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

[Loren Pechtel]

Ukraine is enacting genocide against Russians. There won't be an insurgency, we'll be welcomed with flowers.

Well, you place bunch of nazis with artillery at the border of Donetsk/Lugansk and this is what is gonna happen. And Ukrainian Government is complicit in that.

The only fire landing on Russian interests was fired by Russians.

 

[skepticalbip]

...tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history.

Deja vu.

Though it is funny. Because this is fucking Europe. Great War, WWII, black death... got some history there. So pretty much all Putin can do that hasn't been done is nuke Europe. And that fallout would be an issue, so umm...

Kamala's recent talk with the Europeans apparently made the same assumption as Putin, that Europeans couldn't possibly understand how bad a war in Europe would be. She spent much of her talk explaining to them that they have had 70 years of peace so couldn't imagine how bad a war was.

 

[lpetrich]

Biden imposes additional sanctions on Russia: 'Putin chose this war' - CNNPolitics

"Putin is the aggressor. Putin chose this war. And now he and his country will bear the consequences," Biden said, laying out a set of measures that will "impose severe cost on the Russian economy, both immediately and over time."

The new sanctions include export blocks on technology, a centerpiece of Biden's approach that he said would severely limit Russia's ability to advance its military and aerospace sector. He also applied sanctions on Russian banks and "corrupt billionaires" and their families who are close to the Kremlin.

Biden insisted his threat to directly sanction Putin remains "on the table" and is "not a bluff," but he didn't answer when asked why he hasn't directly sanctioned the Russian president yet.

...
"Our forces are not and will not be engaged in the conflict," he said, addressing the nation from the White House East Room in his first appearance in public since the Russian attack commenced late Wednesday. "Our forces are not going to Europe to fight in Ukraine but defend our NATO allies and reassure those allies in the east."

Biden announces new measures in response to Russian invasion of Ukraine

"There is a complete rupture right now in U.S.-Russian relations," he said when asked by a reporter about relationship between the two nations.

The new sanctions restrict the exports of some products from the U.S. to Russia, blocking Moscow’s ability to acquire semiconductor chips and other technology essential to defense, aerospace and other critical sectors. The sanctions also target Russian banks and elites with close ties to Putin, freezing every asset Russia has in the U.S.

 

[crazyfingers]

When did WWII Start? I suppose it depends on the definition of a World War.

The war in Asia between Japan and China started in the 1930's. I could look up the date but that's not the point.

The war in Europe, If asked I'd say the war in Europe started when Hitler took the Sudetenland. Soon followed by Hitler's attack on Poland and the brief phony war. But war regardless. In Europe.

Australia came in on the side of Britain of course. India and other comonwealth states also aiding Britain. So Australia and parts of Asia came in.

Was it world war when German and Japan became allies? That would link, at least on paper, the war in Europe with the war in Asia.

Canada was aiding Britain from the beginning. That meant North American involvement but not really US involvement but lend lease was clearly designed to aid Britain.

Britain was fighting Germany in Africa. There is one more continent.

Pearl harbor brought the US into the war in Asia. And Hitler's unexplained declaration of war on the US formally created war between US and Germany linking US to the war in Europe and Africa.

When did WWII start? Once again, it depends on whether one counts the regional wars that eventually combined as the start or when all continents were linked? And of course Latin America never had a big involvement through he whole thing.

How many continents need to be actively involved in war before it counts as a world war?

 

[Tigers!]

For a long time we see daily reports of global tradgedy and catastrophe in the news. I have become desensitzed.

That being said, I feel for the Ukrainians. They are facing eradication as a people and culture. I am starting to tink maybe NATO shoud have responded. Are we going down the path of appeasement?

Putin said he is going to "de Nazify Ukraine'. It is not hard to imagine what that will mean.

Isn't the President of Ukraine Jewish himself? Hard to de-Nazify a Jew i would have thought.

 

[bleubird]

I saw a report that Russians are trying to get USD. Anyone see that?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You don't think war is a huge cause for immediate investment into tech sector advances, in the tech age?

No. A huge cause for spending in tech sector products.

