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

[Eric the meek]

Yes indeed, all of those possibilities .

Yesterday, on a related thread to the above, frequent Ukrainian poster MAKS suggested there was info/ intel that there were c. 4000 shells on that ship. Of course...now I can't find his post or recall the source he mentioned . Given the size and duration of the explosions (from the videos I've seen) I'd imagine a cargo of shells far more likely than drones (I have zero skills in such a judgement and happy to be corrected by anyone on here ).

Yes, I saw the same post (like you, I don't know where it was either). Will discuss more later. Right now, there's a football match on.

 

[US Seagull]

Ukraine war: US releases last military aid for Kyiv for now

The funds are the final tranche of aid the White House can allocate without fresh approval from Congress.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why can’t ignorant Republicans see the importance of backing Ukraine? Ukraine falling to Russia would be a terrible precedent in so, so many ways. Give them what they need until Russia backs down, claims victory anyway and that their “special military operation” was a success and then the bloodshed can end.

This is exactly the kind of world politics the USA should be getting involved with, not bombing the crap out of Iraq for no reason other than greed.

It's pretty simple really, the GOP is in Trump's pocket and Trump is in Putin's pocket.

It's a fascist turducken.

 

[raymondo]

Yes, I saw the same post (like you, I don't know where it was either). Will discuss more later. Right now, there's a football match on.

And what a match it was UTA

 

[Eric the meek]

And what a match it was UTA

OMG. Like most of the time, I didn't see that coming !

Back to the Novocherkassk, and that post (I'll try to find it tomorrow) would seem to be true at least in part, due to the way the ship went up.
Someone wrote that 'Russia will have felt that'. And in view of Putin's reported reaction, it rings true.

Bear in mind it came soon after Putin put out the feelers asking for a ceasefire.....

 

[raymondo]

OMG. Like most of the time, I didn't see that coming !

Back to the Novocherkassk, and that post (I'll try to find it tomorrow) would seem to be true at least in part, due to the way the ship went up.
Someone wrote that 'Russia will have felt that'. And in view of Putin's reported reaction, it rings true.

Bear in mind it came soon after Putin put out the feelers asking for a ceasefire.....

I'll have a trawl through tomorrow also, it's worth a second read.

 

[raymondo]

OMG. Like most of the time, I didn't see that coming !

Back to the Novocherkassk, and that post (I'll try to find it tomorrow) would seem to be true at least in part, due to the way the ship went up.
Someone wrote that 'Russia will have felt that'. And in view of Putin's reported reaction, it rings true.

Bear in mind it came soon after Putin put out the feelers asking for a ceasefire.....

I can't find the post from MAKS 23 yet. Most news outlets report that Kyiv say the ship carried Iranian Shahed drones. Quite possible I guess.

 

[raymondo]

I think this is a count of what was launched against Ukraine last night, and what they intercepted. More/better air defence needed.

 

[raymondo]

The UK promised another 200 air defence weapons today (BBC article)... that's enough for about 2 nights . I mean, it's something, but if Ukraine is really going to be helped it needs 000s ready to use.

"
The UK will send more air defence missiles to Ukraine after Russia launched a wave of air strikes overnight, the government has said.
The Ministry of Defence said about 200 weapons would be provided."

 

[Binney on acid]

Putin's inevitable response to The Republicans stance on American aid and Orban being one of his puppets. Way beyond tragic.

 

[Eric the meek]

I think this is a count of what was launched against Ukraine last night, and what they intercepted. More/better air defence needed.

The unprecedented scale of this avalanche of missiles across Ukraine, together with the increase in oppression towards Crimeans in and around Feodosiya, is telling.

When Ukraine attacked and destroyed the Novocherkassk, getting maximum bang for its buck, it struck a nerve with Putin. Possibly like never before.

I've always been mindful of how Russians see Crimea - as part of Russia, a holiday destination with a string of resorts along the Crimean 'riviera', and with Sevastopol as a warm water port available year-round (St. Petersburg and Vladivostok ice over in winter), it is a prize asset. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, because it coveted Crimea. When Ukraine attacked Sevastopol and pinned the Black Sea fleet back, it was thought that Russia withdrew all the fleet back from Sevastopol to Novorossiysk on the Russian east coast of the Black Sea. But it didn't. It seems that they only did this in part, instead using alternative ports on the south-east coast of Crimea.

