The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[Capt. Ironpants]

How many ordinary Iraqis died because Bush and Blair, for reasons only known to them, decided that invading Iraq was the way to.go. The previous decade, on the pretext that it was aimed at Saddam's WMD, sanctions were imposed aimed at topping Saddam. Problem was ordinary Iraqis did the dying and suffering whilst the Baath leadership continued enjoying their imported food, cigars and furniture.

Getting back to the present: I'll.say again what I said when this whole tragedy started; the Ukraine needs the West but it has to exercise extreme caution in ensuring it does not get stuck in a Western/Russian power play.

Zelansky's desperate for a ceasefire and nobody can blame him but I'm curious as to how the West feels about the concessions he's willing to make? Has the U.S. said anything about the ongoing peace talks? Will it try to influence what the Ukraine might agree to with Russia?

Ref Iraq: The baby-killing sanctions that did not bring about the stated result were getting to be a moral liability. I suppose only old-timers can remember Albright's "Yes, it's worth it" moment. As Saddam had once been our boy during the Iran-Iraq War back when Cold War proxy wars abounded, but had got too big for his britches, I suppose Bush and Blair also found him both offensive and embarrassing. I always thought the best (and kindest) thing we could have done is go in, take out Saddam and his goons, install a nicer and more beholden dictator and go home. But that would have been Politically Incorrect and "too colonial". Perhaps they were also ideologically-driven and actually believed all that democracy stuff? Did they really think they could make the world over in our image, buy it a Coke and it would be all honey bees and apple trees from there in some utopian End of History promised land? Only any fool could see it would be a disaster in Iraq. The one thing that worked there was making an example out of a dictator who flirted with WMD (got Gaddafi to shape up, for one). But then we undid that with Libya. So... I have no clue.

The regime change thing backfired in Egypt, Libya, Afghanistan, and so on. (Or maybe not in Libya. Maybe they weren't stupid enough to think democracy would work there, and a failed state sprouting slave markets and launching leaky boats full of migrants toward Europe was what they wanted all along, especially with Gadaffi's weapons stockpiles flowing to their new pet terrorists in Syria.) They called for Assad's head, but it's still attached. NK's Rocketman rocks on. They claimed it worked with Milosevic, but the Serbs wanted rid of him anyway (and had for some time).

All this regime change business seems to prove one principle and one only: you can be the world's nastiest dictator so long as you've got nukes and you are safe, even if you hide Osama in your backyard. Nope, playing mostly nice and giving up your WMD doesn't work (see Libya). Not a good lesson, if you ask me. Certainly not lost on Iran. (And now that Team Biden appears to be attempting, without much success, to court Iran, and having called the KSA a "pariah", I wonder whether the Saudis will look to get some presents from their Pakistani friends? This could turn out fun!) Failing gettting your paws on some nukes, it's best to cozy up to Russia and/or China.

You are correct about Ukraine needing the West and being cautious about getting sucked into power plays. It is a shame that Ukraine could not have maintained a dignified sort of neutrality and served as a bridge between between Russia and Western Europe. It would have been a lucrative path as well, had they played their cards right. But that would have required more wise, capable and honest leaders on their part, and we (mainly US) would have had to take a different tack regarding Russia back in the 1990s (Kennan and Baker instead of the uberhawks of both the Bush and Clinton administrations). I've always thought that had we listened to Kennan and Baker, there likely never would have been a Putin. Sometimes I wonder if I'm a hopeless dreamer to think so, but it looks like I'm not alone:

Opinion | What Did We Expect? (Published 2008)

President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia gave Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin an excuse to exercise his iron fist.

www.nytimes.com

But no, we listened to the folks who kept insisting:

Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.​

​

Sorry for carrying on, but this has always grieved me. There were other chances to prevent the Cold War II we're now in even after Putin came to power. Those chances dimmed after 2007 and died in 2014. But I've carried on too long already. This is a good summary, I think. I can't believe I found something like this:

‘Not One Inch Eastward:’ How the War in Ukraine Could Have Been Prevented Decades Ago

Blake Fleetwood writes about how decades of broken American promises led to the current crisis in Ukraine.

scheerpost.com

As for Zelensky and concessions, the Biden administration has been dismissive of today's talks and said that Russia is not serious. I have not seen any statements by European leaders, but there were those expulsions of Russian diplomats today. Will they try to influence Zelensky? Of course they will. It appears the Russians prefer to keep the Americans out of negotiation sessions and Zelensky is going along with that for now.

