Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Way OT: Ukraine (/thread-23071.html)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 04-21-2022

(04-21-2022, 04:27 PM)thatboy Wrote:  Goose, You know a lot more about the military details than me, but I believe you misjudge Poland and what they would do in response to an attack on them by Russia. An attack on a supply line: you might be right. An attack on a Polish city? A different story. Remember the response to 9/11? We spent 20 years and trillions responding to that. You think Poland is just going to sit back and accept an attack on one of their cities? The hatred of Russia there is palpable and I believe they would like nothing more than a good excuse to get more involved. You suggest Poland can't take on Russia alone, but it wouldn't be alone. Russia already has its hands full against Ukraine and the West is already ramping up supplies against Russia. And whether or not Article 5 is invoked, I suspect an attack on a Polish city would result in an escalation of aid and involvement by NATO members.

Maybe I'm wrong. My intuition is that it would be a of immense proportions mistake for Putin and he is not dumb enough to do that.

My wife is of Polish extraction (2nd generation), so I am quite aware of how "focused" they can be. I agree that the Polish people would be furious. However, when it comes to starting a war, the divisions inside NATO about how much risk is acceptable become a big issue. The government of Poland has also had some significant policy issues with the EU that have not been resolved. I am not sure the Polish politicians are up to matching the public's sentiment, just as the German politicians are clearly not on the same page as their people.

I don't see the leadership that matches or even approaches a Zelenskyy, and to start a war generally you need that. I see more Neville Chamberlain than I do Winston Churchill. Most people in Europe are scared of war, as they should be. Their cities have been bombed and shelled, ours have not. Many of the "between lands" states have a long and painful history of suffering greatly in war, and the cultural memory of that persists. If the war is a "war of choice", not one they absolutely must fight, most of these states will chose not to fight.  Indeed, I could be wrong about that, but I think it probable.

Indeed, it is arguable that Germany, once a strong European power and not a "between lands" state, is right now incapable of fighting, if you believe their military leadership. Granted, they rate a tank with a burned out taillight as "not combat ready", but there is some truth in what their military is saying.

Putin is only going to do something like this if he thinks aid from the West is the difference between winning and losing. His alternative would be a nuclear strike somewhere in Ukraine. Neither of these things is without risk, but unlike you I do not think Putin is "smart enough" to not do it. Of the two, IMHO going nuclear is more risky and would be the next option if plan A failed. If he thinks there is no other path to victory, I fully expect he will start down that path. Hopefully, Putin is removed and we don't get to find out.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - thatboy - 04-21-2022

(04-21-2022, 04:41 PM)DaBears17 Wrote:  From the FAQ:

Why is “h.uge” on the banned word list? Before the 1999 football season, one of our frequent posters trumpeted to opening game against Texas as one that would set the tone for the season. He posted frequently that the game would be “h.uge.” Stanford lost 69-17. The word was banished forever from the CardBoard lexicon. (By the way, the team turned it around, won the Pac-10 and went to the Rose Bowl.)

(04-21-2022, 04:27 PM)thatboy Wrote:  Edit: oddly, my post displays different text than what I wrote. I wrote, "it would be a h.uge [without the period] mistake" and it shows up as "it would be a of immense proportions mistake". I guess you can't write h.uge on this site? "h.uge" gets converted to "of immense proportions"... Weird.

Thanks. That's hugely helpful :)

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - thatboy - 04-21-2022

(04-21-2022, 04:52 PM)Goose Wrote:  Putin is only going to do something like this if he thinks aid from the West is the difference between winning and losing.

I think by the time he even considers it as a serious option it would be too late. If he's really losing that badly in Ukraine at some point, I suspect nocking out a Polish city isn't going to be much help for him. Disrupting supply lines is useful, but I'm just not seeing the rationale for taking out an EU city somewhere.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Treefence - 04-21-2022

These Phoenix drones are pretty interesting, it sounds like they are much better than the switchblade 300's and might be similar to the 600's.  They can fly for up to 6 hours, have night vision capabilities, and can take out medium armored targets.  I'm not quite sure what the practical range is, but with a 6 hour flight time, they must have decent range. 

https://breakingdefense.com/2022/04/meet-phoenix-ghost-the-us-air-forces-new-drone-designed-for-ukraines-war-with-russia/amp/

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 04-21-2022

Quote:The war in Ukraine makes us realise that, though history is a good teacher, it has some poor students. Several Western European politicians have forgotten the lesson offered by the Munich agreement of 1938. The analogies with the present situation are striking. The policy of appeasement, spearheaded by Britain’s prime minister at the time, Neville Chamberlain, was followed by the outbreak of the second world war within a year.

