"The 1980's are calling to ask for their foreign policy back."

The war hasn't just exposed the weakness of the Russian military it's also showing that their cyberwarfare abilities may have been overrated.

Russia really going all in on the technicals.

Eat your heart out Baghdad Bob!

Warning! There is some serious math in this thread:

There's a pretty overt bias in Western defense analysis of Russian capabilities. They have to rely on worst case scenarios, because that's the most they may have to face, and their doctrine is to be able to fight not one but two wars simultaneously.

So their analysis is 'what might this be capable of', not 'what are we definitely going to be seeing.'

The fact this also inflates their budget requests is a feature, not a bug. I don't blame them, I wouldn't want to send young men and women into harms way without giving them the best possible chance of success.

But in reality we keep seeing that the US military has far more capability than its opponents, and no doubt some of this money could have been going to worthwhile projects at home. Not the least of which should be UHC.

Or just don't collect those particular taxes at all.

This aged well...

Since he's Putin's sock puppet I'd say that gives some useful insight into just what Putin was thinking.

Spoiler! One of the tires literally has ‘Made in the USSR’ (likely originally for India) in the rubber.

Putin to undergo surgery for cancer!

Sounds like an opportunity for someone to step in.

And just like that, the war in Ukraine faded away.

Pooty, I know the Polonium Fanta gives just the right mix of tropical sweet and citrus sour, but....y'know what, chug away.

Thread:

As Russia continues to falter, my anxiety level goes up. Because they're running out of conventional forces to throw at this.

According to Peter Zeihan, this conflict is an existential matter for Russia since their shrinking demographics make this the last generation where there will be sufficient numbers of military-aged men to secure defensible borders. If they fail, they face a future where their shrinking population and economy means they are vulnerable to incursion, infiltration, and invasion.

And, if there is one thing engrained in the Russian collective memory, it's that invasions have been calamitous for them.

Defensible borders? They have 5000 nukes. Yes, their borders are defensible because it's suicide for the planet to invade them.

This isn't about defense, its about Putin's desire to go down in history as a great man who restored the Russian Empire.

Even if they take Ukraine (they won't) they've got multiple NATO members on their border.

You know, the nice nations they invaded and ruled for 50 years the last time their own aggression started a world war leading to 20 million of their own dead.

This isn't 1939. Anyone who thinks it is is making an enormous mistake.

How do you use nukes if people in your borderlands get breakaway urges? How do you use nukes if migration across your borders brings, say, radical Islam?

Russia views Ukraine as a hostile nation, one that's only a few hundred miles from Moscow. If Ukraine is in Russia's grip, any outsiders would have to come through it to get to Russia.

I think that's a cartoonish view that may fail to take into account Russian strategic thinking.

If Putin is trying to secure the Russian borders to stave off a collapse, the conflict may extend to NATO.

Given what we've seen of the Russian military, this will likely result in either a humiliating defeat for Russia or the Russians' use of WMDs.

You may think that unlikely, but that step 3 becomes more likely once you make it to step 2.

Brace for May 9
On Russia’s Victory Day, we might find out whether Putin intends to extend his war to the rest of the planet.

You don't. You use tanks, helicopters and soldiers.

How does launching an attack on Ukraine help any of that? None of that has to do with 'defensible borders.' It COSTS you the opportunity to protect yourself from that.

In addition, if they were successful they'd have more issues there, not less. They'd have to maintain a presence in Ukraine, which is a very large country with a very strong nationalistic streak.

And of course losing an attempt to expand their borders was the impetus for the destruction of the Soviet Union in the first place.

You just reflexively respond to fascism. You like it. Even when it's stupid.

LOL. Can you read a fucking map? Latvia and Estonia are also right on their border, it's only a 50km difference between that border and Ukraine. They are already NATO members. If they were truly concerned about NATO, that's what they'd be screaming bloody murder over.

It's not about that. It's about Ukraine's natural resources, large swath of natural gas, and Ukraine's port on the Black Sea which is a warm weather port, unlike the ones in Estonia or Latvia. Notice this is where the Russian troops actually are. The gas reserves are in the East near the Russian border.

And no, Russia does not view Ukraine as a hostile nation. They view Ukraine as the center of their culture and history, and demand that it be part of their Empire. At the beginning of this Russians had warm feelings for Ukrainians. This is why the lie of 'Nazis' in Ukraine, calling Zelensky a 'Jewish Nazi', if that makes any sense at all. Russia is far closer to fascism than democratic Ukraine.

Ukraine is their intended victim, because it has everything they want - oil, gas, rare minerals, is their cultural homeland, and most importantly, a warm weather port that they simply do not have.

Yeah, I know, you've never seen a fascist's cock you don't want to suck. Russia's strategic thinking has nothing to do with defense. That's their cassus belli, and anyone with any knowledge whatsoever can see right through it. Doing this weakens their defense against internal division. And there is absolutely no strategic possibility to invade a nation with 5000 nukes. Even if 75% of them didn't work, and that's doubtful, that's still 5 times the nuclear arsenal of China.

What Russian collapse? The only reason Russia might collapse is because they did this. No one was talking about Russian collapse before the sanctions. There was no analysis indicating Russia was unstable. Putin was consolidating power, and his intelligence offenses in the West had created significant chaos. We are still dealing with Brexit and Trump. Russia's prestige was as high as it's been since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

If they expand conflict to military engagement with NATO they will be thrown out of the West in days and suffer a tremendous loss of prestige. And if they escalate to tactical nukes, they may be wiped from the face of the Earth. The big problem is Putin is doing this for his legacy, good chance he's dying, and it appears he has a neurological issue. He might act in non-rational ways. But then his military will have to stop him, because no one wants their loved ones incinerated along with their entire nation.

Of course, but that still makes it extremely unlikely. If Putin is no longer sane then yes, we all have to worry, but that would be true whether he lost in Ukraine or not.

But that 'we all have to worry' is about their strategic nuclear arsenal, and that totally invalidates your point about 'defensible borders.' It's Russian propaganda, that's it.

Is there ever going to be a fascist whose bullshit you don't fall for?

The 'demilitarize' portion is laughable. Western arms are pouring into the country like never before.

But I think the rest of the analysis is probably right.

The question is can the Ukrainians launch a successful counter offensive. I think the longer the West backs them the more likely that is.

I'm still opposed to overt NATO involvement, as much as I'd personally like to see it. But training, logistics, intelligence, and weapons....

We've seen what arming a nation fighting for its independence can do.

The French did it for us. Let's pay it forward.