Ukraine

[metalslug 31]

14 hours ago, wmw999 said:

And in the whack job branch, here’s what I saw on FB:

Oh, it gets 'whackier' than that... 

[lippy 764]

25 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Oh, it gets 'whackier' than that... 

Yeah if a black leader tried to pull this shit it'd slide...it's not like Vlad wore a tan suit.

[billvon 2,380]

15 hours ago, wmw999 said:

And in the whack job branch, here’s what I saw on FB:

"Putin is destroying the satanic bio-labs in the Ukraine. He is destroying their underground hiding places, their businesses, their child trafficking dens and their strong holds. Do not believe what the mainstream media are reporting. Putin is fighting for the freedom of the human race."

The basement of the DC pizza place has moved a bit.

[jakee 1,254]

On 2/25/2022 at 12:46 PM, brenthutch said:

That is a bit like asking me what would I do if I jumped out of a plane without a parachute, but let me give it a go.

Fully exploit our domestic fossil fuel resources, return us to a net exporter of oil and gas, tap the strategic reserve to ease the transition.   Target Russia’s oil and gas sectors, cutting them off from western markets (Europe can just put up a few more windmills and solar panels).  Perhaps give Iran a temporary time-out from its sanctions to fill the gap.

Can you please point to any time in the past where you have advocated for relaxing sanctions against Iran?

[jakee 1,254]

19 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

They're each supposed to be spending 2% GDP on Defense and few have ever achieved it. We always exceed it at 3%+ to 4%+. The whole of the EU spent $225Billion in 2020. Maybe that should be enough but if it is they need new procurers. 

I don't really understand the budgetary argument here. Western inaction in Ukraine isn't because we think the combined armies of Nato are not strong enough or well equipped enough to repel Russian forces in Ukraine. Of course they are, several times over.

The issue is that Russia is one of the world's biggest nuclear powers and Putin has spent many years cultivating the appearance of being belligerent enough to consider using them for real. No amount of extra military spending in Europe is going to change that.

[ryoder 1,380]

Times of Israel: Ukrainian forces destroy convoy of 56 Chechen tanks, kill general near Kyiv – report

I love a nice feel-good story!

[JoeWeber 2,294]

54 minutes ago, ryoder said:

Times of Israel: Ukrainian forces destroy convoy of 56 Chechen tanks, kill general near Kyiv – report

I love a nice feel-good story!

56 Tanks is a lot in one action, no? Outside of Kursk or somewhere on the Eastern Front has anyone lost 56 tanks in a single action?

[brenthutch 383]

14 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

BIGUN, TriGirl, Brent, help me out here, please. Is it possible to get significant small arms (assault rifles, anti-tank weapons etc.) supplies into Ukrainian hands in real time? As in the next few days.

It will likely take around a week for anything that wasn’t already in the pipeline.

“Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.”

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

9 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

56 Tanks is a lot in one action, no? Outside of Kursk or somewhere on the Eastern Front has anyone lost 56 tanks in a single action?

Yes. 

The Arab-Israeli wars had some pretty significant tank losses.
The First Gulf war saw some large losses by the Iraqis.

However, this is huge. That big of a unit being that badly damaged is significant from a tactical standpoint (that's a lot of capability just gone) and from a morale standpoint (see below).

There are consistent reports that the Russian attack is going a lot slower than planned.
Putin didn't put enough supplies in place (or in transit) for a sustained fight. 
He needed to take Ukraine fast. And it's not happening.

There's a video that's gone viral of an APC (not really a tank, but close enough for the media) out of fuel and being offered a 'tow back to Russia'.

There are unconfirmed reports that some crew are deliberately dumping fuel, to 'run out' because they find out they are attacking Kiev, not 'protecting Russians in the independent regions.' They don't like the idea of attacking well equipped defenders. As imposing and threatening as they appear, tanks and other armored vehicles are pretty vulnerable to anti-tank missiles. You know, like the ones Germany sent. When the tanks get blown up, the crews don't usually survive. The reports from the big column that was attacked are saying a couple hundred dead.

[ryoder 1,380]

6 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

There's a video that's gone viral of an APC (not really a tank, but close enough for the media) out of fuel and being offered a 'tow back to Russia'.
 

Post #196

[ryoder 1,380]

 

[gowlerk 1,902]

42 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Putin didn't put enough supplies in place (or in transit) for a sustained fight. 
He needed to take Ukraine fast. And it's not happening.

This error of an adventure is going to cost Putin his position. And possibly his life.

[wmw999 2,116]

Just now, gowlerk said:

This error of an adventure is going to cost Putin his position. And possibly his life.

One can only hope. And that the alternative isn't worse.

Wendy P.

[jakee 1,254]

39 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Yes. 

