Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

[K1052]

To me the best way out is to accelerate aid to Ukraine. If necessary get UK and France to deploy troops to rear areas in Ukraine. For example re-leave the troops guarding the northern flank of the border with Belarus. Give Ukraine what they need to drive the Russian's to the negotiating table.

The more Trump tries to turn the screws on Ukraine to get what he wants the higher the likelihood of direct European intervention IMO.

 

[Brovane]

The more Trump tries to turn the screws on Ukraine to get what he wants the higher the likelihood of direct European intervention IMO.

I agree, Maybe Europe gets that mineral deal.

The question I have, would the US (Trump) be agreeable to the purchase of US weapons for Ukraine under a cash and carry arrangement? I would rather give this business to European defense firms but the US has current capacity and ability to produce munitions that Europe doesn't have right now.

 

[K1052]

I agree, Maybe Europe gets that mineral deal.

The question I have, would the US (Trump) be agreeable to the purchase of US weapons for Ukraine under a cash and carry arrangement? I would rather give this business to European defense firms but the US has current capacity and ability to produce munitions that Europe doesn't have right now.

So far he does not seem interested in canceling sales. That could change or it may not.

Either way Europe needs a missile conglomerate to replace their dependency on RTX/LM and they should pay to get it going.

 

[APU_Fusion]

Usually, things like this don't end well..
View attachment 118857

I wonder if he will have soldiers gun down protesters? When the blood starts it won’t stop

 

[Pens1566]

I wonder if he will have soldiers gun down protesters? When the blood starts it won’t stop

He tried to do that in the first admin. He was stopped by sane subordinates. All of those are now gone.

 

[silverspaceship]

Russia so far has only been able to keep up troop numbers because they are basically paying large bonuses to pay for volunteers to go to Ukraine. They cannot keep this up indefinitely, so yeah they do care about casualties because it has become harder and harder for them to find people willing to go and fight.

I just want to add that in this matter we should not underestimate russia—when it comes to manpower, they still have a huge reserve. They have not yet launched a full-scale forced mobilization, even though they are capable of doing so, and it wouldn’t be their first time. At the moment, Putin is hoping that a shadow mobilization accompanied by substantial payouts will be sufficient; he probably doesn’t want the population to become discontent, but given russia’s political regime, I see no reason why that might not change.

Therefore, if we continue to drag this war out at the same pace, we won't last another three years—simply because russia has more resources, particularly in terms of manpower. However, if Europe can provide us with sufficient weapons and equipment, it would be a less significant problem.

 

[K1052]

I just want to add that in this matter we should not underestimate russia—when it comes to manpower, they still have a huge reserve. They have not yet launched a full-scale forced mobilization, even though they are capable of doing so, and it wouldn’t be their first time. At the moment, Putin is hoping that a shadow mobilization accompanied by substantial payouts will be sufficient; he probably doesn’t want the population to become discontent, but given russia’s political regime, I see no reason why that might not change.

Russia also has an enormous labor shortage which is fueling inflation through the roof. They really don't want to mobilize again because it would move this from a severe problem to catastrophic.

 

[silverspaceship]

I wonder if he will have soldiers gun down protesters? When the blood starts it won’t stop

I think that would be the end of him. I'm not sure if he would have managed to escape, as happened with Yanukovych in Ukraine after the Maidan. Although perhaps his friend Putin would have helped

Russia also has an enormous labor shortage which is fueling inflation through the roof. They really don't want to mobilize again because it would move this from a severe problem to catastrophic.

I don't think it would bother Putin much.

 

[K1052]

I don't think it would bother Putin much.

Probably in the back of his mind he's at least a little worried about millions of pensioners suddenly trying to kill him because they can't afford food anymore.

Also from a practical standpoint their arms industry is already understaffed and this would make it worse.

 

[biostud]

EU eyeing 800B defense spend.

View attachment 118853

And unfortunately for our ally in distress, US contractors will get very few of those....

 

[cmcartman]

I am really glad to see discussions about our victory, and I agree that given what we currently have, we cannot defeat russia on our own at this moment.

