The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[plague311]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Ask The Don. He's the one that believes the Russian economy is strong enough to build and train replacement forces faster than they're getting worn down in Ukraine.

Legit question.

I don't know how long it takes to build the various forms of military equipment, but if they went full-bore to produce tanks, drones, vehicles, etc. what would be the best case scenario as far as delivery\war ready?

Even with money you can only make things happen at the speed they're able to happen at and I can't imagine that the production of tried and true war equipment can be done in a few months or up to a years time.

Am I on the right path or am I missing something?

Originally Posted by kookbreaker

Putin might be sending the pay….those along the way may be helping themselves.

You might be right, which would make me laugh even harder.

"I'm going to pocket their money, that should help morale!"

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Yeah, but you can also see why Putin is still able to build and train indefinite numbers of tanks and troops for the long term, under his current and forecasted economic conditions.

Russia is not building any tanks at the moment, due to lack of foreign parts, and even if they are able to restart production, it will be at a low rate.

[ginjawarrior]

Originally Posted by The Don

Yes, because he still has considerable foreign currency inflows and the ability to print money.

Like Nazi Germany, the "wartime" economy bears little resemblance to the "real" one. Meanwhile the non- military service economy grinds to a halt.

Take Russia trying now for negotiation as a sign that they're losing strength

Quote:

"The good news is that the Kremlin wants a negotiated solution," Schroeder told Stern weekly and broadcasters RTL/ntv, adding he had met Putin in Moscow last week

https://www.yahoo.com/news/german-ex...040642809.html

[SpitfireIX]

Additionally, as we've discussed, the Russians have gutted their training units, and they've suffered devastating losses to their officer corps at all levels.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Don

Yes, because he still has considerable foreign currency inflows and the ability to print money.

Like Nazi Germany, the "wartime" economy bears little resemblance to the "real" one. Meanwhile the non- military service economy grinds to a halt.

The Nazi wartime economy that hollowed out their nation, hollowed out their military, and collapsed under the unrelenting pressure of the Allies?

You'd have pointed to the Ardennes Offensive and said, "see?! They're advancing! No sign of Germany losing this war anywhere in sight!"

[Allen773]

I think Russia can fight this war for a few more years, probably. However, authoritarian regimes can last a very long time, and I see little reason to think Putin's regime cannot maintain its increasingly brutal grip on Russia for many more years.

Assuming Vlad and his fellow Chekhist allies like Nikolai Patrushev live for many more years (70 is the new 50, or something), their best-case scenario for remaining in power is turning Russia into something like a giant North Korea. Fortress Russia like you've never seen before!

But at least the USSR was a genuine superpower, even at its most murderously repressive.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

pro Russian Lebanese? Is Lebanon particularly pro Russian or is it just this outlet? I hadn't heard if they were an ally

From https://scrutable.science/viewtopic....129403#p129403

Quote:

Al Mayadeen, the channel on which he appeared, have also engaged in Holocaust denial. They are run by a friend of Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah. And while on them, aside from his idiotic commens on Ukraine, he also used antisemitic dogwhistles about "powerful forces", just as Abbott did in his defence. Meanwhile, Shameless Seumas is very interested in articles arguing that Ukraine should lose the war, and Chris Williamson - who was fervently defended by the Corbynite cult - is now claiming that Jews were settler colonists in (checks notes) Odesa.

[eerok]

Originally Posted by theprestige

I'm sorry, but "shoot the hostages to serve a higher principle" just doesn't resonate with me.

As it happens, I suggested no such thing.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Wudang

Don't they rely on a number of European firms for a lot of parts and machine tools?

Yes they do, which is why they are falling back on their considerable stocks of Soviet era artillery and munitions.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by theprestige

The Nazi wartime economy that hollowed out their nation, hollowed out their military, and collapsed under the unrelenting pressure of the Allies?

You'd have pointed to the Ardennes Offensive and said, "see?! They're advancing! No sign of Germany losing this war anywhere in sight!"

I guess the key question is whether we're in 1939 here or 1944.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Allen773

I think Russia can fight this war for a few more years, probably.

Even longer, if by "fight this war" we mean "continue to trickle in increasingly ill-equipped and ill-motivated troops to hold a line against Ukrainian forces that are not yet ready to launch a decisive counter-attack."

