The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
More expert interpretation of the epic interceptor drones and complex math applications, the deal that changes everything:



1774729670849.jpeg

Imagine thinking that one can exchange some cheap drones with questionable performance (see one of my previous posts) - that one likely doesn't have (enough of - to begin with) for the Patriot interceptors that the US fully controls distribution of, has shortage of, and:



In the meantime in Odessa, the rapid gun fire (from the magic interceptor drones, I presume?) successfully downing buckets of Geran UAVs that are slamming all over the place.


Zelensky in response to Rubio’s liar comment says that it all basically depends on one’s interpretation:


Digging his own hole. How anyone can stand the guy is beyond my comprehension.
 

personaldesas

Active Member
When the premise is unachievable, it's nearly impossible to look at the scenario. Unless, of course, the whole point it's just a call to arms for EU/NATO against Russia.
That’s a pretty bizarre leap.

I also find interesting your: "This conflict" below... "Reason" like... Hegseth reason... or like "King & Country" reason?
I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say there. I meant “reasoning” in the normal sense: drawing inferences and reaching conclusions. Not sure what the Hegseth / “King & Country” detour is meant to address.
 

personaldesas

Active Member
More expert interpretation of the epic interceptor drones and complex math applications, the deal that changes everything:

What an awfully written text. I checked the guy out: 300k followers.
That this kind of thing now passes for “reporting” or “journalism” says quite a lot. No wonder people are increasingly unable to inform themselves properly if they treat this sort of hysterical, breathless posting as serious informative media consumption.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Is this really how people reason about this conflict?
It's how this persons reasons about it...

In general FB is a valuable source, he's often confirmed Russian aviation losses when other sources are silent. He's also a professional, a Russian combat jet pilot (though I believe he's not currently serving) with experience from Syria. So his commentary on things related to Russian combat aviation is in my opinion valuable and insightful. I wanted to provide it more as a good example of some of the pessimism that the last couple of months have led to in some pro-Russian circles. Don't forget, he has quite the audience. And to be clear he's hinted that he's in favor of some sort of peace along the current front line before.
 

rsemmes

Active Member
That’s a pretty bizarre leap.



I’m not really sure what you’re trying to say there. I meant “reasoning” in the normal sense: drawing inferences and reaching conclusions. Not sure what the Hegseth / “King & Country” detour is meant to address.
"Bizarre" indeed....
Like:
~close to a decisive outcome... Like a peace agreement better than Istanbul?
~A Russian-occupied or Russia-aligned Ukraine... I thought the whole point was actually being "bizarre".
~a particularly stable end state... You mean we turning Ukraine into another Libya?
~more costly for Europe... What about for Ukraine?
~continuing to support Ukraine now. To the last Ukrainian soldier, that "decisive outcome"?

A reasonable interpretation of a bizarre point or a bizarre interpretation of a reasonable point? Should we fight Russia now because it is going to invade Europe... or should we fight the US because it will invade Greenland?


About "reason", what reason, when?
Reason applied only to this conflict? Only to that individual? FB is not a prominent member of a government? Reason applied to the US selling WMD in Iraq and the rest the rest of the world buying it? Reason about the Russian invasion or reasons?
He (FB) is one individual with his (very, if you like) personal point of view, I would expect Hegseth to reason, not him. (Actually, not Hegseth.)
When did reason ever existed?

I don't think we can see all his (FB) reasoning (or lack of) just because of that fragment of a post. I think we are selling a fairy tale about the war in Ukraine (not to mention its relation to other conflicts), some of my friends try to find more information or try to contrast that information. Some are interested in the next match of their favourite football team, I wouldn't expect any kind of reasonable comment about the war from them; I am certain that they don't expect any rational comment about football from me.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
What an awfully written text. I checked the guy out: 300k followers.
That this kind of thing now passes for “reporting” or “journalism” says quite a lot. No wonder people are increasingly unable to inform themselves properly if they treat this sort of hysterical, breathless posting as serious informative media consumption.
The guy has a book too. Has to be a good read. Laughing.

It’s on people though, if they are unable to inform themselves properly, no? Beyond the basic understanding of the subject matter, one should be able to catch a simple clue, no? For instance, that guy says that these drones cost $2,100 each, while the Patriot missiles they are replacing cost $3.9M each, and in exchange for these drones Ukraine is looking to get the Patriot missiles. All in short 3 consecutive sentences. You should read his post about the deal Zelensky made with Qatar! Or probably any other post, lol (I only read the two, somewhat).

