• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Russia invades Ukraine

DC1989

Member
Joined
25 Mar 2022
Messages
553
Location
London
Russia doesn't like to mention the fact that it's vast USSR Army in ww2 was supplied by the USAs lend lease. It would have been very different without.

I'm no military expert but throwing numbers at the enemy surely doesn't work in 2022 when the enemy can hit you from 80km away to within 1m accuracy
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DC1989

Member
Joined
25 Mar 2022
Messages
553
Location
London
Indeed. His views are decades out of date.
The Mexican (or indeed the Canadian) example is an interesting one. Would the US let them become aligned to China or Russia? Probably not but it ensures that they have no desire to. Perhaps Russia should have tried such an approach with the ex Soviet countries and things may have turned out alot better for them
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,364
Location
Yorks
The Mexican (or indeed the Canadian) example is an interesting one. Would the US let them become aligned to China or Russia? Probably not but it ensures that they have no desire to. Perhaps Russia should have tried such an approach with the ex Soviet countries and things may have turned out alot better for them

I think they did. The Commonwealth of Independent States.
 

Iskra

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2014
Messages
10,701
Location
West Riding
Russia doesn't like to mention the fact that it's vast USSR Army in ww2 was supplied by the USAs lend lease. It would have been very different without.

I'm no military expert but throwing numbers at the enemy surely doesn't work in 2022 when the enemy can hit you from 80km away to within 1m accuracy
And it's population supplied by the British arctic convoys.
They were important but not decisive. The German army attacking on bad roads, being inadequately supplied, not securing supply lines, struggling to replace its losses and generally running out of steam would have happened with or without Lend Lease or patchy British supply. The German army was already weakened from its previous victories and was beginning a slow death spiral when Barbarossa was initiated. There are actually many parallels to the Russian-Ukraine war today, interestingly.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The Mexican (or indeed the Canadian) example is an interesting one. Would the US let them become aligned to China or Russia? Probably not but it ensures that they have no desire to. Perhaps Russia should have tried such an approach with the ex Soviet countries and things may have turned out alot better for them
Mexico is too dependent on the USA economically to become hostile towards it.
 

TwoYellas

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2021
Messages
258
Location
Birmingham
I think the point that Chomsky makes regarding Mexico is a hypothetical: 'how would the US react if a country bordering them decides to join a hostile military alliance'.

There would be an international crisis, imho. I suppose the closest to this hypothetical was the Cuban Missile crisis.

Anyway I've given my views and read other people"s. As I said, I want the issue to be resolved diplomatically and I believe all concerns from all sides have to be taken into account. Certainly hope this doesn't spiral out of control.

Eventually, there will be a settlement, with everyone's concerns addressed and yes this will include Russian security concerns. Hopefully a lasting peace will then begin and maybe one day all the sides involved will reconcile.

My views are from independent research I've done, trying to be as fair minded as possible. Of course, I wish the war criminals to be tried, in fact they should all be, past and present, and have a fair trial at The Hague!

If you disagree then this your right. Maybe I'm wrong in my conclusions, I'll keep an open mind.

Anyway. Good night all

It's been emotional ;)
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,816
Location
West is best
Earlier it was mentioned that Russia had “security concerns”. But they already had a border with NATO countries. A border with Finland (no love of Russia). A border with China (disputes between these in the past). So even if Ukraine had joined or not joined NATO, it does not make any significant material difference in respect of having a ‘buffer zone’ between them and what they class as an unfriendly neighbour…

Russia has claimed to have a large and effective military, a military that was supposed to be more than a match compared to any of the countries that border Russia or nearby neighbouring countries.

Furthermore, since WW2, when has any European or NATO country invaded, or indicated that it may attempt to invade Russia?

Putin is pure and simple a bully. It’s his way and never anyone else’s. It’s him that did not want to have normal diplomatic relations with western countries including NATO members. If Putin had made an effort to have better relations with western countries including NATO members, maybe he would not have ended up so paranoid.

