interest in both denying Ukraine any access to the Black Sea, and having land bridge to Transnistria/Moldova. The whole situation is looking very bleak for Ukraine. The only hope is that in the war of attrition, the weapons keep flowing, and Russia will eventually be worn down enough to give up. But us westerners have the attention span of a squirrel and are not necessarily able to wage that kind of Johnny Depp on tv gotta go.

It's a war of attrition but so long as the weapons keep flowing Ukraine will probably win it.

That's a big if.

And it seems that current flow of weapons is not enough, as Ukraine seems to be constantly short of ammunition and basic gear, not to even mention heavy weapons. Russia is also burning through its equipment, but at least it controls its own production facilities and the troops know their hardware. Ukraine is getting a mixed bag of western weapons that it has to learn to use, which takes time. The west needs seems to think that now that they've given Ukraine a few tanks and howitzers, all we need to do is wait... which is wrong. There needs to be constant flow of new weapons to replace the attrition, especially ammunition, as well as humanitarian supplies, fuel, and other things that the western countries are also in need of. It's a very difficult situation overall.

 

[barbos]

Wow, you still think that Ukraine is winning.
CNN must be that good.

 

[barbos]

The Russian soldiers refusing to fight in Ukraine

Because of their experiences on the front line, some troops are seeking legal advice to avoid being redeployed.

www.bbc.com

Some Russian troops are refusing to return to fight in Ukraine because of their experiences on the front line at the start of the invasion, according to Russian human rights lawyers and activists. The BBC has been speaking to one such soldier.
"I don't want to go [back to Ukraine] to kill and be killed," says Sergey - not his real name - who spent five weeks fighting in Ukraine earlier this year.
He is now home in Russia, having taken legal advice to avoid being sent back to the front line. Sergey is just one of hundreds of Russian soldiers understood to have been seeking such advice.
Sergey says he is traumatised by his experience in Ukraine.
"I had thought that we were the Russian army, the most super-duper in the world," says the young man bitterly. Instead they were expected to operate without even basic equipment, such as night vision devices, he says.
"We were like blind kittens. I'm shocked by our army. It wouldn't cost much to equip us. Why wasn't it done?"

A lawyer told Sergey and two like-minded colleagues to return their arms and go back to their unit's headquarters - where they should file a letter explaining that they were "morally and psychologically exhausted" and could not continue fighting in Ukraine.
Sergey was told that returning to the unit was important because simply leaving could be interpreted as desertion, which can result in a two-year sentence in a disciplinary battalion.
Army commanders try to intimidate contract soldiers into staying with their units, according to Russian human rights lawyer Alexei Tabalov. But he stresses that Russian military law does include clauses which allow soldiers to refuse to fight if they don't want to.
Human rights activist Sergei Krivenko says he is not aware of any prosecutions of those refusing to return to the front.

One commander in northern Russia requested a criminal case be brought against his subordinate who would not return to Ukraine, but a military prosecutor refused to proceed, according to documents seen by the BBC. Such an action would be "premature" without having assessed the harm to the military service he was involved in, the prosecutor said.
And there is no guarantee that more prosecutions might not emerge in the future.
Soldiers like Sergey - reluctant to return to the front line - are not unusual, according to Ruslan Leviev, the editor of Conflict Intelligence Team, a media project investigating the experiences of the Russian military in Ukraine through confidential interviews and open source material.
Leviev says his team estimates a sizeable minority of the Russian contract soldiers sent to Ukraine to fight in the initial invasion refused to go back again.

Russian commenters commented on that. This BBC propaganda piece appeared in response to a massive flux of ukrainian deserters where whole regiments started quitting and very publicly so. With youtube video explanations why they are doing so (many thanks to Elon Musk )
Sorry man, I am not buying anonymous unconfirmed garbage from British State news which was caught lying multiple times. I am buying youtube videos of ukrainian soldiers.

