Ukraine – Russia … not more of the last thread

[Mr._Clark]

While I do hope that the US gives Ukraine all the resources it needs to thoroughly annihilate every Russian soldier within its borders, I do think talk of "Ukraine is just the Beginning of Russia's Ambitions" talk is wildly overblown.

Perhaps, but here's what the Institute for the Study of War had to say yesterday:

>>>The Russian military’s long-term restructuring and expansion effort aims to prepare Russia for a future-large scale conventional war against NATO, and the commitment of expensive naval resources to areas beyond Ukraine and Eastern Europe likely aims to threaten NATO and its allies across multiple regions.<<<

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Central Election Commission (CEC) announced on December 11 that Russia will conduct voting for the 2024 presidential election in occupied Ukraine, likely in an attempt to legitimize the Russian occupation and Russian President Vladimir

www.understandingwar.org

The quote above cites the following:

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) is pursuing three simultaneous and overlapping force generation efforts as it seeks to manage short- to medium-term requirements in Ukraine while also pursuing long-term restructuring to prepare for a potential

www.understandingwar.org

There are numerous reports that Russia has significantly increased military production.

>>>Today, Russian officials have remade their economy to focus on defense production. With revenue from high energy prices, Russia’s security services and ministry of defense have been able to smuggle in the microelectronics and other Western materials required for cruise missiles and other precision guided weaponry. As a result, military production has not only recovered but surged.

Before the war, one senior Western defense official said, Russia could make 100 tanks a year; now they are producing 200.

Western officials also believe Russia is on track to manufacture two million artillery shells a year — double the amount Western intelligence services had initially estimated Russia could manufacture before the war.

As a result of the push, Russia is now producing more ammunition than the United States and Europe. Overall, Kusti Salm, a senior Estonian defense ministry official, estimated that Russia’s current ammunition production is seven times greater than that of the West.<<<

Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say

Moscow’s missile production now exceeds prewar levels, officials say, leaving Ukraine especially vulnerable this coming winter.

www.nytimes.com

 

[shadyJ]

I have to wonder if they have factored in inflated numbers due to corruption. Western intelligence badly over-estimated Russian military capability before the war, and part of that was due to Russia's own corruption; not even Russia's government understood what kind of military it had. I don't think that has fundamentally changed. I think corruption is so intrinsic in its system that what they have in reality will never match what they have on paper.

Anyway, an artillery advantage is great for the world war 1 style trench lines that are being fought over in Ukraine. But it really is nothing against an enemy that has air superiority. Russia, dumbasses that they are, are prepping for a prolonged world war 1 conflict. That could only ever work against Ukraine, a much poorer and smaller country, and even then it is barely working. No NATO country with a modern air force has to worry. This is not to say that we should not be doing everything we can to help Ukraine destroy Russia as thoroughly as possible in this conflict. Ukraine should be given whatever it takes.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Perhaps, but here's what the Institute for the Study of War had to say yesterday:

>>>The Russian military’s long-term restructuring and expansion effort aims to prepare Russia for a future-large scale conventional war against NATO, and the commitment of expensive naval resources to areas beyond Ukraine and Eastern Europe likely aims to threaten NATO and its allies across multiple regions.<<<

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Central Election Commission (CEC) announced on December 11 that Russia will conduct voting for the 2024 presidential election in occupied Ukraine, likely in an attempt to legitimize the Russian occupation and Russian President Vladimir

www.understandingwar.org

The quote above cites the following:

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) is pursuing three simultaneous and overlapping force generation efforts as it seeks to manage short- to medium-term requirements in Ukraine while also pursuing long-term restructuring to prepare for a potential

www.understandingwar.org

There are numerous reports that Russia has significantly increased military production.

>>>Today, Russian officials have remade their economy to focus on defense production. With revenue from high energy prices, Russia’s security services and ministry of defense have been able to smuggle in the microelectronics and other Western materials required for cruise missiles and other precision guided weaponry. As a result, military production has not only recovered but surged.

Before the war, one senior Western defense official said, Russia could make 100 tanks a year; now they are producing 200.

Western officials also believe Russia is on track to manufacture two million artillery shells a year — double the amount Western intelligence services had initially estimated Russia could manufacture before the war.

