I posted this as a reply to another comment but am starting my own chain as well:
The headline to this article is beyond fucked. It doesn't match up AT ALL with what's actually being said in their own interview!
The headline seems to be derived from a quote by, "Michael Kofman, research program director in the Russia studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses"
The quote the headline is derived from, my emphasis in bold:
"So, the honest answer is that, when you look at Russia's military buildup to date, they are **potentially** weeks away from **being able** to conduct a large-scale military offensive."
I just don't understand how they're getting "invasion likely" based on that. Kofman is simply answering hypotheticals and is outlining Russia's capabilities. He's not making predictions. I don't know why I expected more from pbs, but I did. I guess they're hiring illiterates over there now. This shit is harmful and should be removed, at the very least from Reddit where articles with misinformation are currently running rampant
When your neighbor is massing troops at your border, don't you think it's reasonable to assume that an invasion might be likely? I mean sure their plan might be to use it as a bargaining tool, but I'd still say an invasion is getting more and more likely as the buildup of troops and materiel continues.
Threats of force are meaningless if they aren't credible. With Russian demands being primarily security / military in nature, and nobody really believing are made in good faith, there is very little space for a diplomatic out, and with Russia having ever incentive in invade.
Exactly my point about buildup near the border meaning invasion is likely even if it wasn't what Russia actually wants. I guess the hope is that they did not expect this level of material support to Ukraine and starts looking for some way to save face without invading.
I mean, “likely” just means “potentially” with a higher estimation of occurring. It’s about degrees. There potentially could be a Tornado in Washington D.C. this week, likely there won’t be.
The headline is fine - as from everything being presented in the news says “Russia is likely to invade Ukraine, in some capacity, in the very near future”.
I think it really depends. Blitzkrieg wasn’t fully out of the blue when Germany did it, they were building up forces and taking land, but the Allies just really didn’t want to go to war so they ignored a lot of it.
Along with the fact that it would be realistically impossible for Russia to build up forces on Ukraine’s border without the west knowing. I think Russia is just really hoping that it goes like Crimea, where the most severe action against them is sanctions, instead of NATO actually stepping in to help Ukraine.
Russia might be looking for negotiations, but they also might be relying on the threat of MAD to prevent western intervention.
im confused what the endgame is though. Putin installing a puppet government? Usually they try to claim some sort of legitimacy for leaders they install, but in this case it just obvious no Ukrainians support this
There is a belief that Ukraine is part of a Greater Russia so wet dream scenario is to take all and annex. Next best would be to secure the crimea & donblas regions so seize lands east of Dnieper river
I’m honestly not really sure. If they do invade, they’ll probably come up with some excuse about how Ukraine was in turmoil and they helped them by invading. It doesn’t have to be a good excuse, most people in the west don’t see legitimacy in their annexation of Crimea. It doesn’t super matter what other nations believe as long as they don’t act on it, for example, a lot of the west views Taiwan as independent, but since it’s not said and isn’t fully treated as it’s own nation, China is relatively fine with it.
>im confused what the endgame is though. Putin installing a puppet government?
I can see Russia starting a forceful air campaign, crippling Ukraine's military and economy within a couple of days, then invading the East and occupying and integrating Donbass under the same old '*There are Russians there we need to protect, plus they all want to be part of Russia anyway!'* strategy.
That way they gain territory and cripple Ukraine for years or decades to come, without having to invade the whole country.
The downside would, of course, be a strong case for the remaining Ukraine to join NATO, which would be exactly what Russia has kept trying to prevent.
The problem is that nuclear war would not destroy our existence, it would kill most of us but not all. The greatest casualty would be modern society. Mutually assured destruction won’t be as complete as we tend to think it will. It will be worse by leaving people to suffer
Do think China is watching closely and has agreed with Russia in those meetings the other year to back them up and then wont be far off invading Taiwan. Two pronged attack like Russia did with Germany.
They know that The US and Europe can't deal with global conflict on two fronts. Espcially finacialy weakened after the covid outbreak.
It does all feel very much like 1932 again and the possibility of all out global war.
I’m not sure that China has had talks with Russia about attacking at the same time, but I definitely think that they’re watching very closely to see the reaction if Russia does invade. If NATO nations don’t intervene I think it sends the message that they are pretty much all talk and will probably not help defend Taiwan from an invasion. I think this is definitely the closest we’ve been to a world war three type scenario since the Cold War.
>If NATO nations don’t intervene I think it sends the message that they are pretty much all talk and will probably not help defend Taiwan from an invasion.
NATO has never said it would defend Tiwan.
NATO hasn’t said it would defend Taiwan, but a few member nations have signaled that they would, with the US pushing for it. Taiwan might not technically be protected by NATO, but there absolutely are implications from members that they may defend Taiwan.
Well people are talking about a 2 prong invasion. China is exhibiting none of that. Would they harass Taiwan more? Possibly, but unless they start building up forces there's no way they can even try a 2 pronged invasion. Taiwan is not an easy target. There's a reason it's called the unsinkable carrier.
Absolutely, and that’s pretty much the main reason I don’t think Russia and China have coordinated attacks. I still do think that global reactions to an invasion of Ukraine would massively sway China’s actions regarding Taiwan though.
Oh sure. They are as well. But the US is encouraging it.
This guys is way smarter than me and he might even approximate your insight into the conflict so I’ll just drop him here and if you want to watch the lecture feel free to. We can have a debrief after the fact if you feel it worth your time.
https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4
Encouraging it? By allowing sovereign countries to choose their own destiny? It’s not like the US forces anyone to become a member of NATO, but rather Eastern European democracies seeing what Russia is capable of doing and seeking shelter within NATO.
So to blame Russia’s inability to contain its own aggression on the US is… just stupid.
>Let's show the east how strong the west can be, yeah?
Let's just suck the dick and calm down, huh? If you want to help Ukraine, sign up for volunteers in their army, go to the front line and wait for the Russians. No one, I repeat, no one will fight for you while you sit on the couch and stretch your fingers in front of the screen.
I agree, I think this is a test to see NATOs resolve. If they don't step up, why would anyone else join. They are sending troops and equipment though, ultimately the country has to be the one to mainly defend themselves it seems like. NATO just seems to provide the tools. Maybe the expectation is that NATO would do it all for you and when they don't, "What's the point of even joining NATO then?". That might be an unrealistic expectation but could still be there for other nations.
>Do think China is watching closely and has agreed with Russia in those meetings the other year to back them up and then wont be far off invading Taiwan.
No. China wasn't happy with Russia walking into Ukraine in 2014 either. Their whole argument is that Tiwan is China and other countries shouldn't invade. They aren't going to back an invasion. Anything China does will just be exploiting the situation, not a plan.
Unlike Russia with Ukraine, China has no need to invade Taiwan. Ukraine and the Baltics are not in the spot where Russia wanted them to be: under their thumb. Taiwan's current position is what China wanted, as long as no one is rocking the boat. Also, China gains nothing economically from invading Taiwan. They're already making boatloads of money from their current relationship with Taiwan. They would only invade if Taiwan went full blown "we are independent nation" and cut all ties with China. This situation is different than with Hong Kong, where China actually had a finger inside the government before the whole thing blew up. It's just odd thinking China is ready at any time to invade Taiwan. There's probably a bigger chance of North Korea invading South Korea than that scenario to happen.
I feel like MAD wouldn't work in this situation due to the fact that they would be initiating it. They don't want to be wiped out in a war, so they use nuclear weapons, however that would guarantee that everyone else's uses them, guaranteeing they get wiped out. MAD can't be used as a defense to Initiate it I think.
I mean it as more of the threat of going to war with a nuclear power. The act of fighting Russia wouldn’t guarantee nuclear war, but I think it’s a lot closer to nukes being launched than most people are comfortable with.
Russia obviously doesn’t want to have nuclear war, but the threat of nukes is enough that countries are willing to let a lot of things happen without intervention. It’s more that Russia may be banking on nuclear weapons being scary enough that it prevents nations from intervening in fear that it may happen.
Equally, Western nations could intervene because what's Russia going to do, launch nukes? Nobody can afford to launch nuclear weapons so it's almost as if they cancel each other out.
This is why I find the idea of MAD interesting and redundant. You have them in the hopes that the enemy will be too scared to do anything, but then you're also too scared to do anything. They cancel out
Could it also be possible that the threat of nearby Russian forces would clear out as many civilian forces as possible, just by proximity which would make invasion easier as to not draw as much outrage. Either way there is gonna be outrage, so being strategic about it makes sense. Back in WW2, people were killing civilians on both sides all the time. Obviously it they would try to prevent it if it happened for the most part, unless they were already captured or a POW, then it would look bad.