Especially if they're willing to hollow out other fronts (such as their border with China) to sustain their presence in Ukraine.

So it really comes down to how much longer Ukraine is going to let this phase of the war continue. At some point, does Ukraine accumulate enough western gear and ammo, enough drones and other resources, to make a major offensive push on the eastern front? What happens when they do? Does Russia continue to steadfastly hold the line? Does their vaunted artillery actually come through in a pinch?

I think the only way Russia fights this war for a few more years is if Ukraine takes a few more years to get ready for a counter-offensive. I think the Ukrainians are probably hoping to go on the offensive later this year. If they do, then we'll see what's what. We'll see whether The Don is right, and the the Russian forces really are deployed in sufficient depth and strength to throw them back, or if the line they're holding is held by Potemkin battalions and big dumb artillery barrages.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

Additionally, as we've discussed, the Russians have gutted their training units, and they've suffered devastating losses to their officer corps at all levels.

That's certainly the perceived wisdom.

Do you need experienced soldiers or an effective officer corps if your plan is just to reduce everything to dust using inaccurate artillery?

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by plague311

Even with money you can only make things happen at the speed they're able to happen at and I can't imagine that the production of tried and true war equipment can be done in a few months or up to a years time.

Am I on the right path or am I missing something?

It's likely to be a mixed bag, dependent both on what sort of pre-existing production capacity you have as well as how easily you can shift production capacity of other stuff over to it. In WW2, a lot of soviet tanks were made in a tractor factory. There's a fair amount of overlap between the two. But there's little to no overlap of anything non-military with something like the Su-57. And for some high-tech stuff, not only can they not easily expand production capacity, but a lot of it depends on foreign high-tech parts which are now cut off. So... maybe they can ramp up to significant production of new/replacement artillery barrels and shells. But the high end equipment? Not so much. Hell, they only ever made 16 Su-57's in over 12 years, and 10 of those were "test" models, only 6 "serial production". We aren't going to see them fielding new Su-57's in numbers.

Quote:

You might be right, which would make me laugh even harder.

"I'm going to pocket their money, that should help morale!"

It's probably been linked before, but worth linking again:

How Corruption Destroys Armies

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[plague311]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

It's likely to be a mixed bag, dependent both on what sort of pre-existing production capacity you have as well as how easily you can shift production capacity of other stuff over to it. In WW2, a lot of soviet tanks were made in a tractor factory. There's a fair amount of overlap between the two. But there's little to no overlap of anything non-military with something like the Su-57. And for some high-tech stuff, not only can they not easily expand production capacity, but a lot of it depends on foreign high-tech parts which are now cut off. So... maybe they can ramp up to significant production of new/replacement artillery barrels and shells. But the high end equipment? Not so much. Hell, they only ever made 16 Su-57's in over 12 years, and 10 of those were "test" models, only 6 "serial production". We aren't going to see them fielding new Su-57's in numbers.

Ok, that's pretty much what I was thinking. Anything that would be considered a game changer would be a year or so out, if at all.

While the artillery has done\will do damage, if the HIMARS can keep blowing up ammo depots, trains, and the like, then even if that equipment is produced quickly it might not have as much of an impact.

I read that it takes, on average, about 5 months to produce an Abrams tank. I have no idea how reliable that number is, though. I've also read tank production times vary from 12-24 weeks, so it seems consistent. While Abrams aren't what the Russians are using, I'm assuming that being cutoff from parts is going to increase that.

Which, all-in-all, means that Russia is pretty much fighting this war with what they have available to them now.

(Thanks for the video, it was a bit long so I'll watch it tonight after Chinese Buffet.)

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by plague311

...

I read that it takes, on average, about 5 months to produce an Abrams tank. I have no idea how reliable that number is, though. I've also read tank production times vary from 12-24 weeks, so it seems consistent. While Abrams aren't what the Russians are using, I'm assuming that being cutoff from parts is going to increase that.



Which, all-in-all, means that Russia is pretty much fighting this war with what they have available to them now.

The US kept Abrams production going even in times when it didn't seem there was a need for them. That's why they can still be built fast: the key skills have not been dispersed and lost.

