[Archived] Is world war 3 about to kick off, starting in Ukraine

[dave birch]

Dave. Having worked and lived overseas for many years I can promise you that we are no better regarded, having been guilty of many of the failings you now accuse American of.( You do remember we had an Empire don't you and just how we got it?) As to "War being sooo yesterday" do you really think the naive argument behind it will carry any weight with Putin and the Russian military machine as it begins to grind it's way across Eastern Europe? After all years of sanctions didn't stop Tehran gaining Nuclear capability did it? And what about the years of no fly zones and economic sanctions that just didn't stop Saddam doing his thing?

Sorry, Ottoman, I've got to disagree.

GB is better regarded, seen as a more equitable country than the US in terms of how its citizens (and politicians) view others in the world.

OK, Britain has had failings, but hasn't been seen as hard minded as the US or the Russians.

One thing of which I'm certain, there'll be no march of the Russians across the former parts of the USSR, they are , even now, under much pressure. They have too much investment in the West.

In the not too distant future we will see the ordinary Russians see through the likes of Putin and Medvedev and the like, and that country will return to something like normality. Might take a while, but it will happen.

btw, I've lived "Overseas" for the best part of forty years or more. Seen many "tyrants" come and go. In the end, it's generally the people's will that wins out in the end.

[jim mk2]

Anyone who who thinks the Russian military is "going to grind its way across eastern Europe" is naive and has no knowledge of the modern world. This is not 1945 when Russia was keen to grab its spoils for winning the second world war, nor the 1950s and 60s when the Cold War was at its height. Over the past 20 years Russian society has opened up in an extraordinary way, establishing trade links with the west and with China and Japan, two of its former enemies. Western multinationals are all heavily invested in Russia; Russian companies have investments in the west. Russia itself is vastly richer. Russia is not going to risk all this by turning the clock back 60 years. It will not happen.

[otto man]

Anyone who who thinks the Russian military is "going to grind its way across eastern Europe" is naive and has no knowledge of the modern world. This is not 1945 when Russia was keen to grab its spoils for winning the second world war, nor the 1950s and 60s when the Cold War was at its height. Over the past 20 years Russian society has opened up in an extraordinary way, establishing trade links with the west and with China and Japan, two of its former enemies. Western multinationals are all heavily invested in Russia; Russian companies have investments in the west. Russia itself is vastly richer. Russia is not going to risk all this by turning the clock back 60 years. It will not happen.

The Russian military machine has already been mobilised or hadn't you noticed? As to your points regarding 45 and the 50's and 60's. The Russians invaded and occupied Afghanistan for over 9 years (79-89) and have, since the fall of the soviet empire been involved in military campaigns in both Georgia and Chechnya. Putin has a widely known desire for a return to the days of "Empire" and as such is testing the west and their resolve. Only one of us "has no knowledge of the modern world" and it aint me!.

[jim mk2]

According to Vladimir Putin, the "Eurasian Union" that the Kremlin hopes to forge with two of Russia's southwestern neighbours will be a family affair, drawing together like-minded states. This does not mean Putin is trying to reform the USSR, and any other interpretation of recent events is just scare-mongering.

[otto man]

According to Vladimir Putin, the "Eurasian Union" that the Kremlin hopes to forge with two of Russia's southwestern neighbours will be a family affair, drawing together like-minded states. This does not mean Putin is trying to reform the USSR, and any other interpretation of recent events is just scare-mongering.

A family affair forged by military intervention, forced on peoples who want independence from Russia and any other interpretation of recent events is just a blind refusal to face facts.

[thenodrog]

Debate of Radio 5 today about what New Labour need to do to win the election in 2015. I suggest the thought of little Ed having to square up to Putin does little to enhance their credibility.

[yoda]

Debate of Radio 5 today about what New Labour need to do to win the election in 2015. I suggest the thought of little Ed having to square up to Putin does little to enhance their credibility.

yep, can just see it now

Now Mr Putin could you just park the tank at the end of Downing street, not a great turning circle outside the shop.

How was the Euro tunnel crossing, no delays I hope

[Dreyski]

According to Vladimir Putin, the "Eurasian Union" that the Kremlin hopes to forge with two of Russia's southwestern neighbours will be a family affair, drawing together like-minded states.

