Clint Ehrlich Profile picture
Apr 28 25 tweets 8 min read
The West is pushing Ukraine to attack inside Russia.
It's a great tactic – but a horrible strategy.

Putin can respond by declaring war on Ukraine, making millions of conscripts available.

The conflict would grow to an apocalyptic scale matching WW2.🧵👇 A mega-thread...
There have already been a series of mysterious fires and explosions inside Russian territory.

Many of these involve facilities needed for the war effort.

For example, Russia alleges that Ukrainian helicopters blew up an oil-storage depot in Belgorod, Russia.
And Ukrainian drones recently penetrated 140 miles into Russian territory.

At the same time, blasts at nearby Russian military facilities allegedly killed multiple soldiers.

It looks like it may be part of a targeted campaign to strike inside Russia.
newsweek.com/russia-explosi…
This campaign is receiving the full support of the West.

Britain's Defense Minister said yesterday it was "completely legitimate" for Ukraine to use UK weapons to strike inside Russia.

He said "Ukraine needs to strike into its opponent’s depth" to win the war.
No one can disagree that, when a country is invaded, it has a right to launch counter-attacks.

But that does not mean it is *wise* to do so.

I fear that Western support for Ukrainian attacks inside Russia will backfire – and may risk the complete destruction of Ukraine.
To date, Vladimir Putin has insisted that what is happening in Ukraine is a "special military operation."

Because Russia has not declared war, it has not begun a full-scale military mobilization.

In effect, it has been fighting with one hand tied behind its back.
If combat were restricted to Ukraine's territory, then it would have been politically difficult for Putin to justify placing Russia on a full wartime footing.

But cross-border attacks change the political calculus.

They make it seem that the Russian homeland is under threat.
It may benefit Western readers to imagine a similar scenario playing out inside America.

If a U.S. President were losing a foreign war, it would be difficult to justify the draft.

But if the enemy started launching attacks inside America, that option could be on the table.
A full Russian military mobilization would vastly change the strategic picture inside Ukraine.

On paper, Russia has a much larger military, but it has been limited to contracted soldiers.

As a result, it has deployed fewer than 200k troops in its non-war "operation."
That represents approximately 50% of the 400,000 contract soldiers in Russia's active-duty military.

The remaining 600,000 active-duty Russian soldiers are conscripts, whom Russia technically cannot use outside of wartime territorial defense.
Because Ukraine initiated a full-scale mobilization of conscripts at the beginning of the conflict, it has enjoyed numerical parity with Russia.

Many Western analysts believe that its forces actually outnumber Russians on the ground.
However, if Russia begins a full national mobilization, its troops will *vastly* outnumber Ukraine's forces.

It not only will gain access to all ~1 million active-duty soldiers, it will be able to call up ~2 million reserves.
To be clear, these soldiers would not all be deployed into the Ukrainian theater.

Reserves would be largely unfit for combat, and Russia must keep sufficient forces stationed to defend its own vast territory from e.g. China.

But the manpower boost would be enormous.
Russia may also be willing to deploy a surprising percentage of its conventional military to Ukraine.

This is an under-appreciated aspect of Putin's recent emphasis on Russia's readiness to use nuclear weapons if threatened. news.com.au/world/europe/p…
The immediate target of Putin's nuclear rhetoric is the West.

But the subtext is that *any* potential adversary should be ready to be struck with Russian nukes.

That includes China if it were to make territorial incursions into Russia's Far East.
From a game-theoretic perspective, President Putin can make his nuclear threats *more* credible by over-deploying Russian forces into Ukraine.

If Russia sacrifices its ability to defend its territory conventionally, it effectively *pre-commits* to using nukes.
What we are discussing is, of course, military mobilization on a scale that has not been since World War 2.

But the groundwork for such a mobilization is already being laid by the domestic political rhetoric within Russia.
Russia's Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, has argued that the country is now fighting a proxy war against NATO, where Ukraine is simply the battlefield.

He says the risk of a "third world war" is now "serious, real. It should not be understated." wsj.com/articles/russi…
At the same time, Russia's government has sought to invoke the memory of WW2 to justify the current conflict.

This goes beyond merely calling the Ukrainian regime as Nazis.

The symbol "Z" has been rebranded as standing for 77 years since the Great Patriotic War.
The trillion-dollar question is whether the Russian people will go along with their government's claim that a sequel to World War 2 needs to be fought.

So far, it isn't clear that they're ready.

But if Ukraine continues attacking inside Russia, that could change quickly.
It doesn't matter if Ukraine e.g. limits its attacks to military infrastructure where Russian civilians are unlikely to die.

Once the Ukrainian campaign is underway, Russia will easily be able to blame Zelensky's government for *any* explosions or fires on its territory.
Too many Western leaders and analysts are patting themselves on the back, imagining that Russia's original war aims can never be accomplished.

They are imagining that Kiev is safe and the only question is whether Ukraine will prevail in the Donbas.
In reality, Putin still remains determined to delivery victory.

