The Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[Madner Kami]

It appears that they ate their own lies, up to the highest echelons. There are reports of POWs who are completely baffled by the fact, that they are not welcome with celebrations. It's beyond belief.

[phantom000]

Yup, Putin has lost his mind completely. I guess this is what happens when you rely on paranoia and brute force to hold an entire nation hostage.

He's always been a thoroughly nasty piece of work but has never been an idiot, wondering what's made him go over the edge? He seems to have a chip on his shoulder about Ukraine (due it it spurning Russia?), and having surrounded himself with sycophantic yes-men I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's come to believe his own rhetoric, and that he's always in full control of everything and nothing he does will ever be significantly opposed. More than one past dictator has ended up a victim of their hubris.

This could be the begining of the end for Putin, the fear is that he'll take everyone else out with him.

I'm still surprised by the awful state of the Russian strategy. Sure they're advancing, but apparently entire vehicle lines ran out of fuel and supplies. I guess despite all of their modernization claims, they just don't have enough money to fully improve their army.
But then again, intelligent sycophants are an extremely rare breed, so you can't have both, and Putin clearly choose to have sycophants everywhere at the expense of intelligence.

Reminds me of Simon Schama, what's the only thing worse than a tyrant? An incompetent tyrant.

The traditional problem with autocracy is that you need a genius to make it run smoothly. In government you have politics, economics, diplomacy and warfare, it's hard enough to find someone who excels in just one of those areas but all four of them would be impossible.

The Middle Ages had a lot of 'bad' kings who weren't really evil or stupid, they were just the wrong person at the wrong time.

[Mabus]

Not sure how accurate this is, but it could explain why the Russian Army hasn't used its entire amassed force to invade Ukraine just yet:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RihoTerras/s ... 3346220038
Again, this needs to be taken with a grain of sand, but still, it does fit with how the Russian airstrikes have been mostly erratic.
I guess corruption is very expensive if you go to war without having proper supplies.

[phantom000]

Not sure how accurate this is, but it could explain why the Russian Army hasn't used its entire amassed force to invade Ukraine just yet:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RihoTerras/s ... 3346220038
Again, this needs to be taken with a grain of sand, but still, it does fit with how the Russian airstrikes have been mostly erratic.
I guess corruption is very expensive if you go to war without having proper supplies.

Makes me think of the 190th rule of acquisition; "hear all, trust nothing."

I don't claim to be an expert but it seems to me that Putin needs a quick victory for a number of reasons. Supply chain issues aside, there is also the matter of NATO forces which have mobilized but will be about a month before they are in position to move. The big question right now, as far as the international situation, is what happens when NATO is ready?

It seems that whether or not Ukraine can hold out that long can make a huge difference. Even if Putin is crazy enough to have his troops attack NATO forces the nature of that conflict will depend a lot on whether NATO is supporting a local ally, or trying to drive out a foreign occupier.

I'm guessing when the time comes, we will have a repeat of what happened a couple weeks ago when the Russians started massing on the border; a battle of bluffs and signals. Let's just hope Putin finally blinks.

[pilight]

It's going to be a long war regardless of whether NATO gets involved. Anyone predicting a quick Russian victory is ignoring the entire history of Russian warfare.

[Riedquat]

Makes me think of the 190th rule of acquisition; "hear all, trust nothing."

I don't claim to be an expert but it seems to me that Putin needs a quick victory for a number of reasons. Supply chain issues aside, there is also the matter of NATO forces which have mobilized but will be about a month before they are in position to move. The big question right now, as far as the international situation, is what happens when NATO is ready?

Nothing much unless that thug in the Kremlin starts attacking NATO members, in which case it's good bye world. Hopefully the Russian generals aren't quite as insane (either from a lack of desire to get killed or because they recognise the folly of trying to fight a war on more fronts). Ukraine isn't a NATO member so NATO won't get directly involved at all (it's a defensive alliance after all), as long as things stay in Ukraine.

It seems that whether or not Ukraine can hold out that long can make a huge difference. Even if Putin is crazy enough to have his troops attack NATO forces the nature of that conflict will depend a lot on whether NATO is supporting a local ally, or trying to drive out a foreign occupier.

I'm guessing when the time comes, we will have a repeat of what happened a couple weeks ago when the Russians started massing on the border; a battle of bluffs and signals. Let's just hope Putin finally blinks.

Putin won't blink. One of those idiots who believes in "strength" and anything short of upping the ante and following through is "weakness." A dangerous lunatic, and despite the application of "idiot" not a stupid one either, which is all the scarier.

[Riedquat]

It's going to be a long war regardless of whether NATO gets involved. Anyone predicting a quick Russian victory is ignoring the entire history of Russian warfare.

The way things seem to go these days is that you can have a quick conventional military victory (remember it's only been going on a few days, so even with Russian setbacks there's no reason to think it won't be pretty quick), but then you get completely bogged down afterwards. Happened with the West in Afghanistan and Iraq, and with Russia in Chechnya and Georgia.

[Frustration]

The traditional problem with autocracy is that you need a genius to make it run smoothly.

Even a genius needs accurate information; to make any kind of intelligent decisions, you need good data. In addition to tremendous cognitive capacity, an autocrat would need interpersonal insight to a nearly superhuman degree to judge the reliability of his support staff without being able to know anything about outcomes. Once you have people you can really trust to give you accurate data, you can judge others with that data, but you need a core staff of people willing and able to give you the truth.

Do you think the President and Congress run the country? It's the people who determine what information reaches the President and Congress that run the country.

[Frustration]

Ukraine isn't a NATO member so NATO won't get directly involved at all (it's a defensive alliance after all), as long as things stay in Ukraine.

Okay, stupid question time:

Couldn't the Ukraine have invited some friendly coalition troops into their country, to make Russia think twice about invading? Really, assuming Ukraine survives as an independent nation after all this, I can't think of a better way for Russia to have convinced them that they need to enter NATO. I wonder whether NATO would consider admission to be too much of a red flag for Russia.

If they had issued such an invitation, would anyone have sent any troops?

Do we have any reason to think that the West is secretly giving supplies to the Ukraine?

[Thebestoftherest]

Makes me think of the 190th rule of acquisition; "hear all, trust nothing."

I don't claim to be an expert but it seems to me that Putin needs a quick victory for a number of reasons. Supply chain issues aside, there is also the matter of NATO forces which have mobilized but will be about a month before they are in position to move. The big question right now, as far as the international situation, is what happens when NATO is ready?

Nothing much unless that thug in the Kremlin starts attacking NATO members, in which case it's good bye world. Hopefully the Russian generals aren't quite as insane (either from a lack of desire to get killed or because they recognise the folly of trying to fight a war on more fronts). Ukraine isn't a NATO member so NATO won't get directly involved at all (it's a defensive alliance after all), as long as things stay in Ukraine.

It seems that whether or not Ukraine can hold out that long can make a huge difference. Even if Putin is crazy enough to have his troops attack NATO forces the nature of that conflict will depend a lot on whether NATO is supporting a local ally, or trying to drive out a foreign occupier.

I'm guessing when the time comes, we will have a repeat of what happened a couple weeks ago when the Russians started massing on the border; a battle of bluffs and signals. Let's just hope Putin finally blinks.

Putin won't blink. One of those idiots who believes in "strength" and anything short of upping the ante and following through is "weakness." A dangerous lunatic, and despite the application of "idiot" not a stupid one either, which is all the scarier.

I could be wrong but it sounds like Putin is falling for the same trap, that caught the Nazi forces in WW2.