Russia's Military Expansion

[Waylander]

I am very disappointed with the way things have gone in the Middle East and the spillover into Europe. And my country specifically. I blame US policies for that. And their alliance with the saudis/qatar, their relationship with Israel, too.

May I ask which country this is into which the ME conflicts specifically spilled over into?

 

[gazzzwp]

May I ask which country this is into which the ME conflicts specifically spilled over into?

Presumably Germany who under Merkel's insistence took in some million Syrians.

 

[Feanor]

What territorial disputes would these be? The ones that they have caused themselves? Like the Nazis in the 1930's did with the German minorities in the Sudetenland etc., they are using the Russian minorities to create crises in order to advance their aims and goals at the expense of their neighbours freedom and independence. Your blatant anti-Americanism shows through and whilst I do not agree with everything that the US does, I do know who I prefer to work and deal with because they generally have the same values as I do and we have a common history.

Unfortunately the groundwork was laid down in the fall of the Russian Empire, and Soviet map-drawing. For example current-day Ukraine was essentially created by Lenin (even though they'd like to pretend otherwise). Eastern Belarus for example was administratively reassigned to the BSSR from the RSFSR in the 1920s because the BSSR was just too small. And western Belarus was just taken from Poland (like western Ukraine from Poland and Romania).

It's not dissimilar to the Azeri-Armenian conflict.

Russia has no such scruples. Kill lots of people - civilians or rebels, doesn't matter - demolish whole towns with indiscriminate bombing, reinstall and prop up a murderous dictator. Declare victory and reap the geo-political rewards.

This is only half-true. Russia is definitely more discriminate in their use of violence then either the regime or the US-backed rebels. And they've made a significant effort to improve their ability to strike targets accurately. Granted, this is done for military reasons far more so then because they care about collateral damage, but nonetheless when you're backing groups that use hell-cannons in dense urban areas, it's hard to criticize anyone else.

Russia is conducting a bombing campaign just like other major powers. Their RoEs are looser, partly because they care less, and partly because they have less experience, and they have fewer PGMs because they're still behind the curve on cheap mass-produced PGMs. But they're a major improvement over the types of weapons the groups on the ground use or the consideration for civilians. And given that Russia does deliver considerable quantities of humanitarian aid (mostly to IDPs inside regime controlled areas, but then most of the population is in regime controlled areas) it's hard to simply paint them as the bad guys.

They have a plan, and they're following through on it. The US needs to get their head out of their ass, and figure out how they intend to proceed. Because so far it hasn't been working out too well.

 

[Boatteacher]

Unfortunately the groundwork was laid down in the fall of the Russian Empire, and Soviet map-drawing. For example current-day Ukraine was essentially created by Lenin (even though they'd like to pretend otherwise). Eastern Belarus for example was administratively reassigned to the BSSR from the RSFSR in the 1920s because the BSSR was just too small. And western Belarus was just taken from Poland (like western Ukraine from Poland and Romania).

It's not dissimilar to the Azeri-Armenian conflict.



This is only half-true. Russia is definitely more discriminate in their use of violence then either the regime or the US-backed rebels. And they've made a significant effort to improve their ability to strike targets accurately. Granted, this is done for military reasons far more so then because they care about collateral damage, but nonetheless when you're backing groups that use hell-cannons in dense urban areas, it's hard to criticize anyone else.



They have a plan, and they're following through on it. The US needs to get their head out of their ass, and figure out how they intend to proceed. Because so far it hasn't been working out too well.

I had to Google Hell Cannons. I hadn't heard of them. Not very nice.

As the despair evident in my previous posts would show, I agree the present US approach isn't working. I will go further and say some aspects have done more harm than good; I only hope they are learning from their mistakes. But nor do I see a path to an acceptable one that would.

And to compound problems it is hard to see the relationship with Turkey not being strained further.

Still, from what is reported here, it does occasionally look as though Russia or the regime back by them is deliberately targeting hospitals and relief facilities.

 

[Boatteacher]

Unfortunately the groundwork was laid down in the fall of the Russian Empire, and Soviet map-drawing. For example current-day Ukraine was essentially created by Lenin (even though they'd like to pretend otherwise). Eastern Belarus for example was administratively reassigned to the BSSR from the RSFSR in the 1920s because the BSSR was just too small. And western Belarus was just taken from Poland (like western Ukraine from Poland and Romania).

And as I understand the position, the Crimea is a similar (maybe even more extreme version of the) story.

But some of these lands have suffered near genocidal population purges under Stalin (and then Hitler and to an extent, then Stalin again) and policies of deliberate cultural dilutions.

