Russia has invaded Ukraine. How will the West respond?

There was never any question of Russia losing its Black Seas base (at least, not until now). The base is on long-term lease and at no time has the goverment of Ukraine threatened to cancel it. This notion is a non-starter.

Nor is there, Russian propaganda aside, much real appetite on the part of Ukraine’s ethinic Russian minorities to actually rejoin Russia, Crimea aside.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Russia protecting its “legitimate interests” or “ethnic minorities”, and everything to do with Putin’s rage at having his puppet ignominously kicked out, and fear of losing his new-style Russian imperium, and overturning the possibly infectious “bad example” of people successfully defying authoritarianism.

Similarly, the talk of the West going to war is all nonsense. It will not happen.

What will likely happen, is an economic disaster for Russia. The economy of Russia was not doing well, even before this move. That 50 Billion dollars Russia spent on bolstering its international image with the Olympics has all now been wasted, the Russian stock-market and currency are in free-fall, investors are scared off in droves, and that’s before any sanctions have been imposed or any real costs of military adventurism have been paid.

Naturally, it will also be a disaster for Ukraine, and to a lesser extent, to everyone else. But there is no reasonable way Russia can afford much in the way of military adventures.

Mace can’t say for a fact that Senator Kerry ever ‘approved the invasion of another country in the 21st century on trumped up charges’ because it is not a fact and never was.

If you regard ‘thinking’ to be making statements that cannot be backed up with facts or supportable documentation in a debate where facts must be held in high regard then your definition of thinking is not quite as lofty as mine. So be it.

I wonder what that little weasel Mc Cain is whispering in the ears of the fascists in Kiev …

Naval commander-in-chief Rear Admiral Denis Berezovsky appeared on television to announce he was defecting to the Russian-supported Crimean side.

Will more join him after Russia’s surrender or be stormed ultimatum?

The real sad thing is that all these soldiers and sailors were minding their own business a few weeks ago till the fascists started in Kiev now they are the ones who are going to be on the front line dying while the opposition and their Western supporters and activists watch it on TV …

Well, as I was saying before, it always depends on what they “do” with what they bought.

In the 50’s a Chinese infantryman with a mortar was cheap and effective. These days, they’re just as inexpensive, but less effective on most days. The question is, will you be fighting that cheap weapon on a day/place where it’s effective enough?

The invasions of Iraq played to all of the U.S. forces’ strengths. It was largely open terrain, good weather, there were large conventional forces to fight, the opposing force’s morale wasn’t great, and they were fighting using older technology. I don’t think anyone realistically thought there was a question about the outcome.

Afghanistan was a different story for both the U.S.S.R and the U.S… Mountains, lots of irregular forces, taking sides in a civil war with other countries involved on the other side. Neither country made a lot of headway, in the end.

The Ukraine seems to have qualities of both if it becomes a shooting war. Everyone involved has an army, and I can’t see either side eschewing the use of irregular forces. It has mountains on the west and south, and plains in between. It’s weather is all over the place. The Black Sea is there, but neither side can safely place their navy there during a war without air superiority, as it’s possible to cover it by both side’s aircraft. There are plenty of land routes into the region for everyone.

It’s just not comparable to either of the earlier wars, in the end. It also doesn’t seem to have any easy routes to victory for anyone if shooting starts. The Russians have advanced military, but as RedFury says, there’s only one way to find out if the current generation of tech gives either side a decisive advantage. Even if it does, by the time either side gets to the opposite border, a significant portion of the population is going to see your forces as occupiers. Considering all of that: No, I’d rather that the Ukraine wasn’t the place doctrine and hardware were tested, and I hope most agree.

But, the ones who actually control that are Putin and the Ukrainian interim government, right now. If the Ukrainians get their forces under control, and if Putin decides that he can attack them without retaliation from the west, and the west decides he’s wrong about that: things may get very complicated. Strange behavior by the last head of the Ukrainian Navy makes me question they are in control of it, at least. If Putin really is intending to keep the Ukraine under his control at all costs, and decides to attack before the Ukrainian military is in order, it might keep the west out, but I would imagine his occupation would be problematic, even then. And even if he moves fast enough to nullify the immediate response, it could still possibly spread outside of the Ukraine.

Again, ugh, just ugh.

Depending on how Ukraine’s fledgling independence attempts will play out, that lease agreement may or may not be worth the paper it’s written on. Why would Putin wait for it to become a bigger problem than it is now?

Crimea seems to be the only region that Russia is showing interest in. A lot depends on what the Ukrainian interrim gov’t does going forward but I don’t see any evidence of Russia’s interest expanding beyond Crimea.

Sure. Putin can hold a grudge. How does this deminish Russia’s “legitimate interest” in Ukraine? The US is still holding a grudge agains Cuba. Putin is not the only petulant child on the world political scene. I find it hard to judge him without a little perspective.

Agreed.

