Exactly, the Defence Secretary summed it up well here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...etary-in-the-house-of-commons-17-january-2022
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Exactly, the Defence Secretary summed it up well here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...etary-in-the-house-of-commons-17-january-2022
Middle East yeah I'm with you but Europe we need to keep stability and make sure all players stick to the rules.
Last edited:
I've got a very bad feeling about us supporting the Ukrainian government. As far as I can tell they are a bunch of neo-nazis, they never came to terms with their nazi past like Germany did and remain an active political force.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend doesn't always hold!
The enemy of my enemy is my friend doesn't always hold!
Can't dispute they have a problem with the far right but you know, Russia isn't far behind with its blatant racism and homophobia etc.
Also Russia hasn't got to grips with the atrocities it commited under the USSR banner in Russia/Poland etc etc, in fact has Putin made it a criminal act to criticise the past actions of the state during the commie times?
Any way, I never realised Ukraine was part of the Nazi war machine as it was part of the USSR at that point... Got a link?
Do you have anything to back this up? I'm not outright disputing your claims. However, everything (albeit limited) I've read suggests the current Government is centrist with aims to focus on Ukrainians and route out corruption. I'm no expert on the region or its politics but I really dont get the same vibe from them that you are claiming.
The SS used the Ukrainian "Galicia" Division for atrocities even they weren't up for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)
Many of the Ukraine resistance to the Russians post WW2 were Nazis, now regarded as heros by nationalists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_of_Ukrainian_Nationalists
Not Ukraine, but Silvia Foti's "The Nazi's Granddaughter." provides a detailed account of Nazi atrocities beyond Germany:
https://silviafoti.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)
Many of the Ukraine resistance to the Russians post WW2 were Nazis, now regarded as heros by nationalists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_of_Ukrainian_Nationalists
Not Ukraine, but Silvia Foti's "The Nazi's Granddaughter." provides a detailed account of Nazi atrocities beyond Germany:
https://silviafoti.com/
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,657
Do you have anything to back this up? I'm not outright disputing your claims. However, everything (albeit limited) I've read suggests the current Government is centrist with aims to focus on Ukrainians and route out corruption. I'm no expert on the region or its politics but I really dont get the same vibe from them that you are claiming.
They hate Russians though, especially the Ukrainians who prefer to identify as Russian in the East it's Russia excuse for invading under the guise of protecting Russian citizens because apparently they were being attacked when the Western approved government was put into power (not the current comedian who's in charge) and they decided to oppose the puppet
Most of the hatred stems back to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
There were a lot of foreign SS divisions who did the crap Hitler wanted, not exclusive to Ukraine, still didn't answer the point on Russian stance on gay rights and non white people etc etc that they delight in saying is ruining the west.
Or the crimes committed by the USSR and the attempt to show them as good times and nothing bad happened.
But yeah Ukraine has racism....
Jesus... I'm getting a bit tired of explaining this as nobody seems to be reading just skimming and replying to what they think the point of the post was but I'll give it another go. The original poster asserted as a fact that the missile system that shot down the airliner was one of the ones Russia supplied the rebels (and not one of their own identical systems). I merely pointed out that while we know for a fact that Russia sent Buk units to the east to support the rebels own Buk units (a roughly 2:1 ratio by Bellingcat claims), and helped them spirit a number out of the country after the shootdown. We have no way of knowing if the shootdown itself was caused by a Russian supplied one or one of the rebels own. While this has been argued it has never been proven (or disproven) and so to assert it as a solid fact as a basis of an argument is wrong.
To be clear I do agree with the posters main point that Putin is laughable to rage about NATO missiles in Ukraine after deliberately sending his own there, some of which may or may not (more than likely may) have shot down multiple aircraft.
Maybe they're just being more pragmatic, they also refused to help us invade Iraq and history proved them right on that.
One big problem is that the forces that would be defending are the same ones that have been failing to win a civil war since 2014, against a bunch of rebels being armed under the table by Russia. Admittedly most of the rebels are ex Ukrainian military themselves and have the military hardware they claimed when the eastern regions fell plus everything Russia has sent them since. But they are still vastly outnumbered/outgunned. If the Ukrainian forces couldn't advance when at a big military advantage I don't see how they can hold when at a huge military disadvantage.
One of the advantages Russia would have invading Ukraine as opposed to invading a random country is that while the countries eastern regions are mostly pro-Russian and the western regions mostly anti-Russian it's not completely one or the other, there are large minorities in both sides. This is the reason Ukrainian SSR never rebelled against communist rule like some eastern block countries did. It's also the reason that in WW2 the Nazis invasion was celebrated in the west and later the Soviet liberation was celebrated mostly in the east.
Sure if Russia invaded/conquered there would be a resistance, but it wouldn't be as big as in say Afghanistan because once you factor out the Ukrainians in favour of Russian rule and the ones who don't care if Kiev or Moscow is running the show the % of civilians who are both opposed to Russian rule and willing to fight against it would be minimal.
It is quite worrying that at a time that the USA is pulling down confederate statues and we're questioning/voting on ours, that Ukraine's new government have been pulling down statues/memorials of Soviet war criminals and replacing them with statues/memorials of Nazi war criminals lol.
But I think supporting Ukraine is the right call, as if we don't then it will be easier to not support Estonia, Poland, etc down the line.
Most of that time has been spent in a stalemate holding pattern while Ukraine has rebuilt and reconfigured its forces in the new reality including losing a not insignificant amount of experienced personnel and equipment to the rebels - especially since some costly early errors such as the Battle of Ilovaisk depleted a lot of Ukraine's active forces. The situation is quite different to the early days post 2014.
