They were supposed to take Ukraine in about 10 days and here we are a year later with them nowhere near their objective.
What makes you think they can conquer the whole of eastern Europe?
USSR invades Ukraine. (17 Viewers)
- Thread starter Alan Dugdales Moustache
- Start date
They were supposed to take Ukraine in about 10 days and here we are a year later with them nowhere near their objective.
What makes you think they can conquer the whole of eastern Europe?
tisza
Well-Known Member
Not going to do it now. But success in Ukraine would cement the mindset of "might is right," and they can do what they want. Russian mindset is success against Ukraine is success against NATO and the West.
They could just pick off eastern Europe one at a
time - maybe Lithuania next to link to Kalingrad. Or use the same pretences to annex Moldova.
They are obviously committed to a massive military expansion over next 2 years. Are going to learn from the mistakes made now.
tisza
Well-Known Member
Other issue is scale. Ukraine is territorially massive and obviously has a large population. Poland aside rest of eastern Europe is small. Russia could theoretically take any of the Baltic States in 48 hours (once Ukraine war is concluded).
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
We also need to consider that if Russia does control Ukraine then it gives them more power economically with regard to global food production. They have already caused massive disruption with energy, tried it with technology and then controlling Ukraine's food production would further enable them to hold the world to ransom.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
I don't think they can quite frankly, but I'm not looking at it in the way Putin does. He won't have to take all of Eastern Europe to trigger a military confrontation with NATO. It'll come before that. The Baltic States won't take long to take and I'm sure that would be a likely flash point. I'm looking at this pessimistically in order not to be too surprised later on. I'm just not sure at what point beyond Ukraine that NATO will act, and whether Europe itself will decide to reinforce it's own borders and individual nations will ramp up their own defences.
Last edited:
Come on shmmeee, no sure about Musk being stupid…vain and rich, no doubt. I doubt Putins able to play him either.. he’s hardly Trump. Whatever people’s views on Musk as a person and his beliefs, the guys a genius. Flawed definitely but most are. Also by all accounts Starlink was one of the reasons Ukraine managed to resist Russia in the early months of the invasion
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
His genius is in PR. Otherwise he’s generally been able to buy in talent and has consistently underperformed. Have a read of some of the stories from people who have worked for him, generally the entire company becomes about handling Elons stupidity but keeping him onside for marketing purposes. Starlink was definitely important, but the policy changes started after he met Putin and suddenly started posting about Russian propaganda so questions have to be asked.
I’ve seen various articles on both sides of the argument but you don’t do what he’s done without being very intelligent (hasn’t he got 150+ IQ ?). Also on the spectrum though
Ps I get the impression he wants peace. I disagree with how we he might think it’s best to get there but can’t really knock him if that’s his end goal
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
You don't do what he's done without having a big silver spoon to fund all your madcap ideas. A lot of the stuff he's done has created answers to questions nobody but him have asked. Take Paypal. I need to pay someone and I have money in my bank. But instead of just paying from my bank what I really need is some sort of middle account which I can move money from my bank account into and then use that middle account to pay the invoice.
Look at the monumental fuckup he's made of twitter. A genius doesn't do that.
He's got a few things in common with Trump - coming from wealth and used to getting their own way and assuming throwing money at something will solve everything. He has the same tendency to throw his toys out of the pram when he doesn't get what he wants and he has caused massively instability at Tesla by throwing tantrums. But if you massage his ego he'll back you and believe whatever you say.
Of course he's not exactly the same as Trump - he couldn't possibly be that stupid - but for whatever 'genius' he has he lacks emotional intelligence. He can't see the bigger picture or the full implications of what he does.
Last edited:
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
It's a Catch 22, isn't it Milo?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
And all along we could have carpet bombed Putin's army into pissing off. Yet we haven't, in order to appease someone who sees appeasement as a green flag to do what he wants.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Been saying for years how we need to spend the money we've wasted on allowing oil and gas to fleece everyone to set up our own renewable energy infrastructure. We're a really good country for quite a few types of renewables and we wouldn't be at the mercy of outside suppliers. It'd be more secure, as energy generation could be spread out and create numerous jobs, especially in struggling communites like coastal and old mining areas.
Same with food. As well as using land you could build vertical farms, even utilising ageing tall buildings which are effectively massive greenhouses. Hydroponics means you can do it efficiently without soil or wasting water or nutrients as you can just have a cycular system. Rainwater can be collected and stored to use. Climate can be controlled for optimal growing conditions.
The solutions are there, but pandering to greedy fuckers with their snouts in the trough means they aren't happening.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I find it funny that we’re getting laughs from someone who thought it best if Ukraine just surrender and ‘let Putin crack on with it’.
dutchman
Well-Known Member
You mean like in Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia? That worked out well didn't it?
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Nowhere near comparable.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
It would have inevitably escalated pretty quickly and led to WW3.
The Russian mindset is also non comparable to that of the west.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
So I keep hearing. If Ukraine falls, and we end up with Putin gaining enormous territory plus a big chunk of the grain supply, we might still be patting ourselves on the back for ‘not escalating’ against a man who sees that as a weakness.
We then also give the green light to China to take Taiwan so long as they make a nuclear threat upon invasion. Meanwhile Putin would similarly move on to invasions of Georgia and Moldova. Can’t escalate though-let him crack on with it.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
He’s hardly been left to ‘crack on with it’. It would also have made it more likely China would get involved, not to mention the real risk of nuclear war.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
All we have at the moment is a meat grinder that could go on for years when it would not take much to tip the balance. I question how much we are saving by choosing not to do so.
You cannot escalate more than he already has by invading another country with everything he’s got. He is already spinning our ‘intervention’ to date to his people as de facto war. If Ukraine falls, that is a far bigger long term gamble
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Apart from nuclear war that is and risking the likes of China getting involved - tensions with them and the USA are already bad enough.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You’re confusing intelligence with stupidity. He’s clearly an intelligent person but being vain, rich, self indulgent and self entitled leaves him vulnerable to stupidity. Just look at what he’s achieved with taking over twitter or some of the many many ridiculous things he’s said over the years.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
They weren’t the invading forces though. Where were they going to run away too? Not saying for one minute we should carpet bomb Russias forces in Ukraine but if you’re going to compare this to the Vietnam war you’ve put the cart before the horse.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I would argue that China will be more likely to aggress against its neighbours if there is a blueprint for how to prevent Western intervention.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Apart from in reality the west is very much involved, otherwise it would have been over a long time ago.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Nonsense. This has isolated Russia and strained their relationship with China and nuclear weapon use would do so further. Putins whole game is keep threatening to escalate because the other side are pussies and will back down and he gets what he wants. And he’s mostly been right.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yeah, he’s definitely wanted this to go on for a year. It’s naive to think that if the west started carpeting bombing Russian troops and the country and its civilians that it wouldn’t lead to nuclear war.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Nobody has suggested attacking Russian territory, just the invasion force. Like that many mile long column of equipment that made a beeline for Kyiv and was just sitting there exposed.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
that would be an act of war on Russia and it’s allies would respond and ww3 starts
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It’s an act of defence against an invader. Had strategists listened to your way of thinking all of Ukraine would be under Russian control by now.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
It’s also telling that none of them have gone down your preferred route either.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
no it’s an act of war we have no alliance in the west with Ukraine
it’s an act of war
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
We have already provided a lot of the materiel keeping Ukraine in the fight. Providing aircraft able to tip the balance is not much more of a step.
It’s appeasement of a man who sees what we’re doing as a weakness and a green light to carry on. If Ukraine falls it won’t be the last.