• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

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

GDP

Russia - 1.799 trillion USD
South Korea - 1.811 trillion USD
Incorrect.

Russia - 5.3 trillion USD
South Korea 2.9 trillion USD
Russia - 2.24 trillion USD

At least you're providing a source. I can't match any of the other numbers exactly to anything I can find online.

But you're both kinda right. Russian GDP is in the same ballpark with South Korea in nominal $ (about 2 trillion), but is twice that of Korea adjusted for PPP, give or take. And Russian economy is growing by this metric, while South Korea is declining.


But GDP isn't the only relevant measure. In Russia's case, it also includes all the military production, which in real world in no way enhances people's lives in any meaningful way. The civilian economy is contracting. It's also just an estimate, based on data provided by Russia, which might not be so reliable right now.

Originally, i just googled, GDP Russia etc. Russia is not really economically a great power. Biggest economy in Europe as per Barbos? Russia ranks behind Germany, France and the UK. A silly claim from Barbos easily debunk with a bit of googling. But Russia does have an impressive collection of magnificient billion dollar yachts. Not in the Black Sea near Crimea, though.
 
Kyiv Post is claiming Ukrainian forces have broken through a first line of defense "in some areas".

Russian forces are not rotated off the front line. There are no reserves to give these guys a break. Imagine that for months on end.
Russia has a long defensive line to hold and must be ready across the entire line. Ukraine need only punch a hole or two. They can keep probing the defense looking for weak spots.
I think this is bullshit.

Russia has had over a year to prepare the defenses, and they have. There's no "punching through" anywhere, because after the first defensive line, there is going to be another one, and then another one, all the way to Crimea, which are at least as tough as the first one. Russia is prepared to fight for every mile. As for rotation, it's probably true for some places, but Russia can make up for it with numbers.

I expect Ukraine to be able hold the line and make local progress, but not much faster than this.
Well, maybe. But there’s a couple of problems. First, it’s unlikely that Russia can man and supply each of these defensive lines properly. They appear to do so in the first line, but just barely. A breakthrough on the first line may mean that the other lines will crumble quickly. Russia may have more man power on paper, but it has several disadvantages in drawing on it. First it has to worry about internal security, and that issue got seriously worse after the Wagner attempted coup. Second, they’ve lost a significant amount of their trained and most effective fighters. They have been forced to rely on untrained and unmotivated conscripts. Third, they cannot trust these people to fight effectively and require units to police them too much. Fourth, staying on the frontlines for months on end is just not possible. Their ability to fight without support and with only the threat of the “gendarmerie” behind them is not enough to sustain. Eventually they breakdown, mentally and physically. If they’re not killed first. Fifth, Russian logistical issues suck up far more manpower than normal. They can’t field as many front line fighters as they really need to crush Ukraine. Finally, Russian men are fleeing Russia. They aren’t showing up for induction. The smart ones fled long ago. They are burning down recruitment sites. All in all, they just can’t field the army they need to fight this war.

Russia has proven better on defense though. But that’s easier, and you can’t win a war that way. You have to take and hold ground. Russia has an air advantage as well, and we need to do a better job with supplying them with sufficient air defense, and ways to suppress their air defense. Air power should ultimately be the key to breaking the stalemate, but right now air defense systems are very good. Russia also does have a lot of artillery, but how long can they keep it up is the more serious question. We need to desperately ramp up our production of artillery pieces and ammunition and get it to Ukraine. We need to give them far more tanks and other pieces of hardware. If nothing else, we are learning how to fight the next war. We should give them far more advanced technologies, at least we will see if they work.

In the end, this offensive may not go very far. It hasn’t made nearly the progress most had hoped. But that doesn’t mean it hasn’t hurt the Russians. Every dead or wounded Russian is progress. The important thing is to keep fighting. Putin won’t last forever. Every dead or seriously wounded Russian sends a message that Russia can’t win. Every funeral destroys their will to continue and resistance will only grow. Every wounded body returned to Moscow will be a testament to their failure. Poisoning the well for the next batch of Russians.