Restarting production after years is a whole series of mountains to climb by comparison and if you can't get certain key components you might as well not bother trying. Might be worth building something else you can put together from parts you can actually get, but basically I absolutely agree that Russia is going to see out this war with the kit it already has.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by eerok

I disagree with rewarding any criminal action committed by Russia. The fight will end when justice is served. Russia needs to be brought before an international court, and held to account for its reprehensible behavior. Reparation must be paid and hostages must be freed. But first Russia must be beaten, which is the job Ukraine and the West face right now.

If only they didn't have nukes, or the Russian people actually held their oligarchs accountable, or their oligarchs actually had... sympathy or human compassion, then that may be possible. But since, as far as we know, none of that is true then its not going to happen. I'd be surprised if any of their hostages ever make it out of Russia ever again honestly. As theprestige said upthread he'd calculate their lives as more important than territorial gains and I am in a way, with him. But, until those people are back in Ukraine, in Ukrainian held areas, then taking the Russians at their word is just plain idiotic. And I cannot see them "going first", ie they'll demand Ukraine stop fighting and give up their arms... then they'll return their people. I'm actually surprised they haven't started released videos of them torturing/murdering/raping the people they took en masse already.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Even longer, if by "fight this war" we mean "continue to trickle in increasingly ill-equipped and ill-motivated troops to hold a line against Ukrainian forces that are not yet ready to launch a decisive counter-attack."

Especially if they're willing to hollow out other fronts (such as their border with China) to sustain their presence in Ukraine.

So it really comes down to how much longer Ukraine is going to let this phase of the war continue. At some point, does Ukraine accumulate enough western gear and ammo, enough drones and other resources, to make a major offensive push on the eastern front? What happens when they do? Does Russia continue to steadfastly hold the line? Does their vaunted artillery actually come through in a pinch?

I think the only way Russia fights this war for a few more years is if Ukraine takes a few more years to get ready for a counter-offensive. I think the Ukrainians are probably hoping to go on the offensive later this year. If they do, then we'll see what's what. We'll see whether The Don is right, and the the Russian forces really are deployed in sufficient depth and strength to throw them back, or if the line they're holding is held by Potemkin battalions and big dumb artillery barrages.

Haven't we already had discussions that Russia seems to have left their wide ranging Asian borders essentially unguarded, and deployed nearly their entire military (except those guarding Putin), to Ukraine?

My guess is they will resort to extreme ugliness when the Ukrainian Army approaches Russian territory. And by that I mean WMD or mass murder of Ukrainian prisoners.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Don

I guess the key question is whether we're in 1939 here or 1944.

We're in 2022. Remember how an unprepared German army annexed Austria because nobody took them seriously or was prepared to resist? That's Ukraine 2014. Or Ukraine Feb 2022, when the same unprepared Russian Army tried it on again, only this time their victim had taken them seriously, and was prepared.

Imagine if France and the UK had come to Poland's aid earlier, and Hitler didn't have Stalin to help him out.

No, we're definitely looking at something closer to 1944, where the Nazi advance is stalled, and its industry is dying, while its enemies are still gathering steam.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

And I cannot see them "going first", ie they'll demand Ukraine stop fighting and give up their arms... then they'll return their people.

Ukraine might agree to stop fighting, depending on the offer. They will never agree to give up their arms, not post invasion. That proved their necessity.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Ukraine might agree to stop fighting, depending on the offer. They will never agree to give up their arms, not post invasion. That proved their necessity.

Maybe if Putin really starts to feel some heat he'd agree to release all the hostages after just a ceasefire. OTOH, from my completely amateurish analysis, its just not how he or Russia operates. It'd be seen as a sign of weakness and his days will be numbered. My best guess as how this plays out is a decade or more of a low intensity war. Russia keeps lobbing the occasional missile or artillery strike from Russia into Ukraine to remind them they're still at war and then come up with some propaganda like Ukraine bombed a prison or something. Ukraine know they can't actually drive into Russia and oust Putin. So... life there is just going to suck for a long time. Eventually Putin will die and maybe eventually things will change, or maybe Russia just devolves into anarchy and their military packs up and walks home?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by eerok

As it happens, I suggested no such thing.