The political and cultural maps of central Europe have been drawn and redrawn over two world wars and whole population expulsions in between and afterwards.

The lessons of WW2 were meant to be that it all has to stop because if it doesn't then there will be a WW3. Borders are borders. Settle down and get on with each other (mind you, if you detect in my posts an aversion to that form of multicultural immigration policy that facilitates or even permits the formation of cultural silos, the lessons of these countries and their history is foremost in my mind).

I understand that Russia might regret some of it's past actions and that it didn't better negotiate its own break up. But it would do much better if, instead of playing the Imperial bully and reverting to its old Soviet mentality it offered those countries it was trying to seduce a more attractive and benign model.

China is of course making the same mistake.

Not everyone is enamored of the US; many far from it. But even former enemies are being driven into its arms by the arrogant bullying posturing of the countries that aspire to break its dominance.

 

[Feanor]

I had to Google Hell Cannons. I hadn't heard of them. Not very nice.

As the despair evident in my previous posts would show, I agree the present US approach isn't working. I will go further and say some aspects have done more harm than good; I only hope they are learning from their mistakes. But nor do I see a path to an acceptable one that would.

And to compound problems it is hard to see the relationship with Turkey not being strained further.

Still, from what is reported here, it does occasionally look as though Russia or the regime back by them is deliberately targeting hospitals and relief facilities.

It gets messy. For example, Kindi hospital in Aleppo was a rebel strong point not a functioning medical facility. But some media sources reported strikes against it as if it was a normal civilian hospital. And even then the facility was destroyed in a 2013 terrorist attack, after which it was never really rebuilt. The recent aid convoy bombing looks nasty but the key word here is looks. Unfortunately details are often lacking, and traditional sources have been reporting heavily on the side of the rebels. SAA barrel bombs in Aleppo? Tons of media coverage. US and Turkey backed jihadis use improv arty to bombard western Aleppo? Not even mentioned.

Look, none of this excuses the regime, but it would be a serious mistake to think that the regime is the only one or even the main one responsible for the deaths of civilians right now. Hell the two-faced a**holes in power right now (Merkel for example) are trying to blast Putin for the destruction of Aleppo and civilian deaths, while the SAA and Russia had corridors set up to let civilians out, and the rebels in the city prevented them from leaving, going so far as to kill some to prevent the rest from trying. Sad thing is that a murderous dictator is more attractive then the people trying to oust him. And this was the case by the time Russia put troops in Syria.

 

[Toblerone]

Best possible scenario now is for Aleppo neighborhoods to start surrendering their weapons for free passage to other rebel-held territories. This will isolate the radical islamists and defuse the situation. Maybe turn the rebel groups against each other or cause a cascade of surrenders and mass pardons.

May I ask which country this is into which the ME conflicts specifically spilled over into?

Many countries carry a heavy burden with regards to the refugee crisis. For example, France, Germany, Sweden, Italy. I am greek.

 

[Waylander]

It gets messy. For example, Kindi hospital in Aleppo was a rebel strong point not a functioning medical facility. But some media sources reported strikes against it as if it was a normal civilian hospital. And even then the facility was destroyed in a 2013 terrorist attack, after which it was never really rebuilt. The recent aid convoy bombing looks nasty but the key word here is looks. Unfortunately details are often lacking, and traditional sources have been reporting heavily on the side of the rebels. SAA barrel bombs in Aleppo? Tons of media coverage. US and Turkey backed jihadis use improv arty to bombard western Aleppo? Not even mentioned.

Look, none of this excuses the regime, but it would be a serious mistake to think that the regime is the only one or even the main one responsible for the deaths of civilians right now. Hell the two-faced a**holes in power right now (Merkel for example) are trying to blast Putin for the destruction of Aleppo and civilian deaths, while the SAA and Russia had corridors set up to let civilians out, and the rebels in the city prevented them from leaving, going so far as to kill some to prevent the rest from trying. Sad thing is that a murderous dictator is more attractive then the people trying to oust him. And this was the case by the time Russia put troops in Syria.

Calling Merkel a two faced asshole is stretching it when the adressed side is the notorious lyer Putin...

 

[Feanor]

Calling Merkel a two faced asshole is stretching it when the adressed side is the notorious lyer Putin...

But the fact that Putin is a liar doesn't make Merkel any less two-faced. It simply means that they're both of a kind. I don't think most people in this thread have illusions about Putin. But about Merkel?

