Ukraine Today

Users who are viewing this thread

But dude, those pr guys in Kremlin are not kidding. They are planting so many easter eggs in real time that I can't even.
There were nine rings for the CIS leaders with Putin taking one of them. Sauron gave the Kings of Men nine rings to turn them into Nazgûl slaves and kept the one ring of power for himself. Where’s the Kremlin PR in that social media allegory?
Probably just another coincidence like:
Anyway, why is it always windows?
Anyway, interesting summary of war funding:
 
Last edited:
Russia still seems to have more missiles than good sense https://whereisrussia.today/feed/news/the-decline-of-russia-s-missile-stock
I-vh_.jpg

Russian rate of artillery fire has dropped from 60,000 shells per day to 20,000 shells per day https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...-latest-ukrainians-must-try-putin-war-crimes/
 
Last edited:
A report by state-owned news agency TASS, citing Donetsk officials and saying that Ukrainian forces were able to identify the target from soldiers using their Russian mobile phones, has provoked anger among Russia’s military blogger community.
Grey Zone, a Telegram channel linked to the Wagner mercenary outfit, said that around 500 men were billeted in the complex. Grey Zone went on to blame commanders for lodging large numbers of soldiers in a building vulnerable to artillery fire.

Ukraine claims 400 dead, Russian claims 63 - Russian military bloggers closer to Ukraine than Official Russian estimates.


Machine translation of Telegram post by Igor Girkin:
EoIrz.jpg


Such profound military failures will continue to complicate Putin’s efforts to appease the Russian pro-war community and retain the dominant narrative in the domestic information space. Russian sources claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the military and the Investigative Committee to investigate the incident in Makiivka by January 6.[26] Putin’s inability to address the criticism and fix the flaws in Russia’s military campaign may undermine his credibility as a hands-on war leader.


3T1b-.jpg

In Patrushev's report, the ‘total’ losses as a result of the AFU strike on the facility in Makiivka are 312 dead and missing and 157 wounded
Seems to be the reason for sacking Sergei Surovikin
Seems all the officers survived as they didn't have their new year party on top of an ammo dump with the riff-raff
 
Last edited:
A bit extreme to get the youth to stop obsessing with their phones, but it worked.
They've got a lot to phone home about:



Moscow’s troops used encrypted phones at the beginning of the conflict but “they were old-generation phones from the 80s and 90s which ran into problems. So they started using civilian phones instead.”https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/01/05/world/ukraine-strike-russian-tech-weakness/


or unabridged:




Watch out for yellow artillery shells:
“Two months ago, for the first time in the years of independence, Ukraine began to mass-produce artillery ammunition of 152 mm caliber,” read the December 2022 Ukroboronprom statement. “Unfortunately, the war dictated new rules, so the production of projectiles is completely dispersed over a large number of cities in order to make it impossible for the enemy to cover our employees with rockets.”
recent evidence that 155mm shells from Pakistan may have made their way to Ukraine along with propellant charges, which are equally as important as they allow for the firing of said shells.
152mm artillery shells cost Russia $580 in 2016 have a current market price of $2,000-3,000 per shell.
 
Last edited:
I heard on the local radio while I was out that China is considering sending ammo and weaponry to Russia. I can't imagine they will be "allowed" to do this, but if they do try, I wonder if sanctions will convince them not to.

Life & Death

A bit late, but damn, the casualties really must be really high for this to be a thing.
 
It's really been a year, and only just now are heavy tanks being delivered. Fighter aircrafts might also be delivered, but was probably more needed at the start of the war.
Weapon deliveries have really been sluggish out of fear of being too aggressive/provocative/interventionist.
It's time to stop pretending the West is not in a proxy war with Russia and just treat it like an actual war.
 
It's time to stop pretending the West is not in a proxy war with Russia and just treat it like an actual war.
What does that even mean? Total war?
I see the slow escalation as something logical in internal politics of NATO countries, where you need voter support for substantial military help and greater military commitments.
I'm not sure if it's related to any desire not to spook Putin into something rash and explosive.
 
I'm sure there are NATO "little green men" on the ground in some capacity. At the very least the Ukrainian army is getting tactical and strategic intelligence far beyond its stated capabilities. That being said, an open declaration of war against a prominent antipode nuclear power is another thing entirely and it'll take a bit more before the West warms up to opening that particular can of worms. We'll see how things go though.
 
Russia never declared war. Why would other countries do it?
The US troops killed Wagner mercs in Syria on several occasions. That didn't escalate anything.
I believe that the West will have to actually realize that Ukraine is not Russia and that acting on its turf is not an attack on Russia proper. I think that many decision-makers in the West are not there yet.
 
The US troops killed Wagner mercs in Syria on several occasions. That didn't escalate anything.
The shoe was on the other foot for some of those, with Wagner initiating contact against US personnel. Self-defense is universal, even if it takes the form of non-stop artillery, airstrikes, and an AC-130 and no defenders actually being wounded.
 