But then again, why are we talking like this now? Had we received everything we requested in 2022, I believe the war would have been over by 2023. Don't get me wrong—we are absolutely grateful for any help, but we were given just enough aid so that we neither gained a decisive advantage on the front nor suffered defeat. And now, as a result, we have given russia more than enough time to adapt.

What does it matter that different decisions then could have changed the outcome? We can't go back and change them, you have to deal with the situation at hand today. It may not be what you want to hear but it's the cold truth. And it doesn't matter what I, or anyone else here thinks for the most part anyway.

To answer it quickly though, I do think you'd be in a better off position today. I don't think there was any chance of you outright winning the war. Best case is you'd be in another cease fire with smaller amounts of territory lost including all of Crimea still IMHO. There's also the reality that you couldn't have been equipped with every piece of equipment you wanted because it does take time to train on them. You had the same manpower limitations as you still do for the most part. The previous administration was also very worried about Russia using nukes if we supplied you with more equipment, especially the longer range weapons. I personally thought they were being a little too cautious in that regard but I wasn't seeing intel they were. Hindsight is 20/20 and they could have obviously sent more because they didn't use them, but how much is still a question.

If you want to complain you should probably ask, "why Obama and Europe didn't do more in 2014?". Why wasn't more done in the run up to 2022? Why even after the war started has Europe been so slow with sanctions against Russia? Why are they still paying Russia billions for gas? They're right next door and we're half a world away. It's generally easier to prevent a war than to fight or finish one.

To answer why is this happening now you should have to understand at some level there has been censorship of the war. That an overly optimistic viewpoint has been put out when the reality has been more grim. While not hopeless I think too much of the sentiment that if we hold out long enough we can prevail. On the doorstep of Russia that's unfortunately a very long time. With Trump as president he ultimately is going to be making the decision to continue supporting you or not. There's popular support to end the war here on both sides of the aisle. This forum doesn't represent the average sentiment here. That support is simple minded and comes from the idea that the war has drug on too long and people on both sides are dying. Most don't understand the reality of how a cease fire and possible end to the war would look like. From the idea that with our budget the way it is that they don't want to spend more money on it. They don't understand that while it's a disaster (our budget and deficit), this war is not a significant cause of it. They don't understand that Putin is unlikely to stop until he has control of the parts of Ukraine that have been annexed into Russia. They don't understand that Russia has broken every cease fire in Ukraine since 2014. But they don't want us drug into war and they don't want US troops on Ukrainian soil. Those things just aren't going to happen in the next 4 years.

Ultimately I think Europe doing something is your best bet. The problem is they've been all words and not much action since the war started. And in places like Germany it's going to be a very hard sell. If they can convince Putin they're serious about supporting Ukraine and then actually start to do it it has a chance IMHO. Ironically I think the spat between Trump and Zelenskyy has probably helped in this regard showing that Ukraine might just fight on without anyone supporting you. If they can make a real offer of troops on the ground in a cease fire and Putin refuses that you might actually see more stick there. The question there is also what lines are used for the cease fire and what happens assuming it holds and there is an eventual end to the war.

I doubt much of that is what you want to hear but It's my opinion. I do think that Zelenskyy is still likely to sign the minerals deal and I do think that US aid will resume until a cease fire is in place assuming that happens.

 

[K1052]

And unfortunately for our ally in distress, US contractors will get very few of those....

If the frozen Russian funds are seized and given to Ukraine I'm sure they could spend some amount of them buying what they need from the US through intermediary nations like Germany. Main requirements right now are continued supply of missiles and ammunition, which would not take up a lot of the 200B they might get under such a scheme. Western Europe would be happy to oblige as long as large orders were getting placed with their own firms.

 

[K1052]

If they can make a real offer of troops on the ground in a cease fire and Putin refuses that you might actually see more stick there.

Putin has already entirely rejected this as European nations have said they could commit peacekeeping forces.

I do think that Zelenskyy is still likely to sign the minerals deal and I do think that US aid will resume until a cease fire is in place assuming that happens.

Probably the first two things happen but not the third. Zelensky ends up playing for time to get the USAI deliveries going again but on another track secures sizable military support from the Europeans.

