4 ms·

Russia hasn't even begun retaliating for Finland's NATO application yet, which they announced they would (potentially even with 'military consequences', as per

by t_mann 4y ago

Russia hasn't even begun retaliating for Finland's NATO application yet, which they announced they would (potentially even with 'military consequences', as per a Kremlin spokesperson). Besides, the EU has been ramping up sanctions against Russia pretty much continuously since the start of the war, so we're definitely not at peak sanctions yet (unless Russian aggression suddenly ceases).

oneoff786 4y ago
Russia has nuclear weapons, but seemingly nothing else sitting around to use. They’re over extended in Ukraine already.
- ineedasername 4y ago
  They have plenty of artillery too, so they can gradually turn cities to rubble. But they simply don't have then power to occupy much territory with any real degree of control, except maybe in the east.
  - oneoff786 4y ago
    It doesn’t seem like it. Their artillery is old and can’t aim well. Their intel sucks. Their supplies suck. It seems very unlikely that they could launch another front against Finland and achieve anything, even shelling a city.
    - ineedasername 4y ago
      Yes, I agree on Finland, they just don't seem to have the resources or logistics to fight on two fronts like that. My comment was more with respect to Ukraine. You don't need pinpoint accuracy-- or much accuracy at all-- to gradually demolish the city. The ability hit the desired quadrant may suffice. As Ukrainians push more resources towards the east Russia's problem might be that such artillery isn't quite mobile, there's no run-and-gun capability there, while weapons capable of taking them out are man-portable. Despite that, I don't see a happy ending for the Ukrainians here. As much as Russia has already lost, they can't accept defeat in this without the power structure suffering what might be a deadly blow.
jmnicolas 4y ago
Russia's retaliations will be on the order of pointing nukes at Finland and deploying troops in key locations near its borders.
- t_mann 4y ago
  And all of those are likely to trigger further sanctions.

by t_mann 4y ago

oneoff786 4y ago

Russia has nuclear weapons, but seemingly nothing else sitting around to use. They’re over extended in Ukraine already.

ineedasername 4y ago
They have plenty of artillery too, so they can gradually turn cities to rubble. But they simply don't have then power to occupy much territory with any real degree of control, except maybe in the east.
- oneoff786 4y ago
  It doesn’t seem like it. Their artillery is old and can’t aim well. Their intel sucks. Their supplies suck. It seems very unlikely that they could launch another front against Finland and achieve anything, even shelling a city.
  - ineedasername 4y ago
    Yes, I agree on Finland, they just don't seem to have the resources or logistics to fight on two fronts like that. My comment was more with respect to Ukraine. You don't need pinpoint accuracy-- or much accuracy at all-- to gradually demolish the city. The ability hit the desired quadrant may suffice. As Ukrainians push more resources towards the east Russia's problem might be that such artillery isn't quite mobile, there's no run-and-gun capability there, while weapons capable of taking them out are man-portable. Despite that, I don't see a happy ending for the Ukrainians here. As much as Russia has already lost, they can't accept defeat in this without the power structure suffering what might be a deadly blow.

jmnicolas 4y ago

Russia's retaliations will be on the order of pointing nukes at Finland and deploying troops in key locations near its borders.

t_mann 4y ago
And all of those are likely to trigger further sanctions.