Topic: Russia launches invasion of Ukraine (*) & use spoiler tags for anything graphic!

[Garrus]

I doubt India has any ambitions to expand westwards into Pakistan. The idea of recreating pre-partition Greater India has always been restricted to a fringe on the far right.

I do wish India had voted against Russia but for practical reasons, having two Russian backed nuclear powers on either side in Pakistan and China (who have already made their own incursions into Indian territory and would be free from Russia directing restraint), an abstention was always going to be the best case scenario.

What the Russians are doing is shameful.

[Commie Bobbie]

We are at the point where this c*nt needs to be humiliated - Where's the protests like we saw against the Vietnam and Iraq wars?

[Linudden]

I doubt India has any ambitions to expand westwards into Pakistan. The idea of recreating pre-partition Greater India has always been restricted to a fringe on the far right.

I do wish India had voted against Russia but for practical reasons, having two Russian backed nuclear powers on either side in Pakistan and China (who have already made their own incursions into Indian territory and would be free from Russia directing restraint), an abstention was always going to be the best case scenario.

What the Russians are doing is shameful.

I don't believe India have ambitions to make significant movements of the border westwards or even swallowing Pakistan up like Putin is trying to do with much of Ukraine, but they would like to get their hands on the Pakistani part of Kashmir down the road. Thus, the Indian government coming out against Russian annexations of Ukrainian territories is going to be difficult to convince them to do.

[Libertine]

Apparently there are 5K Russian troops now surrounded in Lyman. Their "commanders" refusing to let them retreat/evacuate.

[So… Howard Philips]

We are at the point where this c*nt needs to be humiliated - Where's the protests like we saw against the Vietnam and Iraq wars?

For all the oft quoted faults both Britain and America allowed dissent against those wars.

Extremely unlikely in a fascist state like Russia is now.

[Circa1892]

We are at the point where this c*nt needs to be humiliated - Where's the protests like we saw against the Vietnam and Iraq wars?

In terms of protest - we can’t be far away from Stop the War launching protests about Ukrainian aggression against “Russian” territory…

[Red Beret]

For all the oft quoted faults both Britain and America allowed dissent against those wars.

Extremely unlikely in a fascist state like Russia is now.

There are no shortage of windows in Russia for protestors to inexplicably fall out of.

[So… Howard Philips]

In terms of protest - we can’t be far away from Stop the War launching protests about Ukrainian aggression against “Russian” territory…

NATO backed Ukrainian aggression against “Russian” territory.

I can see the posters now complete with a smiling Putin patting the head of a photogenic Russian toddler.

[Commie Bobbie]

For all the oft quoted faults both Britain and America allowed dissent against those wars.

Extremely unlikely in a fascist state like Russia is now.

I'm talking about people protesting/picketing the Russian embassies around the world, and putting people with questionable links to the Putinist regime in internment, especially if they do the unthinkable.

[Qston]

Predicably the putin fan boy head of chechenya has said the use of a low yield nuclear weapon is probably now justified.

I really fear they may do it after the 4 regions "joined" Russia yesterday which is no doubt setting up some warped legal logic and justification to do it.

If they do then without question china and India will have no choice but to back off supporting that murderous bastard

[Red Beret]

Predicably the putin fan boy head of chechenya has said the use of a low yield nuclear weapon is probably now justified.

I really fear they may do it after the 4 regions "joined" Russia yesterday which is no doubt setting up some warped legal logic and justification to do it.

If they do then without question china and India will have no choice but to back off supporting that murderous bastard

One would think/hope so.

There's only one real way to look at it as far as I can see, although others here may disagree. If Russia uses nukes in this conflict then there can be no such thing as "neutrality". You have to pick a side, and any side training to claim neutrality should essentially be deemed to be on Russia's side.

I realise that's a very stark, black and white perspective; but if nukes get involved then I don't see room for grey areas.

-----

And if Russia does employ nukes, then what? General NATO mobilisation? An attempt to assassinate Putin before things spiral out of control? Admitting Ukraine to NATO immediately seems the best diplomatic option, but where do we go from there?

