Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#791

Post by shswkna »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #668

What is the endgame here? Russia is outclassed by NATO both economically and militarily. If NATO intervenes economically, Russia will lose much. If NATO intervenes militarily, Russia will lose much (but at great cost to NATO). The risk of NATO intervention is high, right? Russia understood this before invading, right? So it seems Russia is accepting a high risk of loss. But it doesn't make sense that a nation as soph…

I think you underestimate how weak the west really is. We need to wake up to the reality behind all the consumable media.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#792

Post by cobby »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #721
smoe wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different A…

>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low I agree the military intervention risk seems low, but what about economic intervention? Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?

> Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?

Russian economy is in decline since 2014. COVID-19 pandemic has increased its decline even further.

So it seems that the upcoming EU + US economic sanctions will be used by propaganda as the ultimate explanation of the decline. I mean Kremlin actually looks forward to more sanctions in order to have plausible explanation ("we are at war and our enemies made your life worse; we need to stay strong around our leader mr. Putin" shit).

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#793

Post by mlindner »

mleg wrote: post #729

Another Russian here. I don't agree and don't support this action. We anticipate long years if not decades of isolation, even more stagnating economy, even more authoritarian government. By all means it's a terrible thing. For both Russians and Ucrainians alike. But... The drama around it as portrayed in Western media is ridiculous. There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense. It would be no…

That's a bit naive. There are already hundreds of civilian casualties. The Russian shelling is not precise. They don't have the technology for that. They were using MLRS rockets which kill indiscriminately. There's a video circulating online of a little girl who got hit by a shell and killed. This is not like Crimea.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#794

Post by throwaway894345 »

smoe wrote: post #691
VoodooJuJu wrote: post #668

What is the endgame here? Russia is outclassed by NATO both economically and militarily. If NATO intervenes economically, Russia will lose much. If NATO intervenes militarily, Russia will lose much (but at great cost to NATO). The risk of NATO intervention is high, right? Russia understood this before invading, right? So it seems Russia is accepting a high risk of loss. But it doesn't make sense that a nation as soph…

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different A…

Not only is Ukraine not a member state, but Russia is a military power and NATO countries have a very low appetite for war (which is good so long as there are other options for resolving conflict).

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#795

Post by jacquesm »

zthrowaway wrote: post #785
jacquesm wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There won't be major loss of life nor any "war" in conventional sense. That's a bit premature. As for the rest: Russians could rise en-masse to put a stop to this. Call a general strike all over Russia tomorrow and you might be able to avoid those decades of isolation and stagnating economy.

> That's a bit premature. I don't think so when looking at what has happened historically. Also, until Putin attacks NATO territory (which he most likely won't) there's not going to be an all out war. We in the West are being a bit hyperbolic. This is a serious issue, but not a "omg nukes are going to be flying next week" level of seriousness. I'd instead watch what China will do with Taiwan while we are distracted..…

> I don't think so when looking at what has happened historically.

Interesting, I think that taking history into account that's actually far more likely than the opposite.

> Also, until Putin attacks NATO territory (which he most likely won't) there's not going to be an all out war.

That's two assumptions, both of which may be wrong, independently.

> We in the West are being a bit hyperbolic.

Hm. I don't think our current reaction to 'war at 30 km away from our Eastern border' is something that should be labelled hyperbolic. If anything it is rather tame.

> This is a serious issue, but not a "omg nukes are going to be flying next week" level of seriousness.

I'm not so much concerned with the next week bit as I am with the fact that you are worried about the timetable, but not about whether or not they will be flying at all.

> I'd instead watch what China will do with Taiwan while we are distracted...

Well, China now already knows something that they didn't know last week: that the Western world will stand by while they do what they want to do, as long as they don't attack a NATO member.

> Russia isn't some democracy that is cool with protesting.

Neither was Poland in the 80's. That didn't stop the protests.

> There are plenty of Russian's living there that are still USSR brainwashed and support this.

Yes, but that doesn't help the people in Ukraine.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#796

Post by helsinkiandrew »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #668

What is the endgame here? Russia is outclassed by NATO both economically and militarily. If NATO intervenes economically, Russia will lose much. If NATO intervenes militarily, Russia will lose much (but at great cost to NATO). The risk of NATO intervention is high, right? Russia understood this before invading, right? So it seems Russia is accepting a high risk of loss. But it doesn't make sense that a nation as soph…

Sanctions (by US, Europe, Japan etc rather than NATO) are going to mean Putin supporters can't spend their money in Paris, London, or New York, their companies (and Russia) can't sell bonds on the international money markets, and (possibly in the future) sell oil and gas to the west. If things got nastier then Russia could be possibly be cut off from SWIFT and the rest of the global financial system too.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#797

Post by rurp »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #694
BurningFrog wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has thousands of nuclear missiles. This makes them immune to NATO invasion.

I had this mind as I wrote up my post but didn't mention it because I didn't consider the nuclear option as a serious option. Or maybe I'm just optimistic/delusional. But how would the nuclear option play out? Here I am, a Russian oligarch. I ordered the Ukrainian invasion because I bet that NATO wouldn't intervene because of my nukes. But it turns out I was wrong and NATO is pushing back my invasion. So I fire some…

War is complicated, confusing, and messy. An all out conflict greatly increases the odds of a situation where Putin thinks a nuclear attack is imminent and decides to strike first.

Or the war could turn into a route against Russia and defeat would mean the end of Putin's life. Why would he not draw a red line of threatening nukes, and mean it, in that situation?

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#798

Post by throwaway894345 »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #721
smoe wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different A…

>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low I agree the military intervention risk seems low, but what about economic intervention? Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?

As an aside, I wonder why more people (especially on this forum) aren't discussing the likelihood of increased cyber attacks, not just on government and military institutions but on private businesses. If we sanction Russia, they might hit our hospitals, banks, etc. Seems like we should start ratcheting up our security.

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#799

Post by Intermernet »

ironcurtain wrote: post #737
phlipski wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only thing that makes sense is Putin's unchecked power (inside Russia) has essentially made him not give a damn anymore. He's rich and powerful and reaching end of his life. He might be physically ill - we don't know. And this is his chance to try to rebuild the USSR consequences be damned.

Quoted post unavailable.

What historical period does he want to rebuild Russia to?

Re: Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack

#800

Post by shagmin »

VoodooJuJu wrote: post #721
smoe wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different A…

>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low I agree the military intervention risk seems low, but what about economic intervention? Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?

Russia has grown its gold reserves drastically over the last decade, has relatively little debt and is increasingly trading with China without using US dollars at all.

I'd say they've anticipated those serious economic repercussions to some extent. But I also suspect Russians may be more willing to tolerate things such as a weak economy if it helps achieve other goals. I kind of see it like a parallel with Russia shooting a bullet at its own economy, while the Soviet Union in the 20th century shot plenty of bullets at its own people...for various reasons.

Post reply on HN