Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smjjames]

Ukraine has drawn up plans for a potential military contribution to the fight against Isis in Syria in a move that could also pit its troops against Russian forces in the Middle East.

An options paper drawn up by Ukraine’s defence ministry is to be discussed this week during a visit by US Defence Secretary Ash Carter, who has been touring the world gathering support for the war against the extremist jihadist group.

According to those who have read it, the paper – produced at the behest of President Petro Poroshenko – highlights the possibility of Ukrainian forces coming up against Russian forces in Syria, and details potential contributions.

A Ukrainian government source said: “We have prepared a range of options for our support against Isis including in Syria, which could include troops. It could result in potential clashes with Russians.”

source

Time to join the !fun!

Oh thanks Ukraine for making the whole mess even more complicated!..... Not that we don't welcome Ukraine joining into the fray against ISIS, just, you know, it's going to make the geopolitics more complicated now or something.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I would prefer to see Ukrainian troops fighting vs Russian ally Assad to joining the club of ISIS pounders

[Morrigi]

That would just make this clusterfuck even worse, and Russia could use it as an excuse to launch full-scale ground operations in both Syria and Ukraine. Without direct NATO involvement against them, they would win. With direct NATO involvement against them, you're looking at World War 3, in which nobody wins.

[Helgoland]

Russia could use it as an excuse to launch full-scale ground operations in both Syria and Ukraine. Without direct NATO involvement against them, they would win.

The second is not clear at all, and thus the first isn't either. Occupying a country the size of Ukraine is no piece of cake - especially when you're gonna have a very motivated nationalist resistance movement with plenty of support from the West -, and it hasn't been so long since a proper superpower had its back broken in the same area.

[Loud Whispers]

How can you even torpedo peace talks that don't include most sides of the civil war?

ISIS and Al Nusra were not even included and they are a major force in this civil war

What
Why would you do this?
The very act of negotiating grants legitimacy to them, negotiating with Muawiyah is what killed Caliph Ali, negotiating with Al-Bagdhadi would grant him legitimacy as Caliph because he'd be brushing shoulders with the leaders of the world, you can't make a greater mistake than negotiating with them.

Jaish Al Islam and Ahrar Al Sham were rejected by Assad and the Russians (Rightly so, as they are all jihadists/salafists not too different to ISIS), The Kurds got rejected by Turkey and Assad is seen as soon to be gone by pretty much anyone who isn't his cousins, wife, sons and Iran so anything he agrees upon, which obviously would not include kicking himself out, will not have any lasting effect.
These "peace talks" are some kind of a ruse for something. i am not sure what though. could be to try and ease the pressure on Europeans, could be to try to actually have peace talks between Turkey, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia and could be just so Obama and Kerry could act like they have any clue about foreign relations.

A ruse for unfucking the middle east?

It's now obvious most leaders underestimated this civil war and its implications. this is not some tribal war buried somewhere in an african jungle, this affects the entire world and if it doesn't end soon, it could even get worse and these peace talks are not a serious effort to end it so i am starting to think most leaders still either underestimate the gravity of the situation, are too scared to act seriously or just wish to pass the little time they have left in power by kicking the can further down the road.

No one underestimates the gravity of the situation, everyone accepts that one mistake can cause WWIII. Vilanat, why doesn't Israel roll the IDF through Syria and exterminate ISIS? They could pull it off, but the answer is simple - so much could go wrong, and it would have devastating blowback consequences.

Ukraine has drawn up plans for a potential military contribution to the fight against Isis in Syria in a move that could also pit its troops against Russian forces in the Middle East.
An options paper drawn up by Ukraine’s defence ministry is to be discussed this week during a visit by US Defence Secretary Ash Carter, who has been touring the world gathering support for the war against the extremist jihadist group.
According to those who have read it, the paper – produced at the behest of President Petro Poroshenko – highlights the possibility of Ukrainian forces coming up against Russian forces in Syria, and details potential contributions.
A Ukrainian government source said: “We have prepared a range of options for our support against Isis including in Syria, which could include troops. It could result in potential clashes with Russians.”

source
Time to join the !fun!

I wonder if Putin would be willing to fight a conflict against NATO? Surely not...

[Ukrainian Ranger]

That would just make this clusterfuck even worse, and Russia could use it as an excuse to launch full-scale ground operations in both Syria and Ukraine. Without direct NATO involvement against them, they would win. With direct NATO involvement against them, you're looking at World War 3, in which nobody wins.

Ukrainian units can be in Syria only as American\Turkish ally and engaging same enemies as American\Turkish army. Otherwise, Ukraine has no logistics and no reason to bring anything to Syria.
BTW I highly doubt that Russia can expand its presence in Syria with its logistics and no help from Turkey.

As for Russia winning the ground war in Ukraine... It is not February 2014 when Russia could take whole Ukraine within weeks. Now we have a real army and while one on one war will be lost (mostly because our air-defence and air force are noticeably inferior to Russian. ), Russia will need to ruin its own economy (even with no Western sanctions) to win and have a lot of fun with resistance afterwards.


PS. If Russia is mad enough to start a nuclear WW3  over Syria then humanity has a duty to destroy Russia it like it did with Third Reich and there are absolutely no way to avoid the war.

