Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[Sureboss]

For all the bluster though, I do not think that large scale nuclear war is remotely likely. It's too insane, even for Putin. "Small" scale? That's a different story unfortunately.

Even if Russia detonated a nuke somewhere in eastern Europe, I'm not sure the US would respond with nukes. The US might go to war with Russia over it, but I don't see ICBMs as the immediate response. I could see the US and Russia fighting a war without using nukes.

What does Putin have to lose? That's what terrifies me the most.

 

[Danoff]

What does Putin have to lose? That's what terrifies me the most.

I don't think that ending Russia (along with most of the rest of the world) is anywhere near his to-do list. The invasion of Ukraine actually shows a lot about what he's trying to do - restore the soviet empire.

 

[eran0004]

"So be it."

Despite the fact that we're probably on a one-way trip to climate breakdown, that's an awfully blasé sentiment for a chain of events that could easily knock civilisation back to the stone ages. I still like feeling the sun on my face, thank you very much.

We can only take responsibility for our own actions. If Putin wants to start a nuclear war there is absolutely nothing we can do about that.

 

[Keef]

The US wouldn't use them out of principle, unless they were aimed directly at our territories. Even then we might not, and instead wage a [strategic] total war.

Edit: Honestly I really don't know what we'd do. These economic sanctions are already extremely effective in a world where globalism decides who sinks and who swims. Dedicating enough conventional resources to respond to a nuclear attack would leave us vulnerable everywhere else.

 

[Danoff]

The US wouldn't use them out of principle, unless they were aimed directly at our territories. Even then we might not, and instead wage a [strategic] total war.

Edit: Honestly I really don't know what we'd do. These economic sanctions are already extremely effective in a world where globalism decides who sinks and who swims. Dedicating enough conventional resources to respond to a nuclear attack would leave us vulnerable everywhere else.

Let's wargame a specific scenario here. What do we think is the most likely path for nuclear weapon usage? Here's one path...

Suppose some NATO nation decides to take up arms against Russia in defense of Ukraine. And let's suppose that to prevent losing, Russia detonates a nuke in Ukraine against that NATO nation. Is that the most likely nuclear scenario? If it's reasonably likely, how would the US respond to that?

Here's an interesting synopsis:

The Biden administration is expected to complete its own broad Nuclear Posture Review, traditionally done by new presidents, early this year. The review lays out an administration’s approach to nuclear weapons policy. These reviews are often largely classified. As a candidate, Biden suggested he would pursue a “sole purpose” nuclear strategy, which means the nuclear force can only be used to deter or retaliate for a nuclear attack against the US and its allies.

My first take on this is that we would not deploy nukes in response to that situation.

 

[Blitz24]

I hope @inCloud can see this image. Unsure if the hosting site is far enough off of Twitter:

141 to 5 basically. 4 of those 5 were laughably obvious but I am surprised at Eritrea.

 

[Joey D]

For all the bluster though, I do not think that large scale nuclear war is remotely likely. It's too insane, even for Putin. "Small" scale? That's a different story unfortunately.

Even if Russia detonated a nuke somewhere in eastern Europe, I'm not sure the US would respond with nukes. The US might go to war with Russia over it, but I don't see ICBMs as the immediate response. I could see the US and Russia fighting a war without using nukes.

If NATO got involved, I can't see that war lasting very long. The Russian military has proven to be woefully unorganized and they can't even keep their vehicles moving or their soldiers fed. I even doubt their readiness in terms of having their ICBMs actually function. While only a handful needs to work in order to cause massive devastation, given the poor logistics that might be a tall order. Even if ICBMs are launched, pretty much any country with a sizeable defense budget has anti-ICBM technology. I don't know all the stuff the US has, but I do know the THAAD system has been shown to intercept an ICBM without much of an issue. Israel has Arrow as well and several NATO countries have Aster. I'm sure there's so more top secret stuff that exists as well that would undoubtedly be deployed.

I'm not sure we or our allies could deploy the technology in time to stop a warhead from hitting Ukraine though. I don't think Russia would even need to resort to an ICBM to hit any target within the country either.