Do you think Ukraine has been of a similar mind to Russia since November? (The people, not the ex-government)

[Steve Moss]

Good ol' Steve is just your average rooti' tooti' all-American guy who has stars and stripes in his eyes and has Mom's apple pie for tea. He votes for the good 'ol GOP and just hates those darn Commies in the Democratic party. Why can't they be more like him dammit? He drives a Dodge (not Japanese junk for our Steve), has a gal in Texas called Bobbie Joe and always vay-cay-shuns in the You-S-A because abroad's a foreign land and they're all socialists in Yurrup like that Arab president Obama. Yee-haa. God bless America folks.

And so being bereft of further rational debate you resort to sneering schoolboy mockery. You really don't mind embarrassing yourself do you!

Don't worry about Wilpshire Blue, Otto. He's not very bright.

There's so much wrong with the assumptions made in his post (and his over-all reasoning), it was laughable and so I didn't bother to respond. For example, I drive an Acura TL- Japanese, but hardly junk.

And like his assumptions about me, I think his assumptions about Putin are miles off-target.

Here's a good article about what Putin's actions mean for Poland. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-germany-poland-winners-ukraine-091500097.html

In my opinion, Poland is the one to watch. In the medium term, it's the country most likely to put a very sharp stick in Russia's eye.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

You mean like they did in 1939 ?

[jim mk2]

Do you think Ukraine has been of a similar mind to Russia since November? (The people, not the ex-government)

Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and pending invasion of Ukraine is a response to the ‘expansion’ of the European Union and Nato.

Redneck Americans (with IQ to match) such as Steve Moss fail to understand that US aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out.

The US war in Iraq, now estimated to have killed about 500,000 people, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, were all carried without UN authorisation and remove any credible basis for the US to rail against Russian transgressions.

Debate of Radio 5 today about what New Labour need to do to win the election in 2015. I suggest the thought of little Ed having to square up to Putin does little to enhance their credibility.

I'm sure Putin listens to every warning from Cameron and Hague and is withdrawing his troops from the Ukraine border as I write.

[yoda]

Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and pending invasion of Ukraine is a response to the ‘expansion’ of the European Union and Nato.

Redneck Americans (with IQ to match) such as Steve Moss fail to understand that US aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out.

The US war in Iraq, now estimated to have killed about 500,000 people, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, were all carried without UN authorisation and remove any credible basis for the US to rail against Russian transgressions.

I'm sure Putin listens to every warning from Cameron and Hague and is withdrawing his troops from the Ukraine border as I write.

Two wrongs don't make a right

[yoda]

You need to read up on missile defense shields. Why does Putin protest installation of the shields in Poland and the Ukraine to protect Europe?

Most military analysts tend to concur that the USA has obtained nuclear primacy, at least in regards to the continental USA. So Putin won't be pushing any buttons in the direction of the USA. But he still has our allies in Europe that he can use to leverage us, which is why he he objects to defense shields in Poland, etc.

mmmmmm!

9/11 mean anything?

I would be very surprised if they don't have a back door

Like this one for example,

"Before dawn on 28 July 2012, intruders broke into the United States nuclear weapons facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

They cut through three fences, set off alarms and managed to pound on the wall of a building that housed enough highly enriched uranium for thousands of nuclear weapons, before finally being confronted by a single guard. They were protesters, but what if they had been terrorists?"

or Ruskies!

[Steve Moss]

You mean like they did in 1939 ?

The exertion of military power is a function of capability and will. The Poles have repeatedly shown themselves to have the will. Your comment, about 1939, only illustrates the point.

While the Polish cavalry charging German tanks is a myth, they did charge German machine guns and did have some success against German infantry.

In your famous Battle of Britain, you may have forgotten that 5% of your pilots defending Britain were Poles. And one of its squadron, 303, claimed the highest number of kills. All total, despite being only 1 in 20 of your pilots, they claimed 12% of your air victories.

And 200,000 Poles fought with the British against German forces in the West, while 400,000 (called the Home Army) consistently continued to fight the Germans despite occupation (a number the French only achieved after D-Day, when everyone began to lay claim to the title of "Resistance").

