They want to be annexed, don't they? It's all the liabilities Canada and its taxpayers would be assuming if we do annex it that makes the whole thing stupid from our perspective.
The issue of ethnic referendums validity in the international law is grey and murky, because the history leading to these referendums is always grey and murky and because international law for that matter is grey and murky.
I’m not a military expert, but the western personnel I have spoken to consider the Ukrainian forces to be more prepared than their Russian counterparts. One way to understand the difference in quality is to look at the the ratio of professional soldiers to conscripts. Ukraine’s armed forces are 60% professional; Russia’s only 30%.
Further, when the Soviet Union broke up, much of its arms industry was located in Ukraine, which even today remains the world’s 9th largest arms supplier. And Ukraine would most likely receive support, both overt and covert, from NATO allies on its borders—Poland especially—and electronic intelligence from the United States.
Of course, Russia’s armed forces are far larger, but there would be no easy victory.
The truth is that Yanukovych’s own party turned against him. The Parliament today is made up of the same members as it was a before the revolution (besides a handful that are now on the run). Interim President Turchynov and Prime Minister Yatsenyuk are both former cabinet ministers and capable, experienced politicians and diplomats.
Yeah, was afraid of exactly that. Funny that they feel they need to do that when they say that over 60% of Crimeans want to be part of Russia anyway.
I have a feeling that there is a lot more support for staying in the Ukraine in Crimea than we know about simply because those people are scared to go outside and show their position on the subject.
It's great that Russia is a POS, but it's still a POS with nuclear capabilities and Boris Badanov at the helm. It would be awesome if a NATO coalition could just go beat the #### out of them, but at what line does their defence warrant nuclear reaction in their minds.
Is that the real line though? I would assume reasonable proximity to Moscow or St. Petersburg would be the real line.
I think captain is right on.
If someone were inclined they could carve themselves an incredible academic career by contrasting Russian psyche and their reactions to hostilities.
Russians really are a unique bunch in terms of cultural psyche. They just don't think like their western European neighbours. It's why the they have been carving out larger and larger "buffer" zones around 'mother Russia', and why the ferocity of the eastern front grew exponentially as Germany got deeper into Russian territory.
It's great that Russia is a POS, but it's still a POS with nuclear capabilities and Boris Badanov at the helm. It would be awesome if a NATO coalition could just go beat the #### out of them, but at what line does their defence warrant nuclear reaction in their minds.
Well the closer you can strike Russia at the heart the less they will use nuclear weapons. They won't use them in their own country. The last resort of course. All of Ukraine should have the right to vote in the referendum not just the single territory. If its not the case then yes thier is no legal ground for it. Scotland is doing the same bit because they are part of a bigger entity then just them self's the whole of the people should vote on it. I told everybody this was the first step to the soviet union reform. Putin grew up and served for them. Crimea is just the first of many. The time for intervention is now. History always repeats it's self but can be changed by learning from the past.
Last edited by combustiblefuel; 03-07-2014 at 11:22 PM.
I actually think the first place they would use them would be in their own country or right on the border of it. I could see them using it on a force moving it into their country. It's a pretty damn effective way of saying "stop ####ing around" without risking the ultimate retaliation.
Chances are if Russian Territory was invaded, the Russians would retaliate with a sky shot. A high altitude nuclear detonation over either the ocean or over America itself.
Nobody would be physically harmed, no buildings would be knocked down, but it would play hell with civilian electronics while leaving government and hardened electronics alone.
The other thing you would see would be conventional. A attack at sea would make more sense or a serious of cruise missile attacks on Nato Facilities.
I don't know if you'd want to invade Russia anyways. While this isn't the 1940's anymore and logistics has become more of a science, you would still need a very long and vulnerable supply line that could be easily cut.
But Russia paranoia is part of their mental state because they've been invaded so often and because of the hideous costs of the German Invasion.
If you want to rally Russian Citizens the way to do it, invade Russia.
Any past grievances with the standing government would vanish in a hurry.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
If you want to rally Russian Citizens the way to do it, invade Russia.
Any past grievances with the standing government would vanish in a hurry.
It's not that easy.
The Germans are an incredibly bad example (no offense), because of their issues with race. In fact, it can be argued that the racial policy of Nazi Germany cost them the war on Russia, as Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Cossacks, and other groups of ethnic minorities welcomed them with parades in 1941.
Unfortunately, those ethnic groups soon found that as bad as a Stalin controlled government was, it was superior to the Nazis plan to enslave most of the Slavic people, to work in labor camps, or kill the intellectuals outright.
If you have an invading force that the local population finds favorable to Putin's version of Russia, resistance would not be as fierce as it was in the Second World War.
