Ukraine Conflict - Es ist nichts schrecklicher als eine tätige Unwissenheit

[Zoraptor]

Eh, Russia would 'lose' a normal war very quickly and always would. The Soviets might not have won a non nuclear war, and the Russians have less than half the power the soviet bloc had, with a fair bit of that lost half swapping sides outright. It's not even a debate. It just wouldn't be a 'normal' war.

It's particularly funny when you get people talking about the 'lessons' to be learnt from the current war then proceeding to completely ignore them by saying that anyone and his dog could invade Russia- because, presumably, Russians aren't as patriotic as Ukrainians? Not as willing to sacrifice? Really just pining for some tough love from their western superiors? I mean, it's not like there's a recent example of a country being invaded with the aim of chopping it up where things went very badly when the people living there objected. It's not like there have been multiple examples in the past 20 years of things going very badly when someone isn't even trying to annex bits of a country. I guess it's different when they're Russians though, they just lack the spine and fortitude of the invading westerner with their superior values- is it genetic, is it cultural, who knows, but it's just self evident and the mere knowledge of westerness gives me a chub thinking of all the people I'm superior too- and will no doubt welcome the invaders with flowers and cheers. Or maybe not, but that would just be because they've been misinformed or are stupid, hate us for our freedoms; and irrelevant because what are they going to do against the serried and glorious undefeated legions of Senatus PopulesQue Americam.

And no, to paraphrase the great philosopher Otto from 'A Fish Called Wanda', "They were all draws, and we weren't trying anyway".

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

According to local military specialists, of whom I am not one, the attempted attack on Kyiv was so hopelessly poor in both its planning and execution that it would have got a resounding F in any proper military academy, had someone suggested that in a strategy test. Not quite idiocy but close to it, anyway.

Really, it was just a stupid idea. It could (almost certainly would) have been executed flawlessly and failed. The entire invasion force was marginal for taking a city of 3.2mn people.

The only way it makes some military sense is if they thought the Belarusians were going to invade alongside them since at least that guards their flank

Edited April 5, 2022 by Zoraptor

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, Malcador said:

Depends on how motivated the Russians are in this scenario.

Agreed. It really depends on context and motivation. If Russia had attacked Ukrainian forces in say Syria (yes, completely hypothetical situation), the outcome may have been different. Possibly. Never underestimate a combatant fighting tooth and claw on their home turf to defend it.

[BruceVC]

5 hours ago, rjshae said:

It would depend on the circumstances. Ukraine is fighting on the defensive and is well-motivated.

 

5 hours ago, Malcador said:

Depends on how motivated the Russians are in this scenario.

Yes I agree, it would be a different military reality if the Russians were defending their country and their would be real and effective resistance

 But the reality of the US is since 9/11 it has trained, funded and honed its military in a way that makes them by far the most powerful military in the world. Ironically as much as we all hate wars and conflicts any country needs an "active " war to ensure it has combat experience 

During Apartheid the SA military spent decades  in Angola and Namibia fighting the Soviet  onslaught, and ensuring a buffer zone was created for SA,  and until the late 1980's SA  was considered to have one of worlds most well trained special forces  because they use to deploy in small groups into the jungles of Angola for various reasons 

So its weird but you almost need war to be an effective military force 

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

So its weird but you almost need war to be an effective military force 

Even a tiny country like Denmark has an experienced group of officers as the country has been constantly at war effectively since Yugoslavia fell apart (early 90's), fighting in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan (2014). Getting scores of body bags with young Danes sent home didn't really rattle the popular opinion either (since the casualties happened to professional soldiers, not enlisted men). I think these days they are mostly active with peace keeping in Kosovo and The Middle East as well as fighting pirates along various East African coasts (which would be navy units). Small, but with 30+ years of active combat experience in "real" war situations.

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Even a tiny country like Denmark has an experienced group of officers as the country has been constantly at war effectively since Yugoslavia fell apart (early 90's), fighting in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan (2014). Getting scores of body bags with young Danes sent home didn't really rattle the popular opinion either (since the casualties happened to professional soldiers, not enlisted men). I think these days they are mostly active with peace keeping in Kosovo and The Middle East as well as fighting pirates along various East African coasts (which would be navy units). Small, but with 30+ years of active combat experience in "real" war situations.

