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

 

[Lapaz]

I’ve heard many claims that we should’ve started sending sending weapons to Ukraine before the Russians attacked, but I haven’t heard any defense for waiting. I think waiting was necessary, because no one knew whether Ukraine would fight hard and competently, or would be another Afghanistan. Imagine if we had sent a bunch of weapons in advance, and then Ukraine quickly collapsed. All we would’ve achieved is to equip Russians, and then those weapons could be used against us. The intelligence assessments prior to the war that expected a quick collapse required us to wait.

 

[DaveXA]

I think the point is that these Republicans that voted against NATO, can’t seriously be asking for more intervention in Ukraine. They’re opportunists, not principled.

I don't think the ones wanting intervention are the same as the ones voting against NATO. They're not the same people.

 

[DaveXA]

I’ve heard many claims that we should’ve started sending sending weapons to Ukraine before the Russians attacked, but I haven’t heard any defense for waiting. I think waiting was necessary, because no one knew whether Ukraine would fight hard and competently, or would be another Afghanistan. Imagine if we had sent a bunch of weapons in advance, and then Ukraine quickly collapsed. All we would’ve achieved is to equip Russians, and then those weapons could be used against us. The intelligence assessments prior to the war that expected a quick collapse required us to wait.

Not really. The hesitancy was always about whether they thought Russia would attack or not. A lot of so-called experts, and a lot of people on the boards said Russia was just posing and saber rattling. They didn't think Russia was actually going to attack. Why send stuff if you don't think anything is gonna happen?

 

[Taurus]

I don't think the ones wanting intervention are the same as the ones voting against NATO. They're not the same people.

As posted, at least one of them is.

 

[J-DONK]

I’ve heard many claims that we should’ve started sending sending weapons to Ukraine before the Russians attacked, but I haven’t heard any defense for waiting. I think waiting was necessary, because no one knew whether Ukraine would fight hard and competently, or would be another Afghanistan. Imagine if we had sent a bunch of weapons in advance, and then Ukraine quickly collapsed. All we would’ve achieved is to equip Russians, and then those weapons could be used against us. The intelligence assessments prior to the war that expected a quick collapse required us to wait.

Under Biden, America delivered 60 million dollars in aide in November. Those weapons showing up in the theater of war appear to trigger Russia's buildup, and eventually invasion.

Anyone this board ever read, or listen to Peter Zeihan? I wonder what holes there are in his logic, and fairly accurate forecasting of global events.

 

[Lapaz]

Not really. The hesitancy was always about whether they thought Russia would attack or not. A lot of so-called experts, and a lot of people on the boards said Russia was just posing and saber rattling. They didn't think Russia was actually going to attack. Why send stuff if you don't think anything is gonna happen?

That’s just another good reason not to send weapons in advance, but the recent Afghanistan sudden collapse had to be a factor. We had to assume the worst would repeat itself.

 

[DaveXA]

As posted, at least one of them is.

Sure there usually are outliers. Sort of like when Rand is the only one trying to hold up legislation for days on end. Ultimately, not consequential.

 

[DaveXA]

That’s just another good reason not to send weapons in advance, but the recent Afghanistan sudden collapse had to be a factor. We had to assume the worst would repeat itself.

Possibly, but I didn't hear much of that talk prior to the invasion. Most of it was surrounding whether Russia would attack or not.

 

[UriUT]

Sure there usually are outliers. Sort of like when Rand is the only one trying to hold up legislation for days on end. Ultimately, not consequential.

I admire your opimisism. And there may be a few. However, look at that list and you’ll see Boebert, Greene, cawthorne, that sexual abuse protector from Ohio, etc. these aren’t the most policy minded individuals. And since when was a defensive pact known as some world builder? We are talking about stating that nato is and will be a democratic based institution. Democratic…

Edit; how did I forget Gaetz and gosar?

 

[UriUT]

Under Biden, America delivered 60 million dollars in aide in November. Those weapons showing up in the theater of war appear to trigger Russia's buildup, and eventually invasion.

Anyone this board ever read, or listen to Peter Zeihan? I wonder what holes there are in his logic, and fairly accurate forecasting of global events.

