Russian Recruits fear being sent to Ukraine.....

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: stirling
And we have yet to see a proof of Russian troops in Ukraine, because all we have is ASSUMPTIONS.

@Xcalibur254

Can you say for 100 certainty, they were Russian soldiers and not just an act so Ukraine would get help? What am i asking. Of course you can't.

www.kommersant.ru...

There you go Comrade! Even in Russian from your favorite Newspaper! Enjoy!

a reply to: stirling

The Russian military is really a paper tiger. After the top 5.000 contract Army troops there is a giant conscription force that only serves months and then rotates out for the next 19 year olds to serve their punishment. To keep up a rotation of troops fighting in Ukraine, which aren't officially there, the Russian army has had to start relying on conscript boys. A government law that mothers hold dear is that no Russian conscript can be sent to another country to fight. The government gets these boys to sign a waiver to get around this law.

Everyone knows Russia has yet to reform it's military services to 1st world standards. Putin himself expects this to be done by 2020...showing that there is lots of work to do. The reality is that it will take longer than another 5 years because they have a large military.

a reply to: noeltrotsky

So we have to strike now is what you are saying?

originally posted by: DrChinstrap
a reply to: noeltrotsky

So we have to strike now is what you are saying?

Let me reread my post...

Hmmmm....

Nope, didn't see the words 'strike now' in it. Nothing to imply that either. No synonyms or hidden meanings either. Sorry, just not there.

originally posted by: stirling
The treaty of Budapest guaranteed Ukraines sovereign integrity for giving up it nuclear arms....
We are signatory to that treaty I believe and are duty bound to help fight the Russian hordes sweeping in from the east......
Nato has spend billions prepping for just that scenario and is ready with the arms to deal with it,,,,turn them loose I say....a promise made is a debt unpaid....

You mean the Budapest Memorandums of 1994.
www.cfr.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Rather than this Treaty which has nothing to do with Nuclear arms or protecting Ukraine from aggressors (well at least anything other than a micro-organism).
www.wipo.int...

a reply to: DrChinstrap

Canada is in the US's backyard. So that gives them the right to send troops in and annex Quebec. Right?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Alberta... where there are thousands of 'Russian speaking' Ukrainians.

eta: And there's oil there!

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DrChinstrap

Canada is in the US's backyard. So that gives them the right to send troops in and annex Quebec. Right?

If the US wants the headache of bilingualism and distinct society then they can have Quebec for free...no need to send troops....

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: DrChinstrap

Canada is in the US's backyard. So that gives them the right to send troops in and annex Quebec. Right?

If America took a part of Canada, would it be right for Russia to intervene with force?

a reply to: noeltrotsky

Nope, didn't see the words 'strike now' in it. Nothing to imply that either. No synonyms or hidden meanings either. Sorry, just not there.

If the words were in there would be no need for me to ask the question. It's just that I think I saw you calling for militairy action earlier.

a reply to: DrChinstrap

Actually I was advocating for a NATO pact with willing countries to apply a timeline of escalating costs against Russia that would result in military force as the last clearly scheduled action. Deployment of massive military forces would have to begin immediately to be able to meet my rather short timeline.

You did read my posts! Thanks and apologies for jumping on you earlier. These Russia threads get heated real fast and we're all using hair triggers and dodging Mods! Belated welcome to ATS! Now duck and cover!

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

But what of the morale of the Russians? Russia already has protests against sending troops to Ukraine. What happens when Putin actually admits that's what they're doing? We've also had a few interviews from Russian soldiers who have expressed fear at being sent to Ukraine. So clearly their morale isn't great either.

The plan was along, make a coup in Ukraine and have Russia invade like in Georgia.

Russia would have become responsible for the security of the whole of the Ukraine and would need to defend against guerilla trained nationalists and mercenaries (Poles, Serbs, etc.) which would operate from inside Poland, etc.

If such a situation was going on for years, together with the economic sanctions, the mood would change in Russia so a colour revolution in Russia would happen over time with the help of a fifth column.

Problem only is, Russia isn`t doing what they "should" do. It has turned the table around by not going in and taking the bait. Instead of Ukraine becoming a new Afghanistan and Russia dealing with the backlash of a disgruntled population, it has turned it around at the Ukraine themselves.

It all doesn`t go to plan for the West with Russia clamping down on opposition and media (part of the fifth column), and the big losses on Ukrainian army side. It`s typical for the Western elite to make actions and expect a certain outcome, but the Kremlin (Putin and his advisers) are playing chess/martial art techniques by staying on the defence and turn attacks back at the attacker.

Ukraine was losing about 4 times as much soldiers as to the other side (without using Air force).

