Ukraine Fun & Games

[stormlion1]

The only real route to get equipment is through Poland and everything would have to be trucked in. I can see the Russians moving in to cut Poland and the Ukraine off from each other using almost the same scenario. "Ethnic Russians" and threats of force because in the end the Russians can lay claim to the Ukraine as full of "Ethnic Russians" because they were part of the USSR only a few decades back. Sanctions do work, but there a long term effect and will not do anything that the Russians won't be able to work around. I honestly expect the Ukraine to be forced to rejoin the Russians new Empire within the decade. Poland is going to have to start worrying as well as NATO is a paper tiger at this point. Which is why they want the US to send its Tanks back now, even though we withdrew them last year from Europe as a whole. Can the EU hold off the Russians without the US?

[Webstral]

The West today is in a much better position than the Anglo-French were in 1938-9. Granted, the internal divisions and legislative paralysis being experienced by the US is uncomfortably similar to the French political situation during the run-up to the Battle of France. That much said, NATO is in a better position vis-à-vis Russia. I write this while trying to bear in mind that overconfidence kills.

Regardless of what happens in the Ukraine, NATO includes the Baltics, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria. Russian military action against any of these states mandates action by the rest of NATO. Regardless of what one thinks of a particular Western leader, NATO obligations provide a clear-cut cover for military action up to and including full scale mobilization and war—even nuclear war. While I don’t have access to a psychological profile of Putin such that I could make a definitive statement about his willingness to test the commitment of the Western powers to NATO, I’m reasonably confident of the long term outcome of any conventional confrontation between NATO and Russia. (NATO v Russia simultaneously with a US-led alliance against China is a different story, if such a story is relevant to tell.)

I do think the tanks have to go back in. I would go so far as to say that the tanks have to be pushed forward to Poland and Romania. In fact, the whole NATO posture needs to be pushed eastwards at this point—if only to demonstrate that NATO means business about defending all NATO members from extralegal action by outside agents. I’m no more anxious for war than anyone else who has looked war in the eye as a rifleman. That much said, I’m perfectly aware that actions speak louder than words; combat units show a far greater commitment to one’s allies than economic sanctions. We want the Poles, the Balts, the Romanians, and the others to feel completely confident that we will go to the mat for them if that’s the way Russia wants to play. Putin may or may not be moved by the loss of revenues from alienating his European clients. He’s far more likely to be moved by the permanent stationing of a half dozen heavy divisions in Poland and another 2-3 in Romania. This number would be too small to invade Russia, but it would be enough to prevent any sudden and rash acts by Russia. This number is not insuperable when spread amongst the NATO allies.

None of this will be helpful to the Ukraine in the immediate future. I suppose some value might be derived from keeping Putin guessing about what is intended by the push eastward, but the short term effect might actually be to raise the temperature and bolster Putin’s domestic support. So be it. Politicians and diplomats dream of solutions that give them the theoretical maximum reward. Soldiers must be more pragmatic. Putin’s support in Russia can go through roof for all I care, so long as every time he looks at our allies he’s looking down a thicket of 120mm barrels.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Some things to keep in mind, the US does not do a lot of trade with Russia so it can't get a lot of leverage from that but... if the US does try to enforce sanctions against Russia, we all better get use to not having GPS, satellite comms, restricted weather forecasting and other things.

NASA is wholly reliant on Russia for the supply of engines for it's main launch vehicle, the Atlas V rocket. The RD-180 engine is considered by some to be the best of its type in the world due to a combination of low cost and good efficiency and it's supplied by NPO Energomash in Russia.
Kick Putin hard enough, he might just ban the sale of RD-180 engines.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Some things to keep in mind, the US does not do a lot of trade with Russia so it can't get a lot of leverage from that but... if the US does try to enforce sanctions against Russia, we all better get use to not having GPS, satellite comms, restricted weather forecasting and other things.

