[BostonCard]

The Russians are struggling mightily to supply their troops and the Ukrainians have done a good job going after resupply convoys.  The longer it stays in a stalemate, the worse Russia’s position becomes.

The Ukrainian Prime Minister predicted that this will not go past May.  He thinks either they will reach a peace or Ukraine will grind down Russian troops (he didn’t allude to the third possibility, which is that Russian troops break through and the Ukrainian defense falls apart).  I think that is probably right.

BC

[BostonCard]

The Russians are struggling mightily to supply their troops and the Ukrainians have done a good job going after resupply convoys.  The longer it stays in a stalemate, the worse Russia’s position becomes.

The Ukrainian Prime Minister predicted that this will not go past May.  He thinks either they will reach a peace or Ukraine will grind down Russian troops (he didn’t allude to the third possibility, which is that Russian troops break through and the Ukrainian defense falls apart).  I think that is probably right.

BC

[M T]

I know zilch about politics and almost nothing about the military situation, but I wonder how Putin can back down and out.  Whatever happens in reality, politically he's going to have to declare victory.  Even if the troops pull out tomorrow, he'll need some way to tell the Russian people that they won.

Even so, those in the know in Russian power/political circle will now see him as vulnerable.  Who will go after his position?  Are they more or are the less likely to do military or other offensive actions?  Surely that is known or predicted by the various intelligence agencies around the world.  I'd think most of the rest of the world wouldn't want a more hard-line Russian leader.

Is it possible that Putin was essentially forced into this action by forces in the Russian power circles?  If so, allowing him a face-saving way out might reduce the likelihood of this happening again in the near future. ("See, military action was a painful, futile exercise.")  But if it was all Putin, then the only reason to give him a face-saving exit  is if otherwise some hardliner would take over and say that Russia's military is too weak and needs to be built stronger.

------
The talk of his being overthrown or assassinated seems like it didn't take into account what would happen afterwards.  Who is poised to take over?  If no one, then in the chaos that follows, what are the chances that some one would get into power with the short-sightedness to do the truly irrational/insane actions.

[M T]

I know zilch about politics and almost nothing about the military situation, but I wonder how Putin can back down and out.  Whatever happens in reality, politically he's going to have to declare victory.  Even if the troops pull out tomorrow, he'll need some way to tell the Russian people that they won.

Even so, those in the know in Russian power/political circle will now see him as vulnerable.  Who will go after his position?  Are they more or are the less likely to do military or other offensive actions?  Surely that is known or predicted by the various intelligence agencies around the world.  I'd think most of the rest of the world wouldn't want a more hard-line Russian leader.

Is it possible that Putin was essentially forced into this action by forces in the Russian power circles?  If so, allowing him a face-saving way out might reduce the likelihood of this happening again in the near future. ("See, military action was a painful, futile exercise.")  But if it was all Putin, then the only reason to give him a face-saving exit  is if otherwise some hardliner would take over and say that Russia's military is too weak and needs to be built stronger.

------
The talk of his being overthrown or assassinated seems like it didn't take into account what would happen afterwards.  Who is poised to take over?  If no one, then in the chaos that follows, what are the chances that some one would get into power with the short-sightedness to do the truly irrational/insane actions.

[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1504115012851413000?s=21[/tweet]

Big if true, but the following quote, from the article, seems more likely:

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

“There’s a likelihood this is trickery and illusion. They lie about everything — Crimea, the build-up of troops on the border, and the ‘hysteria’ over the invasion,” said a Ukrainian source briefed on the talks.

BC

[BostonCard]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1504115012851413000?s=21[/tweet]

Big if true, but the following quote, from the article, seems more likely:

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

“There’s a likelihood this is trickery and illusion. They lie about everything — Crimea, the build-up of troops on the border, and the ‘hysteria’ over the invasion,” said a Ukrainian source briefed on the talks.

