United States of Russia?

[Yingyang]

Yes YingYang it is funny how Russia has totally made a entire ass hat of itself only souly because of Putins piss poor actions and his little "three day operation". Can't even defend their allies right now, how Assad doing?

This is a superpower? One who can't even defend its own allies or secure its own borders but infact needs help securing their borders from DPRK. Extremely laughable indeed.

Obviously Ukraine is not a US ALLIE. As far Russia goes with your opinion suggests the US can only deal with Russia with coward punches. You know what I mean proxy shit. What concerns your military forces that they won't front up?
No Airforce to support Ukraine ground forces?
No all mighty aircraft carrier strike group to support Ukraine.
No submarine missiles support.
No foot soldiers proudly wearing the uniform of the most powerful military force on the planet.
And that is just Russia?
Imagine they support Taiwan by facing off against Chinese coast guard ships of all things to support and protect Taiwan soldiers on a reef,or fisherman or territorial sovereignty constantly challenged.
Yes the all mighty global military projection is definitely impressive and obviously a deterrence. And I've previously covered middle east countries and the overwhelming confidence the US has dealing with these due to their military capabilities of which most have still repelled US forces.
Yes I understand your position and outdated opinions.

 

[Spyglass]

Hope it was worth sacrificing a entire generation for literally nothing.

In a lighter note, the silver lining here, is that if any of us internet weirdos ever need a gorgeous wife, Russia is what they call, “A Target Rich Environment” these days.

 

[Spyglass]

No and no.

The motive was not just to bleed Russia. The point was to show Russia we will not tolerate their pointless wars of aggression particularly or more so in Europe & of course preserve Ukraine independence which we did, Ukraine still here are they not?

Bleeding them was just the cherry ontop all along the way or to give Russia consequences for their reckless actions in Europe to look at it another way.

Question - let’s imagine a world where Ukraine was allowed to fall. Barbaric, I know but let’s do a thought experiment. How would the world have been affected in the next 5, 10, 25, and 50 years, do you think?

 

[OReid]

Question - let’s imagine a world where Ukraine was allowed to fall. Barbaric, I know but let’s do a thought experiment. How would the world have been affected in the next 5, 10, 25, and 50 years, do you think?

Well from a purely national selfish interest. We could have done nothing and then responded with a massive build up of weapons in Europe and aggressively resume ballistic missile development and deployment.

We agree that was not an acceptable response so park that thought.

At some point though we have to see a coherent proactive strategy to accomplish the goals and win or reach an agreeable peace.

This is what is missing from NATO. Everything has been reactionary.
It’s Sh_t sandwich.

 

[Torch]

I do not look at the Ukraine war as a failure. Could we have done more? Yes. But in the end Ukraine & its independence is still here, Russia was set back quite a bit militarily & economically, we have shown how weak the condition is of the Russian military, and made their threats null, laughable at best.

All in all. Positive outcomes besides the hundreds of thousands who have died all because of Putins pointless war of aggression to restore whatever perverted idea of Russian glory he has for Russia.

I think the entire situation has been a resounding success.

Ukraine is still mostly free and gee that’s swell, but Russia… wow. Putin got Russias <male appendage> caught in a zipper whilst pissing on a spark plug and
NATO membership is at an all time high.

Note: self-edited for length

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

Question - let’s imagine a world where Ukraine was allowed to fall. Barbaric, I know but let’s do a thought experiment. How would the world have been affected in the next 5, 10, 25, and 50 years, do you think?

It would embolden Russia. Anything less than the total defeat of Russia in Ukraine is a victory for them. And Russia will see that the world is willing to cave to Russia's demands.

 

[teekay99]

It would embolden Russia. Anything less than the total defeat of Russia in Ukraine is a victory for them. And Russia will see that the world is willing to cave to Russia's demands.

