Can Biden/NATO continue to back Ukraine while avoiding conflict with Putin—who launched his war against Ukraine not in February but eight years ago when he invaded it and illegally annexed the Crimean Peninsula?
In the words of TC, On ' …September 30, Vladimir Putin announced his annexation of four provinces of Ukraine. The fact he does not fully control any of the four provinces - Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson - and that a vote at gunpoint is not a legitimate vote to join Russia, assuming such was actually legal in any way under international law,..'
With this statement, he '.... declared a new war, not merely a war on Ukraine.' (TC)
To remove Putin, it is not possible, in my opinion, for the West to avoid direct conflict with him. Are we moving closer to WW III or has it already begun?
WWIII began when TFG lost to Cruz in Iowa. TFG claimed that the caucuses were rigged. And the Republican establishment did not crush the NYC mobster right there. And then he saw he could effectively lie and lie and lie again into the WH. Republicans then embraced a lying monster - thinking they could tame him for their purposes. Not. The "Base" was in charge from there.
The meeting with TFG and Putin in Helsinki then set the stage for Putin to explore further expansion as if he were Alexander the Great or Attila the Hun. TFG loves that power stuff.
There is a direct line between Republican cowardice and the horrors of Ukraine. TFG set the tone for a weak America. Probably hoping to build that lusted for Moscow hotel. I blame the whole thing on Cruz and all the other Republican cowards who put their careers above the country.
It's a powerful and appropriate vision. They are both indeed sinking.
But they share several traits. They will never admit defeat. They will just keep spinning lies and becoming more and more bellicose. What saddens me so much is that so many people LOVE that bluster. It plays to the disappointments of their lives - that they would love to be saved from. That beastly behavior may even remind them of how their fathers treated them - with disapproval and beatings - if only psychological.
Yes, I think TFG's swan song will sound like: "I fought the law, and the law won." And the only sound from Putin will be a choke when he realizes his "taster" has a relative or friend in Ukraine. Another vision for the day.
Russian soldiers are being slaughtered as they fled Lyman in such numbers that the AFU are being sickened by it. They are afraid to surrender as they have been convinced Ukraine will treat them as they have treated Ukrainian POWs.
So far there has been no sign that Russia is preparing to go nuclear. If they pull a few nuclear equipped missiles out of storage and begin refurbishing them, then worry.
Your call, Fern. When it comes to worrying, Alfred E Neuman and I have much in common. Both of us are not very bright. Everything I read from your own intelligence agencies says that Russia's use of tactical nucs is highly probable but so far they have seen no sign of their immanent deployment. Of course, do not bet on any horse I have money on. Back in February I didn't think Russia was going to actually invade.
Oh, Allen, I turn to you for information and humor, too. The connection of nuclear weaponry and Putin is one that I am somber about and journalistically inclined. I am glad to have read the Institute of Study of War Analysis' summary of the matter, so strongly recommended to me by TC. It was not cavalier in its reading of Putin on the subject.. As a matter of additional concern, Putin, as in other areas may not abide by the timetable for possible use of nukes that the ISW laid out. TC's take on ISW's analysis about this was not accurate as far as I am concerned. The info I have read concerning Putin's use of nuclear weapons is NOT high at this time but has grown.
I need to find that. Usually I read the ISW daily reports but sometimes miss. One hopes Putin is bluffing but he may not be. Once he shows his hole card and goes nuclear, he is all in. I don't think he will like that as Biden is not bluffing and I have faith in that. All I know right now is I am going to Ukraine in mid-October and bringing Tanya and Lucky back to Canada where they will be safe.
This is from yesterday's ISW report:
Kadyrov’s call for using tactical nuclear weapons is likely inconsistent with his demands to continue the “special military operation” to bring more Ukrainian territory under Russian control. The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassable for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.
Allen, Latest last word from ISW is reason for calm.
September 30, 12:45pm ET
'The more confident Putin is that nuclear use will not achieve decisive effects but will draw direct Western conventional military intervention in the conflict, the less likely he is to conduct a nuclear attack.'
Washington is not as sanguine to assume Putin's threat of using nuclear weapons just 'foolish'.
'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm' (excerpts from front page of today's NY Times)
'In a gathering Cold War atmosphere, American officials are gaming out responses should Russia resort to battlefield nuclear weapons.'
'In issuing his warning to Russia last week, Mr. Sullivan declined to describe the playbook of American or NATO responses, knowing that one key to Cold War deterrence was some degree of ambiguity.'
