That’s more difficult since those countries are part of NATO. But it isn’t impossible, either. Russia will have to be more patient and strategic like it used to be. I’m thinking a combination of efforts to divide NATO (which will become far easier if Russia has its way with Ukraine) and “uprisings” by the poor, oppressed Russian minorities in the Baltic states. If those states fall to some kind of internal turmoil and “invite” Russian troops to come re-establish order, then would NATO intervene or just let it play out?
The only way Ukraine truly wins long term is if either Putin gets tossed or the west sends troops, or at a minimum, planes. Because Putin will throw a few million troops at this if he has to to win (however that’s eventually defined). But bloody him enough and degrade his ability to wage a major war and that’s a tactical win. But Russia has three times the population of Ukraine, and a batshit crazy man leading it who doesn’t care about anything other than his own glory. Simply giving Ukraine weapons will likely ever be enough. Hope I’m wrong, but just don’t see it.
I was of this opinion at first but the Russian ineptness is making me think this may not be true. It almost seems as if Russia is intentionally culling their army.
Your assessment is both right and wrong different ways. You are correct that merely giving Ukraine material support and training is probably not going to result in victory. Where I think you miss the mark is your implication that there are no intermediate escalatory steps between that and armed intervention. There are several, some of which would not require Congressional approval, leaving that excuse out the window. You are also correct, in my opinion, that the only realistic way this ends on favorable terms for Ukraine involves Russian defeat on their home front. But that is going to involve the Russian people believing, truly believing, that the West will match them move for move and deny them victory. Do you think Russia believes that presently? Because I don’t.
To the contrary, I get the strong impression that the Russian people are steeling themselves, for war with the West up to and including the US inserting itself directly into the conflict. It is the US which is, at present, not prepared to do that.
While NO DOUBT, Russia has operatives stirring up shit in those countries, my understanding is that the populations of those countries have an overwhelming opinion of DISLIKE for Russian domination of thier political systems. Now, my sources nor my research is substantial on this topic, but that is my understanding.
Stop them now in Ukraine or most of this century will be consumed with what will seem like a never ending war in Europe (and elsewhere).
US can make its puppet stand down at any time. Americans are certainly losing interest in proxy war. There are no Ukrainian flags in my neighborhood. And 41% of Republicans now favor ending the conflict even if it involves ceding major portions of Ukraine to Russia.
So what really happened with the Nordstream pipelines? Of course the source referenced in this article is never identified yet we have a (long read) highly plausible explanation and a previous account of the Ivy Bells intelligence gathering mission in the early 1970's conducted by the US Navy. About the Author Seymour Myron "Sy" Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American investigative journalist, and political writer. Hersh first gained recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. During the 1970s, Hersh covered the Watergate scandal for The New York Times and revealed the clandestine bombing of Cambodia. In 2004, he reported on the U.S. military's mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. He has also won two National Magazine Awards and five George Polk Awards. In 2004, he received the George Orwell Award. How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline Last June, the Navy divers, operating under the cover of a widely publicized mid-summer NATO exercise known as BALTOPS 22, planted the remotely triggered explosives that, three months later, destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines, according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning. Two of the pipelines, which were known collectively as Nord Stream 1, had been providing Germany and much of Western Europe with cheap Russian natural gas for more than a decade. A second pair of pipelines, called Nord Stream 2, had been built but were not yet operational. Now, with Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border and the bloodiest war in Europe since 1945 looming, President Joseph Biden saw the pipelines as a vehicle for Vladimir Putin to weaponize natural gas for his political and territorial ambitions. The Mission Behind Operation Ivy Bells and How It Was Discovered At the beginning of the 1970s, divers from the specially equipped submarine, USS Halibut (SSN 587), left their decompression chamber to start a bold and dangerous mission, codenamed "Ivy Bells." Nearly 400 feet beneath the frigid waters of the Sea of Okhotsk, deep inside Soviet territorial waters, the divers stayed alive only by the umbilical cords that pumped warm water into their dive suits. ........ The Americans continued their operations undetected until 1981, when one day, surveillance satellites showed a number of Soviet warships, including a salvage ship, anchored over the undersea cable. Another intelligence-capable submarine, USS Parche (SSN-683), was quickly sent to the site to retrieve the pod. Unable to find the tap, the Parche's divers realized that the Soviets had discovered the operation. The submarine made it back to the United States safely, leaving American leaders to determine how the Soviets had suddenly detected the tap. After a long probe, U.S. counterintelligence agents determined an NSA employee, Ronald Pelton, betrayed Operation Ivy Bells to the Soviets. He sold the secret of Operation Ivy Bells for $35,000, which ended nearly a decade of espionage. Pelton was later convicted and sentenced to life in prison. The original tap that was discovered by the Soviets is now on exhibit at the KGB museum in Moscow.
Correct. Putin's main support in the population comes from mostly older, Soviet era citizens that don't have internet access and have never even heard of a VPN. The younger, more aware Russians are anxiously awaiting Putin's "accidental" fall from a window. This young Russian, who has tremendous courage, frequently does this type of street "polling." There are very distinct patterns among the respondents, especially when age is factored in.
cool. You mean this guy? Hersh has accused the Obama administration of lying about the events surrounding the death of Osama bin Laden, and disputed the claim that the Assad regime used chemical weapons on civilians in the Syrian Civil War. Both assertions have stirred controversy. Hersh has been criticized by some critics for contradicting the official account of the killing of Osama Bin Laden and for questioning the claim that the Syrian government used chemical weapons on Syrian civilians.[39][26] In 2015, Vox's Max Fisher wrote that "Hersh has appeared increasingly to have gone off the rails. His stories, often alleging vast and shadowy conspiracies, have made startling — and often internally inconsistent — accusations, based on little or no proof beyond a handful of anonymous "officials".[6] Seymour Hersh - Wikipedia
Ukraine's citizens would make Afghanistan look like a "welcome home picnic" if Russia ever tried to occupy it.
Agreed, except that we don’t have a century. It will take Russia and China no less than a decade to achieve their aims through normalization of conquest.
Why would you assume that? Three factors suggest otherwise. First, Ukraine has submitted to Russian occupation each time in the past without much of an insurgency to speak of. Second, if Russia completes its conquest on the current trajectory, then there won’t be much a military-age-make population left to form an insurgency; all the brave ones will be dead, and all the self-serving ones will collaborate. Third, Russia has forgotten more about putting down rebellions than we have ever learned. They won’t try to win hearts and minds. They will be exceptionally brutal with no independent legislature, political opposition, or free media to shine a light on it. I’m afraid I can’t be optimistic about Russia bleeding out in a long COIN operation. They need to lose here and now, strategically.
And I’m saying those escalatory steps don’t mean much if the guy you are fighting doesn't care how many lives he has to lose to save face. They gave up 20 million to beat Germany, so it’s not like there isn’t precedent there. They can wear Ukraine down to the point that losing manpower at a rate of five or ten to one is still winning. As far as the Russian people, not sure it matters nearly as much as what Putin thinks. And he doesn’t care, he just wants to not look weak by losing. If there is a coup, it’s just as likely to be from his right as his left, which doesn’t help us at all, and means he can’t de escalate. But again, hope I am wrong.