So these so called “security concerns” are yet more fiction from Russia. Another excuse or lie from a government that depends on lies, fiction, misinformation and misdirection.

If Russia had kept itself to itself, it would have been a situation that could have been stable. Unfortunately, Putin had other ideas. He sent agents to the U.K. to kill his opponents or people who he thought may be a threat to himself. And he started the war in Ukraine in 2014. And then escalated it earlier this year.

Now, with it clear that his so called mighty Russian military in deep trouble, he has ordered a call up of thousands of Russian citizens to try to save his misadventure in Ukraine.

For the Western and NATO countries, unfortunately there is only one thing that we can do to make Putin understand, and that is to help Ukraine to kick the Russian forces out of all of Ukraine. When the Russian military finally realises that it’s totally untenable to try to stay in Ukraine, that will be the time when it may be possible to try again with the diplomatic discussions. And maybe some time in the future, normal relations may become possible.

None of the above means that the Western / NATO countries did everything correctly. Of course mistakes were made. I personally think that Western countries should have very firmly told Putin that if he did not withdraw the forces that he built up on the border with Ukraine back to where they came from (well away from Ukraine), that we would attack them when they tried to enter Ukraine. And then backed that up with military action if he then did invade.

And in reaction to his partial mobilisation, Western countries should have clearly told him that they would see this as deliberate escalation, and that if this occurred, they would double the supply of military weapons to Ukraine.
 
Last edited:

DC1989

Member
Joined
25 Mar 2022
Messages
553
Location
London
Indeed I think the 'security concerns' are only a small part of it. More like yet another of 'their' countries joining the democratic West and it's citizens enjoying better lives.

Russians seeing their old compatriots gaining significantly better living conditions whilst on holiday in Odessa might have made them question their leadership at home...
 

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,964
Now, with it clear that his so called mighty Russian military in deep trouble, he has ordered a call up of thousands of Russian citizens to try to save his misadventure in Ukraine.

I just wonder what the end result will be here. These hundreds of thousands will simply be torn to shreds

I do wonder if the plan now is for Putin to declare that the "LDPR" and other territories are now part of Russia, and that they're going to flood them with people who were forcibly conscripted. But how long will they last when HIMARS blows them up with impunity?
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,816
Location
West is best
I think one question is, will there be another rout / redeployment / goodwill gesture from Russian forces as Ukraine breaks through the Russian front lines again. Well, actually that could be multiple questions, as it’s not looking good for Russia in a couple of places.

So there could be significant changes on the battlefields before Russia is able to throw bodies into the occupied areas of Ukraine. Let alone provide them with sufficient training, equipment or supplies.

And as winter approaches, how many of these ‘ordinary’ Russian citizens will be able to tolerate the winter weather? Especially as it’s likely they will not be properly equipped…

Just switching the subject slightly, is anyone keeping track of the Russian airforce? Are they now trying to operate only over relatively safe occupied territory?

What happens if Ukraine can increase the number of ground attack aircraft operating over the Russian forces?
 

TwoYellas

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2021
Messages
258
Location
Birmingham
A settlement which I've heard (can't find the link) but Dr Chomsky mentioned it. Could be something like Ukraine remains neutral. Russia withdraws and internationally monitored referendums for the Donbass.

Certainly needs to be a lasting peace as do not want another Cold War era type stand-off threatening world peace flaring up again.

Most of the war games played by people from their living rooms is wishful thinking and provides no solution to the issues imho.
 

Noddy

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
1,652
Location
UK
A settlement which I've heard (can't find the link) but Dr Chomsky mentioned it. Could be something like Ukraine remains neutral. Russia withdraws and internationally monitored referendums for the Donbass.

Certainly needs to be a lasting peace as do not want another Cold War era type stand-off threatening world peace flaring up again.

Most of the war games played by people from their living rooms is wishful thinking and provides no solution to the issues imho.