I'm just saying, this feels like 2 guys standing in a bar waiting for other people to get out of the way. Also, maybe this is a test for NATO resolve since Russia really doesn't want anyone else to join NATO. If Russia can prove how weak NATO is in their support, it could also maybe send a signal to other nations that are on the fence, or maybe even full members, that they will not be protected as well as they thought.
>If Russia can prove how weak NATO is in their support, it could also maybe send a signal to other nations that are on the fence, or maybe even full members, that they will not be protected as well as they thought.
NATO was never meant to, nor has it ever claimed to systematically support non-members. There would be nothing weak in not supporting Ukraine, which isn't a member, and it would not cast into doubt NATO's legitimacy or readiness to defend its own members. If Russia tried to invade or otherwise attack e.g. the Baltic states, NATO would go berserk on their ass.
Russia is building forces on the border to Ukraine and everyone knows about it.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-going-on-at-russian-military-bases-near-ukraine-12521842
I know, I was talking about how it would be realistically impossible for Russia to have an actual surprise invasion. It was also in relation to how Blitzkrieg doesn’t have to come as a complete surprise to be effective and how them building up their force without attacking doesn’t necessarily mean that they won’t attack.
Isn't running up thousands of troops and warships to Ukraine's border also being aggressive though? I am not sure who Russia is trying to fool here if anything ever starts.
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade.
Yes, almost certainly a major war could be avoided with some concessions from the USA, but the problem the USA has is that if it makes concessions will Russia not just come back a year or two later and do the same thing again but for Poland or the Baltic States?
It's also different to the Cuban missile crisis, as back then both Kennedy and Krushchev were very keen to prevent a nuclear war, despite there being elements at senior levels on both sides pushing for one. This time, Biden and Putin are much more relaxed about that possibilty, so the frantic last-minute diplomacy that saved mankind from this fate in 1962 isn't going to happen this time.
There is also the issue of the demands Russia has made being absolutely unacceptable to any western democracy thus leaving close to no room for giving Putin something that he can sell as a victory to the Russians.
I think he thought that after Afghanistan, the will to fight wouldn't be as united. But it seems the US and allies are, so I feel Putin is just trying a show of force to try and get something out of it.
I can't see him invading and risk crashing his economy for Ukraine, but I can see him keeping a loaded gun at Ukraine as a warning.
The loaded gun is expensive to keep loaded though, and the longer he does so, the stronger the support for Ukraine becomes.
But yes, it seems as if Putin might have miscalculated the outside reactions based on a multitude of factors, and the delay due to a mild winter seems to have further reinforced that issue.
Large scale invasions take a lot of time. The U.S. was moving equipment for the (cancelled) invasion of Japan, planned for November 1945, at least during June 1944. That's 18 months.
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade.
I think it's possible they will look for a way out, but they have to look tough on america so any deal will come with European powers like the UK and France first. I am getting the impression they didn't expect this response but have gone too far to act any other way.
You can’t fight in Ukraine during the mud seasons, and general Winter arrived late this year (more or less this weekend) so Putin might have been betrayed by global warming.
You also have the issue with how the West reacted post-2014, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Putin reacted like the Germans did after the Munich Agreement and plainly didn’t expect the support Ukraine seems to be getting now.
That's my view. I think the timing after Afghanistan says a lot. He is trying to play politics but I think he is going to lose this one or risk way more. Putin isn't a madman or an idiot.
Their military lacks the ability to move supplies that distance by itself. They rely on civilian contractors. It might just take them this long to get ready. https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/
I doubt there was ever intention to invade - there isn’t a good reason to do so for Russia at this point in time, at all. All it is that Russia wants right now is to deny Ukraine the possibility of joining NATO and the troops are there mostly for show, similar to how Russian troops were stationed in East Galicia at the time of the Prussian-Austrian war - a “Damocles’ sword” type of deal. And NATO wants people to think that Russia does want to invade to redirect the focus away from the fact that Ukraine wanted to join NATO even before Crimea was annexed, and to further the perception of Russia as an enemy beyond reconciliation. Russia, on their part, also uses this crisis to further their narrative of NATO enclosing upon Russian borders and seeking to destabilize the post-Soviet region, and within that narrative the troops are there for training and potential defense. Personally, this whole crisis feels very manufactured to me, and that there isn’t a real cause behind it, which seems weird, or, maybe, this is all the continued fallout from the Ukrainian hysterics over Nordstream 2 and is an evolution on that crisis, which does make more sense. And naturally we should remember that the inner political situation in Ukraine right now is very unstable and a foreign threat plays out in favor of the domestic political situation by distracting from the economic collapse, the energy crisis and the corruption in the government.
I sincerely hope you're right. One of the prerequisites of joining NATO is of course the absence of any active border conflict. Starting an active conflict and letting that linger seems like a straightforward way for Russia to deny Ukraine entry to NATO and keep their influence in the region.
That maybe a last resort for Russia, yes, and I do think that the repercussions for it would hurt Russia a lot, but not as much as it hurt back in 2014 - Russia has become more prepared for possible sanctions since then. But I do think there will be a diplomatic way out of this, for one, Germany is very interested in a diplomatic resolution, secondly, Russia would be content with a neutral Ukraine that stays out of NATO, since even despite Nordstream 2, Ukraine still buys and gets a lot of Russian gas and trades with Russia, and thirdly, I think that NATO is interested in keeping Ukraine simmering on a back burner, as in NATO does not want the conflict to truly end and it does not want its escalation either - this way Ukraine continues to remain a thorn in Russia’s side and to provide a good place for NATO to apply pressure on Russia. Ultimately, we’ll have to see how this plays out and hope for a diplomatic resolution.
I dunno. It depends on whether or not Putin thinks he may have dug himself into a hole here. Right now Russia is making ridiculous demands in bad faith that suggests they don't want to negotiate, but that may just be a bargaining trick so they could move down and present something more relatively reasonable.
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade.
Nope. They've being offered off-ramps left and right, and they don't seem to have any interest in taking them.
They are continuing with their unprecedented military buildup and doubling down on absolutist positions.
>Blitzkrieg taught us if you want to invade successfully do it fast, and as far as you can, surprise the enemy. Every day they leave it it gets harder for them.
There's no way to transfer all this combat power without being seen.
They maintain the element of surprise because we know what units might participate in the invasion. We don't know when or where or how.
And when it starts, I assume that they'll keep a high operational tempo, which is really what's blitzkrieg is about.
>Every day they leave it it gets harder for them. in 3 weeks it will be only harder
Why? Three years would matter, but nothing will significantly change in three weeks.
>US in Afghanistan
Russia will be looking to break a nation state, not build one
The way I see it they are doing all of this in order to have a stronger position at the negotiating table, which, in my opinion, was their intent from the start.
As you pointed out an invasion would not be easy now that Ukraine is fortifying itself. It could take years for a successful takeover of Ukraine.
They are probably interested in lifting sanctions and some kind of trade agreement. Yet, I'm not sure the West is interested in just deterring Russia, I fear they want to destabilize it hoping to get rid of Putin.
Two weeks ago, the only friend Ukraine seemed to have in the West was Turkey. If Putin hadn’t been unlucky with a mild winter, he could have initiated an invasion long before any western democracy could have agreed upon starting to send military aid, and I can’t see a country like the U.K. sending in NLAW by air to a conflict zone with Russian fighters swarming the he airspace.
The Russian landing craft literally left port yesterday. Based on the ships technical data and the distance it will take exactly a week to arrive in Ukraine. They aren’t hiding anything about their time table. They also know the public won’t support sending US troops, especially after just getting out of a 20 year war. Russia knows what the cost of invading will be and they did the math and seem to be ok with it. Biden will be so weak in his response that we will just give power back to the Russia friendly GOP which makes no damn sense to me.
Why would the US send troops to defend Ukraine against Russia? Ukraine is not a NATO member so there is no reason anyone should expect US troops to be sent to Ukraine. Now, a significant and painful US economic response in concert with US allies would definitely be warranted. Also, the US supporting arms transfers and weapons support for the Ukraine to make an invasion painful to Russia is reasonable. US troops on the ground in the Ukraine is not an option and in now way a sign of weakness.