As a result of the push, Russia is now producing more ammunition than the United States and Europe. Overall, Kusti Salm, a senior Estonian defense ministry official, estimated that Russia’s current ammunition production is seven times greater than that of the West.<<<

Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say

Moscow’s missile production now exceeds prewar levels, officials say, leaving Ukraine especially vulnerable this coming winter.

www.nytimes.com

No offense to your thorough information, but anyone with a pea for a brain can figure out this doesn't end for Russia with a basic 'we're trying to claim land back that belonged to us.' Putin's entire goal has been to bring back Russia to its former glory. It means more wars, and confiscating more poop.

 

[Trell]

Ronald Reagan rolls in his grave, but then he's just a RINO nowadays to the current Republican party.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Perhaps, but here's what the Institute for the Study of War had to say yesterday:

>>>The Russian military’s long-term restructuring and expansion effort aims to prepare Russia for a future-large scale conventional war against NATO, and the commitment of expensive naval resources to areas beyond Ukraine and Eastern Europe likely aims to threaten NATO and its allies across multiple regions.<<<

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Central Election Commission (CEC) announced on December 11 that Russia will conduct voting for the 2024 presidential election in occupied Ukraine, likely in an attempt to legitimize the Russian occupation and Russian President Vladimir

www.understandingwar.org

The quote above cites the following:

Institute for the Study of War

The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) is pursuing three simultaneous and overlapping force generation efforts as it seeks to manage short- to medium-term requirements in Ukraine while also pursuing long-term restructuring to prepare for a potential

www.understandingwar.org

There are numerous reports that Russia has significantly increased military production.

>>>Today, Russian officials have remade their economy to focus on defense production. With revenue from high energy prices, Russia’s security services and ministry of defense have been able to smuggle in the microelectronics and other Western materials required for cruise missiles and other precision guided weaponry. As a result, military production has not only recovered but surged.

Before the war, one senior Western defense official said, Russia could make 100 tanks a year; now they are producing 200.

Western officials also believe Russia is on track to manufacture two million artillery shells a year — double the amount Western intelligence services had initially estimated Russia could manufacture before the war.

As a result of the push, Russia is now producing more ammunition than the United States and Europe. Overall, Kusti Salm, a senior Estonian defense ministry official, estimated that Russia’s current ammunition production is seven times greater than that of the West.<<<

Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say

Moscow’s missile production now exceeds prewar levels, officials say, leaving Ukraine especially vulnerable this coming winter.

www.nytimes.com

The problem is that while Russia can ignore public opinion and ramp up production of munitions, regardless of the cost to taxpayers, NATO democracies are very much subject to the whims, vagaries and short-sighted self-interest of taxpayers. Russia could be peacefully brought to her knees in short order. It would mean cutting off all trade with her, as well as with other countries who continue to buy oil and gas - like China and India - from Russia. It would involve some economic pain for us, but that would be better than sacrificing Ukraine and encouraging Putin to continue with his 'eff-ery.

On top of that, giving up Ukraine will send the signal to China that the west has no intestinal fortitude.

 

[cpp]

Or, maybe its in the BIG Putin plan to push the US into further debt. And regarding China, at #2 China owns about $859.4 billion in U.S. debt , but Japan holds the most US debt at $1.1 trillon.

 

[highfigh]

As above, you do it on the basis of Loan Lease, so it's an investment on return.

The US has a couple of protagonists with the reach and intent to do it harm. The Ukrainians on their own (OK, with Western and US support ) have knocked Russia backwards by a decade in military capability. Russia have taken over 300,000 casualties since the start of the war.

They've literally done a job on the Russians. And want to join NATO and the EU. It's not as if we are funding the mujahideen here.

The US DID fund the Mujahideen- 1979-1992.

 

[Trell]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734924883916681639

 

[cpp]

The US DID fund the Mujahideen- 1979-1992.

oh yes "Operation Cyclone

 

[highfigh]

oh yes "Operation Cyclone

And they left without further support, which is the main reason bin Laden, well you know.....

 

[Mr._Clark]

Or, maybe its in the BIG Putin plan to push the US into further debt. And regarding China, at #2 China owns about $859.4 billion in U.S. debt , but Japan holds the most US debt at $1.1 trillon.

Total U.S. aid to Ukraine in 2022-2023 was 0.33 percent of GDP. The budget deficit was 6.3% of GDP in FY 2023.

