Reports are coming in that Russian General Vitaly Gerasimov and "a number of senior Russian army officers" got got during the fighting in/near Kharkiv.
Second general they have lost in a week, if true.
Reports are coming in that Russian General Vitaly Gerasimov and "a number of senior Russian army officers" got got during the fighting in/near Kharkiv.
Second general they have lost in a week, if true.
Noddaz said:Is this the official start of the new age warfare?
One side starts by physically attacking in the traditional style and the other side attacks the monetary infrastructure and computer systems.
I know that monetary infrastructure and computer systems have been attacked on a limited basis before.
The scale this time is hard to comprehend. Much as the physical damage in Ukraine is hard to comprehend.
Yes and no.
Economic warfare has been a thing for as long as there have been economies. We're just seeing it play out more quickly and directly because we have more sophisticated tools and that allow near immediate sharing of information.
Terry Pratcett has directly satirized about the effectiveness of economic power repeatedly in the Discworld novels with how Ank-Morpork doesn't really have a military, because it doesn't need one, because it controls all the wealth. Even if an invading army were able to seize the seat of government, good luck trying to force all the different guilds and factions and get them to actually do what you want them to do.
Beer Baron said:Noddaz said:Is this the official start of the new age warfare?
One side starts by physically attacking in the traditional style and the other side attacks the monetary infrastructure and computer systems.
I know that monetary infrastructure and computer systems have been attacked on a limited basis before.
The scale this time is hard to comprehend. Much as the physical damage in Ukraine is hard to comprehend.
Yes and no.
Economic warfare has been a thing for as long as there have been economies. We're just seeing it play out more quickly and directly because we have more sophisticated tools and that allow near immediate sharing of information.
Terry Pratcett has directly satirized about the effectiveness of economic power repeatedly in the Discworld novels with how Ank-Morpork doesn't really have a military, because it doesn't need one, because it controls all the wealth. Even if an invading army were able to seize the seat of government, good luck trying to force all the different guilds and factions and get them to actually do what you want them to do.
I think it's analogous to a modern day siege of a city. Hang around outside the gates long enough and the people inside start to starve. The trouble is, in this case, is that we have nothing against Russians. We don't want Russia. It's a defensive version of a siege.
Saw this potential string of events hypothesized. Thoughts? Step 10 is the most worrisome.
1. Withdrawal of credible accounting firms makes investment in Russian companies too dicey.
2. Insurance companies refuse to insure because of nation-level risk.
3. Russian banking data passes through Chinese bank servers. No one wants that.
4. Uncertainty causes domestic spending to drop.
5. Russian personal net worth plunges to zero.
6. Western buyers of Russian energy surprise the world in how quickly they create substitutes.
7. Russia's energy economy becomes "captured" by China, with all that implies.
8. Inability to import new parts and new technology causes Russian industries to disintegrate.
9. Russian military spending exceeds the economy's capacity to support it, causing regime change.
10. China installs a puppet government in Moscow and turns Russia into a gas station.
11. Russia becomes irrelevant over time as greener technologies dominate.
12. Putin is remembered as the second Russian leader to destroy Russia by prioritizing military over economy.
I also wonder how a strategy that involves asking Iran, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia to all cooperate is going to work out.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/07/white-house-oil-deals-saudi-arabia-venezuela-iran-00014803
Oh for berkeleys sake. LOL.
You guys wanna know why Russia is gonna lose this?
They don't have secure communication as their Era cryptophone isn't working.
It isn't working because it requires 3G or 4G phone towers and there are no towers.
There are no towers because Russia focused on taking them out during the invasion.
LOL.
Rather than a siege, I think the closer analogue is a blockade, and specifically what is referred to as a "pacific blockade" (as opposed to a wartime blockade). There is extensive literature on the use of naval blockades over the centuries, and the concept of pacific blockade dates back to the mid-19th Century.
In reply to Mr_Asa :
https://www.rawstory.com/russia-ukraine-war/
This is just
GIRTHQUAKE said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
https://www.rawstory.com/russia-ukraine-war/
This is just
It would be comical if not for the death and suffering of thousands of people.
GIRTHQUAKE said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
https://www.rawstory.com/russia-ukraine-war/
This is just
I just don't get how this got through whatever design committee there was. Modern warfare, rule #1) turn the power off/damage infrastructure.
How the hell are you going to rely on the invaded country's infrastructure?
Destabilize.
It would destabilize...
That's like saying we can't close the lid on the dumpster fire because the lid might melt.
In reply to tuna55 :
It would have the potential to destabilize the situation in the following way: if Sweden and/or Finland were to apply for NATO membership while hostilities are ongoing in Ukraine, Putin may 1) become increasingly desperate for a way to salvage something positive, which could easily mean further escalation; 2) take non-military action against those countries and others in Europe (cutting off natural gas, cyber warfare); and 3) refuse to continue negotiations to halt fighting.
