History in the Making: Russian Invasion

I watched a PBS show called Frontline yesterday that was about Putin and his rise to power. I have come to the conclusion his purpose in Ukraine could be to destabilize democracy in USA by helping a certain ex-president (who appears to want the power Putin has) get re-elected.

I mean if Putin justified to himself the blowing up of apartment buildings killing thousands of its occupants within his own country for the purpose of popularizing himself so he'd be elected President replacing Yeltsin then he would justify this war if it meant hurting democracy in USA.

What do you think? Is this a bit too far out there or anything this bizarre is possible?

bruceman said:

I watched a PBS show called Frontline yesterday that was about Putin and his rise to power. I have come to the conclusion his purpose in Ukraine could be to destabilize democracy in USA by helping a certain ex-president (who appears to want the power Putin has) get re-elected.

I mean if Putin justified to himself the blowing up of apartment buildings killing thousands of its occupants within his own country for the purpose of popularizing himself so he'd be elected President replacing Yeltsin then he would justify this war if it meant hurting democracy in USA.

What do you think? Is this a bit too far out there or anything this bizarre is possible?

Waaaaaaaaay too far out there. He doesn't care who is President of the US, he just wants us at each others throats. The Russian bots were pretty equal on both parties in 2016 and 2020, they just were as polarizing as possible.

I think it was shown in the analysis of Russian social media attacks that they are interested in taking any sensitive topics in the US and amplifying them to the extreme.  This pretty clearly applies to "subjects" that originate from both ends of the political spectrum.  Think of any number of topics that cannot be discussed on this board and then consider why they cannot be discussed (it's generally extreme, unreasonable arguments).

Russia (and China) have much to gain by getting us to attack each other.

That is a good measure though. "To much made of" is a good indicator some one is stirring sh#$ up, and many time that "stirring" is coming from offshore (probably should not forget NK of course).

I did hear a theory that on of Putin primary motives was to capture as much of Ukrainians oil and gas production areas as possible, which are supposed to be in the south eastern areas (?)

 I will have to see if I can find a map of where the Ukrainian oil and gas wells are. 

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

tuna55 said:

bruceman said:

I watched a PBS show called Frontline yesterday that was about Putin and his rise to power. I have come to the conclusion his purpose in Ukraine could be to destabilize democracy in USA by helping a certain ex-president (who appears to want the power Putin has) get re-elected.

I mean if Putin justified to himself the blowing up of apartment buildings killing thousands of its occupants within his own country for the purpose of popularizing himself so he'd be elected President replacing Yeltsin then he would justify this war if it meant hurting democracy in USA.

What do you think? Is this a bit too far out there or anything this bizarre is possible?

Waaaaaaaaay too far out there. He doesn't care who is President of the US, he just wants us at each others throats. The Russian bots were pretty equal on both parties in 2016 and 2020, they just were as polarizing as possible.

Yeah, pretty much. I'm no Trump fan, but I think that too much has been made of his Russian connections. It's pretty safe to say that he envies Putin's level of control over his country, and thinks of him as a winner (Trump's highest compliment?). But the relationship between the two leaders is primarily one of "How can I use/exploit this relationship?". Putin's rationale for going after Ukraine was about power. A bigger, richer, more easily defensible Russia. There's not much rocket science to it.  As Tuna says, destabilizing America through social media is far more effective and inexpensive than other measures.

I think the bottom line is that US presidents have addressed the Russia issue in very different ways both in their actions and in their words, But it's not entirely clear whether Putin actually cares, for whether anything that any of the recent presidents have said or done would have stopped this invasion. 

In reply to aircooled :

On a different topic, I just read a commentary on thedrive that made a lot of sense.  If this turns into a war of attrition, which is what it is looking like, unless Russia has a sudden collapse, Ukraine will need to replenish more of its weapon systems than are being sent.  The suggestion was that now is the time to start training some of the pilots on a western fighter that we have a surplus of (I think F-16 was the first suggestion).  I'll add to that it'd be important to train ground crews at the same time, so if the time comes that we start handing over aircraft, they are ready to use and maintain them inside their own country, rather than risking the "escalation" of flying missions from a base outside Ukraine..

