I remember the start of the Russian invasion proper. There were infographics on the news detailing how much the size of the Russian military amassed around Ukraine utterly dwarfed what Ukraine had to hand in pretty much all aspects - man power, artillery, sea power, air power etc. I don't recall looking at that and going, "Yeah, Putin's going a little easy, there."
Maybe instead of not going in hard enough, the trick would have been to have a competent military. Some of the reports of what Russian battalions were doing would have been comical if the situation weren't so serious.
With what. There tanks are all gone. 30% of there airforce (the more modern part). There artillery is decimated. There navy in the Back sea is destroyed. There economy is in tatters. The army is pulling out of Ukraine and it's commanders will not send it back in.
What good are soldiers if you have nothing to arm them with. Moisin Nagent bolt action WW1 rifles and WW11 tanks that do not work.
They have more men ,that doesn't mean they have anymore professional soldiers,they never moved on from poorly trained ,poorly trained and motivated conscripts .
They started a modernising program in the late 90s /early 2000s and guess what they failed with that as seen in Ukraine,all great at parades or bombing civilian populations in Syria but they haven't done well since WW2 against anyone that has the ability to fight back
The effect of fostering a mafia state. Who wants to tell the boss bad news, or that they're skimming off anything and everything. Official army training reports where soldiers said they just turned up for photo shoot and not actual shooting training. The entire country is built on lies and cons.
BBC4 right now. A powerful and intimate interview with Gorbachev.
Flick over to it. Highly recommended it.
I was amazed to hear him talk so candidly about Russia losing ground and retreating in Ukraine (and not even being challenged). He was literally admitting that the special operation is going terribly.
And lose the pilots. He is probably right that they have more soldiers though and a good fraction of the population still support this crazy war so would back sending more soldiers.
It wouldn't be a gal .
In Slavic Russia woman don't lead
How much of the airforce have been shot down over Ukraine close to 300 and he's saying they have committed.
How many airforces can afford to lose that many aircraft in a few months
This is genuinely pretty astounding stuff, not only saying full mobilisation is necessary but impossible, but also basically "what the hell are we bombing power stations for, how is that going to help win anything and convince Ukraine we mean well?"
These are the kind of statements we were told were impossible to make in Russia today
I have my doubts about his analysis. He said russia hadn't committed it's air force or Navy. I seem to remember the flag ship of the russian black sea fleet got sunk.
Does he post on boards......
Asking for a friend
Yeah not the first time iv'e heard that tbh. There's no guarantee if he's ousted some level headed guy/gal takes his place.
I remember one of the guests on Eamon Dunphy's podcast talking about the war, and they said that Putin's inner circle has dwindled in recent years and it's pretty much dwindled down to a group of people madder than he is, making Putin the moderate voice. Scary thought.
I haven't seen the interview yet but it sounds like total nonsense. Throwing huge numbers of new recruits into battle is a fantasy and, as you say, they probably don't even have the equipment, military hardware or supply lines to even make it work.
Fred Weir is his name I think. He's a correspondent in Moscow with Christian Science Monitor.
For the time being, the priority is to defeat Russia and render it incapable of waging war. Thats the Nr 1 objective. Then we come to the nuclear issue. So, scenario Nr 1, Putin decides to go for broke, and launches nuclear strikes, the west responds, and its end of story. Nuclear problem solved. MAD, kicks in. Putin try's to go for broke, but instead, he is dethroned and another power structure emerges. So the new management will have responsibility for the nuclear arsenal. And in your scenario, some of these weapons fall into the hands of any nutter's, then it will be a case of the cards falling as they will, and any preemptive action designed for just such a scenario kicking in. Final scenario, in a post Putin world, where the military has been rendered powerless, and the economy destroyed due to the sanctions, and the fact that Russia is now a pariah state in the world , reduced to selling its oil and gas at a loss. Major street protests are a regular feature, food and medicines scarce, and worse hardship as the citizens have faced since the collapse of the USSR. Then when it has reached this point, sanctions lifted in limited nrs, based on the removal of all nuclear weapons. Or something along these lines, I guess,
Who was it? Maybe another of the David McWilliams types who tell you what happened after it happens.
Maybe but we must also remember from our own and other histories that ordinary, frankly poor, people often offer succour, support and information to one side or the other.
I hope RTE aren’t paying him too much for these interviews.
No comment-
Fascinating stuff tbh. Saying the word out of Russia is Putin is too soft and hawks pushing for more.
Not good news if true.
He's been on a few times before and he's always convinced Ukraine will lose.
Yeah, he's also claiming they can call up two million troops?
From where? And equip them with what?
Tonight's BBC News report from Moscow by Steve Rosenberg. Definite signs of 'trouble in paradise' and a growing awareness that the special operation is beginning to unravel.
Strange interview on Prime time. Guy saying Ukraine can’t win and Russia still have vast military resources.
Sounds like they're expecting a fight for Crimea alright.
More russians pulling back to Crimea or other russian border crossings
Big "The German Car Makers will tell Angela Merkel to give Britain a deal" energy off this post.