The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[STURM]

The quicker Russia realize that they can never win this war, and pulls out, the better. Russia simply cannot win this war.

Depends on what your definition of a "win" is and what the Russian definition is. You could be right but I'll wait and see. This might not end they way you think or hope it will.

NATO will then bomb Russia out of Ukraine (including Crimea) in less than a week

But the narrative won't end there. Russia will retaliate and eventually but surely the war will spread with the likelihood of further nuclear employment. Doubt you need any reminders of how WW1 and 2 [both started out as European affairs] erupted; things rapidly spiralling out of control with catastrophic consequences. If nukes start flying; it won't matter who was right or wrong; nor will stuff like democracy, freedom and self determination because Europe and Russia will cease to exist.

 

[vonnoobie]

Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in quest to take back Russian lands | Vladimir Putin | The Guardian

President draws parallel with tsar who waged war on Sweden and says campaign in Ukraine stems from ‘basic values’

amp.theguardian.com

Putin is ready for a very long war, the Russians know exactly what they dealing with and as you can see, they are ready to burn resources, both human and material

Putin might be ready for a long war but not so sure about the Russian people both civil, government and military. Appears to be a growing dissent over it. Some in government wanting Putin up on charges of treason, civilians disenfranchised and military whose moral has plummeted so badly hard to see how you could keep order if it drags on for a long war

 

[Vivendi]

But the narrative won't end there. Russia will retaliate and eventually but surely the war will spread with the likelihood of further nuclear employment. Doubt you need any reminders of how WW1 and 2 started; things rapidly spiralling out of control with catastrophic consequences.

Exactly, and that's why Russia must not escalate this into a nuclear conflict. That's on Russia, not NATO.

Russia must understand that NATO will have to respond to a nuclear escalation. So far NATO has shown great restraint in spite of Russian aggression and Russian escalation.

 

[Vivendi]

This is mostly because Russia still isn't fighting a war. Russia is still trying to run a limited military operation, without mobilization, without even committing drafted soldiers to the fight. And given Putin's relatively limited support at home it's quite plausible that Russian leadership will not commit to the war effort.

However... Ukraine also has a breaking point. There is a number, a body count, after which Ukraine's willingness to fight will begin to recede. It's an open question as to how high that number is, and whether Russia can reach it. Russia can't literally deplete Ukraine' mobilization pool. But I don't think the strength of Ukraine as a society is such as to push to that point.

The US was drafting soldiers for Vietnam, and that did not really help did it. It all comes back to this: how important is it for the general Russian population to keep killing and looting in Ukraine? How many Russian lives are they willing to sacrifice for the lies of "denazification"?

You are delusional if you think that "Ukraine's willingness to fight" will begin to recede. Keep in mind they are fighting for their lives, for their existence. There are no stronger motivations than that.

Perhaps Ukrainians will lose the will to fight when Crimea is all that is left to fight about -- apart from that, they will keep going.

 

[STURM]

The reason is the same reason why Ukraine will kick Russia out: Taliban managed to maintain their will to win over 20 years,

A bit more to the narrative than that.

- The Taliban were all but defeated by 2002 but various blunders made by the Americans; including focusing on Iraq; enabled the Talibs to make a comeback.
- A lot of ordinary Afghans initially welcomed the invasion but due to various dissatisfactions; soon began supporting the Taliban.
- The Taliban had a sponsor in the shape of Pakistan and million of sympathetic co enthics in Pakistan.
- The Americans never really had a sound political/economic plan to go hand in hand with military efforts.
- In 2021, the Taliban began its offensive in the north [non Pashtun areas] and only was able to make fast gains because it had won over Tajiks and other non Pashtun groups.

This is not to say that Russian will "win" eventually or that the Ukrainians don't have the "will"; merely that the situation in Afghanistan was very different and it's also far from certain that the Talibs will be able to hold on to power in the coming years.

 

[Vivendi]

A bit more to the narrative than that.

