Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

People have been speculating since day one that Ukraine is about to lose and it's best if they lose quick and in the rare the event that they don't lose then they certainly will get nuked.  All theories so far have been proven wrong.

Posted (edited)

If Russia uses

2 hours ago, james22 said:

Consider: If Russian President Vladimir Putin tired of attrition and decided to use tactical nuclear weapons, how would Russian behavior—a rapid withdrawal and even leaving key equipment behind—be different? The answer: It would not be.

 

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/09/could-russias-sudden-ukraine-retreat-mean-a-tactical-nuclear-weapons-strike-is-coming/

At this point very unlikely. First, Russia has not even declared this special operation a war yet, second Putin himself has downplayed the nuclear option just a short time month ago.

https://www.reuters.com/world/putin-there-can-be-no-winners-nuclear-war-it-should-never-be-started-2022-08-01/

 

Also, to make it clear, in my opinion Russia has lost a huge battle but has not yet lost the war yet. It is clear now however, that victory as Putin sees it is far out of reach. If the Russians can stabilize the frontline, they could probably spin their own propaganda machine to still declare their “accomplishments” a victory.

 

In my opinion, the west should really ramp up their military aid to give Ukraine the offensive weapons they need (tanks, capable infantry fighting vehicles, F16’s )  to get this quickly over with. The Ukrainians have proven to be capable so if they get the full nine yards of weapons, the Russians are out of Ukraine including Crimean early next year.

 

A bit nuclear saber rattling from Putin is expected and should be ignored.

image.jpeg.b2477995a8e14f81c63f6ed93b359b8c.jpeg

Edited by Spekulatius
Posted

I am no expert but what I see from the few Russian accounts I follow is:

- Acknowledgement of the recent Ukrainian victories and Russian withdrawal.

- Blame is placed entirely on NATO weapons and intelligence.

- They are doubling down on their commitment to the conventional war and believe this is a temporary setback.

- The message is that as it's a war against NATO, those who oppose it internally are traitors.

- Large scale attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure are ongoing.  They will likely raise the bar in this regard.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

In my opinion, the west should really ramp up their military aid to give Ukraine the offensive weapons they need (tanks, capable infantry fighting vehicles, F16’s )  to get this quickly over with.

 

Maybe past performance should not be used... but historically US involvement is the kiss of death.  I only know what I see on TV -- and I have no solution...

 

My neighbors are doing their part by flying Ukrainian flags.

Posted

General "Mud" donned an Ukrainian uniform back in March-April when the so-called multi-mile Russian military convoy was trying to pull its weight (unsuccesfully) toward Kiev kicking and screaming. Will General "Mud" don a Russian uniform come Fall as Ukraine overextende its line of communication ??

 

I think like everything else, you cannot just take a snapshot and projected to the future.

 

If someone were to tell me about the subtlies of "declaring war" and "special operation" for Russia pre-Feb 2022, I would have laughed. After all, that subtly was less aparent with U.S. conducting a full scale war in Vientnam without declaring war (yes, yes, U.S. was already drafting). Point is, there was something there that I didnt know and seem to mean something to Russia. How many more other variable & mental tripwire there is for the Kremlin that we do not know about. The one think we can be clear is that the Kremlin (under current regime) cannot have any sort cease-fire that would allow Kiev to replenish itself. (i.e. Kremlin gets a vote too) 

 

I am about 1/3 through my book on Peter the Great. It is an incredible read. Will post it in the book section once i am half way through. The author did the world a service by writing such a biography. So well written. I am at the early stage of the 20-year Great Northern War, where a losely colliation of Peter's Russia, Poland and Denmark embark on war against one of the most powerful imperial force of its day : Charles XII's Sweden. At the battle of Narva (a fortress near the today's border with Estonia-Russia), Charles XII sweep a Russian force many times it size, after knocking the Danes and the Poles out of the war. That was just the start of this long 20 year war (and no one knew it at the time) that would end with Russia ascendence and Sweden losing its empire, if we can use that word.

 

What this has to do with today. Nothing other that, just that whatever you think you know, prepared to be surprised.

 

 

Posted

The Russian army certainly seems to be exposed as hollow. In the Kharkiv region Ukraine has liberated all the way up to the Russian border. Along the way the Russian army left countless amounts of tanks, other military vehicles, and ammo dumps for Ukraine to capture. Not to mention troops killed or captured in the hasty retreat. The invasion force of 200k soldiers by most estimates has taken over 80k casualties, and the volunteer brigades of 60 year old men they have been fielding lately are hardly going to be enough to replace them.

