Appeasement isn’t a successful strategy to an imperialist nuclear armed bully.
The calculus of ‘appeasement’ (stupid outdated phrase BTW) is completely different with a nuclear armed state than it was with Germany in the 1930s. Would we have rushed to war with hitler if he had thousands of intercontinental nuclear missiles at his disposal? I doubt it. Negotiation and compromise is the only thing that will avoid further escalation. Using force and getting into another arms race will not make us safer.
Yeah but what’s the compromise?
No one has yet come up with a realistic scenario where Putin accepts defeat without going nuclear
Your glass is really half empty isn't it? There's a whole series of alternative outcomes.
Would I want us all to die in a nuclear holocaust, or let my family wait here for the Russians to nibble their way across Europe, devastating towns and cities, torturing and raping, until they get to me and my wife and kids? That's the alternative.
dazh
Full Member
Appeasement isn’t a successful strategy to an imperialist nuclear armed bully.The calculus of ‘appeasement’ (stupid outdated phrase BTW) is completely different with a nuclear armed state than it was with Germany in the 1930s. Would we have rushed to war with hitler if he had thousands of intercontinental nuclear missiles at his disposal? I doubt it. Negotiation and compromise is the only thing that will avoid further escalation. Using force and getting into another arms race will not make us safer.
Nobody "rushed to war" with Hitler. For those those of us with close family who died in WWII that's a crass comment.
And to reposition your question, how would it have played out if Hitler "had thousands of intercontinental nuclear missiles" [i]pointing at him[/i]?
I agree, there's a very real danger that Putin will, when cornered, elect for world annihilation over defeat. But then again, conceding him territory will not dissuade him from further expansionism. And if we're so sure that he'll ultimately accept self destruction rather than losing face then isn't the choice just down to when he launches Armageddon?
So are the scenarios
(a) land is ceded to a nuclear-power leader who will stop at literally nothing to get everything he wants - in which case we're doomed anyway, eventually
or
(b) every effort is made to stop said leader now, in the hope that doomsday is somehow averted?
To me, option (b) is the only one with any hope of survival in the long run.
Edited to (try to) correct bad formatting
Yeah but what’s the compromise?
I’m not going to pretend to have the answer to that, but there has to be one. The alternative is collective suicide, which would be much more stupid than both sides swallowing some pride.
I think the compromise is letting Russia get away with killing 1000s, torture, forced deportations and ethnic cleansing.....
Anenxiing whatever bits of countries they fancy and destroying any nation they don't like
I’m not going to pretend to have the answer to that, but there has to be one. The alternative is collective suicide, which would be much more stupid than both sides swallowing some pride.
Do you think Mr Putin is going to swallow some pride?
Whilst a limited nuclear event is quite likely but that is unknown, what is looking more likely is there are quite similar conditions to 1917. An unmotivated army not sure what they're fighting for.
The calculus of ‘appeasement’ (stupid outdated phrase BTW) is completely different with a nuclear armed state than it was with Germany in the 1930s. Would we have rushed to war with hitler if he had thousands of intercontinental nuclear missiles at his disposal?
How many Jews would you have let Hitler kill? Obviously you would have had to let him kill some.
Your glass is really half empty isn’t it?
Yeah. The very real prospect of nuclear war, the collapse of civilisation and starvation of almost everyone on the planet causes a little bit of anxiety.
every effort is made to stop said leader now, in the hope that doomsday is somehow averted?
What do you mean by ‘every effort’? I mean I agree, but ‘every effort’ also includes negotiation.
As someone who's from a country who has had a murderous imperialist neighbour I can assure you the Ukrainians will fight to get all their land back.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there are any charities that are helping the Ukrainian government care for the huge numbers of POWs they're taking?
How many Jews would you have let Hitler kill?
Ridiculous comment. ‘We’, as a nation, let despotic regimes kill people all the time. How many have died across the world when we could have stepped in? Rwanda, Bosnia, Myanmar, Libya, Iraq (in the early days), Palestine, Syria, Chile etc. The list is endless. Millions have died since the end of WW2 whilst we stood aside and watched or even worse sold weapons to some of these regimes.
dazh
Full Member
Curious as to why everyone on here is so celebratory about the collapse of the Russian army
Because the Russians are unambiguously the bad guys in this and Ukraine is unambiguously the victim of violent aggression and attempted genocide. Cheering the good guys when they win is what normal people do.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know if there are any charities that are helping the Ukrainian government care for the huge numbers of POWs they’re taking?