- The Taliban were all but defeated by 2002 but various blunders made by the Americans; including focusing on Iraq; enabled the Talibs to make a comeback.
- A lot of ordinary Afghans initially welcomed the invasion but due to various dissatisfactions; soon began supporting the Taliban.
- The Taliban had a sponsor in the shape of Pakistan and million of sympathetic co enthics in Pakistan.
- The Americans never really had a sound political/economic plan to go hand in hand with military efforts.
- In 2021, the Taliban began its offensive in the north [non Pashtun areas] and only was able to make fast gains because it had won over Tajiks and other non Pashtun groups.

This is not to say that Russian will "win" eventually or that the Ukrainians don't have the "will"; merely that the situation in Afghanistan was very different and it's also far from certain that the Talibs will be able to hold on to power in the coming years.

Again you are missing the big picture. What Gen. Ben Hodges was talking about and what I was referring to are not all the details that you use to "explain" what happened and why. It's about the fundamentals in any war. It all comes down to a test of will and a test of logistics. Lose the will to win and you eventually lose the war. Keep the will to win, maintain the logistics chain and you cannot be defeated (with the notable exception of the enemy killing everybody -- which will be nearly impossible if you maintain your logistics).

The military support provided to Ukraine in 7 months probably surpasses the support to Taliban by Pakistan and others in 20 years. The Russians are much weaker than the US. The Ukrainians are much more united than the Afghans were. What is the sound political/economical plan of Russia in Ukraine, apart from looting and committing genocide? They even change their objectives every now and then, depending on how the "special operation" is developing.

If you look you can find a lot of reasons why this will not end well for Russia, but the two fundamentals are still the most important ones and is why Gen. Ben Hodges and other experts are convinced: Ukraine will kick the Russians out, it's just a question of how long it will take.

 

[STURM]

Exactly, and that's why Russia must not escalate this into a nuclear conflict. That's on Russia, not NATO. Russia must understand that NATO will have to respond to a nuclear escalation.

Firstly, there is no indication Russia will use nukes. Secondly, as Feanor pointed out weeks and weeks ago; there is much talk about NATO wanting to avoid a clash with Russia but Russia also wants to avoid this.

So far NATO has shown great restraint in spite of Russian aggression and Russian escalation.

Is Ukraine a NATO member? Has Russia attacked a NATO member? What "restrain" are you referring to? Are you suggesting that NATO should directly get involved?

A Russian supporter or apologist might point out that Russia has been "restrained" given that Russia has not attacked NATO but Russian troops are being killed by weapons supplied by NATO.

Again you are missing the big picture.

Is that surprising? You and only you are able to see the "big picture" and understand it. Only you have the foresight, clarity and wisdom.

What Gen. Ben Hodges was talking about and what I was referring to are not all the details that you use to "explain" what happened and why. It's about the fundamentals in any war. It all comes down to a test of will and a test of logistics

Spare me the lecture. I merely pointed out that the Taliban won because of various factors; "will" was an important element but it wasn't the only one.

If you look you can find a lot of reasons why this will not end well for Russia

You trying to convince me or your goodself? I never said it would end well for Russia; only that the ending might not be what you expect or hope... I also said previously that even if the Ukrainians continue with their successes on the battlefield; things might not eventually end totally well for them either; with all Russian troops expelled and all Ukrainian territory; including the Crimea; liberated.

 

[Vivendi]

Firstly, there is no indication Russia will use nukes. Secondly, as Feanor pointed out weeks and weeks ago; there is much talk about NATO wanting to avoid a clash with Russia but Russia also wants to avoid this.

Yes I am aware, and most likely Russia will not use nukes even when it becomes clear to them what difficult situation they are in. But very few analysts expected a full-scale invasion on February 24, so we should not discount the possibility completely.

Is Ukraine a NATO member? Has Russia attacked a NATO member? What "restrain" are you referring to? Are you suggesting that NATO should directly get involved?

No but NATO have long restrained their level of support to Ukraine, as you are well aware.

Is that surprising? You and only you are able to see the "big picture" and understand it. Only you have the foresight, clarity and wisdom.

There is no reason to be condescending. I merely repeated what wise and experienced experts like Gen. Hodges have been saying for a long time.

