[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[raymondo]

The importance of air defense:

 

[raymondo]

Both the positive and negative in this article: drone success, delays in delivery of weapons, future fears
BBC News - Ukraine war: On the Kharkiv front as Russia advances again - BBC News

Ukraine war: On the Kharkiv front as Russia advances again

High-tech drones help Ukraine's defenders - but they say they need more support from allies.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[fly high]

Both the positive and negative in this article: drone success, delays in delivery of weapons, future fears
BBC News - Ukraine war: On the Kharkiv front as Russia advances again - BBC News

Ukraine war: On the Kharkiv front as Russia advances again

High-tech drones help Ukraine's defenders - but they say they need more support from allies.

www.bbc.co.uk

Interesting quote about Russian troops gathering across the border before the assault on Kharkiv. When I first heard news of it I thought surely just hit the f##kers before they attack, sitting target of 30,000 men. Sadly they didn't because of Western reluctance to attacks on Russian soil. We really need to develop more backbone. Next time Ukraine should just kill them before they attack.

 

[raymondo]

Interesting quote about Russian troops gathering across the border before the assault on Kharkiv. When I first heard news of it I thought surely just hit the f##kers before they attack, sitting target of 30,000 men. Sadly they didn't because of Western reluctance to attacks on Russian soil. We really need to develop more backbone. Next time Ukraine should just kill them before they attack.

Exactly, I was quite shocked to read it.
I guess Ukraine may have tried to inflict damage with locally developed drones?, but haven't heard.

It sounds like the west has said: ok, you can hit Russian located infrastructure but don't target troop concentrations on Russian soil.
I mean... really? Ukraine has no chance to win if those are the rules.

 

[Eric the meek]

Exactly, I was quite shocked to read it.
I guess Ukraine may have tried to inflict damage with locally developed drones?, but haven't heard.

It sounds like the west has said: ok, you can hit Russian located infrastructure but don't target troop concentrations on Russian soil.
I mean... really? Ukraine has no chance to win if those are the rules.

That reminds me of something.

You know how an ATACMS missile can be landed on a dinner table? And its range is 190 miles or 300km?

A few days ago, I was reading somewhere (but didn't post it), about a message via Telegram to all Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine, to not gather in large numbers.

It seems reasonable to interpret this as a reaction to recent, close-up experience of modern western precision weapons.

 

[raymondo]

That reminds me of something.

You know how an ATACMS missile can be landed on a dinner table? And its range is 190 miles or 300km?

A few days ago, I was reading somewhere (but didn't post it), about a message via Telegram to all Russian troops anywhere in Ukraine, to not gather in large numbers.

It seems reasonable to interpret this as a reaction to recent, close-up experience of modern western precision weapons.

Do you remember if it did say "anywhere in Ukraine"...if so, meaning that Ukraine can fire them at Russian troops within the occupied areas ?...but then by implication Ukraine won't fire at troop concentrations within Russia's borders?
(Maybe I'm overthinking it.)

 

[Eric the meek]

Do you remember if it did say "anywhere in Ukraine"...if so, meaning that Ukraine can fire them at Russian troops within the occupied areas ?...but then by implication Ukraine won't fire at troop concentrations within Russia's borders?
(Maybe I'm overthinking it.)

No I don't. It would have been the Russian description of the same thing though. The gist of it was that it was unsafe for Russian troops to gather in any numbers, anywhere in the pre-war definition of Ukraine, including Crimea. The caveat is that it might have been the (Ukrainian/western) interpretation of it.

Maybe this was more significant than I realised at the time. I'll try to find it. I only use a relatively small number of Twitter accounts.

 

[Eric the meek]

No I don't. It would have been the Russian description of the same thing though. The gist of it was that it was unsafe for Russian troops to gather in any numbers, anywhere in the pre-war definition of Ukraine, including Crimea. The caveat is that it might have been the (Ukrainian/western) interpretation of it.

Maybe this was more significant than I realised at the time. I'll try to find it. I only use a relatively small number of Twitter accounts.

Sorry @raymondo, I can't find it. It was about a week ago, possibly a Tendar or Nexta tweet of a Russian Telegram message.

 

[raymondo]

Sorry @raymondo, I can't find it. It was about a week ago, possibly a Tendar or Nexta tweet of a Russian Telegram message.

No worries .
I often read things that I decide not to post...then forget the source.
If it's an ongoing issue then it'll surface again.

 

[Eric the meek]

A bit of context. US economy vs. Russian economy. Or to be more precise, Nvidia vs. Russian economy.

 

[raymondo]

Couple of interesting quotes in a screenshot from Davydov today: may not be precise news but..

 

[Eric the meek]

Couple of interesting quotes in a screenshot from Davydov today: may not be precise news but..
View attachment 183020

Recent history suggests a sequence of events. Americans and Europeans have dragged their feet on the provision of weaponry, conditions on the use of that weaponry, and 'boots on the ground".

Then something happens, usually in the form of some new atrocity or escalation by Russia (e.g. the supermarket attack in Kharkiv), which makes western minds up.

Consider this. The Kharkiv atrocity (definitely not a peaceful act) occurred just after the feelers were put out to freeze the war. Maybe it was just Russian diplomacy at work, a warning of what they would do if the war continues. Or it might be that there are two competing factions, one that wants to stop the war, and one that doesn't.

 

[raymondo]

Recent history suggests a sequence of events. Americans and Europeans have dragged their feet on the provision of weaponry, conditions on the use of that weaponry, and 'boots on the ground".

Then something happens, usually in the form of some new atrocity or escalation by Russia (e.g. the supermarket attack in Kharkiv), which makes western minds up.

Consider this. The Kharkiv atrocity (definitely not a peaceful act) occurred just after the feelers were put out to freeze the war. Maybe it was just Russian diplomacy at work, a warning of what they would do if the war continues. Or it might be that there are two competing factions, one that wants to stop the war, and one that doesn't.