In real life, the Qatari statement:

“The agreement includes collaboration in technological fields, development of joint investments and the exchange of expertise in countering missiles and unmanned aerial systems,” Qatar’s Defence Ministry said in a statement during Zelenskyy’s visit.


On the subject of people unable to inform themselves, from the same article:

“Ukraine is offering a cheap way of countering Iranian drones. Ukraine has been doing that for the past three and a half years because Russia has been firing Shahed drones since September 2023 at least, and it’s been downing them nearly every day,” said Al Jazeera’s Dmitry Medvedenko, reporting from Doha.

“The Gulf has been using Patriot and THAAD missiles primarily so far to down Iranian missiles and drones. Each Patriot missile costs almost $4m, while Ukraine is offering its expertise in downing drones for about $2,000 each.”[…]

Kyiv has proposed swapping its interceptors for the vastly more expensive air-defence missiles that Gulf countries are using to down Iranian drones. Kyiv says it needs more of them to fend off near-daily Russian missile attacks.[…]

The Patriots are “a much better solution” for countering Russia’s ballistic missiles, he said.


This is the stuff an average+ (well, pretty much everyone, less a margin of error) person reads and most/all outlets report the same stuff, as we discussed previously. And it basically says what the expert in question said in his exciting manner of expression. Here is what Zelensky said on the deal:

Details of what exactly Ukraine has agreed in the Gulf are slim.

“We are talking about a 10-year cooperation. We have already signed a relevant agreement with Saudi Arabia, we have just signed a similar agreement with Qatar, also for 10 years, we will sign one with the Emirates,” Zelensky said.

On the table are co-production of drones – with factories both in Ukraine and in the Gulf – and expertise sharing, he said, without providing specific information.

It is unclear what Kyiv gets in return, or whether the deals are anything more than simple arms-for-cash.

Zelensky, who had originally been pushing for expensive air defence missiles in return, said the agreements were worth “billions, not millions” to Ukraine.

“Specifically billions for our exporters – everyone will earn, Ukraine will earn, we won’t lose out.”



Production lines, billions of dollars, we won’t lose out (which probably means they will or nothing happens (like with euro agreements singed last year and prior), but…). This is the problem, not some amplifying dude on social media (though he certainly is part of it too).

Consider the advanced math here. He is offering 30K drones per month, which should be more than enough for several months in the Gulf, provided the reported launches of Shades of about 2,000 (or 4,500 on the upper estimates) so far and the advertised capabilities of the super interceptors. Why would anyone build any production lines? It’s nonsense, clearly. Also, it’s the cost of about 21 missiles launched by a Patriot system (based on prices from the articles cited above), which is good for less than one average serious Russian mixed air raid. Anyway…

To note, according to the most reliable trackers, the Odessa attack involved 20+ Gerans, a number (unspecified, but I didn’t dig further or checked later reports) of which kept flying further to attack other places. There are at least 7 impacts visible in the video I cited in the previous post alone, without any visible intercepts (the trackers reported 7+ impacts when I checked). There was another video from… some other smaller place (I don’t remember and not exactly relevant as it is likely a daily/regular occurrence) that also got trashed with no intercepts, but a lot of rapid fire (my guess is everything that flew hit).

The Ukrainians have allegedly been in the Middle East for ten days now (Zelensky said so on March 18, 150 or 200 experts). Has there been any noticeable difference in what is happening? Well, not really, not according to the reports (seems to be worse?). Of course, it could be that they have saved dozens of Patriot and THAAD interceptors in the process though. Laughing.


For the “Ukraine is a democracy” crew, the latest v-dem report published recently:

IMG_4611.jpeg

IMG_4612.jpeg

The full report for those interested:


 

personaldesas

Active Member
The guy has a book too. Has to be a good read. Laughing.

It’s on people though, if they are unable to inform themselves properly, no? Beyond the basic understanding of the subject matter, one should be able to catch a simple clue, no? For instance, that guy says that these drones cost $2,100 each, while the Patriot missiles they are replacing cost $3.9M each, and in exchange for these drones Ukraine is looking to get the Patriot missiles. All in short 3 consecutive sentences. You should read his post about the deal Zelensky made with Qatar! Or probably any other post, lol (I only read the two, somewhat).
Yeah, 100%.