 

[Ananda]

have no idea if Russia will withdraw from Ukraine in 2 months, 2 years, or 20 years. However, make no mistake: Russia cannot win this war. They lack the strong will of Ukrainians.

Which Ukranian ? It is still amaze me many people especialy from West did not see this Russian invasion begin with civil war. Off course looking toward Western Media and Western Political stance it is pictures only as Russian Invasion. All references that used to shown in some Western media of civil war, and Russian ethnics political opposition simply fade away to be shown as only Russian invasion.

Many arguments from Western pundits including some ex military ones that Ukranian fighthing for their home. Well those Donentsk and Luhansks militias also doing the same thing. This is why on early part of this thread, I always talk this is not as simple as foreign Invasion. However off course some will put it as part of Russian propaganda. This include the facts that many part of Southern and Eastern Ukraine is used to be part of Russian administrations.

Significant part of Russian forces in Ukraine coming from Eastern Ukranians especially ethnic Russian (Donbas Militia), which off course can not be uses as indication that most eastern ukranian ethnic Russian will fight for Russian occupations. However some did because many eastern ukranian see the Western parts is part of maiden.

So there are home insentives from those pro Russians. This is afterall begin as Civil War. We can argue to kingdom comes on whose begin steering up ethnics confrontations in the begining. However it will not close the fact there's already ethnics divisions in Ukraine to begin with. You can blame on Russian, as for me I see this as part of unfinish USSR business.

 

[sdin]

Consider Taliban. Very few predicted 20 years ago that the US would (in spite of their military superiority and huge resources) would in the end pull out and let Taliban take over. The reason is the same reason why Ukraine will kick Russia out: Taliban managed to maintain their will to win over 20 years, whereas the US' will to stay and pour money into a seemingly never-ending pit was dwindling year by year.

I have no idea if Russia will withdraw from Ukraine in 2 months, 2 years, or 20 years. However, make no mistake: Russia cannot win this war. They lack the strong will of Ukrainians.

Gen. Hodges also believes Ukraine will be able to retake Crimea. He may be right. When Ukrainians bombed a few ammo and fuel depots in Crimea how did the Russians react? They all lined up, not to sign up as soldiers to "defend Crimea", but to get out of there as soon as possible: Russians are realising Crimea is ‘not a place for them’, says Zelenskiy

Western will believe anyting as long Russia is losing LOL. You make comparison with Afghanistan where there is no Russian ethnic. The invaded area have big Russian population, and by expanding their territory , they will surely defend and occupy it at whatever cost.

Who is at the upper hand now, militarily and economically, Ukraine of Russia?

 

[Vivendi]

All Russia had to do to avoid coming into conflict with NATO was (1) not promote separatists & Russian nationalists within the borders of NATO members & (2) not try to conquer Ukraine. Why is that hard?

Russia has been stirring up trouble all along NATO's borders. Putin's financed & given other aid to (non-violent - at least so far) Russian separatist groups in Estonia & Latvia, supported (including direct military aid) breakaway organised crime havens in Moldova & Georgia, invaded two neighbours of NATO, seized & annexed to Russia territory of one of those neighbours, carried out blatant criminal activity within NATO countries such as murdering Russian exiles, threatened NATO, individual NATO countries, & friendly neutrals between NATO & Russia and shown that he's utterly untrustworthy, e.g. by breaking treaties Russia made with NATO members. And all of that was before the current wat in Ukraine, which he began with no provocation whatsoever.

Who's the fucking threat? The gangster state headed by Putin, or NATO? What has NATO done to Russia that was in any way comparable with any of that?

Calling NATO a threat to Russia is like calling the police a threat to Sicily. They're a threat only to the Mafia.

These are all excellent points, summarized very well and expressed succinctly -- a pity I can click "Like" only once on a post, since this post deserves much more than that!

Which Ukranian ? It is still amaze me many people especialy from West did not see this Russian invasion begin with civil war. Off course looking toward Western Media and Western Political stance it is pictures only as Russian Invasion. All references that used to shown in some Western media of civil war, and Russian ethnics political opposition simply fade away to be shown as only Russian invasion.