Absolutely, I think Denmark has done really well with its military training in  both current and historical interventions 

I would suggest your country has the most experienced army compared to all the Nordic countries and that includes Finland which I understand has always been aware of its history with the Soviets and its border with Russia?

But as we mentioned nothing beats actual  combat experience 

Edited April 6, 2022 by BruceVC

[Gorth]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But as we mentioned nothing beats actual  combat experience 

It's this horrible translated from Danish to English stuff (not machine translated, but it sounds "stilted"), but just a list of current and recent engagements. Includes peace keeping missions in various parts of Africa and the training of Ukrainian troops since 2016...

https://www.forsvaret.dk/en/roles-and-responsibilities/International-operations/

As said, the numbers wont overwhelm anyone, but the experience gathered can be shared.

 

Edit: Missing from the list is the Airforce being part of enforcing of the no fly zone over Libya... that one was always a bit weird, because it was never announced nor referenced afterwards. The public only knows because some journalists wondered where all those F-16's suddenly went and they were later spotted on Italian airbases flying sorties to the south...

 

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Gorth said:

It's this horrible translated from Danish to English stuff (not machine translated, but it sounds "stilted"), but just a list of current and recent engagements. Includes peace keeping missions in various parts of Africa and the training of Ukrainian troops since 2016...

https://www.forsvaret.dk/en/roles-and-responsibilities/International-operations/

As said, the numbers wont overwhelm anyone, but the experience gathered can be shared.

 

Edit: Missing from the list is the Airforce being part of enforcing of the no fly zone over Libya... that one was always a bit weird, because it was never announced nor referenced afterwards. The public only knows because some journalists wondered where all those F-16's suddenly went and they were later spotted on Italian airbases flying sorties to the south...

 

Great link, its very cogent

I wonder why Denmark has decided to participate in various military operations compared to other Nordic countries? 

I realize your countries are all separate and have different views on  certain global issues but you also very similar with your value system. Why do you think Denmark is different in this regard with its military?

[Gorth]

21 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Great link, its very cogent

I wonder why Denmark has decided to participate in various military operations compared to other Nordic countries? 

I realize your countries are all separate and have different views on  certain global issues but you also very similar with your value system. Why do you think Denmark is different in this regard with its military?

They are preparing to invade Sweden and liberate Scania, Halland and Blekinge in a special military operation...

[BruceVC]

28 minutes ago, Gorth said:

They are preparing to invade Sweden and liberate Scania, Halland and Blekinge in a special military operation...

You funny Gorthfuscious  

By the way I was hoping the hotties from Juice Media would make a Russian " special military operation " video. Can you imagine how hilarious that would be but I dont think Juice Media does videos outside of Oz ?

[xzar_monty]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I would suggest your country has the most experienced army compared to all the Nordic countries and that includes Finland which I understand has always been aware of its history with the Soviets and its border with Russia?

Finland is very aware and well-prepared given its size and, therefore, limited means. Norway and Denmark are NATO countries. The odd one out is Sweden which used to be, shall we say, naive or at least complacent. Probably because it was able to bypass fighting in WWII and instead make huge amounts of money selling iron to the nazis, so it has to real recent history unlike Finland (Winter War, Continuation War), Denmark (Germans) or Norway (Germans, Quisling).

As for the "experienced" part you mention, I can't comment, I don't know enough about this.

Edited April 6, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Elerond]

8 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

*cough* This kind of rhetoric is similar to that of the Nazi's after the Winter War, hindsight is 20/20 but at the time the Germans were so confident that the Russian army was weak and inept after Winter War that it was the underlying motive to launch Barbarossa the way they did.

Just because Russians have a history of inept invasions doesn't mean they can't defend themselves if attacked  

Finland almost added 50% to territory in beginning of Continuation War. But mainly Finnish forces stopped to Finnish borders before 1939.