 

[Feanor]

Journalist Sergej Sumlenny on Russian soldiers in Ukraine calling home, reporting that Ukraine has something called "asphalt". I guess many of the Russian soldiers come from the poorer parts of Russia?

Sergej Sumlenny on Twitter: "" / Twitter

This doesn't seem credible. The claims he's making are rather strange and he's obviously quite partisan. I'd love to see the original material he cites on Russian soldiers not knowing about pavement or street lights.

Earlier in the day it was presented by various media (Turkish and European mainly) as some sort of compromise by the Russians. I see now the US is calling it for what it is, just a way for the Russians to delay a ceasefire until they get a more favorable military position while still claiming they are offering some kind of concession. But indeed that Northern front was hopelessly bogged down after the Russians failed to accurately assess Kiev's defenses. Not only that but the Russian North-Western thrust could have even been cut off if the Ukrainians could mount powerful counterattacks simultaneously from the West and from Kiev. So the Russians are not offering anything in fact, they just maneuver out of an unfavorable military position while claiming they do some kind of concession.

I don't think they're maneuvering out of anything and I don't see any major counter-offensives taking place. At most we see local platoon-company level counter-attacks. I think Russia has halted offensive operations and instead is slowly expanding their area of control (note how they entered Slavutich, something they previously avoided). I think this has to do with the resources they intend to devote to those areas. If we see a major decrease in Russian strikes around that area or we see Ukrainian troops entering towns some distance into Russian-held areas, that will be an indicator. So far those are absent.

The key question is what will the Ukrainians chose to do about Donbass, will they defend Slaviansk-Kramatorsk area or retreat. If the latter I think it would be a clear indication that Zelenski is willing to consider territorial concessions. Although personally I think it will be the former and thus a prolongation of the war for another month or longer.

If they allow themselves to be encircled there it would sacrifice the lives of those troops, and doom the citizens of the town to heavy urban combat. Militarily the wiser option is to pull those troops back. Politically however there may be other considerations. And strategy is dictated by goals, which are inherently political. If Russia can take the towns in the south-east, and even north-east, without a fight, or with minimal fighting and damage to the town, the locals may be more willing to acquiesce to Russian political dominance. If these urban areas turn into battlegrounds, the cities are destroyed, and the citizens are going to be extremely unhappy. Thus drastically complicating governance of these regions after they fall (and putting a significant cost on Russia in terms of rebuilding).

 

[Ananda]

Will they try to influence Zelensky? Of course they will. It appears the Russians prefer to keep the Americans out of negotiation sessions and Zelensky is going along with that for now.

This is one big part that seems many Western media don't put it. By choosing Turkey and especially Sultan Erdo doing mediation, Russia practically side line US and other Western Power. Sultan Erdo is not someone that for sometime have high regard in Washington, Brussels, Paris, and other Euro Western capital.

Zelensky even with all the talk on Russian problems in the ground, seems also knows the reality on Ukraine force. The Ukranian inteligence already talk on Russian intention to carve Ukraine. Zelensky talk on compromise in teritorial status on Donbas.

With all the effort Russia has in Mariupol and overall Donbas, building Land Bridge from Crimea and Donbass, and their clearly put refocussing on Eastern front for 2nd stage, I see no reason Russia will want anything less then Donbas and Crimea security (remember Crimea security including water supply that Russia achieve after securing Kherson Oblast).

