Ukraine reacts to fears of Russian invasion as troops build up at the border

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

What

Russia has always considered the various baltic states and Ukraine as illegal states (quietly at first, but ramped up as Putin and his posse took complete power) and still part of Russia after the '90s went disastrous for them... and historically Russia has a tendency to be very salty if its hold on the baltic and Ukraine were ever broken.

Haha, what?

From my understanding of Russian nuclear weapon doctrine, the scenarios where Russia (and note this doctrine is inherited from the USSR) would use tactical nukes as a measure to 'de-escalate' the conflict includes forces invading what is considered Russian Soil aka 'Russian Clay'. Due to the above mentality (i.e. Ukraine is Russian Clay), do the math.

What treaty is relevant here?

Basically all of them when you take international precedent into play, but specifically in our situation the treaties that ensure Ukraine's independence after it gave up its nuclear arsenal.

Don't get me started on the repercussions of the various non-proliferation treaties.

What

The thing, historically, is that the only way to defeat an army is literally with another army, and anything less is just sending people to slaughter and marking everyone not fighting a target. This is especially so after the Napoleonic Wars at the earliest, WW1 at the latest. Every successful insurrection/rebellion/guerrilla has the insurrectionists/rebellion/guerrillas not only funded by other nation-states but also transform themselves from an irregular force into a regular one. The VC in Vietnam after Tiet wasn't the actual VC but mostly made up of the special forces of the NVA, for (modern) example.

In addition, simply giving local (proxy) fighters your armaments has a tendency to literally give your own weapon tech to your enemies (the Chinese and Soviets got MANPADS with Stinger-like attributes, likely after getting a few Stingers that the US sent to Afghanistan and using the insight thereof to improve their own designs). Or, in the case of a certain incident with Serbia and an F-117, be a complete idiot and cause stealth-tech to proliferate faster.

I have only ever seen one theory on how sanctions might prove effective. If they hurt the oligarchs enough that they turn on Putin because they can get to him, but not the western countries that are imposing their sanctions. Yeah, I've got my doubts.

Question is, if sanctions don't work and nobody wants to risk Russia launching nukes, what are the other options ?

There is none, which is the problem, and hence why I called it a 'no win scenario'.

[Ralin]

Russia has always considered the various baltic states and Ukraine as illegal states (quietly at first, but ramped up as Putin and his posse took complete power) and still part of Russia after the '90s went disastrous for them... and historically Russia has a tendency to be very salty if its hold on the baltic and Ukraine were ever broken.

While Putin does seem to view Ukraine as a breakaway province in some ways, that's jumping several steps past what's justified.

Basically all of them when you take international precedent into play, but specifically in our situation the treaties that ensure Ukraine's independence after it gave up its nuclear arsenal.

Which treaty?

The thing, historically, is that the only way to defeat an army is literally with another army, and anything less is just sending people to slaughter and marking everyone not fighting a target. This is especially so after the Napoleonic Wars at the earliest, WW1 at the latest. Every successful insurrection/rebellion/guerrilla has the insurrectionists/rebellion/guerrillas not only funded by other nation-states but also transform themselves from an irregular force into a regular one. The VC in Vietnam after Tiet wasn't the actual VC but mostly made up of the special forces of the NVA, for (modern) example.

In addition, simply giving local (proxy) fighters your armaments has a tendency to literally give your own weapon tech to your enemies (the Chinese and Soviets got MANPADS with Stinger-like attributes, likely after getting a few Stingers that the US sent to Afghanistan and using the insight thereof to improve their own designs). Or, in the case of a certain incident with Serbia and an F-117, be a complete idiot and cause stealth-tech to proliferate faster.

Have you even been paying attention for the past twenty years?

Afghanistan: Famous example of Russian military success against an insurgency.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

While Putin does seem to view Ukraine as a breakaway province in some ways, that's jumping several steps past what's justified.

Not to someone far too hopped up on nostalgia.

Which treaty?

One specifically pertaining to Ukraine literally giving up its nuclear arsenal... aka the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances.

Have you even been paying attention for the past twenty years?

Afghanistan: Famous example of Russian military success against an insurgency.

I have and the only reason that Afghanistan in both circumstances won their wars is that they became genuine militaries and defeated them in battle as genuine military units, not as guerilla fighters. While also funded and supplied by a nation-state that is either untouchable (the US in Russia's case, Pakistan in the US's case) or would cause far more problems than it would solve (Iran). I've already said my piece about Vietnam, which is another 'poster boy' for effective insurgencies.

