Jump to content

Ukraine- War.


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

How does Putin plan to hold Ukraine if he does succeed in his objective of gaining a military victory? I feel we haven't seen in recent history (past WWII) such a thing happening, one nation occupying another 'modern' nation. Putin will need way more than 200k troops to keep a nation of 40 odd million (I am counting those who remain) quiescent.

It'll end up being way more of a headache than he bargained for. Not sure what his thinking is to be honest.

I don't think Putin plans to hold Ukraine. He probably wants to blast their army back into the stone-age and then force Ukraine to sign an unfavorable treaty. Something like Ukraine will limit its armed forces and weapon purchases, that Ukraine will remain neutral and recognize the brake-away regions. I very much doubt he intends to occupy the whole Ukraine and assimilate it into Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tongue Stuck to Wall said:

Do you have any evidence that the United States, France, Germany and the UK are now not currently willing to comply with the invocation of Article 5 if Russia were, for example, to invade a Baltic state or Poland? 

https://news.sky.com/video/ukraine-invasion-drone-footage-shows-british-troops-arriving-in-estonia-12551088

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Tongue Stuck to Wall said:

You mentioned you felt a Russian attack on a NATO nation in 2020 would have gone unopposed by NATO's strongest members.  Do you have any evidence that the United States, France, Germany and the UK are now not currently willing to comply with the invocation of Article 5 if Russia were, for example, to invade a Baltic state or Poland? 

Key here is 2020. That means Trump would still have been the president and he very well may have not gone along with the rest of NATO and in turn that could mean the entire thing collapses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

When?  When did France and the UK attack the Germans?

When did "not doing much in protest" morph into a requirement to "attack"? And what on earth more could the UK do to Hitler on top of fighting an all out war that ended only in the destruction of Hitler's regime at a gigantic cost to the UK? And given France was in turn conquered, then I think they should be cut some slack too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, A wilding said:

When did "not doing much in protest" morph into a requirement to "attack"? And what on earth more could the UK do to Hitler on top of fighting an all out war that ended only in the destruction of Hitler's regime at a gigantic cost to the UK? And given France was in turn conquered, then I think they should be cut some slack too.

Had the French and British gone on the Offensive when they declared war the Germans would have been fighting a two front war.  It could have allowed the Polish Army to keep fighting as the Wehrmacht was repositioned to deal with the threat to the west.

The UK and France did nothing until the Germans invaded from the Ardennes.  Poland suffered for their inaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, A wilding said:

When did "not doing much in protest" morph into a requirement to "attack"? And what on earth more could the UK do to Hitler on top of fighting an all out war that ended only in the destruction of Hitler's regime at a gigantic cost to the UK? And given France was in turn conquered, then I think they should be cut some slack too.

The UK and France could have acted a lot earlier, but they did not want to tip the applecart over. That's the comparison here. It's very debatable how things would have played out differently, but it's undeniable they knew they had a problem on their hands and kicked the can down the road until they couldn't anymore.

That said, I don't think this is the best space to relitigate European politics from 1936-1939. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Had the French and British gone on the Offensive when they declared war the Germans would have been fighting a two front war.  It could have allowed the Polish Army to keep fighting as the Wehrmacht was repositioned to deal with the threat to the west.

The UK and France did nothing until the Germans invaded from the Ardeens.

It is easy to point out strategic mistakes in retrospect. But at the time the UK and France needed time to get themselves ready, while significant Polish resistance collapsed quickly, And again, an arguable strategic error is hardly a failure to react strongly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

But no breeches to the sarcophagus itself?

Unknown. Probably not, since the numbers would likely be orders of magnitude higher. But from what I can tell, the theory of "disturbed dust" doesn't really seem that likely either. Maybe some of the higher radiation areas outside the sarcophagus are getting disturbed; though I think that would strictly be a local problem rather than a wider threat.

But if the spikes keep going higher, maybe there is a tiny breech somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

That Zelenskyy is slightly fascist is a fact

Saying something is a fact doesn't make it a fact.  But anyhow, its surreal to see someone accusing Zelensky of being "slightly fascist" given his country has just been attacked by the world's top fascist.

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

We need to rethink our policies. I think other countries will also have to reconsider, what happened yesterday will change Europe for a long time to come.

Yes.  This is not just about what is happening in Ukraine right now.  The fallout is going to carry on for years.  Moldova and Georgia probably feel very concerned.  Things might be ok for a while there but depending on how Ukraine falls, his attention could easily move to those countries.

And if Trump gets back in power in 2024, the rest of Europe can reach new heights when it comes to fear.  The next few weeks are going to tell us a lot.

I think people may re-evaluate Merkel in years to come but a lot of that will be based on hindsight.  It is not as if any major European leaders was pointing at Russia as this nakedly aggressive (except possible Poland?).  So she still remains way on top of the rest of the rabble in Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

How does Putin plan to hold Ukraine if he does succeed in his objective of gaining a military victory? I feel we haven't seen in recent history (past WWII) such a thing happening, one nation occupying another 'modern' nation. Putin will need way more than 200k troops to keep a nation of 40 odd million (I am counting those who remain) quiescent.

It'll end up being way more of a headache than he bargained for. Not sure what his thinking is to be honest.

Maybe he intends to take just a slice for himself, like the Eastern part, and keep chaos and poverty in the Western part of the land (an attack from time to time etc). Or maybe he is just mad / does not care as he wont live long enough to worry about remote future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putin has said that he wants to "demilitarise and denazify" Ukraine. So, obviously the destruction of the Ukrainian military is the primary target. Then, regime change. And probably some territory. The Donezk and Luhansk oblasts, obviously, and maybe part or all of the Black Sea coast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Fez said:

Unknown. Probably not, since the numbers would likely be orders of magnitude higher. But from what I can tell, the theory of "disturbed dust" doesn't really seem that likely either. Maybe some of the higher radiation areas outside the sarcophagus are getting disturbed; though I think that would strictly be a local problem rather than a wider threat.

But if the spikes keep going higher, maybe there is a tiny breech somewhere.

After all the expense and effort to create the “new sarcophagus”… this shit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Babblebauble said:

To me the great sin is having left the nations of Eastern Europe to the whims of the Bolsheviks. Such a thing need never have happened. And damn Truman for his fecklessness.

Maybe.  What could the non-Soviet allies have done… attacked the Red Army?

I’m starting a new thread to keep this one focused on events in Ukraine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

Russia is ready to negotiate. 
Oh god please, let it end. 

Russia is "ready to negotiate" from the very beginning.

I think he miscalculated. He thought that when he attacks from 3 directions it will be as if he did it in 2014, Zelensky will escape to the USA, the army will surrender and people will fall on their knees.

The Snake Island, the guy who sacrificed himself to blow up the bridge, people with molotovs, he did not expect the fury and suicidal determination. Which is strange, because he should have.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, broken one said:

The Snake Island, the guy who sacrificed himself to blow up the bridge, people with molotovs, he did not expect the fury and suicidal determination. Which is strange, because he should have.  

The Snake Island recording is haunting. No words. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, broken one said:

The Snake Island, the guy who sacrificed himself to blow up the bridge, people with molotovs, he did not expect the fury and suicidal determination. Which is strange, because he should have.  

This one I haven't heard about yet.

Also that the taking of the strategic airport outside Kyiv by paratroopers didn't quite work out and the Russians were going to face mounting losses in trying to besiege the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...