-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Massive Russian military buildup near Ukraine
- Thread starter Forerunner
- Start date
- Status
The U.S. has been openly providing money and arms to Ukraine for several years now. This isn't a covert ops proxy war, it's at the behest of Ukraine.
All this talk of "partial" invasion or western/eastern Ukraine up really made me think about the movie Munich: the Edge of War I just watched last night (on Netflix). I find some parallels between the content of the movie and all this situation is with Ukraine
The basic premise is that Nazi Germany was threatening and moving troops near Czechoslovakia. It was the prelude to the official start of WW2 so I guess there were still questions by Europeans on the ambition of Hitler and the Nazi. A couple of major European powers (excluding Czechoslovakia however 🤔) got together talk about it with Hitler. In the end, the parties decided to conceed parts of Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany to avoid that imminent war. That peace lasted only about a year though till Germany invaded Poland. The movie's espionage part though, was that there were folks from German government trying to bring conclusive proofs to Western European powers that Hitler wouldn't stop here. He would want to continue to expand and do terrible things along the way. I kind of find some parallels here where we have this credible threat of Russia invading Ukraine. We got a couple of western powers potentially wondering what is the end game and whether Putin will stop at Ukraine. There are talks between the US and Russia but I don't think I heard Ukraine is in the meetings as well? If western powers concede eastern Ukraine to Russia, what will that imply? Surely the worries are about the safety of other ex-soviet countries as well in the midst of all this.
The basic premise is that Nazi Germany was threatening and moving troops near Czechoslovakia. It was the prelude to the official start of WW2 so I guess there were still questions by Europeans on the ambition of Hitler and the Nazi. A couple of major European powers (excluding Czechoslovakia however 🤔) got together talk about it with Hitler. In the end, the parties decided to conceed parts of Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany to avoid that imminent war. That peace lasted only about a year though till Germany invaded Poland. The movie's espionage part though, was that there were folks from German government trying to bring conclusive proofs to Western European powers that Hitler wouldn't stop here. He would want to continue to expand and do terrible things along the way. I kind of find some parallels here where we have this credible threat of Russia invading Ukraine. We got a couple of western powers potentially wondering what is the end game and whether Putin will stop at Ukraine. There are talks between the US and Russia but I don't think I heard Ukraine is in the meetings as well? If western powers concede eastern Ukraine to Russia, what will that imply? Surely the worries are about the safety of other ex-soviet countries as well in the midst of all this.
It's not really against the West though, I don't buy that. Putin can give any justification he wants but I'd bet if NATO had disbanded 10 years ago he'd still be doing this shit.
Is there any doubt that if the Baltic states were not in NATO, that they would not be under Russia's Thumb? Really the only thing saving them is NATO.
Pressure from the West means nothing if they have nothing to offer in return, giving huge concessions to Putin now will simply be the start of a spiral into Russian aggression across Eastern Europe. Ukraine can't even offer what Putin wants anyway, he wants to force Russian control in the region and the only way he's getting that is through a war, Ukraine isn't going to just surrender large parts of their country and will rightfully fight to defend themselves.
Unfortunately for them if things do get worse they're going to have to do the fighting part alone, there will be help in the background but none of the major Western powers will get involved directly, the most we'll see is huge sanctions against Russia and the continued supply of weapons.
This is a poor read of the situation, firstly because no, WW3 is not happening over this, but secondly because Russia is the sole aggressor here.
Probably so, that's why I think the "West's" hands are clean in this specific scenario. It may be our fault that there's some preemptive sabre rattling before Putin goes in but without our "bravado" Putin wouldn't need to give any justification and everything would be happening all the same.
And frankly, if all we have is bravado I think we're kinda fucked, our power only exists so long as people realistically think we'd use it, if it turns out we never would go to war with Russia or China places like Taiwan might as well just throw in the towel now.
We should sign a defensive pact with Ukraine for their current territory and say any further incursion will draw us into it. Appeasement isn't going to work.
"If we just ignore the county being annexed in a blatant war of territorial aggression, this is a conflict between just the U.S and Russia."
That's certainly one way to read the situation.
That shares the same sentiment as the previous NATO sectary general for both Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova. Otherwise you will continue to be hamstrung by Russia just creating frozen conflicts all over the place.
I dont think that anyone is saying that the world is going to end.. but it very well may be the thing to lead to two super powers going to military actions against each other.
If Russia invades, thousands WILL die. It will be a massive humanitarian crisis.
This can't be just brushed away
No matter what Russia decides to do the US and NATO will not come to blows with Russia. That is just not going to happen. If Russia was doing a large scale invasion of a NATO country then there might be a case there, but NATO/US is not going to go to war with Russia over Ukraine. At most we will continue sending them munitions and equipment maybe even some high level military personnel to help advise the Ukrainians.