Of course a lot could change. Trump, right now, is poised to win the election. Unless there is a massive turn around in the economy, but I neither expect such, nor expect a stronger economy to bolster Biden sufficiently. Biden doesn’t have the bloodsport to truly attack Trump the way he needs to be. If he wins, it will be almost over for Ukraine. I suspect he will stop supplying them altogether and force them to accept the loss of Donetsk, Luhansk, and Zaporizhia. Then a few years later, the rest of Ukraine will be sacrificed.
 
Trump, right now, is poised to win the election. Unless there is a massive turn around in the economy,
Wut? I haven’t seen the poll that says he wins vs Biden, unless there is a lot of 3rd party crap going on.
We have record low unemployment, Biden has overseen record job growth, inflation is now in the “normal”, infrastructure investment at a 50 year high, stock markets at record highs …
We better hope there is no massive turnaround!
Sure would be nice though, if Biden’s actual record was made public, instead of the GOP fairy tale.
🙄
Biden doesn’t have the bloodsport to truly attack Trump the way he needs to be.
I hope he’s just keeping his powder dry and will unload on the scumbag late in the game.
 
Trump, right now, is poised to win the election. Unless there is a massive turn around in the economy,
Wut? I haven’t seen the poll that says he wins vs Biden, unless there is a lot of 3rd party crap going on.
We have record low unemployment, Biden has overseen record job growth, inflation is now in the “normal”, infrastructure investment at a 50 year high, stock markets at record highs …
We better hope there is no massive turnaround!
Sure would be nice though, if Biden’s actual record was made public, instead of the GOP fairy tale.
🙄
Biden doesn’t have the bloodsport to truly attack Trump the way he needs to be.
I hope he’s just keeping his powder dry and will unload on the scumbag late in the game.
right now Trafalgar polling has Trump up by 5 points. Trafalgar picked both of the last two elections spot on. Historically, second term elections are at least a lot closer than the first; it’s easy to find fault and attack an incumbent. The incumbent always loses ground, and Biden barely squeaked in. So I’m not hopeful, unless there is some black swan, perhaps, Trump dies, serious health issues, or goes to jail.

And democrats just don’t seem to be tough enough. They are afraid to attack their opponents. Call him a Russian agent! He probably is. Point out that after his first trip to Moscow in the 80’s, he gave them a sweetheart deal on Manhattan property. He was probably caught in one of their ubiquitous honey pot traps. Is it true? Maybe. Who cares? That’s basically Trump’s tactics. And it works! Going negative works. But I get so frustrated at this bullshit, “when they go low, we go high” nonsense.

I would love for someone to make a really negative campaign commercial about Trump. I mean several, questioning his patriotism, his cowardice in Vietnam, his kids cowardice after 9/11, his Russian connections. Make it sting. But they won’t. The Dems really are the pansies the Republicans make them out to be.
 
I'm "gifting" a very long article written by a journalist who spent a couple of months in Russia, interviewing people and trying to determine Putin's goals for this reckless, unnecessary war that he started. The article is very concerning, especially since some of the things that Putin is doing and claiming remind me of some of the things that Republicans in the US are also trying to do. For example, their hatred of gay and trans folks. If you're not a Times subscriber, I encourage you to read this. The journalist has over 30 years of experience and imo, was very brave to take this trip and spend so much time interviewing people, including those who have put their own safety at risk, for criticizing their own government. The claim has been made that Putin has plans to take over a lot more territories, the threat of nuclear war is a possibility etc. The article is called, "Putin's Forever War".

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/06/...OqfkokwmV6WiwVfwkeyuotvtnpJ12s&smid=url-share
That was indeed a great article and they didn’t block it. It made me think that Putinism has a grip on Russia like fascism did on Germany. The only way to defeat it, is to utterly crush Russia on the battlefield. It makes it even more imperative that we give far more to Russia. We won’t need 90% of our military equipment if Russia is defeated anyways.