This leads me to a few exploratory questions for general discussion:

1. Is a total Russian defeat in Ukraine feasible? Is it something the west is really pursuing?
   • Many have indicated Russian control of Crimea is a red line.
   • Does continued Russian control of Crimea make a total Russian defeat in Ukraine impossible without a much wider war that includes non-Ukrainian forces?
2. In the absence of some kind of larger military engagement from non-Ukrainian forces (i.e. involvement of western manpower), is Ukraine even militarily capable of obtaining a Russian defeat in Ukraine? Is a Russian defeat a possible outcome using Ukrainian forces alone? What would it take for Ukraine to obtain the capability to push out Russia and achieve a Russian defeat?
3. For each of the following scenarios, is the world in a more or less dangerous position:
   • If Russia completely neutralizes Ukraine and imposes their will within Ukrainian territory?
   • If a Russian defeat occurs in Ukraine leading to a withdrawal of forces from occupied territory? Does this cause downstream instability in Russia that we should be concerned about (or come to regret)?
   • If some kind of middle-ground negotiated settlement is reached ending hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, allowing some Russian presence in Ukrainian territory (say, in Crimea, Dontesk, Luhansk, or some combination)? This seems like a likely outcome, but it is also less than a total defeat for Russia. If this outcome emboldens Russia, is this outcome more or less dangerous than the status quo?

 

[Torch]

It would embolden Russia. Anything less than the total defeat of Russia in Ukraine is a victory for them. And Russia will see that the world is willing to cave to Russia's demands.

I cannot conceive of the circumstances, short of a nuclear war that would return the Crimea to the Ukraine.

Total victory excluding that is doable, but it’s gonna be a long fight.

I would advocate allowing them to have the breakaway states in Donbass that are ethically Russian and overwhelmingly seem to want to be part of Russia.
It actually removes a problem area from Ukraine’s plate during reconstruction.

I would push super hard to destroy Russia’s land bridge to the Crimean. Well, they won’t give up the crime in. I doubt they’ll use nuclear weapons to attempt to hold the stolen lands on the eastern border and coast.

It’s possible that a corridor system for Russian through traffic could be worked out.

I would certainly make the Russians earn it in a lot more blood if they’re trying to keep it.

 

[Torch]

This leads me to a few exploratory questions for general discussion:

1. Is a total Russian defeat in Ukraine feasible? Is it something the west is really pursuing?
   • Many have indicated Russian control of Crimea is a red line.
   • Does continued Russian control of Crimea make a total Russian defeat in Ukraine impossible without a much wider war that includes non-Ukrainian forces?
2. In the absence of some kind of larger military engagement from non-Ukrainian forces (i.e. involvement of western manpower), is Ukraine even militarily capable of obtaining a Russian defeat in Ukraine? Is a Russian defeat a possible outcome using Ukrainian forces alone? What would it take for Ukraine to obtain the capability to push out Russia and achieve a Russian defeat?
3. For each of the following scenarios, is the world in a more or less dangerous position:
   • If Russia completely neutralizes Ukraine and imposes their will within Ukrainian territory?
   • If a Russian defeat occurs in Ukraine leading to a withdrawal of forces from occupied territory? Does this cause downstream instability in Russia that we should be concerned about (or come to regret)?
   • If some kind of middle-ground negotiated settlement is reached ending hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, allowing some Russian presence in Ukrainian territory (say, in Crimea, Dontesk, Luhansk, or some combination)? This seems like a likely outcome, but it is also less than a total defeat for Russia. If this outcome emboldens Russia, is this outcome more or less dangerous than the status quo?

OK, did you really just make that up just now?

You had the thoughts and put them in a clear organized fashion in a discussion paper?

Good God, man! All I was able to do was come up with a couple of groping disjunctive paragraphs covering about half of your points… and I took longer.

I am so jealous

 

[teekay99]

OK, did you really just make that up just now? You had the thoughts and put them in a clear organized fashion in a discussion paper? Good God, man all I was able to do was come up with a couple of groping disjunctive paragraphs covering about half of your points… and I took longer.