Putin is a sick old man who doesn't believe in God or an afterlife. He doesn't care how many people he kills, especially if he has nothing to lose.

[Red Beret]

No no, the Russian army is not finished. Their military power is still very much intact, the question is whether or not they're being wasted away in Ukraine on some questionable military tactics, while other areas of the Russian federation become entangled in conflict. You can see now even the likes of Tokayev in Kazakhstan goading Putin on with impunity. As you say, they are being stretched thin, and if the Ukrainians managed to write off more of the Russian forces, the less likely Putin will be able to hold onto power on the periphery.

Around 20,000 men are being encircled as we speak in Lyman, with the Russian escape being limited to a two lane road to the east. The Ukrainians won't stop because Putin says the areas have been annexed, nothing will change for them. This is just another piece of Putin's 'escalation' that they have had to deal with since the beginning. The speech by Putin is made for Western and domestic audiences only, and no one else.

Reading this adds a new dimension to the nuke threat. Putin may not just use it because he's losing ground in Ukraine - it would be a stark warning to other nations within the federation who might be looking to break away.

A lot still depends on "how good" the forces initially deployed in Ukraine were actually supposed to be on paper. There was some top of the line equipment, but most of it seems to have been second string. I always had a mind that the smart thing to do when you have Russia's resources would be to throw your B-team in first and let them grind the enemy down, before deploying your Elite forces to finish them off. But that doesn't take into account Russia's shite handling of logistics, or that NATO would pour equipment into Ukraine to fight the war for them.

Based on the current showing, there's no way Putin could effectively attack Poland, or even the Baltic nations, if they have access to the right war materials. They're already committed to too many fronts as it is.

[Libertine]

Predicably the putin fan boy head of chechenya has said the use of a low yield nuclear weapon is probably now justified.

I really fear they may do it after the 4 regions "joined" Russia yesterday which is no doubt setting up some warped legal logic and justification to do it.

If they do then without question china and India will have no choice but to back off supporting that murderous bastard

It's important to realise (for Putin especially) that the consequences of such an action will not be restricted to a tut-tut by India/China and their withholding of support in UN votes.

NATO's response will be severe, even if not a nuclear response. What's left of Russia's conventional forces will be quickly liquidated, especially their overseas bases, Black Sea fleet and anything left in Ukraine through huge additional arms donations.

[Red Beret]

If you're Putin, how would you use nukes against Ukraine? 

If you go after their offensive, you risk contaminating territory within your own borders (actual Russian territory, not the recently annexed part of Ukraine), along with your own armed forces.

Where are the arms shipments being delivered?  Could Putin get a tactical nuke into those areas?  Try to cut off Ukraine's supply lines?

[classycarra]

Putin is a sick old man who doesn't believe in God or an afterlife. He doesn't care how many people he kills, especially if he has nothing to lose.

he's an orthodox christian. and belief in god and or an afterlife isn't a good proxy indicator for 'someone cares/doesn't care what happens on earth after their death'

[Jiminy Cricket]

he's an orthodox christian. and belief in god and or an afterlife isn't a good proxy indicator for 'someone cares/doesn't care what happens on earth after their death'

It is, as you imply, irrelevant. But I seem to recall reading that Putin's 'Christian Orthodox faith' is one of convenience to improve his popularity, developed during his so-called political career.

[Red Beret]

he's an orthodox christian. and belief in god and or an afterlife isn't a good proxy indicator for 'someone cares/doesn't care what happens on earth after their death'

I recall Biden meeting Putin and saying, "I looked into his eyes and said to him, 'you don't have a soul'. And he replied, "Then we understand each other."

Stalin had an aircraft circle Moscow for days carrying an image of the Madonna, he was that shit scared he'd lose the city to Hitler. I think we can assume that whatever a Russian leader might state their beliefs as being, we can ignore them.