 

[lpetrich]

U.S. announces new sanctions on Russian banks and country’s elites - The Washington Post

The sanctions target not only Russia’s largest state-owned banks but also a number of Russian political and business elites, as well as companies in virtually every major sector of the economy. The Biden administration and allies in Europe and Asia are also cutting off Russia’s access to key components crucial to their emerging and high-tech industries.

Biden emphasized that the coalition of countries working with the United States represents more than half the global economy, and that the sanctions are “going to impose severe costs on the Russian economy, both immediately and over time.”

“We have purposely designed these sanctions to maximize the long-term impact on Russia and to minimize the impact on the United States and our allies,” he said.

noting
U.S. Treasury Announces Unprecedented & Expansive Sanctions Against Russia, Imposing Swift and Severe Economic Costs | U.S. Department of the Treasury

Elites close to Putin continue to leverage their proximity to the Russian President to pillage the Russian state, enrich themselves, and elevate their family members into some of the highest positions of power in the country at the expense of the Russian people. Sanctioned oligarchs and powerful Russian elites have used family members to move assets and to conceal their immense wealth. The following designations target influential Russians in Putin’s inner circle and in elite positions of power within the Russian state. Many of these individuals are believed to participate in, or benefit from, the Russian regime’s kleptocracy, along with their family members. Many serve in leadership roles of companies designated or identified today.

Then listing some of these.

Sergei Sergeevich Ivanov, son of Sergei Borisovich Ivanov

Sergei Borisovich Ivanov (Sergei B. Ivanov) is the Special Presidential Representative for Environmental Protection, Ecology, and Transport.

...
Andrey Patrushev, son of Nikolai Platonovich Patrushev

Nikolai Platonovich Patrushev (Nikolai Patrushev) is the Secretary of the Russian Federation Security Council and is reported to be a longtime close associate of Putin.

...
Ivan Igorevich Sechin, son of Igor Ivanovich Sechin

Igor Ivanovich Sechin (Igor Sechin) is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chairman of the Management Board, and Deputy Chairman of the Board of Directors of Rosneft, one of the world’s largest publicly traded oil companies.

...
Alexander Aleksandrovich Vedyakhin (Vedyakhin) is First Deputy Chairman of the Executive Board of Sberbank

...
Andrey Sergeyevich Puchkov (Puchkov) and Yuriy Alekseyevich Soloviev (Soloviev) are two high-ranking VTB Bank executives who work closely with VTB Bank chief executive Andrei Kostin, whom OFAC designated in April 2018 pursuant to E.O. 13661.

...
Soloviev’s wife, Galina Olegovna Ulyutina (Ulyutina), was previously implicated in a golden passport scheme.

 

[TV and credit cards]

I am still bothered that I haven't heard any serious reaction from the E.U.

Well, let's hope sanctions hit hard. Hard enough to get the Russian people pissed at this asshole. I see the ruble is at an all time low. Hopefully it tanks after Biden speaks. Russians need to call for Putin's head.

One of the guests on MSNBC recently said that the sanctions on Russia could take years to make a difference due to the size of the Russian economy. I hope he's wrong, but I'm not an economist and I know very little about the Russian economy.

Does anyone with a lot of knowledge on this subject, have an opinion?

I don't have "a lot of knowledge on this subject" but I haven't seen anything that would have an immediate effect on Russian economy. Closing the Nord Stream 2 pipeline does nothing since it was not yet open and hasn't yet began to pump any gas into Europe. At most it means that it would limit future expansion of gas income to Russia (but only if the sanctions aren't removed again like they were last month). Now If they had closed the Nord Stream 1 pipeline there would be immediate effect on Russian economy. That pipeline is pumping something like 50 billion cubic yards of natural gas/year into Europe. That amounts to a hell of a lot of Rubles/year for Russia. Closing the oil pipelines from Russia into Europe would also have a massive effect.

Maybe Russia wanted in before the US could export enough LNG to Europe. We're up to 22 billion cubic meters, which is slightly larger than a cubic yard.