 

[silverspaceship]

Probably in the back of his mind he's at least a little worried about millions of pensioners suddenly trying to kill him because they can't afford food anymore.

He hardly ever leaves his bunker anyway. If he really cared about his people he wouldn't have started this war.

What does it matter that different decisions then could have changed the outcome? We can't go back and change them, you have to deal with the situation at hand today. It may not be what you want to hear but it's the cold truth. And it doesn't matter what I, or anyone else here thinks for the most part anyway.

True. And I understand it. I just wanted to explain why russia now has a better position on the battlefield.

I don't think there was any chance of you outright winning the war.

Depends on what we mean by winning a war.

Best case is you'd be in another cease fire with smaller amounts of territory lost including all of Crimea still IMHO.

This is one of the possible scenarios, yes.

There's also the reality that you couldn't have been equipped with every piece of equipment you wanted because it does take time to train on them.

That's also true, I understand that, but we had that time window back then.

You had the same manpower limitations as you still do for the most part.

This is not true, in 2022 there was a completely different situation with manpower than now. Back then there were a large number of volunteers who were ready to go to war and defend their country. Now everything is completely different.

If you want to complain

No, I did not intend to.

 

[cmcartman]

Putin has already entirely rejected this as European nations have said they could commit peacekeeping forces.

I'm aware of that. Trump has said differently. But we don't have any idea really what's been going on behind closed doors. If that becomes a sticking point at least there won't be the bullshit narrative that Zelenskyy doesn't want peace we have now going around.

 

[K1052]

I'm aware of that. Trump has said differently. But we don't have any idea really what's been going on behind closed doors. If that becomes a sticking point at least there won't be the bullshit narrative that Zelenskyy doesn't want peace we have now going around.

The only people who believe Z is the sticking point here almost uniformly work in the WH or the Kremlin.

 

[cmcartman]

It has only been since the start of the Ukraine conflict that the US DOD has been provided funds to start seriously working on increasing production of munitions from 155mm shells to Patriot missiles. There has been specific numbers mentioned earlier in this thread. Increasing 155mm production is easier than Patriot missiles. However I know that a serious re-vamp of 155mm ammo production has occurred because the money was allocated as part of Ukraine aid packages and we have a lot more capacity to produce 155mm than in early 2022.

Like I said they ignored the problems until they had to do something and they've been too late to affect the war. If it drags on several more years and we manage to stay out of a war with China then it matters.

Russia so far has only been able to keep up troop numbers because they are basically paying large bonuses to pay for volunteers to go to Ukraine. They cannot keep this up indefinitely, so yeah they do care about casualties because it has become harder and harder for them to find people willing to go and fight. Also sanctions are having a impact on Russian financial reserves which they have been doing since the start of the war. Overall the Russian economy is not in great shape and from my reading the economy should start running into serious issues by the end of 2025. Even right now Russian production of military hardware cannot keep up on expenditure, why else get crappy North Korea ammo? They have gone through most of their modern tanks and AFV's. Ukrainian drone attacks are making it so that Russian troops have to walk 30+ miles to their offensive line because of drone attacks which also make supplying challenging. If you continue giving Ukraine more modern aircraft like F-16's and French Mirages this will give them back control of the air. What Ukraine has been doing with drones if fairly insane, they are producing drones at the rate now that they are using individual cheaply produced kamikaze drones to kill individual Russian soldiers while the Ukrainian troops sit under cover.



Are you aware that Ukraine is able to regularly rotate troops out of the front line and give it's troops leave to go back and see family? Is Russia doing the same thing? This tells me a lot about the overall situation on the ground and it isn't nearly as desperate for Ukraine as some people think.

You're viewing this from a western perspective which is a mistake. They don't rotate troops because they just don't care. They'll send someone to replace them when they die. Yes they have less tank's and AFV's but they still have a couple years of reserves and manpower will take up a little of that slack. Could it finally be enough and force them to collapse at some point, sure. Is Ukraine more likely to do so first though? Unfortunately I think that's likely.