Why do you think Western politicians say we don`t know what Putin is going to do (and it`s not only Putin, but also the handful of really smart advisers) ?...because they don`t do what is to be expected.

Georgia was equipped with some good Western and Israeli modern military hardware but went down in a couple of days while they got helped by NATO advisers. Unless the technology gap is really huge, other factors come in play, like moral, quality of field commanders and strategy.

Russian people should use their brains, because the other option is going back to the 90s is what they can expect...and they just need to ignore the fifth column elements in Russia trying to stir things up.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Interesting perspective.

Out of curiousity, how did you get to that conclusion?

a reply to: DrChinstrap

By looking at what actions both side do, and to know how certain martial art sports work, together with having played fierce chess games and know how chess works (Russians are excellent chess players).

Russia clamping down on the media and dissidents, and Russia not going in while they can take Kiev in 48 hours are two of the clues.

The other clues are how Western Politicians react lately, for instance, the US is wanting to send in weapons not to defeat Russia but to make the cost as high as possible for Russia.

Combine that with what you know about how the Soviet Union broke up (going bankrupt because of low oil prices and Afghanistan War), knowledge about colour revolutions, coups, how the elite always does things to get a certain outcome...

And with knowledge about The Grand Chessboard and you got your story.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Good points.

Russia clamping down on the media and dissidents, and Russia not going in while they can take Kiev in 48 hours are two of the clues.

I agree, I was wondering about the progression of this war, it's not really going anywhere is it?

Wth, I can star nobody's post accept for the OP and Masqua, it does star but when I refresh the star is gone.

a reply to: DrChinstrap

I keep reading about moral being really low on the Ukrainian armed forces, but what do you expect with the following happening...

They get constantly encircled, shelled to death and are losing with attacks and when attacking. They have to fight against an enemy from which they can`t win, even if they are given better weapons they still will not win.

The only thing which could win conventionally was if NATO was sending in large numbers, but they would not be able to attack Russia itself or else tactical nukes will be used by the Russians for sure...but Russia could also use tactical nukes right away against NATO bases in Poland, Baltic States, etc.

It`s not going anywhere with this war, but US knows that, it only wants to make Russia pay as much as it can.

I expect Russia to just use its Air Force, Iskander missiles with conventional warheads, etc. when US is going to send weapons, simply to flatten troop concentrations.

Who wants to be subjected to that ?

a reply to: DrChinstrap

Wth, I can star nobody's post accept for the OP and Masqua, it does star but when I refresh the star is gone.

You can only star one time, already have starred that post ?

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

No I just can't star some posts, but I can now star the ones I couldn't just now. Weird.

Think about this from the point of view of military strategy. Any military operation, from the tactical to the grand strategic level, has objectives. Nations do not fight just to be fighting, and there is an inseparable link between politics and military action. If Russia was prepared to use its military to achieve specific objectives it would do so without beating around the bush. They are either prepared to use military force or they aren't. If they are, they will use true military force, not forces sent in piecemeal, and especially not forces that were "tricked" or "forced" into fighting. It just makes no sense at all.

They would be setting objectives and deploying troops with a focus on economy of force. It just makes no sense at all for Russia to be sending small contingents of soldiers into Ukraine. If they are, then there must be an objective, and I have yet to discover any objective that makes sense. There are very limited tactical objectives that small groups of well-trained soldiers could achieve, but what sense does it make to achieve such small objectives when they are not meant to serve the broader objectives of military strategy? That is just not how modern nations wage war. I think that there are many with absolutely no clue when it comes to strategic or military issues, and thus they cannot grasp the senselessness there would be in Russia's actions if they truly were doing what they are claimed to be doing.

If Russia has not sent in its military it is likely because they are not prepared to use military force and start an all out war. So if they are not prepared to use military force, they won't use any military force. If they are prepared to use military force, there would be no question as to when they took action, because it would be obvious. There would be no doubt whatsoever. Russia also has absolutely no need to force or trick civilians or soldiers into fighting. Their military forces are numerous. And people cannot have it both ways. They cannot claim Russia is sending in military troops secretly, and then turn around and claim that Russia is forcing non-willing civilians to fight. And soldiers do not have the luxury of choosing when they will fight. That is not how the military operates. There is a chain of command, and soldiers do what they are ordered to do, plain and simple. This fact should not be lost on even those who have no clue where military matters are concerned, because it is common sense. And civilians have little to no military value where fighting is concerned. So civilians thrust into battle could not be expected to achieve even the most limited military objective. I am not even going to entertain these outlandish ideas any longer, because they are so implausible when considered within the scope of military strategy as to be next to impossible.