To limit the view that Ukraine not being a NATO member because of Donbass does not pose a future existential danger is a central mistake in any argument about the Eastern European context involved.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
This interesting photo just showed up on google news, attributed to NYT. Apparently some defensive fortification around tourist attraction in Kiev. Check out the green truck Ukrainians are using, 徐工重卡, Lol.
Taking Donbass alone is not sustainable. It isn't geographically isolated except along the Donets River. They need to move to natural borders like the Samara, Vorskla, Dnieper, etc. rivers to shorten their defensible border. The best case scenario for Russia would be total annexation of the east of the Dnieper but there are intermediate goals as well.
I’m not sure if I would put trust in NATO charter. They can always make exceptions or salami slice their way to their goal. Turkey and Greece actually have active conflict over cyprus and both are in NATO. So is Spain and Britain over Gibraltar.
I'm not sure why Melissa Chan is getting so much air time here. There is no shortage of grifters here in America making a good living. She is just one of them.
The entire Russian war planning was basically done with the expectation for the best or close to best case scenario. They were not trained for this missions. They did not have the force needed for this prolonged war. They were not prepared for all the sanctions that were thrown at them. We are a month in and RuAF still cannot fly anywhere they want in Ukraine. How can that be?
There are a whole host of systems that China has developed for Taiwan scenario that would've been perfect for this Ukraine war. Russia could have purchased a lot of that maybe back in 2019 and they would not be in this position right now. If they had bought more PGMs and trained for them, they strike aircraft would've destroyed Ukraine's air defense capacity a lot earlier on. Just think about having Russia having 50 WL-2 UCAVs roaming across Ukraine air space after achieving full air dominance. Would things look the way they do right now?
The entire Russian war planning was basically done with the expectation for the best or close to best case scenario. They were not trained for this missions. They did not have the force needed for this prolonged war. They were not prepared for all the sanctions that were thrown at them. We are a month in and RuAF still cannot fly anywhere they want in Ukraine. How can that be?
There are a whole host of systems that China has developed for Taiwan scenario that would've been perfect for this Ukraine war. Russia could have purchased a lot of that maybe back in 2019 and they would not be in this position right now. If they had bought more PGMs and trained for them, they strike aircraft would've destroyed Ukraine's air defense capacity a lot earlier on. Just think about having Russia having 50 WL-2 UCAVs roaming across Ukraine air space after achieving full air dominance. Would things look the way they do right now?
They are doing thing Russian style... a disorganized, couldn't-care-less attitude with some loose ends but still getting the job done...
They would have three times the lost because of that.
Last edited:
Turkey and Greece are already in NATO. NATO's letter makes it clear that joining members cannot have wars going on, so Ukraine's accession would only be possible if it ended the War in Donbass.
But this leads to another mistake that many overlook.
Before the country actually joins NATO there is the so-called Membership Action Plan (MAP), the pre-accession stage, at this stage Ukraine could have been accepted if the members accepted, which would also be a problem because France and Germany always were against Ukraine joining the organization. But if there was a favorable situation for NATO members regarding the entry of Ukraine, NATO would give the MAP to Ukraine, even with the war in Donbass. I say this because North Macedonia was in the MAP stage for two decades, it had a short war with the help of NATO, the MAP (pre-accession) was not cancelled, only full membership took a while because of resistance from some members regarding the country's entry into the organization.
Ukraine (and Georgia) was formally invited to join NATO in 2008. Between 2008 and 2014, it was not engaged in external wars, and still could not gather consensus among all 30 members to begin formal NATO membership process (MAP), particularly due to Germany and France strong opposition. So the chances of Ukraine wasn't high to begin with, esp. after sent a message to NATO by invaded Georgia in 2008. With a proxy war against a Russia, definitely out of the question.
Greece and Turkey fought over Cyprus in 1974, which is decades after both entered NATO in 1952. We are discussing pre-existing wars before NATO membership, not afterwards. Spain formally ceded Gibraltar but never actually engaged in war to restore control before NATO membership.
The analysis of the use of aerospace power by Western analysts has a Western interpretive bias on the VKS's view of employment, this is called ethnocentrism - they appreciated the other in the light of our own reality.
Russian air doctrine is not yet consolidated. This is a fact and there was no doctrinal adherence of Russian air power to Western models, until today VKS fights for the independence of air power against the Army's land force, as if it were a ground attack force and rotary wings to support the forces ground forces, an air force subordinate to the Army.
The PVO (Soviet Air Defense Force) and VVS (Soviet Air Force) were consolidated into the VKS only in 2015 and were ineffective in what Douhet called the air domain.
But not always air supremacy or air superiority is the degree of air control desired or planned by an air force, in Brazil we have the classification of "favourable air situation", the minimum degree of air control or air dominance is expressed in a geographic space in an undetermined period of time, the RuAF still follows the discussion of the air precept of the original theorists who aimed at an independent air force, perhaps there is air power as a weapon to support surface operations.
Ukrainian air bases have been attacked with ballistic and cruise missiles from ships and land systems in a greater share than air-launched missiles, strategic bombers are also being sparsely employed and the difficulty of the RuAF to conduct complex air operations, operations that involve more than one type of aircraft in more than one type of mission trying to integrate a common purpose as a "Strike package".
When all this is understood, analysts will know how to analyze the Russian air force.
you made this statement several time of economic costs. Is there quantifiable number?.
The things that Russia exporting especially to Europe on long term contacts have now risen 10X in price and that exclude Turkey.
current account surplus estimate for feb which is usually much smaller number than trade surplus. you are looking at country whose Trade surplus may well reach closer to China. when there is this scale of money relative to population. there is no need for private investments. than there is that 4D chess in Middleast. i am sure Russia has share in that wealth creation.
- Status