Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-25

[DaveCinzano]

Empty shelves in Moscow.

#ruxit

 

[Spymaster]

Empty shelves in Moscow.

Mexit

Edit> Beaten by DC

 

[The39thStep]

Empty shelves in Moscow.

Brilliant The Battle of Empty Shelves mark 2

 

[DaveCinzano]

Mexit

Edit> Beaten by DC

 

[Spymaster]

The quote from Biden above includes



which appears to be him saying that they won't directly attack Russian forces, providing they don't go beyond Ukraine into a NATO member state.

That’s exactly what he said, but it’s still a long way from suggesting Russia has free reign in Ukraine. They’ve been pumping in weapons like they’re going out of fashion and most of the world is treating Russia as a pariah state to the extent that its economy is rapidly going down the khazi.

Once again, what more do you (and bimble ) want to be done?

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

North Korea is playing silly buggers too.



Are you a headline writer for the Star?

View attachment 314020

Nah. I've mostly worked as a broadcast journalist, so didn't get to write that many print headlines. I do appreciate a good pun though. I've worked with people who are very good at it. There's a real knack and an art to headline writing though and, eg, I have a sneaking admiration for those of the Sun in that particular respect, they're good at what they do (repugnant content otherwise).

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Never mind the airsofters, where the ballers?

Hahaha! Reminds me of going to play laser quest one night when I was studying engineering and some of the guys took it way too seriously and turned up wearing camo.

 

[bimble]

That’s exactly what he said, but it’s still a long way from suggesting Russia has free reign in Ukraine. They’ve been pumping in weapons like they’re going out of fashion and most of the world is treating Russia as a pariah state to the extent that its economy is rapidly going down the khazi.

Once again, what more do you (and bimble ) want to be done?

i'm on holiday. But all i was asking is why (for whose ears to what end) does he keep repeating that message about there will be no "direct involvement".

You yourself think it might change & 'the west be forced to act"

That may well change if they start gassing civilians. That’s a huge red line and the west could be forced to act. If that does happened the results will be catastrophic. So let’s hope it doesn’t.

If you think it might change why does he keep saying loud & clear that it won't?? What for.
Right. Back to my pizza etc.

 

[andysays]

That’s exactly what he said, but it’s still a long way from suggesting Russia has free reign in Ukraine. They’ve been pumping in weapons like they’re going out of fashion and most of the world is treating Russia as a pariah state to the extent that its economy is down the khazi.

Once again, what more do you (and bimble ) want to be done?

I'm not suggesting Biden is giving Putin free rein. I've previously pointed out that "the West" clearly is already involved in many ways short of all-out military intervention.

Neither am I saying that I want NATO to intervene to a greater extent than they have already. I can see why some people are calling for it, but I can also see why many are hesitant or resistant.

Having said all of that, I do think there's at least a possibility that NATO may decide to intervene militarily if the situation changes. One possible thing that might trigger that would be the use of chemical weapons, and there have been statements from NATO/US spokespeople which at least hint at that ETA and I see that you've mentioned that as well.

But I also suspect there would be issues about getting complete agreement from all NATO members about such an escalation, which is why making absolute predictions about what would NATO would do in various possible scenarios is a mug's game.

 

[Spymaster]

i'm on holiday. But all i was asking is why (for whose ears to what end) does he keep repeating that message about there will be no "direct involvement".

You yourself think it might change & 'the west be forced to act"


If you think it might change why does he keep saying loud & clear that it won't??
Right. Back to my pizza etc.

I’m not sure he keeps saying it (‘we won’t get involved in the ground in Ukraine’). What he’s repeated several times is that NATO members will be defended robustly.

 

[Doctor Carrot]

That’s exactly what he said, but it’s still a long way from suggesting Russia has free reign in Ukraine. They’ve been pumping in weapons like they’re going out of fashion and most of the world is treating Russia as a pariah state to the extent that its economy is rapidly going down the khazi.

Once again, what more do you (and bimble ) want to be done?

This. I'd like to know the answer to your question too. There's a slowly growing number of people saying WW3 has started but I think that's nonsense. As shit as this is the war, militarily anyway, is still confined to Ukraine. Any incursion by NATO beyond weapons supply will escalate it beyond Ukraine's borders.

 

[Spymaster]

Having said all of that, I do think there's at least a possibility that NATO may decide to intervene militarily if the situation changes. One possible thing that might trigger that would be the use of chemical weapons, and there have been statements from NATO/US spokespeople which at least hint at that ETA and I see that you've mentioned that as well.

I think the probable response to the use of chemical weapons would be the provision of the no fly zone.

 

[bimble]

I think the probable response to the use of chemical weapons would be the provision of the no fly zone.