 

[Feanor]

Gazzwp just a hint, if you want to look at things that are truly alarming, consider Russia's recent moves to set up a clear chain of command in the provinces, in the event of a major war. Exercises held to unify command and control over multiple ministries in the hands of the military are a good indicator that Russia genuinely believes this to be necessary within the forseeable future.

Ðрмии в оÑобый период будут подчинены вÑе органы влаÑти - Добро пожаловать в журнал РоÑтовÑкого Орла

This is far more alarming then Russia's occasional remarks about returning to Vietnam, or Cuba, or potentially renting an airstrip in Egypt.

 

[gazzzwp]

Gazzwp just a hint, if you want to look at things that are truly alarming, consider Russia's recent moves to set up a clear chain of command in the provinces, in the event of a major war. Exercises held to unify command and control over multiple ministries in the hands of the military are a good indicator that Russia genuinely believes this to be necessary within the forseeable future.

Ðрмии в оÑобый период будут подчинены вÑе органы влаÑти - Добро пожаловать в журнал Ð*оÑтовÑкого Орла

This is far more alarming then Russia's occasional remarks about returning to Vietnam, or Cuba, or potentially renting an airstrip in Egypt.

I did read this yesterday and I totally agree. It begs the question is Russia expecting war or does it actually want war?

Here some of my views:

1) Russia may want a conflict sooner rather than later to destroy as much of the Anti-Missile Shield infrastructure as possible before it gets too late.

2) The F-35's may be an alarming technological leap for Russia. Again do it sooner rather than later to take advantage of the USAF now aging fleet and the delays to the F-35 program. The same may be said of the laser technology now emerging in the US military.

3) The leadership desperately wants to regain it's imperial status that existed during the cold war. Taking back the border nations under it's influence will add to it's security in the long term.

4) If the gulf nations can be drawn into the conflict with Iran as an ally then Russia stands to gain as the biggest oil producer if other oil supply systems are destroyed.

5) Russia now believes it has military parity with NATO.

I cannot think of any more at the moment.

 

[Feanor]

I did read this yesterday and I totally agree. It begs the question is Russia expecting war or does it actually want war?

Here some of my views:

1) Russia may want a conflict sooner rather than later to destroy as much of the Anti-Missile Shield infrastructure as possible before it gets too late.

What exactly do you mean by "too late"? The current missile shield doesn't credibly invalidate MAD even in the worst case interpretation.

2) The F-35's may be an alarming technological leap for Russia. Again do it sooner rather than later to take advantage of the USAF now aging fleet and the delays to the F-35 program. The same may be said of the laser technology now emerging in the US military.

The F-35 has reached IOC, and will reach FOC relatively soon. This is not tomorrow's tech, this is today. It's too late to prevent that from emerging. And it's not as alarming of a leap as is presented.

3) The leadership desperately wants to regain it's imperial status that existed during the cold war. Taking back the border nations under it's influence will add to it's security in the long term.

Will it? Has that been the case with Russian involvement in Ukraine?

4) If the gulf nations can be drawn into the conflict with Iran as an ally then Russia stands to gain as the biggest oil producer if other oil supply systems are destroyed.

Assuming that the infrastructure is actually destroyed. Not to mention that this would require an actual war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Also, what does that have to do with tensions between Russia and the US or NATO?

5) Russia now believes it has military parity with NATO.

I cannot think of any more at the moment.

What makes you think this is the case? Russian emphasis on the political significance of nukes is clear evidence to the contrary. Recent demonstration of LACM capabilities also seem to point to the opposite of that. Where do you see evidence of Russia believing something as absurd as them having parity with NATO?

 

[gazzzwp]

What exactly do you mean by "too late"? The current missile shield doesn't credibly invalidate MAD even in the worst case interpretation.



The F-35 has reached IOC, and will reach FOC relatively soon. This is not tomorrow's tech, this is today. It's too late to prevent that from emerging. And it's not as alarming of a leap as is presented.



Will it? Has that been the case with Russian involvement in Ukraine?



Assuming that the infrastructure is actually destroyed. Not to mention that this would require an actual war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Also, what does that have to do with tensions between Russia and the US or NATO?



What makes you think this is the case? Russian emphasis on the political significance of nukes is clear evidence to the contrary. Recent demonstration of LACM capabilities also seem to point to the opposite of that. Where do you see evidence of Russia believing something as absurd as them having parity with NATO?

So where is Russia getting this 'excitement towards war idea from'? Who or what is making them actually think that they are in mortal danger to justify opening up old Soviet bases, announce nuclear capable batteries in Kaliningrad, carry out mass domestic drills, and empower their military to operate within the state? Because quite frankly I don't see that currently the US actions or NATO's is telling them this.

