Crimea - recent escalations

grassylawn

Well he's expressing support without committing to anything.

Nordstream 1 was a bad idea and Reagan said as much at the time. The umbilical cord to Mother Russia that is Nordstream 2 should be binned.

BanditLuke

It's still amazing how manipulated people are by the "it's da big bad Russians" narrative.

PokeHerKing

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I recommend you spend some time there once things reopen, great country and people, but are stuck in an oligarchic dystopian nightmare

Don’t conflate Russia with Putin and his mafia, karma will catchup to him eventually and history won’t be kind.

Id say Putin has nightmares about the karma Chameleon.

wes

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

It's a tricky situation. The Crimea is recognised as part of Ukraine, but the overwhelming majority of the population are Russian.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56616778

Its majority Russian as the Tartars were ethnically cleansed by the Soviet Union, another of the vile communist regimes crimes that many don't know about:

https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/fr/document/suerguen-crimean-tatars-deportation-and-exile.html

I don't think we should reward communist ethnic cleansing. The smart thing is to cut off Russia economically imo.

zom

BanditLuke wrote: »

It's still amazing how manipulated people are by the "it's da big bad Russians" narrative.

With current catastrophic demographic trend "da big Russia" soon will be smaller than Turkey or even Ukraine. And if some miracle happen and Putin will be gone plus Russian nuclear power dismantled this country will implode with Chinese taking Siberia and USA taking everything else while EU taking all migrants who manage to escape falling Russia. There will not be good solutions for current situation and I only hope for as small disaster as possible.:(

Nermal

grassylawn wrote: »

Nordstream 1 was a bad idea and Reagan said as much at the time. The umbilical cord to Mother Russia that is Nordstream 2 should be binned.

The more energy Europe has access to, the better. I can't heat my home with principles.

grassylawn

Nermal wrote: »

The more energy Europe has access to, the better. I can't heat my home with principles.

Our gas comes from Norway, not Russia. Same as the UK. In terms of expansion, renewables is obviously the way to go when climate change is a priority. It's just practical, nothing to do with principles.

Gatling

grassylawn wrote: »

Our gas comes from Norway, not Russia. Same as the UK. In terms of expansion, renewables is obviously the way to go when climate change is a priority. It's just practical, nothing to do with principles.

But many EU states are dependent on Russian gas and oil to a degree including Germany

grassylawn

Gatling wrote: »

But many EU states are dependent on Russian gas and oil to a degree including Germany

Yes that was silly. Building nordstrom II is also silly. Aggressive expansionist country can literally turn off the gas to countries it supplies, and is financed by the gas they do consume.

Nermal

grassylawn wrote: »

Our gas comes from Norway, not Russia. Same as the UK. In terms of expansion, renewables is obviously the way to go when climate change is a priority. It's just practical, nothing to do with principles.

The more options buyers have, the cheaper supply gets. Climate change can be your priority; it's not mine.

Gatling

grassylawn wrote: »

Yes that was silly. Building nordstrom II is also silly. Aggressive expansionist country can literally turn off the gas to countries it supplies, and is financed by the gas they do consume.

Totally agree ,

Yet Ukraine has still got little or no military support from the EU or nato for fear of upsetting oul Vlad in the Kremlin ,

If they had any sense they would relocate ,a few squadrons of AH64s and A10 aircraft and designate any military vehicles trying to cross from Russia into Ukraine a legitimate military target ,

Putin likes his battles one sided , having a proper strong military presence in Ukraine is the only way to deter him ,
His allies and supporters are calling him to use small tactical nukes to prevent Ukraine from getting any outside help

kravmaga

UKRAINE need to join NATO asap to stop any further Russian incursions into the east of Ukraine.

Why is Putin sending large divisions of troops and heavy weapon systems from central Russia to the border with Ukraine?

Another annex of more Ukrainian territory possibly.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/6/ukraine-says-nato-membership-only-means-to-end-war-in-donbass

biko

Ukraine was once the breadbasket of the Soviet Union.

The communist Stalin caused the largest man-made famine ever there, killing 10 million Ukrainians.
In 1939, Hitler said, “I need Ukraine so they can’t starve us out out like in the last war.”
It was, and I think still can play, quite a critical component in any empire.

Gatling

biko wrote: »

Ukraine was once the breadbasket of the Soviet Union.

The communist Stalin caused the largest man-made famine ever there, killing 10 million Ukrainians.
In 1939, Hitler said, “I need Ukraine so they can’t starve us out out like in the last war.”
It was, and I think still can play, quite a critical component in any empire.