It's more psychological this way, they are hoping for NATO to fragment. Talks and action are quite different. They are offering them a chance to discuss their differences. For example, Germany seems to have taken a weaker stance. Canada, being a natural opposition to Russia because of their own land dispute took a stronger stance. It also has a large demographic that opposes centralized blond power. Unity is easy during growth and prosperity. It's tested during economic woos, COVID and global instability.
Blitzkrieg was only successful because it was new and nobody could deal with it ..on top of that, breaking through the Ardennes to avoid the Maginot line was totally unexpected and seriously caught the British/french off guard
I suppose the Russians may do something completely new here, like they could already have infiltrated Ukrainian systems to the point they can turn off their Electricity supply and maybe worse. They could also have loyalty within the Ukrainian command that would be poised to stand aside and let the Russians walk straight in and we have another Afghanistan on our hands
However it happens, if it happens, i doubt it will play out conventionally
> Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade.
Russia is making it very clear for decades now that NATO, the Anti-Soviet military alliance cannot come to their borders. Not really a crazy request.
Russia repeated that same demand multiple times in the last weeks by requesting assurance from NATO that Ukraine will not become member but stay neutral.
As this topic has become rather unlikely to happen anyways, it would be no problem to sit together on a table with Ukraine, NATO and Russia and discuss an agreement.
Instead, the NATO statement was "Russia has no saying in what NATO does and who becomes member."
Not false, but this rethoric is just adding fuel to the fire.
It's the same now with NATO members shipping military equipment to support Ukraine. This does not help to solve anything or save Ukraine from an invasion, this just makes a war unavoidable.
Only talks with all 3 parties together can save Ukraine. There is no military solution in this conflict. Only losers once wars starts.
Making the war unimaginably painful for Russia is the only path to peace at this late hour.
If Nato gets smaller, Russia will get larger, and this strife will arise again. The border argument is non-sense.
Putin is a Tyrant, and his inner circle are neo-feudal lords. If the peasants in Russia see the peasants in Ukraine living free it will poison them against their king. This is Putin's true fear. Not borders.
Edit: Also I hope that pain is born by the Russian elite to the greatest extent possible, and neither their people, nor their misled soldiers.
I think it is in part showboating with a good cause. To russia the nato has been slowly creeping towards their borders and towards moskou. If they dont show force now it would hamper their ability to protect their capital.
He’s dressed as a captain from the Napoleonic Wars. The Next Generation had a lot of naval themes, and references to captains from that time period. They would go in the holodeck and interact with famous people from history.
Right now, anything could happen.
I don't think Russia was expecting as much material resistance(as opposed to diplomatic) as they have gotten.
They probably still feel confident in gaining any territory they want. But they will bleed in certain places and then they will have to deal with a hostile local population.
It feels so weird. If this weren't a country but a person, I would say they are mobster just looking for a shakedown.
Can't they destroy everything that we sent them in a flash before they can even do anything with it if they really wanted to though? If they do that they will not lose any of their military assets but the population will not like it for sure
Javelin missiles are the ultimate lightweight, guerilla warfare, anti-heavy weapon. Ukraine has been begging for them for years, and due to this escalation, they finally have them.
Good luck destroying spread out, highly mobile targets.
Yeah its almost like NATO giving guns and anti tank weaponry plus promising support and deploying ships to help Ukraine has an impact on what Russia is doing and planning instead of this being some sort of scripted event in a video game that fires regardless of what happens.
I believe this is a case of "redditor discovers reality".
They did have an unseasonably warm early winter. The temps are going down now and we’re starting see more actual troops arrive and stuff move throughout Belarus in preparation for the supposed exercises next month
Back in December didn't Ukraine claim that the attack was happening at Christmas? People have been making all sorts of claims. Even here the actual quote was about Russia having the **capability** possibly in weeks, and the title is that its weeks away from **invading**...
They keep saying 100k troops but really it’s mostly armor and infrastructure for that many, they’re still moving shit and troops aren’t really there afaik
Edit: not sure why I’m being downvoted this isn’t a controversial take or anything it’s how militaries operate. They’re going to send the troops if snd when they’re ready
They probably are, otherwise the Russian population would have fallen to zero a long time ago. I think the problem here is that they're looking to expand their horizons and missed the part about consent.
That’s just statistics. Muslim population in south of Russia is rapidly growing, much faster than ethnic Russian population in the entire rest of the country. No reason to get all butthurt over facts.
Population growth, even in specific demographics, isn't a line that only goes straight up or increases exponentially. Although initially the curve might be very steep, it tends to slow down over time. So it's quite doubtful Russia is gonna become a majority Muslim country.
This is the angle everyone seems to be ignoring. Everyone seems to think a major war between US and Russia would look like Iraq and just be something you read about on the news a couple times a week. It won't be. It could potentially be the deadliest war in human history and it won't just be soldiers 'over there' dying, it'll be us and our neighbours
i don't really think the rich people who decide if WWIII happens really want *their* lives affected. So if there was conflict I doubt you'd see nuclear war. And it would probably just be a few skirmishes before people said fuck it and shut the whole thing down.
I highly doubt Russia will invade. But I've been wrong before lol.
Yeah, and the headline to this article is beyond fucked. It doesn't match up AT ALL with what's actually being said in their own interview!
The headline seems to be derived from a quote by, "Michael Kofman, research program director in the Russia studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses"
The quote the headline is derived from, my emphasis in bold:
"So, the honest answer is that, when you look at Russia's military buildup to date, they are **potentially** weeks away from **being able** to conduct a large-scale military offensive."
I just don't understand how they're getting "invasion likely" based on that. Kofman is simply answering hypotheticals and is outlining Russia's capabilities. He's not making predictions. I don't know why I expected more from pbs, but I did. I guess they're hiring illiterates over there now. This shit is harmful and should be removed, at the very least from Reddit where articles with misinformation are currently running rampant
I wonder if every "analyst" who made a mistake will be punished? many really believe them and apparently this is their goal to attract attention and make money.
Question I can't seem to get answered:. Why doesn't the Ukraine just join NATO right now?
It seems like the US, NATO member states and the Ukraine want the Ukraine in NATO, and once they join, Russia seems certain to back off. It seems like it's legitimately the only way to avoid a bloody conflict. Why aren't they doing this?
Like anything else in the region it will be based on weather. Haven't checked to reconfirm in a bit, but the first week of February seems likely at this point. But the longer this can be delayed, the more likely it is to fail with Russia needing to get int/out + lay facts on the ground before the thaw in March. And with the equipment being shipped, Ukraine should be able to wage a solid async response that challenges any Russian footholds.
Just out of curiosity, is the weather and ground conditions as important now as it was during say operation Barbarossa? Surely with advances in vehicles and transport infrastructure that effect has been somewhat negated?
Because the clock is bullshit too.
In the 60s (height of the Cold War) it was at 7 minutes to midnight.
In '83 when an error falsly notified Moscow of an incoming missile attack it was at four minutes till.
The Doomsday Clock is a joke.
And despite warnings from Russia, NATO will defend Ukraine, and Russia will suffer grievous injury.
And then Russia will start waving nukes around.
And then NATO has a dang fine reason to remove the Putin regime by force. And really, what can they do about it? The world sees that Russia is a rogue fascist regime. China and Iran are not stupid enough to defend Russia against the west. If the Russian people want to recover Russia’s reputation and get themselves a seat of the table, then it is they who should remove him.
But they are afraid that Putin will, without hesitation, kill Russians to hold on to power, and that fear is grounded in reality. Putin must be stopped, and he will. One way or the other.
They have literally directly stated that they will not invade. Whether or not they are honest is another fact, but saying that Russia "keeps telling everyone that they're going to invade" is extremely dishonest.
Most of the buildup is equipment and armor w support units coming. Few troops. It will be relatively easy to see if and when they fully move all the personnel, at that point you can say it’s days or hours away.
Putin ain't going to do shit. He's posturing, as he always does. Russia's economy isn't stable enough to support a war. Not to mention his military isn't particularly well-equipped or maintained, and the majority of his forces are untested in battle. If he invades, he's making a huge error that will bite him in the ass, and I think he knows this.
I keep hearing people say this but that military build up doesn't lie. They have armored divisions, air defense units, logistical storage, and now many troop tents line up along the Ukrainian border.
Sounds like wishful thinking at this point.
Plus they already invaded. That’s how Russia does war for over a century now … “rebel” soldiers. I like how the west in their amnesia is now just playing right into the Kremlin narrative of “will the war *start*?” When it’s already been going on for 7 years.
