What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?

[Gator]

UA is dependent on transit revenue and low energy prices.  Although the west is capable of helping, 'restructuring' UA is not possible, thus any help will be conditional and limited....

Other factors in support of this position:

1.  Corruption is rampant and will inhibit economic development initiatives.

2.  Inflation will increase.  The IMF has offered $18Bn in loans over two years but requires austere economic reforms (50% increase in price of energy).  The EU has $11Bn in addition to the IMF with similar requirements.   Energy price increases will accelerate inflation, and  Ukrainian citizens don't have personal savings to deal with the inflation.   Other austerity measures include high taxes on tobacco and alcohol, reduction of government, etc.  This could spawn another wave of social unrest. 

  I get the feeling that the west is looking at UA as a 'rats nest' of problems and that throwing money in that mouse hole won't help at all.. in fact it will only benefit RU. 

A rats nest and a basket case.       The US has much disappointing experience with a similar albeit smaller version - namely Haiti.  One would think Ukraine could be the same except for some key differences:  the Ukrainian citizen is far better educated, Ukraine has some natural resources particularly its fertile cropland, and ......(please help me)

It is up to the Ukrainian citizen to decide their future.  They have a choice.  It starts by empowering the best people in May.  That is not far away.  Who are the leading candidates?  Can they accomplish this difficult job?  If not, BC will be correct and Russia need not invade eastern Ukraine - just wait for the citizens to beckon and then walk in. 

[justme100]

I think until very recently Crimean had more access to Ukrainian press then they had to Russian press. So I can not see how a few days of billboards could have influence people's opinion.

Nothing could influence people's opinion in Crimea, because it was firmly formed long ago before the events. I just smile reading how Ukrainians say that there were only 30% for Russia here Such stupidity can say only people who never lived here. And for sure everyone who would witnessed the events of referendum day and night when the results were announced wouldn't dare to say anything more.Men were crying, people that don't know each other were hugging and celebrating each other with final return home. And all these people are quite aware how difficult the following years would be, that half of us would lose their jobs, that money that people saved would become trash and many many other things. Still I don't remember such happy smiling faces as these days.

[justme100]

 Who are the leading candidates?  Can they accomplish this difficult job?  If not, BC will be correct and Russia need not invade eastern Ukraine - just wait for the citizens to beckon and then walk in.

Their next president will become Poroshenko.  [size=78%]No comments.[/size]

[fathertime]

[quote author=Faux pas


FT, you have stated this now, a half a dozen times, all the while failing to acknowledge that Russia already had the Crimea Ports. That fact alone negates your statement. Why invade to gain something you already have? 
[/quote]
Well faux pas...while many of the posters remain convinced this is only the beginning of a great invasion..my belief is it is not..you have repeated numerous times that Russia already had access to the ports which is true (for now) but they likely felt there was no guarantee in 5 years or 25 years they would always have access. For all we know Ukraine could join forces with the west and that could pit Russia in jeapardy, at least from their prospective.   If you follow that reasoning,then it makes sense what they have done and that they feel they are done.

[calmissile]

What Putin wants is obvious 
Ukraine, preferably whole but if not achievable minimum east and south east of Ukraine. 
However he doesn't want just Ukraine, many other countries on his list of want.
Only blind Russians to whom have been served 'pre-cooked' views on events in the world for a long time do not know what Putin wants. They under some childish illusion their president cares for their interests and wants what is best for Russia. In reality Putin seeks glory, somehow he believes by aggression towards other countries he will make Russia once again mighty. And average Russians remain wondering why are they disliked by other nations.

Naive people of Crimea believed Russian president cares for them and wants bring them back to motherland. How silly of them. Right now they are just a game card Putin is trying to use. Suddenly Russia is the one who wants new referendum in Crimea and will withdraw every single military out of Crimea including Russian Navy in exchange  for new constitution for Ukraine (yeah, constitution that would allow him take each region of Ukraine one by one  ). Narcissistic Sociopath!


http://gazeta.ua/ru/articles/politics/_rossiya-potrebuet-ot-ukrainy-navsegda-otkazatsya-ot-chlenstva-v-es-i-nato-i-stat-federaciej-ekspert/549878

For your young age, you seem to have studied history and the actions of the USSR during the cold war.  Putin, like his predecessors have turned the clock back to negotiate only with military action.  All of the blabbering from Europe and the US is a joke to him.  He will use it to his advantage where he can.  Putin's invasion of Crimea could have been stopped by only one thing...... A military force that would have driven him back across the border.