I can’t imagine this not being part of Putin’s calculus. The man is not stupid. I have a feeling he is prepared to accept the price that will be exacted in the short term. In the long term, it will not be that bad.

It’s a calculated risk and like you said, the west will not go to war over Ukraine.

Kharkiv is the region to watch next

It was never on the cards that an independent Ukraine would tweak the bear by booting out the Russians. Why on Earth would they do that? Militarily, they are weak, and if Russia has ecomomic problems, Ukraine’s an economic basket case on life support.

We will see about that. It certainly is part of the rhetoric pouring out of Moscow.

Because none of their “legitimate interests” were in any way threatened? Unless one concludes that one of Russia’s “legitimate interests” is having an empire or being surrounded by puppet states.

I must say I’m not enamoured of the meme, constantly repeated ad nauseum in this thread and elsewhere, that Russia’s acts are somehow “balanced” or “given perspective” by various bad acts of the USA (who is only very tangentally involved so far). It is totally possible to view the US’s historic preoccupation with Cuba as wrong, and Russia’s current actions as wrong as well.

Wars have a habit of spiralling out of control. I am not willing to bank anything on Putin being “not stupid”.

I sincerely hope that this is all political theatre intended to put pressure on the new Ukrainian government, but very much fear that it will not end as that.

I think he has miscalculated. It would appear he assumed that the reaction in the West would be nothing more than its reaction over Georgia. But the situation here is very different.

The Fact Checker

– many more fucking FACTS @source.

Though I am sure this will go in one eye and out the other, can we please stop this imbecilic highjack? We all get you are a fanatic of Obama and his Administration, but Jebus Fuckin’ Christ! They are fuckin’ human and prone to make mistakes like anyone else! And in Kerry’s case, a hypocritical flip-flopper to boot.

So, coming full circle, yes, he came off as a freaking moron in his presser on Sunday. Thus everyone who’s called him on it – both here and in the media (timid & subservient as the US MSM is, there are still a few reporters who recall what "integrity means) – is exactly right.

Kerry tells Putin: You can’t invade another country ‘on a completely trumped up pretext’

And you are wrong as can be. End of.

</end of asinine hijack…courtesy of NFbB, yet again>

Comparing Iraq to Russia is like comparing Steve Urkel to Mike Tyson. Russia has a real armed forces, and they have a huge logistical advantae if you’re planning on fighting them in Crimea.

Is Russia’s armed forces as good as NATO’s? No, but NATO has no serious force ready to invade Crimea, and Russia’s more than good enough to make such a process incredibly bloody, and that’s even assuming it didn’t go nuclear.

Well, no.

Russia was rather comprehensively squashed in the First World War in their own borders. In the Second World War they seemed to do pretty well fighting outside their own borders. Russia has a mixed history of success and failure on all fronts, as most old countries with long military histories do.

Kerry’s statement on CBS Face that nation yesterday regarding the crisis in Ukraine **is in no way made **ironic or hypocritical because Kerry has ever approved the USA to invade another country on completely trumped-up pretext.

no u.

The current crisis in Ukraine has caused many to criticize a Statement Made by the Secretary of State based upon a false claim.

Kerry stated,

Kerry’s statement on CBS Face that nation yesterday regarding the crisis in Ukraine **is in no way made **ironic or hypocritical because some falsly believe that that Kerry has approved the USA to invade another country on completely trumped-up pretext.

I repeat and **no fact check **has been presented **to refute the fact **that Secretary of State John Kerry **has never in his life **approved the US Military to INVADE another country on “COMPLETELY TRUMPED up CHARGES.”

It was just reported on local news that Russian official are stating that there is no ultimatum.

Cite?

Here you go, pal.

This, and many more like it, from actual real-live Ukrainians of ethnic Russian background.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1099314

Fact is that there are tensions between ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainains in Ukraine, but there is little genuine appetite for succession: gangs of pro-Russia “protesters” in Eastern cities are hardly “spontaneous” (they come armed with giant Russian flags and posters of Putin, so it is hard to believe Russia is even trying to make them look ‘spontaneous’). Russia is deliberately exaggerating those tensions in order to claim a need to “protect” a minority that doesn’t need its protection.

It isn’t even like the Sudetenland - in that case, there was in fact a genuine groundswell of support by ethnic Germans for annexation. Here, it’s more like a faked version, a Potemkin-Sudetenland.

Driving Russia out of some territory would be easier than invading Russia that is true.

But if we were intent on driving Russians out of Crimea when 6 of 10 there want to join the Russian Federation in that context it would be nearly as difficult as taking Moscow and St Petersburg. Russians and Crimeans would dig in.

One the other hand we could destroy the Russian Navy base…But it would be abandoned. But if it got to that point the war would certainly escalate beyond Ukrain’e borders… and the Chinese come in on Russia’s side… the Iranians can do some damage from a rear guard and terrorist… action… Who else…

I don’t think it would be a good idea to take Russians on in any location for conventional war…

Cite for this figure?