Putin & Russia

[Silly McSilly Face]

If it came to the point of being involved in a conventional land war with the Russians it is highly unlikely it would be taking place with only Britain involved. Where would you envisage that war taking place?

I didn't say it would take place. I'm saying that we are sat here in Europe crying about America not being prepared to provide security guarantees and intervene in a way you would like. And we are no longer capable of defending ourselves. Basically.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I don't think any serious military analysts thought Russia would take Kyiv in 3 days. Ukraine is a vast country and had a standing army of 700,000 in 2022, which had been battle hardened via fighting separatists in Eastern Ukraine since 2015. Russia initially deployed 200,000 troops and has still taken most of the Donbas.

The British standing army is circa 75,000. That will get chewed through very rapidly in the sort of fighting we've witnessed in Ukraine. The Russians and Ukrainians are losing 100s to a 1000 men every day.

Probably thought they'd get it done in 3 years though?

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Probably thought they'd get it done in 3 years though?

Depends. If you took away the western military support Kyiv would likely have fallen within months if not weeks. When the US briefly halted military aid not so long ago a whole section of the Ukrainian front collapsed and the Russians gained hundreds of miles in the space of a week. I don't think people realise the rate at which munitions and ammunition are being expended out there. It is only the combined effort of the US and allies keeping Ukraine in the fight at huge economic cost which our government are not being honest about.

 

[DubSpur]

Exactly. "Disgrace that Trump isn't intervening." What about Starmer. Should he deploy our forces to Ukraine? In terms of intervention to "stop people dying" most military anakysts reckon that in a conflict against Russia our entire standing army of c. 75K would be killed/incapacitated within a few weeks. Which is comsistent with current casualty rates suffered by the Russians and Ukrainians in the conflict. It is also estimated we'd be out of ammo within weeks. Then what?

Deploying forces into Ukraine isn't the only option available. Harsher sanctions and give Ukraine the military aid they need. If they had got all the equipment they needed at the start instead of being drip fed this would be over already. Give them tomahawk and tarsus missiles and that'll make a big dent in Russian infrastructure that is supporting the war effort.
And if the US and UK were deployed it wouldn't be the type of war that is being fought now. Air power would come into it in a huge way and Russia wouldn't be able to stop it.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Deploying forces into Ukraine isn't the only option available. Harsher sanctions and give Ukraine the military aid they need. If they had got all the equipment they needed at the start instead of being drip fed this would be over already. Give them tomahawk and tarsus missiles and that'll make a big dent in Russian infrastructure that is supporting the war effort.
And if the US and UK were deployed it wouldn't be the type of war that is being fought now. Air power would come into it in a huge way and Russia wouldn't be able to stop it.

Russia isn't using its airpower though. It isn't actually committing all of its military to this conflict. It has never committed its most modern hardware or provided serious air support to its forces. The reason support for Ukraine has been drip fed is to prevent escalation. As much as we are funding and supporting Ukraine, so Iran, China and North Korea are supporting Russia. The first Russian launched missile made entirely with chinese components was found recently by the Ukrainians. China is on record as stating they cannot afford Russia to lose this war. So the danger is you may think "oh we will do this and it will be over". Will it be over or will it simply poke the bear enough for China to actively join the conflict on the ground?

 

[DubSpur]

Russia isn't using its airpower though. It isn't actually committing all of its military to this conflict. It has never committed its most modern hardware or provided serious air support to its forces. The reason support for Ukraine has been drip fed is to prevent escalation. As much as we are funding and supporting Ukraine, so Iran, China and North Korea are supporting Russia. The first Russian launched missile made entirely with chinese components was found recently by the Ukrainians. China is on record as stating they cannot afford Russia to lose this war. So the danger is you may think "oh we will do this and it will be over". Will it be over or will it simply poke the bear enough for China to actively join the conflict on the ground?

They are using airpower to bomb the Ukraine frontline. They're not going beyond that because it's ineffective and they've lost almost 400 aircraft according to estimates (some going if they aren't using airpower). The reason they don't commit their most modern hardware is they don't have the numbers. There's only about 20 operational SU-57s.
The drip feed is due to the west being afraid to cross Putin's "redlines". Guess what has happened when they have been crossed? SFA. Putin knows Russia would be destroyed in a war against NATO.
China can afford Russia losing the war, they want it to keep on going in order to keep the US distracted. They're not going to get into a war with NATO either. It doesn't benefit them (or the west).

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

They are using airpower to bomb the Ukraine frontline. They're not going beyond that because it's ineffective and they've lost almost 400 aircraft according to estimates (some going if they aren't using airpower). The reason they don't commit their most modern hardware is they don't have the numbers. There's only about 20 operational SU-57s.
The drip feed is due to the west being afraid to cross Putin's "redlines". Guess what has happened when they have been crossed? SFA. Putin knows Russia would be destroyed in a war against NATO.
China can afford Russia losing the war, they want it to keep on going in order to keep the US distracted. They're not going to get into a war with NATO either. It doesn't benefit them (or the west).

China likely views the war as one it really can't afford Russia to lose. If Russia loses, Putin's grip losens and the liklihood of a pro-democracy, pro-west takeover occurring in Russia. That would leave China isolated geopolitically and with what it would view as a major threat all along its borders.

You said SFA has occurred when the west has crossed Putin's red lines. That is not true. Hybrid economic and cyber attacks have increased and Dnipro was targeted by a nuclear warhead capable hypersonic missile that was demonstably able to completely evade Ukraine's western-supplied air defences. Nobody wins in an all-out war between Nato and Russia. One of the reasons why the US has likely turned down supply of tomahawk missiles to Ukraine is that as they are nuclear capable the profile of the missile is likely programmed into Russia's early warning defence system that can automatically launch hundreds of ICBMs in event of being targeted by e.g. the US. Experts have warned that they believe the Russian system is buggy and they think the most likely trigger of a nuclear war in the future is the accidental trigger of the Russian defence system.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Russia isn't using its airpower though. It isn't actually committing all of its military to this conflict. It has never committed its most modern hardware or provided serious air support to its forces. The reason support for Ukraine has been drip fed is to prevent escalation. As much as we are funding and supporting Ukraine, so Iran, China and North Korea are supporting Russia. The first Russian launched missile made entirely with chinese components was found recently by the Ukrainians. China is on record as stating they cannot afford Russia to lose this war. So the danger is you may think "oh we will do this and it will be over". Will it be over or will it simply poke the bear enough for China to actively join the conflict on the ground?

What is your endgame? Retreat to Berlin and pretend its 1988 again and that half the continent haven't had 35 years of liberal democracies?