"Maybe it was just Russian diplomacy at work, a warning of what they would do if the war continues. "
Yes, I was wondering that. Maybe Russia has said they will blanket Kharkhiv (Kyiv?) with glide bombs if their troops are targeted on Russian territory.

Hmmm, as we all know... Ukraine needs that air defense in PDQ.

 

[Eric the meek]

"Maybe it was just Russian diplomacy at work, a warning of what they would do if the war continues. "
Yes, I was wondering that. Maybe Russia has said they will blanket Kharkhiv (Kyiv?) with glide bombs if their troops are targeted on Russian territory.

Hmmm, as we all know... Ukraine needs that air defense in PDQ.

Russia has a history of sowing fear by making threats, veiled and unveiled, as well as setting any number of red lines, the crossing of which usually results in no action. They have been very good at this, influencing western behaviour. But they are not so good at it these days.

We don't know how many glide bombs they've got left. Their offensive near Kharkiv appears to have ground to a halt after considerable losses. There is a reason why Shoigu got moved and a reason why they put out the feelers to freeze the war.

 

[fly high]

Russia has a history of sowing fear by making threats, veiled and unveiled, as well as setting any number of red lines, the crossing of which usually results in no action. They have been very good at this, influencing western behaviour. But they are not so good at it these days.

We don't know how many glide bombs they've got left. Their offensive near Kharkiv appears to have ground to a halt after considerable losses. There is a reason why Shoigu got moved and a reason why they put out the feelers to freeze the war.

Probably true but equally they are getting vibes which suggest the West is faltering over it's commitment to Ukraine. All the rumours that the US wants Ukraine to accept the loss of the occupied land and sell out only encourages them.

 

[Eric the meek]

Probably true but equally they are getting vibes which suggest the West is faltering over it's commitment to Ukraine. All the rumours that the US wants Ukraine to accept the loss of the occupied land and sell out only encourages them.

I agree about the faltering west. That was certainly the case at the back end of 2023 and into 2024, until Congress approved the Ukraine aid package on April 21.

But is it still true? We are a month on, and I assume the weaponry will be beginning to arrive and put into use on the front lines. We have already seen some spectacular successes with ATACMS, the Russian offensive has failed, and they want to 'freeze*' the war.

I haven't kept up to date with the rumours that the US wants Ukraine to accept loss of the occupied territories. All I am aware of, is that their official view, quite rightly, is that it would be up to Ukraine.

* no illusion about what that means. It means Russia needs rest and respite, time for Belousov to get rid of all the deadwood and implement a programme of change, stockpile arms, re-mobilise, re-organise, re-arm, and go again.

 

[peterward]

I agree about the faltering west. That was certainly the case at the back end of 2023 and into 2024, until Congress approved the Ukraine aid package on April 21.

But is it still true? We are a month on, and I assume the weaponry will be beginning to arrive and put into use on the front lines. We have already seen some spectacular successes with ATACMS, the Russian offensive has failed, and they want to 'freeze*' the war.

I haven't kept up to date with the rumours that the US wants Ukraine to accept loss of the occupied territories. All I am aware of, is that their official view, quite rightly, is that it would be up to Ukraine.

* no illusion about what that means. It means Russia needs rest and respite, time for Belousov to get rid of all the deadwood and implement a programme of change, stockpile arms, re-mobilise, re-organise, re-arm, and go again.

I read yesterday that Sweden had also allowed its weapons to be used inside Russia, it said Sweden was pushing other allies into doing same and that was now considering it.

The US position it total madness.

 

[Eric the meek]

I read yesterday that Sweden had also allowed its weapons to be inside Russia, it said Sweden was pushing othe allies into doing same and that was now considering it.

The US position it total madness.

Yes, I read that (or at least the headline) about Sweden. The thing about the west (=30+ democracies) is that it takes time for us all to sing in concert.

Then, after some deliberation, one of us makes a move, and then the others get in line. It was UK who first sent long range missiles to Ukraine. Look at it now.

 

[Eric the meek]

Two good articles from the Guardian, which detail the Kremlin reshuffle and the reasons behind it.

‘Putin’s patience snapped’: Insiders marvel at Russia’s military purge

Under new defence minister Andrei Belousov, FSB is tackling corruption aggressively with serious implications for Ukraine

www.theguardian.com

Putin’s war machine reshuffle reveals his deepest fear – the rise of Kremlin rivals | Samantha de Bendern

By removing Sergei Shoigu and promoting key allies, Russia’s leader is shoring up the war machine he needs to justify his survival, says Samantha de Bendern of Chatham House

www.theguardian.com

 

[Rugrat]

I agree about the faltering west. That was certainly the case at the back end of 2023 and into 2024, until Congress approved the Ukraine aid package on April 21.

But is it still true? We are a month on, and I assume the weaponry will be beginning to arrive and put into use on the front lines. We have already seen some spectacular successes with ATACMS, the Russian offensive has failed, and they want to 'freeze*' the war.

I haven't kept up to date with the rumours that the US wants Ukraine to accept loss of the occupied territories. All I am aware of, is that their official view, quite rightly, is that it would be up to Ukraine.

* no illusion about what that means. It means Russia needs rest and respite, time for Belousov to get rid of all the deadwood and implement a programme of change, stockpile arms, re-mobilise, re-organise, re-arm, and go again.

I can't see how the arrival of the much needed weaponry is going to accomplish much more than maintain the current 'status quo'.

November is drawing ever closer and my fear is that Putin will just sit and wait or just commit more human lives that he has no concern about anyway.

After November who knows? I think that's when the emphasis will switch almost entirely to Europe, who haven't been able to provide anything like enough so far