If you wanna get cloak and dagger maybe the US does a few things behind the scenes to disrupt the whole process on Russia's end, but we will not see major powers come to blows over this. As shit and unfair as it sounds Ukraine is basically on its own here in terms of actual military involvement unless something unimaginable happens to force NATOs hand.
It's possible that Putin would be willing to drop some of his insane demands in exchange for something like Ukraine giving up the Donbas and changing the constitution to declare Ukraine as a neutral state with provisions against future co-operation with foreign militaries. Combine that with a US-Ukraine treaty where the US pledges to always recognize Ukraine's neutrality (US would always block any future Ukrainian bid to join NATO, but without saying that).
I think that would be the kind of huge diplomatic win that Putin might accept. It would be extremely unpopular with a lot of Ukrainians though....
Why do you say that? At some point it will, why not now? If the position is that at no point the US and NATO will ever enter a direct conflict then it may not exist.
I tend to agree direct conflict won't happen here, but Russia is at it's nadir. Over stretched, and NATO is more than it's equal if will was there - and Ukraine is a just enough cause if we actually give a shit about liberal democratic nations.
This is rhetorical, but Russia isn't an unstoppable force and has a lot of deficiencies currently that NATO could exploit to knock lose the Russian boogeyman for a generation.
And no, I don't think Russia would nuke Europe even in self preservation (as government).
Its not about whether or not NATO can beat them. Its about what it would cost to do so in both lives and economic hardship.
And that price is way too high for a situation like this.
Sure there is a point. If Russia invades a NATO country, NATO would respond with force.
I think this explains why Russia will continue getting what they want:
Everyone sure we can't intervene is basically already assuming Russia wouldn't hesitate to go to war with us to take over whatever land they want from Ukraine and don't believe we could go to war with Russia. With that mindset Russia wins every conflict of their making by default. None of us have any faith in our power, don't believe we could bow Russia through the threat of war but are bowed over by Russia with the threat of war.
Sometimes, not being willing to do something is actually the more dangerous act, I'd be willing to bet Putin'd be less likely to further encroach on Ukraine if he thought it carried a real risk or guarantee of a war with the US alone, let alone us and a few allies or two. He's more likely to go through with his invasion because he's convinced there is no threat of war with anyone else.
And by enabling him all we're doing is prolonging this eventual possible engagement. If he's not willing to go to war with us in 10 years he's not ready to go to war with us tomorrow. Likewise, if he is willing to go to war with us over Ukraine today he'd be just as likely to keep prodding us in the future until he does find our tipping point.
The only outcome where appeasing him works is if he dies right after getting what he wants and is replaced by a dove.
And even then we face repurcussions, theoretically we, the UK and Russia should be preserving Ukraine's territory already, if we aren't willing to stand by that security agreement would we really side with Taiwan or South Korea?
Not being willing to risk war with Russia now just emboldens Russia and China further and just increases the chances of them not believing we'd stand by our commitments and taking more land.
Everyone sure we can't intervene is basically already assuming Russia wouldn't hesitate to go to war with us to take over whatever land they want from Ukraine and don't believe we could go to war with Russia. With that mindset Russia wins every conflict of their making by default. None of us have any faith in our power, don't believe we could bow Russia through the threat of war but are bowed over by Russia with the threat of war.
Sometimes, not being willing to do something is actually the more dangerous act, I'd be willing to bet Putin'd be less likely to further encroach on Ukraine if he thought it carried a real risk or guarantee of a war with the US alone, let alone us and a few allies or two. He's more likely to go through with his invasion because he's convinced there is no threat of war with anyone else.
And by enabling him all we're doing is prolonging this eventual possible engagement. If he's not willing to go to war with us in 10 years he's not ready to go to war with us tomorrow. Likewise, if he is willing to go to war with us over Ukraine today he'd be just as likely to keep prodding us in the future until he does find our tipping point.
The only outcome where appeasing him works is if he dies right after getting what he wants and is replaced by a dove.
And even then we face repurcussions, theoretically we, the UK and Russia should be preserving Ukraine's territory already, if we aren't willing to stand by that security agreement would we really side with Taiwan or South Korea?
Not being willing to risk war with Russia now just emboldens Russia and China further and just increases the chances of them not believing we'd stand by our commitments and taking more land.
The US is not going to start a major war with Russia over the Ukraine. Biden has said as much. I don't see why anyone would want to rush into a war with a major nuclear power that is acutely aware of its diminishing importance in the world and its continual decline in power. If it's China attacking Taiwan then it's something worth thinking about whether the US should get involved. Russia and the Ukraine, however, it's not going to happen beyond giving them intel and sending weapons and levying sanctions against Russia.
I don't think we should start a war either. I just think we have to be willing for the conflict to degenerate into one with us being involved. It's a risk, for sure, 100%, but all our actions, and inactions for that matter, carry risk.
