Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Some pretty important developments on the Ukrainian conflict today, as the US will now be providing the Ukrainian military with weapons capable of defeating the Russian T-72B3's that the "seperatists" are fighting with.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/12/22/lethal-weapons-ukraine/978538001/

WASHINGTON —The Trump administration has approved a plan to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine, U.S. officials said Friday, aiming to fortify the former Soviet republic military as it fights separatists backed by Russia.

The new arms include American-made Javelin anti-tank missiles that Ukraine has long sought to boost its defenses against tanks that have rolled through eastern Ukraine during violence that has killed more than 10,000 since 2014. Previously, the U.S. has provided Ukraine with support equipment and training, and has let private companies sell some small arms like rifles.

The officials describing the plan weren’t authorized to discuss it publicly and demanded anonymity.

The move is likely to escalate tensions between the United States and Russia, as President Donald Trump contends with ongoing questions about whether he’s too hesitant to confront the Kremlin. Ukraine accuses Russia of sending the tanks, and the U.S. says Moscow is arming, training and fighting alongside the separatists.

Trump had been considering the plan for some time after the State Department and the Pentagon signed off earlier this year. President Barack Obama also considered sending lethal weapons to Ukraine.

This should have happened years ago.

 Ouze wrote:
This should have happened years ago.

Agreed. I'm hesitant to say so, but this will probably one of the things that the Trump administration will be able to look back proudly on.

Although the portable Javelin anti-tank missiles can kill, proponents for granting them to Ukraine have long argued they are considered “defensive” because the Ukrainians would use them to defend their territory and deter the Russians, not to attack a foreign country or seize new territory.

I may have sniggered at that.

Now its waiting for the Russian response, though well its not like they have a right to. With all the support and intervention they've been providing the Separatists, with minimal response from the West, any hissy fits would be a bit hollow. It would be pretty crap if the Russians increased their support further in the face of the pushes the Ukrainians have been making over the past year (though maybe that'd be the kick NATO needs to commit more assets. That or Trump having a bad phone call with Putin).

I'm sure this will go over well with the Israel lobby in D.C. and Jewish groups in the West, considering all the alleged Schutzstaffel fanboys in the Ukrainian military. Nevermind the fact that Jews served in the Azov Battalion, and still serve in the current special ops regiment of the same name. The Simon Wiesenthal Center already raised a bit of hell when the ban on U.S. forces training with the Azov was lifted, after they became an official unit in the Interior Ministry.


And one would be naive to think that these units with alleged neo-nazi ties won't get a few of those Javelins in their TO&E.


I will admit that the idea of Jewish troops (some of them ex-IDF foreign volunteers) running around with Schwarze Sonne and Wolfsangel shoulder patches is amusing, in a dark humor kinda way.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:



I'm sure this will go over well with the Israel lobby in D.C. and Jewish groups in the West, considering all the alleged Schutzstaffel fanboys in the Ukrainian military. Nevermind the fact that Jews served in the Azov Battalion, and still serve in the current special ops regiment of the same name. The Simon Wiesenthal Center already raised a bit of hell when the ban on U.S. forces training with the Azov was lifted, after they became an official unit in the Interior Ministry.


And one would be naive to think that these units with alleged neo-nazi ties won't get a few of those Javelins in their TO&E.


I will admit that the idea of Jewish troops (some of them ex-IDF foreign volunteers) running around with Schwarze Sonne and Wolfsangel shoulder patches is amusing, in a dark humor kinda way.

...And what does one unit have to do with this decision?

The state's been suppressing the fringe elements for the past few years now. Its not the early days of the war when you had guys in Cold War era gear waving swastikas off of buildings (I believe the US in particular made a point about this when giving aid). Though of course they're gone either.

Even if it is some Neo-Nazi getting these, meh.

 Ouze wrote:
This should have happened years ago.

In complete agreement here.

 Ouze wrote:
This should have happened years ago.

Why? It changes nothing. The US will never be able to provide anything that Russia will not also provide to the separatists. Sending weapons won't change anything in the conflict, except make it more violent and cause even more deaths.