BC

[newguy]

a Stanford student has stopped out and traveled to Poland to help Ukrainian refugees.
here's an editorial she wrote for cnn.com, called "This is How Ukrainians Win the Long War."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/12/opinions/...index.html

[newguy]

a Stanford student has stopped out and traveled to Poland to help Ukrainian refugees.
here's an editorial she wrote for cnn.com, called "This is How Ukrainians Win the Long War."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/12/opinions/...index.html

[81alum]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/15/world...ussia.html

The comparisons with Syria.

[81alum]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/15/world...ussia.html

The comparisons with Syria.

[OutsiderFan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1504115012851413000?s=21[/tweet]

Big if true, but the following quote, from the article, seems more likely:

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

“There’s a likelihood this is trickery and illusion. They lie about everything — Crimea, the build-up of troops on the border, and the ‘hysteria’ over the invasion,” said a Ukrainian source briefed on the talks.

BC

Ukraine would be foolish to accept any deal with Russia. Ukraine was suppose to have its security guaranteed in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons. How did that work out for them? Russia has pulled out of treaties before. Hell, even its olympic athletes are cheaters.

The terms have to be like the U.S. demanded from Japan in WW2; full surrender and Emperor steps down. The difference in this situation of course is Ukraine isn't inflicting damage inside Russia, something I wish they did do, but realize couldn't because all assets had to be used for self defense against invasion. Putin can't be allowed to get anything other than hostilities ending, and Russia being in a worse position vis-a-vis Ukraine after they do end, otherwise, he is rewarded for his evil. There is also the matter of reparations. Russia must be forced to pay Ukraine for the damage it caused as part of any agreement too.

If I know Russia like I think I do, it won't be long until they start demanding global economic sanctions be lifted as part of the deal. That has to be a non-starter. It's bi-lateral negotiation with Ukraine and Russia. The sanctions are up to other countries to decide on, with Russia having zero power to influence whether and when they are lifted, other than improving its behavior to the point the sanctioners feel they should be lifted. But if I'm the rest of the world, I don't end them until Putin steps down and Russia reforms itself.

[OutsiderFan]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1504115012851413000?s=21[/tweet]

Big if true, but the following quote, from the article, seems more likely:

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

“There’s a likelihood this is trickery and illusion. They lie about everything — Crimea, the build-up of troops on the border, and the ‘hysteria’ over the invasion,” said a Ukrainian source briefed on the talks.

BC

Ukraine would be foolish to accept any deal with Russia. Ukraine was suppose to have its security guaranteed in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons. How did that work out for them? Russia has pulled out of treaties before. Hell, even its olympic athletes are cheaters.

The terms have to be like the U.S. demanded from Japan in WW2; full surrender and Emperor steps down. The difference in this situation of course is Ukraine isn't inflicting damage inside Russia, something I wish they did do, but realize couldn't because all assets had to be used for self defense against invasion. Putin can't be allowed to get anything other than hostilities ending, and Russia being in a worse position vis-a-vis Ukraine after they do end, otherwise, he is rewarded for his evil. There is also the matter of reparations. Russia must be forced to pay Ukraine for the damage it caused as part of any agreement too.

If I know Russia like I think I do, it won't be long until they start demanding global economic sanctions be lifted as part of the deal. That has to be a non-starter. It's bi-lateral negotiation with Ukraine and Russia. The sanctions are up to other countries to decide on, with Russia having zero power to influence whether and when they are lifted, other than improving its behavior to the point the sanctioners feel they should be lifted. But if I'm the rest of the world, I don't end them until Putin steps down and Russia reforms itself.

[BostonCard]

An account of the battle of Voznesensk.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-rus...1647444734

BC

[BostonCard]

An account of the battle of Voznesensk.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-rus...1647444734

BC

[teejers1]

An account of the battle of Voznesensk.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-rus...1647444734

BC

If you're a Russian soldier on the ground in Ukraine, don't you have to be asking this question:  "WTF are we doing here?!?"
I don't care what level of propaganda is force fed you on the way in; once there, I've gotta believe the soldiers are looking around and wondering what the hell? . . ."

But I'm probably being hopelessly naive.

[teejers1]

An account of the battle of Voznesensk.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-rus...1647444734

BC

If you're a Russian soldier on the ground in Ukraine, don't you have to be asking this question:  "WTF are we doing here?!?"
I don't care what level of propaganda is force fed you on the way in; once there, I've gotta believe the soldiers are looking around and wondering what the hell? . . ."