No, the conflict in Ukraine did not start with a civil war. The conflict was started by Russia’s armed intervention, not a Ukrainian civic collapse. The Ukrainian public’s support for national unity has been stronger than in many long-established states, among them Spain, Belgium and Canada. As Vladimir Putin has since proudly admitted, it was Russian troops in the spring of 2014 who seized Ukraine’s Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

Back in August 2015, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) monitors encountered personnel in eastern Ukraine openly identifying as Russian regular military. It’s absurd to call the Donetsk and Luhansk authorities “rebel” administrations when they would not have come into being and would not continue to function without Russian backing. Don't call it a civil war – Ukraine's conflict is an act of Russian aggression

 

[Ananda]

the conflict in Ukraine did not start with a civil war. The conflict was started by Russia’s armed intervention, not a Ukrainian civic collapse.

I don't know where you see this conflict begin. Ukranian public unity is not felt on every corner of Ukranian soil. Perhaps you also see the creation of Donbas militia simply of Russian making. Feel free to think on that, but many others especially in non western world can see diferently.

Please free quote something that clearly collective west products. Afterall all Western opinion is the absolute truth.

 

[STURM]

Yes I am aware, and most likely Russia will not use nukes even when it becomes clear to them what difficult situation they are in.

If however we reach a situation where "NATO will then bomb Russia out of Ukraine (including Crimea) in less than a week" [to quote your good self] then we will reach a situation where Russia would feel justified in using nukes.

no but NATO have long restrained their level of support to Ukraine, as you are well aware..

To date everything short of the kitchen sink has been supplied; thus I fail to see how "restrained" even enters the narrative. NATO is "restrained" because it wants to avoid war.

A Russian apologist can claim the Russians have been "restrained" because it has not responded to the fact that Russians are being killed by weapons supplied by NATO in response to a war Russia is waging on the Ukraine and not NATO.

There is no reason to be condescending. I merely repeated what wise and experienced experts like Gen. Hodges have been saying for a long time.

From where I sitting statements like others not being able to "see the big picture" are condescending. Again; I pointed out that "will" is a vital element but not the only one and that the situation in Afghanistan; despite your simplistic comparison; was wholly different.

On how this ends; I have no idea but I'll leave the predictions to you. Russia indeed can't "win" in that it can't achieve its main political goals but whether Russia completely loses remains to be seen.

 

[swerve]

Which Ukranian ? It is still amaze me many people especialy from West did not see this Russian invasion begin with civil war. Off course looking toward Western Media and Western Political stance it is pictures only as Russian Invasion. All references that used to shown in some Western media of civil war, and Russian ethnics political opposition simply fade away to be shown as only Russian invasion.

Many arguments from Western pundits including some ex military ones that Ukranian fighthing for their home. Well those Donentsk and Luhansks militias also doing the same thing. This is why on early part of this thread, I always talk this is not as simple as foreign Invasion. However off course some will put it as part of Russian propaganda. This include the facts that many part of Southern and Eastern Ukraine is used to be part of Russian administrations.

Significant part of Russian forces in Ukraine coming from Eastern Ukranians especially ethnic Russian (Donbas Militia), which off course can not be uses as indication that most eastern ukranian ethnic Russian will fight for Russian occupations. However some did because many eastern ukranian see the Western parts is part of maiden.

So there are home insentives from those pro Russians. This is afterall begin as Civil War. We can argue to kingdom comes on whose begin steering up ethnics confrontations in the begining. However it will not close the fact there's already ethnics divisions in Ukraine to begin with. You can blame on Russian, as for me I see this as part of unfinish USSR business.