In the end everything in the ground will be directed the compromise results of this talk if something come to a conclusive deal. Even Zelensky knows in the end it is going Ukraine blood that will be spill, not US and West.

 

[OPSSG]

@Ananda, I rarely disagree with you but in this occasion — let me explain, why I have a different take.

1. The main dish — or the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine is the US. The biggest provider of security assurance to smaller NATO countries is American.

2. Whatever side dish Putin has with Turkey is not as important — as long as US supplies arms, they ensure Ukraine can’t be defeated. Do not mistake the complimentary peanuts at the restaurant as the main meal.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1508836454193147926

3. Putin can push his narrative all he wants but he has miscalculated at a strategy level — Ukraine has the resolve to fight and as long as arms keep flowing, they will not have to give up. Zelenskyy knows Ukraine is bleeding but he has no choice — I don’t think negotiations will go anywhere at this time — the terms of a negotiated settlement will be decided based on the military situation, and I think Moscow believes it can achieve more success in the JFO to strengthen its negotiating position vis-à-vis Kyiv.

4. The Russians find it difficult to encircle the JFO — Russian C2, logistics, & operational mobility, is just a shit-show. The 10 Ukrainian brigades (in JFO pre-war) are Ukraine's "most well equipped & well trained," but they have been bloodied but still hold the line. Putin will not stop until he gets an outcome at the JFO.

5. The exact numbers are probably wrong. Despite Russia being an armoured powerhouse, Russian losses in their tank force is incredible. If we ignore the narrative of Putin and look at Russia losses so far (only counting confirmed losses), Russia has lost:

(a) 9.2% of their T-72B3 versions;​

(b) 18.4% of their T-80-fleet; and​

(c) 4.8% of their T-90.​

 

[STURM]

This doesn't seem credible.

I find it inconceivable that even a Russian from the most remote/rural/poorest part of Russia would be so surprised with seeing asphalt. Reminds me of reports during WW2 that some Soviet troops entering German cities/towns removed lightbulbs to bring home, not knowing that electricity was needed.

 

[Feanor]

5. The exact numbers are probably wrong. Despite Russia being an armoured powerhouse, Russian losses in their tank force is incredible. If we ignore the narrative of Putin and look at Russia losses so far (only counting confirmed losses), Russia has lost:

(a) 9.2% of their T-72B3 versions;​

(b) 18.4% of their T-80-fleet; and​

(c) 4.8% of their T-90.​

From the active roster. There should be a gigantic pool of T-72 and T-80 variants available in storage. Granted a T-72B or a T-80BV is a poor substitute for a T-72B3M or a T-80BVM. There's another factor to consider here. It's a bizarre strength of Russia's BTG system. Since only units 100% manned with contract soldiers go to war, the equipment of second and third btlns in a brigade/regiment area available to replace losses with very little if any loss to overall combat effectiveness. The downside is that it can often take a long time to haul vehicles from the unit of origin. I suspect physical vehicle losses are less significant then the loss of tempo and the inability to take major cities without reducing them to, if not rubble, at least burned out ruins.

 

[Ananda]

@OPSSG , thanks for your explanation. Perhaps I'll try to explain some to your explanation with point in my post that related:

Do not mistake the complimentary peanuts at the restaurant as the main meal.

By choosing Turkey and especially Sultan Erdo doing mediation, Russia practically side line US and other Western Power. Sultan Erdo is not someone that for sometime have high regard in Washington, Brussels, Paris, and other Euro Western capital.

My point in here more to the Political situation that Sultan Erdo is not what can be said as US or Euro Zone first choice (or perhaps even second choice) to represent their interest as mediator during this Ukraine-Russian conflict. I don't mean in anyway saying Sultan Erdo is with Putin camp.