[Loud Whispers]

PS. If Russia is mad enough to start a nuclear WW3  over Syria then humanity has a duty to destroy Russia it like it did with Third Reich and there are absolutely no way to avoid the war.

On the other side the Russians see the exact same thing, that if we're mad enough to start a nuclear WWIII over Syria then humanity has a duty to destroy us like it did with the Third Reich and there are absolutely no ways to avoid the war.

THIS OUTCOME IS DEATH

So for all concerned, trying to get everyone on the same page even if we're not on the same lines is far more preferable compared to annihilation of everyone from Iceland to Japan

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Starting nuclear WW3 = launching your nukes first

West has no reason to do this because it will win a conventional war.

[Helgoland]

As for Russia winning the ground war in Ukraine... It is not February 2014 when Russia could take whole Ukraine within weeks. Now we have a real army and while one on one war will be lost (mostly because our air-defence and air force are noticeably inferior to Russian. ), Russia will need to ruin its own economy (even with no Western sanctions) to win and have a lot of fun with resistance afterwards.

So Poroshenko's government actually is noticeably less corrupt than all the Ukrainian governments before it? Neat!

By the way, how are the other internal reforms coming?

[Loud Whispers]

Starting nuclear WW3 = launching your nukes first
West has no reason to do this because it will win a conventional war.

Any war fought will not be conventional UR, it will be a gradual escalation until everyone wonders at what date the war started, because it's certainly a war then - such a war would be the definitive end of all European civilization from Tel Aviv to Moscow, from Stockholm to Reykjavik, from Lisbon to Warsaw e.t.c.
And the first nuclear-armed nation that gets desperate will increasingly run out of all but one option

[TheDarkStar]

So for all concerned, trying to get everyone on the same page even if we're not on the same lines is far more preferable compared to annihilation of everyone from Iceland to Japan

Iceland might survive if Russia decides that other targets are better. Same with a few other less-developed or less populated areas like Australia/South America/Africa that don't have major military forces. You'd still be looking at hundreds of millions to billions of deaths, though - most of North America, Europe, the Middle East, coastal China and eastern Russia.

Starting nuclear WW3 = launching your nukes first
West has no reason to do this because it will win a conventional war.

Any war fought will not be conventional UR, it will be a gradual escalation until everyone wonders at what date the war started, because it's certainly a war then - such a war would be the definitive end of all European civilization from Tel Aviv to Moscow, from Stockholm to Reykjavik, from Lisbon to Warsaw e.t.c.
And the first nuclear-armed nation that gets desperate will increasingly run out of all but one option

We might not know the exact date that the war starts, but it should be easy to see when it became nuclear. And when it ended, of course.

[Loud Whispers]

Blowout soon

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Helgoland]

Tel Aviv to Moscow, from Stockholm to Reykjavik, from Lisbon to Warsaw

This may be a quite ingenious new form of trolling, but: Those lines do not sketch out an area. In fact, they don't even cross each other,they just... sort of go all over Europe in no particular discernible pattern.

[Loud Whispers]

This may be a quite ingenious new form of trolling, but: Those lines do not sketch out an area. In fact, they don't even cross each other,they just... sort of go all over Europe in no particular discernible pattern.

Aye, one southeast to northeast, covering the eastern limits, one north to northwest to cover the northern limits, and then one from southwest to northeast to fuck everyone in between up
I don't believe in sketching areas for crises when it's rarely an area, it's a series of vectors reaming their way through everyone's faces in ugly precision just messing everything up, not even messing each other up because they're so messy

[Vilanat]

What
Why would you do this?
The very act of negotiating grants legitimacy to them, negotiating with Muawiyah is what killed Caliph Ali, negotiating with Al-Bagdhadi would grant him legitimacy as Caliph because he'd be brushing shoulders with the leaders of the world, you can't make a greater mistake than negotiating with them.

Yeah, that's why in the sentence after this i stated that i think the Russians are right to not want to negotiate with Ahrar al sham and Jaish Al Islam. it still doesn't mean peace talks without those parties would be effective. these are, after all, the majority of the local players involved in this civil war. so it's not that i think we should send them an invitation in the mail, it's that i think there is no point in wasting time pretending there are peace talks. there aren't.

i am not sure what though. could be to try and ease the pressure on Europeans, could be to try to actually have peace talks between Turkey, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia and could be just so Obama and Kerry could act like they have any clue about foreign relations.
A ruse for unfucking the middle east?

How on earth could such redundant peace talks help unfuck the middle east?

It's now obvious most leaders underestimated this civil war and its implications. this is not some tribal war buried somewhere in an african jungle, this affects the entire world and if it doesn't end soon, it could even get worse and these peace talks are not a serious effort to end it so i am starting to think most leaders still either underestimate the gravity of the situation, are too scared to act seriously or just wish to pass the little time they have left in power by kicking the can further down the road.

No one underestimates the gravity of the situation, everyone accepts that one mistake can cause WWIII. Vilanat, why doesn't Israel roll the IDF through Syria and exterminate ISIS? They could pull it off, but the answer is simple - so much could go wrong, and it would have devastating blowback consequences.

Because ISIS is a symptom and removing this symptom from Syria would not cure the disease even if it could temporarily ease the pain.