NASA is wholly reliant on Russia for the supply of engines for it's main launch vehicle, the Atlas V rocket. The RD-180 engine is considered by some to be the best of its type in the world due to a combination of low cost and good efficiency and it's supplied by NPO Energomash in Russia.
Kick Putin hard enough, he might just ban the sale of RD-180 engines

Wikipedia had this to say on the U.S. use of the RD-180 engine:

During the early 1990s General Dynamics Space Systems Division (later purchased by Lockheed Martin) acquired the rights to use the RD-180 in the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) and the Atlas program. As these programs were conceived to support United States government launches as well as commercial launches, it was also arranged for the RD-180 to be co-produced by Pratt & Whitney. However all production to date has taken place in Russia. The engine is currently sold by a joint venture between the Russian developer and producer of the engine NPO Energomash and Pratt & Whitney, called RD AMROSS.

Jerry Grey, a consultant to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Universities Space Research Association and a former professor of aerospace engineering at Princeton University, suggested using the RD-180 for a prospective NASA heavy-lift launch vehicle. For those who might be concerned about too much reliance on Russia, he pointed out that RD Amross was "very close to producing a U.S.-built version of the RD-180, and with some infusion of NASA funding could be manufacturing that engine (and perhaps even a 1,700,000 lbf or 7.6 MN thrust equivalent of the RD-170) in a few years."[4]

Despite the availability of necessary documentation and legal rights for producing RD-180 in the United States, NASA is considering development of an indigenous core stage engine that would be "capable of generating high levels of thrust approximately equal to or exceeding the performance of the Russian-built engine." NASA considered in 2010 to produce a fully operational engine by 2020 or sooner, depending an partnership with the U.S. Defense Department.[5]


My guess is that whatever work they're doing on producing a replacement engine just got accelerated...

[kato13]

I was reading an article today that said the following.

The US could have production of a local RD-180 going in about a year for a cost of about a billion. (ok lets realistically say 2 years and 10 billion it is still a drop in the bucket compared to non critical expenses)

There is also a replacement in the works with several planned flights coming before 2017.

The GPS sats are actually lasting longer than expected halving the need that was expected for their replacement.

There are enough RD-180 engines to last until 2016 currently in the US.

[Panther Al]

Another interesting tidbit regarding how Europe is reacting to the New Russian Empire:


Finland *and* Sweden have quietly began talking to us - and NATO of course - about seeing if there is a spot in NATO for them as well.


Which speaks volumes when you consider how hard they tried to stay more or less - usually less - neutral during the first Cold War.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Another interesting tidbit regarding how Europe is reacting to the New Russian Empire:


Finland *and* Sweden have quietly began talking to us - and NATO of course - about seeing if there is a spot in NATO for them as well.


Which speaks volumes when you consider how hard they tried to stay more or less - usually less - neutral during the first Cold War.

That's not surprising at all, they might know a thing or two that we don't....or, more likely, just like the other European countries like Poland and Germany, they've seen this movie before and they're in no rush to see the sequel, like you said.

Thing is, the other NATO countries have been letting things slide militarily for too long and have slashed most of their defense budgets almost to a minimum, I'd argue that a lot of NATO's military are currently almost reduced to palace guards in terms of any capability, look at all the trouble they've had just to sustain operations in Afghanistan, much less Libya and the rest of Africa.

And we haven't even yet discussed further defense cuts the Obama administration was proposing in the U.S. prior to this. Methinks, or rather I hope, they'll be taking a second look at things now that Russia's back, but Obama was just recently quoted as saying Russia was "weak" and a "regional power, not a global power". Uh, sorry, but someone's in serious denial here. Having global nuclear reach for starters, along with a rejuvenated military that's been getting rapidly modernized, and an economy that basically can hold Europe by the balls by being it's primary source of petroleum and gas speaks volumes, and I would think elevates it a bit above "regional power" status.

Point is, Europe, other than the usual rumblings in parts like the Balkans, did seem to finally settle down for a while, but now their history is coming back to bite them in the ass again, this time with the "new" Russian empire. The vacation is over.