Russia to Seize Hundreds of Leased Airliners

 

According to Joe Blogs, Russia has just passed a law allowing Russian airline operators to simply declare themselves the owners of commercial aircraft leased from western companies.  Ireland likely hardest hit, IIRC.  These are Airbus and Boeing aircraft owned by leasing companies, but the deals are off, and the planes are due to be repossessed.  How?  Aye, there’s the rub.

Over 500 aircraft worth over $10 Billion may simply be swiped from the western owners.  This is another destruction of wealth, not just a transfer.  The aircraft are no longer supported with parts and inspections from manufacturers and owners.  And a great number of the planes are grounded anyway — Russian airlines don’t have as many destinations to go to these days.

This may be an expensive way to find out what can and cannot be done.  We shall see.

Published in General
Tags: ,

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 69 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Hugh Inactive
    Hugh
    @Hugh

    BDB (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    Does this mean that deterrence based on Mutually Assured Destruction has failed? Putin believes it is possible to fight and win a nuclear war? If that’s true then we have a MUCH bigger problem than Ukraine, and we are, all of us, de facto hostages to Putin.

    Magic 8-Ball says highly likely.

    MAD is based on expected reactions or “bluffs”. We have no leadership — we have no bluff to call. The Commiecrats have taken over, and we will never loose a nuclear shot to defend the US or freedom anywhere (etc), as these are not the interests our Alinskyite friends will protect.

    Putin could vaporize a middling city in Europe and while the outcry would be loud and irritating, nobody would nuke him back. He would then have a free hand to take whatever he “needs”, like Poland, East Germany, and so forth. Many of those non-nuke countries would fight like Hell, but at the same time, they will see that the US’ bluff has been called, and we folded. On them.

    What matters is Putin’s appetite for war and conquest — not ours.

     

    Agree.  Putin decides if it is WWIII.  And he can fabricate any justification he wants.

    • #61
  2. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Hugh (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    Does this mean that deterrence based on Mutually Assured Destruction has failed? Putin believes it is possible to fight and win a nuclear war? If that’s true then we have a MUCH bigger problem than Ukraine, and we are, all of us, de facto hostages to Putin.

    Magic 8-Ball says highly likely.

    MAD is based on expected reactions or “bluffs”. We have no leadership — we have no bluff to call. The Commiecrats have taken over, and we will never loose a nuclear shot to defend the US or freedom anywhere (etc), as these are not the interests our Alinskyite friends will protect.

    Putin could vaporize a middling city in Europe and while the outcry would be loud and irritating, nobody would nuke him back. He would then have a free hand to take whatever he “needs”, like Poland, East Germany, and so forth. Many of those non-nuke countries would fight like Hell, but at the same time, they will see that the US’ bluff has been called, and we folded. On them.

    What matters is Putin’s appetite for war and conquest — not ours.

     

    Agree. Putin decides if it is WWIII. And he can fabricate any justification he wants.

    It is WWIII but since we will not fight then we have lost.  It just may take a bit for it to happen.  

    • #62
  3. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    BDB (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy got drunk and (View Comment):

    Locke On (View Comment):

    Random thoughts on the Russian nukes:

    Soviet doctrine was to use battlefield nukes to blow a hole in NATO’s defense through which to advance armored columns. That doesn’t make much sense in Ukraine, where Russia’s logistics are having trouble supporting their existing positions, let alone a deep advance. (I’ve seen estimates by those who seem to know their business that Russian troops are effectively on half-supply once they are over 100 miles from a rail head, due to lack/inefficiency of truck transport.)

    Putin could always order such a nuke used to make a point, but operationally it wouldn’t make much sense, while creating a real risk of escalation. An anti-city/population attack would seem to make even less sense, since it would wreck a transportation nexus that Russia would need for further advances (remember they are stuck on roads during the mud season), while further upping the escalation risk.

    If a nuke does go off, I wouldn’t necessarily expect NATO/the US to respond in kind. Russia has other assets that can be put at risk much more easily. For instance, destroying the Russian Navy in the Med and Black Sea could probably be done with little or no US/NATO loss, given Russia’s lack of naval aviation.

     

    Russia seems to want Ukraine for its farmland and its fresh water. If that’s accurate, then irradiating the place wouldn’t make sense.

    It’s sorta kinda why I haven’t been too worried about China invading Taiwan, because such an invasion would destroy the very assets that make Taiwan a valuable prize.

    Russia doesn;t care about farmland and water — they have more of both than anybody in the world. And China doesn;t need Taiwan’s stuff. In both cases these are chokepoints for the larger nations’ military aims, and galling, embarrassing, failures that make them look like also-rans. Russia cannot stomach Ukraine any more than China can stomach Taiwan. Food or not, people or not, water or not. None of that matters. Just geography and national authority.

    It is impossible to say what truly motivates Putin, but the above is the stuff of pride that motivates the masses for whom oil and other resources aren’t on offer. 

    • #63
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    TBA (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy got drunk and (View Comment):

    Locke On (View Comment):

    Random thoughts on the Russian nukes:

    Soviet doctrine was to use battlefield nukes to blow a hole in NATO’s defense through which to advance armored columns. That doesn’t make much sense in Ukraine, where Russia’s logistics are having trouble supporting their existing positions, let alone a deep advance. (I’ve seen estimates by those who seem to know their business that Russian troops are effectively on half-supply once they are over 100 miles from a rail head, due to lack/inefficiency of truck transport.)