One of main reason why Finland didn't continue to Leningrad and didn't destroy railways that supplied sieged Leningrad was that UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand declared war to Finland and USA started to supply USSR and threatened to declare war to Finland if Finland doesn't stop it attack against USSR. Which lead to Finland to move defend its territory.

[Gorth]

45 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

You funny Gorthfuscious  

By the way I was hoping the hotties from Juice Media would make a Russian " special military operation " video. Can you imagine how hilarious that would be but I dont think Juice Media does videos outside of Oz ?

They do, but very rarely. It is an "OZ centric" group. Doesn't mean they wont cover the war in Ukraine some day, but I wouldn't hold my breath. E.g. they didn't cover things like Afghanistan etc.

[BruceVC]

24 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Finland almost added 50% to territory in beginning of Continuation War. But mainly Finnish forces stopped to Finnish borders before 1939.

One of main reason why Finland didn't continue to Leningrad and didn't destroy railways that supplied sieged Leningrad was that UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand declared war to Finland and USA started to supply USSR and threatened to declare war to Finland if Finland doesn't stop it attack against USSR. Which lead to Finland to move defend its territory.

Elerond please stop being bad  again, it sounds like you being anti-Western

Are you sure the West wanted to declare war on Finland, I am not familiar with much of Finnish history but that doesnt sound right ?

[Gorth]

4 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Elerond please stop being bad  again, it sounds like you being anti-Western

Are you sure the West wanted to declare war on Finland, I am not familiar with much of Finnish history but that doesnt sound right ?

One of the paradoxes of WWII, Germany was the only country willing to help Finland defend itself against the USSR... the West was perfectly willing to sacrifice it Sudetenland style to make the Soviets happy and keep them in the war against Germany.

[BruceVC]

11 minutes ago, Gorth said:

One of the paradoxes of WWII, Germany was the only country willing to help Finland defend itself against the USSR... the West was perfectly willing to sacrifice it Sudetenland style to make the Soviets happy and keep them in the war against Germany.

That is interesting, is that why some Finns aligned with the Nazis and had their own SS units ?

[xzar_monty]

50 minutes ago, Gorth said:

One of the paradoxes of WWII, Germany was the only country willing to help Finland defend itself against the USSR... the West was perfectly willing to sacrifice it Sudetenland style to make the Soviets happy and keep them in the war against Germany.

This, in turn, apparently provided the Finns with an awful lot of grim determination in the war and an even fiercer determination to keep the country's defences up after the war.

Help was supposed to come from all quarters when the USSR attacked in 1939. No help came.

[Elerond]

45 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

That is interesting, is that why some Finns aligned with the Nazis and had their own SS units ?

SS units were part of deal to get arms from Germany

[Azdeus]

3 hours ago, Gorth said:

They are preparing to invade Sweden and liberate Scania, Halland and Blekinge in a special military operation...

We are, as always, ready to defend our lands to the last FinnScanian.

[xzar_monty]

This is an extraordinarily interesting page from Price Wars by Rupert Russell. Cannot comment on its trustworthiness.

[Lexx]

Well, that's what was talked about already before. This whole ukraine nazi thing is just hogwash of course. This is all about access to resources, which is also why russia will do everything it can to keep crimea and surrounding areas. Unless a miracle happens and ukraine can push russia out of these areas (unlikely for now), this will keep going for a long, long time.

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Lexx said:

Well, that's what was talked about already before. This whole ukraine nazi thing is just hogwash of course. This is all about access to resources, which is also why russia will do everything it can to keep crimea and surrounding areas. Unless a miracle happens and ukraine can push russia out of these areas (unlikely for now), this will keep going for a long, long time.

To be honest I didnt know that, I always assumed Putin wanted Crimea for historical reasons and part of " Soviet border " objective. I wasnt aware the area is rich in gas ?

 

[xzar_monty]

6 minutes ago, Lexx said:

Well, that's what was talked about already before. This whole ukraine nazi thing is just hogwash of course. This is all about access to resources, which is also why russia will do everything it can to keep crimea and surrounding areas. Unless a miracle happens and ukraine can push russia out of these areas (unlikely for now), this will keep going for a long, long time.