As it happens, I think you understand my point well enough

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

Russia is not building any tanks at the moment, due to lack of foreign parts, and even if they are able to restart production, it will be at a low rate.

I heard that they managed to restart production a while ago. No word on how effectively.

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

Maybe if Putin really starts to feel some heat he'd agree to release all the hostages after just a ceasefire.

FWIW, I'm not convinced that Putin actually can do so for all of them at this point on multiple fronts. First, many of those who have been effectively abducted are apparently very poorly monitored - there were stories of Ukrainians who managed to simply cross another border and return to Ukraine a while ago when the focus was a bit more on that issue, for example. This has a number of implications about their ability to keep track of those that weren't brazen enough to do such, too. Second, in a related point, it's pretty much a given that their bureaucracy isn't even remotely keeping accurate information, probably including when it comes to the abducted Ukrainian children. Third, those abducted and used as cannon fodder are difficult to return after use. Plenty more can be said, but... in short, don't count on Russia even being able to return most of those they abducted, even in the unlikely event that they'd be willing to do so. Some POWs, possibly, but even then, we need look no further than the POWs scheduled to be traded that were massacred by the Russians not too long ago for how trustworthy their word actually is. That's not to say to stop efforts to stop the abduction of Ukrainians and to get them back, of course, but acknowledging the situation at hand is something that should ever be done.

[Klimax]

Originally Posted by The Don

Will the EU, UK and USA be willing to plough in $100bn-$200bn a year for the next 5, 10, 15 years while Ukraine rebuilds at the same time that UK and EU economies are suffering because of Russia's withdrawal of oil and gas supplies ?

Guess what is in Donbas. There is your answer.

Quote:

Maybe it is, but those units are still slowly taking ground in the East.

While losing already other ground in same oblast.

Originally Posted by The Don

That's certainly the perceived wisdom.

Do you need experienced soldiers or an effective officer corps if your plan is just to reduce everything to dust using inaccurate artillery?

Yes. Especially in logistics. Trivial equation: No logistics no artillery.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Klimax

Guess what is in Donbas. There is your answer.

Yes there are plenty of petrochemical reserves there but they will take years and billions of dollars to exploit, longer and more investment if they are to be exported by pipeline.

Originally Posted by Klimax

While losing already other ground in same oblast.

Are you referring to the Ukrainian gains around Izyum, or somewhere else ?

Originally Posted by Klimax

Yes. Especially in logistics. Trivial equation: No logistics no artillery.

True, but Russia is still able to maintain their artillery barrage at the moment.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by The Don

True, but Russia is still able to maintain their artillery barrage at the moment.

With the note that the volume seems to have been dramatically reduced.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Aridas

With the note that the volume seems to have been dramatically reduced.

Yes, but they're still grinding on westwards on the Eastern front taking a village or two every day on their way towards the major cities.

It also looks like they might be about to breach the well established (since 2015) defensive lines in the South of Donbas which would result in significant advances thereafter.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not cheering Russia on, neither am I revelling in the bad news from Ukraine. Instead I'm trying to highlight that Russia is still doing immense damage to Ukraine and there's no indication of any significant reversals any time soon. Whether it's the supply of NATO long range artillery or the deployment of HIMARS, these are incremental benefits to Ukraine but there isn't yet any evidence that they are turning the tide of the war.

Winter is rapidly approaching and if Russia turns off gas supplies to Ukraine and Western Europe permanently, there will be lots of hardship which in turn may kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and weaken public support for the war in the UK and Europe.

[jimbob]

I'm trying to find some of the propaganda videos produced by the Russian puppet militias .

Remember that these are propaganda videos, so painting them in the best light.

In one, if they had the training and equipment of a US GI squad of 1944/45, their squad would have been more effective. The helmets providing some protection and not trying to shoot their rifles by holding them at arms length above their heads.

See also this comment on a Russian propaganda video, where at least some of the cannon fodder have helmets.


https://twitter.com/DefMon3/status/1...2Z3mQ_a51PkIEg

Quote:

Def Mon
@DefMon3
·
Aug 2
This one is a good one, ill translate it from Kremlinese:
"We send our stupid ass cannon fodder out in the open, 600m from enemy positions, without cover or protection, to bait Ukrainian artillery to reveal their positions." Video below. #nolivesmatte

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Don

That's certainly the perceived wisdom.