There is no reason whatsoever for Sweden and Finland to pursue this right now, and frankly NATO should state that publicly. There's no way they would be accepted into NATO in any sort of timeframe that would make a difference in the immediate crisis. If they want to think about it after this has been resolved, at least to the point that fighting has stopped, that's another matter.
02Pilot said:In reply to tuna55 :
It would have the potential to destabilize the situation in the following way: if Sweden and/or Finland were to apply for NATO membership while hostilities are ongoing in Ukraine, Putin may 1) become increasingly desperate for a way to salvage something positive, which could easily mean further escalation; 2) take non-military action against those countries and others in Europe (cutting off natural gas, cyber warfare); and 3) refuse to continue negotiations to halt fighting.
There is no reason whatsoever for Sweden and Finland to pursue this right now, and frankly NATO should state that publicly. There's no way they would be accepted into NATO in any sort of timeframe that would make a difference in the immediate crisis. If they want to think about it after this has been resolved, at least to the point that fighting has stopped, that's another matter.
I understand your position. It doesn't make sense to me, but I understand it. I absolutely do not agree.
In reply to tuna55 :
If you're a firefighter coming up to a call, do you focus all of your resources on extinguishing the dumpster that's currently engulfed, or do you divert some focus to preventing other dumpsters in the area that aren't under immediate threat of combustion from going ablaze?
The other dumpsters may have combustible material inside them, but they're far enough away that it's not likely to organically spread from one to the other, and the accelerant from the current fire is mostly used up.
Russia has a large percentage of their military and intelligence focused on Ukraine at the moment. They're already stretched thin as a result. Going after a different country in a different location probably won't happen any time soon. Especially given the current backlash. Nations near Ukraine, with former Soviet ties seem like much easier targets in numerous ways than the Scandanavians.
Meanwhile, Russian losses continue to mount, as does resistance back home
A bunch of angry mothers is never a good thing for leadership:
In reply to 02Pilot :
Telling Vlad that if his current ops "succeed" they'll be petitioning for NATO membership is a lever. I see a difference between petitioning and being confirmed. If Vlad doesn't back down I don't see any problem with following through on petitioning with the full understanding that Sweden could withdraw their petition given Vlad backing down. I don't see any problem with Sweden/Finland demanding a withdrawal to antebellum lines and when that doesn't happen, petitioning membership. I think NATO would regard them as a red line regardless of their membership.
But then, I'm an idiot...
All of this "oh no don't make it worse, don't poke the bear" stuff is bologna. The bear is already in full-on attack mode, with no real end in sight, be it in five days or fifty years. It's time to face the fact that we are in a global war now. Today. Like it or not. It's not going to go away all because we're gentle and kind to the bear as it's ravaging Ukraine. Bringing more countries into NATO now doesn't require diverting anything from the current arms supply to Ukraine. It shows Putt Putt that everything he does is making Western unity stronger. Cause and effect. I think Stroker has it right. STM, if the Scandinavians are not a prime target, then having them petition for NATO membership is perfectly timed. It's moot if they don't want to, but the point is that this conventional "realist" thinking isn't working. It's time to think a bit outside of our precious ideals as to what academics decided. Those same academics rejected the premise that Russia would escalate to de-escalate, and they rejected the thought of Russian aggression.
tuna55 said:02Pilot said:In reply to tuna55 :
It would have the potential to destabilize the situation in the following way: if Sweden and/or Finland were to apply for NATO membership while hostilities are ongoing in Ukraine, Putin may 1) become increasingly desperate for a way to salvage something positive, which could easily mean further escalation; 2) take non-military action against those countries and others in Europe (cutting off natural gas, cyber warfare); and 3) refuse to continue negotiations to halt fighting.
There is no reason whatsoever for Sweden and Finland to pursue this right now, and frankly NATO should state that publicly. There's no way they would be accepted into NATO in any sort of timeframe that would make a difference in the immediate crisis. If they want to think about it after this has been resolved, at least to the point that fighting has stopped, that's another matter.
I understand your position. It doesn't make sense to me, but I understand it. I absolutely do not agree.
I see it the same way tuna55. Look at where all of this weak "don't poke the bear" thinking has gotten us. We need to start acting and force Putin to react. Why are we letting a little thug run the show? If the answer is nuclear weapons, those will still be around as Putin takes over more and more countries...those will still be around as Putin imposes more and more ridiculous demands on the west. I think we need to start broadcasting videos to the soviet people so they know what their PoS leader is up to today. I think we need to declare Putin a war criminal and put a billon dollar bounty on him "dead or alive" today. I think we need to give Poland Et. al all of the F16's & F18's they need so they will give Ukraine Mig's today. Is there some slight chance this could cause Putin to nuke the west, yes, but unless you're willing to surrender to this PoS, that's a chance we need to take.
Listen all we have to do is back away and quietly and gently remind Biff that we don't like this and he can't shop in our stores. He'll probably stop with Loraine, and maybe a few others, but we can't be bothered to make him really mad, because then he might pick on us.