Are you for real with this? Is this just Biden hate or blame America first?

 

[DaveXA]

I admire your opimisism. And there may be a few. However, look at that list and you’ll see Boebert, Greene, cawthorne, that sexual abuse protector from Ohio, etc. these aren’t the most policy minded individuals. And since when was a defensive pact known as some world builder? We are talking about stating that nato is and will be a democratic based institution. Democratic…

Edit; how did I forget Gaetz and gosar?

Well, those idiots are outliers. But the silence on the part of other Republicans is telling. It's sad that we're only hearing from a scant few Republicans denouncing these terrible people. It's clear that a lot of them value their seats and power more than speaking truth to power.

 

[coldseat]

Under Biden, America delivered 60 million dollars in aide in November. Those weapons showing up in the theater of war appear to trigger Russia's buildup, and eventually invasion.

Anyone this board ever read, or listen to Peter Zeihan? I wonder what holes there are in his logic, and fairly accurate forecasting of global events.

I think anybody trying to suggest that Putin was just responding to NATO expansion has holes in their logic. He's had these desires/plans for a long time and has built up to this since he first came to power. NATO expansion is just a convenient foil for the Russian masses and for autocrats around the world.

 

[Lapaz]

Possibly, but I didn't hear much of that talk prior to the invasion. Most of it was surrounding whether Russia would attack or not.

That was my point. I haven't heard the Afghanistan collapse angle rationale for not supplying the weapons early, but I think that should've been part of the rationale. I think it's a better reason than the more unlikely rationale about Russia only cyber rattling, because that would've been one of the largest cyber rattles ever.

 

[DaveXA]

I think anybody trying to suggest that Putin was just responding to NATO expansion has holes in their logic. He's had these desires/plans for a long time and has built up to this since he first came to power. NATO expansion is just a convenient foil for the Russian masses and for autocrats around the world.

Yeah, I agree. Those dreams of reviving the Soviet Union have been around since well before he became their dear leader.

 

[UriUT]

Well, those idiots are outliers. But the silence on the part of other Republicans is telling. It's sad that we're only hearing from a scant few Republicans denouncing these terrible people. It's clear that a lot of them value their seats and power more than speaking truth to power.

Right. It’s very disturbing that a 3rd cannot even raise their hands up to agree that we should be a part of the free world. It’s frightening to me. The whole trend in Europe and here scares me. I think Fukuyama has an essay framing the new world order as a struggle between autocracy and liberal democracy. I haven’t had a chance to read it thoroughly yet, sadly.

 

[DaveXA]

Right. It’s very disturbing that a 3rd cannot even raise their hands up to agree that we should be a part of the free world. It’s frightening to me. The whole trend in Europe and here scares me. I think Fukuyama has an essay framing the new world order as a struggle between autocracy and liberal democracy. I haven’t had a chance to read it thoroughly yet, sadly.

Yep.

 

[UriUT]

That was my point. I haven't heard the Afghanistan collapse angle rationale for not supplying the weapons early, but I think that should've been part of the rationale. I think it's a better reason than the more unlikely rationale about Russia only cyber rattling, because that would've been one of the largest cyber rattles ever.

It should be. The pentagon admitted as much by stating they vastly underestimated Ukraine’s military and resolve and over estimated Russia’s military. So much that they must reevaluate their analysis. The Germans even point blank told the Ukrainian ambassador that Kyiv will fall in a few days and arms transfer would be pointless.

 

[DaveXA]

It should be. The pentagon admitted as much by stating they vastly underestimated Ukraine’s military and resolve and over estimated Russia’s military. So much that they must reevaluate their analysis. The Germans even point blank told the Ukrainian ambassador that Kyiv will fall in a few days and arms transfer would be pointless.

Yeah, it's pretty clear the intelligence on both Ukraine and Russia were way off. Which honestly strikes me as surprising because we've been training Ukranians for years. Part of it was the barometer used was probably based on what happened in 2014. The difference here is that Russia was attempting a much wider scale invasion now than back then, so the Ukranians are putting up a much bigger fight. I think they were willing to let Russia take some territory before, not so much anymore. At this point, it's possible Russia may end up leaving with less territory than what they started with pre-invasion.