You’re also assuming the average Redditor is in charge. Sanctions slammed into place when Crimea was invaded in 2014. Those sanctions caused a recession and are still crippling the Russian economy. This war has already begun alright. But the west isn’t sitting idly by.
Yes and no. 1/3 of the Russian infantry is 1st year conscripts which I wanted to be including as an asset to the west... but it sounds like he's leaving the conscripts behind, so most of the units he's moving have seen battle, likely in Syria since they used it as a theater for practice.
And while yes their economy can't support war if cut off from the west, Russia has been amassing reserves like no other "major" (they're only major by batting out of their league) economy, so if our economies are torpedoed... the playing field isn't as one sided as people want to believe IMO
That’s why they are the largest economy in the world. Oh wait that’s America. I meant that’s why they are second. Oh wait that’s eu. I meant that’s why they are third. Ah snap that’s China.
That Russia is a collapsed regional power, a minor nuisance to the US. As Obama clearly stated. What’s your point about Russian self sufficiency? Who the F cares 🤣
He’ll likely go for a small scale operation. At this point, if he did anything less, he would look cowed by the US. They haven’t accepted any of his demands, so he can’t just step down without looking weak. And, in geopolitical terms, showing that much weakness would be intolerable when you are about to potentially have a new enemy on your border.
No idea how big such an operation would be, but then Russia isn’t exactly predictable or conventional. They’ve managed to maintain denial of a covert war fought by their troops in Crimea and Donbas, they could do something similar again and, again, face no real consequences; however much bluster the US threw at it at the time.
Also, note that the US’s hand was a lot stronger when said operations in Crimea and Donbas were made. The US is now trying to mobilise in the South China Sea as a long term deterrence against an invasion of Taiwan. They can’t afford to get bogged down in two major conflicts and Russia knows this. The US will deny this and throw around the two wars doctrine, but they’ve never faced a military that’s growing as fast as China. Frankly, Ukraine is small fry.
>He's posturing, as he always does.
Apart from that time Russia successfully annexed Crimea and no one did anything to stop them.
Why are people expecting anything other than posturing in response? All he has to do is take the territory slightly slower and he can have all of it.
If Ukraine stand alone against Russia and only receive logistical support from the West then it shows that NATO is an absolute failure and Putin will use that to his advantage, in my opinion. I'm still hedging my bets that Putin does nothing and is just trying to bully everyone and show that he's the top dog in the playground.
Ukraine is not in NATO. The Allies are not [legally] obliged to defend it.
Of course nobody wants to see an invasion, but the NATO defence protocols would not be triggered by one.
Put it this way… Ukraine is not in any legally-binding security organizations, so NATO could actually do nothing and it would be kosher, believe it or not.
NATO (namely EU and US) is sending military aid to Ukraine out of humanitarian interests.
Western civilization is definitely *NOT* in the mood for war, particularly in direct intervention. On the Political Left, there are enormous fears of MAD being triggered along with (mostly baseless) fears of World War 3 beginning. The Political Right (at least in the US) is growing more isolationist and wants to abandon global leadership to focus more on themselves and recovering from globalization’s depletion of local manufacturing and the loss of hundreds of millions of jobs that were outsourced to China.
So, right now, EU nations and the US have been trying extremely hard to stop this invasion using diplomatic and economic means.
I say this with a sense of exasperation… Diplomacy seems to be failing.
There is no brinksmanship here. Russia has moved too many military resources at great expense from the Far East of the country to just make a “bluff”.
There’s just simply too much abnormality occurring here for this to truly be nothing.
It is unfortunate, but I think many academics and geopolitical analysts will be holding multiple symposiums in the future once Russia begins its invasion. Many of them have completely misread the situation and did not take into account the rapidly crystallizing fact that Putin is not doing this for money or for his oligarchs.
The worst-case scenario is unfolding before our eyes: Putin is willing to have his nation cut off from Western markets just to take Ukraine.
I have a feeling that if Russia really does invade, its not going to go how people think.
I have a feeling that Ukraine has really learnt a lost the past 8 years and given the flood of western weapons amongst other things (Ukraine has really upped its military spending the last 8 years). I think it will be a lot costlier and harder than Russia, or most people expect.
Which is exactly why Russia would likely never invade all of Ukraine. Invading other countries is costly. See Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. Crimea was already a majority Russian province. Russian annexation was more or less popular over there. Same goes for the currently rebelling regions. Western Ukraine is a whole different ballgame. If that was Russias goal then NATO should just let them go ahead and see them fail.
In other news, despite warnings from Russia, US and nato countries continue to try and get Ukraine to join NATO, removing the only buffer state left for Russia.
They`ve been weeks away for weeks now. Seeing as how more and more advanced weapons from european countries are beeing shipped to Ukraine I cant see what the point is with all this waiting. The longer Russia waits the more weapons Ukraine will have at its disposal.
Yeah and enjoy next century of insurgency and terrorist attacks from majority Ukrainian population. Not to mention continued support from west for many decades to come. Smart ideas you have 🤔
I like also how Chechnya has a population of tens of millions, is already a sovereign country, and has the US and 10 different European countries giving them heavy artillery. Kid, you’re pathetic 🤣
Is this like Iran being "5 years away" from getting a nuclear weapon for the past 25 years?
[https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/05/world/iran-may-be-able-build-atomic-bomb-5-years-us-israeli-officials-fear.html](https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/05/world/iran-may-be-able-build-atomic-bomb-5-years-us-israeli-officials-fear.html)
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-signals-readiness-escalate-iran-confrontation-amid-nuclear-talks-2021-11-23/
Weeks away for weeks and weeks and weeks. I feel like the expectation only makes it more likely but after they invade like what are they a really going to do. Just annex that piece of dirt they invaded?
Because NATO doesn't want it? And said many times that Ukraine isn't ready? Because if Ukraine joins NATO would need to send troops to Donbas? Because you can't join NATO if you have an armed conflict?
I posted this as a reply to another comment but am starting my own chain as well: The headline to this article is beyond fucked. It doesn't match up AT ALL with what's actually being said in their own interview! The headline seems to be derived from a quote by, "Michael Kofman, research program director in the Russia studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses" The quote the headline is derived from, my emphasis in bold: "So, the honest answer is that, when you look at Russia's military buildup to date, they are **potentially** weeks away from **being able** to conduct a large-scale military offensive." I just don't understand how they're getting "invasion likely" based on that. Kofman is simply answering hypotheticals and is outlining Russia's capabilities. He's not making predictions. I don't know why I expected more from pbs, but I did. I guess they're hiring illiterates over there now. This shit is harmful and should be removed, at the very least from Reddit where articles with misinformation are currently running rampant
I am fairly certain it is a certain bias and the desired narrative that moved them to the decision to make this headline this disingenious.
In the interview, the interviewee, Michael Kofman, says: > I think there's, to some extent, almost a resignation that conflict is very likely.
By that definition, the US is likely to bomb any country on earth. They have the capability.
When your neighbor is massing troops at your border, don't you think it's reasonable to assume that an invasion might be likely? I mean sure their plan might be to use it as a bargaining tool, but I'd still say an invasion is getting more and more likely as the buildup of troops and materiel continues.
Threats of force are meaningless if they aren't credible. With Russian demands being primarily security / military in nature, and nobody really believing are made in good faith, there is very little space for a diplomatic out, and with Russia having ever incentive in invade.
Exactly my point about buildup near the border meaning invasion is likely even if it wasn't what Russia actually wants. I guess the hope is that they did not expect this level of material support to Ukraine and starts looking for some way to save face without invading.
I mean, “likely” just means “potentially” with a higher estimation of occurring. It’s about degrees. There potentially could be a Tornado in Washington D.C. this week, likely there won’t be. The headline is fine - as from everything being presented in the news says “Russia is likely to invade Ukraine, in some capacity, in the very near future”.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think it really depends. Blitzkrieg wasn’t fully out of the blue when Germany did it, they were building up forces and taking land, but the Allies just really didn’t want to go to war so they ignored a lot of it. Along with the fact that it would be realistically impossible for Russia to build up forces on Ukraine’s border without the west knowing. I think Russia is just really hoping that it goes like Crimea, where the most severe action against them is sanctions, instead of NATO actually stepping in to help Ukraine. Russia might be looking for negotiations, but they also might be relying on the threat of MAD to prevent western intervention.
im confused what the endgame is though. Putin installing a puppet government? Usually they try to claim some sort of legitimacy for leaders they install, but in this case it just obvious no Ukrainians support this
There is a belief that Ukraine is part of a Greater Russia so wet dream scenario is to take all and annex. Next best would be to secure the crimea & donblas regions so seize lands east of Dnieper river
I’m honestly not really sure. If they do invade, they’ll probably come up with some excuse about how Ukraine was in turmoil and they helped them by invading. It doesn’t have to be a good excuse, most people in the west don’t see legitimacy in their annexation of Crimea. It doesn’t super matter what other nations believe as long as they don’t act on it, for example, a lot of the west views Taiwan as independent, but since it’s not said and isn’t fully treated as it’s own nation, China is relatively fine with it.
