History in the Making: Russian Invasion

In reply to Opti :

It's obvious Max Verstappen will likely with the Brazilian grand prix today, they're still going to hold the race.

Opti said:

02Pilot said:

In reply to Opti :

I don't know that I agree that it was obvious a year ago. While it certainly had to be considered as a possibility, Ukraine's unexpected success in halting the initial thrust, along with Russia's heavy losses and apparent demoralization, cannot be discounted. Had Putin taken a less committal approach, as some suspected he might in order to forestall domestic dissent and cut his losses, Ukraine might indeed have achieved more than they did, though certainly less than they want.

I've been talking about the shape of a potential settlement for a long time. Absent something radical happening away from the battlefield, Russia will just hold what they have for as long as they need to (something akin to Stalin's death in Mar 53 facilitating a settlement in Korea). The question is how long Ukraine sticks to the 100% reclamation plan; the longer they do, the more costly it will be.

From January 2nd

Opti said:

This post has received too many downvotes to be displayed.

Show/hide post

 

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

In geopolitics, you almost never get a happy ending or nice clean resolution. It would appear Ukraine cannot defend themselves without the help of about 40 countries. People's and country's willingness to give even for a just cause runs out. Public opinion grows weary of 2 countries not willing to concede anything. Neighboring countries get tired of randomly getting hit with a stray missile. People get tired of a nuclear power being in open conflict with raising tensions around the use of nuclear weapons. People get tired of hearing about non combatants being killed. In the beginning these things rile support, less so over time.

If nothing changes this will continue to drag on, killing thousands of combatants and non combatants alike, people will get tired of it and public opinion for support will fade, this will weaken Ukraines position, and if they are forced to the negotiation table it will be at a much worse position.

Absolutely what Russia is doing is wrong, and in a perfect world, we would see a return to pre 2014 Ukraine borders, but think about it, this world isnt perfect or even fair. 

 

It was obvious to some 

That people and governments eventually suffer war fatigue is not exactly a difficult prediction to make. Once you begin to look at the details, it gets rather more complicated and murky.

In reply to Opti :

I'm not especially concerned with relying what's been posted here as a basis for analysis.

I think your position is dramatically oversimplifying the situation. You keep saying "wars don't exist in vacuums" - if that's true, and I think that it is, then the details are all that much more important, as the dynamics will continually shift over time, altering the basis for calculation and policy. Claiming support for peace talks soon after the war started as a basis for being correct after 600+ days of combat is deeply problematic, as the situation is radically different now than it was then. It would be equally flawed to claim that pushing for the unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan in the weeks following the attack on Pearl Harbor was correct all along, as that position could only emerge in Jan 1943 after the stabilization of the situation and the establishment of a degree of confidence in the Allied position that simply did not exist in Dec 1941. Had things gone differently at Midway, the Solomons, or in North Africa, the Allied position would very likely have been altered to fit the circumstances.

Opti said:

johndej said:

In reply to Opti :

It's obvious Max Verstappen will likely with the Brazilian grand prix today, they're still going to hold the race.

Yah because an F1 race and hundreds of thousands dead is a valid comparison

So they should have just let the Russians march into Kiev and bow down to Putin?

No, they probably would not have bowed down en masse. Many would not have accepted Russian subjugation and would have been hunted down by FSB then sent to Siberia. Others who expressed support for a separate Ukrainian identity would have been summarily executed to serve as an example to the rest of the villagers. Women would have been treated terribly by the occupiers. Promising children would have been "accepted" at Russian State boarding schools for "education" and taken from their homes. 

Basically everything that happened in the front line areas, but multiplied over the entire new Russian state formerly known as Ukraine. Welcome to the Federation, comrades!

johndej said:

Opti said:

johndej said:

In reply to Opti :

It's obvious Max Verstappen will likely with the Brazilian grand prix today, they're still going to hold the race.

Yah because an F1 race and hundreds of thousands dead is a valid comparison

So they should have just let the Russians march into Kiev and bow down to Putin?