 

[barbos]

Are there any places in Ukraine that have not been hit? I wonder if Putin is in total denial. All he can do is keep on keeping on.

My neighbor from above have relatives in Ukraine (the one with kids who wanted to kill russians). I recently asked her how they were doing and she said - fine, russian planes flew over few times, but other than that it's pretty normal.
Despite CNN lies most of Ukraine has not been hit in anyway. Russian "invasion" is very accurate and deliberate, unlike yours in Serbia.
I don't think Putin is bluffing. If your nazis hit targets in Russia (Crimea IS Russia) using US supplied Wunderwaffe, Russia will bomb government buildings in Kiev, period.

So in denial is you, not Putin.

 

[Copernicus]

Wow, you still think that Ukraine is winning.
CNN must be that good.

Neither side can actually win this war. Ukraine cannot be conquered by Russia, and Russia cannot be dislodged from much of the territory it has invaded in eastern and Southern Ukraine. I don't think that the weapons being supplied by the West will be enough to support a strong counteroffensive. I suspect that Putin will declare success and try to consolidate his gains in the near future, but that probably won't stop the Ukrainians from fighting to take back some of that territory. So this war is likely to drag on for a long time. If Putin is really in declining health, he will likely be forced out at some time, but his replacement is not likely to withdraw troops from occupied territories. So Russia and Ukraine will likely be suffering for a long time because of this war. In the end, Russia will get nothing worth having for all the deaths, misery, and destruction it has caused. It has created an implacable foe on its border for a very long time. We are also likely to see destabilization of the situation in Belarus, where there is considerable sympathy for the plight of Ukrainians.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Wow, you still think that Ukraine is winning.
CNN must be that good.

After three months, Kyiv stands! Finland and Sweden joining Nato. Most of Ukraine now fully united against Russia (before the war it was 50-50. No more nord stream 2. Nato very united. Yes, Russia will get their land bridge to Crimea. But Putler will fail to de-militiarize Ukraine. You'll have the entire region turning away from Russia to the west. I wouldn't say that your side is losing. But clearly, Russia will be much weaker after the war.

 

[barbos]

After three months, Kyiv stands! Finland and Sweden joining Nato. Most of Ukraine now fully united against Russia

It is spelled "Kiev". And it only stands because Russia don't Blitzkrieg, there is no rush.
They are destroying ukrainian forces in very demoralizing fashion which is ukrainian soldiers dying while russian ones are not.
Remember how much fuss you made about your anti-tank rockets?
Well, here is a news for you, they are useless now, russian army do not use tanks to engage these idiots with javelins. They are using artillery from a safe distance of 30-40 km, there is simply no need for tanks.

Finland and Sweden are not joining NATO any time soon (Ask Turkey why)
And Ukraine is not united at all. In fact it's less united now. If anyone is united it is Eastern Ukraine against nazi Ukraine. People there are crying and begging russian forces not to leave them. It's Russia now.

 

[Elixir]

After three months, Kyiv stands! Finland and Sweden joining Nato. Most of Ukraine now fully united against Russia

It is spelled "Kiev".

Not by the people who live there. You can spell it however you want.

And it only stands because Russia don't Blitzkrieg, there is no rush.

Maybe that's because they don't fancy the Kremlin being reduced to a lump of glass.

They are destroying ukrainian forces in very demoralizing fashion.

Yes, it is quite evident that the Russian conscripts are demoralized, and why not? Generals being killed left and right all around them - there's no reason for them to think THEY are going to survive when senior officers are dropping like flies.

Finland and Sweden are not joining NATO any time soon (Ask Turkey why)

Because dictators try to stick together. Orban, Erdogan, Kim, Duterte, Putler - all of a kind. NATO might just get rid of Erdogan and Orban just to make room for some more democratic members.

And Ukraine is not united at all. In fact it's less united now. If anne is united it is Eastern Ukraine against nazi Ukraine. FOURTEEN People there are crying and begging russian forces not to leave them. It's Russia now.