We need to utterly sanction India and even China for their support. Seriously make their economies hurt ten times worse if they support Russia with these oil deals. We should make it clear to Modi, that we will basically turn India into a North Korea if they continue. Maybe that could make the difference. Not sure.

My real fear after reading this article is that the war is likely to expand; that NATO will inevitably be drawn in. God that would be awful, but it may be the only way. And the son of a bitch must be defeated. Just like Hitler. No difference really.
 
Trump, right now, is poised to win the election. Unless there is a massive turn around in the economy,
Wut? I haven’t seen the poll that says he wins vs Biden, unless there is a lot of 3rd party crap going on.
We have record low unemployment, Biden has overseen record job growth, inflation is now in the “normal”, infrastructure investment at a 50 year high, stock markets at record highs …
We better hope there is no massive turnaround!
Sure would be nice though, if Biden’s actual record was made public, instead of the GOP fairy tale.
🙄
Biden doesn’t have the bloodsport to truly attack Trump the way he needs to be.
I hope he’s just keeping his powder dry and will unload on the scumbag late in the game.
right now Trafalgar polling has Trump up by 5 points. Trafalgar picked both of the last two elections spot on. Historically, second term elections are at least a lot closer than the first; it’s easy to find fault and attack an incumbent. The incumbent always loses ground, and Biden barely squeaked in. So I’m not hopeful, unless there is some black swan, perhaps, Trump dies, serious health issues, or goes to jail.

And democrats just don’t seem to be tough enough. They are afraid to attack their opponents. Call him a Russian agent! He probably is. Point out that after his first trip to Moscow in the 80’s, he gave them a sweetheart deal on Manhattan property. He was probably caught in one of their ubiquitous honey pot traps. Is it true? Maybe. Who cares? That’s basically Trump’s tactics. And it works! Going negative works. But I get so frustrated at this bullshit, “when they go low, we go high” nonsense.

I would love for someone to make a really negative campaign commercial about Trump. I mean several, questioning his patriotism, his cowardice in Vietnam, his kids cowardice after 9/11, his Russian connections. Make it sting. But they won’t. The Dems really are the pansies the Republicans make them out to be.
I don't like it, and I think that it's dangerous for the country, but I assume that the above is exactly what the Biden campaign will do. Most of the republicans lack the courage to do the above. And I assume that Biden dosn't want to help them by attacking Trump as a traitor until Trump has secured the nomination.
 
right now Trafalgar polling has Trump up by 5 points.
Link? Their July 2022 poll had Trump by 5.
Axios had them tied last week at 43%, and that’s the closest I’ve seen in months.
 
I assume that Biden dosn't want to help them by attacking Trump as a traitor until Trump has secured the nomination.
I’d go further. He should probably just shut up about Trump i.e. give him the zero attention he deserves until a few weeks before the election.
 
I have seen several recent polls showing if Trump is convicted of a crime, his GOP support is going to be halved.

.....
45% of Republicans said they would not vote for Trump if he were convicted of a felony by a jury, while 35% said they would.52% said they wouldn't vote for him if he were in prison at the time of the election, while 28% said they would.
.....

 
I have seen several recent polls showing if Trump is convicted of a crime, his GOP support is going to be halved.

.....
45% of Republicans said they would not vote for Trump if he were convicted of a felony by a jury, while 35% said they would.52% said they wouldn't vote for him if he were in prison at the time of the election, while 28% said they would.
.....

Well, you assume that the trial will be held before the election.
 
As the witnesses’ stories become more and more well known, I expect a tiny bit of erosion of support for the treasonous whiner.
 
Historically, second term elections are at least a lot closer than the first; it’s easy to find fault and attack an incumbent. \
That’s not correct. Since 1900, only four elected presidential incumbents lost re-election: Hoover, Carter, the first Bush and Trump. Incumbent Ford lost in 1976, but he had not been elected in 1972.