I'm still surprised you're convinced that even if we placed ourselves in a defensive pact with Ukraine that Russia would still attack. If you really think he's that reckless I don't see how you think we avoid war. Are we to just offer up country after country to appease him?
And once we start weighing countries, why would Ukraine rank lower than Taiwan? We were already partly responsible for ensuring Ukraine's territorial integrity what makes that agreement worth less than whatever agreement we have with Taiwan? Do you just think they're more economically relevant with electronics? If chipmakers follow through with expanding production in the West do we then sacrifice Taiwan as well? And once we've normalized ignoring security agreements what good is NATO anyways? After years of appeasement it isn't impossible that we contrive some scenario where we refuse to come to a NATO members aid by claiming that they're responsible for the war and that Article 5 doesn't apply.
I'm still surprised you're convinced that even if we placed ourselves in a defensive pact with Ukraine that Russia would still attack. If you really think he's that reckless I don't see how you think we avoid war. Are we to just offer up country after country to appease him?
And once we start weighing countries, why would Ukraine rank lower than Taiwan? We were already partly responsible for ensuring Ukraine's territorial integrity what makes that agreement worth less than whatever agreement we have with Taiwan? Do you just think they're more economically relevant with electronics? If chipmakers follow through with expanding production in the West do we then sacrifice Taiwan as well? And once we've normalized ignoring security agreements what good is NATO anyways? After years of appeasement it isn't impossible that we contrive some scenario where we refuse to come to a NATO members aid by claiming that they're responsible for the war and that Article 5 doesn't apply.
Hactivists say they hacked Belarus rail system to stop Russian military buildup
Hactivists say they hacked Belarus rail system to stop Russian military buildup
If confirmed, the attack would be one of the first times ransomware has been used this way.
arstechnica.com
I think that China is likely a more rational actor than Russia at the moment, so deterrence may be more likely to work against a Xi led China than a Putin led Russia. China also has a lot more to lose in terms of going to war than Russia does as things are mostly going fairly well for China in terms of its economy and growing international prominence. Taiwan is the major player in semiconductors so having it lost to China would be a massive economic blow to everyone outside of China's favor. Does that mean that the US/EU and NATO should roll out the red carpet for Russia? No, not at all. I just don't think you're going to see open war between them and Russia over the Ukraine.
This could be a horrible situation with a lot casualties. I really feel like Russia miscalculated here. NATO is rallying for unity, EU probably going to move off Russian energy, probably sanctions coming, the rest of Ukraine isn't full of Russian Nationals, there will be heavy resistance. Long term Russia loses in every conceivable way.
Hactivists say they hacked Belarus rail system to stop Russian military buildup
Hactivists say they hacked Belarus rail system to stop Russian military buildup
If confirmed, the attack would be one of the first times ransomware has been used this way.
Good stuff. More of this.
US and Nato would get involved if its
1. A NATO country where its basically required, if it was a small mostly insignificant country the US would probably consider not committing but it would run the risk of destroying any defense agreements, trade and co-operation around the world.
2.A country big enough to negatively affect the world economy to a degree military escalation is required.
(China invading South Korea or Japan, Russia invading Germany)
Otherwise its just hard to justify the guaranteed losses, potential drawn out WW3 and further Nuclear war where basically the entire world loses over.
It really sucks for people in those countres in a situation like Ukraine but hopefully if it happens everyone else out there moves to sure themselves up, not so much for an actual physical defense but as a deterrent from encroachment by others.
Russia doesn't actually want to fight NATO directly, they just have to look tough just like China, North Korea, etc.
However Putin understands with a nuclear stalemate, whoever moves first basically has the advantage.
He won't start a full on war with a NATO member but will do little hits and moves wherever possible.
If NATO somehow took 90% of Ukraine tomorrow Putin would be fine taking just that other 10% without attacking NATO(until it basically becomes such a moneysink that 10% isn't worth it)
Last edited:
I feel like a full takeover of Ukraine isn't what Russia wants. They probably will invade, but it's there to _improve_ their hand in forcing Ukraine to turn away from NATO. A week after the initial invasion, they could stop and try to negotiate a ceasefire where they compel Ukraine to do what they want.
I recognize the real politik of the situation, but what you described sure sounds like appeasement. What actually is the economic value needs to have to rank? Especially in Europe's backyard - there's plenty of horrible consequences of ignoring conflict, and this seems to be a slow motion catastrophe.
An undeterred Russia taking over a 40 million person nation feels so wrong - that's basically Canada losing their freedom.
Under the Shadow of War in Ukraine
Sketches of life in Kyiv as its citizens respond to reports of Russian saboteurs and hackers infiltrating the country.
Yep, anxiety is growing.. Mixed signals from the government doesn't really help.