I can't see any of the NATO countries resorting to nuclear weapons unless it was the absolute last resort. The way I see it is we'd use our stealth aircraft and drones to unload on select targets with support from the Navy. Once those targets are taken care of, NATO would roll in ground forces to wage a short but bloody battle with the remaining forces. The loss of life would be tremendous, but I can't see a scenario where NATO loses a war to Russia. Hell, even without NATO, I can't see the US losing a war against Russia. If there's one thing the US is really, really good at it's the war machine.

 

[inCloud]

Vladimir Putin is a danger to humanity broadly

You overestimate his power and Russian economy.

Are my sources wrong or do people in current day Russia celebrate Stalin?

Some. Stalin in modern Russia is a symbol of FAST industrialization and order. Main reason why he's not threatened as Hitler is that by his rule Soviet people won GPW.

I'm just recognizing that our leadership may consistently underperform in certain specific areas because they're always so relatively new

democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried

 

[Danoff]

I'm not sure we or our allies could deploy the technology in time to stop a warhead from hitting Ukraine though. I don't think Russia would even need to resort to an ICBM to hit any target within the country either.

Agreed, if the target is in Ukraine, I don't think Russia would use an ICBM. It's too easily detected, too easily misinterpreted, and possibly could be intercepted because of the trajectory. A dropped warhead, or short range artillery or rocket seems more likely.

 

[Keef]

Let's wargame a specific scenario here. What do we think is the most likely path for nuclear weapon usage? Here's one path...

Suppose some NATO nation decides to take up arms against Russia in defense of Ukraine. And let's suppose that to prevent losing, Russia detonates a nuke in Ukraine against that NATO nation. Is that the most likely nuclear scenario? If it's reasonably likely, how would the US respond to that?

Here's an interesting synopsis:



My first take on this is that we would not deploy nukes in response to that situation.

I'd think the most likely scenario would be Russia's use of a small-yield strategic nuke basically to test the waters. It would be useful against a large localized buildup of equipment or troops and because it's a military target there is an argument for it. I don't think something like that would warrant a nuclear response either. The stakes of escalation are just too high.

But why would they do that when they could use their FOAB or conventional ICBMs which could both level city blocks? Ukraine and eastern Euro nations are well within reach of either, and Ukraine in its current state could be overflown by a bomber without too much trouble. Using even a strategic nuke would bypass several other opportunities for escalation.

We both agree the US is not likely to respond with our own nukes of any sort but what would we respond with that wouldn't leave us vulnerable elsewhere? Would we let/instruct Europe to take the lead on that one? The US has a lot on our plate elsewhere that doesn't directly effect Europe so I'm thinking our European NATO friends would need to step up in this situation.

@Joey D you're right that European NATO countries are as close to impervious to nuclear ICBMS as they're gonna get but that doesn't include Ukraine.

Another thing we aren't considering is space warfare. Both the US and Russia have demonstrated the ability to shoot down satellites with conventional missiles fired from fighter jets. Obviously this conflict isn't nearly to that scale but a modern world war would likely involve eliminating enemy systems to make their life a lot harder. We discussed GLONASS a bit and I think crippling that would be very high on our to-do list if we went to a large scale war with Russia.

 

[Joey D]

I am surprised at Eritrea.

Look, I'm decent enough with geography, but I had to actually look up where Eritrea even was. There are a few countries on that list that if you asked me to point to them on a map I'd probably just pick some random African landmass or Oceania island. I mean Benini, Comoros, or Eswatini? No idea.

 

[Blitz24]

Look, I'm decent enough with geography, but I had to actually look up where Eritrea even was. There are a few countries on that list that if you asked me to point to them on a map I'd probably just pick some random African landmass or Oceania island. I mean Benini, Comoros, or Eswatini? No idea.

Ironic that you picked 3 African countries. Comoros is an island and Eswatini is what used to be Swaziland.

 

[Danoff]

I'm thinking our European NATO friends would need to step up in this situation.

I'm thinking if NATO gets involved en masse, so does the US. But I can't see us doing practically anything about any of this without a big coalition, and we wouldn't want to put ourselves in a situation to do the vast majority of the heavy lifting, so that it doesn't look like a cover for a US operation.

Turning this into the US vs Russia is exactly what nobody wants.

 

[Keef]

Eswatini

Pretty sure that one changed their name recently lol.

Edit: Yeah, Eswatini was Swaziland which is landlocked within South Africa.