'Senior American officials say they think the chances that Mr. Putin would employ a nuclear weapon remain low.'
'But they are far more worried about the possibility now than they were at the beginning of the Ukraine conflict in February. After a series of humiliating retreats, astoundingly high casualty rates and a deeply unpopular move to draft young Russian men into service, Mr. Putin clearly sees the threat of his nuclear arsenal as a way to instill fear, and perhaps to recover some respect for Russia’s power.'
'Most important, he may see the threat of unleashing part of his stockpile of roughly 2,000 so-called tactical nuclear weapons as a way to extort concessions that he has been unable to win on the battlefield. Such weapons involve much smaller, less-powerful warheads than those used in intercontinental missiles, which can destroy whole cities.'
'For their part, Russian analysts and officials see the specter of nuclear conflict as giving a distinct advantage to their side.' (NYTimes)
TC, if you read anywhere on The Study of War analysis what you wrote, 'All this talk by the Russians is just that', please post it as that is not what I found. The following is worthwhile for all concerned about Putin's nuclear posturing. ISW wrote that Putin did not literally make the threat in his speech, but he certainly raised the possibility.
September 30, 8:30 pm ET
'ISW cannot forecast the point at which Putin would decide to use nuclear weapons. Such a decision would be inherently personal, but Putin’s stated red lines for nuclear weapon use have already been crossed in this war several times over without any Russian nuclear escalation. Reported Ukrainian cross-border raids into Belgorod Oblast and strikes against Russian-occupied Crimea could arguably meet the stated Russian nuclear use threshold of “aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”[4] Putin framed Ukraine as posing an existential threat to Russian sovereignty repeatedly at the start of his full-scale invasion—a phrase that meets that stated threshold: “For our country, it is a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a nation. … It is not only a very real threat to our interests but to the very existence of our state and to its sovereignty. It is the red line which we have spoken about on numerous occasions,” he said on February 24.[5] Formal Russian nuclear doctrine is evidently not a deciding factor for Putin, who has reportedly been micromanaging this war down to the operational level.[6]'
'Putin has set in motion two major means short of nuclear use through which he will try to achieve his objectives: partial mobilization to replace Russian losses, and wintertime energy pressures on Europe to deter European support. He likely intends Russia’s ongoing mobilization to stabilize Russian positions and enable the temporary freezing of the conflict. He is unlikely to succeed; rushing thousands of untrained and unmotivated Russian men to the front will not meaningfully increase Russian combat power, particularly in places like western Luhansk oblast where the Ukrainian counteroffensives are making significant progress. Putin intends his second approach, curtailing natural gas exports to Europe, to fracture the Western consensus around supporting Ukraine and limit Western military aid to Ukrainian forces. This too is unlikely to succeed; Europe is in for a cold and difficult winter, yet the leaders of NATO and non-NATO European states have not faltered in their support for Ukrainian sovereignty and may increase that support in light of Russia’s illegal annexation even in the face of economic costs.[7] European states are actively finding alternatives to Russian energy and will likely be far more prepared by winter 2023.[8] It is difficult to assess what indicators Putin will use to evaluate the success of either effort. But both will take considerable time to bear fruit or to demonstrably fail, time Putin will likely take before considering a nuclear escalation.' (InstituteFortheStudyofWar) See link below.
What t hey, and others, are saying is, the "red lines" Putin has claimed are there for employing nuclear weapons have been crossed already, more than once, without response.
I think even Putin knows that deploying a nuclear weapon would be the end of everything he has worked for, as well as the end of him. As to who would do it, no one knows.
This is not the time to be "Chicken Little." World War III is not here. At least not yet.
an alarmist or person who panics easily.' Who is that, TC?
Do excerpts from The New York Times' article, 'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm' evidence of a 'Chiken Little' subscriber on TAFM? Was posting a copy ISW's summary another piece of evidence against me? Nowhere does that summary state ''All this talk by the Russians is just that' as you wrote in reply to me. To repeat, ''ISW cannot forecast the point at which Putin would decide to use nuclear weapons.'
Attack, attack, attack is a weak defense, TC, in my opinion. I amend that, it was offensive.
'Go read the Institute for the Study of War...' you commanded me in reply to my comment, which consisted of excerpts from the New York Times' article 'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm'. And so I did. Thank you, TC, for ordering me to do so. Perhaps, I exaggerated the tone of your reply; for that, I am sorry; it was how your reply felt to me.