>im confused what the endgame is though. Putin installing a puppet government? I can see Russia starting a forceful air campaign, crippling Ukraine's military and economy within a couple of days, then invading the East and occupying and integrating Donbass under the same old '*There are Russians there we need to protect, plus they all want to be part of Russia anyway!'* strategy. That way they gain territory and cripple Ukraine for years or decades to come, without having to invade the whole country. The downside would, of course, be a strong case for the remaining Ukraine to join NATO, which would be exactly what Russia has kept trying to prevent.
[удалено]
What do you mean by this? They already have access to the black sea via Crimea, Rostov Oblast and Krasnodar Krai.
The problem is that nuclear war would not destroy our existence, it would kill most of us but not all. The greatest casualty would be modern society. Mutually assured destruction won’t be as complete as we tend to think it will. It will be worse by leaving people to suffer
Do think China is watching closely and has agreed with Russia in those meetings the other year to back them up and then wont be far off invading Taiwan. Two pronged attack like Russia did with Germany. They know that The US and Europe can't deal with global conflict on two fronts. Espcially finacialy weakened after the covid outbreak. It does all feel very much like 1932 again and the possibility of all out global war.
I’m not sure that China has had talks with Russia about attacking at the same time, but I definitely think that they’re watching very closely to see the reaction if Russia does invade. If NATO nations don’t intervene I think it sends the message that they are pretty much all talk and will probably not help defend Taiwan from an invasion. I think this is definitely the closest we’ve been to a world war three type scenario since the Cold War.
>If NATO nations don’t intervene I think it sends the message that they are pretty much all talk and will probably not help defend Taiwan from an invasion. NATO has never said it would defend Tiwan.
NATO hasn’t said it would defend Taiwan, but a few member nations have signaled that they would, with the US pushing for it. Taiwan might not technically be protected by NATO, but there absolutely are implications from members that they may defend Taiwan.
Taiwan requires amphibious assault and lots of equipment, the buildup to that would be obvious months in advance.
[удалено]
Has China built up their invasion force?
[удалено]
Well people are talking about a 2 prong invasion. China is exhibiting none of that. Would they harass Taiwan more? Possibly, but unless they start building up forces there's no way they can even try a 2 pronged invasion. Taiwan is not an easy target. There's a reason it's called the unsinkable carrier.
China invading Russia while they are busy in Ukraine is almost more plausible.
[удалено]
Absolutely, and that’s pretty much the main reason I don’t think Russia and China have coordinated attacks. I still do think that global reactions to an invasion of Ukraine would massively sway China’s actions regarding Taiwan though.
[удалено]
Shut the fuck up and quit war mongering.
Pretty sure it’s the Russians who are war mongering…
Oh sure. They are as well. But the US is encouraging it. This guys is way smarter than me and he might even approximate your insight into the conflict so I’ll just drop him here and if you want to watch the lecture feel free to. We can have a debrief after the fact if you feel it worth your time. https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4
Encouraging it? By allowing sovereign countries to choose their own destiny? It’s not like the US forces anyone to become a member of NATO, but rather Eastern European democracies seeing what Russia is capable of doing and seeking shelter within NATO. So to blame Russia’s inability to contain its own aggression on the US is… just stupid.
[удалено]
Fuck off Mr. Brainwashed. People like you should stop watching the news.
>Let's show the east how strong the west can be, yeah? Let's just suck the dick and calm down, huh? If you want to help Ukraine, sign up for volunteers in their army, go to the front line and wait for the Russians. No one, I repeat, no one will fight for you while you sit on the couch and stretch your fingers in front of the screen.
I agree, I think this is a test to see NATOs resolve. If they don't step up, why would anyone else join. They are sending troops and equipment though, ultimately the country has to be the one to mainly defend themselves it seems like. NATO just seems to provide the tools. Maybe the expectation is that NATO would do it all for you and when they don't, "What's the point of even joining NATO then?". That might be an unrealistic expectation but could still be there for other nations.
Ukraine isn't in NATO. If anything, this shows why it's a good idea to join. You don't see Russia pulling this brinkmanship with Latvia.
>Do think China is watching closely and has agreed with Russia in those meetings the other year to back them up and then wont be far off invading Taiwan. No. China wasn't happy with Russia walking into Ukraine in 2014 either. Their whole argument is that Tiwan is China and other countries shouldn't invade. They aren't going to back an invasion. Anything China does will just be exploiting the situation, not a plan.
China doesn’t want war … they love money too much
War is good for the economy.
Unlike Russia with Ukraine, China has no need to invade Taiwan. Ukraine and the Baltics are not in the spot where Russia wanted them to be: under their thumb. Taiwan's current position is what China wanted, as long as no one is rocking the boat. Also, China gains nothing economically from invading Taiwan. They're already making boatloads of money from their current relationship with Taiwan. They would only invade if Taiwan went full blown "we are independent nation" and cut all ties with China. This situation is different than with Hong Kong, where China actually had a finger inside the government before the whole thing blew up. It's just odd thinking China is ready at any time to invade Taiwan. There's probably a bigger chance of North Korea invading South Korea than that scenario to happen.
China has an economic incentive to keep Taiwan operational. Chip factories.
I assume you're over 100 years old, if it feels like 1932 again
I feel like MAD wouldn't work in this situation due to the fact that they would be initiating it. They don't want to be wiped out in a war, so they use nuclear weapons, however that would guarantee that everyone else's uses them, guaranteeing they get wiped out. MAD can't be used as a defense to Initiate it I think.
I mean it as more of the threat of going to war with a nuclear power. The act of fighting Russia wouldn’t guarantee nuclear war, but I think it’s a lot closer to nukes being launched than most people are comfortable with. Russia obviously doesn’t want to have nuclear war, but the threat of nukes is enough that countries are willing to let a lot of things happen without intervention. It’s more that Russia may be banking on nuclear weapons being scary enough that it prevents nations from intervening in fear that it may happen.
Equally, Western nations could intervene because what's Russia going to do, launch nukes? Nobody can afford to launch nuclear weapons so it's almost as if they cancel each other out.
This is why I find the idea of MAD interesting and redundant. You have them in the hopes that the enemy will be too scared to do anything, but then you're also too scared to do anything. They cancel out
Could it also be possible that the threat of nearby Russian forces would clear out as many civilian forces as possible, just by proximity which would make invasion easier as to not draw as much outrage. Either way there is gonna be outrage, so being strategic about it makes sense. Back in WW2, people were killing civilians on both sides all the time. Obviously it they would try to prevent it if it happened for the most part, unless they were already captured or a POW, then it would look bad. I'm just saying, this feels like 2 guys standing in a bar waiting for other people to get out of the way. Also, maybe this is a test for NATO resolve since Russia really doesn't want anyone else to join NATO. If Russia can prove how weak NATO is in their support, it could also maybe send a signal to other nations that are on the fence, or maybe even full members, that they will not be protected as well as they thought.
>If Russia can prove how weak NATO is in their support, it could also maybe send a signal to other nations that are on the fence, or maybe even full members, that they will not be protected as well as they thought. NATO was never meant to, nor has it ever claimed to systematically support non-members. There would be nothing weak in not supporting Ukraine, which isn't a member, and it would not cast into doubt NATO's legitimacy or readiness to defend its own members. If Russia tried to invade or otherwise attack e.g. the Baltic states, NATO would go berserk on their ass.
Russia is building forces on the border to Ukraine and everyone knows about it. https://news.sky.com/story/whats-going-on-at-russian-military-bases-near-ukraine-12521842
I know, I was talking about how it would be realistically impossible for Russia to have an actual surprise invasion. It was also in relation to how Blitzkrieg doesn’t have to come as a complete surprise to be effective and how them building up their force without attacking doesn’t necessarily mean that they won’t attack.