But I'm probably being hopelessly naive.

[Phogge]

In Cornelius Ryan’s last book he describes Soviet soldiers not knowing what toilets were as they marched on Berlin so they used them to wash potatoes.

I doubt that many Russian soldiers on the ground in the Ukraine have any geopolitical thoughts.

[Phogge]

In Cornelius Ryan’s last book he describes Soviet soldiers not knowing what toilets were as they marched on Berlin so they used them to wash potatoes.

I doubt that many Russian soldiers on the ground in the Ukraine have any geopolitical thoughts.

[Goose]

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

BC

With the exception of making Russian a "recognized" language, this looks like the status quo ante, Ukraine on its own without NATO membership and no foreign military in-country to protect them or function as a tripwire. This does not address repairing the damage caused by Russian invasion, the breakaway republics, and the Crimea status. Presumably Russia retains these, as it was before. Ukraine won't like this deal but possibly would accept it to end the war. OTOH, I don't see how Putin can do so and explain it to his people. Russia started a war from which they got nothing but casualties and returned to square one. No way you can spin this. It is an L for Russia. Can't see it happening.

[Goose]

Although Moscow and Kyiv both said they had made progress on the terms of a deal, Ukrainian officials are sceptical Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is fully committed to peace and worry that Moscow could be buying time to regroup its forces and resume its offensive.

BC

With the exception of making Russian a "recognized" language, this looks like the status quo ante, Ukraine on its own without NATO membership and no foreign military in-country to protect them or function as a tripwire. This does not address repairing the damage caused by Russian invasion, the breakaway republics, and the Crimea status. Presumably Russia retains these, as it was before. Ukraine won't like this deal but possibly would accept it to end the war. OTOH, I don't see how Putin can do so and explain it to his people. Russia started a war from which they got nothing but casualties and returned to square one. No way you can spin this. It is an L for Russia. Can't see it happening.

[dabigv13]

Russia has 75% of their total combat power in Ukraine, and increasing, and still they are making no progress, running out of their best material and soldiers.

If Ukraine can hold out, I don't think it's out of the question that they could reclaim Crimea and Donbas. Good chance this could trigger a nuclear response however.

[dabigv13]

Russia has 75% of their total combat power in Ukraine, and increasing, and still they are making no progress, running out of their best material and soldiers.

If Ukraine can hold out, I don't think it's out of the question that they could reclaim Crimea and Donbas. Good chance this could trigger a nuclear response however.

[Goose]

Russia has 75% of their total combat power in Ukraine, and increasing, and still they are making no progress, running out of their best material and soldiers.

If Ukraine can hold out, I don't think it's out of the question that they could reclaim Crimea and Donbas. Good chance this could trigger a nuclear response however.

I think that reclaiming these areas is very unlikely. The Russians are making no progress in attacking. Defending is probably another story. Lots easier to do. Only if the Russian military actually collapses (not impossible, but I wouldn't count on it) can Ukraine reclaim anything. I question that Ukraine can actually drive Russia out if Russia just stops where they are. Russia only suffers large losses when they attack. Stop attacking and it is the US in Afghanistan. You can't win but you can tolerate the casualty situation essentially forever. How long can Ukraine sustain their military effort under those conditions? How long can Russia? That is the real doomsday scenario IMHO.

[Goose]

Russia has 75% of their total combat power in Ukraine, and increasing, and still they are making no progress, running out of their best material and soldiers.

If Ukraine can hold out, I don't think it's out of the question that they could reclaim Crimea and Donbas. Good chance this could trigger a nuclear response however.

I think that reclaiming these areas is very unlikely. The Russians are making no progress in attacking. Defending is probably another story. Lots easier to do. Only if the Russian military actually collapses (not impossible, but I wouldn't count on it) can Ukraine reclaim anything. I question that Ukraine can actually drive Russia out if Russia just stops where they are. Russia only suffers large losses when they attack. Stop attacking and it is the US in Afghanistan. You can't win but you can tolerate the casualty situation essentially forever. How long can Ukraine sustain their military effort under those conditions? How long can Russia? That is the real doomsday scenario IMHO.

