I think the president of the United States making threats then crawfishing after he is ignored has pretty obvious strategic implications.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
NEWS Iranian F-14's Escorting Russian Anti-ISIL Bomber Ops
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
Uh, you might want to reexamine the definitions of "strategic," "operational," and "tactical." Presidential screwups tend to be national-strategic screwups pretty much by definition.
Putin may be many things, but irrational is not one of them. Cold and calculating as Machiavelli.
No, he will become irrational, if he sees power slipping. Old KGB fucks from my time are what they are. You've only known Russians, not Soviets, and he's a Soviet trying to obtain the good old days. I hope I'm wrong.
And you need to think in a much broader context, some Arab leaders may be annoyed at our President but he hasn't aligned himself with the Iranian-dominated group now fighting in Syria, one that is despised at a visceral level by many of those same folks annoyed at the President. The damage from Putin's intervention will be much gather than waffling over red lines, and much more 'strategic'.
Not irrational but very reactive and nowhere near as cunning as the Florentine.
So Putin calls NATO/France's bluff. He draws a line in the sand and says on XX date, a no fly zone will be enforced. Between now and that date, Russia sends more fighters and support, as well as mobile SA-XXs. Will NATO (and France) back down or ignore the no fly zone and risk further escalation?
I joined the military in the Cold War so I well acquainted with the Soviets. Whether the recent Soviet period or dating back to Kievan Rus in the 9th century, their history has been fascinating.
Please. This "everyone is irrational" is a tired refrain from the chicken little crowd. Putin is probably the most rational actor the international scene has seen since the Cold War. He's playing the game a hell of a lot better than most Western leaders.
His supply chain to and from Syria is tenuous, the main sea route happens to go through the Dardanelles and his only other viable air route could be easily interdicted by us. He has no good options if he wants to actually enforce a no-fly zone other than to sacrifice his forces in Syrua.
He plays well with a relatively weak hand but I don't think the benefit he is gaining will help him or his country in the long term.
I would wager that Putin knows his long term outlook is not pretty based up rapidly declining demographics and the economy getting weaker as oil prices stay low. His troops have been trained, money has been pumped in the military and his "hybrid" method of warfare is both cost-effective and below the radar horizon of the public in general. If he is going to act, perhaps it will be sooner rather later.
I've quoted Peter Zeihan in the past and will here again. Demographics is destiny.
I wasn't baiting you. Wasn't trying to catch you. I agreed with you and simply opined on a related US policy/threat.
I think Putin has gotten himself sucked into a quagmire, something our current President has been able to avoid to a degree though in a poor fashion. I think the President's relative indifference to the crisis has been damaging but nowhere near as bad as Putin's actions in the longer term.
