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

[ZiprHead]

Trump said he would build an 'impenetrable dome' over the US as he warned of a possible World War III

Donald Trump said World War III could involve nuclear weapons and World War I and World War II would look like small battles, by comparison.

news.yahoo.com

• Trump warned of the possible "catastrophe" of World War III amid increased nuclear threats from Russia.
• Trump claimed that other countries were making threats "because they have no respect for our leadership."
• He said he would build an "impenetrable dome" over the US, similar to Israel's Iron Dome.

Former President Donald Trump said he would build an "impenetrable dome" over the US if re-elected as president, as he warned of the possible "catastrophe" of World War III.

"If you take a look right now, the 'nuclear' word is being mentioned all the time. This is a word you're not allowed to use. It was never used during the Trump administration," Trump said in a video released Friday.

 

[Patooka]

Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.

I don't think the issue is one of pragmatism or capability but one of image. With regards to foreign policy, tanks are considered an offensive weapon. Germany for some reason doesn't want to appear to be an aggressive power so they don't want to be the only ones supplying tanks. To paraphrase someone else, the US offering Abrams is largely symbolic and is basically holding Germany's hand whilst we all cross the street together. If that's the case, the commitment from the US is more important than the when or how many. It's a technicality that satisfies everyone's concerns basically. Kinda like how the US never exported its FB-111 strategic bomber but sold a lot of RF-111Gs. Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr. Obviously the lion's share of tanks will be Leopards, but Germany wants to say, "We're not the only ones. Don't forget Poland America".

 

[Jayjay]

Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.

I don't think the issue is one of pragmatism or capability but one of image. With regards to foreign policy, tanks are considered an offensive weapon. Germany for some reason doesn't want to appear to be an aggressive power so they don't want to be the only ones supplying tanks. To paraphrase someone else, the US offering Abrams is largely symbolic and is basically holding Germany's hand whilst we all cross the street together. If that's the case, the commitment from the US is more important than the when or how many. It's a technicality that satisfies everyone's concerns basically. Kinda like how the US never exported its FB-111 strategic bomber but sold a lot of RF-111Gs. Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr. Obviously the lion's share of tanks will be Leopards, but Germany wants to say, "We're not the only ones. Don't forget Poland America".

I don't know what Germany's rationale was, but I think sending Abrams is also good for the future contingency when it turns out Ukraine needs even more tanks and all the Leopards have already been sent (and presumably getting destroyed). At that point it'll be very nice to have the Abrams training and logistics figured out.

Or if WW3 breaks out. Also a possibility.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Tanks would be most useful along the North of Ukraine. Making attacks from Belorussia much more problematic. Ukraine just fielded the first of their own designed and produced high accuracy artillery. The Ukranians have become experts at drone warfare and are starting to produce excellent long range drones. All the Eastern NATO nations will be learning from all of this and working on making Russian military invasions too costly for Russia to contemplate. For Russia, it is now or never.

 

[TomC]

Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr.

Heh.

I don't know enough to have an informed opinion in this thread.

But you just reminded me of a joke from about 2005.

President Bush II is in the Oval Office. A top level military aide enters and says, "Sir, three Brazilian soldiers died in Iraq today"

Bush II says "I'm terribly sorry to hear that."

Aide leaves.

Bush II turns to Cheney.
"How many is a brazillion?"
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Reports are coming in from Ukraine that the Russians have been deploying rubber decoy tanks in Ukraine. Apparently hoping to cause Ukraine to waste munitions destroying these rubber decoys. Unfortunately their rubber tanks don't hold air and deflate, fooling nobody.

This is a standard military strategy for ages.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I am not sure watching your rubber tanks deflate while your enemies laugh at your feeble efforts is age old military strategy. At least nobody stole them.

 

[SLD]

Why does it take a year to get US tanks to Ukraine?

We’ve got hundreds of them just sitting in the desert.

Sure, but they're 9,986km from Kherson, and they're types for which Ukrainian operators are not trained.

It's a lot easier to ship them former Soviet equipment from places like Poland, which the Ukrainian Military are already familiar with and trained to operate (and for which they already have stockpiles of ammunition and spare parts).

Particularly if the Poles are already a long way down the path of replacing their ex-Soviet equipment with NATO equipment, and of training their own forces to operate that new gear.

So that's what has been happening up to now, and that's why it's taken so long to start getting US equipment into Ukraine.

Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.

Further, training for the Abrams is based on the average enlisted dude: slow and methodical. Lengthy training is only provided to those with a six year commitment. Ukraine will be sending guys who can learn at a faster rate. Training will likely be halved. The Leopards are designed with the conscript in mind. Much less training required.

We have 3500 Abrams in storage, and 2500 or so operational. We could and should ship the operational ones over ASAP and pull others out of storage. We don’t need to use the against anyone but Russia anyways. It will still take long weeks, but with a full force of six to seven hundred, they could definitely make a dent.

For now, Ukraine just needs to hold the line. We should’ve provided these tanks back in June. We’ve protracted the war by delaying our aid and being way too stingy. But we can make a huge difference this spring once more supplies pour in. Ukraine need only hang on. By all signs they are. Russia doesn’t appear to be able to even take Bakhmut at this stage. Wagner forces have been depleted by enormous casualties and now regular army troops are being thrown in and getting killed.

 

[SLD]

Ukrainian army maybe so-and-so, and losing rapidly. But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda.

Take these two videos:





The music choices are just golden.