Both the UK and the US should be ashamed!  The Budapest memorandum was signed by both parties and guaranteed Ukraine (including Crimea), protection of their sovereignty and borders when they gave up nuclear weapons.  The agreement had no expiration date.   Both should have immediately offered Ukraine military assistance (even if it were only weapons to defend themselves).

It is true that the American people are tired of foreign wars.  Among many of Obama's failures was to fail to educate the American public that we had a signed obligation to protect Ukraine from the invasion of Russia.  Public sentiment may have swayed toward assisting Ukraine if a public case had been made.  Instead, Obama chose to do what he does best.....run his mouth and then look stupid after he is ignored.

The Brits put up the lamest excuse of all.  The banks in London holding the ill gotten gains of the oligarchs of Russia plus the trade with Russia is more important than honoring the commitments they made to Ukraine.  Perhaps the next time the UK seeks American military assistance, we should sit on our hands and just talk about it.

It seems the American public is starting to wise up to the huge expense of our military which is largely used to be the 'worlds policeman' while other nations have weak militarys and depend on the good old USA to come to their aid. IMO, if Europe does not pay the American taxpayers for the protection we provide them, we should retract our support and stay home.  The 'free lunch' should be ended now!

The "new Russia" expansionism is a lot closer to Europe than it is to America.  As Putin heads west, please remember your lack of support to stop him (at Crimea) before he has a chance to rebuild his military to what it once was before the breakup of the USSR.  It's the same old cold war as before.  The only difference is that Russia rekindled the Cold War and did so because he knows all western nations are weak and will not stand up to him.

Arguing about the 'will of the people' of Crimea is ridiculous at this stage.  Thanks to the bedlam  Putin created with his insurgents, military without insignias, coup he directed in Crimea, and installation of his puppet in government of Crimea, the closing of all independent TV stations, it is impossible to know what the will of the people is and would have been without his interference.

How much of the blame for the invasion of Crimea is the fault of the interim government in Kiev?   Good question, but consider these issues....

The interim government in Kiev has many challenges.  First, it must attempt to actually have government services restored for ordinary citizens.  Government offices must become functional again.  The banks need to normalize.

The fight against corruption needs to continue in a major way.  Kiev has already demonstrated they are willing to continue doing so.  The people demand it, and the candidates are well aware of it.  Unlike Russia where it is accepted by the people, the Ukrainians have had their fill of it and demand accountability.

The interim government needs to reign in the right wing extremists and get them to realize that compromises are necessary for the future unity of Ukraine.

The Russian provocateurs need to be rounded up and exported back to Russia.  Already this is partially being done at the borders by preventing hundreds of troublemakers from entering recently.

The critical financial crisis in the economy of Ukraine is perhaps the highest priority for the interim government.  The loans and loan guarantees culminating now from the West will allow the government to function while it gets the restructuring underway.

It is clear that the Ukraine military was decimated under Yanuckovich.  The inability to respond to the takeover of Crimea was a clear indication of this.   The interim government is doing what it can with the scarce resources available to rebuild the military.  This is a critical area that the West could contribute a lot if it wished to.  Providing weapons and training is all that is necessary.   The Ukraine people will fight with whatever they can muster to defend Ukraine.

In addition, it is imperative that the interim government ensure that the upcoming election is fair and honest, as observed by international monitoring bodies.

There is a lot on the plate of the interim government in Kiev.  It would be nice to expect miracles in only a month or two to resolve all the problems on their plate.   Realistically, it is not going to happen overnight and happen without any mistakes.  The only major mistakes I see so far, is the failure of the Ministry of Defense for not issuing any orders to the troops in Crimea leaving them stranded and semi-captured.   The second mistake was the Rada passing the law making Ukrainian the official language.   This flew in the face of all Russian speakers that for generations spoke Russian.  It was a stupid mistake.  Fortunately, the interim president vetoed the law and it did not get implemented.

Putin's excuse for invading Crimea........
The excuse to 'protect the Russian speaking population in Crimea' was the most stupid words I can remember coming out of the Kremlin in my lifetime.   What is even more amazing is that the Russian's gobble this up as though it was fact.   Prior to Putin's moves to create instability and eventual overthrow of the Crimea government, there were no problems of Russian speakers in Crimea needing protection!!!!   Period!