Honestly, even with zero understanding of the subject matter, the writing itself gives the game away. The tone, the breathlessness, the need to dramatize everything.
 

personaldesas

Active Member
"Bizarre" indeed....
Like:
~close to a decisive outcome... Like a peace agreement better than Istanbul?
~A Russian-occupied or Russia-aligned Ukraine... I thought the whole point was actually being "bizarre".
~a particularly stable end state... You mean we turning Ukraine into another Libya?
~more costly for Europe... What about for Ukraine?
~continuing to support Ukraine now. To the last Ukrainian soldier, that "decisive outcome"?

A reasonable interpretation of a bizarre point or a bizarre interpretation of a reasonable point? Should we fight Russia now because it is going to invade Europe... or should we fight the US because it will invade Greenland?


About "reason", what reason, when?
Reason applied only to this conflict? Only to that individual? FB is not a prominent member of a government? Reason applied to the US selling WMD in Iraq and the rest the rest of the world buying it? Reason about the Russian invasion or reasons?
He (FB) is one individual with his (very, if you like) personal point of view, I would expect Hegseth to reason, not him. (Actually, not Hegseth.)
When did reason ever existed?

I don't think we can see all his (FB) reasoning (or lack of) just because of that fragment of a post. I think we are selling a fairy tale about the war in Ukraine (not to mention its relation to other conflicts), some of my friends try to find more information or try to contrast that information. Some are interested in the next match of their favourite football team, I wouldn't expect any kind of reasonable comment about the war from them; I am certain that they don't expect any rational comment about football from me.
Sorry, this might be on me, but I genuinely don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. You seem to be jumping between several different points. If you’re making a concrete argument, I’m happy to engage with it. But as it stands, I’m not sure what your actual claim is.

I would suggest looking up the verb “reasoning,” as you seem to be conflating it with the noun “reason.” Maybe that clears things up.
 
Last edited:

personaldesas

Active Member
It's how this persons reasons about it...

In general FB is a valuable source, he's often confirmed Russian aviation losses when other sources are silent. He's also a professional, a Russian combat jet pilot (though I believe he's not currently serving) with experience from Syria. So his commentary on things related to Russian combat aviation is in my opinion valuable and insightful. I wanted to provide it more as a good example of some of the pessimism that the last couple of months have led to in some pro-Russian circles. Don't forget, he has quite the audience. And to be clear he's hinted that he's in favor of some sort of peace along the current front line before.
I am not saying he is not a domain-expert, but all the more reason it surprises me that someone with that background would frame it that way.

Let me rephrase my question: is this actually a widely held view, that the conflict could come down to a kind of race to WMD use? Or is that more of a fringe / pessimistic take within certain circles?
 

rsemmes

Active Member
Sorry, this might be on me, but I genuinely don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. You seem to be jumping between several different points. If you’re making a concrete argument, I’m happy to engage with it. But as it stands, I’m not sure what your actual claim is.

I would suggest looking up the verb “reasoning,” as you seem to be conflating it with the noun “reason.” Maybe that clears things up.
I used "rational" too.

"Whether containing that outcome would be significantly costlier for Europe over time than continuing to support Ukraine now."
"That’s a pretty bizarre leap." I do agree.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I am not saying he is not a domain-expert, but all the more reason it surprises me that someone with that background would frame it that way.

Let me rephrase my question: is this actually a widely held view, that the conflict could come down to a kind of race to WMD use? Or is that more of a fringe / pessimistic take within certain circles?
Given some of Zelensky's recent statements about nuclear weapons, I understand how people think this might be the case. I don't know if the view is held widely, but this isn't the only time I've come across this view. I certainly don't think WMD escalation is out of the question, though I do think it's unlikely.

EDIT: A great piece on Russian economic development in occupied areas. I think it lines up with some of what I've been saying. Russia needs this area to have a population and an economy to make this work. It will take considerable investment, but it will also require improving conditions for people to be able to return. Ports and mines, farms and factories, all require labor. And Russia already has a shortage at home, and a demographic problem.

 
Last edited:
Top