Wouldn't US foreign policy fall under the US politics spectrum?

 trexmeyer wrote:
Wouldn't US foreign policy fall under the US politics spectrum?

Not necessarily. Foreign policy falls under diplomacy, which is connected to, but not the same as the internal politics of a country. If we are going to discuss the politics behind the diplomacy, then yes it could fall under US politics. If we instead just discuss the policies themselves and their effect (or lack thereof) on the Ukrainian Civil War, then I think it we could discuss US foreign policy without getting stuck into the stinky quagmire of internal US politics.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Wouldn't US foreign policy fall under the US politics spectrum?

The US politics ban is generally recognized as being for domestic politics.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Wouldn't US foreign policy fall under the US politics spectrum?

Not discussing US foreign policy, discussing the Ukrainian conflict, and I cleared the thread with a mod first.

If we went down that route your suggesting, me spending the winter in Romania would be something I couldn't discuss on here, as I'm here as a matter of US foreign policy.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
This should have happened years ago.

In complete agreement here.

Indeed... that's quite a bit of a policy change there.

*edit: Although, I find it weird they're calling it "defensive" weapons... javelins and sniper rifles defensive? o.O

 whembly wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
This should have happened years ago.

In complete agreement here.

Indeed... that's quite a bit of a policy change there.

*edit: Although, I find it weird they're calling it "defensive" weapons... javelins and sniper rifles defensive? o.O

They're to be used for defensive purposes. As in if the Ukraine were to take these and attempt to invade Moldova with them, they'd be in violation of the agreement. Using them to blow up tanks that are invading the Ukraine though, is a defensive purpose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The cease fire seems to have been called off as Russian mediators were pulled back, followed by artillery strikes on two Ukrainian villages.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia.html

MOSCOW — The war in rebel-held eastern Ukraine has escalated sharply this week, with the heaviest fighting in nearly a year, European observers and Western diplomats reported on Wednesday.

The fighting broke out in the midst of a snowstorm overnight Tuesday and has continued unabated since, the observers say. While skirmishes are common, the heavy artillery barrages have been the thickest since a flare-up in February.

Ukrainian authorities linked the escalation to the Russian military’s decision to withdraw officers from a joint Russian and Ukrainian liaison group that had assisted in monitoring the shaky cease-fire deal, known as the Minsk 2 agreement.

The Russian Foreign Ministry placed the blame for that on Ukraine, saying the Ukrainians had been intimidating the officers and that “all responsibility for possible consequences lies fully on the Ukrainian side.”

In lock step with the rhetoric thrown at the US today, any escalation is the fault of not Russia.

Ah... good point djones... I took it too literally.

 djones520 wrote:
The cease fire seems to have been called off as Russian mediators were pulled back, followed by artillery strikes on two Ukrainian villages.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia.html

MOSCOW — The war in rebel-held eastern Ukraine has escalated sharply this week, with the heaviest fighting in nearly a year, European observers and Western diplomats reported on Wednesday.

The fighting broke out in the midst of a snowstorm overnight Tuesday and has continued unabated since, the observers say. While skirmishes are common, the heavy artillery barrages have been the thickest since a flare-up in February.

Ukrainian authorities linked the escalation to the Russian military’s decision to withdraw officers from a joint Russian and Ukrainian liaison group that had assisted in monitoring the shaky cease-fire deal, known as the Minsk 2 agreement.

The Russian Foreign Ministry placed the blame for that on Ukraine, saying the Ukrainians had been intimidating the officers and that “all responsibility for possible consequences lies fully on the Ukrainian side.”

In lock step with the rhetoric thrown at the US today, any escalation is the fault of not Russia.

Those poor Russian Officers, imagine being intimidated by the population of a country you invaded.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
The cease fire seems to have been called off as Russian mediators were pulled back, followed by artillery strikes on two Ukrainian villages.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/world/europe/ukraine-war-russia.html

MOSCOW — The war in rebel-held eastern Ukraine has escalated sharply this week, with the heaviest fighting in nearly a year, European observers and Western diplomats reported on Wednesday.

