So, as someone on the other side of the world, I’m confused by all the Russia threat rhetoric recently. They can’t manage Ukraine, are in dire economic straits, are scraping the bottom of the barrel for manpower, and you’re expecting them to open a new front?
I don’t get it. Is this about cyberattacks, drones, propaganda, and other asymmetric harassment (AKA terrorism)? Because I hear posturing about rearming and preparing for war (which I generally associate with invasion). Tanks and war planes don’t stop those kinds of threats. Is it general military ‘give us more budget’? Is it military industrial complex lobbying for profit? What’s going on?
Russia is not planning on invading and conquering the whole Europe. The want to disrupt supply chains and divert resources going to Ukraine. Russia already has a lot of military on the borders with NATO (for example Finland). They are just sitting there not helping them win the war in Ukraine in any way. So Russia would like to:
Force NATO to gather more resources on their side of the border instead of sending them to Ukraine
Test if NATO members are actually willing to fight to defend each other (we know USA won’t)
Disrupt supply chains and destroy factories used by Ukraine
Crimea was overtaken by Russia without officially sending any troops. It was all done by some independent “mercenaries” that went there to protect Russian minority. (later Putin admitted it were in fact Russian soldiers)
NATO is worried same thing can happen in Latvia or Estonia: small number of “mercenaries” engaging with the tiny armies those countries have. Other worry is long range missile attacks on critical infrastructure. So far NATO members did not respond to drone attacks and terrorist attacks on their infrastructure. Russia is checking how far they can go and so far NATO let them do anything without any consequences. It’s clear Putin will keep escalating (why wouldn’t he?) and what everyone is saying is that EU should be ready for the next step: direct attack.
Putin doesn’t have to win it. He just has to divert enough resources away from Ukraine for it to pay off. Every drone that flies into NATO means more air defense systems in EU and less air defense in Ukraine. Same with everything else.
They can’t manage Ukraine, are in dire economic straits, are scraping the bottom of the barrel for manpower …
Putin doesn’t care about all this. Lavrov and the other sycophants are hailing their leader for whatever he does (maybe he really thinks that things go well in Russia). Putin is indifferent about the economic strain of ordinary Russians, he will drink their blood, and doesn’t care about the soldiers in the meat grinder.
There is no “Russia threat rhetoric.” There is a Russia threat.
So the threat is Putin is a psychopath (no argument) and might do something batshit crazy before someone finally throws him out a window? While that may be valid, not sure it justifies billions on war machinery, or even the media frenzy recently. I wonder about ulterior motives, perhaps a media push to support right wing politics?
IMO it definitely doesn’t justify spending billions on war machinery. Especially because the countries just use the military spending to fuel growth of domestic arms companies. They could learn a lot from Ukraine about how to spend on defence with limited resources, but prefer to just throw obscene amounts of money on their MIC.
But if you start to depend on arms manufacturing for your GDP goals, you are bound for more war in the future. Spending on defence quickly becomes an end in itself… So if there was a political will to provide an off ramp for Putin to end this war, both sides would have to come to an agreement which provides mutual economic benefit. This is not happening although it’s hard to imagine any way for Ukraine and Europe to win the war militarily in the near future. Instead Ukraines population (like Russias) is slaughtered, its infrastructure obliterated, with no promising outlook for the future whatsoever…
I really don’t understand why Europe doesn’t push Ukraine to give up territory to secure a future for its people. Yes, Putins war is unjust, violates international law, but the human cost is so enormous… Someone has to put an end to this madness. And now the rest of Europe must suffer too because expenses for health, social security, education, mobility, etc. etc. are reduced to spend more money on defence. It’s irresponsible and stupid.
Besides what other commentators already highlighted about what is going on with Russia, there is another component to this: other autocratic and warloving leaders might feel inspired by a lacking response from Europe to such a development.
Xi wants Taiwan (and other territories in SEA, especially oceanic regions), and an attack on Taiwan would have a huge impact on global computing infrastructure. So a Europe seeming willing and able to help who it calls allies would be a better deterrent to war plans elsewhere.
(And yes, it’s quite cynical to argue with the impact on economy rather than humanitarian arguments, but you have to put things into a politician’s perspective.)
The only humanitarian argument can be to end this war as quick as possible, in the sense of not trying to win this war. In WW1 the generals on both sides also thought they could still win the war, sacrificing generation after generation of young boys. We must not make the same mistake. This war is now running longer than WW1. No frickin land grab by an autocrat can justify letting all these people be killed.
Yes it’s a genocide and war crimes are happening everyday, but I think that Ukraine only has a future if this war stops soon. You think this is a fight for survival in the face of genocide? I think there is no survival for the Ukrainian people if the fighting continues much longer.
I dont see the evidence for this. Georgia was attacked by Russia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are occupied to this day, yet Georgia continues to exist. The same is true for Moldova and Transnistria.
So, as someone on the other side of the world, I’m confused by all the Russia threat rhetoric recently. They can’t manage Ukraine, are in dire economic straits, are scraping the bottom of the barrel for manpower, and you’re expecting them to open a new front?