No way. The context of Biden’s remarks yesterday was exactly that, the fact that everyone was asking what the response would be to a chemical weapons attack on civilians.

 

[andysays]

I think the probable response to the use of chemical weapons would be the provision of the no fly zone.

Maybe.

But that in itself would inevitably take the conflict beyond Ukraine because any countries in which planes enforcing the NFZ were based would then become Russian targets (at least those countries; potentially more)

I don't know exactly how NATO decision making works, TBH. Would they need to get every member to agree before doing something like that, or could some of them decide to do it even if others were against it?

 

[andysays]

No way. The context of Biden’s remarks yesterday was exactly that, the fact that everyone was asking what the response would be to a chemical weapons attack on civilians.

I don't think you should take everything Biden says as absolutely set in stone, TBH.

I understand why he's saying it, but even if he isn't deliberately lying, situations can and do change.

As I said above, absolute prediction of what will or won't happen is a mug's game.

 

[dilute micro]

I think the probable response to the use of chemical weapons would be the provision of the no fly zone.

Just sending planes into Ukraine alone without shooting down a Russian aircraft is entering the war. Based on Putin's language recently, he seems to believe in Russia's military superiority. I don't think he'd back down. You can bet every NATO country has had their people do a psycho eval on Putin at this point. I'd love to hear their conclusions.

 

[mauvais]

Maybe.

But that in itself would inevitably take the conflict beyond Ukraine because any countries in which planes enforcing the NFZ were based would then become Russian targets (at least those countries; potentially more)

I don't know exactly how NATO decision making works, TBH. Would they need to get every member to agree before doing something like that, or could some of them decide to do it even if others were against it?

This doesn't exactly answer your question but...

Article 5 sets out the core of NATO's purpose: if a member country is attacked, all other members are obliged to respond.

But Article 6 sets out the geographic limits of this (where the attack is) and it does not include Ukraine.

So in theory a member country of NATO could get involved in the Ukraine conflict and provided Russia didn't attack them at home, there would be no obligation invoked.

The North Atlantic Treaty

www.nato.int

 

[kebabking]

I think the probable response to the use of chemical weapons would be the provision of the no fly zone.

I don't think that's true - the no fly zone stuff - I don't doubt that people would call for it, but given the nature of the conflict in Ukraine, it would have very little impact on the Russian ability to flatten cities, use CBRN, or win.

It's like putting up an umbrella while standing on a beach at low tide and thinking you won't get wet.

A no fly zone over Ukraine while Russian forces were on the ground would also entail huge dangers - the air-to-air combat bit would be possible, but preventing them being shot down by Russian SAM's would require a large, initial strike on the Air Defence Network of radars, missiles, guns and command and control centres, and then a rolling, continuous program of defence suppression - and here's the thing, that's not just on Russian forces in Ukraine, that's Russian forces in Russia proper.

Russian soldiers, in Russia, being killed by British, US, Polish etc.. air forces.

NATO could do the whole hog - we have the air and land power to destroy the Russian army in the field, both in Ukraine and Belarus-Russia - but Russia is not going to respond to either of those courses of action with a shrug, a couple of desultory missile attacks on a NATO air base in Poland, and a 'alls fair in love and war' attitude.

 

[The39thStep]

Just sending planes into Ukraine alone without shooting down a Russian aircraft is entering the war. Based on Putin's language recently, he seems to believe in Russia's military superiority. I don't think he'd back down. You can bet every NATO country has had their people do a psycho eval on Putin at this point. I'd love to hear their conclusions.

What's the matter with the ones on here?

 

[cupid_stunt]

I don't think that's true - the no fly zone stuff - I don't doubt that people would call for it, but given the nature of the conflict in Ukraine, it would have very little impact on the Russian ability to flatten cities, use CBRN, or win.

It's like putting up an umbrella while standing on a beach at low tide and thinking you won't get wet.

A no fly zone over Ukraine while Russian forces were on the ground would also entail huge dangers - the air-to-air combat bit would be possible, but preventing them being shot down by Russian SAM's would require a large, initial strike on the Air Defence Network of radars, missiles, guns and command and control centres, and then a rolling, continuous program of defence suppression - and here's the thing, that's not just on Russian forces in Ukraine, that's Russian forces in Russia proper.

Russian soldiers, in Russia, being killed by British, US, Polish etc.. air forces.

NATO could do the whole hog - we have the air and land power to destroy the Russian army in the field, both in Ukraine and Belarus-Russia - but Russia is not going to respond to either of those courses of action with a shrug, a couple of desultory missile attacks on a NATO air base in Poland, and a 'alls fair in love and war' attitude.

Worth a re-post of this link.