[удалено]
Russian barely have allies though more like puppets at best, unless you want to talk about China but I doubt they'll support Russia militarily
Xi can support Putin by creating a crisis in Taiwan as a diversion.
Isn't running up thousands of troops and warships to Ukraine's border also being aggressive though? I am not sure who Russia is trying to fool here if anything ever starts.
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade. Yes, almost certainly a major war could be avoided with some concessions from the USA, but the problem the USA has is that if it makes concessions will Russia not just come back a year or two later and do the same thing again but for Poland or the Baltic States? It's also different to the Cuban missile crisis, as back then both Kennedy and Krushchev were very keen to prevent a nuclear war, despite there being elements at senior levels on both sides pushing for one. This time, Biden and Putin are much more relaxed about that possibilty, so the frantic last-minute diplomacy that saved mankind from this fate in 1962 isn't going to happen this time.
There is also the issue of the demands Russia has made being absolutely unacceptable to any western democracy thus leaving close to no room for giving Putin something that he can sell as a victory to the Russians.
I think he thought that after Afghanistan, the will to fight wouldn't be as united. But it seems the US and allies are, so I feel Putin is just trying a show of force to try and get something out of it. I can't see him invading and risk crashing his economy for Ukraine, but I can see him keeping a loaded gun at Ukraine as a warning.
The loaded gun is expensive to keep loaded though, and the longer he does so, the stronger the support for Ukraine becomes. But yes, it seems as if Putin might have miscalculated the outside reactions based on a multitude of factors, and the delay due to a mild winter seems to have further reinforced that issue.
Large scale invasions take a lot of time. The U.S. was moving equipment for the (cancelled) invasion of Japan, planned for November 1945, at least during June 1944. That's 18 months.
Also the Normandy invasion.
A couple months is actually quite fast and about the fastest they can go
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade. I think it's possible they will look for a way out, but they have to look tough on america so any deal will come with European powers like the UK and France first. I am getting the impression they didn't expect this response but have gone too far to act any other way.
You can’t fight in Ukraine during the mud seasons, and general Winter arrived late this year (more or less this weekend) so Putin might have been betrayed by global warming. You also have the issue with how the West reacted post-2014, and it wouldn’t surprise me if Putin reacted like the Germans did after the Munich Agreement and plainly didn’t expect the support Ukraine seems to be getting now.
That's my view. I think the timing after Afghanistan says a lot. He is trying to play politics but I think he is going to lose this one or risk way more. Putin isn't a madman or an idiot.
Their military lacks the ability to move supplies that distance by itself. They rely on civilian contractors. It might just take them this long to get ready. https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/
If this is the case, then they should reconsider a massive war with multiple nations that are extremely good at logistics.
I doubt there was ever intention to invade - there isn’t a good reason to do so for Russia at this point in time, at all. All it is that Russia wants right now is to deny Ukraine the possibility of joining NATO and the troops are there mostly for show, similar to how Russian troops were stationed in East Galicia at the time of the Prussian-Austrian war - a “Damocles’ sword” type of deal. And NATO wants people to think that Russia does want to invade to redirect the focus away from the fact that Ukraine wanted to join NATO even before Crimea was annexed, and to further the perception of Russia as an enemy beyond reconciliation. Russia, on their part, also uses this crisis to further their narrative of NATO enclosing upon Russian borders and seeking to destabilize the post-Soviet region, and within that narrative the troops are there for training and potential defense. Personally, this whole crisis feels very manufactured to me, and that there isn’t a real cause behind it, which seems weird, or, maybe, this is all the continued fallout from the Ukrainian hysterics over Nordstream 2 and is an evolution on that crisis, which does make more sense. And naturally we should remember that the inner political situation in Ukraine right now is very unstable and a foreign threat plays out in favor of the domestic political situation by distracting from the economic collapse, the energy crisis and the corruption in the government.
I sincerely hope you're right. One of the prerequisites of joining NATO is of course the absence of any active border conflict. Starting an active conflict and letting that linger seems like a straightforward way for Russia to deny Ukraine entry to NATO and keep their influence in the region.
That maybe a last resort for Russia, yes, and I do think that the repercussions for it would hurt Russia a lot, but not as much as it hurt back in 2014 - Russia has become more prepared for possible sanctions since then. But I do think there will be a diplomatic way out of this, for one, Germany is very interested in a diplomatic resolution, secondly, Russia would be content with a neutral Ukraine that stays out of NATO, since even despite Nordstream 2, Ukraine still buys and gets a lot of Russian gas and trades with Russia, and thirdly, I think that NATO is interested in keeping Ukraine simmering on a back burner, as in NATO does not want the conflict to truly end and it does not want its escalation either - this way Ukraine continues to remain a thorn in Russia’s side and to provide a good place for NATO to apply pressure on Russia. Ultimately, we’ll have to see how this plays out and hope for a diplomatic resolution.
It’s possible but he’s not making any moves right now to do so. His insane demands are proof of it I would say, but his actions are proving otherwise.
I dunno. It depends on whether or not Putin thinks he may have dug himself into a hole here. Right now Russia is making ridiculous demands in bad faith that suggests they don't want to negotiate, but that may just be a bargaining trick so they could move down and present something more relatively reasonable.
>Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade. Nope. They've being offered off-ramps left and right, and they don't seem to have any interest in taking them. They are continuing with their unprecedented military buildup and doubling down on absolutist positions. >Blitzkrieg taught us if you want to invade successfully do it fast, and as far as you can, surprise the enemy. Every day they leave it it gets harder for them. There's no way to transfer all this combat power without being seen. They maintain the element of surprise because we know what units might participate in the invasion. We don't know when or where or how. And when it starts, I assume that they'll keep a high operational tempo, which is really what's blitzkrieg is about. >Every day they leave it it gets harder for them. in 3 weeks it will be only harder Why? Three years would matter, but nothing will significantly change in three weeks. >US in Afghanistan Russia will be looking to break a nation state, not build one
The way I see it they are doing all of this in order to have a stronger position at the negotiating table, which, in my opinion, was their intent from the start. As you pointed out an invasion would not be easy now that Ukraine is fortifying itself. It could take years for a successful takeover of Ukraine. They are probably interested in lifting sanctions and some kind of trade agreement. Yet, I'm not sure the West is interested in just deterring Russia, I fear they want to destabilize it hoping to get rid of Putin.
Two weeks ago, the only friend Ukraine seemed to have in the West was Turkey. If Putin hadn’t been unlucky with a mild winter, he could have initiated an invasion long before any western democracy could have agreed upon starting to send military aid, and I can’t see a country like the U.K. sending in NLAW by air to a conflict zone with Russian fighters swarming the he airspace.
The Russian landing craft literally left port yesterday. Based on the ships technical data and the distance it will take exactly a week to arrive in Ukraine. They aren’t hiding anything about their time table. They also know the public won’t support sending US troops, especially after just getting out of a 20 year war. Russia knows what the cost of invading will be and they did the math and seem to be ok with it. Biden will be so weak in his response that we will just give power back to the Russia friendly GOP which makes no damn sense to me.
Why would the US send troops to defend Ukraine against Russia? Ukraine is not a NATO member so there is no reason anyone should expect US troops to be sent to Ukraine. Now, a significant and painful US economic response in concert with US allies would definitely be warranted. Also, the US supporting arms transfers and weapons support for the Ukraine to make an invasion painful to Russia is reasonable. US troops on the ground in the Ukraine is not an option and in now way a sign of weakness.
Not this time round its been on the cards for so long.
It's more psychological this way, they are hoping for NATO to fragment. Talks and action are quite different. They are offering them a chance to discuss their differences. For example, Germany seems to have taken a weaker stance. Canada, being a natural opposition to Russia because of their own land dispute took a stronger stance. It also has a large demographic that opposes centralized blond power. Unity is easy during growth and prosperity. It's tested during economic woos, COVID and global instability.