>>>The federal budget deficit—the difference between government spending and revenues—increased from 5.4% of GDP in FY 2022 to 6.3% of GDP in FY 2023.<<<

Simplifying for purposes of discussion, if we lump all Ukraine aid into FY 2023, we could reduce the deficit for FY 2023 from about 6.3% of GDP to about 6.0% of GDP. This might be Putin's plan but I have a hard time seeing how it would make a significant difference in the grand scheme of things.

Also, quite a bit of the spending that has been labeled "Aid to Ukraine" is arguably not really any such thing.

>>>One striking element of the request is that $3.5 billion is, at best, indirectly related to Ukraine and arguably entirely unrelated. The Department of State would receive $1 billion for “transformative, quality, and sustainable infrastructure projects that align with U.S. strategic interests and support U.S. partners and allies. Funding would allow the United States to provide credible, reliable alternatives to out-compete China.” The World Bank through the International Development Association would receive $1 billion “to support the IDA’s crisis response window, which provides rapid financing and grants to the poorest countries to respond to severe crises” and another $1.25 billion through the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for loan guarantees “to provide financing to help countries such as Colombia, Peru, Jordan, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Nigeria, Kenya, and Vietnam build new infrastructure and supply chains.” Finally, $200 million would go to a new fund in the Department of State to counter “Russian malign actors” in Africa.

While all of these uses might [or might not] be justified, their inclusion in an emergency supplemental was likely opportunistic. The Office of Management and Budget often refers to this as the “Christmas tree” effect, whereby agencies that could not get money through the regular budget try to append the funds to an emergency supplemental.<<<

Aid to Ukraine: The Administration Requests More Money and Faces Political Battles Ahead

An additional $24 billion has been requested for the war in Ukraine. This is vital for both military operations and humanitarian relief, but a disappointing Ukrainian counteroffensive makes politics more difficult.

www.csis.org

It's also not entirely clear how much of the military aid to Ukraine constitutes older stockpiles that were slated to be destroyed. For example, the U.S. government stopped purchasing cluster munitions in 2007, and various reports suggest that the remaining stockpiles were apparently scheduled to be destroyed.

>>>[T][he United States hasn’t allotted funds for cluster munition production since 2007 . . . The exact number of cluster munitions in current U.S. stockpiles in unclear, but according to the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor’s 2016 report, the United States had 6 million cluster munitions in its inventory in 2011 and in 2015 had roughly 136,000 tons of the munitions in a stockpile set to be destroyed.<<<

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/02/why-the-last-u-s-company-making-cluster-bombs-wont-produce-them-anymore/

I'm not sure if the purported value of the cluster munitions has been included in the various reports concerning the value of U.S. aid to Ukraine, but it's hard to see how this type of aid would require additional "new" spending that would contribute to the budget deficit.

In one sense, sending older equipment is an accounting issue:

>>>The Pentagon overestimated the value of the ammunition, missiles and other equipment it sent to Ukraine by about $3bn, an error that may lead the way for more weapons being sent to Kyiv for its defense against Russian forces.

The error was the result of assigning a higher-than-warranted value on weaponry that was taken from US stocks and then shipped to Ukraine, two senior defense officials said on Thursday.<<<

Pentagon error overvalued US weapons aid to Ukraine by $3bn

‘Inconsistencies in how we value equipment’ could lead to more weapons being sent to Kyiv to defend against Russian forces

www.theguardian.com

If the government does not need to ramp up current spending to replace equipment sent to Ukraine (e.g. because the equipment would have been destroyed anyway), the aid would not result in an increase in the U.S. budget deficit.

Some of the aid to Ukraine undoubtedly did require "new" government spending that did contribute to the budget deficit, but I have yet to find a reliable breakdown on this.

 

[Mr._Clark]

No offense to your thorough information, but anyone with a pea for a brain can figure out this doesn't end for Russia with a basic 'we're trying to claim land back that belonged to us.' Putin's entire goal has been to bring back Russia to its former glory. It means more wars, and confiscating more poop.

The difference is that now it's not just over the top rhetoric from Putin. By all accounts Russia is now planning to expand it's military to engage NATO in a conventional war. Pulling the plug on Ukraine would undoubtedly encourage Putin to move forward with the military expansion.

Russia's military has taken beating in Ukraine so this is probably a longer term threat.

 

[mtrycrafts]

And do we really want to test what Russia will do or not do given the chance?
Would that not culminate in China jumping on Taiwan and Iran getting in the fray.