From an article written by the Polish prime minister in the economist.

https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/04/23/polands-prime-minister-says-the-wests-appeasement-of-vladimir-putin-must-stop?utm_content=article-link-5&etear=nl_today_5&utm_campaign=r.the-economist-today&utm_medium=email.internal-newsletter.np&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=4/21/2022&utm_id=1140839

Does that sound like the leader of a country that would roll over if hit by some Russian missiles?

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 04-21-2022

(04-21-2022, 08:16 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  

Quote:The war in Ukraine makes us realise that, though history is a good teacher, it has some poor students. Several Western European politicians have forgotten the lesson offered by the Munich agreement of 1938. The analogies with the present situation are striking. The policy of appeasement, spearheaded by Britain’s prime minister at the time, Neville Chamberlain, was followed by the outbreak of the second world war within a year.

From an article written by the Polish prime minister in the economist.

https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/04/23/polands-prime-minister-says-the-wests-appeasement-of-vladimir-putin-must-stop?utm_content=article-link-5&etear=nl_today_5&utm_campaign=r.the-economist-today&utm_medium=email.internal-newsletter.np&utm_source=salesforce-marketing-cloud&utm_term=4/21/2022&utm_id=1140839

Does that sound like the leader of a country that would roll over if hit by some Russian missiles?

BC

No, it sounds like the leader of a country that wants others to help him do what needs to be done. What does he do when they say no? If Putin actually invaded Poland, it would be a clear Article 5 case. If he threatens to hit a city and then does so when aid through Poland doesn't stop, what does Poland and the rest of NATO actually do? Concrete actions, not sentiments please. And how do those actions encourage Poland to continue to be an aid corridor? I realize this is a theoretical case, but it would be interesting to know what people think NATO and the EU/US would actually do about it.

Keep in mind that both Poland and Germany, as well as many other European countries are still using Russian gas, at least until the end od the year. That is Munich on steroids IMHO. AFAIK, some of that gas still flows through Ukraine. I wonder if Russia is still paying Ukraine? Anybody know?

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 04-21-2022

The hit to German GDP of giving up Russian gas is estimated to be 1.3% over the next two years. https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/13/economy/german-economy-russian-gas/index.html

I think you underestimate the degree to which Russia’s invasion of Ukraine represents the European breaking point. Hopefully we never find out what happens if Russia fires a missile at a NATO country, but I think the calculus of confronting Russia has materially changed. The response has not been similar to the muted western response to the annexation of Crimea, because unlike Crimea, which had previously been Russian territory and had many Russian speakers who didn’t want to be part of Ukraine, one could not twist oneself in knots to justify the invasion.

The list of things that was unthinkable in January 2022 has actually happened:
Germany shutting down Nordstream II after construction was already finished.
Germany getting its military expenditure to NATO requirements (2%), this year
Sweden and Finland applying to join NATO (hasn’t happened yet, but is imminent)
Germany giving offensive weapons to an active combatant (as recently as February, Germany was being made fun of for offering helmets to Ukraine, and was refusing third countries giving German-made equipment to Ukraine)
Belgium reversing its plan to decommission its nuclear power plants by 2025 (sadly, Germany has not reversed course on its planned closures by the end of the year)
The US, And NATO countries giving Ukraine “offensive” weaponry (tanks, artillery, rockets, long-range drones, and it sounds like, even aircraft).
US and EU cutting a sizable number of Russian banks from SWIFT
US and EU freezing Russian assets
UK actually going after Russian oligarchs, including forcing Roman Abramovich to sell off Chelsea.
US sharing real-time intelligence with Ukraine

Basically, at this point, the only red line that remains is actually entering the fight nad shooting at the Russians. An attack on a NATO country would probably break that taboo, and while we probably won’t see Polish tanks rolling into the Donbas, NATO could start flying sortees into Ukrainian airspace (probably the West at first, but slowly expanding), and special forces on the ground directing Ukrainian firepower in much the same way that Americans worked with the Kurds to defeat ISIS without being directly involved.

BC

---

Fascinating thread about the Russian army productivity or lack thereof…

[tweet]https://twitter.com/trenttelenko/status/1517323375521284097?s=21&t=NUOArwd8FhhKg26e05pVPw[/tweet]

Key quote…

Quote: In contrast, the Russian Army in all its incarnations until the late 1990's always acted as if "There's more conscripts where that came from, comrade."