And supporting Ukrainian attacks inside Russia gives him the blueprint he needs to reset the war.

Once he has a viable political path to call up millions of reserves, why should we assume he won't take it?
A fully mobilized Russia would be capable of not just taking the Donbas, but of invading Kiev and seizing all of Ukraine.

Putin would position himself as a war-time President equal in status to Stalin – the man who took on NATO in Ukraine and won.
Yes, this will entail massive Russian casualties.

Yes, it will result in civilian deaths on a horrifying scale.

But none of that's a reason to believe it won't happen.

It's a reason we should try to *stop* the nightmare scenario, before it becomes real. Before it's too late.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Clint Ehrlich

Clint Ehrlich Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ClintEhrlich

Apr 26
Journalists are claiming Elon Musk doesn't know what he's doing buying Twitter.

In reality, they're the ones who are clueless.

This acquisition will go down as one of Elon's crowning achievements – right next to SpaceX & Tesla. 🧵👇
Their primary argument is that the deal doesn't make financial sense for Musk.

Megan McArdle from the Washington Post says he paid too much and "there's no obvious way he's going to squeeze more money out of Twitter operations."

1. That's BS; and

2. It doesn't matter.
Let's start with why it's BS.

First of all, Twitter already brings in enough money to cover the cost of servicing the debt Elon took on to make the $44B acquisition.

It's going to cost ~$1B a year, and Twitter is projected to earn $1.85B a year by 2023.
Read 21 tweets
Apr 26
This is a remarkable piece of misinformation being spread by major accounts.

They claim the FSB is so dumb that it forged a neo-nazi letter and accidentally signed it "Signature Illegible."

It's amazing that stories this dumb get RTed +10,000 times... 🧵
In reality, "Signature Illegible" is the alleged moniker of the neo-nazi extremists.

Here is the cover of a piece of extremist literature where it's prominently displayed.

The meaning isn't entirely clear: it could refer to e.g. the "signature" of a criminal group.
Another book showing the same moniker is shown in the original video from the FSB.

So it's obvious this wasn't a bizarre oversight in signing the letter.

It's clearly supposed to be a moniker associated with the extremists.
Read 5 tweets
Apr 25
Today, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said America wants to see a "weakened" Russia.

It's an example of a senior Biden administration official saying the quiet part out loud.

A quick thread on the implications... 🧵
First, this is simply bad diplomacy.

Russia has always argued that the West's goal was to bring Russia to its knees.

That was part of Putin's justification for launching the invasion of Ukraine.

Publicly endorsing that strategy helps Putin by apparently vindicating him.
Second, it raises questions about America's actual goals in Ukraine.

I believe we should seek to end the conflict in order to minimize the suffering of the Ukrainian people.

But I've long argued that is not the Biden administration's policy.
Read 8 tweets
Apr 23
Many people are celebrating Ukraine's unexpected battlefield successes against Russia.

In reality, NATO assistance to Ukraine is pushing us closer to nuclear war.

There's a clear path from where we are today to the first combat use of nukes since WW2.🧵
Today, Zelensky gave a press conference inside a metro station in Kiev.

He stated that if the West provides Ukraine with sufficient weapons, then Ukraine will begin a campaign to take back all of the territory that Russia has occupied.
These were Zelensky's exact words, threatening to retake all Russian occupied territories using NATO weapons:

"All that they [Russia] occupy we will return. It is a question of weapons. If we have enough of them, we will immediately begin to return the occupied territories."
Read 17 tweets
Apr 22
The "Mystery Grove Film Recommendations list" is an intriguing collection of films with a reactionary flavor.

I've decided to supplement it with some of my own personal cinematic favorites.

If you watch the original list and this one IN ORDER much shall be revealed.
Bad Lieutenant (1992) is one of the darkest, most powerful movies ever made.

It stars Harvey Keitel as a cop who crosses every conceivable boundary when it comes to alcohol, drugs, and sex.

If even this broken man is moved to seek redemption... why can't you?
Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans (2009) is a Werner Herzog remake, which takes the story in a completely different direction.

Nick Cage gives one of his greatest performances, transforming what should be a B-rate tragedy or thriller into something surreal & hysterical.
Read 16 tweets
Apr 17
Russia losing the cruiser Mosvka is hugely significant... but not for the reasons the media is telling you.

It's actually evidence that Russia invaded Ukraine due to the threat of NATO expansion.

Missing the connection? This thread will explain it. 🧵
When Russia began its pre-invasion military build-up around Ukraine's border, there was widespread debate about its motives.

I argued that NATO expansion into Ukraine was a true "red line" for Russia – one that would be enforced with military action.
Critics of this theory claimed that Ukraine had no imminent prospect of joining NATO, so that couldn't be the impetus for Russia's threatened invasion.

Yes, the alliance had promised in 2008 that Ukraine would *someday* join, but there was zero urgency.
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(