It is now, possibly more than ever, incumbent on the U.S. Congress to avoid their customary posturing and brinkspersonship and pass a budget resolution that funds the government through the end of the fiscal year 2023 and includes support for Ukraine until the status quo ante 2014 is achieved.
Was a very rude house call on our coast. Still a wait to get power restored.
Fortunate to have some fam that kept their power so hot shower and cool air not out of reach. Some of our most beautiful barrier islands on the Gulf coast are literally gone. Tampa Bay saved from direct hit. Flooding and loss of property is astounding. They say “hide from wind, run from water”. Unfortunately, many many people chose not to evacuate or go to shelters and instead chose to be “rugged individuals” and not need the government’s help. Typical Florida. Lots of regret after the fact.
Putin declared WW III when he explained War 6.o: disinformation campaigns at home and abroad, and boosting opposition in other countries to split nations allowing opposition. Terrorist attacks have shown the way by exploiting free press, killing less than hundred innocent people, but spreading fear among billions. The autocratic message is: democracy is weak. We should learn democracy is vulnerable, and learn about ourselves. Putin dug out Trump for president from the confederate dung. We have the same kind of lessons to learn in Sweden. Then we can see there is also back fire to the weapons used against us: disinformation as a lullaby makes for a heavy wakeup.
I wonder about the supersonic weapons; have they not made nuclear weapons obsolete? Really useful only to scare? The US Navy had a film on Youtube with an electric cannon shooting an unarmed warhead at high speed, capable of sinking a warship at 200 km distance, and freeing warships of being loaded with explosives. China has announced a ballistic missile at speed mach 4-7, and Russia one at mach 20.
Trump did not have to be deposited in the White House at supersonic speed, he could just sit there and do all the destruction.
There is much to appreciate about your comment, Olof, including the new supersonic weapons...speed never was so fast before I took special pleasure in '....disinformation as a lullaby makes for a heavy wakeup.' Now, that is tune full! Thank you.
What Putin has done and continues to do, along with his generals and soldiers, and the Wagner Group mercenaries (and there's another group called Ruschists who sound worse than the Wagner boys) is brutality at its worst. If you heard Fiona Hill on Friday's broadcast of PBS Newshour, you'll know that Putin and his submarines are likely behind the explosions in the gas pipelines in the Baltic. I hope you look her interview up as well as some of her articles in Foreign Affairs. There are also some excellent articles in The Guardian and The WSJ (I never thought I'd say that). Putin is going to do what he is going to do in order to hold onto power. The question for me is whether he'll hold on longer than the folks who are fleeing across Russian borders to Georgia and beyond, as well as those who are resisting in the streets all around Russia. My guess is that Medvedev is sharpening his own knives, but he is not the only one. There is a 60 year old guy who is ostensibly the leader of Luhansk who has been with Putin from the beginning of his regime. He says he works behind the scenes. That in itself should make Putin keep his own weapon close at hand. The police keep putting people in prison. Navalny, in a piece that his attorneys apparently smuggled out of Russia, which appeared in the WAPO (I think or perhaps NYT) said some in his penal colony had agreed to join the army in order to get out of prison. Another excellent article. Timothy Snyder has a class you can catch on Youtube coming directly from Yale - a couple of classes a week - they're up to class 8. Check it out. I am immersed with the history of a part of the world I never paid any attention to. And, I frankly do not see how NATO will not be drawn in eventually beyond what they are doing now to train Ukrainian military personnel and provide weapons. BTW the Sueddeutsche Zeitung reports that there have been drones reported hovering over training areas located in Bavaria. So that is being investigated. It will probably be important to begin to keep Russian subs from destroying communications cables which are located in the world's oceans. Imagine that for a moment. Putin is a numbers man - he loves dates on the calendar. He turns 70 on October 7. I'd say, watch out for something horrible to happen to mark his birthday.
From Ruth Ben-Ghiat today… “With his back against the wall, and his supposedly mighty military machine exposed as a failure, Putin is now at his most dangerous. Strongmen in this situation never retreat, but instead double down. Since they despise their own people, they don't care about any repercussions that their actions will have for their country. They only care about restoring their prestige and achieving a semblance of victory.”