My wife and I own property in Crimea, we vacation in Crimea.  Never did we see any issues between Russian speaking Ukrainians and Ukrainian speaking Ukrainians.  From everything I saw plus my wife's opinion,  Ukrainians in Crimea considered themselves Ukrainians not transplanted Russians.   It appeared that Crimeans did have the same complaints about the corrupt government of Yanuckovich that the mainland Ukrainians had (have).  In other words, the Crimeans had no problems with each other until Putin stirred the pot!

It is unfortunate that the new government in Kiev (after the upcoming elections) did not have a chance to demonstrate all the reforms they have planned, as well as allow Crimea to assess the changes before invasion by Russia.  Putin no doubt saw this as a large risk.  His invasion of Crimea was cleverly planned to not allow the new government to function where it would be more difficult to stir up trouble and enlist locals in his aim to take over Crimea.

There are several well written articles that describe why Putin needs to take over eastern and southern Ukraine.  I am not convinced he will not invade mainland Ukraine if he cannot get the west and Ukraine government to give him what he wants.   The topics have not been discussed much either on the forum or the media.  If I am able to find them, I will add to a future post.

[calmissile]

Jone,

you certainly have a point. You arguments if I am correct are mainly based on assumption that Russia will not be able to supply electricity without the bridge. It would be interesting to find out if it is true or not, I have seen the explanations how it could be technically done but I personally do not have the knowledge to evaluate if it was technically viable or not.

The assumption is wrong.  Russia could supply Crimea with electricity without a bridge.  It could be done with a submerged cable without a bridge, or it could be done by building power plants.  The only issue would be what energy source to use to fuel them.  Gas, via a submerged pipeline, LNG via tankers to Sevestopol, fuel oil via tankers to the port.   Long term, it would be best to have a fuel source that does not depend on tankers.  In the short term there are several options that could serve as an interim solution.

[jone]

The assumption is wrong.  Russia could supply Crimea with electricity without a bridge.  It could be done with a submerged cable without a bridge, or it could be done by building power plants.  The only issue would be what energy source to use to fuel them.  Gas, via a submerged pipeline, LNG via tankers to Sevestopol, fuel oil via tankers to the port.   Long term, it would be best to have a fuel source that does not depend on tankers.  In the short term there are several options that could serve as an interim solution.

I defer to my engineering friend.

However, aside from electricity and gas, Russia will have to do a great job of importing lots of summer tourists, too.     

[fathertime]

The assumption is wrong.  Russia could supply Crimea with electricity without a bridge.  It could be done with a submerged cable without a bridge, or it could be done by building power plants.  The only issue would be what energy source to use to fuel them.  Gas, via a submerged pipeline, LNG via tankers to Sevestopol, fuel oil via tankers to the port.   Long term, it would be best to have a fuel source that does not depend on tankers.  In the short term there are several options that could serve as an interim solution.

Excellent points.  It would appear Russia can get critical supplies to the peninsula.  If the two nations can kiss and makeup then Ukraine can possibly profit by supplying utilities to the region...that way both countries can win.
Fathertime!

[calmissile]

Nothing could influence people's opinion in Crimea, because it was firmly formed long ago before the events. I just smile reading how Ukrainians say that there were only 30% for Russia here Such stupidity can say only people who never lived here. And for sure everyone who would witnessed the events of referendum day and night when the results were announced wouldn't dare to say anything more.Men were crying, people that don't know each other were hugging and celebrating each other with final return home. And all these people are quite aware how difficult the following years would be, that half of us would lose their jobs, that money that people saved would become trash and many many other things. Still I don't remember such happy smiling faces as these days.

Your Russian propaganda is bringing tears to my eyes.  All those poor Russians that now feel at home with mother Russia.   

All these tear jerking Russians could go back and forth to mother Russia whenever they wanted to!  It was not necessary to invade Crimea for them to go to Russia whenever they chose to.

[Faux Pas]

Well faux pas...while many of the posters remain convinced this is only the beginning of a great invasion..my belief is it is not..you have repeated numerous times that Russia already had access to the ports which is true (for now) but they likely felt there was no guarantee in 5 years or 25 years they would always have access. For all we know Ukraine could join forces with the west and that could pit Russia in jeapardy, at least from their prospective.   If you follow that reasoning,then it makes sense what they have done and that they feel they are done.

