Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

Options
17879818384315

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    I really think Putin was banking on NATO getting involved in this big time so he had a foreign enemy to fight, to rally the Russian forces against and to justify what he's been saying about NATO being the wolves at the door, that's why he only committed a small force for the initial invasion, he was waiting to see where NATO would come at him from.

    I wonder what the Russian backed rebels in the eastern breakaway states are making of all this, could imagine a few changing sides when they see what Russia is doing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,425 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    It underlines the contrasting commitment to the conflict. The issue was so important to Russia that they literally are putting everything on the line. The EU have ruled out almost any commitment that would impact their citizens.

    Madman attacks neighbour out of the blue is the current narrative. Is that a balanced view?

    Neutrality has served Ireland well and our military has a trustworthy and professional reputation in International peace keeping. The Irish passport offers some of the best access in the world. Giving up neutrality, however imperfect is not something to be done lightly.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,550 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Yes,I was wondering about them too.

    Will they also be hit by the sanctions?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,826 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Given how Russia have performed against a poorly equipped army like the Ukraine, albeit with massive nationalist fervour, what chance would they have against a small NATO force?


    None and next to none.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,425 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    One can try to understand the reasons for the invasion without trying to justify it or be dismissed as a Putin bot or apologist or whatever else.

    There is going to have to be a deeper understanding of the realpolitik behind the invasion than the simplistic analysis at the moment, however reassuring that may be.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,326 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    I never accused you of anything, and there's nothing wrong with trying to look beyond the headlines in any scenario; but searching for complexity where none necessarily exists is hunting for answers to non-existent questions. It's not a question of feeling "reassured" by a simplistic analysis - and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt you're not trying to be patronising - but the evidence, as it exists right now, does not justify a Russian invasion; and the justification given has not passed a simple Smell Test. Not least for the straightforward situation where Russia has changed its own reasoning for the invasion. That alone should be a Red Flag about their bona fides, while exaggerating the internal problems of Ukraine would take some doing to allow for foreign incursions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Russia is an ex-superpower, if they wanted to bomb Ukraine back to the stone age it would be done already and they still have massive reserves to commit to this war if they want, either they wanted to provoke NATO with a small invasion or they were banking on Ukraine rolling over to take the country intact so Putin can put in his puppet to run it.

    Either way a NATO force in Ukraine would face the full force of the Russian army resources and fighting because they are the "enemy at the gates"



  • Registered Users Posts: 389 ✭✭pjordan


    One particularly and not especially encouraging take on the mindset of the average Russian in the replies to this video of captured Russian servicemen on Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t7cbkj/another_interview_with_captured_russians_if_this/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

    The basic premise of the insightful and lengthy commentary is that, although Putin is the head of the beast, he is surrounded by loyalists and a military/petrochemical industrial complex which have a lot to lose or gain in this conflict.

    The entire mindset of the average Russian, whilst undoubtedly influenced and swayed by a totally one-sided propogandist and pro Putin media, is as equally if not moreso influenced or institutionalised by a fear of the West going right back through the cold war and (justifiedly even moreso) by the collective experience of the Great Patriotic war where the invasion from the West caused the deaths of 20 million Russians. Russia has not moved on from this mindset and it has served Putin well to perpetuate this "operation" as a continuation of this struggle against the threat from the West and all its evils (Whilst ironically at the same time embracing all the trappings of Capitalism).

    Unfortunately, it would seem that merely overthrowing Putin or beheading the senior military command, who equally benefit from this mindset will still not be enough to convert the average Russian from this albeit outdated, but nonetheless historically justified, fear of the West.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,425 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Labels are lazy. Are you a pro American war hawk because you think the invasion is wrong? Am I a Putin apologist for believing that the Russian invasion is wrong while also understanding that Russia were not the only country interfering with Ukrainian democracy?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,826 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    I'm certain that a NATO force would face the full Russian force, my point is that it would be taken apart very, very quickly by a small NATO force.


    The Russian army part that is modern is very small. The rest of it is from the 1990s.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    I don't know. There might be something to that theory.

    If Russia are supposedly doing so bad then why are majority of the Russian troops still sitting back in Russia?

    But on the other hand, If Putin wanted NATO to get involved, why would he make such heavy threats on the outset about anyone else getting involved? Russia would get crushed if NATO got involved too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,826 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Saddam had a million men, look how that went, a hundred US forces dead and everything he had destroyed.


    There are Russian forces fighting in The Ukraine now who have the same model Tanks as he did in Gulf War 1.


    The scale of difference and ability is stark.


    It's cheap for him to talk it up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 995 ✭✭✭iColdFusion


    Unless your small NATO force crosses the border into Ukraine and is taken out by a couple of Russian tactical nukes, people think these are like a Chernobyl event but the fallout is much less and wouldn't be on Russian territory.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    Saddams men were up against the US though. And Russia isn't even using most of their men yet.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Just about 200,000 and 14 days in After it was predicted Russia would be in complete control of Ukraine in 3 days ...

