Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Germany is one that seems to fear Russia the most. Perhaps they are thinking about what if this war escalates beyond Ukraine.
 
Germany is one that seems to fear Russia the most. Perhaps they are thinking about what if this war escalates beyond Ukraine.

There certainly remains a tangible system of belief in the post-war German establishment and to some degree the public as well about the complication of implying Germany should take part in anything that could be perceived as warmongering. There's also the risk that if Germany started to reverse that image of self-loathing that the Kremlin will have been justified in all the domestically consumed rhetoric about falsely construing past events as repeating, this along with a general attempt to rewrite history is something that Putin has increasingly turned to.

I totally get the contrition in Berlin when it comes to this, but I think time may be up on the self-loathing if it is now a risk to Europe's safety.

Obviously the real reason the German government is concerned is balancing public opinion when the gas gets shut off against the rationale of defending a non-NATO country, that's a tough calculation that really shouldn't have occurred had Europe (France mostly not included) not wasted decades on ridiculous anti-nuclear nimbyism, but it happened so how to deal with it now?
 
Last edited:
Germany, as a key economy of the EU feels it has some responsibility give the large Russian gas liability the states of the EU have. France is self sufficient in that regard with nuclear power.
Germany sees it as the stepping stone after Poland, and it’s also moved on since the east Germany reunification. I don’t think Germany itself fears russia unless NATO countries fail to support their brethren.

I thin Biden is less concerned with Europe invasion than China invasion given the impact to the US. The US is still operating in full on America first mode from Trump. I don’t thin the US has the stomach for more war in Europe, so the NATO EU plus France needs to step up. However I have the ugly feeling that nothing will be done for the Ukraine.
 
Why doesn't the US/UK/France just accidently their amphibious assault ships on route to the Bosphorus? If they fire on our ships then they'll have shown their hand too soon.
 
Absolutely they would. There is no desire in Poland to look east.

Poland has always looked west theres a reason they're catholic rather than orthodox and use the latin alphabet instead of cyrillic

My Brother-in-Law is currently in the far North of Finland for a week or so with work and has said that there are a lot of fast jets buzzing around the skies. My guess would be that they'll be monitoring what Russia is doing in, and around, Murmansk.

Sweden is building up troops in Gotland on their eastern borders as well
 
I thin Biden is less concerned with Europe invasion than China invasion given the impact to the US. The US is still operating in full on America first mode from Trump. I don’t thin the US has the stomach for more war in Europe, so the NATO EU plus France needs to step up. However I have the ugly feeling that nothing will be done for the Ukraine.

Hence unfortunately Biden's comments which open the door for a "limited" conflict possibly in the hope of it acting like a pressure relief valve for the benefit of the US. I hope I'm reading that wrong as it would be naive and foolish.
 
I mean, if you're going to twist/omit facts then yes it would look 110% one sided >.>

To answer your points though:

No Russia didn't invade and take Crimea, their troops were already there (as part of an agreement with Ukraine) when the 2014 coup in Ukraine took place and the Crimean government took the opportunity to secede from Ukraine and hold a public vote on re-joining Russia (which passed, and Russia accepted). Now valid arguments can be made on both sides about whether Crimea should have done it, and whether Russia should have agreed to their request but it's a bit unfair to blame it on Russia when it was caused as a direct result of the Ukrainian coup, and Russia were by no means the cause of that. (NB: My personal thought on it are that Crimea should have waited after seceding before holding a vote on reunification, as the Russian presence would have stopped Ukraine from re-annexing the region so they had time to invite independent/UN/etc observers in to validate the result was genuine).

No Russia didn't invade and take the Donbass region, if they had done they would either have held or still hold the Donbass region, it wouldn't be mostly held by Ukrainian loyalists with Russian backed/armed/supplied rebels holding small territory in the far east. It should be noted that the rebel self proclaimed "republics" have repeatedly asked to join Russia and been repeatedly told no (NB: My personal thought on that last note is that Russia's refusals probably have less to do with caring about right/wrong and more due to such actions not having the international law precedent that Crimea's secession/reunification did, as self determination is easier to proclaim when you have an actual government and a history as a sovereign region/republic).

Firstly the troops/exercise weren't "bang on the border" (to put it in non-sensationalist perspective the British army hold training exercises in Britain that are closer to France that the exercise in question was to Ukraine). Secondly the reason they held the exercise in that part of Russia is because they have been doing so for decades, Ukraine even used to send forces to take part. It's never been a problem until the media started hyping it as one (which is what caused politicians to snowball this entire farcical standoff).

Your completely correct on your last point however and Russia are being flat out retarded if they think NATO will agree to pulling back troops (maybe they know this and are making crazy demands so they can fall back to their real demands and look like they gave ground?). Threatening Finland/Sweden not to join NATO is another dumb move, however the threat was basically "if you make yourselves a threat to us we will treat you as such" which is kind of understandable, but if they want to deter them from joining NATO they are going about it totally the wrong way. (NB: The funny thing is that even if NATO pulled all troops out of Poland and kicked Poland out of NATO it wouldn't matter because it would still be an EU state and if Russia invaded it would instantly be at war with the EU, most of which are in NATO xD).


They had a vote after they were invaded.

Invaded on the 20th February 2014.
Voted on the 16th March 2014.



With 99 % I believe in favour of Russia, suprise suprise and not sanctioned by the Ukrainian government.

When you hold a massive exercise, conduct espionage etc cause cyberwarfare, tell that country it should and will be part of Russia ,invade parts of said country then I'm not sure why you think the west would not be worried..