Those Donetsk & Luhansk militia had homes, jobs, votes, representatives in the Ukrainian parliament, schools teaching in Russia, & they'd had friendly Ukrainian presidents, until one of them got too greedy & overdid the corruption. Then Russian provocateurs & organisers arrived, with Russian money & weapons. Remember Igor Ivanovich Strelkov (real name Igor Girkin)? One of the leaders of the pro-Russian uprising in Donetsk & Luhansk - Russian, ex-Russian army officer, & an FSB officer. He wasn't the only one. By an amazing coincidence, those two oblasts suddenly rose up against the government in Kyiv just after that lot arrived. He was defence minister of the so-called Donetsk Peoples Republic for a while, until he fell out with the prime minister, Alexander Borodai - another Russian, currently a member of the Russian State Duma for United Russia, i.e. Putin's party.

Yes, there were divisions in Ukraine, but I doubt they'd have turned into a civil war if Putin hadn't organised, armed, & provided leaders for separatist units, many of the members of which were from Russia. Look at Moldova & Georgia. Isn't it an amazing coincidence that independent-minded former Soviet republics have this happen to them? Belarus avoids it by being a subject state, not truly independent, & Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania by being in NATO.

BTW, by all accounts, the Russian army is conscripting Ukrainians from Donbas to use as cannon-fodder. It can't get away with it in Russia, but its power over the population of the separatist regions in Ukraine is untrammelled. I can't help wondering how many of those conscripts would prefer to be back in pre-2014 Ukraine now. I don't think their lives have improved in the slightest since Putin carved their puppet states out of Ukraine.

 

[Vivendi]

If however we reach a situation where "NATO will then bomb Russia out of Ukraine (including Crimea) in less than a week" [to quote your good self] then we will reach a situation where Russia would feel justified in using nukes.

I think you misread my post -- NATO will not take such an action unless Russia goes nuclear. NATO will show restraint even in such a scenario by not responding with nukes, but by using conventional munitions to hit Russian military installations in Ukraine only.

To date everything short of the kitchen sink has been supplied; thus I fail to see how "restrained" even enters the narrative. NATO is "restrained" because it wants to avoid war.

It took a long time before heavy weapons were supplied and some weapons e.g. modern fighter jets and ATACS have (yet) not been supplied.

A Russian apologist can claim the Russians have been "restrained" because it has not responded to the fact that Russians are being killed by weapons supplied by NATO in response to a war Russia is waging on the Ukraine and not NATO.

Yes, both parties have shown some restraint towards each others, Putin knows that attacking NATO will be an even bigger mistake than those he already committed in Ukraine.

From where I sitting statements like others not being able to "see the big picture" are condescending. Again; I pointed out that "will" is a vital element but not the only one and that the situation in Afghanistan; despite your simplistic comparison; was wholly different.

I apologize if I sounded condescending, it was not my intention.

Afghanistan 2001-2021 was of course entirely different -- as was the Vietnam war, which is another relevant example. That was part of the point I was trying to make. Will and logistics are universal fundamentals in war, and therefore relevant in completely different wars with completely different situations. Since they are fundamentals, other factors are building and depend on them. Without strong will to win, do you really think the meager support from Pakistan would suffice to keep Taliban going for 20 years? Also, without the dwindling will of the US, the US could have kept going for another 20 years. Similar statements (but different details) could be made about the Afghanistan/USSR war, the Vietnam war, etc. etc.

 

[Ananda]

Donetsk & Luhansk militia had homes, jobs, votes, representatives in the Ukrainian parliament, schools teaching in Russia, & they'd had friendly Ukrainian presidents, until one of them got too greedy & overdid the corruption. Then Russian provocateurs & organisers arrived, with Russian money & weapons. Remember Igor Ivanovich Strelkov (real name Igor Girkin)? One of the leaders of the pro-Russian uprising in Donetsk & Luhansk - Russian, ex-Russian army officer, & an FSB officer. He wasn't the only one. By an amazing coincidence, those two oblasts suddenly rose up against the government in Kyiv just after that lot arrived. He was defence minister of the so-called Donetsk Peoples Republic for a while, until he fell out with the prime minister, Alexander Borodai - another Russian, currently a member of the Russian State Duma for United Russia, i.e. Putin's party.

That's what many in West including those in Western part of Ukraine see what Yanukovtch admistration is. However what come out after maydan is not something that many pro russian ukranian feel going to benefit them.