FT, you continue to miss the point. Russia gained use of the ports through negotiation. There was no indication that it wouldn't have been continued well into the future. Ukraine had nothing to gain by shutting Russia out of Crimea. All of the sudden invasion in favored over negotiations?

The invasion has happened. There is no win/win for either country especially, Ukraine

[jone]

Their next president will be Poroshenko.

Quite likely.  He will certainly be in a runoff.  His support from Klitschko will help him. 

He will not be someone who is liked by the Kremlin.  He has previously advocated membership in NATO and affiliation with the EU.

The Chocolate King is a favorable alternative to those who have already been in power.  Who will you vote for JustMe?    Oops.  Sorry.  I forgot.  You don't have a say, anymore than I do. 

[jone]

Excellent points.  It would appear Russia can get critical supplies to the peninsula.  If the two nations can kiss and makeup then Ukraine can possibly profit by supplying utilities to the region...that way both countries can win.
Fathertime!

You may be smart, but sometimes you are somewhat obtuse.  The vast number of Ukrainians are going to elect someone who is pro-West as a direct result of Russia's incursion into Crimea.  They are starting a long and arduous change, if allowed. 

If not allowed, they will be invaded.  In no way does this ever come out where Russia and a free Ukraine are kissed and made up.  We are seeing a plain and simple divorce.  And the only issue outstanding is whether it will be bloody, with lots of fighting, or whether they just never talk to each other with the exception of child support and visitation rights.

Your win/win scenario has NEVER been in play.

Russia, more than ever, is in a very bad situation.

[calmissile]

Here is the link to some interesting facts about Ukrainian production of Russian military weapons and parts.
Hopefully the Kiev government will immediately quit supplying Russia these parts, move the engineering to a safe place, and negotiate with the West to manufacture goods to make up the losses of income.

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-ukraine-military-equipment/25312911.html

[ML]

Both the UK and the US should be ashamed!  The Budapest memorandum was signed by both parties and guaranteed Ukraine (including Crimea), protection of their sovereignty and borders when they gave up nuclear weapons.  The agreement had no expiration date.   Both should have immediately offered Ukraine military assistance (even if it were only weapons to defend themselves).

It is true that the American people are tired of foreign wars.  Among many of Obama's failures was to fail to educate the American public that we had a signed obligation to protect Ukraine from the invasion of Russia.

Doug, you make many good points in your post.  However, why are you persisting in repeating the above which is false?

The USA never agreed to do anything for Ukraine other than not cause it trouble ourselves; to seek UN action if Ukraine is subject to nuclear attack; and to consult if questions arose concerning the Budapest Memorandum.

Russia has gone back on their  word concerning the Budapest Memorandum.  But USA nor UK is obligated to do anything.

Note:  I think USA should do something; but they are not obligated to do so under Budapest Memorandum.

http://www.cfr.org/arms-control-disarmament-and-nonproliferation/budapest-memorandums-security-assurances-1994/p32484

[calmissile]

ML,

I read the link you provided.  It seems that the word nuclear is much more prevalent than the version I read earlier.   In any case, I agree with you.  Based upon this link it would support your interpretation.

[BillyB]

  Who are the leading candidates?  Can they accomplish this difficult job?

Chocolate king Petro Poroshenko backed by world heavyweight boxer Vitali Klitschko and Yulia Tymoshenko. Yulia would be a mistake since she couldn't get the job done before. Both candidates are pro West and if they listen to advice, they may be able to have some Western style economic success in Ukraine.


I have not heard any names of pro Russian candidates. Although dialogue has increased between Obama and Putin, Putin's troops still are on the move and Russian troops in Georgia has been on the move too. With increased dialogue, Putin has increased covert operations in eastern Ukraine and may try a "Crimea" before the May 25 election. This tells me Putin may have a difficult time finding a pro Russian candidate that can win it all so he'll have to achieve his goals with baby steps.

[ML]

As of right now, the reason Russia has threatening troops on Ukraine borders is to provide scare so that Russia can obtain its demands which are:

1) Ukraine not join NATO.
2) Russian be equal national language in Ukraine.
3) Ukraine adopt a Federalist system of governing where each oblast can hold referendums.

