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

[aupmanyav]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in killing you and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

Russians were not killing Ukrainians till 2013 when Ukraine elected Poroshenko as President.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in killing you and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

Russians were not killing Ukrainians till 2013 when Ukraine elected Poroshenko as President.

So if a government doesn't like the government of another country; okay to attack them? Or what is your point here?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

By the way. You lost Georgia. They voted down (democratically) their long standing policy of being US puppets.
And remarkably, they did not become Russian puppets, were not invaded by Russia, they are perfectly fine.

If you didn't invade how are you occupying part of the country?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

By the way, according to normal war rules using Polish/Romanian territory to launch air-defence missiles against russian missiles is an act of war and Russia would be in their right to strike targets in Poland/Romania. Even using radars to guide ukro-missiles is an act of war. So german idea is BS. You lock romanian radar on russian anything and expect to be bombed.

Nope. The fact that the missiles are Russian is irrelevant, what's important is where the engagement is. Ukraine has absolute authority to say whether something is permitted in their airspace or not and is free to grant permission for friendly forces to engage unwanted objects in their airspace.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Supposedly Ukrainian drones knocked out a Russian over the horizon early warning radar. I don't know why they would. I don't think such a long range radar would be much concern to anything Ukraine would be launching at 300km or less.

ATACMS flies high enough that the Russian radar could see it. Not well (it was at the edge of where the Russian radar could see), but any detection is of value in telling the guys on the ground to light up their radars. (In a perfect world this would not be needed, but in the real world no radar operates truly 24/7.)

(And at the time of the Norwegian rocket incident they were range-only systems. They could see that something was coming but did terribly at figuring out exactly what it was doing, resulting in the volume of uncertainty that included northern Russia when in reality the rocket was headed for the North Pole and never entered Russian airspace.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We have some pretty gross corruption in the US, but it happens differently here. The corruption is more aimed at the bottom of our social structures than the top, in preventing education and pushing misinformation that furthers the corporate interests so that people ask for the boot as it were.

It's like blood cancer vs dementia. They're both really bad.

That report is specifically looking at public sector corruption.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Are you aware that US did plan to first strike USSR. You ascribe too much sense to current regime in the West.

"Plan to".

You fail to understand military reality.

Of course we have plans for a first strike on Russia! The generals would be seriously deficient in their duties if we didn't. I'm also sure Russia has plans for a first strike on the US, although I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn they're garbage that could not actually be implemented. A failure to actually do such planning will likely not be discovered unless the plans are actually needed, making it a prime target for corruption.

Every major power has a variety of plans for war with every other major power.

 

[TV and credit cards]

What are these "Russian interests"?

What is the US interest in establishing NATO and expanding it. Russia too has similar interests.

It's all in how you go about with the expansion. Does a country request to join? Is a country asked to join? Is a country economically incentivized to join? Is a country coerced to join? Is a country invaded?

NATO is specifically a military alliance who's members have equal voice. It is not a collection of satellite states controlled by one overwhelming power.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I suppose these strikes are a message to stop the tactical missile saber rattling.

Tactical missiles have nothing to do with these radars. Terrorist nazi regimes does not really care what theey hit, be it civilians in Belgorod or some radar which has not effect on the war.

You continue to have no understanding of the reality on the ground. We continue to see Ukrainian strikes either being shot down or hitting something that is relevant to the war. Only two incidents come to mind that don't fit this pattern, one is virtually certainly false flag and the other very well might have been a drone that ran into something, whether by navigation error (GPS is not good enough to give 100% reliability in guiding a drone down a street and could also have fallen victim to the steel canyon) or because it got clipped by air defense.

These drones went a very long ways and hit military objects. That's not a mistake, they were aiming for those military things. Note how these strikes have happened after they got the longer range version of the ATACMS--the logical conclusion is that they could see something and send warning. ATACMS is ballistic, neglecting atmospheric effects figure apogee to be 1/4 the range. I believe reality is higher than this because of atmospheric effects but that's way outside my knowledge.

 

[aupmanyav]

So if a government doesn't like the government of another country; okay to attack them? Or what is your point here?

Depends. If they can live with the perceived threat, they may use economic methods. If it is more serious, then attack.
Like the increase of Uranium purity in Iran may make US or Israel to take action. Basic politics which does not care about the ethics..

 

[aupmanyav]

NATO is specifically a military alliance who's members have equal voice. It is not a collection of satellite states controlled by one overwhelming power.

I do not know if it is that, equal voice. Do the former USSR nations have the equal voice? The states with nuclear piles and stronger military will hold the power (US, France, UK). They will act if it suits them. Why NATO is not taking Ukraine as a member - because it does not suit them.

 

[aupmanyav]

Terrorist nazi regimes does not really care what they hit, be it civilians in Belgorod or some radar which has not effect on the war.

Missiles have guidance systems and they do not come cheap. The militaries aim them at definite targets. Of course, if they miss that and hit radars, that too is good. If they hit civilians, unfortunate, but collateral damage. War is a tough game.

 

[bilby]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in killing you and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

Russians were not killing Ukrainians till 2013 when Ukraine elected Poroshenko as President.