 

[TheCracker]

Putin is said to be quite the historian scholar, he's not after a Stalin's Soviet Russia, he looks more to Peter the Great's Imperial Russia for what he want's modern day Russia to emulate.

The form of presidency he has moulded for himself allows him more freedom to act on whim and to do so quickly. Much more so than a US president or other true democratic leader does. He's largely surrounded by a small but powerful group of yes-men, but that is very much likely to have breed an unknown and hidden faction of politicians and military generals who are opposed to many of Putin's plans. We can only hope that if it hits the fan and Putin feels backed into a corner, the chain of command between the president's red button and the actual red buttons will step in and question if it's the right thing to do.

As it stands today, Putin's Russia is a pariah state all across the globe and nothing other than his removal will ever change that.

 

[Keef]

The form of presidency

Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me. They're somewhat predictable but we haven't dealt with one so capable and well-armed before. Even the USSR had a relatively sensible chain of command.




Good.



Bad. This basically means there won't be a clear-cut winner to this until Russia can slog it's way through Kyiv.

 

[inCloud]

Invasion is okay, you can always just move

Hell, no. Be a refugee is always better than be a dead body. Putin isnt immortal creature. I understand why Ukrainians fight for their home, but I think its not worth it for individual person. You can call me coward if you want.

For all the bluster though, I do not think that large scale nuclear war is remotely likely.

Keep in mind that Putin cant just decide to nuke someone.

 

[Keef]

This dude is a real man's man right here. I know he wants to protect himself but he's got to be kept safe. Not sure what Ukraine's presidential terms are like or how he can be involved afterward but he seems like the kind of dude who can change the culture of government and a nation, sort of like how Obama did in the US. He truly believes in his cause. Putin on the other hand is a real expletive of your choosing.

 

[Dotini]

Putin is using his nuclear deterrent to prevent anyone from stopping Russian aggression - this is a fundamental shift in behaviour and an unprecedented use of 'nuclear deterrence'.

Putin is setting the stage for the genocide of the Ukrainian people, and is threatening the rest of the world with nuclear holocaust if anyone tries to stop him. Hell, the psychopath even raised Russia's nuclear threat level because Liz Truss said something that upset him...

The world now faces the terrifying prospect of a demented, psychopathic, sadistic dictator unleashing barbarism on millions of people, and determined to take the rest of the world with him if he is attacked. Putin has made Russia the geopolitical equivalent of a suicide bomber.

I concur that a large scale nuclear war is unlikely. However, my understanding is the Putin has threatened to use nuclear missiles in the case his great column or other military operations were counterattacked from the air by NATO or the US. He might go so far as to target the bases the planes were sent from.

 

[Keef]

Not sure if the HW Bush and Gerald R Ford are doing sea trials together or loading up but they were both in port last week.





Must have been a misfire.

 

[inCloud]

RF Ministry of defence reporting 498 soliders dead, 1597 injured. 1/3 of Grozny siege numbers. A lot.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Bad. This basically means there won't be a clear-cut winner to this until Russia can slog it's way through Kyiv.

If they learned anything at all from Grozny, they will be very reluctant to begin urban warfare. For Russian armored divisions, the thought of every window in every high-rise potentially hosting a Javelin team is a terrifying prospect.

I'm pretty sure that Russia/Putin was hoping for a very quick result like Desert Storm and a capitulation from Kyiv. That way they could remain at standoff range and not risk men and equipment in a prolonged quagmire in Ukrainian urban centers. Not only that, but I can't imagine Russia is all that enthusiastic about destroying everything in Kyiv considering it's one of their cultural centerpieces. They are forcing to pivot and it seems like their ground forces are not professional enough and not sufficiently motivated or supplied to make this a quick job.

Putin must be fuming.

RF Ministry of defence reporting 498 soliders dead, 1597 injured. 1/3 of Grozny siege numbers. A lot.

That's more than 1/5 the total combat casualties America had in Afghanistan in 20 years.

 

[Blitz24]

If they learned anything at all from Grozny, they will be very reluctant to begin urban warfare. For Russian armored divisions, the thought of every window in every high-rise potentially hosting a Javelin team is a terrifying prospect.

I'm pretty sure that Russia/Putin was hoping for a very quick result like Desert Storm and a capitulation from Kyiv. That way they could remain at standoff range and not risk men and equipment in a prolonged quagmire in Ukrainian urban centers. Not only that, but I can't imagine Russia is all that enthusiastic about destroying everything in Kyiv considering it's one of their cultural centerpieces. They are forcing to pivot and it seems like their ground forces are not professional enough and not sufficiently motivated or supplied to make this a quick job.