[Crazedwraith]

So much for the Russians don't have enough troops to invade and US is scaremongering.

[Ralin]

I have and the only reason that Afghanistan in both circumstances won their wars is that they became genuine militaries and defeated them in battle as genuine military units, not as guerilla fighters. While also funded and supplied by a nation-state that is either untouchable (the US in Russia's case, Pakistan in the US's case) or would cause far more problems than it would solve (Iran). I've already said my piece about Vietnam, which is another 'poster boy' for effective insurgencies.

Yes. That's generally how a successful insurgency ends. You're saying the guerilla warfare doesn't work because the cases of the guerillas transitioning to an actual military doesn't count?

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Yes. That's generally how a successful insurgency ends. You're saying the guerilla warfare doesn't work because the cases of the guerillas transitioning to an actual military doesn't count?

Wait, so you're not one of those idiots that consider guerilla warfare on its own a viable type of warfare? I think we got off the wrong foot here because I've seen those that do use similar debating threads as you.

[Col. Crackpot]

Whelp.

If nothing else it seems that trying to cozy up to NATO didn't do Ukraine any good.

Ahh yes, the old geopolitical equivalent of “she was asking for it”. Classy.

[wautd]

Russia has always considered the various baltic states and Ukraine as illegal states (quietly at first, but ramped up as Putin and his posse took complete power) and still part of Russia after the '90s went disastrous for them... and historically Russia has a tendency to be very salty if its hold on the baltic and Ukraine were ever broken.

While Putin does seem to view Ukraine as a breakaway province in some ways, that's jumping several steps past what's justified.

Man, not to derail this tread, but I hope that China won't be jumping on the bandwagon by thinking that the time is ripe to invade Taiwan.

[Broomstick]

Like, Putin clearly isn't an angel, but I don't think it's obvious that he's literally Slavic Hitler and can't be appeased by anything less than total Russian domination of Eastern Europe.

I don't speak Russian myself so I have to rely on translations, but didn't Putin pretty much say he wanted the Russian Empire back? The only way to get that is by being the "Slavic Hitler". Why do you think Putin is lying about his ambitions?

This is only going to get worse.

[Broomstick]

The sad thing is that any NATO troop movements into Ukraine are very likely to get them nuked, as per standing Russian nuclear weapon doctrine and the fact that Ukraine is still considered Russian Clay.

Yes, let's try to avoid WWIII. Ukraine is fucked. I wish I could come up with a way to un-fuck the situation but it's beyond my knowledge and talents.

So, we're in a no-win situation. Send NATO troops into Ukraine and get a few tac-nukes to the face, not help and make every treaty not worth the paper they're written on, or simply feed Russia insider knowledge of our weapon tech (because, historically, guerilla war doesn't work, only wars between armies).

Guerilla warfare can tire out an adversary which, as we've seen over the past 70-80 years, can lead to a more powerful adversary pulling out. It's not guaranteed to work and it's very costly in lives. Afghanistan managed the trick against not just one but two superpowers: the USSR and the US. It left the country a wreck, but eventually the other guys went back home.

I also suspect the Russians already have a fairly decent knowledge of our weapon tech, just as we have some idea of theirs.

Question is, if sanctions don't work and nobody wants to risk Russia launching nukes, what are the other options ?

Ground war. Cyberattacks.

So much for the Russians don't have enough troops to invade and US is scaremongering.

Too much focus on troop numbers. Like the US, the Russians have significant mechanical capabilities. In the 21st Century you have to count more than just boots on the ground.

[Broomstick]

Man, not to derail this tread, but I hope that China won't be jumping on the bandwagon by thinking that the time is ripe to invade Taiwan.

Of course they're at least thinking about it.

[Ralin]

Yes. That's generally how a successful insurgency ends. You're saying the guerilla warfare doesn't work because the cases of the guerillas transitioning to an actual military doesn't count?

Wait, so you're not one of those idiots that consider guerilla warfare on its own a viable type of warfare? I think we got off the wrong foot here because I've seen those that do use similar debating threads as you.

'On its own' is a weird and loaded way to describe it. What you're talking about is part of the process most successful insurgencies aim for.

[Col. Crackpot]

Man, not to derail this tread, but I hope that China won't be jumping on the bandwagon by thinking that the time is ripe to invade Taiwan.

Of course they're at least thinking about it.

The buildup would be months long and obvious. They would need to launch an amphibious assault the size of Overlord and there is no hiding that in the 21st century. Also the Taiwanese can fight and will have at least American backing. Possibly Japan, Korea and Australia too. That would be WWIII.