There are reports Putin's health is deteriorating so that may explain why he's not directly in the news much. This is also sometimes given as a reason why he wants to invade Ukraine now as it's his last personal chance to do so.
Before WW2 the Allies really threw Czechoslovakia under the bus to protect themselves. The Allied powers were actually quite aware of Hitler's plans for both Czechoslovakia and Poland but chose to appease Hitler at the time as the Allied powers knew they were not prepared for war and politically at home it would have been extremely unpopular to go to war again with the memory of the Great War so vivid in many people's memories.
I am not condoning Allied actions here, they ultimately sacrificed Czechoslovakia and millions of others by waiting to confront Hitler. If they had acted sooner they could have prevented the loss of potentially millions of lives.
Ukraine isn't quite the same as Czechoslovakia granted. If the situations were the same, Ukraine would have agreed to surrender Crimea and the eastern oblasts first and without a fight and this current situation would see them surrender the entire country without fight. That isn't happening here as Ukraine is preparing to fight for their land.
That would be extremely unpopular even outside of Ukraine, nobody is going to take those kind of demands from Putin seriously. Ukraine is never going to willingly cede control over the Donbas, it's an insane demand in itself never mind combined with a US-Ukraine treaty that basically gives up Ukraine's right to self-determination. In the unlikely event that they gave up the Donbas they'd almost certainly be demanding that they be allowed to join NATO and push further for integration with the EU, they wouldn't be getting anything out of the deal otherwise.
I'm fairly certain that Ukrainians are willing to defend themselves in a war against an aggressor trying to steal their country away from them, it's not the outcome anyone wants but if that's what Russia wants then they will be stuck in a very long war that will cause a huge amount of casualties on both sides.
This is going to come down to if Ukraine can fight well enough to have long and protracted war that Russia would want no part in. For Putin, achieving quick tactical victory is the only way Russia can come out on top.
Many eastern European countries have seen the same parallel. Big Nato countries are negotiating with Russia and without representation of Eastern European countries. Why isn't Poland in these talks? Poland is big player in NATO so they and other CEE countries should have been included. Now it's yet again four largest European countries instead of countries that are in the frontlines.
But I do fear for the worse that Ukraine can't count for help of others. It still baffles me that Nord Stream 2 hasn't been scrapped. We should already be discussing temporal solutions with US when it comes to gas imports and figuring out European future without Russian gas.
Why should the smaller European NATO members mobilize and send troops to Ukraine when the bigger players are still indecisive AND the country (government) with the 2nd ? 3rd biggest army inside NATO, which is Turkey, is almost fully aligned * with Putin ?
* with the exception of Syria and possibly Ukraine .
* with the exception of Syria and possibly Ukraine .
Bots in my era? Someone wake up a mod.
Anyway I hope for a continued united show of support for a democracy like Ukraine from NATO and America.
Anyway I hope for a continued united show of support for a democracy like Ukraine from NATO and America.
I guess the russians do have bots everywhere if they are even on ERA
I can tell you from experience that the US government has gotten pretty good at detecting and characterizing Russian online propaganda and disinformation campaigns as they happen in real time. It's actually a very interesting research area with lots of analogies to epidemiology.
We just don't have the means to put a stop to them or to counter them all that effectively.
Gotta love how if it's a war the US 'started' it. Every time.
These kinds of bots and sock puppets have been on the message boards, not just the huge social sites, before Era even existed. Astroturfing and disinformation is highly vertical.
These kinds of bots and sock puppets have been on the message boards, not just the huge social sites, before Era even existed. Astroturfing and disinformation is highly vertical.
One thing that makes me doubt the invasion will happen soon is that the russian propaganda machine has not yet started the hate campaign yet. Normally before any escalation they would have their "ukrainian nazis are killing russian speaking babies" stick on all TV and internet channels, but it is rather tame so far. I guess they either they are aiming for mid February to start it, or it is indeed a huge ruse.
I really want to know how the fuck this guy came to conclusion that it's ok to side with Russia in this matter.
I assume the guy was bought by Kremlin (wouldn't be surprising), but he should still come up with some (likely extremely flawed) logic to present to his viewers, right?
The Minsk II agreement does require a permanent change of the Ukrainian constitution that would declare special status for the Donbas, so that they could hold their own elections, have independent "militias" etc. Basically an autonomous zone. And another part of Minsk II agreement bans "all foreign armed formations, military equipment" from Ukraine. It would be very difficult for Ukraine to become a NATO member if foreign military equipment is banned from entering the country...
Still, I don't think this alone would satisfy Putin though. That's why I think the concessions would need to be even greater for any chance of avoiding a war.
Russia is a white supremacists dream come true.
Their defense of it stems from the belief that it is the perfect ethno state.
Conservatives/Republicans fucking love Russia now. Lets not forget those 4 congressmen who went to Moscow on July 4th.
- Status