While the nostalgia for the Red Army the Putin Regime had blinded it to the demographic realities

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BostonCard - 04-21-2022

[tweet]https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1517145872609341440?s=21&t=NUOArwd8FhhKg26e05pVPw[/tweet]

What a happy coincidence for Ukraine.

BC

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - M T - 04-22-2022

Let's not double count.  I believe the fire in BC's post (#608) is the same one in Tver reported in DaBigV's post #590.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 04-22-2022

No need to double count, because the hits keep coming. 

Anyways here's an actual new fire at a Russian strategic facility. This makes three in past two days (the one in Tver and the Dmitrievsky chemical plant)

[Tweet]https://twitter.com/tweet4anna/status/1517493057918275584?s=20&t=XAC_WXEAKxtTzK3oMWxAbA[/tweet]

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - Goose - 04-22-2022

(04-21-2022, 10:54 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  The hit to German GDP of giving up Russian gas is estimated to be 1.3% over the next two years.  https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/13/economy/german-economy-russian-gas/index.html

From the article: "Germany would plunge into a deep recession if its supply of Russian natural gas was suddenly shut off, the country's top forecasters warned on Wednesday."
Another source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/14/russian-gas-oil-boycott-mass-poverty-warns-germany
The Bundesbank forecasts a 5% drop in GDP. Equally importantly Scholz and Yellen are in that camp.
https://www.ft.com/content/0738a816-cb3c-44f9-9257-7a8489bf4c9c
I would strongly suspect their thinking is governing, unfortunately IMHO. Even if it is 5%, it isn't as bad as thousands of Ukrainians being killed.

Quote:I think you underestimate the degree to which Russia’s invasion of Ukraine represents the European breaking point.

I agree it represents a European breaking point. The question is, which way Europe breaks. I think what we are seeing is Europe being forced to realize their world view didn't reflect reality. How they respond is the issue.

Quote:Hopefully we never find out what happens if Russia fires a missile at a NATO country, but I think the calculus of confronting Russia has materially changed.  The response has not been similar to the muted western response to the annexation of Crimea, because unlike Crimea, which had previously been Russian territory and had many Russian speakers who didn’t want to be part of Ukraine, one could not twist oneself in knots to justify the invasion.

Crimea was "different" because it was part of Ukraine only because of bureaucratic considerations in the USSR, not because of any historical association. Of course, it's forced annexation still should have been disallowed among civilized states, but that was too much trouble. Who cares about international law and the like?

Quote:The list of things that was unthinkable in January 2022 has actually happened:

Germany shutting down Nordstream II after construction was already finished.

To be clear, Nordstream II was never started up. It was finished and awaiting certification by the government, which it never got. Your point stands, this is a detail.

Quote:Germany getting its military expenditure to NATO requirements (2%), this year
Sweden and Finland applying to join NATO (hasn’t happened yet, but is imminent)
Germany giving offensive weapons to an active combatant (as recently as February, Germany was being made fun of for offering helmets to Ukraine, and was refusing third countries giving German-made equipment to Ukraine)
Belgium reversing its plan to decommission its nuclear power plants by 2025 (sadly, Germany has not reversed course on its planned closures by the end of the year)
The US, And NATO countries giving Ukraine “offensive” weaponry (tanks, artillery, rockets, long-range drones, and it sounds like, even aircraft).
US and EU cutting a sizable number of Russian banks from SWIFT
US and EU freezing Russian assets
UK actually going after Russian oligarchs, including forcing Roman Abramovich to sell off Chelsea.
US sharing real-time intelligence with Ukraine
Basically, at this point, the only red line that remains is actually entering the fight and shooting at the Russians. An attack on a NATO country would probably break that taboo, and while we probably won’t see Polish tanks rolling into the Donbas, NATO could start flying sortees into Ukrainian airspace (probably the West at first, but slowly expanding),

IMHO, not a chance in the world, unless NATO takes over the entire war. This is for technical reasons. The NATO IFF is not compatible with the one used by Ukraine. It would be a blue force on yellow force nightmare, never mind the red force. 

Quote:with everyband special forces on the ground directing Ukrainian firepower in much the same way that Americans worked with the Kurds to defeat ISIS without being directly involved.
BC

I suspect this might already be happening to some degree. I also suspect contractors are working in Ukraine to train and to support newly delivered equipment.

