Ukraine
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
Wars aren't going to be won by the on the ground army's. We all know that these days.
We do? Please explain what you mean by "won".
Well, honestly there is no winner in war. Perhaps concluded is the better word.
Then in that case you're wrong. The army occupying the ground is the winner.
EDIT: Not going to be driven away from the main point into this dribble.
Don't get pissy because you made an incorrect statement and got called on it.
-
@MajorRage said in Ukraine:
Would recommend everybody reads this.
I’ve not fact checked any of it, but it’s a pretty interesting read
Same dude giving his interpretation:
Point (in the second tweet below) struck me:
Now that's a thread. I think I have a man-crush (on him, not you sorry)
-
India and China aren't buying Russian gas (unless you mean gas in the American gasoline sense). Well, I think a small pipeline goes to china actually. But not connected to the huge infrastructure (and source) that supplies/ supplied Europe.
They are buying oil, though. Albeit at an opportunistic discount. Tankered.
India will never be connected to Russia by a pipeline . Geography precludes it.
China could, after a lot of new infrastructure is built.
-
-
India and China aren't buying Russian gas (unless you mean gas in the American gasoline sense). Well, I think a small pipeline goes to china actually. But not connected to the huge infrastructure (and source) that supplies/ supplied Europe.
They are buying oil, though. Albeit at an opportunistic discount. Tankered.
India will never be connected to Russia by a pipeline . Geography precludes it.
Exactly. No common border means it would have to traverse Pakistan, so that won't happen. And there's no way you could build a pipeline into the Ladakh region - they have to rebuild the "highway" to Leh every year. This is how they get fuel up there:
China could, after a lot of new infrastructure is built.
The great irony being China wouldn't need it once it's built given the ticking time bomb that is their demographics.
-
Speaking of demographics. Russia's population pyramid is pretty scary (for them) for people sub-30 years of age.
Really dont think they can afford the 60k deaths and counting of young men and now several hundred thousand crossing borders to avoid mobilization.
-
@Rapido that is tight belt through the 15-24 brackets. Ages 5-14 is lean as well.
A fair whack of those men getting out of dodge will be 30+ with the means to live outside of Russian for a while, aka probably strong contributors to the economy.
-
The Daily Telegraph channels Herman Kahn and makes the case for winning nuclear war.
The US government has estimated that Russia may have from 1000 to 2000 tactical nuclear warheads. Considering other Russian military equipment, it's likely that a lot of these are unserviceable. So this would not be the sort of operation that could be kept up forever: especially given reported shortages of suitable delivery systems to carry the warheads.
Look, they could probably only nuke Ukraine a few hundred times. Relax already!
Thank goodness for British nukes
What could Putin do then? Escalate again, as he and his spokesmen have threatened, and use strategic megaton-range nukes against Nato targets – London, for instance?
London would be a particularly bad choice. The UK, thank goodness, is a nuclear-armed nation and all of Russia would shortly cease to exist without the need for the rest of Nato to do anything. Russia's cities would not survive like Hiroshima and Nagasaki: strategic megaton weapons are a different ball game.
Check mate, Putin. Too bad about London, eh.
-
@Tim It's an odd argument to make isn't it? We're all aware that the entire point of nuclear weapons is deterrence - having a leader threaten to use them in a conflict he started is a remarkable gambit.
IMO a better article in the WSJ:
Great and pertient quote of JFK: “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.”
-
The gung-ho vibe was truly weird, but the scenario of Putin using tactical nukes, it not having much of an impact on the battlefield and how the West would respond was quite plausible and seemed well thought thru - if a little terrifying.
Personally, I thunk Putin knows if he goes nuclear, he'll probably turn any friends he might have against him so will desist.
-
@antipodean said in Ukraine:
Great and pertient quote of JFK: “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war.”
And yet this is where we find ourselves now isn't it? There just doesn't seem to be any face-saving off-ramp available to Putin. Ukraine doesn't seem to be about to let the Donbas go even if that would have been enough. How does it end?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Ukraine:
Personally, I thunk Putin knows if he goes nuclear, he'll probably turn any friends he might have against him so will desist.
Those that are still alive after nuclear war breaks out.
-
There just doesn't seem to be any face-saving off-ramp available to Putin. Ukraine doesn't seem to be about to let the Donbas go even if that would have been enough. How does it end?
They would if the West collectively supported this. Unlikely as it is now.
How does it end?
Hopefully not in WW3
-
surely only way things are resolved without further escalation is someone close to Putin taking power from him? Walk back claiming it was all on Putin?
-
@taniwharugby "unfortunate accident" tovarisch ....
-
@taniwharugby said in Ukraine:
surely only way things are resolved without further escalation is someone close to Putin taking power from him? Walk back claiming it was all on Putin?
More than likely a pro-war hardliner (that would make Putin look like a pussycat) would do this.
And as the Western media has very effectively painted Putin as an out of control madman. Russian media would paint a very different picture. So I suspect the majority of Russian people support Putin. As most of those close to him would too. Russian's will feel they have a valid case. And will fear the country being destroyed and split up by the West
The only way to stop this escalating is to stop demonising Putin and negotiate with him. This won't happen though