Ukrainian advances are a positive sign, however they need to be careful not to overextend themselves with these recent advances.
The russians seem to be prioritising personnel (lol - in as much as russians can value a life) over territory, likely because they are outnumbered big time. Hence the partial-mobilization too.
The war will not be won in this year, and maybe not in the next either - so its important Ukraine don't waste too many men to reclaim territory, otherwise the russians will claw it all back and more. The war will only end when 1 side can no longer keep it up due to lack of money or men - sadly there will be no capitulation due to troops surrounding moscow (nor will the same happen to kiev)
I think this is an increasingly likely option for the Russians. They've been sugar-coating various retreats in the last few days (I'm being kind by calling them retreats), but it's a way to sell it at home - that Russia bravely fought against the tide of Western Satanism, but in the end the Devil really does have all the best tunes, with that huge arsenal the West have at its disposal. Who knows, a few of them might even keep their jobs, which is all the Kremlin really cares about at this point...
Plus Russia has turned to Iran and North Korea for weapons. Says it all about their standing.
Surely as things stand, Russia can only attack targets within Ukrainian borders, so they must wait till military and other supplies cross the border. To target locations in other adjacent states would have to be major escalation.
Personally I think that a combination of domestic unrest and dissatisfaction in the military will unseat the regime. The regime may head that off by making a strategic withdrawal, on the basis that they are not warring with Ukraine anymore but the collective might of the USA and NATO etc etc.
Yes, I agree with much of what you're saying and one thing is certain - there are no certainties nowadays...
And yet, I believe, and perhaps some here will say it's a Disneyish notion, that countries like China (and to a lesser extent, India) need a radical re-calibration of their societies if they aspire to become dominant superpowers. I think the West, for all its flaws, will remain superior as long as authoritative regimes stifle individualism and innovation, disregard the checks and balances of government, erode human rights and pursue policies of censorship and exclusion. But I'm straying off topic here and it’s a conversation for another time and place.
But Russia is far from close to those countries. There is a huge amount of mutual distrust and they are the type who would stab each other in the back at a moment's notice. The G7 countries (plus the EU) have a generally warm and friendly relationship by comparison.
There is far more to the world than Europe.
Countries like China and India etc are going to be the economic powerhouses of the next generation.
Russia knows this, hence why it has been working very hard for the last decade to build strong relationships with the SCO and BRICS groups. And those relationships so far seem to be surviving this conflict reasonably well. But only time will tell of course.
It's unlikely that Russia will be as isolated as some people imagine. And the US & EU are facing into some big challenges themselves over the coming years, so there is no guarantee of exactly where their position will be globally in the face of a shifting geopolitical landscape.
Some analysts say this is the first time in a history that a country has tried to legally annex territory in the middle of a war in those territories. It's unheard of.
Nope, everything that comes into this thread is not just from Twitter and Telegram. There are other, much more reliable OSINT, sources. Personally, I never use Telegram and I'll only repost a twitter snippet after I check the source material. In actual fact, you glean better information from the threads below Twitter posts, than the OP post itself.
Live UA Maps is a particularly good filter.
But, I see your point otherwise...
could he strike or disrupt or damage in some way the centre in Germany, the airport in Poland or Romania, or the border crossings and distribution centres in Kiev, Odessa, on the Romanian border?
Its a pretty easy question to answer though - no. Beyond the question of capability (and that would be far from clear) it would be cause a monumental backlash against him if not fully dragging NATO countries into the conflict. Beyond which, the route these supplies have been taking is well known to the Russians and they have been threatening to attack the supply lines for months. It is quite clear they do not have the precision weapons to do so.
Not to forget Putin has cancer and has two weeks to live, any day now.
Gas thing is if someone posted some rubbish Telegram link that was related to let's say Russian's gaining territory or having routed a Ukrainian unit you'd hear the same heads shout for a source/back up with evidence etc... (rightfully) yet we have posters putting up complete BS about nuclear weapons and when called out about it the coin flips.
It's beyond pathetic.
Cardassians.
Treatment if prisoners.
Slave camps.
Corrupt regime.
As do I. If I was a betting man, I'd wager that Kiev and possibly one or two of the distributors centres for arms on the Ukranian side of the Country.
There is a third unthinkable option that I've yet to see mooted, and it does not involve Nuclear weapons.
Arms for Ukraine enter the country from 3 areas, Poland and two other countries that have asked for anonymity. I'd say Romania is definitely one of them, given the C-130j and C17 traffic in the country, and possibly Turkey.
The whole thing is coordinated from an army barracks in Stuttgart, manned by a mixture of US, UK and Ukranian army logistical experts. Ukranian commanders contact the centre every morning with a "shopping list" of weapons and equipment, the centre arranges their procurement and shipment to one of the 3 centres and then it is up to Ukraine to get them across the border. The Ukranians in Poland drive to the airport just north of Rzeszow, load up the gear and then cross the border at points that ate different from the crossings used by humanitarian assets. Rzeszow is bristling with Patriot batteries at the moment, and it is in a NATO country, so Putins options are limited here, but, the question needs to be asked, could he strike or disrupt or damage in some way the centre in Germany, the airport in Poland or Romania, or the border crossings and distribution centres in Kiev, Odessa, on the Romanian border?