 

On the materiel side you would have thought they had endless supplies of cold war munitions, but now with the news they are turning to North Korea to buy shells you have to wonder how deep the reserves really are.

 

It seems like Russia will soon need to contract the battle lines back to the 2014 borders to have a fight they can handle. Either that or they do have to give up the pretense of this being a "special military operation" and take the risk of actually declaring war and full mobilization. Then they will see how much their citizens truly support the war effort, when it requires more than giving up a few western comforts and wearing a Z.

 

By the way, tonight's clip from Russian media is surprisingly candid. It's worth a watch.

 

 

 

 

Posted

I had the most amazing experience today and this seems like the place to share it.

When I was a teenager both my (now) wife and myself took a summer volunteer trip to Ukraine. We were mostly working with kids in a rural area, and it absolutely rips me apart that the 3-5 year olds I spent the summer reading to and playing games with are now almost certainly all engaged in a brutal war for survival. I'm often online late at night now because I can't sleep thinking about it.

A bunch of us were billeted with an amazing family in this little village. They took care of us, fed us, and were just wonderful hosts. Today, my wife got a whats app message (kind of a friend-of-a-friend thing) that someone was looking for winter clothing for some Ukrainian refugees who have kids a bit younger than ours, and did we have any extras/hand-me-downs that would suit. As the conversation progressed, she found out some information about the family.

It turns out that the family who billeted us in Ukraine ~20 years ago has fled the country. The parents, their two children, the children's spouses, and the grandchildren are all living temporarily with a family IN CALGARY (the medium sized Canadian city where I live). I have no idea what the odds of this are, it seems astronomical to me. Obviously we'll be doing the winter clothes and more, and we haven't made it down to see them yet as we just found out today. I'm sort of in shock and am a bit unsure of exactly what to do next, but had to share it somewhere and this thread seemed like a reasonable place.

Posted

Thanks for sharing @bizaro86

What are the odds indeed !!   there a lot of them in Saskatchewan as well

 

A remote Canadian province luxuriates in the global supply crunch | The Economist 

 

"Nor, it seems, can the world. The 15m tonnes of wheat and 20m tonnes of other crops that the province produces in a typical year will be vital to markets roiled by the war between Russia and Ukraine. So, too, will almost everything else Saskatchewan produces.

 

When Ukrainian immigrants first streamed into Canada at the end of the 19th century, the government of the day had a role in mind for them: to settle the vast prairies between the forests of Ontario and the Rocky Mountains. The minister of immigration knew what he wanted: “a stalwart peasant in a sheepskin coat, born on the soil, whose forefathers have been farmers for ten generations, with a stout wife and a half-dozen children.” Those with uncalloused hands could look elsewhere.

 

It was a good match. The landscape reminded many of Bukovina and Galicia in western Ukraine. Its aspen forests needed clearing but the soil was lush and the land dirt cheap. By the first world war tens of thousands had come, settling around onion-domed churches, often living next to the same neighbours they had back home. That migration established what would become the world’s second-largest Ukrainian diaspora, behind Russia’s. In Saskatchewan, where a tenth of the population has Ukrainian roots, events in eastern Europe are again shifting local fortunes. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has not quite prompted a stampede towards the prairie—the refugees arriving in Canada mostly prefer the comfort and energy of cities in the east. But it has caused the price of many of the commodities which drive Saskatchewan’s see-sawing economy to rocket like never before.

 

.................

 

Like most of Canada, the province also suffers from a shortage of workers. No other province has seen such slow population growth. Over the past century the ranks of Saskatchewanites have increased by half to 1.2m while the country’s population has quadrupled. The provincial government has been keen to take as many Ukrainian refugees as it can get. But despite ample jobs, cheap housing and a diaspora, Ukrainians have not come flocking. "

Posted

"The invasion force of 200k soldiers by most estimates has taken over 80k casualties, and the volunteer brigades of 60 year old men they have been fielding lately are hardly going to be enough to replace them."

 

60 year old's are too used to living by their own decisions - they run versus stay and get killed.

Whether their commanders shoot them, or the opposition, they are old enough to recognize that they are still dead. Whereas if they run ... they stay alive, and can easily blend back into civilian hood - smart. And all that captured Russian armament in the field can now instantly resupply Ukrainian forces.

 

Ever since Roman times (& probably before); the traditional defense has been to kill 1 in 10 of the remaining troops (60 year old's) as a warning to the remainder; deserters are shot for a reason. The riposte is to kill the commander before he/she kills you, and run. In the Vietnam era, it was typically a pair of grenades thrown into the commanders fox hole.  

