Russia Ukraine, the war has begun

NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/19/world/ukraine-russia…

Snippet

Our reporters are on both sides of the Russia-Ukraine border as shelling intensifies in eastern Ukraine and thousands of civilians board buses to evacuate. Follow live.
Saturday, February 19, 2022 2:57 PM EST

Several thousand people have crossed into Russia after Kremlin-backed leaders of the two separatist republics in Ukraine declared an evacuation of women and children, claiming that the Ukrainian government is about to launch an attack.

Kyiv has denounced the separatist claims as baseless provocation, and many of their moves are seen as a deliberate effort to create panic.

1 Like

You can convince me it’s already started. I think it will be official and obvious on Monday, and have thought that for a few days now. Olympics over, holiday in US with markets closed, and I believe Zelensky will be out of the country as well. But yeah, it’s kinda already started.

1 Like

bjurasz

You can convince me it’s already started.

Wouldn’t it be something if Ukrainians just stood and watched as Vlad’s mighty armor rolled into the country, no fighting?

Maybe serve them tea and cookies?

What would the Ruskies do, just start plinking a ‘targets’?

They would look like fools. Maybe depart with their bear tails tucked between their legs?

But war, being what it is, anything is possible. (Maybe likely?)

The reports of civilians in the rebel held areas being evacuated to Russia, if true, is not encouraging.

Topped up the car gas tank a week ago. Stopped at the ATM for some cash today. Just in case the cyber war extends to the US…the ATM at the bank, usually dead reliable, was very wonky today, touch screen did not want to respond. Could just have been the walk up one that I tried. Did not try the drive up ones…because the walk up one had my card.

Steve…of course, I have been wrong before.

1 Like

I still doubt actual invasion to take over Ukraine, or just Kyiv, or similar occurs.

Why?

Because I doubt Putin sees high enough liklihood of good enough end games emerging from this middle position if he now wholesale moves into Ukraine. And neither the Ukrainian government nor EU no NATO nor Biden has signalled the possibility of a negotiated peace that cedes the Donbas nor Odessa nor nada to Russia, either by treaty or by nudge nudge separatist rule.

Putin seems to be moving significant numbers of Russian speaking and descendant people out of Donbas into Russia. Makes sense as they

– had been largely supportive of Russia up until recently, but polls were showing a shift in sentiment towards wanting to be part of an independent Ukraine instead of Russia, and
– they make up a large portion of the skilled and knowledgable (although inreasingly hopelessly obsolete) steelmaking population of ex-USSR now Russia, and Russia needs people.

But heck, what do I know? Both Russia and USA/NATO/EU are now in full propaganda blather mode and only reality on the ground really matters. WE Shall See.

david fb

2 Likes

Stopped at the ATM for some cash today.

Shopping for toilet paper once the shelves are empty is a day too late.

The Captain

1 Like

I still doubt actual invasion to take over Ukraine, or just Kyiv, or similar occurs.

Why?

Because I doubt Putin sees high enough liklihood of good enough end games emerging from this middle position if he now wholesale moves into Ukraine. And neither the Ukrainian government nor EU no NATO nor Biden has signalled the possibility of a negotiated peace that cedes the Donbas nor Odessa nor nada to Russia, either by treaty or by nudge nudge separatist rule.

===============================================================================

I agree with your thinking. Russia/Putin always does a detailed cost/benefit analysis of their actions without lots of rosy assumptions. I do not see much positives in their cost/benefit of taking on Ukraine with NATO support. Ukraine is a large country with lots of tanks, weapons and soldiers.

Ukraine has about 250,000 active military forces and another 250,000 reserves.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine 2014 and occupied 5 percent of its territory in Luhansk and Donetsk, Ukraine has benefited from billions of dollars in US defense aid and is much better prepared for a Russian offensive than it was in 2014. The Russians are sophisticated opponents, but the Ukrainians are competent and they do not have any other security concerns that will divide their attention and their forces from resisting a Russian invasion. The Russians will distracted by all NATO forces on their borders.

Russia always tries to use the element of surprise to their advantage. But here with NATO blaring out to the world everything Russia is doing and might do has left Russia without the element of surprise.

Jaak

2 Likes

Zelensky will be out of the country as well.

He is already back from Munich.

2 Likes

Because I doubt Putin sees high enough liklihood of good enough end games emerging from this middle position if he now wholesale moves into Ukraine.

david fb,

Dictators get on a treadmill where power must be maintained at all costs. The logic in Putin’s actions are out the window a long time ago. Proving you can have $200 billion or whatever and be a completely crazy idiot out to kill people. A criminal.

Putin in Russia cast the dye a long time ago about a greater Russia. No going back now for Putin.

He can not ever retire…without worrying about his possibly being put on trial by his successors. Or a much quicker fate.

2 Likes

Russia/Putin always does a detailed cost/benefit analysis of their actions without lots of rosy assumptions.


Really? Did he graduate Harvard?

On Putin's treadmill the mile marker for a cost/beneft analysis was passed years ago.

The bottom line Putin wants to keep his job without being executed.

Putin made a promise of greater Russian glory. He means it. He is an idiot. I get there are more idiots behind him chanting him on.

We just do not read their press.

Really if Putin ever applied a cost/benefit analysis of anything ever in his entire life, he would not be a multi billionaire and the Russia economy would be a lot larger than Italy's, France's and the UK's, maybe competing with Germany's.