“NATO-Ukraine pact that falls far short of … NATO membership”
https://www.understandingwar.org/project/ukraine-project 25/2/23
UK, French, and German officials are reportedly preparing a NATO-Ukraine pact that falls far short of the protections Ukraine would receive from NATO membership and appears to reflect a desire to press Ukraine to accept a negotiated settlement on unfavorable terms. The Wall Street Journal reported that the exact provisions of the pact are undecided, but the officials indicated that the pact will provide advanced military equipment, arms, and ammunition to Ukraine, but not Article V protection or a commitment to station NATO forces in Ukraine—falling short of Ukraine’s aspirations for full NATO membership. The officials stated that the pact aims to provision Ukraine so that Ukrainian forces can conduct a counteroffensive that brings Russia to the negotiating table and deter any future Russian aggression. The Wall Street Journal noted that these officials expressed reservations about the West’s ability to sustain a prolonged war effort, the high casualty count that Ukraine would sustain in such a prolonged war, and Ukrainian forces’ ability to completely recapture long-occupied territories like Crimea, however. The Wall Street Journal contrasted these officials’ private reservations with US President Joe Biden’s public statements of support—which did not mention peace negotiations—and with Central and Eastern European leaders’ concerns that premature peace negotiations would encourage further Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin has given no indication that he is willing to compromise on his stated maximalist goals, which include Ukraine’s “neutrality” and demilitarization—as well as de facto regime change in Kyiv, as ISW has consistently reported.
 
Why do they talk as if membership was a viable option. It is so annoying and cheap. Same for EU membership.
Ukraine gets special treaties and status, and all that matters are the details of those treaties, not idle speculation about membership.
appears to reflect a desire to press Ukraine to accept a negotiated settlement on unfavorable terms
this is the important bit tho
 
My main concern is that the war will drag out (for years) and Ukraine fails to make considerable advances. Both sides fighting back and forth over minor pieces of land/villages, while using exorbitant amounts of ammunition.
Western countries will grow weary of financially spending the equivalent of an Afghan war in Ukraine.
I think secretly countries like France and Germany are pondering an exit strategy that includes Ukrainian concessions, i.e. surrendering land. (I did not allude to the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact!).

There are no negotiations to be made with Russia unless they're winning. If they lose they'll withdraw and spin it (propaganda) into western aggression and Nazi sympathy (and how it required the entire Western World to keep Russia out of eastern Ukraine, or something). Or it's Putin returning victoriously, like Napoleon from Egypt.
 
I believe that the situation is much worse and much more globally significant. Paradoxically, this allows me to have a more optimistic outlook on the future of this war.

I think that Western leaders secretly hate Zelensky's guts for his initial decision to fight. If he just accepted Biden's offer and left Kyiv. If Russian troops could occupy Kyiv, displace the government, and install a new one, loyal to Russia, none of this would have to happen. Russia would just make Ukraine whole again, with Crimea and Donbas, under a puppet regime. The West would be very angry, there would be sanctions, and there would be diplomatic repercussions but there would be no actual threat to global peace and no reason to inch anywhere close to military confrontation with Russia. If they just did a "clean" regime-toppling job like the US do when they invade people... alas.
But as Zelensky chose to fight and so did the entire nation along with him, as Russians were unable to seize Kyiv, eventually everyone understood that it was going to be a war of territorial conquest instead. With chunks of land changing hands. And that's the actual no-no here in my opinion. Territories can secede, countries can collapse but no one is allowed to enlarge their territory via an aggressive war because that is how world wars start. I honestly believe that is the only reason the West is so invested in the de-occupation of Ukraine.

So I believe that Russia can not be allowed to keep its territorial gains lest the entire post-WW2 world order crumbles. Which, to be fair, is Putin's self-declared goal in this war after all.
I can not see a scenario where this war drags on which does not result in 1) the west looking impotent and 2) more conflicts sparkling across the globe. Ukraine's NATO membership is not a certainty but it is not off the table either. I hope you don't believe the platitudes that the West is afraid of escalation. The West escalates exactly to match Russia's stubbornness. First, we were offered to give up, then we only received armament fit for guerilla warfare, then we received artillery, then anti-aircraft systems, then tanks, jets will come next, NATO membership is somewhere along that progression of "that will never happen -> okay that just happened".
The West can not afford not to shift its position when Russia does so constantly. Even if it chose to be reactionary, you can either call, re-raise or fold, there's not much wiggle room. When Russia raises so aggressively, I expect even more unpredictable moves from the West. I think what many onlookers in the west fail to notice is that their future way of life actually hangs on the outcome of this war and that is why the political class is so hyped about that small guy Zelensky. It's not because he's so charismatic and everyone is so virtuous in helping a beleaguered democratic nation. It's not because of Biden's son's shady deals with Burisma, boys. Not because of military-industrial complex lobbies. It's about the absolutely real national interests of everyone who enjoys the global status quo.
 
Back
Top Bottom