Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Timester]

No one is worried about Russia today, they slightly worry about Russia in 10-20 years after they rebuild their military

That's assuming that everyone else won't also continue to develop themselves.

Russia just wasted its military and logistical rebuilt of the past 40 years and the result was to make Ukraine stronger than ever before. That's the lesson that should be learned, paper tigers (or bears) shouldn't be feared.

[Gorsameth]

That's assuming that everyone else won't also continue to develop themselves.

Russia just wasted its military and logistical rebuilt of the past 40 years and the result was to make Ukraine stronger than ever before. That's the lesson that should be learned, paper tigers (or bears) shouldn't be feared.

And Europe would not continue to develop themselves if they felt they were safe hiding behind America's skirt.
(and to be clear America wanted the EU to hide behind their might because it let them dictate geopolitical policy)

[Timester]

And Europe would not continue to develop themselves if they felt they were safe hiding behind America's skirt.
(and to be clear America wanted the EU to hide behind their might because it let them dictate geopolitical policy)

Again, that's assuming the nations stay in vacuum and fearing paper tigers. Poland alone would crush Russia in the present day.

[Wilian]

No one is worried about Russia today, they slightly worry about Russia in 10-20 years after they rebuild their military

That's the meme. In reality most European and NATO military experts keep talking about next 2-5 years to rebuild enough for potential invasion against NATO if the war ended now.

[Nymrohd]

I don't know if Europe, and especially France, building up their military is something to celebrate though. Sure it would help with Ukraine. But I don't think that various European countries would be that much better than the US at how they use military force. I mean they'd be better than Trump's USA but not better than Cheney's.

[KrayZ33]

I don't know if Europe, and especially France, building up their military is something to celebrate though. Sure it would help with Ukraine. But I don't think that various European countries would be that much better than the US at how they use military force. I mean they'd be better than Trump's USA but not better than Cheney's.

Building up military is never something to celebrate, no matter who does it.
It's wasted money, even more so if you don't use it aggressively. It's sad that after 2 world wars, it is still necessary.
Global peace will only be achieved once we colonize Mars.



And that doesn't stop the military, because we'll need it to attack/defend against Mars.

[Makabreska]

That's the meme. In reality most European and NATO military experts keep talking about next 2-5 years to rebuild enough for potential invasion against NATO if the war ended now.

For me the biggest meme is Russia ever attacking a NATO country. Even with what is happening in USA right now.

[Timester]

For me the biggest meme is Russia ever attacking a Nato country. Even with what is happening in USA right now.

I mean, Russia can't even retake completely Kursk right now, even by throwing North Korean meat shields.

[Wilian]

For me the biggest meme is Russia ever attacking a NATO country. Even with what is happening in USA right now.

Well that's what the generals, military analysts and some governmental bodies are saying. That Russian army could recoup and be a real threat in couple to five years.

[Gorsameth]

Well that's what the generals, military analysts and some governmental bodies are saying. That Russian army could recoup and be a real threat in couple to five years.

Publicly saying.
To people who decide if they get funding or vote in people who give them funding.

Considering the speed which with Russia burns through old stock that needs to be restocked to be burned through next time. While there economy is crashing and burning. With entire generations getting wiped out on the field.

I don't buy Russia being rebuild and ready for round 2 in 5 years. Not even for a moment.

[Nymrohd]

Publicly saying.
To people who decide if they get funding or vote in people who give them funding.

Considering the speed which with Russia burns through old stock that needs to be restocked to be burned through next time. While there economy is crashing and burning. With entire generations getting wiped out on the field.

I don't buy Russia being rebuild and ready for round 2 in 5 years. Not even for a moment.

My understanding is that Russia converted to a war economy. AS it is right now, it is more efficient for them to produce material for war than to return to a peace time economy.

[Timester]

Publicly saying.
To people who decide if they get funding or vote in people who give them funding.

Considering the speed which with Russia burns through old stock that needs to be restocked to be burned through next time. While there economy is crashing and burning. With entire generations getting wiped out on the field.

I don't buy Russia being rebuild and ready for round 2 in 5 years. Not even for a moment.

Exactly this. The reason why military are able to sell those numbers is because people don't usually understand logistics. And Russia is NOWHERE near to able to replenish their logistics in the next generation. This ignoring the fact that technology changed so much that Ukraine stopping and hurting the Russia's chance of recovery with cheap long-range drones.

Putin thrown 40-50 years of military stockpile and development (I'm considering the Afghan War) against Ukraine.

- - - Updated - - -

My understanding is that Russia converted to a war economy. AS it is right now, it is more efficient for them to produce material for war than to return to a peace time economy.

But for a war economy to fully work, you need to have continuous gains. It's very very finite and actually develop the country. That's not happening with Russia, they lacking everything to keep a real war economy.

And then moving from war economy to back to consumer economy is an absolute pain.

[D Luniz]

That's assuming that everyone else won't also continue to develop themselves.

Russia just wasted its military and logistical rebuilt of the past 40 years and the result was to make Ukraine stronger than ever before. That's the lesson that should be learned, paper tigers (or bears) shouldn't be feared.