Supply chain is definitely going to be attacked in a big way. There are, despite some people rubbishing the idea, major movements in Brlarus and, more importantly, Kaliningrad..
If you were Putin, what would you do given the facts that I know you will certainly present in order to support your hypothesis...;)
Annexing areas and losing control of them within days: as said before, if it wasn't so mired in tragedy it would be pure comedy.
The military seems in such disarray I just wonder is there any chance of them turning on the political class.
I agree, I think being overthrown by military or inner circle is more likely, but I suspect the young would then swiftly take to the streets to demand change. Many of the older generation seems genuine supporters.
You're the clown if you can't see the difference between a reliable source (ie an outlet or person with a proven track record) reporting a development that will probably prove more or less true versus some anonymous nobody saying Russia is getting its nuclear weapons ready and Ukrainians are being told where they can take shelter, or Xi Jinping is under house arrest, or Belarus, for the 500th time, is about to join the war.
It's not about "don't use Twitter as a source", it's about applying a tiny bit of critical thinking before dumping sensational rumours here.
Thanks - useful.
So it looks like Ukraine is actually getting close to the pre-war frontlines in the east (which are presumably heavily fortified and would be very hard to break through) but Russia holds a large swathe of land in the south that was Ukrainian. Hard for us Irish to comprehend the vast distances and sq\km areas.
The screw begins to turn on Putin. A lot of hawks will be hovering to pick the carcass apart.
The door closes behind you, and the window opens in front. Two muscular men stand by you, one on either side, and gesture to the window - 'right this way...'
see the red lines
Eh, more like 2-3 days if fired from the widest parts...
Is there a map anywhere that contrasts the current state of the battlefield with the pre-February lines of control? I imagine the south is where the main Russian gains are still but would be interesting to see just how far the Ukrainians still have to push the enemy back to get back to that point.
Thanks in advance.
Whether people like this fact or not is irrelevant, no matter what current sensibilities may have arisen during 2022. However, the majority of the people of the Crimea identify as ethnically Russian. Not "politically" Russian, ethnically Russian and they have done for many years. Just because khrushchev gifted the peninsula to a particular Soviet Republic in the 50's didn't mean that these people suddenly became "Ukrainian". Nor did they when the Ukraine took it over once it became an actual country in 1991. The Crimea is more Russian than it has ever been Ukrainian and it has always been that way, irrespective of Putin's silly war. The Ukrainians have never gotten above 25% of the population there. They are firmly, and always have been, a minority in the Crimea.
The way this is going I wouldn’t be surprised if the way it ended was the army turning on Putin and ousting him. Seems more likely than a peoples Revolt at present IMO. How many times can he keep sacking the military top brass, must be at least some of them fed up with the midget.
Crimea's a big old chunk of land where pro-Russian sentiment is arguably more concentrated than other parts of Ukraine. I'm not saying Ukraine would be wrong in principle to push into Crimea, assuming they could put themselves in that position, but they'd really need to make some rational assessments before doing so. This push for Kherson has been a grinding one, and although breakthroughs have been made in the last days, it's been tough overall because of the defenses the Russians have apparently erected. So, one thing to ask would be what fortifications have the Russians placed in Crimea with the 8 years they've been there, and the 7 months since this phase of the conflict began? If Crimea promised to be a much longer version of the Kherson offensive, that'd give pause. If, on the other hand, the whole of the Russian military looked to be collapsing, fire away.
Secondly, it's one thing for Russia to see Crimea being attacked, but what of actually losing the territory, including Sevastopol? So far, I believe Ukraine have been pushing forward because Putin's nuclear threats appear hollow. Would they be hollow with respect to Crimea. I certainly don't know, but that's something that military intelligence would have to soberly look at.
When viewed on their own, no. HIMARS and its slower tracked relative, the M270 MLRS, are impressive systems but they share the vulnerability that all artillery systems have namely that when located without escort, they're basically toast. Their best defence is their mobility and the speed at which they can respond to a fire mission request, i.e. stop, set up, target, fire their salvo and then get the hell out.
However, when taken in concert with the way the Ukrainian Armed Forces have operated so far, their integrated, and highly effective command & control capabilities, battlefield awareness, access to intelligence, tactical abilities and the generally high level of both training and morale, the picture changes completely. Ukraine has, at least from what I've seen, proven extremely effective at employing the weapons systems at their disposal and in the hand of such an army, a system such as HIMARS is a major asset and a lethal enemy to go up against. Having said that, given their range, HIMARS and M270 are probably better utilised in going after staging areas and rear-echelon depots rather than providing fire support for front-line forces. Conventional artillery systems or mortars are probably better for the latter mission profile.
Yes, it's basically an underwater equivalent of an ICBM, except less detectable. Obviously it has to be nuclear powered. The Chinese supercavitating missile-torpedo and supposed submarine are even less credible.
I wonder whether it works better than the nuclear powered cruise missile that blew up in testing killing multiple engineers? That must have been a reall mess to decontaminate. Being Russia, they probably didn't bother and just moved to a new location.
Even one of the talk show guys this weekend highlighted the absurdity of annexing four regions in the middle of a full blown war and where the front is changing on a daily basis (mainly the Russians retreating).
Probably only a matter of time before the evil goblin himself is suicided from a very high window.
It's turning into a really large Jonestown
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/57b46741463fbc937e45703395be22da.svg)