Opti said:

 

From January 2nd

.....If nothing changes this will continue to drag on, killing thousands of combatants and non combatants alike, people will get tired of it and public opinion for support will fade, this will weaken Ukraines position, and if they are forced to the negotiation table it will be at a much worse position.

Absolutely what Russia is doing is wrong, and in a perfect world, we would see a return to pre 2014 Ukraine borders, but think about it, this world isnt perfect or even fair. 

It was obvious to some 

I am not sure you should get to strained patting yourself on the back here.  First of all, it isn't over yet. I am also going to assume "If nothing changes" refers to piece talks, because otherwise it could cover almost any developments either way (which could cover you almost no matter what happens). 

As o2 noted, your statement is very broad and vague and not entirely out of line with what the common thinking was (fight back the Russians to a point where they are willing to come to some agreement).  Also, I would not say Ukraine's position at this point is weaker than it was then.  It's likely stronger, considering mostly the amount of trouble Ukraine has been able to cause behind the lines, in the Black Sea, in Russia etc.  Considering this, it doesn't leave you with much.

It also should be noted, that it is super easy to make statements like this ("it could have been done better") because you don't have to deal with what you don't know. (of note: I do love "what if" historical thought experiments though) That is, the long-term and otherwise, results of such a choice.  There is no way of knowing what exactly would have resulted from that (e.g. could have been the stepping stone for a much bigger war in the future). 

While it is certainly laudable to want peace, to not want war, and not want people to be killed, that is hardly a minority opinion, and could, in generally, be said reasonable to be the opinion of the very vast majority of people. As I have said previously though, it's rather idealistic, and that pacifism (probably overstating your position a bit) is a perfect concept... right up to the point where the tanks cross the boarder.

The primary factors that seem to have brought them to the current situation (fighting wise), as stated previously, is the almost omnipresence of drones and drone based intelligence, the inability to use massed armor / vehicles.  Because of the above. the wildly increased difficulty in penetrating Russian defensive lines.  If you had predicted this, then yes, you would get the Nostradamus hat.

On that point, it should be noted, that likely one of the biggest failures here is what seemed like the total inability for western (or Ukrainian) strategist to predict the above.  The western generals were even encouraging massed attacks (which the Ukrainians did a bit of, and took some notable loses doing).

I also wanted to make the point that your want for negotiations, while I think is a bit idealistic, does not mean you are some sort of Russian sympathizer.  Though, (as you seem to admit), your position does, in general, benefit the Russians (as opposed to some other possible outcomes), it does not mean that is the REASON you take that position.  That is, I respect your positions, and see where you are coming from, even if I don't agree with it.

For reference, here is the status in Jan 2023 (the time of your statement above):   Basically, Ukraine has taken back some of it's land as the Russians retreated across the Dnieper River (south west) and were pushed back around Kharkiv (north east).  It should also be note, at this point, Russia has already built significant defensive structures (trenches, mine fields etc) in the captured areas.

Also of note, as can be seen by the grey (recaptured) areas, Russia was clearly pushing towards Odessa (taking the entire Black Sea coast), Kyiv (essentially the entire country), and likely most of the land east of the Dnieper.  This is to set the position of what, likely, Russia "wants", or at least, tried to get.

Good point on the waining US support weakening their position, I did not consider that.  I would still say their posltion might be a bit stronger now.  What the Russians thought of their ability to defend in January is important though, and there is almost no way of knowing that.  Up to this point (from then), only Ukraine has had any real successes (although small, pretty consistent, since then) while Russia seems mostly adept at loosing mass amounts of equipment and soldiers in poorly executed assaults.

As time goes on... who knows, but certainly signs that Russia could potentially slowly generate an advantaged position (more equipment / shells, unlimited supply of soldiers etc).  There is the Russian elections..... I know, I know... not really expecting anything...

