Jump to content

Ukraine Part 2: Playing chicken with Kiev


KalVsWade
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, DMC said:

Again, didn't really muddy anything outside of Russia.

Kinda? It got play on fox, it got play here. Even my wife was seeing headlines of Russia withdrawing and thinking why people were buying it.

It doesn't need to be a majority view. It just needs to be confusing. Russia narrative is now, imo, that they were withdrawing but continued provocations from the US and nato forced them to come back, even though they didn't want to.

Also, seriously - yikes. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

Kinda? It got play on fox, it got play here. Even my wife was seeing headlines of Russia withdrawing and thinking why people were buying it.

It doesn't need to be a majority view. It just needs to be confusing. Russia narrative is now, imo, that they were withdrawing but continued provocations from the US and nato forced them to come back, even though they didn't want to.

I mean it certainly got play for a matter of hours but I'd have to think even Putin knew that wasn't going to change anything outside of selling it to his own people.  And I suppose the Trumpist/pro-Russia FNC crowd but clearly he can already count on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I mean it certainly got play for a matter of hours but I'd have to think even Putin knew that wasn't going to change anything outside of selling it to his own people.  And I suppose the Trumpist/pro-Russia FNC crowd but clearly he can already count on them.

Yep. I don't think changing minds is what he cared about. He cared about solidifying the views of those already on his side - the pro Russia fox News and breitbarts around the world. This gave them a bit more to talk to and put another wedge between then and political figures and other news.

And in that it was super successful. When the invasion happens I bet that fox runs with "how did Biden provoke Russia after Russia was removing their troops".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

And in that it was super successful. When the invasion happens I bet that fox runs with "how did Biden provoke Russia after Russia was removing their troops".

I haven't watched at all in years but is it really all of FNC that's taking this Trumpist/pro-Russia line?  I'm hardly surprised Carlson is taking it (frankly it's actually consistent with his views on international intervention going back decades), but I can't believe some of the hawkish personalities that are still there are toeing that line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

I haven't watched at all in years but is it really all of FNC that's taking this Trumpist/pro-Russia line?  I'm hardly surprised Carlson is taking it (frankly it's actually consistent with his views on international intervention going back decades), but I can't believe some of the hawkish personalities that are still there are toeing that line.

As far as I can tell it is almost 100% the fox viewpoint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kalibuster said:

As far as I can tell it is almost 100% the fox viewpoint. 

Hm...Just turned it on and they got Bill Hemmer hosting with a blonde woman I don't know.  Jack Keane is on discussing the possible invasion.  All of them are generally echoing the administration's viewpoint - Keane's currently emphasizing Zelensky shouldn't leave Ukraine right now.

Obviously their daytime TV is significantly different (let alone watching it for 5 minutes is obviously an insanely small sample).  Maybe I'll check in how their coverage is during/after Biden's address at 4, as well as checking out the primetime coverage.  But that's a heavy ask even if I am really bored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kal said in the US politics thread: 

Quote

What I don't know is how rational putin would be here. Does putin desire empire so much that he would want to try and hold Ukraine? I don't know. But I think it's a real possibility. 

I think that "Russia invades Ukraine to destroy the military and destabilize it for decades, then leaves" is just vastly more likely than "Russia invades and occupies Ukraine indefinitely".  I freely admit I've been wrong about Putin before, but the former sounds like a very Putin sort of plan.  There's an achievable goal, an exit strategy, and a cost/benefit analysis that could theoretically end up favoring Russia if the US/EU sanctions aren't too severe/long lasting. 

Russia straight up occupying Ukraine just sounds like a complete debacle.  Ukrainian resistance would no doubt be supported by the West, and would be a constant drain on Russian resources.  If Putin attempts this it could realistically lead to his government falling apart from within, as the Russian economy is already shaky and sanctions + an expensive neverending war is definitely not going to help.  And for what?  I don't see what Russia is even getting out of that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's an overestimation here of how effectively Russia could just decimate Ukraine, leave, and then assume it'd be destabilized for decades.  If Putin just pulls out, then Ukraine would almost certainly turn to the west for aid and, hopefully, it would be provided.  At the very least all that would do is make Ukraine even more reliant on the west, which is plainly counter to Putin's aims.  This sequence of events doesn't seem to be accurately looking down the game tree -- or at least assumes certain aspects that are not at all certain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I think there's an overestimation here of how effectively Russia could just decimate Ukraine, leave, and then assume it'd be destabilized for decades.  If Putin just pulls out, then Ukraine would almost certainly turn to the west for aid and, hopefully, it would be provided.  At the very least all that would do is make Ukraine even more reliant on the west, which is plainly counter to Putin's aims.  This sequence of events doesn't seem to be accurately looking down the game tree -- or at least assumes certain aspects that are not at all certain.