[dabigv13]

Well I don't know that it's likely, but I think it's a lot more likely that Ukraine retakes those areas than Russia takes and holds Kiev.

Russia is suffering more KIA in a couple weeks in Ukraine than the average monthly KIA for US during WW2, and the losses thus far have been disproportionately to their best soldiers and equipment.

If we take 7000 as KIA, likely there are ~25k Russian soldiers dead or wounded by now. At this rate their entire invasion force will be dead or wounded in 3 to 4 months. 

We don't know Ukrainian losses but they are probably much less than Russia given their advantage as defenders. And their army and territorial defense forces are far more numerous than the Russian invasion force.

I think a Russian military collapse is more likely than not at this point. And they certainly have not secured the areas their troops "occupy" from this offensive so I think their hold is very tenuous on those areas. Plenty of videos of supply trucks being ambushed near Russian border well behind the ostensible front lines, and the local populace hates them. This is not 2014.

[dabigv13]

Well I don't know that it's likely, but I think it's a lot more likely that Ukraine retakes those areas than Russia takes and holds Kiev.

Russia is suffering more KIA in a couple weeks in Ukraine than the average monthly KIA for US during WW2, and the losses thus far have been disproportionately to their best soldiers and equipment.

If we take 7000 as KIA, likely there are ~25k Russian soldiers dead or wounded by now. At this rate their entire invasion force will be dead or wounded in 3 to 4 months. 

We don't know Ukrainian losses but they are probably much less than Russia given their advantage as defenders. And their army and territorial defense forces are far more numerous than the Russian invasion force.

I think a Russian military collapse is more likely than not at this point. And they certainly have not secured the areas their troops "occupy" from this offensive so I think their hold is very tenuous on those areas. Plenty of videos of supply trucks being ambushed near Russian border well behind the ostensible front lines, and the local populace hates them. This is not 2014.

[gailtate]

While we're at this sanction thing, can we lead an effort to de-fund the U.N.? It is a long-time planetary disgrace. And an epic waste of ultra-premium east-side Manhattan property. All that this debating society does is enable Russia, China and Iran while trying to undermine the Israelis.  U.N. peacekeepers? Sex criminals led by corrupt apparatchiks in cheap suits. Useless as teats on roosters.

[gailtate]

While we're at this sanction thing, can we lead an effort to de-fund the U.N.? It is a long-time planetary disgrace. And an epic waste of ultra-premium east-side Manhattan property. All that this debating society does is enable Russia, China and Iran while trying to undermine the Israelis.  U.N. peacekeepers? Sex criminals led by corrupt apparatchiks in cheap suits. Useless as teats on roosters.

[dabigv13]

Not really sure how getting rid of the UN solves any problems in a good way, unless you really covet their Manhattan real estate??? Did a UN peacekeeper shoot your dog or something? Yikes.

[dabigv13]

Not really sure how getting rid of the UN solves any problems in a good way, unless you really covet their Manhattan real estate??? Did a UN peacekeeper shoot your dog or something? Yikes.

[CompSci87]

Can we please keep this thread about Ukraine?

[CompSci87]

Can we please keep this thread about Ukraine?

[martyup]

In Cornelius Ryan’s last book he describes Soviet soldiers not knowing what toilets were as they marched on Berlin so they used them to wash potatoes.

I doubt that many Russian soldiers on the ground in the Ukraine have any geopolitical thoughts.

Yes, Russia has a long history of treating its soldiers as cannon fodder.  I doubt that the Russian leaders value soldier lives as highly as we do.  Hopefully, the Russian people hold a much higher value.

[martyup]

In Cornelius Ryan’s last book he describes Soviet soldiers not knowing what toilets were as they marched on Berlin so they used them to wash potatoes.

I doubt that many Russian soldiers on the ground in the Ukraine have any geopolitical thoughts.