The problem is that none of these unprecedented events addresses the Polish city being hit to stop deliveries through Poland. It does not protect Poland from those strikes, or even pretend to do so. The Polish Prime Minister has to recommend a response. He could ask NATO to invoke Article 5, but he knows that Hungary will vote no. He also knows that Bulgaria probably will too. He also knows that Germany is militarily pretty much a zero right now. The US will undoubtedly plead with him not to do this, because it shows that NATO is totally impotent in this situation. So, what does he do? Does he go to his people and say "We just have to bear this burden of being the only NATO country whose citizens are being killed because it is the right thing to do?". If he does that, how long will he be Prime Minister? I think it is possible for such an appeal to succeed. Zelenskyy is in effect asking this and more from his people. But Ukraine has no choice. Poland does, at least for now. I believe they will (justifiably) feel abandoned by their allies and will go with their own self-interest. Remember, they use Russian gas too. This is what I fear is the "turning point".

I believe it was Finland's Prime Minister who said that Finland isn't joining NATO only to buy fire insurance, but also to join the fire brigade. The present hypothetical situation illustrates that if Russia doesn't  attack your country with full force, maybe that brigade isn't coming. What message does this send to Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria? Even to Finland? Asymmetric warfare is a bitch for alliances.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 04-22-2022

Can't believe we're still talking about this dumb theoretical. If Russia attacks a NATO country, they are going to lose even harder than they are losing now. The US didn't respond to Pearl Harbor by giving in to the Japanese. Poland or any other country that gets attacked by a weak and rapidly weakening Russia is not going to be deterred in the slightest.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 04-22-2022

(04-22-2022, 09:52 AM)dabigv13 Wrote:  Can't believe we're still talking about this dumb theoretical. If Russia attacks a NATO country, they are going to lose even harder than they are losing now. The US didn't respond to Pearl Harbor by giving in to the Japanese. Poland or any other country that gets attacked by a weak and rapidly weakening Russia is not going to be deterred in the slightest.

IMHO, the fact that we're discussing this hypothetical reflects that the war effectively has been on pause for 3 weeks while the Russians withdrew from the North and have been repositioning and reconditioning their forces.  The first 5 weeks of the war were much more eventful and unpredictable, with the Ukrainian resistance surprising and riveting the world.  So there was lots to discuss here.  During this pause, the notewothy events mostly have been "diplomatic" in nature, namely decisions to increase military aid, decisions to expand sanctions against Russia and the Russian regime, and discussions about further NATO expansion.  Not as exciting message board material.  We may be coming to another eventful stage of the war as Russia readies its next phase of its attack.  However, NATO's decision to put it's finger more heavily on the scale with military aid is reducing the likelihood that Russia actually could annex most of Ukraine.  So even as the next phase of the shooting war is about to begin, the suspense we felt in the initial phase is not likely to return.  So we need something to occupy ourselves, and we Stanford sports fans have become expert at creating debates over issues far smaller than those that remain in doubt in the Russia/Ukraine conflict.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - OutsiderFan - 04-22-2022

When the invasion started, the west instituted economic sanctions on Russia. Many at the time said "sanctions won't do anything," despite being told sanctions wouldn't have an impact right away, but they would ultimately hinder Russia's ability to wage war. 

Today I am reading about:

1. The fact Ukraine now has more tanks than Russia due to donations from other countries and the obliteration of Russian tanks by drones, Javelins, and NLAWs.

2. The U.S. and France are donating dozens of howitzers and nearly 150k artillery shells (!!!!) 

3. Russian factory that produces surface to air missiles had to shut down due to sanctions.

I don't see how Russia can prevail with the industrial might of the west and fighting vigilance of Ukraine coming together as they are.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - TrumpCard - 04-22-2022

(04-22-2022, 12:51 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  When the invasion started, the west instituted economic sanctions on Russia. Many at the time said "sanctions won't do anything," despite being told sanctions wouldn't have an impact right away, but they would ultimately hinder Russia's ability to wage war. 

Today I am reading about:

1. The fact Ukraine now has more tanks than Russia due to donations from other countries and the obliteration of Russian tanks by drones, Javelins, and NLAWs.

2. The U.S. and France are donating dozens of howitzers and nearly 150k artillery shells (!!!!) 

3. Russian factory that produces surface to air missiles had to shut down due to sanctions.

I don't see how Russia can prevail with the industrial might of the west and fighting vigilance of Ukraine coming together as they are.

I think this is the reason you're seeing speculation on this message board about the circumstances under which Russia could deter NATO from continuing to provide military aid.  Namely, that's the only realistic scenario under which Russia would have a reasonable chance to annex all of Ukraine.  Even then, Russia might well have some difficulty, as reflected by Ukraine's success in repelling the attack on Kyiv.  But Russia has 3x the population and 10x the GDP of Ukraine, so Russia potentially would have the ability to marshall sufficient troops and resources to achieve its goal.  