And what about Crimea?

No elections held in the Donbas or Crimea are going to be fair. Since 2014 much of the Ukrainian population has left, being replaced by Russians.

Why should Ukraine, an independent sovereign state, be forced by Putin to remain ‘neutral’. And what does that even mean? Can’t join NATO? Can’t join the EU? Can’t join the council of Europe? Can’t join the new European community project Macron is proposing?
 
Last edited:

oldman

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
1,349
A settlement which I've heard (can't find the link) but Dr Chomsky mentioned it.
An interview with Chomsky here quotes from another article saying:

According to multiple former senior US officials we spoke with, in April 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement. The terms of that settlement would have been for Russia to withdraw to the positions it held before launching the invasion on February 24. In exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.

Chomsky, predictably, blames the democratic West for the failure of this 'settlement'. Personally I don't believe that back in April Putin would have agreed to withdraw to the 2014 lines or accepted that Ukraine should have security guarantees to protect them from Russia. I also doubt that Ukraine would have refused such an offer.

Chomsky undoubtedly made a major contribution to lingustics with his theories about the innate nature of language, although a lot of his later, increasingly abstruse, theories are less widely accepted by scholars. His political views are basically just 'USA - bad' and like many of his generation, he has struggled to come to terms with post-1990 reality.
 

TwoYellas

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2021
Messages
258
Location
Birmingham
Chomsky undoubtedly made a major contribution to lingustics with his theories about the innate nature of language, although a lot of his later, increasingly abstruse, theories are less widely accepted by scholars. His political views are basically just 'USA - bad' and like many of his generation, he has struggled to come to terms with post-1990 reality.
I don't agree that his views are just 'US - bad'. Personally find his views to be sensible, balanced, fair and un-propagandised. And extremely pro-democracy. I agree with the old timer in his view that kleptokrats and despots should be consistently condemned and not supported and not just when someone on the box tells us to get very very cross because this week 'insert - despot' is on the naughty step!

Of course we've got to have resources. But to support despots is anti-democratic and anti 'uman rights.

Why should Ukraine, an independent sovereign state, be forced by Putin to remain ‘neutral’. And what does that even mean? Can’t join NATO? Can’t join the EU? Can’t join the council of Europe? Can’t join the new European community project Macron is proposing?
Depends how they, Russia, sees NATO; doesn't matter what you or I think - if they think it's an existential threat could mean unimaginable escalation. As far as independent sovereign states are if they are invaded the culprits should stand trial - absolutely agree. But a precedent hasn't exactly been set.
 

Noddy

Established Member
Joined
11 Oct 2014
Messages
1,652
Location
UK
Depends how they Russia sees NATO; doesn't matter what you or I think - if they think it's an existential threat could mean unimaginable escalation. As far as independent sovereign states are if they are invaded the culprits should stand trial absolutely agree. But a precedent hasn't exactly been set.

So they can join the EU? And when the EU sets up its own army?
 

Cloud Strife

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2014
Messages
2,964
And as winter approaches, how many of these ‘ordinary’ Russian citizens will be able to tolerate the winter weather? Especially as it’s likely they will not be properly equipped…

Just switching the subject slightly, is anyone keeping track of the Russian airforce? Are they now trying to operate only over relatively safe occupied territory?

What happens if Ukraine can increase the number of ground attack aircraft operating over the Russian forces?

Winter will simply demoralise them even further. We've seen that Russia doesn't have the ability to equip them very well, and the Ukrainian forces are now becoming very well equipped for warfare. Will they even have suitable winter equipment?

In terms of the air, Russia is still taking losses, and the Ukrainian air defences are improving steadily. It's still not perfect, but we can say that the Ukrainian strategy of air denial (rather than air superiority) is working. The Russians are afraid to come into Ukrainian-controlled territory, and it seems that they've barely tried to use their air assets. Oryx (https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html) confirms that they've lost 10% of their SU-34 fleet already!