No, but an occasional poster @jkomo or similar had arranged some first aid shipments previously. Maybe they have heard something? Assuming someone can remember the correct user name.
Ridiculous comment. ‘We’, as a nation, let despotic regimes kill people all the time. How many have died across the world when we could have stepped in
I’m guessing from this your answer is the full 6 million
The list is endless. Millions have died since the end of WW2 whilst we stood aside and watched or even worse sold weapons to some of these regimes.
Yet you're ok with it happening again?
Russia started this insane war, now they are losing, the sooner it's over the better
The West tried ignoring the seizure of Donetsk & Crimea, it didn't work, Putin only came back determined to take the entire country
We’, as a nation, let despotic regimes kill people all the time.
So your argument is that we should be consistent in our inaction? Why?
Russians still falling back
https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1577426159955955712?t=ggiaiC1givd9ppg1rvRnVA&s=19
The other problem with allowing Putin to get what he wants with the threat of nukes is it will embolden the likes of North Korea to do similar.
At some point a line has to be drawn and like it or not sooner is probably better than later, when multiple countries are pushing at neighbouring countries with impunity because they have nukes.
Ridiculous comment. ‘We’, as a nation, let despotic regimes kill people all the time. How many have died across the world when we could have stepped in? Rwanda, Bosnia, Myanmar, Libya, Iraq (in the early days), Palestine, Syria, Chile etc. The list is endless. Millions have died since the end of WW2 whilst we stood aside and watched or even worse sold weapons to some of these regimes.
Ahhhh, the old whataboutery response rears it head in yet another thread.
Never play poker, Daz
Another excellent thread from Mick Ryan.
https://twitter.com/WarintheFuture/status/1577528523580809222
There's propaganda value in discussions like this ^^
Also worth noting that a possible, albeit unlikely, outcome from this conflict is nuclear war — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 3, 2022
"It is very positive that somebody like Elon Musk is looking for a peaceful way out of this situation," said spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63126550
Yes, use of tactical nuclear weapons is a possibility, but we've had that discussion.
In the circumstances in the Ukraine, is President Putin going to launch nukes into territory and a population that he's claiming for his own to protect it from fascists?
There's no military advantage to tactical nukes either.
The only wildcard is President Putin's state of mind, and none of us can discuss that from a position of knowledge, can I suggest that we move on?
Snihurivka withdrawal is a big one! The Russian strategy in Kherson has been a link of Fortress towns, with defences in between.
Snihurivka was a big Fortress, defending the corner of the Inhulets River.
From the Mick Ryan thread he talks about Recon.
Which I know nothing about.
How hard is that to do well? (Recon, not 'knowing nothing' which I find easy)
There’s propaganda value in discussions like this
Yeh very much so, Russia has dedicated rail cars for transportation which are allegedly* not in the video. Which indicates (if accurate) who the intended audience is, and who else is meant to pick up (different) messaging from it. The White House are claiming there is no sign of change, but there are some fairly level headed assessments that theres a good chance of a test in the Arctic. Which is probably intended to try and "dislocate support".
Movement of such things is not only normal, but normal in the UK with a dedicated 'spotter' community and associated website.
Sometimes you can predict when discussion point will be raised on STW by seeing pro Russian channels messaging, followed by certain 'types' of Western channels, followed by wider general 'chats'.
Not dismissing the risk mind you. Before I get accused of being ok with extrapolation x, y, or z. And no, its doesnt logically mean any of those extrapolations.
*If anyone can counter that, with a source, not a rant, feel free.
Sounds right.
The reason we all laugh at RT TV propaganda is that we are not the Audience.
These things all happen on multiple levels.
It appears that the Russian forces are either retreating (in good order) or are suffering a rout. Either one is as likely as the other, we're all trying to second guess through a fog of propaganda and Telegraph channels.