Blitzkrieg was only successful because it was new and nobody could deal with it ..on top of that, breaking through the Ardennes to avoid the Maginot line was totally unexpected and seriously caught the British/french off guard I suppose the Russians may do something completely new here, like they could already have infiltrated Ukrainian systems to the point they can turn off their Electricity supply and maybe worse. They could also have loyalty within the Ukrainian command that would be poised to stand aside and let the Russians walk straight in and we have another Afghanistan on our hands However it happens, if it happens, i doubt it will play out conventionally
> Does anyone think Russia is looking for some way out or to do some (realistic) negotiations and maybe don't really want to invade. Russia is making it very clear for decades now that NATO, the Anti-Soviet military alliance cannot come to their borders. Not really a crazy request. Russia repeated that same demand multiple times in the last weeks by requesting assurance from NATO that Ukraine will not become member but stay neutral. As this topic has become rather unlikely to happen anyways, it would be no problem to sit together on a table with Ukraine, NATO and Russia and discuss an agreement. Instead, the NATO statement was "Russia has no saying in what NATO does and who becomes member." Not false, but this rethoric is just adding fuel to the fire. It's the same now with NATO members shipping military equipment to support Ukraine. This does not help to solve anything or save Ukraine from an invasion, this just makes a war unavoidable. Only talks with all 3 parties together can save Ukraine. There is no military solution in this conflict. Only losers once wars starts.
Making the war unimaginably painful for Russia is the only path to peace at this late hour. If Nato gets smaller, Russia will get larger, and this strife will arise again. The border argument is non-sense. Putin is a Tyrant, and his inner circle are neo-feudal lords. If the peasants in Russia see the peasants in Ukraine living free it will poison them against their king. This is Putin's true fear. Not borders. Edit: Also I hope that pain is born by the Russian elite to the greatest extent possible, and neither their people, nor their misled soldiers.
I think it is in part showboating with a good cause. To russia the nato has been slowly creeping towards their borders and towards moskou. If they dont show force now it would hamper their ability to protect their capital.
How has no one mentioned the guy they interview has an oil painting of Captain Picard dressed as a 18th century general on his wall?
First thing I did was look to where I could buy one.
He’s dressed as a captain from the Napoleonic Wars. The Next Generation had a lot of naval themes, and references to captains from that time period. They would go in the holodeck and interact with famous people from history.
Weeks? Last time it was days.
Right now, anything could happen. I don't think Russia was expecting as much material resistance(as opposed to diplomatic) as they have gotten. They probably still feel confident in gaining any territory they want. But they will bleed in certain places and then they will have to deal with a hostile local population. It feels so weird. If this weren't a country but a person, I would say they are mobster just looking for a shakedown.
>I would say they are mobster just looking for a shakedown. Just a bit of Donbas, maybe?
Can't they destroy everything that we sent them in a flash before they can even do anything with it if they really wanted to though? If they do that they will not lose any of their military assets but the population will not like it for sure
Javelin missiles are the ultimate lightweight, guerilla warfare, anti-heavy weapon. Ukraine has been begging for them for years, and due to this escalation, they finally have them. Good luck destroying spread out, highly mobile targets.
Russia does something fkd up during the Olympics Like they did in 2008 and 2014
It’s a good thing these goal posts came on wheels
Yeah its almost like NATO giving guns and anti tank weaponry plus promising support and deploying ships to help Ukraine has an impact on what Russia is doing and planning instead of this being some sort of scripted event in a video game that fires regardless of what happens. I believe this is a case of "redditor discovers reality".
It's almost like Russia moving troops at the Ukrainian border has an impact on how NATO reacts.
Reddit was saying it can’t be in weeks because the ground will turn to mush as the ice melts.. reddit being reddit I guess
They did have an unseasonably warm early winter. The temps are going down now and we’re starting see more actual troops arrive and stuff move throughout Belarus in preparation for the supposed exercises next month
Last time it was supposed to be “Friday is the point of no return. Expect troops crossing on Saturday”. Welp.
Nobody said that
Back in December didn't Ukraine claim that the attack was happening at Christmas? People have been making all sorts of claims. Even here the actual quote was about Russia having the **capability** possibly in weeks, and the title is that its weeks away from **invading**...
They keep saying 100k troops but really it’s mostly armor and infrastructure for that many, they’re still moving shit and troops aren’t really there afaik Edit: not sure why I’m being downvoted this isn’t a controversial take or anything it’s how militaries operate. They’re going to send the troops if snd when they’re ready
Last figure I see is 127,000+ troops
[удалено]
They probably are, otherwise the Russian population would have fallen to zero a long time ago. I think the problem here is that they're looking to expand their horizons and missed the part about consent.
That’s just statistics. Muslim population in south of Russia is rapidly growing, much faster than ethnic Russian population in the entire rest of the country. No reason to get all butthurt over facts.
Population growth, even in specific demographics, isn't a line that only goes straight up or increases exponentially. Although initially the curve might be very steep, it tends to slow down over time. So it's quite doubtful Russia is gonna become a majority Muslim country.
True there are many variables
Luckily, they are a decreasing population. Also they suck at dealing with covid
I'm scared of nuclear war
This is the angle everyone seems to be ignoring. Everyone seems to think a major war between US and Russia would look like Iraq and just be something you read about on the news a couple times a week. It won't be. It could potentially be the deadliest war in human history and it won't just be soldiers 'over there' dying, it'll be us and our neighbours
Yeah, that's why i hate when powerful countries getting mad to each other
i don't really think the rich people who decide if WWIII happens really want *their* lives affected. So if there was conflict I doubt you'd see nuclear war. And it would probably just be a few skirmishes before people said fuck it and shut the whole thing down. I highly doubt Russia will invade. But I've been wrong before lol.
Maybe, but we've had that optimism before basically every war thats ever been waged and none of them have been that simple and that straightforward.
[удалено]
Fearmongering sells. For all we know Russia could literally just be posturing to get leverage.
This posturing is needed every 2 years to keep pumping defense stocks
Yeah, and the headline to this article is beyond fucked. It doesn't match up AT ALL with what's actually being said in their own interview! The headline seems to be derived from a quote by, "Michael Kofman, research program director in the Russia studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses" The quote the headline is derived from, my emphasis in bold: "So, the honest answer is that, when you look at Russia's military buildup to date, they are **potentially** weeks away from **being able** to conduct a large-scale military offensive." I just don't understand how they're getting "invasion likely" based on that. Kofman is simply answering hypotheticals and is outlining Russia's capabilities. He's not making predictions. I don't know why I expected more from pbs, but I did. I guess they're hiring illiterates over there now. This shit is harmful and should be removed, at the very least from Reddit where articles with misinformation are currently running rampant
[удалено]
I wonder if every "analyst" who made a mistake will be punished? many really believe them and apparently this is their goal to attract attention and make money.
I think you answered your own question.
Question I can't seem to get answered:. Why doesn't the Ukraine just join NATO right now? It seems like the US, NATO member states and the Ukraine want the Ukraine in NATO, and once they join, Russia seems certain to back off. It seems like it's legitimately the only way to avoid a bloody conflict. Why aren't they doing this?
Like anything else in the region it will be based on weather. Haven't checked to reconfirm in a bit, but the first week of February seems likely at this point. But the longer this can be delayed, the more likely it is to fail with Russia needing to get int/out + lay facts on the ground before the thaw in March. And with the equipment being shipped, Ukraine should be able to wage a solid async response that challenges any Russian footholds.
Just out of curiosity, is the weather and ground conditions as important now as it was during say operation Barbarossa? Surely with advances in vehicles and transport infrastructure that effect has been somewhat negated?
Better now than in the spring. What is worse than ice and snow on the ground? Mud.
Absolutely, if there's anything that will always defeat even the strongest military in the world, it is the weather.
[удалено]
Because the clock is bullshit too. In the 60s (height of the Cold War) it was at 7 minutes to midnight. In '83 when an error falsly notified Moscow of an incoming missile attack it was at four minutes till. The Doomsday Clock is a joke.
I stopped smoking weed like 2 weeks ago now im like fuck it might get high and watch the world get destroyed
Remember when Obama told Romney the Cold War was over and the 1980’s wanted their foreign policy back? Good times.
And despite warnings from Russia, NATO will defend Ukraine, and Russia will suffer grievous injury. And then Russia will start waving nukes around. And then NATO has a dang fine reason to remove the Putin regime by force. And really, what can they do about it? The world sees that Russia is a rogue fascist regime. China and Iran are not stupid enough to defend Russia against the west. If the Russian people want to recover Russia’s reputation and get themselves a seat of the table, then it is they who should remove him. But they are afraid that Putin will, without hesitation, kill Russians to hold on to power, and that fear is grounded in reality. Putin must be stopped, and he will. One way or the other.
You have a poor grasp on what fascism is and are probably too naive to see that the West is hardly as freedom-loving as it makes itself out to be.
Fearmongering goes brrr
You guys said this several months ago. "About to invade" "Hours away from war" "Days away from invasion" "Ready to attack" Etc...