Yes, Russia has a long history of treating its soldiers as cannon fodder.  I doubt that the Russian leaders value soldier lives as highly as we do.  Hopefully, the Russian people hold a much higher value.

[2006alum]

Can we please keep this thread about Ukraine?

Generally totally agree with you, but anyone who contends that Turtle Bay is "ultra premium" real estate must be refuted!!

[2006alum]

Can we please keep this thread about Ukraine?

Generally totally agree with you, but anyone who contends that Turtle Bay is "ultra premium" real estate must be refuted!!

[OutsiderFan]

While we're at this sanction thing, can we lead an effort to de-fund the U.N.? It is a long-time planetary disgrace. And an epic waste of ultra-premium east-side Manhattan property. All that this debating society does is enable Russia, China and Iran while trying to undermine the Israelis.  U.N. peacekeepers? Sex criminals led by corrupt apparatchiks in cheap suits. Useless as teats on roosters.

Zelensky effectively called out the UN in his speech to Congress March 16, when he suggested the need for a UN-type organization comprised only of the world's democracies. This body would be able to act on global issues that the UN can't effectively address at the speed they must be.

The UN does do some good things and I don't think the world is better without it, but it also has failed at some very important things like preventing this war in Ukraine, for example, that show the need for something else that can prevent something similar from happening in the future.

[OutsiderFan]

While we're at this sanction thing, can we lead an effort to de-fund the U.N.? It is a long-time planetary disgrace. And an epic waste of ultra-premium east-side Manhattan property. All that this debating society does is enable Russia, China and Iran while trying to undermine the Israelis.  U.N. peacekeepers? Sex criminals led by corrupt apparatchiks in cheap suits. Useless as teats on roosters.

Zelensky effectively called out the UN in his speech to Congress March 16, when he suggested the need for a UN-type organization comprised only of the world's democracies. This body would be able to act on global issues that the UN can't effectively address at the speed they must be.

The UN does do some good things and I don't think the world is better without it, but it also has failed at some very important things like preventing this war in Ukraine, for example, that show the need for something else that can prevent something similar from happening in the future.

[gailtate]

Not really sure how getting rid of the UN solves any problems in a good way, unless you really covet their Manhattan real estate??? Did a UN peacekeeper shoot your dog or something? Yikes.

You may want to take a closer look:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-p...se-problem

And pick up a copy of Why Peacekeeping Fails, by Dennis Jett, a former U.S. ambassador to Peru and Mozambique who also worked in U.S. embassies in Argentina, Israel, Malawi, and Liberia.

Excerpt:
The most recently launched peacekeeping missions will therefore fail, because U.N. peacekeeping has become a way for rich countries to send the soldiers of poor countries to deal with conflicts the rich countries do not care all that much about. The fundamental problem is that there is no peace to keep, and U.N. forces are incapable of imposing one because they are peacekeepers and not warfighters. If the international community wants to try to impose a peace, it should send troops that are capable and willing to do that.

The United Nations is largely irrelevant to the world’s biggest problems. When push comes to shove, it’s an impotent debating society that fails to pay its parking tickets.

Operative word: "Irrelevant".

[gailtate]

Not really sure how getting rid of the UN solves any problems in a good way, unless you really covet their Manhattan real estate??? Did a UN peacekeeper shoot your dog or something? Yikes.

You may want to take a closer look:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/01/11/un-p...se-problem

And pick up a copy of Why Peacekeeping Fails, by Dennis Jett, a former U.S. ambassador to Peru and Mozambique who also worked in U.S. embassies in Argentina, Israel, Malawi, and Liberia.

Excerpt:
The most recently launched peacekeeping missions will therefore fail, because U.N. peacekeeping has become a way for rich countries to send the soldiers of poor countries to deal with conflicts the rich countries do not care all that much about. The fundamental problem is that there is no peace to keep, and U.N. forces are incapable of imposing one because they are peacekeepers and not warfighters. If the international community wants to try to impose a peace, it should send troops that are capable and willing to do that.

The United Nations is largely irrelevant to the world’s biggest problems. When push comes to shove, it’s an impotent debating society that fails to pay its parking tickets.

Operative word: "Irrelevant".