And despite being divided by geography and command structures, considered as a whole, and despite occupation, the Poles fielded the 4th largest army in Europe during WWII.

There is a reason that Germany and Russia has always feared a strong, united Poland. The Poles have been brutalized throughout their history and have the will to fight and will do so, even if against a wall.

If we want to push back at Russia without sanctions, blockades and embargoes, getting Poland (and the Ukraine and Baltic States) up to speed in weapons, supply, training, etc., would be a very good response. Heck, encourage them to enter into military alliances; a united (and armed front) of Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithunia, etc., would give Russia significant pause.

[Ozz]

Some excellent point/counterpoint guys, a good read this thread. .

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Steve, you're barking at the moon. None of that will happen. The vast majority of Crimeans want an alliance with Russia. If they didn't you would have a case.

[ultrablue]

If we want to push back at Russia without sanctions, blockades and embargoes, getting Poland (and the Ukraine and Baltic States) up to speed in weapons, supply, training, etc., would be a very good response. Heck, encourage them to enter into military alliances; a united (and armed front) of Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithunia, etc., would give Russia significant pause.

Well that would be dandy, wouldn't it. Bloody hell, it's like you are playing a computer game. You know the names of these countries and where they are, but you seem to have zero appreciation for their real life history or motivations. Eastern Europe has changed a lot since the Cold War, but a lot of its people are still torn between east and west. Armchair War-hawks on the other side of the Atlantic need to keep their beaks out. Go and play with some rebels in Venezuela instead.

[jim mk2]

According to the FT, Russia is braced for the country's capital outflows to soar to $70bn in the first three months of this year as investors seek cover from the fallout from the annexation of Crimea. The G7 (minus Russia) is now scheduled to meet in Brussels in June instead of the scheduled G8 meeting in Sochi. Plus, 20 members of Putin's inner circle have been blacklisted and German companies have started repatriating profits accumulated in their Russian subsidiaries. Sanctions are expected to get tighter over the coming weeks.

Russia is becoming isolated economically and Putin will not be able sustain this bravado for very long. Sure, he might pick off smaller targets, such as Moldova, but a show of strength by invading Ukraine would leave Russia ultimately weaker. Macho military thrill-seekers in the US can cover up their bare chests and return to under the stones from which they emerged. Sanctions work - there isn't going to be a war nor is there a need for one.

[thenodrog]

According to the FT, Russia is braced for the country's capital outflows to soar to $70bn in the first three months of this year as investors seek cover from the fallout from the annexation of Crimea. The G7 (minus Russia) is now scheduled to meet in Brussels in June instead of the scheduled G8 meeting in Sochi. Plus, 20 members of Putin's inner circle have been blacklisted and German companies have started repatriating profits accumulated in their Russian subsidiaries. Sanctions are expected to get tighter over the coming weeks.

Russia is becoming isolated economically and Putin will not be able sustain this bravado for very long. Sure, he might pick off smaller targets, such as Moldova, but a show of strength by invading Ukraine would leave Russia ultimately weaker. Macho military thrill-seekers in the US can cover up their bare chests and return to under the stones from which they emerged. Sanctions work - there isn't going to be a war nor is there a need for one.

Really? What do cornered rats do?

We must always leave him a way out.

[Paul]

Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and pending invasion of Ukraine is a response to the ‘expansion’ of the European Union and Nato.

Redneck Americans (with IQ to match) such as Steve Moss fail to understand that US aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out.

The US war in Iraq, now estimated to have killed about 500,000 people, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, were all carried without UN authorisation and remove any credible basis for the US to rail against Russian transgressions.

I'm sure Putin listens to every warning from Cameron and Hague and is withdrawing his troops from the Ukraine border as I write.

As yoda says two wrongs don't make a right but this demonstrate the US is equally prepared to act almost without recourse to others.

The exertion of military power is a function of capability and will. The Poles have repeatedly shown themselves to have the will. Your comment, about 1939, only illustrates the point.

While the Polish cavalry charging German tanks is a myth, they did charge German machine guns and did have some success against German infantry.

In your famous Battle of Britain, you may have forgotten that 5% of your pilots defending Britain were Poles. And one of its squadron, 303, claimed the highest number of kills. All total, despite being only 1 in 20 of your pilots, they claimed 12% of your air victories.