Thanks Kathy - for the quote from Ruth Ben-Ghiat. What I mean about Putin is that he really looks to calendar dates that have some meaning to him and his worldview. That's why I'm wondering what he may decide to do October 7. He has been quiet since the big "celebration" of the faux referenda and annexations. So I feel like another shoe will drop in the near future. I hope I am wrong. Could be October 17 - or something related to the Bolshevik Revolution back in the day. So many possibilities.
Hum. What modeling is Putin engaging in by rewriting history or in this instance taking back parts of a country that was once under Russia's sphere of influence ( part of it's empire)? When is "border" "or "sovereignty" established in victory renegotiatible? Will Rome be next to declare sovereignty over say England or France or Austria? China over Singapore (oh, wait they already did) or Taiwan? Or, Mexico over Texas and Arizona or California? Should we fear that the Mexicans will use the US and Mexico trade agreement, unfair by all standards (made up of course) as justification for storming our Southern borders and, God forbid, retake Texas (hum, a loss or a gain?) and threaten to move The Wall to the Oklahoma and Arkansas borders? What international insanity is he unleasing? Next, we'll see Cubans invading Florida, establishing a Nation in Exile in Miami or Venezuelans demanding relocation to Martha's Vineyard or the Irish retaking Bauston. Too much to think about, TC. I must rest. 😉
Smart, knowlegable, acerbic, well read, even better as a writer and historian, and while he will harbor no tub or tug or flotilla of fools, he lacks the averace or single mindedness of a dictator or conqueror. While they might conscript him, he'd be leading the coup before he was assigned to the front. Never fodder. TC is on the right side.
We are all needed. Both of you keep me thinking. TC because he speaks as he does (the Chiago kid in me) and you and others who keep track, remember and provide materials to the positions we are trying to manage in our minds and then act upon.
I read earlier reports that many Russian soldiers in Lyman have been fleeing Lyman. It occurred to me that they must feel between a rock and a hard place. Not only were they sent to Lyman to fight the Lyman citizens, but also, they were now charged to fight their ostensible Russian citizens, otherwise known as comrades. I hope they all get home safely. Although I doubt there is any way for them to avoid being nailed as traitors while under threats of lethal punishment by Putin's goons.
Two Ukraine experts, Colonel Vindman and another whose name I cannot recall both spoke on MSNBC saying the same thing: the only way to end this war now is to WIN this war.
It seems to me that the response the US to the Russian assault on Crimea in 2014 set the table for this invasion of Ukraine. I think that the Yard Punk in Russia was emboldened by (if not indirectly aided by) our own Yard Punk who left office in 2021.
Encirclement generally involves preventing enemy soldiers from escaping to fight another day, does it not? If so, how the heck did Russian troops withdraw from Lyman after it was encircled?
Ah. Having just read Allen's comment, I see. The reports of Russian withdrawal were fanciful at best. The enemy troops are being killed or captured, exactly as one would expect.
Can Biden/NATO continue to back Ukraine while avoiding conflict with Putin—who launched his war against Ukraine not in February but eight years ago when he invaded it and illegally annexed the Crimean Peninsula?
In the words of TC, On ' …September 30, Vladimir Putin announced his annexation of four provinces of Ukraine. The fact he does not fully control any of the four provinces - Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson - and that a vote at gunpoint is not a legitimate vote to join Russia, assuming such was actually legal in any way under international law,..'
With this statement, he '.... declared a new war, not merely a war on Ukraine.' (TC)
To remove Putin, it is not possible, in my opinion, for the West to avoid direct conflict with him. Are we moving closer to WW III or has it already begun?
WWIII began when TFG lost to Cruz in Iowa. TFG claimed that the caucuses were rigged. And the Republican establishment did not crush the NYC mobster right there. And then he saw he could effectively lie and lie and lie again into the WH. Republicans then embraced a lying monster - thinking they could tame him for their purposes. Not. The "Base" was in charge from there.
The meeting with TFG and Putin in Helsinki then set the stage for Putin to explore further expansion as if he were Alexander the Great or Attila the Hun. TFG loves that power stuff.
There is a direct line between Republican cowardice and the horrors of Ukraine. TFG set the tone for a weak America. Probably hoping to build that lusted for Moscow hotel. I blame the whole thing on Cruz and all the other Republican cowards who put their careers above the country.
They started WWIII.
Our reading of history may differ, but do you agree that Putin and TFG are both sinking? May they hold hands in hell. What do you think of that, Bill?
It's a powerful and appropriate vision. They are both indeed sinking.
But they share several traits. They will never admit defeat. They will just keep spinning lies and becoming more and more bellicose. What saddens me so much is that so many people LOVE that bluster. It plays to the disappointments of their lives - that they would love to be saved from. That beastly behavior may even remind them of how their fathers treated them - with disapproval and beatings - if only psychological.
Yes, I think TFG's swan song will sound like: "I fought the law, and the law won." And the only sound from Putin will be a choke when he realizes his "taster" has a relative or friend in Ukraine. Another vision for the day.
I cannot fathom that “love of that bluster” any more that I can fathom why some Americans want a fascist government.
Few of us can Ally, that's what makes counterargument so difficult.
And an entirely acceptable vision, one that cannot be realized too soon.
They are alike in many ways, hopefully in sinking as well.
Russian soldiers are being slaughtered as they fled Lyman in such numbers that the AFU are being sickened by it. They are afraid to surrender as they have been convinced Ukraine will treat them as they have treated Ukrainian POWs.
So far there has been no sign that Russia is preparing to go nuclear. If they pull a few nuclear equipped missiles out of storage and begin refurbishing them, then worry.
Allen, I am referring to Putin, who must be stopped, but, please, anyone who isn't worried, I won't use a TC word for those _____!
Your call, Fern. When it comes to worrying, Alfred E Neuman and I have much in common. Both of us are not very bright. Everything I read from your own intelligence agencies says that Russia's use of tactical nucs is highly probable but so far they have seen no sign of their immanent deployment. Of course, do not bet on any horse I have money on. Back in February I didn't think Russia was going to actually invade.
Oh, Allen, I turn to you for information and humor, too. The connection of nuclear weaponry and Putin is one that I am somber about and journalistically inclined. I am glad to have read the Institute of Study of War Analysis' summary of the matter, so strongly recommended to me by TC. It was not cavalier in its reading of Putin on the subject.. As a matter of additional concern, Putin, as in other areas may not abide by the timetable for possible use of nukes that the ISW laid out. TC's take on ISW's analysis about this was not accurate as far as I am concerned. The info I have read concerning Putin's use of nuclear weapons is NOT high at this time but has grown.
I need to find that. Usually I read the ISW daily reports but sometimes miss. One hopes Putin is bluffing but he may not be. Once he shows his hole card and goes nuclear, he is all in. I don't think he will like that as Biden is not bluffing and I have faith in that. All I know right now is I am going to Ukraine in mid-October and bringing Tanya and Lucky back to Canada where they will be safe.
This is from yesterday's ISW report:
Kadyrov’s call for using tactical nuclear weapons is likely inconsistent with his demands to continue the “special military operation” to bring more Ukrainian territory under Russian control. The Russian military in its current state is almost certainly unable to operate on a nuclear battlefield even though it has the necessary equipment and has historically trained its units to do so. The chaotic agglomeration of exhausted contract soldiers, hastily mobilized reservists, conscripts, and mercenaries that currently comprise the Russian ground forces could not function in a nuclear environment. Any areas affected by Russian tactical nuclear weapons would thus be impassable for the Russians, likely precluding Russian advances. This consideration is another factor that reduces the likelihood of Russian tactical nuclear weapons use.
Allen, Latest last word from ISW is reason for calm.
September 30, 12:45pm ET
'The more confident Putin is that nuclear use will not achieve decisive effects but will draw direct Western conventional military intervention in the conflict, the less likely he is to conduct a nuclear attack.'
Mid-October is not far away. I cannot be alone with a deadly fantasy of his imminent demise.
Or an Ally word?? 🤬
As TC has pointed out before in his reviews on Russian history, things have
not always gone well for the Yard Punks
who have subjugated their population.
Yard Punk Putin was a KGB thug. You
can dress him up and botox him, but
he will always be a KGB thug. Most of
his Yard Boys have been in it for the
money and power. A lot of that is being
drained away with sanctions and the
foolish threat of nuclear weapons.
Absolutely no one in this world, even
the Yard Boys, want nukes set off.
The threat to Putin will come from
within.
Washington is not as sanguine to assume Putin's threat of using nuclear weapons just 'foolish'.
'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm' (excerpts from front page of today's NY Times)
'In a gathering Cold War atmosphere, American officials are gaming out responses should Russia resort to battlefield nuclear weapons.'
'In issuing his warning to Russia last week, Mr. Sullivan declined to describe the playbook of American or NATO responses, knowing that one key to Cold War deterrence was some degree of ambiguity.'
'Senior American officials say they think the chances that Mr. Putin would employ a nuclear weapon remain low.'
'But they are far more worried about the possibility now than they were at the beginning of the Ukraine conflict in February. After a series of humiliating retreats, astoundingly high casualty rates and a deeply unpopular move to draft young Russian men into service, Mr. Putin clearly sees the threat of his nuclear arsenal as a way to instill fear, and perhaps to recover some respect for Russia’s power.'
'Most important, he may see the threat of unleashing part of his stockpile of roughly 2,000 so-called tactical nuclear weapons as a way to extort concessions that he has been unable to win on the battlefield. Such weapons involve much smaller, less-powerful warheads than those used in intercontinental missiles, which can destroy whole cities.'
'For their part, Russian analysts and officials see the specter of nuclear conflict as giving a distinct advantage to their side.' (NYTimes)
Go read the Institute for the Study of War analysis on nuclear war. All this talk by the Russians is just that.
TC, if you read anywhere on The Study of War analysis what you wrote, 'All this talk by the Russians is just that', please post it as that is not what I found. The following is worthwhile for all concerned about Putin's nuclear posturing. ISW wrote that Putin did not literally make the threat in his speech, but he certainly raised the possibility.
September 30, 8:30 pm ET
'ISW cannot forecast the point at which Putin would decide to use nuclear weapons. Such a decision would be inherently personal, but Putin’s stated red lines for nuclear weapon use have already been crossed in this war several times over without any Russian nuclear escalation. Reported Ukrainian cross-border raids into Belgorod Oblast and strikes against Russian-occupied Crimea could arguably meet the stated Russian nuclear use threshold of “aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy.”[4] Putin framed Ukraine as posing an existential threat to Russian sovereignty repeatedly at the start of his full-scale invasion—a phrase that meets that stated threshold: “For our country, it is a matter of life and death, a matter of our historical future as a nation. … It is not only a very real threat to our interests but to the very existence of our state and to its sovereignty. It is the red line which we have spoken about on numerous occasions,” he said on February 24.[5] Formal Russian nuclear doctrine is evidently not a deciding factor for Putin, who has reportedly been micromanaging this war down to the operational level.[6]'
'Putin has set in motion two major means short of nuclear use through which he will try to achieve his objectives: partial mobilization to replace Russian losses, and wintertime energy pressures on Europe to deter European support. He likely intends Russia’s ongoing mobilization to stabilize Russian positions and enable the temporary freezing of the conflict. He is unlikely to succeed; rushing thousands of untrained and unmotivated Russian men to the front will not meaningfully increase Russian combat power, particularly in places like western Luhansk oblast where the Ukrainian counteroffensives are making significant progress. Putin intends his second approach, curtailing natural gas exports to Europe, to fracture the Western consensus around supporting Ukraine and limit Western military aid to Ukrainian forces. This too is unlikely to succeed; Europe is in for a cold and difficult winter, yet the leaders of NATO and non-NATO European states have not faltered in their support for Ukrainian sovereignty and may increase that support in light of Russia’s illegal annexation even in the face of economic costs.[7] European states are actively finding alternatives to Russian energy and will likely be far more prepared by winter 2023.[8] It is difficult to assess what indicators Putin will use to evaluate the success of either effort. But both will take considerable time to bear fruit or to demonstrably fail, time Putin will likely take before considering a nuclear escalation.' (InstituteFortheStudyofWar) See link below.
https://www.understandingwar.org/
What t hey, and others, are saying is, the "red lines" Putin has claimed are there for employing nuclear weapons have been crossed already, more than once, without response.
I think even Putin knows that deploying a nuclear weapon would be the end of everything he has worked for, as well as the end of him. As to who would do it, no one knows.
This is not the time to be "Chicken Little." World War III is not here. At least not yet.
Who is "Chicken Little", TC? ' Chick·en Lit·tle:
an alarmist or person who panics easily.' Who is that, TC?
Do excerpts from The New York Times' article, 'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm' evidence of a 'Chiken Little' subscriber on TAFM? Was posting a copy ISW's summary another piece of evidence against me? Nowhere does that summary state ''All this talk by the Russians is just that' as you wrote in reply to me. To repeat, ''ISW cannot forecast the point at which Putin would decide to use nuclear weapons.'
Attack, attack, attack is a weak defense, TC, in my opinion. I amend that, it was offensive.