The fighting broke out in the midst of a snowstorm overnight Tuesday and has continued unabated since, the observers say. While skirmishes are common, the heavy artillery barrages have been the thickest since a flare-up in February.

Ukrainian authorities linked the escalation to the Russian military’s decision to withdraw officers from a joint Russian and Ukrainian liaison group that had assisted in monitoring the shaky cease-fire deal, known as the Minsk 2 agreement.

The Russian Foreign Ministry placed the blame for that on Ukraine, saying the Ukrainians had been intimidating the officers and that “all responsibility for possible consequences lies fully on the Ukrainian side.”

In lock step with the rhetoric thrown at the US today, any escalation is the fault of not Russia.

Those poor Russian Officers, imagine being intimidated by the population of a country you invaded.

Well, yes. If your job is to work together with them, intimidation certainly is not very handy. Especially not if you are working together to enforce international agreements and prevent a civil war in your country from escalating further.
Ultimately, Ukraine will have to work together with Russia if it wants to survive. The US sending weapons is a significant step. Russia will never tolerate the US turning Ukraine into another outpost on its border. The Ukrainian government is walking a thin line here. If it cooperates with the US too much, Russia will not hesitate to wipe it off the map, and there is nothing they, the US or anyone in the world would be able to do anything about it.
And since Ukrainian governments historically have always been supremely incompetent, and this one isn't any better, I predict that by 2020, Ukraine will be one of the republics of the Russian Federation. Only question is, how much bloodshed will there be between now and then?
Best case scenario would still be for the Ukrainian government to back down, negotiate with the separatists and grant some of their demands in return for peace. Then acknowledge the loss of Crimea and suck up to Russia just enough to avoid being invaded. That would hurt Ukrainian pride, but it would ensure the survival and independence of Ukraine for the future. Unfortunately, with the current Ukrainian government leaning so heavily on radical nationalist elements, it is hard to see that happening.

Look iron captain has come full circle, it only took a few years to admit that russia invaded Ukraine and wants their land

 Ustrello wrote:
Look iron captain has come full circle, it only took a few years to admit that russia invaded Ukraine and wants their land

I read no admittance of any supposed past invasions (nor any mention of past events) in my post. My previous post in this thread was about a potential future invasion that seems likely if Ukraine snuggles up to the US too closely.
Also, I do not see how this means that I would have come full circle, considering that if I did believe in this 'invasion' nonsense I would not be back at the point where I started. I never believed in it.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Look iron captain has come full circle, it only took a few years to admit that russia invaded Ukraine and wants their land

I read no admittance of any supposed past invasions (nor any mention of past events) in my post. My previous post in this thread was about a potential future invasion that seems likely if Ukraine snuggles up to the US too closely.
Also, I do not see how this means that I would have come full circle, considering that if I did believe in this 'invasion' nonsense I would not be back at the point where I started. I never believed in it.

"supposed past invasions" you should say that to the families of the dead russian soldiers and the wounded ones, I am sure they would like you a lot. But hey you will get more chances to do it soon once the Ukranians get these weapons

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Look iron captain has come full circle, it only took a few years to admit that russia invaded Ukraine and wants their land

I read no admittance of any supposed past invasions (nor any mention of past events) in my post. My previous post in this thread was about a potential future invasion that seems likely if Ukraine snuggles up to the US too closely.
Also, I do not see how this means that I would have come full circle, considering that if I did believe in this 'invasion' nonsense I would not be back at the point where I started. I never believed in it.

"supposed past invasions" you should say that to the families of the dead russian soldiers and the wounded ones, I am sure they would like you a lot. But hey you will get more chances to do it soon once the Ukranians get these weapons

Weapons that are purely symbolic. Ukraine is the biggest stockpile of weapons in the world. It is not as if the Ukrainian army lacked anti-tank weapons, much less small arms. What the Ukrainian army lacks is well-trained people to wield those weapons. The Ukrainian army is nothing but an ill-disciplined rabble of conscripts. The only thing that is going to happen is more violence. I am sure families of all the people that are going to be killed due to the escalation are going to like you and your countrymen that are cheering on this a whole lot.