 

This is quickly turning into another Russian Vietnam (post Afghanistan).

Keep squeezing the orange to extract the juice, and eventually the regime collapses - the Ace of Spades, and most of the other high ranking cards in the deck as well. Even in the US, the Vietnam War eventually brought down the administration of the time.

 

SD

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

Interesting to watch the mental gymnastics from Tucker Carlson and his goto expert McGregor:

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/tucker-carlsons-ukraine-war-expert-totally-debunked-in-72-hours/

 

Foxnews would fit well into Russian media landscape.

 

Indeed.  Slowly the evidence piles up.  If Ukraine is really only involved because the US is pushing them, why are so many going to their death?  If the equipment is all stolen, how are they holding the entire Russia army back?  If they really have 170k casualties (one claim I read on social media), how do they keep fighting.   The issue I have here is not Tucker but those blindly following him with no idea of Ukraine, it's history and no real interest other than to back their party line.

 

Edited by no_free_lunch
Posted

it's interesting that the Azerbaijan - Armenia conflict has flared up again right along the Ukrainian offensive and I don't think it's coincidence.

 

Armenia has been backed by Russia and Azerbaijan has been backed by Turkey. I think Azerbaijan smelled blood in the water and that's why they attacked Armenia when it became clear that the Ukraine had a huge success with their offensive.

 

The underlying thinking is that Russia is busy and can't help Armenia. As with the Ukraine conflict - Azerbaijan used Turkey's Bayraktar drones to hit the Armenians. Just another case where seemingly unrelated conflicts have an interaction.

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/15/azerbaijan-says-71-soldiers-killed-in-armenia-border-clashes

 

 

Another notable fact is that Xi visited Kazakhstan before meeting Putin. I think this visit may have more than a symbolic value because Kazakhstan ahs been distancing themselves from Russia with this Ukraine conflict and Kazakhstan may try to improve the ties to Beijing as a backup so to speak.

 

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-health-japan-china-72f848530e0b16d2cbd80d38e74fda03

 

I think these all are early indications that Putin's empire building (or rebuilding) ambitions are unravelling  due to the attack on Ukraine turning out to be a failure.

Posted

Spek,

 

While it is truth that Azerbaijan was heavilly backed by Turkey, Armenia however was not really backed by Russia in its most recent war last year. Russia did not do much to help Armenia, as Putin and the Armenian president didnt see eye to eye. 

 

But yest, the Turkish drone played an outsize role in the 2020-2021 war last year.

 

A captive ally: Why Russia isn’t rushing to Armenia’s aid – European Council on Foreign Relations (ecfr.eu)

Posted (edited)

This Peter Zeihan (i dont know who he is) doesnt understand the Iranian-Russian relationship. They are not allies. They sometimes have shared interest but more often than not, they do not. And in fact Russia has been helping Israel limiting Iranian influence in Syria.

 

Russia is not in Syria for Bashar, it is there for the port of Tartus, and by extension the government that provides that legitimacy. So Bashar is not going anywhere as he is the only one that provides that legitimacy.

 

Peter Zeihan calls this a Russian Alliance. Capital "R" and Capital "A". That is the a typical Western one-dimensional thinking mumbo-jumbo. Russia does not have alliances. It has satraps (Belasarus) and close geopolitcal regional part-time associates when interest aligns (Iran, Turkey etc), "oil world order" part-time associates (Saudi Arabia/OPEC+) and "geopolitical world order/big league" part-time associate (PRC) etc.

 

 

Edited by Xerxes
Posted
1 hour ago, mcliu said:

It's interesting that the West does not provide weapons to Armenia since it is a democratic country being invaded by an autocracy. Aren't there parallels between the Armenia-Azerbaijan and Ukraine-Russia conflicts?

And if the proxy war in Ukraine is about defending democracy, why is EU partnering with Azerbaijan?

https://www.politico.eu/article/the-eu-azerbaijan-gas-deal-is-a-repeat-mistake/

These are very good points.  The short answer is that Armenia's allies are Iran and Russia, oh and Azerbaijan has a lot of oil and gas.

Posted
2 hours ago, Dinar said:

These are very good points.  The short answer is that Armenia's allies are Iran and Russia, oh and Azerbaijan has a lot of oil and gas.

And on top of that you have the complication of Turkey, a NATO country, actively helping Azerbaijan... Not sure the West wants to go there given Erdogan is trying to distract the unhappy populace by reopening border disputes with Greece (another NATO member), and also has the ability to threatening Europe with refugees. Although I agree the West seems to be unfairly ignoring it. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...