Ok. Hey, since you are in/from Germany, can you perhaps offer some kind of idea about the internal feelings/tensions in the country now? I mean, Germany is the country with the Russian noose most tightly around its neck with the energy thing. How is Merkel viewed now? What's going on? All info and commentary would be appreciated. I am curious, not out to blame.

[Zoraptor]

2 hours ago, Gorth said:

One of the paradoxes of WWII, Germany was the only country willing to help Finland defend itself against the USSR... the West was perfectly willing to sacrifice it Sudetenland style to make the Soviets happy and keep them in the war against Germany.

Eh, at the time of the Winter War Germany and the USSR were (technically, kind of if you squinted) allies under Molotov-Ribbentrop so Finland got zero help from Germany. Continuation War though, sure.

(Churchill at least was very keen to declare war on the USSR in 1939, but in this case at least fortunately Chamberlain was still PM.  Then again Churchill was also very keen to invade... Norway, at more or less the same time. Well, protectively occupy even if the occupants objected.

Practically there wasn't anything France or Britain could do to help anyway, and if there had been a campaign Churchill would have been in charge- and while his speeches were great his military campaigns tended to be awful. Indeed, the actual Norway campaign run by him was an almost unmitigated disaster, the almost part being pretty much solely Warspite sinking half the Kreigsmarine's total of destroyers at Narvik.

Churchill's plan for helping Finland was... Dardanelles 2.0, of course, just run a big fleet and invasion force through to the Baltic, what can go wrong? Not like Britain was also at war with Germany, and Germany could invade Denmark at any time bottling the British fleet up wholesale and forcing them to run a narrow strait dominated by the Luftwaffe. Then again, Churchill being Churchill, maybe he was going to invade Denmark too...)

[Lexx]

24 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Ok. Hey, since you are in/from Germany, can you perhaps offer some kind of idea about the internal feelings/tensions in the country now? I mean, Germany is the country with the Russian noose most tightly around its neck with the energy thing. How is Merkel viewed now? What's going on? All info and commentary would be appreciated. I am curious, not out to blame.

Can't really say much of that, I'm not reading german news a lot. Of course there are people who yell "stop russian gas/oil now!" etc. but they don't seem to realize what will happen if we'd just cut off the pipelines now (personally I think this would be catastrophic and might give a rise to pro-putin and the usual right wingers again). It's probably all too early to tell anyways, because most people aren't feeling the economic shift yet. Maybe things will look a lot different in 3 or 4 months. The way I see it, most people are on the side of ukraine. Interestingly, suddenly everyone feels like european brothers. Not really sure what exactly caused this, though, because I could swear anti-eu sentiment was quite strong before ("why do we have to pay for those poor, mismanaged countries?!" etc stuff like that).

tl;dr -- I have no idea. But right now I think the worst is yet to come.

Edited April 6, 2022 by Lexx

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Lexx said:

Can't really say much of that, I'm not reading german news a lot. Of course there are people who yell "stop russian gas/oil now!" etc. but they don't seem to realize what will happen if we'd just cut off the pipelines now (personally I think this would be catastrophic and might give a rise to pro-putin and the usual right wingers again). It's probably all too early to tell anyways, because most people aren't feeling the economic shift yet. Maybe things will look a lot different in 3 or 4 months. The way I see it, most people are on the side of ukraine. Interestingly, suddenly everyone feels like european brothers. Not really sure what exactly caused this, though, because I could swear anti-eu sentiment was quite strong before ("why do we have to pay for those poor, mismanaged countries?!" etc stuff like that).

tl;dr -- I have no idea. But right now I think the worst is yet to come.

I would guess the reason  why you seeing " EU and Western " unity is the Ukrainian invasion has highlighted that our quality of life and Democratic values  can always potentially and abruptly be threatened by an external country

Its outside of living memory for most us to remember a time where this could occur and what the Ukrainians are going through reminds all of us of the reality and potential brevity of something taken for granted...security in our  ways of life