Illuminati-R-Us

Anyone here going to try for the presidency or the prime ministership?

Be my guest

I'm holding out for Witchfinder General or maybe Interior MInister.

I'm wondering whether West Ukraine will need an ambassador to East Ukraine, and vice-versa.

I hope they put a wall up.

Мастер wrote:I'm wondering whether West Ukraine will need an ambassador to East Ukraine, and vice-versa.

Soviet Ukraine won't need an ambassador.

So is Влад trying to get the Crimea back, or keep a friendly government in all of Ukraine?

Also, will the US/UK go in by land (through Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, or Romania) or by sea (from Romania, Bulgaria, or Turkey)?

Traditionally it is by way of the Med with our Turkish and French allies.

Don't forget the ANZACs. We could always hold the fort in the Dardanelles for a while, thus freeing up our Turkish brothers (until we run out of supplies).

I guess international diplomacy is different from my existence. I just imagine President Obama warning those old Russian that they better not invade Ukraine, and the Russkies thinking, "Right. This from the country that invaded Iraq and Afghanistan."

Using terms like "regime change" does come back to haunt governments.

How much of the problem is Russian and how much is Putin?

I'm sure the Chechens are taking a keen interest in the Russian support for self-determination.

Hey, the Chechens are totally self-controlled: They can do whatever Ruslan Khadyrov wants, right?

Chechnya is part of Russia. But only part of the Ukraine is part of Russia (for the time being).

Arneb wrote:Hey, the Chechens are totally self-controlled: They can do whatever Ruslan Khadyrov wants, right?

Ramzan Kadyrov. Used to be a rebel fighter himself.

The pre-game line ups:

Ukraine has 31% of the population of Russia, and 7.9% of the nominal GDP (12.6% at PPP). Note that these are comparisons of statistics from different sources, and not necessarily over the exact time periods, so the comparisons are a bit rough, but by all measures, Ukraine is a lot smaller, and much poorer.

From http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26421703, it appears that Ukraine has 15.4% of the armed forces of Russia, 44.4% of the tanks, 15.9% of the combat aircraft, and 9.9% of the combat ships. I believe the Ukrainian nuclear arsenal is 0% of the size of Russia's. These comparisons are numeric only, and don't really reflect whether there is any substantial difference in the qualify of the personnel, tanks, aircraft, or ships. It's also not clear that Ukraine would have a home field advantage, as Russia has military bases within the territory of Ukraine, and a substantial part of the Ukrainian population may well feel more affinity with Russia than with Ukraine. On the other hand, Russia is big, and a substantial part of its military resources are going to be spread around all over the place, whereas the Ukrainian forces are going to be more concentrated.

Still, I feel like Russian troops occupying Kiev is a more likely near-term outcome than Ukrainian troops occupying Moscow.

Also don't forget that the Ukraine has Chernobyl.

tubeswell wrote:Also don't forget that the Ukraine has Chernobyl.

Yes, but they already attacked Russia with that. Or maybe it was the Russians attacking the Ukrainians by putting it there in the first place. Hard to say.

Maybe they could use it again to mount a counter-offensive.

The navies are largely irrelevant as the entire Ukranian Navy (formerly the Soviet Black Sea Fleet) is in the Black Sea while the Russian Navy is in the Baltic and Pacific (formerly the Baltic, Pacific and Red Banner Fleets). Other than that the smart money is on a Russian victory as you say.

I'm no weapons expert but it seems to me that most of the "armed standoffs" in the Crimea involve troops with unloaded weapons, or at least no magazines in them.

I now have the old Soviet National Anthem playing in my head.

This whole thing could have been avoided if they had thought ahead in 1991.

Heid the Ba' wrote:I now have the old Soviet National Anthem playing in my head.

Which, with new lyrics we don't understand anyway, IS the national anthem of Russia. (Since 2000)

Halcyon Dayz, FCD wrote:This whole thing could have been avoided if they had thought ahead in 1991.

Or before that, whenever it was that the Soviets made Crimea part of the Ukraine. I suppose back then, though, they pretty much considered one part of the Union the same as any other.

You know how you'll sometimes see a lion relaxing in the sun and it will bat an ear in response to a fly being too close to it's head? That's probably very like Putin's reaction to William Hague's attempted intervention. Poor chap still seems to think Britannia rules the waves and is a force to be reckoned with, what, what.