The Arab-Israeli wars had some pretty significant tank losses.
The First Gulf war saw some large losses by the Iraqis.

However, this is huge. That big of a unit being that badly damaged is significant from a tactical standpoint (that's a lot of capability just gone) and from a morale standpoint (see below).

If it's true. Only source so far seems to be the Ukrainian government and they're going to have an understandable tendency to be 'optimistic' in their reporting right now.

That said, if it was a column of the Chechen military - Ramzan Kadyrov and his cronies like the general reportedly killed are basically what you'd get if the Sons of Anarchy were given a country to run. They're not exactly the epitome of competence and discipline.

[ryoder 1,380]

2 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

One can only hope. And that the alternative isn't worse.

Wendy P.

If something happens to Putin, and the replacement isn't Trump, we will hear years more whining about how "he was robbed".

[jakee 1,254]

4 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

This error of an adventure is going to cost Putin his position. And possibly his life.

Just gotta hope he's not the only one who knows where they keep the Novichok.

[ryoder 1,380]

1 minute ago, jakee said:

Just gotta hope he's not the only one who knows where they keep the Novichok.

...or the polonium. But I'm sure there is no shortage of windows he could fall from.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

This error of an adventure is going to cost Putin his position. And possibly his life.

At this point, it's looking better and better.

The damage being done to the Russian economy is pretty serious.

Don't forget that Putin isn't really in charge. 

He serves the oligarchs that really run the country (and have for a long time, even back before the Soviet Union fell).

While it's true that Europe & the west need Russian energy, it's equally true that the Russians need the money from the sale of that energy.

Cut off that income (and freeze the assets they have around the world) and the chances of Putin suffering a surprise 'heart attack' go WAAAAY up.

He may or may not die, but he'll be 'too ill' to continue as leader.
Which would be a shame. 

 

[JoeWeber 2,294]

27 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

At this point, it's looking better and better.

The damage being done to the Russian economy is pretty serious.

Don't forget that Putin isn't really in charge. 

He serves the oligarchs that really run the country (and have for a long time, even back before the Soviet Union fell).

While it's true that Europe & the west need Russian energy, it's equally true that the Russians need the money from the sale of that energy.

Cut off that income (and freeze the assets they have around the world) and the chances of Putin suffering a surprise 'heart attack' go WAAAAY up.

He may or may not die, but he'll be 'too ill' to continue as leader.
Which would be a shame. 

 

I had no idea we had so many talented intelligence agents under deep cover but posting on SC. I'm humbled.

[ryoder 1,380]

Bomb disposal, Ukrainian style:

 

[ryoder 1,380]

37 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Don't forget that Putin isn't really in charge. 
 

He is in charge, but only as long as keeps his lackeys (oligarchs & generals) happy:

 

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

This error of an adventure is going to cost Putin his position. And possibly his life.

Hi Ken,

I sure hope that crystal ball of yours is working properly.

I wonder just what it would take for the military to turn on him.

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Yes. 

The Arab-Israeli wars had some pretty significant tank losses.
The First Gulf war saw some large losses by the Iraqis.

However, this is huge. That big of a unit being that badly damaged is significant from a tactical standpoint (that's a lot of capability just gone) and from a morale standpoint (see below).

There are consistent reports that the Russian attack is going a lot slower than planned.
Putin didn't put enough supplies in place (or in transit) for a sustained fight. 
He needed to take Ukraine fast. And it's not happening.

There's a video that's gone viral of an APC (not really a tank, but close enough for the media) out of fuel and being offered a 'tow back to Russia'.

There are unconfirmed reports that some crew are deliberately dumping fuel, to 'run out' because they find out they are attacking Kiev, not 'protecting Russians in the independent regions.' They don't like the idea of attacking well equipped defenders. As imposing and threatening as they appear, tanks and other armored vehicles are pretty vulnerable to anti-tank missiles. You know, like the ones Germany sent. When the tanks get blown up, the crews don't usually survive. The reports from the big column that was attacked are saying a couple hundred dead.

Hi Joe,

Since the tank was developed, tank crews have had some of the highest mortality rates of anyone on the battlefield.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,902]

1 minute ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

I sure hope that crystal ball of yours is working properly.

I wonder just what it would take for the military to turn on him.

Jerry Baumchen

Of course it is just a wild guess on my part. But the flip side is that if he really does feel like he is in danger he may make even worse moves in desperation. I don't like it very much when big historic events are unfolding. It's the old curse, "May you live in interesting times".

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Don't forget that Putin isn't really in charge. 

He serves the oligarchs that really run the country (and have for a long time, even back before the Soviet Union fell).

I don't think I've ever seen a Russia expert describing that dynamic. 

My understanding is that (while there's always some element of symbiosis) Putin is unquestionable the daddy bear of everything over there, and the oligarchs prosper via his patronage.