Bit like Hitler invading everywhere, holding a massive exercise on your border then telling you not to worry.

Again it's 110% Putin's doing and fault.
 
Last edited:
I don't get the way the US is reacting - either Putin has pulled their pants down for a laugh and they don't know it yet, or they know something we don't.

How do you mean? Do you think that the US have not reacted correctly?

I think they're seeing this as the greatest real threat from a near-peer adversary that they've ever had. They are cognisant that they are required to maintain stability in Europe, just look at the sheer bases, manning and machinery in EUCOM. Added to that is China playing silly buggers in the South China Sea, with huge build up. Throw in the Covid spice, a weak president and all the socio-economic issues the US is perpetually tussling with/distracted by right now and you've got a lovely **** stew to quaff down.

Interesting to see how this all unfolds.
 
Last edited:
How do you mean? Do you think that the US have not reacted correctly?

I think they're seeing this as the greatest real threat from a near-peer adversary that they've ever had. They are cognisant that they are required to maintain stability in Europe, just look at the sheer bases, manning and machinery in EUCOM. Added to that is China playing silly buggers in the South China Sea, with huge build up. Throw in the Covid spice, a weak president and all the socio-economic issues the US is perpetually tussling with/distracted by right now and you've got a lovely **** stew to quaff down.

Interesting to see how this all unfolds.

The Americans are acting like it is a done deal, the Russian hordes lined up 2 feet from the border, guns drawn, waiting for the whistle to blow.

From what is available in the public domain though that isn't really the picture - the vast majority of military movements are normal levels of traffic for the situation - an unstable border. Yes the Russians have been building up higher levels of equipment than normal levels, they've seemingly pulled hardware out of mothballed stock which isn't exactly defensive of nature including the likes of Tyulpans, been upgrading infrastructure and at a higher level of mobilisation than normal but not excessively so. It is certainly a situation to watch out for but the US is acting like things are pretty much set in stone now.
 
How do you mean? Do you think that the US have not reacted correctly?

I think they're seeing this as the greatest real threat from a near-peer adversary that they've ever had. They are cognisant that they are required to maintain stability in Europe, just look at the sheer bases, manning and machinery in EUCOM. Added to that is China playing silly buggers in the South China Sea, with huge build up. Throw in the Covid spice, a weak president and all the socio-economic issues the US is perpetually tussling with/distracted by right now and you've got a lovely **** stew to quaff down.

Interesting to see how this all unfolds.
Near peer adversary would be pushing it a bit. The US spends more than 10x and the US forces alone are greater in number than Russia never mind it’s NATO that will fight this. Whilst the threat should never be underestimated this will be more than likely Russia’s defeat.
 
Near peer adversary would be pushing it a bit. The US spends more than 10x and the US forces alone are greater in number than Russia never mind it’s NATO that will fight this. Whilst the threat should never be underestimated this will be more than likely Russia’s defeat.

In terms of peer adversary there is a serious fly in the ointment for Russia/China in that a lot of their highest end tech still relies on the Western semiconductor industries to function at full performance. And that isn't something you can just capture as a resource like oil or engine production, etc. Without it the hardware operates more like the export spec versions.

It is a serious problem in a conflict versus the West as they won't be able to replenish much of their higher end hardware in a war of attrition. One of the reasons China has its eyes on Taiwan as destroying or halting the operations of the facilities there would go a long way towards evening the playing field - and one of the reasons the US has been pushing for investment of semiconductor production in the US and Germany (and to a lesser extent elsewhere).
 
Near peer adversary would be pushing it a bit. The US spends more than 10x and the US forces alone are greater in number than Russia never mind it’s NATO that will fight this. Whilst the threat should never be underestimated this will be more than likely Russia’s defeat.

Not intending on heading into a protracted discussion about the US vs Russia in a dog fight. Military spending is a poor indicator on a nations ability to conduct war. In the simplest of terms, an outright full on confrontation between the two would be devastating for both sides. Further to that, yes they have a huge defence budget, but remind yourself that is for the most high tech equipment and for essentially policing the whole globe.
 
Military spending is a poor indicator on a nations ability to conduct war.

Indeed - the US spending tends to be inefficient and bloated while Russia has spent the last few years tightening up their spending making a comparison much more difficult.
 
The Americans are acting like it is a done deal, the Russian hordes lined up 2 feet from the border, guns drawn, waiting for the whistle to blow.

From what is available in the public domain though that isn't really the picture - the vast majority of military movements are normal levels of traffic for the situation - an unstable border. Yes the Russians have been building up higher levels of equipment than normal levels, they've seemingly pulled hardware out of mothballed stock which isn't exactly defensive of nature including the likes of Tyulpans, been upgrading infrastructure and at a higher level of mobilisation than normal but not excessively so. It is certainly a situation to watch out for but the US is acting like things are pretty much set in stone now.
It's the standard paranoid US approach.

Some of the rhetoric I heard at a big exercise last year was that the situation with China is now at a "phase 1.5" out of 6, that's well beyond OPORD activation and into seizing initiative. That was alarming to hear, it's as if some staff believe they are already at war with them.

The thing is, they'll always be paranoid and one day they'll be proven correct.
 
Not intending on heading into a protracted discussion about the US vs Russia in a dog fight. Military spending is a poor indicator on a nations ability to conduct war. In the simplest of terms, an outright full on confrontation between the two would be devastating for both sides. Further to that, yes they have a huge defence budget, but remind yourself that is for the most high tech equipment and for essentially policing the whole globe.
It will come down to how many Russia want to give to take Ukraine. The killing efficiency of the US and NATO forces will be far greater.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom