Ukraine - Russia Conflict

Cookie_

SOF Support
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
1,116
I read the story you linked (Nick F) what is GAB? I ask because the CEO is a Putinista.

It's one of the "free speech" twitter clones. It became a hub for the "Christian Nationalist"/neo-nazi crowd when stormfront (Neo-Nazi forum) went down for a bit in 2017.

So we all agree that there are **not** a significant percentage of Republicans who are "pro-Putin?" Because that's what started this line of discussion.

Pretty much. I think it was a bit of a "fuck Tucker Carlson" take that took broader swipes at "conservatives" as shorthand.

... this- but in the reverse. It most certainly seems like someone is making it a talking point politically, but all evidence points to the Dems highlighting a fringe member of the GOP, making it seem like that's a main-party point supported by most and then demonizing everyone on that side.

And I know, I know, the Dems would never do such a thing like they did with CRT or gender ideology in schools or abortion or climate change or election integrity or transing the kids or drag queen story hour for kids or labeling parents as terrorists or labeling things as vaccine misinformation or keeping books in a child's library that openly describes anal sex meant for 5th graders

I see the bolded more from media sources than politicians. I'm sure there have been a few people with hawkish takes in support of Ukraine attacking any GOP member not fully on board, but I can't think of anything off the top of my head.
 

Cookie_

SOF Support
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
1,116
Now that that's settled, I'm curious about what the board's thoughts are on this piece. To sum up, Putin claims his callup is "limited" and will only involve 300,000 troops. I don't think that's enough for what he says its for, and it may be a ruse for... I don't know, something else.
@pardus @DasBoot

Link to story






View attachment 40637

The partial mobilization seems less like a military focused choice and more a domestic one. Putin clearly needs more than 300k based on how badly he was already losing professional troops, but he needed to see if it would be possible to do a national draft.

As shown by the attacks against recruitment centers, this probably isn't the case.

At this point, the best policy for the US regarding Russia is probably to just support our NATO allies and wait for Russia to implode itself.
As long as the populace doesn't have a enemy to unite against other than their own government, it seems Putin may get himself overthrown.
 

RackMaster

Nasty-Dirty-Canuck
SOF Support
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
10,830
Location
Land of Swine and Maple Syrup
Now that that's settled, I'm curious about what the board's thoughts are on this piece. To sum up, Putin claims his callup is "limited" and will only involve 300,000 troops. I don't think that's enough for what he says its for, and it may be a ruse for... I don't know, something else.
@pardus @DasBoot

Link to story






View attachment 40637

Aside from mass conscription, I'm not sure Putin has many more options. From everything I've seen, these are retired members being called up; zero retraining/skill upgrade and straight to the front.
 

amlove21

Pararescue
Verified SOF
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
4,779
Location
The City of Destiny
SSMP
SOF Mentor
Aside from mass conscription, I'm not sure Putin has many more options. From everything I've seen, these are retired members being called up; zero retraining/skill upgrade and straight to the front.
Crazy that Putin's "sort of" conscription of 300K is just shy of how many active duty AF people there are (325K ish).

I've seen the same floating around- videos of Russians leaving the processing places for the front without training or equipment.
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,395
Location
CONUS
So do we just commit to ending Russia at this point? That’s not hyperbole, I would also like the opinion of someone who has been on the ground.

I know we (America) have our skeletons in our closet regarding invading and generally interfering in the affairs of other nations. I do feel like, post OIF and OEF we have collectively said “that was a phase, our bad.”

Russia has been, for hundreds of years, doing shit like this. Is this when the West, plus’s maybe India, says it’s time to demilitarize?

@pardus and @Marauder06 (the resident professor) what do you guys think?
I've never been to Ukraine or Russia and I don't study the area closely so consider that when you read my response.

Like many people, I'm torn on this issue and my views are clouded by the shadows cast by my limited experiences. But I think we have a really, really poor track record when it comes to getting involved in other peoples' conflicts. Vietnam, Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria... lots of blood and treasure for what was, in almost every case I just listed, some very limited results.

At the same time, as I've said many times here on the site, appeasement never works. That's the same if the bully is here on the page, or is the leader of a nuclear-armed country. So by not intervening as we have, an emboldened Putin might be even stronger by the time he goes after something that we decide we do care about.

At the same (same-same?) time, we are throwing A LOT of money we don't have, at a fight that's not directly ours. Our focus should be on China. They're the ones who are going to upset the US-led world order, not the f'ing Russians. So yeah, I'm conflicted...