And 200,000 Poles fought with the British against German forces in the West, while 400,000 (called the Home Army) consistently continued to fight the Germans despite occupation (a number the French only achieved after D-Day, when everyone began to lay claim to the title of "Resistance").

And despite being divided by geography and command structures, considered as a whole, and despite occupation, the Poles fielded the 4th largest army in Europe during WWII.

There is a reason that Germany and Russia has always feared a strong, united Poland. The Poles have been brutalized throughout their history and have the will to fight and will do so, even if against a wall.

If we want to push back at Russia without sanctions, blockades and embargoes, getting Poland (and the Ukraine and Baltic States) up to speed in weapons, supply, training, etc., would be a very good response. Heck, encourage them to enter into military alliances; a united (and armed front) of Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Lithunia, etc., would give Russia significant pause.

There is never any doubting the historical, very well informed as far as I can see, perspective Steve places on this and other issues and therein is the difficulty. While I'm not as knowledgeable, or at least haven't done the Googling, what such arguments do not account for is how the world has changed in this period.

If we look back at WW1, less relevant, and WW2 it is clear society and individual attitudes have changed enormously. I think in WW2 the average combatant age was 26, in Vietnam 19, the changes in young people in the intervening years have been enormous and I would argue the mindset or "spirit" among today's young men, serving military personnel excepted, would mean any willingness to fight for king and country has long since disappeared.

Since WW2 conscription has not existed in the UK, replaced by National Service for Korea, and in my lifetime a significant historical feature was young Americans, and others throughout Europe, campaigning against the draft and the Vietnam war. If we are to fight WW3, and presuming it is a "conventional" war, it seems highly likely far more troops than the regular army will be required. Quite how any Western government is going to raise an army of sufficient size to wage war is a very difficult question and one unlikely to find a successful answer.

We can look at history as much as we wish but the reality is several generations of fighting age have grown up outside the shadow of war, the draft, conscription and I very much doubt more than a small percentage could be relied on to fight for king and country in the manner millions did 70+ years ago. To my mind this demonstrates how outdated the approach of those advocating military force is both in our physical ability and our "moral" (not quite the right word) willingness to do so.

Would you find a Polish army prepared to take up arms against Russia? Not in my view - most are too busy plumbing in the UK!!

As for wishing to push back Russia without the use of sanctions etc. That's the whole point we do WANT to push back Russia using economic attacks and not physical ones.

[otto man]

As yoda says two wrongs don't make a right but this demonstrate the US is equally prepared to act almost without recourse to others.

There is never any doubting the historical, very well informed as far as I can see, perspective Steve places on this and other issues and therein is the difficulty. While I'm not as knowledgeable, or at least haven't done the Googling, what such arguments do not account for is how the world has changed in this period.

If we look back at WW1, less relevant, and WW2 it is clear society and individual attitudes have changed enormously. I think in WW2 the average combatant age was 26, in Vietnam 19, the changes in young people in the intervening years have been enormous and I would argue the mindset or "spirit" among today's young men, serving military personnel excepted, would mean any willingness to fight for king and country has long since disappeared.

Since WW2 conscription has not existed in the UK, replaced by National Service for Korea, and in my lifetime a significant historical feature was young Americans, and others throughout Europe, campaigning against the draft and the Vietnam war. If we are to fight WW3, and presuming it is a "conventional" war, it seems highly likely far more troops than the regular army will be required. Quite how any Western government is going to raise an army of sufficient size to wage war is a very difficult question and one unlikely to find a successful answer.

We can look at history as much as we wish but the reality is several generations of fighting age have grown up outside the shadow of war, the draft, conscription and I very much doubt more than a small percentage could be relied on to fight for king and country in the manner millions did 70+ years ago. To my mind this demonstrates how outdated the approach of those advocating military force is both in our physical ability and our "moral" (not quite the right word) willingness to do so.

Would you find a Polish army prepared to take up arms against Russia? Not in my view - most are too busy plumbing in the UK!!

As for wishing to push back Russia without the use of sanctions etc. That's the whole point we do WANT to push back Russia using economic attacks and not physical ones.