 

[Trell]

The difference is that now it's not just over the top rhetoric from Putin. By all accounts Russia is now planning to expand it's military to engage NATO in a conventional war. Pulling the plug on Ukraine would undoubtedly encourage Putin to move forward with the military expansion.

Russia's military has taken beating in Ukraine so this is probably a longer term threat.

And Putin is, of course, rooting for Trump to become US President. They both want a weak NATO.


[Article from 2018]

'Very aggressive': Trump suggests Montenegro could cause world war three

The president also called into question the common defence principle of Nato in an interview with Fox News

www.theguardian.com

>>>Donald Trump has drawn fresh scorn for attacking Montenegro, whose people he described as “very aggressive”, suggesting the small nation could be the cause of a third world war.

Days after a widely-criticised summit with his Russian counterpart, Trump’s comments were decried as a “gift to Putin”.

In an interview with Fox News, Trump also called into question Nato’s founding principle. He was asked about Article 5, Nato’s common defence clause which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all.

“Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack?” Fox host Tucker Carlson asked.

Trump responded: “I understand what you’re saying. I’ve asked the same question.”

“Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people ... They’re very aggressive people. They may get aggressive, and congratulations, you’re in world war three,” the US president added. ...<<<

 

[GO-NAD!]

Total U.S. aid to Ukraine in 2022-2023 was 0.33 percent of GDP. The budget deficit was 6.3% of GDP in FY 2023.

>>>The federal budget deficit—the difference between government spending and revenues—increased from 5.4% of GDP in FY 2022 to 6.3% of GDP in FY 2023.<<<

Simplifying for purposes of discussion, if we lump all Ukraine aid into FY 2023, we could reduce the deficit for FY 2023 from about 6.3% of GDP to about 6.0% of GDP. This might be Putin's plan but I have a hard time seeing how it would make a significant difference in the grand scheme of things.

Also, quite a bit of the spending that has been labeled "Aid to Ukraine" is arguably not really any such thing.

>>>One striking element of the request is that $3.5 billion is, at best, indirectly related to Ukraine and arguably entirely unrelated. The Department of State would receive $1 billion for “transformative, quality, and sustainable infrastructure projects that align with U.S. strategic interests and support U.S. partners and allies. Funding would allow the United States to provide credible, reliable alternatives to out-compete China.” The World Bank through the International Development Association would receive $1 billion “to support the IDA’s crisis response window, which provides rapid financing and grants to the poorest countries to respond to severe crises” and another $1.25 billion through the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for loan guarantees “to provide financing to help countries such as Colombia, Peru, Jordan, India, Indonesia, Morocco, Nigeria, Kenya, and Vietnam build new infrastructure and supply chains.” Finally, $200 million would go to a new fund in the Department of State to counter “Russian malign actors” in Africa.

While all of these uses might [or might not] be justified, their inclusion in an emergency supplemental was likely opportunistic. The Office of Management and Budget often refers to this as the “Christmas tree” effect, whereby agencies that could not get money through the regular budget try to append the funds to an emergency supplemental.<<<

Aid to Ukraine: The Administration Requests More Money and Faces Political Battles Ahead

An additional $24 billion has been requested for the war in Ukraine. This is vital for both military operations and humanitarian relief, but a disappointing Ukrainian counteroffensive makes politics more difficult.

www.csis.org

It's also not entirely clear how much of the military aid to Ukraine constitutes older stockpiles that were slated to be destroyed. For example, the U.S. government stopped purchasing cluster munitions in 2007, and various reports suggest that the remaining stockpiles were apparently scheduled to be destroyed.

>>>[T][he United States hasn’t allotted funds for cluster munition production since 2007 . . . The exact number of cluster munitions in current U.S. stockpiles in unclear, but according to the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor’s 2016 report, the United States had 6 million cluster munitions in its inventory in 2011 and in 2015 had roughly 136,000 tons of the munitions in a stockpile set to be destroyed.<<<

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/02/why-the-last-u-s-company-making-cluster-bombs-wont-produce-them-anymore/

I'm not sure if the purported value of the cluster munitions has been included in the various reports concerning the value of U.S. aid to Ukraine, but it's hard to see how this type of aid would require additional "new" spending that would contribute to the budget deficit.