FIFY.

Hard to believe you haven't had enough of being laughed at.

 

[Elixir]

Wow, you still think that Ukraine is winning.
CNN must be that good.

After three months, Kyiv stands! Finland and Sweden joining Nato. Most of Ukraine now fully united against Russia (before the war it was 50-50. No more nord stream 2. Nato very united. Yes, Russia will get their land bridge to Crimea. But Putler will fail to de-militiarize Ukraine. You'll have the entire region turning away from Russia to the west.

It's easy to see where poor @barbos is getting his (mis)information. It is rather interesting to see how he has gone from citing relatively credible media to bolster his slanted takes, to citing sources known to be absolute rubbish, to not citing any sources whatsoever (or comments sections on Youtube) and making side-splittingly hilarious baldfaced assertions of fantasy.

I wouldn't say that your side is losing. But clearly, Russia will be much weaker after the war.

The fact is, Russia already much weaker than it was before its unprovoked invasion, and NATO is much stronger. The weakness of barbos' presentations follows suit.

:Shrug:

 

[barbos]

I don't know if it was reported in Western Media but Volodimir the Clown ordered retaking Snake Island just before May 9. He did so over objections from his generals. It failed miserably, all participants in that suicide mission including second in command of their Navy or something of the sort dead, no survivors. Similar fate with other counter offensives which were "designed" to spoil May 9 Victory day.

But hey, keep telling yourself that ukrainian army is winning.

 

[Copernicus]

I don't know if it was reported in Western Media but Volodimir the Clown ordered retaking Snake Island just before May 9. He did so over objections from his generals. It failed miserably, all participants in that suicide mission including second in command of their Navy or something of the sort dead, no survivors. Similar fate with other counter offensives which were "designed" to spoil May 9 Victory day.

But hey, keep telling yourself that ukrainian army is winning.

This report is appearing prominently in state-owned Russian media and being spread by Kremlin supporters, but I could not find anything in the Western press to corroborate it. It doesn't sound likely that there would be any point to retaking Snake Island at this point, because it would be impossible for Ukraine to defend it for long. The notoriously unreliable Russian media are not a good source, but barbos uses them all the time as if their accuracy were unquestioned, even though they've been caught spinning disinformation repeatedly in the past. I almost feel sorry for the guy, but he does have much better access to Western sources than the vast majority of Russians. I'm not sure what he thinks he is achieving by simply repeating his side's propaganda here, since he almost never cites sources for the stories that he posts.

 

[ZiprHead]

Remember how much fuss you made about your anti-tank rockets?
Well, here is a news for you, they are useless now, russian army do not use tanks to engage these idiots with javelins. They are using artillery from a safe distance of 30-40 km, there is simply no need for tanks.

Chickenshits murdering from afar.

 

[Jayjay]

After plan A of "march into Kyiv and be greeted as liberators" failed, Russia has regressed into tactics that it knows well: massive artillery shelling. Just like Grozny or Aleppo. It works, and Ukraine doesn't have a good way to counter it, except with its own counter-artillery, but they don't have as much guns, ammo, or drones.

It maybe working for Russia (though the progress is slow), but it also means that there is no infrastructure left behind. The "liberation" of Severodonetsk is a joke, when the entire city is reduced to a rubble first by Russian artillery, and then into a finer grained rubble by Ukrainian counter-artillery. Just like Mariupol, really... a city that now has a cholera problem because of all the dead bodies.

Those who survive, end up tortured in basements, raped, or moved to "filtration camps". What a glorious victory.

 

[barbos]

Remember how much fuss you made about your anti-tank rockets?
Well, here is a news for you, they are useless now, russian army do not use tanks to engage these idiots with javelins. They are using artillery from a safe distance of 30-40 km, there is simply no need for tanks.

Chickenshits murdering from afar.

As opposed to your chickenshit nazis who uses hostages to defend themselves.