Diplomacy should always be the first option Paul. However the "militarists" as we have been labeled believe that sanctions will not work as they did not work against Tehran or indeed Saddam and his regime. As I have posted before, Putin is refusing to negotiate with the west as he believes we are part of the problem, so that is not an option. Sanctions? well as I stated above they are not always effective (if ever) and this is further evidenced by the fact that in spite of the threat of said sanctions the Russians are now demanding autonomy for parts of the Ukraine itself and doing so using the very "gun boat" diplomacy you yourself do not want to see the west using, So please let me ask you. How far are you willing to let Putin go and if( as I believe) sanctions prove to be ineffective, what course of action would you then adopt?

[Paul]

otto man - I use the term "militarists" for want of anything better. I don't intend it in a perjorative sense but do feel it's an adequate shorthand.

How far do we allow Putin to go? I think it can be no further BUT, and I know the question you'll raise, I still cannot imagine the circumstances under which I would agree to war. We can move troops in and out, we can posture etc. and I suspect Putin will still push to find the boundary. He would probably keep pushing until his opponents are forced to prove they are prepared to fight and hostilities begin. This is the problem with demonstrating one's willingness to fight. If we are convinced Putin needs to be shown the West will fight it doesn't matter how many tanks are lined up nothing is proven till the bombs begin to fall. If Putin really wants to test this the outcome is terrible.

If war breaks out we are not discussing a small conflict somewhere hot and dusty against a largely inadequately armed and trained enemy. This is two modern, well equipped armies going head to head. Historically I think I'm right in saying Russia doesn't worry too much about counting the dead provided victory is achieved which puts the West in a very tough position. I truely believe "we" would struggle to find enough people prepared to die in a foreign land.

If I'm asked for a solution it would be this. War will devastate Europe so we have to be prepared to cut Russia off economically, not sanctions but a complete isolation from all and every form of trade. The effect on European and probably world economies would be far-reaching but surely better than war? If Russia were to be totally isolated economically, socially, travel, sport etc. perhaps the Russians would do the job for us?

[jim mk2]

How far do we allow Putin to go? ......... perhaps the Russians would do the job for us?

I visited Russia in 1979, in the depths of winter and by chance the week Russia invaded Afghanistan. The Foreign Office said it was safe for us to go, so off we went. Russia back then was a fascinating but desperate place. The transformation when I returned 2 years ago was startling. Modern Russia is a vibrant, rich country with a large and increasingly wealthy middle class (non-existent in 1979) that enjoys spending its wealth and the luxuries of life. You only have to holiday around Europe in the best hotels to see Russians enyoing their newfound prosperity. Putin can flex his muscles all he likes but there is no way these people will allow their country to descend into its poor, internationally isolated pre-1990 state. Economic sanctions that hurt the Russians will work, and could lead ultimately to Putin's downfall.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and pending invasion of Ukraine is a response to the ‘expansion’ of the European Union and Nato.

Redneck Americans (with IQ to match) such as Steve Moss fail to understand that US aggression and lawless killing is on another scale entirely from anything Russia appears to have contemplated, let alone carried out.

The US war in Iraq, now estimated to have killed about 500,000 people, along with the invasion of Afghanistan, bloody regime change in Libya, and the killing of thousands in drone attacks on Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, were all carried without UN authorisation and remove any credible basis for the US to rail against Russian transgressions.

Ridiculous. Russia have taken over Crimea and made it part of their country. America/Nato has done no such thing in Afghanistan, Iraq or Libya. All 3 have been abandoned or are in the process of being abandoned to the whims of their own populace. Afghanistan was invaded because it harboured terrorists who murdered thousands of people, Iraq because it had a dictator who'd started a war, Libya because it had a dictator killing his own people. None were a strategic expansion except in the eyes of conspiracy theorists and blinkered haters of the West

Criticising Steve Moss' intelligence simply highlights how dire your own is. Regardless of the guy's standpoint, his posts are well structured, well researched and eloquent. Labelling him and all Americans rednecks is prejudiced bordering on racist.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

All three of the West's interventions in the Middle East that you mention are either disasters or disasters in the making. And you want more intervention ? I'll be there at the station to wave you off guys.

Steve's a well meaning guy, he's just watched too many Rambo films.