Since 2015 they've been upgrading in many areas especially anti-tank capabilities and in the last 2-3 years have been bringing into active service long range artillery systems, since 2017 the number of heavy tanks available for service has more than doubled.
Likewise since 2014 the number of personnel has increased significantly - but it takes time to train those forces up - you can't just chuck another 100K people into an army and it immediately be an effective fighting force.
Sure Russia dwarfs Ukraine on paper but this isn't total war - Russia will not be committing its central forces, it might pare down its forces on other borders or defending other assets, etc. or pull more experienced units from other areas, replacing them with reservists but it will still be looking to a lot of other interests and can't risk weakening its overall defensive posture to enable an assault on Ukraine. The bulk of the forces for an invasion of Ukraine would be meat grinder reserve/conscript backed by heavier hitting units and while they have significantly more resources and ability to replace losses behind them than Ukrainian forces would have, enabling them to win out a longer conflict, they still need significant numbers for an invasion against a dug in opposition.
A lot ultimately would come down to how well prepared and actual performance in the face of combat - it is possible it would be a total push over in reality with shattered communications, fragmented organisation and not enough willing to fight, etc. or Ukraine could put up a fight and require serious commitment to beat.
EDIT: A significant wildcard will be air superiority - Russia on paper would walk over Ukraine in this respect significantly shifting the balance of ground war in their favour - but it is a tricky environment for either to work in given the implications of air defences on either side and considerations with surrounding countries, etc. and how well Ukraine may or may not be able to defend and operate their anti-air network in reality.
Last edited:
I'm no apologist for Russia - I just don't like that we're supporting the Ukrainian regime. There isn't a 'good guy' in the fight.
Ukraine has a significant far right/nazi problem but I'm not sure it is fair to brand the whole country because of it. There aren't really good guys in this conflict (you only have to look at the likes of the Azov battalion) but there is far more to it than just that and ultimately if Ukraine was involved more with the West in theory that is a situation which would only improve over time - though looking at the likes of Hungary there are limits to that.
Seems like the papers are convinced Russia is going in at any minute with the prime target being Kiev. I can’t believe Russia would do that with NATO there ready to defend. It’s going to turn into another Korean War with both sides pushing up and down (left and right) the country until there is a truce.
Does seem a bit strange how the media and even governments reaction is as if Russia is about to invade in days - NATO has been conducting significant ISR, etc. along the border along with statements and sending equipment and training forces, etc. as if it is inevitable and imminent - but the reality from OSINT, etc. doesn't really indicate that level of build up, so far with a lot of could be, maybe in the future kind of stuff i.e. what might be stationed in Belarus.
The line from the Whitehouse is that Russia could invade at any moment now
There is, only one country has been invaded without provocation, it's not grey, it's black and white.
Just because they have a few far right idiots does not mean they are just as bad as a country that has invaded them and destroyed peoples lives.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,279
Hopefully we arm Ukraine to the teeth to cause maximum pain. Such a shame they gave up their nukes.
You sure sound like an apologist. I don’t think the people of Ukraine deserve this or have done anything to deserve this.
You sure sound like an apologist. I don’t think the people of Ukraine deserve this or have done anything to deserve this.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Goddammit I'm due to fly to kiev tomorrow
This comment could read differently depending on direction of travel...
^^ That, unfortunately, is the reality at the moment.
Russia and China's agreement is more about sticking together to prevent retaliation when they do attempt to expand their borders. Planning the expansions at the same time creates a large surface area for the allied to push back on and weakens the standard "over power" strategy that the US typically employs.
However the same principle is true in reverse. If Russia invades and gets bogged down, then china has to support and that starts distracting and draining resources. However china's army is large, the grade of soldiers depends on the units and there are less highly skilled units which china would keep for their own plans on Taiwan. A long war with Russia could hurt China's long term financials as countries, impacted by the lack of Chinese products due to sanctions, would seek their own manufacturing capabilities. China historically see recruitment into warring armies as a natural way to reduce the population growth.. considering they have issues with underpopulation this option is an own goal.
This shapes the length of wars - short and sweet is the order of the day - Putin's bank account is propped up by oil&gas, that is under threat from the push to reduce energy consumption and operate nuclear within the EU etc. The EU could look France to reduce the power demand and that has causes problems to Russian boarder expansion.
The Chinese are in a stronger position but the expansion would have a return on investment - Taiwan and it's semiconductor businesses produce revenue that could pay back for a war. That is why a war for Taiwan would be savage, with a large amount of war Renminbi and Dollars. The US gorilla tactic would be pull the dependency on Taiwan back into the US. China's war would simply result in a cut of semiconductors and sections, the longer the war continues the longer the product goods supply lines for export remain at a risk. So the US only has to keep the production of Taiwan closed towards China. This presents issues for Taiwan and for the world should the Chinese annex the country - naturally a large source of semiconductor fab, the world is then starved of semiconductors and thus competition to Chinese products becomes a lot harder.
The longer the US can keep the Chinese away from war and Taiwan as it is now, the longer the time that countries and companies have to de-risk semiconductor production and limit the threat to their own electronics product exports. If you think Brexit has made exports a pain.. wait till you find you have no semiconductors or the price increases start bankrupting your exporting companies.
The economies are tied, thus sticking you head in the sand and saying don't worry about it has dire effects in the UK's ability to export and manufacture.
Brexit shot the UK manufacturing industry right at the wrong time - Intel et al were looking for fabrication investment outside of Taiwan for this reason. So now the UK has to cope with the cost of import for components that only increases the cost of exported products compared to other countries.
Another own goal for Brexit and short sightedness.
- Status