History in the Making: Russian Invasion

02Pilot said:

In reply to aircooled :

...I don't think there's a reason Russia would want the US or NATO as a party to any agreement, except to acknowledge the exclusion of Ukraine from the latter...

I was thinking they might as a way to remove sanctions, which I imagine they are very interested in doing.

Probably getting ahead of ourselves, but I would certainly hope the West would not just cut off the sanctions if they do come an agreement. They did still do the crime, even if they are not still actively doing it.  I am pretty certain, some sort of continuation of buying gas from them will be a thing. Those negotiations / maneuvers will get rather interesting.  I hope the West realizes what a powerful position they have, and takes as much advantage as possible. You know Russia would.

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

...What Iran says or does is irrelevant. Iran's only sphere of influence is in its immediate general vicinity....Iraq, the Gulf, Syria, and the levant. Iran has no stake or voice in what happens in Ukraine.... 

Well... sort of.   As mentioned previously, Russia is acting as a go-between for negotiations between the US (and others?) in nuclear talks.  Which makes the whole situation ridiculously intertwined.  Their recent attack near a US compound in Iraq was likely some sort of message related to that.  They claim is was retaliation for an Israeli strike in Syria that killed two members of its Revolutionary Guard.  (...uhm... what?)

aircooled said:

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

...What Iran says or does is irrelevant. Iran's only sphere of influence is in its immediate general vicinity....Iraq, the Gulf, Syria, and the levant. Iran has no stake or voice in what happens in Ukraine.... 

Well... sort of.   As mentioned previously, Russia is acting as a go-between for negotiations between the US (and others?) in nuclear talks.  Which makes the whole situation ridiculously intertwined.  Their recent attack near a US compound in Iraq was likely some sort of message related to that.  They claim is was retaliation for an Israeli strike in Syria that killed two members of its Revolutionary Guard.  (...uhm... what?)

Sure, but with the right carrot, and less stick, Iran will come to the table without Russia. Iran likely values western investment and money over whatever tacit support Russia provides. Being Russia's "ally "for the past 30 years hasn't exactly put Iran on the path to prosperity, because Russia isn't interested in building up Iran economically, it's interested in taking advantage of them (much like China....and admittedly the US does this as well....). But again, Iran has to be able to do it while saving face for themselves.

All that said, this invasion could also serve to show how useful it is to have a handful of your own nukes. If Ukraine had kept some of their nukes, Russia would not be invading at present. That fact probably isn't lost on Iran. Iran, NK....they know they can't stop a superpower like the US in a conventional military fight and their only hope is that having nukes dissuades any perceived thread of attack by US (or other major countries). 
 

We need to not treat our adversaries like they are idiots, or clowns, or children. China, Iran, North Korea - all of their actions are very carefully planned to achieve a goal that may not be readily apparent or obvious. When i hear people say "China is evil" or "North Korea is crazy" or "Iran's leaders are idiots" I cringe. All three of those countries push the margins and are always testing to see how far they can go. But it's worth noting that none of them blatantly "cross the line" the way Putin has. They want leverage (mostly for economic reasons), not an actual war. 

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

With China shipping the US all the fentanyl it can OD on, I very much feel that they have crossed the line.  Its just that the US has not seriously taken them to the mat on this.  Yet.

Apparently this was on Russia's main "news" program the other day.

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

My first thought when I saw that article/video was: "Well, she's dead".

Not to get too political or weepy-eyed, but it's a bit inspiring to see folks protesting in Russia where it takes some serious cajones and commitment to speak against Putin.  It reminds me of the old joke:

An American and a Soviet were discussing their different systems and the American said "In my country, I can walk right into the white house and bang my fist on the desk of the oval office and say 'Mister President, I don't like the way you're running the country'".

The Soviet said, "Oh, I can do that, too."

"Really?!", replied the surprised American.

"Oh yeah. I can march right in to the Kremlin, pound my fist on the General Secretary's desk and say "Mr Gorbechev, I don't like the way President Reagan is running his country!"

volvoclearinghouse said:

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

With China shipping the US all the fentanyl it can OD on, I very much feel that they have crossed the line.  Its just that the US has not seriously taken them to the mat on this.  Yet.

I mean one could argue that they are simply providing what is demanded by US citizens. The US gets heroin and cocaine from all kinds of countries that we are not enemies with. 

