Seems like a lot of posters here are convinced Putin is intent on, at the very least, bringing the entire past territory of the USSR under his control, if not marching to the English Channel.
But if that's his intent, why didn't he launch a full scale military assault on the Ukraine in 2014 when that country had violently overthrown a supposedly pro-Russian elected President? From what I understand, Ukraine's military was much weaker then (https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/12/23/ukraine-russia-military-buildup-capabilities/); Russian troops met little resistance in the Crimea that year.
Putin's been in power since 2000 after all; what's he been waiting for?
@no1marauder
I think he is going to do it in stages. Ala Hitler, a piece here, another piece there, a couple years later, and so forth.
@contenchess saidYou should end all your posts with "duh".
@no1marauder
He was waiting for Biden.
Duh...
Putin is not going to attack the EU or NATO.
Well, I guess he’s crazy enough to do anything, but triggering WW3 isn’t anyway to achieve any sort of goals.
Also, he’ll be well aware that it’s logistically impossible. Certainly to obtain parts of Europe completely and hold on to it.
Much the same that the West couldn’t invade all of Russia and hold on to it. Just not feasible.
I do comprehend Russia wanting less NATO on their doorstep. And I even understand them asserting their will over satellite states (not that I agree with it).
However, what boggles my mind is what Russia’s end game is here in Ukraine.
They’re gonna overthrow a government and then retreat? That’s a very expensive short term solution. Or is it to point out to NATO: just know we’re willing? Also a very risky and expensive act.
Or, are they planning to occupy? Tie themselves into a money-draining nightmare for years? With the West fighting them by proxy; arming partisans the whole time? Why the hell would you do that?
I understand the West’s motivation here: bad political polling, so strong-voiced like tactics are always good; nothing like a crisis to unite people and government. And, of course, the military industrial complex needs enemies to sell weapons.
But what the hell Russia hopes to get out of this is beyond me.
@shavixmir saidPerhaps Putin thinks he can get a "neutral" Ukraine that recognizes the loss of the Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk.
Putin is not going to attack the EU or NATO.
Well, I guess he’s crazy enough to do anything, but triggering WW3 isn’t anyway to achieve any sort of goals.
Also, he’ll be well aware that it’s logistically impossible. Certainly to obtain parts of Europe completely and hold on to it.
Much the same that the West couldn’t invade all of Russia and hold on to it. Just not fea ...[text shortened]... ex needs enemies to sell weapons.
But what the hell Russia hopes to get out of this is beyond me.
@no1marauder saidCould be.
Perhaps Putin thinks he can get a "neutral" Ukraine that recognizes the loss of the Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk.
But how’s this going to achieve it without draining resources?
@shavixmir saidDefeat Ukraine's military overwhelmingly enough that it accepts such terms, I suppose.
Could be.
But how’s this going to achieve it without draining resources?
Occupation of the main cities in a short period might make that a plausible scenario.
@no1marauder saidIt’s only going to lead to partisans and Western funding, drawing Russia into a new Afghanistan.
Defeat Ukraine's military overwhelmingly enough that it accepts such terms, I suppose.
Occupation of the main cities in a short period might make that a plausible scenario.
@shavixmir saidThat assumes a prolonged occupation of the entire country which I doubt Putin desires.
It’s only going to lead to partisans and Western funding, drawing Russia into a new Afghanistan.
But get a defeated Ukraine to agree to the terms I outlined above and it's a win for Putin without the necessary costs of permanent military occupation.
@no1marauder saidWhy now?
Seems like a lot of posters here are convinced Putin is intent on, at the very least, bringing the entire past territory of the USSR under his control, if not marching to the English Channel.
But if that's his intent, why didn't he launch a full scale military assault on the Ukraine in 2014 when that country had violently overthrown a supposedly pro-Russian elected Pre ...[text shortened]... in the Crimea that year.
Putin's been in power since 2000 after all; what's he been waiting for?
I think Putin goes down the way of autocrats who are in power for long times. They get delusional. From today's point of view Putin would probably have seized the Ukraine then...but he was a different man then.
What is plans are is oly guesswork, certainly any peace treaty would enclose the secession of the eastern regions, where Russian troops have been called to "avoid bloodshed".
@no1marauder saidWhy now? To divert the threat of domestic unrest. Putin has been in power a long time and resentment against him is growing at home. Hence, the time-honoured tactic to "busy giddy minds in foreign wars" (Shakespeare, Henry IV). Ukraine was merely an opportunity; it could have been somewhere else.
Seems like a lot of posters here are convinced Putin is intent on, at the very least, bringing the entire past territory of the USSR under his control, if not marching to the English Channel.
But if that's his intent, why didn't he launch a full scale military assault on the Ukraine in 2014 when that country had violently overthrown a supposedly pro-Russian elected Pre ...[text shortened]... in the Crimea that year.
Putin's been in power since 2000 after all; what's he been waiting for?
@moonbus saidBut it is a perfect opportunity to install a puppet government, like in Belarus.
Why now? To divert the threat of domestic unrest. Putin has been in power a long time and resentment against him is growing at home. Hence, the time-honoured tactic to "busy giddy minds in foreign wars" (Shakespeare, Henry IV). Ukraine was merely an opportunity; it could have been somewhere else.
It would also close this chapter and enable him to concentrate on bringing countries like Kazakhstan into line.
@suzianne saidUnlike many Western leaders, who must stand for re-election every few years, dictators for life, including Putin and Xi, can play a longer game. I’m sure Putin would like nothing better than to have a buffer zone of compliant regimes on his borders.so I guess the choice of Ukraine was not arbitrary. Nothing to be gained for him by invading a non-bordering nation.
But it is a perfect opportunity to install a puppet government, like in Belarus.
It would also close this chapter and enable him to concentrate on bringing countries like Kazakhstan into line.
@no1marauder saidThere is no evidence of that. That is just more propaganda to make to seem like they are a bigger threat than they are. Remember how The Islamic Caliphate was going to take over the world? LOL!
Seems like a lot of posters here are convinced Putin is intent on, at the very least, bringing the entire past territory of the USSR under his control, if not marching to the English Channel.
But if that's his intent, why didn't he launch a full scale military assault on the Ukraine in 2014 when that country had violently overthrown a supposedly pro-Russian elected Pre ...[text shortened]... in the Crimea that year.
Putin's been in power since 2000 after all; what's he been waiting for?
Don't believe it. It is absolute rubbish.