WW3 -All Russia / Ukraine stuff here please-

As much as I support sanctions I am not sure what the objective is and outcome desired if the target is ultimately someone so all-powerful, controlling, feared, narcissistic, self-serving and quite possibly a bit unstable, who, when completely cornered might act irrationally (in our eyes though not his own) and in deluded desperation.
 
IainP said:
I was reflecting over the weekend, some of you may have seen the groups reported in the media making home-made weapons in preparation. The pragmatist in me was thinking, bad idea - a load of civvies up against trained soldiers with proper weapons. But then, if I happened to be caught up in that situation, would I be doing the same thing - maybe.
Just re-enforced how unrelatable much of this is.
Click to expand...
I thought something similar yesterday, especially when the BBC were interviewing a British dentist who was preparing to go out to Ukraine to fight . When asked if he had any military experience, he paused a while and said " A little,................I was in the Cadets". I can't help thinking that he will be more of a hinderance to the Ukrainian forces than much help. Will end up getting people killed - and not necessarily the enemy.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
As much as I support sanctions I am not sure what the objective is and outcome desired if the target is ultimately someone so all-powerful, controlling, feared, narcissistic, self-serving and quite possibly a bit unstable, who, when completely cornered might act irrationally (in our eyes though not his own) and in deluded desperation.
Click to expand...
What is the alternative? But yes, it is a really difficult situation. The most dangerous point, as expressed on the news today, will be when Putin is backed into a corner he can't get out of. He isn't going to go off and live a quiet retirement.
 
Swango1980 said:
What is the alternative? But yes, it is a really difficult situation. The most dangerous point, as expressed on the news today, will be when Putin is backed into a corner he can't get out of. He isn't going to go off and live a quiet retirement.
Click to expand...
Exactly. There are only 2 alternatives: do nothing or get involved militarily and they aren't seriously acceptable.
 
Neilds said:
I thought something similar yesterday, especially when the BBC were interviewing a British dentist who was preparing to go out to Ukraine to fight . When asked if he had any military experience, he paused a while and said " A little,................I was in the Cadets". I can't help thinking that he will be more of a hinderance to the Ukrainian forces than much help. Will end up getting people killed - and not necessarily the enemy.
Click to expand...
If he can administer anaesthetics and do nursing duties, he'll be worth his weight in gold. Armies aren't just infantry.
 
RichA said:
If he can administer anaesthetics and do nursing duties, he'll be worth his weight in gold. Armies aren't just infantry.
Click to expand...

Indeed. There was an interview with a guy travelling out there yesterday, he has no military experience but feels strongly that he needs to do something. He doesn't expect/want to end up on the front line however he said he'd take the place of a trained Ukrainian doing menial tasks wherever he could. Not every role is a combat one.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
As much as I support sanctions I am not sure what the objective is and outcome desired if the target is ultimately someone so all-powerful, controlling, feared, narcissistic, self-serving and quite possibly a bit unstable, who, when completely cornered might act irrationally (in our eyes though not his own) and in deluded desperation.
Click to expand...
What's the alternative. We can only hope that sanctions create such disruption to Russians that they will turn against their politicians and remove them. Maybe the Military and Politicians will decide Putin is too much of a loose cannon and strap him down.
 
SocketRocket said:
What's the alternative. We can only hope that sanctions create such disruption to Russians that they will turn against their politicians and remove them. Maybe the Military and Politicians will decide Putin is too much of a loose cannon and strap him down.
Click to expand...
I don't know - but that's not what I'm asking - which is about the outcome being sought by the application of these very severe sanctions. What do we want to happen and how likely is it to be achieved?

And there is in fact a third alternative to what's being done in addition to 'do nothing' and direct military intervention - and please - I am not suggesting that I would prefer it to what is being done. That further alternative would be gradual and increasingly restrictive sanctions. But of course whether that is a realistic alternative or not would very much depend upon the outcome we wish to see and how long we would be willing to work towards it. And that is why I ask the question on the outcome and how likely we are to achieve it.

The rat when cornered will fight. The current strategy seems to be to corner the rat.
 