In most cases, incumbent presidents running for re-election won by greater margins than they did in their initial election. Roosevelt did in 1936, Eisenhower did in 1956, Nixon did in 1972, Reagan did in 1984, Clinton did in 1996, the second Bush did in 2004. Only Obama broke the trend, winning re-election by a smaller margin than his original election.
 
In fact, further research shows that Obama was the first president in history to win a second term with a smaller share of the popular vote and the electoral vote than in his first victory. This doesn’t include FDR’s third and fourth terms, since he is the only one who was elected more than twice. His vote share in this third and fourth wins did decline relative to his first two victories.
 
As the witnesses’ stories become more and more well known, I expect a tiny bit of erosion of support for the treasonous whiner.
As Trump's history of deceit, philandering, and bankruptcy became more and more well known I expected erosion of support.

That was 2016. Before he'd won a state primary. Boy, was I wrong.
Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
As the witnesses’ stories become more and more well known, I expect a tiny bit of erosion of support for the treasonous whiner.
As Trump's history of deceit, philandering, and bankruptcy became more and more well known I expected erosion of support.

That was 2016. Before he'd won a state primary. Boy, was I wrong.
Tom
Agreed. It's quite stunning. According to PBS, "Seventy-six percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they hold a favorable view of Trump – up 8 percentage points since mid-February." A little tongue in cheek, but I wish that we could expel the Americans who don't want a democracy anymore; exchange them for the South Americans swimming under the rotating underwater barb-wire barriers in order to seek a better life.
 
I'm "gifting" a very long article written by a journalist who spent a couple of months in Russia, interviewing people and trying to determine Putin's goals for this reckless, unnecessary war that he started. The article is very concerning, especially since some of the things that Putin is doing and claiming remind me of some of the things that Republicans in the US are also trying to do. For example, their hatred of gay and trans folks. If you're not a Times subscriber, I encourage you to read this. The journalist has over 30 years of experience and imo, was very brave to take this trip and spend so much time interviewing people, including those who have put their own safety at risk, for criticizing their own government. The claim has been made that Putin has plans to take over a lot more territories, the threat of nuclear war is a possibility etc. The article is called, "Putin's Forever War".

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/06/...OqfkokwmV6WiwVfwkeyuotvtnpJ12s&smid=url-share
That was indeed a great article and they didn’t block it. It made me think that Putinism has a grip on Russia like fascism did on Germany. The only way to defeat it, is to utterly crush Russia on the battlefield. It makes it even more imperative that we give far more to Russia. We won’t need 90% of our military equipment if Russia is defeated anyways.

We need to utterly sanction India and even China for their support. Seriously make their economies hurt ten times worse if they support Russia with these oil deals. We should make it clear to Modi, that we will basically turn India into a North Korea if they continue. Maybe that could make the difference. Not sure.

My real fear after reading this article is that the war is likely to expand; that NATO will inevitably be drawn in. God that would be awful, but it may be the only way. And the son of a bitch must be defeated. Just like Hitler. No difference really.
I'm glad that somebody read that article. It wasn't blocked because subscribers can share 10 articles per month and that one was worth sharing. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I agree with you that Putin is likely as big a threat as Hitler. It doesn't seem as if our allies are taking this seriously enough, and some of the Republicans seem to value Putin more than our own president, just because he's not a Republican. And, it could all be due to the oil. I usually quote from an article that I link. I didn't do it this time because there was so much information in this piece and the author did such a good job of interviewing so many people with various viewpoints. I'll post a little bit in case that generates a little interest. There is certainly more to discuss in the article that hasn't been addressed very well in this thread, at least not in the parts I've read.

Sitting at a cafe overlooking the Patriarch’s Ponds in one of the toniest areas of central Moscow, Pyotr Tolstoy, a deputy chairman of the State Duma and a direct descendant of the great novelist Leo Tolstoy, exuded confidence as a moneyed crowd ate large crab claws and other delicacies.
When I asked him how Russia proposed to pay for a prolonged war effort, he shot back: “We pay for it all from our sales of oil to Europe via India.”