How do Ukrainians in Russia feel about the crisis?

Some say they are strongly on Moscow’s side, but in the past, officials have cracked down on those who criticise Russia.

www.aljazeera.com

Off course those pro russian ukranian now simply swept away as provocateurs.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/whitewashing-ukraines-corruption

Russian is corrupt so does Ukranian, Yanukovitch is corrupt but so does what comes after him. However for many ethnic russian in eastern parts, he is one of them.

Still, this did not lead to civil war in those countries, in spite of Russian attempts at stirring trouble and weakening democratic processes in several of those countries.

This is shown Russian can only steer up Civil war or Ethnic clash if the seeds already there and strong. like I said we can argue whose steering up ethnic confrontations in Ukraine until kingdom come, Hell froze, etc. But whether it is Russian or West that steer up the ethnics clash into civil war, they can only do it depends on how big the seeds already is.

In the end it is also means those seperatist also have good motivation.

by all accounts, the Russian army is conscripting Ukrainians from Donbas to use as cannon-fodder

Is those that Ukranian recruits also not uses as cannon-fodder ? Like I said several times, Moscow and Kviy regimes are coming from same cloth.

 

[seaspear]

Re the cutting of power to Ukranian cities is Crimea vulnerable to attacks on water supplies in retaliation

 

[Ananda]

cutting of power to Ukranian cities is Crimea vulnerable to attacks on water supplies in retaliation

They can do it, if Kherson is already being taken back. That's why this is one of the reasons why Russian taking Kherson Oblasts. Ukranian do cut water to Crimea from Kherson before.

This is why I believe the incentives for Russian to fight on Kherson and Donbas will be different. Again this is just my opinion.

 

[Vivendi]

Like I said several times, Moscow and Kviy regimes are coming from same cloth.

The Ukranian president was elected through a democratic process in a nascent democracy. Ukraine and Russia have been on different trajectories for a long time. One of the main reasons why Ukranian democracy has not developed even further is due to significant meddling by Russia.

Is Ukraine a Democracy? Separating Fact From Fiction

The president of Ukraine is chosen through a popular election, but the country's democracy remains imperfect.

www.newsweek.com

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/publication/kennan_cable_30_-_rojansky_minakov.pdf

 

[swerve]

This is shown Russian can only steer up Civil war or Ethnic clash if the seeds already there and strong. like I said we can argue whose steering up ethnic confrontations in Ukraine until kingdom come, Hell froze, etc. But whether it is Russian or West that steer up the ethnics clash into civil war, they can only do it depends on how big the seeds already is.

In the end it is also means those seperatist also have good motivation.

Is those that Ukranian recruits also not uses as cannon-fodder ? Like I said several times, Moscow and Kviy regimes are coming from same cloth.

Look at the performance of Ukrainian territorial defence forces defending against stronger Russian forces. Compare the reports of panicky flight of Russian troops from the latest Ukrainian attack. A lot of those fleeing troops seem to be conscripted Luhansk/Donetsk units. Good motivation? Hardly. From what I've read they're not trusted to hold the front alone, but are stiffened by units from Russia.

Ukraine has had men & women queueing up to volunteer. Where are the Russians doing that? And do you really think Zelensky, or even the likes of Poroshenko, are cut from the same cloth as Putin? Get real!

We can only argue about who's stirring up ethnic confrontations in Ukraine until kingdom come, hell freezes, etc., if you are strongly biased towards Russia. It's not in Western interests for Ukraine to be turbulent. European countries have been trying to integrate Russia into the European & world economies, which is exactly the opposite of what you do if you're seeking confrontation. Do you think the Germans would have spent all those billions on new gas pipelines if they weren't trying hard to keep everything peaceful?

If, on the other hand, you're trying to rebuild the Russian Empire by force, stirring up ethnic confrontation is a great way to weaken states you see as opposing you, & give you excuses to intervene on behalf of the group you're backing. It's not even as if Putin pretends not to be doing it! He's open about it. His big mistake this time was to think that he'd been much more successful at subverting Ukraine than the reality.