Past and present history would seem to suggest Russia is easily offended. Looking back with 20/20 hindsight, moving against them would have been better is 2014, or 2008 in Georgia.
Scuttlebutt, of course…
Top Russian security officials think the war in Ukraine is “lost,” suggesting that Vladimir Putin’s regime might be coming to an end, according to an expert on Russia-related security threats…
There are those in Putin’s inner circle who may pressure him to use nuclear or chemical weapons, [Bellingcat’s lead Russia investigator Christo] Grozev continued, but others will say “enough is enough.” These people would say “it is better not to waste another 10,000 lives of our soldiers and officers,” Grozev said, per Metro.
Russia is getting more desperate. I assume barrel bombs will primarily target civilians. People that won’t have weapons to shoot down the helicopters.
I hope the rumors of Putin’s removal come true. I think his successor will understand the need to restore limited relations with the West. I doubt Western businesses like McDonalds and Starbucks will ever come back and reinvest in Russia. It depends on the direction of a new government in Russia. I doubt the next leader will relinquish the power Putin seized.
In some situations, probably so. Your hypothetical is very light on specifics, however. What kind of unit? Where are they? Why are they there? Are they kicking ass or are they about to be annihilated?
If the situation was dire enough (say, about like it is in Ukraine) Americans wouldn’t have too much problem with neo-Nazis, Hare Krishnas or even Scientologists fighting next to them to repel invaders.*
Thing is, we pampered Americans can’t even imagine such a scenario (since We’re Number ONE!). So we can’t comprehend a situation where having neo-Nazis amongst us isn’t even close to our biggest problem.
You know that film, The Defiant Ones? Kinda like that.
*Yeah, I know, that’s what many of us thought would be the reaction to COVID. Being invaded by people would be very different.
A few days old, but a good assessment of how the next few weeks or months might go:
Ukraine hasn’t said very much about their military casualties. It’s hard to predict if they’re actually able to mount a large counterattack.
I’m concerned we’ll see another stalemate with low intensity fighting on Donbas.
Yesterdays assessment indicates slow but determined Russian advances.
My sense would be that the US government and Europe agreed with my assessment from near the beginning of the war. If Russia loses too fast then they’re liable to lash out in anger and wreak havoc in the name of saving face, throwing nukes and chemical bombs at every city in Ukraine, before disappearing into self-imposed exile from the world. To avoid that, you sort of just have to wear them down, until they’re tired of trying to fight it anymore, accept that this whole thing was dumb, and start negotiating to get themselves out of the morass. (I still recommend that Ukraine offer to give the contested territories a free vote, overseen by neutral parties.)
We’re supplying Ukraine with just enough material to be able to fight a slow and frustrating war of attrition. That’s likely to continue, and it will suck for them…but it’s hopefully worth avoiding the alternate of greater Russian escalation and an expanding war front.
Look, we’re on iteration 5,487 of “Things That Would Cause Russia to End the World.”
Russia said that if NATO supplied arms to Ukraine, it would mean nuclear war, and it hasn’t, same for who knows how many other threats that turned out to be totally empty.
At a certain point, we have to stop treating nuclear armed aggressors with the sort of groveling deference and submission some want, or else we’re rewarding nuclear proliferation and blackmail. The Neville Chamberlain lesson doesn’t stop being relevant in today’s world just because nukes exist.
Listening to some people, you’d think that if Russia demanded that Biden hand over $100 billion in gold bars tomorrow morning “or else the nukes fly,” America would be obligated to comply. After all, The End of the World Would be a Bad Thing.
But isn’t that a contradiction in terms? We are escalating this by an ever increasing amount of better arms.
Boris Bondarev, 41, confirmed his resignation in a letter delivered Monday morning after a diplomatic official passed on his English-language statement to The Associated Press.
“For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on Feb. 24 of this year,” he wrote, alluding to the date of Russia’s invasion.
Technically, yes, but that’s because it’s the only kind we have to give. We’re balancing it by giving them not very much.
So, sure, we could just hand them some B2s, some F-15s, a nuclear ICBM or two, some sharks with lasers, and call it a day but we’re keeping it at the most high-tech equipment available in the whole world that’s small and not too dangerous, and only just enough to let them just barely win.
That’s a pretty risky step, considering that after resigning from the foreign service you pretty much have to move back home. Home to a country infamous for being inhospitable to critics.
I wish him well.
I was thinking the same thing but he’s a career diplomat and probably been in Geneva, along with any family he has, for years. The article says when asked if he was going to apply for asylum he replied he hadn’t thought that far ahead. It has to be weighing heavily on his mind now.
And so far as sophisticated weapons are concerned, besides AA to make the Russian air force think twice, I think the mainstay is going to be artillery shells from this point on.
Concerning sending advanced western weaponry to Ukraine, I had heard the official explanation thus far as being we are providing Ukrainians with the weapons they need for the fight they face right now, and that their troops can learn to use relatively quickly, not requiring multiple months or years of training or re-training to use effectively.
So sending over squadrons of F-15s or regiments of M-1 tanks (as well as all the logistics required) would potentially represent a lot more combat capability, we are to understand these weapons platforms could not be put to effective use by Ukraine for quite a long time.
I wouldn’t be surprised however if some of the more experienced trainers are currently in NATO countries being trained on some of that advanced equipment should a longer-term situation require it.
Since Russia started out with much initiative, and progress has been slow and unsustained, if there is an equilibrium this is a partial “advantage” for Ukraine (although this may not be the right word under the circumstances).
the US is sending in troops to defend their embassy. Something fun to put in Putin’s crack pipe.
Do you have a source for “is sending” ? What I see from Ukraine latest updates: Kyiv says invasion in most active phase | Russia-Ukraine war News | Al Jazeera is:
“Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley… Milley’s comments left open the possibility troops could return for embassy security or another non-combat role.”
That seems a lot more like far-fetched speculation than a plan.
I was listening to one of the broadcast news shows. I did google it and got this:
From the Hill: Pentagon working on plans to send troops to protect US Embassy in Kyiv
- Plans to send U.S. forces back into Ukraine to guard the recently reopened American Embassy in Kyiv are “underway at a relatively low level,” Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Monday.
Maybe not as imminent as “is sending” but it was a public statement.
If it happens, it will represent a very strong statement.