Reply to Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As winter proceeds, there has been an interesting observation coming from Ukrainian troops that have used both NATO and Soviet gear:

NATO gear is made for missions, and Soviet gear is made for war. NATO gear performs amazingly when its supply chain is fully intact, it can attack and disengage, and then return to base for maintenance and replenishment. When those supply chains dry up, or it can't be rotated, NATO gear is failing on the battlefield. Many of the NATO vehicles also can't seem to handle the mud and ice. There are videos of Strykers stuck in mud that isn't particularly bad. There are also rumors that the Abrams have issues with their filters, and are being withheld from the combat zone.

Soviet gear on the other hand loses far less capability when supply or maintenance is interrupted. Its more friendly to field and ad-hoc repair. Its also more suited to the climate of Ukraine with mud proving far less of a problem. It may not match NATO gear at its peak, but it seems to be more reliable in the long run.

Its interesting to see a lot of old "what-ifs" from the cold war being played out in Ukraine. [/quote]

That comparison is interesting though disappointing for NATO in advance of winter  - truly hope this pointless and cruel war ends soon  …

Yes it is astonishing how many of the Cold War what ifs are playing out. Putin has been playing a very long game since he came to power when it superficially looked like the Cold War was no longer a great threat in the late 90s. But his world view was formed twenty years before as a KBG foreign intelligence officer for 16 years (1975-1991) during the peak of the Cold War.

Putin has been in power as president or prime minister since 1999 and has held talks with and seen four U.S. presidents leave office. He is running for president again this year for a fifth term (even though there was a constitutional limit on serving more than two terms in office) and he has removed all viable opposition.

The need for NATO and Western allies unity has never been higher.

I truly hope that Ukraine will be able to join both EU and NATO. I hope all this suffering and loss will have some important gains for them. [/quote]

DP.  
It is accurate that NATO gear tends to be dainty compared to Russian equipment.  That is a Pentagon failure to believe that future wars will be 'clean' and 'controllable' theaters of conflict and a direct result of the 'anti-terrorist' / Low Intensity Conflict / 9-11 mentality.  The A-10 is a prime example of a design that was missioned to hold ground front-lines, chews-up tanks and bunkers, built to take a beating, can fly off of roads vs runways, and can make field repairs - it's a Marine Corps K-Bar survival knife; vs the F-35 which is a Swiss Army Knife - pretty, great for picnics and yacht lunches, but snaps if you try to stab anything other than a pate roll.

Yes, Putin was KGB through-and-through.  But this is also a weakness.  Putin should have played Civilization, since he does not seem to understand the concept of "Cultural Victory".  This short-sightedness will, I believe, be Russia's ultimate downfall.  The pattern I'm seeing is pretty consistent.

Russian counter-attacks a failure..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russians-carry-10-unsuccessful-assault-174410885.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russians-attack-most-actively-avdiivka-054728100.html
Hypersoninc missiles a fizzle..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-us-missiles-exposed-putin-132821745.html
Key logistics disrupted..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/military-ukrainian-strike-hits-ammunition-172029297.html'Internal sabotage deep in Russian territory..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukraine-releases-video-burning-russian-171500557.html

The Kremlin didn't seem to understand basic math.  When the war started, Ukraine had only 3.5% of Russia's territory size, but 30% of Russia's population size.  Russia needs their population to maintain control over it.  Russia was already (and continues to) lose territory to the Chinese, whether they realize it or not.  Long term, Russia's Far East is culturally capitulating to China and well on it's way to becoming a Chinese vassal state.

“It appears Russia is on its way to long-held worst fear: becoming a weak economic dependent of China — a source of cheap raw materials”
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4358485-china-and-russia-a-no-limits-partnership-with-firm-limits/

The Chinese also already see Putin as a weak leader, with the danger that the "no bounds" relationship could prove a liability for Xi if it continues to drag down the Chinese economy.  Russia is temporarily using China to launder Rubles at China's expense.  But I think Xi is playing the long-term game and hopes to target Russian raw materials and oil.

"The Russian prime minister, who is now on a two-day visit to Beijing following his previous trip to China in May this year, agreed with Chinese Premier Li Qiang on Tuesday to enhance bilateral economic ties and boost energy cooperation, according to the Chinese ministry."
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/China-s-Xi-Russian-PM-agree-to-expand-economic-cooperation

It's a bad deal for the Russian Government, who's used to dictating terms.  But, using a Chinese saying, the Russians "have no eyes" (e.g. they don't see the hidden strength of who they're dealing with).  Tethered to Beijing means being subject to their will.  There is only one silver lining from the Russian standpoint.

"The infrastructure in Russia’s far east is so underdeveloped and degraded that the PRC has made substantial investments to get access to the resources it wants. By most accounts, those investments are not paying off."
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4358485-china-and-russia-a-no-limits-partnership-with-firm-limits/

I believe China would need to undertake a massive, large-scale rail infrastructure project.  However, once completed, long-term this will culturally transform Russia's Far East.  Ex. It will then be easier to travel to Beijing than Moscow.  I also believe China would see their infrastructure investment as theirs, setting up the stage for confrontation between the two superpowers.  Remember that if Russia ever loses control over the Far East (ex. through rebellion, governmental collapse, etc.), then like Khazakstan, those areas will fall under Chinese influence.  China would be able to exert massive influence on how those natural resources are consumed since they would control the infrastructure to move it.

Although this is far beyond the timeline of the conflict with Ukraine, Ukraine will ironically accellerate the timeline that conflict between Russia and China will occur.[/quote]

Thanks PP

This is extremely interesting and well resourced. I thought I was OK at making connections and big picture thinking, but you leave me in the dust.

I do think China is way more principled and rational than Russia under Putin. That is a low bar I know but it is interesting that this formerly rock solid alliance is crumbling under the surface.

I hope Ukraine wins it much deserved freedom from Russia’s aggressive invasion and is in a better position long term eventually.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics