3 ms·

I’m confident the attack on the whole Ukraine is to prevent Western weapon supplied counter attacks. I doubt they have long term plans for occupation for the en

I’m confident the attack on the whole Ukraine is to prevent Western weapon supplied counter attacks. I doubt they have long term plans for occupation for the entire country.

mcguire 5y ago
When your enemy tells you what he is going to do, it is best, to a first order approximation, to believe him.
- cjbgkagh 5y ago
  Do you mean what they said or what others said that they said because unfortunately they are different and not enough people know that despite how easy it is to check?
  - mcguire 5y ago
    https://web.archive.org/web/20220222212015/http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67828 https://web.archive.org/web/20220222212015/http://en.kremlin...
    - cjbgkagh 5y ago
      That page is what people are using to suggest he is reestablishing USSR which is not my read of it. On the subsequent page which I’m going by memory because it is inaccessible they state that they will neutralize and de-nazify the country. From that I don’t see how people are getting to long term occupation (except for the breakaway regions). Their objectives can be met by demilitarization which is what I assume they mean by neutralization of Ukraine and I think that is something everyone could come to terms with as a reasonable compromise. If Ukraine starts re-arming then Russia would come back and prevent it.
      - mcguire 5y ago
        De-nazify a country with a Jewish president? (His grandfather's father and brothers were killed in the Holocaust.
nest0r 5y ago
Russia doesn't have the logistical power to have an occupational force. They need to implement a strawman government and hope that the military falls into place.
- int_19h 5y ago
  Russia has the Donbass separatist militias, which would make for a perfect occupation force - they are ideologically motivated, but also, they know that they'll be treated as traitors by any Ukrainian state with more than a semblance of independence.
  - nest0r 5y ago
    You gonna need to explain how a region with a population of 2 million will occupy a country with a population of 44 million.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      Many of those 44 million will become refugees in Europe. And some - not many, but probably at least a couple million more - will support the occupying forces. Authoritarian regimes manage to keep their population in check with forces smaller than that.
      - nest0r 5y ago
lucb1e 5y ago
You think it's easier to invade a country in home territory, while they had years to prepare between the previous invasion and now, than it is to defend against some attack that Ukraine might hope to mount against Russia? That sounds... unlikely. It's apparently also what supporters of Russia are saying, so I doubt this is the whole truth, even if there were a grain of truth to an all-out attack being "self defense".
- cjbgkagh 5y ago
  Of the three options of don't invade, invade a little, or invade the whole country, invading a little would allow Ukraine to mount an attack against the breakaway regions and the West was bound to supply advanced weapons to make sure they would be successful at it. So when Putin said they were going to secure the breakaway regions my first thoughts was that there would be no way to do that unless you neutralize the entirety of Ukraine.
NicoJuicy 5y ago
That's not the main thing. Ukraine was edging to the EU. Without Ukraine, Russian naval fleet would become worthless as it can't leave the black sea anymore.
- newuser94303 5y ago
  The map seems to show that Russia has ports on the Black sea especially since they took Crimea. Turkey owns the mouth of the Black Sea and it is already part of NATO

I’m confident the attack on the whole Ukraine is to prevent Western weapon supplied counter attacks. I doubt they have long term plans for occupation for the entire country.

mcguire 5y ago

When your enemy tells you what he is going to do, it is best, to a first order approximation, to believe him.

cjbgkagh 5y ago
Do you mean what they said or what others said that they said because unfortunately they are different and not enough people know that despite how easy it is to check?
- mcguire 5y ago
  https://web.archive.org/web/20220222212015/http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67828 https://web.archive.org/web/20220222212015/http://en.kremlin...
  - cjbgkagh 5y ago
    That page is what people are using to suggest he is reestablishing USSR which is not my read of it. On the subsequent page which I’m going by memory because it is inaccessible they state that they will neutralize and de-nazify the country. From that I don’t see how people are getting to long term occupation (except for the breakaway regions). Their objectives can be met by demilitarization which is what I assume they mean by neutralization of Ukraine and I think that is something everyone could come to terms with as a reasonable compromise. If Ukraine starts re-arming then Russia would come back and prevent it.
    - mcguire 5y ago
      De-nazify a country with a Jewish president? (His grandfather's father and brothers were killed in the Holocaust.

nest0r 5y ago

Russia doesn't have the logistical power to have an occupational force. They need to implement a strawman government and hope that the military falls into place.

int_19h 5y ago
Russia has the Donbass separatist militias, which would make for a perfect occupation force - they are ideologically motivated, but also, they know that they'll be treated as traitors by any Ukrainian state with more than a semblance of independence.
- nest0r 5y ago
  You gonna need to explain how a region with a population of 2 million will occupy a country with a population of 44 million.
  - int_19h 5y ago
    Many of those 44 million will become refugees in Europe. And some - not many, but probably at least a couple million more - will support the occupying forces. Authoritarian regimes manage to keep their population in check with forces smaller than that.
    - nest0r 5y ago

lucb1e 5y ago

You think it's easier to invade a country in home territory, while they had years to prepare between the previous invasion and now, than it is to defend against some attack that Ukraine might hope to mount against Russia? That sounds... unlikely. It's apparently also what supporters of Russia are saying, so I doubt this is the whole truth, even if there were a grain of truth to an all-out attack being "self defense".

cjbgkagh 5y ago
Of the three options of don't invade, invade a little, or invade the whole country, invading a little would allow Ukraine to mount an attack against the breakaway regions and the West was bound to supply advanced weapons to make sure they would be successful at it. So when Putin said they were going to secure the breakaway regions my first thoughts was that there would be no way to do that unless you neutralize the entirety of Ukraine.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

That's not the main thing. Ukraine was edging to the EU. Without Ukraine, Russian naval fleet would become worthless as it can't leave the black sea anymore.

newuser94303 5y ago
The map seems to show that Russia has ports on the Black sea especially since they took Crimea. Turkey owns the mouth of the Black Sea and it is already part of NATO