Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Threviel]

The second any kind of war breaks out the Russian army will be obliterated by the complete and total military superiority of the west, and that's before the US gets involved. We are totally superior in every metric of conventional war and we have highly motivated and competent militaries defending us.

Canada might fold, but I assume Canada won't have time before there's a victory parade in the ruins of Moscow.

Canada has already deployed its force to the Baltic. If there is war that force will be directly engaged in it.

If it is a conventional war, the Russians will be destroyed in short order.

That is why there will not be a conventional war between Russia and NATO.

Yes, the Canada thing was aimed at Crazy Ivans comment regarding the folding of the west and was meant tongue in cheek. Of course Canada won't fold.

[grumbler]

And, no matter what the Russian leadership says publicly, they have to be terrified at the prospect of even a limited nuclear war given that they are aware of how poorly Russian equipment performs when put to the test.  A nuclear war would be disastrous for the West but catastrophic for Russia.

[Josquius]

And, no matter what the Russian leadership says publicly, they have to be terrified at the prospect of even a limited nuclear war given that they are aware of how poorly Russian equipment performs when put to the test.  A nuclear war would be disastrous for the West but catastrophic for Russia.

I wouldn't be so confident here. The UK has had two test launches in a row fail and the US' old ground launched system is being phased out  (/passing the point where it can be maintained anymore) whilst the new one won't be ready for a few years.
And then we should remember Russia did do the insane and invade Ukraine.

Either way whether your country becomes 50% or 99% glass alongside a full climate meltdown has to count as a loss for all concerned.

[grumbler]

I wouldn't be so confident here. The UK has had two test launches in a row fail and the US' old ground launched system is being phased out  (/passing the point where it can be maintained anymore) whilst the new one won't be ready for a few years.
And then we should remember Russia did do the insane and invade Ukraine.

Either way whether your country becomes 50% or 99% glass alongside a full climate meltdown has to count as a loss for all concerned.

What would you not be so confident about?  The Russian leadership's awareness of the severe issues with Russian equipment reliability, or something else that you forgot to mention?  Two failures by the UK would only increase Russian awareness of the reliability concerns that the Russian arsenal has.  The fact that the US feels the need to replace its Minuteman ICBMs would only increase Russian awareness of the reliability concerns that the Russian arsenal has.

I think that your argument that a nuclear war "has to count as a loss for all concerned" is a breathtaking understatement of the actual impact of such a war.

[Threviel]

Nothing implies that the US or the UK shoots blanks. Any scenario having the UK firing nukes has the US firing nukes and that's the end of most of us. Even if 50% of the missiles fail (and 50% won't fail) there's still enough missiles.

And we still have France being able to obliterate anything relevant in Russia. Russia has no chance of winning any nuclear exchange, the problem is that the rest of us will also lose.

[HVC]

Nukes were never about winning, just making sure the other guys loses too (plus the rest of the world)

[Josquius]

Nukes were never about winning, just making sure the other guys loses too (plus the rest of the world)

I do think we've a very real problem there that Putin is already not winning and might get into a mind that he should take everyone down with him. He has the kind of psyche that makes for him just being that much of a sore loser.

Again I really do think we are very heavily reliant on making sure there's a decent opposition in Russia, within the Kremlin even, who can ignore the "let's destroy the world to avoid Putins feelings being hurt" orders.

It's all very worrying stuff and the world seems closer to things going hot than over much of the cold war even. At least then you had some sanity and understanding from the two sides: the main examples of when the nukes nearly flew being technical error fixed by human sanity.

[Jacob]

That's not my read on Putin nor on the state of the war at all.

[crazy canuck]

The second any kind of war breaks out the Russian army will be obliterated by the complete and total military superiority of the west, and that's before the US gets involved. We are totally superior in every metric of conventional war and we have highly motivated and competent militaries defending us.

Canada might fold, but I assume Canada won't have time before there's a victory parade in the ruins of Moscow.

Canada has already deployed its force to the Baltic. If there is war that force will be directly engaged in it.

If it is a conventional war, the Russians will be destroyed in short order.

That is why there will not be a conventional war between Russia and NATO.

Yes, the Canada thing was aimed at Crazy Ivans comment regarding the folding of the west and was meant tongue in cheek. Of course Canada won't fold.

Ok

[Crazy_Ivan80]

My comment had more to do with the west basically not going all in for victory in Ukraine from the start, allowing the Russians to stick around in Ukraine and allowing their propaganda department to start more or less setting the narrative among an increasing share of western population, to even -seemingly- capturing the US congress.

And then we're still discounting their subversive activities in Africa as well as their axis of evil with North Korea, China and Iran.

[Sheilbh]

Nothing implies that the US or the UK shoots blanks. Any scenario having the UK firing nukes has the US firing nukes and that's the end of most of us. Even if 50% of the missiles fail (and 50% won't fail) there's still enough missiles.

And we still have France being able to obliterate anything relevant in Russia. Russia has no chance of winning any nuclear exchange, the problem is that the rest of us will also lose.

Although my understanding is that's not what either the British or French deterrents are set up to do and isn't in line with either countries' nuclear doctrine at the minute.

I think if Trump wins again, it'd be well worth the UK and France in effect cooperating on a joint doctrine and working a lot more closely on our deterrents. Politically difficult but I think possibly necessary and do-able from a defence policy perspective.

[grumbler]

I think if Trump wins again, it'd be well worth the UK and France in effect cooperating on a joint doctrine and working a lot more closely on our deterrents. Politically difficult but I think possibly necessary and do-able from a defence policy perspective.

Yes, because if Trump wins this November there are a bunch of miniTrumps waiting in the wings to continue leading the US into isolation and irrelevance.

[Jacob]

The other unknown is how much the European Putin-sympathetic (or at least useful idiot) wing is set to surge in upcoming European elections.

One can hope that the Fascist adjacent Europeans turn out like Italy's Meloni re: Ukraine if (when) they get power and influence, but it's not something I'd bet money on.

[Sheilbh]

The other unknown is how much the European Putin-sympathetic (or at least useful idiot) wing is set to surge in upcoming European elections.

One can hope that the Fascist adjacent Europeans turn out like Italy's Meloni re: Ukraine if (when) they get power and influence, but it's not something I'd bet money on.

Italy's post-fascist politics comes from the Cold War. Her party was literally founded by former ministers from the Salo Republic, in part, as a "this is how we save anti-Bolshevism (the real enemy)" pivot. They're very Atlanticist, very anti-Russia, deep ties into Italy's security services (all of the Operation Gladio stuff in Italy).

I think that's relatively rare - not sure I can think of many other examples in Europea (arguably Britain's Reform Party whose leader has done several trips delivering things to Kyiv in a van). I'd be astonished if the far or radical right in Poland or the Baltics were particularly Russia-sympathetic, but you never know.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

The other unknown is how much the European Putin-sympathetic (or at least useful idiot) wing is set to surge in upcoming European elections.

One can hope that the Fascist adjacent Europeans turn out like Italy's Meloni re: Ukraine if (when) they get power and influence, but it's not something I'd bet money on.

Hope that the same goes for the far left, cause if they're like our far left... well, they sure think that the Ukrainians belong beneath the heel of the Russian jackboot