As I see things there is a Russian agenda; the west is not shouting that there is a war coming.

 

[lowgo]

NYT article on Russian inflatable decoys (sorry for broken URL but cant post these yet):
nytimes.com/2016/10/13/world/europe/russia-decoy-weapon.html?_r=0

I would like to ask if anyone has more info on whether or not these products have been officially implemented in the military. Its not a new thing but I was wondering if with all new toys Russia has been playing lately and stretching its reach beyond its borders usage of these props has any significance in the current strategy.

 

[Waylander]

But the fact that Putin is a liar doesn't make Merkel any less two-faced. It simply means that they're both of a kind. I don't think most people in this thread have illusions about Putin. But about Merkel?

If you really think Merkel and Putin are two of the same kind when one compares their actions and believes then you are way too far down the apologetic path IMHO.

And I am sorry to see that.

 

[STURM]

As I see things there is a Russian agenda; the west is not shouting that there is a war coming.

Who doesn't have an agenda? The West might not be warning of imminent war but it's doing things that might be perceived as the Russians to be provocative. It's a 2 way street, not monopolised by either side.

 

[gazzzwp]

Who doesn't have an agenda? The West might not be warning of imminent war but it's doing things that might be perceived as the Russians to be provocative. It's a 2 way street, not monopolised by either side.

That's what I can't see. The last thing Europe wants is a war. It is too busy putting it's economies in a better shape to even think about it.

Let's look at some basic facts. The US has been complaining that most of the NATO countries are not meeting their minimum 2% of GDP obligation. That alone does not support claims of a war like posture toward Russia and neither does situating a 40000 strong force on what is a massive long indefensible border.

I'm sorry but the evidence does not stack up. Yes the US has been sailing close to the wind so as to speak in the Black Sea, and the Baltic but a few solo vessels and spy planes is hardly an existential threat.

Regarding the anti-missile shield. On the one hand Russia is adamant that it's missiles can easily defeat it, while on the other it is complaining that it poses a grave threat to peace and stability and so it produces yet more aggressive counter measures. Which is it? The contradictions are bizarre.

 

[Ranger25]

Who doesn't have an agenda? The West might not be warning of imminent war but it's doing things that might be perceived as the Russians to be provocative. It's a 2 way street, not monopolised by either side.

I agree with Feanor et al.

I do not believe the Russians see themselves on Par with NATO militarily, but are spending the treasury to catch up and modernize as rapidly as possible.

Putin continues to Saber Rattle and extend his military in close proximity to the Motherland for several reasons: enlarge his ring of security vis a vie NATO, keep his supporters happy, keep the Nationalism going despite a horrible economy, and a percieved weakness (or lack of attention due to a decade of war) from the US.

All present a synergy of opportunities for an opportunist Putin.

Old school brinkmanship, Putin will push until someone else blinks, recently it's been the West.

 

[gazzzwp]

I agree with Feanor et al.

I do not believe the Russians see themselves on Par with NATO militarily, but are spending the treasury to catch up and modernize as rapidly as possible.

Putin continues to Saber Rattle and extend his military in close proximity to the Motherland for several reasons: enlarge his ring of security vis a vie NATO, keep his supporters happy, keep the Nationalism going despite a horrible economy, and a percieved weakness (or lack of attention due to a decade of war) from the US.

All present a synergy of opportunities for an opportunist Putin.

Old school brinkmanship, Putin will push until someone else blinks, recently it's been the West.

So it speaks of nothing more than ambition (ego) and anything to galvanise the public of Russia in his favour and win support?

No wonder some nations in the west are edging towards pariah status for Russia.

 

[Boatteacher]

So it speaks of nothing more than ambition (ego) and anything to galvanise the public of Russia in his favour and win support?

No wonder some nations in the west are edging towards pariah status for Russia.

I tend to distinguish between posturing and action before getting too alarmed. I also tend to take what I read in the press with a grain of salt.

But this report (sourced to the Daily Star), if true, crosses the action line.

"VLADIMIR Putin has reportedly told officials to fly relatives living abroad back to Russia, leaving many worried about the reason for the “urgent” call.

The call extended to elderly relatives overseas and children, even if they are in the middle of the school year.

The newspaper says the edict applies to “administration staff, regional administrators, politicians of all levels and employees of public corporations” and that “anyone who fails to act will put their chances of promotion at risk.”

That is a really unusual action to take. I can't really think of a historic precedent.