Sultan Erdo is for Turkey own interests. However since Turkey still with NATO, off course they will provide the progress on this mediation with NATO. However cause Sultan Erdo insistence on Turkey independent within Nato, and their in reality more open relationship with Russia, perhaps that's why Putin more comfortable for him as negotiator.

Ukraine has the resolve to fight and as long as arms keep flowing, they will not have to give up. Zelenskyy knows Ukraine is bleeding but he has no choice — I don’t think negotiations will go anywhere at this time — the terms of a negotiated settlement will be decided based on the military situation, and I think Moscow believes it can achieve more success in the JFO to strengthen its negotiating position vis-à-vis Kyiv.

Even Zelensky knows in the end it is going Ukraine blood that will be spill, not US and West.

Yes, I agree on this. That's why I said why in the end the blood spill is Ukrainian (and off course the Russian), and not US or West. Off course US and West will going to keep sending arms and support to keep Ukraine fighting.

However Zelensky and his administration that has to make decisions whether enough blood spill to make compromise or continue fighting. They should the one who decided, not Russian and not also US and West.

The 10 Ukrainian brigades (in JFO pre-war) are Ukraine's "most well equipped & well trained," but they have been bloodied but still hold the line. Putin will not stop until he gets an outcome at the JFO.

Zelensky even with all the talk on Russian problems in the ground, seems also knows the reality on Ukraine force. The Ukranian inteligence already talk on Russian intention to carve Ukraine. Zelensky talk on compromise in teritorial status on Donbas.

Yes JFO is the Russian main thing as objective to defeat. That's why I said in my previous posts that fighting the JFO in the East will be the decisive battle for both Ukraine and Russian in this War. Certainly not the skirmish in around Kyiv that Western media focus on.

We don't know the real situation of Ukraine JFO right now. However Zelensky certainly knows. That's why I said the real situation on the ground (that's means especially JFO cause that's the real fight) can be the determinating factor on Zelensky position in this talk.

I also still see the compromise position is still quite far. Zelensky talk on compromise on Donbas base on referendum. Putin clearly want clear cut decision from Ukraine on Donbas separation right now.

That's only on Donbas, not talking on Crimea security. Something that can vary from water supply security to Crimea, toward control on all Sea of Azov coast line. Something that Russia already hold now and fought hard to get.

That's why Ukrainian Intelligence put in Western media on Russia intention to carve Ukraine. Something that for me personally, already put that in this thread the moment invasion come.

The fate of JFO in my opinion will determine what Ukraine willing to compromise in the end, or Russia decision on the position they're holding now in Ukraine.

 

[ngatimozart]

How many ordinary Iraqis died because Bush and Blair, for reasons only known to them, decided that invading Iraq was the way to.go. The previous decade, on the pretext that it was aimed at Saddam's WMD, sanctions were imposed aimed at topping Saddam. Problem was ordinary Iraqis did the dying and suffering whilst the Baath leadership continued enjoying their imported food, cigars and furniture.

Getting back to the present: I'll.say again what I said when this whole tragedy started; the Ukraine needs the West but it has to exercise extreme caution in ensuring it does not get stuck in a Western/Russian power play.

Zelansky's desperate for a ceasefire and nobody can blame him but I'm curious as to how the West feels about the concessions he's willing to make? Has the U.S. said anything about the ongoing peace talks? Will it try to influence what the Ukraine might agree to with Russia?

Putin started this war ages ago and the Europeans will be wanting peace in the region, but not at the cost of a Russian victory. They are more pragmatic than their friends across the Atlantic who seem to have more of a religious zeal in such matters. But we forget that the Americans, by nature, are quite a conservative nation when compared to the Europeans, Australians, or Kiwis. They have religious, moral, social, and political peculiarities that harken back to the Puritans,, who were a Christian protestant religious sect that could make the Taliban look somewhat liberal. The Puritans that sailed to America in the 17th century on the Mayflower, were Puritans the same as the Lord Protector Cromwell, he who relieved King Charles I, King of England and Scotland, of his head with the assistance of an axe. However they were of a different Puritan sect to Cromwell and he considered them to be "fanatical" so had them arrested on various convenient charges. They got the hint and left, first for the Netherlands and then to the American Colonies. That's why America today is a bastion of intolerant right wing protestant Christian fundamentalism. They're just as intolerant and evil as Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, and Buddhist religious fundamentalists. Not all Americans are Christian and not all American Christians are Christian fundamentalists, but enough of the Christian fundamentalists exist to have inordinate control of the political system.

