Russian Games: 120,000-140,000 Russian Troops on the Ukrainian border…

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Yeah I'm carrying water for Russia, you got me.  What are sanctions right now going to do?  If Russia's goal is to invade, it's not like sanctions are going to stop them, and you can apply them later, there's no deterrent value.  If their goal is something else, you're just looking nervous and irrational.  

You are in the sense that you're allowing them to dictate the terms of engagement to you. That's what a reactionary strategy is and that's what they want. What sanctions might do right now is cause them to back off, and there's some evidence that Putin legitimately fears that. How is sanctioning them after the fact actually going to prevent anything from happening? If the point is to stop them from invading, take the necessary measures beforehand rather than trying to do so after the fact. The latter is just a further signal of weakness. 

[Gorn]

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You are in the sense that you're allowing them to dictate the terms of engagement to you. That's what a reactionary strategy is and that's what they want. What sanctions might do right now is cause them to back off, and there's some evidence that Putin legitimately fears that. How is sanctioning them after the fact actually going to prevent anything from happening? If the point is to stop them from invading, take the necessary measures beforehand rather than trying to do so after the fact. The latter is just a further signal of weakness. 

Trade is a two-way street. International trade sanctions would not only harm Russia, they would do various amounts of harm to every nation that trades with Russia.

For example, considering Russia is Ukraine's largest trade partner, they would bankrupt the same country you are supposedly trying to protect.

That's why they are the tool of absolute last resort.

[Larry of the Lawn]

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You are in the sense that you're allowing them to dictate the terms of engagement to you. That's what a reactionary strategy is and that's what they want. What sanctions might do right now is cause them to back off, and there's some evidence that Putin legitimately fears that. How is sanctioning them after the fact actually going to prevent anything from happening? If the point is to stop them from invading, take the necessary measures beforehand rather than trying to do so after the fact. The latter is just a further signal of weakness. 

Easy to recommend sanctions when you won't personally be affected by them. 

What do you think the goal is here, from Russia, and why do you think that?

[DMC]

LOL @ thinking imposing economic sanctions now - very likely without consensus which undermines the entire endeavor and may well cause a rift with Germany, playing right into Putin's hands - rather than in a matter of weeks (if they are gonna invade, it's gonna be soon) makes anyone look "strong."

[Gorn]

Also, if you think gasoline prices are high now, guess what will happen when the world's 2nd biggest oil exporter is suddenly kicked out of the market.

[Larry of the Lawn]

4 minutes ago, DMC said:

LOL @ thinking imposing economic sanctions now - very likely without consensus which undermines the entire endeavor and may well cause a rift with Germany, playing right into Putin's hands - rather than in a matter of weeks (if they are gonna invade, it's gonna be soon) makes anyone look "strong."

Do you even lift sanctions, bro?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

LOL @ thinking imposing economic sanctions now - very likely without consensus which undermines the entire endeavor and may well cause a rift with Germany, playing right into Putin's hands - rather than in a matter of weeks (if they are gonna invade, it's gonna be soon) makes anyone look "strong."

And if Putin then backs away from the border claiming this was all an “exercise” it makes the US and the allies who agreed to the sanctions look like idiots who overreacted.  If we aren’t going to use force to defend Ukraine Sanctions have to be reactionary to give them maximum impact.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Trade is a two-way street. International trade sanctions would not only harm Russia, they would do various amounts of harm to every nation that trades with Russia.

For example, considering Russia is Ukraine's largest trade partner, they would bankrupt the same country you are supposedly trying to protect.

That's why they are the tool of absolute last resort.

No shit Sherlock. Obviously it would negatively impact other countries, but that pain in turn could be eased through various relief efforts. The other option is to let Russia topple the Ukrainian government less you think this is just a giant bluff.

8 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Easy to recommend sanctions when you won't personally be affected by them. 

What do you think the goal is here, from Russia, and why do you think that?

I think their goal is to slowly undermine Ukraine and scare other regional actors. They will succeed in that aim if the West does nothing but react to them with half measures, assuming we can even muster that. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

And if Putin then backs away from the border claiming this was all an “exercise” it makes the US and the allies who agreed to the sanctions look like idiots who overreacted.  If we aren’t going to use force to defend Ukraine Sanctions have to be reactionary to give them maximum impact.

Do you miss the part where Russia already invaded Ukraine?

[Gorn]

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No shit Sherlock. Obviously it would negatively impact other countries, but that pain in turn could be eased through various relief efforts. The other option is to let Russia topple the Ukrainian government less you think this is just a giant bluff.

I think their goal is to slowly undermine Ukraine and scare other regional actors. They will succeed in that aim if the West does nothing but react to them with half measures, assuming we can even muster that. 

de·ter·rent

/dəˈtərənt/

 

noun

1. a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, Gorn said:

de·ter·rent

/dəˈtərənt/

 

noun

1. a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something.

How's that working out? Since the West floated the possibility of severe sanctions has Russia backed off or gotten more aggressive? 

[DMC]

20 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Do you even lift sanctions, bro?

I only lift full blown blockades.

[Clueless Northman]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Nobody outside of Russia is going to believe any of the garbage they'd be spinning about needing to invade because of sanctions.