Holodomor - to this day mostly denied it actually happened according to russia they take dim views against any state that mentions it too ,

Some believe up to 12 million died but others mainly pro Kremlin says it was less than 3 million , while at the same time increasing russian losses at the hands of Germans higher every few years

Gatling

Just looking at the size of the russian forces arriving on a daily basis suggest this is no training excercise , definitely preparing for something big

Gatling

Seems now russian forces based in a breakaway region of Moldova are now moving towards the Ukrainian border , something that is very unusual , russian building up in East Ukraine , Crimea and now russian forces moving to the Western border with Moldova ,

Putin planning on taking the whole of Ukraine ???

TheValeyard

Gatling wrote: »

Seems now russian forces based in a breakaway region of Moldova are now moving towards the Ukrainian border , something that is very unusual , russian building up in East Ukraine , Crimea and now russian forces moving to the Western border with Moldova ,

Putin planning on taking the whole of Ukraine ???

If he does. It will become his Vietnam.

Edit: Afghanistan. Twas late and watching war movies.

grassylawn

TheValeyard wrote: »

If he does. It will become his Vietnam.

Vietnam was Russia's Vietnam, and they won it.

riffmongous

His Afghanistan

Hande hoche!

grassylawn wrote: »

Vietnam was Russia's Vietnam, and they won it.

Enjoyed the line in the Ken Burn's documentary on the Vietnam war. That the Vietnamese intervention in Cambodia was Vietnam's Vietnam.

TheValeyard

riffmongous wrote: »

His Afghanistan

Sorry yeah, was Watching Platoon at the time.

riffmongous

TheValeyard wrote: »

Sorry yeah, was Watching Platoon at the time.

Great movie, I'm not sure if there are any real Russian equivalents to this :pac: the closest would be 9th Company but it's a bit more straightforward as a war movie

grassylawn

When I watched the Ken Burns documentary I was surprised by how little i knew about vietnam. I had the impression I had some knowledge of it from watching apocalypse now and platoon etc

Polar101

Gatling wrote: »

Seems now russian forces based in a breakaway region of Moldova are now moving towards the Ukrainian border , something that is very unusual , russian building up in East Ukraine , Crimea and now russian forces moving to the Western border with Moldova ,

Putin planning on taking the whole of Ukraine ???

Apparently Transnistria has just 1,500 Russian troops, but they could always send more - would mean three fronts in Ukraine, if things were to escalate.

Putin might be interested in the old Novorossiya (New Russia) provinces.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya

grassylawn

Apparently France's miltary preparations have pivoted from a counter-insurgency focus to one for high-intensity war - i.e. one where the adversary is a state or states of similar strength.

...in his strategic vision for 2030 published last year, General Thierry Burkhard, the chief of the French army, underscored the need to prepare for a high-intensity, interstate conflict.

https://www.archyde.com/french-armed-forces-prepare-for-high-intensity-war/

High intensity warfare refers to state versus state conflict with a modern, peer or near-peer adversary, as envisioned during the Cold War period. This demands complex, full-spectrum capabilities, and a whole-of-government response. Since the end of the Cold War, Western militaries have been mostly engaged in low-intensity asymmetric warfare. The renewed prospect of state-based warfare means that many militaries are looking at recapitalising and upgrading warfighting assets.

https://www.army-technology.com/comment/high-intensity-warfare/

The French have enough issues to be dealing with at home, without some Generals looking for a war with Russia

grassylawn

Deleted User wrote: »

The French have enough issues to be dealing with at home, without some Generals looking for a war with Russia

I doubt they plan to start a war with Russia. However they appear to see war with Russia, Turkey or some other nations as an eventuality they should prepare for.

banie01

grassylawn wrote: »

Apparently France's miltary preparations have pivoted from a counter-insurgency focus to one for high-intensity war - i.e. one where the adversary is a state or states of similar strength.



https://www.archyde.com/french-armed-forces-prepare-for-high-intensity-war/



https://www.army-technology.com/comment/high-intensity-warfare/

The pivot in Defence posture by France, Germany and far more interestingly by the UK is an interesting one.
The UK in particular seeking to continue downsizing conventional forces, whilst seeking to increase their nuclear stockpile and pivoting towards Asia?
It makes near zero sense in the current and potential geopolitical frame.

The chances of a nuclear escalation versus conventional war with a near peer rival?
I'd rate the likelihood of the former far lower than the latter, and also the current warhead stockpiles are likely sufficient for either scenario.
It should be noted also that the increase in UK warhead numbers is a bit of a paper tiger.

No additional subs or actual delivery systems will be deployed.
Rather the number of MIRV warheads on each deployed missile would likely be increased.
Or the number of single warhead armed missiles deployed on each sub would be increased to allow Trident launches against "single" targets, versus the traditional role for trident as a weapon of MAD deterrence.

TheValeyard

Turkey backing Ukraine it seems. Then again throughout history the Turks have often been wary of the Russians.

Gatling

TheValeyard wrote: »

Turkey backing Ukraine it seems. Then again throughout history the Turks have often been wary of the Russians.

Azerbaijan Comes to mind , russia doesn't like fighting real wars or strong militaries