And current infrastructure can handle a 20% mix of hydrogen. I heard on CNBC, the money grubbers at Golden Slacks is investing in it so I started to poke around. 20% is nothing to sneeze at.
https://www.greentechmedia.com/arti...elines-decarbonization-solution-or-pipe-dream

 

[bleubird]

Ukraine Army Downs Multiple Russian Aircraft, Retakes 2 Towns

The Ukraine military that faced Russia in 2014 is not the same one that Russian President Vladimir Putin faces now. Although America will not be sending troops, we have been sending in vast quantities of military armament and military trainers in previous months. It seems President Biden had a...

bipartisanreport.com

Did Pooty see that coming?

 

[lpetrich]

What is the Controversial Golden Passport? | Passport Health

What is a Golden Passport?

Only the wealthiest of individuals can get one of these coveted documents. They come from the European Union, the United Kingdom, and other nations at a bargain price of between $112,000 to over $5.5 million.

The price, which is called an “investment,” differs according to the country providing it. The passport is known for providing residency and citizenship to those who purchase it.

Galina Olegovna Ulyutina?

A high-profile Russian partner of Ukraine’s top banker - The Panama Papers from 2016

Cordova Management lists the person “Ulyutina, G.O.” from Moscow as its sole owner. This matches the name and initials of Soloviev’s wife: Galina Olegovna Ulyutina. Such a listing, using just the initials of a bank’s beneficiary, violates the Ukraine National Bank’s regulations which require a full name. Those regulations are supposed to be enforced by Gontareva’s National Bank.

Ulyutina held an equal share of the company with Gontareva and its managing partners Konstyantyn Stetsenko and Makar Paseniuk. With Gontareva’s appointment to head the National Bank of Ukraine, she sold her share of ICU in mid-June 2014 to her partners.

I didn't try to untangle that financial mess any further.

 

[lpetrich]

Russians protest in dozens of cities against attack on Ukraine - The Washington Post

Thousands of people protested President Vladimir Putin’s attacks on Ukraine in cities across Russia on Thursday, a striking show of anger in a nation where spontaneous mass demonstrations are illegal and protesters can face fines and jail.

More than 1,700 people were arrested in at least 47 cities across the nation, according to rights group OVD-Info. The group was declared a foreign agent last year, when Putin launched a sweeping crackdown on activists, rights groups and opposition figures.

The protests came with an outpouring of horror from liberal Russians, social media influencers, athletes, actors, television presenters and others.

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny on Thursday spoke out against the attacks during a court hearing, as members of the Russian political elite either remained silent or celebrated.

That's good to see.

Kamil Galeev on Twitter: "3 theses on the Russian-Ukrainian war: ..." / Twitter

3 theses on the Russian-Ukrainian war:

1. Putin's decision to start the war on Ukraine isn't foreign policy. It's domestic one. Putin first consolidated his power through the war in 1999-2000 and it worked. So he repeated this trick every time his popularity started waning

Putin was confirmed as the Prime Minister on 16 August 1999. By that point Yeltsin chose him as a successor and Putin controlled intelligence. But he still had to stand on elections - and he was unknown. His rate of approval was between 3-4% because ppl didn't recognise his face. Just two weeks later apartment bombings started. Since September 4, a number of residential houses in Moscow, Volgodonsk, Buinaksk were blown up. More than 300 people died, 1700 were wounded. Putin accused Chechen terrorists in these attacks and invaded the separatist region. He won. In the course of the war he built his image as a tough victorious military leader. And Russian public opinion likes victorious military leaders. By the end of the year with the Chechen resistance largely crushed, he became very electable. That's how he became a President.

Of course, the entire story with so timely blown up houses looked kinda shady. There were certain suspicions regarding who really organised these attacks, especially in the context of the Ryazan case. With all these explosions, the country became vigilant. On September 22 Alexey Kartofelnikov living on Novoselov 14/16 in Ryazan noticed a strange white car parked near their residential building. Its passengers took several bags and brought them into the basement of the house. After the strangers left, locals called the police. Police came and found several large bags from sugar - with a detonator. People were evacuated and the police expertise showed that the bags contain hexagon. Next day it became the national news - the media were still free.