One thing that puzzles me is that I have not really seen an fighter jets being used in the war, at least by the Russians. Maybe they are being used in abundance outside the cities, away from the cameras, but I thought their air force would be a lot more visible in this war. I've seen plenty of tanks, a few helicopters and other general military road vehicles.

I did read an interesting article that provide some possible reasons that the Russian fighter jets were not being used up to now, and gave reasons such as:
  • Limited weapons stockpile for them
  • Many of their weaponry from aircrafts cannot be fired with accuracy
  • Risk of friendly fire
  • Lack of flying hours for trained Russian pilots
I wonder if Russia are simply holding back, but likely to release their air force into cities at some point in the future.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I don't know - but that's not what I'm asking - which is about the outcome being sought by the application of these very severe sanctions. What do we want to happen and how likely is it to be achieved?

And there is in fact a third alternative to what's being done in addition to 'do nothing' and direct military intervention - and please - I am not suggesting that I would prefer it to what is being done. That further alternative would be gradual and increasingly restrictive sanctions. But of course whether that is a realistic alternative or not would very much depend upon the outcome we wish to see and how long we would be willing to work towards it. And that is why I ask the question on the outcome and how likely we are to achieve it.

The rat when cornered will fight. The current strategy seems to be to corner the rat.
Click to expand...

The intended outcome of the sanctions is not to hurt Putin, or to hurt Russian people - the West knows Putin doesn't care about the plight of the Russian people. The intended outcome is to hurt those close to Putin who might be able to influence his thinking. If these people start losing millions, and their freedom to travel and trade, there is a chance that they will either try to persuade him to stop, or turn on him completely and have him ousted. Putin can't be ousted by the people unless there is a full scale revolution, but he can be ousted by those within the corridors of power...and he WILL be ousted by those at some point if he doesn't back down and the sanctions start to bite.

Not often I agree with the tactics of any government, but in this case I think they're getting it spot on.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I don't know - but that's not what I'm asking - which is about the outcome being sought by the application of these very severe sanctions. What do we want to happen and how likely is it to be achieved?

And there is in fact a third alternative to what's being done in addition to 'do nothing' and direct military intervention - and please - I am not suggesting that I would prefer it to what is being done. That further alternative would be gradual and increasingly restrictive sanctions. But of course whether that is a realistic alternative or not would very much depend upon the outcome we wish to see and how long we would be willing to work towards it. And that is why I ask the question on the outcome and how likely we are to achieve it.

The rat when cornered will fight. The current strategy seems to be to corner the rat.
Click to expand...
I answered your question quite clearly. The sanctions are being used to create financial hardship in Russia which will hopefully put pressure on the Politicians and Military to remove Putin and inject some pragmatism into the current situation. I can't understand why you don't see that.

A rat might fight back when cornered but so will a lion and that's what the brave people of Ukraine are doing.
 
Last edited:
Swango1980 said:
One thing that puzzles me is that I have not really seen an fighter jets being used in the war, at least by the Russians. Maybe they are being used in abundance outside the cities, away from the cameras, but I thought their air force would be a lot more visible in this war. I've seen plenty of tanks, a few helicopters and other general military road vehicles.

I did read an interesting article that provide some possible reasons that the Russian fighter jets were not being used up to now, and gave reasons such as:
  • Limited weapons stockpile for them
  • Many of their weaponry from aircrafts cannot be fired with accuracy
  • Risk of friendly fire
  • Lack of flying hours for trained Russian pilots
I wonder if Russia are simply holding back, but likely to release their air force into cities at some point in the future.
Click to expand...

Ive seen a viral video of a fighter jet firing rockets in Ukraine, so there is some use but you are right, its a very boots on the ground operation thus far!
 
Swango1980 said:
One thing that puzzles me is that I have not really seen an fighter jets being used in the war, at least by the Russians. Maybe they are being used in abundance outside the cities, away from the cameras, but I thought their air force would be a lot more visible in this war. I've seen plenty of tanks, a few helicopters and other general military road vehicles.