We already know that Putin is letting it be known through the back channels with the US, that he wants a ceasefire, as long as he can present it as a victory. That won't be easy if Ukraine keep up the attacks on Russian assets in Crimea. Which I fully expect them to do.

Following the Novocherkassk strike, both Ukraine and Russia know that Sevastopol, all the minor ports on the south-east coast of Crimea, the Kerch bridge and the Shahed drone launch site south of Sevastopol, are all within range of Ukrainian missiles.

 

[essbee1]

What I don't fully understand is why, strategically, the Kerch bridge isn't being targeted 100%. Blow the thing out of
the water. What's to gain by leaving it in tact?

 

[Hastings gull]

What I don't fully understand is why, strategically, the Kerch bridge isn't being targeted 100%. Blow the thing out of
the water. What's to gain by leaving it in tact?

Didn't they target and partially destroy it some time ago, only for Putin to then launch a massive missile attack in a strop. This might be the reason?

 

[Eric the meek]

What I don't fully understand is why, strategically, the Kerch bridge isn't being targeted 100%. Blow the thing out of
the water. What's to gain by leaving it in tact?

Think what the Kerch bridge is and what it represents.

What it is, is a useful supply route for Russian occupiers of Crimea. That makes it a target for Ukraine. So it will be heavily defended by Russia.
But what it represents, in the future, is a possible escape route for those Russian occupiers who have made Crimea their new home. If the bridge is destroyed, there may not be a safe escape route for Russians.

I'm guessing that Ukraine would rather they left of their own accord, rather than stay in Crimea and give Russia an excuse to 'liberate' them at some point in the future, with Crimea becoming the new Donbas. So, maybe it will be destroyed later rather than sooner?

But Ukraine can only destroy it once. When it is eventually destroyed, it will be hugely symbolic, and could be a real watershed. Some things in life are worth waiting for.

 

[essbee1]

Think what the Kerch bridge is and what it represents.

What it is, is a useful supply route for Russian occupiers of Crimea. That makes it a target for Ukraine. So it will be heavily defended by Russia.
But what it represents, in the future, is a possible escape route for those Russian occupiers who have made Crimea their new home. If the bridge is destroyed, there may not be a safe escape route for Russians.

I'm guessing that Ukraine would rather they left of their own accord, rather than stay in Crimea and give Russia an excuse to 'liberate' them at some point in the future, with Crimea becoming the new Donbas. So, maybe it will be destroyed later rather than sooner?

But Ukraine can only destroy it once. When it is eventually destroyed, it will be hugely symbolic, and could be a real watershed. Some things in life are worth waiting for.

Fair enough Eric. Makes sense.

 

[raymondo]

I think this is a count of what was launched against Ukraine last night, and what they intercepted. More/better air defence needed.

The unprecedented scale of this avalanche of missiles across Ukraine, together with the increase in oppression towards Crimeans in and around Feodosiya, is telling.

When Ukraine attacked and destroyed the Novocherkassk, getting maximum bang for its buck, it struck a nerve with Putin. Possibly like never before.

I've always been mindful of how Russians see Crimea - as part of Russia, a holiday destination with a string of resorts along the Crimean 'riviera', and with Sevastopol as a warm water port available year-round (St. Petersburg and Vladivostok ice over in winter), it is a prize asset. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, because it coveted Crimea. When Ukraine attacked Sevastopol and pinned the Black Sea fleet back, it was thought that Russia withdrew all the fleet back from Sevastopol to Novorossiysk on the Russian east coast of the Black Sea. But it didn't. It seems that they only did this in part, instead using alternative ports on the south-east coast of Crimea.

We already know that Putin is letting it be known through the back channels with the US, that he wants a ceasefire, as long as he can present it as a victory. That won't be easy if Ukraine keep up the attacks on Russian assets in Crimea. Which I fully expect them to do.