Putin must be fuming.

It feels like this is a massive miscalculation by Putin to the point where there is no endgame other than destroying Kyiv.

 

[McLaren]

Been hearing even if Ukraine surrendered, Russia would likely be facing resistance fighters for years that could cost mountains of money alone. Was said the situation would be similar to when Russia fought the Mujahideen for several years.

 

[Keef]

I just read something saying Yandex is a Russian company and was like ope...Ohio State University has a deal with Grubhub and Yandex for these weird food delivery robots. They've been roaming campus for almost two years now. Anyway, turns out that the founder of Yandex has lost $2 billion of his personal wealth since last Thursday and the company's stock collapsed from $45 to $19 between Feb 18 and 25 when their markets were closed. And that's after Yandex's stock crashed from $86 on Nov 5 to $45 on Jan 21. Yandex itself and its founder seem like legitimate efforts at a successful tech company - apparently the name of the company is short for Yet Another Index which is pretty funny. It was Russia's largest tech business with a $30 billion cap but has dropped to just $6.7 billion since November.

Putin has decimated Russia's economy, destroyed the world's trust, and is driving all his citizens into Soviet-style poverty. If I were a Russia citizen I'd be scraping up every Ruble I could find, packing my things, and moving out. Russia is no longer a modern growing economy, it's now an isolated outlier that never even got to enjoy its full potential before the megalomaniac at the helm ruined it for everybody. Judging by how much money has been lost and how much money will never be made back, I wouldn't be surprised if Putin ends up assassinated before the end of this.

All these videos on Youtube about how Russia was going to gain massive wealth and influence through European fuel exports and Arctic Ocean exploration and shipping, and Putin managed to ruin it all in a week. Wow. It's hard to believe it honestly. Take another look at those economic numbers - @Blitz24 I don't think any of us have grasped how massive a miscalculation this has been. Not even Venezuela's economic catastrophe was this drastic.

 

[inCloud]

That's more than 1/5 the total combat casualties America had in Afghanistan in 20 years.

Gulf War, basically.

just read something saying Yandex is a Russian company

Yeap, our local Google + biggest taxi operator + food delivery.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Anyone have any insight on military movement in Alaska? Seeing as we are a stones throw away from Russia up there. Just curious.

 

[Com Fox]

This dude is a real man's man right here. I know he wants to protect himself but he's got to be kept safe. Not sure what Ukraine's presidential terms are like or how he can be involved afterward but he seems like the kind of dude who can change the culture of government and a nation, sort of like how Obama did in the US. He truly believes in his cause. Putin on the other hand is a real expletive of your choosing.

I think this is the part that makes Invasions from a dictator like this different from past ones and probably one aspect Putin didn't account for until it's too late. Thanks to Internet access unless you North Korea-it, we have gotten a lot of knowledge from other places in the world so people who do that are less likely to respond to a dictator blindly

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Anyone have any insight on military movement in Alaska? Seeing as we are a stones throw away from Russia up there. Just curious.

That part of Russia is almost entirely undeveloped. Just look on google maps, it's just a few outposts and very few roads. The nearest population center to the Bering Strait, IIRC is Vladivostok which is a good 2,600 miles away. I sincerely doubt there would be any movement, from either side, on that side of the world.

edit: As far as I can tell, Russia does not have a single rail or road link between the Bering Strait and Moscow. As they must say in Moscow, you can't get there from here. The closest road-connected outpost I could find is Seymchan, which is still over 1,000 miles from the Strait.

 

[Keef]

Thanks to Internet access unless you North Korea-it, we have gotten a lot of knowledge from other places in the world so people who do that are less likely to respond to a dictator blindly

A great example of this is Cuba for the past couple decades. For the most part it seems that their awakening has been relatively gradual and peaceful - by virtue of weapons and crime being non-existent - and the Cuban people tend to stay in their lane because it's just easier that way. But almost anybody there who mingles with tourists knows exactly what's going on and has known for many years. They're just biding their time. Life isn't terrible in Cuba - they do live on a tropical island after all - but they could easily make it worse by challenging their government before it's ready.