    Putin could always order such a nuke used to make a point, but operationally it wouldn’t make much sense, while creating a real risk of escalation. An anti-city/population attack would seem to make even less sense, since it would wreck a transportation nexus that Russia would need for further advances (remember they are stuck on roads during the mud season), while further upping the escalation risk.

    If a nuke does go off, I wouldn’t necessarily expect NATO/the US to respond in kind. Russia has other assets that can be put at risk much more easily. For instance, destroying the Russian Navy in the Med and Black Sea could probably be done with little or no US/NATO loss, given Russia’s lack of naval aviation.

    Russia seems to want Ukraine for its farmland and its fresh water. If that’s accurate, then irradiating the place wouldn’t make sense.

    It’s sorta kinda why I haven’t been too worried about China invading Taiwan, because such an invasion would destroy the very assets that make Taiwan a valuable prize.

    Russia doesn;t care about farmland and water — they have more of both than anybody in the world. And China doesn;t need Taiwan’s stuff. In both cases these are chokepoints for the larger nations’ military aims, and galling, embarrassing, failures that make them look like also-rans. Russia cannot stomach Ukraine any more than China can stomach Taiwan. Food or not, people or not, water or not. None of that matters. Just geography and national authority.

    It is impossible to say what truly motivates Putin, but the above is the stuff of pride that motivates the masses for whom oil and other resources aren’t on offer.

    How about power, perceived weakness, territory and pride?  Not to mention long-range NATO cruise missiles on Russia’s border.  And with Biden in office, a once in a lifetime opportunity.  This war has been loosely forecast for nearly two decades.

    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin.  Whether the movers and shakers in the US  avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    • #64
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):
    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin.  Whether the movers and shakers in the US  avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    They were wrong about Russia before.  For decades.  Why should they have good intel now?

    • #65
  6. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Flicker (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy got drunk and (View Comment):

    Russia seems to want Ukraine for its farmland and its fresh water. If that’s accurate, then irradiating the place wouldn’t make sense.

    It’s sorta kinda why I haven’t been too worried about China invading Taiwan, because such an invasion would destroy the very assets that make Taiwan a valuable prize.

    Russia doesn;t care about farmland and water — they have more of both than anybody in the world. And China doesn;t need Taiwan’s stuff. In both cases these are chokepoints for the larger nations’ military aims, and galling, embarrassing, failures that make them look like also-rans. Russia cannot stomach Ukraine any more than China can stomach Taiwan. Food or not, people or not, water or not. None of that matters. Just geography and national authority.

    It is impossible to say what truly motivates Putin, but the above is the stuff of pride that motivates the masses for whom oil and other resources aren’t on offer.

    How about power, perceived weakness, territory and pride? Not to mention long-range NATO cruise missiles on Russia’s border. And with Biden in office, a once in a lifetime opportunity. This war has been loosely forecast for nearly two decades.

    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin. Whether the movers and shakers in the US avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    You are quite right. What I should have said was that it is impossible to know exactly what motivates Putin. 

    • #66
  7. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin. Whether the movers and shakers in the US avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    They were wrong about Russia before. For decades. Why should they have good intel now?

    Good psych profiles are not the same as good intel.  Maybe there’s no such thing as a good psych profile anyway.  But the US government spends billions on it.  Anyway, if the FBI can form a functional, predictive profile of a serial killer whom no one’s ever seen, you’d think they could do a better job with Putin.

    • #67
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin. Whether the movers and shakers in the US avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    They were wrong about Russia before. For decades. Why should they have good intel now?

    Good psych profiles are not the same as good intel. Maybe there’s no such thing as a good psych profile anyway. But the US government spends billions on it. Anyway, if the FBI can form a functional, predictive profile of a serial killer whom no one’s ever seen, you’d think they could do a better job with Putin.

    There’s a lot more information available on how past serial killers have been, than there is on how past Putins have been.

    • #68
  9. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    But more to the point, if the US’s greatest psychological experts can ever be put to good use, I’m sure they have a powerful and deep psych profile of Putin. Whether the movers and shakers in the US avail themselves of it, or care one way or the other, is a different matter.

    They were wrong about Russia before. For decades. Why should they have good intel now?

    Good psych profiles are not the same as good intel. Maybe there’s no such thing as a good psych profile anyway. But the US government spends billions on it. Anyway, if the FBI can form a functional, predictive profile of a serial killer whom no one’s ever seen, you’d think they could do a better job with Putin.

    There’s a lot more information available on how past serial killers have been, than there is on how past Putins have been.

    I don’t think so.  Generalizations about past killers and forming a conceptual framework of their type are not the same things as watching a man’s words and actions for most of his lifetime.  But even if they are, this generalization can be applied equally to one well-known and well-documented man such as Putin.

    In other words, if psychology means anything at all, has anything to predict of people’s personalities, motivations, and actions, Putin’s personality has been dissected by the US — just as Biden’s has been by Russia.

    This should give everyone pause, I think.

    • #69
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.