This was bravado, but it had some truth to it. Russia has rapidly adjusted to the loss of European markets with oil sales to Asia — and India has sold some of it on to Europe in refined form.
“Our values are different,” Mr. Tolstoy said. “For Russians, freedom and economic factors are secondary to the integrity of our state and the safeguarding of the Russian world.”
Mr. Putin’s rule is all about the reconstitution of this imagined Russian world, or “Russkiy mir,” a revanchist myth built around the idea of an eternal Russian cultural and imperial sphere of which Ukraine — its decision to become an independent state never forgiven — is an integral part.
As for the future, Mr. Putin has very little to say, leaving people guessing.
Rarely in Moscow or elsewhere in Russia is Mr. Putin’s image visible, other than on television, even if he has ventured out a little more of late. He governs from the shadows, unlike Stalin, whose portrait was everywhere. There is no cult of the leader of the kind Fascist systems favored. Yet mystery has its own magnetism. The reach of Mr. Putin’s power touches all.
It is evident in the bodyguards bursting into upscale Moscow restaurants to make room for some capo or oligarch of a system where great wealth comes only at the price of unwavering loyalty to the president.

Above all, it is in the fear that causes people to lower voices and hesitate before uttering that treacherous word of Mr. Putin’s double-think — “war.”
The Kremlinology of the Cold War has been replaced by the equally arduous pursuit of trying to penetrate the utter opacity of the Kremlin to read the mind of a new czar, Mr. Putin, now in the autumn of his rule.

The State of the War​

Repression has become fierce and the war Mr. Putin started in Ukraine has been waged with near total unconcern for the consequences of his decision, a human trait that John le Carré once described as “a primary qualification for psychopathy.”
Putinism is a postmodern compilation of contradictions. It combines mawkish Soviet nostalgia with Mafia capitalism, devotion to the Orthodox Church with the spread of broken families, ferocious attacks on a “unipolar” American world with revived Russian imperialist aggression — all held together by the ruthless suppression of dissident voices and recourse to violence when necessary.
 
Though there’s no way for me to form a truly educated picture of the Russian populace, it’s hard to avoid thinking that they are largely aware of all the situation they’re in, the level of repression, the consequences of dissent etc., and they embrace it by and large.
barbos is probably not typical; his rabid enthusiasm for Pootey’s propaganda is probably not met by most. But the trains run on time, sort of. And “we’re sticking it to The West”, and it has been a lot worse in the past* …


* is the heritage of real bloody terror, with millions repeatedly murdered or killed in wars, the core requisite for a population to put up with such a brutal dictator? Or is that just a small contributing factor in the regime’s longevity?
 
France is sending SCALP-EGs to Ukraine, which are identical to the British Storm Shadows except they don't work on weekends.
It turns out they do work on weekends. :whistle:


Zelensky signed a SCALP-EG that was brightly adorned with its designation in French flag colors and a Ukrainian coat of arms with the Eiffel Tower set in it as it hung off an Su-24 Fencer. (...)

A subsequent tweet by Ukraine's Defense Ministry attributed the missile - referred to by its U.K. moniker - as having crated bridges in Chongar and Henichesk. These spans work as a key arteries for conveying supplies and personnel from occupied Crimea to Russian troops along the frontlines to the north.
 
Though there’s no way for me to form a truly educated picture of the Russian populace, it’s hard to avoid thinking that they are largely aware of all the situation they’re in, the level of repression, the consequences of dissent etc., and they embrace it by and large.
As I've pointed out before, Barbos reminds me of my conservative Republican Dad. Dad was a staunch supporter of Bush II and the Invasion of Iraq. Left home at 18 to defend America from the Japanese. Came back to become a solid husband and father. And Reagan Republican. He was a good man.

He also supported his government when they went to liberate Iraq. Lock, stock, and barrel, he supported the liberation of Iraq from Islamic Muslims. Totally believed that it would end in a month or two because the Iraqis would welcome their liberators with flowers and parades.