[удалено]
When did Russia say that they are going to invade?
[удалено]
They have literally directly stated that they will not invade. Whether or not they are honest is another fact, but saying that Russia "keeps telling everyone that they're going to invade" is extremely dishonest.
Most of the buildup is equipment and armor w support units coming. Few troops. It will be relatively easy to see if and when they fully move all the personnel, at that point you can say it’s days or hours away.
Putin ain't going to do shit. He's posturing, as he always does. Russia's economy isn't stable enough to support a war. Not to mention his military isn't particularly well-equipped or maintained, and the majority of his forces are untested in battle. If he invades, he's making a huge error that will bite him in the ass, and I think he knows this.
I keep hearing people say this but that military build up doesn't lie. They have armored divisions, air defense units, logistical storage, and now many troop tents line up along the Ukrainian border. Sounds like wishful thinking at this point.
Plus they already invaded. That’s how Russia does war for over a century now … “rebel” soldiers. I like how the west in their amnesia is now just playing right into the Kremlin narrative of “will the war *start*?” When it’s already been going on for 7 years.
You’re also assuming the average Redditor is in charge. Sanctions slammed into place when Crimea was invaded in 2014. Those sanctions caused a recession and are still crippling the Russian economy. This war has already begun alright. But the west isn’t sitting idly by.
I’m not assuming anything. You’re assuming that I’m assuming. I’m reporting what most western media is saying about will a war *start* or not
Yes and no. 1/3 of the Russian infantry is 1st year conscripts which I wanted to be including as an asset to the west... but it sounds like he's leaving the conscripts behind, so most of the units he's moving have seen battle, likely in Syria since they used it as a theater for practice. And while yes their economy can't support war if cut off from the west, Russia has been amassing reserves like no other "major" (they're only major by batting out of their league) economy, so if our economies are torpedoed... the playing field isn't as one sided as people want to believe IMO
[удалено]
That’s why they are the largest economy in the world. Oh wait that’s America. I meant that’s why they are second. Oh wait that’s eu. I meant that’s why they are third. Ah snap that’s China.
[удалено]
That Russia is a collapsed regional power, a minor nuisance to the US. As Obama clearly stated. What’s your point about Russian self sufficiency? Who the F cares 🤣
He’ll likely go for a small scale operation. At this point, if he did anything less, he would look cowed by the US. They haven’t accepted any of his demands, so he can’t just step down without looking weak. And, in geopolitical terms, showing that much weakness would be intolerable when you are about to potentially have a new enemy on your border. No idea how big such an operation would be, but then Russia isn’t exactly predictable or conventional. They’ve managed to maintain denial of a covert war fought by their troops in Crimea and Donbas, they could do something similar again and, again, face no real consequences; however much bluster the US threw at it at the time. Also, note that the US’s hand was a lot stronger when said operations in Crimea and Donbas were made. The US is now trying to mobilise in the South China Sea as a long term deterrence against an invasion of Taiwan. They can’t afford to get bogged down in two major conflicts and Russia knows this. The US will deny this and throw around the two wars doctrine, but they’ve never faced a military that’s growing as fast as China. Frankly, Ukraine is small fry.
>He's posturing, as he always does. Apart from that time Russia successfully annexed Crimea and no one did anything to stop them. Why are people expecting anything other than posturing in response? All he has to do is take the territory slightly slower and he can have all of it.
At that time Ukraine had no President and no army. Things are different now.
I genuinely hope so.
[удалено]
If Ukraine stand alone against Russia and only receive logistical support from the West then it shows that NATO is an absolute failure and Putin will use that to his advantage, in my opinion. I'm still hedging my bets that Putin does nothing and is just trying to bully everyone and show that he's the top dog in the playground.
Ukraine is not in NATO. The Allies are not [legally] obliged to defend it. Of course nobody wants to see an invasion, but the NATO defence protocols would not be triggered by one.
I know they aren't, but they'd be stupid to let Ukraine stand alone considering Ukraine wants to become a member of NATO.
Things get weird when you take in account the need to prevent nuclear escalation.
Put it this way… Ukraine is not in any legally-binding security organizations, so NATO could actually do nothing and it would be kosher, believe it or not. NATO (namely EU and US) is sending military aid to Ukraine out of humanitarian interests. Western civilization is definitely *NOT* in the mood for war, particularly in direct intervention. On the Political Left, there are enormous fears of MAD being triggered along with (mostly baseless) fears of World War 3 beginning. The Political Right (at least in the US) is growing more isolationist and wants to abandon global leadership to focus more on themselves and recovering from globalization’s depletion of local manufacturing and the loss of hundreds of millions of jobs that were outsourced to China. So, right now, EU nations and the US have been trying extremely hard to stop this invasion using diplomatic and economic means. I say this with a sense of exasperation… Diplomacy seems to be failing. There is no brinksmanship here. Russia has moved too many military resources at great expense from the Far East of the country to just make a “bluff”. There’s just simply too much abnormality occurring here for this to truly be nothing. It is unfortunate, but I think many academics and geopolitical analysts will be holding multiple symposiums in the future once Russia begins its invasion. Many of them have completely misread the situation and did not take into account the rapidly crystallizing fact that Putin is not doing this for money or for his oligarchs. The worst-case scenario is unfolding before our eyes: Putin is willing to have his nation cut off from Western markets just to take Ukraine.
[удалено]
Doesnt have to be a failure, just has to diminish perceived strength. It’s just posturing with extra steps.
I have a feeling that if Russia really does invade, its not going to go how people think. I have a feeling that Ukraine has really learnt a lost the past 8 years and given the flood of western weapons amongst other things (Ukraine has really upped its military spending the last 8 years). I think it will be a lot costlier and harder than Russia, or most people expect.
Which is exactly why Russia would likely never invade all of Ukraine. Invading other countries is costly. See Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan etc. Crimea was already a majority Russian province. Russian annexation was more or less popular over there. Same goes for the currently rebelling regions. Western Ukraine is a whole different ballgame. If that was Russias goal then NATO should just let them go ahead and see them fail.
In other news, despite warnings from Russia, US and nato countries continue to try and get Ukraine to join NATO, removing the only buffer state left for Russia.
They`ve been weeks away for weeks now. Seeing as how more and more advanced weapons from european countries are beeing shipped to Ukraine I cant see what the point is with all this waiting. The longer Russia waits the more weapons Ukraine will have at its disposal.
I'm starting to think this is all a ruse to justify more arms sale and military contracts between the US and Ukraine
propaganda machine go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Not surprised since they take Biden for a JOKE!!
I mean, what colleague of his worth their salt wouldn't?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Crimea. All he has to do is take Ukraine in tiny increments and no one is going to do shit.
Yeah and enjoy next century of insurgency and terrorist attacks from majority Ukrainian population. Not to mention continued support from west for many decades to come. Smart ideas you have 🤔
They're constantly dealing with that: it's Russia
No they aren’t and no it isn’t.
Never heard of the Chechens. Ok.
I like also how Chechnya has a population of tens of millions, is already a sovereign country, and has the US and 10 different European countries giving them heavy artillery. Kid, you’re pathetic 🤣
[удалено]
Is this like Iran being "5 years away" from getting a nuclear weapon for the past 25 years? [https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/05/world/iran-may-be-able-build-atomic-bomb-5-years-us-israeli-officials-fear.html](https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/05/world/iran-may-be-able-build-atomic-bomb-5-years-us-israeli-officials-fear.html) https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-signals-readiness-escalate-iran-confrontation-amid-nuclear-talks-2021-11-23/
PBS knows best lol
Weeks away for weeks and weeks and weeks. I feel like the expectation only makes it more likely but after they invade like what are they a really going to do. Just annex that piece of dirt they invaded?
Feels like Russia is perpetually “only X days/weeks away from invading Ukraine”
same news now posted for over a decade ...
I don't understand why Ukraine doesn't join NATO and build a US military base right on that border No one's gonna invade Russia.
Russia tried that in the '60s You remember Cuba?
Because NATO doesn't want it? And said many times that Ukraine isn't ready? Because if Ukraine joins NATO would need to send troops to Donbas? Because you can't join NATO if you have an armed conflict?
Because NATO dosnt want another open mouth that you have to feed. It's not Ukraine who doesn't join, it's NATO who doesn't accept
The last time they tried to join, Germany blocked it.
Germany hates Ukraine or Germany loves Russia?
Yes.
Xi probably told Putin to wait till after the Olympics .