Ukraine April 2021

Status
Not open for further replies.

Travis The Dragon

Well-known member
If the US did get involved, I wonder if Russia would hit them with a nuke. Maybe they would attack with something less powerful that would still do damage and send a strong message.
 

Obreid

Power Poster
Russia can move in peacefully any time and we stay at Defcon 5 here.
Seriously? This as a independent news forum has any influence on Vladimir Putin and Russia is such a ridiculous idea.
You either have a irrational concept of what influence this website has or have confused DWS with an arm of the US Military.
In the words of a movie character in a combat situation. “Calm down son! You are combat ineffective”
 
S

ScoobieDoo

Guest
If the US did get involved, I wonder if Russia would hit them with a nuke. Maybe they would attack with something less powerful that would still do damage and send a strong message.
My thinking is they don't need to use nukes. The thing that worries me the most is something like China and Russia simultaneously sinking two US ships. The US responds proportionately. Then the ceasefire and kabuki theater at the UN for months until the White House finds a way to give up on Taiwan and Ukraine.
 

Obreid

Power Poster
Could there be a renewed and expanded conflict in Ukraine soon? Yes but I doubt it’s about Kiev. Too many international connections to current gov. Their President has been to active solidify ties with the west.
More than likely a front opens to make a land route to Crimea or re-enforce area around Donaboss.
The west will provide aid and advisors to insure any front doesn’t go much beyond this.
I don’t like it but the west holds the weaker hand here and I don’t necessarily mean military.
If Russia wants to do it they can and survive and diplomatic repercussions because they know NATO won’t commit to hostilities because they know the west is weak and war tired.
Let alone resort to any conflict that leads to nuclear weapons. Most Americans don’t even have this build up on their radar. And the politicians know there’s not a snow balls chance and hell they could sell Americans soldiers being killed in Eastern Europe.
So Russia very well might invade, they might not. But they know the US isn't going to commit large number of troops to risk.
So the risk of nuclear conflict is minimal because they are not needed by either side to accomplish their goals.
If there are other events that happen that indicate some additional strategic front to seriously weaken one of the super powers then things change.
 

CreepyMonkey

Active member
If the US did get involved, I wonder if Russia would hit them with a nuke. Maybe they would attack with something less powerful that would still do damage and send a strong message.
Every NATO vs. Russia strategic scenario I've ever seen regarding NATO/Russia conflict ends badly because Russia retaliates vs. field use of battlefield nukes. Other scenarios see slow ramp ups if the conflict starts at sea but eventually ending in a nuke exchange. There are very few ways a direct NATO/Russia conflict could or would stay conventional. Most of those ways involve no direct conflict but only proxy wars, such as we have now.

However, the most likely way any war starts, period, is by accident. Someone dodges left when they should have dodged right, boom. Escalation. Possible nuclear conflagration.

However, Putin has no desire to use nukes. The only way NATO will use field nukes (at least in theory) is to stop advancing Russian troops they have otherwise no way to stop. So even though it all sounds so very scary, it really isn't as scary as it may seem because in the end no one actually wants to use nuclear weapons in this situation. No one has anything to gain by blowing up anyone else. Russia wants Ukraine intact and NATO needs Russia as the boogie man. No one wants to blow up anyone else with nukes.
 
Every NATO vs. Russia strategic scenario I've ever seen regarding NATO/Russia conflict ends badly because Russia retaliates vs. field use of battlefield nukes. Other scenarios see slow ramp ups if the conflict starts at sea but eventually ending in a nuke exchange. There are very few ways a direct NATO/Russia conflict could or would stay conventional. Most of those ways involve no direct conflict but only proxy wars, such as we have now.

However, the most likely way any war starts, period, is by accident. Someone dodges left when they should have dodged right, boom. Escalation. Possible nuclear conflagration.

However, Putin has no desire to use nukes. The only way NATO will use field nukes (at least in theory) is to stop advancing Russian troops they have otherwise no way to stop. So even though it all sounds so very scary, it really isn't as scary as it may seem because in the end no one actually wants to use nuclear weapons in this situation. No one has anything to gain by blowing up anyone else. Russia wants Ukraine intact and NATO needs Russia as the boogie man. No one wants to blow up anyone else with nukes.
i don't trust Putin, reminds me of 1983 all over again.
 

bartok

Member
I agree the US and NATO look weak, but being frank, if its a chocie between sacrificing Kiev and Ukrainian territory to the Russians or a nuke dropping on New York, Seatttle, San Diego, etc. well I'm sorry Kiev but you're on your own.
I see that you don't minimally calculate the rest of the Europe, as is to say the remaining 90% of the NATO! You speak about New York, Seattle, San Diego, but what about Rome, Paris, Madrid, etc? If a war begin, Europe will surely get involved as the main war theatre. So, the problem we are speaking about, you forget that is, first of all, an European problem, more then American. I don't know what is it the awareness level in US about a real wide-spread war, but speaking about Europe, specially about Italy, the things, compared to the '80s, are very changed: now, I'm not kidding, most of the people (except some military) doesn't even know what NATO is or exists, specially under the age of 40. Above this age, NATO is just something makes you remember the cold-war. Europe has not the slightest intention to get even minimally involved in a war againt Russia. So, I suppose, if the question is to twaddle, impose sanctions to Russia and bad-mounth about Putin, Eupope will be bravely 100% with US. But be sure: if something hard has to happen, you will be alone with Ukraine, maybe UK, against Russia. US leadership and Eupopean diplomacies know this very well. So, I think that a nuclear war is, luckily, very improbable, because you will find very very difficult to get Europe involved.
 
G

Giveadamn

Guest
Scenario:

Ukraine has enough manpower, the will and the weapons to win the battles because of western arms supply. Russian troops get descimated.
Putin will have to withdraw his troops at some point and admit defeat. If he can't do that he will use his nuclear trump card to archive victory.
NATO will not allow that and nuclear war begins. The End.
 

MichaelH

Member
This situation is an unfortunate reminder of the real limitations we have when faced with a problem half a world away from us, but right next door to a powerful rival. In some ways it's the best insurance we have against the crisis getting worse from the nuclear weapons POV: there really aren't credible ways to directly challenge Russia here without going to a pretty extreme level immediately. Much different from Berlin or something of that nature. Right, wrong, or indifferent, the map tells a pretty clear tale as far as how this very likely plays out.
 

Soldiereye

Member
Aside from the obvious info from this article, I feel it important to remember Biden’s stake in all of this. He may be the wild card.
“The U.S. has provided Ukraine $2 billion in security assistance since 2014, including two tranches of Javelin missiles as well as other military equipment. Biden, who pushed unsuccessfully to provide lethal aid to Kyiv during the Obama administration, also recently approved an additional $125 million worth of lethal aid to help the country defend its borders, including two armed patrol boats and counter-artillery radar.”
 

Kushan

Member
Aside from the obvious info from this article, I feel it important to remember Biden’s stake in all of this. He may be the wild card.
“The U.S. has provided Ukraine $2 billion in security assistance since 2014, including two tranches of Javelin missiles as well as other military equipment. Biden, who pushed unsuccessfully to provide lethal aid to Kyiv during the Obama administration, also recently approved an additional $125 million worth of lethal aid to help the country defend its borders, including two armed patrol boats and counter-artillery radar.”

I think sanctions and additional aid are the most likely outcomes of this weeks NATO meeting, and whenever Russia decides to go for it, along with another "strongly" worded call to Russia to back away. If troops deployments where going to happen we'd already have seen it by now.
 
D

Deathcon💀

Guest
Putin is going to waste russian soldiers lives for no reason. Millions of dead 💀
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top