To me the best way out is to accelerate aid to Ukraine. If necessary get UK and France to deploy troops to rear areas in Ukraine. For example re-leave the troops guarding the northern flank of the border with Belarus. Give Ukraine what they need to drive the Russian's to the negotiating table.

How many troops do you think the UK and France can reasonably deploy assuming you could magically convince them to? If Germany still had 12 divisions and the 4000 tanks they had before the wall fell this might be a reasonable idea. Ignoring the idea they might use tactical nukes when they do start losing because NATO troops are in Ukraine I guess you can not call it completely nuts.

The generally accepted ratio of troops to go on the offensive is 3:1 advantage. It doesn't have to be over the whole front but you're going to need a lot more Ukrainians than you think you do. And a lot more equipment. Europe is tapped out there as well and they're going to have to equip the troops you're talking about sending to the Belarus border. At this point you're really just hoping it will be enough when it unfortunately won't be.

 

[cmcartman]

The only people who believe Z is the sticking point here almost uniformly work in the WH or the Kremlin.

I wish that were true.

Slim majority of Americans support Ukraine, poll finds

Poll conducted before meeting with Trump and Zelenskyy says 52% of respondents ‘personally support’ Ukraine

www.theguardian.com

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5173356-trump-zelensky-meeting-poll/

I realize the polls aren't asking that specific question but a large minority do believe it.

 

[K1052]

How many troops do you think the UK and France can reasonably deploy assuming you could magically convince them to? If Germany still had 12 divisions and the 4000 tanks they had before the wall fell this might be a reasonable idea. Ignoring the idea they might use tactical nukes when they do start losing because NATO troops are in Ukraine I guess you can not call it completely nuts.

The generally accepted ratio of troops to go on the offensive is 3:1 advantage. It doesn't have to be over the whole front but you're going to need a lot more Ukrainians than you think you do. And a lot more equipment. Europe is tapped out there as well and they're going to have to equip the troops you're talking about sending to the Belarus border. At this point you're really just hoping it will be enough when it unfortunately won't be.

Any peacekeeping force will probably be under 50K troops however they would be backed by European air power. If the Russians do not like facing old F-16s they are really not gonna like F-35s, Typhoons, and Rafale.

 

[K1052]

I wish that were true.

Slim majority of Americans support Ukraine, poll finds

Poll conducted before meeting with Trump and Zelenskyy says 52% of respondents ‘personally support’ Ukraine

www.theguardian.com

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5173356-trump-zelensky-meeting-poll/

I realize the polls aren't asking that specific question but a large minority do believe it.

I was bein hyperbolic of course.

This does not say "good job Mr. Trump" from the American people:

Fifty-one percent of surveyed independents said neither country walked away as a winner, while 28 percent said the U.S. did. Fifteen percent said Ukraine was the winner.

 

[IronWing]

Any peacekeeping force will probably be under 50K troops however they would be backed by European air power. If the Russians do not like facing old F-16s they are really not gonna like F-35s, Typhoons, and Rafale.

A peace keeping force won’t work when the belligerent is a nuclear power.

 

[DZero]

A peace keeping force won’t work when the belligerent is a nuclear power.

They have nukes too. Mutual destruction assured.

 

[K1052]

A peace keeping force won’t work when the belligerent is a nuclear power.

If the Russians use nukes on euro troops the French and or Brits will start vaporizing major Russian military installations.

 

[cmcartman]

Any peacekeeping force will probably be under 50K troops however they would be backed by European air power. If the Russians do not like facing old F-16s they are really not gonna like F-35s, Typhoons, and Rafale.

He was talking about troops there to guard the Belarus border before a ceasefire so Ukraine could go on the offensive.



They're unsure they could even support 30k for a peacekeeping mission considering the indefinite timeframe.

 

[K1052]

He was talking about troops there to guard the Belarus border before a ceasefire so Ukraine could go on the offensive.



They're unsure they could even support 30k for a peacekeeping mission considering the indefinite timeframe.

Frankly F-35s doing the Highway of Death to a Belarusian incursion would be pretty neat.

The forces that can be deployed depends on the commitments but with rotations something like 50K should be doable depending on who signs up.