Putin is a loser

[Terry - Somerset]

Meanwhile all the idiotic 'realists' who assume Russia is undefeatable ignore the fact that its economy is now collapsing. All the 'have to settle' talk is because Putin is losing and knows he is, and knows that Trump will throw him a lifeline if Western opinion shifts enough to make that politically feasible.

Russia has a population 4 times that of Ukraine and a land area 30 times that of Ukraine.

That Ukraine could control Russia (assuming military success) is laughable. It is just possible the Russian public welcome the invading Ukrainians in bringing peace, prosperity, fairness, order, etc etc to a country currently beset by a corrupt and incompetent ruling elite - a bit of a risk there!!

To achieve military supremacy, defeat the Russians, and force their surrender would require huge western support - probably boots on the ground due to Russian numerical superiority. There is close to zero chance of this happening due to the very real prospect of serious escalation.

Final possibility - military defeat, complete withdrawal from Ukraine, threats to the rest of Europe neutered. No occupation. Russia risks becoming an ungovernable rogue state with huge resources and thus power (oil, gas, minerals, etc) at its disposal. Doesn't make me feel comfortable.

Perhaps you see something I have missed??

 

[Jake]

That Ukraine could control Russia (assuming military success) is laughable.

My dumb strawman alert has gone off.

The idea that UKR can kick Russia out is not laughable, their invasion is failing with huge losses and their economy is collapsing fast now.

 

[Jake]

Final possibility - military defeat, complete withdrawal from Ukraine, threats to the rest of Europe neutered. No occupation. Russia risks becoming an ungovernable rogue state with huge resources and thus power (oil, gas, minerals, etc) at its disposal. Doesn't make me feel comfortable.

Perhaps you see something I have missed??

Oh poor Terry, does not allowing the fascist to have a little invasion success make you feel uncomfortable? Why don't the Ukrainians (who will end up living under a dictatorial regime with genocidal ambitions) think about your feelings?

 

[Terry - Somerset]

The follow on question then re-asserts itself.

From my previous:


If the west supports the ceding of territory to Putin, then what next?? Do you think that will be the end of it. Or do you think that Putin will reset, then launch another invasion?


Every time I post on this thread I always have front and centre of my mind - the social media 'phone video images of that civilian running away from a tank that is trying to run him over on invasion day. <shivers>
Use that image as your barometer of what you believe would happen next.
Also note that eastern Moldova has a "Russian Enclave".

Bismarck - politics is the art of the possible.

You may dislike a negotiated settlement which rewards an aggressor - but what does your alternative involve.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Oh poor Terry, does not allowing the fascist to have a little invasion success make you feel uncomfortable? Why don't the Ukrainians (who will end up living under a dictatorial regime with genocidal ambitions) think about your feelings?

No need for rudeness - one woud hope for a constructive informed exchange of views.

 

[Jake]

No need for rudeness - one woud hope for a constructive informed exchange of views.

Well really, your point was that a people facing a horrific future if they lose should be made to lose because you would feel fearful about the future if they weren't abandoned. And you want a serious debate about whether your fearful feelings are important?

A bit of gentle mocking was well earned.

 

[Jacob]

The thing about Ukraine and also Palestine; it's not easy to imagine a peaceful ending occurring until the main proponents are dead and gone, i.e. Putin, Netanyahu and their servile entourages.
You'd think they could do something with all this amazing drone technology. No doubt the other side are tagging Volodymyr as best they can.

 

[Fergie 307]

Meanwhile still waiting for some explanation why evil is an unfair judgement of Mr Putin.

 

[Fergie 307]

Putin is a boomer. Unlike those born in the UK, he was brought into a world in which 20m+ Russians died in WW2, grew up and started his career during the heights of the cold war. Life (I suspect) was tough in the 1950-60s for a kid born to a factory worker and naval conscript.

The collapse of the Soviet Union would have tested his world view as he rose through the ranks.

The invasion of Crimea went unopposed by the West - possibly as it was culturally very closely aligned with Russia. Eastern Ukraine has similar close ties - culture, language etc. Concerned at the expansion of NATO and EU, Ukraine was an obvious target.

