Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (2 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

Russia continues to mass assets within range of Ukraine - though the official explanations are that they are for various exercises. United States intelligence has noted that Russian operatives in Ukraine could launch 'false flag' operations as a predicate to invasion. The West has pressed for negotiations and on Friday in Geneva, the US Sec. State Blinken will meet with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

Certainly the Russian movements evidence some plan - but what is it? Some analysts believe that Putin's grand scheme involves securing Western commitments that NATO would never expand beyond its current composition. Whether that means action in Ukraine or merely the movement of pieces on the chess board remains to be seen.

VIENNA — No one expected much progress from this past week’s diplomatic marathon to defuse the security crisis Russia has ignited in Eastern Europe by surrounding Ukraine on three sides with 100,000 troops and then, by the White House’s accounting, sending in saboteurs to create a pretext for invasion.

But as the Biden administration and NATO conduct tabletop simulations about how the next few months could unfold, they are increasingly wary of another set of options for President Vladimir V. Putin, steps that are more far-reaching than simply rolling his troops and armor over Ukraine’s border.

Mr. Putin wants to extend Russia’s sphere of influence to Eastern Europe and secure written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge. If he is frustrated in reaching that goal, some of his aides suggested on the sidelines of the negotiations last week, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Russia Issues Subtle Threats More Far-Reaching Than a Ukraine Invasion

If the West fails to meet its security demands, Moscow could take measures like placing nuclear missiles close to the U.S. coastline, Russian officials have hinted.

www.nytimes.com

Blinken Will Meet With Russia as U.S. Pushes for More Diplomacy

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken will meet with Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia in Geneva on Friday as the United States warns that Russia could soon attack Ukraine.

www.nytimes.com

How to think about war in Ukraine

Start with the Ukrainians

snyder.substack.com

 

[superchuck500]

Since @Farb asked why we should support Ukraine, and we tried to answer but none of us are foreign policy experts, here is a thread with reasons. Not too long a read:

I think he gets most of the points (you don't have to be a foreign policy expert to understand US interests in Eastern Europe) but he misses (or at least only implies) one of the most important.

Just to summarize Mike Nelson's tweets (he's a visiting fellow at George Mason University's National Security Institute), he says that it is in US interests to defend Ukraine because:

1. We were party to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum where Ukraine agreed to relinquish its nuclear arsenal in exchange for a guarantee of its sovereign security;
2. The US benefits more than Russia or China from the status quo of Ukraine and the region as it relates to the global economy;
3. Though Ukrainian democracy is messy and corrupt, they still have real elections that defending democracy in Europe from tsarist totalitarian is in US interests;
4. This is sort of a corollary to 2, but if Russia and China are our antagonists, we should meet their challenge to the current order that benefits the US so much.

Perhaps some of it is implicit in his bulletpoints but I think the most central reason is that in responding to Putin's threat to dominate either informally with invasion and then a puppet state, or by some kind of annexation a country in Europe, the US has two choices: to continue it its role as the leader of the West, or to surrender that role to the EU. A real irony of Trump's Europe policy that sought to diminish NATO and embolden Putin was that he presented it as evidence of America's strength - when it served quite the opposite effect, weakening NATO and pulling back from the US role as the key member reduced American "soft power" in the region, as traditional allies and those who oppose Russian influence were left to question what support they might have should a challenge to the status quo arise. Being the key player in European security IS power. Stepping back from that role IS weakening that source of power.

So we have a handful of good and practical reasons why it is in US interest to support a large, European democratic state in resisting being brought under Moscow's control. But we also have the fundamental reason that if we don't, it will usher in a new phase of America's role in Europe . . . one of substantially less influence. Influence is power.

I think this is quite obvious and it continues to be surprising (and ironic) to me that people like Tucker Carlson, who no doubt believe that America is or should be the strongest nation in the world, advocate for a course of action that clearly reduces American strength because it abdicates American influence in a zone where the US has led on security issues since 1945.


See, e.g. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/01/putin-ukraine-battle-west/621361/

 

[MT15]

I don’t think Tucker’s interests align with the US anymore, if they ever did. He’s basically representing Putin’s interests at this point.

 

[superchuck500]

For what it's worth, I couldn't agree more with this:

Ukraine is a problem for Putin’s Russia not because it may join NATO, but because it is democratizing—slowly, awkwardly, imperfectly—and after 30 years of independence is constructing a new national identity. So, too, have the other former Soviet republics, a number of which (Azerbaijan, for example) have quietly sided with Kyiv. The aim of reconstructing if not the Russian empire, then a 21st-century version of it, is slipping out of Putin’s grip, and he knows it. In many ways, what we’re seeing now from Moscow is a spasm of atavistic postimperial assertion, which, rather like British and French intervention in Egypt in 1956, may begin well but will probably end poorly.