'Go read the Institute for the Study of War...' you commanded me in reply to my comment, which consisted of excerpts from the New York Times' article 'In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm'. And so I did. Thank you, TC, for ordering me to do so. Perhaps, I exaggerated the tone of your reply; for that, I am sorry; it was how your reply felt to me.
It is now, possibly more than ever, incumbent on the U.S. Congress to avoid their customary posturing and brinkspersonship and pass a budget resolution that funds the government through the end of the fiscal year 2023 and includes support for Ukraine until the status quo ante 2014 is achieved.
Dave, How else can they topple the duly elected President Joseph R. Biden?
😣
Overstepping
Its a concept foreign to dictators. They don’t get it. Until they do. Then it ends badly
The sizzlin’ griddle is real.
Thank you, TC. The dang truth always cuts through the nonsense.
Russian warship….really go f*ck yourself.
I like that President Biden says it in his own way emphatically.
Unita. 🗽
Glad to see you here, Christine. You do OK when Ian came to call?
Was a very rude house call on our coast. Still a wait to get power restored.
Fortunate to have some fam that kept their power so hot shower and cool air not out of reach. Some of our most beautiful barrier islands on the Gulf coast are literally gone. Tampa Bay saved from direct hit. Flooding and loss of property is astounding. They say “hide from wind, run from water”. Unfortunately, many many people chose not to evacuate or go to shelters and instead chose to be “rugged individuals” and not need the government’s help. Typical Florida. Lots of regret after the fact.
Thank you for asking, Ally.
Unita. 🗽
❤️
Thank you for the news, Christine, and very happy that you are OK.
Putin declared WW III when he explained War 6.o: disinformation campaigns at home and abroad, and boosting opposition in other countries to split nations allowing opposition. Terrorist attacks have shown the way by exploiting free press, killing less than hundred innocent people, but spreading fear among billions. The autocratic message is: democracy is weak. We should learn democracy is vulnerable, and learn about ourselves. Putin dug out Trump for president from the confederate dung. We have the same kind of lessons to learn in Sweden. Then we can see there is also back fire to the weapons used against us: disinformation as a lullaby makes for a heavy wakeup.
I wonder about the supersonic weapons; have they not made nuclear weapons obsolete? Really useful only to scare? The US Navy had a film on Youtube with an electric cannon shooting an unarmed warhead at high speed, capable of sinking a warship at 200 km distance, and freeing warships of being loaded with explosives. China has announced a ballistic missile at speed mach 4-7, and Russia one at mach 20.
Trump did not have to be deposited in the White House at supersonic speed, he could just sit there and do all the destruction.
There is much to appreciate about your comment, Olof, including the new supersonic weapons...speed never was so fast before I took special pleasure in '....disinformation as a lullaby makes for a heavy wakeup.' Now, that is tune full! Thank you.
What Putin has done and continues to do, along with his generals and soldiers, and the Wagner Group mercenaries (and there's another group called Ruschists who sound worse than the Wagner boys) is brutality at its worst. If you heard Fiona Hill on Friday's broadcast of PBS Newshour, you'll know that Putin and his submarines are likely behind the explosions in the gas pipelines in the Baltic. I hope you look her interview up as well as some of her articles in Foreign Affairs. There are also some excellent articles in The Guardian and The WSJ (I never thought I'd say that). Putin is going to do what he is going to do in order to hold onto power. The question for me is whether he'll hold on longer than the folks who are fleeing across Russian borders to Georgia and beyond, as well as those who are resisting in the streets all around Russia. My guess is that Medvedev is sharpening his own knives, but he is not the only one. There is a 60 year old guy who is ostensibly the leader of Luhansk who has been with Putin from the beginning of his regime. He says he works behind the scenes. That in itself should make Putin keep his own weapon close at hand. The police keep putting people in prison. Navalny, in a piece that his attorneys apparently smuggled out of Russia, which appeared in the WAPO (I think or perhaps NYT) said some in his penal colony had agreed to join the army in order to get out of prison. Another excellent article. Timothy Snyder has a class you can catch on Youtube coming directly from Yale - a couple of classes a week - they're up to class 8. Check it out. I am immersed with the history of a part of the world I never paid any attention to. And, I frankly do not see how NATO will not be drawn in eventually beyond what they are doing now to train Ukrainian military personnel and provide weapons. BTW the Sueddeutsche Zeitung reports that there have been drones reported hovering over training areas located in Bavaria. So that is being investigated. It will probably be important to begin to keep Russian subs from destroying communications cables which are located in the world's oceans. Imagine that for a moment. Putin is a numbers man - he loves dates on the calendar. He turns 70 on October 7. I'd say, watch out for something horrible to happen to mark his birthday.