I don’t get it. Is this about cyberattacks, drones, propaganda, and other asymmetric harassment (AKA terrorism)? Because I hear posturing about rearming and preparing for war (which I generally associate with invasion). Tanks and war planes don’t stop those kinds of threats. Is it general military ‘give us more budget’? Is it military industrial complex lobbying for profit? What’s going on?
FWIW, genuinely curious.
Russia is not planning on invading and conquering the whole Europe. The want to disrupt supply chains and divert resources going to Ukraine. Russia already has a lot of military on the borders with NATO (for example Finland). They are just sitting there not helping them win the war in Ukraine in any way. So Russia would like to:
Crimea was overtaken by Russia without officially sending any troops. It was all done by some independent “mercenaries” that went there to protect Russian minority. (later Putin admitted it were in fact Russian soldiers)
NATO is worried same thing can happen in Latvia or Estonia: small number of “mercenaries” engaging with the tiny armies those countries have. Other worry is long range missile attacks on critical infrastructure. So far NATO members did not respond to drone attacks and terrorist attacks on their infrastructure. Russia is checking how far they can go and so far NATO let them do anything without any consequences. It’s clear Putin will keep escalating (why wouldn’t he?) and what everyone is saying is that EU should be ready for the next step: direct attack.
Putin doesn’t have to win it. He just has to divert enough resources away from Ukraine for it to pay off. Every drone that flies into NATO means more air defense systems in EU and less air defense in Ukraine. Same with everything else.
That makes some sense of it. Thanks.
Putin doesn’t care about all this. Lavrov and the other sycophants are hailing their leader for whatever he does (maybe he really thinks that things go well in Russia). Putin is indifferent about the economic strain of ordinary Russians, he will drink their blood, and doesn’t care about the soldiers in the meat grinder.
There is no “Russia threat rhetoric.” There is a Russia threat.
So the threat is Putin is a psychopath (no argument) and might do something batshit crazy before someone finally throws him out a window? While that may be valid, not sure it justifies billions on war machinery, or even the media frenzy recently. I wonder about ulterior motives, perhaps a media push to support right wing politics?
IMO it definitely doesn’t justify spending billions on war machinery. Especially because the countries just use the military spending to fuel growth of domestic arms companies. They could learn a lot from Ukraine about how to spend on defence with limited resources, but prefer to just throw obscene amounts of money on their MIC.
But if you start to depend on arms manufacturing for your GDP goals, you are bound for more war in the future. Spending on defence quickly becomes an end in itself… So if there was a political will to provide an off ramp for Putin to end this war, both sides would have to come to an agreement which provides mutual economic benefit. This is not happening although it’s hard to imagine any way for Ukraine and Europe to win the war militarily in the near future. Instead Ukraines population (like Russias) is slaughtered, its infrastructure obliterated, with no promising outlook for the future whatsoever…
I really don’t understand why Europe doesn’t push Ukraine to give up territory to secure a future for its people. Yes, Putins war is unjust, violates international law, but the human cost is so enormous… Someone has to put an end to this madness. And now the rest of Europe must suffer too because expenses for health, social security, education, mobility, etc. etc. are reduced to spend more money on defence. It’s irresponsible and stupid.
If you think surrendering territory would put an end to it, you’re an absolute fool. It would do the opposite.
deleted by creator
No, it’s about preparing for Russian aggression.
Besides what other commentators already highlighted about what is going on with Russia, there is another component to this: other autocratic and warloving leaders might feel inspired by a lacking response from Europe to such a development.
Xi wants Taiwan (and other territories in SEA, especially oceanic regions), and an attack on Taiwan would have a huge impact on global computing infrastructure. So a Europe seeming willing and able to help who it calls allies would be a better deterrent to war plans elsewhere.
(And yes, it’s quite cynical to argue with the impact on economy rather than humanitarian arguments, but you have to put things into a politician’s perspective.)
The only humanitarian argument can be to end this war as quick as possible, in the sense of not trying to win this war. In WW1 the generals on both sides also thought they could still win the war, sacrificing generation after generation of young boys. We must not make the same mistake. This war is now running longer than WW1. No frickin land grab by an autocrat can justify letting all these people be killed.
It’s not about a land grab though. It’s a fucking genocide and an attack against democratic aspirations.
Yes it’s a genocide and war crimes are happening everyday, but I think that Ukraine only has a future if this war stops soon. You think this is a fight for survival in the face of genocide? I think there is no survival for the Ukrainian people if the fighting continues much longer.
They have a better chance for survival as long as they keep fighting. Because as soon as Ukraine capitulates, it seizes to exist.
I dont see the evidence for this. Georgia was attacked by Russia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are occupied to this day, yet Georgia continues to exist. The same is true for Moldova and Transnistria.
Have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_of_Ukrainians_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_war
Neither Moldova nor Transnistria are occupied by Russia though it’s on Putin’s wish list.