Politics Is it time for the west to assemble an army and kick Putin out of Ukraine?

[Politesse]

It's not time, because it isn't possible. If it's a question of whether we should go to war, I'd say we already have. Supplying arms and aid to one side while laying economic sanctions on the other is going to war. But we have no power to "kick Putin out of Ukraine", and putting troops on the ground would not change that reality. This isn't a TV Western; the Russians are not going to scream "oh my god the Swedes have arrived" and just retreat. Rather, the presence of more foreign troops would prolong the conflict, increase its devastation to the average citizen, and ultimately build greater support for the Russian cause as people start to wonder whether a diplomatic end to the war would be preferable to the continued burden of supporting vast numbers of non-Ukrainian soldiers.

 

[ZiprHead]

I think I could get behind NATO providing air support for Ukraine, but no troops on the ground. But I'm also sure this would expand the war to other countries.

 

[Elixir]

this would expand the war to other countries.

Okay... I'm wondering what THAT would look like, considering how thin-spread the great Red Army seems to be just trying to take a small bite out of Ukraine.

 

[TSwizzle]

I was about to write Russia. But it's not really Russia that has invaded the Ukraine, it's Putin. Russians are his victims as well.

If it's Putin, then surely taking out Putin would be the logical solution? I've no idea about Putin's popularity in Russia and how it would fly to have Putin offed.

What do you think? Has this invasion gone on long enough? Is it time to make a show of force and push out Russia once and for all?

I think the time for sanctions and diplomacy has passed. The Ukraine is slowly being ground to dust, and will lose this war. If we (the west) don't step up and help them.

What do you think?

The "West's" involvement is just prolonging things. Diplomacy needs to end this thing. I get the impression there's a lot of chest thumping going about how the Ukrainians are standing up to Putin.

 

[Jayjay]

I was about to write Russia. But it's not really Russia that has invaded the Ukraine, it's Putin. Russians are his victims as well.

If it's Putin, then surely taking out Putin would be the logical solution? I've no idea about Putin's popularity in Russia and how it would fly to have Putin offed.

Not so easy to do. CIA tried to assassinate Castro hundreds of times, and Putin is much more well protected than Castro ever was.

What do you think? Has this invasion gone on long enough? Is it time to make a show of force and push out Russia once and for all?

I think the time for sanctions and diplomacy has passed. The Ukraine is slowly being ground to dust, and will lose this war. If we (the west) don't step up and help them.

What do you think?

The "West's" involvement is just prolonging things. Diplomacy needs to end this thing. I get the impression there's a lot of chest thumping going about how the Ukrainians are standing up to Putin.

The purpose of giving weapons is (or should be) to give Ukraine a better negotiation position when the diplomacy begins. As for western diplomacy with Russia, it failed because there was no credible threat of force or unity behind it. Europe is still paying billions of dollars every month to finance Putin's war machine, because they are too addicted to Russian natural gas and oil.

 

[ZiprHead]

this would expand the war to other countries.

Okay... I'm wondering what THAT would look like, considering how thin-spread the great Red Army seems to be just trying to take a small bite out of Ukraine.

I would guess artillary shelling. It seems to be the only thing the Russians are good at.

 

[Jayjay]

this would expand the war to other countries.

Okay... I'm wondering what THAT would look like, considering how thin-spread the great Red Army seems to be just trying to take a small bite out of Ukraine.

I would guess artillary shelling. It seems to be the only thing the Russians are good at.

Or taking out soft targets, causing forces to be spread thin instead of being focused in Ukraine. Also, EU countries would start to wonder whether they should send equipment to Ukraine, or use it themselves.

It's definitely not something that would work out for Russia. But I think the point here is, if NATO starts to attack Russian troops in Ukraine, then the bar gets lower for Russia to attack NATO troops elsewhere.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I was about to write Russia. But it's not really Russia that has invaded the Ukraine, it's Putin. Russians are his victims as well.

If it's Putin, then surely taking out Putin would be the logical solution? I've no idea about Putin's popularity in Russia and how it would fly to have Putin offed.

Don't you think he'd be as revered and honoured as Saddam was? The Iraqis loved him up until his secret police folded. Then suddenly all that love evaporated in an instant.

What do you think? Has this invasion gone on long enough? Is it time to make a show of force and push out Russia once and for all?

I think the time for sanctions and diplomacy has passed. The Ukraine is slowly being ground to dust, and will lose this war. If we (the west) don't step up and help them.

What do you think?

The "West's" involvement is just prolonging things. Diplomacy needs to end this thing. I get the impression there's a lot of chest thumping going about how the Ukrainians are standing up to Putin.