[classycarra]

as a staunch atheist i dont know protocol, but shouldn't someone's self-professed religious views be taken on (forgive me) faith?

the infallible one, big fran, seems to have a personal relationship with putin, and tries to hang out with him more. and that guy, who i think represents putin's professed god, refuses to criticise putin too.

[stoa]

who i think represents putin's professed god, refuses to criticise putin too.

I think that's because they're old KGB-mates...

[Nobby Reserve]

[west_london_red]

If you're Putin, how would you use nukes against Ukraine? 

If you go after their offensive, you risk contaminating territory within your own borders (actual Russian territory, not the recently annexed part of Ukraine), along with your own armed forces.

Where are the arms shipments being delivered?  Could Putin get a tactical nuke into those areas?  Try to cut off Ukraine's supply lines?

It’s hard to predict, put a tactical nuke into a cruise missile or more likely I would imagine a hypersonic missile so it can’t be shot down and all of Ukraine is within range. There’s been speculation they might do a demonstration let’s say over some empty land or the Black Sea to show everyone what they can do.

[Indomitable_Carp]

It’s hard to predict, put a tactical nuke into a cruise missile or more likely I would imagine a hypersonic missile so it can’t be shot down and all of Ukraine is within range. There’s been speculation they might do a demonstration let’s say over some empty land or the Black Sea to show everyone what they can do.

Someone had posted an article in here which suggest tha launching it at empty land or sea would be unlikely to happen, because there would still be all of the costs (international pariah status, potential conventional NATO response etc) and none of the gain (destroying some sort of key Ukrainian military formation or base)

I think if Putin uses a tactical nuke, it will be on an actual target.

[Red Beret]

If Russia were to "test" a nuke, the isn't the protocol to announce it in advance?  A random nuke going off, even in a remote, uninhabited area, would set alarms screaming all over the world.

That said, if you're going to announce it beforehand, you better pick one that actually works. For all we know, they might have already tried and failed!

Which I guess is another point - how remote is remote?  A one or two kiloton device is comparatively small and Russia is a big place - full of areas that are barely inhabited and plenty of people without internet. Some satellites are designed to watch for this stuff, but if Putin sets one off without going public - just a quiet threat to governments - would NATO itself go public on it?  It could cause a bit of a panic.

[reddebs]

What's the difference between a tactical nuke and a nuke?  Aren't they both going to cause death and destruction to someone or something?

[Bend It Like Aurelio]

What's the difference between a tactical nuke and a nuke?  Aren't they both going to cause death and destruction to someone or something?

Tactical nuke is basically as you imagine it, a smaller weapon with a smaller yield. One can be detonated not too far away from friendly troops, if you can call that safe.

I still think though it would be a weapon of last resort, as Putin can only use it against a population centre far from the front, in the middle of Ukraine, in a city or military complex of some sort. The end result though, in an event such as that, will probably be universal condemnation, which Putin and his cohorts will unlikely survive from. Another possible scenario is that he can blow up one of the nuclear reactors within an occupied territory, which would provide just as large of a terror effect. However, radioactive fallout from such an event can also affect Russia itself, which will also not be ideal for Putin politically.

I don't think one can ever discount the eventuality, but then again, I think people need to relax and breathe a little.

[reddebs]

Tactical nuke is basically as you imagine it, a smaller weapon with a smaller yield. One can be detonated not too far away from friendly troops, if you can call that safe.

I still think though it would be a weapon of last resort, as Putin can only use it against a population centre far from the front, in the middle of Ukraine, in a city or military complex of some sort. The end result though, in an event such as that, will probably be universal condemnation, which Putin and his cohorts will unlikely survive from. Another possible scenario is that he can blow up one of the nuclear reactors within an occupied territory, which would provide just as large of a terror effect. However, radioactive fallout from such an event can also affect Russia itself, which will also not be ideal for Putin politically.

I don't think one can ever discount the eventuality, but then again, I think people need to relax and breathe a little.

Presumably Ukraine don't have nuclear weapons themselves for any type of retaliatory strike?