The Russian dictator has made demands that he knows cannot be met. He has issued them publicly when such things are usually done in private, meaning that he is looking for a fight on any terms. He has mobilized a large army on Ukraine’s borders—more than 100,000 troops—but not nearly one big enough to subjugate a country of 40 million people, many of whom are not only willing to fight but ready to do so. Urban areas absorb armies as blotting paper absorbs an ink drop, and a Russian invasion will lead to a stream of coffins headed home to a population that has little taste for losses.

Putin’s No Chess Master

Some believe Putin has not only Ukraine, but the whole West, exactly where he wants it. A more balanced consideration is in order.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I don't get people like Putin. What is his endgame? World domination? Does he not live in reality?

 

[the annoying thing]

I think he gets most of the points (you don't have to be a foreign policy expert to understand US interests in Eastern Europe) but he misses (or at least only implies) one of the most important.

Just to summarize Mike Nelson's tweets (he's a visiting fellow at George Mason University's National Security Institute), he says that it is in US interests to defend Ukraine because:

1. We were party to the 1994 Budapest Memorandum where Ukraine agreed to relinquish its nuclear arsenal in exchange for a guarantee of its sovereign security;
2. The US benefits more than Russia or China from the status quo of Ukraine and the region as it relates to the global economy;
3. Though Ukrainian democracy is messy and corrupt, they still have real elections that defending democracy in Europe from tsarist totalitarian is in US interests;
4. This is sort of a corollary to 2, but if Russia and China are our antagonists, we should meet their challenge to the current order that benefits the US so much.

Perhaps some of it is implicit in his bulletpoints but I think the most central reason is that in responding to Putin's threat to dominate either informally with invasion and then a puppet state, or by some kind of annexation a country in Europe, the US has two choices: to continue it its role as the leader of the West, or to surrender that role to the EU. A real irony of Trump's Europe policy that sought to diminish NATO and embolden Putin was that he presented it as evidence of America's strength - when it served quite the opposite effect, weakening NATO and pulling back from the US role as the key member reduced American "soft power" in the region, as traditional allies and those who oppose Russian influence were left to question what support they might have should a challenge to the status quo arise. Being the key player in European security IS power. Stepping back from that role IS weakening that source of power.

So we have a handful of good and practical reasons why it is in US interest to support a large, European democratic state in resisting being brought under Moscow's control. But we also have the fundamental reason that if we don't, it will usher in a new phase of America's role in Europe . . . one of substantially less influence. Influence is power.

I think this is quite obvious and it continues to be surprising (and ironic) to me that people like Tucker Carlson, who no doubt believe that America is or should be the strongest nation in the world, advocate for a course of action that clearly reduces American strength because it abdicates American influence in a zone where the US has led on security issues since 1945.


See, e.g. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/01/putin-ukraine-battle-west/621361/

Yes indeed they will invade the Ukraine. Putin has accessed the European political climate and he knows they will not do much and Biden has more then given Putin the OK to go for it.
He would have never done this under Trump.
Biden removed Trump sanctions on Russia like a moron would and has said he will do nothing and has proven he his a weak man time and time again. Add all of that up and the damage done to the Euro nations and us Economy's and the time is right for Putin to make a move . He knows the rest of the world will do little to stop him

 

[bird]

Yes indeed they will invade the Ukraine. Putin has accessed the European political climate and he knows they will not do much and Biden has more then given Putin the OK to go for it.
He would have never done this under Trump.
Biden removed Trump sanctions on Russia like a moron would and has said he will do nothing and has proven he his a weak man time and time again. Add all of that up and the damage done to the Euro nations and us Economy's and the time is right for Putin to make a move . He knows the rest of the world will do little to stop him

Riiiight. Putin would never have done it when Donnie Dimwit was president. The rise of authoritarians in Europe (Orban, Erdogan, the Law and Justice party in Poland, Le Pen) and the praising of authoritarians (Kim Jung-un, Xi Jingping, Duerte and Putin) occurred primarily during Trump’s failed presidency.

Merkel wants the Nord Stream gas pipeline. The pipeline was 90% complete prior to Biden’s election. Putin has weaponized energy which Biden understands thus the concept of supplying natural gas to Europe from the U.S. The drawback is that U.S, natural gas is more costly.

 

[bird]

I don't get people like Putin. What is his endgame? World domination? Does he not live in reality?

Power. Trump utilized his playbook. MAGA is nothing more than “reclaiming” imagined glory which is what Putin is trying to do.