As you said, however, Russia's chance of prevailing to that extent seems extremely small if NATO continues to put its finger on the scale.  Assuming NATO's current resolve continues, I would think that a stalemate is the best Russia can hope to achieve.  That's still a bad outcome for millions of Ukrainians, but it's likely one that would allow the non-occupied portions of Ukraine to continue as a functioning, democratic, and independent state, which is the last thing Russia wants on its border.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - dabigv13 - 04-22-2022

Canada is sending M777 howitzers and guided Excalibur shells.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ukraine-m777-howitzer-russia-heavy-artillery-1.6427762

France is sending CAESAR howitzers.

https://defence-blog.com/france-to-send-caesar-self-propelled-howitzers-to-ukraine/

Both are very modern and advanced arty pieces. We don't know what type exactly US is sending, though it will be a lot more numerous at least than what France and Canada are. But if Ukraine has parity with tanks, parity at least in troop numbers, perhaps more capable artillery, and still no Russian air superiority, well their Donbas offensive is pretty much over. Holding the land bridge to Crimea may be a tall order as well.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - BigJohn043 - 04-22-2022

(04-22-2022, 01:35 PM)TrumpCard Wrote:  

(04-22-2022, 12:51 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  When the invasion started, the west instituted economic sanctions on Russia. Many at the time said "sanctions won't do anything," despite being told sanctions wouldn't have an impact right away, but they would ultimately hinder Russia's ability to wage war. 

Today I am reading about:

1. The fact Ukraine now has more tanks than Russia due to donations from other countries and the obliteration of Russian tanks by drones, Javelins, and NLAWs.

2. The U.S. and France are donating dozens of howitzers and nearly 150k artillery shells (!!!!) 

3. Russian factory that produces surface to air missiles had to shut down due to sanctions.

I don't see how Russia can prevail with the industrial might of the west and fighting vigilance of Ukraine coming together as they are.

I think this is the reason you're seeing speculation on this message board about the circumstances under which Russia could deter NATO from continuing to provide military aid.  Namely, that's the only realistic scenario under which Russia would have a reasonable chance to annex all of Ukraine.  Even then, Russia might well have some difficulty, as reflected by Ukraine's success in repelling the attack on Kyiv.  But Russia has 3x the population and 10x the GDP of Ukraine, so Russia potentially would have the ability to marshall sufficient troops and resources to achieve its goal.  

As you said, however, Russia's chance of prevailing to that extent seems extremely small if NATO continues to put its finger on the scale.  Assuming NATO's current resolve continues, I would think that a stalemate is the best Russia can hope to achieve.  That's still a bad outcome for millions of Ukrainians, but it's likely one that would allow the non-occupied portions of Ukraine to continue as a functioning, democratic, and independent state, which is the last thing Russia wants on its border.

Even without additional NATO weapons, Russia has literally no chance of taking Ukraine.  They have no where near the forces required to conquer a city like Kiev or Kharkiv.  And they never really even started in the initial invasion.

The difference NATO weapons likely makes is it will enable the Ukraine to drive Russia back to their borders.

FWIW, there is no pause right now.  Russia is trying to advance in the east.  It is just not really working.  The next 1-2 weeks are crucial.  If Russia can't advance they likely have to retreat....

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - ca245 - 04-22-2022

Anyone have any thoughts on what would happen to a NATO unified front against Putin if Le Pen wins the French presidential election? Don't know much about her, other than that she is a right-winger who has been pro-Putin in the past.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - DC 86 - 04-22-2022

(04-22-2022, 03:24 PM)ca245 Wrote:  Anyone have any thoughts on what would happen to a NATO unified front against Putin if Le Pen wins the French presidential election? Don't know much about her, other than that she is a right-winger who has been pro-Putin in the past.

Well, as a start, she's stated explicitly that she would move to remove France from NATO's integrated military command if elected.

---

RE: Way OT: Ukraine - thatboy - 04-22-2022

(04-22-2022, 09:46 AM)Goose Wrote:  I believe it was Finland's Prime Minister who said that Finland isn't joining NATO only to buy fire insurance, but also to join the fire brigade. The present hypothetical situation illustrates that if Russia doesn't  attack your country with full force, maybe that brigade isn't coming. What message does this send to Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria? Even to Finland? Asymmetric warfare is a bitch for alliances.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the point here, but I don't think you can infer how NATO would respond to an attack on Poland or another NATO country based on how it's responded to the invasion of Ukraine -- a non NATO country.

---