Most observers seem to think that there's no real need for Ukraine to have air superiority right now. It would be helpful, but it's not critical. What is badly needed is a good anti-missile system, which would allow life to return to normal in Kharkiv and other areas.

Chomsky undoubtedly made a major contribution to lingustics with his theories about the innate nature of language, although a lot of his later, increasingly abstruse, theories are less widely accepted by scholars.

Chomsky was (and still is) an outstanding linguist. I would never hear a bad word about his ability in that field, and his contributions to fields beyond linguistics have been considerable. But in terms of geopolitics, Chomsky should simply be ignored, because he has nothing to say.

Could be something like Ukraine remains neutral. Russia withdraws and internationally monitored referendums for the Donbass.

Ukraine is not going to remain neutral now. Perhaps it could have been agreed after the Battle of Hostomel Airport, but now? There is absolutely no reason for Ukraine to agree to anything other than full liberation of the "LDPR" and the other occupied territories, with the exception of Crimea.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,816
Location
West is best
Not sure. Could someone look into why, as I understand it, Georgia and Ukraine were their red lines?

Maybe something to do with geo-strategic interest.
My opinion is because:
  1. It’s an excuse.
  2. Putin knows trying to fight Finnish military forces would end up with the Russian forces losing badly.
 

TwoYellas

Member
Joined
10 Jul 2021
Messages
258
Location
Birmingham
My opinion is because:
  1. It’s an excuse.
  2. Putin knows trying to fight Finnish military forces would end up with the Russian forces losing badly.
Respect your opinion. But I want to know why the Russian bear considers Ukraine and Georgia to be their red lines. Can someone answer as I think it's vitally important to understand, in an unbiased way, what the hell is going on.

Yes I've heard the 'they are gonna be driven out and the people of Russia are going to rise up and overthrow Pootin'. I also want to win the Euro Millions!

Imho there will be a negotiated settlement and the sooner the better.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,816
Location
West is best
Unfortunately trying to read Putin’s mind is near impossible…

As indicated earlier in this topic, it’s likely due to him wanting to hold on to power (and his way of life including his own life). Power is everything to Putin (going by his actions and the actions of Russia’s special forces under his government).

If Ukraine becomes like other Western European countries, Russians in Moscow and elsewhere may start asking awkward questions as they compare Russian way of life with Ukrainian way of life.

One thing is certain, the invasion of Ukraine is definitely not to protect Russian speaking ordinary people. Otherwise why are the Russian forces smashing everything up and stealing from anywhere they can?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,695
Location
Scotland
Respect your opinion. But I want to know why the Russian bear considers Ukraine and Georgia to be their red lines. Can someone answer as I think it's vitally important to understand, in an unbiased way, what the hell is going on.
From a purely military point of view, for Ukraine it's because it lies on the main potential invasion route from the West into Russia.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
7,239
Location
UK
Unfortunately trying to read Putin’s mind is near impossible…
I imagine that his initial motive was that he thought invading Ukraine would be relatively simple. Their PM was a joke (okay, a comedian), their military less equipped, and presumably lots of reports from the Donbas that the people wanted to be free of Ukraine were applied generally.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,695
Location
Scotland
I imagine that his initial motive was that he thought invading Ukraine would be relatively simple. Their PM was a joke (okay, a comedian), their military less equipped, and presumably lots of reports from the Donbas that the people wanted to be free of Ukraine were applied generally.
It is likely an example of confirmation bias - he believed the reports that said what he wanted to be true and ignored the ones that held a contrary view.
 

TheEdge

Established Member
Joined
29 Nov 2012
Messages
4,498
Location
Norwich
Just switching the subject slightly, is anyone keeping track of the Russian airforce? Are they now trying to operate only over relatively safe occupied territory?

What happens if Ukraine can increase the number of ground attack aircraft operating over the Russian forces?

