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

Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 287 posts

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#111

Post by imnotlost »

alephnan wrote: post #58
rlt wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it subtle? Wikipedia says Ukraine was in the “Intensified Dialog” phase which apparently means they are engaged in ‘discussion of a "full range of political, military, financial and security issues relating to possible NATO membership“‘ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_NATO#Intensif...

So is it bureaucracy holdup or a matter of negotiations?

I think economics is a major hurdle for Ukrainian EU membership. Their GDP/capita is less than $4,000. EU average is 8x that.

I'm sure there are many other issues as well.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#112

Post by hef19898 »

neuronic wrote: post #92
thaumasiotes wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Putin is clearly not objectively rational, at best subjectively rational within the realms of his ideology This is the only type of rationality. What are you imagining when you say "objectively rational"? > Most economic models need to stop assuming that the typical actor is rational. Being rational as defined by your personal ideology is what economic models postulate when they assume rationality.

> This is the only type of rationality. What are you imagining when you say "objectively rational"? I really disagree. For starters, I would put "not tank your economy into the stone age" firmly into the objectively rational category of thinking. How can this war ever be "worth it" for Putin? Ukrainians will never accept the occupation force and RUSSIA DOESNT EVEN HAVE ONE to begin with. They cannot at all maintain a…

Pretty good summary. Personally, I would have thought that Putin is smarter than this, I really did. Dangerous, deeply undemocratic for sure, but not stupid. He played the West, and NATO, for years as he pleased. He created opportunities for Russia and China that didn't even remotely exist before. And then he threw all that away for a pointless war, one he might very well be loosing, a war that will only drive even more of hos direct neighbors into the arms of NATO. A war that also creates the global climate that those countries can, without any big problems, actually join NATO. All that while isolating his country, destroying his legacy and utterly ruining Russia's economy, to a point where he might very well throw Russia back to the early 90s.

No idea why he thought any of that was worth the risk...

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#113

Post by neuronic »

vkou wrote: post #98
neuronic wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most economic models need to stop assuming that the typical actor is rational. Putin is clearly not objectively rational, at best subjectively rational within the realms of his ideology (unite the ethnically Russian people). Add to that miscommunication within all sectors of government just to please your superiors and that's how you arrive at the, sorry, shit tier decision making surrounding this entire war. Anyone…

I don't think his behaviour was particularly irrational, as much as he has been acting on a few pieces of intelligence that ultimately proved to have been incorrect. 1. He incorrectly assumed that he'd only be facing minor sanctions for starting a war of aggression. Given how many other countries have waged wars of aggression in the past few decades, this wasn't an insane assumption... given the information he had at…

You are probably very right, I agree with all of your points. However, this is what I meant by "rational within his ideology". He created this situation by surrounding himself with bootlickers and punishing any differing opinions. He effectively built an information bubble for himself and he may act rational within that bubble but totally irrational for anyone outside of it - even players like China who won't publicly state that. After all, their benefit is breathtaking.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#114

Post by misja111 »

vkou wrote: post #98
neuronic wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most economic models need to stop assuming that the typical actor is rational. Putin is clearly not objectively rational, at best subjectively rational within the realms of his ideology (unite the ethnically Russian people). Add to that miscommunication within all sectors of government just to please your superiors and that's how you arrive at the, sorry, shit tier decision making surrounding this entire war. Anyone…

I don't think his behaviour was particularly irrational, as much as he has been acting on a few pieces of intelligence that ultimately proved to have been incorrect. 1. He incorrectly assumed that he'd only be facing minor sanctions for starting a war of aggression. Given how many other countries have waged wars of aggression in the past few decades, this wasn't an insane assumption... given the information he had at…

> 1. He incorrectly assumed that he'd only be facing minor sanctions for starting a war of aggression

Russia's biggest source of income is their export of gas and oil. These are not sanctioned, the West is buying as much as ever and the profits are flowing straight into Putin's war chest.

> 2. He incorrectly assumed that Ukraine would fold in less than a week.