Do you need experienced soldiers or an effective officer corps if your plan is just to reduce everything to dust using inaccurate artillery?

Yes, because that's not a plan. Artillery is not magic. Even inaccurate artillery needs to be supplied and positioned and directed to fire on targets. Gun crews still need to be encouraged to lay their guns properly on the target, and keep up a steady rate of fire. Damage assessment still needs to be done, and accuracy reported back to the crews to adjust their fire. Even an empty apartment block needs to be ranged.

And empty apartment blocks aren't enemy formations. There's not enough artillery in all of Russia to just vaguely wave in the estimated direction of a Ukrainian force and assume enough rounds will hit the target by accident to make a difference. Sure, maybe you can do that with a city center or some other large, stationary target. But that doesn't do anything about enemy tanks, or enemy artillery. Inaccurate artillery, poorly crewed, and poorly informed by inadequate reconnaissance, are useless for counter-battery work.

This isn't WWI. This isn't a dozen howitzers bombarding the same quarter-mile of trench line every day, prior to that day's charge across no man's land. This is maneuver warfare. The Ukrainians are maneuvering.

You really need to give up this fantasy of magical Russian artillery barrages. A stationary village is not a motorized infantry company. Rubble is not destroyed tanks. Russian artillery is not magic.

[Klimax]

Originally Posted by The Don

Originally Posted by Klimax

Guess what is in Donbas. There is your answer.

Yes there are plenty of petrochemical reserves there but they will take years and billions of dollars to exploit, longer and more investment if they are to be exported by pipeline.

Originally Posted by Klimax

While losing already other ground in same oblast.

Are you referring to the Ukrainian gains around Izyum, or somewhere else ?

Izium and Kherson. And any other parts of front from which Russains are moving BTGs to Kherson.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klimax

Yes. Especially in logistics. Trivial equation: No logistics no artillery.

True, but Russia is still able to maintain their artillery barrage at the moment.

Far weaker and its not getting any better.Although it should be noted that not all areas got equal HIMARS treatment.

Originally Posted by The Don

Yes, but they're still grinding on westwards on the Eastern front taking a village or two every day on their way towards the major cities.

You are behind again. They are now taking at best a village or two after a week. At worst.

Quote:

It also looks like they might be about to breach the well established (since 2015) defensive lines in the South of Donbas which would result in significant advances thereafter.

Where? And evidence. This assertion is very vague.

Quote:

...
Winter is rapidly approaching and if Russia turns off gas supplies to Ukraine and Western Europe permanently, there will be lots of hardship which in turn may kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and weaken public support for the war in the UK and Europe.

There won't. Govs are busy preparing for such case. What makes you think there will be hardship? The worst case companies will be impacted, but not homes.

[lobosrul5]

Originally Posted by The Don

Yes, but they're still grinding on westwards on the Eastern front taking a village or two every day on their way towards the major cities.

It also looks like they might be about to breach the well established (since 2015) defensive lines in the South of Donbas which would result in significant advances thereafter.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not cheering Russia on, neither am I revelling in the bad news from Ukraine. Instead I'm trying to highlight that Russia is still doing immense damage to Ukraine and there's no indication of any significant reversals any time soon. Whether it's the supply of NATO long range artillery or the deployment of HIMARS, these are incremental benefits to Ukraine but there isn't yet any evidence that they are turning the tide of the war.


Winter is rapidly approaching and if Russia turns off gas supplies to Ukraine and Western Europe permanently, there will be lots of hardship which in turn may kill tens or hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and weaken public support for the war in the UK and Europe.

A village or two a week maybe... damnit I wish I could find the map and figures I saw the other day. Russia took just 160 square kilometers in the entire month of July, or .02% of Ukraine.

[theprestige]

Russia made a big surge at the beginning, and grabbed some territory thereby. Ever since, they've been slowing down.

The Don imagines they've got substantial reserves hiding in the shadows, unnoticed by western intelligence, ready to break through and make more big advances.

