Reports of Russian troops using shovels as weapons as they have no ammo.
Yes, I saw this. Very disturbing. Basically trying to brainwash the younger ones and murder the older ones. Done so that they don’t face any resistance from the next generation of Ukrainians.Disturbing story in the Sunday Times today about thousands of Ukrainian children abducted by Russia in occupied territory and taken to camps in Russia. No great surprise I suppose: I think we all realise by now that Putin has lost his moral compass, if he ever had one.
Rather suggests their imminent takeover of Bakhmut might not be quite so imminent as was thought then?Reports of Russian troops using shovels as weapons as they have no ammo.
You're right, but I'm not convinced Chinas starting point is to see Ukraine fail. I dont think they really care that much about Ukraine tbh, its the bigger geo political considerations at play.... Even their partnership with Moscow is not ideologically driven but a marriage of convenience as oppostion to US hegemony.It's not a case of just immediately stopping trading with them. We should make plans where we trade more when they play nicely, and less when they don't. I'd like to see the free world sign a pact where we all deal with these anti-freedom countries together, such that they get hit hard when they decide to wage war etc.
At the moment China is at war with democratic countries, so they see it as in their interest to see places like Ukraine fail. If we allow them to supply Russia with weapons unpunished, then we're heading for a very dark future.
You're right, but I'm not convinced Chinas starting point is to see Ukraine fail
YepI'm not convinced China is all that happy with where things are at, peaceful world stability is better for the trade they rely on, but now we are where we are and Putin has gone all in, China will see Russia failing and how that US/NATO victory would translate across the globe, as a huge risk to its desires for global supremacy and breaking US hegemony, Especially in places like SE Asia and Africa where China is competing for interests against the US.
Both Russia and China want a muti polar world where US dominance is broken, and Russia losing (which by default is US success), is the thing China wants to prevent.
Don't think they will arm Russia directly, but as they are effectively the only Oxygen for Kim Jong Un and N Korea, I'd expect them to lean on him to supply Russia or to provide certain tech to N Korea which will then end up in Moscow. They will do it, but without their fingerprints on it.
I don't understand this, because they can't use shovels as weapons unless Ukrainians also don't have guns (because obviously they wouldn't get close enough).Reports of Russian troops using shovels as weapons as they have no ammo.
They’re using sidearms and then shovels in close quarter combat. Several reports in Apple News round up from various sauces.I don't understand this, because they can't use shovels as weapons unless Ukrainians also don't have guns (because obviously they wouldn't get close enough).
Even in urban areas, a side arm would be a better choice than a shovel.They’re using sidearms and then shovels in close quarter combat. Several reports in Apple News round up from various sauces.
I’m assuming this would be in urban and built up areas as oppose to open country where, as you say, shovels would be of no use.
Well, I’m not an expert but if you have a sidearm that then runs out of ammo and you have nowhere to retreat, ie no choice but to fight, you’ll use anything to hand.Even in urban areas, a side arm would be a better choice than a shovel.
Of course in any war it's possible for two sides to get close enough to use melee weapons, after shooting at each other and closing the distance, but the suggestion is that the Russians don't have rifles, so they're going in to a gun fight with just a shovel, and managing to use it. That seems unlikely.
It's true and happening in bakhmut. Russian side starved of ammo is sending men forward with shovels.They’re using sidearms and then shovels in close quarter combat. Several reports in Apple News round up from various sauces.
I’m assuming this would be in urban and built up areas as oppose to open country where, as you say, shovels would be of no use.
LikewiseWell, I’m not an expert
Yes of course people will use anything to hand if they have to. But the report is suggesting that they don't have enough weapons/ammo, and therefore the shovel is their main choice of weapon. If they run out of ammo, presumably they won't mount an attack, and if attacked, they'd retreat.but if you have a sidearm that then runs out of ammo and you have nowhere to retreat, ie no choice but to fight, you’ll use anything to hand.
Bayonets were used on single shot rifles that couldn't be reloaded quickly with another 30 rounds, so there'd be a chance of rushing an enemy, while firing some shots, and closing the distance. In a war where every soldier should have an automatic rifle, I'd expect a melee weapon to only be used on rare occasions, rather than be an option as a primary weapon.Hand to hand combat is a very common occurrence in close quarter combat so I’m not sure why it’s so hard to believe.
There’s a reason the bayonet was utilised in previous wars.
It just seems to me like trying to make a headline of 'Russia out of ammo'. If they're really out of ammo, I expect them to retreat. They cannot fight a war against Ukraine with the shovel as their primary weapon (all only IMO obvs)As I say, I’m no expert but it’s not that hard to believe, surely?
Ukraine war: Russian reservists fighting with shovels - UK defence ministry - BBC News
Troops could be engaging in hand-to-hand combat in Ukraine, Britain's defence ministry says.www.bbc.co.uk
Some of the crucial battles in the Falklands were won by British toops bayonetting the Argentines.Even in urban areas, a side arm would be a better choice than a shovel.
Of course in any war it's possible for two sides to get close enough to use melee weapons, after shooting at each other and closing the distance, but the suggestion is that the Russians don't have rifles, so they're going in to a gun fight with just a shovel, and managing to use it. That seems unlikely.
But I imagine the British troops had rifles and ammunition, and used those too. If we only had bayonets I imagine we'd have lost.Some of the crucial battles in the Falklands were won by British toops bayonetting the Argentines.
What, in preference to NSC?I’m not getting into one of your sentence by sentence analytical debates.
However, I trust military intelligence.