[ray245]

Russia has always considered the various baltic states and Ukraine as illegal states (quietly at first, but ramped up as Putin and his posse took complete power) and still part of Russia after the '90s went disastrous for them... and historically Russia has a tendency to be very salty if its hold on the baltic and Ukraine were ever broken.

While Putin does seem to view Ukraine as a breakaway province in some ways, that's jumping several steps past what's justified.

Man, not to derail this tread, but I hope that China won't be jumping on the bandwagon by thinking that the time is ripe to invade Taiwan.

Only in the minds of people who don't study the Taiwanese situation at all.

[ray245]

Man, not to derail this tread, but I hope that China won't be jumping on the bandwagon by thinking that the time is ripe to invade Taiwan.

Of course they're at least thinking about it.

China aren't dumb, and they know they have far more to lose in regards to invading Taiwan than what Russia is doing now. As much as Chinese leadership likes to be jingoistic about reunifying China, they have strong economic cost to consider. Far more than what Russia have.

Russia's economy is not that closely tied to other major world economies even if they are supplying gas to Europe. Russia barely export anything else.

China on the other hand exports nearly everything else to the world. Invading Taiwan will hurt them economically on a far more excessive level than what Russia is doing. Russian oligarchs are far less beholden to the economic well-being of their citizens than the CCP.

Russian leadership derive its appeal from political rhetoric like retaking the "lost" Soviet states. Chinese leadership derive their appeal from the economic well-being of the average citizen.

[Ralin]

I don't speak Russian myself so I have to rely on translations, but didn't Putin pretty much say he wanted the Russian Empire back? The only way to get that is by being the "Slavic Hitler". Why do you think Putin is lying about his ambitions?

This is only going to get worse.

Honestly? Hadn't read his speech yet and I'm looking it up now. I personally default to assuming what he says about his motivations is partially true, partially cynical propaganda. Same as when he was talking about the danger to Russia and concern about minorities.

China aren't dumb, and they know they have far more to lose in regards to invading Taiwan than what Russia is doing now. As much as Chinese leadership likes to be jingoistic about reunifying China, they have strong economic cost to consider. Far more than what Russia have.

...

Russian leadership derive its appeal from political rhetoric like retaking the "lost" Soviet states. Chinese leadership derive their appeal from the economic well-being of the average citizen.

I'm pretty sure as far as Xi Jinping is concerned maintaining the status quo there is a success. Since they're only going to be in a stronger position in that relationship as time goes by barring changes.

[ray245]

I'm pretty sure as far as Xi Jinping is concerned maintaining the status quo there is a success. Since they're only going to be in a stronger position in that relationship as time goes by barring changes.

Maintaining the status quo is what China is happy with, even if there is the occasion hawkish rhetoric about how they have to reunify it in the future. China is not Russia, despite what American news is telling people.

They might both be rivals of the West, but the two countries are very different in both its domestic outlook and economic structures. China is an incredibly economically tied region that can't afford a war the same way Russia can.

Russia have enough gas to export it to Europe. China's economy grind to a halt if war with Taiwan breaks out and all of its fuel imports get cut off.

Only stupid and ill-informed Westerners would think China is thinking of copying Russia in the exact same way. Taiwan is not Ukraine.

[ray245]

I'm pretty sure as far as Xi Jinping is concerned maintaining the status quo there is a success. Since they're only going to be in a stronger position in that relationship as time goes by barring changes.

Maintaining the status quo is what China is happy with, even if there is the occasion hawkish rhetoric about how they have to reunify it in the future. China is not Russia, despite what American news is telling people.

They might both be rivals of the West, but the two countries are very different in both its domestic outlook and economic structures. China is an incredibly economically tied region that can't afford a war the same way Russia can.

Russia have enough gas to export it to Europe. China's economy grind to a halt if war with Taiwan breaks out and all of its fuel imports get cut off.

Only stupid and ill-informed Westerners would think China is thinking of copying Russia in the exact same way. Taiwan is not Ukraine.

[Tribble]

Whelp.

If nothing else it seems that trying to cozy up to NATO didn't do Ukraine any good.

Ahh yes, the old geopolitical equivalent of “she was asking for it”. Classy.

Doesn’t make it any less true.

Whether or not Russia was always going to invade, Ukraine’s attempt to join NATO was exactly the kind of casus belli that Putin was looking for. Especially because Putin knew that NATO was not capable nor prepared to actually commit to defending Ukraine, at least in time enough for it to matter.

Naturally invading another country is morally (and legally) wrong. Pointing out the logic behind Putin’s actions doesn’t make it any less horrific.