And we might still see such a breakthrough. I doubt it, but it could happen. If it does, I think it will look a lot more like the Rundstedt-Offensive, than like Operation Overlord. If nothing else, such a breakthrough would provide the Ukrainians a clear concentration of high-value targets to focus their increasingly-effective artillery fire on.

And as even The Don has acknowledged, the Russians cold suck at maneuver warfare. It's laughable to imagine their Soviet-era artillery and supply chain would be able to keep up with an army on the move, and provide timely and accurate supporting fire and counterbattery during engagements. In fact, I doubt they'd be able to fire effectively enough, or move fast enough, to retard a Ukrainian advance before their positions were overrun.

This war is no longer a question of what the Russians can do - we're seeing what the Russians can do. They've lost all momentum. The real question now is what the Ukrainians can do. If they can assemble and launch a major offensive this year, that's probably it for the Russians. If the Ukrainians can't do that, then this probably ends up in a decade-long stalemate along the current front.

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by lobosrul5

A village or two a week maybe... damnit I wish I could find the map and figures I saw the other day. Russia took just 160 square kilometers in the entire month of July, or .02% of Ukraine.

Another point that I don't think some people are grasping is that this isn't some tabletop wargame where the Russian player can keep an unlimited number of units in supply as long as each can trace a line of hexes back to Moscow free from Ukrainian units or zones of control. Every kilometer the Russians advance puts additional strain on their already overstretched logistics. They don't have enough trucks, drivers, mechanics, spares, or supply personnel, and those they do have are being steadily eroded. And the longer their rail and road supply lines become, the more susceptible to attacks from GMLRS, drones, and partisans they become.

[Jimbo07]

Originally Posted by theprestige

The Don imagines they've got substantial reserves hiding in the shadows, unnoticed by western intelligence, ready to break through and make more big advances.

I don't think any of us believe that Russia's got a lot of high quality, highly trained reserves (although Russian boosters still cling to the idea that Russia has yet to send its best). That said, the most optimistic Western boosters don't seem to be acknowledging the depths of Putin's depravity! They're recruiting from poor rural areas, so he can avoid a general mobilization. However, that option is always lurking in the background. I don't think we know how far he can be pushed!

Even if they're no longer effective warfighters, a bunch of poorly trained Russian pirates running around Ukraine still means trouble for Ukraine!

Quote:

And as even The Don has acknowledged, the Russians cold suck at maneuver warfare.

The Russian military has shown itself to be... not good, to say the least. People are still suffering. Does it even matter? I've seen one speculation that a slow burn stalemate suits Putin's needs of having a cause to wave the flag around.

Quote:

If they can assemble and launch a major offensive this year, that's probably it for the Russians. If the Ukrainians can't do that, then this probably ends up in a decade-long stalemate along the current front.

Captain Swoop says it'll be a rout. You're saying that if not, it'll be a decade-long stalemate. I guess we'll see. Anything short of a Russian defeat may be spun as a victory! Putin may not be being punished enough to even consider withdrawing right now.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX

Russia is not building any tanks at the moment, due to lack of foreign parts, and even if they are able to restart production, it will be at a low rate.

Maybe they got some T-34's they can take out of mothballs?

[SpitfireIX]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Maybe they got some T-34's they can take out of mothballs?

According to Perun they don't, unfortunately. It would be humorous to see T-34s go up against Ukrainians armed with modern anti-tank weapons. Perun does say that supposedly the Russians have 100 Katyushas in storage somewhere, though.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Don

Yes, because he still has considerable foreign currency inflows and the ability to print money.

How does that work? Printing rubles isn't the same as printing circuit boards.

Kontakt-5 is specific chemical compounds assembled into explosive reactive armor bricks. You can't just wedge a sheaf of foreign currency between two metal plates, bolt it onto a tank turret, and call it "armor".

[ZiprHead]

****posting Shiba Inu Accounts Chased a Russian Diplomat Offline

Quote:

An unofficial army of cartoon Shiba Inu dogs is making life hard for people who post Russian disinformation about the war in Ukraine online. They are known as NAFO, the North Atlantic Fellas Organization, a small but growing cadre of shitposters who’ve gathered to raise money for Ukraine and call out obvious propaganda when they see it. It’s getting hard to tow the Kremlin’s party line on Twitter without them showing up in the replies to mock and counter it.