I'm not leaving China blameless here but if there's a demand in the US for fentanyl it will come from someplace, China or elsewhere. The fentanyl problem is ultimately our fault first and foremost, since we have a large number of morons in our own country who are actually using that E36 M3. Columbia has been working its ass off for decades trying to stop cocaine production and is basically accomplished nothing.  The Chinese government has less control over what its industrial economy is doing then most might think in the end it's still a huge economy that has a ton of corruption in it.

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I tend to agree with all of this. The one issue I'm still wondering about (I brought it up here before hostilities commenced) is the canal east of Kherson that supplies water to Crimea. It was clearly a primary Russian objective, they took it early, and it's vital to the long-term survival of Crimea. If the shooting stopped today, I have no doubt the Russians would have a strong claim to it, but depending on how long it takes to get a cease-fire, and where the situation on the ground is at that point, I do wonder if the Ukrainians will push to control it. If the land bridge remains in Russian hands it's less of a long-term issue, as they can construct another canal or pipeline or whatever, but if that goes the existing canal remains critical. This is the sort of detail that can drag negotiations out for weeks.

If the West wants to maintain the moral high ground and keep up the pressure on Putin, they will lift sanctions on things that hurt ordinary Russians quickly (mostly currency-related stuff), while maintaining those on the government and individuals connected to Putin. Tricky business to make things easier for the average Russian while still being effective in hurting the state, and hard to explain to the average Westerner. The alternative, I suppose, is to just keep squeezing, but Putin's going to demand something in exchange for calling off the attack, so something's going to have to give.

02Pilot said:

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I tend to agree with all of this. The one issue I'm still wondering about (I brought it up here before hostilities commenced) is the canal east of Kherson that supplies water to Crimea. It was clearly a primary Russian objective, they took it early, and it's vital to the long-term survival of Crimea. If the shooting stopped today, I have no doubt the Russians would have a strong claim to it, but depending on how long it takes to get a cease-fire, and where the situation on the ground is at that point, I do wonder if the Ukrainians will push to control it. If the land bridge remains in Russian hands it's less of a long-term issue, as they can construct another canal or pipeline or whatever, but if that goes the existing canal remains critical. This is the sort of detail that can drag negotiations out for weeks.

If the West wants to maintain the moral high ground and keep up the pressure on Putin, they will lift sanctions on things that hurt ordinary Russians quickly (mostly currency-related stuff), while maintaining those on the government and individuals connected to Putin. Tricky business to make things easier for the average Russian while still being effective in hurting the state, and hard to explain to the average Westerner. The alternative, I suppose, is to just keep squeezing, but Putin's going to demand something in exchange for calling off the attack, so something's going to have to give.

I wouldn't sign it as Zelensky. If he wants to join NATO, he should. Promising not to is essentially giving Russia a raincheck on invasion later on when they regroup.

wae said:

In reply to volvoclearinghouse :

My first thought when I saw that article/video was: "Well, she's dead".

Not to get too political or weepy-eyed, but it's a bit inspiring to see folks protesting in Russia where it takes some serious cajones and commitment to speak against Putin.  It reminds me of the old joke:

An American and a Soviet were discussing their different systems and the American said "In my country, I can walk right into the white house and bang my fist on the desk of the oval office and say 'Mister President, I don't like the way you're running the country'".

The Soviet said, "Oh, I can do that, too."

"Really?!", replied the surprised American.

"Oh yeah. I can march right in to the Kremlin, pound my fist on the General Secretary's desk and say "Mr Gorbechev, I don't like the way President Reagan is running his country!"

She has been dissapeared and cannot be found immediately following that brave show.

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I don't see Ukraine giving up Donesk and Luhansk. Maybe the part that was controlled by the separatist prior to now but not the whole thing. It is a valuable industrial area. To me, that is probably the biggest sticking point in the whole peace talks.

tuna55 said:

02Pilot said:

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I tend to agree with all of this. The one issue I'm still wondering about (I brought it up here before hostilities commenced) is the canal east of Kherson that supplies water to Crimea. It was clearly a primary Russian objective, they took it early, and it's vital to the long-term survival of Crimea. If the shooting stopped today, I have no doubt the Russians would have a strong claim to it, but depending on how long it takes to get a cease-fire, and where the situation on the ground is at that point, I do wonder if the Ukrainians will push to control it. If the land bridge remains in Russian hands it's less of a long-term issue, as they can construct another canal or pipeline or whatever, but if that goes the existing canal remains critical. This is the sort of detail that can drag negotiations out for weeks.