The thing I respect the most about Ukraine is that they actually have the will to fight. And (with extensive help from us) they are good at it. Like most people who (unlike me) are actual experts in the region, I expected Ukraine to fold in a matter of weeks. It's refreshing to me for us to be supporting a side that actually has the will to not only fight, but to win.

When it comes to regime change in Russia, I'm not sure that's in our long term interests, at least not if it's a sudden cataclysmic change. I think Putin is a terrible human being and the Russian regime is a bad one. But we saw in Iraq, Syria, and Iran (and many other places) that sometimes stability is better than having a good (by Western standards) national leader. In addition to geography and people, another major difference between Russia and the Middle Eastern states I just named is that Russia has nukes. Like... a lot of them. And given the level of corruption in that country, a lot of that material, as well as mass-casualty conventional weapons, might find its way into the black market and be used against our interests. I've seen what happens when you take down a regime and don't have the means and/or will to install something better. Three times. I'm not looking for Round 4.
 

ThunderHorse

Verified Military
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
5,135
Location
The Big D
Almost all of the "pro-Putin" takes are from people in the right-wing "outrage coverage" media space. Candace Owens, Charlie Kirk, and Tucker Carlson have all made comments about Putin attacking the "globalists" in Ukraine, or Putin fighting against "woke-western ideology". I don't think any of them are Pro-Putin as much as they are fitting culture war talking points into an international incident.

The same is true of the politicians like MTG and Madison Cawthorn, who called Ukraine Neo-Nazis and woke, respectively. It's not really about Ukraine or Putin as much as it is finding a way to turn the war into anti-Biden/Dem talking points.

The only legit "Putin is doing a good thing" takes I've seen are from dudes like Nick Fuentes, and that guy is a legit white nationalist, so not really someone I think should be representative of a "right-wing" pro-Putin take.


I just love how none of you guys are bringing up the Democrats who also are pro-Putin. Here's one. There are many others of his ilk. Why this discussion even went anywhere I don't know other than certain folks political persuasion. I also find it funny how hard google makes it to find these articles from legitimate news sources that discuss the pro Russia democrats.

Meet the Democrat siding with Putin on the Ukraine war
 

Cookie_

SOF Support
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
1,116
I just love how none of you guys are bringing up the Democrats who also are pro-Putin. Here's one. There are many others of his ilk. Why this discussion even went anywhere I don't know other than certain folks political persuasion. I also find it funny how hard google makes it to find these articles from legitimate news sources that discuss the pro Russia democrats.

Meet the Democrat siding with Putin on the Ukraine war
We briefly mentioned Pro-Putin dems, but nobody had an example readily available

Thanks for providing one.

As much as I'd believe the subtitles are their actual feelings (particularly the "ethnic minorities should fight for me"), it seems that account just posts satirical subtitles.

I wonder how close the translation actually is.
 

Blizzard

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
2,409
So, what to make of the damage to the Nord Stream pipeline off Sweden?

Western leaders blame 'deliberate' sabotage after Nordsteam pipeline

Confidence appears to be high that it's the result of sabotage. But who did it? Easy finger points at the Soviets. Repairs are estimated to take a week. So, while a leak isn't really in their interest right now, it's only short term and possibly sends some sort of message to greater Europe?

It's been a busy day for general jackassery.
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,395
Location
CONUS
So, what to make of the damage to the Nord Stream pipeline off Sweden?

Western leaders blame 'deliberate' sabotage after Nordsteam pipeline

Confidence appears to be high that it's the result of sabotage. But who did it? Easy finger points at the Soviets. Repairs are estimated to take a week. So, while a leak isn't really in their interest right now, it's only short term and possibly sends some sort of message to greater Europe?

It's been a busy day for general jackassery.
Russians seem like the obvious culprits, kind of a “nice civilization you’ve got there… shame if… everyone should freeze to death this winter” reminder. But there are many other potential perpetrators, if this was indeed sabotage.

I do t know the details but it seems like something like this would take a little bit of equipment and expertise. Not the usual “Molotov on a police station” type of action.
 

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
11,395
Location
CONUS
I read this article in Foreign Policy this morning and thought it was interesting:

With Russia greatly diminished and an economic recession looming, current pledges to increase European defense capabilities will lose steam, and America’s NATO allies will go back to relying on Uncle Sam for protection. Despite many past failures, proponents of liberal hegemony will claim vindication, at least temporarily.

