Thread: Stupid Shit in Kyiv
+
Add Report
Results 751 to 765 of 2583
-
04-02-23 23:57 #1833
Posts: 1976Originally Posted by Jmsuttr [View Original Post]
1. There is a thriving nationalist movement in Russia, which is even more belligerent than Putin himself. Girkin, for example, used to urge caution about nuclear rhetoric. Well, he's not anymore.
2. Putin's propagandists are consistently pushing tactical nuclear strikes against Kyiv.
3. And finally, Putin knows his days in power (and likely his own life) are over when the war is over.
So if he keeps ratcheting up, then at some point in the future things just might go wrong. Fateful mistakes are far from impossible, especially at the times of heightened tensions, and we've been there before.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ar_close_calls
-
04-02-23 23:28 #1832
Posts: 1976Originally Posted by Paulie97 [View Original Post]
-
04-02-23 23:24 #1831
Posts: 690"Assimilate"?
BTW. China didn't assimilate Hong Kong, The UK captured in in a war (over "trading rights") and signed a document for its return after a period of 100 years. In the second, "Arrow War, the French and British were victorious and gained commercial privileges and "legal" and territorial concessions in China ". Some believe that nuclear weapons belonging to the Americans are stationed in South Korea and Japan.
-
04-02-23 18:32 #1830
Posts: 516China is the new wrinkle in the fabric of the nuclear discussion.
Originally Posted by Xpartan [View Original Post]
China hates chaos and loves stability, while Putin has demonstrated that he's the ultimate merchant of chaos. China seeks domination, don't get me wrong, but they're happy to move slowly, deliberately, and with minimal risk. They'd love to assimilate Taiwan the way they did Hong Kong. And they'd love to be economically dominant in Asia (and beyond) such that they become the predominant world power without ever needing to fire a shot or drop a bomb.
China is happy to allow Russia to serve as a distraction and thorn in the side of NATO and the West. But they're not happy with the potential for instability as a result of Putin's saber-rattling. After Russia declared an intent to relocate some nuclear assets to Belarus, China made a public statement widely seen as critical of that decision. And I'm pretty sure more frank criticisms were expressed through private channels.
All of this means that Putin's bluster is more transparently a bluff, and empty threat, than would otherwise be the case. Russia can't afford to piss off or alienate their new master, and China has multiple screws they can tighten to keep Russia on a leash. Rhetoric might be tolerated but not anything that significantly turns up the nuclear thermostat.
If anyone doubts this line of reasoning, consider what would happen if Russia actually used a nuke (tactical or otherwise) or realistically appeared to be on the brink of doing so. One probable outcome would be the collapse of any non-proliferation policies, with countries like Japan and South Korea racing to arm themselves. That's a scenario China desperately wants to avoid. There are other scenarios of instability one can think of, but the main point remains the same. China will simply not allow Russia to push the world down that path. And it's important to remember that, despite all the BFF talk, there's no love lost between Russia and China. Which means that China won't be slow about yanking on the leash to bring their dog to heel. And, with the way the Chinese like to think and work, it's my guess they already have a contingency plan in place that involves replacing Putin.
-
04-02-23 14:12 #1829
Posts: 330A the fool makes his appearance
Originally Posted by Questner [View Original Post]
-
04-02-23 06:44 #1828
Posts: 1976Originally Posted by Chicago85 [View Original Post]
His instinct, which has worked for him in the past, is to escalate at every sight of trouble. He knows the West doesn't have much tolerance for the loss of life. He sees it as a huge weakness. That's what his nuclear blackmail means.
Of course, he's bluffing. But the problem with nuclear rhetoric is even talking about it is dangerous. Things can simply go wrong. Statements misunderstood. There are plenty of nervous people everywhere.
Gerontocrats from Soviet Politburos are probably turning nonstop in their graves.
-
04-02-23 04:09 #1827
Posts: 516Agree + three quick additional points
Originally Posted by Chicago85 [View Original Post]
2. If either Trump or DeSantis take office, they'll immediately be confronted with the difference between governing and criticizing the policies of others. Europe is remarkably united in their support of Ukraine. And other nations like Canada, Australia, and Japan are firmly on board. A Republican administration might want to make changes but I doubt they would pull the plug or be willing to piss off so many important allies. They might try to pressure Ukraine to negotiate but Putin's war criminal status and Russia's continued atrocities make that a tough sell. And most of Europe will also take Ukraine's side on that issue.
3. If the US does throttle back on support, it wouldn't surprise me to see other countries throttle up. Poland, for example, has the ability to transfer more equipment if they choose to do so. Most NATO countries have been allowing the US to take the lead. But, if that leadership wanes, I fully expect others to step up. Russian aggression is an existential threat for the Baltics, Nordics, Poland, and others. They will adapt to any changing circumstances because supporting Ukraine is the best way to ensure their own security.