 

[superchuck500]

Yes indeed they will invade the Ukraine. Putin has accessed the European political climate and he knows they will not do much and Biden has more then given Putin the OK to go for it.
He would have never done this under Trump.
Biden removed Trump sanctions on Russia like a moron would and has said he will do nothing and has proven he his a weak man time and time again. Add all of that up and the damage done to the Euro nations and us Economy's and the time is right for Putin to make a move . He knows the rest of the world will do little to stop him

This is a junk take.

 

[MT15]

Yep, possibly the worst take I’ve read on this.

 

[the annoying thing]

Yep, possibly the worst take I’ve read on this.

well isnt that nice.

 

[samiam5211]

I think if Putin started offering support for the Texas Nationalists, or the Proud Boys, they would happily accept it and see Putin as more of a leader than the US president.

 

[CoolBrees]

For what it's worth, I couldn't agree more with this:

Putin’s No Chess Master

Some believe Putin has not only Ukraine, but the whole West, exactly where he wants it. A more balanced consideration is in order.

www.theatlantic.com

New person says trump would have been tough on Putin…

Like the time he said he believed Putin over our own intelligence. Really showed him!

Prior to the interruption Chuck posted this article. I bring it back up because this is exactly my thoughts as well. If Putin really invades, he is forgetting he doesn’t command a large army without massive reserve’s calls up. 100,000 troops at the border isn’t doing shirt. You need like 5-7 times that to take and hold a country (of 40 million people no less) minimum.

The other point I would make is the messages being sent by Russian Media is not like Hitler was sending prior to his conquest. Hitler spoke of their rite to take back what was theirs. Putin’s mouthpiece is saying we are just defending our border from the mean westerners. If/when their tone changes to “even if we are there to mobilize….” Then you know it is getting serious.

 

[the annoying thing]

I think if Putin started offering support for the Texas Nationalists, or the Proud Boys, they would happily accept it and see Putin as more of a leader than the US president.

Really you think that lol. I assume you have some evidence of that right ? My self I think the proud boys or any white supremacist group the black panthers or blm or antifa type groups are scum .
Now Biden has already removed sanctions on Russia that Trump put in place to delay and make it harder for the pipe line to euro nations that will make them even more dependent on on them for fuel basically placing a ring in Europe's nose like a cow so Putin can influence them and threaten them , it will take awhile but Putin wants them dependent on his fuels . Also Biden has made it plain he wont help the Ukraine and will not allow American troops to help Nato. Plus we have hunter who was found to be with a Russian hooker and Russian drug dealers who he claims stole his other lap top and hunter taking money from a Russian woman with mafia ties. Biden might as well be on Putins pay roll. And whats the proud boys got to do with Russia invading the Ukraine O you say nothing .

 

[samiam5211]

Really you think that lol. I assume you have some evidence of that right ? My self I think the proud boys or any white supremacist group the black panthers or blm or antifa type groups are scum .
Now Biden has already removed sanctions on Russia that Trump put in place to delay and make it harder for the pipe line to euro nations that will make them even more dependent on on them for fuel basically placing a ring in Europe's nose like a cow so Putin can influence them and threaten them , it will take awhile but Putin wants them dependent on his fuels . Also Biden has made it plain he wont help the Ukraine and will not allow American troops to help Nato. Plus we have hunter who was found to be with a Russian hooker and Russian drug dealers who he claims stole his other lap top and hunter taking money from a Russian woman with mafia ties. Biden might as well be on Putins pay roll. And whats the proud boys got to do with Russia invading the Ukraine O you say nothing .

Yea, there are plenty of message boards that i visit where plenty of people gush over Putin. Those same people talk about things like Texit, and civil war.

It's not hard to find. Which suggests to me that your incredulity towards my claim is not genuine.

 

[the annoying thing]

Yea, there are plenty of message boards that i visit where plenty of people gush over Putin. Those same people talk about things like Texit, and civil war.

It's not hard to find. Which suggests to me that your incredulity towards my claim is not genuine.

Well sir I doubt Putin and the Proud boys will join forces and over throw the American governent.But you are free to believe what you want.
However Putin will likely invade the Ukraine and I doubt the proud boys will help Putin as much as Joe Biden has

 

[samiam5211]

Well sir I doubt Putin and the Proud boys will join forces and over throw the American governent.But you are free to believe what you want.

I agree with you, but only because I doubt Putin would ever consider the proud boys worthy of his help, not because they wouldn’t accept it.

 

[the annoying thing]

I agree with you, but only because I doubt Putin would ever consider the proud boys worthy of his help, not because they wouldn’t accept it.

Maybe antifa or blm would accept his help to , thats about as likely.

 

[samiam5211]

Maybe antifa or blm would accept his help to , thats about as likely.

I’m sure some of them would.

Now, can you acknowledge that some on the right would welcome Putin’s help, and anyone who praises Putin is a problem?