The Ukranians don't have a chance. Right now fighting is just putting off the inevitable. I think the only reason the Ukranians are still fighting is because they expect western aid at some point. When that hope dies I think Ukranian defences will melt away

 

[Elixir]

the only reason the Ukranians are still fighting is because they expect western aid at some point. When that hope dies I think Ukranian defences will melt away

Why will that hope die? The munitions industry will keep it alive.

 

[TSwizzle]

Don't you think he'd be as revered and honoured as Saddam was? The Iraqis loved him up until his secret police folded. Then suddenly all that love evaporated in an instant.

I don't know what the Russian people think of Putin. They're a funny (funny weird, not funny ha-ha) lot.

The Ukranians don't have a chance. Right now fighting is just putting off the inevitable. I think the only reason the Ukranians are still fighting is because they expect western aid at some point. When that hope dies I think Ukranian defences will melt away

Indeed, how much money is the USA going throw at this fool's errand because the European's will be pleading poverty pretty soon. Has Russian played them a blinder by getting them so dependent on Russian oil and gas? What a situation, heavily rely on Russia for oil and gas and then give their neighbor weapons to bomb them. Funny old game.

 

[Patooka]

Don't you think he'd be as revered and honoured as Saddam was? The Iraqis loved him up until his secret police folded. Then suddenly all that love evaporated in an instant.

If you think Ws invasion of Iraq was shining success story that should be emulated, then that's why I compared your attitude to Leroy Jenkins.

You haven't specified if it should be a NATO invasion or EU-led invasion
You haven't specified who would lead such an invasion
You haven't specified the size and type of military equipment involved
You haven't specified which countries next to Russia would be fine with a mobilization within their borders
You haven't specified what talks, if any, between Moldova, Belarus and Hungary and the imaginary coalition army of yours would entail
You haven't specified what sort of transitional government would take place in the very unlikely chance Putin is taken out by Western forces (FYI, this is the big point)
You haven't specified what the type of "lost coms" procedure would be used in this coalition army you imagined to prevent a metric fuckload of blue on green happening
You haven't specified how each and every nation involved in this fantasy of yours would authorise an act on war via their government to their citizens
You haven't specified any involvement of the UN, the Security council in particular
You haven't specified the obvious reaction from China

You've ignored a lot of things, decided "fuck it, we'll figure it out on the fly because Hitler" and consider that to be a good idea. It's downright moronic. I don't think you have a fucking clue how difficult it is to have armies from only two countries working together. Let alone this, what twenty?, you've conjured up in this fantasy.

 

[bilby]

And who's going to pony up the cash to develop gas fields with the risk that they'll just be gobbled up by Russia and Belarus the next time they attack?

A way will be found. I'd argue that Europe (mostly Germany) took a much bigger risk on counting on Russia when it decided to ditch its nuclear power plants in favor of Russian gas. The sad fact is that Europe needs power. Or they can't run their factories nor heat their homes. They can't count on Russia. But they have to find a way to power their countries.

Germany took that risk. France didn’t.

France is the model; If the rest of the EU want freedom from Russian gas, and want to massively reduce their carbon emissions, they need to look at the fact that the French did both, and the Germans have spent vastly more time and money, yet have achieved neither.

This is a simple choice between doing something that works, and has been demonstrated to work; And doing something that feels like it ought to work, that has massive ideological support, but that has been demonstrated to be impossible.

Feelings and ideology cannot overcome engineering and reality.

The sooner we accept this, the less pain we will all have to endure.

 

[Patooka]

the only reason the Ukranians are still fighting is because they expect western aid at some point. When that hope dies I think Ukranian defences will melt away

Why will that hope die? The munitions industry will keep it alive.

It's also worth pointing out that everyone, including the Ukrainian military thought they would last weeks at most conventionally resisting a Russian invasion. The original plan was what military experts call asymmetrical warfare. That's the reason why Ukraine tripled the amount of underground shelters since 2014 and I suspect some were kept off the books. That Ukraine decimated Russia's paratrooper force over Kiev and forced them to use technicals in some parts of occupied territories for example surprised pretty much everyone.

So if we are going to use Iraq as an example, Putin hasn't even reached the equivalent of a Mission Accomplished moment yet. And if/when he does reach that stage, he'll still have to occupy a hostile nation. I suspect Russia will run out of steam before Ukraine does.

 

[Jayjay]

So if we are going to use Iraq as an example, Putin hasn't even reached the equivalent of a Mission Accomplished moment yet. And if/when he does reach that stage, he'll still have to occupy a hostile nation. I suspect Russia will run out of steam before Ukraine does.

I think the occupation analogy also fails. The US in Iraq or Afghanistan wasn't trying to annex land, or replace the local population with Americans. Also American occupiers had to work within some boundaries when it came to human rights, respecting local authorities, and international law. Russia has no such limitations. It will crush any insurgency, get rid of the Ukrainian population, and replace it with Russians. That's how Russia has done it for hundreds of years. It will not be anything like the temporary US occupation of Iraq.