Either way, I guess that depending on how you do define 'invasion', you could say that Russia did invade Ukraine. But in my opinion, it was not a real invasion. In my opinion, an invasion is a major operation that involves significant forces. A few advisors and 'volunteer' units do not constitute a full-fledged invasion in my opinion. I mean, you could say it is an invasion, but it is a different kind of invasion. Saying that Russia invaded Ukraine makes it sound as if entire Russian tank divisions rolled across the border. And that simply never happened, and therefore I object to the use of the word invasion. The Russian army definitely has operated in Ukraine. But calling it an invasion blows it out of proportion. It would be like calling US activities in Nicaragua in the 1980s an invasion.

What I can't figure is why you feel the need to reflexively defend it. My understanding is the Russian troops who died in Ukraine had their families lied to about how and where they died, and none of the survivors benefits have been paid out which would normally be due for combat deaths. I certainly don't feel obligated to defend every gakky thing my country does. And yet, like clockwork, every time Russia gets mentioned in an unflattering light, here you are.

I mean, do you get paid for this? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm honestly trying to understand and at least that I could totally understand, you know?

 Ouze wrote:
What I can't figure is why you feel the need to reflexively defend it. My understanding is the Russian troops who died in Ukraine had their families lied to about how and where they died, and none of the survivors benefits have been paid out which would normally be due for combat deaths. I certainly don't feel obligated to defend every gakky thing my country does. And yet, like clockwork, every time Russia gets mentioned in an unflattering light, here you are.

I mean, do you get paid for this? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm honestly trying to understand and at least that I could totally understand, you know?

"Defend"? Is that how you see it? That is a very polarising view. I didn't think I was defending anything in this thread. I was only lamenting how more weapons will cause more deaths, how this conflict is likely to only get worse, and disagreeing on the use of the word "invasion".
If you would have remembered all of my posts better (Not that I blame you for not remembering, I barely remember all the stuff I write on here myself, let alone that of other dakkanauts.) you would have noticed that I am plenty critical of Russia as well. You might also notice that there is a Dutch, and not a Russian flag besides my username. That Dutch flag is still there for a reason. I could rattle off a whole list of things of why Russia sucks, but let's just say that the Netherlands is a better place to study and live.
However, this is also very important to know: Russians love their country very much. Russia is our mother. And just like you would defend your mother from being slandered and abused, so do we. Believe me when I say I am probably one of the least patriotic Russians in the world. I will defend my country when I think what they are doing is justifiable, but not when they do something I disagree with. Now if only I could get paid for that. Getting paid for wasting time on Dakka and "defending" whatever the Russian government does... That would really be a great way to make money, God knows I can use it. Maybe I should write to Putin about it, make him a proposal?

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
What I can't figure is why you feel the need to reflexively defend it. My understanding is the Russian troops who died in Ukraine had their families lied to about how and where they died, and none of the survivors benefits have been paid out which would normally be due for combat deaths. I certainly don't feel obligated to defend every gakky thing my country does. And yet, like clockwork, every time Russia gets mentioned in an unflattering light, here you are.

I mean, do you get paid for this? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm honestly trying to understand and at least that I could totally understand, you know?

"Defend"? Is that how you see it? That is a very polarising view. I didn't think I was defending anything in this thread. I was only lamenting how more weapons will cause more deaths, how this conflict is likely to only get worse, and disagreeing on the use of the word "invasion".
If you would have remembered all of my posts better (Not that I blame you for not remembering, I barely remember all the stuff I write on here myself, let alone that of other dakkanauts.) you would have noticed that I am plenty critical of Russia as well. You might also notice that there is a Dutch, and not a Russian flag besides my username. That Dutch flag is still there for a reason. I could rattle off a whole list of things of why Russia sucks, but let's just say that the Netherlands is a better place to study and live.
However, this is also very important to know: Russians love their country very much. Russia is our mother. And just like you would defend your mother from being slandered and abused, so do we. Believe me when I say I am probably one of the least patriotic Russians in the world. I will defend my country when I think what they are doing is justifiable, but not when they do something I disagree with. Now if only I could get paid for that. Getting paid for wasting time on Dakka and "defending" whatever the Russian government does... That would really be a great way to make money, God knows I can use it. Maybe I should write to Putin about it, make him a proposal?

