• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The War in Ukraine

At the moment, Ukraine is more or less holding its own but it wouldn't take much of a push to bring them to the brink. If that happens, Ukraine becomes a border zone protecting Russia whilst Russia gears up and goes for its next target only its next target will be either a NATO member such a Poland or one of the Baltic states and then we will be in for it. Wouldn't it be a better use of weapons and manpower to take the shackles off Ukraine while they are still able to defend themselves?
And Russia will have a whole lot of battle hardened Russified (Ukrainian) troops plus their hardware and industry to add to their efforts. Betrayed and angry troops. Who will have a legitimate grudge against the west and especially the US
 
My guess you get a short, sharp Civil War with a possible change in power factions and possibly a negotiated withdrawal from part or all of Ukraine, in return for lifting of most of the sanctions. Very little will change for the average Russian.
You mean in Russia? I was poking at the possibility of a Ukrainian loss.
 
Allow me to clarify a few of my points...

- A no fly zone enforced by NATO over Ukrainian skies would be considered (I assume anyway) as an escalation.
NATO has enforced No Fly zones in a lot of places - the Turks however have shot down Russian Aircraft over Syria enforcing a No Fly there.
NATO could easily put a NO FLY Zone over 3/4 of Ukraine with zero escalation issues - as the VKS isn't flying over that area.
It would be next to impossible to place a NO FLY over all of Ukraine due to the fact the fronts do not represent the internationally accepted border.


So if the US decided to go ahead with the no fly zone, it wouldn't just be fighter planes deployed. It's the security forces, air defense systems for the airfield they'd be stationed at, maybe CSAR assets to retrieve downed crew, a QRF of some sort, the C2 staff, etc etc
All of which could be run out of Poland.
The point I made above about a NFZ is that there is zero chance in hell that any NATO Country as an individual or group, or the whole alliance would attempt to place one over the entire area of Ukraine due to Russian occupation - 50km from current fronts potentially - but no where over active fighting or over Russian occupied positions -- simply because your point that it would be a Hot War in minutes.
The US could just announce they'll be working with partners to help enforce a no fly zone over Ukraine, and the public wouldn't really raise an eye - because not many ppl realize all the other assets that would need to also be deployed (Hence public ignorance & easy to escalate without perhaps meaning to)



Something I don't think is appreciated here as much as it should be is that Ukraine is running low on troops, aka the number of young (and old) Ukrainians who are dead as a result of this war is truly mind boggling...

We all know that the casualty numbers for both sides are way higher than what's currently being counted - not to mention the troops who get classified as 'missing in action' because they literally got blown to pieces or turned into pink mist

We all also know that Ukraine's civilian population has taken far more casualties than Russia's...


My point simply being that this war needs to end as soon as freaking possible.

We've discussed on this forum before that Ukraine may have been able to absorb their combat losses better than Russia could, even though Russia has the significantly larger population...but did any of us foresee the war dragging on for this long? Or being this brutal?

Ukraine isn't just running low on troops. It's running low on men, period - because a lot of them are dead. (Ukraine's gender demographics are gonna be so screwed up once the dust settles from all of this)



🍻
The only acceptable end to this conflict is Ukraine back to its initial 1991 borders, the quicker the better, for everyone.
 
Would NATO even need to deploy aircraft over Ukrainian airspace in order to provide a level of missile defence? Aircraft and ground-based launchers could fire at incoming Russian missiles targeting Western Ukraine from inside NATO territory.

Not saying I support that course of action which would in my opinion be highly escalatory and make NATO a combatant in the conflict, but rather just pointing out that a sort of "no fly zone" wouldn't necessarily require NATO aircraft flying over Ukraine or exposing themselves to any but the longer range Russian AD systems.
 
Instead of all this NFZ talk coming out of some NATO countries, why dont they just try and match US/GER/PL in military donations. The UK has fallen way off and FR/IT/SP/CAN are way way off. Ukraine should never be limited in 155 ammo but where does the Czech and Baltic plans stand today?
 
Would NATO even need to deploy aircraft over Ukrainian airspace in order to provide a level of missile defence? Aircraft and ground-based launchers could fire at incoming Russian missiles targeting Western Ukraine from inside NATO territory.

Not saying I support that course of action which would in my opinion be highly escalatory and make NATO a combatant in the conflict, but rather just pointing out that a sort of "no fly zone" wouldn't necessarily require NATO aircraft flying over Ukraine or exposing themselves to any but the longer range Russian AD systems.
From a strict legal aspect Defense like that inside a another country doesn't make you party to the conflict.
- note the vast array of assets that have shot down missiles and SUAS aimed at Israel (and from Arab nations as well)

The only issue would be IF one of those AD missiles landed in Russia - and since they have been a few Russian MISSILES and components thereof that have landed in NATO countries and flown over NATO countries on their way to Ukraine, Russia would have a tough time arguing that any AD system landing in Russia was an offensive action.

The issue is more that NATO doesn't have the balls to do it, not that there is a legitimate reason not to do it.
 
I think we know the answer is yes.

I suspect he is under a lot of duress from the Kremlin, and given of how he tied his fate to Putin...
yeah but can uncle Putler save him this time if theres another potential uprising?
 
yeah but can uncle Putler save him this time if theres another potential uprising?
A slew of folks left Belarus who were either resistant to him, or sympathetic to those who resisted. I’m not sure if the Belarusian resistance have the strength these days to actively topple him.
 
“Thank you Belarus for the new gear!”
Exactly.

If the Ukrainians harvested hundreds of armoured vehicles and thousands of tonnes of munitions off the Russians, I can just imagine the haul off the Belarusian Army who is probably, to a man, dozens of times less motivated to fight in Ukraine than the average Russian…
 
Back
Top