    Russia is trying to fight war they are ill equipped and trained for , they are still stuck in the 1950's ,as it Stands if Nato does get involved it will be a short fight before Russian forces would either be anilated or permanently expelled from Ukraine ,as it stands ukraine are increasing in strength and numbers on a daily basis, along with thousands of tons of nato weapons flowing into the country .



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    This has been incredibly frustrating from start to finish. It seems that nobody want to "officially" be the ones to pass the jets to the Ukrainians for fear that the Russians will blame them. FFS - the Russians are going to blame everyone anyway!

    Zelensky is, understandably, urging them to figure this out





  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    Ah ok, I just seen an article now from yesterday saying all troops are now in Ukraine.

    How many troops did Belarus send in? I think they put some in too?



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,749 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    You missed the bit about launching loads of nukes if NATO get involved



  • Registered Users Posts: 762 ✭✭✭starkid


    whatabout away.

    how could anybody be a neocon hawk saying an invasion is wrong. The narrative of expansion is tired. The Soviets for all intents and purposes have 100 years of posture against the World. They crushed the east. So countries in Eastern Europe crushed by nazism, soviets and then the sphere of influence by a dictatorship. who are you to tell them not to join Nato?

    yes you are an apologist as this is his very reason for threatening nuclear war. as i said you´d be in vichy working for the Germans if this was 1940s France. or one of the people in the UK or elsewhere who thought the Germans had a point and conceded that the terms of ww1 were harsh.

    Russia are the ones to blame here and people who bothsiding this thing in its current state, are terrible people, on the wrong side of history. and if God forbid it escalates people who do it will be ostracised



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,335 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    That's somewhat illusory though. According the western analysis, the Russians have committed all of the forces they had built up. While they have larger reserves in theory, they aren't positioned to intervene in Ukraine. In addition, it's questionable if Russia even has the sustainment capacity for the forces it has right now.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The scary thing to think about is Russian tactics and their next steps.

    It would appear that their ground forces really aren't up to all that much for a host of reasons - Poorly trained & equipped conscripts , poor planning, poor logistics and poor leadership to name a few.

    But their Airforce and/or Missiles systems are extremely effective when put to use.

    If you look at their recent "successes" in Chechnya and Syria both of those were built on indiscriminate bombing at a massive scale - They literally levelled entire cities. Their actions in Ukraine thus far haven't done that (although they are ramping that up significantly in recent days).

    It's almost certain that the next step will be bombing of Ukrainian cities on a massive scale.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,044 ✭✭✭patnor1011


    I do not think so. All Russians need to do is to wait about a week or two. All these cities will be completely without power, water and food. Civilian population will not tolerate this conditions for too long and will push government to sit and negotiate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,335 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    I don't see Western countries permitting that level of violence. That's just too much to ignore



  • Registered Users Posts: 155 ✭✭ODriscoll


    Labels are lazy, true! but essential for war and the simpler the better to convince those on either side typically already convinced and with little to interest in any analysis, any possibility of another side of the story.

    Anyone who believes anything at face value and especially claims during a war, you might want to read the story of the late Pat Tillman, ask his fooled suffering parents what they now think.

    Those who think this all started out the blue - 2016 A documentary directed by Oliver Stone on Ukraine, and a warning of events that have now transpired. Mainly the investigative work of Robert Parry an American investigative journalist, best known for his role in covering the Iran-Contra affair.




  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,705 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Unfortunatly I agree with Quin_Dubs opinion in terms of Russian next steps. Back in the 2010s, Russian war planning was fairly innotivate according to some military books escpecially with their embrace of the concepts of 4th generation war (multi-spectral fighting). However, the current campaign looks to be a return to their older style of fighting - to liberate the city we had to destroy it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,550 ✭✭✭amandstu


    What is the point of these arguments.

    Nato cannot get directly involved with Russia for fear of nuclear escalation.


    It makes no sense to compare conventional forces between Nato and Russia.


    If either side feels it has been directly attacked then all bets are off.


    That is what is trying to be avoided at present and Ukraine is paying a terrible price for this terrible trade off.


    But I agree Russian conventional forces do not impress.It has been said that Russia's strength lies in defence and not attack.


    I hope they have now met their match.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,065 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    The problem with nuclear threats is that it cuts both ways. Putin may be threatening their use in his rhetoric but the Russian regime knows full well that even if other nuclear powers are keeping schtumm on the matter, that they are also monitoring very carefully and on alert. So the threat is a bit empty. Someone would have to actually launch such weapons for it to escalate and the likelihood of that being a major player is limited as they know that their own populations would suffer massive casualties. I think the 'west' and the 'rest' are calling Putin's bluff, playing it cool and giving him enough latitude to dig a very deep hole for himself & Russia.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,550 ✭✭✭amandstu




  • Registered Users Posts: 25,749 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    So if NATO are rolling over Russia with ease like you say and at the gates of Moscow you don't think Putin would launch. Even just as a now win burn em all tactic.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,550 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Indeed,hopefully noone in authority is prepared to take that risk.


    All the talk is of how to avoid direct military confrontation with a foe whose leadership does not need to be clinically insane to be abominable dangerous to each and everone's existence.



Advertisement