He's been gone for many years now. I'm not sure he ever realized what the U.S. really did.
Tom
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
Kyiv Post is claiming Ukrainian forces have broken through a first line of defense "in some areas".

Russian forces are not rotated off the front line. There are no reserves to give these guys a break. Imagine that for months on end.
Russia has a long defensive line to hold and must be ready across the entire line. Ukraine need only punch a hole or two. They can keep probing the defense looking for weak spots.
I think this is bullshit.

Russia has had over a year to prepare the defenses, and they have. There's no "punching through" anywhere, because after the first defensive line, there is going to be another one, and then another one, all the way to Crimea, which are at least as tough as the first one. Russia is prepared to fight for every mile. As for rotation, it's probably true for some places, but Russia can make up for it with numbers.

I expect Ukraine to be able hold the line and make local progress, but not much faster than this.
Well, maybe. But there’s a couple of problems. First, it’s unlikely that Russia can man and supply each of these defensive lines properly. They appear to do so in the first line, but just barely. A breakthrough on the first line may mean that the other lines will crumble quickly. Russia may have more man power on paper, but it has several disadvantages in drawing on it. First it has to worry about internal security, and that issue got seriously worse after the Wagner attempted coup. Second, they’ve lost a significant amount of their trained and most effective fighters. They have been forced to rely on untrained and unmotivated conscripts. Third, they cannot trust these people to fight effectively and require units to police them too much. Fourth, staying on the frontlines for months on end is just not possible. Their ability to fight without support and with only the threat of the “gendarmerie” behind them is not enough to sustain. Eventually they breakdown, mentally and physically. If they’re not killed first. Fifth, Russian logistical issues suck up far more manpower than normal. They can’t field as many front line fighters as they really need to crush Ukraine. Finally, Russian men are fleeing Russia. They aren’t showing up for induction. The smart ones fled long ago. They are burning down recruitment sites. All in all, they just can’t field the army they need to fight this war.
Russia hasn't yet fully mobilized. Yes, they are mobilizing people, but it's still being selective. Students or those with large families to support have been getting a pass for now. Putin is clearly worried that if the middle-classes from Moscow and St. Petersburg are too exposed to the reality of the war, he could have a popular revolt in his hands. But that doesn't mean that if the war isn't going well, he won't tap into these reserves.

Russia has during the past year made several changes to the law to prepare for the "big war" and further mobilization. They increased the age of conscription from 27 to 30. The drafting process was modernized so that people who are mobilized don't have to be delivered the draft papers in person, but it's done digitally, and dodging is becoming more difficult. Crossing the borders to escape being mobilized has been made harder. Elementary schools have re-introduced soviet-style indoctrination and military training courses.

As for conscripts, that's one prime example of an untapped resource. Russia has a conscription army, so they train 100k-150k people annually. And right now these people are largely not being utilized. Sure, some of them might be mobilized immediately, and there's probably a lot of pressure for them to sign up as contract soldiers voluntarily, but for now that's just a small portion. These would not be "untrained" and not necessarily even "unmotivated" soldiers, in fact a young conscript who's just been trained for 12 months is probably more effective than a 35-year old reservist who hasn't touched a rifle in fifteen years.

Russia's got a lot more fuel in the tank so to speak.

Of course a lot could change. Trump, right now, is poised to win the election. Unless there is a massive turn around in the economy, but I neither expect such, nor expect a stronger economy to bolster Biden sufficiently. Biden doesn’t have the bloodsport to truly attack Trump the way he needs to be. If he wins, it will be almost over for Ukraine. I suspect he will stop supplying them altogether and force them to accept the loss of Donetsk, Luhansk, and Zaporizhia. Then a few years later, the rest of Ukraine will be sacrificed.
Yep. This is what I think will happen. It doesn't even have to be Trump, DeSantis is just as bad, and I doubt any sane candidate has a snowball's chance in hell in the republican primaries. Already over 50% of republican voters think that Ukraine is getting too much aid.
 
Back
Top Bottom