Russian Warship, Go Berkeley Yourself said:

In reply to stuart in mn :

I think I will wait for a confirmation from somewhere more trustworthy than "Russian Officials" who have previously made up easily debunked stories about Ukraine invading Russia.

The more I think about, the more I am less convinced.  I just can't see the Ukrainian forces doing anything that could jeopardize the western assistance they are receiving.   A strike into Russia could do that, regardless of how effective or justified a strike against your enemy's oil depot may be. A good tactical move, but possibly a poor strategic one?  Unless maybe they received tacit approval from the western alliance. 

I can imagine a large number of spy satellites are watching every square meter of Ukraine and the surrounding areas right now, so I suppose we'll find out one way or another what likely happened.

Mr_Asa said:

Yep I saw news of this in some very questionable trash rags yesterday, but the news that they've been getting the hell out of Chernobyl has now hit legit sources, including the rumor that it's because they've all radiation-poisoned the hell out of themselves:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/russians-fled-chernobyl-with-radiation-sickness-says-ukraine-as-iaea-investigates

tuna55 said:

QuasiMofo (John Brown) said:

I just read that Koigu has been sugar coating the war effort to Putin by a vast margin. How is the leader of a country incapable of fact checking his staff to ensure they are being honest?

I know it's not a surprise but really Vlad?

1: Someone in the White House or Intelligence is brilliant for publishing otherwise classified information to the public.

2: When you start out lying your way to the top, and disappear everyone who gets in the way, you eventually start believing you really are the smartest person in the room.

I wonder if this is actual classified info, or if they're trying to make Putin more paranoid and get him to disappear even more advisors. Or if they are trying to induce paranoia in Putin's advisors and get them to do their own disappearances.

Russian Warship, Go Berkeley Yourself said:

In reply to stuart in mn :

I think I will wait for a confirmation from somewhere more trustworthy than "Russian Officials" who have previously made up easily debunked stories about Ukraine invading Russia.

CNN, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, etc. are reporting on the apparent attack, although it doesn't appear that Ukraine has issued any statement yet.  There is video of the place on fire.

stuart in mn said:

Russian Warship, Go Berkeley Yourself said:

In reply to stuart in mn :

I think I will wait for a confirmation from somewhere more trustworthy than "Russian Officials" who have previously made up easily debunked stories about Ukraine invading Russia.

CNN, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, etc. are reporting on the apparent attack, although it doesn't appear that Ukraine has issued any statement yet.  There is video of the place on fire.

The video I've seen also shows two helicopters, and what appears to be rockets fired from the sky (though the aircraft was out of frame at the time).  So, it looks like it was an attack, not an accident.  Just remains to be seen if it was the Ukrainians or the Russians.

And in other news it seems Zelensky has had to do a little housekeeping: 

"...the ex-chief of the Main Department of Internal Security of the Security Service of Ukraine Naumov Andriy Olehovych and the former head of the Office of the Security Service of Ukraine in the Kherson region Kryvoruchko Serhiy Oleksandrovych are no longer generals"

Ian F (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Russian Warship, Go Berkeley Yourself :

True. I could just as easily believe some Russian helicopters attacked their own depot by mistake.

It would certainly be a more attractive target.  I mean, the Ukrainian targets shoot back!

The attack on the Belgorod oil depot is interesting primarily for the language being used around it.

The Russians claim a Ukrainian attack, which raises some very serious questions about their air defense capabilities, but also helps their domestic narrative about Ukraine being a danger. They have further stated that it may negatively influence negotiations, which seems obvious in a sense, but the public statement seems calculated to dissuade the Ukrainians from further such efforts.