What cost/benefit analysis has Putin ever done? Nada.
1 Like

I agree with your thinking. Russia/Putin always does a detailed cost/benefit analysis

Putin has been working the shirtless he-man image for quite a while. Backing down would stain that strong-man image. He probably figured the rope sellers in the west could be intimidated: mass some troops and get concessions. Next year, mass troops again, and get more concessions. Wash, rinse, repeat. That’s the problem with a personality cult. There is no way for the leader of the cult to gracefully shuffle out of the scene.

Steve

Really if Putin ever applied a cost/benefit analysis of anything ever in his entire life, he would not be a multi billionaire and the Russia economy would be a lot larger than Italy’s, France’s and the UK’s, maybe competing with Germany’s.

==================================================================

a silly reply because we are not discussing Russian economics - we are discussing Russian war with Ukraine.

Also a silly reply assuming that Putin does all the Ukraine war strategy himself. Putin depends on others to the figuring for him. And I am strictly talking about military operations and the associated political and financial pros/cons.

Putin has lots of military, political and financial experts to figure out the best Russian strategy on any military operations.

Jaak

a silly reply because we are not discussing Russian economics - we are discussing Russian war with Ukraine.

Also a silly reply assuming that Putin does all the Ukraine war strategy himself. Putin depends on others to the figuring for him. And I am strictly talking about military operations and the associated political and financial pros/cons.

Putin has lots of military, political and financial experts to figure out the best Russian strategy on any military operations.

Jaak

Listen you are the expert on Slavic nations. Great, but government policies based on cost/benefit analysis are something your Russian experts have NEVER done. If you are going to throw the idea of cost/benefit analysis out there first know what it is. It is a highly integrated set of government policies for economic growth. It is not just willy nilly invading the Ukraine for national glory.

The invasion is a tragedy for the Ukraine, but will be a national disaster for Russia. Their Afghanistan was nothing on this blunder.

If you personally see a benefit to invading the Ukraine fill us in.

You are loosely saying “cost/benefit”…the invasion will be a huge and growing cost and no benefit.

You can say “silly” to be all day long, but I cracked my upper level public finance book hard open many times.

LBJ first brought cost/benefit analysis in as a US government set of policies. Ironically he was funding the Vietnam with inexcusably massive amounts of money with no benefit. It brought down his presidency.

Russia has no cost/benefit analysis policies on the federal level. As I am saying the potential of the country’s economy is buried for the oligarchic rape of the country.

2 Likes

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-intel-russian-commanders-orders…

US intel, Russian commanders in the field have orders for an invasion.

If you are going to throw the idea of cost/benefit analysis out there first know what it is. It is a highly integrated set of government policies for economic growth.

========================================================

You just can not see that the term “cost benefit” is used in more ways than your economic growth polices. Here is an academic study of how it is used for war.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309088927_Cost_bene…

“Cost benefit analysis of war”
Kjell Hausken
Faculty of Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

Abstract

Purpose – Among the many perspectives to analyze war, such as rational actor, organizational process, governmental politics and ethics, the perspective that actually incorporates the costs andbene?ts into a systematic theoretical structure has hardly been analyzed. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the costs and benefits perspective.

Design/methodology/approach – Three kinds of value are distinguished, i.e. human, economic and influence. Different actors (politicians, populations, stakeholders, etc.) assign different weights to the three kinds of value. Six gradually more complicated models are developed. The first subtracts losses from gains for the three kinds of value. Thereafter, the paper accounts for multiple periods, time discounting, attitude towards risk, multiple stakeholders, subcategories for the three kinds of value, sequential decision-making and game theory.

Findings – The rich theoretical structure enables assessing costs and benefits more systematically and illuminatingly. The cost benefit analysis is illustrated with the 2003-2011 Iraq War. The paper estimates gained and lost value of human lives, economic value and influence value, and show how different weights impact the decision of whether to initiate war differently. Originality/value – The paper provides scientists and policy makers with a theoretical structure within which to evaluate the costs and bene?ts of war, accounting for how different actors estimate weights, the future, risk and a variety of parameter values differently.

Wars are started for all kinds of reasons and sometimes apparently without reasons. This paper seeks to establish cost benefit reasoning for starting wars. That which makes war costlier or less beneficial will reduce its likelihood.

1 Like

The paper estimates gained and lost value of human lives, economic value and influence value, and show how different weights impact the decision…different actors estimate weights, the future, risk and a variety of parameter values differently.

Aye, there’s the rub. Good luck to the academic who “seeks to establish cost benefit reasoning for starting wars.”

DB2

1 Like

That which makes war costlier or less beneficial will reduce its likelihood.

The paper does not establish that Russia has done any cost/benefit analysis of entering the Ukraine.

The paper establishes that it can be done. Of course it can be done.

What I am saying is the cost is far to high for Russia. This can include the overthrow of Putin. Probably will include.

Biden and Macron are saying that in spaces to Putin for a few weeks now. Putin is not listening. Biden and Putin have western well done analysis of the war, including cost/benefit analysis. Because it can be done. The last Czar also ignored the British cost/benefit analysis of that day.

Putin is probably hanging himself.

Cost/benefit analysis changes for a project/military adventure over time.

I will ask again what is the benefit in your words for this invasion of Ukraine?

The benefits are supposed to out weight the costs. Even if the public bares the cost but the benefits come back indirectly as greater tax receipts.

If you want to skip the econ as the benefit, how does this benefit Putin? Skipping the cost/benefit analysis altogether is good with me.