Breaking a country is vastly easier than building one.  I agree that this plan would solidify anti-Russian sentiment in Ukraine for a generation or more, which is not a preferred outcome for Russia.  But if Putin wants Ukraine to be weak, this would more or less guarantee that.  The brain drain Ukraine is already suffering from would get vastly worse, and anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe would make Ukraine/EU relations very challenging. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Maithanet said:

Breaking a country is vastly easier than building one.

Certainly, it is preferable to nation-building as I would think every world leader should understand by now.  I just don't think the results would be as beneficial to Russia as is being portrayed -- nor do I think it would take "decades" for Ukraine to rebuild itself if Russia just immediately left, especially with presumably western aid. 

Regardless, though, it is a good point to raise that any invasion would almost certainly affect a refugee crisis in Europe that virtually none of them want to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe would make Ukraine/EU relations very challenging. 

I don’t know about that, there are already plenty of Ukrainian refugees and migrant workers in Poland and they’re usually looked at very favourably - definitely a very different vibe than the refugees at the  Belarusian border.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

@Ser Salvo Summerhall

@Mr Fixit

Why are Russian Troop numbers near 200,000 if this is a bluff.

Never said bluff, "testing waters". I thought Putin would posture more, but as he increases troops at the border invasion does seem more likely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US intelligence seems to be really convinced Russia is going to attack, and it does seem likely from the rapidly escalating news in the last 24 hours (compared to, say, Tuesday-Wednesday when it felt like Putin might be considering a drawing down and withdrawal).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Werthead said:

US intelligence seems to be really convinced Russia is going to attack, and it does seem likely from the rapidly escalating news in the last 24 hours (compared to, say, Tuesday-Wednesday when it felt like Putin might be considering a drawing down and withdrawal).

If Putin is playing chess here could he have been waiting for Biden to make such a firm unequivocal statement before pulling back?  Really make the West look foolish and alarmist?

It’s not likely, still, Putin is rarely a one move ahead guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

If Putin is playing chess here could he have been waiting for Biden to make such a firm unequivocal statement before pulling back?  Really make the West look foolish and alarmist?

It’s not likely, still, Putin is rarely a one move ahead guy.

It's also possible Biden made these comments with the hopes that it could make Putin backdown. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a certain level this is getting ridiculous.  "US intelligence is now really, really convinced - as opposed to yesterday when they were only really convinced."  Intelligence can only tell you what they are prepared to do anyway, the CIA gave up on MKUltra 50 years ago so pretty sure they can't read Putin's mind.  That's not to say Biden isn't wrong to keep up this pressure - it's absolutely the right thing to do.  I just don't think anyone should be losing any sleep over US' incessant intelligence warnings.  To paraphrase the great US-Russian diplomat Ivan Drago, "if he invades, he invades."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Werthead said:
US intelligence seems to be really convinced Russia is going to attack, and it does seem likely from the rapidly escalating news in the last 24 hours (compared to, say, Tuesday-Wednesday when it felt like Putin might be considering a drawing down and withdrawal).

I've been amazed how liberal/leftist people, including US progressives, might actually believe what US intelligence is saying nowadays, because this definitely would have happened way less often, if at all, in the 1960s/70s/80s. As far as I'm concerned, all intelligence services publish pure bullshit, misinformation and propaganda, whatever the country they're from and whatever they're talking about; the only people Russian or American intelligence are going to tell the straight truth are their very own governments (and even then, not every single time).

7 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I think that "Russia invades Ukraine to destroy the military and destabilize it for decades, then leaves" is just vastly more likely than "Russia invades and occupies Ukraine indefinitely".  I freely admit I've been wrong about Putin before, but the former sounds like a very Putin sort of plan.  There's an achievable goal, an exit strategy, and a cost/benefit analysis that could theoretically end up favoring Russia if the US/EU sanctions aren't too severe/long lasting. 

Russia straight up occupying Ukraine just sounds like a complete debacle.  Ukrainian resistance would no doubt be supported by the West, and would be a constant drain on Russian resources.

Exactly. Actually occupying Ukraine for a long time would be total madness or absolute desperation. The US has shown the way: attack, invade, destroy, eventually get out. Except the US has the means to stay longer to be more thorough in fucking up defeated countries. The other major difference is that US fucks up far away countries at the other end of the world, like Vietnam or Iraq, not neighbouring countries like Canada and Mexico. therefore the fallout, refugee flows and collateral damages are of lesser concern. Fucking up the bulk of Ukraine might be satisfying to some Russians, but would turn out to be a terrible idea with bad consequences very fast. I don't doubt that there are plenty of people of limited intelligence across Russia that would actually do this if in power - we've seen it happening several times with Western leaders and past historical rulers -, but I still expect Putin to be less unbalanced. We'll see soon enough though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Clueless Northman said:

The US has shown the way: attack, invade, destroy, eventually get out.

:huh:  I mean, I suppose the US has shown the way, but in terms of showing what not to do.

10 minutes ago, GrimTuesday said:

Even progressives who will claim to be doves can't wait to get a little taste when the war drums begin to sound.

Oh c'mon no one here is relishing war they're just reacting to the same information everyone else is getting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...