Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[chasfh]

58 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Too hard to think about top 5 lists.  I used to think "Everyday I write the Book" was the perfect pop song and then I just got sick of Elvis Costello. 

Top 5s also change with time. Emaline by Ben Folds is in my current top 5. I hadn't even heard the song two years ago. Two years from now it'll be gone, replaced by something else.

[smr-nj]

All the news stations are reporting about the Russian retreating from their position outside of Kyiv, from 12 miles out to about 33 miles out. The dark part of my mind wants to say is this an intentional drawback by the Russians because they are planning to use chemical weapons and or maybe thinking moving an extra 20 miles out protects their troops?

[1984Echoes]

2 hours ago, romad1 said:

Too hard to think about top 5 lists. ...

How about a top 10,000 list?

[1984Echoes]

5 minutes ago, smr-nj said:

All the news stations are reporting about the Russian retreating from their position outside of Kyiv, from 12 miles out to about 33 miles out. The dark part of my mind wants to say is this an intentional drawback by the Russians because they are planning to use chemical weapons and or maybe thinking moving an extra 20 miles out protects their troops?

As soon as I heard Ukraine was pushing back Russian forces I started to worry about Putin lashing out with a chemical or nuclear attack in revenge/ frustration/ rage. I won't put it past him at all.

[romad1]

38 minutes ago, smr-nj said:

All the news stations are reporting about the Russian retreating from their position outside of Kyiv, from 12 miles out to about 33 miles out. The dark part of my mind wants to say is this an intentional drawback by the Russians because they are planning to use chemical weapons and or maybe thinking moving an extra 20 miles out protects their troops?

I can only imagine how badly chemical attacks would go for Russian troops.   Badly trained troops should not attempt difficult things.

[smr-nj]

36 minutes ago, romad1 said:

I can only imagine how badly chemical attacks would go for Russian troops.   Badly trained troops should not attempt difficult things.

But, would Putin give the command anyway?  And would his on site commanders carry out that order or defy him?

[chasfh]

I don’t think the ground troops would directly reject the order by Putin to wage chemical warfare, but to what I believe is romad’s point, if they’re so inept at the ground war, what makes us think these same people could successfully wage a chemical campaign?

[romad1]

4 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I don’t think the ground troops would directly reject the order by Putin to wage chemical warfare, but to what I believe is romad’s point, if they’re so inept at the ground war, what makes us think these same people could successfully wage a chemical campaign?

contrary to this.  I think the series Chernobyl indicates that the troops the Soviets used to first work the reactor problem were their specially trained chemical warfare troops.  It was an area that the Soviets invested some resources into. 

[romad1]

good news

 

[romad1]

 

[romad1]

Biden has laid out the marker that chem and nuclear weapons are a red linear thing

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

good news

 

what a strange dynamic it would set up if the Ukrainians took a large Russian force as POWs. Then again, I saw a clip from the southern front the other day where a local partisan was complaining about the Russians leaving their dead behind. Hard to imagine where the head of an army like that must be.

Edited March 24, 2022 by gehringer_2

[ewsieg]

The pictures out of Mariupol are sad.  I'm still battling within my head if we should stay the course that Biden has set, which IMO is the choice my head says is the best, or go with my gut and up our assistance, including offensive weapons, no fly zone,  and even stepping up threats, such as if Belarus goes in, we go into Belarus with the thought that Russia backs down.  Or go with my heart, which says we might need to put pressure on Ukraine to move closer to Russia on a resolution.  Might be as simple as giving them the tools to force us to relieve sanctions on their orders, with the objective to spare other cities and citizens from the pain Russia can inflict from missiles, even if the ground war is a stalemate or is showing incremental Ukraine gains.

I know this would give China the ammunition they need to bring up at United Nations debates for decades, but outside of the Ukraine government being overthrown, give Russia everything they want, the second the last Russian vehicle gets out of the Ukraine border, NATO troops swarm in and Zelensky accepts a NATO invitation.  IDK, maybe just US troops go in and he signs a peace treaty with the US so we technically don't break any agreement with Ukraine getting into NATO.

[gehringer_2]

8 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

The pictures out of Mariupol are sad.  I'm still battling within my head if we should stay the course that Biden has set, which IMO is the choice my head says is the best, or go with my gut and up our assistance, including offensive weapons, no fly zone,  and even stepping up threats, such as if Belarus goes in, we go into Belarus with the thought that Russia backs down.  Or go with my heart, which says we might need to put pressure on Ukraine to move closer to Russia on a resolution.  Might be as simple as giving them the tools to force us to relieve sanctions on their orders, with the objective to spare other cities and citizens from the pain Russia can inflict from missiles, even if the ground war is a stalemate or is showing incremental Ukraine gains.

I know this would give China the ammunition they need to bring up at United Nations debates for decades, but outside of the Ukraine government being overthrown, give Russia everything they want, the second the last Russian vehicle gets out of the Ukraine border, NATO troops swarm in and Zelensky accepts a NATO invitation.  IDK, maybe just US troops go in and he signs a peace treaty with the US so we technically don't break any agreement with Ukraine getting into NATO.

the reality (problem?) now is that whatever cultural affinity there was between Ukraine and Russia, this war has utterly destroyed it. In fact you now not only have 40 million Ukrainians who will never acquiesce to Russian demands again. but for whom the war has created a new confidence that they are a force to be reckoned with in their own right.

