nvm

Microsoft stops business & service in Russia - not sure if just physical ones or online also

K8Toledo:

 

 

NATO

 

Both Russia and the West view Ukraine as a buffer against each other.

 

 

 

Sending NATO troops into Ukraine would be suicide.

 

Russia has 850,000 active personnel, with 250,000 more in reserve. 200,000 are inside Ukraine.

 

Putin could send in more forces, take Ukraine, seize the Baltic states then attack Poland. 

 

 

 

The last thing Europe wants is another war with Russia, even without nukes involved.

 

It's a long way to Moscow: Operation Barbarossa

 

 

 

Going on the performance of the Russian troops invading Ukraine, NATO forces would decimate the Russians.

Batman:

 

Russia has bombed a Nuclear Power Plant ... risk of problems 10X larger than Chernobyl 

 

https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/ukraine-russia-conflict-live-updates-putins-threat-to-destroy-as-civilian-targets-hit/news-story/1d63b3cd5b1774a52d4470f70b4f36c3

 

 

 

Might be time for NATO to consider taking a peacekeeping role in securing nuclear facilities to avoid such stupidity. 

freitasm: You'd never invade Russia in winter. Lucky it is just coming to summer.

When does International Law stop NATO jumping in? On one hand thats WW3, on the other its invade with impunity on the free world. The middle ground would be throwing in a LOT of weaponry to the Ukraininans. Thats happening a lot for small weaponry and ammunition, but isnt giving a lot of larger weaponry tantamount to being a proxy war between Russia and Ukraine/NATO?  I guess the ideal scenario is Ukraine stalling them as much as possible, to get Russian morale lower as the actual war isnt known to many Russian military (when they went) and citizens. I see Russia is about to block Facebook. Ironically for how many others view Facebook, for Russian Government its too much factual news.

Watched a reporter in Moscow asking citizens. Half of them said there is no war, and what there is, is Ukraine's fault. The others (generally younger) see the real news in social media and are horrified.

elpenguino:

freitasm: You'd never invade Russia in winter. Lucky it is just coming to summer.

On one hand , winter is a good time to invade Russia, makes it possible to cross frozen rivers and the ground is solid so your tanks won't sink in the mud like that tank photographed in Ukraine recently.

But why would you invade Russia? Then you'd be a bad guy.

tdgeek:

 

When does International Law stop NATO jumping in? On one hand thats WW3, on the other its invade with impunity on the free world. The middle ground would be throwing in a LOT of weaponry to the Ukraininans.

 

Let's not forget we live in a post-9/11 world where the US just solved a lot of its problems with things like extraordinary rendition and black sites, etc. Russia hash had few qualms about 'sensitive operations' on other country's soil.

The Americans know a thing or two about covert ops and regime change, don't think they won't reach into that grab bag if it means avoiding nuclear war. 

tdgeek:

 

... but isnt giving a lot of larger weaponry...

 

That and the fact that most of the heavy weaponry takes years to manufacture and years to train on. As in, if the American hypothetically decided to give Ukraine 100 Abrams tanks, the war would still be long over before any Ukrainians were qualified to operate them.

SaltyNZ:

 

That and the fact that most of the heavy weaponry takes years to manufacture and years to train on. As in, if the American hypothetically decided to give Ukraine 100 Abrams tanks, the war would still be long over before any Ukrainians were qualified to operate them.

 

There's no doubt Ukraine's army is outnumbered and outgunned - particularly with heavy weapons - by Russia's. 

But Ukraine's also been at war for eight years. They have tens of thousands of people with good training and military experience.
The United States has given them $3 billion in military aid since 2015 - and the type of equipment they're sending to Ukraine is already used there, is easy to learn, and easy to teach.

Remember the success - in the 1980's - of Afghan mujahideen against Soviet aircraft with CIA provided, 'Stinger' shoulder-launched surface-to-air missiles.
The Americans definitely didn't forget. The US, and other countries including Lithuania, Netherlands and Germany have supplied thousands of modernised Stingers to Ukraine.