Its doing as bad as the rest of the Russian forces. Only a few days ago they managed to loose an Su-30 to a Stinger. Stingers are not really for shooting down jets, they are for helicopters. Ukraine is probably served better by using drones to attack and its air force for direct combat with the Russian air force.

Respect your opinion. But I want to know why the Russian bear considers Ukraine and Georgia to be their red lines. Can someone answer as I think it's vitally important to understand, in an unbiased way, what the hell is going on.

Because Putin believes Novarossiya is a thing but he can only bully nations weaker than Russia to create it. I'm sure he'd love the Baltics, Poland, Czechia and the rest of the old Warsaw Pact to be back in his sphere but most of them are in NATO so that would trigger Article 5. And, until they also joined NATO, Finland has been preparing to fight Russia since about a day after the end of the Continuation War, so he can't really poke them as they'd get beaten back to St Petersburg. So the non-aligned states are the only targets left.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,494
Location
Taunton or Kent
Trouble brewing around Lyman for Russia:


Ok Lyman looks like the old bait and switch. Drive flanks north and east of Lyman causing the Russians to reinforce this critical railroad junction (1). Then drive a much bigger encircling movement to trap the whole lot (2).

This may develop into a thread …

Let’s hope so …

Apparently Putin has ordered everyone to hold their ground.

This is causing the Russian Air Force to fly desperate missions to keep hard to defend pockets in business. They lost 4 or 5 planes yesterday.

Obv not sustainable.
 

Shaw S Hunter

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2016
Messages
3,495
Location
Over The Hill
Unfortunately trying to read Putin’s mind is near impossible…
Although in some ways it's quite simple:
But I want to know why the Russian bear considers Ukraine and Georgia to be their red lines. Can someone answer as I think it's vitally important to understand, in an unbiased way, what the hell is going on.
Consider Putin's history. At the time the Soviet empire started to crumble he was an upcoming KGB officer serving in East Germany. His expected career path was quickly destroyed. He himself has said that he believes the end of the Soviet Union was the greatest tragedy to befall Russia in the 20th century. Not the pointless bloodletting of the imperial war of 1914-1918 and the subsequent civil war of the Soviet Union's early years. Not the death of 27 million Soviet, though mostly Russian, citizens during "The Great Patriotic War". No, according to Putin it was the ending of a regime that continually subjugated its citizens while also being so paranoid about its military security that it spent money it couldn't afford on its armed forces and also occupied a whole swathe of central and eastern European countries to maintain their servility and act as "buffer states" against a NATO block which has never expressed any interest in attacking Russia/Soviet Union.

Putin is essentially as paranoid as any Soviet era leader but also has delusions that Russia should continue to be an imperial power. So former constituents of the Soviet Union, in his view, should be under Moscow's control and he should be the modern-day Tsar. If the former Soviet block members of NATO had not joined that organisation he would almost certainly have already invaded the Baltic States as well as having picked off the Caucasus nations one by one.

The Maidan uprising in Ukraine refocused Putin's attention in that direction so he was more than happy to allow unofficial support for Russian separatists in the Donbas. Despite the MH17 atrocity. Perhaps the final straw was the need to send in Russian personnel to quell the potential uprising in Belarus thereby cementing that country's regime as Moscow's favourite lapdog. That subsequently facilitated the ultimately disastrous attempt to capture Kyiv.

In short Putin believes he has a lot of unfinished business that is practically impossible to achieve by diplomatic means so he is happy to use the military option. It seems unlikely that anything other than complete military defeat will stop him. Though that does not have to mean any invasion of (pre-2014) Russia nor a regime change in Moscow due to external pressure. As such any hope of bringing him to any court for war crimes is an idealistic concept only with no realistic prospect of it actually happening.
 

adc82140

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2008
Messages
3,408
His nuclear rhetoric seems to have got a few rattled in both Washington and Brussels. Are they right to be worried, or is this exactly what he wants?
 

Top