I heard about this. Links?
Lol the Gauls had numerical superiority inside and outside the city (Alesia? from memory) at least according to Julius.
I suppose a more relevant and recent comparison would be the Germans in Barbarossa, who did encircle very large groups of Soviets.
Alesia really is a Slavic name, you know.
Of course not. Those are NATO countries! We are obligated to defend them, and every single person in a position of power in any NATO country keeps saying, explicitly, that we can’t risk nuclear war for a non-NATO country like Ukraine but that we absolutely will for any NATO member.
Lurb
5527
This is the first mention of Russian troops south of Makariv I’ve read.
While the reports Makariv was retaken were official (which is notedly different from trustworthy) they didn’t say anything about Russian troops south.
Sadly, Georgia (the US state) would not qualify for EU membership, based solely on its human rights record…
And that’s the only real position we can take, for sure. The danger is of course that someone like Putin won’t read the (not that subtle) difference between not defending Ukraine and defending, say, Poland. We find the NATO/not NATO binary really clear, but given how Putin and Co. seem to conflate all things western or opposing him, I sometimes wonder how clearly he differentiates things.
Aceris
5531
I quite agree. It’s worth reiterating that there are thousands of NATO troops in the baltics, right now, with standing orders to defend against any invasion. They’ve put German troops right in the path of any Russian attempt to create a Kaliningrad corridor.
The invasion of Ukraine was enough for the EU in general, and Germany in particular, to completely reorient their foreign policy. Imagine what would happen if Russia invaded an EU state, attacking EU soldiers in the process.
Sure. It’s just frustrating to e.g. hear Biden say we will absolutely defend every inch of NATO territory with the full strength of American and NATO might and then hear someone else say if we won’t defend Ukraine what happens when Putin invades Poland? The question has been answered! The distinction has been made, in the clearest possible language!
Yes, this. It’s quite hard to look at the current situation and conclude that NATO will abandon its obligations to NATO countries.
Quaro
5533
The Russia propoganda video in context is even creepier:
True that.
Although I do not think “crazy” is quite the accurate word.
The USSR was the rare case of those with enormous power ceding it without a bitter to-the-end fight. We experienced this as the triumph of capitalism over communism and/or as sheer relief. But ordinary Russians experienced it as a terrible national defeat, with a humiliating lack of effort to avert it. Or at least that is what I have heard in recent years from ordinary Russians.
Putin represents those Russians. So counting on his meekly accepting national humiliation, when he represents “no more accepting national humiliation without a bitter fight” is a shaky proposition.
Look in the comments of the video tweet for partial translations.
I think we may have to tentatively conclude that the Russian army is a mess. They’ll still most probably overwhelm Ukraine with sheer numbers of artillery shells and men, but this campaign looks like a debacle, one created by deep systemic failures in the service.
Lurb
5538
I’m almost starting to understand Putin’s fear of NATO
I would do a modern day Berlin Airlift in this case. Send in transport planes to airdrop supplies in. If Putin attacks these humanitarian planes (and let the UN inspect and improve the cargo, possibly an Indian or UAE delegation who can be seen as neutral), then you have the causus belli to do a no-fly zone.
At this point the best case scenario is Putin gets couped, and this time we make sure Russia doesn’t get shock therapy.
The whole point of the Berlin Airlift was that there was no shooting war taking place, and nobody wanted a shooting war, and both sides knew that, so neither side was going to do any shooting.
And are we actually looking for a casus belli? Really?
We should start a thread called Let’s Play Global Thermonuclear War for this stuff.
Like a lot of clever people in the thread have said, nukes aren’t really a military chess move, so much as a fit where you knock over the table and kill everyone in the room, including yourself and everyone you know.
So the question is whether someone is reckless or unhinged enough to do that. In most cases the answer will obviously be no, but humans can be incredibly weak, so it is still a possibility.
Thought experiment: What if Hitler had had nukes. You think he would’ve thought twice about using them?