Prime Minister Putin congratulated them with preventing a terrorist attack. The same night police (police is MVD - different from FSB) arrested two suspects. To their surprise they showed the FSB IDs. Ofc Moscow HQ of FSB called the police and ordered to release their agents. Next day Putin gave a different version. Now he said that those were simply the trainings, the manoeuvres. The FSB was learning how to prevent terror attacks and these bags contained regular sugar. The detonators were fake. It all sounded shady. But the military planes were already raising Grozny to the ground. Successful invasion that followed changed the electoral balance completely. In August 1999 2% voters would vote for Putin, in 2000 - 53% did. Russian people love victorious wars.

So some of those "terrorist attacks" were false-flag attacks?

 

[lpetrich]

KG:

So, it worked. And that's how the institutional inertia dynamics commence. Whatever worked out in the past, will likely work out again. So why bother with making up new ideas if older ones are completely reliable? And indeed, reliable they were.

In 2010s Putin was clearly losing popularity. Fraud on the parliamentary elections of 2011 triggered the largest street protests since Putin came to power. That was a bad marker. Economy was rising, quality of life improving. And many were still angry. But streets protests could be ascribed to a politicised minority, whereas silent majority supported him. That's why he confidently came to a boxing championate to give a speech, with the federal TV broadcasting it in real time. And he was booed with millions people watching. That was a heavy blow. He came to power as a victorious military leader. But now, 11 years later, ppl didn't recognise him as such. They saw him as a pathetic gerontocrat with too much botox fillings. He became a joke. So he had to take urgent action to be treated seriously again.

His popularity falling, he had to restore his image as a serious leader. How? Well, by winning wars. Again, he initially built his legitimacy through a military victory, so why not do it again? Thus Russia engages into wars: Syria, Ukraine, Africa. Domestic policy by other means. So the real audience of this play are neither Ukrainians, nor Westerners. It's Russians. Of course many won't wholeheartedly support the war. But it will make them take Putin seriously. And for Putin it's much better to be regarded as bloody and merciless, rather than ridiculous.

That's an interesting thesis, that VP starts those wars to make himself seem like a better leader.

 

[lpetrich]

KG:

2. Many in the West exaggerate how robust the Putin's regime is. It's not only dependent on Western technologies and imports, it also can't decrease its dependence without a renegotiation of power balance. Which means it exists only as long as the West doesn't take action. Infrastructure-wise there is one thing it's doing well - building and maintaining communications for exporting raw materials. Railways, pipelines, seaports. And yet, sanctions obstruct development of new oil or gas deposits. There are new deposits introduced, but they don't compensate the depletion. Theoretically Russia has huge deposits, but they're primarily on Arctic shelf and Russia lacks the technology to extract them alone.

Russia is not the USSR. The USSR was a theocracy legitimised through technological progress, which valued scientists and engineers highly. Modern Russia doesn't. Consider salaries which state corporation offers to aerospace engineers - kinda 150 usd/month. That's important to keep in mind. Unlike USSR, Russia doesn't value people who produce stuff. It's not prestigious, it doesn't pay. So whoever can leave to the IT and work for international market directly, will do it. There's huge negative selection in production of hardware. Which means that Russian industry, including military, is highly dependent upon Western technologies and equipment. Precision manufacturing is done on German, Swiss, Italian machines. Production of literally anything complicated continues only as long as it is allowed to continue.

Seems like Russia has become too dependent on oil and gas for its income, meaning that with that income it can buy things rather than make things at home. Making things at home was what the Soviet Union had to do.

3. What will be the result of this war? That largely depends on Western, primarily American reaction. If Putin manages to win a small victorious war again and get away with that, it will not only increase his authority but trigger tons of terrirotiral conflicts all over the world. Let's be honest, in most countries there're groups who believe that their neighbours occupy a piece of our sacred land illegitimately. That's very typical feeling and usually it's mutual. The only reason why wars over the land don't happen more frequently is the fear of reprisals.

If this invasion succeeds and Putin gets away with it, this will trigger a chain of imitators waging their small victorious wars all over the world. More powerful powers than Russia will certainly do, less powerful ones will try their chance, too. That will be a very bloody era. Paradoxically enough, even the military defeat of Russia is not necessary to prevent that scenario. Simply Putin losing his power would be enough as a warning. And counterintuitively, that would likely result naturally if he doesn't achieve a quick victory.