Edited March 24, 2022 by gehringer_2

[mtutiger]

10 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

The pictures out of Mariupol are sad.  I'm still battling within my head if we should stay the course that Biden has set, which IMO is the choice my head says is the best, or go with my gut and up our assistance, including offensive weapons, no fly zone,  and even stepping up threats, such as if Belarus goes in, we go into Belarus with the thought that Russia backs down.  Or go with my heart, which says we might need to put pressure on Ukraine to move closer to Russia on a resolution.  Might be as simple as giving them the tools to force us to relieve sanctions on their orders, with the objective to spare other cities and citizens from the pain Russia can inflict from missiles, even if the ground war is a stalemate or is showing incremental Ukraine gains.

This would be pretty terrible on a number of levels... it would basically come with massive risks of alienating the Ukrainians, who are a much larger stakeholder in this conflict than we are for obvious reasons, with very little chance of gain. On top of the fact that it isn't clear that Russia is even interested in dealing with us, the Ukrainians now largely hate the Russians with a fiery passion... how on earth can we assume that we can push either of these countries on a whim?

And then there's the matter of NATO... what would Poland or the Baltics think? They all view this conflict (correctly) as existential. It would irreparably damage NATO by leading to questions about members' commitments to mutual self defense.

Biden has handled this well and he should continue to give the Ukrainians space to drive peace negotiations. Not everything that happens in the world revolves around us, nor should it.

Edited March 24, 2022 by mtutiger

[gehringer_2]

Just now, mtutiger said:

Biden has handled this well

With the one exception that he has probably talked too much. Stuff like the 'war criminal' rhetoric doesn't help. It's fine if the US does this institutionally, but I don't see any value in Biden himself personalizing the conflict. It just raises the heat with no other clear payoff.

[mtutiger]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

the reality (problem?) now is that whatever cultural affinity there was between Ukraine and Russia, this war has utterly destroyed it. In fact you now not only have 40 million Ukrainians who will never acquiesce to Russian demands again. but for whom the war has created a new confidence that they are a force to be reckoned with in their own right.

Exactly...

I'm also unclear what leverage we have to bring about a different result... sanctions didn't stop Russia from invading, but ending sanctions will magically lead them to a ceasefire?

And the Ukrainians... we could theoretically tell 40 million people to lay down their arms, but the more likely result is they respond by saying that they are the ones who are under invasion and that the US can go pound sand.

[mtutiger]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

With the one exception that he has probably talked too much. Stuff like the 'war criminal' rhetoric doesn't help. It's fine if the US does this institutionally, but I don't see any value in Biden himself personalizing the conflict. It just raises the heat with no other clear payoff.

Agreed.

It's one thing if we say it, another if the government says it.

[ewsieg]

31 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

This would be pretty terrible on a number of levels... it would basically come with massive risks of alienating the Ukrainians, who are a much larger stakeholder in this conflict than we are for obvious reasons, with very little chance of gain. On top of the fact that it isn't clear that Russia is even interested in dealing with us, the Ukrainians now largely hate the Russians with a fiery passion... how on earth can we assume that we can push either of these countries on a whim?

I mean, is there a solution that isn't terrible?  I know myself, i'd want to fight to the death and would be against any concessions, but Mariupol is just the beginning.  A ground war stalemate is enough to keep Ukraine's morale up, but Russia has the ability to make the rest of their country look like this city.  

[mtutiger]

14 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I mean, is there a solution that isn't terrible?  

Fair point, I guess I would want to pursue strategies that support our allies and support Ukraine in their fight for self determination. Not a strategy with little to no chance of succeeding that would burn bridges with our allies and the Ukrainians fighting for self determination.

Either way, there is this distinctly American mentality that we hold a bunch of cards in all foreign policy situations and that it'd be easy to just sit the two parties down and hammer out a deal. When in reality, ceasefires between two countries who hate each other are extremely hard to accomplish and require more from the two parties involved than us, who technically aren't even involved.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict from 2020 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war) isa great example: it took multiple attempts at ceasefire to ultimately get one... during the US attempt to get one, the ceasefire lasted all of 30 mins before falling apart. The war only ended once Azerbaijan captured a key city and led Armenia/Artsakh to capitulate.

Simply put, this conflict is more likely than not going to last as long as Vladimir Putin wishes it to last and Ukraine chooses to resist. The whole world doesn't revolve around us.

[gehringer_2]

29 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I mean, is there a solution that isn't terrible?

sure, there is (Putin removed from the scene), it just isn't very likely...

[ewsieg]

49 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Fair point, I guess I would want to pursue strategies that support our allies and support Ukraine in their fight for self determination. Not a strategy with little to no chance of succeeding that would burn bridges with our allies and the Ukrainians fighting for self determination.

While I hope that Ukraine can continue the defense they have shown, and even add to it with some more offense, allowing them to keep a stalemate on the ground could very well ensure they have no chance of succeeding.

49 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Simply put, this conflict is more likely than not going to last as long as Vladimir Putin wishes it to last and Ukraine chooses to resist. The whole world doesn't revolve around us.

And that's why i'm saying that's why I wonder if maybe we should give Ukraine the tools and help them understand a 'win' in the morale category, might be a lot more death and destruction for Ukraine and its citizens.

[romad1]

My choice for an ending to this is that Ukraine captures a Russian city and the negotiation occurs on a table made of Putin's corpse. 

 

[romad1]

Russian influencer surprised at the sanctions working.

[romad1]

Well well,  Good work boys!