Just dumb luck ... I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night...

 

[Torch]

You:



Me:

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

Is a total Russian defeat in Ukraine feasible?

Yes. But it would take a commitment the West is unwilling to do.

Is it something the west is really pursuing?

No.

is Ukraine even militarily capable of obtaining a Russian defeat in Ukraine?

Afghanistan could make an argument. Don't know if Ukraine is up to it, though.

For each of the following scenarios, is the world in a more or less dangerous position:

• If Russia completely neutralizes Ukraine and imposes their will within Ukrainian territory?
• If a Russian defeat occurs in Ukraine leading to a withdrawal of forces from occupied territory? Does this cause downstream instability in Russia that we should be concerned about (or come to regret)?
• If some kind of middle-ground negotiated settlement is reached ending hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, allowing some Russian presence in Ukrainian territory (say, in Crimea, Dontesk, Luhansk, or some combination)? This seems like a likely outcome, but it is also less than a total defeat for Russia. If this outcome emboldens Russia, is this outcome more or less dangerous than the status quo?

Scenario #2 isn't happening, so I'll skip that.

Scenario #1 will embolden Russia. And frighten surrounding nations. Russia won't like the result from them taking all of Ukraine. They've already seen nations running to NATO.

#3 just slow-walks #1.

Attacking Ukraine was a monumental destabilization of the area and Russia has no one to blame but themselves. They can whine about NATO encroachment all they want, but no one put a gun to anyone's head to join. But Russia put a gun to someone else's head that drove those countries to come running to NATO.

 

[Spyglass]

Yes. But it would take a commitment the West is unwilling to do.

No.


Afghanistan could make an argument. Don't know if Ukraine is up to it, though.


Scenario #2 isn't happening, so I'll skip that.

Scenario #1 will embolden Russia. And frighten surrounding nations. Russia won't like the result from them taking all of Ukraine. They've already seen nations running to NATO.

#3 just slow-walks #1.

Attacking Ukraine was a monumental destabilization of the area and Russia has no one to blame but themselves. They can whine about NATO encroachment all they want, but no one put a gun to anyone's head to join. But Russia put a gun to someone else's head that drove those countries to come running to NATO.

This explains the west’s thinking, that Putin needs a serious haircut, but just enough before it becomes existential. Might be the only way to kick the Russia can down the road long enough.

If left unchecked Russia could totally pull off Soviet Union 2.0 is the high and low of it. That would be demonstrably counter to the west’s imperialistic objectives.

 

[DarkNoon]

Question - let’s imagine a world where Ukraine was allowed to fall. Barbaric, I know but let’s do a thought experiment. How would the world have been affected in the next 5, 10, 25, and 50 years, do you think?

We all know it, come on now. Putin will not stop at Ukraine if we do not stop him there.

 

[DarkNoon]

If left unchecked Russia could totally pull off Soviet Union 2.0

Russia is not, never has been, and never will be the equivalent of the Soviet Union.

Thank you for listening to our TED talk

 

[DarkNoon]

Obviously Ukraine is not a US ALLIE. As far Russia goes with your opinion suggests the US can only deal with Russia with coward punches. You know what I mean proxy shit. What concerns your military forces that they won't front up?
No Airforce to support Ukraine ground forces?
No all mighty aircraft carrier strike group to support Ukraine.
No submarine missiles support.
No foot soldiers proudly wearing the uniform of the most powerful military force on the planet.
And that is just Russia?
Imagine they support Taiwan by facing off against Chinese coast guard ships of all things to support and protect Taiwan soldiers on a reef,or fisherman or territorial sovereignty constantly challenged.
Yes the all mighty global military projection is definitely impressive and obviously a deterrence. And I've previously covered middle east countries and the overwhelming confidence the US has dealing with these due to their military capabilities of which most have still repelled US forces.
Yes I understand your position and outdated opinions.

Kool-aid bad for you. Lmao!