The Ukrainians, meanwhile, refuse to confirm or deny the attack. This seems odd if it was their operation; if they were responsible, why not claim success? If, however, it was Russian helos that hit the target, this stance makes more sense; no reason to claim something that could later be disproved, but at the same time, why not let people assume it was a Ukrainian strike? It boosts morale, and perhaps pushes the Russians toward a cease-fire (though the Russians would never admit linkage).

Given the video evidence, there are three possibilities for what really happened: 1) a successful Ukrainian attack; 2) a successful Russian false-flag operation; 3) a friendly-fire incident. #3 seems least likely, as those pilots were clearly skilled, and the chance of them accidentally missing their target by tens of miles seems remote. #2 is certainly possible, though I'm not really sure how it helps the Russian position (except the domestic narrative, as noted above, but it is unknown how much control of this the government retains at this point). #1 is the clear favorite, but I still don't quite understand why the Ukrainians are being coy about it. No matter how it happened, the loss of POL is going to slow the Russians as they attempt to redeploy forces east.

Yes, the fact that Russia is noting the Ukrainians have made a successful within Russia is rather suspicious....

All the info around this war is an exercise in trying to see through the information to what might be reality.

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :

OK, thanks for the map.  Yes, it does looks a bit suspicious when you see the map that oil is the target, but hard to say.

One other aspect that has been touched on here that someone was talking about:

As we are aware, Russia and Ukraine are very large wheat producers.  April, NOW, is planting season.  If you want wheat in harvest season, it must be planted now.   I am guessing not a lot of planting is going on.  

Russia will certainly be fine, they should have plenty for themselves.  The interesting aspect here though is... China.  China is a wheat importer.  I am sure they can get some from Russia, but I hear China also owns a good amount of the wheat production in Ukraine!

So... China might have a strong self interest in getting wheat production going in Ukraine, and that has to happen very soon!

As you can see by the map, it almost certain some of the most productive areas are clearly not happening.

02Pilot said:

The Russians claim a Ukrainian attack, which raises some very serious questions about their air defense capabilities, but also helps their domestic narrative about Ukraine being a danger. They have further stated that it may negatively influence negotiations, which seems obvious in a sense, but the public statement seems calculated to dissuade the Ukrainians from further such efforts.

I don't understand why it's a big deal, even if was a successful Ukrainian attack.  I mean, the Russians started a war by rolling tanks across the border, you don't get to do that and then whine about the other guy striking back.

A quick map update:   This is of northern Ukraine (Kyiv to left).  It shows (blue flags) the locations where the Ukrainians have pushed back and recaptured areas (including Hostomel airport).  The trucks to the northwest of Kyiv are units withdrawing towards Belarus.

The area to the right (where the blue skull is) is Kharkiv.  The red dots to the northeast of there is where the attack over the boarder are happening.  It seems, based on what is reported in those incidents, that the Ukrainians are, at least, launching rockets into those areas (a bit of "turn about" at least I suppose).

And this lovely tidbit:

Russian troops planted explosives at Cookies plant in Bucha, also poisoned all products at warehouses

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

02Pilot said:

The Russians claim a Ukrainian attack...

I don't understand why it's a big deal, even if was a successful Ukrainian attack.  I mean, the Russians started a war by rolling tanks across the border, you don't get to do that and then whine about the other guy striking back.

It proves that that the aggression of the Ukrainian people against mother Russia that our great leader warned us about is true. Just think what they would have done if the forever young (no plastic surgery at all!) leader had not started the Special Operation to suppress their military might that was pointed at Russia!

In reply to aircooled :

IIRC, Ukraine officials claim to have a 5 year stockpile of wheat.  Whether this means 5 years including exports or only internal use, I cannot remember.

I was the first to name Trump after someone else alluded to him (not by name). I thought that what I said was uncontroversial, but that is clearly not the case. So in good faith will edit that out so as not to E36 M3 up the thread.