I can see Putin passing the blame for the failure of these forces to hold territory onto the newly created leaders of the annexed parts of Ukraine. They seem to have been created solely for that purpose anyway. (some-one to point the finger at who isn't him, or one of his cronies)
All the images and twitter feeds I looked at with regards to that nuke convoy seem to suggest it is some of the armoured vehicles that are associated with nukes being transported. Nothing about the nukes themselves. Havent seem this mentioned anywhere, but could it be they are just short on vehicles so moving every asset they can to the front line?
And I'm glad some on this thread aren't on the negotiating table.
I can't see the use of a tactical nuke, unless its dropped on kyiv, and then god knows what the world will do. I think its far more likely that the nuclear plant near Kherson will have an 'accident' if troops there are surrounded or forced to withdraw.
Continues the theme of using energy as a weapon, and general Ru strategy of trying to control it (or destroy others access to it)
How hard is that to do well?
Depends how good the other side are. If they are a bunch of uninterested conscripts using unencrypted radios then a lot easier than against people who take it seriously.
You also need to have a decent command and intelligence structure to collate the reports and figure out what it means in total.
The Ukrainians do have an advantage here since there is a load of very expensive kit flying around just the other side of the border listening in.
If he uses nukes in Ukraine and fails to reverse things, won't that send a very strong signal to China that Eastern Russia is up for grabs?
Havent seem this mentioned anywhere, but could it be they are just short on vehicles so moving every asset they can to the front line?
There was some photos short(ish) range ballistic weapons were being moved around but it wasnt clear where or when those photos were taken.
I linked to a report which pretty much said that about not just the vehicles but also the troops. The nuclear defence units are, in theory, an elite unit so the Russians may be choosing to throw them into the fray. Whether they will be much use is debatable since their training and equipment is presumably more aimed at handling a raid from fairly lightly equipped special forces (since they would be way behind Russian lines normally) rather than an armoured brigade attack.
A lesson Russia is learning the hard way. They are using Spetznaz on the frontlines to prop up their lacking infantry. Once you are in a trench subjected to Artillery, you are just a soldier and your SF training has less worth.
And I’m glad some on this thread aren’t on the negotiating table.
Is there a negotiating table? Or hidden diplomatic channels?
I saw Zelenskyy made some sort of decree saying no negotiation with the current President of the Russian Federation.
There WILL be a negotiation at some point. All wars end that way. As above, not all messages are meant for all audiences.
Is there a negotiating table? Or hidden diplomatic channels?
Right from the start, Putin made it very clear that he had no serious interest in negotiating. He made maximalist demands that he knew would not be accepted and he has continued that pattern. His record of violating agreements is obvious to Ukraine so they will not accept anything he says unless there it is backed up by Ukrainian troops with tanks and guns being on the ground to enforce it.
So, no, there isn't a negotiating table because Putin refuses to negotiate in good faith.
There WILL be a negotiation at some point. All wars end that way.
Apart from the biggest one. Unconditional surrender is hardly a negotiation.
Edit cross posts
Theres obviously some form of communications in place, if only to negotiate prisoner swaps
Russia losing in Ukraine does not mean all out nuclear war. There is an alternative.
https://twitter.com/mbk_center/status/1577582774592102400
Theres another man who wants to watch what he drinks Mikhail Khodorkovsky in light of those comments.
The statement from Zelenskyy say he wont discuss negotiations this Russia while hes in power is the key. Hes offering a small glimmer of hope to all Russian forces that there is a way out rather than further bloodshed and loss. Effectively offering a simple way out to someone brave enough to leave a window open in a high building.
Khordokovsky has had to watch what he drinks since 2001.
Look back at these comments in a year.
Who thinks:
1/ Putin is still in power.
2/ There has been some negotiation.
For me, the obvious off ramp is Zelensky agreeing to stand down as President. It allows Putin to claim he achieved his aim, whilst stil giving Ukraine the victory.
Not sure Poootin will take an off-ramp, just full Dukes of Hazzard.
I cant see any way Zelensky will step down or be asked to step by the people of Ukraine. Im would hate to call this anyway and the moment and with any bet there is always the outside chance of the unexpected.