There's a big difference between an easy war and a hard war. An easy war makes regime stronger because it achieves victory without having to transform. But a hard war will transform it. The longer WWI lasted, the more the real power over Germany flowed from Kaiser to Ludendorff.

Russia plays hard. But hard war is incompatible with the state security rule. They aren't guys who do stuff, they are the guys who find wrongdoings in the work of others. Critics, not doers. So once the war becomes existential, power will start flipping from their hands. End of

What he describes has a name:  Irredentism - claiming some territory in some other nation as rightfully belonging to one's nation.

Closely associated with it is  Revanchism - "the political manifestation of the will to reverse territorial losses incurred by a country, often following a war or social movement."

 

[southernhybrid]

I'm gifting economist Paul Krugman's take on things, in his NYTimes opinion piece.

nytimes.com/2022/02/24/opinion/russia-ukraine-sanctions-offshore-accounts.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWka3DPDmweiOMNAo6B_EGKf7d4fNo6mimYXtZANrJqX_V0xfNeOEp2Dg6mrICEn44IZiw-ooWuWH8tmZLRWLRyuRnbUl6EEsYtjruuo0DB

 

[lpetrich]

 List of irredentist claims or disputes has oodles of them, including such familiar ones as Israel/Palestine and Northern Ireland -- and Crimea and the Donbas region of Ukraine.

What Kenya's UN Ambassador delivered a recent speech about was essentially postcolonial Africa renouncing irredentist claims.

As I was researching this subject, I came across  List of proposed state mergers - with many successes and many failures. There are surprisingly many successes, including such familiar nations as the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, and Australia.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

...tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history.

Deja vu.

Though it is funny. Because this is fucking Europe. Great War, WWII, black death... got some history there. So pretty much all Putin can do that hasn't been done is nuke Europe. And that fallout would be an issue, so umm...

Kamala's recent talk with the Europeans apparently made the same assumption as Putin, that Europeans couldn't possibly understand how bad a war in Europe would be. She spent much of her talk explaining to them that they have had 70 years of peace so couldn't imagine how bad a war was.

There is some truth to that, but best coming from someone that saw it.

 

[skepticalbip]

...tries to interfere with us, and even more so to create threats to our country, to our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences as you have never experienced in your history.

Deja vu.

Though it is funny. Because this is fucking Europe. Great War, WWII, black death... got some history there. So pretty much all Putin can do that hasn't been done is nuke Europe. And that fallout would be an issue, so umm...

Kamala's recent talk with the Europeans apparently made the same assumption as Putin, that Europeans couldn't possibly understand how bad a war in Europe would be. She spent much of her talk explaining to them that they have had 70 years of peace so couldn't imagine how bad a war was.

There is some truth to that, but best coming from someone that saw it.

Yes there is some truth to it but I am pretty sure that the Europeans she was "explaining" it to were every bit as aware, if not more aware, of it than she is. Some of them likely remember the destroyed cities they played in as children even if they didn't remember the war itself. All of them likely grew up hearing stories of the war and the misery from their parents and grandparents.

 

[steve_bank]

When I look at Putin I see Trump, and vice versa.

They do not live in the moral reality most people at least try to live in.

Putin knew it could hurt Russian people economically, yet did it anyway. Like Trump I doubt Putin has any loyalty or empathy to anyone.

Russian and civilian casualties are irrelevant. Economic deprivation is irrelevant. Nothing short of military defeat will deter Putin. The ball is NATO's court.

As to invoking Nazis, I think you have to look at WWII and the invasion of Russia. Causality estimates I read run from 20-30 million. I expect the word Nazi is a deep cultural hot button for Russians.

 

[ZiprHead]

Former US presidents on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine:

Clinton: “Brazen violation”

GWB: “The gravest security crisis on the European continent since World War II”

Obama: “A brazen attack on the people of Ukraine, in violation of international law”

Trump: “That’s pretty smart”

Trump said this would never have happened if he were in charge. To that I say bullshit. He would have happily let it happen.