I would say (not trying to be Nostradamus here ) an interesting angle would be the West giving Ukraine everything they can use to strike targets in occupied territories while allowing ("encouraging") Ukraine to develop their own longer range solutions to harass Russia itself.  Not saying it's a solution but if the Ukrainians are going to get any sort of reasonable settlement out of the Russians, the Russians really need to have some "fear", otherwise they almost have no reason to ever settle!

As stated previously, the more ideal solution would have been for the offensive to push back the Russians and at least severely threaten Crimea (which is essentially what you are saying), but that is certainly not happening now (at least not this year).  Not sure it could have ever happened in retrospect even with significantly more help (short of personnel of course).  Still pretty amazing (or not) that these military commanders had no way of predicting this (just wild over confidence / arrogance?), and no, I don't really see any nefarious reasons why they would lie, it's certainly not to the advantage of the West or US to do that.

Hmmmm, OK, that is an interesting question (if I am interpreting it correctly, maybe I am twisting it a bit):  Given the option, would the West (or some in the West) rather see the conflict continue over time rather then a quicker resolution, assuming the same basic outcome?

Assuming the situation stays somewhat static (hypothetical), I can see the advantage of keeping Russia "tied up" and drained.  Obviously, a horribly cruel direction.

There are some pretty big potential downsides I think though.  Certainly that the situation is not static and Russia gains position and eventually ends up with far more than they might (e.g. potentially loosing all of Ukraine).  Also you miss out on having a Ukraine not at war which can build to defend itself better and contribute more to the world economy.

I would certainly think/hope the calculation on that question would not result in the former, but maybe I am missing some aspects.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

Russia has always won wars by stubbornness and attrition.  Anyone around here study history?  Why was this one going to be any different? 

It's also lost wars by the same mechanisms: Afghanistan, the First World War (particularly during the Kerensky provisional government following the first 1917 revolution), and the Russo-Japanese War for example, and that's just the 20th Century.

That people, is what is called in one profession:

"hanging a curve ball into the middle of the strike zone of the cleanup hitter"

But hey, they did win one war that way in the 20th century... well... with a bunch of other countries.... and with a crap load of un reimbursed help...  so....

Meanwhile, in Ukraine:

A Russian ammunition depot exploded in Donetsk region

Continuation of martial law and mobilization: Zelenskyy submitted draft laws to the Council

In Ukraine, the production of long-range attack UAVs was established - "Ukroboronprom"

The Ministry of Defense won almost 400 million hryvnias from a foreign supplier in court

Rockets attacked the shipbuilding plant in Kerch

The board software hides posts that get a thumbs down, that IS NOT CENSORING. If a post were to be removed or heavily edited by GRM, that would be "censoring" and also perfectly in their ability as this is a PRIVATE board. 
 

STOP INSISTING YOU ARE "CENSORED".  Your whole argument is over being censored and ANTHONY, YOU ARE NOT BEING CENSORED!!  
 

TJL (Forum Supporter) said:

The board software hides posts that get a thumbs down, that IS NOT CENSORING. If a post were to be removed or heavily edited by GRM, that would be "censoring" and also perfectly in their ability as this is a PRIVATE board. 
 

STOP INSISTING YOU ARE "CENSORED".  Your whole argument is over being censored and ANTHONY, YOU ARE NOT BEING CENSORED!!  
 

 

 

We have explained this to him multiple times, given exact text, Supreme Court decisions, etc. He's either willfully ignorant, or just has a ridiculous martyr complex. He has shown in multiple threads, his only desire is to denigrate everyone who disagrees with him and tell us he is being censored. 

In reply to z31maniac :

His IS willing to change his mind once presented with evidence. Said so himself.

Opti said:

johndej said:

In reply to Opti :

It's obvious Max Verstappen will likely with the Brazilian grand prix today, they're still going to hold the race.

Yah because an F1 race and hundreds of thousands dead is a valid comparison

But hey, it's an analogy!  And if there's one thing we're good at, it's reducing complex and difficult-to-comprehend situations to completely unrelated, but much simpler situations!

#allanalogiesareterrible