So when you are bad mouthing the west, just remember it's not just made up of Americans and that there are a difference of views, cultures, languages, attitudes and experiences between the Americans, British, Europeans, Australians, and Kiwis. As a general rule, on here, we don't go around bad mouthing Malaysians or Asians in general because most of us have quite a lot of respect for the different Asian peoples and cultures. You will notice in my case when I talk about China a vast majority of the time I use the term CCP / PRC rather than China or Chinese because I am talking about the CCP rather than Chinese people. I happen to loathe the CCP but I don't dislike Chinese people.

Just my 1 cents worth.

 

[ngatimozart]

When I referred to "Americans" I should clarify I am only referring to the ones in Power who are involved with foreign policy. The average American has as much input into this war as the average Russian (or Australian for that matter). All we can do is voice our opinions in forums.

I particularly blame the CIA for this ridiculous regime change thinking which has been around for a while now. Sadly it will probably be an even more favoured strategy with dealing with adversaries after this War.

The other problem is the proliferation of so called "Hawks" in key Defence positions which date back to Rumsfeld and Wolfowicz, surely two of the most unfortunate appointments in history.

As bad as Putin has become the tactics used to bring Western Politics and Military to Russia's door step were never going to be appreciated by any Russian President and were only going to lead to trouble the World didn't need.


Yes I can answer that one. Supplying Ukraine with Fighter Jets in the middle of the War would be viewed as deeply escalatory by the Russians and may trigger a nuclear response.

It appears that the CIA is behind every evil plot and disaster that happens in the world. That's rubbish because they can't cause volcanic eruptions, tsunami, tornadoes, solar storms and earthquakes yet.

WRT to the so called "hawks" in the US, every nation has them within their government.

The Eastern European nations that joined NATO requested to do so of their own free will. They had to apply to join and had to meet certain criteria. No-one within NATO or the EU forced them to do so. They did so because of their history with Russia.

If the EU, US, Mars, Klingon Empire or anyone else wants to supply Ukraine with combat aircraft they are free to do so under international law. It's only Putin's bullying that's stopping them.

This post of yours hasn't added anything new to the conversation and is only rehashing Russian propaganda which isn't ideal. You also stepped into the political arena with one comment which isn't appreciated. You know the rules about politics. Please put a bit more thought and effort into your future posts. Thank you.

 

[koxinga]

From the active roster. There should be a gigantic pool of T-72 and T-80 variants available in storage. Granted a T-72B or a T-80BV is a poor substitute for a T-72B3M or a T-80BVM. There's another factor to consider here. It's a bizarre strength of Russia's BTG system. Since only units 100% manned with contract soldiers go to war, the equipment of second and third btlns in a brigade/regiment area available to replace losses with very little if any loss to overall combat effectiveness. The downside is that it can often take a long time to haul vehicles from the unit of origin. I suspect physical vehicle losses are less significant then the loss of tempo and the inability to take major cities without reducing them to, if not rubble, at least burned out ruins.

Tanks need crews, and experienced ones. They can have thousands of tanks in reserve but they are useless without calling up the reservists. And I have considerable doubts about the ability of those reservists to use those tanks, much less within an ATGM rich environment like Ukraine.

 

[CumbrianRover]

I find it inconceivable that even a Russian from the most remote/rural/poorest part of Russia would be so surprised with seeing asphalt. Reminds me of reports during WW2 that some Soviet troops entering German cities/towns removed lightbulbs to bring home, not knowing that electricity was needed.