I did read an interesting article that provide some possible reasons that the Russian fighter jets were not being used up to now, and gave reasons such as:
  • Limited weapons stockpile for them
  • Many of their weaponry from aircrafts cannot be fired with accuracy
  • Risk of friendly fire
  • Lack of flying hours for trained Russian pilots
I wonder if Russia are simply holding back, but likely to release their air force into cities at some point in the future.
Click to expand...
Maybe Russia don't yet want those kind of military tactics at this point. The use of Ariel bombing and heavy artillery on cities create total devastation as we have witnessed recently in Syria.
 
SocketRocket said:
I answered your question quite clearly. The sanctions are being used to create financial hardship in Russia which will hopefully put pressure on the Politicians and Military to remove Putin and inject some pragmatism into the current situation. I can't understand why you don't see that.

A rat might fight back when cornered but so will a lion and that's what the brave people of Ukraine are doing.
Click to expand...
I know you did, but you asked about my alternatives and I was actually asking about the desired outcome.

And please don't misunderstand, I do want the same outcome...Putin gone. But how long that might take and what happens meanwhile (inc. what Putin might resort to to keep in power) I don't know, as the hoped for timescales are surely a key part of the outcome we (both/all) desire.

So for instance, Putin might go in 5yrs time after 5 yrs of Russian occupation of Ukraine, terrible military conflict, and many millions of refugees having to be accommodated across Europe and RoW - is that an acceptable outcome. I don't think so...but that is why the timescales are surely important,
 
Swango1980 said:
One thing that puzzles me is that I have not really seen an fighter jets being used in the war, at least by the Russians. Maybe they are being used in abundance outside the cities, away from the cameras, but I thought their air force would be a lot more visible in this war. I've seen plenty of tanks, a few helicopters and other general military road vehicles.

I did read an interesting article that provide some possible reasons that the Russian fighter jets were not being used up to now, and gave reasons such as:
  • Limited weapons stockpile for them
  • Many of their weaponry from aircrafts cannot be fired with accuracy
  • Risk of friendly fire
  • Lack of flying hours for trained Russian pilots
I wonder if Russia are simply holding back, but likely to release their air force into cities at some point in the future.
Click to expand...
I had the same puzzling thoughts - along with wonder about the slow speed of movement of the vast number of troops assembled.
I don't believe any of those 'reasons' above are anywhere near valid for this situation - and seems more likely to be propoganda type 'reporting'. There was certainly some Air Force activity in the 2014 annexation of Crimea though.
The entire exercise seems to be more a demonstration of strength rather than actual battles/conquest.
Maybe the goal is to 'recover' the provinces with significant Russian presence - the ones near Crimea/Russia and Belarus - via negotiation rather than conquest.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I know you did, but you asked about my alternatives and I was actually asking about the desired outcome.

And please don't misunderstand, I do want the same outcome...Putin gone. But how long that might take and what happens meanwhile (inc. what Putin might resort to to keep in power) I don't know, as the hoped for timescales are surely a key part of the outcome we (both/all) desire.

So for instance, Putin might go in 5yrs time after 5 yrs of Russian occupation of Ukraine, terrible military conflict, and many millions of refugees having to be accommodated across Europe and RoW - is that an acceptable outcome. I don't think so...but that is why the timescales are surely important,
Click to expand...
The timescales are what they are if we want shorter timescales then there are only two options: Wage war on Russia or give up to them. Neither of these are preferred so we are left with the only other option which the western world are fairly United with and that's what we're doing.
 
SocketRocket said:
The timescales are what they are if we want shorter timescales then there are only two options: Wage war on Russia or give up to them. Neither of these are preferred so we are left with the only other option which the western world are fairly United with and that's what we're doing.
Click to expand...
Indeed it is. But normally I wouldn't implement an action plan without having a very good idea of how long things were going to take for it to have the desired effect - and if I didn't know I'd have a load of contingences in place for different timescales for the issue continuing. I fear the West is rather playing things by ear - making up our contingencies as we go along. Maybe that's all that can be done, but it is not a comfortable place to be when you know that the target of your action plan is a ticking timebomb and you have no idea how much time is on the clock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top