3 ms·

Russia can’t defend Crimea conventionally either at least not against NATO but that would be a nuclear trigger for them almost certainly.

adventured 5y ago
Seeing how the Russian army is performing so far, it's starting to make more sense why Putin constantly, oddly whips out the nuclear threat (giving off hints of serious insecurity). Turns out it's very revealing as to the state of their military, it can't properly defend itself against NATO and is badly outmatched today. China has to be seeing this and eyeing some of that sweet Russian border territory for the future.
- blunte 5y ago
  Extrapolating from bits I've read online (which means, this is probably completely wrong... but possibly not!)... Most of Russia's income is from oil and gas. And the profits from oil and gas are received by a very small few people. Those people probably do not pay a lot of taxes. Therefore, it can be assumed that the Russian military and related systems are not well funded. Russia has for decades had a brute-force approach to military - simpler, less efficient systems which are more robust and which can be field serviced. If numbers found on the internet can be believed chuckle, in 2017 Russia spent 66 billion USD-equivalent on its military. The US spent $646 billion. Now maybe the US is much less efficient, with grifter middlemen contractors, but still... 10x the expenditures. As for China, they want the energy and mineral resources from Russia. They are treading carefully to appear supportive of Russia while not alienating the rest of the world (their major trading partners).
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    I've got a suspicion that Russian military procurement has its own share of grifters. Maybe even as high as the US does. Maybe even higher.
- oblio 5y ago
  Russia has about 145 million people. The US has about 340 million. The Russian economy is about $1.7tn and the US one is about $29tn. Yup, you read those figures right. For comparison, the USSR had 286 million people in 1989 to the US 248 million. And their GDPs were $1.7tn for Soviets (yep, same amount after 30 years of inflation, plus the Soviet one was most likely inflated...) and US about $6tn. Russia is the world's biggest banana republic. More like oil sheikdom, actually.
  - blunte 5y ago
    These are depressing numbers for Russia. I think within 5 (maybe 10) years we will see a regime change in Russia and a big shift in policy.
    - oblio 5y ago
      They didn't stay the course during the 90s. They fell, like the rest of us, but they, Ukraine and Belarus did... nothing. Or installed dictators. Meanwhile 90% of the former Warsaw Pact recovered by 2005 or so and now is at historical economic peaks, see places like Poland.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  He has said as much. Here he says there is "no comparison" between Russian forces and NATO forces, implying the latter dwarf the former: https://twitter.com/CorpsmanUP1898/status/1496879294060150789?s=20&t=MTe5DPj8Y6VjpApO-K4OJQ https://twitter.com/CorpsmanUP1898/status/149687929406015078...
dghughes 5y ago
It seems to be Putin is terrified that just dust kicked up at Chernobyl will contaminate Russia. There was a battle to secure the facility. Ironically all the military vehicles involved stirred up dust causing a 20 fold spike in radiation compared to the typical level. I can't accept that Putin would nuke any European country. If he were to nuke anywhere I think it would be the US far away from Russia.
- dogma1138 5y ago
  Russia wasn’t scared about Chernobyl they captured it because it was on the way to Kyiv and it was before they started bypassing towns and infrastructure due to their poor combat performance.
- dralley 5y ago
  Putin took Chernobyl because A) it's pretty much on the way from the Belarus border and B) it's a convenient staging area for forces where they're mostly immune to attack from heavy artillery or drones, precisely because of the risk of breaching the containment.

adventured 5y ago

Seeing how the Russian army is performing so far, it's starting to make more sense why Putin constantly, oddly whips out the nuclear threat (giving off hints of serious insecurity). Turns out it's very revealing as to the state of their military, it can't properly defend itself against NATO and is badly outmatched today. China has to be seeing this and eyeing some of that sweet Russian border territory for the future.

blunte 5y ago
Extrapolating from bits I've read online (which means, this is probably completely wrong... but possibly not!)... Most of Russia's income is from oil and gas. And the profits from oil and gas are received by a very small few people. Those people probably do not pay a lot of taxes. Therefore, it can be assumed that the Russian military and related systems are not well funded. Russia has for decades had a brute-force approach to military - simpler, less efficient systems which are more robust and which can be field serviced. If numbers found on the internet can be believed chuckle, in 2017 Russia spent 66 billion USD-equivalent on its military. The US spent $646 billion. Now maybe the US is much less efficient, with grifter middlemen contractors, but still... 10x the expenditures. As for China, they want the energy and mineral resources from Russia. They are treading carefully to appear supportive of Russia while not alienating the rest of the world (their major trading partners).
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  I've got a suspicion that Russian military procurement has its own share of grifters. Maybe even as high as the US does. Maybe even higher.
oblio 5y ago
Russia has about 145 million people. The US has about 340 million. The Russian economy is about $1.7tn and the US one is about $29tn. Yup, you read those figures right. For comparison, the USSR had 286 million people in 1989 to the US 248 million. And their GDPs were $1.7tn for Soviets (yep, same amount after 30 years of inflation, plus the Soviet one was most likely inflated...) and US about $6tn. Russia is the world's biggest banana republic. More like oil sheikdom, actually.
- blunte 5y ago
  These are depressing numbers for Russia. I think within 5 (maybe 10) years we will see a regime change in Russia and a big shift in policy.
  - oblio 5y ago
    They didn't stay the course during the 90s. They fell, like the rest of us, but they, Ukraine and Belarus did... nothing. Or installed dictators. Meanwhile 90% of the former Warsaw Pact recovered by 2005 or so and now is at historical economic peaks, see places like Poland.
CryptoPunk 5y ago
He has said as much. Here he says there is "no comparison" between Russian forces and NATO forces, implying the latter dwarf the former: https://twitter.com/CorpsmanUP1898/status/1496879294060150789?s=20&t=MTe5DPj8Y6VjpApO-K4OJQ https://twitter.com/CorpsmanUP1898/status/149687929406015078...

dghughes 5y ago

It seems to be Putin is terrified that just dust kicked up at Chernobyl will contaminate Russia. There was a battle to secure the facility. Ironically all the military vehicles involved stirred up dust causing a 20 fold spike in radiation compared to the typical level. I can't accept that Putin would nuke any European country. If he were to nuke anywhere I think it would be the US far away from Russia.

dogma1138 5y ago
Russia wasn’t scared about Chernobyl they captured it because it was on the way to Kyiv and it was before they started bypassing towns and infrastructure due to their poor combat performance.
dralley 5y ago
Putin took Chernobyl because A) it's pretty much on the way from the Belarus border and B) it's a convenient staging area for forces where they're mostly immune to attack from heavy artillery or drones, precisely because of the risk of breaching the containment.