Russia is good at finding and exploiting the people that will turn their countries into a similar pit as Russia.

So the assumption that most of those nations would spend that 10-20 years not sitting on their hands is a risky one

[caervek]

Apparently Macron has invited all EU leaders to an emergency summit in Paris tomorrow in order to decide on a response to Donald Trump and his team's statements on their abandonment of Ukraine and Europe, and the new state of affairs with America's appeasement of Russia.

I mean, Russia can't even retake completely Kursk right now, even by throwing North Korean meat shields.

The problem with the Kursk scenario, is that it holds significantly different value to Ukraine and Russia, and so their objective goals are vastly different. And so success has to be measured differently.

From the Ukrainian perspective they believe holding a part of Russian territory gives them a safety net in any negotiations the US/EU may force them into, and so they believe that keeping a large group of well trained/supplied forces there while Russia is advancing inside Ukraine is the right call.

From the Russian perspective, While Ukraine have seized a piece of Kursk and it's getting a lot of media attention, in reality it's relatively miniscule (approximately four times the size of Walt Disney World), and they have done so by committing a large group of well trained/supplied forces there while Russia is advancing inside Ukraine. Russia are undoubtably of the opinion this was a bad call as they have managed to acquire many many times as much territory inside Ukraine due to those forces/equipment not being there. There is also the double bonus for Vlad that he has a load of spare Koreans he can use to help whittle down the Ukrainian forces in Kursk.

So while they haven't managed to take back Kursk, it's because they have actively chosen not to reallocate the forces required to do it and instead just rush it with expendables to tie up the Ukrainians

[KrayZ33]

The problem with the Kursk scenario, is that it holds significantly different value to Ukraine and Russia, and so their objective goals are vastly different. And so success has to be measured differently.

From the Ukrainian perspective they believe holding a part of Russian territory gives them a safety net in any negotiations the US/EU may force them into, and so they believe that keeping a large group of well trained/supplied forces there while Russia is advancing inside Ukraine is the right call.

From the Russian perspective, While Ukraine have seized a piece of Kursk and it's getting a lot of media attention, in reality it's relatively miniscule (approximately four times the size of Walt Disney World), and they have done so by committing a large group of well trained/supplied forces there while Russia is advancing inside Ukraine. Russia are undoubtably of the opinion this was a bad call as they have managed to acquire many many times as much territory inside Ukraine due to those forces/equipment not being there. There is also the double bonus for Vlad that he has a load of spare Koreans he can use to help whittle down the Ukrainian forces in Kursk.

That's hardly what is available online for us to see.
Kursk pins down roughly <80k Russian troops of which 10k were Korean (so whatever is left from those) and it's assumed that these troops would otherwise be active in the Kharkiv region. Among them are elite VDV units and conscripts alike

you can read up on a lot of it here:

https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...nth-assessment

what is immediately clear is how "easy" it would be for Ukraine to shift the battlefield if enough help was available, because it made clear that Russia has not commited enough strategic reservers to the whole war to immediatly respond to these situations. I'm saying "easy" because the reaction was extremely slow and that is mostly due to how little they were concerned about counterattacks. It's almost as if they had put everything in one basket.

[alach]

I know it's not exactly the topic at hand, but I would just like to say for those who believe Ukraine chose poorly with the Kursk incursion.
The troops involved in the incursion were offensive trained and were being wasted on the eastern flank.

[ringpriest]

No one is worried about Russia today, they slightly worry about Russia in 10-20 years after they rebuild their military

Most logistics issues don't take nearly that long to resolve. Six months to two years, if they're got half-way competent officers in power and the country is functioning at all. 10-20 years is what it will take to replenish their manpower, but there's plenty of damage they can do outside of nukes and human waves.

[hellhamster]

I don't know if Europe, and especially France, building up their military is something to celebrate though. Sure it would help with Ukraine. But I don't think that various European countries would be that much better than the US at how they use military force. I mean they'd be better than Trump's USA but not better than Cheney's.

The EU is going through the precursor of a financial crisis right now - municipalities have way lower budgets than previous years. Most countries are preparing for a big hit this year. Even if they agree on a bigger EU army, which they won't in the foreseeable future, there is basically no money for it unless they grab a LOT of debt.

Germany should be the one setting an example of what's to come, and they aren't looking good.

[NED funded]

I don't know if Europe, and especially France, building up their military is something to celebrate though. Sure it would help with Ukraine. But I don't think that various European countries would be that much better than the US at how they use military force. I mean they'd be better than Trump's USA but not better than Cheney's.

Does Europe even have the fiscal space to build a military? Some of its members are literally a tier above junk bond, if it wasnt for ECB intervention.

[hellhamster]

To clarify, it is pivotal for countries now that inflation seems to be temporarily tamed, especially in the EU, to reduce government spending as a means to reduce their debt to GDP ratio. If the debt to GDP ratio rises right now, it automatically doubles the 10 year bond yield for every percent, causing inflation and recession to hit back way harder as economic uncertainty becomes prevalent.

EU countries probably know this, which is why I think there won't be a military spending spree in the coming year or 2.