If the West wants to maintain the moral high ground and keep up the pressure on Putin, they will lift sanctions on things that hurt ordinary Russians quickly (mostly currency-related stuff), while maintaining those on the government and individuals connected to Putin. Tricky business to make things easier for the average Russian while still being effective in hurting the state, and hard to explain to the average Westerner. The alternative, I suppose, is to just keep squeezing, but Putin's going to demand something in exchange for calling off the attack, so something's going to have to give.

I wouldn't sign it as Zelensky. If he wants to join NATO, he should. Promising not to is essentially giving Russia a raincheck on invasion later on when they regroup.

It's not up to Zelensky. NATO is not going to accept Ukraine as a member - too much risk. Sure, Poland and the Baltics might be all for it, but there's no way you'll get unanimous consent.

Article 10

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

This fallacy that China and Russia are allies, or even friends, is a dangerous road for the West to take. China is distasteful for its own reason (not the least of which is its own push for east Asian hegemony), but China isn't going to get involved in Russia any more than it gets involved in India-Pakistan disputes, or Yemen-Saudi disputes, or Syria-Israel disputes, or US-Venezuela disputes. China will *never* intervene in a conflict between two foreign countries unless it has a compelling interest to do so. No such interest exists in this case. It will stay out of things enough to prevent the West from sanctioning it, and it will dip its toes in enough to get some cheap oil. It won't openly oppose Russia but also won't openly support Russia.

China and Russia are sort of friends. China's not going to get militarily involved in anything Russia does, but they're ideologically aligned in autocracy and they both want to weaken Western democratic alliances. See also, the concept of "Autocracy Inc:"

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/12/the-autocrats-are-winning/620526/
 

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

volvoclearinghouse said:

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

With China shipping the US all the fentanyl it can OD on, I very much feel that they have crossed the line.  Its just that the US has not seriously taken them to the mat on this.  Yet.

I mean one could argue that they are simply providing what is demanded by US citizens. The US gets heroin and cocaine from all kinds of countries that we are not enemies with. 

I'm not leaving China blameless here but if there's a demand in the US for fentanyl it will come from someplace, China or elsewhere. The fentanyl problem is ultimately our fault first and foremost, since we have a large number of morons in our own country who are actually using that E36 M3. Columbia has been working its ass off for decades trying to stop cocaine production and is basically accomplished nothing.  The Chinese government has less control over what its industrial economy is doing then most might think in the end it's still a huge economy that has a ton of corruption in it.

There's demand in this country for fully automatic weapons, and European market cars under 25 years old, but the government cracks down on that stuff. 

Not saying we don't hold some responsibility for the drug issue within our own borders (and the very related mental health issue) but cutting off the supplies sure wouldn't hurt.  Anyway, digression. 

02Pilot said:

tuna55 said:

02Pilot said:

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I tend to agree with all of this. The one issue I'm still wondering about (I brought it up here before hostilities commenced) is the canal east of Kherson that supplies water to Crimea. It was clearly a primary Russian objective, they took it early, and it's vital to the long-term survival of Crimea. If the shooting stopped today, I have no doubt the Russians would have a strong claim to it, but depending on how long it takes to get a cease-fire, and where the situation on the ground is at that point, I do wonder if the Ukrainians will push to control it. If the land bridge remains in Russian hands it's less of a long-term issue, as they can construct another canal or pipeline or whatever, but if that goes the existing canal remains critical. This is the sort of detail that can drag negotiations out for weeks.

If the West wants to maintain the moral high ground and keep up the pressure on Putin, they will lift sanctions on things that hurt ordinary Russians quickly (mostly currency-related stuff), while maintaining those on the government and individuals connected to Putin. Tricky business to make things easier for the average Russian while still being effective in hurting the state, and hard to explain to the average Westerner. The alternative, I suppose, is to just keep squeezing, but Putin's going to demand something in exchange for calling off the attack, so something's going to have to give.

I wouldn't sign it as Zelensky. If he wants to join NATO, he should. Promising not to is essentially giving Russia a raincheck on invasion later on when they regroup.

It's not up to Zelensky. NATO is not going to accept Ukraine as a member - too much risk. Sure, Poland and the Baltics might be all for it, but there's no way you'll get unanimous consent.