And - the US has provided hundreds of man-portable, shoulder-carried, fire-and-forget Javelin anti-tank launchers and nearly a thousand (@ $100K each) missiles. 
They're a heavier, longer distance missile system than stingers, use a modern automatic infrared guidance system and are "fire and forget".

An inexperienced operator can use one after ~12 hours training.

There was a push by the US after Russia’s military buildup on the border last year to increase Javelin training and deployment, and planeloads of them were still being unloaded in February.

Enough of them have been delivered now that the Ukranians are firing them at nearly everything - helicopters, trucks, even groups of Russian soldiers. 

And the British have supplied thousands of close-range Main Battle Tank and Light Anti-tank Weapons (NLAWs) which Ukranian Volunteer militias have in positions they've dug surrounding the main roads.

Add to that good real-time intel and comms from the US, and you can see why the Russians are losing so much stuff.
There's a good verified list of it here.

SaltyNZ:

 

That and the fact that most of the heavy weaponry takes years to manufacture and years to train on. As in, if the American hypothetically decided to give Ukraine 100 Abrams tanks, the war would still be long over before any Ukrainians were qualified to operate them.

 

Doris Miller might have something to say about that. You don't need formal training to do a lot of damage with the right weapon. You just need to figure out how to pull the trigger.

SaltyNZ:

 

tdgeek:

 

... but isnt giving a lot of larger weaponry...

 

 

 

 

That and the fact that most of the heavy weaponry takes years to manufacture and years to train on. As in, if the American hypothetically decided to give Ukraine 100 Abrams tanks, the war would still be long over before any Ukrainians were qualified to operate them.

 

I get that, but im thinking bigger guns and bigger ammo

GV27:

 

Let's not forget we live in a post-9/11 world where the US just solved a lot of its problems with things like extraordinary rendition and black sites, etc. Russia hash had few qualms about 'sensitive operations' on other country's soil.

 

The Americans know a thing or two about covert ops and regime change, don't think they won't reach into that grab bag if it means avoiding nuclear war. 

 

Can you elaborate on that? As I see it, US (the great super power who can do anything) gave its options, not wanted, so ok. Then Germany and France doubled down, meaning that the usual and unfair US dominance, was withheld, and subsequently agreed upon. As a global problem. The last thing we want is a US we know everything and go on in. Now, there is a global single opinion.

In some ways this is not dissimilar to one country's actions in 1939. Of the many conflicts that have happened over the years, is this any different? IMHO it is. A new USSR 2.0, with China

Ukraine (despite its past as a USSR part), is now an independent sovereign nation. When does the globe decide that this is not acceptable? How can Russia tell them and the globe that Ukraine cannot be a NATO nation? Can New Zealand order that the Maldives cannot be a NATO nation? 

Rikkitic:

 

Doris Miller might have something to say about that. You don't need formal training to do a lot of damage with the right weapon. You just need to figure out how to pull the trigger.

 

 

 

 

 

Yep, and as posted by others, since 2014, they have upskilled. The morale and patriotism is fantastic. The targeted civilian casualties is a war crime

Watched this avo, 6 bods, 5 American, one Brit, no plan but are going in to help. Another was an ex sniper, French Canadian, going in to help. 

While I get we dont want a world war, this is quickly becoming unreal. 8 or 9 days in, not 8 or 9 months. Putin now has a scorched eartb policy. Its 2022, that cannot happen.

China. What do they do?? Well, they could support a murdering dictator. They could also, insure themselves. (We love Russia, but our progress will be stalled if we support Putin) Soooo, support Russia but castigate Putin, so that Russia says communist, but no Putin, everyone happy. Russia gets trade, China gets trade, the globe gets trade. The theme here is Putin, get rid of him. get rid of the problem. 

Its 2022