But no one here should be surprised.

[Ralin]

Doesn’t make it any less true.

Whether or not Russia was always going to invade, Ukraine’s attempt to join NATO was exactly the kind of casus belli that Putin was looking for. Especially because Putin knew that NATO was not capable nor prepared to actually commit to defending Ukraine, at least in time enough for it to matter.

Naturally invading another country is morally (and legally) wrong. Pointing out the logic behind Putin’s actions doesn’t make it any less horrific.

But no one here should be surprised.

And if you can't win a war with Russia on your own and can't ally with someone else willing to do it for you at some point that really just leaves hashing out what being a Russian vassal state means and making the best possible deal.

[Col. Crackpot]

https://twitter.com/afp/status/1496869477820026892?s=21

AFP reporting that Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting at Chernobyl.

Chernobyl.

Jesus Christ have they all gone mad…

[Tribble]

https://twitter.com/afp/status/1496869477820026892?s=21

AFP reporting that Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting at Chernobyl.

Chernobyl.

Jesus Christ have they all gone mad…

I’m guessing both sides want to maintain control of the plant (and others) to prevent the other side from using it as an area of denial weapon.

I doubt either side intends on destroying it themselves; radioactive lands aren’t very productive after all.

Of course, fighting over it can cause the very catastrophe they are trying to avoid.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Yes, let's try to avoid WWIII. Ukraine is fucked. I wish I could come up with a way to un-fuck the situation but it's beyond my knowledge and talents.

Then prepare for a world that is constantly at war and largely out for itself and basically a return to the old colonial empires and constant warfare... because that's where we're heading.

Guerilla warfare can tire out an adversary which, as we've seen over the past 70-80 years, can lead to a more powerful adversary pulling out. It's not guaranteed to work and it's very costly in lives. Afghanistan managed the trick against not just one but two superpowers: the USSR and the US. It left the country a wreck, but eventually the other guys went back home.

That relied on two factors: the uninterceptablility of the funding and the recognition of evolving from a guerilla force to a genuine military and undertaking that evolution.

I also suspect the Russians already have a fairly decent knowledge of our weapon tech, just as we have some idea of theirs.

What I'm talking about is literally giving samples to reverse engineer and understanding their capabilities.

Ground war. Cyberattacks.

A ground war where NATO sends troops is literally out of the question (Russian nuclear weapons policy) and getting cyberattacks to Russia requires them to be complacent and not have their defenses up, which neither is a thing right now.

Too much focus on troop numbers. Like the US, the Russians have significant mechanical capabilities. In the 21st Century you have to count more than just boots on the ground.

No, it's just that people can't wrap their heads around wars in general.

And if you can't win a war with Russia on your own and can't ally with someone else willing to do it for you at some point that really just leaves hashing out what being a Russian vassal state means and making the best possible deal.

There will be no deal, I'm afraid...

'On its own' is a weird and loaded way to describe it. What you're talking about is part of the process most successful insurgencies aim for.

Let's just say that there are people out there that think you don't need to go to the 'genuine military' phase of warfare when you don't have a genuine military to speak of when history outright states the opposite.

[Col. Crackpot]

https://twitter.com/afp/status/1496869477820026892?s=21

AFP reporting that Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting at Chernobyl.

Chernobyl.

Jesus Christ have they all gone mad…

I’m guessing both sides want to maintain control of the plant (and others) to prevent the other side from using it as an area of denial weapon.

I doubt either side intends on destroying it themselves; radioactive lands aren’t very productive after all.

Of course, fighting over it can cause the very catastrophe they are trying to avoid.

Area denial.. if they aren’t careful they will deny all the area from Pripyat to Moscow. They don’t have the resources of the Soviet Union to contain the fallout like they did in 1986.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

https://twitter.com/afp/status/1496869477820026892?s=21

AFP reporting that Russian and Ukrainian forces are fighting at Chernobyl.

Chernobyl.

Jesus Christ have they all gone mad…

I’m guessing both sides want to maintain control of the plant (and others) to prevent the other side from using it as an area of denial weapon.

I doubt either side intends on destroying it themselves; radioactive lands aren’t very productive after all.

Of course, fighting over it can cause the very catastrophe they are trying to avoid.

Area denial.. if they aren’t careful they will deny all the area from Pripyat to Moscow. They don’t have the resources of the Soviet Union to contain the fallout like they did in 1986.

Apparently they've "seized" Chernobyl. If they're even halfway sane they'll stay the fuck away from the plant itself. But then it is Putin that's sending them in after all.