It is a weird form of hybrid war for certain. I dont think anyone seriously thinks the Ukrainians could stop an actual Russian invasion, or even appreciably slow it. Giving a clearly overmatched force better weapons encourages it to continue fighting with false hope. They cant win and noone is going to come help them. As the weaker nation, the Ukraine should negotiate directly with Russia and the UN should encourage open talks without the euphemisms or denials.

Well, as long as Russia stays in the "we're going to pretend we aren't invading" and doesn't commit full forces, it is feasible for the Ukraine to come out well on this.

Blow up enough tanks, and they'll either commit to an invasion, evoking a full scale response, which they won't be able to handle, or they'll leave the separatists out to dry, and be satisfied with their Crimea gains.

That's pretty much been the current state of affairs. There's already been pressure at homes from the families of the dead soldiers who aren't receiving the proper benefits (and if they oppose this, and go public about the deaths, the government cuts all the money). Though obviously there's not enough to stop the current commitment, but the same could be said about the protests against the Kremlin's homophobia as well.

 thekingofkings wrote:
I dont think anyone seriously thinks the Ukrainians could stop an actual Russian invasion, or even appreciably slow it. Giving a clearly overmatched force better weapons encourages it to continue fighting with false hope. They cant win and noone is going to come help them. As the weaker nation, the Ukraine should negotiate directly with Russia and the UN should encourage open talks without the euphemisms or denials.

It depends on if they made good on their statements about restarting their nuclear weapon factories. Remember that the Ukraine made most of Russia's nukes during the cold war, and while they 'disarmed' the infrastructure to produce weapons is still there. Further, while we're quick to dismiss the Ukrainians, I point out that we were quick to dismiss the Vietnamese too. Never underestimate people fighting for their homes.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
I dont think anyone seriously thinks the Ukrainians could stop an actual Russian invasion, or even appreciably slow it. Giving a clearly overmatched force better weapons encourages it to continue fighting with false hope. They cant win and noone is going to come help them. As the weaker nation, the Ukraine should negotiate directly with Russia and the UN should encourage open talks without the euphemisms or denials.

It depends on if they made good on their statements about restarting their nuclear weapon factories. Remember that the Ukraine made most of Russia's nukes during the cold war, and while they 'disarmed' the infrastructure to produce weapons is still there. Further, while we're quick to dismiss the Ukrainians, I point out that we were quick to dismiss the Vietnamese too. Never underestimate people fighting for their homes.

North Vietnam knew it was not going to be invaded, which is what allowed them to continue to fight for so long, the Russians could feasibly overrun Ukraine in a week or two, there really is no geographical barrier to stop them save for the Dnieper which the Russians should be tactically proficient enough to not be halted by.

 thekingofkings wrote:
the Russians could feasibly overrun Ukraine in a week or two, there really is no geographical barrier to stop them save for the Dnieper which the Russians should be tactically proficient enough to not be halted by.

Forgetting the Exclusion Zone, are we? Or do you not consider areas of lethal radiation to be a geographic barrier? To bypass the Dnieper you run into the worst of the contaminated area.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
the Russians could feasibly overrun Ukraine in a week or two, there really is no geographical barrier to stop them save for the Dnieper which the Russians should be tactically proficient enough to not be halted by.

Forgetting the Exclusion Zone, are we? Or do you not consider areas of lethal radiation to be a geographic barrier? To bypass the Dnieper you run into the worst of the contaminated area.

vertical envelopement, seize the bridgeheads. The Russians are good at making river barrier not a problem. and no considering its location and that it wouldnt be defended anyhow, its not much of a deterrent at all. even for sake of argument that it were for some reason an issue, the Russian army is capable of fighting in a CBR environment, even trained in the cold war for just that eventuality.