Before invasion I suspect he thought it would be a simple few week campaign (as did I) to the borders with Poland, Romania etc. He had massive weapons and manpower superiority, and the Crimea experience "proved" the reluctance of the west to get involved.

The West has provided just enough support to stall the conflict in static positions for the last two years - an bit of an advance here, a little retreat there. The question is - what now?

• withdraw further funding and support - Ukraine loses rapidly. Many dead. Putin bolstered. Potential further threat in Europe. Not a good solution for Ukraine or the West.
• continue providing "just enough" support - Russia will not want to acknowledge impotence or apparent defeat. War could drag on for years. Lots more dead. Would keep Russia occupied reducing further European conflict risk.
• increase support - it is a war Ukraine cannot "win" with troops in Red Square. Russia likely to escalate rather than surrender. Remember Afghanistan - Russia were there for 11 years before withdrawing.

Assuming bringing the conflict to an end would be a good thing (there could be arguments for extending it indefinitely) the solution must be negotiated - there is no military option.

This requires (a) that Putin has some reward he can sell to evidence "success" (redrawn borders), and (b) that Zelensky has no choice but to accept the outcome (do it or support is withdrawn).

The morality of such a settlement - possibly rewarding the aggressor - is questionable. But it may be the price necessary to end a destructive conflict.

Who has ever suggested a win by Ukraine involving troops in red square, what an odd thing to say.
I dare say Ukraine would be quite happy to just see the Russians leave.

 

[Spectric]

The idea that UKR can kick Russia out is not laughable, their invasion is failing with huge losses and their economy is collapsing fast now.

If Putin really believed he was about to lose the war in Ukraine do you really believe he would just accept defeat and do nothing ? That is when esculation will occur, you don't sit back and lose when you have the firepower to remove entire countries off the map .

 

[Jake]

If Putin really believed he was about to lose the war in Ukraine do you really believe he would just accept defeat and do nothing ? That is when esculation will occur, you don't sit back and lose when you have the firepower to remove entire countries off the map .

This is a really stupid take. Russia withdrew from the whole USSR and didn't nuke everything because they were losers. MAD ensures that Putin won't and if he tried because he lost his mind someone in the elites would take him out because they do want to live.

You are all scraping and bowing and giving way to the playground bully. How did you survive primary school even?

 

[Hypnotic Chimera]

Bismarck - politics is the art of the possible.

You may dislike a negotiated settlement which rewards an aggressor - but what does your alternative involve.

I'm not the analyst here.
However, after asking myself the question: "After a negotiated settlement that allowed Putin to keep ALL of the territory that he has thus far seized - in order to safeguard the lives of the remainder - what happens next??"

My honest answer is that the I strongly believe that the lives that were "safeguarded" under the settlement would still be at risk - a risk at least as severe as staying in hostilities. Reason? I would sincerely expect Putin to regroup and launch another offensive invasion. (Never ever forget the images of that civilian being chased by a tank.)

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Who has ever suggested a win by Ukraine involving troops in red square, what an odd thing to say.
I dare say Ukraine would be quite happy to just see the Russians leave.

I agree - but what would persuade them to leave in a reasonable timeframe - say the next 6 months.

Leaving = great loss of face, unless there is a persuasive carrot or stick - what is it.

Simply saying "sorry chaps - its time to go" or "if you don't go we will get really cross" probably won't cut it!

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I'm not the analyst here.
However, after asking myself the question: "After a negotiated settlement that allowed Putin to keep ALL of the territory that he has thus far seized - in order to safeguard the lives of the remainder - what happens next??"

My honest answer is that the I strongly believe that the lives that were "safeguarded" under the settlement would still be at risk - a risk at least as severe as staying in hostilities. Reason? I would sincerely expect Putin to regroup and launch another offensive invasion. (Never ever forget the images of that civilian being chased by a tank.)

You may be right - I may be wrong.

