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

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm so confused

I don’t think it’s you.

Here's my theory. I think Aupunyav is explaining why Russia attacked. Not justifying it.

If that's what he is doing then I agree with him. Upp until the Maidan revolution Ukraine was under Russian control and thanks to western meddling, now it isn't.

I don't even see the western meddling. That came later.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How's it anyone's business who Ukraine/the wife sides with?

Crimeans and Eastern Ukrainians sided with Russia.

You peddle rubbish. Russians invaded Crimea AND eastern Ukraine in 2014 and the Russian guns to the heads of the people did the "siding." It's like you think nobody has ever been mugged because all of those wallets were handed over willingly by their original owners.

We will never know the true wishes and preferences of the people in Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014, but it doesn't even matter if they DID prefer to join Russia. Because THEY WERE FREE TO DO SO ALREADY! (legally and without bloodshed)

Actually, I think we do know their wishes. The thing is that Russian "election" was set up so status quo ante wasn't even on the ballot. That makes it very clear that Russia was afraid it would win despite how much they were rigging things. Thus I'm left with the conclusion that Russia knew the area would prefer to be with Ukraine.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, Aupy you should be able to figure that out for yourself. The very first thing they did when they invaded their neighbor, was to head a twenty mile line of tanks straight for Kyiv. They all got slaughtered, much to Putler’s surprise. Do you think they’d have made such a spectacular sacrifice going for something they didn’t want?

Perhaps it was an over-reach by a General who was later sacked. Perhaps they wanted to encircle Kyiv and force Ukraine their way.

Encircle or invade, basically the same objective.

And I'm not surprised the general was sacked as how it was handled was an epic blunder. In land warfare cutting off a column is about the best move you can make. They pulled their move in mud season when the column would be pretty much confined to the road, rather than when it was dry and they could have gone around. Finland gave Russia a brutal lesson in the danger of getting a column cut off and that was back when infantry had to get up close to kill tanks. This time around the infantry had missiles that could kill from beyond gun range, making the cut-off vehicles little more than targets.

Either the general is an idiot for sticking his dick in the meat grinder, or he's the fall guy for someone above him ordering him to stick his dick in the meat grinder.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

100kT is a tiddler by thermonuclear standards.

A B83 warhead (1200kT) airburst would cause 3rd degree burns out to 13.4km, and according to NUKEMAP, would kill about 1.5 million people.

And Russia has them even bigger. Big booms are used to compensate for inaccurate delivery systems. We

A number of smaller warheads is far more destructive than a single large one; 30 x 40kT targeting large Indian cities (including three or four on New Delhi) would be able to instantly kill ten million people easily, and Pakistan would still have 140 left.

Simple way to figure this--blast radius goes at the third root of power. Damage area goes at the square of radius. Thus dividing a boom into 8 smaller booms doubles the damage area.

A full scale strike by Pakistan could kill 600 million people by blast, burns and other immediate trauma, before we even consider the effects of fallout and long term consequences due to the collapse of infrastructure and the destruction of food and water systems and supply chains.

Having a few hundred thousand corpses on your doorstep would affect you a great deal more than a few broken windows.

And the disruption would kill a lot more.

 

[Elixir]

You have had wars with China because you dared defy them. Why is the Ukraine situation any different?

Because China is not 10x the size with 4x the population of India. And India has little worth taking, let alone 40% of the world’s grain production.