So, what’s wrong with that?
 

RackMaster

Nasty-Dirty-Canuck
SOF Support
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
10,830
Location
Land of Swine and Maple Syrup
Russians seem like the obvious culprits, kind of a “nice civilization you’ve got there… shame if… everyone should freeze to death this winter” reminder. But there are many other potential perpetrators, if this was indeed sabotage.

I do t know the details but it seems like something like this would take a little bit of equipment and expertise. Not the usual “Molotov on a police station” type of action.

My first thought is, who gains the most from new gas contracts to replace Nord Stream and that Europe had hesitated to do business with recently.
 

Devildoc

Verified Military
Joined
Nov 3, 2015
Messages
5,320
Location
Durham, NC
I've never been to Ukraine or Russia and I don't study the area closely so consider that when you read my response.

Like many people, I'm torn on this issue and my views are clouded by the shadows cast by my limited experiences. But I think we have a really, really poor track record when it comes to getting involved in other peoples' conflicts. Vietnam, Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria... lots of blood and treasure for what was, in almost every case I just listed, some very limited results.

At the same time, as I've said many times here on the site, appeasement never works. That's the same if the bully is here on the page, or is the leader of a nuclear-armed country. So by not intervening as we have, an emboldened Putin might be even stronger by the time he goes after something that we decide we do care about.

At the same (same-same?) time, we are throwing A LOT of money we don't have, at a fight that's not directly ours. Our focus should be on China. They're the ones who are going to upset the US-led world order, not the f'ing Russians. So yeah, I'm conflicted...

The thing I respect the most about Ukraine is that they actually have the will to fight. And (with extensive help from us) they are good at it. Like most people who (unlike me) are actual experts in the region, I expected Ukraine to fold in a matter of weeks. It's refreshing to me for us to be supporting a side that actually has the will to not only fight, but to win.

When it comes to regime change in Russia, I'm not sure that's in our long term interests, at least not if it's a sudden cataclysmic change. I think Putin is a terrible human being and the Russian regime is a bad one. But we saw in Iraq, Syria, and Iran (and many other places) that sometimes stability is better than having a good (by Western standards) national leader. In addition to geography and people, another major difference between Russia and the Middle Eastern states I just named is that Russia has nukes. Like... a lot of them. And given the level of corruption in that country, a lot of that material, as well as mass-casualty conventional weapons, might find its way into the black market and be used against our interests. I've seen what happens when you take down a regime and don't have the means and/or will to install something better. Three times. I'm not looking for Round 4.

I love most of the Russian people. They are awesome. I hate Russia. It is not awesome. People assume that because they look like us (westerners) they think like us, and that ain't true. The people are in a real pickle.

I pretty much agree with you. Appeasement does not work. Our type of engagement does not work. How much is enough especially in light that China is watching with interest? I hate throwing bad money after good, but right now we don't have ANY money to be throwing at them (and yet, we do, while we slide to recession and worsening inflation).

I don't like Putin. Never have. I waffle on regime change, I see both sides of the argument, but maybe it's the devil you know. I DO know that in order for it to have the best odds it needs to be organic. I fear if we/the west tries to interfere we'll fuck it up like we always do (see all situations, ever).
 

Locksteady

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Messages
461
Confidence appears to be high that it's the result of sabotage. But who did it? Easy finger points at the Soviets.
Assuming it was sabotage, that is certainly possible, whether Putin wanted to send a message about Russian capabilities to other fuel sources ahead of the Baltic Pipe launch or, given his all-in mentality during this invasion, permanently remove the cashcow incentive for Russian oligarchs to try and overthrow him.

My first thought is, who gains the most from new gas contracts to replace Nord Stream and that Europe had hesitated to do business with recently.
Indeed.

Meanwhile, Tucker Carlson argued it was just as possible - if not more likely - that Americans were responsible, since the US only stood to profit by putting the final nail in the coffin of Russia's main bargaining chip with the EU.

CIA's advanced warning to Berlin weeks ago about possible future attacks on both the pipelines that were sabotaged doesn't exactly erode Carlson's claim, either, for those prone to conspiratorial thinking about the federal government and the IC in particular.

Also (though the claim may not directly apply since Germany ultimately did cancel it shortly after the invasion), in before a bloodthirsty airborne rabbit reminds us how President Biden famously threatened to end Nord Stream II back in February if Russia invaded Ukraine.

This will be an interesting European winter.
 
Top