But my best bet would be on bringing Ukraine (provisionally until normal criteria met) into the NATO and EU fold which may act as a deterrent to further military action by Russia. It would also be a clear condition of any territorial agreement that NATO and EU were part of the deal.

It may be another 10 years before Russia tried offensive action again - Putin may be then be dead, demented, ousted etc. We know little about who may replace him.

 

[Spectric]

This is a really stupid take. Russia withdrew from the whole USSR and didn't nuke everything because they were losers. MAD ensures that Putin won't and if he tried because he lost his mind someone in the elites would take him out because they do want to live.

I know the consequences are rather bad but finding excuses as to why they will not happen will not prevent them from happening, you need to think as a Russian not as a person from the west.

Read this to get some idea of Russian thinking, they decided early on that if they lose then so will everyone else.

https://www.military.com/history/russias-dead-hand-soviet-built-nuclear-doomsday-device.html

 

[bushwhaker]

Putinversteher narrative:​

"Russia 'did not attack Ukraine' says Lavrov after meeting Kuleba"

 

[Jake]

Read this to get some idea of Russian thinking, they decided early on that if they lose then so will everyone else.

And? That's just MAD in action, it's all about the second strike being literal annihilation for the other side, hence deterrence of a first strike.

It used to be the left who got the collywobbles about this stuff. Russia is really good at injecting fearfulness into RW info sources and your minds are all melting.

 

[Fergie 307]

I know the consequences are rather bad but finding excuses as to why they will not happen will not prevent them from happening, you need to think as a Russian not as a person from the west.

Read this to get some idea of Russian thinking, they decided early on that if they lose then so will everyone else.

https://www.military.com/history/russias-dead-hand-soviet-built-nuclear-doomsday-device.html

Putin was KGB, as such he will have had far better information than the average Russian, and been far better placed to know about world affairs.
Nuclear weapons are a last resort, not for when you don't get your way and are having a hissy fit, but for when your country is under serious threat.
There is no real threat to Russia, and never had been from NATO or Ukraine.
Unless Putin is indeed mad, which I very much doubt, then he knows this to be the case.
The propaganda he puts out to the contrary is just that, an attempt to justify his expansionist ambitions.
So do you think he is really likely to want to see his entire country laid waste, just because he can't get his own way in Ukraine?
He didn't when Ukraine threw his forces back in the North. He didn't when they actually invaded part of Russia. If his forces in the South collapsed tomorrow and were routed there would still be no direct threat to Russia. So where would be the justification.

He invaded with the clear expectation that he would overrun the country in a matter of days.
He probably assumed that, presented with a fait accompli, the West would do little more than their usual hand wringing. And sadly he was probably right.
Unfortunately the Ukrainians hadn't read the script, and had other ideas.
So now, as a direct result of this folly, NATO has expanded it's membership, his military is arguably on its knees, his economy is in a bad way and he now has more NATO forces deployed in eastern Europe than at any time since the cold war, and with all its members looking to increase spending because of the threat HE poses.
A spectacular balls up however you look at it.
If he had the sense to swallow his pride he would declare that Ukraine had been successfully cleared of Nazi elements and bring his troops home.
As it is he's probably counting on Trump to get him out of the mess he has got himself into, and he will probably oblige.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Military and civilian deaths there in WWII are conservatively estimated at 27 million. In Russia life is cheap - and certainly no great concern to Putin.

Firstly apologies for being late to return - busy day at the office.

Secondly, your statement above is exactly the sort of thing that appears to be ingrained in British culture. The Evil Nazis killed 6 million Jews, which was dreadful. So dreadful that the world gave them their own country so it could never happen again (never mind that this country was already occupied, not important). The same Naziz killed up to 30 million Russians, but this was because the Russians are thoughtless, uncaring sociopaths. Nothing to do with Nazis, lebensraum, etc., the Russians killed themselves, obviously.

Could you perhaps be blaming the victim? Or just not thinking it through at all.

 

[selectortone]

Could you perhaps be blaming the victim? Or just not thinking it through at all.

Where did I say the Nazis killed them all? Stalin was as ruthless with his own as he was with the Germans.