-
04-02-23 03:54 #1826
Posts: 1680Lol
Originally Posted by Locamotive [View Original Post]
-
04-02-23 02:58 #1825
Posts: 516Reality is more than cherry-picked confirmation bias
Originally Posted by Locamotive [View Original Post]
But facts are stubborn things and they don't give a shit about either side's narrative. Reality is what actually happens on the battlefield, and that reality has not been kind to Russia, which occupies much less territory today than they did one year ago.
Let's take Bakhmut, as just one example. It's been "about to fall" for many months. And, even if it does fall, there are fortifications nearby that Ukraine has been preparing since 2014. And, even if it does fall, what if (as some have reported) it's cost Russia a hugely disproportionate amount of eqp and personnel losses? And, even if it does fall, will the Russians be able to hold it or will it be retaken by Ukraine, as happened with Lysychansk?
So what happens over the next few months? Will it be the case that Russia has shot their offensive wad and will only be able to wage defensive warfare? Will Ukraine be able to mount an effective offensive? I don't have the answers to those questions, and I'm not in the business of making predictions. But any honest observer of the current situation can see that Russia is currently at a near-standstill. And that's true no matter what happens in Bakhmut.
Not only are their ground forces moving at a snail's pace (where they're moving at all) but they no longer seem capable of mounting the kinds of massive missile attacks they did before. In fact, there's not one militarily significant area in which Russia's efforts haven't decreased in tempo and intensity.
And, if Russia is such a giant and powerful country, why can't they replace their lost equipment (tanks, etc.) with equivalent models? Instead, they're refurbishing WW-II era tanks and trying to buy drones and other weapons from countries like Iran.
Oh, and that "giant" country has a GDP less than the state of California. So, while it's massive when it comes to geographic size, it's below average when it comes to economic heft. Meanwhile, all of the US and all of Europe are firm in their support of Ukraine. And, in Asia and the Pacific, both Japan and Australia are supporting Ukraine. Russia was hoping for China's help but, at least so far, that's been more talk than anything else.
So, go right ahead and smoke your crack while patting yourself on the back about the "accuracy" of your crystal ball. I prefer to observe the facts on the ground and let those inform my assessments. And, as I noted above, reality has not been kind to Russia. But go ahead and buy your girl another lumpia. That should make everything better.
-
04-02-23 01:57 #1824
Posts: 387Originally Posted by Locamotive [View Original Post]
Ukraine has fought Russia to a stalemate without any tanks, very few planes, and USA Tech from the early 90's. Once the 150+ promised advanced tanks arrive, a few pilots get trained on F-16's, and the US sends some things from more recent than 30 YEARS AGO! . Stuff will move.
Russia's supposed trump card is their nuclear stockpile. Even if they were to deploy one of those, and it miraculously worked, they'd be 10x worse off and it would lead to the ware being ended by 'the adults in the room.' Putin knows that it would be his downfall as the USA Would respond with overwhelming firepower and likely boots on the ground. Russia would be out of the occupied territories in a week, and should the US want to, we'd be in Red Square within a month. Putin would be overthrown and likely killed.
You can call this hubris, and there is a good dose of that, but more so my position is based upon the absolute shit show of a performance that has been Russia so far.
-
04-02-23 01:44 #1823
Posts: 1327April Fool's Day. A professional holiday for the wretched jester and the spare macabre camarilla around the puppet.
-
04-01-23 23:24 #1822
Posts: 1680Yep
Originally Posted by Jmsuttr [View Original Post]
-
04-01-23 19:34 #1821
Posts: 516Russian academic speaks the truth. Is there an open window in his future?
"Russia is losing its future. Aleksandr Auzan, dean of Economics at Moscow State University on the loss of human capital in Russia".
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/...C-0ZemysYtAAAA
The video clip is 1 min 18 secs in length, and Auzan tries to soften his dire predictions by saying "if" the brain drain doesn't continue in the same way it's been going. Unfortunately for him, and Russia, there's no evidence Putin has any intention of changing course. Which means the brain drain is likely to continue along its death-spiral course, taking with it the hopes of Russia's future (for years, possibly generations) to come.
If you watch the clip it's clearly a warning, albeit cloaked in academic language, about the negative consequences of the current policy path. And it's clearly coming from someone in a position to have in-depth knowledge.
Unfortunately for the professor, pointing out Putin's negatives usually results in negative consequences showing up at your own door. Let's hope he has enough in the way of connections and influence to avoid any untimely accidents.
-
04-01-23 14:20 #1820
Posts: 330Originally Posted by Questner [View Original Post]
The new foreign policy doctrine has been well understood as taking it in the ass from China from now onwards.
-
04-01-23 06:03 #1819
Posts: 516Did you translate it from the original Mandarin?
Originally Posted by Questner [View Original Post]
If anyone doubts this, just look at reports about Xi's recent Russia visit. The deliverables were decidedly in China's favor while Russia received mostly platitudes.
Putin has become Xi's lapdog, and everyone knows it, even in Russia. Can't wait for Vladivostok to revert to Chinese ownership and control. Won't that be exciting?