[BillyB]

As of right now, the reason Russia has threatening troops on Ukraine borders is to provide scare so that Russia can obtain its demands ....

If Russia becomes more appealing than the West for nations to partner up with, they wouldn't need to threaten anybody.

[fathertime]

FT, you continue to miss the point. Russia gained use of the ports through negotiation. There was no indication that it wouldn't have been continued well into the future. Ukraine had nothing to gain by shutting Russia out of Crimea. All of the sudden invasion in favored over negotiations?

The invasion has happened. There is no win/win for either country especially, Ukraine

Hey fp...I realize you think I'm missing your point but that is not the case I do get your point but I just don't see it that way.
I think putin felt there was good reason to invade Crimea. Perhaps he realized that he wasn't going to take his chances.  It was a desperation move bit his options weren't good in his mind...at least that is how iy looks to me.

[fathertime]

You may be smart, but sometimes you are somewhat obtuse.  The vast number of Ukrainians are going to elect someone who is pro-West as a direct result of Russia's incursion into Crimea.  They are starting a long and arduous change, if allowed. 

If not allowed, they will be invaded.  In no way does this ever come out where Russia and a free Ukraine are kissed and made up.  We are seeing a plain and simple divorce.  And the only issue outstanding is whether it will be bloody, with lots of fighting, or whether they just never talk to each other with the exception of child support and visitation rights.

Your win/win scenario has NEVER been in play.

Russia, more than ever, is in a very bad situation.

It doesn't matter if I am smart or obtuse so I don't know why you have to preface your post like that.  If we discuss the points we can later see who made the right predictions.  Last we you insisted this was the beginning and an invasion was coming.  For the past several weeks ive stood almost alone in stating I believed there would  be no big invasion. I still believe there is a solution where both sides win.
I also believe that Ukraine was slanting west before this invasion, not because of it.

[calmissile]

As of right now, the reason Russia has threatening troops on Ukraine borders is to provide scare so that Russia can obtain its demands which are:

1) Ukraine not join NATO.
2) Russian be equal national language in Ukraine.
3) Ukraine adopt a Federalist system of governing where each oblast can hold referendums.

I think you forgot.....Keeping Crimea.

Also,  3) Ukraine adopt a Federalist system of governing where each oblast can hold referendums.   LOL, right after Russia demonstrates the same thing.

[calmissile]

It doesn't matter if I am smart or obtuse so I don't know why you have to preface your post like that.  If we discuss the points we can later see who made the right predictions.  Last we you insisted this was the beginning and an invasion was coming.  For the past several weeks ive stood almost alone in stating I believed there would  be no big invasion. I still believe there is a solution where both sides win.
I also believe that Ukraine was slanting west before this invasion, not because of it.

FT,
I can't understand how you can consider this a win/win when the country was invaded and part of it overthrown by a dictator.

In any case, you might want to read this Forbes article and see if it modifies your position on the issue.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2014/03/26/mr-putin-tear-down-that-potemkin-village/

[jone]

This CNN news article interviews families and mothers of sons on the front lines.  The mothers believe their sons will be killed.  For those of you reading this forum for entertainment, here is the real dialogue that happens every day in Eastern Ukraine.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/30/world/europe/ukraine-russia-border-tension/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

While I have advocated an opinion of Russia as an aggressor, I still have friends on both sides of the border and have no wife or girlfriend in Ukraine.  But I believe that after seeing what Russia is now trying to impose on Ukraine:  Federalism so that Russia can tear up Ukraine, piece by piece, Russia will invade as soon as the preference of the people is made known. 

The Russian speaking areas of Ukraine no longer hold the majority with the absence of Crimea.  So Ukraine will elect a pro-Western government.  As soon as that becomes apparent, the tanks will roll.

[justme100]

FT, you continue to miss the point. Russia gained use of the ports through negotiation. There was no indication that it wouldn't have been continued well into the future.

There was more than clear indication of this, as Ukraine wanted to enter NATO and have its base on the Ukrainian territtory.

[justme100]

  And the only issue outstanding is whether it will be bloody, with lots of fighting

Unfortunately it will be this way if it comes to invasion. There are a lot of people in Ukraine to shoot at the backs of Ukrainians.
30 of March
Kharkiv
Odessa
Donetsk
Lugansk