Few in the West (expanded to Eastern Europe up to Ukraine in this case), but outside, in the wide world of Africa, Asia and Latin America, there'll be a lot of people who'll just think "there the arrogant Western imperialists go again". If it's a legitimate comment or not is beyond the point; the West sanctioning before Putin has given a real good excuse is a losing move outside the Western world. Heck, at some point even some European countries might get sick of the US sanctioning everybody and his dog and will just say "fuck it".

Tactically speaking, by the way, you sanction Putin before he does anything stupid, how can you expect him to back down then? I mean, if you hit him first before he's acted, he's not going to believe you'll lift the sanctions if he doesn't do anything and doesn't react. On the contrary, he'll obviously be convinced you're going to keep all the sanctions forever.

Besides, I wouldn't be as optimistic as you are about the effectiveness of sanctions or about Russia' s irrelevancy apart from its nukes. Russia's economy has been pushed to align with China and to be self-reliant in the last 7 years. If they can't supply Europe with Nordstream, they'll just supply other customers in the East - pipelines towards China are being built. There's a lot of other resources in the country as well - unsurprisingly considering its size.

At this point, I tend to think it's not just about the current regime in Ukraine: toppling it and replacing it is quite temporary and we've seen in the last decade that putting pro-Russian guys at the helm can be countered by popular revolt. Fear of NATO setting up nukes closer, in Romania or Poland, and eventually in Kiev, are probably what worries some paranoid minds. Current build-up isn't big enough to invade and occupy half Ukraine, though it's more than enough to annihilate all forces close to the rebel Eastern areas. An attack might happen in a couple of months, sure, but if there's a very short-term (say in 2-3 weeks) action, it should be something else, not some kind of military aggression. Setting up military bases in Cuba and Nicaragua, or having Russian sub exercising by firing a couple of missiles outside San Francisco and Cheaspeake Bays (all in international waters obviously) as a way of pointing to the US that if NATO can set up nukes a few minutes away from Moscow, Russia will also be able to hit in a very short time.

[Gorn]

34 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

How's that working out? Since the West floated the possibility of severe sanctions has Russia backed off or gotten more aggressive? 

Well, I haven't heard any news of Russian tanks in Kyiv, so it's working as intended. In worst case, it buys Ukrainians more time to prepare.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Well, I haven't heard any news of Russian tanks in Kyiv, so it's working as intended. In worst case, it buys Ukrainians more time to prepare.

What kind of nonsense logic is this? "They haven't invaded the capital, so our means of deterrence are working despite the enemy side strengthening their forces and repositioning to attack. So continue to wait and see what they do."

ETA: Sounds a lot like how the US and Europe dealt with the Taliban in Afghanistan. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

7 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

What kind of nonsense logic is this? "They haven't invaded the capital, so our means of deterrence are working despite the enemy side strengthening their forces and repositioning to attack. So continue to wait and see what they do."

ETA: Sounds a lot like how the US and Europe dealt with the Taliban in Afghanistan. 

Ok.  You sanction Russia right now.  They don't care.  Two weeks later, they continue to stack resources along the border, in Belarus they absolutely load up troops at the Dneiper.  

What do you do now, when they call your bluff but haven't actually invaded or anything?

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Larry of the Lake said:

Ok.  You sanction Russia right now.  They don't care.  Two weeks later, they continue to stack resources along the border, in Belarus they absolutely load up troops at the Dneiper.  

What do you do now, when they call your bluff but haven't actually invaded or anything?

 

Doesn't that just prove that the threat of sanctions were useless to begin with, which nullifies the argument that we should wait?

And if that's the case I go to my European allies and beg them to realize that Russia isn't kidding (and to be clear, imposing sanctions is not in any way a bluff).

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

No shit Sherlock. Obviously it would negatively impact other countries, but that pain in turn could be eased through various relief efforts. The other option is to let Russia topple the Ukrainian government less you think this is just a giant bluff.

I think their goal is to slowly undermine Ukraine and scare other regional actors. They will succeed in that aim if the West does nothing but react to them with half measures, assuming we can even muster that. 

What the fuck does any of this mean?  Are they going to invade or not?  This sounds like you think they're just shaking the cage.  Your other posts make it sound like invasion is imminent.  What is it?  Use your words and say what you think their intentions are, and why sanctions will stop that.  

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

9 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

What the fuck does any of this mean?  Are they going to invade or not?  This sounds like you think they're just shaking the cage.  You're other posts make it sound like invasion is imminent.  What is it?  Use your words and say what you think their intentions are, and why sanctions will stop that.  

I think this is a play for Ukraine’s seaboard.  Putin wants Odessa and a ground link to Transdeinester.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

27 minutes ago, Larry of the Lake said:

What the fuck does any of this mean?  Are they going to invade or not?  This sounds like you think they're just shaking the cage.  Your other posts make it sound like invasion is imminent.  What is it?  Use your words and say what you think their intentions are, and why sanctions will stop that.  

I think they want to invade and are testing how the West will respond. And the West's wait and see approach, as you and many others are backing, will only encourage them to push further, hence why I want to blunt their advances right now and push back heavily.