Quote:

Ulyanov’s reply became a meme among the fellas, a rallying cry for the obvious stupidity of so much Russian disinformation. Replies and quote tweets from other Fellas poured in. People began parroting the phrase. Now, you can buy it on a T-Shirt from the St. Javelin charity that donates cash to Ukraine.

Ulyanov tried to play the whole thing off for the next few days and pondered aloud if some of the Shibas were bots. Then he vanished from Twitter for a week before returning on July 1 with the explanation that he’d taken a pre-planned vacation. “Now is the time to resume tweeting,” he said. The first reply is from a Fella account. They will not leave him alone.

Sending a Russian diplomat’s Twitter feed to reply-guy hell is one of the funniest things the Fellas have done, but they’re also raising a lot of money for Ukraine. St. Javelin reached out and now there’s a separate page on its store just for Fellas-branded merchandise. When I spoke to Kama, they’d raised about $47,000 just for the Legion and “at least another $10k for other causes and we have roughly made $30 to $50k through the St. Javelin store.”

[crescent]

In portions of Ukraine that are currently occupied by Russia, support for being annexed by Ukraine is at no more than 30%..

Two issues with the poll:
1: Many of the pro-Ukrainian people would have fled those areas.
2: 40% of respondents refused to answer. Pro-Russian people would have little to fear from answering positively to a Russian poll, so I would assume that most of that 40% don't support annexation.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by theprestige

My personal calculus has revolved around the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians that have been kidnapped and transported into Russia. It hinges on whether the Ukrainians can acquire something of value, and offer it to the Russians in exchange for getting their people back.

For me, those lives are paramount. I'd be willing to consider a substantial trade of territory and other things, to get them back. I would think it a great tragedy if the Ukranians were able to drive the Russians off their Crimean land bridge, but never saw those kidnapped Ukrainians again. I would consider trading the land bridge back to the Russians, in exchange for those lives being returned to Ukraine. I would consider giving up claims to the "separatist" regions, in exchange for those lives.

I'm not saying a Russian total or partial victory on those terms is preferable to continued war. I'm saying that's the central question, for me, about whether Ukraine should keep fighting or seek some sort of compromise that brings peace by giving the Russians something they want.

This comment stuck with me because I'm quite divided in myself on the matter. A part of me agrees with you fully: that getting forcibly removed Ukranians returned to their home country is more important than complete land reclamation.

Then there's another part of me that worries about other lives: those that live in the territory that Ukraine might leave to the Russians under such a deal. Those that might be lost in the future to the example set: that you can gain territory by taking hostages.

Where I landed with it is it's not my decision. The government of Ukraine has to decide what's possible and whether the implications are indeed worth risking for getting the people home. I remember seeing something recently about that kind of decision, can't quite remember where. The hero of the story decided making the right thing happen now was better.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by crescent

In portions of Ukraine that are currently occupied by Russia, support for being annexed by Ukraine is at no more than 30%..

Two issues with the poll:
1: Many of the pro-Ukrainian people would have fled those areas.
2: 40% of respondents refused to answer. Pro-Russian people would have little to fear from answering positively to a Russian poll, so I would assume that most of that 40% don't support annexation.

Refusing to answer doesn't automatically mean holding a particular position, though. Plenty might just not feel like dealing with such. Thus, 2 is a poor actual indicator in either direction. With that said, a coercive environment with, for example, officials that would be entirely willing and able to misuse/abuse ostensibly anonymous data or act to try to scam people into revealing information that could be hazardous to their health is not one where polls will tend to be particularly trustworthy. In the brutal warlord controlled separatist areas, conditions like that are fairly certainly met. In the newly militarily occupied areas, conditions like that are fairly certain met. Even those who claim to support the coercers' positions in such a situation cannot be trusted to be saying so out of honest opinion rather than fear/caution or sycophancy, before even getting to the people who have fled or been removed because of how much they don't support the coercers.

It's entirely plausible that it happens to be accurate in any particular case, of course, but it should be impossible to trust that it is. As I've said before, Russia has utterly destroyed any will of the people argument that can be made for any part of Ukraine to either separate/stay separate from Ukraine or to join Russia, by sheer virtue of the fact that it's impossible to trust any such result.