Article 10

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

I take issue with "is not" in your reply. I do not think you are able to accurately predict the post war structure of NATO, and I, as Zelensky, would not be willing to give up that chance.

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

.....The Chinese government has less control over what its industrial economy is doing then most might think in the end it's still a huge economy that has a ton of corruption in it.

They may have little control on what they produce, but they have a lot of control on what they sell in country. 

Do you know you cannot buy cough medicine in China, because pseudoephedrine (used to be used a lot to make speed) is illegal there, despite them being one of the largest producers?  I know, because I caught some sort of cough sickness when I was in China and could not buy any damn cough medicine for the trip back.  I spent the next 12 hour on the plane coughing. And yes, I was as respectful as possible to the other passengers, coughing into a rag, but it was pretty brutal.

I mean, isn't it kinda of funny that we take issue with China shipping drugs here while China made the Americans and English hugely rich back in the 1800s for doing just the same?

I think the USA had at least 2 presidents who came from opium trade money families.

An update:   Looks like Russia may be going for an amphibious assault on Odessa.  Not sure I have great confidence in their success on this one.  One wonders what an ATM will do to a landing craft....

Substantial Russian Navy force, including landing ships, advancing on Odessa area today. Seen 09:47 UTC in satellite imagery

Ice Station Zebra!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/navy-launches-training-exercise-in-arctic-circle-as-global-tensions-rise/ar-AAV4qas?ocid=msedgdhphdr

aircooled said:

Do you know you cannot buy cough medicine in China, because pseudoephedrine (used to be used a lot to make speed) is illegal there, despite them being one of the largest producers?  I know, because I caught some sort of cough sickness when I was in China and could not buy any damn cough medicine for the trip back.  I spent the next 12 hour on the plane coughing. And yes, I was as respectful as possible to the other passengers, coughing into a rag, but it was pretty brutal.

Pseudoephedrine is for nasal congestion though.

Yeah, I am certainly mixing up my drugs etc.   It is certainly true though that China restricts (or makes illegal) the sales or of things they produce.

Another thought: Regardless of how and when the fighting stops, what happens once Russian soldiers return to Russia? This has to be on Putin's mind - soldiers returning from Afghanistan were the primary conduit of information on the failures of that war to the Russian people, and this one isn't going any better. Already I've seen speculation that conscripts fighting in Ukraine now are probably going to be far less likely to extend their contracts; this is apparently a major source of manpower to the Russian military, one which may have all but dried up. The Russians can't keep their entire military confined to bases indefinitely, so word is going to get around. How does that impact the stability of the Putin government long-term? It certainly has to be a consideration in his timing of any sort of agreement, and further reinforces the idea that he has to have a way to claim at least some sort of success if he hopes to remain in power and without a major domestic uprising on his hands. And what happens if the Russian military is forced to shrink due to lack of available manpower? Do they retain conscripts longer? That's certainly not going to be popular.

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

Just for posterity -here's what I think the negotiated solution will be:

- Russia keep Crimea (there would never be a deal otherwise)

- Russia can have Donesk and Luhansk. Let them be a drag on the Russian economy and rid Ukraine of its problem children

- Russia may or may not keep a land bridge to Crimea. While that woudl be a big sticking point, the reality is that a Ukrainian port on the Azov Sea woudl always be threatened with either conquer, blockade, or general pressure from Russia, and it's of limited economic value.

- Some sanctions relief, though I don't thin it will be much initially. Probably on some kind of scale depending on future "good behavior"

---

- Ukraine gets back all of the rest of the territories taken so far by Russia 

- Ukraine pledges not to join NATO (which wasn't going to happen in the first place), but may still join the EU.

- Ukraine will significantly upgrade its stock of modern (Western) defensivel weapons. Which, incidentally, it was already doing before this all started...quietly. All those Javelins didn't just arrive there when Russia invaded....

 

ANyhow, that's what I see happening ultimately. Posting for posterity and hope I'm right. 

- 

I hope you are right , there is some give and take , plus Russia gets the port that it wants and really needs

In reply to 02Pilot :

Well, we are also talking about Russians, who had lived with Russian government their whole lives.  If you confronted the man on the street with hard evidence that the Official Story is complete BS, they'd probably say yeah, and water is wet and the sky is blue.