In one sense, sending older equipment is an accounting issue:

>>>The Pentagon overestimated the value of the ammunition, missiles and other equipment it sent to Ukraine by about $3bn, an error that may lead the way for more weapons being sent to Kyiv for its defense against Russian forces.

The error was the result of assigning a higher-than-warranted value on weaponry that was taken from US stocks and then shipped to Ukraine, two senior defense officials said on Thursday.<<<

Pentagon error overvalued US weapons aid to Ukraine by $3bn

‘Inconsistencies in how we value equipment’ could lead to more weapons being sent to Kyiv to defend against Russian forces

www.theguardian.com

If the government does not need to ramp up current spending to replace equipment sent to Ukraine (e.g. because the equipment would have been destroyed anyway), the aid would not result in an increase in the U.S. budget deficit.

Some of the aid to Ukraine undoubtedly did require "new" government spending that did contribute to the budget deficit, but I have yet to find a reliable breakdown on this.

Opposition to further aid for Ukraine seems to be a common mindset amongst conservatives in the west these days. The members of parliament from the Conservative Party of Canada just voted against further aid for Ukraine. And, the CPC leader, Pierre Poilievre, stood up in the House of Commons and - I can only assume from a poor grasp of history - called Ukraine a "far away foreign land". You might recall what Neville Chamberlain said in 1938 about the dispute between Czechoslovakia and Germany: “A quarrel in a faraway country, between people of whom we know nothing”.

 

[Dude#1279435]

The difference is that now it's not just over the top rhetoric from Putin. By all accounts Russia is now planning to expand it's military to engage NATO in a conventional war. Pulling the plug on Ukraine would undoubtedly encourage Putin to move forward with the military expansion.

Russia's military has taken beating in Ukraine so this is probably a longer term threat.

Putin is Russia. I'm not surprised.

 

[haraldo]

Russia couldn't handle an army that still had one foot stuck in Soviet military doctrine; how do they think they can handle fully NATO-standard armies? They would need to have North Korean levels of conscription to have an army that could cope with Poland or the Baltic states, and that would only be to not lose the war outright on the first day. Besides that, their economy isn't exactly growing, so how are they going to support a larger army when they will inevitably have a much worse economy?

What most people in the west seemingly fail to fully comprehend.... me including, I am trying to get to grasp with this.... is that ruzzian logic fails to comply with anything like normal sense or logic.

It is not impossible that the ruzzians will be crazy enough to go with this, realising that NATO will possibly fail to respond according to article 5. ruzzians seem to consistently test how far they can go, and as scary as it seems there are very strong forces pushing for tactical nuclear weapons in the current situation. Again I am not confident on what would be the reaction from NATO.

The logic seem to be that if ruzzia would go into the Baltic countries and fail to take over the whole countries, NATO possibly will not be able to send ruzzia fully back, so if ruzzia ends up with taking 10%, they will still have 10% more than what they had before, if ruzzia fail to take Ukraine but end up with 15% of the country, they will have 15% more than before and will take it as a victory. If half a million people die during this war, it doesn´t seemingly concern ruzzian leadership, and even the majority of the ruzzian population seem to fully embrace this, even if hundreds of thousands of their own people die;

According to polls I have seen, putler is now more popular and supported in ruzzia than ever before.

Crazy nation, crazy people, scary nation, scary people, scary situation

 

[mtrycrafts]

Opposition to further aid for Ukraine seems to be a common mindset amongst conservatives in the west these days. The members of parliament from the Conservative Party of Canada just voted against further aid for Ukraine. And, the CPC leader, Pierre Poilievre, stood up in the House of Commons and - I can only assume from a poor grasp of history - called Ukraine a "far away foreign land". You might recall what Neville Chamberlain said in 1938 about the dispute between Czechoslovakia and Germany: “A quarrel in a faraway country, between people of whom we know nothing”.

Interesting what self-centered, short sighted, ignorance will bring.

"People of whom we know nothing" would cause one to find out about those people perhaps? No, ignorance is bliss.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Putin wants more territory. For what? What have they done with what they already have? Like 10 time zones is not enough? And is brimming with great life that he wants to take abroad?

 

[haraldo]

Putin wants more territory. For what? What have they done with what they already have? Like 10 time zones is not enough? And is brimming with great life that he wants to take abroad?

because he is fu#$# retarded

And I think he needs to play this powerplay to withhold the support of the nation .... just my 5 cents