In addition to monitoring, fighter aircraft are needed to enforce a no-fly zone. Ben Hodges, who was the commander of the U.S. Army Europe and now works for the U.S.-based Center for European Policy Analysis, said: "You'd have aircraft that are prepared for air-to-air [combat], to shoot down other aircraft.

You'd have aircraft that are prepared to shoot down drones and you would want to be prepared to have other aircraft that are prepared to hit ground targets, air defense, for example. So, there's a mix of capabilities that you would need, including the AWACS and including the helicopters that would be used to go in and rescue [potentially downed pilots]."

According to Hodges, there are other reasons to be cautious. "We would never put pilots up in the air if we were not prepared to destroy enemy air defenses on the ground. So now you're talking about shooting, attacking Russian ground targets inside Ukraine and probably even inside Russia," Hodges said.

"And then another consideration is that we would never put pilots in the air if we were not prepared to go in and pick them up if they were shot down and had to parachute. So, you've got to have the possibility of picking up a naval pilot on the ground in Ukraine or even in Russia."

Why A No-Fly Zone Over Ukraine Probably Won't Fly

RFE/RL takes a closer look at what a no-fly zone would mean, why it could prove so difficult to impose over Ukraine, and if there are other, similar options that could be considered.

www.rferl.org

 

[Flavour]

Whatever happened to SDI / Star Wars? Shouldn't have spent the 90s and 2000s and 2010s pissing about. Fucking Trump was the one to restart the program. Would sure feel nice knowing that the chances of nuclear bombs actually hitting their targets and exploding was reduced even by 70%.

 

[Pickman's model]

Whatever happened to SDI / Star Wars? Shouldn't have spent the 90s and 2000s and 2010s pissing about. Fucking Trump was the one to restart the program. Would sure feel nice knowing that the chances of nuclear bombs actually hitting their targets and exploding was reduced even by 70%.

You've not been paying attention to the recent hypersonic stuff I see. Long story short: China nicked all the American nuclear secrets years ago and can build nuclear weapons as advanced as theirs, plus they've been working on non-icbm methods of delivery. So you will never be able to be confident in the auld ways of intercepting nuclear bombs. Maybe Russia doesn't have them. Yet.

 

[Supine]

If you think it might change why does he keep saying loud & clear that it won't?? What for.
Right. Back to my pizza etc.

Breakfast pizza

He’s saying it loud and clear because the US want everyone to know they are not aggressors in this war.

Stepping on nato soil is obviously a red line. Would something like gas attacks in ukraine be enough to force western involvement? I don’t think any of us know the answer to that. Lets hope the sanctions and ukrainian resistance are enough to make russia turn back.

 

[zahir]

An attempt at analysing how the Russian leadership got to this point.

Why the Kremlin Invaded Ukraine – Riddle Russia

V.G. on what guided the Russian government’s military decision making

ridl.io

 

[Indeliblelink]

"Western sanctions against Russia could cause the International Space Station to crash, the head of Russian space agency Roscosmos warns, calling for the punitive measures to be lifted"

Bollocks it will.

 

[Pickman's model]

An attempt at analysing how the Russian leadership got to this point.

Why the Kremlin Invaded Ukraine – Riddle Russia

V.G. on what guided the Russian government’s military decision making

ridl.io

Is it a good attempt?

 

[LDC]

This. I'd like to know the answer to your question too. There's a slowly growing number of people saying WW3 has started but I think that's nonsense.

I wonder what the various factions within the Russian State opinion/s on whether it has or not are though?

 

[platinumsage]

This will go down well

 

[bimble]

Just sending planes into Ukraine alone without shooting down a Russian aircraft is entering the war.

That's true if you take the word & threats of Putin as a reliable indicator of how things really are, If Polish planes are handed over that means nato entering the war, cos Putin said so.

But what about these Turkish drone-plane things that drop explosives onto Russian tanks and kill their generals and stuff. They have been so important to the Ukrainian defence that there's even a song about them.

Turkey is in nato and those bayraktar things are definitely offensive weapons so why is that ok but old Polish planes would be different?

 

[Pickman's model]

That's true if you take the word & threats of Putin as a reliable indicator of how things really are, If Polish planes are handed over that means nato entering the war, cos Putin said so.

But what about these Turkish drone-plane things that drop explosives onto Russian tanks and kill their generals and stuff. They have been so important to the Ukrainian defence that there are songs about them.

Turkey is in nato and those bayraktar things are definitely offensive weapons so why is that ok but old Polish planes would be different?

write to v. putin, c/o the kremlin, red sq., moscow, russia and ask. sadly we're not privy to the reasons for the russian government's declarations of what would lead to them conferring belligerent status