[Runehammer]

No they gave them up to sign that treaty where Russia agreed to respect their sovereignty!

[Indomitable_Carp]

Presumably Ukraine don't have nuclear weapons themselves for any type of retaliatory strike?

Ironically Ukraine did thousands of leftover nuclear weapons stockpiled after the fall of the USSR. Then Russia, the UK and USA signed a 1994 pact guarenteeing Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving them up and agreeing to joint the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Edit: Runehammer beat me to it!

[Qston]

It's important to realise (for Putin especially) that the consequences of such an action will not be restricted to a tut-tut by India/China and their withholding of support in UN votes.

NATO's response will be severe, even if not a nuclear response. What's left of Russia's conventional forces will be quickly liquidated, especially their overseas bases, Black Sea fleet and anything left in Ukraine through huge additional arms donations.

I agree that the consequences would be massive for the Russians but Putin has, certainly recently, not used any logic at all. I also saw the speech he was giving last Friday and he worked himself up into a frenzy and was lost in his own hubris. That bought to mind Hitler and his rallies. I just fear that the more he loses the more likely he is to do something truly horrific

[Red Beret]

The bombs used against Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be classed in the tactical nuke range according to their yield, which I think was around 12 kilotons. But they were A Bombs whereas modern nukes are H Bombs.

[Libertine]

Lots of chatter about the Russian front collapsing north of Kherson.

[Red Beret]

Lots of chatter about the Russian front collapsing north of Kherson.

Channel 4 News reported yesterday that the Russians had abandoned Lyman.

EDIT: If Kherson falls, would Ukrainian forces attempt to move south east against Crimea? I imagine they don't want to over extend themselves, but just the threat of an attack and the area being vulnerable would be a major military headache for Russian forces that seem to be already disintegrating. There's just too many holes in the dyke right now.

[Lusty]

Lots of chatter about the Russian front collapsing north of Kherson.

There's 25,000 Russians trapped on that bank apparently, so could get very messy very quickly.

If they can take Kherson and get as far as the Azov sea, they'll have cut the land bridge to Crimea and they'll be in range to destroy the actual bridge as well.

Think we might be about to find out whether Putin is willing to use nukes or not.

[Cruiser]

When you use nukes, the fallout means the world gets involved.

Petraeus: US would destroy Russia’s troops if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine

Former CIA director and retired army general says Moscow’s leader is ‘desperate’ and ‘battlefield reality he faces is irreversible’

The US and its allies would destroy Russia’s troops and equipment in Ukraine – as well as sink its Black sea fleet – if Russian president Vladimir Putin uses nuclear weapons in the country, former CIA director and retired four-star army general David Petraeus warned on Sunday.

Petreaus said that he had not spoken to national security adviser Jake Sullivan on the likely US response to nuclear escalation from Russia, which administration officials have said has been repeatedly communicated to Moscow.

He told ABC News: “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a Nato – a collective – effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black sea.”

The warning comes days after Putin expressed views that many have interpreted as a threat of a larger war between Russia and the west.

Asked if the use of nuclear weapons by Russia in Ukraine would bring America and Nato into the war, Petreaus said that it would not be a situation triggering the alliance’s Article 5, which calls for a collective defense. That is because Ukraine is not part of Nato – nonetheless, a “US and Nato response” would be in order, Petreaus said.

Petreaus acknowledged that the likelihood that radiation would extend to Nato countries under the Article 5 umbrella could perhaps be construed as an attack on a Nato member.

“Perhaps you can make that case,” he said. “The other case is that this is so horrific that there has to be a response – it cannot go unanswered.”

Yet, Petreaus added, “You don’t want to, again, get into a nuclear escalation here. But you have to show that this cannot be accepted in any way.”

Nonetheless, with pressure mounting on Putin after Ukrainian gains in the east of the country under last week’s annexation declaration and resistance to mobilization efforts within Russia mounting, Petreaus said Moscow’s leader was “desperate”.