 

[Snowfall]

Obviously Ukraine is not a US ALLIE. As far Russia goes with your opinion suggests the US can only deal with Russia with coward punches. You know what I mean proxy shit. What concerns your military forces that they won't front up?
No Airforce to support Ukraine ground forces?
No all mighty aircraft carrier strike group to support Ukraine.
No submarine missiles support.
No foot soldiers proudly wearing the uniform of the most powerful military force on the planet.
And that is just Russia?
Imagine they support Taiwan by facing off against Chinese coast guard ships of all things to support and protect Taiwan soldiers on a reef,or fisherman or territorial sovereignty constantly challenged.
Yes the all mighty global military projection is definitely impressive and obviously a deterrence. And I've previously covered middle east countries and the overwhelming confidence the US has dealing with these due to their military capabilities of which most have still repelled US forces.
Yes I understand your position and outdated opinions.

Have you ever heard of the Cold War? Of course we fight proxy wars rather than actual wars because of the whole mutually assured destruction thing. It’s the same reason the Russians aren’t bombing staging bases for transfers of equipment to Ukraine. That’s not a sign of weakness it’s a sign of restraint.

 

[Yingyang]

Have you ever heard of the Cold War? Of course we fight proxy wars rather than actual wars because of the whole mutually assured destruction thing. It’s the same reason the Russians aren’t bombing staging bases for transfers of equipment to Ukraine. That’s not a sign of weakness it’s a sign of restraint.

Yeah yeah when it suits. My question was direct to those with the attitude of superiority.
Those who believe Russia is nothing to be concerned about.
Especially nuclear weapons or arms or soldiers etc . Russian military is weak, useless etc.
You ask me about knowledge of cold war ? Surely my statement questions those who are convinced of Russian bluff. Putin is bluffing. I simply presented the question to their beliefs. Cold war reasons as you suggest obviously doesn't exist in minds as a real threat.

 

[Snowfall]

Yeah yeah when it suits. My question was direct to those with the attitude of superiority.
Those who believe Russia is nothing to be concerned about.
Especially nuclear weapons or arms or soldiers etc . Russian military is weak, useless etc.
You ask me about knowledge of cold war ? Surely my statement questions those who are convinced of Russian bluff. Putin is bluffing. I simply presented the question to their beliefs. Cold war reasons as you suggest obviously doesn't exist in minds as a real threat.

That’s because Putin is bluffing FOR NOW. There’s a red line where Putin would use nukes nobody’s gone near it yet though putting NATO troops in Ukraine would be a quick way to find it. It’s quite clear Russias conventional capabilities are a joke though.

 

[OReid]

Yeah yeah when it suits. My question was direct to those with the attitude of superiority.
Those who believe Russia is nothing to be concerned about.
Especially nuclear weapons or arms or soldiers etc . Russian military is weak, useless etc.
You ask me about knowledge of cold war ? Surely my statement questions those who are convinced of Russian bluff. Putin is bluffing. I simply presented the question to their beliefs. Cold war reasons as you suggest obviously doesn't exist in minds as a real threat.

Of course there’s a red line, what is it?
And more importantly it’s been asked what happens if Ukraine is allowed to fall.
The real question what happens if the west allows nuclear blackmail to win?

It’s been fairly commonly agreed that nukes are a deterrent only. That the cost in wielding them should be limited to defense against a direct attack.

Now Putin has played with the definitions and is using the threat of nuclear retaliation due to a conventional war they started.

One can complain that NATO provoked this by moving East’s. Sure fine what ever, Russia got played diplomatically and economically.
Now they decided diplomacy has moved to warfare. Fine with that as well.
But a nation who chooses war should make sure that can win that war before embarking on that path.
Now that it’s become clear Russia can’t win the war on their terms. They have conflated “existentixal threat” with not winning a conventional war of their choosing.
I’ve used poker as a metaphor, but maybe what I should have been using was Russian Roulette. How luck does everyone feel.