I don't know. Should you have lived in Latvia many roads were made of compacted stone. Main roads were concrete panels, indeed, the main road between Brno and Prague, Czech Republic, was panels into the noughties.

Only with accession to the EU have the central European and Baltic countries been able to upgrade, although the caveat to that is that there is still no motorway in Latvia.

Just my experience.

 

[danonz]

Putin started this war ages ago and the Europeans will be wanting peace in the region, but not at the cost of a Russian victory. They are more pragmatic than their friends across the Atlantic who seem to have more of a religious zeal in such matters. But we forget that the Americans, by nature, are quite a conservative nation when compared to the Europeans, Australians, or Kiwis. They have religious, moral, social, and political peculiarities that harken back to the Puritans,, who were a Christian protestant religious sect that could make the Taliban look somewhat liberal. The Puritans that sailed to America in the 17th century on the Mayflower, were Puritans the same as the Lord Protector Cromwell, he who relieved King Charles I, King of England and Scotland, of his head with the assistance of an axe. However they were of a different Puritan sect to Cromwell and he considered them to be "fanatical" so had them arrested on various convenient charges. They got the hint and left, first for the Netherlands and then to the American Colonies. That's why America today is a bastion of intolerant right wing protestant Christian fundamentalism. They're just as intolerant and evil as Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, and Buddhist religious fundamentalists. Not all Americans are Christian and not all American Christians are Christian fundamentalists, but enough of the Christian fundamentalists exist to have inordinate control of the political system.

So when you are bad mouthing the west, just remember it's not just made up of Americans and that there are a difference of views, cultures, languages, attitudes and experiences between the Americans, British, Europeans, Australians, and Kiwis. As a general rule, on here, we don't go around bad mouthing Malaysians or Asians in general because most of us have quite a lot of respect for the different Asian peoples and cultures. You will notice in my case when I talk about China a vast majority of the time I use the term CCP / PRC rather than China or Chinese because I am talking about the CCP rather than Chinese people. I happen to loathe the CCP but I don't dislike Chinese people.

Just my 1 cents worth.

Id consider my self a right wing Christian fundamentalists - but we aren't really encouraged to go a blow ourselves up in the name of God or decapitate someone for insulting God - Bible teaches quite the opposite really...

 

[DavidDCM]

I doubt any person except maybe the last uncontacted tribes in the depths of the Amazon don't know what asphalt is. What is more credible is that the guy was telling his mother that asphalt roads in the Ukraine extend way into the countryside and villages, rather than just exist in large cities and highways. This may definitely be the case in many parts of Ukraine as compared to Eastern Siberia. The sensationalist style of reporting that we see nowadays than blew this up into "Russian people have never heard of asphalt" nonsense.

 

[STURM]

ngatimozart,

I wasn't bad mouthing the West or Western people per see but being critical of certain policies which have had devastating consequences to the locals whilst also not achieving the desired results.

 

[Capt. Ironpants]

In other developments I find it amazing how the Russians managed to sell a decision they made unilaterally a few days ago (to stall their attacks in the North for the time being and focus elsewhere) as a diplomatic gesture to show good will and build trust. So they gave the impression they compromised a little but without agreeing to an inconvenient ceasefire (inconvenient until Mariupol and Donbass are fully occupied). The move seems pulled straight from Lavrov's playbook. And the West and Ukraine so desperate to show some progress that they played along with it.

I think it wasn't so much a "sell" as it was politely viewed as a Sun Tzu golden bridge. After Biden's regime change remarks, a golden bridge was a welcome thing, especially as the Russians built it themselves.

Journalist Sergej Sumlenny on Russian soldiers in Ukraine calling home, reporting that Ukraine has something called "asphalt". I guess many of the Russian soldiers come from the poorer parts of Russia?