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in ruling you through a puppet government and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

 

[aupmanyav]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in ruling you through a puppet government and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

It was not a one way traffic. If they were taking away something, they were also providing something - electricity (though I am not very certain about that).
Or at least, that was providing peace.

 

[ZiprHead]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in ruling you through a puppet government and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

It was not a one way traffic. If they were taking away something, they were also providing something - electricity (though I am not very certain about that).
Or at least, that was providing peace.

You don't seem to know what you are actually talking about.

 

[bilby]

Disregarding the interests of people who are interested in ruling you through a puppet government and taking all your stuff, isn't really a mistake, though, is it?

It was not a one way traffic. If they were taking away something, they were also providing something - electricity (though I am not very certain about that).
Or at least, that was providing peace.

Ukraine was a net exporter of electricity before the Russians invaded - and their main buyer was Russia.

In 2022, they exported $590M of electricity, and were the 37th largest electricity exporting nation in the world.

 

[aupmanyav]

Ukraine was a net exporter of electricity before the Russians invaded - and their main buyer was Russia.
In 2022, they exported $590M of electricity, and were the 37th largest electricity exporting nation in the world.

That was good. Now, they may have lost some of these power stations.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Terrorist nazi regimes does not really care what they hit, be it civilians in Belgorod or some radar which has not effect on the war.

Missiles have guidance systems and they do not come cheap. The militaries aim them at definite targets. Of course, if they miss that and hit radars, that too is good. If they hit civilians, unfortunate, but collateral damage. War is a tough game.

Actually, turns out a simple guidance system isn't all that expensive. They doodle along slow and dumb and aren't good enough to hit a point target (nor can they find a target) but against basically nonexistent air defenses they're getting through.

 

[aupmanyav]

Brahmos goes with a speed of Mach 3.5. It utilises a "fire-and-forget" system, requiring no additional input from the operator once the missile has been launched. Fire it from land, air, sea or submarine (various versions).

 

[TV and credit cards]

More and more countries are calling for allowing Ukrainian strikes within Russia with Western weapons. Italy is still pussing out. Biden, Biden is desperately trying to at least maintain the status quo among the US electorate until November. As damaging as it may be for Ukraine, I can hardly blame him. He's got the Jews and young liberals to balance out, McDonald eating, coupon clipping crybabies whining about inflation, Non-White votes are shrinking as the civil rights generation dies off and is replaced by voters who did not grow up in that era, their main concerns being elsewhere. White women and the abortion issue alone may not be enough.
But maybe, just maybe given that many of our western allies are giving Ukraine the go ahead, Biden will give his tacit approval and not wait until November to allow Ukraine to hit Russia's weapons factories. Russia has shown they cannot provide air cover for all necessary assets within Russia. They also brazenly stack up troops and munitions within striking distance, just within the international border.

https://www.axios.com/2024/03/13/why-democrats-black-hispanic-vote-republican

‘The time has come’: Calls grow to allow Ukrainian strikes inside Russia

Pressure is building for the US and other NATO allies to lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons for Ukrainian strikes inside Russia, writes Peter Dickinson.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

Western officials are increasingly suggesting that they support Ukraine's right to use Western-provided weapons to strike military targets in Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron stated on May 28 at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz that France supports Ukraine's use of French-provided weapons to strike Russian "military sites from which missiles are fired" and other Russian "military sites from which Ukraine is attacked" in Russian territory.[6] Macron noted that Ukraine should not strike "other military" or civilian targets in Russia, likely referring to Russian sites that are not actively involved in attacks on Ukraine. Scholz stated at the May 28 press conference that Germany recognizes Ukraine's right to defend itself against Russian strikes under international law as long as "regulations" on Ukraine's use of Western-provided weapons are "within the framework of international law."[7] Scholz's recognition of Ukraine's right to strike military targets on Russian territory is notable as it defines the issue in terms of international legal norms but ultimately does not reflect a change in Germany's position against providing Ukraine with long-range Taurus missiles or allowing Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia with German-provided weapons.[8]


Other Western countries have recently noted that they do not impose restrictions on Ukraine's ability to use weapons they have provided to strike military targets in Russia. Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly stated on May 29 that Canada "does not have any conditions for the use of arms supplied to Ukraine" and that Canada does not oppose Ukraine using Canada-provided weapons against military targets in Russia.[9] Polish Deputy Defense Minister Cezary Tomczyk stated that Poland also has no restrictions on Ukraine's use of Polish-supplied weapons on military targets in Russia.[10] Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen stated that Finland has not set "special restrictions" on its military assistance to Ukraine as Finland "assumes that it will be used in accordance with international law."[11] Thus far 10 countries have expressed support for Ukraine's use of weapons they have provided to strike military targets on Russian territory with some or no restrictions: the UK, France, Sweden, Czechia, Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, and Canada.[12] US Pentagon Spokesperson Sabrina Singh and US National Security Council Spokesperson John Kirby both reiterated on May 28 that there is no change in the US position against using US-provided weapons to strike military targets in Russia.[13]

On the bright side, we just opened up a brand spanking new 155mm artillery factory in Mesquite, TX with Turkish equipment put up by Turkish workers. Also DoD money is ramping up production at other locations including my beloved Ohio. Combined, they'll be producing 100k shells a month.