Following the Novocherkassk strike, both Ukraine and Russia know that Sevastopol, all the minor ports on the south-east coast of Crimea, the Kerch bridge and the Shahed drone launch site south of Sevastopol, are all within range of Ukrainian missiles.

What's the source for the back channel ceasefire discussions...I believe what you say, just haven't seen it.
Would be a mistake for Ukraine to agee to a ceasefire IMO, also it will be a mistake if the West don't speed up supply of missiles/shells to Ukraine so they can target Crimean targets any time they want.
Clear that Russian air defence still has major weaknesses, whether it was just one missile that destroyed that ship, or whether their system was overloaded by a number.

 

[raymondo]

Think what the Kerch bridge is and what it represents.

What it is, is a useful supply route for Russian occupiers of Crimea. That makes it a target for Ukraine. So it will be heavily defended by Russia.
But what it represents, in the future, is a possible escape route for those Russian occupiers who have made Crimea their new home. If the bridge is destroyed, there may not be a safe escape route for Russians.

I'm guessing that Ukraine would rather they left of their own accord, rather than stay in Crimea and give Russia an excuse to 'liberate' them at some point in the future, with Crimea becoming the new Donbas. So, maybe it will be destroyed later rather than sooner?

But Ukraine can only destroy it once. When it is eventually destroyed, it will be hugely symbolic, and could be a real watershed. Some things in life are worth waiting for.

I tend to think of the Kerch bridge differently:
- it can be destroyed multiple times if it's rebuilt
- there's another escape route back to Russia via the land bridge; Ukraine is nowhere close to a counteroffensive reaching the south coast yet

Personally I would say...get more air defence systems in to protect Ukrainian cities from Russian attacks... then take out the Kerch bridge. I can't see a negative,but am willing to defer if appropriate!

 

[Binney on acid]

According to the BBC, Ukraine has launched missile and drone attacks against Belgorod, causing ten fatalities. I think I'm losing my mind ! One minute I'm in tears, because the double amputee Tony Huggell has received the British Empire medal in the New Years honours list, and a few minutes later, I'm rejoicing about Russian deaths........

 

[Triggaaar]

Didn't they target and partially destroy it some time ago, only for Putin to then launch a massive missile attack in a strop. This might be the reason?

No that won't be the reason. Putin will launch everything he can to upset Ukraine. He'll stop when he runs out. Ukraine won't be trying to appease Russia, it's gone a bit past that.

 

[Eric the meek]

What's the source for the back channel ceasefire discussions...I believe what you say, just haven't seen it.
Would be a mistake for Ukraine to agee to a ceasefire IMO, also it will be a mistake if the West don't speed up supply of missiles/shells to Ukraine so they can target Crimean targets any time they want.
Clear that Russian air defence still has major weaknesses, whether it was just one missile that destroyed that ship, or whether their system was overloaded by a number.

The source is the New York Times. There are now multiple other sources, but they may have just got the news from the NYT.

I didn't post the link to the article, as you need a subscription, and I didn't want to get into any trouble with Bozza and the mods.

I agree it would be a mistake for Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire. The very fact that Putin has asked for a ceasefire in private (while continuing his bravado in public), is all the more reason not to agree to it. We don't want to facilitate his duplicity, and surely want the Russian people to wake up, rather than enable Putin to save his skin by continuing to mislead them. Also the fact that he has approached the Americans instead of Ukraine, shows he is still making miscalculations. Offering a ceasefire, while illuminating, was itself a miscalculation.

 

[raymondo]

The source is the New York Times. There are now multiple other sources, but they may have just got the news from the NYT.

I didn't post the link to the article, as you need a subscription, and I didn't want to get into any trouble with Bozza and the mods.

I agree it would be a mistake for Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire. The very fact that Putin has asked for a ceasefire in private (while continuing his bravado in public), is all the more reason not to agree to it. We don't want to facilitate his duplicity, and surely want the Russian people to wake up, rather than enable Putin to save his skin by continuing to mislead them. Also the fact that he has approached the Americans instead of Ukraine, shows he is still making miscalculations. Offering a ceasefire, while illuminating, was itself a miscalculation.

Thanks @Eric the meek I'll search the NYT