I didn’t know Putin was a “numbers man”.
From Ruth Ben-Ghiat today… “With his back against the wall, and his supposedly mighty military machine exposed as a failure, Putin is now at his most dangerous. Strongmen in this situation never retreat, but instead double down. Since they despise their own people, they don't care about any repercussions that their actions will have for their country. They only care about restoring their prestige and achieving a semblance of victory.”
I’m hoping horrible= cyanide + a gun…
Thanks Kathy - for the quote from Ruth Ben-Ghiat. What I mean about Putin is that he really looks to calendar dates that have some meaning to him and his worldview. That's why I'm wondering what he may decide to do October 7. He has been quiet since the big "celebration" of the faux referenda and annexations. So I feel like another shoe will drop in the near future. I hope I am wrong. Could be October 17 - or something related to the Bolshevik Revolution back in the day. So many possibilities.
Good info Linda. Those are all good sources.
Hum. What modeling is Putin engaging in by rewriting history or in this instance taking back parts of a country that was once under Russia's sphere of influence ( part of it's empire)? When is "border" "or "sovereignty" established in victory renegotiatible? Will Rome be next to declare sovereignty over say England or France or Austria? China over Singapore (oh, wait they already did) or Taiwan? Or, Mexico over Texas and Arizona or California? Should we fear that the Mexicans will use the US and Mexico trade agreement, unfair by all standards (made up of course) as justification for storming our Southern borders and, God forbid, retake Texas (hum, a loss or a gain?) and threaten to move The Wall to the Oklahoma and Arkansas borders? What international insanity is he unleasing? Next, we'll see Cubans invading Florida, establishing a Nation in Exile in Miami or Venezuelans demanding relocation to Martha's Vineyard or the Irish retaking Bauston. Too much to think about, TC. I must rest. 😉
Excellent lesson in sovereignty, Fred. It is best directed to the dictators and conquerors. Do you consider TC to be among them? ✈️🌍
Smart, knowlegable, acerbic, well read, even better as a writer and historian, and while he will harbor no tub or tug or flotilla of fools, he lacks the averace or single mindedness of a dictator or conqueror. While they might conscript him, he'd be leading the coup before he was assigned to the front. Never fodder. TC is on the right side.
A message for TC...please pass it on.
I actually Laughed Out Loud at this. You guys are good. :-)
We have magical means to reconnect. 🌱
Fred, You are a healer. I believe able to work wonders in tough circumstances, but differences between TC and I originated in our DNA.
We are all needed. Both of you keep me thinking. TC because he speaks as he does (the Chiago kid in me) and you and others who keep track, remember and provide materials to the positions we are trying to manage in our minds and then act upon.
There you go, Fred the Healer. Just watch out buddy, I'm from THE BRONX.
😅
I read earlier reports that many Russian soldiers in Lyman have been fleeing Lyman. It occurred to me that they must feel between a rock and a hard place. Not only were they sent to Lyman to fight the Lyman citizens, but also, they were now charged to fight their ostensible Russian citizens, otherwise known as comrades. I hope they all get home safely. Although I doubt there is any way for them to avoid being nailed as traitors while under threats of lethal punishment by Putin's goons.
Two Ukraine experts, Colonel Vindman and another whose name I cannot recall both spoke on MSNBC saying the same thing: the only way to end this war now is to WIN this war.
It seems to me that the response the US to the Russian assault on Crimea in 2014 set the table for this invasion of Ukraine. I think that the Yard Punk in Russia was emboldened by (if not indirectly aided by) our own Yard Punk who left office in 2021.
Well said TC.
TCinLA. can you email me @ rhubbell@gmail.com?
So much truth is encapsulated in this statement: "The war is not existential for Russia, but it is for Putin: He wins or dies."
Encirclement generally involves preventing enemy soldiers from escaping to fight another day, does it not? If so, how the heck did Russian troops withdraw from Lyman after it was encircled?
Ah. Having just read Allen's comment, I see. The reports of Russian withdrawal were fanciful at best. The enemy troops are being killed or captured, exactly as one would expect.