Why do you keep saying this shit? They’re not losing rapidly. It’s the Russians who can’t do shit. Wagner is done for, and now it’s back to regular Army - the same ones that got kicked out of Kiev and Kharkiv last year and ran away from Kherson. And they aren’t even close to taking Bakhmut. Even if they eventually do, it won’t do them much good. The eventual arrival of further western aid will fuck the Russians up all over again.

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all - or at least a century to come. Give Ukraine everything it needs to utterly destroy the Russian military machine and it will. Russia will soon have no modern battle tanks, no serious air power, no real mobility for its forces. It will be defeated and utterly useless if we let Ukraine have what it needs.

Seriously. What the fuck is our leadership afraid of? We shouldn’t be giving them 30 tanks - we should be giving them 1,000, plus 1,000 leopards (what the fuck does Germany need them for? France?). Nail Russia’s butt to the wall. It can be done.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Ukrainian army maybe so-and-so, and losing rapidly. But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda.

Take these two videos:





The music choices are just golden.

Why do you keep saying this shit? They’re not losing rapidly. It’s the Russians who can’t do shit. Wagner is done for, and now it’s back to regular Army - the same ones that got kicked out of Kiev and Kharkiv last year and ran away from Kherson. And they aren’t even close to taking Bakhmut. Even if they eventually do, it won’t do them much good. The eventual arrival of further western aid will fuck the Russians up all over again.

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all - or at least a century to come. Give Ukraine everything it needs to utterly destroy the Russian military machine and it will. Russia will soon have no modern battle tanks, no serious air power, no real mobility for its forces. It will be defeated and utterly useless if we let Ukraine have what it needs.

Seriously. What the fuck is our leadership afraid of? We shouldn’t be giving them 30 tanks - we should be giving them 1,000, plus 1,000 leopards (what the fuck does Germany need them for? France?). Nail Russia’s butt to the wall. It can be done.

I do think that Russia has regained the initiative. We should have started the process of sending the tanks earlier. We need to send more to Ukraine. Whatever they need. Our leadership is afraid of nuclear war. We've been too slow sending aid. However, we also need to keep the coalition together. Russia can do whatever the fuck they want as an outlaw nation. We have to be far more careful to keep the allies together. But we have to do whatever we can to help Ukraine stop Russia. If Russia wins, they'll continue their vile march through the rest of Eastern Europe and who knows where else. China will attack Taiwan. And etc and etc.

 

[barbos]

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all

I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.

The dissolution of the Russian Federation is far less dangerous than leaving it ruled by criminals

The invasion of Ukraine is a direct continuation of Russia’s imperial and colonial policies; policies that never disappeared. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has been coupled with a propaganda campaign denying the very existence of a Ukrainian nation, genocide being actively committed...

www.euractiv.com

There are no such things as Russian gas, oil, aluminium, coal, uranium, diamonds, grain, forests, gold, etc. All such resources are Tatar, Bashkir, Siberian, Karelian, Oirat, Circassian, Buryat, Sakha, Ural, Kuban, Nogai

And who the fuck are these Siberians and Kubans?

By the way, I would like to know what Canada, Australia and US think about this great Idea.
You have not thought that through you polish nazi lady.

 

[Elixir]

And who the fuck are these Siberians and Kubans?

They’re the people whose oil-gas and other natural resources y’all stole. Now you’re trying to do the same to Ukranians.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all

I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.

Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.

 

[barbos]

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all

I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.

Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.

And do you?
The whole damn thing started with that. Euro-scam has always wanted to destroy Russia
It's being going on for centuries ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War ). This polish cunt should know.
She just glad she can say it openly now.

 

[Elixir]

The whole damn thing started with that

“That” being Putler illegally “annexing” Crimea, then amassing over a hundred thousand troops on Ukraine’s border and staging the botched invasion that is decimating what’s left of Russia’s pitiful military.
Barbos might be right that we would have been better off just disabling Russia from the start. I don’t think that even barbie wants to see the entirety of his Country reduced to a radioactive wasteland….

 

[Harry Bosch]

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all

I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.

Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.

And do you?
The whole damn thing started with that. Euro-scam has always wanted to destroy Russia
It's being going on for centuries ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War ). This polish cunt should know.
She just glad she can say it openly now.

I really don't give a damn about who started it. I'll be the first to admit that the west was very mean to Russia. What I care about is how to stop the war; have Russians return home; and Eastern Europe living in peace. We don't need your resources. We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others.

 

[barbos]

What I care about is how to stop the war;

That's easy, just tell Elensky to stop.
Problem is, US neocons don't want war to stop.

 

[barbos]

We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others

We who? Don't speak for Europe. They want russian resources, so much so that they are dreaming about splitting Russia into parts so they can rob more easily.
Of course that piece of shit polish cunt sucks at geography, otherwise she would know that Europe would get shit if they split Russia.

 

[Harry Bosch]

What I care about is how to stop the war;

That's easy, just tell Elensky to stop.
Problem is, US neocons don't want war to stop.

Your side has committed to hanging all members of the Ukranian government. When Russian troops take over a Ukranian village, your side rapes, kills, and loots whatever they want. Your side has made a terrible mistake, you've given the Ukrainians no choice but to fight. They are fighting for their lives. For their country. For their future. What is your side fighting for?

 

[Harry Bosch]

We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others

We who? Don't speak for Europe. They want russian resources, so much so that they are dreaming about splitting Russia into parts so they can rob more easily.
Of course that piece of shit polish cunt sucks at geography, otherwise she would know that Europe would get shit if they split Russia.

What are you talking about splitting up Russia? That's crazy talk. People want Russians to return home. We don't need to invade Russia. Your side is destroying Russia for us.