Sergej Sumlenny on Twitter: "" / Twitter

Some really sad photos of backwater Russia there. A few look much as it did back in the bleak and hungry years near the end of the 1990s when I spent time there, most much worse than anything I saw. I spent most of my time in St. Petersburg, which is almost like being in a different country compared to the rest of Russia, yes, including Moscow (which I did not much care for). Russia is a vast country, and there are huge sparsely populated areas that are not exactly hospitable to human habitation, similar to some parts of the American West, Canada, Alaska, etc.

I never got to Siberia or the east or what they call the "far north" (although I heard about those areas from officers who had been stationed there), so maybe there are areas with only dirt roads and no street lights. But even if these soldiers were raised by wolves in the wilds of Siberia, they must have seen paved roads and street lights in Russia on their way to Ukraine. Even back when I was there, there were paved roads all over, connecting cities and towns and even villages, and certainly in cities and towns and in the centers of villages. And yes, in the cities and towns, street lights -- although street lights were not as ubiquitous in small towns as here in the States, and mostly absent in small villages.

I'm going to put the rest of my reply in a quote box, as it's rather OT:

There were dirt roads on the outskirts of smaller villages even in the west, and lots of sadly leaning houses. I only ever saw one house that was built on plumb and stood straight. It was a "weekend house" built by a brilliant St Petersburg engineer using mainly "found" railroad ties for the framing.

I once spent about a week in a small garrison town in Voronezh Oblast, more like a large village really. There were paved roads and sidewalks, and in the center, street lights. There were a few dirt roads, mainly leading to nice spots by the river or a small lake where people went to swim and picnic. Living conditions were pretty primitive, though. I had to go up the street to get water from a tap, and it was a game at night -- seriously, like the evening entertainment --to sneak out after dark to empty your used dish water or bathwater in a neighbor's yard. No one emptied in their own yard.

Bathroom facilities were not your standard latrines. Nope. Commie latrines: a long attached row (gotta be communal) of latrines with padlocks on the doors to prevent TP theft. Instead of a deep hole underneath, was a rather shallow metal-lined trench. The stench was unbearable, eye-watering. I was kindly issued an old Red Army gas mask which also came in handy for thwacking the vicious geese that attacked anyone who approached. The people who lived there had rather rough manners, very unlike St. Petersburg.

There was only only one restaurant there, a roasted chicken joint owned by an enormous jolly Tatar lady. The chicken was delicious, but our dining experience was somewhat marred when a "lesbian prison gang" burst in brandishing large knives and started leaping and dancing about their glitter-eyed leader. It was surreal. I was seated between two large, well-built majors and the place was full of Russian officers and soldiers, but everyone just sat stock still and a number were duly robbed, as was the jolly Tatar lady. "You don't mess with the lesbian prison gang," one of the majors told me, after advising me not to make eye contact. "They are psycopaths. You cannot imagine our prisons. They become this way."

As for the small military base there, all I could think at the time was "And we Americans thought all that time the Red Army was so scary?"

I sometimes wish I could send these kids who think communism is so great to that little town for a week so they could get a small taste of what it's really like, even after it's over.

Anyway, I hoped there had been some investment in infrastructure since I was last in Russia so long ago, but alas. Corruption is a particularly nasty form of robbery, isn't it?

 

[Vivendi]

Norway has donated another 2,000 M-72 to Ukraine, in addition to 2,000 sent some time ago. The shipment has already been done. This news broke just now -- seems they have changed communication strategy and is not announcing shipments until after the fact.
Norge har gitt ytterligere våpen til Ukraina - regjeringen.no

I hope they will also donate some land-based NSM missiles, and NASAMS, although those will require a bit of training and preparations. Also a question if the Norwegian government is willing to donate such capable systems.

Land based NSM has been acquired by Poland, Romania and USMC. Romania Becomes Latest Naval Strike Missile Customer - Naval News
NASAMS is operated by 15 countries NASAMS Air Defence System - Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace

 

[Pentaprism]

It appears that the CIA is behind every evil plot and disaster that happens in the world. That's rubbish because they can't cause volcanic eruptions, tsunami, tornadoes, solar storms and earthquakes yet.