Or we could punch him in his silly mouth and end this thing, as awful and messy as it might be, because it's the only way to avoid this rampaging moron from terrorizing the rest of the world with his lust for power.
In reply to tuna55 :
As I can only assume that your dismissal of "academics" is directed at me, allow me a brief response to your charges.
First, realist theory is anything but conventional, especially among policymakers. As I've noted here before, the vast majority of Americans embrace one form or another of liberal internationalism, usually combined with a healthy dose of American exceptionalism. Realists are a tiny minority of the overall population, and virtually none that I can think of exist at the highest levels of government. Personally, I find realist theory dramatically more useful in understanding global events through a global - as opposed to American - prism. The world rarely conforms to the model most Americans suggest it should; realism acknowledges this, while liberal internationalism rejects it.
Second, declaring an entire body of theory dead based on a few weeks of activity in a single crisis seems premature. I never suggested that the theoretical approach is predictive, and I predicated all of my assessments here with what I thought was a clear indication that I was laying out what I saw as the course of action most likely to achieve its objectives. I stand by that assessment: Putin would have gained more for Russia and himself if he had taken more time and effort to leverage the Russian build-up, rather than launching an invasion. Why he made the choice he did, I cannot say, but it clearly has not achieved what it was intended to.
Finally, this is far from a global conflict. It is a regional war with broader implications, just as Vietnam, Afghanistan (1979-), Korea, the various Arab-Israeli wars, and countless others were during the Cold War. A danger of expansion exists, as it did then, but the direct effects of the conflict are currently tightly contained, and will probably stay that way. Secondary effects will last much longer, and certainly extend further, but there is a massive difference between strengthening an alliance or increasing a defense budget on the one hand, and engaging in direct combat operations with a nuclear-armed peer competitor on the other.
No academic with half a brain is going to suggest that they're right; they're going to study the issue, assess it from their own informed perspective, and offer a reasoned, evidence-backed set of conclusions. Policy-makers rely on academics as data sources, not oracles.
In reply to 02Pilot :
No not directed at you, you're a fellow GRMer guy, but the people you're quoting who are writing articles and giving interviews are these 'realists' (as far as I can tell, self-named). I am absolutely not a neo-con and not a "realist", and I think neither one of these theories is going to get us anywhere. None of them are predictive, for sure as you stated. Therefore, use them to explain away the past all you want, it isn't relevant. We need to act strongly now. I disagree very much that this isn't a global war. Dozens of countries are involved, with financial sanctions, with condemnation or support in the EU, NATO and the UN, and with arms supply. This has been going on since at least 2008, and every time we've been told that it is isolated, won't be repeated, maintain the status quo etc. It's not good enough to say that again. The pattern and escalation of brutality is unavoidably obvious. We need to do better as humans.
Beer Baron said:Noddaz said:Is this the official start of the new age warfare?
One side starts by physically attacking in the traditional style and the other side attacks the monetary infrastructure and computer systems.
I know that monetary infrastructure and computer systems have been attacked on a limited basis before.
The scale this time is hard to comprehend. Much as the physical damage in Ukraine is hard to comprehend.
Yes and no.
Economic warfare has been a thing for as long as there have been economies. We're just seeing it play out more quickly and directly because we have more sophisticated tools and that allow near immediate sharing of information.
Terry Pratcett has directly satirized about the effectiveness of economic power repeatedly in the Discworld novels with how Ank-Morpork doesn't really have a military, because it doesn't need one, because it controls all the wealth. Even if an invading army were able to seize the seat of government, good luck trying to force all the different guilds and factions and get them to actually do what you want them to do.
I haven't read those novels, so don't know if they have magical powers to protect their territory, but I don't think Terry Pratcett read Kipling's poem "Cold Iron".
"Iron, cold iron, is master of them all.."
Poetry Lovers' Page - Rudyard Kipling: Cold Iron (poetryloverspage.com)
I apologize for not making my statements well-organized and clear if they are vague. I'm getting really sick of the Stalinization of the way we view casualties in this world. We seem numb. It isn't okay, and it needs to stop. I try to have my kids read an article from the WSJ every day to acclimate them to the news, and my nothing-bother-me preteen son can't stand to read it anymore because of the sadness depicted in this war. He's not wrong, and I want him to grow up as a man who still feels it when this happens. All that to say that 1938esque appeasement didn't work then and it won't work now. I know it's been thrown out here as a proper analogy, but I think it's pretty close. History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.
In reply to tuna55 :
Right on tuna55.
I don't know if anyone else feels this way but I keep thinking about how it's 2022 and things like this just shouldn't be happening anymore.
I mean, I don't avoid cruises for fear of getting scurvy...I just thought that since we're all so interconnected today "we" could just tell someone to stop being such a dick and they'd have to cool it.
Russian warship that fired upon Snake Island has followed instructions. Presumably they didn't go berkeley themselves, so they found an obliging Ukrainian organization to do so for them.
https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-warship-snake-island-attack-destroyed-report-says-2022-3
You'll need to log in to post.