“The battlefield reality he faces is, I think, irreversible,” he said. “No amount of shambolic mobilization, which is the only way to describe it; no amount of annexation; no amount of even veiled nuclear threats can actually get him out of this particular situation.

“At some point there’s going to have to be recognition of that. At some point there’s going to have to be some kind of beginning of negotiations, as [Ukrainian] President [Volodymyr] Zelenskiy has said, will be the ultimate end.”

But, Petreaus warned, “It can still get worse for Putin and for Russia. And even the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield won’t change this at all.” Still, he added, “You have to take the threat seriously.”

Senator Marco Rubio, the ranking Republican member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee told CNN that Putin was down to two choices: established defensive lines or withdraw and lose territory.

Rubio said he believed it “quite possible” that Putin could strike distribution points where US and allied supplies are entering Ukraine, including inside Poland. The senator acknowledged the nuclear threat, but he said most worries about “a Russian attack inside Nato territory, for example, aiming at the airport in Poland or some other distribution point”.

“Nato will have to respond to it,” he said. “How it will respond, I think a lot of it will depend on the nature of the attack and the scale and scope of it.”

But as a senator privy to Pentagon briefings, Rubio resisted being drawn on whether he’d seen evidence that Russia is preparing to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.

“Certainly, the risk is probably higher today than it was a month ago,” Rubio said, predicting that Russia would probably take an intermediate step.

“He may strike one of these logistical points. And that logistical point may not be inside … Ukraine. To me, that is the area that I focus on the most, because it has a tactical aspect to it. And I think he probably views it as less escalatory. Nato may not.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/02/us-russia-putin-ukraine-war-david-petraeus?CMP=share_btn_tw

[BarryCrocker]

When you use nukes, the fallout means the world gets involved.

Petraeus: US would destroy Russia’s troops if Putin uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine

He told ABC News: “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a Nato – a collective – effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black sea.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/02/us-russia-putin-ukraine-war-david-petraeus?CMP=share_btn_tw

Imagine being in the Russian army or navy engaged in this war knowing that you'd be wiped out instantly if your 'leader' decides to go nuclear.

[Red Beret]

How would the West target the Black Sea Fleet? What assets are in the area? I'm presuming we wouldn't respond to a nuclear attack in kind, so there must have submarines in the area?

EDIT: I found this.  There was a NATO exercise back in July, but it seems to have been mostly Bulgaria and Romania.  Then again, it doesn't reall go into specifics and likely NATO doesn't want to advertise what forces it has available.

https://www.wionews.com/photos/nato-conducts-naval-exercise-in-black-sea-amid-ukraine-war-500170

[Lone Star Red]

It’d be a rapid strike air and naval based attack, Russians wouldn’t know what hit them.

There’s enough US Air Force units based in and around Europe alone that could take out the majority of the Black Sea Fleet, not even factoring in prominent NATO air forces like the Hellenic and RAF.

[Indomitable_Carp]

I wander where Turkey would stand? If NATO was operating from Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria and Poland to hit Russian targets they´d be getting smashed from all angles across the Black Sea, along with any other European bases.

The already demoralised Russian forces would I think be in complete disarray. The danger then is, does Putin try to up the ante yet another notch, or take the message?

[Red Beret]

If the state of the Russian army in Ukraine is anything to go by, then Putin has no means for a conventional response against NATO if they sink the BSF.

Maybe artillery barrages across the border into Poland and other areas. But even if he deployed his top of the line aircraft in a strike, they'd have to transverse hundreds of miles across hostile airspace that's expecting them.

A low level cruise missile attack at targets just across the border might get through. The alternatives don't really bear thinking about.

[thaddeus]

If Putin is toppled would that also expose the scumbag Ramzan Kadyrov to justice?

Seeing the four smug prats put in charge of the land grabbed Ukrainian regions I came up with only four possible scenarios of where they'll be in four months time:
1) Dead
2) Captured
3) In hiding
4) Administering a nuclear wasteland after Putin has shown the world what a strong man he is

It felt like the 2022 equivalent of being banished to Siberia but those clowns were lapping it up.