 

[Patooka]

So if we are going to use Iraq as an example, Putin hasn't even reached the equivalent of a Mission Accomplished moment yet. And if/when he does reach that stage, he'll still have to occupy a hostile nation. I suspect Russia will run out of steam before Ukraine does.

I think the occupation analogy also fails. The US in Iraq or Afghanistan wasn't trying to annex land, or replace the local population with Americans. Also American occupiers had to work within some boundaries when it came to human rights, respecting local authorities, and international law. Russia has no such limitations. It will crush any insurgency, get rid of the Ukrainian population, and replace it with Russians. That's how Russia has done it for hundreds of years. It will not be anything like the temporary US occupation of Iraq.

Good point, but I don't think Russia has the military personnel to accomplish even that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think the reason why Russia hasn't used nukes, and will likely not do so, is fear of drawing NATO into the conflict. But if NATO or just the US does send troops or planes to Ukraine, and start directly attacking Russian troops there, then the cat would be out of the bag and there's no reason for Russia not to start using tactical nuclear weapons or hitting NATO/US targets outside Ukraine.

The cat needs to stay in the bag, so that there are some unknown, unpredictable consequences that the West can threaten Russia with. When those consequences are activated and become predictable, their value as a deterrence is going to plummet.

This. Direct combat is a horrendous risk that we shouldn't take.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What do you think? Has this invasion gone on long enough? Is it time to make a show of force and push out Russia once and for all?

At the beginning of the conflict, I heard an argument for establishing a no-fly zone over Ukraine, and the longer this goes on the better that option looks.

The plan was to not just go in guns-a-blazing. NATO (or select members) would simply set a date and time for the operation to start. When the deadline arrived, the participating powers would shoot down any aircraft larger than a kite that entered the airspace of Ukraine. Ukraine's air force would also stand down. Simple deterrence. Don't fly here, don't get shot down.

Russia knows that going toe to toe with NATO is a losing proposition. Stick a toe out there, guys. You don't have to "push out Russia" from Ukraine. The Ukrainians can do that.

And what happens when the patrols get shot down by SAMs in Russia and Belarus?

 

[Ford]

What do you think? Has this invasion gone on long enough? Is it time to make a show of force and push out Russia once and for all?

At the beginning of the conflict, I heard an argument for establishing a no-fly zone over Ukraine, and the longer this goes on the better that option looks.

The plan was to not just go in guns-a-blazing. NATO (or select members) would simply set a date and time for the operation to start. When the deadline arrived, the participating powers would shoot down any aircraft larger than a kite that entered the airspace of Ukraine. Ukraine's air force would also stand down. Simple deterrence. Don't fly here, don't get shot down.

Russia knows that going toe to toe with NATO is a losing proposition. Stick a toe out there, guys. You don't have to "push out Russia" from Ukraine. The Ukrainians can do that.

And what happens when the patrols get shot down by SAMs in Russia and Belarus?

Part of the message delivered to Russia would be an explicit warning that ANYTHING which enters Ukrainian airspace would elicit a response. Fire a SAM? That site no longer exists. Is that an escalation? Yes. Is it a threat? Yes. Yet Putin has threatened escalation since day one. The threat of escalation is part of his strategy. Yet again, Putin knows his limits. Would he be stupid enough to launch a weapon against a NATO aircraft, knowing the response would be immediate and overwhelming?

It is also worth noting that Putin wants to return his country to a semblance of it's former glory when he was in the KGB. Back then it was understood...."we won't shoot at you so long as you don't shoot at us." Russia is a shadow of what the USSR was as far as military capability. The USSR could stand up to NATO. Russia today can't. Putin needs NATO to sit this one out, because otherwise he will lose. Leverage that position. We promise "we won't shoot at you so long as you don't shoot at us." That promise always came with "but if you do..."

 

[Tigers!]

Part of the message delivered to Russia would be an explicit warning that ANYTHING which enters Ukrainian airspace would elicit a response. Fire a SAM? That site no longer exists. Is that an escalation? Yes. Is it a threat? Yes. Yet Putin has threatened escalation since day one. The threat of escalation is part of his strategy. Yet again, Putin knows his limits. Would he be stupid enough to launch a weapon against a NATO aircraft, knowing the response would be immediate and overwhelming?

Would not work with Russian weapons already on Ukrainian territory. They have not entered Ukrainian airspace. But would work with missiles fired from bombers etc.

 

[Derec]

Bad idea. Nothing rallies the plebs to a nation's leader than a threat by an external force. As far as most Russians are concerned Ukraine is rightfully an integral part of Russia. It's called the rally 'round the flag effect.

So we should not have kicked out Hitler out of parts of Europe he occupied (most of it)? You know, because of the fear Germans might rally behind him if we do.