WRT to the so called "hawks" in the US, every nation has them within their government.

The Eastern European nations that joined NATO requested to do so of their own free will. They had to apply to join and had to meet certain criteria. No-one within NATO or the EU forced them to do so. They did so because of their history with Russia.

If the EU, US, Mars, Klingon Empire or anyone else wants to supply Ukraine with combat aircraft they are free to do so under international law. It's only Putin's bullying that's stopping them.

This post of yours hasn't added anything new to the conversation and is only rehashing Russian propaganda which isn't ideal. You also stepped into the political arena with one comment which isn't appreciated. You know the rules about politics. Please put a bit more thought and effort into your future posts. Thank you.

I’m not sure why you routinely accuse me of “rehashing Russian propaganda“ whenever I point out the CIA meddles with other Countries, which in many cases contributes to conflict. This is a defence forum. Surely we are allowed to discuss the causes of conflict? The issue is hardly limited to the Ukraine situation;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/23/the-cia-says-russia-hacked-the-u-s-election-here-are-6-things-to-learn-from-cold-war-attempts-to-change-regimes/

The CIA is even suspected of interfering with Australia’s political process;

Did the US interfere in Australia's 1975 election?

New data shows US government routinely intervenes in foreign elections. Did they play a part in Australia's tumultuous 1975 poll?

thenewdaily.com.au

We are in the middle of a proxy war. If we want to avoid future Wars it is important to understand how they start. Both sides will invariably blame the other but the truth inevitably lies somewhere in the middle. The West is trying to pass this off as being 100% Russia’s fault but that view ignores reality.

 

[CumbrianRover]

Norway has donated another 2,000 M-72 to Ukraine, in addition to 2,000 sent some time ago. The shipment has already been done. This news broke just now -- seems they have changed communication strategy and is not announcing shipments until after the fact.
Norge har gitt ytterligere våpen til Ukraina - regjeringen.no

I hope they will also donate some land-based NSM missiles, and NASAMS, although those will require a bit of training and preparations. Also a question if the Norwegian government is willing to donate such capable systems.

Land based NSM has been acquired by Poland, Romania and USMC. Romania Becomes Latest Naval Strike Missile Customer - Naval News
NASAMS is operated by 15 countries NASAMS Air Defence System - Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace

Land based NSM would diametrically change in the Black Sea, heavens, the Russians can witness armour being destroyed, however, start sinking their ships with much larger crews and that is a bad news day.

I hope it happens.

 

[STURM]

The question which arises is why hasn't the Ukraine been supplied with the means to target Russian ships? Doesn't have to be NSM; Harpoon, Exocet or even Hellfire would provide the means. Could be because of issues related to the time it would take to train crews?

On.another matter has there been reports on the use of Starstreak? Beam riders tend to be harder to employ compared to "fire/forget" IR systems but the advantage is that most fighters lack the means to decoy them.

 

[OPSSG]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1506540021343531015

Finland, much respect for their clear eyed view.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1509235436878770180

In a plot twist to the story about Russian aircraft violating Swedish airspace a few weeks back. Reports are out that the two Su-24 carried nuclear weapons, is likely to be wrong. One thing is for certain, Putin has got NATO concerned with its Northern Flank.

It's a bizarre strength of Russia's BTG system. Since only units 100% manned with contract soldiers go to war, the equipment of second and third btlns in a brigade/regiment area available to replace losses with very little if any loss to overall combat effectiveness. The downside is that it can often take a long time to haul vehicles from the unit of origin.

I suspect physical vehicle losses are less significant then the loss of tempo and the inability to take major cities without reducing them to, if not rubble, at least burned out ruins.

Thanks for explaining the details. Below is a graphic on a BTG’s vehicle fleet.