How do you know this? Russia has fought wars before, e.g. in Chechnya. They eventually won after bombing the whole country to ruins, but it took several years.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#115

Post by thow-58d4e8b »

misja111 wrote: post #86
deepsun wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did it previously, in Chechnya, in Debaltsevo. No one did anything, besides "seriously concerned of reports".

Exactly. In Chechnya the Russians continued to bomb Grozny until the whole city was a ruin and people surrendered. The UN called Grozny 'the most destroyed city on earth'. But there were almost no consequences for Russia, the world just stood by and did nothing.

That's how urban warfare goes. Either prolonged Sarajevo-style siege waiting for surrender, or brutal block by block demolition until there's no place where defenders can fire from. The logic of urban warfare hasn't really changed since Stalingrad or Berlin

It's also likely the reason the Russian advance stalled. Neither party really wants to go through that hell

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#116

Post by cf141q5325 »

Well yes. Artillery bombardment is THE Russian military doctrine. Any uncertainty on the headline would mean assuming Russia had developed some unusual qualms on the subject. And why would they?

It seems to me that among the moral outrage people kind of lost touch with reality. There is some basic facts, take it here from the German public broadcast

>According to its president, Russia is seeking the "denazification" and "demilitarization" of Ukraine. However the government in Kiev sharply rejects the demand for neutral status.

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/russland-ukraine-ge...

There is an actual war. Russia wants something that the Ukrainian government sharply rejects. They are in range of multiple cities and gave evacuation notices days ago. What do you think will happen next? Why wouldnt the next step be Grozny? Because the western public is outraged and appalled? Because those things dont happen in todays day and age? There can be no NATO intervention without triggering WW3. Any sanctions left would be oil which the economy of most western countries likely cant stomach.

If Ukraine continues to resist the very likely result is that it will burn. Feelings and stories dont change any of that. Russian artillery will likely turn house after house, street after street and city after city into rubble. Not some individual shelters, not some tv stations. Everything.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#117

Post by zpeti »

oblio wrote: post #105
zpeti wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is wanting to put your name in the history books not objectively rational?

Not if it kills you and not if it's infamy. Especially since he has kids, he'll be leaving them an extra bad legacy, even in his own country.

Oh come on, there are plenty of people in history who are willing to sacrifice their family for fame or fortune.

You might not think it’s rational but it’s fairly common. Saying it’s irrational is explaining away pretty common behaviour with “they aren’t like me so they’re idiots”.

Except it’s more your own empathy that’s lacking for understanding another perspective.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#119

Post by timeon »

alephnan wrote: post #85
lmm wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well not posting troops in Ukraine doesn't seem to have stopped Ukraine getting invaded does it? So it seems that was empty rhetoric.

The red line was the expansion of the West. Putting troops in Ukraine is one way of satisfying that. The encroachment of NATO was another. Whether that is true or not, it would have given more weight to Russia/Putin’s argument than stuff about Nazis.

> red line

Only relevant red line is border of sovereign nation. No NATO member was forced to join - they actually asked to join in order to prevent invasion like the one which is in Ukraine now.

> expansion of the West

Isn't is cynical to call it expansion of the West while no-one except Russia expanded beyond borders of Russia? It is just expansion of Russia.

Re: Putin may be planning to pummel Kyiv into submission

#120

Post by alephnan »

neuronic wrote: post #92
thaumasiotes wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Putin is clearly not objectively rational, at best subjectively rational within the realms of his ideology This is the only type of rationality. What are you imagining when you say "objectively rational"? > Most economic models need to stop assuming that the typical actor is rational. Being rational as defined by your personal ideology is what economic models postulate when they assume rationality.

> This is the only type of rationality. What are you imagining when you say "objectively rational"? I really disagree. For starters, I would put "not tank your economy into the stone age" firmly into the objectively rational category of thinking. How can this war ever be "worth it" for Putin? Ukrainians will never accept the occupation force and RUSSIA DOESNT EVEN HAVE ONE to begin with. They cannot at all maintain a…

> How can this war ever be "worth it" for Putin? Ukrainians will never accept the occupation force

You're assuming an occupation of all of Ukraine is the endgame.

Post reply on HN